Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness in Addressing the Retention of African American Male...
description
Transcript of Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness in Addressing the Retention of African American Male...
Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness in Addressing the Retention of African
American Male Students at a Historically Black College
by
Howard G. Wright
A Thesis
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree Education Specialist
in the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Leadership
in the School of Graduate Studies
Alabama A & M University
Normal, Alabama 35762
May 2005
1
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
Submitted by HOWARD G. WRIGHT in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of EDUCATION SPECIALIST with a concentration in HIGHER
EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION.
Accepted on behalf of the Faculty of the Graduate School by the Thesis
Committee:
____________________________
____________________________
____________________________
____________________________ Major Advisor
__________________________ Dean School of Graduate Studies
___________________________ Date
2
Copyright by
HOWARD G. WRIGHT
2005
3
This thesis is dedicated to my grandmother Vashti James who made the
commitment to change the fortunes of her second generation through education. It is
through her vision that a new generation of college educated professionals have risen
above the status quo set for children of an agrain society.
4
Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness in Addressing the Retention of African
American Male Students at Alabama A & M University
Wright, Howard, G., Ed.S. Alabama A & M University, 2004, 155 pp.
Thesis Advisor: Dr Phillip L. Redrick
The study examined faculty perceptions regarding the retention of African
American male students at Alabama A & M University. Using a 38-item questionnaire,
106 faculty members participated in a campus-wide survey in the fall semester of the
2004 Academic Year. The instrument examined faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of
institutional policy, the effectiveness of institutional support, the effect of workload on
the perceptions to institutional effectiveness, knowledge of institutional retention
programs for African American Males, and faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the
retention program based on to race, gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and
academic advising. Faculty in general was neutral on the effectiveness of institutional
policy, and support, revealed marginal knowledge of the mechanism of institutional
programs for African American male students. Their perceptions were consistent
irrespective of gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and academic advisement.
Based on the data revealed, it is recommended that (1) the study is replicated at a private
Historically Black College or University, (2) the study be replicated at a predominately
White institution, (3) a study be conducted of African American males’ perception of
institutional program targeting their retention, and (4) a comparative analysis between the
retention results and the allocation of resources.
KEYWORDS: retention, faculty, institutional effectiveness, African American male students, Historically Black Colleges and Universities
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL ii
ABSTRACTS AND KEYWORDS v
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT xiv
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION 1Background and significance 6Statement of the problem 10Purpose of the study 10Research questions 11Need for the study 12Limitations of the study 12Definition of terms 13
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 15
3. METHODOLOGY Introduction 37Population 37Sampling method 39Research Instrument 39
Research Procedures and Design 42Reliability and Validity 45Statistical Method 46
4. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 47Introduction 47Profile of Participants 47
Research Question One 51Research Question Two 59Research Question Three 65
6
Research Question Four 69Research Question Five 77
5. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, 83AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Discussions 83 Conclusion 88
Implications 88 Recommandations 90
APPENDICES A. Letter of Request Provost/Vice President 91
B. Letter of Request Vice President Oakwood College 93C. Letter to Request Oakwood College Faculty 95D. Letter of Request to Deans 96E. Letter of Request to Faculty Members 97F. Follow-Up Letter to Faculty Members 98 G. Research Instrument 99H. Variable Description 97I. Summary of Cross Tab and Chi Square 108J. Frequency Table for Questionnaires 137
REFERENCES 149 VITA
7
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. 1992-1997 cohorts graduation rates for African American 8 males/females at Alabama A & M University.
2. Full time faculty by race and gender 38
3. Faculty by schools and department 38
4. Relationship between research questions and 41 questionnaire items
5. Date collection summary 45 6. Age and gender 48
7. Tenure status 48
8. Years of teaching 49
9. Academic rank of respondents 49
10. Courses taught 50
11. Number of undergraduate African American male 50 students advised per academic year
12. School affiliation 51
8
13. Retention policy clearly communicated and understood 53
14. Retention program aligned with policy and mission 54
15. Retention policy encourage interaction between faculty and 55 African American male students outside the classroom
16. Program encourage faculty and staff to work collaboratively 56 to increase African American male students.
Page Table
17. Retention policy is aligned with the goals 57
18. Retention policy addresses the academic, 58 social, cultural environment essential for African American male retention
19. Retention policy addresses social and 59 economic background of African American male students
20. The program include provision for addressing the needs of African American male students 61
21. The institution allocates financial resources 62 to African American male students support
22. Freshman/new student orientation includes segments that addresses the need of African American male students 63
9
23. Retention program encourages parental involvement 64 with African American male students
24. The institution recognizes and rewards 65 efforts of faculty to improve the retention of African American male students
25. Number of credit hours taught per semester 66
26. Time spent on committee work 67
27. Percentage of time spent interacting with African 68 American male students outside of classroom
28. Number of publications the past two years 69
29. The relationship between perceived work-loads 70 and
institutional effectiveness
30. Training for faculty to address the problems and 71 concerns of African American male students
31. I am cognizant of the collegiate problems 72 of African American male students
Table Page
32. I am provided with an early alert on African American male 73 students who are having academic, social and other difficulties
33. I am provided with information regarding individual and 74 institutional services to assist African American male students
10
34. Institution tracking system allows for identification and monitoring 75 of African American male students progress
35. I am able to make contact with African American male students 76 through telephone calls
36. I am able to make contact with African American male students 77 through emails
37. Number of undergraduate students advised per academic year 78
38. Office hours spent advising African American male students per week 79
39. I use my advisement time to help African American male students 80
with personal and career goals
40. I provide African American Male students with information 81
that helps them make decisions concerning their major
41. I frequently refer African American 82 male advisees to counselors and tutors
42. I meet informally with students African American 82
43. Retention policy is clearly communicated and understood 109
44. Retention policy is aligned with policy and mission 110
45. Retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside the classroom 111
46. Program encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male student retention 112
11
47. Retention policy is aligned with the goals of 113 African American male students
Table Page
48. Relationship between retention policy and academic, social 114 and cultural environment
49. Relationship between retention policy and social and economic 115 background of African American male students
50. Retention policy includes provision for addressing 116 the needs of African American male students
51. Relationship between retention policy, financial resource 117
allocation
52. Relationship between retention policy and the inclusion of 118 segments for African American male freshman/new student at orientation
53. Relationship between retention policy and 119 parental involvement with African American male students
54. Relationship between retention policy rewarding 120and recognizing faculty efforts to improve the
retention of African American male students
55. Institution provides training for faculty to address the 121 problems and concerns of African American male students
56. Cognizant of the problems of African American male student 122
12
57. Provision with early alert on African American male students 123 who are having social and academic difficulties
58. Information is provided on services and individuals to assist African 124 American male students
59. The institution’s tracking system allows for monitoring 125
African American male students progress
60. I am able to make contact with African American male students 126 through telephone calls and selected variables
Table Page 61. Making contact with African American male students 127 through emails
62. Number of African American male undergraduate 128 students advised per academic year
63. Office hours spent advising African American male students 129
64. Using advisement time to help African American male 130
students with their personal and career goals
65. Providing African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their majors 131
66. Referring African American male students advisees to tutors 132 67. Meeting informally with African American male students I advise 133
68. Collapsing Values 134
13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Model of institutional departure 16
2. Model of undergraduate socialization 17
3. Weidman’s model of undergraduate socialization 18
14
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I must thank the faculty of Alabama A & M University and Oakwood College for
participating in the project and for the insight and knowledge shared on the project.
Special thanks to Dr. Phillip L Redrick, my thesis and academic advisor, for not only
providing guidance throughout the thesis experience, but for exposing me to the
intricacies of higher education administration.
I must also extend my gratitude to the other members of my committee, Dr.
Victoria W. Husley, Dr. James H. Stewart and Dr. D. Derrick Davis for the valuable
insights and continuous encouragement. Special thanks also must be extended to Dr.
William B. Gile and other members of the faculty of Curriculum, Teaching and
Educational Leadership for sharing their thoughts and experiences about education
administration.
15
Thanks must also be extended to the staff of Institutional Research notably, Dr.
Subodh Shrama for his assistance, and Dr Leatha Bennett from the Office of Retention
and Support for her encouragement and support.
My heart goes out to my family, grandmother Vashti James who instilled the
importance of a proper education. Also to Orlethia for enduring my countless hours from
home, for understanding my aspirations and endeavors and supporting them. To my
children Andrea, Rojae and Georgiana for giving daddy time to work undisturbed.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
The issue of student retention is relevant to every institution of higher learning,
Black or predominantly White. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs),
however, because of their unique mission in providing educational opportunities to all
students of African descent, have opted to attract and enroll a wide range of students from
various socio-economic and academic backgrounds, many of whom would not have met
the criteria for acceptance at predominately white institutions (Wilson, 2000).
Historically Black Colleges and Universities are becoming an increasing option
for many Black students. These institutions constitute only three percent of American
16
higher education; they educate 24 percent of all African American students enrolled in
four-year colleges, and award 24 percent of all baccalaureate degrees earned nationally.
In terms of gender, however, the percentage of male students at HBCUs has decreased in
recent years from a high of 47 percent in 1976 to approximately 40 percent in 1999-2000,
while the percentage of Black women has risen significantly to over 60 percent for the
same period (Wenglinsky, 1999).
African American males face several problems and hardships which affect every
aspect of their lives (Noguera, 1997). The national high school dropout rate in 1998 for
African Americans ages 18-21 was 19 percent and 14.3 percent for ages 22-24, with a
third of the states reporting dropout rates of higher percentages. Of the 1.7 million
African Americans males between the ages of 18-24 that completed high school,
approximately 36 percent entered college, compared to 46 percent for their White
counterparts (United States Department of Commerce, 1997).
The National Collegiate Athletics Association (2003) graduation report for
Division 1 HBCUs reported that the four-year graduation rate class average for African
American males was 29 percent, showing variations of a high of 42 percent at Hampton
University to a low of nine percent at Texas Southern University. More students,
however, are completing their degrees in five to six years rather than the traditional four
years. This is a completion rate of 34 percent compared to 43 percent for their White
counterparts (United States Department Commerce, 1997).
According to Davis (1999), the effects of racism, stereotyping, the
disproportionate placing of African American males in special education, under
achievement in reading and mathematics, low teacher expectations, negative peer
17
pressure, anti-schooling attitudes, drugs, gangs, the criminal justice system and the lack
of positive Black male influence in the home and schools have created enormous strain
on the psyche of Black male students. Many of these issues become unresolved in high
school and migrate with the student into the college experience, creating problems in
adjusting to the pressures and expectations of college life. Furr and Elling’s (2002)
research conclude that African American males come to college under- prepared for the
experience. They wrestle with adjustment expectations, as well as behavior and
responsibility issues. The result is fewer African American males earning their degrees
and completing their programs.
Wilson (2000) stated that African American males are not choosing to pursue
higher education at rates comparable to females. He further suggested stated that the
decline is due to the inclination to entering the military, entering employment after high
school, a relatively high incident of incarceration, and displays a lack of familiarity with
the college environment. He concludes that colleges are aware of the problems that
contribute to the decline in male enrollment but cannot create gender specific programs
due to court challenges to race and gender specific issues.Enrollment in college after high
school is the expected transition for most students as a means to improve their social,
economic and occupational standing; an investment, which usually pays off in the future.
For all demographic groups, workers who have completed at least their baccalaureate
degree are expected to earn over their lifetime in excess of over $1.0 million more than
those with a high school diploma (College Board, 2003).
Graduation from college, therefore, has financial implications over an individual’s
lifetime. This creates long-term economic problems that have social and political
18
consequences for society as it alters the productive future and social dynamics of the
Black family (Davis, 1999). Poor retention rates also have other effects. It has negative
implications for the students who drop out, the institution’s reputation is compromised
and revenues, which could be generated for academic, and student services, are lost
(Tinto, 1993).
Many administrators at HBCUs over the years have not had retention as an
institutional priority because their focus was on increased enrollment so as to reflect
increases in state budgetary allocations (Hurd, 2000). They have recognized that in order
to improve retention rates on their campuses it will take a collective responsibility to
nurture the psyche of the African American male by creating better college experiences
that address their needs (Davis, 1999).
Having acknowledged that retention is a serious institutional issue, efforts have
being undertaken to establish retention projects at most Historically Black Colleges and
Universities by making retention a part of their institutional mission. They have
established institutional strategies such as academic support services, remediation,
counseling and retention centers. These programs are aimed at developing academic
skills through remediation, social skills development and providing financial assistance
(Chenoweth, 1999).
While there are improvements in the freshman cohorts at most institutions, the
majority still struggle with retention of Black males with rather discouraging completion
rates (Chenoweth, 1999). According to Nittie et al (1994) the “fade out effect” has
trapped many institutions in which students at risk are asked to participate in programs in
which they have made significant improvements only to have these gains negated when
19
they move out of the programs.
Successful teachers of African American males have commonly helped students
develop an attachment for learning by dealing with student concerns, and have gained
their students respect. It is in developing personal alliances and relationships with their
students that they establish behavioral and academic standards. In the process they have
developed these students socially and emotionally by teaching self-confidence, attitude
development, leadership skills and responsibility for self and others. These teachers not
only have the required pedagogical skills to teach these students but also posses character
building traits which are necessary for these student’s survival (Davis, 1999). Foster and
Reele (2000, p. 12) state that “it is the style of teaching which requires an authoritative
parenting style which integrates acceptance, involvement, firm control and respect”.
A positive and nurturing environment is therefore significant for the Black male
retention, development and satisfaction with college. For faculty to truly change toward
a student centered professional retention mentality, educational planners have to place
high value on programs that improve retention and give staff the time and reward to
invest the effort to maximize the outcomes (Cuseo, 2003). According to Lidholm (2002),
“program mangers have to also take into consideration the compatibility between the
characteristics of faculty and the attributes of their work environment. A sense of fit
between faculty and their institution is important, because faculty perceptions and
behavior are known to affect their work environment” (p. 224).
According to Lee, Letiz, Noel, and Saluri (1985) a major source of resistance to
changing retention programs on campuses is faculty misconception of retention efforts.
They further postulate that “faculty is a critical part of any retention program but their
20
efforts should not be assumed, as they are subjected to a wide variety of pulls, which
involve investment of their time. They will select what they want to be involved with, to
what extent, and will give priority to those tasks that carry the greatest weight in the
reward system” (p. 399).
The needs of a diversified African American male student population are
constantly shifting with students of different age groups, socioeconomic backgrounds and
preparation levels. They bring to college different variables that affect their college
experiences, which have to be addressed collectively or individually for them to graduate
(Pascarella, 1985). For African American males, their plight is of serious concern which
will require evaluation of strategies employed and solutions found to ensure that the
majority of African American male students graduate in five to six years.
The problem of retention therefore, is a complex issue and requires intervention
from all facets of the college to make it a success. Faculty and program managers have to
work together on the same strategic plan, having a common understanding of the
dynamics of at risk students (Chenoweth, 1999).
Background and Significance
Alabama A & M University (AAMU) was organized through the effort of an ex
slave in 1875 and became a land-grant college with the passing of the Morrill Act of
1890. Alabama A & M University is located in Huntsville, a city of 186, 0000 residents,
with an enrollment of over 6,000 students during the 2003-2004 school year. It defines
itself as a center of knowledge through teaching and research, and provides baccalaureate
and graduate degrees, including Ph.D. degrees. It also provides vocational training and
public service in the form of agricultural extension as part of its land granting mandate
21
(Alabama A & M University, 2001).
The admission process is designed to accommodate students with different
educational backgrounds. As part of its mission, the institution;
1. Commits itself to the provision of a comprehensive program designed to meet the
challenges of the larger community and for providing programs necessary to adequately
address the major needs and problems of capable students who have experienced limited
access to education;
2. provides excellence in education and a scholarly environment in which inquiry and
discriminating minds may flourish; and
3. provides programs to adequately address the major needs and problems of capable
students who have had limited access to education.
The objective of each student entering the university is to graduate in a four-year
time-frame. The university is cognizant of its role in helping students to graduate within
this time frame, and the university examined the various factors contributing to them not
meeting those objectives. In recognition of its role in assisting the various cohorts in
graduating as scheduled , a study was conducted by Alabama A & M University in 1986-
87 to examine the factors that contributed to student attrition.
A report, Increasing Student Success: A Campus Wide Retention Plan, (Alabama
A& M University, 1988) was developed by a task force on student retention. From this
report a strategic academic plan was developed. The model had four areas of attention
which included the following components: (a) academic advisement center to address
academic, social and psychological needs, (b) tutorial and referral service, (c) key
advisors (school level), and (e) major /academic advisors.
22
During the early nineties, data from the Office of Counseling and Student
Development indicated that the greatest attrition rate was occurring in the freshman to
junior years. To correct the situation, the university revised and improved its freshman
seminar and new student orientation program to reflect the skills necessary for college
survival. It also improved its learning community experience by instituting mandatory
campus residence for all freshmen living outside the city of Huntsville. The living
facilities were also upgraded to make them more students friendly and equipped with
study halls and computer labs.
The institution also expanded University College, the entry unit for all freshmen
and first-time students, to provide advisement and counseling, and for transfer students
with 31 or fewer semester hours. An adjustment was made to the curriculum to improve
and increase developmental programs, and academic services were developed to offer
specific services during orientation of new students. These initiatives contributed to a
75% return rate of the fall 2000 cohort for the second year, the third best result for four-
year colleges in the state of Alabama (Alabama Commission on Higher Education, 2001).
The six-year graduation rates of the respective cohorts (Table 1) between 1992
and 1996 indicated that less than a third of all African American males who were enrolled
at the institution were graduating in six years.
======================================================Table 1.1992-1997 Cohorts graduation rates for African American males/females Alabama A&M University after 6 Years
Year % males % females
1992 27.8 44.27
1993 27.34. 42.17
23
1994 32.33 38.4
1995 29.44 50.69
1996 31.88 44.89
Source: Alabama Commission on Higher Education: Completion and Retention Rates Report, 2001.
In realizing that the services of University College could not carry out the
objectives required to meet the retention needs of all cohorts, the Office of Retention and
Academic Support (RAS) was created in 2001 with the mandate to coordinate and
implement programs and services to assist undergraduate students successfully complete
their degree.
The mission of RAS is to be instrumental in developing, coordinating and
implementing programs and services to assist students with successful degree
completion. It also designed programs to assist students in reducing acclimatization,
stress, and make connections with peer and faculty so as to improve their chances for
graduating. RAS was designated to work with all academic departments, student services
and all academic support units to help students reduce the obstacles that prevented them
from completing their degrees and foster interaction among students, faculty and staff.
Tinto (1987) and Braunstien and McGrath (1997) emphasized that nearly 85% of
student departures are voluntary and occur even though most students maintain adequate
levels of academic performance. Administrative personnel, faculty members and staff
therefore, must develop an understanding of students who withdraw and the reasons why
they do. Programs that are designed must have inputs from administration, academic
staff, alumni, and student services. They have to work together and be on the same
strategic plan, having a common understanding of the issues and concerns of students at
24
risk.
It is imperative that the perceptions and the experiences of individuals be
examined so that decisions made are guided by research (Levin & Levin 1992). Levin
and Levin et.al further stated that in order to improve retention rates for at-risk minority
students, program developers will benefit from consultation or collaboration with
researchers and faculty in the areas of student life and curriculum development.
Braunstien (1997) indicated that if this does not occur the institution will have several
departments with an abundance of retention programs with different budget systems and
responsibilities offering relevant, but non- coordinated and segmented services.
Changes in academic and essential program objectives are usually based more
frequently on the planner’s assumptions, personal convictions and perceptions
(Braunstien, McGrath, 1997). Administrators, therefore, must pay attention to the
compatibility between the characteristics of faculty and the factors that affect their work
environment (Lidholm, 2002). Faculty have to be challenged to be not only facilitators of
learning but also be able to accommodate the problems and experiences of African
American males and lend their support in enhancing their collegiate experiences
(Spradley, 2001). The perceptions of faculty regarding program design and
implementation becomes critical in successful planning, executing and evaluating any
initiative to improve retention. If faculty perceives that there is no fit between them, their
institution, and work environment, then their participation in programs will be affected
(Braunstien, McGrath, 1997).
Statement of the Problem
25
The primary issue investigated in this study is: What are faculty perceptions
regarding the institution’s retention program for African American male students as
related to race, gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and academic advising?
The Purpose of the Study
Several studies have been conducted on the retention of African American
students at Predominately White Colleges and Universities (PWCUs) and at HBCUs, but
little research as been conducted on the perceptions of faculty regarding their perception
of institutional initiatives that affect the retention of male African American students.
According to Hickenson (2002) limited research has also been conducted with respect to
gender and race at HBCU.
The purpose of the study is to contribute to the body of research on student
retention by investigating faculty perceptions regarding a historically black institution’s
retention program for African American male students as related to race, gender, age,
years of teaching, academic rank, and academic advising.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
1. What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional
policies for increasing the retention of African American male students?
2. What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional
support for increasing the retention of African American male students?
3. How do workload influences faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of
the institution’s retention program affecting African American male
26
students?
4. What knowledge do faculty members possess regarding the institution’s
retention program?
5. How do faculty perceptions differ on the effectiveness of the
institution’s retention program with respect to race, gender, age, years of
teaching, academic rank, and academic advising?
The Need for the Study
The study will be useful to the entire university community and specifically to:
1. The Board of Trustees – The study will provide information, that will assist the board
in formulating and amending institutional policies regarding student retention.
2. The President – It will provide the President with information regarding faculty
perceptions of student retention and how institutional retention policies are implemented.
2. The Provost/ Vice President of Academic Affairs and The Vice President for Students
Affairs – It will provide these senior administrators with information regarding faculty
perceptions of retention programs that can be used as a benchmark to determine
acceptable faculty engagement.
3. Dean of University College/ Office of Retention and Support – It will provide
information from the faculty’s perspectives on the effectiveness of the institution’s
retention program for African American male students.
4. Deans and Department Chairs – The information will be useful to these academic
leaders to serve as a tool for improving faculty participation in retention initiatives.
5. Faculty- To make faculty aware of their role and expectations by students, and the
institution in fulfilling the retention mandate.
27
Limitations of the Study
1. The sample was limited to full-time faculty (9-12 months) employed by the
university during the 2003-2004 academic year.
2. The study was limited to one Historically Black Public University.
3. The variables associated with retention in this study were limited only to faculty
perceptions, and do not take into consideration other factors such as students’
socioeconomic background, college satisfaction, financial aid, and first generation
college entrants.
Definition of Terms
1. Institutional Policy. Clear and explainable university policy that is central to the
institution and approved by the board of trustees.
2. Institutional support. Allocation of funds, personnel, facilities, technology, and other
essential resources.
3. Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Institutions established before 1960 with
the primary intention of educating African Americans.
4. Retention – The flow of students through the university within a 1-6 year time period
and is reflected in the way students enroll, complete their degree
requirements or drop out.
5. Faculty Workload. Time spent in teaching, research, service and professional
28
activities.
6. Full- time faculty. Individuals employed by the university on a 9-12 month contract,
who teach a minimum of 6- 9 hours credit hours per semester as
graduate faculty, and 9-15 credit hours per semester as
undergraduate faculty
(American Association of University Professors, 2003).
7. Research and professional activity. Scholarly endeavors beyond those required for
effective teaching; the results intended for publication, dissemination for
evaluation or criticism by peers in books, scholarly journals or
professional meetings (American Association of University
Professors, 2003).
8. Years of Teaching. Number of years spent participating in classroom teaching,
directed studies, and supervised field work, grading, advising, and
directing thesis or dissertation, serving or graduate or thesis
committees at the institution sampled.
9. Frequency of Contact. Interaction with students in and out of the classroom.
Organization of the study
The remainder of the research report presents the chapters beginning with the
review of the literature in Chapter two. The literature review is divided into (1)
theoretical perspective, (2) impact of institutional policy on retention, (3) impact of
faculty support, (4) impact of gender, (5) impact of workload, and (6) impact of years of
teaching. In chapter three the research methodology is presented while chapter four
provides the presentation and analysis of the data. Chapter five presents the findings,
29
conclusions, recommendations and recommendation.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical Perspective
To understand the factors that are expected in a successful retention program there
has to be an examination of how the students’ environment in and out of the institution
affects their persistence. Austin’s (1985) theory of involvement concludes that for
students to be successful they must be involved with their environment and exploit the
opportunities available.
30
Tinto’s (1987) theory of institutional departure depicts the impact of student
environment on persistence (see Figure 1.). Tinto stipulated that students enter college for
various reasons including personal, family, academic characteristics, college disposition
and goals. These have to be modified and reformulated through longitudinal interactions
with individuals and structures in both the academic and social system of the institution.
Satisfying encounters will lead to greater integration by the student and enhances the
student retention chances. Negative interactions, on the other hand, will distance the
student and create marginality and withdrawal (Tinto, 1987).
Fig 1. Model of Institutional Departure===============================================================
31
Source: Tinto, 1987, Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student
attrition. (p.114) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tinto (2002) stated that persistence by students is related to the level of
integration of the student within an institution and the feelings they experience as they try
to fit into the community. Students, he concludes, must feel that their goals are aligned
with the institution’s goals and must have sufficient interaction to feel that their goals and
values are the same as the organization’s.
Pascarella’s general model for assessing changes ( see Figure 2) also emphasizes
environmental variables effect on retention. He stated that college background, pre-
college traits, the structural and organizational characteristics of the institution, the
college or university environment influences student interaction and socialization. He
concludes that student retention is determined by the quality of the student effort to
socialize and interact with socialization agents such as peers, faculty, and the effort in
learning and developing.
32
Fig 2. Model of Undergraduate Socialization===============================================================
===============================================================Source: From Pascarella, E. (1985). College environmental influences on learning and
cognitive development: A critical review and synthesis. (p.50) New York: Agathon
The Weidman model of undergraduate socialization, takes into consideration
socialization and psychological influences on a student’s effort to change their behaviors
(see Figure 3). Student behavior within a college structure and the organizational setting
can be influenced by groups out of the college environment such as parental socialization,
church, other community organizations, peers and employers. When they become
exposed to the college normative and socialization experience they have to make a
decision to maintain or change their aspirations or values that they had on entering
college. The encounters with peers and faculty will help the student decide on career,
lifestyle preferences, values and aspirations.
33
Fig 3. Weidman Model of Undergraduate Socialization===============================================================
===============================================================Source: Weidman, J. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J
Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol.5). New York: Agathon.
Molnar (1996) stated that social and psychological outcomes are important
contributions to predicting retention but his analysis concludes that the only variables
associated with social integration that encourage persistence were those that support
academic involvement, credit hours attempted, prior expectation of graduation, and
participation in orientation course.
Bean (1980), in his model of attrition, also supports the notion that environment
shapes students behaviors and attitudes. He postulates that different types of students in
the same institution differ in their types of economic and social experiences. Social and
academic integration in the institution affect student persistence at different times during
34
the college experience. The intentions and approaches are shaped by attitudes and
experiences, intentions, background, environment and behavioral outcomes. These
factors, he concludes, affect students intentions to leave the university.
According to Diola (1996) the typical construct of these models includes parental
approval, financial attitudes, and opportunity to transfer, courses, encouragement from
friends, institutional quality fit, academic integration, social integration, institutional
commitment, goal commitment and interest to persist. The research concludes that
academic and social integration are considered as longitudinal outcomes, and their
measurements focus on events or outcomes that take place within the college experience.
If college experiences are critical in examining retention status, efforts of
Historically Black Colleges and Universities and open admission colleges to identify
those who are likely to withdraw prior to, or shortly after enrollment is not the correct
procedure. Diola (1996) concludes that the focus should be on students early in their
college experience, the student/college match, culture, and the initial experiences of the
students, academic advising, and support services.
Impact of Institutional Policy and Support
In a comprehensive model on black student retention Credle and Dean (1991)
stated that colleges must examine their philosophy and mission, asses the institution’s
ability to work with black students and assesses black students’ academic and social
readiness. They conclude that when the students enter college, the advisor, staff and
faculty must establish rapport with them, help them work within the organizational
35
structure, assist with career and the world of work, and adopt services to support these
endeavors.
According to Cuseo (2003) academic advisors are in an ideal position to connect
with students rather than academic support personnel. Johnson (1997) stated that it is the
people who come face to face with students on a regular basis who provide the positive
growth experiences for students that enable them to identify their goals and talents and
learn how to use them. Tinto (1987) stated that academic advising is the only structured
activity on campuses in which students have the opportunity to have one to one
interaction with a concerned representative of the institution. Academic advising
therefore is one of the major social and academic domains of the college experience that
decide if students leave or stay. Johnson (1997) also stated that advising is not an isolated
process, as retention efforts must be focused on all components of the campus and the
university. He postulates that colleges and universities must build an effective and strong
connection between advising programs and various components on campus. Wyckoff
(1999) in his research concludes that one of the key factors that contribute to poor
advising is lack of consensus about the role and function of the advisors.
Milem (1996) stated that involvement influences students’ perception of
institutional support. His findings suggest that early involvement of the student with
faculty have positive effect on student persistence therefore, students must not only be
encouraged to be actively engage with their peers but also with their professors. Mohr,
Fiche, and Sedlacek (1998) in a study of non- returning seniors concluded that the
retention of seniors is best predicted by dissatisfaction with academic guidance,
dissatisfaction with access to school information, dissatisfaction with quality of
36
education, and the feeling of institutional alienation. This is further supported by Furr and
Elling (2002) who found a negative relationship between not knowing about campus
programs, interest in the university, and retention.
Furr further postulated that the university should collect information prior to the
student entering college and after the student begins so that they can have information
from the students concerning social integration, involvement in and out of class
experiences, program activities, financial needs, and intentions to work through
structured climate surveys. He stated that if faculty members are aware of this
information they can develop profiles to help students monitor and balance their various
activities, interact on the student’s behalf with financial aid, provide information for
counselors, residential hall advisors and other faculty members before the student’s
problems become insurmountable.
Shwitzer (1993) stated that persistence through graduation was related positively
to voluntarily seeking help. In his study he stated that as voluntary use of counseling
increased, the academic performance of second year at risk students who participated in
brief mandatory counseling improved dramatically. According to Boyd (1987) many
students who are at risk however, fail to avail themselves of the resources provided for
them by their universities. He stated that in the interest of academic retention, colleges
and universities must take a proactive stance by contacting students at risks to offer them
specific services.
Friedlander (1980) stated that at-risk students are less likely than low- risk
students to seek assistance from academic related programs, become involved in college
activities or report that college is helping them to make academic progress. Requiring
37
these students to participate in remedial programs generates it own problems as these
students become isolated from the general student population. Visibly distinguishing
these students creates a sense of inferiority and separateness. He postulates that program
staff and faculty should go after these students to increase the likelihood of the students
making use of campus resources. High-risk students he concludes should be worked with
closely to develop their confidence, skills, and interest in learning.
One of the key reasons for students at-risk not seeking assistance is the
communication apprehension that exits. According to McCroskey (1989) communication
apprehension is conceptualized as a casual agent in student success. He stated that this is
implicated in both academic and interpersonal success. From his study the results
indicated that students with communication apprehension were more likely to drop out
and attain lower grade point averages compared to students with low communication
apprehension. The impact is strongest in the first two years of school. Hawken (1991)
further confirmed that the social confirmation dimensions of communication competence
differentiate persisters and non persisters up to four years in college. Cuseo (2003)
suggested that the institution should deliver academic support intrusively by initiating
contact with students and aggressively bringing the support services to them, rather than
hoping the students will take advantage of them in their own time.
Tinto (1975) stated that out-of-class contact with students has a powerful effect
on the persistence of students who are “withdrawal prone”. Tinto (1997), in his study of
high-risk students, found that every student who persisted had cited someone on the
faculty who has made contact with them outside of the classroom. This becomes more
apparent when it is embedded into the institutional mission.
38
The perception of the extent that a program shares in the institutional mission is
an important component to faculty participation in any program. Faculty who buy into
institutional mission report greater satisfaction than those who consider the mission
irrelevant (Padilla, 2000). Thomas, Giles and Green (1994), on the other hand, stated that
faculty should be convinced that retention is important and the problems associated with
student retention are a part of the college life. According to Thomas, Giles and Green
retention effort, should be organized for faculty and students to understand how to
receive and take advantage of the available assistance.
According to Saluri, Levitz, Noel and associates (1985) “there are at least five
factors that determine the success in organizing a campus effort to confront the issue of
retention. They are (a) institutional climate, (b) definitive objectives, (c) well conceived
strategy for achieving these objectives, (d) involvement of key faculty members and
administrators, and (e) specific and realistic recommendations” (p.432).
According to Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) institutional climate can influence
faculty members if there activities have some reward. They stated that faculty cannot be
expected to have an involvement in out-of-class student activities if they are recruited for
research and whose research brings them more prominence than involvement with under
graduate students. Faculty recruitment and reward, therefore, should focus on reflecting
the seriousness of the institution to retention.
The Impact of Faculty Support
39
Bandura’s (1997) theory of self-efficacy postulates that problems are affected by
environmental and prior experiences. Individuals who are motivated to pursue a course of
action and the way they support environmental initiatives are affected by self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy and outcome expectations are beliefs about whether the outcome is worth
pursuing. Expectations of a person’s efficacy determine whether behavior will be
imitated, how much effort will be expended and how long the effort will be sustained in
the presence of obstacles.
Commitment of faculty, as well as the institution, is central to higher education’s
program success. Armon (1995) stated that faculty want to help their institutions, and
administrations should communicate with them openly, honestly, and frequently in face-
to-face dialogues centered on their mission. Armon (1995) further found that
commitment to an organization by faculty does not change due to faculty age, gender,
length of employment, teaching load, marital status, tenure status and highest educational
degree achieved. Organizational commitment, he postulates, correlated positively with
perceptions of openness of communication system, professional growth opportunities,
socialization opportunities, pay satisfaction and personal agreement with collegiate
mission.
A study conducted by Sydow and Sandel (1998) to determine the reasons behind
the high rate of student attrition indicated that student faculty interaction had a stronger
relationship to student satisfaction then any other variable. They reported that academic
advisors gave their advisees encouragement and support, helped them define their goals,
sent notes, made phone calls, visited advisee, discussed dropping out, emphasized class
attendance, and referred advisees to counselors and tutors.
40
This is further supported by Carerra, Nora and Castaneda (1993) who suggested
three issues that have significant impact on students thought of leaving the university,
faculty members who have been psychologically supportive of the student’s needs,
faculty who return phone calls and emails in a timely fashion, and faculty members who
are approachable. The research also contends that faculty who help students gain
competency and self-worth, and who want students to succeed have implemented more
meaningful strategies for effective intervention. From the student perspective,
undergraduates value faculty who function very effectively as mentors and counselors,
are accessible and available, are knowledgeable and helpful, are personable and helpful,
and act as a humanizing agent.
Henderson (2002) found that the majority of students at a historically black
college felt it is most important to have someone who cares about their future and has a
vested interest in their education. Race, the research revealed, had nothing to do with the
quality of the individual. Lee (1999) also said that the race of the faculty members was
not important in facilitating minority-mentoring relationship but it was the quality of the
interaction that was important. Lee further postulates that students expected a faculty
advisor to help them gain insight of the dominant culture, to help them succeed both in
attaining their degree and securing employment in their career field. According to Lee,
Noel, Letiz and Saluri (1985) “ among the characteristics of those persons with the
greatest potential to retention projects seem to be those with (1) knowledge of students
concern and behavior, (2) clout and credibility within the institution decision mechanism,
and (3) time to attend regularly scheduled meeting” (p.42).
41
Many faculty members may not be aware of the impact of these factors on
retention. Braunstein & McGrath (1997) stated that there should be informal discussions
as well as formal opportunities to discuss and propose ways by which the issue of
retention should be addressed. As part of that dialogue he postulates that the focus
should be on both the functional and substantive reality of institutional life so that
stakeholders are less disengaged and have greater participation. He suggested that those
responsible for retention share the predictors of retention with members of the
community so that they can be sensitized to needs of the students. It is then that room can
be allowed for the design that is conducive and adaptive to the academic environment.
For faculty to truly change towards a student-centered professional advising
mentality, educational administrators have to place a high value on academic advisement
as a professional responsibility. Lowe (2000) said that in comparing student satisfaction
with academic advising the frequency and contact with faculty greatly predicts student
satisfaction. He also indicated that academic advising varies greatly across colleges,
between student groups, and there was a difference in the perception of advising based on
the student status. In order to bring about a more effective advising system, Lowe (2000)
recommends that advising be recognized as a high priority activity, advisors be trained,
advising responsibilities be defined, materials be improved and become more widely
available, there must be accountability, evaluations be conducted and reward measures be
instituted.
Research has shown that faculty influence affects retention of students more than
any other group and is a good predictor of student retention. Faculty transforms many
students from deprived backgrounds into competent confident black professionals.
42
Students who interact with faculty frequently report significant increases in educational
satisfaction and consider the caring attitudes as the most important factor contributing to
their degree completion than any other variable (Tinto, 1975; Austin, 1977). Out- of-
class contacts with students have a perennial impact on students who are “withdrawal
prone”. Frequent faculty contact in and out of the classroom, whether it is in the form of
advising, mentoring and counseling, requires time and commitment for it to be successful
(Astin, 1985). The present system as it exists does not allow faculty to contribute
effectively to their professional endeavors, meet their academic responsibilities and serve
the needs of male students (AAUP, 2003).
For faculty to invest time and effort in addition to teaching, research and
publishing it will be reasonable to expect some form of compromise. According to Boyer
(1991), faculty research and scholarship should be more broadly defined to include the
advising and retention process, and it should be apart of the tenure process. He further
stated that for institutions to make high quality advisement a reality, advisors need to be
aware of the position and commitment of the institution towards advising, be given the
time to do it, know that the time will be counted to their promotion and tenure, maintain
advisee ratios that are small enough to deliver personal advising, provide strong incentive
for students to meet their advisors, identify effective advisors and position students who
are at risk in their major area so they are declared to the advisor during their first
semester.
Berger (1996) indicated that various forms of involvement did influence students'
perceptions of institutional support and peer support. In turn, these perceptions of support
appear to have an effect on students' levels of institutional commitment. Of greater
43
significance, he reported, was early involvement with faculty, which tended to have a
positive role in molding student persistence.
Faculty, know that the demands of tenure and promotion are vested in scholastic
achievement. Faculty members would like to be considered as scholars and not just
teachers. They believe that research and teaching are complementary and not competing
activities. While administrators reiterate that teaching is priority they expect faculty to be
involved in research and service actives along with their standard teaching load
(Sharobeam & Howard, 2000).
Historically Black Colleges and Universities do not function under the publish or
perish philosophy. Administrators under pressure from public policies, legislation and
cost constraints have increased teaching loads for faculty, which have decreased the
quality of their research and give less time to scholarly activities. An increase in student
to faculty ratio decreases the educational quality which underscores retention initiatives
(Massy and Zemesky 1994). Studies by Wagner (1994) found that faculty promotion and
tenure decisions are marginally affected by excellence in teaching and are mainly based
on faculty research activities. Research is not only essential for promotion and tenure but
also for career and professional development.
The changing demands of students, the demand to carry out productive research
and invest in the service components can create tension and resentments in addressing
program objectives associated with the African American males. For a faculty member at
a historically black college, a conflict can arise between racial uplift goals of working to
improve and advance the condition of one's race, promotion and tenure obligations.
Faculty can have societal and community impacts through their research but faculty have
44
to make decisions every day between obligations that are focused on individual
accomplishments, such as publishing a research article, and obligations to race-related
service activities (Townsend, 2003).
The overrepresentation of minority faculty in service involvements has a few
interesting twists. As long as faculty is not supporting community service initiatives, then
community service initiatives will be marginalized (O’Meara, 2002). Furthermore,
according to Ascher (1991), as long as service is marginalized and under rewarded in the
academic work hierarchy, faculty who are extensively involved in service and who are
not tenured will risk the ultimate, which is marginalization and denial of tenure for failure
to engage in the activities that are rewarded through promotion. Omera (2002) support
this further by stating that the dilemma presents a challenge for scholars interested in
service roles and campuses interested in creating a service culture. Faculty support for
programs, he conclude will depend on their perception to programs that require constant
interaction between faculty and students and which infringes on time for activities
affecting their tenure.
The Impact of Gender
Bonner (1995), in examining the perceptions of African-American male and
female faculty and administrators in areas such as promotion, tenure, institutional
climate, and professional life, indicated significant differences by gender in response to
items assessing the subjects' perceptions of promotion, tenure, institutional climate, and
professional life. Female subjects reported lower satisfaction with their professional lives,
reported a greater sense of isolation on campus, and reported differential and more
negative treatment by colleagues. Bonner (1995) stated that women faculty is reporting
45
greater pressure, more so than their male counterparts, as they have had to juggle family
and academic responsibilities. Buck (2003) also stated that women faculty, because of
their traditional role, are expected to provide more service to their students, the
department, and institution in greater measures than their male colleagues.
Bonner (2001), in a study on gender issue at Historically Black Colleges revealed
that black women continue to experience a pattern of location at the bottom of the
employment, rank, and tenure ladder. Moreover, they indicate that in relation to barriers
to promotion, exclusion from the curricula, a chilly climate in the workplace and
classroom, and sexual harassment. Black women face the same obstacles at HBCUs as
they do at predominantly white institutions, because most of these institutions lag behind
in addressing gender issues. Black women on faculty are also faced with the issues
relating to managing career and family, attaining tenure, overcoming external barriers,
and establishing support systems (Bonner, 2001). Dey (2002) reported that tenure status,
race, gender and household/childcare roles all produced significant level of stress for
white and black women faculty but non-white women report higher rates of stress related
to subtle racism.
Racial uplift is a concern for students as well as faculty. Involvement with
external racial communities through service is an important mechanism for faculty and
students to contribute to their racial community (Harris, 1995). Depending, therefore, on
supportive network that exits and the development culture that encourages participation
by faculty in most critical retention discussions, female faculty perception and
participation will be affected. If there is no focus on institutional climate, support systems
and networks, role ambiguity and role overload, the connections between racism and
46
sexism, along with other systemic barriers facing black women faculty in the academy,
then women participation in retention program will be affected (Bonner, 2001).
According to Allen (1998), there is a gender gap in public doctoral institutions.
Men and women give different priorities to their work responsibilities. Males in general,
he postulates, spend more time on research than teaching and publish more frequently
than their female counterparts. They work more hours irrespective of their ethnicity.
Female faculty, on the other hand, devote more time to teaching and spends less time on
research and publish less.
Impact of Work Load
Jane Buck (2003), in her presentation to an AAUP conference underscores the
plight of faculty at Historically Black Colleges by stating “the problems of individual
faculty members of HBCUs are of great concern. Faculty members of HBCUs complain
of crushing teaching loads coupled with accelerating demands for research productivity,
lack of effective participation in governance, pathetically low salaries, increasingly
difficult time criteria for promotion and tenure.” (p.4)
The AAUP (2004) guidelines states that “only in extraordinary circumstances will
tenure track, probationary faculty be called to teach more than 9 credit hours per
semester.” (p.3). Annual criteria for such faculty are 60% teaching, 30% research and
10% service. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (1999), full-time
faculty members work about fifty-five hours a week, and part-time faculty work nearly
forty. With a further decrease in most state appropriation for higher education, faculty at
Historically Black Colleges and Universities are teaching more courses, have larger
undergraduate classes and are working 48-60 hours per week (AAUP, 2003).
47
Faculty role and workload are usually shaped by academic culture include values
and incentives that tend to be in large part disciplined related and institutionally driven
(Amey, 1995). Workload is critical in creating work situations that allow faculty to meet
criteria for promotion and tenure. Workload imbalances or inequities, also, can lead to
significant morale problems within the faculty unit. Dissatisfaction with workload
allocation and possible inequities among faculty creates faculty dissatisfaction and
problems with cooperation. For these reasons programs should ensure that workload
policies cover all faculty roles, and are clearly stated and fair to all faculties. Equally
important is a faculty based mechanism to monitor the implementation of these policies
and one that pays special attention to differences based on race, gender, and rank
(Seaberg, 1998).
Four work environmental factors mostly connected with stress are exhaustion,
alienation, low self-esteem, and depression. These occur most often where there are high
teaching loads, low institutional support including pay and satisfaction, low participation
institutional governance and loss of satisfaction with academic life (Wills, 2000). The
workload of faculty requires great time management in balancing professional lives, work
environment and situations occurring on the job itself. Faculty who try to get more done
in less time frequently experience academic “burn out”, frustration and work related
stress (Plane & Jacob 2000).
Plane and Jacob (2000) also maintained that time management is generally seen
as effective when individuals can control their work. If there is no great organizational
effectiveness and faculty are not able to manage academic stress and work related
pressure they will “burnt out”. When faculty workload is tremendous and stress is not
48
managed the result is lessened job satisfaction, depression and family difficulties. Plane
and Jacobs (2000) conclude that if faculty believes they have control of good and bad
outcomes in their lives they will be better able to cope with the stress related to academic
workload.
Impact of Years of Teaching
According to Knight (2002), attempts to improve teaching are often focused on
beginning teachers but there are indications that older teachers are losing teaching service
vitality. Knight contend that “ faculty exhibit a general displacement energy in the
second half of their careers and have a tendency to exhibit withdrawal from work, exhibit
less activism and zealousness about the pursuit of service excellence.” (p. 76). Knight
(2002) further stated that attempts to improve teaching are often focused on younger
faculty who tend to be more active due to tenure and promotion obligations but older
faculty is losing teaching service vitality. Most still do teach but they face new
challenges, new teaching mandates, a more diverse student body and new policies but
tend not to engage in instructional, developmental and professional activities.
According to Rosa (2003), faculty becomes polarized as the privileged elite of
older tenure males who teach graduate students and have time available for research.
According to the National Education Association (1995, 2001) recently hired full- time
faculty (five years or less) are less likely to have tenure or be on tenure tract than is the
case of full- time faculty members. The study concluded that tenured faculty members
publish more, teach more classes, serve on more committees, have more contact with
students, and receive higher salaries than those who are on tenure tract.
49
Lindholm (2002), in a study on understanding faculty work experience and its
relationship, looked at faculty members assessment of fit, intellectual stimulation
social/economic and structural support based on gender, career stage and departmental
affiliation concludes that the importance of university based associations tend to decline
as faculty become established in their careers. This, he stated, can create conflicting
dimensions for faculty work and individuals as institutional characteristics operate
together to affect organizational community.
Summary of Literature Review
African American male student retention is affected by social and psychological
experiences associated with their environment before and after they entered college. They
have different experiences and expectations upon entering college that must be molded
and guided within the college environment so that career and graduation expectation are
achieved. For this to occur social programs have to be designed to help at risk African
American male students with academic and social integration.
The cornerstone for its success is faculty student socializing and interaction in or
out of the classroom. Faculty role in retention program success reflects the variety of
roles they play, whether it is advisor, mentor or teacher. Their interaction and reaction to
African American male students can determine their persistence to graduation.
The literature cited showed that:
1. Faculty participation in retention programs is impacted by clearly
defined institutional policies, goals and resources.
50
2. The success of retention initiatives for African American male students
will be impacted by the frequency of informal or formal interaction with
faculty in and out of the classroom. The level of support will be
determined, if it is consistent with faculty personal and professional
goals.
3. Faculty, irrespective of gender, face the same professional issues
throughout their careers, however women faculty because of their
traditional roles are expected to provide more service to students than
their males colleagues. They also have additional issues relating to
family and career, which can create overload and role ambiguity. This
can affect their participation in retention programs.
4. High teaching loads at Historically Black Colleges and Universities can
create dissatisfaction and faculty cooperation. Workload must seem fair
and equitable and faculty must be able to balance both their professional
lives and participate in activities such as retention.
5. Recently hired faculty in trying to establish their careers are more active
and vibrant and show a willingness to accommodate a more diverse
student body. More establish faculty members on the other hand are
more involved in research, teach graduate students and involved with
policy issues. An environment thus has to created for both groups to
work together in their different dimensions to improve African
American male student retention.
51
The literature cited postulates that there are connections between faculty
participation in intrusive programs based on their ability and willingness to manage and
balance academic and social responsibilities. Research also show that the level of
institutional commitment, tenure, faculty workload, gender of the faculty and years of
teaching, are embedded in the visages of academic life, and do affect participation.
Faculty perceptions are based on interrelated variables molded into their academic
experiences and campus environment.
Chapter 3
Methodology
52
Introduction
The purpose of the study is to contribute to the body of research on student
retention by investigating faculty perceptions regarding a Historically Black University’s
institutional retention program for African American male students as related to race,
gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and academic advising.
This chapter presents information regarding (a) the population, (b) data collection, (c)
research instrument, (d) research procedures and design, and (e) data analysis.
Population
Permission to complete the study was received from the Provost and Vice
President for Academic affairs (see Appendix A). A request was made to Institutional
Research and Planning for a list of the full time academic faculty for the 2003-2004
school year. The population for this study consisted of 250 full-time faculty at Alabama
A & M University.
As shown in Table 2 the racial profile was 50.3% Black non-Hispanic, 28.8%
White non-Hispanics, 13% Asian Pacific Islander, and 7.2% Non Resident alien. The
population also consisted of 187 or (65.1%) male faculty and 108 or (36 %) female
faculty.
Table 2. Headcount of full-time faculty by race and gender, 2003-2004===============================================================Gender Black-Non White Non Asian Pacific American Non Resident
Hispanic Hispanic Islander Indian Alien
53
_______________________________________________________________________Female 36.6% 35.7% 23.7% 0 4.8%Male 63.3% 64.3% 76.3% 1 95.2%Race as 50.3% 28.8% 13% 0.03% 7.2%A % ofTotal___________________________________________________________________N = 295
Table 3 shows the full-time faculty from schools and departments across the
institution. The School of Arts and Science comprise of 100 faculty, Agriculture and
Environmental Sciences has 60, Business with 28, Education 60, and Engineering and
Technology 47.
Table 3. Faculty members by schools and departments===============================================================
Full Time-FacultyAgriculture and Environmental Sciences 60
Agri-Business 9Community Planning and Urban Studies 6Family and Consumer Science 11Food and Animal Science 8
Plant and Soil Science 26 Arts and Sciences 100
Behavioral Sciences 11 English and Foreign Languages 35
Mathematics 14Chemistry 9
Biology 11 Physics 14 Social Work 6Business 28
Accounting 6Economic and Fiancé 11Management and Marketing 11
Education 60 Communicative Sciences and Disorders 6
Table 3. (continued)================================================================ Full Time-Faculty
54
Elementary and Early Childhood 9 Arts and Music 13
Physical Education 8 Psychology and Counseling 8 Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Leadership 16Engineering and Technology 47 Civil Engineering 6 Computer Science 12
Electrical Engineering 7Industrial Technology 14Mechanical Engineering 8
Total 295
Sampling Method
A copy of the faculty listing for 2004 was requested from The Office of Planning
and Institutional Research. Two lists were generated, the first presented faculty by gender
and race while the second listed faculty by schools and departments. The lists were
checked against the faculty database at aamu.edu, the official Web site of the institution
and the campus directory for 2003-2004.
Research Instrument
According to Lee (1997) surveys are useful in determining the actual
values of the variables studied and the relationship between them. They can be pretested,
used to determine appropriate response rate, evaluate non-response biases assessment of
whether any real relationships exits, and are appropriate to be used with other forms.
A questionnaire was developed specifically for this study. The developmental
process of the instrument involved:
55
(a) Identifying the intended population;
(b) identifying and clarifying the research objectives using issues addressed in
the literature review;
(c) designing and selecting appropriate research questions; and
(d) considering the relationship between questions on the instrument and the
research objectives.
The survey was designed to address and to seek information on faculty
perceptions regarding the institution’s retention program for African American male
students. The questionnaire was designed in six sections to address specific research
questions. A numeric Likert-like scale was used to measure participants’ responses of the
questionnaire items. Participants responded to a series of statements indicating whether
they strongly agree (SA), agree (A), disagree (D), neutral (N), or strongly disagree (SD).
Each item was associated with a value point and individual scores ranging from 1 for
strongly agree (SA) to 5 for strongly disagree (SD). The usable questionnaires were
numbered, coded, with value labels for preparation for computer analysis (Appendix H).
The relationship between the research questions and items in the questionnaire is shown
in Table 4.
Table 4. Relationship between research questions and items in questionnaire
Research Questions Related Items on Questionnaire
56
1. What are faculty perceptions regarding Institutional Policy 14-20the effectiveness of institutional policies for increasing the retention of African American male students?
2. What are faculty perceptions regarding Institutional Support 21-25 the effectiveness of institutional support for increasing the retention of African American male students?
3.How does faculty workload influence Workload 10-13 & 14-15? their perceptions of the effectivenessof the institution’s retention program Affecting African American male students?
4. What knowledge do faculty possess regarding the institution’s retention program?
Knowledge 26-31
5. How do faculty perceptions differ on the Race 6 effectiveness of the institutions retention Gender 7program affecting African American males Age 8with respect to race, gender, age, years Years of teaching 9of teaching, academic rank and academic Academic Rank 3 advising? Academic Advising 33-38
The instrument contained 38 questions and was divided into the following six
sections:
1. General faculty and demographic information,
2. faculty workload,
3. faculty perceptions of institutional policy towards retention of African
American males students,
4. faculty perceptions of the institution’s support towards the retention of
African American males students,
57
5. faculty perceptions about their knowledge of the institution’s retention
program and
6. academic advisement.
Procedure and Design
The subjects participated in the study during the spring semester of the 2003-
2004 academic year. A week before the survey instrument was distributed, a letter was
sent to the respective school deans explaining the purpose of the study. They were asked
to help in informing department chairs in their schools regarding the purpose of the study.
The Deans and Chairpersons were also to ensure that faculty members received,
completed, and returned the survey instrument. (See Appendix D).
The researcher delivered the survey instrument to each department and given to
the secretary or chair for distribution to the faculty in that department
Each survey package contained:
(a) a cover letter to faculty members (Appendix F),
(b) the questionnaire (see Appendix G),
(c) a return envelope addressed to the researcher. Each envelope contained a number
from 1-295.
A record sheet was developed and use to record the department name, range of surveys
distributed, number of surveys distributed, and the number of instruments returned.
The following steps were employed to collect the completed questionnaire:
58
1. In early April contact was made with the secretaries of the respective departments
soliciting their assistance in distributing the questionnaire to faculty members in
their department. The faculty list for the department was verified with each
secretary. A copy of the questionnaire along with the cover letter and an attached
numbered return envelope was distributed to each department. The numbers were
distributed in sequence based on the number of faculty in the department. The
secretaries were given a folder to place all returned, sealed responses.
2. The secretaries placed the questionnaire in the mailbox of the respective faculty
members in their department.
3. Faculty members were given six days to complete the questionnaire and return it
in a sealed envelope to the department office.
4. In mid April, the investigator made the first pickup from the secretaries in all the
departments. Data were entered on the record sheet as to how many envelopes
were picked up. No records were made of the names of the faculty members who
did not return the survey so as to maintain confidentiality and anonymity. The
secretaries’ assistance was solicited to remind faculty members to complete the
questionnaire.
5. During the third week of April, 280 phone calls were made to faculty by the
investigator encouraging their participation in the study. Another pickup was
made six days after the follow-up phone calls.
6. At the end of April, 270 letters (Appendix F) were mailed to faculty members as a
reminder to complete the questionnaire. A second pickup was made in early May.
59
7. During the first week in May 250 phone calls were made thanking faculty
members for their participation in the survey and encouraged those who had not
responded to complete the instrument and return it to their department secretary.
The final pickup was made in mid May.
Data Collection
One hundred and seventeen questionnaires or 39.7 percent were returned. Nine of
the questionnaires were discarded. Of the nine unusable responses five were returned
unanswered, and four were from individuals who no longer held full-time faculty
positions. Four surveys were returned through the mail and the investigator collected one
hundred and thirteen from the respective departments. Table 5 highlights the summation
of the data collection from the respective schools and departments
Questionnaires distributed
Number returned
Percent returned
Agriculture and Environmental Sciences 60 23 38.3
60
Agri-Business 9 2 22.2
Community Planning and Urban Studies 6 2 33.3
Family and Consumer Sciences 11 4 36.4
Food and Animal Science 8 3 37.5
Plant and Soil Science 26 12 46.2Arts and Sciences 100 35 35.0
Behavioral Sciences 11 4 36.4
English and Foreign Languages 35 11 31.4
Mathematics 14 4 28.6
Chemistry 9 3 33.3
Biology 11 3 27.3
Physics 16 4 25.0
Social Work 6 6 100.0
Business 28 13 46.4Accounting 8 3 37.5
Economics and Finance 9 5 55.6
Management and Marketing 11 5 45.5
Education 60 32 53.3 Communicative Sciences and Disorders 6 3 50.0
Early Childhood Elementary Education 9 2 22.2
Fine Arts and Music 13 4 32.5
Physical Education 8 5 62.5
Psychology and Counseling 8 3 37.5 Curriculum Teaching and Educational Leadership 16 9 56.25
Engineering 47 14 29.8 Civil Engineering 6 3 50.0
Computer Science 12 5 0.0
Electrical Engineering 7 0 0.0
Industrial Technology 14 0 0.0
Mechanical Engineering 8 3 37.5
Total 295 117 39.7 Table 5. Faculty Data Collection Summary
_______________________________________________________________________
Reliability and Validity
The instrument was field tested at a Historically Black four-year private college.
A letter was sent to the Provost/Vice-President for Academic Affairs at the institution
61
requesting permission to conduct a field test of the instrument (Appendix B). After verbal
permission was granted, a cover letter was provided to the field test subjects explaining
the purpose of the study (Appendix C). The instruments and numbered envelopes were
hand delivered to the offices of each department. The secretary of the departments placed
the instruments in respective faculty mailboxes. Seventy instruments were distributed.
The investigator returned to the field test site seven days after the initial distribution to
collect the instruments. A second visit was made four (4) days later to collect any
remaining completed instruments. Faculty members and the investigator had informal
discussions relating to the instrument and suggestions were made to clarify a few
questions. Twenty of the instruments or thirty-five percent were returned. The returned
instruments were evaluated and minor adjustments made where necessary.
Statistical Methods
The responses from the survey were coded and analyzed using the Statistical
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 10.0. Descriptive statistics were used to
analyze and compare the variables relating to the demographic profile of the respondents.
The frequency table was generated and cross-tabulated to compare the responses within
the variables. Chi-Square was used to determine the significance among the variables:
gender, race, age, years of teaching, academic rank, and tenure status.
CHAPTER 4
PRESENTATION AND ANAYSIS OF DATA
62
Introduction
Chapter four consists of presentation of the data. The results of the study are
presented in two sections. The first section presents descriptive analysis of the
participants. The second section presents data on the responses to individual research
questions relating to faculty perceptions regarding the institution’s retention program for
African American male students as related to race, gender, age, years of teaching,
academic rank and academic advising.
Part One
Profile of Respondents
The data were collected from 106 subjects. Sixty-nine or 65.1 % of the
respondents were males and 37 or 34.9 % were females (Table 6). Table 6 also shows the
age of the respondents in relationship to gender. A little less than half of the respondents,
both male and female were between the ages of 51-60 years old, 40.6% and 43.2 %
respectively. This is followed by the age range 41-50, with 26.1% for males versus 21.1%
females.
Table 6. Respondents age and gender. N=106===========================================================Age Range Male Percentage Female Percentage Total
20-30 1 1.4 2 5.4 3
63
31-40 8 11.6 4 10.8 12
41-50 18 26.1 8 21.7 26
51-60 28 40.6 16 43.2 44
61-70 14 20.3 7 18.9 21
Total 69 100 37 100 106
___________________________________________________________________
Table 7, on the other hand show 44 or 41.5 % of the respondents hold tenure, 27
or 25.5 % are non-tenured, and 35 or 33% hold a tenure track position.
Table 7. Tenure status. N=106=============================================================Tenure Status Frequency Percent
Tenure 44 41.5
Non- Tenure 27 25.5
Tenure Track 35 33
Total 106 100
____________________________________________________________________
Thirty-seven or 34.9% of the respondents have taught at the institution between
1 -5 years. Cumulatively, 65.1 percent of the faculty has taught at the institution between
1 - 15 years (Table 8).
Table 8. Years of teaching at the institution. N=106 ===================================================
Years Range Frequency Percentage
64
1-5 37 34.9
6-10 20 18.9
11-15 12 11.3
16-20 10 9.4
21-25 13 12.3
26 or more 14 13.2
Total 106 100
Eight or 7.5% of the respondents instructors. A little less than half of the
respondents were assistant professors, 50 or 47.2%, 28 or 26.4% are associate professors,
and 20 or 18.9% were professors (Table 9).
Table 9. Academic rank of respondents. N= 106 ======================================================Rank Frequency Percentage
Instructor 8 7.5
Assistant Professor 50 47.2
Associate Professor 28 26.4
Professor 20 18.9
Total 106 100
Table 10 shows that 21 or 19.8% of the respondents teach undergraduate courses
only, 24 or 22.6% teach graduate courses, and 61 or 57.5% teach graduate and
undergraduate courses.
Table 10. Courses taught. N = 104 =========================================================Course Taught Frequency Percent
Undergraduate Only 21 19.8
Graduate Only 24 22.6
Graduate & Undergraduate 61 57.5
65
Totals 106 100
As shown in Table 11, 66 or 62.3% advise 1-10 undergraduate male African
American males students per academic year, eight or 7.5% advise 21-30, seven or 6.6%
advice both 31-40 and 41-50 respectively while five or 4.7 % advise 51 and over.
Table 11. Number of undergraduate African American male undergraduate students advised per academic year. N=106
===========================================================Number Frequency Percent
1-10 66 62.3
21-30 8 7.5
31-40 7 6.6
41-50 7 6.6
51 & over 5 4.7
Missing 3 2.8
Total 106 100
Table 12 shows that 23 or 21.7 % of the respondents are affiliated with the School
of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, 33 or 31.1% with the School of Arts and
Sciences, nine (9) or 8.5% with the School of Business, 27 or 25.5% with the School of
Education and 14 or 13.2 % with the School of Engineering and Technology.
Table.12 School affiliation. N=106===========================================================School Frequency Percent
Agriculture and Environnemental Sciences
23 21.7
Arts & Sciences 33 31.1
Business 9 8.5
66
Education 27 25.5Engineering & Technology 14 13.2
Total 106 100
Part Two
In part two of the Chapter four the data is presented in the form of descriptive
statistics. Five research questions are discussed and presented in the form of frequency
tables and cross-tabs. The level of significance of the responses are determined by the use
of Chi-square at less than or equal to 0.05 probability. The responses from the survey
showing the frequency are displayed in Appendix J while the cross-tab and Chi-square
results are displayed in Tables 43-66 in Appendix H.
Research Question One
What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional policies
for increasing the retention for African American male students?
Seven questions were asked to solicit faculty responses. Faculty was asked to respond to
the following statements:
1. The institution’s retention policy is clearly communicated and understood.
2. The institution’s retention policy is aligned with its policy and mission.
3. The retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American
male students outside of the classroom.
4. The institution’s retention program encourages faculty and staff to work
collaboratively to increase retention of African American male students.
5. The institution’s retention policy is aligned with the values and goals of African
67
American male students.
6. The institution’s retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural environment
essential for African American male retention.
7. The institution’s retention policy addresses the social and economic background of
African American male students.
To measure the response to each item, a Likert scale was used. Participants were
asked to respond to the items by circling 1- strongly disagree, 2- disagree, 3- neutral
4- agree, 5- strongly disagree. Separate tables are developed for both the responses and
the summary of the Chi-Square results for the different variables. Cross tabulation and
Chi-Square analysis between the variables race, gender, age, years of teaching and
academic rank can be observed in the Appendix I.
In response to the item, the institution’s retention policy is clearly communicated
and understood, Table 13 shows that 12.6% strongly disagreed, 19.8 % disagreed, 30.2%
were neutral, 29.2% agreeing, and 9.5% strongly agreeing. Cumulatively (agreeing,
neutral, and disagreeing), there is a fairly even distribution of the responses (32.4%,
30.2% and 37.7% respectively), but there is a slight inclination to support the statement.
This indicates that, in general there is not an overwhelming support of this statement by
the respondents. Chi-square analysis shows no statistically significant relationship
between faculty perceptions of the clarity in the communication and understanding of the
retention policy irrespective of race (x2 = 26.5, p = 0.051), gender
(x2 = 2.1, p = 0.712), age ( x2 = 21.1, p = 0.739), years of teaching (x2 = 24.2, p = 0.232),
and academic rank (x2 = 20.1, p = 0.06). See Appendix I Table 43.
68
Table13. The Retention policy is Clearly Communicated and Understood. N=106
=========================================================Response Frequency Percent
69
Strongly disagree
70
Disagree 21 19.8
Neutral 32 30.2
Agree 31 29.2
Strongly agree 9 8.5
Total 106 100.0
_________________________________________________________________
The results relating to the question, the retention program is aligned with its
policy and mission is shown in Table 14. The results showed that 4.7% of the respondents
strongly disagreed, 18.9% disagreed, 32.1 % were neutral, 36.8% agreed and 7.5 %
strongly agreed. Cumulatively, there was positive support to the statement by 44.3 % of
the respondents. The results indicate, that most of the respondents have a positive
perception to the alignment of the retention program with the institution’s mission and
policy. Table 44 (Appendix I) shows no statistically significant relationship between the
respondents perception irrespective of race (x2 = 22.1, p = 0.141), gender (x2 = 6.7, p =
0.153), age (x2 =14.4, p = 0.569), years of teaching (x2 =18.8, p = 0.533), and academic
rank (x2 = 11.1, p = 0.521).
Table 14. The Retention program is aligned with its policy and mission. N=106
========================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7
Disagree 20 18.9
Neutral 34 32.1
Agree 39 36.8
Strongly agree 8 7.5
71
Total 106 100.0
__________________________________________________________________
In response to the item regarding whether the institution’s retention policy
encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside the
classroom, Table 15 summarizes the responses. Less than half or 41.5% of the
respondents were neutral, while a quarter or 25.5 % agreed, 7.5 % strongly agreed 19.8 %
disagreed and 5.7% strongly disagreed. The results indicate that a large percentage of the
respondents were not able to take a definitive stance on this issue. Chi-square analysis
(Table 45, Appendix I) indicates no significant statistical relationship between faculty
perceptions on this issue irrespective of race (x2 = 20.9, p = 0.182), gender (x2 =4,
p = 0.405), age (x2 =18.9, p = 0.274), years of teaching (x2 = 18.4, p = 0.559), and
academic rank (x2 = 9.1, p = 0.695).
Table 15. Retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside the classroom N=106
========================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 6 5.7
Disagree 21 19.8
Neutral 44 41.5
Agree 27 25.5
72
Strongly agree 8 7.5
Total 106 100.0
In response to the statement the institutions program encourages faculty and staff
to work collaboratively to increase the retention of African American male students, 34%
were neutral, 31% agree and 9.4% strongly agreed, in contrast 19.8 % disagree and 4.7%
of the respondents strongly disagree (see Table 16). This indicates that more than a third
of the respondents did not take a position on the issue, however, more than 40%
respondents agreed with the statement.
As indicated in Table 46 (Appendix I), Chi-square analysis indicates no
statistically significant relationship between the respondents perception of the retention
program encouraging faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase the retention of
African American male students and the variables gender (x2 = 1.6, p = 0.807), age (x2 =
21.8, p = 0.807), years of teaching (x2 = 26.2, p = 0.161), and academic rank (x2 =15.6, p
= 209). Chi-square test also revealed race to be significant, x2 = 30.3, p < 0.016. Test of
independence for the respondents based on the association with race, however, was not
significant, x2= 1.5, p = 0.220. See Table 68.1 Appendix I.
Table16. Program encourages faculty & staff to work collaboratively to increase the retention of African American male students. N=106=============================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7
Disagree 21 19.8
Neutral 36 34.0
Agree 33 31.1
Strongly agree 10 9.4
Total 105 99.1
73
Missing 1 .9
Total 106 100.0
The result from the statement, the retention policy is aligned with the goals of
African American male students showed less than half of the respondents or 44.3 %
remained neutral, less than a quarter or 24.5 % agreed and 4.7 % strongly agree. In
contrast 7.9 % disagree with the statement, while the remaining 5.7% strongly disagreed
(Table 17). The result indicates, that most of the respondents were not able to take a
position on the issue. As illustrated in Table 47 (Appendix I) Chi-square analyses showed
no statically significant relationship between the alignment of the institution’s policy and
goal with the retention of African American male student and the variables race (x2 =
11.4, p = 0.495), gender (x2 = 4.6, p = 0.336), age (x2 = 12.2, p = 0.729), years of teaching
(x2= 18.7, p = 0.544), and academic rank (x2 =16.4, p = 0.173).
Table 17. Retention policy is aligned with the goals of African American male students.
N=106============================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 6 5.7
Disagree 19 7.9
Neutral 47 44.3
Agree 26 24.5
Strongly agree 5 4.7
74
Total 103 97.2
Missing 3 2.8
Total 106 100.0
The results to the item, the retention policy addresses the academic, social, and
cultural environment essential for African American male student retention showed less
than a half or 46.2 % of the respondent remained neutral, a quarter or 25.5% agreed and
5.7% strongly agreed. Table 18 further shows that 17% disagreed and 3.8% strongly
disagreed with the statement. The Chi-square analysis showed no statistically significant
relationship between the policy addressing the academic, social, and cultural environment
irrespective of race (x2= 24.3, p = 0.083), gender (x2= 7.0, p = 0.136), age (x2= 15.1, p =
0.521), years of teaching (x2= 17.5, p = 0.620), and academic rank (x2= 12.4, p = 0.410).
See Table 48 (Appendix I).
Table 18. Retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural and environment essential for African American male retention. N=106
==========================================================Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 4 3.8
Disagree 18 17.0
Neutral 49 46.2
Agree 27 25.5
Strongly agree 6 5.7
75
Total 104 98.1
Missing 2 1.9
The item, the retention policy addresses social and economic background of
African American male students completes the questions for research question one. The
responses to items shown in Table 19 indicate that less than half or 46.2% of the
respondents were neutral, a fifth or 21.7 % agreed and 5.7% strongly agree. In contrast,
less than a fifth or 19.8% disagree and 3.8% strongly disagree with the statement. As
indicated in Table 49 Appendix I, the Chi-square results showed no statistically
significant relationship between the respondents perception relating to the retention
policy addressing he socio-economic background of African American male students
irrespective of race (x2 = 21, p = 0.180), gender (x2 = 3.1, p = 0.550), age (x2 = 19.5,
0.245), years of teaching (x2= 21.6, p = 0.360), and academic rank (x2= 22.1, p = 0.140).
Table 19. Retention policy addresses social and economic background of African American male students. N=106
============================================================ Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 4 3.8Disagree 21 19.8Neutral 49 46.2Agree 23 21.7Strongly agree 6 5.7Total 103 97.2Missing 3 2.8
76
Total 106 100
Research Question Two
What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional support
for increasing the retention of African American male students?
Five questions were placed on the survey instrument to solicit responses from
faculty. Faculty members responded to the following questions:
1. The institution’s retention program includes specific provisions for addressing the
needs of African American male students.
2. The institution allocates financial resources to support the retention of African
American male students.
3. The institution’s freshman/new student orientation program includes a segment that
addresses the needs of African American male students.
4. The institution’s retention program encourages parental involvement with African
American male students.
5. The institution rewards and recognizes efforts by the faculty to improve the retention
of African American male students.
The results showed that in general, most of the respondents were neutral with the
responses varying from a low of 35.5% to a high of 52.8 %. Exception to the
generalization is faculty negative perceptions of institutional effort to reward and
recognize retention efforts for African American male students. Tables 50-54 (Appendix
I) show the Chi-square results for the variables race, gender, age, years of teaching and
academic rank.
77
Table 20 shows the responses to the item, the institutional program includes
provisions for addressing the needs of African American male students. Less than half of
the respondents or 46.2% had a neutral response. Further analysis showed that less than a
third or 28.3 % of the respondents agreed with the statement compared to 17 % that
disagreed. Table 50 (Appendix I) showed significant statistical relationship between
institutional provisions for African American male student retention and the variable race
(x2= 30.3, p < 0.016). No significant statistical relationship, however, exits between the
variables gender (x2 = 11.2, p = 0.052), age (x2 = 24.4, p = 0.079), years of teaching (x2 =
27.2, p = 0.335), and academic rank (x2= 13.5, p = 0.129). Test of independence for the
respondents based on the association with race, however, was significant (x2 = 8.97, p
= .003). See Table 69.2 (Appendix I). The results indicate that whites were more likely to
agree that the retention program includes provision for addressing the needs of African
American male students
Table 20. Program includes provision for addressing the needs of African American males. N=106
============================================================ Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 3 2.8
Disagree 18 17.0
Neutral 49 46.2
Agree 30 28.3
Strongly agree 3 2.8
78
Total 103 97.2
Missing 3 2.8
Total 106 100
The response to the item, the institution allocates financial resources to support
African American male students, more than half or 52.8% of the respondents were
neutral. Table 21 further shows that a quarter or 25% agree with the statement, 15.1%
disagreed, and 3.8% strongly disagreed. Chi-square test showed no significant statistical
relationship between the variables race (x2 = 15.2, p = 0.513), gender (x2 = 9.3, p = 0.055),
age (x2 = 12.9, p = 0.683), years of teaching (x2 = 24.8, p = 0.208), academic rank (x2 =
15.3, p = 0.224) and the allocation of financial resources for African American male
student retention (Table 51, Appendix I).
Table 21. The institution allocates financial resources to support African American male students. N=106 ============================================================= Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 4 3.8
Disagree 16 15.1
Neutral 56 52.8
Agree 27 25.5
79
Strongly agree 1 .9
Total 104 98.1
Missing 2 1.9
Total 106 100
Table 22 shows a neutral perception to with the statement; freshman/new student
orientation includes segments that address the need of African American male student. A
little less than half or 48.1 % of the respondents are neutral, 31.1% agreed, 13.2 %
disagreed and 4.7% strongly disagreed. Chi-square analysis indicates no statistically
significant relationship between the inclusion of segments in new student orientation to
address retention and the variables race (x2 = 19.6, p = 0.236), gender
(x2 = 6.9, p = 0.141), age ( x2 = 11.4, p = 0.782), years of teaching (x2 = 30.5, p = 0.061),
and academic rank ( x2= 8.03, p = 0.782). See Table 52 Appendix I.
Table 22. Freshman/New student orientation includes segments that address the need of African American male students.
N=106=============================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7
Disagree 14 13.2
Neutral 51 48.1
80
Agree 33 31.1
Strongly agree 2 1.9
Total 105 99.1
Missing 1 .9
Total 106 100.0
Table 23 shows the response to the statement, the institution retention program
encourages parental involvement with African American male students. More than half or
55.7% of the respondents were neutral in contrast, 19.8% agreed, 15.1% disagreed, and
5.7 % strongly disagreed. As shown in Table 53 (Appendix I) there was no statistically
relationship between the retention program encouraging parental involvement and the
variables race (x2 = 14.1, p = 0.589), gender (x2 = 13.0, p = 0.051), age (x2 = 8.2, p =
0.942), years of teaching (x2 = 17.2, p = 0.062), and academic rank (x2 = 11.7, p = 0.467).
Table 23. Retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male students. N=106
=========================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 6 5.7
Disagree 16 15.1
Neutral 59 55.7
81
Agree 21 19.8
Strongly agree 1 .9
Total 103 97.2
Missing 3 2.8
Total 106 100.0
Faculty was asked to respond to the item, the institution recognizes and rewards
efforts by faculty to improve the retention of African American male students. The results
showed that 35.8% of the respondents are neutral, while cumulatively, 48.1.1% disagreed
with the statement (see Table 24). The results indicate that a little less than half the
respondent did not perceive the institution recognizing or supporting their efforts to
improve the retention of African American male students. As illustrated in Table 54
(Appendix I), there is an association between genders (x2 = 10.1, p < 0.04), and faculty
perception of the institution recognizing and rewarding faculty efforts to improve the
retention of African American male students.
Test of independence for the respondents based on the association with gender,
was also significant, (x2 = 7.25, p < 0.007) indicating that females are more likely to
disagree that the institution recognizes and reward retention efforts. See Table 68.3,
(Appendix I). Chi-square result also showed no statistically significant relationship
irrespective of race (x2 =15.6, p = 0.484), age (x2 =18.1, p = 0.32), years of teaching (x2 =
30.5, p = 0.061), and academic rank (x2 = 8.03, p = 0.782). See Table 54, Appendix I.
Table 24. The institution recognizes and rewards faculty efforts to improve the retention of African American male students. N=106
===========================================================
82
Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 21 19.8
Disagree 30 28.3
Neutral 38 35.8
Agree 16 15.1
Strongly agree 1 0.9
Total 106 100.0
Question Three
How does faculty workload influence their perceptions of the effectiveness of the
institution’s retention program affecting African American male students?
Five questions relating to workload were asked to measure faculty response. Participants
were asked to place a circle around each response that they deemed most appropriate. The
following questions were asked of the respondents to ascertain their perceptions:
1. How many credit hours do you teach each semester?
2. What percentage of your time is spent on institutional committee work during the
academic year?
3. What percentage of your time do you spend each academic year interacting with
African American male students outside the classroom?
4. State the number of publication you completed over the past year.
The results from the questionnaire indicate that the respondents teach mainly 3-12
credit hours per semester, spends 1-15% of their time on committee work, use less than
16% of their time interacting with African American male students outside of the
classroom, and have published less than two items for the past two years. To determine
how workload influences faculty perception Chi-square analysis was done with questions
83
related to workload and institutional effectiveness (policy and institutional support). See
Appendix G. The results showed no significant statistical difference between workload
and the respondents perception of institutional effectiveness, indicating that faculty
workload did not impact their perceptions
In response to the question, how many credit hours do you typically teach each
semester, the respondents were given the choices: 3-6 credit hours, 1-5 credit hours, 13 -
15 credit hours, 16-19 credit hours, and Other. The results, shown in Table 25 shows that
58.5% of the respondents teach 7-12 credit hours, 20.8% teach 13-15 hours and 17%
teach 3-6 hours. This indicates that a large percentage of the respondents teach 7-12 hours
per semester. Chi-Square results in general showed no statistically significant
relationships between hours teach per semester and the perception of institutional
effectiveness. See Table 29, page 79.
Table 25. Numbers of credit hours taught per semester. N=106 ========================================================= Response Frequency Percent
3-6 18 17.0
7-12 62 58.5
13-15 22 20.8
16-19 2 1.9
Other 2 1.9
In response to the question, what percentage of your time is spent on institutional
committee work during the academic year. As shown in Table 26, 38.7% of the
respondents spend 10-15% of their time, 19.8 % spend 1-5, 14.2% spend 16-20 and 8.5%
84
spend 21% or more. Chi square analysis in general showed no significant statistically
relationship between time spent doing committee work and the indicators associated with
the perception of institutional effectiveness (Table 29, page 69).
Table 26. Time spent on committee work. N=106=========================================================Response Frequency Percent
1-5 % 21 19.8
6-9% 20 18.9
10-15% 41 38.7
16-20% 15 14.2
21% & more 9 8.5
Faculty members were asked to respond to the question, what percentage of your
time is spent interacting with African American males outside of the classroom. As
illustrated in Table 27, the result showed 25.5 % of the respondents spent 16% or more of
their time interaction with African American male students outside of the classroom. The
results also showed that 23.6% spent 5-8%, 19.8% spent 1-4%, 19.8. %, spent 9-12%
and 11.3% spent 13-16% of their time interaction with African American male students
outside of the classroom. Chi-square analysis revealed no significant statistical
relationship between the times spent interacting with African American males outside the
classroom and the respondents’ perception of the factors associated with institutional
effectiveness (Table 29, page 69).
Table 27. Percentage of time spent interacting with African American male students outside of classroom. N=106
============================================================
85
Response Frequency Percent
1-4% 21 19.8
5-8% 25 23.6
9-12% 21 19.8
13-16% 12 11.3
16% & over 27 25.5
Total 106 100.0
___________________________________________________________________
In response to the item addressing publishing, 41.5% published 0 articles, 24.3
published 1, 13.2% published 2, 12.3 % published 4 and over and 8.5% publish 3 articles
in the past two years. Chi-square results show no significant statistical relationship
between the number of articles published and the variables associated with institutional
effectiveness (Table 29, page 69).
Table 28. Number of Publication the Past Two Years N=106==========================================================Response Frequency Percent
0 44 41.51 26 24.5
2 14 13.2
3 9 8.5
4 & over 13 12.3Total 106 100.0
86
Table 29 The relationship between perceived workload and institutional effectiveness. N=106==================================================================================
Credit Hours Per Time Spent on Interaction Time Publication the
Per Semester Committee WorkOutside Classroom Past 2 Years
Chi square Chi Square Chi square Chi Square
Value Asymp Sig Value
Asymp Sig Value
Asymp Sig Value Asymp sig
Retention Policy Communicated and Understood
11.7 0.926 * 17.538 0.352* 15.791 0.468* 14.411 0.568*Program Aligned with Missionand Policy
17.061 0.649* 17.74 0.339* 15.149 0.514* 7.704 0.103*
Interaction Outside of Classroom
18.709 0.541* 18.846 0.227* 19.638 0.237* 19.406 0.248*
Faculty and Staff Collaboration
15.149 0.768* 20.41 0.202* 23.297 0.106* 21.422 0.372*
Goals Aligned with Goals of AAMS
15.922 0.731* 13.948 0.603* 27.005 0.041** 4.818 0.964*
Academic Social, Cultural Environment 29.05 0.087* 13.957 0.602* 20.258 0.209* 17.91 0.951*Social and Economic Background 14.07 0.827* 18.872 0.275* 20.051 0.455* 16.794 0.399*Provision for Addressing the Needs of AAMS
18.485 0.555* 18.31 0.567* 20.051 0.455* 22.372 0.132*
Allocation of Financial Resources
17.866 0.848* 11.146 0.8* 10.3 0.85* 17.344 0.364*
Orientation Addresses the Needs of AAMS
16.866 0.662* 13.799 0.614* 16.828 0.397* 19.906 0.225*
Encourages Parental Involvement
16.256 0.435* 26.67 0.45* 9.55 0.889* 8.931 0.984*
Rewards and Recognizes faculty
19.866 0.226* 13.897 0.606* 12.237 0.727* 11.67 0.766*
** P < .05 * Not significant AAMS = African American male student
87
Question Four
What knowledge does faculty possess about the institution’s retention program?
Seven items were placed on the questionnaire to measure faculty perceptions. Faculty
was asked to respond to the following statements:
1. The institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of
African American male students.
2. I am cognizant of the collegiate problems of African American male students at this
institution.
3. I am provided with an early academic alert on African American male students who are
having academic, social and other difficulties.
4. I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to
assists African American male students.
5. The institution’s academic tracking system allows for the identification and
monitoring of African American male students progress.
6. I am able to make personal contact with African American male students with
telephone calls.
7. I am able to make contact with African American male students through emails.
There was an inclination to disagree with statements relating to training,
monitoring of African American student progress, and the provision of an early alert
system on African American male issues. In contrast, there were positives responses to
statements relating to the problems of African American males students and the ability to
make contact through telephone call and emails. With an overall statistical mean of 2.96
88
on the scale of 1- 5 there is an inclination to marginally agree with the statement.
In responding to the statement, the institution provides training for faculty to
address the problems and concerns of African American male students; Table 30 shows
that respondents generally tend to disagree with the statement. The result showed that
23.6% strongly disagree, 34.9% disagree, 24.5% were neutral and 16% agreed with the
statement. Chi-square analysis indicates no statistically significant relationship between
the provision of training and the variables race (x2 = 14.4, p = 0.568, gender (x2 = 7.7,
p = 0.103), age ( x2 = 19.4, p = 0.248), years of teaching ( x2 = 21.4, p = 0.372) and
academic rank (x2 = 4.8, p = 0.964). See Table 55, Appendix I.
Table 30. Response to training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American Male students. N=106
=========================================================== Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 25 23.6
Disagree 37 34.9
Neutral 26 24.5
Agree 17 16.0
Strongly agree 1 .9
Total 106 100.0
In response to the question, I am cognizant the problems of African American
males students at this institution, more than a third or 33.4% of the respondents agree
with the statement, 17% strongly disagreed, 25.5 % were neutral, 18.9% disagreed and
2.8% strongly disagreed (Table 31). The results indicate that a little more than half of the
respondents are aware of the problems of African American male students. Chi-square
test showed no statistically significant relationship irrespective race (x2 = 20.4,
89
p = 0.203), age ( x2 = 5.03, p = 0.973), years of teaching (x2 = 14.8, p = 0.594), and
academic rank (x2 = 18.8, p = 0.251). See Table 56, Appendix I.
Table 31. Response to I am cognizant of the collegiate problems of African American male students.
N=106============================================================= Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 3 2.8
Disagree 20 18.9
Neutral 27 25.5
Agree 37 34.9
Strongly agree 18 17.0
Total 105 99.1
Missing 1 .9
Total 106 100.0
In response to the statement, I am provided with an early alert on African
Americans males who are having academic, social and other difficulties; the respondents
in general, disagreed with the statement. The table shows that 33% disagreed, 27.4%
strongly disagreed, 12.7% remained neutral, 15.1% agreed, and 2.8% strongly disagreed
(Table 32). Chi-square analysis showed no significant statistical relationship between the
provision of early alert systems and the variables race (x2 = 23.6, p = 0.099), age (x2 =
7.9, p = 0.094), and academic rank (x2 = 14.4, p = .0278). See Table 57 Appendix I.
There were, however, significant relationship between years of teaching (x2 = 34.0,
p < .0026) and the perception to the provision of an early alert system for African
American males who are have social and academic difficulties. Test of independence for
the respondents based on the association with years of teaching was not significant (x2 =
90
1.177, p = .278). See Table 69.4, Appendix I.
Table 32. I am provided with an early alert on African American male students who are having academic, social and other difficulties.
============================================================= Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 29 27.4
Disagree 35 33.0
Neutral 23 21.7
Agree 16 15.1
Strongly agree 3 2.8
Total 106 100.0
Table 33 shows the response to I am provided with information regarding
individual and institutional services to assists African American male students. A little
less than half of respondents did not support the statement: 19.8% strongly disagreed,
24.5 % disagreed, 33% were neutral, 17.9 % disagreed, and 4.7 % strongly disagreed.
More than 44.3% of the respondents do not agree with the statement. Chi-square test
showed that except for the variable age (x2 = 27.5, p < 0.036) there is no statistically
significant relationship between the provision of information and the variables race
(x2 = 23.1, p = 0.111), gender (x2 = 7, p = 0.138), years of teaching (x2 = 24, p = 0.241),
and academic rank (x2 = 8.7, p = 0.728). See Table 58, Appendix I.
91
Table 33. I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to assist African American male students.===============================================================Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 21 19.8
Disagree 26 24.5
Neutral 35 33.0
Agree 19 17.9
Strongly agree 5 4.7
Total 106 100.0
Table 34 shows the response to the institution’s tracking system allows for
identification and monitoring of African American male student’s progress. Over a third
or 38.7% of the respondents remained neutral, 22.6 % agree, 20.8% disagree, 10.4%
strongly disagree and 7.5% strongly agree. Cumulatively, there is an even distribution
between those who agree, are neutral and disagreeing. Results from the Chi-square test
showed no significant statistical relationship between the respondents perception of the
institutions’ tracking system allowing for the identification and monitoring of African
American male students progress irrespective of race (x2 =18.7, p = 0.286), gender
(x2 = 2.7, p = 0.938), age (x2 = 8.3, p = 0.938), years of teaching (x2 = 21.6, p = 0.36), and
academic rank (x2 = 6.4, p = 0.896). See Table 59, Appendix I.
Table 34. Institution tracking system allows for identification and monitoring African American male student’s progress.
==============================================================
92
Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 11 10.4
Disagree 22 20.8
Neutral 41 38.7
Agree 24 22.6
Strongly agree 8 7.5
Table 35 shows cumulatively, a little more than 50% of the faculty members
survey agreed that they were able to make contact with African American male students
through telephone calls. Table 35 shows that 40.7% agreed, 17.9 % strongly agreed,
19.8% was neutral 17% disagreed and 4.7% strongly disagreed. Chi-square analysis
showed no significant statistical relationship between the ability to respond to making
contact with African American males through telephone irrespective of gender (x2 = 4.1,
p = 0.394), age (x2 = 13.6, p = 0.625), years of teaching (x2 = 7.7, p = 0.790), and
academic rank (x2 = 12, p = 0.809). Race, however, was significant (x2 = 35.3, p < 0.004).
See Table 60 Appendix I. Test of independence for the respondents based on the
association with race, showed no significant statistical difference (x2 = 1.987, p = 0.159).
See Table 68.5, Appendix I.
Table 35. The ability to make contact with African American Male Students through telephone calls.
==========================================================
93
Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7
Disagree 18 17.0
Neutral 21 19.8
Agree 43 40.6
Strongly agree 19 17.9
Total 106 100.0
In responding to the statement, I am able to make contact with African American
males through email, more than half of the respondents support the statement 38.7%
agreed, 17% strongly agreed, 17.9% disagreed and 4.97 strongly disagreed (Table 36).
The Chi-square test for the responses showed no significant statistical relationship
between the variables gender (x2 =1.7, p = 0.775), age (x2 = 12.6, p = 0.699), years of
teaching (x2 = 16.6, p = 0.676), academic rank (x2 = 8.1, p = 0.775) and the ability to
communicate with African American male students (Tables 61 Appendix I). There was a
significant difference based on race (x2 = 28.6, p < 0.027). Test of independence for the
respondents based on the association with race, however, showed no significant statistical
difference (x2 = 0.77, p = .781). See Table 68.6, Appendix I.
Table 36. The ability to make contact with African American male students through
emails============================================================
94
Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7
Disagree 19 17.9
Neutral 23 21.7
Agree 41 38.7
Strongly agree 18 17.0
Total 106 100.0
Question Five
How does faculty perceptions differ on the effectiveness of institution’s retention
program for African American male students with respect to race, gender, age, years of
teaching, academic rank and academic advisement?
Seven items were placed on the questionnaire to measure faculty perceptions relating to
academic advising. Faculty was asked to respond to the following statements:
1. How much of your office hours are spent advising African American males
students per week?
2. I use my advisement time to help African American male students with their
personal and career goals.
3. I provide African American students with information that helps them make
decisions concerning their majors.
4. I frequently refer African American male advisees to counselors and tutors.
5. I meet informally with African American male students I advise.
The results indicate that the respondents advise 1-10 African American male
students per year, and spend 1-10 hours per week advising them. They tend to use their
advisement time helping African American students with personal and career goals and
95
providing them with information to assists them in making decisions about their majors.
They frequently refer them to counselors and tutors and frequently meet informally with
African American male students.
Table 37 shows that 62% of the respondents advise 1-10 African American
students per academic year. The Chi-square result showed no statistical significant
relationship between the number of undergraduate students advised and the variables race
(x2 = 25.3, p = 0.064), gender (x2 =2.0, p = 0.735), age (x2 = 18, p = 0.324) and years of
teaching (x2 = 19.6, p = 0.483), academic rank (x2 = 10.5, p = 0.571). See Table 62,
Appendix I.
Table 37. The number of undergraduate students advised per academic year.======================================================== Response Frequency Percent
1-10 66 62.3
21-30 8 7.5
31-40 7 6.6
41-50 7 6.6
51 & over 5 4.7
Total 106 100.0
In response to the question, how much of your office time is spent advising
African American male students per week. Participants were asked to select from items 1-
5 hours, 6-10 hours, 11-15 hours, and 16 hours and over by circling one of four choices.
Table 38 shows that more than half of the respondents or 57.5% spend 1-6 hours, 22.6%
spend 6-10 hours per week, 6.6% spend 11-15 hours per week and 10.4% spend 16 hours
per week. As shown in Table 63, Appendix I, Chi-square analysis indicate no statistical
significant relationship between the number of students advices and the variables race (x2
96
= 7.5, p = 0.821), gender (x2 = 5.9, p = 0.899), age (x2 = 14.2,
p = 0.283), years of teaching (x2 = 23.4, p = 0.741), and academic rank (x2 = 14.4,
p = 0.85).
Table 38. Office hours spent advising African American students per academic year.============================================================ Response Frequency Percent
1-5 61 57.5
6-10 24 22.6
11-15 7 6.6
16 & over 11 10.4
Total 103 97.2
Missing 3 2.8
Total 106 100.0
On the statement, I use my advisement time to help African American male
students with personal and career goals, more than three quarter of the respondents
support the statement. As shown in Table 39, 51.9% agreed with the statement, 19.8%
strongly agreed, 12.4 disagreed, and 4.8 % strongly disagreed. Chi-square analysis
showed no significant statistical relationship between advisement time and the variables
race (x2 = 9, p = 0.355), gender (x2 = 2.1, p = 0.799), age (x2 = 27.7, p = 0.369), years of
teaching (x2 = 24, p = 0.866), and academic rank (x2 = 12.5, p = 0.315). See Table 64,
Appendix I.
Table 39. The use of advisement time helps African American male students with personal and career goals.
==========================================================
97
Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7
Disagree 13 12.3
Neutral 11 10.4
Agree 55 51.9
Strongly agree 21 19.8
Total 105 99.1
Missing 1 .9
Total 106 100.0
Table 40 shows the result of the response I provide African American male
student with information that helps them make decision about their majors. The results
showed that 47.7% of the respondents agreed with the statement, 33.3% strongly agreed,
8.6 disagreed, 3.8 strongly disagreed and 6.7 remained neutral. This indicates that more
of the respondents agreed with the statement. Chi- square test showed no significant
statistical relationship between the provision of information and the variables race (x2 =
8.9, p = 0.914), gender (x2 = 2.1, p = 0.709), years of teaching (x2 = 24, p = 0.705), and
academic rank (x2 = 12.5, p = 0.404). See Table 65, Appendix I. There was, however, a
significant relationship between age (x2 = 27.7, p < 0.035) and the provision of
information to help African American male students make decisions about their major.
Test of independence for the respondents based on the association with age, showed no
significant statistical difference (x2 = 0.344, p = 0.558) among the respondents. See Table
68.6, Appendix I.
Table 40. Response to I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their major.
==============================================================
98
Response Frequency PercentStrongly disagree 4 3.8Disagree 9 8.5
Neutral 7 6.6
Agree 50 47.2
Strongly agree 35 33.0
Total 105 99.1
Missing 1 0.9
Total 106 100.0
More than half the respondents had a positive perception towards the statement, I
frequently refer African American male advisees to counselors and tutors. The result
showed that 35.6% agreed and 18.3% strongly agreed, more than a quarter of the 25% of
the respondents were neutral, 16.3% disagreed and 4.8% strongly disagreed (Table 41).
Chi-square test revealed no significant statistical relationships between the provision of
information to make decision and the variables race (x2 = 17.4 p = 0.36), gender (x2 = 4.7,
p = 0.315), age (x2 = 23.7, p = 0.095), years of teaching (x2 = 14.6, p = 0.799), and
academic advising (x2 = 17.7, p = 0.124). See Table 66 Appendix I.
Table 41. Response to I frequently refer African American male advisees to counselors and tutors.
===============================================================
99
Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7Disagree 17 16.0
Neutral 26 24.5
Agree 37 34.9
Strongly agree 19 17.9
Total 104 98.1
The final statement, I meet informally with African American students I advise,
showed more than half of the respondents agreeing with the statement (41.9% agreed and
23.8 strongly agreed). Tables 42 showed also that 11.4% of the respondents strongly
disagreed, 10.5 disagreed and 12.4% remained neutral. Chi-square results show no
significant statistical relationship between the informal meeting of African American
male students and the variables race (x2 = 17.4, p = 0.36), gender, (x2 = 4.7, p = 0.315),
age (x2 = 23.7, p = 0.095), years of teaching (x2 = 14.6, p = 0.799), and academic
advising (x2 = 17.7, p = 0.124). See Table 67, Appendix I.
Table 42.Response to I meet informally with African American students I advise.========================================================= Response Frequency Percent
Strongly disagree 12 11.3
Disagree 11 10.4
Neutral 13 12.3
Agree 44 41.5
Strongly agree 25 23.6
Total 105 99.1
CHAPTER 5
100
DISCUSSIONS, IMPLICATIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS
Discussions
The discussions of the findings are based on the data generated
Research Question One
Faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of institutional policy for increasing the
retention of African American male students were in general, neutral. The respondents in
general perceived that the retention policy is in alignment with the institution mission and
policy, but there is no indication that it is clearly communicated and understood. This is
indicating a difference between what is outlined in the institution mission and how it is
communicated and interpreted as part of the overall retention strategy by faculty
members. Padilla (2000) suggested that faculty who buy into the institution mission
show a higher level of program satisfaction than those who consider the mission
irrelevant.
Policy issues relating to the retention of African American males were neutral for
a little less than 50% of the respondents. In general, faculty did not take a position as to
the alignment of the institution’s policy with the goals of African American students, the
policy addressing the environmental problems African American male students
experience prior to coming to the institution, the addressing of the academic and social
environment necessary for their retention once they are in college and the policy issues
relating to the encouragement of interaction between faculty and African American male
students outside of the classroom.
101
Faculty, also in general, did not take a position as to the effectiveness of the
institution policy for the retention of African American males students is contrary to what
research has indicated as the foundation for a successful retention program. Thomas,
Giles and Green (1994) suggested that faculty should be convinced that retention is
important and should be organized for faculty to understand how to take advantage of the
available assistance.
Research Question Two
Faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional support for
increasing the retention of African American male college students is generally neutral.
A little less than 50% of the respondents were neutral to statements regarding the
retention program including provisions for addressing the needs of African American
male students. There were differences based on race, with whites faculty members more
likely agreeing with the statement. Faculty did not take a position as to the allocation of
resources to support African American male student retention, the orientation program
addressing the needs of African American male students, and the encouragement of
parents in the retention program for African American males.
Faculty did not agree with the institution’s effort in offering rewards and
recognition for efforts in improving the retention of African American male students
(Table 24), with female faculty members disagreeing more. According to Bonner (2001),
depending on the supportive network that exits and the development culture that
encourages participation by faculty in most critical retention discussions, female faculty
perception and participation will be affected. This does not serve as positive motivation
102
for faculty to go beyond professional service expectations to assist students with
difficulties (Pascarella and Ternezini1991).
The most surprising finding concerned faculty perception to the institution’s
allocation of resources to support African American male retention efforts. More than
half the respondents, irrespective of variables investigated, did not take a position on the
issue. This is contrary to Saluri, Levitz, Noel and associates (1985) who suggest that
factors, which determine the success in organizing a campus effort to confront the issue
of retention, must include definitive resources, and a well conceived strategy for
achieving the retention objectives.
Research Question Three
The findings show that faculty in general teach 3-12 credit hours per semester,
spends 16% or more of their time on committee work, and produce no publications for
the past two years (Tables 25-27). The findings indicate that in general, the faculty
workload is within the teaching guidelines of American Association of University
Professors (60%), is drastically below the research guidelines of (30%), but slightly
above the time spent on service (10%) (AAUP, 2003). With a little more than half of the
respondents teaching graduate and undergraduate classes and having less than 10 African
American male undergraduate advisee per year, the level of committee involvement
(thesis and administrative) is expected to be high.
Chi-square analysis between issues related to institutional effectiveness, (policy
and support) and workload shows no significant statistical relationship. This indicates, a
103
general consistency in faculty perception of institutional effectiveness irrespective of
workload
Research Question Four
Faculty knowledge of the institution’s retention program is marginally positive. In
general the results shows that the respondents are cognizant of the problem of African
American males, and are able to make contact through telephone calls and emails (Tables
35 & 36). According to Sydow and Sandal (1998) this is a key determinate in student
satisfaction and retention. In contrast, there are negative perceptions of the institution
providing training on issues affecting African American students’ retention, the tracking
and monitoring of African American students progress, and the provision of information
on services and individuals to assist African American male students retention (Tables 33
to 34). There was, however, an even distribution of responses toward the provision of an
early alerts system to track African American males who are having academic, social and
other problems (Table 32). The results suggest that faculty believe that they are not
trained to handle the various issues associated with African American male retention and
are not very knowledgeable of the services and personnel involved. They also have mixed
feelings regarding the tracking system in place to identify and monitor the progress of
African American male students (Table 34). This is contrary to Noel, et al (1985) who
suggests that persons who have greatest influence in retention projects are those with
knowledge of and the concerns of student behavior.
104
Research Question Five
Chi-square analysis of the questions related to academic advisement indicates that
the respondents had a positive perception toward academic advisement. The data shows
that faculty advises 1-10 African American male students per year and spends 1-10 hours
per week advising them. They tend to use advisement time helping African American
students with personal and career goals and provide them with information that helps
them make decisions about their majors. They frequently refer them to counselors and
tutors and frequently meet informally with the African American male students they
advise.
Perceptions of the effectiveness of the retention of African American male
students indicate that in general, no significance statistical differences exits between
faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the institutions retention program affecting
African American males and the variables race, age, years of teaching and academic
advising. There were exceptions: female faculty members disagreeing more with the
rewards and recognition offered for efforts to improve the retention of African American
male students and white faculty members more likely agreeing with the statement
regarding the retention program including provision for addressing the needs of African
American male students
The positive statistical significance for the variables can be interrupted to mean
that in general, faculty are consistent in the perceptions of the program for the retention
of African American males irrespective of, gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank
or academic advisement relationship.
105
Conclusions
The findings related to faculty perceptions regarding the institution’s retention
programs have generated the following conclusions:
1. Faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the institutional policy for increasing the
retention of African American male students are not definitive.
2. Faculty members did not show an awareness of the effectiveness of institutional
support for increasing the retention of African American male students.
3. Respondents workload do not affect their perceptions of the effectiveness of
institution retention program for African American male students.
4. In general, faculty has a marginal knowledge of the mechanism involving the
institution’s retention program.
5. Faculty members are, in general, consistent in their perceptions of the effectiveness of
the program for the retention of African American male students irrespective of faculty,
gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank or academic advisement relationship.
Implications
The analysis of the data provided the basis from which the following implications can be drawn:
1. Faculty, though aware of the institution’s policy on the retention of African
American males, lack a comprehensive understanding of the strategies that have
been pursued by the institution to combat the external and internal issues faced by
this group of students. The required contribution by faculty to support retention
initiatives needs to be clearly defined at the institutional level.
106
2. The allocation of resources at both program and personnel levels to support the
retention of African American male students has not been fully understood by
faculty. Faculty members have a negative feeling toward the institutional
motivational support for their efforts to improve the retention effort of African
American male students.
3. Faculty members are knowledgeable of the problems of African American male
students and are able to make contact with them. They, however, lack an
understanding of infrastructure, which tracks and monitors African American
students with difficulties. The provision of training and more information on the
issues relating to the retention of African American males could increase their
involvement.
4. Workload changes did not affect faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the
policy and support of the institution towards the retention of African American
male students. Having a faculty-base retention program that is clearly stated,
equitable and monitored could impact the decision of faculty members to get
involved in the retention effort.
5. Faculty perceptions on institutional retention efforts of African American male
students are consistent irrespective of race, sex, gender, years of teaching and
academic rank. Fostering an environment that embody a culture of retention will
create an institutional effort that will foster and focus faculty involvement
irrespective of their background.
107
Recommendations
In reviewing the literature, no studies were found that looked at faculty perceptions
of institutional program for African American male students. Based on the investigator’s
interpretation of the data, further research needs to be conducted on the topic. The
following recommendations are offered:
1. The study should be replicated at a Private Historically Black College and
University to determine if differences in perceptions exit.
2. The study should be conducted at a Predominantly White University to determine
if there are differences in perceptions.
3. A study should be conducted with college administers and staff to determine their
perceptions.
4. A study should be conducted with African American male students to determine
their perceptions of efforts regarding institutional retention programs to address
issues they face through their college experience.
5. Studies should be conducted on the role of mentoring vs. academic advising as the
method of contact between African American male students and faculty.
6. A comparative analysis should be conducted of the results of the retention
programs based on the resources allocated by the institution.
108
Appendix A
Letter of Request to the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs at Alabama A & M University
4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816
February 16, 2004.
Dr. Virginia CaplesProvost/Vice President Academic AffairsAlabama A & M University4900 Meridian StreetHuntsville, AL 35762.
Dear Dr Caples:
Public Historically Black Colleges and Universities because of their unique mission in providing opportunities for all students through their semi open door policy attracts students from lower socio economic backgrounds, who have poor pre-college preparation and lack functional skills necessary for the collegiate experience. This creates serious challenges for many African American male students who must also grapple with the vintages of racism and stereotyping and develop alliances and relationships that will contribute to the successful completion of their degrees.
Many institutions have initiated orientation and remediation programs to improve the likelihood of successes for cohorts beyond the freshman year. While there may not be a program per se for African American males, results from retention initiatives, however, have not shown significant improvement in retention rates for African American males on most campuses. According to research by Tinto, Pascarella, Terenzini and others it will take a collective effort by most institutions to reverse that trend. Faculty, they conclude because of the frequency of their contact with African American male students have the greatest influence in changing the fortunes of any campus retention initiative to assist this group.
Faculty, however, is faced with their professional and personal responsibilities, which require time and commitment. They are also challenged with the changing dynamics of the student population, political and financial constraints that require more of their time and effort. They tend to dedicate more time and effort into activities that they find most rewarding. The success of any retention program therefore hangs on their perceptions of its overall success, the commitment of the institution in making it successful, and their overall participation.
109
It is along this background that I have proposed a study to investigate the extent to which faculty perceptions of a institution’s retention program contributing to the success or interruption of the African American male experience. The research questions will address faculty perceptions regarding, the effectiveness of institutional policy, institutional support, faculty workload, knowledge of institution retention program, the effectiveness of the institution retention program in relationship to faculty race, age, years of teaching, tenure status, and teaching load.
I am therefore requesting your permission to conduct a survey among the faculty at Alabama A&M University for this project. The information gained will be confidential and the source of the information will not be divulged unless given permission to do so. The information gained will be made available to the university, which I hope will assist in improving the retention of our African American male students.
I will be willing to discuss this further with you if necessary. I can be contacted at (256) 430-1854 or [email protected] .
Thank you in advance for your kind assistance.
Sincerely,
Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate Higher Education Administration Alabama A&M University
110
Appendix B
Letter of Request to Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs Oakwood College
4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816
February 16, 2004.
Provost /Vice President Academic AffairsOakwood College,7000 Adventist BlvdHuntsville, Al 35896.
Dear Sir:
Public Historically Black Colleges and Universities because of their unique mission in providing opportunities for all students through their semi open door policy attracts students from lower socio economic backgrounds, who have poor pre-college preparation and lack functional skills necessary for the collegiate experience. This creates serious challenges for many African American male students who must also grapple with the vintages of racism and stereotyping and develop alliances and relationships that will contribute to the successful completion of their degrees.
Many institutions have initiated orientation and remediation programs to improve the likelihood of successes for cohorts beyond the freshman year. The results however, have not shown significant improvement in retention rates for African American males on most campuses. According to research by Tinto, Pascarella, Terenzini and others it will take a collective effort by most institutions to reverse that trend. Faculty they conclude because of the frequency of their contact with African American male students have the greatest influence in changing the fortunes of any campus retention initiative to assist this group.
Faculty however is faced with their professional and personal responsibilities, which require time and commitment. They are also challenged with the changing dynamics of the student population, political and financial constraints which require more of their time and effort. They however, will only dedicate more time and effort into activities that they find most rewarding. The success of any retention programs therefore hangs on their perception of its overall success and the commitment of the institution in making it successful and their overall participation.
It is along this background that I have propose a study to investigate the extent of faculty perception of a institution’s retention program contributing to the success or interruption of the African American male experience. The research questions will address faculty
111
perception regarding, the effectiveness of institutional policy, institutional support, faculty workload, knowledge of institution retention program, the effectiveness of the institution retention program in relationship to faculty race, age, years of teaching, tenure status, and teaching load. The population will be the faculty of a Public Historically Black College and University.
Testing the validity and reliability of an instrument is very important in the research process, therefore I am requesting your permission to have thirty faculty members at your institution assist in this endeavor. The process will be confidential will and entail replying to thirty-four questions. Faculty will also be asked to comment on whether the items on the questionnaire are clear and to offer any other comment they deemed necessary.
I will be willing to discuss this further with you if necessary. I can be contacted at (256) 430-1854 or [email protected] .
Thank you in advance for your kind assistance
Sincerely,
Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate Higher Education Administration
112
Appendix C
Letter of Request to Oakwood College Faculty
4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816
March 29, 2004.
FacultyOakwood College7000 Adventist BlvdHuntsville, Al 35896.
Dear Faculty:
I am in the process of conducting a study on faculty perceptions regarding Alabama A & M University’s retention program for African American male students.
I have requested permission from the Provost/ Vice President for Academic Affairs at Oakwood in soliciting your kind assistance in conducting a pilot test of the instrument. This exercise will assists in determining the reliability and validity of the instrument. I would appreciate your cooperation in completing the attached questionnaire. Please place the completed questionnaire in the envelope provided and return it to the office of Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs for pickup by 4.p.m on Friday April 2, 2004. Your response will be treated in confidence.
I appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have in strengthening the instrument. Please feel free to write on the questionnaire.
I look forward in receiving your responses by April 2nd. Thank you for your kind assistance in this endeavor.
Sincerely,Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate
Appendix D
113
Letter of Request to the DeansAlabama A & M University
4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816
March 31, 2004.
Dear Dean:
This letter is to inform you of a research project, I am conducting involving the entire-full time faculty at Alabama A & M University. My research addresses faculty perceptions regarding the retention program for African American male college students. I have received permission from the Provost/ Vice president of Academic Affairs to conduct the study. I am requesting your assistance in informing your department chairs of the intended project.
The study will include the distributing and picking up the survey instrument at respective department offices. I would like to begin issuing the survey instruments on April 5, 2004 and begin picking them up five days after. If the return rate is not acceptable I will extend the pickup time and issue a follow- up letter.
The names of the faculty members will not be requested on the instrument as to ensure confidentiality. A summary of the results will be shared with senior university officials and the respective schools deans.
I will be willing to discuss any questions you may have. You may contact me by phone at (256) 430-1854 or by email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate Higher Education Administration
Appendix E
114
Letter to Alabama A & M University Faculty Members
4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816
March 31, 2004
Dear Faculty Member:
I will be embarking on a research project involving the entire full-time faculty at Alabama A & M University. The project will address faculty perceptions regarding the University’s retention program for African American male college students. The Provost/ Vice president of Academic Affairs has given permission me to conduct the study and your Dean has been briefed on the project.
Alabama A & M University has initiated orientation and remediation programs to improve the likelihood of success for incoming freshmen. Results from other retention initiatives have not, however, shown significant improvements in the six year graduation rates for African American males, which range from 22.68 percent in 1992 to 31.88 in 1997. This is not unique to Alabama A & M University. Other Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) are faced with the same dilemma.
Researchers have paid little attention to retention efforts to assists African American male college students, and faculty perceptions of the retention programs at HBCUs. Research has indicated that faculty is faced with professional and personal responsibilities which require time and commitment, and is challenged with the changing dynamics of the student population. This requires more of their time and effort but they can only dedicate more time and effort into activities that are most rewarding.
I have developed a questionnaire, which contains items, which will indicate your perception of the institution’s retention program for addressing African American male students. The questionnaire will be distributed to you and your colleagues by April 6 through your department. Upon completion, please deliver your completed and sealed questionnaire to the secretary in your department for pickup on April 12, 2004. This is a voluntary exercise, but it is important that a high level of response is ascertained; therefore, your response will be important. Thank you for your kind assistance.
Sincerely,
Howard Wright
Appendix F
115
Follow Up Letter to Faculty Alabama A & M University
4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816
April 25, 2004
Dear Faculty Member:
A questionnaire was distributed to you and your colleagues that focused on faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the Alabama A & M University retention program for African American male students. I know this is a very busy time of the year for you with the end of the semester approaching. Indications from your colleagues who have completed the survey, suggest that it will take approximately five minutes to have it done.
Although participation is voluntary, the completion of each questionnaire is important, as a small amount of non- responses will affect the study. Your single response is extremely important to the success of the study. If you have not completed the questionnaire as yet, please do so and return it to the secretary in your respective department. By doing this, you will assist in contributing to the knowledge about the effectiveness of programs addressing African American male retention at a Historically Black College.
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate
Appendix G
116
Research InstrumentQuestionnaire
Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness of the Program for Addressing the Retention of African American Male Students at Alabama A&M University
Background and Demographic Information
1. Do you hold a full-time faculty appointment? (1) Yes (2) No
2. What is your current tenure status?
(1) Tenured (2) Non- tenured (3) Tenure track 3. What is your current academic rank? (1) Instructor (2) Assistant Professor (3) Associate Professor (4) Professor 4. What level of courses do you teach?
(1) Undergraduate only (2) Graduate only (3) Graduate and Undergraduate
5. Which school is you affiliated?
(1) Agriculture & Environmental Sciences (2) Arts & Sciences (3) Business (4) Education (5) Engineering & Technology
6. Racial identification (1) White non Hispanic (2) Black Non-Hispanic (3) Asian/Pacific Islander (4) Non Resident Alien (5) Hispanic (6) Native American
(7) Other________________ (please specify)
7. Gender (1) Male (2) Female
8. What is your age range?
117
(1) 20-30 (2) 31-40 (3) 41-50 (4) 51-60 (5) 61-70 (6) 71 & over
9. How many years have you been teaching at this institution?
(1) 1-5 (2) 6-10 (3) 11-15 (4)16-20 (5)21-25 (6) 26 or more
Workload
10. How many credit hours do you typically teach per semester?
(1) 3-6 (2) 7-12 (3) 13-15 (4) 16-19 (5) Other __________ (please specify)
11. What percentage of your time is spent on institutional committee work during the academic year?
(1) 1- 5% (2) 6-9% (3) 10-15% (4) 16-20% (5) 21% or more
12. What percentage of your time do you spend each academic year interacting with African American male students outside of the classroom?
(1) 1-4 % (2) 5-8% (3) 9-12% (4) 13-16% (5) 16 % or more
13. Please state the number of publications you completed over the past two years?
(1)0 (2) 1 (3) 2 (4) 3 (5) 4 & over
Institutional policy
Indicate your response by circling one Strongly Disagree -1Choice for each item Disagree - 2
Neutral - 3 Agree - 4
Strongly Agree -5
14. The institution’s retention 1 2 3 4 5 policy is clearly communicated and understood. 15. The institution’s retention 1 2 3 4 5program is aligned with its policy and mission.
16. The institution retention policy 1 2 3 4 5encourages interaction between faculty
118
and African American male student outside the classroom.
17. The institution’s retention program 1 2 3 4 5 encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase retention of African American male students.
18. The institution’s retention policy is 1 2 3 4 5 aligned with the goals of African American male students.
19. The institution’s retention policy 1 2 3 4 5 addresses the academic, social and cultural environment essential for African American male student retention. 20. The institution’s retention policy 1 2 3 4 5 addresses the social and economic background of African American male students. Institutional support
21. The institution’s retention program 1 2 3 4 5 includes specific provisions for addressing the needs of African American male students.
22. The institution allocates financial 1 2 3 4 5 resources to support the retention of African American male students. 23. The institution’s freshman/new 1 2 3 4 5student orientation program includes segments that address the needs ofAfrican American male students.
24. The institution’s retention program 1 2 3 4 5encourages parental involvement with African American male students. 25. The institution rewards and recognizes 1 2 3 4 5efforts by the faculty to improve the retention of African American male students.
119
Knowledge
26. The institution provides training 1 2 3 4 5 for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American male students.
27. I am cognizant of the 1 2 3 4 5collegiate problems of African American male students at this institution.
28. I am provided early academic alert 1 2 3 4 5on African American male students who are having academic social and otherdifficulties.
29. I am provided with information regarding 1 2 3 4 5 individual and institutional services to assist African American male students. 30. The institution’s academic tracking 1 2 3 4 5system allows for the identification and monitoring of African American male students’ progress.
31. I am able to make contact 1 2 3 4 5 with African American male students through telephone calls.
32. I am able to make contact 1 2 3 4 5 with African American male students through emails.
Academic Advisement
33. Please indicate the number of African American male undergraduate students you advise for the academic year? (Circle One).
1. 10-20 2. 21-30 3. 31-40 4. 41-50 5. 51 and over
120
34. How much of your office hours are spent advising African American students? (Circle One).
1. 0 2. 1-5 3. 6-10 4. 11-15 5. 16 and over
35. I use my advisement time to 1 2 3 4 5help African American male students with their personal and career goals.
36. I provide African American students 1 2 3 4 5 with information that helps them make decisions concerning their major.
37. I frequently refer African American 1 2 3 4 5male advisees to counselors and tutors.
38. I meet informally with African American male students I advise. 1 2 3 4 5
121
Appendix H
Variable Description
Variable Label Response Choice Value code
Full time faculty appointment yes no
12
Current tenure status tenurenon – tenuretenure track
123
Academic rank InstructorAssistant ProfessorAssociate ProfessorProfessor
1234
Course teach undergraduate onlygraduate onlygraduate & undergraduate
123
School affiliation Agriculture & Environmental SciencesArts and SciencesBusinessEducationEngineering & Technology
1
2345
Racial identification HispanicBlack –non HispanicAsian/ Pacific IslanderNon Resident AlienHispanicNative AmericanOther
1234567
Gender malefemale
12
Age range 20-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071 & over
123456
Years of teaching 1-56-1011-1516-2021-2526 or more
123456
122
Variable Label Response Choice Value code
Percentage of time spent on committee 1-56-910-1516-2016 or more
12345
Percentage of time spent interacting with African American male students outside classroom
1-45-89-1213-1616 or more
12345
Number of publication the past two years 01234 & over
12345
Retention policy clearly communicated strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
Retention program aligned with mission & policy strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
Retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside of classroom
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
Institution allocates financial resources to support with African American male students
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly disagree
12345
123
Variable Label Value label Value code
Retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male students
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
Institution rewards and recognizes faculty efforts to improve the retention of African American male students
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
Institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concern of African American male students
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I am cognizant of the problems of African American male students at this institution
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I am provided with early alert on African American male students who are having academic, social, and other difficulties
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to assist with African American male students
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
Institutional tracking system allows for identification and monitoring of African American male students progress
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I am able to make contact with African American male students through telephone calls
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
124
Variable Label Value label Value code
Number of undergraduate students advice per academic year
10-2021-3031-4041-5051 & over
12345
Office hours spent advising African American male students per week
1-56-1011-1516 & over
1234
I use my advisement time to help African American male students with personal and career goals
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decision concerning their major
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I frequently refer African American male students advisees to counselors and tutors
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
I frequently met informally with African American male students I advise
strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree
12345
125
APPENDIX I(TABLES 43-68.7)
SUMMARY OF CROSS TAB AND CHI-SQUARE
126
Table 43. The retention policy is clearly communicated and understood. ===============================================================
Variables X2 Asymp sig (2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 26.5 0.051 *White- Non-Hispanic 3.8 8.5 8.5 9.4 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 8.5 8.05 14.2 9.4 5.7 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 2.8 6.6 12.3 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 7.5 0.9 .09Other 0 0 0.9 0 8.5 1.9Total 12.3 19.8 30.2 29.2 48.5 100
Gender 2.1 0.712 *Male 7.5 15.1 17.9 19.8 4.7 65.1Female 4.7 4.7 12.3 9.4 3.8 34.9Total 12.3 19.8 30.2 29.2 26 5.8
Age 12.1 0.739 *20-30 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 2.831-40 1.9 2.8 3.8 1.9 0.9 11.341-50 0 5.7 6.6 9.4 2.8 24.551-60 6.6 8.5 13.2 9.4 3.8 41.561-70 2.8 1.9 5.7 8.5 0.9 19.8.Total 12.3 19.8 30.2 29.2 8.5 100
Years of Teaching 24.2 0.232 *1 to 5 6.6 4.7 10.4 11.3 1.9 34.96 to 10 0 5.7 3.8 7.5 1.9 18.911 to 15 0 2.8 4.7 2.8 0.9 11.316 to20 0.9 3.8 0.9 1.9 1.9 9.421 to25 0.9 2.8 3.8 3.8 0.9 12.326 or more 3.8 0 6.6 1.9 0.9 13.2Total 12.3 19.3 30.2 29.2 8.5 100Academic Rank 20.1 0.06 *Instructor 0 0.9 1.9 4.7 0 7.5Assistant Professor 5.7 11.3 11.3 11.3 7.5 47.2Associate Professor 3.8 5.7 6.6 10.4 0 26.4Professor 2.8 1.9 10.4 2.8 0.9 18.9Total 12.8 19.8 30.2 29.2 8.5 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
127
Table 44. Retention program is aligned with policy and mission===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 22.1 0.141*White- Non-Hispanic 0.9 7.5 8.5 13.2 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 8.5 16 15.1 5.7 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 0.9 7.5 8.5 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 100
GenderMale 1.9 11.3 20.8 28.3 2.8 65.1 6.7 0.153 *Female 2.8 7.5 11.3 8.5 4.7 34.9Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 100
Age20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.8 14.4 0.569 *31-40 0 2.8 2.8 3.8 1.9 11.341-50 0 4.7 6.6 11.3 1.9 24.551-60 2.8 9.4 14.1 11.3 2.8 41.561-70 1.9 0.9 5.7 10.4 0.9 19.8Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 100
Years of Teaching1 to 5 0.9 1.9 0.9 2.8 0.9 7.5 11.1 0.521 *6 to 10 1.9 9.4 17 13.2 5.7 47.211 to 15 0 3.8 9.4 10.4 0.9 26.416 to20 0 3.8 4.7 10.4 0 18.921 to25 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 10026 or moreTotal
0.9 6.6 11.3 14.2 1.9 18.8 0.533 *Academic Rank 0 4.7 6.6 6.6 0.9Instructor 0.9 1.9 3.8 2.8 1.9Assistant Professor 0.9 1.9 2.8 1.9 1.9Associate Professor 0.9 2.8 5.7 1.9 0.9Professor 0.9 0.9 1.9 9.4 0Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
128
Table 45. The Policy encourages interaction between faculty and AfricanAmerican male students outside of the classroom
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 20.9 0.182 *
White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 7.5 13.2 5.7 1.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 7.5 22.6 14.2 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific Islander 0 3.8 5.7 4.7 3.8 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 0.9 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Gender 4.0 0.405 *Male 1.9 13.2 28.3 17.9 3.8 65.1Female 3.8 6.6 13.2 7.5 3.8 34.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Age 18.9 0.274 *20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.831-40 0 0.9 8.5 0.9 0.9 11.341-50 0 3.8 9.4 10.4 0.9 24.551-60 2.8 9.4 16 8.5 4.7 41.561-70 2.8 4.7 5.7 5.7 0.9 19.8Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Years of Teaching 18.4 0.559 *1 to 5 0.9 5.7 14.2 10.4 11.3 1.96 to 10 0.9 5.7 6.6 4.7 7.5 1.911 to 15 0 1.9 4.7 3.8 2.8 0.916 to20 0 1.9 5.7 0.9 1.9 1.921 to25 2.8 3.8 2.8 2.8 3.8 0.926 or more 0.9 0.9 0.9 2.8 1.9 0.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 29.2 8.5Academic Rank 9.1 0.695 *Instructor 0 1.9 1.9 3.8 0 5Assistant Professor 3.8 7.5 20.8 11.3 3.8 47.2Associate Professor 1.9 5.7 8.5 7.5 2.8 26.4Professor 0 4.7 10.4 2.89 18.9 26.4Total 5.7 19.9 41.5 25.1 7.5 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
129
Table 46. The program encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male retention.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 30.4 0.016 **White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 7.5 13.2 5.7 1.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 7.5 22.6 14.2 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 3.8 5.7 4.7 3.8 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 0.9 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Gender 1.6 0.807 *Male 1.9 13.2 28.3 17.9 3.8 65.1Female 3.8 6.6 13.2 7.5 3.8 34.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Age 21.8 0.149 *20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.831-40 0 0.9 8.5 0.9 0.9 11.341-50 0 3.8 9.4 10.4 0.9 24.551-60 2.8 9.4 16 8.5 4.7 41.561-70 2.8 4.7 5.7 5.7 0.9 19.8Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Years of Teaching 26.2 0.161 *1 to 5 0.9 5.7 14.2 10.4 3.8 34.96 to 10 0.9 5.7 6.6 4.7 0.9 18.911 to 15 0 1.9 4.7 3.8 0.9 11.316 to20 0 1.9 5.7 0.9 0.9 9.421 to25 2.8 3.8 2.8 2.8 0.9 12.326 or more 0.9 0.9 0.9 2.8 0.9 0.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
Academic Rank 15.6 0.209 *Instructor 0 1.9 1.9 3.8 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 3.8 7.5 20.8 11.3 5.7 47.2Associate Professor 1.9 5.7 8.5 7.5 0.9 26.4Professor 0 4.7 10.4 2.8 0 18.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100
_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
130
Table 47. The retention policy is aligned with the goals of African American male students.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 11.4 0.495 *White- Non-Hispanic 1 6.8 11.7 8.7 1 29.1Black-Non Hispanic 4.9 8.7 24.3 10.7 1.9 50.2Asian-Pacific Islander 0 1 9.7 4.9 1.9 17.5Non-Resident 0 1 0 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 1 0 1.9Total 0 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100
Gender 2.9 13.6 29.1 14.6 4.9 65 4.6 0.336 *Male 2.9 4.9 16.5 10.7 0 35Female 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100Total
Age 12.2 0.729 *20-30 1 0 1 1 0 2.931-40 1 1 6.8 1.9 1 11.741-50 0 3.9 9.7 7.8 1.9 23.351-60 1.9 9.7 18.4 11.7 1 42.761-70 1.9 3.9 9.7 2.9 1 19.4Total 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100
Years of Teaching 18.7 0.544 *1 to 5 1.9 4.9 16.5 9.7 1.9 356 to 10 1.9 5.8 5.8 4.9 1 19.411 to 15 0 2.9 5.8 1 1 10.716 to20 0 1 4.9 3.9 0 9.721 to25 1.9 3.9 5.8 1 0 12.626 or more 0 0 6.8 4.9 1 12.6Total 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100
Academic Rank 16.4 0.173 *Instructor 0 0 3.9 2.9 1 7.8Assistant Professor 4.9 8.7 15.5 15.5 2.9 47.6Associate Professor 1 6.8 15.5 1.9 1 26.2Professor 0 2.9 10.7 4.9 0 18.4Total 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100
_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
131
Table 48. The retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural, environment essential for African American male student retention.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 24.3 0.083 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 16.3 8.7 1 29.8Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 6.7 26 10.6 2.9 50Asian-Pacific Islander 0 4.8 4.8 6.7 1 17.3Non-Resident 0 1 0 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 0 1 1.9Total 3.8 17.8 47.1 26 5.8 100
Gender 7.0 0.136 *Male 1 9.6 28.8 21.2 3.8 64.4Female 2.9 7.7 18.3 4.8 1.9 35.6Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100
Age 15.1 0.521*20-30 0 0 1.9 1 0 2.931-40 1 1 5.8 3.8 0 11.541-50 0 2.9 9.6 10.6 1.9 2551-60 1 10.6 22.1 5.8 1.9 2561-70 1.9 2.9 7.7 4.8 1 18.3Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100
Years of Teaching 17.5 0.620 *1 to 5 1.9 5.8 14.4 10.6 2.9 35.66 to 10 0 4.8 8.7 3.8 1.9 19.211 to 15 0 1.9 5.8 3.8 0 11.516 to20 0 1.9 4.8 1.9 1 9.621 to25 1.9 2.9 4.8 1.9 0 11.526 or more 0 0 0 3.8 0 12.5Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100
Academic Rank 12.4 0.410 *Instructor 0 1 4.8 1.9 0 7.7Assistant Professor 2.9 6.7 19.2 14.4 4.8 48.1Associate Professor 1 7.7 10.6 6.7 1 26.9Professor 0 1.9 12.5 2.9 0 17.3Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100
_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
132
Table 49. The relationship between retention policy addresses social and economic background of African American male students===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 21.0 0.180*White- Non-Hispanic 0 7.8 12.6 9.7 0 30.1Black-Non Hispanic 3.9 9.7 25.2 7.8 2.9 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 1.9 8.7 4.9 1.9 17.5Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 0 1 1.9Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100
Gender 3.1 0.550*Male 1 13.6 30.1 15.5 3.9 64.1Female 2.9 6.8 17.5 6.8 1.9 35.9Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100
Age 19.5 0.245*20-30 0 0 2.9 0 0 2.931-40 1 1 5.8 1 1.9 10.741-50 0 3.9 9.7 10.7 1 25.251-60 1 10.7 21.4 7.8 1.9 42.761-70 1.9 4.9 7.8 2.9 1 18.4Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100
Years of Teaching 21.6 0.360*1 to 5 1.9 5.8 18.4 6.8 1.9 356 to 10 0 4.9 7.8 4.9 1.9 19.411 to 15 0 1.9 7.8 1.9 0 11.716 to20 0 1 3.9 2.9 1.9 9.721 to25 1.9 4.9 2.9 1.9 0 11.726 or more 0 1.9 6.8 3.9 0 12.6Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100
Academic Rank 22.1 0.140*Instructor 0 1 5.8 1 0 7.8Assistant Professor 2.9 6.8 20.4 12.6 4.9 47.6Associate Professor 1 8.7 12.6 3.9 1 27.2Professor 0 3.9 8.7 4.9 0 17.5Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
133
Table 50. The retention policy address includes provision for addressing the needs of African American male students. ===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 30.3 0.016 **White- Non-Hispanic 0 1.9 16.5 11.7 0 30.1Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 11.7 25.2 8.7 1 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 1.9 4.9 8.7 1.9 17.4Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1.9 0 0 0 1.9Total 2.9 17.5 46.9 29.1 2.9 100
Gender 11.2 0.52 *Male 1 14.6 24.3 23.3 21.9 65Female 1.9 2.9 23.3 5.8 1 35Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100
Age 24.4 0.079 *20-30 0 0 2.9 0 0 2.931-40 0 1 7.8 2.9 0 11.741-50 0 1.9 6.8 12.6 1.9 13.351-60 1.9 11.7 21.4 6.8 0 41.761-70 1 2.9 8.7 6.8 1 20.4Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100
Years of Teaching 27.2 0.335 *1 to 5 1 4.9 20.4 8.7 0 356 to 10 0 3.9 5.8 7.8 1 18.411 to 15 0 1 7.8 1.9 1 11.716 to20 0 2.9 4.9 1 0 8.721 to25 1.9 2.9 4.9 1.9 1 12.626 or more 0 1.9 3.9 7.8 0 13.6Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100
Academic Rank 13.5 0.129 *Instructor 0 1 2.9 3.9 0 7.8Assistant Professor 2.9 5.8 22.3 14.6 1 46.6Associate Professor 0 8.7 9.7 6.8 1 26.2Professor 0 1.9 12.6 3.9 1 19.4Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100
_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
134
Table 51. The institution allocates financial resources to support the retention of African American male students.
=============================================================== Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 15.2 0.513 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 13.5 13.5 0 30.8Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 8.7 26.9 8.7 1 48.1Asian-Pacific Islander 0 1.9 11.5 3.8 0 17.2Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 1 0 0 2Total 3.8 15.4 53.9 26 1 100
Gender 9.3 0.055 *Male 1.9 12.5 28.8 21.2 1 65.4Female 1.9 2.9 25 4.8 0 34.6Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100
Age 12.9 0.683 *20-30 0 0 2.9 0 0 2.931-40 0 1.9 5.8 3.8 0 11.541-50 0 1.9 13.5 7.7 1 2451-60 2.9 9.6 19.2 9.6 0 41.361-70 1 1.9 12.5 4.8 0 20.2Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100
Years of Teaching 24.8 0.208 *1 to 5 1.9 4.8 20.2 8.7 0 35.66 to 10 0 2.9 6.7 7.7 1 18.311 to 15 0 0 8.7 2.9 0 11.516 to20 0 3.8 2.9 1.9 0 8.721 to25 1.9 1.9 7.7 1 0 12.526 or more 0 1.9 7.7 3.8 0 13.5Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100
Academic Rank 15.3 0.224 *Instructor 0 1 4.8 1.9 0 7.77Assistant Professor 2.9 5.8 25 13.5 0 47.1Associate Professor 1 5.8 8.7 9.6 1 26Professor 0 2.9 15.4 1 0 19.2Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
135
Table 52. The freshman/new student orientation includes segment that addressesthe needs of African American male students.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 19.6 0.236 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 12.4 12.4 1.9 30.5Black-Non Hispanic 4.8 7.6 26.7 10.5 0 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 1 7.6 8.6 0 17.1Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 1 0 0 1.9Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100
Gender 6.9 0.141 *Male 2.9 11.4 26.7 23.8 1 65.7Female 1.9 1.9 21.9 7.6 1 34.3Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100
Age 11.4 0.782 *20-30 0 1 1.9 0 0 2.931-40 1 1.9 6.7 1.9 0 11.441-50 0 2.9 9.5 11.4 1 24.851-60 1.9 6.7 19 12.4 1 4161-70 41.9 1 11.4 5.7 0 20Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100
Years of Teaching 30.5 0.061 *1 to 5 2.9 4.8 19 7.6 1 35.26 to 10 0 3.8 8.6 6.7 0 1911 to 15 0 1 7.6 2.9 0 11.416 to20 0 2.9 3.8 1 1 8.621 to25 1.9 0 6.7 3.8 0 12.426 or more 0 1 2.9 9.5 0 13.3Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100
Academic Rank 8.03 0.782* Instructor 0 1 4.8 1.9 0 7.6Assistant Professor 3.8 7.6 19 15.2 1.9 47.6Associate Professor 1 1.9 13.3 9.5 0 25.7Professor 0 2.9 11.4 4.8 0 19Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
136
Table 53. The retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male students.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 14.1 0.589 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 5.8 18.4 5.8 1 31.1Black-Non Hispanic 5.8 5.8 28.2 8.7 0 48.5Asian-Pacific Islander 0 2.9 9.7 4.9 0 17.5Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 1 0 1.9Total 5.8 15.5 57.7 20.4 1 100
Gender 2.9 13.6 31.1 15.5 0 64 13.0 0.051 **Male 2.9 1.9 26.2 2.9 1 35Female 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1Total
Age 0 1 1.9 0 0 2.9 8.2 0.942*20-30 0 1 8.7 1.9 0 11.731-40 1 2.9 14.6 5.8 0 24.341-50 3.9 6.8 23.3 6.8 1 41.751-60 1 3.9 8.7 5.8 0 19.461-70 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1 100Total
Years of Teaching 17.5 0.620 *1 to 5 1 5.8 21.4 6.8 0 356 to 10 1.9 2.9 9.7 3.9 0 18.411 to 15 0 1.9 6.8 2.9 0 11.716 to20 1 1 3.9 1.9 1 8.721 to25 1.9 1 7.8 1.9 0 12.626 or more 0 2.9 7.8 2.9 0 13.6Total 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1 100
Academic Rank 11.7 0.467 *Instructor 0 1 3.9 2.9 0 7.8Assistant Professor 4.9 4.9 27.2 9.7 1 47.6Associate Professor 1 4.9 12.6 6.8 0 25.2Professor 0 4.9 13.6 1 0 19.4Total 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
137
Table 54. The institution rewards and recognizes efforts by the faculty to improve the retention of African American males.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 15.6 0.484 *White- Non-Hispanic 5.7 12.3 7.5 4.7 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 11.3 11.3 19.8 6.6 0 49.1Asian-Pacific 1.9 3.8 7.5 3.8 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0.9 0 0 1.9Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100
Gender 10.1 0.04 **Male 14.2 14.2 21.7 14.2 0.9 65.1Female 5.7 14.2 14.2 0.9 0 35.9Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100
Age 18.1 0.32 *20-30 0 0 1.9 0.9 0 2.831-40 0.9 5.7 2.8 0.9 0.9 11.341-50 3.8 7.5 9.4 3.8 0 24.551-60 11.3 11.3 14.2 4.7 0 41.561-70 3.8 3.8 7.5 4.7 0 19.8Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100
Years of Teaching 19.6 0.483 *1 to 5 4.7 12.3 11.3 5.7 0.9 34.96 to 10 6.6 0.9 6.6 4.7 0 18.911 to 15 0.9 2.8 5.7 1.9 0 11.316 to20 0.9 4.7 2.8 0.9 0 9.421 to25 2.8 4.7 2.8 1.9 0 12.326 or more 3.8 2.8 6.6 0 0 13.2Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100
Academic Rank 7.7 0.808 *Instructor 0.9 3.8 1.9 0.9 0 7.5Assistant Professor 11.3 10.4 15.1 9.4 0.9 47.2Associate Professor 3.8 7.5 11.3 3.8 0 26.4Professor 3.8 6.6 7.5 0.9 0 18.9Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
138
Table 55. The institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American male students
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 14.4 0.568 *White- Non-Hispanic 6.6 13.2 6.6 3.8 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 12.3 17 13.2 5.7 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 2.8 3.8 4.7 6.6 0 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0.9 0.9 0 0 1.9Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100
Gender 7.7 0.103 *Male 14.2 23.6 13.2 14.2 0 65.1Female 9.4 11.3 11.3 1.9 0.9 34.9Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100
Age 19.4 0.248 *20-30 0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 2.831-40 1.9 4.7 1.9 1.9 0.9 11.341-50 4.7 11.3 5.7 2.8 0 24.551-60 13.2 12.3 12.3 3.8 0 41.561-70 3.8 5.7 3.8 6.6 0 19.8Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100
Years of Teaching 21.4 0.372 *1 to 5 10.4 9.4 9.4 5.7 0 34.96 to 10 2.8 8.5 4.7 1.9 0.9 18.911 to 15 1.9 3.8 1.9 3.8 0 11.316 to20 2.8 4.7 1.9 0 0 9.421 to25 5.7 1.9 2.8 1.9 0 12.326 or more 0 6.6 3.8 2.8 0 13.2Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100
Academic Rank 4.8 0.964 *Instructor 1.9 2.8 0.9 1.9 0 7.5Assistant Professor 13.2 16 10.4 6.6 0.9 47.2Associate Professor 5.7 10.4 6.6 3.8 0 26.4Professor 2.8 5.7 6.6 3.8 0 18.9Total 23.6 34.9 34.5 24.5 0.9 100
_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
139
Table 56. I am cognizant of the problems of African American male students.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 20.4 0.203*White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 6.7 14.3 4.8 29.5Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 12.4 9.5 15.2 9.5 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 2.9 8.6 5.7 1 18.1Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1 1Other 0 0 1 0 1 1.9Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100
Gender 5.03 0.973*Male 1.9 13.3 17.1 21.9 10.5 64.8Female 1 5.7 8.6 13.3 6.7 35.2Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100
Age 11.6 0.772*20-30 0 1 1 1 0 2.931-40 0 2.9 4.8 3.8 0 11.441-50 1 3.8 3.8 9.5 6.7 24.851-60 1.9 5.7 11.4 14.3 8.6 41.961-70 0 5.7 4.8 6.7 1.9 19Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100
Years of Teaching 14.8 0.594*1 to 5 0 6.7 11.4 13.3 3.8 35.26 to 10 1.9 2.9 3.8 6.7 3.8 1911 to 15 0 3.8 2.9 2.9 1.9 11.416 to20 0 2.9 1.9 1.9 2.9 9.521 to25 0 1 3.8 6.7 1 12.426 or more 1 1.9 1.9 3.8 3.8 12.4Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100
Academic Rank 18.8 0.251*Instructor 0 1 1 4.8 1 7.6Assistant Professor 2.9 4.8 12.4 19 8.6 47.6Associate Professor 0 9.5 5.7 6.7 4.8 26.7Professor 0 3.8 6.7 4.8 2.9 18.1Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100
_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
140
Table 57. I am provided with early alert on African American male students who are having social and academic difficulties
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 23.6 0.099*White- Non-Hispanic 9.4 12.3 3.8 2.8 1.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 15.1 15.1 14.2 4.7 0 49.1Asian-Pacific 0.9 5.7 3.8 6.6 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0.9 0 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100
Gender 7.9 0.094*Male 13.2 23.6 13.2 13.2 1.9 65.1Female 14.2 9.4 8.5 1.9 0.9 34.9Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100
Age 22.5 0.128 *20-30 0 1.9 0.9 0 0 2.831-40 5.7 1.9 2.8 0.9 0 11.341-50 6.6 4.7 6.6 5.7 0.9 24.551-60 12.3 17 9.4 2.8 0 41.561-70 2.8 7.5 1.9 5.7 1.9 19.8Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100
Years of Teaching1 to 5 14.2 7.5 9.4 3.8 0 34.9 34.0 0.026**6 to 10
5.7 6.62.8
3.8 0 18.911 to 15 0.9 4.7 0.9 2.8 1.9 11.316 to20 0.9 6.6 1.9 0 0 9.421 to25 3.8 5.7 1.9 0.9 0 12.326 or more 1.9 1.9 4.7 3.8 0.9 13.2Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100
Academic Rank 14.4 0.278 *Instructor 0.9 2.8 0.9 1.9 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 18.9 12.3 11.3 4.7 0 47.2Associate Professor 4.7 9.4 5.7 5.7 0.9 26.4Professor 2.8 8.5 3.8 2.8 0.9 18.9Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05
141
* Not significantTable 58. Information on services and individuals for African American male students.===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 23.1 0.111 *White- Non-Hispanic 7.5 7.5 8.5 5.7 0.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 8.5 13.2 19.8 6.6 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 1.9 3.8 4.7 5.7 1.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0.9 0 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 19.8 24.5 24.5 17.9 4.7 100
Gender 7.0 0.138 *Male 9.4 17 19.8 15.1 3.8 65.1Female 10.4 7.5 13.2 2.8 0.9 34.9Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7
Age 27.5 0.036 **20-30 0 1.9 0 0.9 0 2.831-40 0.9 6.6 2.8 0.9 0 11.341-50 2.8 4.7 7.5 7.5 1.9 24.551-60 14.2 6.6 16 3.8 0.9 41.561-70 1.9 4.7 6.6 4.7 1.9 19.8Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7 100
Years of Teaching 24.0 0.241 *1 to 5 9.4 10.4 8.5 6.6 0 34.96 to 10 4.7 2.8 5.7 3.8 1.9 18.911 to 15 0 2.8 4.7 1.9 1.9 11.316 to20 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.8 0.9 9.421 to25 2.8 2.8 3.8 2.8 0 12.326 or more 0.9 3.8 8.5 0 0 13.2Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7 100
Academic Rank 8.7 0.728 *Instructor 0 2.8 1.9 1.9 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 12.3 12.3 12.3 8.5 1.9 47.2Associate Professor 4.7 5.7 9.4 5.7 0.9 26.4Professor 2.8 3.8 9.4 1.9 0.9 18.9Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
142
Table 59. The institution’s tracking system allows for monitoring African American male students progress
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 18.7 0.286 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 8.5 11.3 7.5 2.8 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 7.5 10.4 20.8 8.5 1.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 1.9 1.9 6.6 4.7 2.8 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 0.9 0 0.9Other 0.9 0 0 0.9 0 1.9Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100
Gender 2.7 0.609 *Male 4.7 14.2 24.5 16 5.7 65.1Female 5.7 6.6 14.2 6.6 1.9 34.9Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100
Age 8.3 0.938 *20-30 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 2.831-40 1.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 0.9 24.541-50 1.9 4.7 9.4 6.6 1.9 24.551-60 3.8 10.4 17.9 6.6 2.8 41.561-70 1.9 1.9 7.5 6.6 1.9 19.8Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100
Years of Teaching 21.6 0.36 *1 to 5
2.8 2.817
8.5 2.8 34.96 to 10 3.8 5.7 5.7 3.8 0 18.911 to 15 0 3.8 3.8 1.9 1.9 11.316 to20 1.9 3.8 1.9 0.9 0.9 9.421 to25 1.9 2.8 4.7 2.8 0 12.326 or more 0 0.9 5.7 4.7 1.9 13.2Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100
Academic Rank 6.4 0.896 *Instructor 0 1.9 2.8 1.9 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 6.6 9.4 17 11.3 2.8 47.2Associate Professor 3.8 3.8 11.3 5.7 1.9 26.4Professor 0 5.7 7.5 3.8 1.9 18.9Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100
________________________________________________________________________
143
** P < .05* Not significantTable 60. I am able to make contact with African American male students through
telephone calls.===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 35.3 0.004 **White- Non-Hispanic 0.9 3.8 3.8 14.2 7.5 30.1Black-Non Hispanic 2.8 8.5 14.2 16 7.5 49Asian-Pacific 0 4.7 0.9 10.4 1.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0 0.9 0 0.9 1.8Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100
Gender 4.1 0.394*Male 1.9 13.2 11.3 28.3 10.4 65.1Female 2.8 3.8 8.5 12.3 7.5 34.9Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100
Age 13.6 0.625 *20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.831-40 0 0.9 1.9 6.6 1.9 11.341-50 0 4.7 2.8 12.3 4.7 24.551-60 3.8 7.5 8.5 15.1 6.6 41.561-70 0.9 2.8 4.7 6.6 4.7 19.8Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100
Years of Teaching1 to 5 2.8 3.8 6.6 16 5.7 34.9 7.7 0.790 *6 to 10 0.9 2.8 6.6 6.6 1.9 18.911 to 15 0 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 11.316 to20 0 1.9 0 4.7 2.8 9.421 to25 0.9 3.8 2.8 3.8 0.9 12.326 or more 0 1.9 0.9 6.6 3.8 13.2Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100
Academic Rank 12.0 0.809 *Instructor 0 1.9 0.9 2.8 1.9 7.5Assistant Professor 3.8 5.7 7.5 20.8 9.4 47.5Associate Professor 0 4.7 7.5 9.4 4.7 26.4Professor 0.9 4.7 3.8 7.5 1.9 18.9Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100
________________________________________________________________________
144
** P < .05* Not significantTable 61. I am able to make contact with African American male students
through emails===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 28.6 0.027**White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 5.7 3.8 11.3 7.5 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 1.9 9.4 12.3 19.8 5.7 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 2.8 4.7 7.5 2.8 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0 0.9 0 0.9 1.9Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100
Gender 1.7 0.775*Male 1.9 12.3 14.2 26.4 10.4 65.1Female 2.8 5.7 7.5 12.3 6.6 34.9Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100
Age 12.6 0.699*20-30 0 0.9 0.9 0 0.9 2.831-40 0 1.9 1.9 5.7 1.9 11.341-50 0 5.7 4.7 8.5 5.7 24.551-60 3.8 4.7 10.4 18.9 3.8 41.561-70 0.9 4.7 3.8 5.7 4.7 19.8Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100
Years of Teaching 16.6 0.676*1 to 5 1.9 5.7 6.6 14.2 6.6 34.96 to 10
0.9 2.83.8
8.5 2.8 18.911 to 15 0 3.8 2.8 1.9 2.8 11.316 to20 0 1.9 0.9 4.7 1.9 9.421 to25 0 3.8 3.8 4.7 0 12.326 or more 1.9 0 3.8 4.7 2.8 13.2Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100
Academic Rank 8.1 0.775*Instructor 0 0.9 1.9 2.8 1.9 7.5Assistant Professor 1.9 8.5 6.6 20.8 9.4 47.2Associate Professor 0.9 5.7 8.5 9.4 1.9 26.4Professor 1.9 2.8 4.7 5.7 3.8 18.9Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100
145
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
146
Table 62. The number of African American male undergraduate students advise per academic year.
===================================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race 1-10 21-30 31-40 41-50 51&Over
Total
White- Non-Hispanic 16.1 4.3 2.2 3.2 2.2 28 25.3 0.064*Black-Non Hispanic 39.8 2.2 3.2 2.2 2.2 49.5Asian-Pacific 12.9 2.2 2.2 2.2 0 19.4Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1Other 2.2 0 0 0 0 2.2Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100
Gender 2.0 0.735*Male 47.3 6.5 5.4 5.4 2.2 66.7Female 23.7 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 33.3Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100
Age 18.0 0.324*20-30 2.2 0 1.1 0 0 3.231-40 10.8 0 0 0 0 10.841-50 15.1 2.2 1.1 3.2 0 21.551-60 32.3 3.2 2.2 1.1 3.2 41.961-70 10.8 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.2 22.6Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100
Years of Teaching 19.6 0.483*1 to 5 26.9 1.1 2.2 3.2 2.2 35.56 to 10 15.1 0 2.2 2.2 0 19.411 to 15 5.4 3.2 1.1 0 0 9.716 to20 6.5 1.1 1.1 0 1.1 9.721 to25 7.5 2.2 1.1 1.1 0 11.826 or more 9.7 1.1 0 1.1 2.2 14Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100
Academic Rank 10.5 0.571*Instructor 3.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 0 6.5Assistant Professor 36.6 3.2 4.3 3.2 1.1 48.4Associate Professor 18.3 3.2 2.2 2.2 1.1 26.9Professor 12.9 1.1 0 1.1 3.2 18.3Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100
____________________________________________________________________________** P < .05 * Not significant
147
Table 63. Office hours spent advising African American male students=================================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race 1-5 6-10 11-15 16& Over Total
White- Non-Hispanic 18.4 5.8 1.9 3.9 30.1 7.5 0.821 *Black-Non Hispanic 29.1 9.7 4.9 4.9 48.5 Asian-Pacific 10.7 5.8 0 1.9 18.4 Non-Resident 0 1 0 0 1 Other 1 1 0 0 1.9 Total 59.2 23.3 6.8 10.7 100
Gender 5.9 0.899*Male 37.9 16.5 3.9 6.8 65Female 21.4 6.8 2.9 3.9 35 Total 21.4 6.8 2.9 3.9 35
Age 14.2 0.283 *20-30 2.9 0 0 0 2.931-40 6.8 1.9 1.9 1 11.7 41-50 14.6 6.8 1.9 0 23.3 51-60 26.2 6.8 2.9 5.8 41.7 61-70 8.7 7.8 0 3.9 20.4 Total 59.2 23.3 6.8 10.7 100
Years of Teaching 23.4 0.741*1 to 5 25.2 3.9 2.9 2.9 356 to 10 9.7 5.8 1 1.9 18.4 11 to 15 6.8 1.9 1 1 10.7 16 to20 2.9 2.9 1 2.9 9.7 21 to25 6.8 3.9 0 1.9 12.6 26 or more 7.8 4.9 1 0 13.6 Total 49.2 23.3 6.8 10.7 100
Academic Rank 14.4 0.85*Instructor 3.9 2.9 0 0 6.8 Assistant Professor 29.1 8.7 2.9 5.8 46.6 Associate Professor 15.5 5.8 1.9 3.9 27.2 Professor 10.7 5.8 1.9 1 19.4 Total
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
148
Table 64. I use my advisement time to help African American male students with their personal and career goals.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 9.0 0.355*White- Non-Hispanic 1 0 2.9 21 4.8 28.5Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 8.6 6.7 20 11.4 49.5Asian-Pacific 1 2.9 1 10.5 2.9 18.1Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1 1Other 0 1 0 1 0 1.9Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100
Gender 2.1 0.799*Male 2.9 8.6 5.7 36.2 11.4 64.8Female 1.9 3.8 4.8 16.2 8.6 35.2Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 35.5 100
Age 27.7 0.369*20-30 1 1 1 0 0 2.931-40 1 1.9 0 6.7 1.9 11.441-50 1 3.8 1.9 14.3 2.9 23.851-60 1 3.8 6.7 20 10.5 41.961-70 1 1.9 1 11.4 4.8 20Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100
Years of Teaching 24 0.866*1 to 5 1.9 3.8 1.9 17.1 9.5 34.36 to 10 1 2.9 2.9 9.5 2.9 1911 to 15 1 1.9 2.9 4.8 1 11.416 to20 0 1.9 1.9 3.8 1.9 9.521 to25 1 1 1 7.6 1.9 12.426 or more 0 1 0 9.5 2.9 13.3Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100
Academic Rank 12.5 0.315*Instructor 0 0 1 6.7 0 7.6Assistant Professor 3.8 8.6 2.9 20 11.4 46.7Associate Professor 1 1.9 4.8 15.2 3.8 26.7Professor 0 1.9 1.9 10.5 4.8 19Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
149
Table 65. I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their majors.
===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 8.9 0.914*White- Non-Hispanic 1 1.9 1 18.1 7.6 29.5 Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 4.8 4.8 21.9 15.2 49.5 Asian-Pacific 0 1.9 1 6.7 8.6 18.1 Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1 1 Other 0 0 0 1 1 1.9 Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100
Gender 2.1 0.709*Male 2.9 4.8 4.8 33.3 19 64.8Female 1 3.8 1.9 14.3 14.3 35.2 Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100
Age 27.7 0.035**20-30 1 1 0 0 1 2.9 31-40 1.9 1 1 4.8 2.9 11.4 41-50 1 0 1 11.4 10.5 23.8 51-60 0 3.8 1.9 24.8 11.4 41.9 61-70 0 2.9 2.9 6.7 7.6 20 Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 100 33.3 100
Years of Teaching 24.0 0.705*1 to 5 1.9 2.9 2.9 15.2 11.4 34.3 6 to 10 1 1 0 8.6 8.6 19 11 to 15 1 2.9 1 2.9 3.8 11.4 16 to20 0 0 0 5.7 3.8 9.5 21 to25 0 1 1 7.6 2.9 12.4 26 or more 0 1 1.9 7.6 2.9 13.3 Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100
Academic Rank 12.5 0.404*Instructor 0 1 0 2.9 3.8 7.6Assistant Professor 3.8 3.8 1 21 17.1 46.7 Associate Professor 0 1.9 3.8 12.4 8.6 26.7 Professor 0 1.9 1.9 11.4 3.8 19 Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
150
Table 66. I frequently refer African American male student advisees to tutors===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 17.4 0.36*White- Non-Hispanic 2.9 4.8 6.7 11.5 3.8 29.8 Black-Non Hispanic 1.9 10.6 9.6 16.3 10.6 49 Asian-Pacific 0 0 7.7 7.7 2.9 18.3 Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1 Other 0 1 0 0 1 1.9 Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100
Gender 4.7 0.315*Male 2.9 9.6 16.3 26.9 8.7 64.4 Female 1.9 6.7 8.7 8.7 9.6 35.6 Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100
Age 23.7 0.095*20-30 0 1 1.9 0 0 2.931-40 1.9 1.9 3.8 2.9 0 10.6 41-50 1.9 1.9 5.8 11.5 2.9 24 51-60 1 6.7 15 15.4 7.7 42.3 61-70 0 4.8 1.9 5.8 7.7 20.2 Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100
Years of Teaching 14.6 0.799*1 to 5 3.8 5.8 9.6 9.6 4.8 33.76 to 10 1 2.9 5.8 5.8 3.8 19.2 11 to 15
0 2.92.9
4.8 1 11.5 16 to20 0 1.9 1.9 2.9 2.9 9.6 21 to25 0 2.9 1.9 4.8 2.9 12.5 26 or more 0 0 2.9 7.7 2.9 13.5 Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 18.3
Academic Rank 17.7 0.124*Instructor 0 0 1 5.8 1 7.7Assistant Professor 4.8 7.7 12.5 12.5 8.7 46.2 Associate Professor 0 6.7 7.7 6.7 5.8 26.9 Professor 0 1.9 3.8 10.6 2.9 19.2 Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
151
Table 67. I meet formally with African American male students I advise.===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig
(2 sided)
Race SD D N A SA Total 20.43 0.201White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 1.9 1 17.1 7.6 29.5Black-Non Hispanic 6.7 7.6 7.6 17.1 10.5 49.5 Asian-Pacific 1.9 1 2.9 7.6 4.8 18.1 Non-Resident 1 0 0 0 0 1 Other 0 0 1 0 1 1.9 Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100
Gender 7.28 0.121Male 5.7 9.5 5.7 29.5 14.3 64.8Female 5.7 1 6.7 12.4 9.5 35.2 Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100
Age 17.2 0.37620-30 0 1 1 0 1 2.931-40 1.9 0 2.9 4.8 1.9 11.4 41-50 1 4.8 1.9 8.6 7.6 23.8 51-60 6.7 3.8 5.7 19 6.7 41.9 61-70 1.9 1 1 9.5 6.7 20 Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100
Years of Teaching 16.9 0.656 1 to 5 3.8 2.9 4.8 12.4 10.5 34.3 6 to 10 2.9 1.9 2.9 4.7 5.7 19 11 to 15 1 2.9 1.9 3.8 1.9 11.4 16 to20 1 0 1 4.8 2.9 9.5 21 to25 11.9 1.9 1.9 4.8 1.9 12.4 26 or more 1 1 0 10.5 1 13.3 Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100
Academic Rank 9.19 0.686Instructor 0 1 1 4.8 1 7.6Assistant Professor 7.6 4.8 5.7 16.2 12.4 46.7 Associate Professor 1 1.9 4.8 11.4 7.6 26.7 Professor 2.9 2.9 1 9.5 2.9 19 Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100
________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant
152
Table 68. Collapsing Values
68.1.The program encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male retention
Race White Black X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 11 20 1.5 0.22
Disagree 12 12
68.2.The retention policy includes provision for addressing the needs of African American male students
Race White Black X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 13 10 1.0 0.003**
Disagree 2 16
68.3.The institution rewards and recognizes efforts by faculty to improve the retention of American males
Gender Male Female X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 16 1 7.25 0.007**
Disagree 30 17
Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 44 35 4.6 0.031**
Disagree 11 20
Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 34 27.5 3.0 0.80*
Disagree 21 27.5
Gender Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 17 34 17 0.001**
Disagree 51 34153
68.4. I am provide with early alert on African American male students who are having social and academic difficulties
Years of Teaching
1-10 10 > X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 8 11 1.17 0.278*
Disagree 36 28
Years of Teaching
Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 19 41.5 24.4 0.001 **
Disagree 64 41.55
68.5. I am able make contact with African American male students through telephone calls
Race Black White X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 20 13 1.987 0.159*
Disagree 26 23
Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 23 42.5 17.89 0.001 **
Disagree 52 42.5
68.6. I am able to make contact with African American male students through emails
Race Black White X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 13 8 .077 0.781*
Disagree 28 20
Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 59 41.5 14.76 0.001 **
Disagree 24 41.5
154
68.7. I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their majors
Age 20-50 Over 50 X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 32 53 034. 0.558 *
Disagree 6 7
Age Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided
Agree 85 49 52.9 0.001**
Disagree 13 49.0
155
APPENDIX J
Frequency Table for Responses
N = 106
1. Do you hold a full time faculty appointment?=============================================================== Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Yes 106 100.0 100.0 100.0_______________________________________________________________________
2. Current tenure status=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Tenured 44 41.5 41.5 41.5Non-tenured 27 25.5 25.5 67.0Tenured track 35 33.0 33.0 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
3. Academic rank=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Instructor 8 7.5 7.5 7.5Assistant Professor 50 47.2 47.2 54.7Associate Professor 28 26.4 26.4 81.1Professor 20 18.9 18.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
4. Courses taught=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Undergraduate Only 21 19.8 19.8 19.8Graduate only 24 22.6 22.6 42.5Graduate and undergraduate
61 57.5 57.5 100.0
Total 106 100.0 100.0
156
5. School facilitation=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Agriculture. & Environmental sciences
23 21.7 21.7 21.7
Arts & Sciences 33 31.1 31.1 52.8Business 9 8.5 8.5 61.3Education 27 25.5 25.5 86.8Engineering and Technology
14 13.2 13.2 100.0
Total 106 100.0 100.0
6. Racial identifications
Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentWhite Non Hispanic 32 30.2 30.2 30.2Black Non Hispanic 52 49.1 49.1 79.2Asian Pacific Islander 19 17.9 17.9 97.2Non Résident Alien 1 .9 .9 98.1Other 2 1.9 1.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
7. Gender===================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Male 69 65.1 65.1 65.1Female 37 34.9 34.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
8. Age range============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
20-30 3 2.8 2.8 2.831-40 12 11.3 11.3 14.241-50 26 24.5 24.5 38.751-60 44 41.5 41.5 80.261-70 21 19.8 19.8 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
157
9. Years teaching at institution===============================================================Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
1-5 37 34.9 34.9 34.96-10 20 18.9 18.9 53.811-15 12 11.3 11.3 65.116-20 10 9.4 9.4 74.521-25 13 12.3 12.3 86.826 or more 14 13.2 13.2 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
10. Credit hours teach per semester============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
3-6 18 17.0 17.0 17.07-12 62 58.5 58.5 75.513-15 22 20.8 20.8 96.216-19 2 1.9 1.9 98.1Other 2 1.9 1.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
11. Percentage of time spent on committee work=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
1-5 % 21 19.8 19.8 19.86-9% 20 18.9 18.9 38.710-15% 41 38.7 38.7 77.416-20% 15 14.2 14.2 91.521% & more 9 8.5 8.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
158
12. Percentage of time interacting with African American male students outside of classroom=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
1-4% 21 19.8 19.8 19.85-8% 25 23.6 23.6 43.49-12% 21 19.8 19.8 63.213-16% 12 11.3 11.3 74.516% & over 27 25.5 25.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
13. Number of publication the past two years==============================================================Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
0 44 41.5 41.5 41.51 26 24.5 24.5 66.02 14 13.2 13.2 79.23 9 8.5 8.5 87.74 & over 13 12.3 12.3 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
14. Retention policy is clearly is clearly communicated and understood============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid
PercentCumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 13 12.6 12.3 12.3Disagree 21 19.8 19.8 32.1Neutral 32 30.2 30.2 62.3Agree 31 29.2 29.2 91.5Strongly agree 9 8.5 85 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
159
14. Retention program is aligned with its policy and mission========================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
PercentStrongly disagree 5 4.7 4.7 4.7Disagree 20 18.9 18.9 23.6Neutral 34 32.1 32.1 55.7Agree 39 36.8 36.8 92.5Strongly agree 8 7.5 7.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
16. Policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students ============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
PercentStrongly disagree 6 5.7 5.7 5.7Disagree 21 19.8 19.8 25.5Neutral 44 41.5 41.5 67.0Agree 27 25.5 25.5 92.5Strongly agree 8 7.5 7.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
17. Program encourages faculty & staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male student retention============================================================= Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree
5 4.7 4.8 4.8
Disagree 21 19.8 20.0 24.8Neutral 36 34.0 34.3 59.0Agree 33 31.1 31.4 90.5Strongly agree
10 9.4 9.5 100.0
Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0
160
18. Retention policy is aligned with the goals of African American male students============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 6 5.7 5.8 5.8Disagree 19 17.9 18.4 24.3Neutral 47 44.3 45.6 69.9Agree 26 24.5 25.2 95.1Strongly agree 5 4.7 4.9 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0
19. Retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural environment essential for African American male students retention=============================================================== Variance Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Variable 4 3.8 3.8 3.8Strongly disagree 18 17.0 17.3 21.2Disagree 49 46.2 47.1 68.3Neutral 27 25.5 26.0 94.2Agree 6 5.7 5.8 100.0Strongly agree 104 98.1 100.0 Missing 2 1.9 Total 106 100.0
20. Retention policy addresses social & economic background of African American male students=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 4 3.8 3.9 3.9Disagree 21 19.8 20.4 24.3Neutral 49 46.2 47.6 71.8Agree 23 21.7 22.3 94.2Strongly agree 6 5.7 5.8 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0
161
21. Program includes provision for addressing the needs of African American male students============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 3 2.8 2.9 2.9Disagree 18 17.0 17.5 20.4Neutral 49 46.2 47.6 68.0Agree 30 28.3 29.1 97.1Strongly agree 3 2.8 2.9 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0
22. Institution allocates financial resources to support African American male students=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 4 3.8 3.8 3.8Disagree 16 15.1 15.4 19.2Neutral 56 52.8 53.8 73.1Agree 27 25.5 26.0 99.0Strongly agree 1 .9 1.0 100.0Total 104 98.1 100.0 Missing 2 1.9 Total 106 100.0
23. Freshman/new student orientation includes segments that addresses the need of African American male student ============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 5 4.7 4.8 4.8Disagree 14 13.2 13.3 18.1Neutral 51 48.1 48.6 66.7Agree 33 31.1 31.4 98.1Strongly agree 2 1.9 1.9 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0
162
24. Retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male ============================================================= Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 6 5.7 5.8 5.8Disagree 16 15.1 15.5 21.4Neutral 59 55.7 57.3 78.6Agree 21 19.8 20.4 99.0Strongly agree 1 .9 1.0 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0
25. Institution rewards and recognizes faculty efforts to improve the retention of African American male students=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 21 19.8 19.8 19.8Disagree 30 28.3 28.3 48.1Neutral 38 35.8 35.8 84.0Agree 16 15.1 15.1 99.1Strongly agree 1 .9 .9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
26. Institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American male students============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 25 23.6 23.6 23.6Disagree 37 34.9 34.9 58.5Neutral 26 24.5 24.5 83.0Agree 17 16.0 16.0 99.1Strongly agree 1 .9 .9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
163
27. I am cognizant of the problems of African American male students at this institution=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 3 2.8 2.9 2.9Disagree 20 18.9 19.0 21.9Neutral 27 25.5 25.7 47.6Agree 37 34.9 35.2 82.9Strongly agree 18 17.0 17.1 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0
28. I am provided with early alert on African American male student who are having academic, social and other difficulties============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 29 27.4 27.4 27.4Disagree 35 33.0 33.0 60.4Neutral 23 21.7 21.7 82.1Agree 16 15.1 15.1 97.2Strongly agree 3 2.8 2.8 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
29. I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to assist African American male students============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 21 19.8 19.8 19.8Disagree 26 24.5 24.5 44.3Neutral 35 33.0 33.0 77.4Agree 19 17.9 17.9 95.3Strongly agree 5 4.7 4.7 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
164
30. Institution tracking system allows for identification and monitoring African American male students progress=========================================================
31. I am able to make contact with African American male students through telephone calls========================================================= Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7 4.7 4.7Disagree 18 17.0 17.0 21.7Neutral 21 19.8 19.8 41.5Agree 43 40.6 40.6 82.1Strongly agree 19 17.9 17.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
32. I am able to make contact with AAMS through emails=========================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 5 4.7 4.7 4.7Disagree 19 17.9 17.9 22.6Neutral 23 21.7 21.7 44.3Agree 41 38.7 38.7 83.0Strongly agree 18 17.0 17.0 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0
Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Variable 11 10.4 10.4 10.4Strongly disagree 22 20.8 20.8 31.1Disagree 41 38.7 38.7 69.8Neutral 24 22.6 22.6 92.5Agree 8 7.5 7.5 100.0Strongly agree 106 100.0 100.0 Total
165
33. Number of undergraduate students advised per academic year
Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent1-10 66 62.3 71.0 71.021-30 8 7.5 8.6 79.631-40 7 6.6 7.5 87.141-50 7 6.6 7.5 94.651 & over 5 4.7 5.4 100.0Total 93 87.7 100.0 Missing 13 12.3 106 100.0
34. Office hours spent advising African American male students per week=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
1-5 61 57.5 59.2 59.26-10 24 22.6 23.3 82.511-15 7 6.6 6.8 89.316 & over 11 10.4 10.7 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 106 100.0
35. I use my advisement time to help African American male students with personal and career goals=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7 4.8 4.8Disagree 13 12.3 12.4 17.1Neutral 11 10.4 10.5 27.6Agree 55 51.9 52.4 80.0Strongly agree 21 19.8 20.0 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9
106 100.0
166
36. I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decision concerning their major=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 4 3.8 3.8 3.8Disagree 9 8.5 8.6 12.4Neutral 7 6.6 6.7 19.0Agree 50 47.2 47.6 66.7Strongly agree 35 33.0 33.3 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0
37. I frequently refer African American male students advisees to counselors and tutors=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Strongly disagree 5 4.7 4.8 4.8Disagree 17 16.0 16.3 21.2Neutral 26 24.5 25.0 46.2Agree 37 34.9 35.6 81.7Strongly agree 19 17.9 18.3 100.0Total 104 98.1 100.0 Missing 2 1.9 Total 106 100.0
38. I meet informally with African American male students I advise=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 12 11.3 11.4 11.4Disagree 11 10.4 10.5 21.9Neutral 13 12.3 12.4 34.3Agree 44 41.5 41.9 76.2Strongly agree 25 23.6 23.8 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0
167
REFERENCES
Alabama A&M University. (2001). Message from the president. Retrieved January 12, 2004 from Alabama A & M University Web site:http://www.aamu.edu/.
Alabama A&M University. (1988). Strategic academic planning phase 1. Huntsville, Alabama: Alabama A & M University.
Alabama Commission on Higher Education. (2001). Completion and Retention Rates Report. Retrieved November 24, 2004 from http://www.ache.state.al.us/03Abstract/Index.htm.
Allen,W.R.(1988). Improving black students, access and achievement in higher education research. The Review of Higher Education, 11, 403-416.
Amey, M. J. (1999). Faculty culture and college life: Reshaping incentives towards student outcomes. New Directions for Higher Education. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Armon, M. (1995). Factors that influence faculty organizational commitment in highereducation. (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University 1995). Dissertation Abstract International 56 (03), 834.
Ascher, C. (1991). School programs for African American males. (Eric Digest no.72). Eric Clearing House on Urban Education: New York. ( Eric Document Service No. ED3334340).
Astin, A.W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years: Effects of College on beliefs, attitudes and knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Astin, A.W. (1985). Assessment for excellence: A critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
American Association of University Professors. (2000). Statement on faculty workload with interactive comments. Retrieved on November 23, 2003, from http://aaup.org/statments/reddook/rbworl.html.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, Freeman.
Bean, J.P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a casual model of students attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12, 2.
168
Bean, J .P. (1981). The synthesis of a theoretical model of student attrition. Paper presented at the 1981 meeting of the American educational Research Association. Los Angeles, California.
Berger M.J. (1996). A modified model of college student persistence: Exploring the relationship between Astin’s theory of involvement and Tinto’s departure
theory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Seattle, Washington.
Bonner, F.B., Thomas, V.G. (2001). New continuing challenges and opportunities for Black women in the academy. Journal of Negro Education, 70(3),
125-126.
Bonner, F.B. (2001). Addressing gender in the historically black college and university community: A challenge and call to action. Journal of Negro Education,
70(3), 176-192.
Boyer, E. L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper & Row.
Boyer, E.L. (1991). NJ: Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Braunstien, A., McGrath, M. (1997). The retention of freshmen students: An examination of the assumptions, beliefs and perceptions held by college administrators and faculty. College Student Journal, 31(2), 188-201.
Buck, J. (2003). The state of African American Professoriate: Challenges and responsibilities. Paper presented at the 2003
meeting of the American Association of University Professors. Mahwah, New Jersey
Dey, E.L. (2002). Job satisfaction in teaching: An examination of personnel and environmental influences on faculty, October 2002. (ERIC Document Service No.ED474038)
Cabrera, A. F., & Nora, A. (1992). The convergence between two theories of college persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 123-137.
Chenoweth, K. (1999). HBCUS tackle the knotty problem of retention. Black Issues in Higher Education, 15(26), 38-42.
College Board. (2003). Trends in college pricing. Retrieved on November 5, 2003, from http://www.collegeboard.com/press/cost/cost03/trends.html.
169
Corbin, S.K. (1998). Role perception and job satisfaction for community college faculty. (Doctoral dissertation, Catholic University of America, 1998). Dissertation
Abstracts International Section, 59(4) 1050.
Credle, J.O., Dean, J. (1991). Comprehensive model for enhancing black student retention in higher education. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 19(4), 24-39.
Cusoe, J. (2003). Academic advisement and student retention: Empirical connections and systematic intervention. Retrieved April 17, 2003, from http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/listserve/remarks/cuseoretention.pdf.
Davis, J.E, & Polite, V.C. (Eds). (1999). What does gender have to do with the experiences of the African American males in school and Society, African American males in school land Society: Practices and Policies for effective education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Diola, B., & Kelly E. (1996). The Dynamics of student retention: A review and a prescription. Journal of Higher Education, 14(3), 22-35.
Foster, M., & Peele, T.P. (1999). Teaching black males: Lessons for the experts. In Davis, J.E, & Polite, V.C, (Ed.s). (1999). What does gender have to do with the experiences of the African American males in school and Society, African American males in school land Society: Practices and Policies for effective education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Furr, S.R.,& Elling, T.W. (2002). African American students in predominantly white universities: Factors associated with retention. College Student Journal, 36(2), 188-203.
Friedler, J. (1980). Are colleges support programs and services reaching high risk students. Journal of College Students Retention, 21(1), 23-28.
Gohn, L., Swartz, J., & Donnelly, S. (2000). A case of second year persistence. Journal of College Student retention: Research Theory and Practice, 2(4), 188-190.
Harris, S.M. (1995). Psychological development and the black male masculinity: Implications for counseling economically disadvantage male adolescents. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 279-285.
170
Hawken, L., Duran, R., & Kelly, L. (1991). The relationship of interpersonal communication variables to academic success and persistence in college. Communication Quarterly, 39(4), 297-309.
Henderson, W.E., Henderson, D. Hudson, J. (2002). The retention of entering and returning freshmen at Florida A & M University’s school of general studies. Education, 123(1), 210-214.
Henry, A. (1998). Faculty workload and productivity; A gender comparison. NationalAssociation 1998 Almanac of Higher Education. Retrieved November 2, 2003, from http://www.N.C.A.A.org/he/healma98/workload.pbf.
Hickson, M.E. (2002). What role does the race of the professors have on the retention of students attending historically black colleges and universities. Education, 123 (1), 186-192.
Johnson, J.C. (1997). Commuter college students: What factors, determine who drop out
of college. College Students Journal, 3(1), 323-332. Knight, T.W. (2002). What matters in the university: Graduation of community college
transfer students,. (ERIC Document Production Service No. ED477828)
Lau, R.S. (1996). Evaluating faculty workload. An application of process control chart. Journal of Education for Business 72(2), 94-107.
Lee, W.Y. (1999). Striving toward effective retention: The effect of race on the mentoring of African American student. Peabody Journal of Education, 74(2), 17-27.
Levin, M. & Levin, J. (1991). An initial explanation of academic retention programs for at risk college minority students. Journal of College Development, July 1999, 32, 323-334.
Lidholm, J.A. (2002). Establishing a sense of “space” within academic environment: faculty constructors of institutional fit and the resulting implications for professional vitality.(Doctoral dissertation University of California, 2002) Dissertation Abstracts International, 26(12), 4088.
Lowe, A. & Michael, T. (2000). Academic advising: Views of the givers and takers.Journal of College Student Retention: Research Theory and Practice, 2(2), 150-170.
National Education Association. (1995).Research Center Update, 1, (3). RetrievedNovember 10, 2003 fromhttp://www.nea.org/he/heupdate/vol17no3.pdf.
171
National Education Association. (2001).Research Center Update, 7, (3). Retrieved November 10,2003 from http://www.nea.org/he/heupdate/vol17no3.pdf.
N.C.A.A (2003). Graduation report for NCAA division one schools. Retrieved
Novenber 10, 2003, from http://www.ncaa.org.org/graduationrates/2003/dr/index:html.
Nettie, L., McDill, E., & McPartland, J. (1994). Education reforms and students at risk: A review of the current state of the art. Education Review, 34(4), 145-162.
Newsted, P. R., Chin,W., Ngwenyama, O., and Lee, A. (1997, December). Resolved: surveys have outlived their usefulness in IS research. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems, Cleveland, OH.
Noel, L., Levitz, R., Saluri, D. (1985). Increasing student retention. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
Norguera, P.A. (1997). Responding to crisis confronting black youth: Providing support without further marginalization. Motion Magazine, 6, 18-26.
McCroskey, J.C., Butterfield, S., & Payne, S.K. (1989). The impact of communication apprehension on college student retention and success. Communication Quarterly,
37(2), 100-108.
Milen, J., Berger, J. (1996). A modified model of college persistence. Exploring the relationship between Astin’s theory of involvement and Tinto’s theory of departure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher education. New Orleans, LA.
Molnar, D. (1996). The impact of institutional effectiveness on student retention. Annual forum paper. (Report No 397721). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 307-721.
McDaniel, C., & Graham S.W. (2001). Student retention at a Historically Black College College student Journal, 35(1), 15-21.
Mohr, J., Fiche, K., Sedlacek, W. (1998). So close yet so far: Predicting attrition in college seniors. Journal of College Development, 39(4), 343-354.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2001) Selected statistics on degree granting Historically Black Colleges 1999- 2000. Digest of Educational Statistics. Retrieved December 21, 2003, from http://www.neces.ed.gov/pub2002/digest2001.
172
O’Mera, T.L. (2002). Faculty Socialization: Lessons learned from urban black colleges. Urban Education, 3(6), 5, 630-647.
Padilla, R.V. (2000). College retention: Focus on success. Journal of College Retention: Research Theory and Practice,1(2), 124-135.
Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How collage affects students. Finding and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
(RAS). (2001). Office of Retention and Academic Support Publication. Huntsville, Alabama A & M University.
Pascarella, E. (1985). College environment influences on learning and cognitive development: A critical review and synthesis. In J. Smart (ed). Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, V5, New York: Agathon.
Rosa, M.L. (2003). Campus climate at Cal Poly Poma: Perceptions of students, faculty, staff and administrators. Academic Resources, Institutional Research and Planning. Cal Poly Poma University.
Plane, R.K., & Jacob, W.L. (2000). Intensification, Extension and complexity of teachers workload. Journal of Sociology and Education, 21(1), 43-59.
Seaberg, J. (1998). Faculty report of workload: The result of national survey. Journal of Social Work Education, 34(1), 7-22.
Schreiner, L. A. (1988). Increasing retention on a college campus through at risk student
identification and faculty student contact (Report No CGO21081). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 298400).
Sharobean, M.H.,& Howard, K. (2000). Teaching demands versus research productivity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(7), 436-441.
Shwitzer, A.M. (1993). Implementing and utilization of per counselors for minority freshmen at a predominately white university. Journal of Freshman Experience, 10 (1), 31-50.
Spradley, P.A. (1996). A multivariate analysis of the persistence of adult African American males from a baccalaureate degree program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, Teachers College.
Sydow, D.L., Sandel, R.H. (1998). Making retention an institutional priority. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 22 (7), 635-644.
173
Thompson, D. (1978). Black faculty and students. Black colleges in America, challenge, development, survival. New York: Columbia University.
Thomas, S., Giles, M. G. (1994). Assessment and retention of blacks students in higher education. Journal of Negro Education, 63(2), 164-178.
Tinto, V. (1987). Increasing student retention. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from Higher Education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1998). Classroom as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177.
Tinto, V. (2002). Taking student retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. Paper presented at the 2002 meeting of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admission Officers. Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Towsend, B.(2003). Tenure in the sacred grove: Issues and strategies for women and minority faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 74, 712-716.
U.S.Department of Commerce. ( 1997). Percent of high school students enrolled in college, by age and race-ethnicity . Bureau of Census population surveys. Retrived on October 20, 2005, from http://www.bls.census.gov/cps/pub/hsgec_1095.htm
Wenglinsky, H. (1999). Historical Black Colleges and Universities: Their aspirations and accomplishment. Educational Testing Service. Retrieved on November 5, 2003, from Web site http://www.ets.org/.
Weidman, J.C. (1989) Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol 5. New York: Agathon.
Wilson, M. (2000). Reversing the plight of African American male college students. Black Issues in Higher Education, 17(18), 175-176.
Winston, R.B. (1994). Developmental academic advising reconsidered: Chimera or unrealized potential? NACADA Journal, 14(2), 112-116.
Wyckoff, S.C. (1999). The academic advising process in higher education: History, research and improvement. Recruitment and Retention in Higher Education, 13(1), 1-3.
174
VITA
Howard Wright was born in Hanover, Jamaica on April 21, 1968. He obtained an
associate of science degree in agricultural sciences in 1988 from the College of
Agriculture, Port Antonio, Jamaica. He worked as a teacher of agricultural science and
biology at his alma mater, Happy Grove High School between 1988 and 1989 before
being employed as a project officer with the Jamaica/ Netherlands Rural Development
Project in 1991. He entered Florida A & M University in 1991 and competed his
bachelors of science degree in agri-business in 1993. He returned to Jamaica and worked
with Eastern Banana Estates as a technical services manager. He entered Alabama A &
M University to pursue a masters degree in business administration with emphasis in
human resource management. He graduated in 1997 and was employed as the agricultural
business manager at Appleton Estates in St Elizabeth, Jamaica specializing in cost
analysis and resource development. He is currently a technical trainer at West
Corporation in Huntsville, Alabama.
175