Introduction

34
Service and Diverse Interactions in College as Predictors of Civic Engagement in the Post-college Years: Differences Across Institutional Types Erica Yamamura, M.A. Nida Denson, M.A UCLA Higher Education Research Institute AIR Annual Forum San Diego, CA May 2005

description

Service and Diverse Interactions in College as Predictors of Civic Engagement in the Post-college Years: Differences Across Institutional Types Erica Yamamura, M.A. Nida Denson, M.A UCLA Higher Education Research Institute AIR Annual Forum San Diego, CA May 2005. Introduction. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Introduction

Page 1: Introduction

Service and Diverse Interactions in College as Predictors of Civic Engagement in the

Post-college Years: Differences Across Institutional Types

Erica Yamamura, M.A.Nida Denson, M.A

UCLA Higher Education Research Institute

AIR Annual ForumSan Diego, CA

May 2005

Page 2: Introduction

Introduction

Shifts in community service and service learning (K-12 & Higher Education)

Increasingly diverse college campuses Impact of College on Volunteerism after

college

Page 3: Introduction

Background: Community Service and Service Learning

Few studies have looked at the long-term impact of college community service on post-college civic engagement. (Astin, Sax, & Avalos, 1999; Denson, Vogelgesang, & Saenz, 2005; Eyler, 2000)

Page 4: Introduction

Background: Racial Diversity in Higher Ed Types of Diversity

– Structural Diversity– Diversity Initiatives– Cross-racial Interaction(Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen,

1999; Milem, 2003)

Page 5: Introduction

Background: Cross-Racial Interaction Cross-racial interaction (CRI):

type of college diversity that looks directly at peer interaction with students of different racial and ethnic groups (Antonio, 1998; Milem, 2003).

Page 6: Introduction

Background: Cross-Racial Interaction Few studies have looked at the long-

term benefits of cross-racial interaction. A notable exception:

Bowen and Bok’s (1998) study of graduates of selective schools

Page 7: Introduction

Theoretical Framework:Institutional Type Analysis No current study on the impact of

college service and diversity on civic engagement post-college by institutional type

Institutional Types for Study:– Public– Private– Religious

Page 8: Introduction

Data Sources

CIRP 1994/1998 Data

2004 Post-College Follow Up Survey– supported by a three-year grant from the

Atlantic Philanthropies U.S.A., Inc

Page 9: Introduction

Method

Sample– 6,515 students from 138 institutions– 1994 SIF, 1998 CSS, 2004 PCFS

Analytic Approach– Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM)

Page 10: Introduction

Logic of Hierarchical Linear Modeling (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002)

HLM decomposes relationships between variables into separate student-level and institution-level components

The different effects of a variable resulting from differing levels can be included in one model

Allows for formulation and testing of hypotheses about cross-level effects

Page 11: Introduction

Institution-level

Student-level

OutcomePost-College Volunteerism

Type AVG: service

AVG: CRI

Service CRI

% URM

Conceptual Framework

Page 12: Introduction

Research Question #1: Student-Level Effects

Institution-level

Student-level

Outcome Post-College Volunteerism

Type AVG: service

AVG: CRI

Service CRI

% URM

Page 13: Introduction

Research Question #2:Institution-Level Effect

Institution-level

Student-level

Outcome Post-College Volunteerism

Type AVG: service

AVG: CRI

Service CRI

% URM

Page 14: Introduction

Research Question #3: Institution-Level EffectsInstitution-level

Student-level

Outcome Post-College Volunteerism

Type AVG: service

AVG: CRI

Service CRI

% URM

Page 15: Introduction

Research Question #4: Cross-Level Effects

Institution-level

Student-level

OutcomePost-College Volunteerism

Type AVG: service

AVG: CRI

Service CRI

% URM

Page 16: Introduction

2004 Volunteerism Outcome (α=.81)12 Items- Frequency: performed volunteer work (.74)- HPW: volunteer work (.68)- Collect, prepare, distribute, or serve food (.60)- Collect, make or distribute clothing, crafts, or goods other

than food (.49)- Teach, tutor, mentor, coach, or referee (.56)- Fundraise or sell items to raise money (.54)- Supply transportation for people (.55)- Provide general office services (.49)- Provide information, be an usher, greeter or minister (.60)- Engage in music, performance, or other artistic activities

(.49)- Perform physical labor (.64)- Other (.49)

Page 17: Introduction

Variables of Interest Student-Level

– Service (no service, community service only, both community service and SL)

– Cross-racial interaction (CRI) Institution-Level

– Institutional type (public, private, religious)– Structural diversity (% URM)– Peer average levels of volunteerism– Peer average levels of CRI

Page 18: Introduction

Control Variables Student-Level

– Freshman pretest for volunteerism– Pre-college characteristics – College experiences

Institution-Level– Size, selectivity– Student-level aggregates (peer effects)

Page 19: Introduction

Sample – Percent by institutional type

05

101520253035404550

Public Private Religious

Page 20: Introduction

Service by Institutional Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Public Private Religious

No service

Communityservice onlyBoth communityservice and SL

Page 21: Introduction

CRI by Institutional Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Public Private Religious

Low CRIMedium CRIHigh CRI

Page 22: Introduction

2004 Volunteerism by Institutional type

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Public Private Religious

Low VolunteerismMedium VolunteerismHigh Volunteerism

Page 23: Introduction

Student-Level Findings

Volunteer (+++)Volunteer & SL (+++)Cross-racial interaction (++)

* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 24: Introduction

Student-Level Findings HS volunteering (+++) Curricular/co-curricular diversity acts

(+++) Attended religious services (+++) Leadership/honors acts (+++) Challenged prof’s ideas in class (+++)* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 25: Introduction

Student-Level Findings

Asian/Asian-American (-)Joined a fraternity/sorority (-)

* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 26: Introduction

Institution-level findings

Institutional type: private (ns) Institutional type: religious (ns) Structural diversity: %URM (ns) AVG: volunteerism (ns) AVG: CRI (ns)

* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 27: Introduction

Institution-level findings

AVG: attended religious services (++)

* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 28: Introduction

Cross-Level Findings

AVG: volunteerism (ns)

* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 29: Introduction

Cross-Level Findings

Structural diversity: % URM (--)AVG: attended religious services (+

+)

* p <.05** p<.01*** p<.001

Page 30: Introduction

Summary

Student participation in service and/or cross-racial interaction in college positively influences volunteerism after college

Attending religious services also positively influences volunteerism after college

Page 31: Introduction

Summary

Student peer group influence plays a larger role than institutional type (i.e. religious colleges) in predicting volunteerism after college

Page 32: Introduction

Summary

Structural diversity (as measured by %URM) had a weakening effect on the CRI volunteerism relationship

Peer average levels of attending religious services had a strengthening effect on the CRI volunteerism effect

Page 33: Introduction

For copies of our presentation…

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri

Page 34: Introduction

Question & Answer Session

Thank you!