University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Native Hawaiian student success in the first-year: the impact of college programs and practices

(USC Thesis Other)

Native Hawaiian student success in the first-year: the impact of college programs and practices

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR: THE IMPACT OF
COLLEGE PROGRAMS AND PRACTICES

by

Ellen Lokelani Kenolio

______________________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

Copyright 2019 Ellen Lokelani Kenolio
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

i

Acknowledgements
The completion of this dissertation and doctoral program would not have been possible
without the dedication and support of my family, friends, faculty, and colleagues. First, it is
important to acknowledge the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education for
the opportunity for doctoral study in Hawai`i. I have had the privilege to study with amazing
faculty and staff. Their wisdom and passion have inspired my learning and leadership in doing
the important work of education.
Thank you to my chair, Dr. Lawrence Picus, and committee members, Dr. Alan Green
and Dr. Judy Ann Oliveira for their encouragement, support, and assistance through the
dissertation process. Mahalo to my awesome classmates in the USC Hawai`i cohort who have
supported me each step of the way. Leslie, Dana, Kammie, Keolani, and Mike, you have all been
an inspiration.
Mahalo nui to Dr. Lui Hokoana, Dr. Judy Ann Oliveira, Dr. Nolan Malone, Dr. Punihei
Lipe, and the Title III team for allowing me to be part of the system-wide evaluation project. I
am humbled to have had the opportunity and have learned so much. To Nolan, mahalo for
generously sharing your expertise with the data analysis and technical writing. Your guidance
and encouragement were an essential part of completing this project.
I need to recognize the staff and faculty at the University of Hawai`i West O`ahu No`eau
Center and Windward Community College who supported me throughout this journey. Mahalo
to Dr. Jan Javinar for your candor and encouragement to persist. To my supervisors, No`eau staff
and colleagues, thank you for providing support and leadership in my absence.
Mahalo to the Native Hawaiian Doctoral Fellows Program and the Native Hawaiian
Education Association for the scholarship and support that allowed me to be part of the USC
doctoral experience. I am honored to serve our Native Hawaiian community.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

ii

Mahalo to my `ohana and friends for your encouragement throughout this journey. To my
Kenolio, Padeken, Tiffany, and Layaoen family, thank you for the inspiration and motivation. To
my parents, Olivia Padeken-Kenolio and David Kenolio, mahalo nui for the prayers, support, and
encouragement to complete my study. Your love and guidance have provided me with the
opportunity for lifelong learning.
Most important, I want to acknowledge the commitment and sacrifices of my loving
husband, Jeffrey, and my children Kealohikea and La`ikū. Mahalo for allowing me the necessary
time to focus on my studies to complete this doctorate. Much family time has been sacrificed but
know you have all helped to make this possible. The completion of this doctorate is a family
accomplishment. Let’s celebrate and plan our next adventure together.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

iii

Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study ................................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ...................................................................................................... 3
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................... 4
Individual Factors ............................................................................................................... 5
Institutional Factors ............................................................................................................ 6
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 8
Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................... 9
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................... 9
Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................... 9
Organization of the Dissertation ............................................................................................. 10
Chapter 2: Literature Review ....................................................................................................... 12
Defining First-Year Student Success ...................................................................................... 13
Theories of Student Persistence .............................................................................................. 14
Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome Model .................................................................... 15
Tinto’s Student Departure Theory .................................................................................... 16
First-Year Student Characteristics .......................................................................................... 19
Academic Preparation ....................................................................................................... 19
First Generation to College ............................................................................................... 21
Socioeconomic Status ....................................................................................................... 22
Family Support ................................................................................................................. 24
Commitment to Degree and Institution ............................................................................. 25
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 26
First-Year Experience ............................................................................................................. 27
Principles of Model First-Year Programs ......................................................................... 27
Model First-Year Experience Programs ................................................................................. 29
Organizing for First-Year Success .................................................................................... 29
Creating a Student-Centered Campus Culture .................................................................. 30
Good Practices in the Classroom ...................................................................................... 32
Promoting First-Year Success Outside the Classroom ..................................................... 34
Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 35
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 36
Research on Native Hawaiian Students .................................................................................. 37
Defining Native Hawaiians ............................................................................................... 37
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

iv

Native Hawaiians and Student Persistence ....................................................................... 38
Native Hawaiian Students at the University of Hawai`i ......................................................... 41
Policies and Initiatives ...................................................................................................... 43
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 44
Conceptual Framework ........................................................................................................... 45
Chapter 3: Methodology .............................................................................................................. 47
Research Design ...................................................................................................................... 48
Site and Population ................................................................................................................. 50
Data ......................................................................................................................................... 52
Input Variables .................................................................................................................. 53
Environment Variable ....................................................................................................... 56
Outcome Variables ............................................................................................................ 58
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 60
Limitations of the Study .......................................................................................................... 61
Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................ 62
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 62
Chapter 4: Research Results ........................................................................................................ 64
Analyses .................................................................................................................................. 64
Results ..................................................................................................................................... 65
Results on First-Year Experience ........................................................................................... 65
Bivariate Analyses ............................................................................................................ 65
Multivariate Analyses ....................................................................................................... 67
Summary of Results on First-Year Experience ................................................................ 75
Results on Native Hawaiian Students ..................................................................................... 76
Bivariate Analyses ............................................................................................................ 76
Multivariate Analyses ....................................................................................................... 78
Summary of Results on Native Hawaiian Students .......................................................... 79
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 80
Chapter 5: Discussion .................................................................................................................. 81
Overview of Study .................................................................................................................. 81
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................. 83
Response to Research Question 1 ..................................................................................... 84
Response to Research Question 2 ..................................................................................... 86
Study Limitations .............................................................................................................. 87
Implications for Practice ......................................................................................................... 88
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

v

Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................. 90
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 91
References ..................................................................................................................................... 93

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

vi

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Native Hawaiian student enrollment across the University of Hawai`i system ....... 42
Table 2.2 Native Hawaiian student degrees and certificates earned across the University of
Hawai`i system. ........................................................................................................ 43
Table 3.1 Enrollment distribution across the University of Hawai‘i system, 2017. ................ 50
Table 3.2 Descriptive statistics for study input variables. ....................................................... 55
Table 3.3 Descriptive statistics for study environment variables. ........................................... 58
Table 3.4 Descriptive statistics for study outcome variables. .................................................. 60
Table 4.1 Inputs of First-Year Experience program participants and non-participants. .......... 66
Table 4.2 Outcomes of First-Year Experience program participants and non-participants. .... 67
Table 4.3 Statistical output of Persistence model 1: Finished first year. ................................. 68
Table 4.4 Statistical output of Persistence model 2: Returned for second year. ...................... 69
Table 4.5 Statistical output of Persistence model 3: Finished second year. ............................ 70
Table 4.6 Statistical output of Achievement model 1: First-year cumulative grade point
average. .................................................................................................................... 71
Table 4.7 Statistical output of Achievement model 2: Second-year cumulative grade point
average. .................................................................................................................... 72
Table 4.8 Statistical output of Completion model 1: Earned an associate degree. .................. 73
Table 4.9 Statistical output of Completion model 2: Transferred to a University of Hawai'i
four-year campus. .................................................................................................... 74
Table 4.10 Statistical output of Completion model 3: Achieved any completion measure
(certificate, degree, or transfer). ............................................................................... 75
Table 4.11 Inputs of Native Hawaiian First-Year Experience program participants and non-
participants. .............................................................................................................. 77
Table 4.12 Outcomes of Native Hawaiian First-Year Experience program participants and non-
participants. .............................................................................................................. 78
Table 4.13 Summary of First-Year Experience multivariate model statistics for all outcomes:
all Windward Comm. Coll. students and Native Hawaiian students only. .............. 79

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

vii

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Input-Environment-Outcome model (Astin, 1993). ................................................. 16
Figure 2.2 Model of Student Departure (Tinto, 1975). ............................................................. 18
Figure 2.3 Conceptual framework. ............................................................................................ 46
Figure 3.1 Conceptual framework. ............................................................................................ 49
Figure 3.2 Study design. ............................................................................................................ 53

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR

viii

Abstract
This study examines the relationship between Native Hawaiian student participation in
first-year college programs and student success measures. Specifically, the study assesses
whether participation in a first-year experience program at a community college campus was
significantly associated with increases in students’ persistence, achievement, and completion,
particularly among Native Hawaiians.
Applying Astin’s (1993) input-environment-outcome model and leveraging archival data
of 1,106 first-time, classified undergraduates from Fall 2014 to Fall 2016, bivariate and
multivariate analyses were conducted on the entire eligible campus population, as well as a
subset of Native Hawaiian students only. Logistic regression analyses were conducted for six
models of binomial persistence and completion outcome variables, while general linear
regression analyses were conducted for two models of continuous academic achievement
outcome variables.
Findings indicate participation in first-year programs significantly increased persistence
in finishing the first-year of college – among all students, as well as among Native Hawaiian
students specifically -- compared to their non-participant peers. For all other persistence,
achievement, and completion measures, the models indicated no statistically significant
differences between first-year program participants and non-participants. Of note, the regression
models revealed that cumulative college credits earned and most recent grade point averages
were highly significant in all achievement and completion variables. This study begins to bridge
a gap in the research on Native Hawaiian first-year college students and contributes to research
on understanding the relationship between student characteristics, university programs, and
student success.
Running head: NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR
1
CHAPTER 1 : OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Warriors
Being a warrior… it is the willingness to sacrifice everything except your
truth, your way of being, your commitment. The ultimate stand is to your
commitment to do something with your life that will make a difference.
Warriors don’t always have to fight. They may just have to stand up.
-- Cardinal (1995)

We can never predict the impact of our actions. When I welcomed Leilani into my
counseling office, she smiled as she walked in and sat on the sofa. I asked how she was doing,
and she excitedly responded “great.” I inquired how I could help her, and she shared she needed
assistance planning her freshmen year classes. Leilani was the first in her family to attend college
and knew little about the process of getting started. We worked for over an hour designing the
next four semesters of course work. Upon leaving, she expressed how she appreciated taking the
time to map her academic plan. She loved knowing what her next steps could be and reminders
of the importance of attending class and doing well in her academics. She was grateful someone
cared about her success.
Leilani returned several more times and on one of those visits she shared her family story.
She was struggling to balance her tight finances, studies, and family obligations. Her mom had
returned to jail, her dad was back associating with his drug-using friends, and she was caring for
her tutu (grandmother) and two younger siblings. Leilani was scheduled to see a family court
judge about managing the responsibility of her younger sister. We spent the afternoon writing
her story and practicing what she would present on that court day. She left my office giving me
the biggest hug of appreciation.
In both intent and outcome, my effort was modest. I helped nurture a student in need, yet
it also had a powerful emotional and spiritual impact on us both. For her, our time helped replace
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 2

neglect with connection and purpose. For me, the experience allowed me to reflect on my
personal experience as a Hawaiian woman and an employee at the university. As a youngster, I
clearly identified with my Hawaiian culture and values. I was raised to believe hard work and
commitment were critical to success. When I entered the University of Hawai`i as a freshman, I
was shocked by the unfamiliar challenges of trying to survive in a new environment, managing
the academic load and part-time work, being away from home and family, and balancing my
Hawaiian and western cultural identity. At the end of my first year, I left unsure if the college
experience was the right fit for me. I used that first summer to reconnect with family, refocus my
goals, regain personal confidence, and recommit to excellence. I returned energized with a
purpose to attain my college degree. My personal understanding of the challenges of
transitioning to college and experiences with Leilani and numerous other college students has
inspired this research and my commitment to help improve the university to better support
college student success and the Hawaiian student experience. As Cardinal (1995) described in
the opening quote, for me being a warrior is standing for students and their success. This
dissertation is a study of university programs and practices that successfully support Native
Hawaiian first-year students.
A college education is valuable not only in our global society but also in how we meet
the needs of personal development, economic development, innovation, civic responsibility and
embracing differences. Hochschild and Scovronick (2003) described education as a bridge to the
“American Dream”, the individual and collective gateway to economic success and the path to
personal freedom. Although, the American Dream may look different for Native Hawaiians,
there is still a need to be able to help Hawaiian students achieve academic success.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 3

Background of the Problem
One of the critical issues in higher education is the number of students who fail to persist
or graduate. According to the U.S. Department of Education, 2016 National Center for
Educational Statistics review of the 2012 entering first-time, full-time freshmen class at four-
year granting institutions, 39% of undergraduate students completed their bachelor’s degree in
four years and 60% completed in six years. Among underrepresented ethnic students in the 2012
cohort, 29% graduated in four years and 51% graduated in six years (U.S. Department of
Education, 2016).
The economic impact of the college student attrition on citizens, states, and the nation is
serious. National and state college initiatives such as the Lumina Goal 2025, Complete College
America 2018, and the Hawai`i Graduation Initiative were designed to address the current
realities and concerns on developing an educated and prepared workforce. Higher education
correlates strongly with important social and economic outcomes including economic success,
health, family stability, and social connections (Hout, 2012). Daly and Bengali (2014) stated that
earning a four-year college degree is a worthwhile investment for the average student and found
a typical college graduate earns over $800,000 more than the average high school graduate by
retirement age. Autor (2014) described the economics of education as the potential earnings to be
received from investing in a college education. In addition, Hout (2012) affirmed education
positively affects individuals and groups who are less likely to pursue a college education.
At the University of Hawai`i, Native Hawaiian students have among the lowest
graduation rates throughout the University of Hawai`i system. Hawai`i Graduation Initiative data
revealed the graduation rates for the first-time full-time fall 2012 cohort at the 4-year degree
granting institutions were 19% and 44% for 4-year and 6-year graduations, respectively
(University of Hawai`i, 2016). Among Native Hawaiian students in the 2012 cohort, 9%
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 4

graduated in 4-years and 40% graduated in 6-years. This dire problem of low graduation rates
impacts the achievement goals of graduating Hawaiian students, as well as the total student
population. This issue affects the university’s commitment to increase the number of educated
citizens in Hawai`i communities and provide graduates to address workforce development needs.
This matter is critical and solving this problem is important for the University of Hawai`i.
Statement of the Problem
There is considerable research on higher education enrollment, retention, and graduation.
The historical retention and persistence theories of Astin (1984) and Tinto (1975) are viewed as
foundational to beginning the discussion of student retention and persistence. Astin’s (1984)
work examined the inter-connection of individual student characteristics and institutional
characteristics and how they impact student retention. Tinto’s (1975, 1987) studies focused on
the connection and commitment a student develops with the institution and how that connection
can influence student persistence. Pascarella and Terenzini (1980) built upon Astin (1975) and
Tinto’s (1975) efforts and found in their research academic integration had the strongest
relationship to persistence. Kuh’s (2001) theory of student engagement concentrated on the time
and effort students devote to activities and how that linked to college persistence. Additional
studies by DeAngelo (2014) explored the successful programs and practices, as well as the
factors contributing to the retention of students from the first to second year and persisting to
graduation. These theories have provided a foundation for understanding the issues related to
student success. Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) assert that student success is largely
determined by a student’s experience during the first-year of college.
First-year student success is generally defined as the completion of courses taken in the
first year and continued enrollment into the second year (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005). In
addition, first-year students are also expected to develop intellectual and academic competence,
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 5

establish and maintain supportive relationships, explore identity development, decide on a career,
maintain health and wellness, consider what they believe and value, develop a multicultural
awareness, and develop civic responsibility (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980; Tinto, 1987;
Seidman, 2012). Theories of retention and models of freshman success help to identify the
various factors that contribute to student persistence.
Astin (2005) affirmed, “an institution`s degree completion rate is primarily a reflection of
its entering student characteristics” (p.7). Thus, it is critical when looking at first-year student
persistence to study a student’s precollege characteristics and how they may influence success.
There are numerous individual challenges and factors that affect freshman student persistence
including the student’s academic preparedness, being a first-generation college student, financial
aid, college course success and grade point average, commitment, and family background.
Freshman persistence rates are also influenced by a number of institutional characteristics
including the campus acceptance policy, racial climate, multicultural curriculum, development of
specific programs, and resource allocation.
Individual Factors
Astin (2005), Yeh (2005), and Menifield (2012) examined factors that influenced student
success and found common characteristics included individual academic preparedness prior to
entering college, exposure to the American educational system, and scores on college entry
exams. College course attendance, persistence, and grade point average were other determining
factors in minority students’ graduating (Yeh, 2005). Minority students who successfully
graduated in four years were able to manage their academics, were full-time and continuously
enrolled, and had a grade point average greater than 2.0 (Donhardt, 2013; Makuakane-Drechsel
& Hagedorn, 2000).
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 6

Financial aid matters were found to have positive and negative effects on academic
success. Positive effects of financial aid were noted when students supported themselves with
savings from scholarships, grants, and summer work (Astin, 2005). This allowed students to be
fully present and focused on their studies during the school year. Negative effects were found
with students who worked part-time off campus. This caused students to be absent from school
and have fewer opportunities to interact with other members of the institution (Creighton, 2007).
Students were also found to have difficulty managing school and off-campus work
responsibilities during the school semester (Astin, 2005).
Students’ exposure to higher education and family expectations were found to have
significant effects on student success and motivation. Astin (2005) affirmed students who were
from well-educated families had an advantage when it comes to completing college. The
student’s degree of “social capital” – in this case, knowing others who have experiences in
higher education – played a role in college completion over and above the effects of academic
preparation and other personal factors (Astin, 2005). Makuakane-Drechsel and Hagedorn (2000)
found families who did not have knowledge or involvement with higher education were not able
to provide emotional and academic support because they were unfamiliar with the college
experience. In addition, Yeh (2005) and Hernandez and Lopez (2005) discovered many minority
students were expected to care for younger siblings while low-income family members worked
two or three jobs to support the family. Students shared they felt dropping out of college was not
an option and there was a sense of responsibility. In addition to individual factors, research has
shown institutional factors affect student persistence, retention, and graduation rates.
Institutional Factors
First-year success is influenced by a number of different institutional factors including
the campus racial climate, multicultural curriculum, and resource allocation. The racial climate
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 7

of a campus influences how underrepresented students feel about being part of a campus.
Lundberg (2014) explored Native Americans’ historical distrust of the educational system and
ways Native American college students have experienced a campus climate where they have
been dismissed, demeaned, and marginalized. Yeh (2005) and Hernandez and Lopez (2005)
discovered many minority students felt invisible and were forgotten populations in the
community. This feeling of marginality affects a student’s sense of belonging with the institution
and can ultimately influence one’s intent to persist.
When institutions commit to multicultural curriculum and centricity or using a student’s
culture as a context for teaching and learning, minority students are provided opportunities to be
academically successful (Bennett, 2001). Halagao (2010) and Hernandez and Lopez (2005)
discovered when faculty and staff created empowering programming and curriculum that
provided a sense of belonging, minority students adjusted academically and socially and were
found to have more intent to be present and persist.
Universities invest a tremendous amount of funds and resources to recruit, support, and
graduate students. Hamrick, Schuh, and Shelley (2004) found institutional characteristics,
classifications, and resource allocations were significant predictors of college persistence and
graduation rates. They found campus priorities focused on instructional expenditures and student
affairs expenditures had considerable impact on student persistence and graduation rates. Titus
(2006) confirmed college completion was positively associated with the amount of student
financial aid distributed, priorities of campus resource allocations, and total higher education
appropriations of state tax funds.
While much of the literature gathered on the subject of student retention and theories is
based on the experience of students in a homogenous environment, the experiences of Native
Hawaiian students and other students of color need to be further studied. The enrollment and
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 8

retention data of Native Hawaiian students at the University of Hawai`i illustrates the importance
of examining and identifying the challenges experienced by Native Hawaiian students within the
contemporary educational system and programs that best support their success.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine how university programs contribute to Native
Hawaiian freshman persistence. The secondary purpose is to contribute to the research literature
on models of retention of Native Hawaiian, indigenous, and minority students. The study focuses
on Native Hawaiian first-year students at Windward Community College (WCC) who
participated in multiple first-year programs. The study will determine the relationship between
student success measures and participation in new student orientation, freshman camp, a first-
year seminar, a learning community, and Supplemental Instruction.
This study will use Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome model to guide the assessment
of programs and activities for first-year students. The Input-Environment-Outcome model
hypothesizes that students enter with pre-established characteristics that influence their views
about college. The environment of college experiences influences a student’s outcome. The
intent of this study is to understand the relationship between Native Hawaiian students and the
intervention programs.
This quantitative retrospective study is designed to address the following research
questions:
Question 1: Does participation in first-year experience programs significantly increase Native
Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and completion?
Hypothesis 1: Participation in first-year experience programs will significantly increase Native
Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and completion.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 9

Question 2: How do Native Hawaiian students’ who participate in first-year experience
programs compare to Native Hawaiian non-participants in their persistence,
achievement, and completion?
Hypothesis 2: Native Hawaiian students who participate in first-year programming level of first
year continuation, persistence, and achievement will significantly increase
compared to Native Hawaiian students who do not participate in first-year
experience program.
Significance of the Study
The results of this inquiry will contribute to the literature that exists with respect to
Native Hawaiian student persistence, freshman persistence, and first-year programs and
practices. This study will contribute to the increased need for understanding Native Hawaiian
students, their pre-college characteristics, and the importance of sense of belonging, identity
development, and motivation. Finally, this study will help to improve Native Hawaiian student
retention by informing educational providers, policy makers, and leaders of programs that
address student success and institutional goals.
Limitations and Delimitations
1. This study is limited to the number of subjects surveyed and the subjects from a small
college campus.
2. Validity of this study is limited to the reliability of the analysis and instruments used.
Definition of Terms
In this section, definitions of key concepts utilized throughout this dissertation are provided:
Attrition – refers to a student who fails to re-enroll at an institution in consecutive semesters
(Tinto, 1993).
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 10

Native Hawaiian - is defined as “any person who is a descendant of the aboriginal people, who
prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now comprises the
State of Hawai`i” (Benham & Heck, 1998).
Persistence – for this inquiry, refers to the desire and action of a student to remain in college
from the first-year through each semester to degree completion (Seidman, 2012).
Pre-college experience - relates to the experiences students have before they enroll in college,
such as high school attended, high school coursework, family background, socio-
economic status, and college enrollment choices.
Retention – refers to the ability of a higher education institution to retain a student from
admission through graduation (Seidman, 2012; Tinto, 1993).
Organization of the Dissertation
The focus of this study is to examine the impact of the college environment on Native
Hawaiian student success. Chapter one presented the overview of this study introducing the
problem at the University of Hawai`i of low success and completion rates among Native
Hawaiian students. The significance of the study, limitations and definition of terms provide a
foundation for this dissertation.
Chapter two reviews the literature on student persistence and retention with a focus on
Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome Model (1993) and Tinto’s Student Departure Theory (1975,
1993). To conceptualize the importance of understanding best practices for Native Hawaiian
first-year success, first-year student characteristics, the first-year experience, and model first-
year programs are presented. Following is research on Native Hawaiian students and current
University of Hawai`i initiatives focused on addressing student retention.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 11

Chapter three presents the methodology to be used, including a description of the
research design, site and population, and the data elements. The limitations of the study, as well
as ethical considerations, are also shared.
Chapter four reveals the findings of the bivariate and multivariate analyses. Logistic
regression analyses and generalized linear regression analyses were conducted for the different
outcome variables.
The final chapter presents a discussion and interpretation of the results of the study
guided by the research questions. Implications for practice, policy, and future research are also
outlined as action steps to address or enhance the work of retention and graduation.

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 12

CHAPTER 2 : LITERATURE REVIEW
As America’s ethnic minority population increases, universities are seeking ways to
enroll, support, and graduate underrepresented students. Examining the factors that influence
first-year success is critical to student persistence and completion and provides a pathway to
guide higher education institutions. Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) stated student success
is largely determined by student experiences during the first-year of college.
At the University of Hawai`i, millions of dollars have been invested in first-year
programs to increase persistence and graduation rates of Native Hawaiian students. However,
Native Hawaiian students continue to struggle to make progress to persist through the first year
and graduate. In spring 2016, the average four-year graduation rate for Native Hawaiian students
at three University of Hawai`i undergraduate campuses was 19% and the average three-year
graduation rate at the seven University of Hawai`i community colleges was 14% (University of
Hawai`i, 2016). Looking at freshmen persistence, the Native Hawaiian retention rate from the
freshmen to sophomore years was 68% at the baccalaureate campuses and 50% at the community
colleges.
In order to clearly conceptualize the importance of understanding the best practices for
Native Hawaiian first-year success, there are several inquiries that have guided the review of the
literature. These questions include:
1. What is first-year success?
2. What are the theories and research on student persistence?
3. What are the characteristics of first-year college students?
4. What is the first-year experience?
5. What are the best practices of model first-year programs?
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 13

6. What does the research and literature tell us about Native Hawaiian student
persistence?
7. What programs or practices has the University of Hawai`i implemented to address
Native Hawaiian student success?
This chapter begins by defining first-year success and continues with an overview of
student persistence theories. The next section provides a look at the first-year student and their
pre-college characteristics. Following is a presentation of the first-year experience and model
first-year programs that provide opportunities for student engagement. The final section
describes the research on Native Hawaiian student persistence and significant University of
Hawai`i initiatives focused on addressing student retention. The purpose of this chapter is to
describe research that has been done in the field of first-year student success, provide a
foundation for this study, and illuminate where more research is needed.
Research on Native Hawaiian students is minimal; therefore, much of the research for
this literature review focused on comparative studies with minority student groups. A majority of
the pertinent literature used in this study was accessed in journals and reports specific to Hawai`i,
such as those published by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the University of Hawai`i
Institutional Research and Analysis Office (UH-IRAO).
Defining First-Year Student Success
M. Lee Upcraft, John Gardner, and Betsy Barefoot have helped to define the first-year
student through their years of research and comprehensive studies. The first book by Gardner
and Upcraft, The Freshmen Year Experience: Helping Students Survive and Succeed in College,
written in 1989, presented a valuable benchmark of the first-year experience movement. Upcraft,
Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) defined first-year student success as the 1) successful completion
of courses taken in the first year, and 2) continued enrollment into the second year. They and
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 14

other researchers including Pascarella and Terenzini (1980, 2005), Astin (1984), Tinto (1987),
Tierney (1992), Phinney (1992), Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, and Whitt (2005), and Darling-Hammond,
Wilhoit, and Pittenger (2014) also described a broader definition of success that includes goals of
developing intellectual and academic competence, establishing and maintaining supportive
relationships, exploring identity development, deciding on a career, maintaining health and
wellness, considering what they believe and value, developing a multicultural awareness, and
developing civic responsibility. Although the broader dimensions of student success are
important, most higher education institutions use the first two points of course completion and
persistence to define freshmen success. Course completion is determined if a student has earned
the required number of academic credits with a minimum grade point average. Persistence is
distinguished when a student completes the first-year required coursework and continues on to
the next semester.
Theories of Student Persistence
First-year student retention and persistence has been a consistent concern in American
colleges and universities (Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot, 2005). Numerous studies and theories
have been developed to better understand the reasons students persist or leave college, including
historical models by Tinto (1975), Astin (1977, 1993), Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) and
Tierney (1992). These theories and models help to identify the various factors that contribute to
student persistence. For this research, Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome model (1993) and
Tinto’s Theory of Student Departure (1975) will assist in gaining a better understanding of
freshmen student characteristics, retention strategies, and student success outcomes.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 15

Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome Model
Alexander Astin’s Input–Environment–Outcome model has evolved over thirty years as a
conceptual guide for studying and assessing college persistence (1993). Astin described the
model as simple and grounded in the basic idea that student success is a function of who students
are before they entered college and what happened to them after they enrolled. The purpose of
the model is “to assess the impact of various environmental experiences by determining whether
students grow or change differently under varying environmental conditions” (1993, p.7).
Astin’s model proposed students enter college with a pre-established set of characteristics
(inputs) that influence their views about college and reflect their ability to persist (Upcraft,
Gardner, and Barefoot, 2005). Inputs refer to the student’s incoming pre-college characteristics
such as high school grades, admission and placement test scores, ethnicity, age, gender, marital
status, income, parental level of education, and reasons for attending.
The student then enters college and encounters an environment of new people, programs,
policies, cultures, and experiences. Astin identified eight categories of environmental variables
that might influence student success including institutional characteristics (type and size),
students’ peer group characteristics (such as socioeconomic status, academic preparation, values,
and attitudes), faculty characteristics (such as methods of teaching), curriculum, financial aid
(such as grants and loans), college major, place of residence (such as student housing, living at
home or apartment living), and student involvement (such as hours spent studying, number of
classes, and participation in extracurricular activities) (Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot, 2005).
The final step of Astin’s model is the outcome, as shown in Figure 2.1. Outcome refers to
the student’s characteristics, skills, knowledge, attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors
developed after exposure to the college environment (Astin, 1993).
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 16

Figure 2.1 Input-Environment-Outcome model (Astin, 1993).

Tinto’s Student Departure Theory
The student retention model most often used in student success research is Tinto’s (1975,
1993) longitudinal model of student departure. Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) affirmed
while Astin’s model helped to explain the student and institutional variables that influence
student persistence, Vincent Tinto’s (1975) work on integration helped to clarify how these
variables work together. According to Tinto, college persistence occurs when a student
successfully integrates into the institution academically and socially.
Tinto proposed the theory of student departure based on the work of Emile Durkheim’s
theory of suicide and William Spady’s (1970) work on the interrelationship of student attributes
and the university. Although Tinto (1975, 1993) does not equate student departure to suicide, the
theory proposed that student departure share similar withdrawal characteristics as suicide.
Tinto’s model, like Durkheim’s, used integration as its foundation. Both theories affirm the more
integrated an individual is with society or community, the less likely that individual is to
withdraw or commit suicide. Spady’s (1970) work on dropouts from higher education also
ENVIRONMENT
OUTCOME INPUT
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 17

asserted that students who become socially integrated within the academic and social systems of
the university are more likely to persist.
The purpose for understanding Tinto’s (1975, 1993) model of student departure is to
provide a framework for what factors impact a student’s decision to drop out of college. Tinto
(1975) developed the model by describing the longitudinal process a student experiences in
deciding to leave or persist. A sample of Tinto’s model is available in Figure 2.2. Tinto (1993)
discussed three main concerns of student departure: 1) difficulties in academic studies owing to
the lack of foundation carried over from high school, 2) unresolved educational and occupational
goals while the student is at the university, and 3) a lack of incorporation in the scholarly and
societal life of the university.
Consistent with Astin’s idea of inputs, Tinto’s (1993) model asserted students enter a
college or university with a range of characteristics including family background (e.g., social
status, parental education, and size of community), personal attributes (e.g., sex, race), skills and
abilities (e.g., intellectual and social), financial resources, attitudes, and pre-college educational
experiences (e.g., prior schooling). These characteristics affect students’ initial commitments to
their educational goals and institutions. Identifying a student’s pre-college characteristics is
foundational to understanding the factors that contribute to withdrawing or persisting in college.
Students enter college with a set a goals such as completing a program of study, obtaining
skills, or gaining personal enrichment. Tinto (1975) noted the more a student is committed to
their personal goals, the more likely they are to persist. In addition, a student’s goals and
commitment is increased or decreased depending on the quality and quantity of their academic
and social experiences (Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot, 2005).
Tinto (1993) described the institutional experiences as “made up of both academic and
social systems, each with its own characteristics, formal and informal structure” (p. 106). The
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 18

academic environment includes in-class activities, while the social environment includes
interactions with peers, faculty, and staff. Students who have positive and rewarding institutional
experiences are more likely to integrate and strengthen their commitment resulting in positive
student outcomes. Students who have negative college experiences and are more likely to
withdraw from the environment or institution.
The primary focus of Tinto’s (1993) student departure theory is based on the success of
the student’s academic and social integration. It is at this critical step of the model, with the
combination of goals and commitments that a student decides to persist or drop out of college.
Overall, the theory provides a model of the stages of the college experience. As students enter
college, their prior background and skills impact their initial goals and institutional experiences.
Persistence and success through the first year occurs when a student successfully integrates into
the institution academically and socially.

Figure 2.2 Model of Student Departure (Tinto, 1975).

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 19

First-Year Student Characteristics
Why is research on first-year students important? Astin (2005) affirms from his
longitudinal analysis of incoming students that “an institution`s degree completion rate is
primarily a reflection of its entering student characteristics” (p.7). Thus, it is critical when
looking at first-year student persistence to study the research and literature on precollege
characteristics and how they may influence success. This literature review continues with a
presentation of student characteristics or inputs as described in both Astin and Tinto’s models.
Although Native Hawaiian students have distinctive risk characteristics, there are
numerous characteristics minority students share that influence college persistence. A discussion
of these commonalities will provide a foundation of the following variables: (1) academic
preparation, (2) first generation to college, (3) socioeconomic status, (4) family support, (5)
commitment to degree and institution.
Academic Preparation
There is substantial research the strongest predictor of freshmen persistence includes high
school grades and entry standardized test scores (Astin, 2005; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991).
According to Astin (2005), data from a study with registrars at 262 baccalaureate-granting
institutions who participated in the Cooperative Institutional Research Program revealed a high
correlation between the four-year completion and a student’s average secondary school grades. If
students earned a higher-grade point average in high school, they were more likely to complete
their college degree. In addition, high school foreign language and physical science coursework
were found to be positive predictors of college persistence.
Oliveira (2005), in her study on Native Hawaiian students in higher education, found
similar predictors of degree completion. Oliveira examined data collected from the Completion,
Persistence, Transfer and Success of Kamehameha Students project. The sample included 515
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 20

Native Hawaiian students who were either Kamehameha Schools graduates or recipients of the
Kamehameha Schools’ scholarship. She found high school grade point average and completion
of high school science courses were significant predictive factors of Native Hawaiian students
and their completion of bachelor’s degrees.
In addition to grade point average, a student’s knowledge of, or experience with, college
readiness and entry exams was found to be predictive of success. Venezia and Voloch (2012)
discovered in an examination of the California’s Early Assessment program and New York’s
Home in College program the lack of content alignment between high school exit exams and
college entrance exams. Research on low-income students, first-generation college-goers, and
underrepresented students revealed the lack of clear definitions and understanding around
college readiness among the students. Venezia and Voloch (2012) found negative correlations
between the need for remediation in multiple areas and degree attainment, the lack of alignment
between high school and college curricula, and students' lack of understanding of the importance
of college placement exams. They noted it was vital students are given early counseling and
guidance on college readiness and are provided with opportunities to enhance their knowledge
and skills before they graduate from high school. Reaffirming Venezia and Voloch’s results,
Jackson and Kurlaender (2014) utilized a longitudinal dataset from census data of first-time
freshmen and found high school grade point average to be a useful predictor for both readiness
and college success through the first year.
Academic preparedness is critical not only for the transition into college but also for
college completion. Donhardt (2013) tracked a cohort of first-time, full-time freshmen at an
urban research university through their academic careers to degree completion up to the sixth
year. He found senior students who were enrolled in their fourth year failed to complete their
degree due to taking developmental classes, receiving an F, dropping to part-time or stopping
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 21

out, and withdrawing from classes. While withdrawal from courses could have resulted from a
number of non-academic issues, Donhardt (2013) indicates that students who were
underprepared for the course content or had reservations on how to tackle the rigors of college
life were found to be at a disadvantage with respect to degree completion. In addition, Donhardt
(2013) noted developmental or remedial college courses lengthened students’ programs without
contributing hours toward degree achievement, while not completely helping student learning.
Academic preparedness is critical to success of college entry, course completion, and first-year
persistence.
First Generation to College
There is a large body of knowledge about students who are the first members of their
families to attend college. Data from the U.S. Department of Education National Center for
Education Statistics (2005) show these students are at a distinct disadvantage in gaining access,
remaining enrolled, and attaining a college degree. Of the 7.3 million undergraduates attending
4-year public and private institutions, approximately 20 percent of college students are the first
in their families to attend college (Cooperative Institutional Research Program, 2015). First-
generation college students are at high risk due to their limited exposure to higher education,
little family support, and inadequate social capital.
First generation college students were found to be high risk due to their limited exposure
and support for college success. Makuakane-Drechsel and Hagedorn (2000) examined Native
Hawaiian student persistence at four community colleges over a five-year period using
multivariate regression methods. Their research findings highlighted the factors that best
predicted transfer to a four-year institution and program completion in liberal arts and
vocational-technical majors. Makuakane-Drechsel and Hagedorn found that Native Hawaiian
students who enrolled in college were almost always the first generation in their families to do
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 22

so. The researchers concluded that families who did not have experiences with higher education
were not able to provide emotional and academic support because they were unfamiliar with the
college experience.
Terenzini, Springer, and Yeager (1996) found significant differences in precollege and
educational experiences in their research of 2,685 first-generation and traditional students. First
generational students were found to have less knowledge about higher education; less family and
social support for attending and persisting through college; less well-developed time
management, study skills, and other personal skills; and less experience navigating the college
environment.
First-generation college students are at high risk to persist and complete their degree due
to their limited exposure to higher education, limited family support, and inadequate social
capital. In Astin’s (2005) national study on student retention and graduation rates, he found a
positive correlation between a student’s bachelor’s degree completions in four years to a parent’s
level of education. Astin (2005) suggested students who come from well-educated families have
an advantage when it comes to completing college. The student’s degree of “social capital” or
knowing others who have experiences in higher education, played a role in college completion
over and above the effects of academic preparation and other personal factors. Being the first in a
family to attend college places minority students at a disadvantage in navigating higher
education institutions.
Socioeconomic Status
Another student variable that influences persistence for incoming freshmen is
socioeconomic status. According to Astin (1993), first-year students from high-socioeconomic
backgrounds are more likely to complete a bachelor’s degree within four years. Indigenous and
minority first-year students are more likely to receive some form of financial aid to pay for
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 23

college: in 2011-2012, American Indian students accounted for 53.4% of the Pell grants received
at four-year public institutions, while Asian/Pacific Islander students received more than 35.5%
of the grants and 29.9% of the grants went to White students (U.S. DOE NCES, 2015). In
addition, more American Indian/Alaskan Native (69.9%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
(63.0%) students received and accepted loans for their undergraduate degrees compared to White
(60.1%) and Asian (52.9%) students (U.S. DOE NCES, 2015).
Financial aid matters were found to be an added risk to success for minority students.
Creighton (2007) reviewed the factors affecting the graduation rates of multiple
underrepresented populations including African American, Hispanic, Asian Pacific American,
and Native American students. Evidence collected indicated financial aid issues made the most
impact on minority student persistence. For example, Hispanic students responded the need to
work additional hours to defray educational expenses, attended college part-time to manage
college tuition, or deferred enrollment to save for college costs. The high need for financial
assistance forced many minority students to consider alternatives to managing the high costs of
college.
Yeh (2004) discovered in her study of Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander college
students from low-income families the variety of struggles to pay for college tuition, books, and
fees. Students shared that they could not afford to live on campus and spent a great deal of time
commuting from home, causing additional stress for students.
Financial aid has been found to have both positive and negative effects on undergraduate
students’ retention and graduation rates. Astin (2005) found in his national study that students
who supported themselves with savings from scholarships, grants, and summer work noted
positive effects of financial aid. Students shared they were able to fully focus on their studies
during the school year knowing their finances were in order. Students who supported themselves
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 24

through part-time work off campus experienced negative effects of financial aid. Students shared
how they struggled with managing school and off-campus work responsibilities during the
school semester (Astin, 2005). Research on socioeconomic status and financial aid for
indigenous and minority students were found to have multiple effects on academic success
including the need to work additional hours, live off campus and commute daily to school, and
effectively manage school and work expectations.
Family Support
Parents and families have a significant effect on freshman student success beginning even
before children enroll in college. Tierney, Corwin, and Colyar (2005) discussed the value of
social support networks such as parents, family members, and mentors in sharing and aiding
students to decipher information about college and navigate the college application process.
They stated if “students in low-support environments do not receive adequate and appropriate
guidance, their likelihood of dropping out or not pursuing a college education rises significantly”
(p. 5).
Studies among Asian and Asian Pacific American students found family demands and
expectations to be a challenge for students to manage. Yeh (2005) stated many students are
expected to care for younger siblings while low-income family members work two or three jobs
to support the family. Asian students play critical roles in their families’ duties and
responsibilities.
Hernandez and Lopez (2005) researched the socio-cultural factors among Latino students
including studying immigrant status, ethnic identity development, gender roles, family
expectations, community orientation, and the role of religion. They described family as a source
of support and encouragement for Latino students; however, the family also placed pressure on
the participants (Hernandez & Lopez, 2005). Students shared that they felt that dropping out of
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 25

college was not an option and that there was a sense of responsibility and a belief that they
“owed a debt” to their parents for going to college (Hernandez & Lopez, 2005).
Creighton (2007) added successful Hispanic students who demonstrated a positive mental
outlook, attributed this as the single most important factor that influenced their retention in
college. Thus, it’s especially important for underserved populations that students perform better
and are more likely to succeed when their families affirm their choices and encourage them to
stay focused on their college goals (Tierney, Corwin & Colyar, 2005).
Commitment to Degree and Institution
Much of the freshman-year research has focused on a student’s academic preparation,
financial aid assistance, and social support networks. Tierney, Corwin, and Colyar (2005) stated
in their book on preparing for college, that there can be a lack of accurate information about
college options especially for underserved students. Students are confused about the expectations
of college, the application process, and actual college costs. As a result, pre-college
encouragement programs have been developed to expose students to colleges and degree
opportunities. Early college awareness programs such as GEARUP, Upward Bound, Student
Support Services, and Educational Talent Search focus on developing college-going aspirations
and self-efficacy skills such as goal setting and time management.
Flowers (2004) found that a pre-college program for engineering students resulted in
significantly higher retention rates when compared to students who did not participate in the
program. The pre-college program goal was to increase African-American student success. The
activities in the program were designed to increase the students’ academic awareness and to
provide students with success strategies. Results of the program revealed that the social support
developed during the program facilitated an increased commitment to the institution and served
to help students feel their goals and interests were congruent with the university’s academic
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 26

mission. Tinto (1987) affirmed students who were found to be committed to their institution,
were satisfied with the learning environment, and had consistent goals related to degree
completion were more likely to persist and graduate.
Summary
Research on first-year students is critical in understanding the multiple factors students
bring as they enter college and how those pre-college characteristics influence success. The
major themes highlighted in this section on the first-year student reveal several pre-college
variables including academic preparation, first generation to college, socioeconomic status,
family support, and commitment to degree and institution. Research on first-year student
persistence includes:
• the quality of high school academic preparation strongly predicts first-year success;
• family educational background and experiences are related to a student’s higher
education aspirations;
• socioeconomic status influences prior academic preparation, postsecondary admission,
enrollment, and completion; and
• early exposure to higher education opportunities, college campuses, and success skills
and strategies increase a student’s aspirations and goals.
Understanding the individual student factors and how they impact success can provide
critical information for college and university faculty, staff, and administrators. Students from
minority or underrepresented groups experience additional risks to persistence through the first
year. Studies on Native Hawaiian students confirm that high school coursework, grade point
average, financial aid, and family support are strong predictors of persistence and graduation.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 27

First-Year Experience
What is the first-year experience and why is it so important? According to extensive
research by Tinto (1975, 1993), Astin (1984), Pascarella and Terenzini (1991), and Kuh, et. al.
(2005), the first year is critical to persistence and degree completion and is noted as the time
when most students decide to depart or drop out of college.
The first-year experience movement started in the 1970’s as colleges and universities
committed to addressing the low persistence rates of their freshmen students (Upcraft, Gardner,
& Barefoot, 2005). Universities were seeking strategies to address countless problems including
diminishing resources, rising costs of institutional operation, cuts in state and federal funding,
community concerns over tuition increases and student debt, as well as the low retention and
graduation rates of incoming students. Kuh (2015) described the growing community concern
“that college costs too much and student and the larger society are getting too little in return for
their investments” (p.4).
Today, the first year of college is a high priority for many institutions as the national
conversation on persistence and completion directs higher education goals and expectations. The
first-year experience can be defined as the institutional environment students experience from
their entry point at enrollment through the first year. Many in-class and out-of-class variables
influence first-year student persistence including student motivation, intentional institutional
interventions, campus culture, and interactions with faculty and other students.
Principles of Model First-Year Programs
Tinto (1993) developed three principles of effective retention that provide a guide for
institutional practices to reduce student rates of departure. The first principle is “effective
retention programs are committed to the students they serve” (p. 106). Tinto believed this
commitment is “at the core of an institution’s educational mission” (p. 146). The second
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 28

principle stated that “effective retention programs are first and foremost committed to the
education of all, not just some, of their students” (p. 107). Tinto argued that it is the
responsibility of the institution to ensure new students either enter with or have the opportunity
to learn sufficient knowledge and skills to meet the academic demands of the institution
(Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005). Tinto’s third principle is “effective retention programs are
committed to the development of supportive social and educational communities in which all
students are integrated as competent members” (p. 107). Tinto emphasized the need for
institutions to involve students in the daily life of the campus with frequent and rewarding
connections both inside and outside the classroom.
In addition to Tinto’s three principles, another key factor in freshman success is student
engagement. Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement refers to “the amount of physical and
psychological energy the student devotes to the academic experience” (p. 518). According to
Astin, this theory focuses on the motivation and behavior of the student. The theory has five
postulates: 1) involvement refers to the investment of physical and psychological energy in
various objects including anything from the student experiences; 2) involvement occurs along a
continuum; 3) involvement has both quantitative and qualitative features such as how much time
devoted to an activity or quality of attention given; 4) the amount of student learning and
personal development is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of student involvement,
for example the more the student puts into an activity, the more they get out of it; and 5) the
effectiveness of any educational policy or practice is directly related to the capacity of that policy
to increase student involvement (p. 519). Astin’s theory affirmed the higher the student
involvement, the higher the learning and for student learning and growth to occur, educators
need to create opportunities for in- and out-of-classroom involvement. Tinto’s principles and
Astin’s theory have been foundational to model first-year experience programs.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 29

It is important to note the extensive amount of research and assessment on the first-year
experience and the components of the first-year experience has produced a debate within higher
education as to the consistency of the findings and the success of the practices (Padgett, 2014).
Many first-year initiatives that have produced positive results on one campus have not produced
the same positive results on other campuses. Thus, assessment is critical to fully understand the
components of student success for any particular student group or institution.
Model First-Year Experience Programs
Model first-year experience programs include 1) organizing for freshmen success, 2)
creating a student-centered campus culture, 3) following principles of good practice in the
classroom, 4) promoting success outside the classroom, and 5) designing quality assessment.
Organizing for First-Year Success
According to Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) if students are to succeed, they must
be able to succeed in their first year of college and move on in their college career. Ideally,
colleges engage entering students beginning with a student’s first contact months before
enrolling through the first weeks of their initial course. Organizing for success includes early
connections, high expectation and aspirations, clear academic planning, effective track to college
readiness, engaged learning, and academic and social support networks (Center for Community
College Student Engagement, 2009).
Academic advising. Academic advising provides students with an opportunity to make a
strong, early, and positive connection with a representative of the campus. When meeting with
an advisor, students can set academic goals and create a path to reach their educational goals.
Research on academic advising has been mixed in terms of effects on persistence, however is
considered an important part of a student`s first year. Smith (2002) found in his study on first-
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 30

year student perceptions of academic advising that although students valued meeting with an
advisor, it was not clear if meeting with an advisor had impact on their development. Smith
stated that many available assessments of academic advising are often through satisfaction
surveys. Further assessment of advising is needed to consider any impact on student persistence.
Orientation. Most colleges and university offer some kind of orientation program
designed to help transition first-year students to the campus. Orientation may be a single event or
an extended structured experience to familiarize student with college resources, services, policies
and organizations; build a network of support; and, develop an academic plan and individual
goals (Center for Community College Student Engagement, 2014). In a review of first year
programs, Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) concluded that there is a statistically significant
positive link between exposure to various orientation experiences and persistence, from freshman
to sophomore year and through attainment of a bachelor’s degree (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot,
2005).
Creating a Student-Centered Campus Culture
Institutions with high freshman persistence rates and graduation rates have been found to
be innovative, committed to student retention, aware of campus and racial climate, and guided by
collaborative leadership.
Environment of innovation. Researchers, Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, and Whitt (2005) were
part of a two-year study of 20 four-year colleges and universities. They found the institutions
with high persistence and graduation rates were innovative, positive, and constantly improving.
These colleges invested in creative initiatives and made decisions based on current data and best
practices. Effective strategies included commitment to new programming, providing
collaborative leadership, getting and keeping people with similar vision, converting challenges
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 31

into opportunities, cultivating a campus culture that embraces differences, and avoiding work
overload.
Commitment to minority student retention. Having a commitment to minority student
retention as a campus effort was reported as an essential part of increase student persistence
rates. Rosemary (2005) studied the effective solutions for retention and success of Native
American students. She concluded that an institutional mission that supported indigenous
identity and cultural congruency was critical for minority student success. The research affirmed
that institutions must develop and implement appropriate training for faculty and staff, examine
and implement culturally meaningful systems of educational experience, examine current
recruitment and retention strategies, provide culturally appropriate counseling, and increase the
number of American Indian faculty and administrative positions . In addition to the campus
mission, resource allocation was found to predict higher education graduation rates. Hamrick,
Schuh, and Shelley’s (2004) study incorporated institutional characteristics such as Carnegie
type, selectivity, size, and classification and resource allocation into a statistical model to predict
undergraduate completion rates. They concluded when there are campus priorities that focused
on instructional expenditures and a number of institutional classification variables were
significant predictors of graduation rates.
Awareness of racial climate. Perceptions of the racial climate can influence how
underrepresented students feel about being part of a campus and have been found to affect
college success. Yeh (2005) studied the high rates of departure among Asian and Asian Pacific
American students. She discovered that “since the number of Pacific Islanders, Cambodians,
Hmong, and Laotians are so small on most college campuses, the few students who do attend
feel alienated from the rest of the students.” Students shared that they feel invisible and are a
forgotten population on their campus. In addition, Yeh (2005) documented that some of the
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 32

wealthier Asian Americans tried to distance themselves from the less educated and poor Asian
American students causing struggles for many students within the same racial group.
Hernandez and Lopez (2005) researched the socio-cultural factors and issues impacting
Latino/a college student retention. Their study examined ethnic identity development, gender
roles, family expectations, and community orientation. They concluded that Latino “students will
not adjust academically or socially if the campus racial climate allows students to feel like
outsiders. This feeling of marginality will affect a student’s sense of belonging with the
institution and can ultimately influence one’s intent to persist” (p. 43). It is critical for higher
educational institutions to create a campus culture of student centeredness especially for their
minority student populations.
Collaborative leadership. Martin and Meyer (2010) studied the efforts to improve
retention and graduation rates of Hispanic students at the University of Texas at San Antonio.
They shared how creating a comprehensive and coordinated campus plan helped to address low
graduation rates among Hispanic students. Successful program objectives included strong
leadership with a clear message that graduation rates can and will improve; involvement of the
entire academic “village” to change a graduation rate; understanding why students fail to
graduate in a timely college and university manner; and determination of the aspects that need to
be changed and that can be changed.
Good Practices in the Classroom
Institutions with high freshman persistence rates have been found to use multiple high-
impact practices. High-impact practices have evolved over years of studies and assessments of
college programs and initiatives. The Center for Community College Student Engagement
(2014) included the following among high impact practices in the classroom: freshman seminar,
Supplemental Instruction, learning communities, and effective instructional design.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 33

Freshman seminar. The first-year seminar is one of the most widely researched
environmental influences on first-year persistence and has been found to be the most powerful
predictor of persistence to sophomore year (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005). While the
“seminars may vary in structure, content, grading, and credits, they are designed to foster better
understanding of the institution, enhance academic interest and integration, and provide
opportunities for social integration” (p. 41). The course is focused on student success and offered
to students during their first term. Effective study strategies, career planning, and academic
planning are foundational to the curriculum. In addition, students learn about academic policies,
procedures, campus resources, and services. The course also offers opportunities for students to
engage in the campus and build a stronger connections to the institution, faculty, staff, and other
students.
Williford, Cross Chapman, and Kahrig (2001) conducted a longitudinal study to
determine the success rates of 10 years of student participants of the university experience course
at Ohio University. The study examined the differences between the course participants and
nonparticipants in student academic performance (first-year grade point average) and persistence
(first-year retention). When the pre-college variables were controlled, participating students’
first-year end grade point average and persistence to sophomore year were higher than non-
participants.
Supplemental instruction. Supplemental instruction is a regularly scheduled, small
group learning session for a portion of students enrolled in a large course section. Supplemental
instruction may be led by the course instructor, tutor, or a peer student, who is often a former
student who was successful in the course.
Learning communities. Learning communities are clusters of courses organized around
a curricular theme that students enroll in as a group. Learning communities have been found to
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 34

strengthen and enrich students’ connections to each other, their teachers, and the subject matter
(Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot, 2005).
Effective instructional design. Inclusive curriculum has been found to have significant
impact on students feeling connected to their culture and to the campus. When institutions create
diverse curricula and cultivate a campus culture that embraces differences, underrepresented
students are more likely to persist and be successful (Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh and Whitt, 2005).
Halagao (2010) studied the impact of alternative frameworks and inclusive curriculum
for Filipino-American students to understand how their historical background and cultural
identity impact their college experience. She found the long-term impact of Pinoy Teach, an
empowering multicultural teacher education program, was students’ connection to the campus
and academic success. She concluded that educators must develop curriculum and pedagogy
with a decolonization framework with the aim to ignite a commitment to academic success and
persistence (Halagao, 2010).
In a study with Latino students, Hernandez and Lopez (2005) researched the socio-
cultural factors and issues impacting retention. Their study looked at the ethnic identity
development, gender roles, family expectations, and community orientation. They discovered
when faculty and staff created programming and curriculum that provide a sense of belonging for
Latino students, students adjusted academically and socially, and were found to have more intent
to persist.
Promoting First-Year Success Outside the Classroom
Purposeful and coordinated student support services have shown success in increasing
first-year student persistence. Creighton (2007) reviewed the experiences of minority students in
higher education and noted that when students are involved on campus, acclimate to the
academic culture of the institution, and connect socially to various parts of the university
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 35

community such as with faculty, staff, and peers, they are more likely to be successful in school.
Mentorship programs were found to be an effective tool in helping Hispanic students succeed in
school by creating opportunities for students to develop social networks and learn to navigate
unfamiliar settings. Mentoring programs “addressed several causes of student attrition and
delayed graduation, including the lack of proper academic preparation for college and the lack of
knowledge about or access to social or academic resources” (Creighton, 2007).
When institutions develop special support programs and counseling programs specifically
for African American students, students were found to be more successful in their schoolwork.
Flowers (2004) studied the perceptions of African American students who attended a
predominantly White institution regarding the factors needed to enhance retention. Institutional
factors that were found important included the development of special support programs focused
on African American students’ needs, diversity training for all faculty and staff, hiring additional
African American faculty and staff to serve as role models, increased faculty-student interaction,
the initiation of a counseling program specifically for African American students, and
opportunities to assist in planning campus programs.
Assessment
Astin (2005) affirmed most campuses are familiar with strategies for student success but
struggle to be innovative and successful in increasing graduation rates. Institutions labor to
collect relevant information on their students and make data-driven decisions assessing
institutional quality or effectiveness. Astin (2005) stated institutions need to “collect relevant
information on their students when they first matriculate. Such data would then provide a basis
for learning how much students actually change after entering college, a kind of ‘value-added’
information which comes much closer to assessing institutional quality or effectiveness” (p.16).
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 36

Seidman (1996) also noted that data collection is key to identification of “at risk” students, which
may vary at each individual institution based on student profile and demographic data.
Summary
Research on the first-year experience is critical for higher education institutions to
understand successful high-impact freshmen programs. Tinto (1975, 1993), Astin (1984),
Pascarella and Terenzini (1991), and Kuh (2015), concur that the first-year is critical to
persistence and is noted as the time when most students decide to depart or drop out of college.
The major themes highlighted in this section on the first-year include:
• participation in academic advising and orientation provide a strong foundation for
incoming freshmen before the start of school;
• campuses with high freshmen persistence rates have a campus culture that is innovative,
committed to student retention, aware of campus and racial climate, and encouraged by
collaborative leadership;
• high-impact practices in the classroom include the first-year seminar, Supplemental
Instruction, learning communities, and inclusive instructional design;
• alignment of student support systems promote first-year success outside the classroom;
and
• assessment of first-year students and programs are essential to promoting student
retention and persistence.
Understanding the first-year experience factors and how they impact success can provide critical
information for college and university faculty, staff, and administrators.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 37

Research on Native Hawaiian Students
This section of the literature review concentrates on Native Hawaiian students. The
section begins with a definition and description of the political status of Native Hawaiians. Next,
there is an analysis of research focusing on Native Hawaiian student persistence and a report of
the current enrollment and completion rates at the University of Hawai`i. Following is an
explanation of the University of Hawai`i’s mission and commitment to student success. There
are limited studies specifically on Native Hawaiian students in higher education, thus a majority
of the pertinent literature was accessed in journals and reports specific to Hawai`i, such as those
published by UH-IRAO.
Defining Native Hawaiians
The indigenous people of Hawai`i are defined as Native Hawaiians. These first people
have ancient connections to Hawai`i as described in origin stories and genealogies (Kamakau,
1992). In Lipe’s (2012) perspective of the origin story of Papa and Wākea, Hawaiians are
described as descendants from the chief Hāloa, who is the grandson of Papa, the earth. Kalo is
Hāloa’s elder sibling and is also the foundational food or staple for the Hawaiian people. These
connections to Hāloa describe the Hawaiian people’s relationship with the `āina, or land, and the
natural elements of Hawai`i.
Native Hawaiians, as defined by federal legislation, are “…descendent of the aboriginal
people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now constitutes
the State of Hawai`i” (Benham & Heck, 1998, p. 219).
In addition to the 1993 definition, the Native Hawaiian Education Act in 2001 (PL 197-
110, Title VII, Part B) affirmed the unique status of Native Hawaiians as indigenous people;
comparable to American Indians and Alaskan Natives, of a once sovereign nation to whom the
United States has established a trust relationship. This unique status and trust relationship have
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 38

been described as a “mixed blessing” by Benham and Heck (1998, p. 220). This status affords
Native Hawaiians a range of social services similar to those received by other native peoples.
However, Benham and Heck (1998) caution how these assistance programs stigmatize and
oppress the self-esteem and independence of Native Hawaiians.
As a minority in Hawai`i and at the University of Hawai`i, Native Hawaiians are further
characterized as an involuntary minority. Ogbu and Simons (1998) proposed that involuntary
minority students view conforming to the institutions culture means buying into the dominant’s
cultural frame of reference and abandoning their own indigenous ways. Unlike autonomous or
voluntary minorities, involuntary minorities are also more likely to perceive that institutions act
as barriers and do not believe that education can help them to be successful (Oliveira, 2005).
Native Hawaiians and Student Persistence
Only a few educational studies have focused on Native Hawaiian student persistence in
higher education. Usually when Hawaiians are studied, they are included in research on Asian
Americans and Pacific Islanders. The research presented in this section on Native Hawaiian
student persistence highlights the factors related to student success.
Makuakane-Drechsel and Hagedorn (2000) surveyed the best predictors of transfer to a
four-year institution and program completion among Native Hawaiian students. The study
examined Native Hawaiian students’ persistence at four community colleges on the island of
O`ahu. The research covered a five-year period and focused on factors promoting persistence for
students pursuing either an associate degree in liberal arts or vocational-technical degrees. The
results indicated four factors were significant for both liberal arts and vocational-technical
majors. They included cumulative grade point average, financial aid, average credit hours, and
enrollment at their next campus.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 39

Makuakane-Drechsel and Hagedorn (2000) recognized that Native Hawaiian and Pacific
Islander students who enrolled in college were almost always the first generation in their family
to do so. They reported that families who did not have experiences with higher education were
not able to provide emotional and academic support because they were unfamiliar with the
college experience. This research reveals critical individual factors that affect persistence of
Native Hawaiian students.
Another study by Hagedorn, Tibbetts, Moon, and Lester (2003) used data from the
Completion, Persistence, Transfer and Success of Kamehameha Students (CP-TASKS) project.
Their study focused on alumni and a set of students who received financial aid dedicated to the
education of Native Hawaiians. The survey identified factors leading to the acquisition of a
bachelor’s degree among Native Hawaiians. Major findings included financial aid is an
important contributor to college completion; students who attended college on the mainland
tended to complete their degree in higher proportion than those who remained in Hawai`i; and
students who began their postsecondary experiences at a community college were much less
likely to attain a bachelor’s degree.
Oliveira (2005) continued the research collected from the Completion, Persistence,
Transfer and Success of Kamehameha Students project. Oliveira’s (2005) study investigated how
parent encouragement, high school experience, college financial aid, and Hawaiian sense of
belonging influenced bachelor’s degree completion. The sample included 515 Native Hawaiian
students who graduated from high school in 1993, 1994, and 1995. Using a logistic regression
model, Oliveira found that financial aid, attendance at Kamehameha Schools, high school
science courses completed, high school grade point average, and parental encouragement were
significant predictive factors on the completion of a bachelor’s degree.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 40

In 2010, Hokoana questioned whether Native Hawaiian students face the same type of
barriers to college that other students face and if they seek assistance from the same types of
support networks. The study also asked if Native Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian students believe
having a good understanding of their culture helps to be successful in college. Hokoana (2010)
found Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians experience the same barriers to college success and
seek similar services for support. Differences among Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians were
found based on financial aid and socio-economic status. During the interviews of Hokoana’s
(2010) study, Native Hawaiian students shared that having a good understanding of their culture
assisted them to be successful in college, and campus programs and services that integrated
Hawaiian culture pedagogy assisted them better than those that did not.
Part of Oliveira (2005) and Hokoana`s (2010) studies emphasized Hawaiian culture,
Hawaiian sense of belonging, and family support. Family and cultural relevancy were noted as
important factors among Native Hawaiian students. Lino (2010) further identified the
relationship of a culturally relevant and responsive learning environment and its effect on
achievement motivation for Native Hawaiian students. Using quantitative research methods,
Lino’s survey consisted of 129 questions and was issued to 3,200 secondary students in Hawai`i.
Purposeful sampling was utilized to ensure that Native Hawaiian youth exposed to culturally-rich
learning environments grounded in Native Hawaiian values and practices were selected. Students
from public Hawaiian language immersion schools, charter Hawaiian language immersion
schools, charter Hawaiian-focused schools and one private school were included. Lino (2010)
specifically investigated the correlation between cultural connectedness (cultural attachment,
Hawaiian language, connection to ‘āina [land]; connection to ‘ohana [family]; cultural practices;
and cultural issues) and achievement motivation. Lino (2010) learned that when there is a
connection between the home culture of Native Hawaiian students and the school culture, Native
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 41

Hawaiian students are motivated to want to do better and therefore succeed despite the
socioeconomic factors they face. Allowing students to integrate their primary culture into the
institution’s culture increases self-efficacy. This research underscored the important and
proactive role of higher education institutions in incorporating culturally-relevant curricula and
activities on campus that will motivate Native Hawaiian students and increase their self-efficacy.
Native Hawaiian Students at the University of Hawai`i
As of Fall 2016, one in almost every four students in the University of Hawai`i System
are Native Hawaiian. There was a total of 12,803 Native Hawaiian students in the University of
Hawai`i System in Fall 2016, a decrease of 776 students from 13,579 in Fall 2014. The decrease
in the number of Native Hawaiian students is representative of the University of Hawai`i System
enrollment decrease from Fall 2014 to Fall 2016. The bulk of the decreases in enrollment are
attributed to decreases at University of Hawai`i Mānoa and the community colleges. However, in
this three-year review, Native Hawaiian student growth has occurred at University of Hawai`i
Hilo and University of Hawai`i West O`ahu. Although there has been a decrease in enrollment,
the percent of Native Hawaiian students in the University of Hawai`i System has increased from
23.8% in Fall 2014 to 24% in Fall 2016. Table 2.1 details the enrollment changes.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 42

Table 2.1 Native Hawaiian student enrollment across the University of Hawai`i system

Source: University of Hawai`i Institutional Research and Analysis Office (2016).

In addition to enrollment, Native Hawaiian student completion is critical to review. As of
Fall 2016, one in almost every five students who earned a degree or certificate in the University
of Hawai`i System is Native Hawaiian. There were 2,209 Native Hawaiian students who
completed a degree in the University of Hawai`i System in Fall 2016 of the 11,286 total students.
The 20% mark of degrees earned by Native Hawaiian students has been consistent from Fall
2014 through Fall 2016. The bulk of the degrees earned were at the community colleges. Table
2.2 details the degrees and certificates earned.

Campus
Num. Pct. Num. Pct. Num. Pct.
Total UH System 57,052 13,579 23.8 55,756 13,304 23.9 53,418 12,803 24.0
UH Mānoa 19,507 2,895 14.8 18,865 2,796 14.8 18,056 2,651 14.7
UH Hilo 3,924 1,045 26.6 3,829 1,066 27.8 3,666 1,079 29.4
UH West O`ahu 2,661 761 28.6 2,692 749 27.8 2,939 851 29.0
Comm. Colls. 30,960 8,878 28.7 30,370 8,693 28.6 28,757 8,222 28.6
Fall 2016 Fall 2015 Fall 2014
Hawaiian Hawaiian Hawaiian
Total Total Total
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 43

Table 2.2 Native Hawaiian student degrees and certificates earned across the University of
Hawai`i system.

Source: University of Hawai`i Institutional Research and Analysis Office (2016).

Policies and Initiatives
Board of Regents policy. In 2009, the University of Hawai`i Board of Regents adopted a
new policy to honor Hawai`i’s indigenous people. The policy states in section C-3:
As the only provider of public higher education in Hawai`i, the University embraces its
unique responsibilities to the indigenous people of Hawai`i and to Hawai`i’s indigenous
language and culture. To fulfill this responsibility, the University ensures active support
for the participation of Native Hawaiians at the University and supports vigorous
programs of study and support for the Hawaiian language, history, and culture
(University of Hawaii, 2016).
This policy asserts the commitment the University of Hawai`i has to Native Hawaiian students,
their learning, and their success.
Strategic directions. Aligning with the University of Hawai`i Board of Regents policy,
the University of Hawai`i Strategic Directions, 2015-2021 outlines and guides the university’s
Campus
Num. Pct. Num. Pct. Num. Pct.
Total UH System 11,158 2,234 20.0 11,680 2,378 20.4 11,286 2,209 19.6
UH Mānoa 4,923 682 13.8 5,104 726 14.2 5,064 705 13.9
UH Hilo 905 196 21.6 893 204 22.8 882 193 21.9
UH West O`ahu 493 112 22.7 474 116 24.5 399 88 22.0
Comm. Colls. 4,837 1,244 25.7 5,209 1,332 25.6 4,941 1,223 24.8
Total
Hawaiian
Fall 2014 Fall 2015 Fall 2016
Total
Hawaiian
Total
Hawaiian
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 44

priorities of Native Hawaiian student success. Interwoven in the strategic directions is the
University of Hawai`i’s mission and commitment to be a foremost indigenous-serving
institution.
The first of four strategic directions defined in the University of Hawai`i Strategic
Directions is the Hawai`i Graduation Initiative developed in 2010. The goal of the initiative is to:
Increase the educational capital of the state by increasing the participation and
completion of students, particularly Native Hawaiians, low-income students and those
from underserved regions and populations and preparing them for success in the
workforce and their communities.
Specific action strategies detailed to address Native Hawaiian students under the Hawai`i
Graduation Initiative include 1) strengthening the pipeline and college readiness initiatives for
Native Hawaiians through University of Hawai`i programs and partnerships and 2) implementing
structural improvements that promote persistence to attain a degree and timely completion by
reducing the gaps in college completion for Native Hawaiians and stabilizing the student support
services for Native Hawaiians. Both the University of Hawai`i Board of Regents Policy (2012)
and the University of Hawai`i’s Strategic Directions (2015) demonstrate the institutional
commitment to Native Hawaiian students and their success.
Summary
The current literature on Native Hawaiian students, although limited, illustrates the many
barriers in higher education success. Research on Hawaiian student’s persistence highlight
themes including:
• cumulative grade point average, financial aid, and average credit hours are predictors of
degree completion for community college students;.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 45

• financial aid, high school science course completed, high school grade point average, and
parental encouragement were significant predictors of bachelor’s degree completion;
• Native Hawaiian students believe having a good understanding of their culture assisted
them to be successful in college and campus services that integrated Hawaiian pedagogy
assisted better than programs that did not; and
• when there is a connection between the home culture and school culture, Native
Hawaiian students are motivated to want to do better in school despite the socioeconomic
factors they face.
The University of Hawai`i has implemented a clear commitment to Native Hawaiian students
through the Board of Regents Policy and the Strategic Directions. However, understanding that
financial aid, academic preparedness, and grade point average matter in student persistence and
completion and further that the University is providing directions to address these points, why
are few Native Hawaiian students persisting through the first year and to completion? What are
the university programs that have the most impact on success for first-year Native Hawaiian
students? This study will help to identify and inform policy and administrators on the
experiences of Native Hawaiians and how they relate to college success.
Conceptual Framework
Native Hawaiian students, like all entering freshmen, enroll in college with the intent to
persist and graduate. Years of research and theories on student retention have provided higher
education institutions numerous guides on how to retain students. To promote retention,
institutions must understand and adopt the student perspective and ask how they should act to
retain their students and how they should act so that more students want to persist (Tinto, 2016).
The purpose of this study is to investigate the first-year programs, as a form of
environment and integration, to determine the effect of student outcomes. The intent is to
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 46

understand the relationship of Native Hawaiian student development and the intervention
programs.
This study will rely on Astin’s (1977) Input-Environment-Outcome model to guide the
assessment of programs and activities at Windward Community College (Figure 2.3). The Input-
Environment-Outcome model hypothesizes that students enter with pre-established
characteristics that influence their views about college. In addition, Tinto’s Student Departure
Model (1975) argues that persistence occurs when a student successfully integrates into the
academic and social communities connecting the input and environment variables.

Figure 2.3 Conceptual framework.

According to the conceptual framework, the environment or the first-year programs is the
focus of the study, controlling for student prior experiences and characteristics, and examining
the different intervention programs as a predictor of student outputs.
ENVIRONMENT
Comprehensive First-Year Programs
Engaging, Meaningful Experience
OUTCOME
Persistence
Academic Achievement
Degree Completion
INPUT
Student attributes
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 47

CHAPTER 3 : METHODOLOGY
The first-year of college is critical for student success. Across the nation, model first-year
programs incorporating effective retention and success strategies have been created and
implemented to address low first-year persistence. The purpose of this study was to identify
those strategies, practices, and programs that lead to a successful first year for Native Hawaiian
students. Using Astin’s (1993) Input-Environment-Outcome model, this study examined the
relationship between Native Hawaiian student participation in first-year programs and student
success measures. There is considerable research on higher education enrollment, retention, and
graduation, however few studies focus on Native Hawaiian student success. Current research on
Native Hawaiian student persistence targets the inputs or student’s attributes and characteristics.
The significance of this study was its focus on the college environment during the first-year. The
secondary purpose of this study was to provide data for educational providers, policy makers,
and leaders of programs to determine practices that may address student success and institutional
goals as well as contribute to the research literature that exists with respect to Native Hawaiian,
indigenous, and minority students’ persistence.
This study was part of a comprehensive evaluation project at the University of Hawai`i.
In 2015, University of Hawai`i received funding from the United States Department of Education
to conduct an analysis of the impact of Title III funded programs at ten University of Hawai`i
campuses from Fall 2008 to Spring 2016. The Department provides dedicated funding through
the Title III program to minority-serving colleges and universities to better support educational
opportunities for certain ethnic populations (U.S. Department of Education, 2018). In simple
terms, the Title III program goal is to increase institutional capacity to better support Native
Hawaiian student success. The comprehensive evaluation used data collected and analyzed from
four sources including grant documents, student and staff surveys, student and staff interviews
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 48

and focus groups, and student administrative and academic records. This study focused on data
collected through the student records specifically with first-year students.
This chapter serves as a road map to identify how the study was designed and describes
the research questions that guided the examination. This research will answer the overarching
questions: What are the significant university practices and programs that successfully support
Native Hawaiian students? What promising and best practices have significantly increased
Native Hawaiian student success?
Question 1: Does participation in first-year experience programs significantly increase Native
Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and completion?
Hypothesis 1: Participation in first-year experience programs will significantly increase Native
Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and completion.
Question 2: How do Native Hawaiian students’ who participate in first-year experience
programs compare to Native Hawaiian non-participants in their persistence,
achievement, and completion?
Hypothesis 2: Native Hawaiian students’ who participate in first-year programming level of
first-year continuation, persistence, and achievement will significantly increase
compared to Native Hawaiian students who do not participate in first-year
experience program.
The following sections clarify how these research questions will be addressed through (a)
research design, (b) site and population, (c) data, (d) data analysis, and (e) ethical considerations.
Research Design
The conceptual framework and research questions evolved from a review of the literature
on theories of student persistence, first-year students and programs, Native Hawaiian students,
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 49

and college student success. Figure 3.1 provides a visual representation of this study’s theoretical
framework based on Astin’s (1993) Input-Environment-Outcome model.

Figure 3.1 Conceptual framework.

This quantitative study was conducted using a quasi-experimental design. A quantitative
approach can be used “for testing objective theories by examining the relationship among
variables” (Creswell, 2014, p. 4). In this study, the purpose was to examine the impact of first-
year programming, the environment, with success performance measures, the outcome. This
required the study of variables that have already occurred. This retrospective research attempted
to determine if one or more program elements may be related or statistically associated with the
student success variables. The goal of using a quantitative design was to produce generalizable
knowledge as a first step in understanding how the environmental variables may relate to success
outputs as well as study any larger or significant trends. The limitations of using a quantitative
design is the lack of rich details that help to inform the researcher and clarify the real-life student
experience gained from a qualitative design (Creswell, 2014).
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 50

Site and Population
The site for this study focused on Windward Community College. Windward Community
College, established in 1972, is one of seven community colleges in the University of Hawai`i
(UH) 10-campus system which spans four islands, includes one research and two liberal arts
baccalaureate degree-granting institutions, and enrolled 51,674 students in Fall 2017. The
distribution of student enrollment in the University of Hawai`i System is detailed in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Enrollment distribution across the University of Hawai‘i system, 2017.

Source: University of Hawai‘i Institutional Research and Analysis Office (2018).
Windward Community College is located on the east side of the island of O`ahu, the
island where four of the seven University of Hawai`i community colleges were established. The
service area for the college extends over 40 miles on the east and north shore from Kahuku to
Campus Num. Pct.
Regular
students
Early
Admit
Continuing
Education
Total UH System 51,674 100.0 49,522 2,152 2,046
UH Mānoa 17,612 34.1 17,591 21 5,024
UH Hilo 3,539 8.8 3,491 48 -
UH West O‘ahu 3,082 6.0 2,932 150 -
UH Comm. Colls. 27,441 53.1 25,508 1,933 22
Hawai‘i CC 2,819 5.5 2,502 317 -
Honolulu CC 3,563 6.9 3,382 181 22
Kapi‘olani CC 7,095 13.7 6,905 190 -
Kaua‘i CC 1,346 2.6 1,128 218 -
Leeward CC 6,805 13.2 6,381 424 -
Maui College 3,302 6.4 2,980 322 -
Windward CC 2,511 4.9 2,230 281 -
Total Category
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 51

Waimānalo, through primarily rural based communities. The main public high schools in the
district are Kahuku, Castle, Kalaheo, and Kailua.
Windward Community College’s mission is to offer innovative programs in the arts and
sciences and opportunities to gain knowledge and understanding of Hawai‘i and its unique
heritage. With a special commitment to support the access and educational needs of Native
Hawaiians, Windward Community College works to provide O‘ahu’s Ko‘olau region and
beyond with liberal arts, career and lifelong learning in a supportive and challenging
environment — inspiring students to excellence.
This two-year public college offers four associates degrees and ten certificates.
Windward Community College is an open-enrollment institution; however, applicants are
required to submit transcripts of their high school diploma, GED or equivalent. Students are
required to complete a placement exam to meet course prerequisites for registration. The current
cost of tuition is $128 per credit for residents and $342 per credit for non-residents (University of
Hawai`i Windward Community College, 2016).
According to a 2018 UH-IRAO report, of the 2,511 students enrolled at Windward
Community College in Fall 2017, 58% were female and 38% male. The average age of the
students was 25 years old. Native Hawaiian students consisted of 40% of the student population,
the highest of any other ethnic group. It is also important to note, 83% of the student population
was categorized as minority and includes students of mixed race, Filipino, mixed Asian, and
Japanese ancestry. There were 70% part-time students and 30% full-time students. In 2017, 301
associate degrees were awarded. The average grade point average was 2.64 and the persistence
rate from Fall 2016 to Spring 2017 was 44%.
Windward Community College has several unique characteristics. First, it offers two
Associate of Arts degrees; one in liberal arts and one in Hawaiian Studies; second, the campus
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 52

has the highest percentage of Native Hawaiians on the island of O`ahu at 40%, and third, it has
the highest proportion of financial aid recipients in the University of Hawai`i System at 47%.
Because of these unique characteristics, small size, and innovation with first-year programs,
Windward Community College was chosen for this study.
Targeting first-time students attending Windward Community College provided data on
examining the first-year experience programs. Three types of first-time students were identified:
(1) “New” students were first-time arrivals to college with no prior credits, (2) “Returning” were
students who returned after a gap of enrollment at Windward Community College and at a new
starting point of enrollment, and (3) “Transfer” were new students to Windward Community
College with credits from a prior institution. All three types of “first-year” students were eligible
for participation in the First-Year Experience program at Windward Community College.
Data
To initiate the analysis, semester-by-semester data requested from the UH-IRAO for all
students enrolled at Windward Community College from Fall 2008 to Fall 2016. First-year
experience program tracking reports were requested from Windward Community College
program directors to provide data on participation in the First-Year Experience programs and
sent directly to the UH-IRAO to be merged to the data, then anonymized and delivered for
analyses by the researcher. Of the original 6,670 student cases received, 1,106 cases from 2014-
2016 were usable for the study.
Data elements requested were organized based on Astin’s (1993) Input–Environment-
Outcome Model. Figure 3.2 is a visual representation of the variables in the theoretical
framework. Most input and environment variables were operationalized as binomial variables,
i.e., 1 means “yes” and 0 means “no.” In some cases, in which semester-by-semester activities
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 53

are accumulated over time, those variables are operationalized in continuous formats, e.g., total
semesters attended can range from 1 to 5.

Figure 3.2 Study design.

Input Variables
The input indicators included in the study were student attributes that may have an effect
on success measures as discussed in the literature review. Astin (2012) noted the first year of
college is an opportunity to establish baseline data by recording entering student characteristics
such as high school grade point average, financial need, and other demographic information.
This type of data collection allows universities to better understand the needs of their students
and design appropriate programming and services. This study incorporated 12 indicators detailed
below and summarized in Table 3.2.
Age. Age, a continuous variable, was defined as the biological years a student has
attained at the time of the first semester attended within the study time frame, 2014 to 2016.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 54

Gender. There are three options for gender in the University of Hawai`i System: male,
female, and other. Not all campuses or years have students that identify as other, so for the
purposes of this study gender was examined through use of a binomial variable for female.
Native Hawaiian ancestry. Data on Native Hawaiian ancestry were derived from self-
reported Hawaiian race, ethnicity, and Native Hawaiian legacy data on the University of Hawai`i
System application form. For this study, a binomial Native Hawaiian ancestry variable was based
on “Native Hawaiian” or “part-Native Hawaiian” responses to any of those three questions.
High school district. Geographic residence prior to post-secondary enrollment was
determined by the high school district reported by students on the University of Hawai`i System
application form. Responses were summarized into five school categories: Windward O‘ahu
public school; other Hawai`i state public school; Hawai‘i state private school; GED from any
state; and any school outside of Hawai`i.
Socio-economic status. Socio-economic status was based primarily on Federal Pell
Grant funding awards by semester. This variable was operationalized by whether the student had
received any Federal Pell Grant funding at any point during their post-secondary tenure
(binomial variable).
Prior achievement. As noted earlier University of Hawai`i community colleges are open
enrollment institutions and therefore have no requirement for college entry exam test scores such
as SAT and ACT. However, high school grade point averages are requested upon application. In
those cases where no grade point average was provided, the official Hawaii Department of
Education grade point average at time of graduation was merged to the study data set by the UH-
IRAO and its partner Hawai`i Data Exchange Partnership (Hawai`i DXP). As a result, high
school grade point average was leveraged as the measure of prior achievement for first-year
outcomes. In subsequent years, the most recent grade point average at Windward Community
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 55

College (or elsewhere, for transfer students) was used instead. Grade point average variables
were operationalized in ordinal format to one half point decimal place, e.g., 2.51-3.0, 3.01-3.50.
Enrollment type. Enrollment type simply determines whether a student was a new, first-
time freshmen, a returning WCC student who took time off but had no previous college credits,
or a transfer student arriving for the first time at WCC. This indicator was operationalized by
binomial variables: New and Returning/Transfer.
Enrollment status. Enrollment status was organized as full-time with 12 or more credits
and part-time with less than 12 credit hours during a semester. The two statuses, full-time and
part-time, were operationalized by whether the student was enrolled full-time or part-time ever
during their post-secondary tenure (binomial variables).
Enrollment changes. Enrollment changes concern any events that interrupt a student’s
enrollment at WCC, such as a gap in enrollment or transfer to another institution. These changes
were operationalized as continuous variables of the cumulative number of occurrences of gaps.
Credit earned. The number of credits earned was operationalized as a continuous
variable of the cumulative number of credits earned.
Employment. Students who are engaged in the labor force during their post-secondary
enrollment are classified under two separate indicators: campus-based student employment and
off-campus employment. Student employment, which means a student worked for the University
of Hawai`i System, although not necessarily at the campus they attended, was operationalized as
a binomial variable which indicates if a student was ever employed in the system. Off-campus
employment, which can be divided into full-time and part-time categories, was operationalized in
the same manner.
Table 3.2 Descriptive statistics for study input variables.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 56

Environment Variable
Universities have intentionally implemented programs focused on the first-year including
summer bridge, orientation, academic advising, financial aid assistance, first-year seminar
courses, learning communities, Supplemental Instruction, developmental education, and student
employment. In 2008, Windward Community College took steps to improve the first-year for
students through partnerships with Achieving the Dream, Lumina Foundation, and the U.S.
Variable Freq. or
Label Type Mean N Freq./Mean Pct. Std. Dev.
Age Continuous mean 1,106 23.20 8.7405
Gender:
Female Binomial freq. 1,106 619 55.9% 0.4967
Male Binomial freq. 1,106 455 41.1% 0.4923
Other Binomial freq. 1,106 32 2.9% 0.1677
Native Hawaiian ethnicity Binomial freq. 1,106 546 49.4% 0.5002
High school district:
Windward O'ahu public school Binomial freq. 1,106 466 42.1% 0.4940
Other Hawai‘i state public school Binomial freq. 1,106 109 9.9% 0.3921
State private school Binomial freq. 1,106 136 12.3% 0.3285
GED (any state) Binomial freq. 1,106 108 9.8% 0.2970
Any school outside Hawai'i Binomial freq. 1,106 287 26.0% 0.4386
Socio-economic Status:
Received Pell funding Binomial freq. 1,106 583 52.7% 0.4995
Prior Achievement:
High school GPA upon graduation Continuous mean 1,106 2.85 0.4961
Cumulative GPA over first year Continuous mean 799 2.42 1.0723
Cumulative GPA over first two years Continuous mean 432 2.76 0.8266
Enrollment Cohort:
AY 2014-15 Binomial freq. 1,106 687 62.1% 0.4853
AY 2015-16 Binomial freq. 1,106 419 37.9% 0.4853
Enrollment Type:
New Binomial freq. 1,106 838 75.8% 0.4287
Returning/transfer Binomial freq. 1,106 268 24.2% 0.4287
Enrollment Status:
Enrolled full-time Binomial freq. 1,106 778 70.3% 0.4569
Enrolled part-time Binomial freq. 1,106 716 64.7% 0.4780
Enrollment Changes:
Total duration of all gaps (semesters) Continuous mean 1,106 0.20 0.6360
Credits Earned:
Total credits earned Continuous mean 1,106 30.26 23.5774
Employment - Student (On-campus):
Employed on-campus Binomial freq. 1,106 84 7.6% 0.2650
Employment - Off-campus:
Employed off-campus: Binomial freq. 1,106 741 67.0% 0.4704
Employed off-campus full-time Binomial freq. 1,106 239 21.6% 0.4118
Employed off-campus part-time Binomial freq. 1,106 631 57.1% 0.4952
Statistics
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 57

Department of Education’s Title III-funded programs. Over a five-year period, new interventions
were implemented each fall semester.
The Windward Community College first-year experience programs started in Fall 2008
with the development of the required two-hour New Student Orientation (NSO) which
emphasized registration for fall courses, academic planning and advising, and financial aid
assistance by completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). Students also
met with peer leaders who provided guidance on next steps and were hired as part of the
expanded student employment opportunities.
Frosh Camp was implemented in Fall 2009 as a two-day interactive summer bridge
experience focused on student success strategies, getting to know the campus, and meeting
faculty, staff, and other students. All first-year students were required to attend. This event was
held on campus the week before the start of school to introduce new students to life at Windward
Community College.
In fall 2010, first-year students were enrolled in a learning community that included a
first-year experience seminar course partnered with a general education required course.
Learning communities are clusters of courses organized around a curricular theme that students
enroll in as a cohort. The first-year experience course focused on student success, effective study
strategies, career planning, and provided an awareness of campus resources and services. In
addition, the course introduced students to academic policies, procedures, and academic
planning. The course offered opportunities for students to engage in the campus to build a
stronger connection to the institution, faculty and students. The course was offered over the 16-
week semester term for three credit hours and met two times a week on campus. All first-year
experience seminars were partnered with a first-year general education courses including college
algebra, expository writing, psychology, speech, botany, or Hawaiian studies.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 58

Supplemental instruction was expanded to support the academic experience of students at
Windward Community College. Supplemental instruction peer leaders facilitated regularly
scheduled, small group learning sessions in 53 historically difficult courses such as college
algebra, chemistry, Hawaiian studies, history, psychology, and college English.
This environmental variable was operationalized in two ways: whether the student
participated in any first-year programs (binomial variable). The descriptive statistics for the
environment variable are summarized in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3 Descriptive statistics for study environment variables.

Outcome Variables
Measures used to assess community college student success are complex due to varying
student experiences. Conventional measures of success include enrollment in college, completion
of courses, grades received in course work, continued enrollment, and degree completion. Tinto
(2012) defined student persistence and completion as the rate at which a student began their post-
secondary education at a given point in time and eventually complete their degree, regardless of
where they do so. He noted, for many community college students, persistence may include a
temporary pause in their college enrollment, called a “stop out” or “drop out,” or they may enroll
in another institution, called “delayed transfer.” Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) affirmed
multiple measures are needed to assess community college student success beyond degree
completion and must include the first steps of successful courses taken in the first-year and
continued enrollment into the second year. The output variables used in this study were based on
Variable Freq. or
Label Type Mean Count Freq./Mean Pct. Std. Dev.
Num. sems. FYE participation Continuous mean 1,106 0.30 0.4605
Any FYE participation Binomial freq. 1,106 331 29.9 0.4581
Statistics
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 59

conventional higher education success measures of persistence, achievement, and completion.
Recognizing that there are lots of other ways to measure, using these success measures were
necessary in order to incorporate different enrollment patterns and student goals. The descriptive
statistics for the output variables are summarized in Table 3.4.
Persistence. Persistence was defined as the completion of coursework and credits earned
in a semester and the enrollment in the next semester. Persistence was measured at three specific
milestones: completion of the first year (two semesters); return for the second year (third
semester); and, completion of the second year (four semesters). Each of these persistence
variables were operationalized as binomial variables that indicate whether a student achieved that
milestone.
Academic achievement. According to Upcraft, Gardner, and Barefoot (2005) and
Pascarella and Terenzini (1991), several studies have concluded that one of the best predictors of
first-year student success is grades earned during the first year. For this study, academic
achievement was based on the cumulative grade point average a student earned each semester
and at the end of each academic year (or equivalent). Grade point average variables were
operationalized in an ordinal format to one half point decimal place.
Completion. Completion refers to a student’s achievement of a specific goal, such as a
degree or transfer to a four-year institution. For this study, completion focused on the award of
an associate degree; the transfer to a University of Hawai`i four-year campus; or achievement of
any component of the community college “success” measure: award of a certificate, an associate
degree, or transfer to a four-year campus. These completion variables were operationalized as
binomial variables indicating whether the student had successfully achieved those outcomes.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 60

Table 3.4 Descriptive statistics for study outcome variables.

Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics and tests of significance were computed to explore the data and
make note of potential correlations among the variables used in the study, especially the
environment variable relative to both the input and output variables. Means, percentages,
standard deviations, and associated measures of significant differences for all variables were
calculated.
To address the first research question – Does participation in first-year experience
programs significantly increase Native Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and
completion?– cross-tabulations of the study outcome variables – persistence, academic
achievement, and completion – by participants and non-participants allowed for tests of
significance to determine bivariate differences in outcome achievement between the two groups.
Further, logistic regression analyses were conducted for each of the binomial persistence and
completion outcome variables cited above in order to infer the extent of their relationships to the
input variables and the environment variable of focus: first-year experience program
participation. For the continuous academic achievement outcome variables, generalized linear
model regression analyses were conducted in the same manner.
Variable Freq. or
Label Type Mean N Freq./Mean Pct. Std. Dev.
Persistence:
Completed first year (n = 1,106) Binomial freq. 1,106 799 72.2 0.4480
Returned for second year (n = 799 Binomial freq. 799 586 73.3 0.4424
Completed second year (n = 586) Binomial freq. 586 432 73.7 0.4405
Academic Achievement:
Cumulative GPA over first year Continuous mean 799 2.42 1.0723
Cumulative GPA over first two years Continuous mean 432 2.76 0.8266
Completion:
Earned associate's degree Binomial freq. 1,106 161 14.6 0.3528
Transferred to 4-yr UH campus Binomial freq. 1,106 86 7.8 0.2679
Achieved any success measure Binomial freq. 1,106 197 17.8 0.3828
Statistics
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 61

To address the second research question – How do Native Hawaiian students’ who
participate in first-year experience programs compare to Native Hawaiian non-participants in
their persistence, achievement, and completion? – the same bivariate and multivariate analyses
described for the first research question were applied to a subset of the study population
consisting of Native Hawaiian students only.
All analyses were conducted using SAS
®
software.
Limitations of the Study
This study uncovered three substantive limitations. First, this study was based on the
analysis of student data received from the UH-IRAO. While conducting the data-quality and
consistency check before performing the statistical analysis, the data set was found to have gaps
in the success variables. The UH-IRAO office explained how data collection was closed or
frozen based on a selected date. Once a data set was closed, institutional data was not updated
with any changes such as enrollment, grade point average, or degrees awarded for a semester.
The researcher relied on another variable available through UH-IRAO to ascertain achievement
of various outcomes for students.
Second, the study relied heavily on student participation lists from Windward
Community College, but two problems arose during that task: (a) due to the lack of a
comprehensive student tracking system, many participation lists were based upon the accuracy of
staff memory, and (b) lists that were collected on student participation listed only “yes” or “no”
if a student had participated, providing little detail on the frequency, magnitude, and diversity of
programming experienced by each student.
Third, since Windward Community College had an open admissions policy and did not
require high school grade point average upon entry, records on prior achievement were based on
matching as many students as possible to their Hawaii DOE data records. However, students in
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 62

the state who attended private schools, as well as those from outside Hawai‘i may have been
dropped from the analysis owing to the lack of prior academic achievement data.
Ethical Considerations
Permission for access to student data was requested from the Institutional Review Boards
(IRB) at the University of Hawai`i and University of Southern California. By using historical
data and information, no human subjects were contacted during this study. Student identification
was protected according to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) by the
removal of any identifiable information. All research was conducted at the University of Hawai`i
West O`ahu campus after access was granted by the UH-IRAO, with the assistance from a data
analyst. All data files were encrypted and stored on USB drives that were kept in a locked office
at the University of Hawai`i.
The researcher and data analyst completed and were certified in all training requirements
including modules from the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI), Human
Subjects, National Institutes of Health (NIH), FERPA, University of Hawai`i Information
Security Awareness Training, and University of Hawai`i General Confidentiality. The researcher
committed to following these guidelines when conducting research.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to determine what student success programs contribute to
Native Hawaiian first-year retention. This chapter described the research project, including the
design, site and population, data collection, and data analysis. The study focused on Native
Hawaiian first-year students at Windward Community College who participated in a variety of
first-year experience programs. The study examined the relationship between student success
performance measures and participation in first-year programs. The results of the study will help
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 63

to improve Native Hawaiian student retention by informing educational providers, policy
makers, and leaders of programs that address student success and institutional goals.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 64

CHAPTER 4 : RESEARCH RESULTS
Model first-year programs incorporating effective retention and success strategies have
been created and implemented to address low first-year persistence, achievement, and
completion. Using Astin’s (1993) Input-Environment-Outcome Model, this study examined the
relationship between student variables, participation in first-year programs, and success
measures. Considerable research has been done on higher education enrollment, retention, and
graduation, however, few studies focus on Native Hawaiian student success. Current research on
Native Hawaiian student persistence targets the inputs or student attributes. The significance of
this study was the focus on the environment component of Astin’s model.
Analyses
This chapter reveals the quantitative results that addressed the following research questions.
1. Does participation in first-year experience programs significantly increase Native
Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and completion?
2. How do Native Hawaiian students’ who participate in first-year experience programs
compare to Native Hawaiian non-participants in their persistence, achievement, and
completion?
To begin the review of the student data, bivariate analyses were conducted for each of the
student input (independent) variables on the frequencies and means. To obtain the descriptive
statistics, frequencies were provided for all categorical variables; for the continuous variables,
the statistics were summarized by the means. For consistency’s sake, standard deviations are
provided for all variables. In the case of categorical variables, the standard deviation was
provided based on the mean of the binominal versions of the variables’ categories.
Following the bivariate analyses, multivariate analyses were conducted. Logistic
regression analyses were conducted for each of the binomial persistence and completion outcome
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 65

(dependent) variables in order to infer the extent of their relationships to the input variables and
the environment variable of focus: first-year experience program participation. Salkind (2014)
stated using a logistic regression allows testing models to predict categorial outcomes with
multiple independent variables that are either categorical or continuous. For the continuous
academic achievement outcome variables, generalized linear model analyses were conducted in
the same manner.
Results
The research results are presented in three sections. The first section details the analyses
addressing research question 1 on the first-year experience that included 1,106 (n=1,106) usable
records. Results are presented for the bivariate analyses and multivariate analyses based on the
different outcomes (continuation, achievement, and completion). The second section focuses on
research question 2 on Native Hawaiian students and results are presented for both the bivariate
and multivariate analyses. The final section summarizes the findings of the study in relation to
the main variables: first-year experience and Native Hawaiian students.
Results on First-Year Experience
Bivariate Analyses
Input variables. Cross tabulations of all input variables suggest significant differences
between first-year experience participants and non-participants in several input variables. First-
year experience participants were significantly more likely to be younger (21.4 versus 24.0 years
old), Native Hawaiian (54.7% versus 47.1%), and from the Windward O`ahu school district
(55.9% versus 36.3%). First-year participants also reported lower grade point averages (2.7
versus 2.9). Once on campus, first-year experience participants were significantly more likely to
be new to college (93.7% versus 68.1%), enrolled full-time (79.2% versus 66.7%), employed
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 66

part-time off-campus (65.9% versus 53.8%), and earn more credits (32.7 versus 29.2 credits)
during the semesters under observation compared with non-participants. The student input
variable bivariate statistics are displayed in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 Inputs of First-Year Experience program participants and non-participants.

Note: Statistical difference significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

FYE Participants Non-participants
Variable Statistic Num. Pct. Num. Pct.
Age *** mean 21.39 23.98
Gender:
Female freq. 139 42.0 316 40.8
Male freq. 179 54.1 440 56.8
Other freq. 13 3.9 19 2.5
Native Hawaiian ancestry * freq. 181 54.7 365 47.1
High school district: ***
Windward O'ahu public school freq. 185 55.9 281 36.3
Other Hawai‘i state public school freq. 30 9.1 79 10.2
Hawai‘i state private school freq. 42 12.7 94 12.1
GED (any state) freq. 28 8.5 80 10.3
Any school outside Hawai'i state freq. 46 13.9 241 31.1
Socio-economic status:
Received Pell funding freq. 180 54.4 403 52.0
Prior achievement:
High school GPA: *** mean 2.74 2.90
Enrollment type: ***
New freq. 310 93.7 528 68.1
Returning/transfer freq. 21 6.3 247 31.9
Enrollment Status:
Enrolled full-time *** freq. 262 79.2 517 66.7
Enrolled part-time freq. 206 62.2 522 67.4
Enrollment Changes:
Total duration of all gaps (semesters) * mean 0.14 0.22
Credits Earned:
Total credits earned * mean 32.65 29.24
Employment - Student (On-campus):
Employed on-campus freq. 32 9.7 53 6.8
Employment - Off-campus:
Employed off-campus: * freq. 245 74.0 501 64.7
Employed off-campus full-time freq. 66 19.9 181 23.4
Employed off-campus part-time *** freq. 218 65.9 417 53.8
Note: * = p < .05 ** = p < .01 *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 67

Outcome variables. For the success outcome variables, persistence – specifically
completion of the first-year – was significantly higher among participants of first-year
experience programs (81.6%) than their peers (68.3%). There was no significant difference
among the persistence variables on returned for second year and completed second year, as well
as all the achievement variables on grade point average in the first or second year or in any of the
completion variables measured here. Table 4.2 details the outcome variable bivariate statistics.
Table 4.2 Outcomes of First-Year Experience program participants and non-participants.

Note: Statistical difference significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.
Multivariate Analyses
For each of the binomial persistence and completion outcome variables, logistic
regression analyses were conducted in order to infer the extent of their relationships to the input
variables and the environment variable. For the continuous academic achievement outcome
variables, generalized linear model analyses were conducted.
Persistence. To analyze the persistence outcome, three models were run to assess (1)
completed the first-year, (2) returned for the second year, and (3) completed second year. In the
finished first-year model as shown in Table 4.3 line 20, with all things equal, for students who
participated in first-year experience programs, there was a 96% greater odds of finishing the
FYE Participants Non-participants
Variable Statistic Num. Pct. Num. Pct.
Persistence:
Completed first year *** freq. 270 81.6 529 68.3
Returned for second year freq. 200 74.1 386 73.0
Completed second year freq. 152 76.0 280 72.5
Academic Achievement:
Cumulative GPA over first year mean 2.39 2.43
Cumulative GPA over first two years mean 2.74 2.78
Completion:
Earned associate's degree freq. 43 13.0 118 15.2
Transferred to 4-yr UH campus freq. 20 6.0 66 8.5
Achieved any success measure freq. 53 16.0 144 18.6
Note: * = p < .05 ** = p < .01 *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 68

first-year. The model showed no significant difference between students of Native Hawaiian
ancestry in completing their first year, as noted in line 4. Looking at other variables of
significance, with each additional semester gap, as shown in line 14, students were 217% more
likely to finish their first year. There was also a 24% greater odds of finishing the first year with
each credit earned (line 15). For every half-point increase in college grade point average, the
odds of completing the first-year increased by 95% (line 16).
Table 4.3 Statistical output of Persistence model 1: Finished first year.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.2354 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.3396.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

Looking at the second analysis on whether a student returned for a second year, with all
things equal, both participation in first-year experience programming and Native Hawaiian
Parameter Estimate Std.Err. Chi.Sq. Pr>Chi.Sq. OddsRatio
⓿ Intercept -2.1824 1.0127 4.6446 0.0312
❶ Age 0.0343 0.0485 0.5003 0.4794 1.035
❷ Age squared -0.0005 0.0007 0.5344 0.4648 1.000
❸ Gender: Male -0.0506 0.1631 0.0964 0.7562 0.951
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian -0.1171 0.1880 0.3881 0.5333 0.889
❺ High School: O'ahu public school -0.5371 0.2838 3.5827 0.0584 0.584
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 0.3247 0.8308 0.1528 0.6959 1.384
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school 0.0071 0.3213 0.0005 0.9824 1.007
❽ High school: GED (any state) -0.7160 0.3010 5.6580 0.0174 0.489 *
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i -0.5006 0.2704 3.4271 0.0641 0.606
❿ High school GPA -0.0819 0.1234 0.4397 0.5073 0.921
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.0878 0.1696 0.2677 0.6049 1.092
⓬ Student type: New -0.7987 0.3019 6.9980 0.0082 0.450 **
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) -0.0662 0.2132 0.0963 0.7563 0.936
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) 1.1532 0.2461 21.9495 <.0001 3.168 ***
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.2154 0.0268 64.4094 <.0001 1.240 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 0.6653 0.1592 17.4693 <.0001 1.945 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 1.5619 1.1654 1.7962 0.1802 4.768
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.5023 0.2606 3.7155 0.0539 1.653
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.3959 0.1758 5.0690 0.0244 1.486 *
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) 0.6746 0.1903 12.5644 0.0004 1.963 ***
Notes: R-Square = 0.2354; Max-rescaled R-Square = 0.3396.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 69

ethnicity did not have significant effects on returning, as noted in Table 4.4 lines 20 and 4,
respectively). However, significance was noted among students who attended a Hawai‘i private
high school (227% higher odds, line 7) and among part-time students (299% higher odds, line
13).
Table 4.4 Statistical output of Persistence model 2: Returned for second year.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.3920 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.5712.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

As shown in Table 4.5, the third model used to evaluate persistence as whether a student
finished their second year, both participation in first-year experience (line 20) and Native
Hawaiian ethnicity (line 4) did not reach significance. Although, as shown in line 13, with each
additional part-time semester, students had a 195% increase in the odds of completing the second
year compared to their peers. There was also a 91% greater odds of finishing the second year
with each credit earned, as noted in line 15.
Parameter Estimate Std.Err. Chi.Sq. Pr>Chi.Sq. OddsRatio
⓿ Intercept -8.2195 1.6896 23.6650 <.0001
❶ Age -0.0337 0.0773 0.1903 0.6627 0.967
❷ Age squared 0.0004 0.0011 0.1521 0.6966 1.000
❸ Gender: Male 0.3741 0.2353 2.5272 0.1119 1.454
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian -0.0726 0.2652 0.0750 0.7842 0.930
❺ High School: O'ahu public school -0.3649 0.4306 0.7183 0.3967 0.694
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 1.0394 1.2852 0.6540 0.4187 2.827
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school 1.1835 0.4307 7.5525 0.0060 3.266 **
❽ High school: GED (any state) -0.7872 0.4491 3.0720 0.0796 0.455
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i 0.4592 0.3662 1.5728 0.2098 1.583
❿ High school GPA -0.0628 0.1430 0.1926 0.6608 0.939
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.6221 0.0983 40.0468 <.0001 1.863 ***
⓬ Student type: New 0.5074 0.3050 2.7670 0.0962 1.661
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 1.3832 0.1649 70.3744 <.0001 3.988 ***
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) 0.5205 0.1564 11.0771 0.0009 1.683 ***
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.4667 0.0592 62.1387 <.0001 1.595 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 0.2842 0.0559 25.8321 <.0001 1.329 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 0.5868 0.2337 6.3051 0.0120 1.798 *
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.6335 0.1548 16.7496 <.0001 1.884 ***
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.6015 0.1016 35.0268 <.0001 1.825 ***
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) 0.1145 0.2422 0.2236 0.6363 1.121
Notes: R-Square = 0.392; Max-rescaled R-Square = 0.5712.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 70

Table 4.5 Statistical output of Persistence model 3: Finished second year.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.3536 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.5170.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

Achievement. For the continuous academic achievement variables, generalized linear
model analyses were conducted on two areas: first-year cumulative grade point average and
second-year cumulative grade point average. The results of the first-year grade point average
model, as shown in Table 4.6, with all things equal, revealed no significant difference between
first-year experience participants (line 20) and those who did not participate in first-year
programs. Similarly, as listed in line 4, there was no significant difference between Native
Hawaiian students and their peers at Windward Community College. In the parameter of post-
secondary grade point average noted in line 16, every-one unit (half point) increase of most
recent grade point average results in a 172% increase in current grade point average.

Parameter Estimate Std.Err. Chi.Sq. Pr>Chi.Sq. OddsRatio
⓿ Intercept -7.2803 1.9203 14.3725 0.0001
❶ Age -0.0875 0.0877 0.9963 0.3182 0.916
❷ Age squared 0.0009 0.0012 0.5790 0.4467 1.001
❸ Gender: Male 0.0120 0.2653 0.0021 0.9639 1.012
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian 0.0811 0.2873 0.0796 0.7778 1.084
❺ High School: O'ahu public school -0.4738 0.4879 0.9432 0.3314 0.623
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school -0.6270 0.9367 0.4481 0.5033 0.534
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school 1.0301 0.4462 5.3295 0.0210 2.801 *
❽ High school: GED (any state) -0.1283 0.5201 0.0608 0.8052 0.880
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i 0.3118 0.4141 0.5670 0.4515 1.366
❿ High school GPA -0.2318 0.1562 2.2020 0.1378 0.793
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.2882 0.0841 11.7301 0.0006 1.334 ***
⓬ Student type: New -0.1821 0.3588 0.2576 0.6118 0.834
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 1.0800 0.1537 49.3996 <.0001 2.945 ***
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) -0.3044 0.1660 3.3643 0.0666 0.738
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.6487 0.0856 57.4299 <.0001 1.913 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 0.3249 0.0772 17.6985 <.0001 1.384 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 0.2752 0.1276 4.6493 0.0311 1.317 *
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.3460 0.1231 7.8941 0.0050 1.413 **
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.4739 0.0919 26.5866 <.0001 1.606 ***
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) 0.2773 0.2812 0.9727 0.3240 1.320
Notes: R-Square = 0.3536; Max-rescaled R-Square = 0.517.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 71

Table 4.6 Statistical output of Achievement model 1: First-year cumulative grade point
average.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.3197 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.3022.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

As for the analysis of second-year grade point average as shown in Table 4.7, there was
no significant difference between first-year experience participants and those who did not
participate in first-year programs (line 20) as well as among Native Hawaiian students and their
non-Hawaiian peers (line 4). Similar to the previous analysis, for every-one unit (half point)
increase in most recent post-secondary grade point average (line 16), there was 74% increase in
second year grade point average.

Parameter Estimate Std.Err. t Value Pr>|t|
⓿ Intercept -2.1813 0.9712 -2.2500 0.0250
❶ Age 0.1702 0.0489 3.4800 0.0005 ***
❷ Age squared -0.0019 0.0007 -2.8100 0.0051 **
❸ Gender: Male -0.1112 0.1398 -0.8000 0.4266
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian -0.2048 0.1529 -1.3400 0.1809
❺ High School: O'ahu public school 0.0536 0.2618 0.2000 0.8379
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 0.1390 0.5509 0.2500 0.8009
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school -0.0876 0.2189 -0.4000 0.6891
❽ High school: GED (any state) -1.1976 0.2710 -4.4200 <.0001 ***
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i -0.5768 0.2151 -2.6800 0.0075 **
❿ High school GPA 0.0091 0.1068 0.0900 0.9321
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) -0.0986 0.1420 -0.6900 0.4876
⓬ Student type: New -0.9718 0.2234 -4.3500 <.0001 ***
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 0.6409 0.2117 3.0300 0.0026 **
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) -0.3334 0.0944 -3.5300 0.0004 ***
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.1099 0.0273 4.0300 <.0001 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 1.7199 0.1679 10.2400 <.0001 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 1.0127 0.5008 2.0200 0.0435 *
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.3726 0.2316 1.6100 0.1081
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) -0.3070 0.1437 -2.1400 0.0330 *
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) 0.0686 0.1455 0.4700 0.6375
Notes: R-Square = 0.3197; Adj R-Sq = 0.3022.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 72

Table 4.7 Statistical output of Achievement model 2: Second-year cumulative grade point
average.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.7783 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.7675.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

Completion. Looking at the completion indicators, three models were run for (1) earned
an associate degree, (2) transferred to a University of Hawai`i four-year campus, and (3) any
success, i.e., credentials earned or transfer. The results from the first model, as displayed in
Table 4.8, revealed first-year experience participation had a negative effect on earning an
associate degree (line 20) and Native Hawaiian ethnicity was not significant as a completion
indicator (line 4). On a positive note, with each additional credit acquired, there was a 105%
greater chance of earning an associate degree, as listed in line 15. For every half-point increase in
college grade point average, the odds of completing an associate degree increased by 503% is
highlighted in line 16 .
Parameter Estimate Std.Err. t Value Pr>|t|
⓿ Intercept -1.4682 0.6974 -2.1100 0.0359
❶ Age 0.0572 0.0358 1.6000 0.1114
❷ Age squared -0.0006 0.0005 -1.1800 0.2392
❸ Gender: Male 0.0376 0.0838 0.4500 0.6541
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian -0.1088 0.0879 -1.2400 0.2167
❺ High School: O'ahu public school 0.1689 0.1639 1.0300 0.3033
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 0.3457 0.2970 1.1600 0.2452
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school 0.1010 0.1152 0.8800 0.3810
❽ High school: GED (any state) 0.1820 0.1870 0.9700 0.3310
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i 0.0674 0.1289 0.5200 0.6014
❿ High school GPA 0.0903 0.0516 1.7500 0.0804
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.0408 0.0210 1.9400 0.0530
⓬ Student type: New -0.3839 0.1119 -3.4300 0.0007 ***
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 0.1551 0.0404 3.8400 0.0001 ***
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) -0.1546 0.0825 -1.8700 0.0618
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.1271 0.0257 4.9500 <.0001 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 0.7364 0.0282 26.1400 <.0001 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 0.0115 0.0113 1.0200 0.3061
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.0084 0.0318 0.2600 0.7918
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.0226 0.0220 1.0200 0.3061
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) 0.1150 0.0887 1.3000 0.1956
Notes: R-Square = 0.7783; Adj R-Sq = 0.7675.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 73

Table 4.8 Statistical output of Completion model 1: Earned an associate degree.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.3278 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.6638.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

As shown in Table 4.9, similar to the previous completion model, first-year experience
participation had a negative effect on transferring to a University of Hawai`i four-year campus
(line 20). In addition, as shown in line 4, Native Hawaiian ethnicity was not significant as a
transfer indicator. Significance was noted in line 16 for every half point increase in college grade
point average, the odds of transferring increased by 182%. In addition, in line 3, male students
were 143% more likely to transfer compared to their peers.

Parameter Estimate Std.Err. Chi.Sq. Pr>Chi.Sq. OddsRatio
⓿ Intercept -18.1229 3.1144 33.8612 <.0001
❶ Age 0.0622 0.1555 0.1603 0.6889 1.064
❷ Age squared -0.0012 0.0023 0.2632 0.6079 0.999
❸ Gender: Male -0.7967 0.3517 5.1322 0.0235 0.451 *
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian 0.2676 0.3693 0.5253 0.4686 1.307
❺ High School: O'ahu public school 0.0737 0.5970 0.0152 0.9017 1.077
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 0.0399 1.1942 0.0011 0.9733 1.041
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school 0.1787 0.4490 0.1584 0.6906 1.196
❽ High school: GED (any state) -1.0524 0.8580 1.5045 0.2200 0.349
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i 0.5390 0.4700 1.3152 0.2515 1.714
❿ High school GPA 0.3004 0.4821 0.3884 0.5332 1.350
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.2564 0.0844 9.2154 0.0024 1.292 **
⓬ Student type: New -0.7750 0.3851 4.0509 0.0441 0.461 *
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 0.4988 0.1848 7.2867 0.0069 1.647 **
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) 0.0594 0.3396 0.0306 0.8611 1.061
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.7192 0.1089 43.6285 <.0001 2.053 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 1.7975 0.2978 36.4360 <.0001 6.034 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 0.1333 0.0469 8.0694 0.0045 1.143 **
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.2515 0.1316 3.6540 0.0559 1.286
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.3718 0.0895 17.2557 <.0001 1.450 ***
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) -0.7779 0.3812 4.1636 0.0413 0.459 *
Notes: R-Square = 0.3278; Max-rescaled R-Square = 0.6638.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 74

Table 4.9 Statistical output of Completion model 2: Transferred to a University of Hawai'i four-
year campus.

Notes: Model r-square is 0.2078 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.5054.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

The third model used to analyze completion was if a student experienced any community
college success. This measure included an award of a certificate or an associate degree, or
transfer to a four-year University of Hawai`i campus. The results presented in Table 4.10, line 16
revealed, with all things equal, significance for every half point increase in college grade point
average, the odds of success increased by 331%. In addition, as noted in line 15, with each
additional credit earned, students had a 104% greater chance of receiving a credential or
transferring.
Parameter Estimate Std.Err. Chi.Sq. Pr>Chi.Sq. OddsRatio
⓿ Intercept -10.5919 3.2210 10.8136 0.0010
❶ Age -0.0070 0.1882 0.0014 0.9703 0.993
❷ Age squared -0.0008 0.0030 0.0728 0.7874 0.999
❸ Gender: Male 0.8879 0.3228 7.5688 0.0059 2.430 **
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian -0.3543 0.3451 1.0541 0.3046 0.702
❺ High School: O'ahu public school -0.3337 0.5498 0.3684 0.5439 0.716
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 0.8847 0.8718 1.0297 0.3102 2.422
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school -0.2701 0.4427 0.3724 0.5417 0.763
❽ High school: GED (any state) -0.8712 0.8533 1.0424 0.3073 0.418
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i -0.1759 0.4540 0.1501 0.6985 0.839
❿ High school GPA -0.1791 0.4427 0.1636 0.6858 0.836
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.1560 0.0782 3.9824 0.0460 1.169 *
⓬ Student type: New -0.6390 0.3932 2.6405 0.1042 0.528
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 0.0349 0.1883 0.0345 0.8527 1.036
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) -1.0905 0.8056 1.8325 0.1758 0.336
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.5186 0.1026 25.5400 <.0001 1.680 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 1.0375 0.2515 17.0167 <.0001 2.822 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 0.1441 0.0394 13.3670 0.0003 1.155 ***
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.1480 0.1484 0.9946 0.3186 1.160
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.3031 0.0809 14.0242 0.0002 1.354 ***
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) -0.8287 0.3607 5.2774 0.0216 0.437 *
Notes: R-Square = 0.2078; Max-rescaled R-Square = 0.5054.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 75

Table 4.10 Statistical output of Completion model 3: Achieved any completion measure
(certificate, degree, or transfer).

Notes: Model r-square is 0.3889 and max-rescaled r-square is 0.6432.
Statistical significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

Summary of Results on First-Year Experience
In summary, of the eight models conducted for all first-year students at Windward
Community College, several outcomes emerged as positively significant. These included:
• students who participate in first-year experience programs were significantly more likely
to complete their first year of college compared to their non-participating peers;
• for each additional college credit earned, there was a greater chance of finishing the
second year, achieving a higher-grade point average, earning an associate degree and
transferring to another campus; and
Parameter Estimate Std.Err. Chi.Sq. Pr>Chi.Sq. OddsRatio
⓿ Intercept -15.6259 2.1567 52.4959 <.0001
❶ Age 0.0675 0.0995 0.4597 0.4978 1.070
❷ Age squared -0.0011 0.0014 0.6083 0.4354 0.999
❸ Gender: Male -0.2121 0.2586 0.6726 0.4122 0.809
❹ Ethnicity: Native Hawaiian 0.1584 0.2856 0.3076 0.5792 1.172
❺ High School: O'ahu public school -0.1871 0.4657 0.1615 0.6878 0.829
❻ High school: Other Hawai'i public school 1.0308 0.9064 1.2933 0.2554 2.803
❼ High school: Hawai'i private school 0.1104 0.3674 0.0903 0.7638 1.117
❽ High school: GED (any state) -0.4420 0.5888 0.5637 0.4528 0.643
❾ High school: Outside Hawai'i 0.3556 0.3644 0.9525 0.3291 1.427
❿ High school GPA 0.1861 0.3563 0.2726 0.6016 1.205
⓫ SES:Federal Pell funding (sems.) 0.1709 0.0665 6.6036 0.0102 1.186 *
⓬ Student type: New -0.7619 0.3053 6.2296 0.0126 0.467 *
⓭ Student status: Part-time (sems.) 0.6114 0.1287 22.5524 <.0001 1.843 ***
⓮ Student status changes: Gaps (sems.) 0.0360 0.2303 0.0244 0.8758 1.037
⓯ Credits earned (cumulative) 0.7148 0.0823 75.3538 <.0001 2.044 ***
⓰ Prior (post-secondary) GPA 1.4611 0.2001 53.3216 <.0001 4.311 ***
⓱ Employment: On-campus (sems.) 0.1264 0.0440 8.2748 0.0040 1.135 **
⓲ Employment: Off-campus full-time (sems.) 0.0533 0.1046 0.2590 0.6108 1.055
⓳ Employment: Off-campus part-time (sems.) 0.2503 0.0695 12.9739 0.0003 1.284 ***
⓴ First-year Experience participation (sems.) -0.4001 0.2757 2.1056 0.1468 0.670
Notes: R-Square = 0.3889; Max-rescaled R-Square = 0.6432.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 76

• for every half-point increase in college grade point average, the odds increased earning an
associate degree and transferring to a University of Hawai`i four-year campus.
It is important to note that Native Hawaiian ethnicity, as an input variable, was not a significant
indicator for persistence, achievement, or completion in the first-year model analyses.
Results on Native Hawaiian Students
Bivariate Analyses
Input variables. Looking specifically at the input variables of 546 (n=546) usable records on
Native Hawaiian students, cross tabulations suggest a few significant differences between first-
year experience participants and non-participants. Detailed in Table 4.11, Native Hawaiian first-
year experience participants were significantly more likely to be younger (21.1 versus 22.8 years
old), new to college (96.1% versus 82.5%), and have a lower high school grade point average
(2.62 versus 2.75) compared to Native Hawaiian non-participants. In addition, participants were
significantly more likely to be full-time (80.1% versus 71.2%) and employed part-time off
campus (69.6% versus 59.5%) compared to non-participants.

NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 77

Table 4.11 Inputs of Native Hawaiian First-Year Experience program participants and non-
participants.

Notes: Cells containing “–“ failed to meet the minimum reporting threshold per the corresponding
institution’s data-sharing agreement.
Statistical difference significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

Outcome variables. The bivariate analysis results of the outcome variables showed
persistence specifically completion of the first-year was significantly higher among Native
FYE Participants Non-participants
Variable Statistic Num. Pct. Num. Pct.
Age * mean 21.13 22.78
Gender:
Female freq. 97 53.6 203 55.6
Male freq. 76 42.0 154 42.2
Other freq. – – – –
High school district:
Windward O'ahu public school freq. 108 59.7 181 49.6
Other Hawai‘i state public school freq. 16 8.8 40 11.0
Hawai‘i state private school freq. 28 15.5 72 19.7
GED (any state) freq. 19 10.5 50 13.7
Any school outside Hawai'i state freq. 10 5.5 22 6.0
Socio-economic Status:
Received Pell funding freq. 122 67.4 222 60.8
Prior Achievement:
High school GPA: ** mean 2.62 2.75
Enrollment Type: ***
New freq. 174 96.1 301 82.5
Returning/transfer freq. – – 64 17.5
Enrollment Status:
Enrolled full-time * freq. 145 80.1 260 71.2
Enrolled part-time freq. 110 60.8 246 67.4
Enrollment Changes:
Total duration of all gaps (semesters) mean 0.15 0.25
Credits Earned:
Total credits earned mean 32.20 30.64
Employment - Student (On-campus):
Employed on-campus freq. 13 7.2 27 7.4
Employment - Off-campus:
Employed off-campus: freq. 140 77.4 256 70.1
Employed off-campus full-time freq. 41 22.7 91 24.9
Employed off-campus part-time * freq. 126 69.6 217 59.5
Notes: Cells containing "–" failed to meet the minim. reporting threshold per the UH data-sharing agreement.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 78

Hawaiian participants of first-year experience programs (80.7%) than their peers (69.9%). There
was no significance among the persistence indicators on returned for the second year and
completion of the second year, as well as in all academic achievement variables of grade point
average and in all completion variables measured here. Details of the Native Hawaiian students’
outputs are displayed in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12 Outcomes of Native Hawaiian First-Year Experience program participants and non-
participants.

Notes: Cells containing “–“ failed to meet the minimum reporting threshold per the corresponding
institution’s data-sharing agreement.
Statistical difference significance denoted by * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001.

Multivariate Analyses
Overall, the results on the eight outcome models on the Native Hawaiian students’
persistence, achievement, and completion had similar results as the analyses on the first-year
experience as highlighted in Table 4.13.
When controlling for Native Hawaiian students, students who participated in first-year
experience programs had double the odds of finishing the first-year relative to their peers, as
FYE Participants Non-participants
Variable Statistic Num. Pct. Num. Pct.
Persistence:
Completed first year ** freq. 146 80.7 255 69.9
Returned for second year freq. 114 78.1 184 72.2
Completed second year freq. 84 73.7 143 77.7
Academic Achievement:
Cumulative GPA over first year mean 2.30 2.29
Cumulative GPA over first two years mean 2.68 2.65
Completion:
Earned associate's degree freq. 21 11.6 51 14.0
Transferred to 4-yr UH campus freq. – – 27 7.4
Achieved any success measure freq. 26 14.4 60 16.4
Notes: Cells containing "–" failed to meet the minim. reporting threshold per the UH data-sharing agreement.
Symbols defined as * = p < .05, ** = p < .01, and *** = p < .001
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 79

noted in line 1. There was also near significance for students who participated in first-year
programs to have a 94% increase in returning for the second year (line 2). And there was no
significant difference between Native Hawaiian students who participated compared to Native
Hawaiian students who did not participate in first-year programs in finishing the second year.
Once again, line 4 and 5 reveal there was no significant difference on achievement between
Native Hawaiian first-year participants and non-participants for both first-year and second year
grade point average.
Finally, the results on all completion models, as illustrated in lines 6, 7, and 8, showed no
significant difference between students of Native Hawaiian ancestry who participated in first-
year experience compared to their peers, all things equal.
Table 4.13 Summary of First-Year Experience multivariate model statistics for all outcomes: all
Windward Comm. Coll. students and Native Hawaiian students only.

Notes: Statistical difference significance denoted by † =p<.10, *=p<.05, **=p<.01, and ***=p<.001.

Summary of Results on Native Hawaiian Students
The results on these models focused on Native Hawaiian student participants revealed
similar results as the analyses on the overall first-year experience models.
All Windward CC students (n = 1,106) Native Hawaiian WCC students (n = 546)
Outcome
Est.
Std.
Err.
Chi.Sq. or
t Value
Prob.
Odds
Ratio
Est.
Std.
Err.
Chi.Sq. or
t Value
Prob.
Odds
Ratio
Persistence (w/chi-squares):
❶ Finished 1st year 0.675 0.190 12.564 0.000 1.96 *** 0.732 0.271 7.318 0.007 2.08 **
❷ Returned for 2nd year 0.115 0.242 0.224 0.636 1.12 0.664 0.375 3.141 0.076 1.94 †
❸ Finished 2nd year 0.277 0.281 0.973 0.324 1.32 -0.088 0.366 0.057 0.811 0.92
Achievement (w/t values):
❹ First year GPA 0.069 0.146 0.470 0.638 0.291 0.203 1.440 0.152
❺ Second year GPA 0.115 0.089 1.300 0.196 0.209 0.130 1.610 0.109
Completion (w/chi-squares):
❻ Associate's degree -0.778 0.381 4.164 0.041 0.46 * -0.787 0.641 1.508 0.220 0.46
❼ Transfer to UH 4-yr inst. -0.829 0.361 5.277 0.022 0.44 * -0.703 0.581 1.465 0.226 0.50
❽ Any success measure -0.400 0.276 2.106 0.147 0.67 -0.670 0.470 2.030 0.154 0.51
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 80

• When controlling for Native Hawaiian students, those who participated in first-year
experience programs had double the odds of finishing the first year relative to their peers.
• Models on achievement and completion revealed no significant difference between
Native Hawaiian first-year participants and non-participants.
Summary
Data from this quantitative study show the extent of the relationships of the student
success outcomes (persistence, achievement, and completion) to the student input variables and
the environment variable of focus: first-year experience program participation. First,
participation in first-year experience programs significantly increased persistence in finishing the
first year of college in the models for all students, as well as those models limited to Native
Hawaiian students only. Second, for all other persistence, achievement, and completion
measures, the models indicated no statistical significance for all students who participated and
did not participate in first-year programs. Of note, the regression models revealed that
cumulative college credits earned, and most recent college grade point average was highly
significant in all achievement and completion models.
Understanding the relationships between student characteristics, university programs, and
student success can serve as a framework for programs what will encourage Native Hawaiian
student success. As shared in the introduction of this chapter, considerable research has been
done on higher education enrollment, retention, and graduation, however, few studies focus on
Native Hawaiian students and the college environment. The findings from this study can be used
to address programs and how they enhance engagement and create meaningful academic
experiences. The final chapter of this study will conclude with a discussion of the findings,
implications for practice, and recommendations for future research.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 81

CHAPTER 5 : DISCUSSION
This chapter presents a discussion and interpretation of the results of the study. The first
section summarizes the purpose of the study. The second section discusses the findings guided
by the research questions. The third section outlines implications for practice, policy, and future
research. The chapter concludes with reflections and insights.
Overview of Study
Success of the first year of college is foundational for student persistence, achievement,
and graduation. Nearly half of full-time, first-time students (43%) who start college at a 2-year
institution do not complete the first year (NCES, 2017). National and state initiatives such as the
Lumina Goal 2025 and Complete College America were designed to address the current realities
and concerns of student success. Across the nation, model first-year programs have been created
and implemented with effective retention and success strategies to address low first-year
persistence and completion.
Native Hawaiian students at the University of Hawai`i have struggled with the college
experience. Over the past 20 years, focus on Native Hawaiian students have resulted in federal
and state legislation, as well as University policies and programs, to address the issue. The
University of Hawai`i received over $60 million from 2008-2014 from the U.S. Department of
Education Title III program to implement success strategies for Native Hawaiian students.
The primary purpose of this study was to identify what strategies, practices, or programs
lead to a successful first year for Native Hawaiian students. Using Astin’s (1993) Input-
Environment-Outcome model, this study examined the relationship between Native Hawaiian
student participation in first-year programs and student success measures of persistence,
achievement, and completion.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 82

There is considerable research on higher education enrollment, retention, and graduation,
however few studies focus on the success of students of Native Hawaiian ancestry. Current
research on Native Hawaiian student persistence target the inputs or student’s attributes and
characteristics. The significance of this study was its focus on the college environment during the
first-year. The secondary purpose of this study was to provide data for educational providers,
policy makers, and leaders of programs to determine practices that may address student success
and institutional goals in addition to contribute to the research literature that exists with respect
to Native Hawaiian, indigenous, and minority students’ persistence.
This study was part of a comprehensive evaluation project at the University of Hawai`i.
In 2015, University of Hawai`i received funding from the United States Department of Education
to conduct an analysis of the impact of Title III-funded programs at ten University of Hawai`i
campuses from Fall 2008 to Spring 2016. The U.S. Department of Education provides dedicated
funding through the Title III program to minority-serving colleges and universities to better
support educational opportunities for certain ethnic populations (U.S. Department of Education,
2018). In simple terms, the Title III program goal is to increase institutional capacity to better
support Native Hawaiian student success. The comprehensive evaluation used data collected and
analyzed from four sources including grant documents, student and staff surveys, student and
staff interviews and focus groups, and student administrative and academic records. This study
focused on data collected through the student records specifically with first-year students.
This quantitative study set out to explore the relationship between student characteristics,
participation in first-year programs, and student success measures. The research hypotheses
sought to determine if a strong relationship existed among and between the independent
variables of student inputs and the environment with the completion outcome dependent
variables. Using 1,106 student cases, bivariate analyses were conducted for each student input
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 83

variable before multivariate analyses were conducted. Logistic regression analyses were run for
each binomial persistence and completion outcome (dependent) variables in order to infer the
extent of their relationship to the input and environment variables. Generalized linear model
analyses were conducted for the (continuous) achievement outcome variables. Separate analyses
were conducted for the all first-year students and all Native Hawaiian first-year students.
The site for this study focused on Windward Community College, one of seven two-year
public community colleges in the University of Hawai`i 10-campus system. Establish in 1972,
Windward Community College’s mission is to offer innovative programs in liberal arts and
sciences with opportunities to gain knowledge and understanding of Hawai`i’s heritage. This
two-year public college offers four associates degrees and ten certificates. Approximately 2,500
students were enrolled in Fall 2017 with over 40% of the student body of Hawaiian ancestry.
Windward Community College was selected as an ideal campus for this study due to the high
percentage of Native Hawaiian students and innovative first-year programs.
The summary of findings discusses how meaningful the results may be in relation to the
implications of practice and future directions for research.
Summary of Findings
This study addressed two research questions on the relationship among student input
variables and participation with first-year experience programming with the success outcomes of
persistence, achievement, and completion. Of the eight models conducted for all first-year
students at Windward Community College, three outcomes emerged as significant. For Native
Hawaiian first-year students, of the eight models run, one outcome was significant with another
showing near significance. Overall, Native Hawaiian students and all students who participated
in first-year programs were significantly more likely to finish the first-year compared to their
peers who did not participate in first-year programs. All other models of persistence,
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 84

achievement, and completion measures revealed no statistically significant difference for both
participants and non-participants of first-year programs. A detailed response to each research
question follows explaining how the findings are important or relevant to this study’s focus.
Response to Research Question 1
The first research question asked if participation in first-year experience programming
significantly increased Native Hawaiian students’ persistence, achievement, and completion.
The first three logistic regression models conducted focused on the persistence outcome of
success. Of those analyses, one emerged as significant. Participation in first-year experience
programs significantly increased persistence in finishing the first year of college for all students
compared with students who did not participate in first-year programs. This result is important
and reflects the impact of college student engagement activities on first-year persistence while
also aligning with Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome Model (1993) and Tinto’s Student
Departure Theory (1993). Both Astin and Tinto assert that college year-to-year persistence
occurs when a student successfully integrates into the institution academically and socially.
Unfortunately, the next two models on persistence – returned for the second year and finished the
second year – showed no statistically significant difference between participants who attended
any first-year programs and non-participants. This issue of persistence in the sophomore year is
worthy of further study and may need programming specific to the second-year college
experience. For all three models, Native Hawaiian ethnicity did not have any significant effect on
persistence.
The next two models on academic achievement were analyzed using generalized linear
models to review grade point average in the first and second year. In this study, with all things
equal, the results revealed participation in first-year experience programs and Native Hawaiian
ethnicity did not have any significance on college grade point average. This is an interesting
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 85

finding and one that may provide insight for program development. If the goal of a student
program is academic success, programs may need to integrate best practices of integrating
foundational courses with student engagement strategies. Complete College America introduced
the momentum year practice of increasing academic success in first-year math and writing
coursework by including extended learning time, skill building, and embedded course tutors
(2018).
Looking at the completion indicators, three logistic regression models were conducted for
earned an associate degree, transferred to a University of Hawai`i four-year campus, and any
success (credentials or transfer). The results in all completion models showed Native Hawaiian
ancestry was not a significant indicator for success. The first two models revealed first-year
experience participation had a negative effect on earning an associate degree and transferring to a
University of Hawai`i four-year campus. This was unexpected however, there may be two
factors that had an effect on this statistically significant result. The first was the usable data
covered a short duration. By having only 2014-2016 cohorts available for this study, individual
student cases may not have had enough time to show success in persistence for additional years
or in completion beyond the 150%-time frame. Although the conventional goals of completion
are important for a community college and students, for other students the goal may be to get to
the finish line of completion and less about the timeline of two years of completion. Continuing
this study with a longer time frame and more cohorts as well as looking at the timeliness of
degree completion is recommended for further research. A second factor to consider is the
students’ goals of attending a community college. Although graduation and completion of
credentials are important for a college, this goal might not align with student goal of taking
classes for personal growth and career interest. For many students, the need for a degree may not
be their goal.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 86

Response to Research Question 2
The second research question focused on how Native Hawaiian students’ who participate in
first-year experience programs compare to Native Hawaiian non-participants in their
persistence, achievement, and completion. Overall the results on the eight outcome models had
similar results as the analyses on the first-year experience.
When controlling for Native Hawaiian students, those who participated in first-year
experience programs had double the odds of finishing the first-year relative to their peers. There
was also near significance for students who participated in first-year programs to have a 94%
increase in returning for the second year. And last, when looking at the persistence models, there
was no significant difference between Native Hawaiian students who participated compared to
those Native Hawaiian students who did not participate in first-year programs in completing the
second year.
Academic achievement, once again, revealed no significant difference between Native
Hawaiian first-year participants and non-participants for both first year and second year grade
point average.
Finally, the results on all completion models showed no significant difference between
students of Native Hawaiian ancestry who participated in first-year experience compared to their
peers, controlling for all things equal. Consideration must be noted for the time frame of this
study of two cohort years which may not have allowed enough time to show further completion
results. Another particular note to consider, given that the first-year experience program was
funded by the DOE Title III Program and the University of Hawai`i has received over $60
million in grants (Malone et al., 2018), whose purpose is to improve Native Hawaiian post-
secondary outcomes, the models show no significant difference between students of Native
Hawaiian ancestry in completing their first-year, all things equal.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 87

Study Limitations
This study uncovered four substantive limitations. First, this study was based on the
analysis of student data received from the UH-IRAO. While conducting the data-quality and
consistency checks before performing the statistical analyses, the data set was found to have gaps
in the success variables. The UH-IRAO explained how data collection was closed or frozen
based on a selected date. Once a data set was closed, institutional data was not updated with any
changes such as enrollment, grade point average, or degrees awarded for a semester. The
researcher relied on another variable available through UH-IRAO to ascertain achievement of
various outcomes for students.
Second, the study relied heavily on student participation lists from Windward
Community College, but two problems arose during that task: (a) due to the lack of a
comprehensive student tracking system, many participation lists were based upon the accuracy of
staff memory, and (b) lists that were collected on student participation listed only “yes” or “no”
if a student had participated, providing little detail on the frequency, magnitude, and diversity of
programming experienced by each student. The researcher combined all first-year programs into
one variable of participation in any first-year experience activity.
Third, since Windward Community College had an open admissions policy and did not
require high school grade point average upon entry, records on prior achievement were based on
matching as many students as possible to their Hawaii DOE data records. However, students in
the state who attended private schools, as well as those from outside Hawai‘i may have been
dropped from the analysis owing to the lack of prior academic achievement data.
Lastly, in this study the environment being assessed was all first-year programs funded
by the Department of Education Title III. These programs included summer bridge, orientation,
academic advising, financial aid assistance, first-year seminar courses, learning communities,
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 88

Supplemental Instruction, developmental education, and student employment. However, other
environmental programs existed at Windward and at most college campuses including TRiO
tutoring, service learning, and student internships. These programs may have been part of first-
year experience although was not accounted for in this review. It is unclear how these other
programs may have had impact on student success.
Implications for Practice
According to Tinto (2012) enhancing student success requires ongoing reflections on a
framework for institutional action based on sound research. This study proposes five
recommendations for practice focusing on first-year college success for Native Hawaiian
students. Conducted at one rural community college located on O`ahu, the sample population of
this study was comprehensive and included all first-year students in different age groups, gender,
and ethnicity. It included students of different social economic status, prior achievement, and
enrollment types. Such single campus studies provide results specific to different student
characteristics and program activities.
The persistence models examined the completion of the first-year, returned for the second
year, and completion of the second year. The first-year experience showed significant association
with finishing the first-year and no significant difference with returning or completing the second
year. These findings show persistence seemed to matter and participation in campus programs
have a clear effect on student success. Practitioners should consider elevating first-year
experience program participation from voluntary to mandatory, incentivize participation in the
program, or embed first-year experience elements in introductory general curricula (Tinto, 2012).
What we don’t know is which components of the first-year program are affecting success. The
results indicate the need for further studies, and to look at each first-year component
independently and if that may show significance on persistence, achievement, or success. This
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 89

will allow the campus and program staff to focus on practices that have the most impact on
student success (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005; Seidman, 2012; DeAngelo, 2014).
The models for academic achievement looked at first- and second-year cumulative grade
point averages. The findings showed no statistically significant difference between participants
who attended any first-year programs and non-participants over the years examined for both the
overall sample and the Native Hawaiian subsample. Given there was no effect, research on
frequency and depth of interactions with students could reveal more resources needed that can
bolster academic achievement (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980; Tinto, 1987, 2012; Halagao, 2010;
Kuh, 2015).
The models for completion included three measures: earned an associate degree,
transferred to a University of Hawai`i four-year campus, and any success in credential or
transfer. Both the overall sample and Native Hawaiian subsample showed no positive effects of
first-year participation in completion. The lack of time of the student cohorts available for this
study may have contributed to the findings for completion. A study beyond two-years may in
fact show a positive effect on completion considering the strong persistence effect of first-year
experience programs. A broader study of the entire University of Hawai`i system, found
significant positive influence of first-year program participation on completion outcomes
although it may be beyond the standard college definition of timely completion (Malone et al.,
2018).
The community college student experience is not always clean or a straight line and, in
many cases, a student experience doesn’t always fit the national criteria’s set for first-time, full-
time, 18-year-old students. Students look different, especially community college students who
embrace the open-door policy to stop out of enrollment as needed. In addition to assessing
completion over a longer time frame, university researchers should consider adding data
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 90

collection points on other enrollment types of students including stopping-out, transfer, and
returning students. With the increase in non-traditional students, it’s critical the University of
Hawai`i also understand their needs to be successful (Bean & Metzner, 1985; Kenner &
Weinerman, 2014).
Another consideration for practice for the University of Hawai`i is to support data-
gathering tools and management systems for programs, practices, and other interventions beyond
the classroom that can influence student engagement, persistence, achievement, and completion.
Research, both formative and summative, is critical for higher education programs especially in
understanding the effects of programs and practices for students.
Recommendations for Future Research
There is very limited literature relating to Native Hawaiians in college. Most research are
focused on pre-college student characteristics (Oliveira, 2005) and perceptions of Native
Hawaiian students of college barriers (Hokoana, 2010). This study adds to the literature with a
focus on the college environment and its significance to student success. This research continued
the work and should be developed throughout the University of Hawai`i system. The following
recommendations are presented for future research.
1. Participation in first-year programs is a significant predictor of first-year persistence
based on the findings. Research is needed on the individual program components such as
orientation, financial aid, summer bridge, learning communities, Supplemental
Instruction, and first-year seminar course (Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005; Seidman,
2012; DeAngelo, 2014).
2. Research over a longer period of time, using entry cohorts as the basis of data selection,
would allow for a more robust historic analysis.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 91

3. To address academic achievement, future research must continue to explore academic
integration with student engagement and success (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980; Tinto,
1987, 2012; Halagao, 2010, Kuh, 2015).
4. The mean age of the participants in this study was 26 years old, thus future research
should focus on nontraditional students and consider external factors such as family and
work commitments (Bean & Metzner, 1985; Kenner & Weinerman, 2014).
5. Quantitative studies are valuable tools for providing statistical evidence to test or support
theories (Creswell, 2014). However, the results of quantitative studies often establish
associations and relationships, rather than conclusively identify causes or detailed
experiences (Salkind, 2014). This analysis of data allowed for the study of large trends of
student success. Future research is needed for a deeper understanding of the student
experience and can be conducted through student surveys, focus groups, and individual
interviews. Collecting data across the University of Hawai`i system will allow for
broader understanding of student success.
Conclusion
The Complete College America (2018) initiative is leading the work on “implementing
strategies around the country to close achievement gaps, boost graduation rates and ensure every
student has the opportunity to achieve their dreams.” Twenty million Americans are enrolled in
college now, all who are recent high school graduates, working parents, first-generation students,
and skilled-trade workers, striving to earn a degree and build a fulfilling career. However, the
American higher education system is failing to meet that need.
This study examined the relationship between college first-year experience programs and
student success performance measures. The results of the study confirmed the value and impact
of quality first-year programming on student success and Native Hawaiian success. Further
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 92

research is needed in understanding which elements of college programs make the most impact
on student success. Providing a strong start for new students is an ambitious goal for institutions
that are stretched with competing initiatives, however everyone should have a sense of urgency
to create a campus programs that clearly create an engaged student experience.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 93

References
Astin, A. W. (1977). Four Critical Years. Effects of College on Beliefs, Attitudes, and
Knowledge.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of college student personnel, 25(4), 297-308.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Astin, A. W. (2005). Making sense out of degree completion rates. Journal of College Student
Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 7(1-2), 5-17. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/7PV9-KHR7-C2F6-UPK5
Astin, A. W. (2012). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and
evaluation in higher education. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Autor, D. (2014). Polanyi's paradox and the shape of employment growth (Vol. 20485).
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate
student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485-540.
Benham, M.P. & Heck, R.H. (1998). Culture and educational policy in Hawaii: The silencing of
native voices. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of Educational
Research, 71 (2), 171-217.
Cardinal, D. (1995, Sept. 10). Warriors. In Schaef, A.W. (1995). Native Wisdom for White
Minds. New York: Ballantine Books.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 94

Center for Community College Student Engagement. (2014). A matter of degrees: Practices to
pathways (High-impact practices for community college student success). Austin, TX:
The University of Texas at Austin, Program in Higher Education Leadership.
Center for Community College Student Engagement. (2009). Benchmarking & Benchmarks:
Effective Practice with Entering Students. Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin,
Community College Leadership Program.
Complete College America. (2018). http://completecollege.org/index.html
Creighton, L. M. (2007). Factors affecting the graduation rates of university students from
underrepresented populations, 11 (7). IEJLL: International Electronic Journal for
Leadership in Learning, 11.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daly, M. C., & Bengali, L. (2014). Is it still worth going to college? FRBSF Economic Letter, 13,
2014.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., & Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college and career
readiness: Developing a new paradigm. education policy analysis archives, 22, 86.
DeAngelo, L. (2014). Programs and practices that retain students from the first to second year:
Results from a national study. New directions for institutional research, 160, 53-75.
Donhardt, G. L. (2013). The fourth-year experience: Impediments to degree completion.
Innovative Higher Education, 38, 207-221.
Flowers, L. A. (2004). Retaining African-American students in higher education: An integrative
review. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 23-35. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/196729842?accountid=14749
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 95

Gardner, J. N., & Upcraft, M. L. (1989). The freshman year experience: Helping students survive
and succeed in college.
Hagedorn, L. S., Tibbetts, K., Moon, H., & Lester, J. (2003). Paper on factors contributing to
college retention in the native Hawaiian population.
Halagao, P.E. (2010). Liberating filipino americans through decolonizing curriculum. Race
Ethnicity and Education, 13(4), 495-512.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2010.492132
Hamrick, F. A., Schuh, J. H., & Shelley, M. C. (2004). Predicting higher education graduation
rates from institutional characteristics and resource allocation. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 12(19), 24. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/61836011?accountid=14749
Hernandez, J. C., & Lopez, M. A. (2005). Leaking pipeline: Issues impacting latino/a college
student retention. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 37-60. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/196729924?accountid=14749
Hochschild, J. L., & Scovronick, N. (2003). The American dream and the public schools. Oxford
University Press.
Hokoana, L. K. (2010). Native Hawaiians and College Success: Does Culture Matter? (Doctoral
dissertation). University of Southern California, California.
Hout, M. (2012). Social and economic returns to college education in the united states. Annual
Review of Sociology, 38, 379-400.
Jackson, J., & Kurlaender, M. (2014). College readiness and college completion at broad access
four-year institutions. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(8), 947-971.
Kamakau, S. M. (1992). Ruling chiefs of Hawaii (p. 513). Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools
Press.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 96

Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2014). Adult learning theory: Applications to nontraditional
college students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41, 87-96.
Kuh, G. D. (2001). Organizational culture and student persistence: Prospects and
puzzles. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 3(1), 23-39.
Kuh, G. D. (2015). Continuity and change: 20 years of about campus. About Campus,
November-December. DOI: 10.1002/abc21215
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2005). Never let it rest: Lessons about
student success from high-performing colleges and universities. Change: The Magazine
of Higher Learning, 37(4), 44. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/62064733?accountid=14749
Lipe, K. (2012). Ka ho`okō kuleana: Exploring the university of hawai`i at mānoa’s journey to
live into its kuleana to become a hawaiian place of learning (Doctoral dissertation).
University of Hawai`i at Mānoa, Hawai`i.
Lino, T. K. (2010). The relationship of a culturally relevant and responsive learning
environment to achievement motivation for native hawaiian secondary students (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.
3403607)
Lumina Foundation. (2017). Strategic Plan for 2017-2020. Retrieved from
https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/strategic-plan-2017-to-2020-apr17.pdf
Lundberg, C. A. (2014). Institutional support and interpersonal climate as predictors of learning
for native american students. Journal of College Student Development, 55(3), 263-277.
doi:10.1353/csd.2014.0027
Makuakane-Drechsel, T., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2000). Correlates of retention among asian pacific
americans in community colleges: The case for hawaiian students. Community College
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 97

Journal of Research and Practice, 24(8), 639-655. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/62330629?accountid=14749
Malone, N., Lipe, K, Kenolio, E, Opulauoho, L. (2018). U.S. Department of Education, Title III:
Kuahui A Ku Ka Hale: University of Hawai`i Comprehensive Title III Evaluation Report.
Manuscript in progress.
Martin, N. K., & Meyer, K. (2010). Efforts to improve undergraduate student retention rates at a
Hispanic serving institution: Building collaborative relationships for the common good.
College and University, 85(3), 40-49. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/762466735?accountid=14749
Menifield, C. E. (2012). Lottery funded scholarships in tennessee: Increased access but weak
retention for minority students. Journal of Education Finance, 38(1), 3-17. Retrieved
from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1140136286?accountid=14749
Ogbu, J. U., & Simons, H. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: a cultural‐ecological
theory of school performance with some implications for education. Anthropology &
Education Quarterly, 29(2), 155-188.
Oliveira, J.A. (2005). Native Hawaiians’ Success in Higher Education: Predictive Factors and
Bachelor’s Degree Completion (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Thesis database. (UMI No. 3220142)
Padgett, R. D. (2014). Emerging research and practices in first-year students. New Directions for
Institutional Research, 160. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. doi: 10.1002/ir20057.
Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1980). Predicting Freshman Persistence and Voluntary Dropout
Decisions from a Theoretical Model. The Journal of Higher Education, 51(1), 60-75.
doi:1. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1981125 doi:1
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 98

Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). Twenty years of research on college students:
Lessons for future research. Research in Higher Education, 32(1), 83-92.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students (Vol. 2). K. A. Feldman
(Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Phinney, J. S. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identity measure: A new scale for use with diverse
groups. Journal of adolescent research, 7(2), 156-176.
Rosemary, W. S. (2005). The retention of indigenous students in higher education: Historical
issues, federal policy, and indigenous resilience. Journal of College Student Retention,
6(1), 111-127. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/196712100?accountid=14749
Salkind, N. J. (2014). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (Fifth edition.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Seidman, A. (1996, Spring). Retention Revisited: RET = E Id + (E + I + C) Iv. College and
University, 71 (4), 18-20.
Seidman, A. (2012). College student retention: Formula for student success. American Council
on Education series on higher education. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Smith, J. S. (2002). First-year student perceptions of academic advisement: A qualitative study
and reality check. NACADA Journal, 22(2), 39-49.
Spady, W. G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and
synthesis. Interchange, 1(1), 64-85.
Terenzini, P. T., Springer, L., Yaeger, P. M., Pascarella, E. T., & Nora, A. (1996). First-
generation college students: Characteristics, experiences, and cognitive
development. Research in Higher education, 37(1), 1-22.
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 99

Tierney, W. G. (1992). An anthropological analysis of student participation in college. The
Journal of Higher Education, 63(6), 603-618.
Tierney, W. G., Corwin, Z. B., & Colyar, J. E. (2005). Preparing for college: Nine elements of
effective outreach. SUNY Press.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent
research. Review of educational research, 45(1), 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1993). Building community. Liberal Education, 79(4), 16-21.
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (2016, September 26). From retention to persistence. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from
https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2016/09/26/how-improve-student-persistence-
and-completion-essay
Titus, M. A. (2006). Understanding college degree completion of students with low
socioeconomic status: The influence of the institutional financial context. Research in
Higher Education, 47(4), 371-398. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/62099433?accountid=14749
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2005. First-
Generation Students in Postsecondary Education. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_326.10.asp
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2015. NCES
2015-601. Trends in Pell Grant Receipt and the Characteristics of Pell Grant Recipients:
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 100

Selected Years, 1999-2000 to 2011-2012. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015601.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2016.
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Fall 2001 and Spring 2007
through Spring 2013, Graduation Rates component. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_326.10.asp
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2016. The
Condition of Education 2016 (NCES 2016-144), Undergraduate Retention and
Graduation Rates. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_326.10.asp
U.S. Department of Education, Title III Part A Programs – Strengthening Institutions (2018).
Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/programs/iduestitle3a/index.html.
University of Hawai`i. (2015). University of Hawai`i Strategic Directions, 2015 – 2021.
Retrieved from
http://blog.hawaii.edu/strategicdirections/files/2015/01/StrategicDirectionsFINAL-
013015.pdf
University of Hawai`i. (2016). Hawai`i Graduation Initiative. Retrieved from
http://www.hawaii.edu/hawaiigradinitiative
University of Hawai`i. (2016). University of Hawai`i System-wide Policies and Procedures
Information System (PPIS). Retrieved from
https://www.hawaii.edu/policy/?action=viewPolicy&policySection=Rp&policyChapter=
4&policyNumber=201
University of Hawai`i Institutional Research and Analysis Office. (2016, Fall). Retrieved from
http://www.hawaii.edu/iro
NATIVE HAWAIIAN STUDENT SUCCESS IN THE FIRST-YEAR 101

University of Hawai`i Institutional Research and Analysis Office. (2018). Headcount Enrollment
Overview Fall 2017.
University of Hawai`i Windward Community College. (2016). Retrieved from
https://windward.hawaii.edu/About_WCC/
Upcraft, M.L., Gardner, J. N., & Barefoot, B. O. (2005). Eds. Challenging and supporting the
first-year student: A handbook for improving the first year of college.
Venezia, A., & Voloch, D. (2012). Using college placement exams as early signals of college
readiness: An examination of California's Early Assessment Program and New York's At
Home in College program. New Directions for Higher Education, 2012(158), 71-79.
Williford, A. M., Chapman, L. C., & Kahrig, T. (2001). The university experience course: A
longitudinal study of student performance, retention, and graduation. Journal of College
Student Retention, 2(4), 327-340. doi:10.2190/K7K9-91EG-E6F9-EVMK
Yeh, T. L. (2004). Issues of college persistence between Asian and Asian pacific American
students. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 81-96. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/196723927?accountid=14749

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study examines the relationship between Native Hawaiian student participation in first-year college programs and student success measures. Specifically, the study assesses whether participation in a first-year experience program at a community college campus was significantly associated with increases in students’ persistence, achievement, and completion, particularly among Native Hawaiians. Applying Astin’s (1993) input-environment-outcome model and leveraging archival data of 1,106 first-time, classified undergraduates from Fall 2014 to Fall 2016, bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted on the entire eligible campus population, as well as a subset of Native Hawaiian students only. Logistic regression analyses were conducted for six models of binomial persistence and completion outcome variables, while general linear regression analyses were conducted for two models of continuous academic achievement outcome variables. Findings indicate participation in first-year programs significantly increased persistence in finishing the first-year of college—among all students, as well as among Native Hawaiian students specifically—compared to their non-participant peers. For all other persistence, achievement, and completion measures, the models indicated no statistically significant differences between first-year program participants and non-participants. Of note, the regression models revealed that cumulative college credits earned and most recent grade point averages were highly significant in all achievement and completion variables. This study begins to bridge a gap in the research on Native Hawaiian first-year college students and contributes to research on understanding the relationship between student characteristics, university programs, and student success.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Factors affecting native Hawaiian student persistence in higher education

PDF

Persistence interventions for Native Hawaiian students

PDF

Examining the relationship between Latinx community college STEM students’ self-efficacy, social capital, academic engagement and their academic success

PDF

And still we rise: examining the strengths of first-generation college students

PDF

Developing a sense of belonging and persistence through mentoring for first-generation students

PDF

The impact of college success program on first generation college students in their preparation for college

PDF

Transfer first-generation college students: the role of academic advisors in degree completion

PDF

Native Hawaiians and college success: Does culture matter?

PDF

The impact of dual enrollment programs on first-year college success for Hispanic students from low-socioeconomic-status communities: a promising practice

PDF

Ma ka hana ka ike perpetuating excellence in Native Hawaiian education: Native Hawaiian Education Council members' approaches to supporting the needs of Native Hawaiians

PDF

Impact of culturally responsive education on college choice

PDF

The relationship of a culturally relevant and responsive learning environment to achievement motivation for Native Hawaiian secondary students

PDF

First-generation college students: perceptions, access, and participation at urban university

PDF

A pathway to persistence: perspectives of academic advising and first-generation undergraduate students

PDF

The impact of student-faculty interaction on undergraduate international students' academic outcome

PDF

The perception of innovation in the delivery of services for Hawaiian students

PDF

Student loan debt and the impacts on first-generation student success

PDF

The use of students funds of knowledge to increase college success among low-income and first-generation students

PDF

Raising cultural self-efficacy among faculty and staff of a private native Hawaiian school system

PDF

Model based view-invariant human action recognition and segmentation

Asset Metadata

Creator Kenolio, Ellen Lokelani (author)

Core Title Native Hawaiian student success in the first-year: the impact of college programs and practices

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 02/20/2019

Defense Date 01/11/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag college practices,college programs,first-year,minority students,Native Hawaiian,OAI-PMH Harvest,student success

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair)

Creator Email elkenolio@gmail.com,kenolio@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-124902

Unique identifier UC11675697

Identifier etd-KenolioEll-7095.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-124902 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-KenolioEll-7095.pdf

Dmrecord 124902

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Kenolio, Ellen Lokelani

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA