University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A study of the perceptions of factors that enhanced and impeded progress towards the completion of the doctoral degree in education for Hispanic students employed in public school systems

(USC Thesis Other)

A study of the perceptions of factors that enhanced and impeded progress towards the completion of the doctoral degree in education for Hispanic students employed in public school systems

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be
from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced
form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to
order.
UMI
A Bell & Howell Information Company
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
A STUDY OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS THAT ENHANCED AND
IMPEDED PROGRESS TOWARDS THE COMPLETION OF THE
DOCTORAL DEGREE IN EDUCATION FOR HISPANIC
STUDENTS EMPLOYED IN PUBLIC
SCHOOL SYSTEMS
by
Mary Catherine McCabe-Martinez
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
May 1996
Copyright 1996 Mary Catherine McCabe-Martinez
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 9636729
Copyright 1996 by
McCabe-Martinez, Mary Catherine
All rights reserved.
UMI Microform 9636729
Copyright 1996, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized
copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90007
This dissertation, written by
Mary Catherine McCabe-Martinez
under the direction of .... Dissertation
Committee, and approved by all its members,
has been presented to and accepted by The
Graduate School, in partial fulfillm ent of re
quirements for the degree of
D O C TO R O F P H IL O S O P H Y
Dean o f Graduate Studies
D a t e 19.2. 6,
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
\ ■ ,
Chairperson
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
A STUDY OF THE PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORS THAT ENHANCED AND
IMPEDED PROGRESS TOWARDS THE COMPLETION OF THE
DOCTORAL DEGREE IN EDUCATION FOR HISPANIC
STUDENTS EMPLOYED IN PUBLIC
SCHOOL SYSTEMS
This study examined the perceptions of Hispanic
doctoral degree recipients, doctoral candidates, and
doctoral students employed in public school systems, in
Southern California, regarding the factors that enhanced
and impeded their progress towards the completion of a
doctoral degree in education.
Many studies have looked at the factors that affect
attrition and retention, however, few studies have examined
these factors as they relate to the Hispanic doctoral
student, even though Hispanics are increasingly the largest
ethnic population in the Southwest (U.S. Bureau of Census,
1992) . This study addressed this oversight.
Both survey and interview methods were utilized.
Fifty-five surveys were completed for this study, and
follow-up interviews were conducted with 10 of the survey
respondents.
The survey findings were reported in frequency
distributions, crosstabulations, and the results of a 1
test for the variable complete. Factors that enhanced,
impeded and did not affect Hispanic doctoral students'
progress towards completion of the degree were identified.
The respondents also suggested policy modifications that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
would further increase the completion rate for Hispanic
students.
It was found that financial resources,
responsibilities to spouse, and employment were
significantly different for those who had completed the
degree. In addition, interviews identified job
responsibilities as the most significant factor that had
affected degree progress and completion.
The factors that were identified as enhancing or
impeding progress for Hispanic students were not
significantly bound by cultural implications and resemble
the findings in earlier research studies. However, this
study found that employment as related more to promotional
opportunities, rather than to the percentage of time
employed, was significant for Hispanic students. This
study also reported recommendations for policy
modifications that: (a) university personnel show greater
respect for students' culture, and (b) school district
administrators recognize and respect the additional time
and effort required by doctoral candidates to complete
their degrees.
with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ii
Acknowledgments
The completion of this dissertation would not have
been possible without the support of my parents, John and
Martha, who always pushed me to exceed my expectations, my
children, Patrick, Jessica, Vanessa, and Erik, who with
patience endured many times without me during this process,
and my husband, Jorge, who inspired me and made me believe
in myself.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
iii
Table of Contents
Page
Chapter 1 Introduction
Background of the Problem ......................... 1
Attrition in Doctoral Programs.................. 1
Attrition in the Field of Education............. 3
Attrition and the Hispanic Student.............. 3
Statement of the Problem........................ 6
Purpose of the Study............................. 7
Importance of the Study.......................... 7
Major Questions To Be Answered.................. 10
Definition of Terms.............................. 12
Attrition ...................................... 12
Doctorate ...................................... 12
Doctoral Candidate or A.B.D................... 12
Hispanic ....................................... 12
Persistence ................................... 13
Population of Interest and Sample .............. 13
Delimitations ................................... 14
Limitations ...................................... 14
Assumptions ...................................... 15
Organization of the Remainder
of the Study .................................. 15
Chapter 2 Review of the Relevant Literature
Introduction ....................................... 17
Academic Achievement and the Hispanic
Student Population .............................. 18
Attrition and Retention in Doctoral Programs .... 22
Factors Associated with Attrition and Retention... 23
Personal Characteristics ........................ 23
Support ................................. 23
Financial Resources ........................... 28
Employment ..................................... 29
Previous Academic Achievement ................ 30
Extracurricular Activities ................... 32
Cultural Identity ............................. 32
Motivation ..................................... 33
Personal Responsibilities .................... 35
Marital Status ................................ 36
Age ............................................ 36
Gender ......................................... 37
Ability ........................................ 39
Self-concept .................................. 41
Institutional Factors ......................... 42
Faculty/Student Relationships ................ 44
Utilization of Support Services .............. 48
Accommodation to Role of Graduate Student .... 48
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
iv
Page
Dissertation .................................. 51
Characteristics of the Institution ........... 52
Composition of the Faculty ................... 52
Institutional Commitment to the Student ..... 52
Availability of Support Services ............. 53
Summary .......................................... 54
Chapter 3 Methodology
Introduction ...................................... 56
Research Techniques ............................... 57
Population of Interest ............................ 58
Variables and Measurements ........................ 59
Instrumentation ................................... 61
Interview Process ................................. 61
Procedures ......................................... 62
Treatment of the Data ............................. 63
Summary of the Chapter ............................ 64
Chapter 4 Report of the Findings .................... 66
Introduction ...................................... 66
Background Information .......................... 69
Results of the Survey Instrument ................. 72
Characteristics of the Sample Population ...... 72
Personal Factors ................................ 91
Institutional Factors ........................... 110
Comparison of Subgroups ......................... 126
Crosstabulations of Personal Factors ........ 129
Crosstabulations of Institutional Factors .... 138
Crosstabulations of Demographic Variables .... 145
Open-ended Questions ............................ 174
JL Test for Independent Samples for
the Variable Complete ......................... 185
Interview Component ............................... 189
Background Information on Interview
Respondents ................................... 193
Summary ............................................ 211
Chapter 5 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
Summary ............................................ 219
Summary of the Results of the Survey
Instrument........................................ 221
Background Information of Respondents ....... 221
The Findings of the Survey Instrument ............ 224
Selected Factors that Were Perceived
to Enhance Progress ........................... 224
Selected Factors that Were Perceived
to Impede Progress ............................ 225
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
V
Page
Selected Factors that Were Perceived
to Not Affect Progress .................... . .. 226
Findings of the Perceptions of Those
Who Had Completed the Degree for
Selected Factors .............................. 227
Findings of the Perceptions of Those
Who Had Not Completed the Degree
For Selected Factors .......................... 229
Summary of the Results of the Interview.......... 231
Background on Respondents to the Interview 232
Results of the Interviews ....................... 232
Financial Resources ............................. 233
Responsibilities to Spouse ...................... 233
Employment . . . 234
Single Greatest Factor Influencing
Time to Obtain the Degree .................... 236
Suggestions for Policy Development ............... 236
Conclusions ........................................ 237
Conclusions Regarding the Factors Suggested
in the Review of the Literature to Affect
Progress for Doctoral Students ................. 238
Personal Factors ................................ 238
Support ........................................ 238
Financial Resources ........................... 239
Employment .................................... 240
Previous Academic Achievement ................ 241
Extracurricular Activities ................... 242
Cultural Identity ............................. 243
Motivation .................................... 244
Personal Responsibilities .................... 245
Marital Status ................................ 246
Age ............................................ 247
Gender ......................................... 248
Ability ........................................ 249
Self-concept .................................. 250
Institutional Factors ........................... 251
Accommodation to the Role of
Graduate Student ............................ 251
Faculty/Student Relationships ................ 251
Utilization of Support Services .............. 252
Dissertation .................................. 253
Characteristics of the Institution ........... 255
Presence of Hispanic Family .................. 255
Institutional Commitment to the Student ..... 256
Recommendations ................................... 257
Further Research ................................ 257
Recommendations for Policy Development ........ 258
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vi
Page
References ............................................. 263
Appendices ............................................. 276
A. Survey .......................................... 277
B. Correspondence ................................. 281
C. Interview Guide ................................ 284
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1. Research Studies on Dq
and Degree Progress
2. Cultural Heritage ...
3. Current Professional P
4. Year Qualifying Exams \
5. Year That Degrees Were,
6. Entrance Age for Each j
7. Completed Age ......
8. Grade Point Average
9. Type of Institution
10. Mothers' Occupation
11. Fathers' Occupation
12. Mothers' Highest Level-
13. Fathers' Highest Level
14. Did Parents Emphasize
15. Support From the Fami^
16. Support from Employer
17. Support From Signifies
18. Financial Resources
19. Employment .........
20. Promotions/Career Adva
21. Previous Academic Achi,
22. Sense of Cultural Iden
23. Participation in Commu
24. Economic Investment in!
25. Motivation to Succeed
26. Responsibility to Chil
27. Responsibility to Care
28. Responsibilities to Sp
29. Age During Pursuit of
30. Gender ...............
31. Ability ..............
32. Self-Concept ........
33. Faculty-Student Relati*
34. Availability of Suppor
35. Utilization of Univers
36. Choice of Committee Ch'
37. Changes in Committee .
38. Choice of Dissertation
39. Academic Preparation f
40. Choice of Institution
41. Cultural Setting of th'
42. Presence of Hispanic F
43. University Commitment 1
44. Enhancing Factors ....
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
viii
Table Page
45. Impending Factors ............................. 127
46. Results of the Comparison of the Two
Subgroups for Each of the Personal
Factors From the Survey .................... 130
47. Results of the Comparison of the Two
Subgroups for Each of the Institutional
Factors From the Study ..................... 140
48. Comparison of the Gender of the
Respondents by the Variable Complete ...... 146
49. Comparison of the Number of Children of
the Respondents by the Variable Complete ... 148
50. Comparison Between the Variable Cultural
Heritage and the Variable Completed ........ 148
51. Comparison Between the Variable Doctoral
Degree Objective and the Variable
Completed ................................... 150
52. Comparison Between the Variable Class
Attendance and the Variable Completed..... 150
53. Comparison Between the Variable Professional
Position and the Variable Completed ....... 151
54. Average of the Year that Qualifying
Exams Were Passed ........................... 155
55. The Average Year That Each Degree Was
Conferred as Compared by the
Variable Completed .......................... 157
56. Age at Entrance and Completion of
Degree Programs ............................. 159
57. Average GPA During Degree Programs as
Compared to the Variable Completed ......... 163
58. Type of Institution Attended for Degree
Program as Compared to the
Variable Completed .......................... 165
59. Employment Status of the Respondents as
Compared to the Variable Completed......... 167
60. Mothers' Occupation Compared with the
Variable Completed .......................... 169
61. Fathers' Occupation Compared with the
Variable Complete .......................... 171
62. The Most Significant Factors Perceived
to Enhance Progress Towards Completion
to the Degree as Reported in
Open-ended Format ........................... 175
63. The Most Significant Factors Perceived
to Impede Progress Towards Completion
of the Degree as Reported in
Open-ended Format ........................... 180
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ix
Table Page
64. The Results of a t Test Between the
Means of Personal Factors as Compared
to the Variables Completed................. 186
65. The Results of a i Test Between the
Means of Institutional Factors as
Compared to the Variable Completed......... 198
66. Suggestions for Policy Implementation
at the University Level .................... 190
67. Results of Interview Question #1:
How Did Financial Resources Affect
Your Progress Towards the Degree? .......... 195
68. Results of Interview Question #2:
How Did Responsibilities to Spouse
Affect Your Progress Towards the Degree 197
69. Results of Interview Question #3: How
Did Employment Affect Your Progress
Towards the Degree? ......................... 199
70. Results of Interview Question #4: What
Do You Think Was the Single Greatest
Factor Influencing the Time it Took
to Obtain Your Degree? ..................... 202
71. Results of Interview Question #5: What
Kind of Additional Pressures, If Any,
Did You Feel in Regards to Completing
Your Doctoral Work, Especially the
Dissertation, and Where Did These
Pressures Originate? ........................ 205
73. Summary of the Factors as Reported to
Have Affected Progress Towards the
Completion of the Doctoral Degree for
All Respondents ............................. 214
74. Perception by Those Who Had Completed
the Degree of Factors that Affected
Progress Towards the Completed ............. 215
75. Perception of Factors by Those Who Had
Not Completed the Degree ................... 217
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
This study exa
doctoral degree rec
doctoral students i'
factors that enhance
the completion of a
Although many
affect attrition anc
& Benkin, 1987; Beni
1961; Centra, 1974; ,
Gottlieb, & Pease, jf
few studies have ex«/
the Hispanic doctord
increasingly the la;
(U.S. Bureau of Cenjj
oversight. J
Attrition in Doctoral
The problem of J
received national at|
grow over the future
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
university positions (Berger, 1989). Graduate schools must
evaluate their programs and encourage more students to seek
and complete the doctorate (D'Arms, 1990).
The rate of attrition in doctoral programs
historically has been reported at various percentages: 40%
(Berelson, 1960), 50% (Carmichael, 1961), and 38% (Tucker
et al., 1964). There is little evidence to show that these
figures, whether higher or lower, have changed in recent
decades. Many researchers have attempted to understand the
factors associated with attrition in doctoral programs yet
no definitive answers have been found (Berelson, 1960;
Carmichael, 1961; Mooney, 1968; Reeble, 1975; Renetzky,
1966; Schultz, 1983; Tucker at al., 1964; Wood, 1978).
Although the problem of attrition has long been
recognized, there is little research available to better
understand this phenomenon. Hartnett and Katz (1977)
suggest that due to the emphasis on research at the
graduate level, little thought or attention has been given
to the graduate students and their progression through the
doctoral program. The quantity of research available on
doctoral students pales by comparison to the amount of
research available on the learner in elementary and
secondary educational programs.
The effects of attrition are of great consequence to
both the individual and society. The failure to complete
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
the dissertation is a personal loss, a loss for the
educational institution and a loss for society: Attrition
results in a waste of time, energy, and economic resources.
Moreover, attrition affects all members of society through
the loss of potential tax revenue and expertise (Levin,
1972), as well as the serious financial strains placed upon
institutions, as attrition undermines a continuing source
of revenue from students (Tinto, 1982) .
Attrition in the Field of Education
The field of education has historically produced a
higher number of doctorates than other fields. Even though
education produces the highest number of earned doctorates
yearly, the absolute number has declined over the last
decade. In 1980, there were 7,586 earned doctorates in
education (Carter & Wilson, 1992). By 1991, there were
only 6,397 doctorates awarded nationally in education.
This represents a 16.7% decline over the 11 year period
(Camara, 1992).
It is unclear whether this decline has resulted from
fewer students entering doctoral programs in education
during the last decade or an increase in attrition.
Attrition and the Hispanic Student
There is little research on actual levels of attrition
for the Hispanic doctoral student. The available
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
statistics only report the number of earne
degrees for Hispanic students.
Of the 7,586 doctorates awarded in edl
2.4% went to Hispanics (Carter & Wilson, 1
there were 6,397 doctorates nationally wit;
Southern California awarded to Hispanics ( i
Despite the increase in the number of earn*
Hispanics in the last decade, the percenta*
cantly low when compared to the size of tht’
population in our society. Hispanics make
10% of the total U.S. population as reports
1991 (Strategy Research Corporation, 1991) .
There has been limited research on th«
Hispanic students at the secondary and post
levels. Some of the factors that studies r .
with the persistence of the Hispanic studer
and postsecondary problems include: Family
1975); socioeconomic level (Astin, 1982; Du
Lopez, 1990); financial assistance (Lopez,
Destinon, 1989); self-confidence (von Desti
motivation/commitment (von Destinon, 1989);
English language background (Cumminings, 19
others, 1981); self-confidence (Gutierrez,
1977; Rist, 1970); student aspiration (Asti
1990; von Destinon, 1989); faculty-student
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
interaction and support (Astin, 1982; Hamaker, 1986; von
Destinon, 1989); faculty role models (Payan and others,
1982); attendance at integrated schools (Coleman and
others, 1966) . The results of the limited number of
studies on Hispanics in graduate programs studies reflect
the factors related to attrition at the secondary and
undergraduate levels.
Valentine (1987) concluded that the following factors
were associated with attrition of doctoral students:
Proximity to the university during coursework; decided on
major field during undergraduate study; commitment to
career; financial subsistence level; source of financial
subsidy; relationship with faculty, graduate students,
committee members; perception of coursework quality;
orientation to academic expectations and support services;
difficulty with the dissertation; and perceived value of
the degree.
Clewell (1987) reports that Hispanic persisters in
doctoral programs had similar characteristics that
included: Achievement at the high school level; support
from major advisers; participation in professional
activities; pursuit of the degree due to a desire for
knowledge; dislike of failure.
Through the study of the factors that affect those who
have not completed the degree, or who have failed to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
complete the degree, can be suggested. In or
a comprehensive answer to the factors that in
enhance the completion of progress toward the
degree, both those who have completed the dec
who have not completed the degree will be sti,
Statement of the Problem
Attrition has contributed to a lack of 1
educated, credentialed, Hispanic scholars to
leadership roles in the educational systems a
institutions of our society. The political a
implications of changing demographics have
1
need to increase the number of highly educate!
leaders to assume policy making positions. T
of the Hispanic leader's perspective on quali
for minority children and their provision as
benefits Hispanic youth as well as all member
To attain a leadership role that facilit
making, the doctorate is often a prerequisite
others (1987) found that the doctorate had a j
effect on career patterns, and that in educat.
was perceived as a "career advancement credenl
115) . Research has shown that minority group:
levels of education (Cortes and others, 1989)
less likely to hold prestigious occupations (t
sion on Civil Rights, 1978). Calathes (1991)
r l l I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
that the higher education of minorities must re
moral issue of national proportion.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to identify fan
affect the completion of the doctoral degree for
doctoral candidates in education in order to pro
that will increase completion rates.
Importance of the Study
The importance of this study lies in the ne
increase the number of doctoral degrees in educa
by Hispanic students. By increasing the number
degrees awarded to Hispanic students, the elite '
individuals who have earned doctoral degrees in f
would then better represent the actual group of ,
whose majority ethnic population is Hispanic in
California who are being serviced by these docto
need has been created through recent demographic
that have affected the student composition of thel
elementary and secondary levels, as well as a ne^
university level to employ more minority faculty
reflect a diverse society.
According to new data from the U.S. Bureau c
Census (1992), Hispanics are the fastest growing
in the United States as reported by Commerce Seer
Brown (as cited in Whitefield, October 19, 1995)
P
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
there are 27 million Hispanics in the total U.S.
population, which means that approximately one in every 10
Americans are Hispanic. Commerce Secretary Brown also
reports that the rapid growth of this population has to
have an impact on the policy of our nation (as cited in
Whitefield, October 19, 1995).
The specific characteristics of this population have
significant implications for future policy. The average
birth rate for Hispanics is well above the average for non-
Hispanics; 23.9% of the total Hispanic population is under
11 years of age; the median age of the Hispanic population
is 24.0; only 9.4% of the total Hispanic population has
attended college and 69% of the total Hispanic population
has attended some junior or senior high school (Strategy
Research Corporation, 1991).
As the demographic figures indicate, the Hispanic
population is a rapidly growing entity in American society
that warrants representation at the federal, state and
local levels. The participation of Hispanics in the
decision making process, administration and review of
educational programs will positively influence educational
reform for Hispanic youth (De Baca, 1975).
In future years, the shortage of highly educated
Hispanics will affect the quality of education for inner-
city students. Camara in the Chronicle of Higher Education
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
(1992) points out that by the year 2000, the majority of
public schools in the United States will have student
populations that are racially and culturally diverse.
There is a need to provide models of educational leadership
to represent and be sensitive to the concerns of these
students, von Destinon (1989) reports that contact with
Hispanics in positions of respect, as instructors or
student service workers, impacted the motivation and
persistence of Hispanic university students.
The Hispanic leader with a different perspective
toward quality education and a level of sensitivity toward
the minority student will serve as a role model and
advocate for the needs of the Hispanic pupil. Grossman
(1984) concludes that "the American educational system was
not developed for Hispanic students, and with few excep
tions, it is not staffed . . . by Hispanic professionals"
(p. 7) . "Hispanic professionals are more aware of the
effects of living in two cultures and prejudice on the
lives of Hispanics than are non-Hispanics" (p. 209) .
The future also indicates a specific need for an
increase in the number of minority professors; however,
"... with so few minority students seeking doctoral
degrees, many institutions are worried about how they will
achieve their ambitious goals of hiring more minority
professors (Magner, 1989, p. A22). Magner (1989) also
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
reports that many minority graduate s'
mission to serve as a role model for < <
the completion of their doctorates am’
i
of academe. Calathes (1991) states t
. . . the most unusual solution
commitment to increase the numbe
and administrators in the school
The effect of this would be to m,
relevant to all students. The v,
is inseparable from its diversit]
staff and integrated education b«
students for a multiracial and mi
community. Moreover, the presem
and administrators allows studeni
of educational attainment, and m;
be more easily encouraged to purs
(pp. 148-149)
The review of the literature indij
of research on minority doctoral stud^
studies on Hispanics. This limited an
research on the factors related to the
Hispanic students in doctoral programs,
significance of this study in order tc.
propose policies that will increase tt
Major.Questions To Be Answered
la. What are the perceptions of
completed the doctorate regarding the
enhanced their progression through the
lb. What are the perceptions of
had not completed the doctorate regard.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
factors that enhanced theL
doctoral program? I
2a. What are the pe
completed the doctorate r
impeded their progression
2b. What are the pe
had not completed the doc
factors that impeded thei
program?
3a. What are the pe
completed the doctorate r*
that enhanced their progre
program?
3b. What are the pe-
had not completed the doct
factors that enhanced thej
doctoral program?
4a. What are the pet
completed the doctorate ra
that impeded their progres
program?
4b. What are the pei
had not completed the doct
factors that impeded their
program?
i
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
02020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020202020253020202020202
12
5. What are the perceptions of Hispanic students, who
had completed their doctorate and who had not completed
their doctorate, regarding reforms to university policy
that can be proposed to encourage the completion of the
degree for Hispanic students.
6. What suggestions can be made to institutions to
increase the number of Hispanic candidates who successfully
complete the doctoral degree in education?
Definition,of Terms
Attrition. This term refers to the process of
dropping out of the doctoral program before the completion
of the degree.
Doctorate. This term refers to either the Doctor of
Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree with a major in Education or the
Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) degree.
Doctoral Candidate or A.B.D. This term refers to the
doctoral student who has successfully completed all course
work and has passed the qualifying examinations and was
advanced to candidacy to complete the dissertation phase of
the doctoral program and remains all but dissertation,
hence A.B.D.
Hispanic. This term first appeared in the U.S. Census
forms in 1975, "a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban,
Central or South American or Spanish cultures or origins"
(Gann & Duignan, 1986, p. 260) . The term Hispanic is used
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
in this study to al
vocabulary.
Persistence,
in the doctoral pro
degree.
Eopulation .of Inter
The population
of Hispanic doctora
degree recipients i
Hispanic doctoral d
didates, and doctor
systems in Southern
This specific
this study due to t
California which is
Research Corporatio
researcher that due
population, that the,
degree recipients, <
candidates, in this
which would provide
this study, and whic
study to be general x|
populations in Other-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
D.elimit at ions
1. This study was delimited to Hispanic doctoral
students, doctoral candidates, and degree recipients who
enrolled in doctoral programs in education in Southern
California.
2. This study was delimited to doctoral students,
doctoral candidates, and degree recipients who were
employed in the public school systems in Southern
California.
3. This study was delimited to doctoral students,
doctoral candidates, and degree recipients in Southern
California who were identified for the purposes of this
study by their district or county superintendent.
Limitations
1. This study was limited to the information received
from .07% of the surveys that were mailed to 260 super
intendents of public school systems and county offices of
education in Southern California.
2. This study was limited to doctoral students,
doctoral candidates, and degree recipients in education who
were employed by public school systems in Southern
California.
3. This study was limited to a disproportionate
number of Hispanic degree recipients (63.6%) than doctoral
students and doctoral candidates.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
4. This study was limited to a disproportionate
number of Hispanic students whose self-identified, culture
of origin was Mexican or Mexican-American.
Assumptions
The following assumptions underlay this study:
1. The perceptions of the respondents in this study
were factors that actually contributed to the completion or
failure to complete their doctoral degrees.
2. It is important for society and the Hispanic
population that the number of doctoral degrees awarded to
Hispanics increase, in order to provide Hispanic scholars
as role models, policy makers and faculty within the
educational systems.
Organization of the Remainder
of the. Study
The remainder of this study is divided into four
chapters. Chapter 2 surveys and reports on the available
research related to factors involved in the attrition and
retention in doctoral programs.
Chapter 3 provides a detailed description of the
methodology that was used to gather, analyze, and report
data for this study, as well as difficulties that were
encountered during the field testing of the survey
instrument.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
Chapter 4 presents the findings, analysis and
discussion of the data. Finally, Chapter 5 presents a
summary, conclusions, recommendations for policy and
identification of the areas in need of further research.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
17
CHAPTER 2
Review of the Relevant Literature
Introduction
This study identified factors that were perceived by
doctoral students, doctoral candidates and degree recipients
of Hispanic origin to enhance or impede their progress
towards the completion of the doctoral degree in education.
This chapter provides a review of literature on the academic
achievement of the Hispanic student at all educational
levels, in order to better understand attrition, the act of
dropping out of an educational program before completion, and
retention, the act of remaining in a program until comple
tion. The factors examined in this study are discussed in a
detailed review of the literature that integrates those
factors suggested to be associated with the retention and
attrition of all students in doctoral programs with those
factors suggested to be unique to the Hispanic student
population. The chapter concludes with a summary of the
factors that are examined in this study as being associated
with attrition and retention of the Hispanic doctoral
student.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
Academic Achievement and the Hispanic
Student Population
Carter and Wilson (1992) report that the educational
attainment of Hispanics is far below that of the general
population at all educational levels. In 1990, the high
school completion rate for the Hispanic ages 18-24 was 55.3%,
while Anglos had a completion rate of 83.8%. During the
years 1986 to 1990, the college going rates of Hispanic high
school graduates remained disproportionately low, while
higher percentages of Anglo-American high school graduates
enrolled in college.
During the years 1986 to 1990, the gap widened between
Anglo and Hispanic student populations who attended college.
For example, in 1988, the Anglo high school population had a
graduation rate of 71% with approximately 43% of these
graduates who enrolled in college. For the Hispanic student
population, there was a high school graduation rate of 48%,
but only approximately 27% of these graduates ever enrolled
in college.
Between the years 1980-1990, only 15% of all Hispanic
youth, ages 18-24, ever enrolled in college (Carter & Wilson,
1992). The Census Bureau update on the 1990 statistics (as
cited in Whitefield, 1995) report that "in 1994, 53% of the
Hispanics in the United States had attained high school
degrees or higher, while 83% of non-Hispanics had achieved
high school degrees or higher" (p. 10).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
Carter and Wilson (1992) report a significant drop in
the percentage of Hispanics who enrolled in college during
the years 1985 and 1990. Between 1976 and 1988, the pro
portion of low-income Hispanic high school graduates, within
the 18-24 age group, who enrolled in college fell by 15%
points, from 50.4% to 35.3%. This decline was influenced by
the drop in college participation of Hispanic males. Carter
and Wilson (1992) refer to this decline as "an educational
failure rate of intolerable magnitude" (p. 12), due to the
substantially lower number of Hispanic male students who
enrolled in college.
In the field of education, Carter and Wilson (1992)
report an increase of 3.1% in the number of bachelor's
degrees awarded between 1990 and 1991; however, this does not
offset the 19% decrease that occurred between 1976 and 1989.
The number of doctorates in education that were awarded to
Hispanics between 1980 and 1990 increased by 9.8%. However,
it is important to remember that this percentage increase
only reflects a total of 18 degrees nationwide. In 1990,
there were 201 doctoral degrees in education awarded to
Hispanics, while Anglos received 4,922 doctoral degrees.
In order to understand the low number of Hispanics that
enroll at all levels of academic programs in the university,
the literature reports that Hispanics are less likely to
graduate from high school, to successfully complete college
and to receive degrees and pursue graduate training.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Hispanic females continued to complete high ;
in college at a higher rate than males. Dura
that Hispanics tend to enroll in the communit
and low-prestige colleges versus the higher i
sities. This enrollment trend would suggest
students do not graduate from high school witi
preparation to enroll in these high prestige
this trend may suggest that these high prestJ
may not service nor understand the Hispanic £ 1
tion.
The research suggests that some of the 3
associated with college success for the Angle
population are not predictive for the Hispani
(excluding foreign students). High school gi
admission test scores (Calkins & Whitworth, 1
1983; Goldman & Hewitt, 1975; Goldman & Richa
the influence of peers (Astin, 1982) were not
college persistence until completion for the
as compared to the Anglo-American student.
Duran (1983), in a discussion of college
the Hispanic population, reported that the as
between high school grades and college grades
association between verbal and quantitative t
college grades, were not as good predictors tj
student population as for the non-Hispanic stu
populations.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
21
Sedlacek and Webster (1978) have suggested noncognitive
predictors of minority students' persistence include:
Positive self-image, an understanding of racism, realistic
self appraisal, ability to formulate long-range goals, avail
ability of a support person, leadership experience, and
community service.
In addition to the factors identified in the literature
to be associated with persistence in educational programs for
all students, the research suggests that there may be other
factors that influence retention for Hispanic students at all
educational levels. A full understanding of retention and
attrition at the doctoral level is dependent on the factors
that affected previous educational experiences. For the
purposes of this study, the factors that are suggested by the
research to influence the achievement of the Hispanic student
at the elementary, secondary, and undergraduate levels are
examined, as well as those factors suggested by the research
to affect attrition and retention of all students at the
doctoral level.
Clewell (1987) contended that the nature of the graduate
school was perhaps responsible for the limited body of
research on minorities in graduate school and for the lack of
specific and consistent policies for minority students. This
study attempted to add this body of research and to identify
policies that will increase the completion rate for the
Hispanic doctoral student in education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
Attrition and-Retention in-D.octoral. EcQgrama
Attrition in doctoral programs has been recognized as a
major problem that wastes human and institutional resources
(Berelson, 1960; Taylor, 1959; Tinto, 1982; Wright, 1972).
The review of the literature revealed a limited number of
studies that examined factors affecting the completion of a
doctoral degree. Much of the research was conducted in the
1950s and 1960s, although there has been a resurgence in
recent years.
Even though the significance of attrition at the
doctoral level is acute, only a limited number of studies
have attempted to examine this phenomenon. Even fewer of the
studies have specifically looked at the doctoral program in
education.
Education has historically produced more earned
doctorates than other fields; however, it also has produced
higher levels of attrition. A three decade trend in
education indicates a decline in the number of Ph.D. and
Ed.D. degrees awarded (U.S. Department of Education, Center
for Education Statistics, 1987). in 1969, Sproull reported
that attrition in the field of education was more acute than
in the arts and sciences. Since that decade, the number of
degrees awarded in education, has decreased from 7,586
degrees in 1980 to a low of 6,485 degrees awarded in 1990
(Carter & Wilson, 1992, p. 61). The impact of this decline
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Personal
1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 1
Research Studies on Doctoral Students and Degree. Proor*
Author Year Research Study
Benkin 1984 This study looked at 1,265 doctore
students at UCLA who entered in tl
of 1969, 1970, 1971, and who had €
finished or failed to finish by Sp
1981.
Berelson 1960
Bundy 1968
In a large, multi-institutional st
this study sampled deans, faculty
members, degree recipients, presic
liberal arts colleges and teachers
colleges, and industrial firms emp
technical and professional personr
Respondents were asked to list the
important reasons for attrition at
doctoral level. Student responden
included recent degree recipients,
recipients were not surveyed.
This study looked at selected fact
the time of admission in order to
success in the doctoral program ir
education at the University of Sou
California.
Civian 1990 This study used survival analysis
examine the estimated time to obta
degree and the factors associated
completion of the degree at the Ha
University Graduate School of Educ
(HGSE). It sampled 625 full time
students who entered HGSE between
1982 and Fall 1988.
Clewell 1987 Studied factors influencing persis
and nonpersistence of Black and Hi
doctoral students at the graduate
level. Institutional practices th
affect minority participation in g
education were examined.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 1 (Continued)
Author Year Research St
Cronbach 1949
Cunningham 1970
Feick 1969
Franklin 1970
Friedenberg
and Roth 1954
Hobish 1979
Jacks and
Others 1983
Reeble 1975
Looked at problem sol'
related to progress o:
The intellectual prob
the failure to comple^
were considered.
Examined the doctoral
education at the Univ
during the years 1960
Surveyed graduate stu<
received their doctor;
had terminated their
years 1960 and 1965.
Studied attrition in ]
in the Department of i
Supervision at Arizona^
Both successful candic~‘
who had been classifit
the pursuit of the dec
Looked at success andj
relationship instead d
Their study at the Una
focused on students’ p
themselves and the un^
purpose of the study >
certain characteristic
one’s self to graduate
study and the influenq
institution.
Examined the psycholoc
attrition in the doct
I
Examined factors assoc
termination of the pro
candidates in Ph.D. pr
sciences and social sq
Conducted research in
intellectual ability a
Missouri at Columbia.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
Table 1 (Continued)
Author Year Research Study
Renetzky 1966 Studied graduate students in the School
of Education at the University of
Southern California. This study used
both survey and interview methods for
students who were successful in
completing the doctoral program and also
those students who failed to meet the
time requirement for the degree.
Robertson 1971 Found that failure to develop a
complementary program between the course-
work and the dissertation topic may
contribute to attrition.
Rosenhaupt 1958
Schultz 1983
Sproull 1969
Tucker and
Others 1964
Valentine 1987
Studied factors that affect progress
toward the degree at Columbia University.
Studied the A.B.D. doctoral student in
the off-campus centers of the University
of Southern California.
Studied the question of duration of
doctoral study and the A.B.D. phenomenon.
Conducted the first nationwide study of
attrition in doctoral programs in which
7,747 graduate students were surveyed at
24 universities. This study looked at
graduate students in the arts and
sciences who had enrolled during the time
period 1950-1953.
Surveyed students in the doctoral program
of education at West Virginia University.
Respondents included 215 doctoral
recipients who had received degrees
between August 1977 and august 1984 and
also 184 non-recipients who had not
enrolled since 1983.
Weil 1990 Examined the factors that facilitated or
impeded the registered time to obtain the
degree for 28 doctoral students in
Biology and Literature at the University
of California, San Diego.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
Table 1 (Continued)
Author Year Research Study
Wilson 1965 Surveyed graduates who had received their
doctoral degree between 1950 and 1958,
graduate deans and faculty members from
23 southern institutions.
Wood 1978 Studied degree recipients and non
recipients in the doctoral program in the
College of Education at the University of
Toledo.
Wright 1964 Conducted longitudinal research on
success and failure in graduate school.
Interviews were conducted with 189 first
semester graduate students in 1951. The
researcher followed this sample through
their doctoral programs, allowing 11
years for completion.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
28
Gandara (1979) studied the factors related to the
professional and academic attainment of Hispanic Medical
Doctors, Doctors of Philosophy, and Juris Doctors. She
reported that the majority of successful Hispanic profes
sionals interviewed in a study recalled that their family
experiences included a stable, supportive home environment,
where parents supported educational endeavors by providing
stimulating reading materials for their children, regardless
of the parents' level of education.
Clewell (1987) found that Hispanic doctoral degree
recipients reported an upbringing that reflected a family
headed by parents "who had high expectations of their
children's performance" (p. 15). Support from family and
peers has been identified as an important factor in
determining the completion of the doctoral degree or failure
to complete the degree for all student populations.
Financial Resources. The research has reported that a
lack of financial resources is a factor associated with the
attrition of students in doctoral programs (Berelson, 1960;
Renetzky, 1966; Valentine, 1987; Wilson, 1965; Wood, 1978);
perceived ability to meet current financial obligations
(Astin, 1975; Lenning et al., 1974); financial pressures
(Feick, 1969; Jacks et al., 1983); annual income during
doctoral study and the degree of financial assistance
(Franklin, 1970); receipt of financial support during the
degree program (Reeble, 1975; Valentine, 1987).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
In a study by Tucker, Got
included A.B.D.s and degree rd
that the most important persoij
complete the doctoral program
was found that attrition was ?
having insufficient financial
who received fellowships, schd-
tanceships, attrition was lowd
their income from non-academidJ
ships, attrition rates were hi
With regard to Hispanic s
that the lower the family incc
student's prospects in higher
difficulties have been cited i r
than Anglo students with refer
college (Duran, 1983). Garcia
Hispanic student, lack of fina,
of attrition at the undergradu
Employment. Employment h
attrition of students in doctci
researchers: Job responsibilil
1983) ; full-time employment wh
(Wilson, 1965); persisters wer
nonpersisters and spent more t
(Valentine, 1987).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
Wright (1964) found that successful students could be
characterized as spending less than 21 hours per week in non
university related employment. Wilson (1965) and Tuck and
Others (1964) found that employment as a teacher assistant,
which provided financial benefits, lengthened the time to
degree since it was time spent that did not contribute to the
student's individual research.
Benkin (1984) surveyed A.B.D.s who within a 10-12 year
period had not completed their degrees. Sixty-two percent of
the A.B.D.s reported an employment situation that required
most of their attention.
It is possible that if a student in education is
employed full time and is progressing professionally to the
level where the doctorate is a necessary credential, the
completion of the degree must take place in balance with the
professional development, tending to lengthen the time to
degree.
Previous Academic Achievement. Past academic
experiences have been reported by persisters more so than
nonpersisters as a key reason for pursuing graduate study
(Astin & Burciaga, 1982; Calkins & Whitworth, 1974; Clewell,
1987; Cross, 1974; Goldman & Hewitt, 1975) . The literature
suggests that the persisters' self-confidence in their own
academic ability may be an indicator of success in completion
of a doctoral program (Astin, 1982; Duncan, 1976; Jacks et
al., 1983).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Noboa-Rios (1981) found
recipients reported significa
in their academic ability,
previous achievement at the h |
indicator of persistence in
found that persisters more s
their past academic performari|
degree and master's degree, w
entry into the doctoral progr
literature that suggests that
their own academic ability ma
completion of a doctoral prog
Astin and Cross (1979) f
predictor for the undergradua
persistence was past academic
identified several variables i
graduate persistence for the J
to the baccalaureate program,
school grades; well-developed
esteem in terms of academic at
academic successes. Payan anc
academic self-concept and sel}
persistence for Hispanic unde
academic ability based on pre^*
to influence students at all
f 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 1 1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
Extracurricular Activities. Allen, Haddad, and Kirkland
(1984) reported that participation in professional activities
affects success in graduate school. This includes publishing
articles and presenting papers in the professional arena.
Clewell (1987) found that persisters reported participation
in extracurricular activities as early as the high school
level, as well as at the graduate level. Sedlacek and
Webster (1978) have suggested that noncognitive predictors of
minority students' persistence in undergraduate programs
include previous experience with leadership roles.
There has been little research that examined the impact
of professional development during the pursuit of a doctoral
degree, although this area may affect progress towards the
completion of the degree. This factor of professional
development, which includes participation in extracurricular
activities and professional organizations during doctoral
study, may affect success in graduate school. It is unclear
whether it will positively or negatively impact upon the
completion of the degree for Hispanic doctoral candidates.
Cultural Identity. Cultural identify is a factor that
has not previously been examined in regard to attrition and
retention at the doctoral level. Gandara (1979) found that
the successful Hispanic professional women in her study
reported: "... almost all of the subjects felt that their
ethnicity had been a factor in their academic success and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
most felt it had provided impetus for their high attainment"
(p. 110) .
Astin (1982) found that Hispanic respondents, in a study
of attrition of undergraduate students, reported a belief
that the greatest strength of the Hispanic youth, in American
society, was cultural identity, a strong sense of family, and
a feeling of community. Other studies that suggest positive
factors that deter attrition at the undergraduate and
secondary levels were: Identification with family, community
and ethnic group (Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974). Sedlacek and
Webster (1978) found that a predictor of minority students'
persistence in undergraduate programs included participation
in community service. A sense of cultural identity and a
commitment to their individual communities has been shown to
affect attrition for the minority student at undergraduate
levels. This factor may apply to the graduate student as
well.
Motivation. The attitudes, aspirations, and expecta
tions with which a student enters the university may vary for
different student populations, and may ultimately affect
student performance (Minatoya & Sedlacek, 1983). Motivation
to complete the degree has been identified in many different
studies of doctoral students as well as undergraduates and
secondary students.
Berelson (1960) reported that non-persisters lacked the
proper motivation to complete the degree. Tucker et al.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
34
(1964) found that the lack of motivation was reported as the
third most important attrition factor following lack of
financial resources and acquisition of a job that did not
require the degree. This study found that attrition was
lower among those who considered the doctorate an excellent
economic investment. Tucker at al. (1964) concluded that:
. . . it seems that ability without motivation is not
sufficient to complete the requirements for the Ph.D.
. . . it is unlikely that a student will be able to
generate a strong motivation after beginning a doctoral
program if he/she does not already have it by that time,
(p. 279)
Feick (1969) reported that general discouragement that
led to a lack of motivation was given more often by students
as the force behind attrition. Schultz (1983) found that
respondents said that a lack of motivation, defined as a
desire or need to complete the degree, was the reason given
as the primary obstacle to writing the dissertation. Jackson
(1985) reported significantly higher levels of motivation for
the persister versus the nonpersister in all areas,
especially the single, female persister.
Clewell (1987) found that persisters had desires to
leave the program before completion of the degree, yet a
"determination to succeed against all odds" (p. 23) helped
students to persist. Most respondents who were successful in
completing the doctoral degree in this study reported that
the sacrifices faced during the course of study were well
worth it, regardless of the strain the program imposed on
their lives. A strong desire to avoid failure, regardless of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
the obstacles, in order to complete the doctoral degree, and
the pursuance of a doctorate influenced by a love of learning
and a desire to acquire knowledge, were reported by
persisters (p. 19).
A lack of motivation produced by a career or employment
situation that does not require the doctorate has also been
documented to affect motivation and thereby attrition for
nonpersisters (Berelson, 1960; Renetzky, 1966; Tucker et al.,
1964).
Personal Responsibilities. Personal responsibilities
that demand attention and deter the student from completing
the degree within a reasonable amount of time have received
much attention in the research.
Tucker et al. (1964) found that the rate of attrition
was 47% for respondents who reported three or more children,
39% for those who reported two children, and 31% for those
who reported none or one child. However, Valentine (1987)
found that the number of dependent children was not a
significant factor in attrition and persistence of doctoral
students.
Feick (1969) found that nonpersisters in doctoral
programs reported more critical periods that involved family.
Schultz (1983) studied doctoral students in off-campus
programs and found that family responsibilities were reported
by respondents to affect the completion of the degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Wright (19 <
minimal pe:
Resea:
the attrit:
level. Mui
have a higl
students.
who may bal
Maritt
of doctoral
persistency
(1987) did
marital stal
that attrit^
start of th,
separated d
that marria
McLaughlin,
the degree
Age.
Columbia Un
factor in t
more likely
this succes
students ha<
1
1
1
t
S I
hm]
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
the high school and university undergraduate level due to
their superior intelligence.
Research has reported various dimensions of the effect
of age on persistence and completion of the doctoral degree.
Renetzky (1966) and Feick (1969) found that doctoral
candidates, who never completed the dissertation or the
doctoral degree, began their study for the doctoral degree at
a later age than those who did complete the degree. Other
research has reported that an increase in attrition
associated with age (Benkin, 1984; Bundy, 1968); and at the
undergraduate level, as well as, the older student shows
somewhat poorer rates of undergraduate persistence (Astin,
1975). Valentine (1987) found that the age of the student
when beginning or terminating the doctorate was not
significant factor in attrition.
The research does not offer conclusive evidence on
whether age is a factor in the completion of the doctoral
degree. Age may play a positive role in affecting attrition
in education, where the students may be somewhat older, such
as working professionals returning for the degree in order to
advance to higher career levels within their respective
systems. Further research is necessary to determine the role
of age and its influence on attrition and persistence.
Gender. Studies have shown that men and women may
differ in the rate of persistence in undergraduate as well as
doctoral programs (Bundy, 1968; Cross, 1974; Feldman, 1974;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
Pascarella & Terezini, 1979; Roby, 1973; Tinto, 1987; Wong &
Sanders, 1983) . Different explanations have been offered as
to why gender would affect the completion of the doctoral
degree. One explanation is that males tend to receive more
financial aid than females, which allows male students more
time to focus on the completion of the degree and less need
to pursue employment that takes away both focus, and time to
work on the requirements for the degree (Janes & Seeman,
1975; Wong & Sanders, 1983). In fields that tend to have a
longer time to degree, such as education, there is a higher
concentration of women; whereas, there are more males in the
sciences, which have a shorter time to the completion of the
degree (Civian, 1990).
The psychological predictors of attrition in a doctoral
program were investigated by Hobish (1979). This study
examined the relationship of specific sex-related achievement
based personality predispositions to the receipt or non
receipt of the degree for males and females. The findings
indicate: That the dissertation stage may be a more
complicated psychological experience for females than males,
that doctoral candidates of either sex in order to complete
their degrees must manifest a willingness and a capacity to
push themselves and their ideas ahead and demand recognition
for both, that completion of the program, especially for
women, may be related to the learned professional behaviors
that are reflected in interpersonal relationships that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
39
manifest themselves during the degree program with relation
ships with faculty and other students.
Other studies have found that gender was not significant
in persistence (Valentine, 1987; Weil, 1990). Cook and
Austin (1978) reported that gender was not significantly
associated with the completion of a doctoral degree in
education. Lopez (1990) reported no significant relationship
between gender and the risk of graduation for Hispanic under
graduate students.
The effect of gender on the completion of the doctoral
degree may be different for the Hispanic student, particu
larly for women. Astin (1982) has found that gender is
negatively associated with persistence for the Hispanic
woman. Research has suggested that cultural attitudes
negatively impact the Hispanic women who are socialized into
roles of mother and wife (Chacon, Cohen, & Strover, 1986;
Munoz, 1986).
The research does not offer a single answer to the
question of the effect of gender on the completion of a
doctoral degree. Further research may be the only means of
determining whether either gender has an advantage over the
other concerning persistence to degree.
Ability. The student's individual ability has been
examined in many research studies. The lack of intellectual
ability has been associated with a higher percentage of
attrition. Berelson (1960) found that the lack of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
40
intellectual ability to do the work was reported by 50% of
the graduate deans, 64% of the faculty, and 52% of the recent
recipients, to be one of the most important reasons for
attrition. Berelson (1960) concluded, "... the candidate's
ability is directly related to his speed in finishing: On the
average, the best students complete their degrees first, the
less able take longer to do so— the least able do not finish
at all" (p. 170).
The argument for intellectual ability suggests that the
more intelligent student will be able to complete the degree
at a faster rate than the less able student. This seems to
be a common belief among students and faculty.
Renetzky (1966) found that attrition was higher for
students who had a G.P.A. of 3.6 or less at the doctorate
level. This study also reported that scores on the Graduate
Record Examination and the Comprehensive Examination in
Education were significantly associated with persistence
until completion in a doctoral program.
Bundy (1968) reported that grade-point average during
master's degree study was positively associated with
persistence in doctoral programs. Other studies have
concluded that other variables related to ability are
associated with the completion of the doctoral degree:
Ability to pass the qualifying examinations (Tucker et al.,
1964); ability to complete the research for the dissertation
(Cunningham, 1970; Tucker et al., 1964; Valentine, 1987).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Not all studies have determined that ability is
associated with completion of the doctoral degree. Fr
(1970) and Reeble (1975) did not support intellectual
as significantly associated with attrition.
The doctoral student's previous academic performa
graduate and undergraduate levels, coupled with a beli
ability, may be an indication of the individual's inte
tual ability. It is difficult to isolate ability from,
motivation and other factors that affect the total stui.
determining persistence or nonpersistence.
Self-concept. Friedenberg and Roth (1954) reveal
differences between successful and unsuccessful groups
students. Those students that were successful shared < ,
common factor in their perceptions in self-assertion,
determination, and acceptance of one's self, while
unsuccessful students were hostile and dependent on the
university.
The findings of many studies have associated self-1
concept with successful degree recipients. It was four
successful degree recipients exhibited a stronger sense'
confidence towards their study (Renetzky, 1966) ; self-d
and belief in academic ability (Jackson, 1985; Sedlacek
Webster, 1978); and self-assurance of academic ability
(Clewell, 1987).
Self-confidence brought about through personal re
tionships was found to affect the academic attainment
!
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Hispanic stud,*
respondents r
other Hispani
competitive r
students. Ga.
built confide:
competition.
In a Ion
that Hispanic
competently ij
predictors of
It is re.
and confidence,
completion of
Hispanic stude|
i
educational le
fostered by f
J
and profession
determining pc
Institutional
To fully
persistence ar.
i
necessary to c .
student as wel
characteristic.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
43
Hamilton (1973) looked at graduate school programs
offered specifically to minority students. He found that the
characteristics of an effective program included: A defined
policy regarding the minority student population; coordinated
recruitment efforts by various levels in the university's
hierarchy; an understanding of the type of student sought;
programs for the marginal applicant; effective program
evaluation; and support services for the minority student.
The degree of to which the student body of the institu
tion represents an integrated, multicultural environment, has
also been identified as significant in the completion of
graduate programs by minority students.
Gandara (1979) found that the composition of the student
body and the degree to which the university offered an inte
grated, multicultural environment affected the academic
attainment of Hispanic professionals. Respondents in this
study reported that their pre-university educational exper
iences, such as high school and undergraduate programs, were
institutions that offered an integrated, multicultural
setting. Gandara (1979) suggests that an integrated school
environment allows Hispanic students to acquire behaviors
necessary to function within Anglo dominant institutions, as
well as in our society's competitive arena, by allowing
Hispanic students opportunities to compete against Anglo
student populations.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
44
Faculty/Student Relationships. A factor found in many
of the studies on attrition of doctoral students to be
associated with persistence is faculty and student relation
ships. Tucker et al. (1964) report that attrition was higher
for those who reported that they did not interact with
faculty or other graduate students and had never had an
opportunity to discuss career plans with faculty.
Wright (1964) found that 51% of the doctoral candidates
who frequently conversed with faculty in contrast to 32% of
doctoral candidates who less frequently conversed with
faculty, completed the degree. Renetzky (1966) reported that
the degree of student/faculty interaction, the degree of
student/advisor interaction, and the degree of student/
committee interaction affected the completion of the doctoral
degree.
Cunningham (1970) found that the formality of the
faculty, the faculty or committee members changing their
minds, excessive criticism and not enough praise affected
persistence in doctoral programs. (Wood (1978) reported that
students, who persisted and completed their doctoral degrees,
had closer relationships with faculty members, and that non-
persisters did not value interacting with faculty and thus
had more distant relationships with faculty.
Schultz (1983) found that A.B.D.s indicated difficulties
with their relationships with faculty, while Valentine (1987)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
45
reported that persisters had more positive relationships with
faculty.
Faculty interaction may be different for the Hispanic
student as compared to the Anglo student. Many studies have
reported that instructors may stereotype students based on
accent and their English language abilities.
Laosa (1977) studied classroom interaction and the
language dominance of a student. This study reported that
language dominance, more than ethnicity, was a significant
factor that influenced the disapproving or approving behavior
of a teacher toward the Hispanic student.
Ramirez (1981) reported evidence that both Anglo and
Hispanic teachers were more likely to attribute negative
qualities in the form of lower expectations of students with
accented English, nonstandard English or nonstandard Spanish.
De Baca (1975) studied Hispanic high school students and
found that the persistence and graduation from high school
was very much related to the perceived command of the English
language. Tyan and Carranza (1975) found that students who
speak accented English were judged to have less socioeconomic
status, lower academic achievement and less intelligence.
The U.S. Commission of Civil Rights (1978) examined
teacher behavior with Hispanic and Anglo-American student
populations. This study reported that teachers interacted
with the Hispanic students much differently from the Anglo
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
students. The Hispanic student rece.
encouragement, less acceptance for pi
positive responses, less teacher que:
Haro (1977), in a study of two J
ceptions and reported that the Hispai
of the differential treatment and bet
These behaviors were influenced by st
on the part of the teacher.
Carter and Segura (1979) reporte
stereotypes on Hispanic students. It
were affected when unfounded stereoty
teachers. The belief in an untrue st
negative expectations in the teacher
Hispanic students and these expectati
esteem and lower achievement gains.
Studies have shown that differer
teachers can be attributed to: Physic
1974); stereotypes based on race and
ences (Freedman, 1972); and expectati
economic levels (Cooper, Baron, & Low
Gutierrez (1981) studied the eff
tudes, student characteristics and ex
college persistence of Hispanic stude
that there was a difference between s
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
criticizing teacher talk, and less t:
Angeles, looked at teacher expectancy
47
unsuccessful students in the areas of perceived treatment by
faculty. Studies have reported, similarly, that the
perceived faculty attitude towards the student's ethnicity is
significant to persistence of Hispanics (Astin, 1982);
Hamaker, 1986); while Anglo students do not consider faculty
support or attitudes as significant (Tinto, 1975).
Hall and Allen (1982) found that the achievement level
of minority students was influenced by their perception of
available opportunities for the establishment of a mentor/
mentee relationship with faculty. Clewell (1987) reported
that supportive faculty advisers and significant others at
the institution were significant factors in the completion of
the doctoral degree by African-American and Hispanic
students.
These studies suggest that the unsuccessful doctoral
candidate may have difficulty with faculty relationships and
interactions. The studies on Hispanic students at pre
graduate levels suggest that there are factors related to
culture that affect the development of student/faculty
relationships for the Hispanic student. The research
suggests that there is a need for minority faculty and staff
to serve as sources of support for the minority graduate
student (Blackwell, 1983; Carrington & Sedlacek, 197 6;
Clewell, 1987; Duncan, 1976).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
48
Utilization of Support Services. Valentine (1987)
reports that support services from both department and
university sources affects persistence in doctoral programs.
Studies have shown that persistence is positively associated
with the utilization of support and advisory services
(Friedlander, 1980; Payan et al., 1982; Sedlacek & Webster,
1978; Trujillo, 1981).
Prior studies have found that the college success of the
Hispanic undergraduate student is affected by factors that
include the reluctance to participate in support services and
to ask for instructor feedback (Friedlander, 1980) or to
participate in a tutorial program (Abrams & Jernigan, 1984).
The failure to seek out university services may be a
significant factor in determining the success of the doctoral
student. Further research is needed in this area to fully
understand the importance of encouraging utilization of
university support services for the Hispanic student.
Accommodation to Role of Graduate Student. In 1954,
Friedenberg and Roth looked at success and failure as a
relationship instead of a condition. Their study of the
University of Chicago focused on students' perceptions of
themselves and the university. The purpose of their study
was to search for "an understanding of certain characteris
tic ways of relating one's self to graduate school and
graduate study" (p. 70) .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
49
Berelson (1960) found that nonpersisters were
disappointed in graduate study. Tucker and Others (1964)
reported that nonpersisters were generally unhappy with the
life of a student. Renetzky (1966) reported that the degree
of satisfaction with the graduate school experience affected
attrition and persistence. The sacrifice and self-discipline
needed to complete the doctoral program sometimes causes
frustration and stress that could lead to attrition for the
graduate student.
Social adjustment and integration into the university
culture were found to be significantly related to success on
the doctoral level (Wright, 1964). This study found that
students who had a negative attitude towards the graduate
program and/or school were slightly, yet not significantly,
less likely to succeed than those with a positive attitude.
For the minority student, integration into the academic
and social life of the institution (Mannman & Preusz, 1980)
and student integration (Astin, 1982; Hamaker, 1986; Lenning
et al., 1980; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1979; Payan et al.,
1982; Tinto, 1975) have affected persistence. Studies have
found that the students' perception of their ability to
integrate into the graduate school influences success at this
level. Studies have reported that minority students
experience feelings of isolation and alienation, as well as
difficulty establishing relationships with non-minority
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
50
faculty, which affect retention (Carrington & Sedlacek, 197 6;
Duncan, 1976; McNamara, 1979).
Wright's (1964) study found that accommodation to
graduate school, particularly social adjustment, was measured
by the level of integration into the graduate school
community. Integration included: A personal relationship
with faculty and other graduate students characterized by
frequent communication and socializing; participation in
graduate school activities through academic and social
groups; and duration of socializing with friends outside of
the academic community.
Many studies have suggested that the involvement in
college activities and organizations has been associated with
the completion of the undergraduate degree (Astin, 1982;
Pascarella & Terenzini, 1979; Tinto, 1975). Payan and Others
(1982) reported that study habits and adjustment to college
routine and the social and emotional adjustment to college
affects the persistence of Hispanic undergraduate students.
Braddock (1981) found that low environmental congruence,
defined as the fit between the individual minority student
and the characteristics of the university setting, led to
withdrawal. Studies have reported that alienation,
isolation, and feelings of not belonging to the campus
community have affected the rate of attrition for the
minority student (Bean, 1985; Edmunds, 1983) .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Dissertation. Eat'
education by Cronbach i
behavior and progress c
variety of techniques v
students for dealing wi
suggested that the stuc
intellectual problem of
This would relate direc
experience of the stude
The nature of the
affect the completion c j
Renetzky (1966) st
dissertation topic, mul
topic, a perceived need
dissertation, an attitu
the purpose of the diss
and an attitudinal orie
necessity of the disser
completion of the degre
Cunningham (1970)
found at the proposal a,
influenced by the inade<
research training cours
ation. Robertson (1971
complementary program b<
tation topic led to att>
L-i
1
....
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
52
that doctoral students who successfully completed the degree
had less difficulty with the dissertation overall.
Characteristics of the Institution. Payan and Others
(1982) suggest that structural characteristics of the
institution, such as size, location, cultural setting and
proximity to the Hispanic population affects attrition and
retention in undergraduate degree programs for Hispanic
students. This study suggests that Hispanic students who
were successful in the completion of a degree were affected
by the setting of their universities and the local
communities that offered Hispanic students validation for
their individual culture through participation in their
cultural population.
Composition of the Faculty. Payan and Others (1982)
report that the ethnic composition of the faculty and the
presence of Hispanic faculty members to serve as role models
and mentors, affect the completion of a degree for the
Hispanic student. Faculty at both non-tenured and tenured
levels that represent the composition of the student
population have been shown to impact the attrition of the
Hispanic student at undergraduate levels (Garcia, 1980).
Institutional Commitment to the Student. Research
suggests that the institution's commitment to the student,
defined as the degree to which the university assists and
supports the student throughout the academic program, affects
the outcome of persistence or attrition of the minority
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
53
student (Bean, 1985; Hamaker, 1986; Tinto, 1975) . The
overall institutional commitment to the students (Astin,
1982; Payan et al., 1982) and instructional commitment to the
Hispanic student, defined as the university's commitment to
support and assist the instructional program also impact the
success or failure to complete the degree.
In a case study of six institutions of higher education,
Clewell (1987) reported "varying degrees of commitment to
minority support as well as different levels of implementa
tion of that commitment" (p. 82) . This study found that
institutes that have been successful with minority graduate
programs, have implemented a level of commitment for the
minority student that begins with the administration and
reaches down to the individual departments within the
university, so that all levels support and assist the efforts
of these students.
Such commitment includes: Specific recruitment efforts
(Garcia, 1980); a policy for admitting marginal minority
students (Clewell, 1987; Garcia, 1980); an institutional
commitment to minority students (Clewell, 1987); and a system
of monitoring the effectiveness of the institution's efforts
to increase and retain minority students (Clewell, 1987).
Availability of Support Services. Trujillo (1981)
identified a need for expanded support services, with an
emphasis on counseling, to increase the college persistence
of the Hispanic student. Other studies have suggested that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
54
the availability and quality of advisory services affect the
Hispanic student in undergraduate programs (Friedlander,
1980; Payan et al., 1982).
The personal characteristics related to attrition, such
as those factors that relate specifically to the individual
student, have received much more attention by researchers
than those factors related to the institution. Understanding
both of these sets of variables are necessary to form a
picture of the factors that affect the progress toward the
completion of a doctoral degree in education for the Hispanic
student.
Summary
The review of the literature integrated the research on
attrition and retention of doctoral students with the
research on factors that affect the success of the Hispanic
student population at all levels of education. As a result
of this review, a variety of factors were identified which
may affect the attrition and retention of students. Both
student and institutional factors were considered in this
study.
The student factors included: Support, financial
resources, employment, previous academic achievement,
extracurricular activities, cultural identity, motivation,
personal responsibilities, marital status, age, gender,
ability, and self-concept.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
55
The institutional factors included: Characteristics of
the institution which is defined as the individual variables
of each institution such as faculty-student relationships;
utilization of support services; accommodation to the role of
graduate student; dissertation; location of institution;
composition of the faculty body; institutional commitment to
the student which is defined as the university's
implementation of specific policies and programs to retain
and recruit students; and the availability of support
services.
Understanding these two facets, the personal and
institutional factors, related to the doctoral experience for
the Hispanic student is crucial to gaining insight into the
factors that affect the completion of the degree. This study
examined the Hispanic doctoral students' perceptions of how
according to their own unique experience, their progress was
affected by these personal and institutional factors.
The remainder of this dissertation contains the
methodology, which is discussed in Chapter 3, the results of
the research reported in Chapter 4, and the discussion of the
findings in Chapter 5.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
56
CHAPTER 3
Methodology
Introduction
This study examined the perceptions of Hispanic doctoral
degree recipients, doctoral candidates, and doctoral students
in Southern California, regarding the factors that enhanced
and impeded their progress towards the completion of a
doctoral degree in education.
This study surveyed Hispanic degree recipients, doctoral
candidates and doctoral students, who worked in the public
school system, to obtain their perceptions of how selected
factors affected their progress towards the completion of the
doctoral degree in education.
This chapter contains a description of the methodology
used to gather data for this study. The chapter is organized
in the following manner: Description of the research tech
niques, description of the population, description of
variables and measures, development of the survey instrument,
description of the procedures utilized in this study and the
definition of the variables. The chapter ends with a
description of the analysis and statistical procedures used
for each variable.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
57
Research Techniques
In the selection of the research techniques for this
study, the scope of the problem and the type of requested
information were considered. These considerations required a
descriptive method that included descriptive data, a survey
instrument, and interviews in order to determine students'
perceptions of factors and personal characteristics that were
involved in their completion, or lack of completion, of the
doctoral program in education.
The descriptive method has been defined by Best (1981)
as a study that "... describes and interprets . . . condi
tions or relationships that exist, opinions that are held
. . . or trends that are developing" (p. 93). This method
does not "seek or explain relationships, test hypotheses,
make predictions, or get at meanings and complications"
(Isaac & Michael, 1971, p. 18).
The use of descriptive data in this study allowed for
the assigning of respondents to categories based on their
individual responses. Nominal data relating to personal,
professional, and demographic statistics were collected and
evaluated in order to better understand the individual
responses to the surveys.
The use of a survey in this study allowed the researcher
to gather quantitative data from a sample of individuals at
one particular time (Best, 1981; Fraenkel & Waller, 1990).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
58
The interview method was chosen for this study in order
to gather additional information that might not have surfaced
with a survey technique. Best (1981) reports that "the
interview is often superior to other data-gathering devices.
One reason is that people are usually more willing to talk,
than to write" (p. 164) .
This study was intended to gather pertinent information
on a particular student population in order to describe
existing conditions that enhanced or impeded their completion
of the doctoral program in education. The technique utilized
in this study allowed for the description of the existing
phenomena that were perceived to affect the completion of the
doctoral program in education. Given the intentions of the
descriptive research design, it was determined by the
researcher to be the most appropriate method for this study.
Population of Interest
Due to legal restrictions, universities were unable to
provide the researcher with a sample population of Ph.D. and
Ed.D. students in education. Therefore, it was necessary to
find an alternative method of locating a sample population.
Through the California State Department of Education, the
names and addresses of public school district superintendents
located in Southern California were acquired. These superin
tendents were asked to distribute the survey within their
school districts to three individuals who were Hispanic, and
who had either completed the doctoral degree in education or
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
59
were in the process of working towards the completion of that
degree.
The State of California was chosen as the best area to
extract a sample population due to its significant Hispanic
population. According to the Strategy Research Corporation
(1991), 35.8% of all Hispanics that reside in the United
States live in California, resulting in a total Hispanic
population statewide of 29.7%. Southern California was
specifically used in this study instead of the entire State
of California due to the budgetary limits of the researcher.
This study examined conditions that affected the
Hispanic doctoral student, and, therefore, needed a
significant sample of Hispanic doctoral students to
participate in the study. Since the State of California has
the largest number of Hispanic residents, this researcher
believed that the number of Hispanic graduate students in
this state would be significantly higher than in other states
that had fewer Hispanic residents.
This researcher also believed that the majority of
doctoral students and degree recipients in education would be
employed by a public school district or educational county
office.
Variables and Measurements
As suggested by Williamson and Others (1982), the ques-
tionniare used in this study looked at four specific types of
data: "(a) information about the respondents' backgrounds,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
an
at
ti
is
ch
te
th.
de
th
a
st;
re!
act
dii
Cha
setl
mer
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
A questionnaire wa;
structured in a Likert :
that were structured in
use of the Likert respoi
response alternatives ar
be given an assigned see
report that the techniqi.
"elicits a great deal of
relative judgments more
The use of an open-endec
questions allowed the re
providing the possibilit
pertinent to this study
review of the literature
The survey instrume
tested with degree recip
were working in private
according to the results
II*
Interviews were con
surveys in order to furt
significant factors that
the completion of the do
Ten respondents who had
pate in an interview fol
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Telephone interviews were conducted in which questions
were asked to further probe into the three most significant
factors identified from the surveys as significant in the
enhancing or impeding of progress towards the completion of
the doctoral degree for this sample of Hispanic students.
These three factors were employment, responsibilities to
spouse and financial resources. Additional questions were
asked of the interviewees regarding the effects of time and
additional pressures that affected their progress. A
question also asked for policy recommendations that would
enhance progress towards the completion of the degree for
Hispanic students.
Procedures
The procedures that were used to obtain the sample were
the following:
1. A database was developed that contained the names
and addresses of superintendents of public school districts
and individual counties in Southern California.
2. The counties in southern California were identified
using the Thomas Brothers Map for Southern California (1995)
3. The superintendent of the Little Lake City School
District, the employer of this researcher, wrote a cover
letter urging support for this study from fellow super
intendents .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
63
4. All school district and county superintendents in
southern California received three surveys with cover
letters.
5. These superintendents were asked to distribute the
surveys within their school districts or county offices to
Hispanic personnel who were working but had not completed a
doctoral degree in education, and/or to Hispanic personnel
who had completed a doctoral degree in education.
6. Ten individuals were selected from those who
completed the survey. The researcher contacted these
individuals and conducted a recorded telephone interview.
The respondents' answers were later transferred to a response
sheet.
Treatment of the Data
The categorical data gathered in this study were com
piled and treated in descriptive formats utilizing frequency,
measures of central tendency, and cross tabulations. A £.
test was used to determine whether a significant difference
existed in the responses from students who had completed the
degree. A significance level of p < .05 was used to deter
mine whether a difference existed between the two subgroups
for each factor. These results were reported in table
format. More advanced forms of statistical analysis were not
utilized given the descriptive nature of the research.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Summary, gf thg-Chap'
This study was conducted to determ
those factors that enhanced and impeded
the completion of a doctoral degree for
recipients, doctoral candidates and doc
A survey instrument in the form of
specifically designed for this study,
in this survey were drawn from the rese
during the review of the literature. T .
both Likert response formats and open-ei
instrument was field tested with doctor,
in education who were working in the pr
Changes were then made accordingly. Dei
collected on the survey in order to beh
sample population.
Following the survey, interviews w<
individuals who had completed a survey <
their willingness to participate in a t<
The interviews were conducted to provide
into the most significant factors that \
findings from the surveys.
The data obtained in this study we:
frequency distribution and cross tabulat
test was used to analyze significant dil
by subgroups on the selected variables,
included and reported in the following c
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Chapter 4 will report the results of the surveys and
interviews. Chapter 4 will also include a summary of the
data relevant to the purpose of this study. Chapter 5 will
include a discussion of the findings reported in Chapter 4
and recommendations for further study.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Chapter
Report of the
Introduct-L
This chapter reports the fir
collected through the survey and j
perceptions of Hispanic students
institutional factors that enhance
progress towards the completion o
education are reported in this ch
that the data obtained in this st
understanding of the factors that
progress towards the completion o
Hispanic graduate students. It w
the data would provide informatio
university departments of educati
progress towards the completion o
students.
This chapter is organized in
correspond with the design of the
survey interviews. The first sect
reports the demographic findings
population that responded to the s
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
67
data provide an understanding of the respondents by
reporting their unique characteristics, and allowing
overall conclusions to be drawn for all respondents when
describing the total population. The demographic data are
reported in table format, utilizing frequency percentages.
The next section of this chapter reports the data
collected for items 1 to 19 which asked respondents for
their perceptions of the personal variables that enhanced
or impeded their progress towards the completion of their
degrees. Each of these factors are defined in the review
of the literature found in Chapter 2. These data are
reported in frequency distribution tables for each
variable.
The data that reveal the perceptions of Hispanic
students of the institutional factors that affect progress
towards the completion of the degree are reported next.
The data collected for items 20 to 30, which asked
respondents for their perceptions of the institutional
variables that enhanced or impeded their progress towards
the completion of their degrees are presented in tables of
frequency distributions and discussed.
The last section of the survey asked the respondents
to answer three open-ended questions— items 70, 71 and 72.
The responses to items 70 and 71, which asked respondents
to report the five most significant factors that affected
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
68
their progress towards the completion of the degree, are
discussed and reported in tabular format by frequency and
valid percentages. The results of item 72 will be reported
at a later time.
The next segment of this chapter reports the results
of the data as they were analyzed by crosstabulations. A
comparison was made between the responses to the survey
questions as reported by those who had already completed
the degree, and those who had not completed the degree. In
reporting these data the actual count and frequency
percentages were used to compare the responses from these
two subgroups.
The research questions for this study looked at
selected factors as perceived by Hispanics, who were
doctoral students, doctoral candidates and doctoral degree
recipients in education, to have enhanced or impeded their
progress towards the completion of the doctoral degree. In
order to answer these research questions, crosstabulations
were run for each selected factor utilized in the survey
instrument by each of these subgroups. The results of
these crosstabulations are presented in table format and
discussed in order to better understand any differences
that may exist between these two subgroups.
A £. test was used in order to provide more information
on the affects of these selected factors on these two
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
69
subgroup populations. In order to determine whether there
was a significant difference in the mean of each variable
for each subgroup, a £. test, with a significance level of
p < .05 or less and using 2 degrees of freedom (H ~ 2 = df
or £. (53)), was used to analyze each factor. Results of
this £. test are reported in table format for each subgroup
and discussed.
The next segment of this chapter reports the results
of the final open-ended question on the survey, item 73,
that asked respondents for suggestions of university
policies that might enhance the progress and the completion
of the doctoral degree for Hispanic students. The
responses reported by the respondents for this item are
reported in table format and discussed.
Following the analysis of the survey data, an
additional instrument, the interview process, was used to
further probe respondents for information. Respondents
were asked to elaborate on how the significant factors, as
revealed in the analysis of the data, as well as additional
factors might have affected their progress towards the
completion of the doctoral degree. The results of the
interviews are reported in tabular format and discussed.
Background Information
The survey instrument utilized in this study (Appendix
A) was mailed on September 20, 1995, to all public school
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
70
district and county superintendents in Southern California.
A total of 780 surveys were mailed to the 260 public school
districts and county superintendents in Southern
California. Three copies of the survey designed for this
study were accompanied by cover letters; one from the
researcher to each superintendent soliciting help with
identifying the necessary sample population for this study,
one from the researcher's own superintendent soliciting the
help of fellow superintendents in identifying the necessary
sample population for this study, and finally a letter to
the respondent from the researcher explaining the objective
and task of completing the survey (Appendix B). It was
believed by the researcher that the superintendents would
assist in identifying Hispanic public school personnel who
had completed a doctoral degree in education, or who were
currently working towards the completion of the degree, or
who had attempted the degree and had not completed the
degree.
The survey responses revealed that superintendents did
assist in the identifying Hispanic personnel who met the
criteria of this study. It was believed by the researcher
that the number of Hispanics that would meet the criteria
of this study would be low. The number of responses
confirmed this belief. Only 55 surveys were returned to
the researcher by public education personnel who met the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
71
criteria for this study. There were 27 other surveys that
were returned that were completed by individuals who did
not meet the criteria. There were 13 surveys returned and
five phone calls made to the researcher indicating that
various school districts in Southern California did not
have any Hispanic personnel who fitted the criteria for
this study.
Although the response rate was low by comparison to
the number of surveys that had been mailed out, it was not
possible to verify whether this rate of response was, or
was not, accurately representative of the actual size of
the target Hispanic population in Southern California, of
those who had completed a doctoral degree in education, or
those who had not yet completed a doctoral degree in
education. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the
actual rate of return since the desired size of the sample
population could note accurately determined.
Once the returned survey results were analyzed, 10
telephone interviews were conducted from among those
responding to further probe for information related to the
factors that enhanced or impeded students' progress towards
the completion of the doctoral degree. The telephone
interview questions (Appendix C) asked the respondents to
consider the effects of three factors (responsibilities to
spouse, employment, and financial resources) that were
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
72
identified as being significantly different between these
two subgroup populations.
The telephone interview questions also asked
respondents to identify any other additional pressures that
may have affected their progress, and to identify what was
the single greatest factor that had influenced the time it
took to complete their degrees. Each respondent was also
asked to identify university policy changes which would
increase the completion rate of doctoral degrees in
education for Hispanic students.
Results of the Survey Instrument
The results of the survey instrument are reported in
the following tables and discussed. Characteristics of the
sample population are reported as based on the responses to
the demographic variables of the survey instrument.
Following the description of the sample population, the
results of data analyses concerning personal and
institutional variables are reported and discussed
utilizing tables of frequency distributions and cross
tabulations. The results of the £. test are reported and
discussed.
Characteristics of the Sample Population
There were 82 surveys, from the 780 that were mailed
to superintendents in Southern California, that were
returned by respondents. Of these 82 surveys, it was
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
determined that 27 of the respondents did not meet the
criteria of this study. The sample population who did meet
these criteria were 50% female and 50% male. The majority
of the population, 84.6%, were married, while 11.5% were
divorced, and only 3.8% were single. An average number of
two children was reported by 34.1% of the population,
followed by three children as reported by 25%.
The majority of this population, 63%, reported their
cultural heritage to be Mexican-American. The category
other referred to any other Hispanic with a heritage from a
Latin American country other than Mexico. There were 18.5%
who self-identified with this label. It is possible that
these respondents may have had cultural roots either in
Mexico or in some other Hispanic country. Table 2 reveals
the cultural heritage of this population as reported by the
respondents.
The majority of the respondents, 58.5%, reported that
their degree objective was an Ed.D. while 41.5% reported
the Ph.D. as their degree objective. An overwhelming
number of respondents, 68.6%, reported that they had
already completed their doctoral degrees, 21.6% reported
that they were still in the coursework phase of the degree,
5.9% reported that they were in the dissertation phase of
the program and 3.9% reported that they were A.B.D. and did
not plan on asking for further extensions.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
74
Table 2
Cultural Heritage
Value Label Value Frequency Valid %
Mexican 1 7 13.0%
Mexican-American 2 34 63.0%
Other Hispanic 3 3 5.6%
Latino 4 10 18.5%
Missing Cases 1
Totals 55 100.0%
Note. X = 2.296; 2D. = .924
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Class attendance was or had been on
as reported by 54.7% of the population wh;
on a full-time basis and 1.9% attended bo1
part-time. During the coursework phase, I
population were employed full-time with 1<
part-time. During the dissertation phase,
population were employed full-time with 6
time.
Table 3 provides data on the sample ]
current professional positions. As indie;
table, the most prevalent professional po;
respondents were principal (26.4%), or as:
superintendent (22.6%). The majority of 1
were involved in community service, as rei
the responses. When asked about their im
graduate student activities, only 19.6% re
involvement. The respondents reported the
were involved in professional organizatioi
9.6% who were not involved in professional
Table 4 reveals the year that qualify
passed for those doctoral candidates and c
recipients that was reported by the respor
sample population.
Table 5 reports the years that the v;
were conferred. This table reveals the pi
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
76
Table 3
Current Professional Position
Value Label Value Frequency Valid %
School Psychologist 1 2
00
•
00
Asst. Superintendent 2 12 21.8
Asst. Principal 3 2 3.8
Superintendent 4 7 13.2
Principal 5 4 26.4
Administrator 6 2 3.8
Dir. Title VII 7 1 1.9
Professor 8 1 1.9
Counselor 9 1 1.9
Dir. Bilingual Education 10 1 1.9
Personnel Administrator 11 7.5
Sr. Program Evaluator 12 1 1.9
Dir. of Instruction 13 1 1.9
MRC Director 14 1 1.9
Retired Superintendent 15 1 1.9
School Site Specialist
Missing Cases
16 1
2
1.9
Totals 55 100.0
Note. X = 5.792; 2D = 4.115
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
77
Table 4
Year Qualifying Exams Were Passed
Year
Frequency
of Response
Valid
Percent
1972 2 2.4
1976 1 4.8
1978 1 2.4
1980 1 2.4
1981 2 2.4
1984 4 9.5
1985 2 4.8
1986 4 9.5
1986 1 2.4
1988 2 4.8
1989 3 7.1
1990 1 2.4
1991 2 4.8
1992 3 7.1
1993 2 4.8
1994 5 11.9
1995 5 11.9
Missing Cases 13
Totals 55 100.0
Note. X = 87.500; SD = 6.421. Percentages are based only
on the total cases of responses. Missing cases are not
included in these : results.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 5
Year That Degrees Were Conferred
High School Bachelors
Year Frequency % Year Frequency %
1948 1 1.9 1955 1 1.9
1954 2 00
1960 1 1.9
1956 1 1.9 1961 1 1.9
1957 1 1.9 1962 3 5.8
1958 4 7.7 1966 3 5.8
1959 2 3.8 1967 1 1.9
1960 2 3.8 1968 4 7.7
1962 1 1.9 1969 4 7.7
1963 4 7.7 1970 6 11.5
1964 4 7.7 1971 1 1.9
1965 5 9.6 1972 7 13 .5
1966 4 7.7 1973 1 1.9
1967 3 5.8 1974 2 3.8
1968 4 7.7 1975 3 5.8
1969 2 3.8 1976 5 9.6
Masters Doctorate
Year Frequency % Year Frequency %
1940 1 2.0
1960 1 2.0
1964 1 2.0
1968 1 2.0
1970 1 2.0
1971 2 3.9
1972 3 5.9
1973 2 3.9
1974 3 5.9
1975 3 5.9
1976 4 7.8
1977 1 2.0
1978 4 7.8
1979 2 3.9
1981 2 3.9
1972 1 2.9
1975 1 2.9
1976 1 2.9
1978 1 2.9
1981 3 8.8
1983 1 2.9
1984 3 8.8
1985 1 2.9
1986 1 2.9
1987 1 2.9
1988 2 5.9
1989 4 11.8
1990 1 2.9
1992 4 11.8
1993 1 2.9
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 5 (Continued)
Year
High School
Frequency % Year
Bachelors
Frequency %
Masters
Year Frequency % Year
Doctorate
Frequency %
1970 3 5.8 1977 1 1.9 1982 8 15.7 1994 4 11.8
1972 3 5.8 1979 3 5.8 1983 2 3.9 1995 4 11.8
1973 1 1.9 1980 4 7.7 1984 1 2.0 21
1974 1 1.8 1981 1 1.9 1985 2 3.9
1975 1 1.8 3 1986 2 3.9
1916—
2 3 -8 1_Q P7 1 7 n
1978 1 1.9
1988 2 3.9
Missing
1989 1 3.9
Missing
4
Note. Hiah School. - X = 65i. 13 , SD = 6.237; Bachelors: X = 71.365, £D = 5.801; Masters:
K = 77.549, ss = 8.305; Doctorate: X = 87.529, £D = 6.354.
- j
v o
80
between degree programs for the respondents as indicated by
the mean for the year that each degree was conferred. The
percentages reported in this table reflect the actual
number of responses for this item that were reported by the
respondents. The mean age for the sample population of
respondents, who responded to this item, are reported at
the bottom of Table 6.
The subsequent tables report additional responses that
reveal characteristics about this population. The reported
age that the respondents completed their degree programs
are revealed in Table 7 and the GPAs, as reported by the
respondents for their degree programs, are indicated in
Table 8. Finally, Table 9 reveals the types of institu
tions, public or private, attended by the respondents for
each degree.
The review of the literature revealed that background
factors related to family characteristics affect a
student's progress. These factors include the level of
education attained by parents, parents' occupation and
parents' emphasis on education. The family background
characteristics for this population are reported in the
following set of tables. Table 10 reveals the mothers'
occupations while Table 11 reports the occupations for
fathers' of the respondents. The most frequent response
(53.7%) for mothers' occupations was homemaker. For
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 6
Entrance Acre for Each Degree Program
High School Bachelors
Age Frequency % Age Frequency %
12 1 2.1 16 1 2.0
13 8 14.5 17 7 14.0
14 27 49.1 18 29 58. 0
15 9 16.4 19 3 6.0
16 2 3.6 20 1 2.0
20 2 1.8 21 1 2.0
Missing 7 23 1 2.0
25 2 4.0
26 2 4.0
27 1 2.0
32 1 2.0
41 1 2.0
Missing 5
Masters Doctorate
Age Frequency % Age Frequency %
20 1 to
o
25 1 2.2
21 2 4.0 27 1 2.2
22 4 8.2 28 3 6.7
23 4 8.2 30 1 2.2
24 2 4.1 31 2 4.4
25 2 4.1 32 1 2.2
26 4 8.2 34 1 2.2
27 4 8.2 35 4 8.9
28 5 10.2 36 6 13.3
30 9 18.4 37 6 13.3
31 1 2.0 38 1 2.2
32 1 2.0 39 1 2.2
33 4 8.2 40 3 6.7
35 2.0 41 1 2.2
37 2 4.1 42 1 2.2
39 1 2.0 43 1 2.2
00
i —*
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 6 (Continued)
High School Bachelors
Age Frequency % Age Frequency % Age
Masters
Frequency % Age
Doctorate
Frequency %
43 1 2.0 44 1 2.2
44 1 2.0 45 2 4.4
Missing 6 46 1 2.2
47 3 6.7
48 1 2.2
49 1 2.2
50 1 2.2
54 1 2.2
Missing 10
Note. Hiah School: X = 14.188. SD = 1.161; Bachelor's: X = 19.600, SD = 4.417; Master's:
X = 28.408, SD = 5.481; Doctorate: X = 38.1563, SD = 6.732
.
oo
to
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 7
Completed Aae
High School Bachelors
Age Frequency % Age Frequency %
16 1 1.9 20 3 5.9
17 20 38.5 21 12 23 .5
18 27 51.9 22 13 25.5
19 3 5.8 23 3 5.9
22 1 1.9 24 3 5.9
Missing 3 25 3 5.9
26 3 5.9
27 3 5.9
28 1 2.0
30 3 5.9
31 1 2.0
33 1 2.0
36 1 2.0
43 1 2.0
Missing 4
Age
Masters
Frequency %
22 2 4.0
23 2 2.0
24 3 6.0
25 1 2.0
26 4 8.0
27 1 2.0
28 3 6.0
29 4 8.0
30 6 12.0
31 3 6.0
32 7 14.0
33 2 4.0
34 5 10.0
36 3 6.0
39 1 to
o
Age
Doctorate
Frequency %
33 2 5.9
34 1 2.9
37 5 14.7
38 1 2.9
39 2 5.9
40 4 11.8
41 5 14.7
43 4 11.8
44 2 5.9
45 2 5.9
46 2 5.9
47 1 2.9
50 1 2.9
51 1 2.9
53 1 2.9
oo
U)
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 7 (Continued)
High School Bachelors Masters Doctorate
Age Frequency % Age Frequency % Age Frequency % Age Frequency %
41 2 4.0 Missing 21
45 1 2.0
46 1 2.0
Missing 5
Note. High School: X = 17.712, SD = .871; Bachelor's: 2C = 24.196, SD = 4.495; Master's:
X = 30.960, SD = 9.334; Doctorate: X = 41.441, SD = 4.762.
oo
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 8
Grade Point Average
High School Bachelors
GPA Frequency % GPA Frequency %
2.0 4 8.9 2.5 1 2.1
2.3 1 2.2 2.6 1 2.1
2.5 2 4.4 2.7 2 4.3
2.8 1 2.2 2.8 1 2.1
3.0 8 17.8 2.9 1 2.1
3.2 3 6.7 3.0 8 17.0
3.3 2 4.4 3.1 1 2.1
3.4 2 4.4 3.2 3 6.4
3.5 8 17.8 3.3 3 6.4
3.6 1 2.2 3.4 2 4.3
3.7 1 2.2 3.5 11 23.4
3.8 2 4.4 3.6 2 4.3
3.9 4 8.9 3.7 4 8.5
Masters Doctorate
GPA Frequency % GPA Frequency %
3.0 3 6.7 3.0 4 10.3
3.2 1 2.2 3.2 1 2.6
3.3 1 2.2 3.5 4 10.3
3.5 10 22.2 3.7 7 17.9
3.6 3 6.7 3.8 6 15.4
3 .7 2 4.4 3.9 8 20.5
3.8 8 17.8 4.0 9 23.1
3.9 7 15.6
4.0 10 22.2 Missing 16
Missing 10
00
U1
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 8 (Continued)
High School Bachelors Masters Doctorate
GPA Frequency % GPA Frequency % GPA Frequency % GPA Frequency %
4.0 6 13.3 3.8 4 8.5
3.9 2 4.3
Missing 10 4.0 1 2.1
Missing 8
Note. High School: X = 3.280, £>D = .593; Bachelor's: X = 3.343, §D = .375; Master's:
X = 3.698, SD = .285; Doctorate: X = 3.721, SD = .305.
00
C T >
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 9
Type of Institution
High School
Type Frequency
Bachelors
Type Frequency
Masters
Type Frequency
Doctorate
Type Frequency %
66.7 83.7
35.6
29.4
64.4
^
Table 10
Mothers' Occupation
Occupation Value Frequency I
Homemaker (not employed) 1 29 ;
Housekeeper 2 5
Seamstress 3 1
Field Worker 4 2
Accountant 5 1
Instructional Aide 6 3
Nurse 7 2
Secretary 8 3
Assembly Line Worker 9 1
Civil Service 10 1
Beautician 11 1
Retired 13 1
Teacher 13 1
Food Server 14 1
Bookkeeper 15 1
Laborer
Missing Cases
Totals
16 1
1
55 ]
Note. X = 3.907; ££ = 4.301.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
89
Table 11
Fathers' Occupation
Occupation Value Frequency Percent
Pattern Maker 1 1 2.0
Labor Estimator 2 1 2.0
Carpenter 3 3 6.0
Mason 4 1 2.0
Barber 5 1 2.0
Field Worker 6 2 4.0
Engineer 7 4 8.0
Trucker 8 2 4.0
Laborer 9 6 12.0
Accountant 10 1 2.0
Custodian 11 1 2.0
Laundry Worker 12 1 2.0
Mechanic 13 1 2.0
Teacher 14 1 2.0
Military 15 1 2.0
Maintenance 16 1 2.0
Self Employed 17 5 10.0
Office Manager 18 1 2.0
Contractor 19 1 2.0
Foundry 20 1 2.0
Retired 21 2 4.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
90
Table 11 (Continued)
Occupation Value Frequency Percent
Minister 22 1 2.0
Plant Foreman 23 2
• o
•
Electrician 24 3 6.0
Groundsman 25 1
o
•
C M
Plumber 26 1 2.0
Government Employee 27 1 2.0
Steelworker 28 1 2.0
Missing Cases 5
Total 55 100.0
Note. & = 13.680; SB = 7.582.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
- < n M I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
92
Table 12
Mothers' Highest Level of Education
Level of Education Value Frequency Percent
No Education 0 2 3.7
Elementary 1 19 35.2
Secondary 2 16 29.6
H.S. Degree 3 11 20.4
Some College 4 3 5.6
College Degree 5 3 5.6
Missing Cases
Total
1
55 100.0
Note. X = 2.056; £D. = 1.204.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 13
Fathers' Highest Level of Education
93
Level of Education Value Frequency Percent
No Education 0 1 1.9
Elementary 1 19 35.8
Secondary 2 8 15.1
H.S. Degree 3 12 22.6
Some College 4 5 9.4
College Degree 5 5 9.4
Post Graduate 6 3 5.7
Missing Cases
Total
2
55 100.0
Note. X = 2.528; = 1.601.
Table 14
Did Parents Emphasize Education?
Label Value Frequency Percent
Yes 1 47 88.7
No 2 6 11.3
Missing Cases 2
Total 55 100.0
Note. & = 1.113; 2D = .320.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
as a factor that facilit.
helped the student to cor
impeded progress towards
defined as a factor that
student to complete the <
in table format giving ft
ages, mean and standard c
The variable suppori
enhance progress towards
than it impeded progress
revealed in Table 15.
The variable support
strongly enhance or enhar
of the degree as indicate
respectively. It was ref
progress by 9.1% of the i
The variable support
reported in Table 17 as a
progress towards the comf
majority of the responder,
response rate and a mean
answer in the enhanced ca
As revealed in Table
resources was reported me
the respondents (31.5%),
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
95
Table 15
Support From the Family
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0
Impeded 2 4 7.3
Did Not Affect 3 5 9.1
Enhanced 4 14 25.5
Strongly Enhanced 5 32 58.2
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Nofe. X 3.745; SD = .907.
Table 16
Support from Employer
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0
Impeded 2 5 9.1
Did Not Affect 3 16 29.1
Enhanced 4 22 40.0
Strongly Enhanced 5 12 21.8
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. £ = 3.745; ££ = .907.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
96
Table 17
Support From Significant Other
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 2 3.8
Impeded 2 1 1.9
Did Not Affect 3 11 21.2
Enhanced 4 10 19.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 28 53.8
Missing Cases 3
Total 55 100.0
Note- X = 4.173; SD = 1.080.
Table 18
Financial Resources
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 3 5.6
Impeded 2 17 31.5
Did Not Affect 3 11 20.4
Enhanced 4 12 22.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 11 20.4
Missing Cases 1
Total 55 100.0
Note, x = 3.204; 22 = 1.250.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
97
progress of 5.6% of the respondents. This variable was
also reported by 22.2% of the respondents to enhance their
progress and by 20.4% of the respondents to strongly
enhance their progress. Overall, this variable was
reported by 42.6% of the respondents to enhance their
progress and by only 36.6% of the respondents to impede
their progress. Another 20.4% reported that this variable
did not affect their progress.
Table 19 reveals that the variable employment enhanced
the progress for a majority of the respondents as indicated
by the 17% of the responses in the strongly enhanced
category, and the 35.8% of the responses in the enhanced
category. There were 28.3% of the respondents who felt
that this factor impeded their progress while 1.9% of the
respondents felt that their progress was strongly impeded
by employment. Of the respondents, 52.8 felt that
employment did not affect their progress.
Table 20 reports that the variable promotions/career
advancements was found to not affect the progress of 4 6.3%
of the respondents. Only 16.7% of the respondents felt
that this variable impeded their progress, and 24.1% and
13% of the respondents reported that their progress was
enhanced and strongly enhanced by this variable.
Table 21 indicates that the variable previous academic
achievement was reported to not affect 50.9% of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
98
Table 19
Employment
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.9
Impeded 2 15 28.3
Did Not Affect 3 9 17.0
Enhanced 4 19 35.8
Strongly Enhanced 5 9 17.0
Missing Cases 2
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.377; SD = 1.130.
Table 20
Promotions/Career Advancements
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0
Impeded 2 9 16.7
Did Not Affect 3 25 46.3
Enhanced 4 13 24.1
Strongly Enhanced 5 7 13.0
Missing Cases 1
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 2.782; 2G = .786.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
99
Table 21
Previous Academic Achievement
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.8
Impeded 2 19 34.5
Did Not Affect 3 28 50.9
Enhanced 4 5 9.1
Strongly Enhanced 5 2 3.6
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 2.782; SO. = -786.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
progress fc
respondents
by their pi
When e
identity, e
completion
respondents
had either
(Table 22)-
reported tY ,
Table
community s
to not affe
their degrs
The vel
24) was rep
their progr
this variafc
that this v
additional
variable im
variable st
The va
was defined
and to comp
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
101
Table 22
Sense of Cultural Identity
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0
Impeded 2 3 5.5
Did Not Affect 3 14 27.3
Enhanced 4 15 19.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 23 41.8
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 4.055; SP = .951.
Table 23
Participation in Community Service
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 3 5.5
Impeded 2 4 9.1
Did Not Affect 3 38 69.1
Enhanced 4 5 9.1
Strongly Enhanced 5 4 7.3
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.036; Sfi = .838.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
102
Table 24
Economic Investment in Doctorate
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 2.0
Impeded 2 7 14.0
Did Not Affect 3 22 44.0
Enhanced 4 12 24.0
Strongly Enhanced 5 8 16.0
Missing Cases
Total
5
55 100.0
Note. X = 3.380: SD = .987.
Table 25
Motivation_to Succeed
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0 Impeded
2 2 3.7
Did Not Affect 3 1 1.9
Enhanced 4 10 18.5
Strongly Enhanced 5 41 75. 9
Missing Cases
Total
1
55 100.0
Note. & = 4.667; SR = .700.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
the respondents (75.9%) as having strongly enhanced their
progress towards the completion of their degree. An
additional 18.5% of the respondents reported that this
variable enhanced their progress, while only 3.7% of the
respondents reported that this variable impeded their
progress.
The review of the literature reported that progress
towards the completion of a doctoral degree was affected by
responsibilities to children, spouse and career. The
following tables report the results of the items from the
returned surveys that asked respondents whether these
variables enhanced or impeded their progress towards the
completion of their doctoral degree in education.
Of the sample population who responded to this item,
31.5% indicated that this variable, responsibility to
children (Table 26), did not affect their progress. There
was another 24.1% (impeded) and 7.4% (strongly impeded),
who felt that their progress had been impeded by these
responsibilities. Those who felt that their progress had
been enhanced or strongly enhanced by this variable
accounted for 22.2% and 14.8% of the total population
respectively.
When asked about the variable responsibilities to
career, 21.8% and 20% of the respondents reported that this
variable enhanced and strongly enhanced their progress,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
104
Table 26
Responsibility to Children
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 4 7.4
Impeded 2 13 24.1
Did Not Affect 3 17 31.5
Enhanced 4 12 22.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 8 14.8
Missing Cases 1
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.130; = 1.166.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
respe
also
impec
rep or
progr
imped
thes6
spous
towar
respc
affec
these
additj
stroni
17% a
progr
respo
as va
towar
utili
of th
the c
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
106
Table 27
Responsibility to Career
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 4 7.3
Impeded 2 14 25.5
Did Not Affect 3 14 25.5
Enhanced 4 12 21.8
Strongly Enhanced 5 11 20.0
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.218; SD = 1.243.
Table 28
Responsibilities to Spouse
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 5 9.4
Impeded 2 12 22.6
Did Not Affect 3 20 37.7
Enhanced 4 7 13.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 9 27.0
Missing Cases 2
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.057; ££ = 1.200.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107
Table 29 indicates that there were 65.5% of the
sampled population who responded that age did not affect
their progress. Additionally, there were 25.5% and 5.5% of
the respondents who reported that age had enhanced and
strongly enhanced their progress. Only 2.16% felt that age
impeded their progress in any way.
In this study, gender was reported by 72.7% of the
respondents to not affect their progress (Table 30).
However, there were 20.4% and 1.9% who reported that this
variable enhanced and strongly enhanced their progress. No
one reported that gender strongly impeded their progress.
It was revealed in this study, that 43.6% and 36.4% of
the respondents reported that their intellectual ability
had enhanced and strongly enhanced their progress toward
the completion of the degree. The mean response for this
item was 4.091, which indicates that the average response
fell in the enhanced category (Table 31). There were 14.5%
of the respondents who reported that their ability did not
affect their progress towards the completion of this
degree.
The variable self-concept was reported in Table 32 by
the respondents as having enhanced (38.2%), and strongly
enhanced (45.5%) their progress on the degree. Only 9.1%
of the respondents reported that their self-concept had
impeded their progress toward the completion of the degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
108
Table 29
Age During Pursuit of the Degree
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.8
Impeded 2 1 1.8
Did Not Affect 3 36 65.5
Enhanced 4 14 25.5
Strongly Enhanced 5 3 5.5
Missing Cases
Total
0
55 100.0
Note. X = 3.309; SD = .690.
Table 30
Genriar.
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0 Impeded
2 3 5.6
Did Not Affect 3 39 72.2
Enhanced 4 11 20.4
Strongly Enhanced 5 1 1.9
Missing Cases
Total
1
55 100.0
Note. X = 3.185; 2B. = .552.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
109
Table 31
Ability
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.8
Impeded 2 2 3.6
Did Not Affect 3 8 14.5
Enhanced 4 24 43.6
Strongly Enhanced 5 20 36.4
Missing Cases
Total
0
55 100.0
X = 4.091; = .908.
Table 32
Self-Concent
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.8
Impeded 2 4 7.3
Did Not Affect 3 4 7.3
Enhanced 4 21 38.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 25 45.5
Missing Cases
Total
0
55 100.0
Note. X = 4.182; = .983.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
110
Institutional Factors
The following tables represent data obtained from
survey items which asked the respondents to rate their
perceptions of how selected institutional factors had
enhanced or impeded their progress towards the completion
of the doctoral degree in education. The results are
presented in tabular format indicating frequency distribu
tions, percentages, mean and standard deviations for each
question.
The review of the literature identified the relation
ship between university faculty and a graduate student as a
variable that can affect the student's progress towards the
completion of a doctoral degree. As indicated in Table 33,
the results of this study show that 58.2% of the
respondents reported that their progress had been enhanced
or strongly enhanced by this variable. Another 30.9%
reported that their progress had not been affected by this
variable. Only 10.9% of the respondents felt that their
progress had been impeded by this variable.
The availability of university support services and
the utilization of university support services by Hispanic
students was identified in the review of the literature to
affect the attrition rate for minority student populations.
It was revealed from the results of the survey that
45.5% of the respondents reported that the variable
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Ill
Table 33
Faculty-Student Relationship
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 2 3.6
Impeded 2 4 7.3
Did Not Affect 3 17 30.9
Enhanced 4 21 38.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 11 20.0
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.636; £D = 1.007.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
112
availability of university support services enhanced their
progress, while only 18.2% of the respondents reported that
their progress had been impeded or strongly impeded by this
variable. The results of the responses for this item are
reported in Table 34.
As indicated in Table 35, the results from this study
report that 50.9% of the respondents reported that the
variable utilization of university support services did not
affect their progress. There was a total of 41.8% of the
respondents who reported that their utilization of
university support services had enhanced their progress
towards the completion of the degree.
Another set of variables that were identified in the
review of the literature and examined in this study focused
on the students1 committees. The variable choice of
committee chairperson and changes in the committee were
examined. In the data as reported in the following tables,
it was the perception of the respondents that their choice
of the committee chairperson did enhance their progress,
although changes in the committee did not seem to affect
progress.
As indicated in Table 36, 48.1% of the respondents
reported that this variable, choice of committee chair
person, strongly enhanced their progress, while another
29.6% reported that their progress had been enhanced by
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Valr
Nota
Valu
Stro
Did
Enha.
Stro
Miss
Tota
II
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
^999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999^
114
Table 36
Choice of Committee Chairperson
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.9
Impeded 2 5 9.3
Did Not Affect 3 6 11.1
Enhanced 4 16 29.6
Strongly Enhanced 5 26 48.1
Missing Cases 1
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 4.130; ££ = 1.065.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
115
their committee chairperson. Only 11.2% reported that
their progress had been impeded by their committee chair
person .
As indicated in Table 37, the variable changes in
committee was reported by 70.4% of the respondents to not
affect their progress. Only 18.6% reported that their
progress had been enhanced by this variable, and 11.11%
reported that their progress had been impeded by changes in
their committee.
Another variable reported by the literature to affect
progress on the doctorate was the choice of dissertation
topic. This variable, as reported in Table 38, was
reported by the respondents to enhance their progress. An
overwhelming 83.7% of the population and a mean value of
4.182 shows that these students felt that this variable
enhanced their progress.
As indicated in the background information on this
population, there were still 36.4% of this population who
had not completed their degree at the time of this survey.
Of the population surveyed, 74.5% reported that their
academic preparation for the dissertation phase enhanced
their progress. All 55 respondents answered this question,
although, there were 11 respondents who had not yet
completed their coursework. These results are revealed in
Table 39.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
116
Table 37
Changes in Committee
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 2 3.7
Impeded 2 4 7.4
Did Not Affect 3 38 70.4
Enhanced 4 5 9.3
Strongly Enhanced 5 5 9.3
Missing Cases
Total
1
55 100.0
Note. X = 3.130; ££ = .825.
Table 38
Choice of Dissertation Topic
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.8
Impeded 2 4 7.3
Did Not Affect 3 4 7.3
Enhanced 4 21 38.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 25 45.5
Missing Cases
Total
0
55 100.0
Note. X = 4.182; 2H = .983.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
117
Table 39
Academic Preparation for Dissertation
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 0 Impeded
2 3 5.5
Did Not Affect 3 11 20.0
Enhanced 4 23 41.8
Strongly Enhanced 5 18 32.7
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 4.018; ££ = .871.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
118
The majority of the respondents reported that their
choice of an institution for their doctoral program
enhanced their progress. As shown in Table 40, there were
49.1% of the respondents who reported that their choice of
institution had strongly enhanced their progress, while
another 28.3% of the respondents felt that their choice had
enhanced their progress. A total of 77.4% of the respon
dents reported that this variable, choice of institution,
had enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress towards
the completion of the degree.
The literature suggested that the cultural setting of
the institution, which is defined as the cultural make-up
and cultural neighborhood of the university, may play a
role in the attrition of Hispanic students. This study, as
reported in Table 41, found that 40% of the respondents
revealed that their progress had been enhanced or strongly
enhanced by the cultural setting of their institution,
although an additional 43.6% of the respondents reported
that this variable did not affect their progress.
Another variable found to affect the progress of
Hispanic students is the presence of Hispanic faculty in
the degree program. Table 42 indicates that only 26% of
the respondents reported that their progress had been
enhanced by the presence of Hispanic faculty, while there
were 18% who reported that their progress had been impeded
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
119
Table 4 0
Choice of Institution
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 2 3.8
Impeded 2 4 7.5
Did Not Affect 3 6 11.3
Enhanced 4 15 28.3
Strongly Enhanced 5 26 49.1
Missing Cases 2
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 4.113; SD = 1.121.
Table 41
Cultural Settino of the Institution
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 2 3.6
Impeded 2 7 12.7
Did Not Affect 3 24 43.6
Enhanced 4 12 21.8
Strongly Enhanced 5 10 18.2
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.382; 22 = 1.045
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
120
Table 42
Presence of Hispanic Faculty
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 3 6.0
Impeded 2 6 12.0
Did Not Affect 3 28 56.0
Enhanced 4 7 14.0
Strongly Enhanced 5 6 12.0
Missing Cases 5
Total 55 100.0
Note. X = 3.140; SD. = .990.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
121
or strongly impeded by this variable. This study found
that 56% of the respondents reported that this variable did
not affect their progress. It is unclear whether their
answers suggest that their progress was impeded by the lack
of a presence of Hispanic faculty or from the actual
presence of Hispanic faculty.
This study looked at the variable, university's
commitment to the student, as defined in the literature to
include support, assistance and commitment on behalf of the
university and faculty to ensure the success and increase
the chances of the student to complete the degree. This
study as reported in Table 43, found that 69.1% of the
respondents reported that this variable enhanced or
strongly enhanced their progress toward the completion of
the degree. Only 16.3% of the respondents reported that
their progress had been impeded or strongly impeded as a
result of the university's commitment to them. An
additional 14.5% reported that this variable did not affect
their progress.
At the close of the survey, the respondents were asked
to list the five most significant factors that enhanced and
impeded their progress towards the completion of their
degree.
Many of the responses were factors that were reported
by the respondents were in addition to those factors that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
122
Table 43
University Commitment to the Student
Value Label Value Frequency Percent
Strongly Impeded 1 1 1.8
Impeded 2 8 14.5
Did Not Affect 3 8 14.5
Enhanced 4 21 38.2
Strongly Enhanced 5 17 30.9
Missing Cases 0
Total 55 100.0
Note. £ = 3.818; = 1.090.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
123
had been found during the review of the literature and that
were used to construct the survey for this study.
There were 218 total responses to the first open-ended
question that asked respondents to list the five most
significant factors that enhanced their progress towards
the completion of the degree. The results of this question
are revealed in Table 44, which reports the variables
frequencies of response and percentages of total responses.
The most frequent response, from both of those
variables that were utilized in the survey and those that
were additionally identified by respondents in the open-
ended question, was the variable motivation to succeed
which was reported by 20.6% of the respondents to have
enhanced their progress. The second most frequent response
was support from the family which was reported by 12.8%.
Following these two variables were support from significant
other with 6.9%, promotions/career advancements with 6%,
and support from colleagues/friends with 5.5%. All other
responses were reported by less than 4.6% of the
respondents to have enhanced their progress towards
completion of the degree.
There were 162 total responses to the second open-
ended question that asked respondents to list the five most
significant factors that impeded their progress towards the
completion of the degree. The results of this question are
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
124
Table 44
Enhancing Factors
Category Label Count Percent Of Responses
Support from Family* 1
Support from Employer* 2
Support from Significant Other* 3
Financial Resources* 4
Employment* 5
Promotions/Career Advancement* 6
Previous Academic Achievement* 7
Sense of Cultural Identity* 9
Economic Investment in Degree* 11
Motivation to Succeed* 12
Responsibility to Children* 13
Responsibility to Career* 14
Responsibility to Spouse* 15
Ability* 18
Self-Concept* 19
Faculty-Student Relationship* 20
Choice of Chairperson* 22
Choice of Dissertation Topic* 23
Choice of Institution* 26
Univ. Commitment to Student* 29
Role Model to Hispanic
Community 31
Role Model to Children/
Family 32
Conduct Research 33
Prestige/Power 34
Role Model to Students 35
28
8
15
8
1
13
1
13
1
1
2
1
1
2
5
4
10
3
6
4
12.8
3.7
6.9
3.7
.5
6.0
.5
.5
.9
20.6
.9
.5
.5
.9
3
8
6
4
3
4
1
1.4
2.8
1.8
3.2
1.8
1.4
1.8
.5
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
125
Table 44 (Continued)
Category Label Count Percent Of Responses
Time 37 2 .9
Survival Instinct 38 1 .5
Self-Actualization 39 1 .5
Collegiality 40 8 3.7
Self-Discipline 41 3 1.4
Support from Colleague/
Friend 42 12 5.5
Free to Use New Technology 43 1 .5
Access to Data Needed 45 2 .9
Physical Factors 48 1 .5
Contribute to Hispanic
Community 50 2 .9
Death in Family 51 4 1.8
Personal Growth 54 2 .9
Total 218 100.0
Note. Variables utilized in the survey for this study (*).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
126
revealed in Table 45 which reports the variables,
frequencies of response and percentages of total responses.
The most frequent five responses reported by the
respondents to have impeded their progress were employment
with 16.7%, financial resources with 13%, time with 10.5%,
motivation to succeed with 8%, need to contribute to the
Hispanic community, with 5.6% and choice of chairperson
with 4.3%. The remaining variables that were identified by
the respondents were reported by less than 3.7 of the total
responses.
Comparison of Subgroups
In order to understand the affect of the selected
variables on those who completed the degree, and on those
who had not completed the degree, it was necessary to
compare these two groups. Cross tabulations were run for
each variable by each of the subgroups. The data report
that 63.6% of the respondents in this study had completed
their degree, while 21.6% were in the coursework stage of
the program and 5.9% were in the dissertation phase. There
were only 3.9% of the respondents who reported no intention
of returning to complete the degree. This information
gives us a better understanding of how these factors
affected each group of students. The following tables
report the frequency and percentage for each variable while
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
127
Table 45
Impeding Factors
Percent Of
Responses Code Count Responses
Support from Family* 1 1 .6
Support from Employer* 2 5 3.1
Support from Significant Other* 3 3 1.9
Financial Resources* 4 21 13.0
Employment* 5 27 16.7
Promotions/Career Advancement* 6 1 .6
Participation in Community
Service* 10 1 .6
Sense of Cultural Identity* 12 3 1.9
Motivation to Succeed* 13 13 8.0
Responsibility to Children* 14 4 2.5
Responsibility to Career* 15 2 1.2
Responsibility to Spouse* 18 1 .6
Ability* 19 4 2.5
Self-Concept* 20 2 1.2
Faculty-Student Relationship* 22 5 3.1
Choice of Chairperson* 23 7 4.3
Choice of Dissertation Topic* 24 1 .6
Changes in Committee* 25 3 1.9
Academic Preparation for
Dissertation* 26 4 2.5
Choice of Institution* 28 3 1.9
Univ. Commitment to Student* 29 6 3.7
Availability of Support
Services* 30 1 .6
Lack of English Proficiency 36 1 .6
Time 37 17 10.5
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 45
Responses
Self-Disc
Support f
Friend
Access to
Fear of EC
Peer Press"
Distance 4
Contribute
Communi*
Networking
Personal c"
Total
Note. Vav
I
A ____________________________________________________
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
129
comparing those who had already completed the degree from
those who had not completed the degree.
Crosstabulations of Personal Factors. The following
tables report the data obtained from the survey that looked
at the personal factors that were identified in the review
of the literature to affect progress towards the doctoral
degree and therefore utilized in the survey. Cross tabula
tions were run between each of these factors utilizing the
variable complete, that was created from item 69 on the
survey, to compare the reported responses for each factor
by the two groups of respondents— those who had completed
the degree and those who had not completed the degree.
The results of Table 4 6 reveal that support from
family was reported to strongly enhance or enhance progress
for 82.8% of the respondents who had completed their degree
and 85% of the respondents who had not completed their
degree.
There were 62.9% of the respondents who had already
completed the degree who reported that support from
employer enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress.
Similarly, 60% of the respondents who had not completed
their degree, reported that this variable had enhanced or
strongly enhanced their progress.
Support from significant other was reported by 7 9.4%
of the respondents who had completed the degree to have
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 46
Results of the Comparison of the Two Subgroups for Each of the Personal Factors From the
Survey
Variable
Strongly
Impeded Impeded
Did Not
Affect Enhanced
Strongly
Enhanced Total
Support from Family
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Cases (0)
0.0
0.0
8.6
5.0
8.6
10.0
25.7
25.0
57.1
60.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
Support from Employer
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Cases (0)
0.0
0.0
8.6
10.0
28.6
30.0
42.9
35.0
20.0
25.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
Support from Significant Other
Completed 2.9
Did Not Complete 5.6
Missing Cases (0)
0.0
5.6
17.6
27.8
26.5
5.6
52.9
55.6
65.4
34.6
100.0
Financial Resources
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Observations (1)
5.7
5.3
20.0
52.6
22.9
15.8
25.7
15.8
25.7
10.5
64.8
35.2
100.0
Employment
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Observations (2)
0.0
5.6
22.9
38.9
14.3
22.2
42.9
22.2
20.0
11.1
66.0
34.0
100.0
130
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 46 (Continued)
Strongly Did Not Strongly
Variable Impeded Impeded Affect Enhanced Enhanced Total
Promotions/Career Advancements
Completed 0.0 11.8 50.0
Did Not Complete 0.0 25.0 40.0
Missing Observations (1)
Previous Academic Achievement
Completed 0.0 0.0 22.9
Did Not Complete 0.0 0.0 26.3
Missing Observations (1)
Sense of Cultural Identity
Completed 0.0 8.6 22.9
Did Not Complete 0.0 0.0 30.0
Missing Observations (0)
Participation in Community Services
Completed 2.9 5.7 71.4
Did Not Complete 20.0 15.0 65.0
Missing Observations (0)
Economic Investment in Doctorate
Completed 0.0 6.5 51.6
Did Not Complete 5.3 26.3 31.6
Missing Observations (5)
23.5
25.0
48.6
47.4
28.6
25.0
11.4
5.0
22.6
26.3
14.7
10.0
28.6
26.3
40.0
45.0
8.6
5.0
19.4
10.5
63.0
37.0
100.0
64.8
35.2
100.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
62.0
38.0
100.0
131
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 46 (Continued)
Strongly
Variable Impeded
Motivation to Succeed
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 0.0
Missing Observations (1)
Responsibility to Children
Completed 2.9
Did Not Complete 15.8
Missing Observations (1)
Responsibility to Career
Completed 5.7
Did Not Complete 10.0
Missing Observations (0)
Responsibility to Spouse
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 25.0
Missing Observations (2)
Age
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 5.0
Missing Observations (0)
Did Not Strongly
Impeded Affect Enhanced Enhanced Total
5.9
5.0
20.0
31. 6
20.0
35.0
21.2
25.0
0.5
5.0
0.0
5.0
37.1
21.1
31.4
15.0
42.4
30.0
62.9
70.0
20.6
15.0
22.9
21.1
20.0
25.0
18.2
5.0
34.3
10.0
73.5
80.0
17.1
10.5
22.9
15.0
18.2
15.0
2.9
10.0
63.0
37.0
100.0
64.8
35.2
100.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
62.3
37.7
100.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
132
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 46 (Continued)
Variable
Strongly
Impeded Impeded
Did Not
Affect Enhanced
Strongly
Enhanced Total
Gender
Completed 0.0 5.7 65.7 25.7 2.9 64.8
Did Not Complete 0.0 5.3 84.2 10.5 0.0 35.2
Missing Observations
(1) 100.0
Ability
Completed 2.9 2.9 11.4 51.4 31.4 63.6
Did Not Complete 0.0 5.0 20.0 30.0 45.0 36.4
Missing Observations (0) 100.0
Self-Concept
Completed 2.9 5.7 8.6 48.6 34.3 63.6
Did Not Complete 0.0 10.0 5.0 20.0 65.0 36.4
Missing Observations (0) 100.0
133
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
reported that this variable had im£
40% reported that it had not affectc
Previous academic achievement
the respondents who had completed t
73.7% of those who had not complete
or strongly enhance their progress.
completed the degree, extracurricu]
reported by 62.9% of the respondent
progress, however, for those who had
degree, 60% reported that this vari
progress.
The variable sense of cultura]
by 68.6% of the respondents, who ha-
and by 70% of the respondents, who h
degree, to enhance or strongly enha
was found that participation in comm
reported to not affect progress by
who had completed their degree and
completed the degree. There were 25
pleted the degree, as compared to 8
the degree, who reported that this
strongly impeded their progress.
The economic investment in the
to not affect progress for 51.6% of
the degree while 42% reported that t
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
136
enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress in this sub
group. For those who had not completed the degree, 31.6%
reported that this variable had not affected their
progress, 36.8% reported that it had enhanced or strongly
enhanced their progress, and 31.6% reported that it had
impeded or strongly impeded their progress.
Motivation to succeed received a majority response
from both subgroups of respondents who reported that this
variable had enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress.
There were 94.1% of the respondents, who had completed the
degree, and 95% who had not completed the degree, who
reported that this variable had enhanced or strongly
enhanced their progress.
It was found that for the variables that focused on
the students' responsibilities to children, career and
spouse, the results were spread across scale of possible
responses. For the variable responsibilities to children,
those who had completed the degree reported that for 37.1%,
it did not affect their progress, while for 40% it had
enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress, and for the
remaining 22.9% it was reported that this variable had
impeded or strongly impeded their progress. For those who
had not completed the degree, 47.4% reported that
responsibilities to children had impeded or strongly
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
137
impeded their progress while 40% reported that it had
enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress.
It was found that for the variable responsibility to
career, 42.9% of the respondents who had completed the
degree reported that it had enhanced or strongly enhanced
their progress. Only 25.7% of this subgroup reported that
this variable had impeded or strongly impeded their
progress, and 31.4% reported that it had not affected their
progress. For the subgroup who had not completed the
degree, it was found that 40% had reported that
responsibility to career had enhanced or strongly enhanced
their progress while 45% reported that it had impeded or
strongly impeded their progress.
Responsibility to spouse was reported by 42.4% of
those who had completed the degree to not affect their
progress, while 36.4% reported that it had enhanced or
strongly enhanced their progress. For those who had not
completed the degree, 50% reported that this variable had
impeded or strongly impeded their progress, while only 20%
reported that it had enhanced or strongly enhanced their
progress and 30% reported that it had not affected their
progress.
This study revealed that age was reported by the
majority of both subgroups, 62.9% of those who had
completed the degree and 70% of those who had not completed
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
138
the degree, to not affect their progress. Of those who had
completed the degree, there were 34.3% who reported that
this variable had enhanced their progress.
Gender was reported by 65.7% of those who had com
pleted the degree and 84.2% of those who had not completed
the degree to not affect their progress. Only 5.7% of
those who had completed the degree, and 5.3% of those who
had not completed the degree, reported that this variable
had impeded their progress.
Ability was reported by 82.8% of those who had
completed the degree, and by 75% of those who had not
completed the degree, to enhance or strongly enhance their
progress. Self-concept was reported by 82.9% of those who
had completed the degree and 85% of those who had not
completed the degree, to enhance or strongly enhance their
progress. Only 10% of those who had not completed the
degree reported that this variable had impeded their
progress.
Crosstabulations of Institutional Factors. The
following tables report data from the survey questions that
investigated whether the institutional factors identified
in the review of the literature had enhanced or impeded
progress toward the completion of the doctoral degree.
Crosstabulations were run between each of these factors and
the variable complete that was created from item 69 in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
order to look at each factor as reported by th<
groups— those who had completed the degree and
had not completed the degree. The results are
Table 47 by frequency and percentage for each 3
The results reveal that faculty student r<
was reported to strongly enhance or enhance pr<
57.1% of the respondents who had completed theJ
55% of the respondents who had not completed ti
although 37.1% of the respondents who had comp.J
degree, and 20% of the respondents who had not
their degree, reported that this variable did 1
their progress.
It was found that the utilization of univ<
support services did not affect the progress of
those who had completed the degree and 4 0% of t
not completed the degree. However, for 40% of
had completed the degree and for 45% of those v
completed the degree, it had enhanced or stront
their progress.
The choice of committee chairperson was r
85.7% of those who had completed the degree an<
those who had not completed the degree to enhar
strongly enhance their progress, although, th
of those who had not completed the degree who
this variable had impeded their progress.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
^999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999^
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 47
Results of the Comparison of the Two Subgroups for Each of the Institutional Factors From
the Survey
Strongly
Variable Impeded Impeded
Did Not
Affect Enhanced
Strongly
Enhanced Total
Faculty-Student Relationship
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 10.0
Missing Cases (0)
5.7
10.0
37.1
20.0
40.0
35.0
17.1
25.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
Utilization of University Support Services
Completed 0.0 2.9
Did Not Complete 0.0 15.0
Missing Cases (0)
57.1
40.0
25.7
35.0
14.3
10.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
Choice of Committee Chairperson
Completed 2.9
Did Not Complete 0.0
Missing Cases (1)
5.7
15.8
5.7
21.1
34.3
21.1
51.4
42.1
64.8
35.2
100.0
Choice of Dissertation Topic
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 5.0
Missing Cases (0)
2.9
15.0
2.9
15.0
42.9
30.0
51.4
35.0
63.6
36.4
100.0
Changes in Committee
Completed 2.9
Did Not Complete 5.3
Missing Cases (0)
11.4
0.0
57.1
94.7
14.3
0.0
14.3
0.0
64.8
35.2
100.0
140
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 47 (Continued)
Strongly
Variable Impeded
Academic Preparation for Dissertation
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Cases (0)
Choice of Institution
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Cases (2)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Cultural Setting of the Institution
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 10.0
Missing Cases (0)
Presence of Hispanic Faculty
Completed
Did Not Complete
Missing Cases (5)
6.1
5.9
University Commitment to Student
Completed 0.0
Did Not Complete 5.0
Missing Cases (0)
Did Not Strongly
Impeded Affect Enhanced Enhanced Total
0.0
15.0
9.0
0.0
11.4
15.0
6.1
23.5
14.3
15.0
14.3
30.0
6.1
26.3
45.7
40.0
54.5
58.8
17.1
10.0
54.3
20.0
36.4
47.4
22.9
20.0
15.2
11.8
45.7
25.0
31.4
35.0
48.5
26.3
20.0
15.0
18.2
0.0
22.9
45.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
35.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100
100.0
100.0
141
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 47 (Continued)
Variable
Strongly
Impeded Impeded
Did Not
Affect Enhanced
Strongly
Enhanced Total
Availability of Support Services
Completed 0.0 14.3 40.0 40.0 5.7 100.0
Did Not Complete
Missing Cases (0)
5.0 20.0 30.0 35.0 10.0 100.0
142
143
The choice of dissertation topic was found to be
reported by 94.3% of the respondents who had completed the
degree and 65% of those who had not completed the degree to
enhance or strongly enhance their progress. There were 20%
of those respondents who had not completed the degree who
reported that this variable had impeded or strongly impeded
their progress.
The changes in committee was reported by a majority of
respondents in both subgroups to not affect their progress,
as reported by 57.1% of those who had completed the degree,
and 94.7% of those who had not completed the degree.
The academic preparation for dissertation was reported
by 85.7% of those who had completed the degree and only 55%
of those who had not completed the degree to enhance or
strongly enhance their progress. There were 30% of those
who had not completed the degree who reported that this
variable did not affect their progress.
The institutional variables utilized in this study,
choice of institution and cultural setting of the
institution, were reported by both subgroups as factors
that did not impede progress for a majority of the
respondents. The choice of institution was reported by
84.9% of those who had completed the degree, and 65% of
those who had not completed the degree, to enhance or
strongly enhance their progress. The cultural setting of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
144
the institution was found to be reported by 45.7% of those
who had completed the degree and 40% of those who had not
completed the degree to not affect their progress. An
additional 42.9% of those who had completed the degree
reported that this variable had enhanced or strongly
enhanced their progress, while only 25% of those who had
not completed their degree reported that this variable had
enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress and 25% of
this subgroup reported that it had impeded or strongly
impeded their progress.
The presence of Hispanic faculty was reported by 54.5%
of those who completed the degree and 58.8% of those who
had not completed the degree to not affect their progress.
There were 28.4% of those who had not completed the degree
who reported that their progress had been impeded or
strongly impeded by this variable. An additional 23.4% of
those who had completed the degree reported that this
variable had enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress.
The variable, university commitment to student, was
reported by 67.6% of those who had completed the degree and
70% of those who had not completed the degree to have
enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress. Only 20% of
those who had not completed the degree reported that this
variable had impeded or strongly impeded their progress.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Finally, the availability of s
reported by 45.7% of those who had
45% of those who had not completed
enhanced or strongly enhanced their
additional 40% of those who had com
I
30% of those who had not completed
that this variable did not affect t
Crosstabulations of Demoaraphi
following tables report the data fr
looked at the demographic variables
Crosstabulations were run between e
variables and the variable complete
item 69, in order to look at each f
two groups— those who had completed
who had not completed the degree.
mation provides an understanding on
teristics for each group. The resu
frequencies and percentages for eac.
In this study, the majority of
had completed their degree, while tl
respondents had not completed their
in Table 48, there were more female
completed their degree than male sti
4
fewer females who had not completed
-ft
male counterparts.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction
146
Table 48
Comparison of the Gender of the Respondents by the Variable
Complete
Variable: Sex Female Male Total
Degree Status
Complete 54.3 42.1 100.0
Did Not Complete 42.1 57.9 100.0
Missing Cases (1)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Of those responder
was reported that 53.4$
those who had not comp].
An additional 13.3% of
the degree, reported tt
also reported by those
that 21.4% had no chile
completed the degree re
Table 50 reports t
the variable cultural h
in reference to the com
who had completed the
cultural heritage was K
those who had not comp
cultural heritage was
there were 8.6% of the
degree, who reported th
another Hispanic countr
were no respondents who
reported that their cul
country of Hispanic ori
additional 14.3% of tho
26.3% of those who had i
their cultural heritage,
actual association withi
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
148
Table 49
Comparison of the Number of Children of the Respondents by
the.Variable Complete
Variable
Number of Children 0 1 2 3 4 5 Total
Degree Status
Complete 10.0 23.3 26.7 26.7 10.0 3.3 100.0
Did Not Complete 21.4 0.0 50.0 21.4 7.1 0.0 100.0
Missing Cases (11)
Table 50
Variable Completed
Variable
Cultural Heritage Mexican
Mexican-
American
Other
Hispanic Latino
Degree Status
Complete 11.4 65.7 8.6 14.3
Did Not Complete 15.8 57.9 0.0 26.3
Missing Cases (1)
Note. Total = 100.0,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
150
Table 51
Comparison .Between the Variable Doctoral Degree Ob-iective
and the Variable Completed
Variable
Doctoral Degree
Objective Ph.D.Ed.D.Total
Degree Status
Complete 44.1 55.9 100.0
Did Not Complete 36.8 63.2 100.0
Missing Cases (2)
Table 52
Comparison Between the Variable Class .Attendance and the
Variable Completed
Variable Part-Full-
Class Attendance Time Time Both Total
Degree Status
Complete 51.4 45.7 2.9 100.0
Did Not Complete 61.1 38.9 0.0 100.0
Missing Cases (2)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
151
Table 53
Comparison Between the Variable Professional Position and
the Variable Completed
Count Completed the Doctoral Degree
Row Pet
Col Pet Yes No Row
Tot Pet 1.0 2.0 Total
Current Professional Position
School Psychologist
1 1
50.0
2.9
1.9
1
50.0
5.3
1.9
2
3.8
Asst. Superintendent
2 10
83.3
29.4
18. 9
2
16.7
10.5
3.8
12
22.6
Asst. Principal
3 2
100.0
10.5
3.8
2
3.8
Superintendent
4 5
17.4
14.7
9.4
2
28.6
10.5
3.8
7
13.2
Principal
5 7
50. 0
20. 6
13.2
2
50.0
36.8
13.2
14
26.4
Administrator
6
100.
2
0
10.5
3.8
2
3.8
Dir. Title VII
7 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
152
Table 53 (Continued)
Count Completed the Doctoral Degree
Row Pet
Col Pet Yes No Row
Tot Pet 1.0 2.0 Total
Current Professional Position
Professor
8 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Counselor
9 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Dir. Bil. Ed.
10 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Personnel Admin.
11 3
75.0
8.8
5.7
1
25.0
5.3
1.9
4
7.5
Sr. Prog. Evaluator
12 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Dir. of Instruction
13 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Bilingual Resource
14 1
100.0
5.3
1.9
1
1.9
MRC Director
15 1
100.0
1
1.9
2.9
1.9
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
153
Table 53 (Continued)
Count
Row Pet
Col Pet
Tot Pet
Completed the Doctoral Degree
Yes No Row
1.0 2.0 Total
Current Professional Position
Retired
Superintendent
16 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1 1
1.9
School Site
Specialist
17 1
100.0
2.9
1.9
1
1.9
Column 34 19 100.0
Missing Cases (0)
Total 64.2 35.8 100.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
profes
of deg
tabula
gain i
profes
comple
the de
freque
as rep
comple
degree
freque
curren
while
major!
fessio.
most o
degree
this t.
doctor,
advanci
T
those i
complei
The me;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
155
Table 54
Average of the Year that Qualifying Exams Were Passed
Qualifying Exams
X 2D
Cases
For Entire
Population 87.5000 6.4212 42
Completed 86.5455 6.4212 33
Did Not Complete 91.0000 6.8374 9
Missing Cases (13)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
156
missing. These 13 missing cases represent those respon
dents who had not yet taken the qualifying exams as of the
time of this survey.
This table reports additional background information
on the respondents by reporting the average years in which
each group of respondents had taken the qualifying examina
tions. For those who had not completed the degree, this
group had taken their qualifying examinations, on the
average, in 1991, while those who had already completed the
degree had taken these examinations, on the average, five
years earlier in mid-1986.
Additional information about the two subgroups was
obtained by running crosstabulations for survey items which
asked respondents to indicate a variety of demographic
variables for the high school diploma, bachelor's degree,
master's degree and doctoral degree which included the year
each degree was conferred, the age upon entrance into each
degree program, the age of completion of each degree, the
GPA for each degree and whether the institution attended
for each degree was public or private.
Table 55 reports the average year that each degree was
conferred for each educational program for each subgroup,
those who had completed the degree and those who had not
completed the degree. The average respondents who had
completed the degree graduated from high school in 1964,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
157
Table 55
bv_the.Variable Completed
Did Not Entire
Conferred Degree Completed Complete Population
High School Diploma
Cases 33 19 52
X
64.1515 66.8421 65.1346
2D
6.2606 5.9746 6.2372
Missing Cases (3)
Bachelor's Degree
Cases 33 19 52
X
70.9394 72.1053 71.3654
2D 6.2606 5.9746 6.2372
Missing Cases (3)
Master's Degree
Cases 32 19 51
X 76.7500 78.8947 77.5490
2D
5.6454 11.5609 8.3050
Missing Cases (4)
Doctorate Degree
Cases 32 0 32
X 87.0625 00.0000 87.0625
2D 6.2576 .0000 6.2576
Missing Cases (23)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
158
received their bachelor's degree in 1970, their master's
degree in mid-1976, and their doctorate in 1987. For those
who had not yet completed the degree, the average
respondent graduated from high school in 1966, received
their bachelor's degree in 1972, their master's degree in
mid-1978 and had not yet received their doctorate.
Table 56 reports the average ages at the time of
entrance to each degree program and the average ages at the
time of completion of each degree program, for both those
respondents who had completed the doctoral degree and those
who had not completed the doctoral degree.
The average respondent who had completed the degree
entered high school at 14 years of age, entered their
bachelor's program at 20 years of age, entered their
master's degree program at 28 years of age and entered
their doctoral degree program at 36 years of age. For
those who have not completed the degree, the average
respondent entered high school also at 14 years of age, the
bachelor's degree program at 18 years of age, the master's
degree program at 29 years of age and the doctoral degree
at 42 years of age.
Table 56 indicates the average ages at the time of
completion of each degree program for both those respon
dents who had completed the doctoral degree, and those who
had not completed the doctoral degree. The average
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
159
Table 56
Age at-Entrance and-Completion of Degree. Programs,
High Bachelor's
School Degree
Master's
Degree
Doctoral
Degree
Entrance Age
Respondents Who Completed the Degree
Cases 30 32 31 31
X
14.1 20.2 28.0 36.1
2D
.8339 5.2255 5.2086 6.0023
Respondents Who Had Not Completed the Degree
Cases 18 18 18 14
X
14.2 18.3 29.0 42.5
2D
1.5925 2.0041 6.0293 6.3821
Age at Completion
Respondents Who Completed the Degree
Cases 33 33 32 32
X
17.6 24.7 30.3 41.3
2D .6990 5.0853 5.7690 4.8700
Respondents Who Had Not Completed the Degree
Cases 19 18 18 00
X
17.8 23.1 32.1 00
2D
1.1187 2.9682 5.0510 00
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
160
respondent who had completed the doctoral degree graduated
from high school at 17.6 years of age, received their
bachelor's degree at 24.7 years of age, received their
master's degree at 30.3 years of age and completed their
doctoral degree at 41.3 years of age. For those who have
not completed the degree, the average respondent graduated
from high school also at approximately 17.8 years of age,
received their bachelor's degree at 23.1 years of age,
received their master's degree at 32.1 years of age.
A gap of time began to develop between the entrance
and completion of degree programs for the two subgroups,
those who had completed the doctoral degree and those who
had not completed the doctoral degree, as they progressed
through the educational system.
Those who had completed the doctoral degree tended to
complete high school in four years, and waited two years
before entering a bachelor's degree program. This same
group tended to complete the bachelor's program in four
years, waited an additional four years before entering a
master's program which they completed in an average of two
years, and then waited six years before entering the
doctoral degree program.
Those who had not completed the doctoral degree at the
time of this study tended to also complete high school in
four years, however, this group did not wait before they
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
161
entered a bachelor's degree program immediately following
high school. This same subgroup, those who, had not
completed the doctoral degree, tended to complete the
bachelor's degree program in five years, and waited six
years before entering a master's degree program which they
completed in three years, and then waited 10 years before
entering a doctoral degree program.
Those who had not completed the doctoral degree had
begun their master's degree at 29 years of age and
completed it at 32.1 years of age. The average time span
for those who had successfully completed the degree
indicated that on the average these students had begun
their master's degree at 28 years of age, and had completed
the degree by 30.3 years of age. This same group who had
completed the doctoral degree, had on the average, begun
their doctoral program at 36 years of age and had completed
the doctoral degree by 41.3 years of age. Those who had
not yet completed the doctoral degree had begun the degree
at a later age, 42.5 years old, and had still not completed
the degree. It can be assumed from the age at completion
of high school and the average year of graduation from high
school, that most students who had not yet completed the
doctorate were approximately 46.5 years of age at the time
of this study.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
162
These data somewhat support the literature that sug
gests that those candidates who are successful in com
pleting the doctoral degree have less of a time span or gap
between degree programs. At this time, it is inconclusive
whether the 10 year gap between the end of the master's
degree and the beginning of the doctoral degree will affect
the completion of the doctoral degree for those who had not
completed the degree at the time of study. Those who had
completed the degree at the time of this study did report
less of a gap or time span between the completion of degree
programs and the entrance to subsequent degree programs,
which does support the literature.
Table 57 reports the average GPA during each degree
program for both those respondents who had completed the
doctoral degree and those who had not completed the
doctoral degree. The average respondent who had completed
the doctoral degree reported an average GPA in high school
of 3.25, a GPA of 3.36 in their bachelor's degree program,
a GPA of 3.71 during their master's degree program, and a
GPA of 3.76 during their doctoral degree program. For
those who have not completed the degree, the average GPA in
high school was 3.32, a GPA of 3.3 during the bachelor's
degree program, a GPA of 3.67 during the master's degree
program, and a GPA of 3.58 during the doctoral degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
163
Table 57
Average GPA During Degree Programs as Compared to the
Yariafole ggmpletsd
Did Not Entire
GPA Completed Complete Population
High School Diploma
Cases 28 19 52
X
3.2536 3.3235 3.2800
2D
.5406 .6870 .5934
Missing Cases (10)
Bachelor's Degree
Cases 29 18 47
X
3.3690 3.3000 3.3426
2D
.3983 .3395 .3746
Missing Cases (8)
Master's Degree
Cases 27 18 45
X
3.7111 3.6778 3.6978
.3055 .2579 .2848
Missing Cases (10)
Doctorate Degree
Cases 29 10 39
X
3.7690 3.5800 3.7205
2D
.2634 .3853 .3054
Missing Cases (16)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
164
The literature suggests that those who are successful
in completing the doctoral degree are more intelligent, as
indicated by a higher GPA, than those who did not complete
the degree. As indicated by Table 57, those respondents
who had already completed the degree tended to report only
a slightly higher GPA during the master's degree and
doctoral degree programs than those who had not completed
the degree. The GPAs during the bachelor's degree program
and high school tended to be somewhat the same for both
subgroups. Therefore, both groups seem to have made,
relatively, the same grades during all degree programs.
The literature has also suggested that the type of
institution— public or private— may play a role in the
completion of the doctoral degree. Table 58 reports the
type of institution attended by the respondents throughout
their progression of degree programs.
The average respondent, who had completed their
doctoral degree, had attended a public high school, a
public university for the bachelor's degree, a public
university for the master's degree and a private university
for their doctorate. The average respondent who had not
completed their doctoral degree had attended a public high
school, a public university for the bachelor's degree,
either a public or private university for the master's
degree and the doctoral degree. There did not seem to be
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
165
Table 58
Type of Institution Attended for Degree Programs as
Compared to the Variable Completed
High
School
Bachelor's Master's
Degree Degree
Doctoral
Degree
Those Who Completed Doctoral Degree
Public Institution
Cases 22 27 21 9
Percentages 68.7 87.0 68.0 29.0
Private Institution
Cases 10 4 10 22
Percentages 31.3 12.9 32.0 71.0
Those Who Did Not Complete Doctoral Degree
Public Institution
Cases 12 14 9 7
Percentages 71.0 78.0 63.0 50.0
Private Institution
Cases 5 4 8 7
Percentages 29.0 22.0 47.0 50.0
Missing Cases (4) (6) (6) (10)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
166
much difference between the responses of those who had
completed the degree and those who had not completed the
doctoral degree for this item, type of institution.
To further determine any variations in responses
between the two subgroups— those who had completed the
degree and those who had not completed the degree— cross
tabulations were run on survey items that asked respondents
background information on their employment status during
their coursework and the dissertation phase of the degree.
Table 59 reports the results in frequency distributions as
revealed by the respondents. It was found that for both
subgroups, a majority of respondents worked full-time
during the coursework, 87% of those who had completed the
degree and 94% of those who had not completed the degree.
During the dissertation phase of the degree program, a
similar frequency for both groups reported working full
time, 94% of those who had completed the degree and 93% of
those who had not completed the degree. Very few respon
dents from either subgroup reported working part-time
during either the coursework, 10.2%, or the dissertation
phase of the degree program, 6.1%. These findings support
the literature which suggests that the time to degree for
the doctoral degree in education is longer than other
academic areas, in part due to the fact that most doctoral
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
167
Table 59
Employment Status of the Respondents as Compared to the
Variable Completed
Completed the
Yes No
Degree
Total
Employment Status During Coursework
Part-time 1 4 1 5
80.0 20.0 10.2
13.0 5.0
Full-time 2 28 16 44
63. 6 36.4 89.8
87.0 94.0
Missing Observations (6)
Employment Status During Dissertation
Part-time 1 2 1 3
66.7 33.3 6.1
6.0 7.0
Full-time 2 33 13 46
71.7 28.3 93.9
94.0 93.0
Missing Observations (5)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
168
students in education are usually also full-time profes
sionals .
The literature suggested that family characteristics,
especially parents' emphasis on succeeding in school, can
affect the attrition and progress of students in graduate
programs. The following tables report background
information for both subgroups— those who completed the
degree and those who had not completed the degree.
When comparing mothers1 occupations between the two
subgroups, those who had completed the degree and those who
had not completed the degree, Table 60 reports that for
both subgroups, the response homemaker received the highest
frequency of responses. The remainder of the responses
reported by the respondents were stranded throughout the
table for both groups.
When comparing fathers' occupations between the two
subgroups, those who had completed the degree and those who
had not completed the degree, Table 61 reports that for
both subgroups, the most frequent responses were laborer
with 12% of the total responses, and self employed with
10%. The remainder of the responses reported by the
respondents received less than 8% of the total responses
for both subgroups.
When considering background characteristics of the
respondents, the results of the data analysis of cross
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
169
Table 60
Mothers1 Occupation Compared with the Variable ■Completed
Occupation Yes
Completed the Degree
No Total
Homemaker 1
Housekeeper 2
Seamstress 3
Field Worker 4
Accountant 5
Instructional Aide 6
Nurse 7
Secretary
Assembly Line Worker 9
Civil Service
Beautician
Retired
Teacher
Food Server
10
11
12
13
14
21
72.4
3
60.0
8
27.6 53.7
29
1
50.0
2
66.7
1
50.0
1
100.0
2
40.0
1
100.0
1
50.0
1
100.0
1
33.3
1
50.0
100.0
1
100.0
100.0
40.0
1
100.0
100.0
1
100.0
9.3
1
1.9
2
3.7
4
1.9
3
5.6
2
3.7
3
5.6
1
1.9
1
1.9
1
1.9
1
1.9
1
1.9
1
1.9
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
170
Table 60 (Continued)
Occupation Yes
Completed the Degree
No Total
Bookkeeper 15 1
100.0
1
1.9
Laborer 16 1
100.0
1
1.9
Missing Observations (1)
Column 35 19 54
Totals 64.8 35.2 100.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
171
Table 61
Fathers' Occupation Compared with the Variable Complete
Completed the Degree
Occupation Yes No Total
Pattern Maker 1 1 1
100.0 2.0
Labor Estimator 2 1 1
100.0 2.0
Carpenter 3 3 3
100.0 6.0
Mason 4 1 1
100.0 2.0
Barber 5 1 1
100.0 2.0
Field Worker 6 1 1 2
50.0 50.0 4.0
Engineer 7 3 1 4
75.0 25.0 8.0
Trucker 8 2 2
100.0 4.0
Laborer 9 6 6
100.0 12.0
Accountant 10 1 1
100.0 2.0
Custodian 11 1 1
100.0 2.0
Laundry Worker 12 1 1
100.0 2.0
Mechanic 13 1 1
100.0 2.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
172
Table 61 (Continued)
Completed the Degree
Occupation Yes No Total
Teacher 14 1 1
100.0 2.0
Military 15 1 1
100.0 2.0
Maintenance 16 3 3
100.0 6.0
Self Employed 17 3 2 5
60.0 40.0 10.0
Office Manager 18 1 1
100.0 2.0
Contractor 19 1 1
100.0 2.0
Foundry 20 1 1
100.0 2.0
Retired 21 1 1 2
50.0 50.0 4.0
Minister 22 1 1
100.0 2.0
Plant Foreman 23 1 1 2
50.0 50.0 4.0
Electrician 24 3 3
100.0 6.0
Groundsman 25 1 1
100.0 2.0
Plumber 26 1 1
100.0 2.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
173
Table 61 (Continued)
Completed the Degree
Occupation Yes No Total
Government Employee 27 1 1
100.0 2.0
Steelworker 28 1 1
100.0 2.0
Missing Observations (5)
Column 35 15 50
Total 70.0 30.0 100.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
tabulations reveal that, for both groups,
parents did not emphasize education. The
reported that 88.7% had parents who emphas
Open-ended Questions
Item 70 of the survey was an open-enc
asked the respondents to identify the five;
factors that enhanced progress towards the
the degree. The results to this item are
62 for each subgroup, those who had comple
degree and those who had not completed the
the factors identified from the review of
were included in the open-ended responses,
factors that were not found in the literat
When comparing the two subgroups in t
table, the factor motivation to succeed, r
the total percentage of responses, which i
factor as the most frequently reported fac
progress by both those who had completed t
those who had not completed the degree.
The five most frequent responses by t
pleted the degree, reported that the facto
succeed with 20.4%, support from family wi
from significant other with 6.6%, choice o
support from colleagues/friends both with
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
175
Table 62
The Most Significant-. Factors Percpivpri ho Enhance Progress
Towards Completion of the Degree as .Reported in Open-ended
Eounat
Count Completed the Degree
Row Pet
Col Pet Yes No Row
Tot Pet 1.0 2.0 Total
Enhancing Factors
Support from Family 1 20.0 8 28
71.4 28.6 12.8
13.2 12.1
Support from Employer 2 6 2 8
75.0 25.0 3.7
3.9 3.0
Support from
Significant Other 3 10 5 15
66.7 33.3 6.9
6.6 7.6
Financial Resources 4 5 3 8
62.5 37.5 3.7
3.3 4.5
Employment 5 1 0 1
100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Promotions/Career
Advancement 6 5 8 13
38.5 61.5 6.0
3.3 12.1
Previous Academic 7 1 0 1
Achievement 100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Sense of Cultural 9 1 0 1
Identity 100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table
Count
Row P
Col P
Tot P
Ecoi
I n Vi
Mot!
Sue-
i
Res
, ■
to tl
Re si
to i
Resj
to
]
Abi>
Sell
Facil
Rel<
Choq|
Chari
Chor
Dis£~
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
177
Table 62 (Continued)
Count
Row Pet
Col Pet
Tot Pet
Completed the Degree
Yes
1.0
No
2.0
Row
Total
Choice of 23 9 1 10
Institution 66.7 33.3 1.4
1.3 1.5
University's 29 1 3 4
Commitment to 25.0 75.0 1.8
Student .7 4.5
Role Model to 31 5 2 7
Hispanic Community 71.4 28.6 3.2
3.3 3.0
Conduct Research 32 3 0 3
100.0 .0 1.4
2.0 .0
Prestige/Power 33 3 1 4
75.0 25.0 1.8
2.0 1.5
Role Model 35 0 1 1
to Students .0 100.0 .5
.0 1.5
Time 37 2 0 2
100.0 .0 .9
1.3 .0
Survival 38 1 0 1
Instinct 100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Self-Actualization 39
100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Collegiality 40 6 2 8
75.0 25.0 3.7
3.9 3.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
179
from employer and collegiality with 3.9% had enhanced their
progress.
For those who had not completed the degree, their most
frequent responses regarding the factors that enhanced
their progress were motivation to succeed with 21.2%,
support from family and promotions/career advancements with
12.1%, support from significant others with 7.6%, financial
resources and self-concept and university's commitment to
student each with 4.5%.
The respondents were asked to respond to another open-
ended prompt that asked for the five most significant
factors that they perceived had impeded their progress
towards the completion of the degree. The results of this
item are reported in Table 63 for each subgroup, those who
had completed the degree and those who had not completed
the degree. Many of the factors identified in the review
of the literature were included in the open-ended
responses, as well as new factors that were not found in
the literature on previous studies on this topic.
The results of Table 63 report that the most
frequently reported factors that were perceived to impede
progress for both subgroups were employment, with 16.7% of
the total responses, and financial resources with 13% of
the total responses. The next most frequently reported
response was time, with 10.5% of the total responses.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
178
Table 62 (Continued)
Count Completed the Degree
Row Pet
Col Pet Yes No Row
Tot Pet 1.0 2.0 Total
Self-discipline 41 2 1 3
66.7 33.3 1.4
1.3 1.5
Support from 42 9 3 12
Colleagues/Friends 75.0 25.0 5.5
5.9 4.5
Free to Use New 43 1 0 1
Technology 100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Access to 45 2 0 2
Data Needs 100.0 .0 .9
1.3 .0
Physical Factors 48 1 0 1
100.0 .0 .5
.7 .0
Contribute to 50 1 1 2
Hispanic 50.0 50.0 .9
Community .7 1.5
Death in Family 51 4 0 4
100.0 .0 1.8
2.6 .0
Personal Growth 54 1 1 2
50.0 50.0 .9
.7 1.5
Missing Cases (3)
Column 152 66 218
Total 69.7 30.3 100
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
180
Table 63
The.Most Significant Factors Perceived to Impede Progress
Towards Completion of the Degree as Reported in Open-ended
Format
Count Completed the Degree
Row Pet
Col Pet Yes No Row
Tot Pet 1.0 2.0 Total
Enhancing Factors
Support from Family 1
Support from Employer 2
Support from
Significant Other 3
Financial Resources 4
Employment 5
Promotions/Career
Advancement 6
Participation in 10
Community Service
Motivation to 12
Succeed
1 0 1
100.0 .0 .6
1.0 .0
2 3 5
40.0 60.0 3.1
1.9 5.1
2 1 3
66.7 33.3 1.9
1.9 1.7
11 10 21
52.4 47.6 13.0
10.7 16.9
18 9 27
66.7 33.3 16.7
17.5 15.3
1 0 1
100.0 .0 .6
1.0 .0
0 1 1
.0 100.0 .6
1.0 .0
2 1 3
66.7 33.3 1.9
1.9 1.7
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 63 (Continued)
Count
Row Pet
Col Pet
Tot Pet
Responsibilities
to Children
Responsibilities
to Career
Responsibilities
to Spouse
Ability
Self-concept
Faculty-student
Relationship
Choice of
Chairperson
Choice of
Dissertation
Changes in
Committee
Choice of
Institution
Complete
Yes
1.0
13
14
15
18
19
20
22
23
24
26
69.
8.
2
50.
1.
1
50.
1
100.0
1.0
3
75.0
2.9
1
50.0
1.0
4
80.
3,
5
71.
4.
1
100.0
1.0
2
50.0
1.9
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
182
Table 63 (Continued)
Count
Row Pet
Col Pet
Tot Pet
Completed the Degree
Yes
1.0
No
2.0
Row
Total
Presence of 28 2 1 3
Hispanic Faculty 66.7 33.3 1.9
1.9 3.4
University's 29 4 2 6
Commitment to 66.7 33.3 3.7
Student 3.9 3.4
Availability of 30 0 1 1
Support Services .0 100.0 .6
.0 1.7
Lack of English 36 1 0 1
Proficiency 100.0 .0 .6
1.0 .0
Time 37 11 6 17
64.7 35.3 10.5
10.7 10.2
Self-discipline 41 0 2 2
.0 100.0 1.2
.0 3.4
Support from 42 1 0 1
Colleagues/Friends 100.0 .0 .6
1.0 4.5
Access to 45 4 0 4
Data Needs 100.0 .0 2.5
3.9 .0
Fear of Educational 46 1 0 1
System 100.0 .0 .6
1.0 .0
Peer Pressure 47 0 1 1
.0 100.0 .6
.0 1.7
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
183
Table 63 (Continued)
Count
Row Pet
Col Pet
Tot Pet
Completed the Degree
Yes No Row
1.0 2.0 Total
Distance to
University 49 3 3 6
50.0 50.0 3.7
2.9 5.1
Contribute to 50 6 3 9
Hispanic 66.7 33.3 5.6
Community 5.8 5.1
Networking 52 1 0 1
100.0 .0 .6
1.0 .0
Personal Growth 54 0 1 1
.0 100.0 .9
.0 1.7
Missing Cases (8)
Column 103 59 162
Total 63. 6 36.4 100.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
184
The most frequent responses, by those who had
completed the degree to this open-ended question regarding
the factors that they perceived had impeded their progress,
were employment with 17.5%, financial resources and time
with 10.7%, responsibilities to children with 8.7%, the
need to contribute to Hispanic community with 5.8%.
For those who had not completed the degree, their most
frequent responses regarding the factors that impeded their
progress were financial resources with 16.9%, employment
with 15.3%, time with 10.2%, responsibilities to children
with 6.8%, and the need to contribute to the Hispanic
community with 5.1%.
As evident in the preceding table, the same variables
were reported by the respondents from both subgroups as
factors that they perceived had impeded their progress.
The only difference between the two subgroups seems to be
that for those who had completed the degree, financial
resources was the second most frequent response, and
employment was the most frequent response. For those who
had not completed the degree, financial resources was the
most frequent response and employment was the second most
frequent response.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
185
t_ Test for Independent Samples for
the_Yariable Complete
The remainder of the analysis of the data collected
from this survey was completed using a £ test to determine
the variance of the means taken from the two subgroups—
those who completed the degree and those who had not
completed the degree— for each personal and institutional
factor utilized in the survey. Minium (1978) states that
"the £ test gives remarkably good results when applied in
situations characterized by non-normality, and in the case
of independent means" (p. 34 6) . Thus, the researcher chose
to use a £ test in comparing the means for the independent
samples of the variable complete. Using H-2 = d£, and
2 . < .05 or less significant level to determine the
significance of each variable. The results are presented
in Table 64 for personal variables from survey items 1-19,
and in Table 65 for institutional variables for survey
items 20-30.
As seen in this table, there are three variables that
are significantly different between the two subgroups;
financial resources, employment, and responsibilities to
spouse. This significance indicates that these variables
did affect the progress towaras the completion of the
doctorate for those who have not completed as compared to
those who had completed the degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
186
Table 64
Ifre -Results o£-a t Test Bethea the-Means .of Personal
Factors as Compared to the Variable Completed
Not
Completed Completed
Variable
X 2D X 2D £
Support from Family 4.31 .963 4.40 .883 -.33
Support from Employer 3.74 .886 3.75 .967 -.03
Support from
Significant Other 4.2 .963 4.0 1.283 .84
Financial Resources 3.45 1.245 2.73 1.147 2.09*
Employment 3.60 1.063 2.94 1.162 2.06*
Promotions/
Career Advancements 3.41 .892 3.20 .951 .82
Previous Academic
Achievement 4.05 .725 4.00 .745 .27
Extracurricular
Activities 2.91 .742 2.55 .826 1.68
Sense of Cultural
Identity 4.00 1.000 4.15 .875 -.56
Participation in
Community Service 3.17 .785 2.80 .894 1.60
Economic Investment
In Doctorate 3.54 .888 3.10 1.10 .252
Motivation to
Succeed 4.61 .779 4.75 .550 -.67
Responsibilities
to Children 3.31 1.078 2.78 1.273 1.60
Responsibilities
to Career 3.34 1.211 3.00 1.298 .98
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
187
Table 64 (Continued)
Variable
Completed
X 2h
Not
Completed
X SD. L
Responsibilities
to Spouse 3.33 1.021 2.60 1.353 2.24*
Age 3.40 .553 3.15 .875 1.30
Gender 3.25 .611 3.05 .405 1.31
Ability 4.05 .906 4.15 .933 -.36
Self-concept 4.05 .968 4.40 .995 -1.25
Note. p* < .05.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 65
The Results of a t Test Between thq
Eactors .as-CcanparecL Jto_ the Variabl
Variable
Completec
X 2D
i
Faculty-Student
Relationships 3.68 .83^
Utilization of
University
Support Services 3.51 .78
Choice of Committee
Chairperson 4.25 l.OlOi
Choice of
Dissertation
Topic 4.42 . 69t*
Changes in
Committee 3.25 .95C
Academic Preparation
for Dissertation 4.17 .6641
Choice of
Institution 4.24 . 9361
Cultural Setting
of Institution 3.51 .951
Presence of Hispanic
Family 3.33 1.051
University Commitment
to Student 3.77 .973
Availability of
Support Services 3.37 .80
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
As reported in Tabl
factors that were found
less. Although these fa
the respondents to have
there was no significant
these factors on the pro
The survey containe
which asked respondents ■
enhance the progress tow
degree in education for :
reports the response for
listed by their frequenc;
As reported in this
suggested that policy de'
consider financial assis
fellowships; establish pt
establish mentors student
encouragement for minorit
faculty who are in tenure
Inte
I
Ten respondents who
participate in a follow-i
were contacted by telephc
interview was conducted *
interview was recorded ar
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
190
Table 66
Suggestions for Policy Implementation at the University
Leval
Response
Frequency
of Response
20
11
10
8
7
1. Provide scholarships/financial
assistance/fellowships
2. Establish peer support groups
3. Identify mentor/role models
4. Support/encouragement for monitory students
5. Examine/better recruitment practices
6. Hire Chicano faculty as tenured track
employees, not just visiting professors
7. Support of academic advisor/
chairperson/faculty
8. Hire faculty who are interested in
minority students
9. Universities need to understand/
support cultural differences
10. Networking groups for minorities
11. Nurture minority students at BA
level or earlier
12. Treat students with respect
13. Provide minorities with the necessary
academic preparation and procedural
information
14. Pre-agreements with places of
employment to support the candidate/
support from employer
4
2
2
2
15. Supportive counseling staff
2
2
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
191
Table 66 (Continued)
Response
Frequency
of Response
16. University support systems 2
17. Connect with Hispanic professional
18. Dispense with faculty who have trouble
dealing with women and minorities
in power
19. Flexible faculty
20. Support for family of candidate
21. Admit applicants who meet the
entrance criteria
22. Establish a grievance procedure
for discriminatory practices
23. Allow students to work according
to individual learning styles
24. Maintain rigorous timelines for
the completion of the dissertation
25. Strategies for selecting supportive
chairpersons
26. Individualized support for commuter
students
27. Communication and assistance at the
dissertation level
28. Improve the availability of faculty
for students
29. Better admittance practices
30. Advertise/recruit in the
minority communities
organizations 1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
192
Table 66 (Continued)
Frequency
Response of Response
31. Provide a student placement services 1
32. Opportunity to earn degree on weekends 1
33. Offer a pre-doctoral orientation
program to process and product 1
34. University's commitment to the student 1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
193
raw data format. The interview questions were taken from
the three factors; financial resources, responsibilities to
spouse, and employment, which were identified significant
between those who had completed the degree and those who
had not completed the degree, utilizing a £. test for the
variance of means at a level of p < .05. The interview
further asked respondents to identify the single greatest
factors that enhanced or impeded their time to degree and
any additional pressures that affected their progress.
Finally, respondents were asked to suggest policy that
would enhance the completion of the doctoral degree in
education for Hispanic students.
Background Information on
Interview Respondents
The following characteristics apply to the 10 respon
dents who participated in the telephone interviews:
1. Of the total population, 40% were male.
2. There were 80% of the population who had already
completed the doctoral degree in education, either the
Ed.D. or the Ph.D. in Education.
3. There were 90% who were employed full-time during
their entire doctoral program.
4. There were 70% who attended a private university
for the doctorate program.
5. Professional responsibilities included superin
tendent (10%), director (20%), publisher's representative
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
194
(10%), assistant principal (20%), teacher (10%), principal
(20%), and independent businessman (10%).
6. All respondents were Latino with 70% of Mexican
origin.
The results of the interviews are reported for each
respondent in raw data format (Table 67) and discussed.
Of the 10 respondents who were interviewed, eight
reported some affect of financial resources on their
participation in the doctoral program. As reported in
Table 66, many of the respondents reported needed financial
assistance to complete the program, either from borrowing
money or receipt of scholarships from a variety of sources.
Only two respondents (one who had completed the degree and
one who had not completed the degree), felt that financial
resources were not a significant issue in their progress.
As indicated in this table, 80% of the respondents reported
some affect, either positive or negative, by financial
resources on their progress. These results do not support
the data from the £. test which reported that there was a
significant difference in the affect of financial resources
for those who had completed the degree and those who had
not completed the degree. These results do support the
findings of the survey which indicated that financial
resources were reported to affect progress, either
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Re
1 |
(C
2
(N
Co1
3
(0
4
(N
Co
5
(C
6
(C
7
(C
8
(Cf
9
(C
10
(C<
■ I I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
positively or negatively toward the complet
doctoral degree.
Table 68 looked at the second questio
view which asked respondents how responsiba
had affected their progress. The results
raw data format by respondent.
As evident from this table, there was
individual responses to this question, howi
majority report that this factor (responsi]
had affected their progress, either posit i'
tively. Those who reported an easier time
the degree tended to report a supportive S]
stood the time commitment that a doctoral <
Also, those who had already raised their ch
not need to share these additional respons;
their spouse reported a more supportive sp<
Table 69 reports the results to the i:
tions which asked respondents how employmei
progress. All 10 respondents reported thal
employed during their doctoral programs, a.
the respondents were employed full-time, ai
respondent was employed part-time.
Four of the respondents reported that
career advancement had affected, either poj
negatively, their progress as their new poj
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
197
Table 68
to SDOuse Affect Your Proaress Towards the Dearee?
Respondent Comments
(Completed)
2.
(Not
Completed)
3.
(Completed.
4.
(Not
Completed)
5.
(Completed)
My spouse was supportive.
My spouse has been very supportive— she's
going into the third year of her coursework
so I need to complete it soon.
When I started we had discussions on what
the program would entail so we both
understand the amount of time it would take.
The university had a retreat for students
and spouses to discuss the amount of time,
the nature of the program...it give them a
clear picture of what they would be
experiencing.
I didn't want to divorce during my doctorate
like so many do, so I had to do my studying
after my husband went to bed, he felt very
jealous, so did the kids of my time.
I had 100% of support from my husband. We
delayed getting new cars, taking vacations.
We refinanced our home. He knew that he
would have to do alot more picking up of the
children from school, taking them to music
lessons. I couldn't have done it without
him.
6 .
(Completed)
(Completed)
8 .
(Completed)
It was affected, but my spouse understood
and undertook some of the responsibilities
that I had been doing for several years. It
worked out well for me.
If you don't have a spouse you aren't going
to finish the degree. I was able to finish
because of my spouse.
It was more responsibilities child-wise,
was emotional.
it
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
198
Table 68 (Continued)
Respondent Comments
9.
(Completed)
I got rid of my spouse. I had been trying
to get a doctorate for years and he always
put some psychological impediment in front
of me, although he went for his doctorate.
10.
(Completed)
I have been married a long time and we have
no children at home. My spouse was very
understanding and proud of me and what I do.
He helped me to input the dissertation into
the computer.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 69
Results .of Interview,Question. 13; flaw. JJi
Affect Your Progress Towards the Degree?
Respondent
1.
(Completed)
2.
(Not
Completed)
3.
(Completed)
4.
(Not
Completed)
5.
(Completed)
Comments
During the program, I had
promotions, with new job r
and time commitments, whic'
for research.
Employment has been a facti
actually changing jobs thr«
this process probably did
do with it— but ULV has ex;
-people know that I am worj
coursework and it1s part oj
I have promoted.
I was a principal— there w<
that I couldn't attend claj
school early— I had a supp*
administration— I had alrel
principal for a couple of i
how to run things— I did m
At first, my superintendent
doctorate and was Latino) i j
supportive and I could do t
at work, the new superintei
supportive and he does not
and now all work has to be
It was very difficult doinc
homework, and all of the r«
When I started the degree
teacher and when I was off
all of the homework. When 1
administrator, I couldn't c
6 weeks, it was very difficij
out as a classroom teacher,!
coordinator, and an assist*
changed jobs three times dn
doctorate.
il
i
f:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
200
Table 69 (Continued)
Respondent Comments
6.
(Completed)
7.
(Completed)
8.
(Completed)
I elected to stay in a position where I was
instead of seek the next level, the
principalship. I felt that changing jobs
and completing the degree would not be
conducive, I stayed in a job that I was
familiar with. I changed jobs during the
coursework, but during the dissertation, no.
It slows things down, being that I couldn't
do it full time and that it was during the
busiest time of my career. I have a sales
type job where it was flexible, work was not
a deterrent— if I had my previous job, I
couldn't do it at all. I changed at the
beginning.
I was employed part-time— it didn't really
enhance it because I found myself in the
market.
9.
(Completed)
10.
(Completed)
I wouldn't let it— it would have been
wonderful to have been a full-time student.
I was a classroom teacher during all four
years although I changed sites— one job was
very stressful and going to school was the
only alleviator I had.
Well I was already in the program when I was
picked up as an AP (Assistant Principal)—
when I first went in I told my principal to
be that I was already in my second year and
that I had already bought my airplane
tickets— that I had this commitment which
would mean that I had to take off every
other Friday— he was supportive.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
increased job responsibilities and
of the respondents reported that th
in familiar professional positions
the completion of the degree, defer
the degree was near completion or c4
tive or unsupportive nature of the
reported by many of the respondents
progress, either positively or nega
Table 70 reports the results o
from the interview, which asked resj
single greatest factor that influen
the degree. Many respondents repor
sional position was a major factor i
ferred with their time spent on the
in Table 69, one respondent reported
influence was working in cohort grou
regular basis.
The choice of chairperson was <
single greatest factor that enhancec
respondent through the chairperson'
Another respondent reported that th^=
assistance and feedback affected th
to persist at times. Another respo
got involved in other things (8), a
the dissertation stage.
cr
1
l i >r* ■
b
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
202
Table 70
Results of Interview Question #4: What Do You Think Was
the Single Greatest Factor Influencing the Time it Took to
flbtai n.Xsy r-Degree 2
Respondent Comments
1. Job responsibilities, by the time I was at a
(Completed) point where I could focus on the
dissertation I was working 60-70 hours a
week and I had weekend commitments with my
job so it was hard to focus on the
dissertation.
2. A positive influence would be working with a
(Not diad partner, my university had support
Completed) groups who met on a monthly basis— as they
completed their degree, I now meet on a
weekly basis with my diad partner— constant
contact.
(Completed)
When I entered, I knew that it would take 5
years— it pretty much went according to my
schedule.
4.
(Not
Completed)
5.
(Completed)
My job— I have changed school sites but have
the same position.
I had thought that I would be finished
within the traditional window, and then I
didn't finish. I started as a classroom
teacher, then when the 5 years were up, I
was a coordinator, and already I had more
responsibility in my daytime job. I had
less time to do the coursework.
6. I chose the right chairperson for my
(Completed) though I had to change because I didn't
really have a dissertation topic, he stuck
with me— he didn't give up— I felt very
supported.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
203
Table 70 (Continued)
Respondent Comments
7.
(Completed)
Without a doubt, the lack of a regiment
provided by my advisor, the lack of written
response, the lack of facing a timeline.
Eventually, after a year of floundering
around after comps, I decided that I needed
to take a class that directed me
specifically to the elements of the
dissertation. I wasn't getting advise or
direction from my advisor, so I took this
class. I had two professors— administrator
types— both were very adversarial to my
topic, part was the determination that they
were full of it, and that I was going to do
it regardless of what they said. I enjoyed
the adversarial role, it was negative but it
was a very positive experience for me.
8.
(Completed)
I think I got distracted doing other things-
-I got involved with many other things— My
wife was also doing her Ph.D., I assumed
that she would finish her Ph.D. first— that
also was part of doing everything else.
9.
(Completed)
10.
(Completed)
My personal relationships— they sucked
energy out of me. I quit so that I could
spend more time with my relationship— she
was getting very jealous of the time.
I had to finish in three years— I couldn't
afford to pay on my own, I entered it
seriously; I go all out whatever it takes; I
never missed a class. I made friends who
cared about each other and supported each
other.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
204
The ability to pay on my own (10), influenced one
student to complete the degree within the timeframe of a
fellowship. An additional factor reported by a respondent
dealt with their involvement in personal relations: I quit
at times so that I could spend more time on my relation
ships (9) .
Table 71 reports the results of question 5, which
asked respondents to identify any additional pressures that
were felt in regards to completing their doctoral work or
dissertation. As evident in this table, the pressures were
commonly family, employment, committee, professional
jealousy, death in family, lack of support from advisors,
and participation in outside organizations. One inter
esting pressure that was not recognized in the literature
dealt with the student's participation in a new doctoral
program, which needed to test and document student progress
without taking into consideration the needs of the student.
The respondents reported that in a new program, there is
alot of pressure to perform (4), versus an established
university program.
At the conclusion of the interview, the respondents
were asked to suggest policies for universities that would
assist Hispanic students in the completion of a doctoral
degree in education. Some of the most common suggests were
for universities to offer:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 71
Results of Interview Question #5
Pressures, .If Any, .Pic* You Feel
Your.Doctoral Work, Especially t
Did These Pressures Originate?
Respondent Comment
1.
2.
3.
Pressure from fan
responsibilities,
they wanted to se
Contract in curre
receiving degree.
Employment— high
position AP, and
right now I am in
other demands. M
there is a pressu|
always the factor
The committee its
information. You
track? When you
was hard— if memb-
responding to the
Since I am in a n
of pressure to pei
an incomplete ana
every innuendo,
interviews with s
month, and they w
the same time. I
incomplete was su
that that1s not f
extra pressure.
'H
J
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
^99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999^
91
Table 71 (Continued)
Respondent Comments
5. During the disserta
doing the dissertat
me alot of support
district. I didn't
people supervising
doctorates, so they
of me taking compan
company time. This
greatest deterrent
on schedule.
My father died duri,
finished the course
the dissertation,
family set me back
choosing a topic ar
topic, that wasn't
spent 6 months on t J
depressed for 6 mon
lapsed between the
coursework and I Pi
The timeline is one
another was that my
I was missing them
pressures, alot of
Another aspect was
wouldn't pay foreve
the fact that I ha
wanted to finish i
pressure was me, c
you finish it? ReaJ
process involves ju,
This is truly just
to jump through th
determining that yo
through all given h,
almost a year and a
much, I wasn't inte
disenfranchised, I
lot of help, I was
checking in, it was
where the whole sys
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
207
Table 71 (Continued)
Respondent Comments
8. Nothing really.
9. One of the pressures was that I had a
committee chair who was very, very popular,
so she had very little time to give to me—
so then I changed to another committee
chair— who was an alcoholic— he had very
little time to share. It was difficult to
be with this alcoholic. There was internal
bickering among my committee members but I
didn't let it get to me, but I was very
aware of it.
10. Trying to be everywhere at once— I belong to
organizations on the outside. I have family
here, my mother, I think the biggest
pressure that I had was that my daughter had
two children while I was in the program, and
I couldn't be with her like I wanted to, she
resented it a little bit.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
208
1. A group that meets on a regular basis.
2. A cohort group of individuals, someone interested
in what you are doing. Hispanics in particular need that
connectedness.
3. Cohort groups that meet on a regular basis to help
students to stay connected with the university and doctoral
program (1).
4. A mentoring program may be the key for Hispanic
students (6).
5. Proactive recruitment and development of support
groups.
6. After the doctoral coursework to continue to
encourage yourself and others (2).
Another suggestion for policy development focused on
the instructional techniques used currently at the univer
sity level. One respondent suggested that instructional
methods at the university level be more tuned into instruc
tional practices at earlier educational levels: I had the
experience of working in a group for a project; I think
that with Hispanic women, we try to do it all— the mothers,
wives and work on our jobs. I think that I had the chance
to do what I could do the best for the project, the pres
sure was much less, I learned the most. If they could work
out projects that are within your lifestyle, in which you
can show that you met these objectives. We ask our
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
classroom teachers to do this,
university professors to do th-
be good teaching, even at the
my time on what I don't know i
picked one thing that we didn1
other. It was a very fulfilli
Along the same thoughts c
methodology with earlier educa
respondent stated that we have
preschool, who have that dream
change (9) in order to increas
students who receive doctorate
Another suggestion made t
provide workshops and/or retre
student and spouse by providin
standing of the requirements o
working with families (3).
Another policy suggestion
establish and/or encourage coh
trict to support and encourage
pursuit of the doctoral degree
that: People, who are within i
have a doctorate, could set up
the struggling doctoral studen
understand especially at the d
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
210
for the quals, they would understand that the time you use
would benefit the district. I now have someone above me
who has a doctorate, who understands, and can support time
(5) .
Another suggestion focused on the nature of the
graduate program for minority students. The suggestion was
made to offer proactive assistance at the beginning of the
program, to better prepare the minority students for
participation in the doctoral student through support,
assistance and especially, an interest in the student. One
respondent states that: Support would have been nice. The
university is very impersonal, people do not really care
whether you make it or don't. There's no built in support
unless someone takes an interest in you— my chair was
supportive, but not really effective as a true advisor.
Feedback was not something that I got— I got real feedback
from people outside of the university— unless you are
resourceful in finding the right support or expertise this
wouldn't have happened. You have to call on people and
they have to be willing to help (7).
Another respondent also commented on the nature of
support and its affect on her progress: We didn't feel
like alienated people; my chair was terrific, we supported
each other and delighted in one another; feelings of
camaraderie and support (10).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
211
one of the respondents reported that universities
should have a faculty representative of the student popula
tion, which would offer those minority students whfi prefer
to work with someone who may better understand their
cultur®. One respondent reported that: Hispanics are
fighting so many factors; the nastier you get with me the
strong I get; it was difficult; .01% of the Latino
population with doctorates does not make me feel good at
all. It is such an elite group, they don't make it easy
for the others to join the circle (9).
& final suggestion made by a respondent was to offer
financial assistance to Hispanic students in order to
increase the number of Hispanic students who complete their
doctoral degree.
Summary
This chapter reports the findings for this study. The
results of the survey instrument are reported in frequency
distribution tables. Crosstabulation tables reported the
differences in frequency between those who completed the
degree and those who had not completed the degree for each
personal and institutional variable.
Table 72 reports the mean value for each personal and
institutional variable as perceived by the respondents to
have enhanced or impeded their progress towards the com
pletion of the degree. The mean for each variable was used
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2 1 2
Table 72
Summary of the Factors as Reported to Have Affected
Progress Towards the Completion of the Doctoral Degree for
all ResDondents
Factors Mean
sn
Enhanced
Motivation to succeed 4.667 .700
Support from family 4.345 .927
Choice of dissertation topic 4.182 .983
Self-concept 4.182 4.182
Support from significant other 4.173 1.080
Choice of committee chairperson 4.130 1.065
Choice of institution 4.113 1.121
Ability 4.091 .908
Sense of cultural identity 4.055 .951
Previous academic achievement 4.055 .726
Academic preparation for dissertation 4.018 .871
Did Not Affect
University commitment to student 3 .818 1.090
Support from employer 3 .636 1.007
Utilization of University support
services 3 .473 .813
Cultural setting of institution 3 .382 1.045
Economic investment in doctorate 3 .380 .987
Employment 3 .377 1.130
Promotions/career advancements 3 .333 .911
Availability of support services 3 .327 .904
Age 3 .309 .690
Responsibility to career 3 .218 1.243
Financial resources 3 .204 1.250
Gender 3 .185 .552
Presence of Hispanic faculty 3 .140 .990
Changes in committee 3 .130 .825
Responsibility to children 3 .130 1.166
Responsibility to spouse 3 .057 1.200
Participation in community service 3 .036 .838
Impeded
Extracurricular activities 2 .782 .786
Note. The scale used for this table utilized 1 = Strongly
Impeded, 2 = Impeded, 3 = Did Not Affect, 4 = Enhanced, and
5 = Strongly.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
213
to determine their overall frequency of response by the
respondents.
As reported in this table, the variable with the
highest frequency of response that was reported to enhance
the progress towards the completion of the degree was moti
vation to succeed. The only variable whose mean placed
that variable under the impeded category was extracur
ricular activities.
The results of the two open-ended questions which
asked the respondents to list the five most significant
factors that had enhanced their progress, and the five most
significant factors that had impeded their progress toward
the completion of the degree, are summarized in Table 73.
The results of the open-ended questions on the survey,
which asked respondents to identify the five factors that
most enhanced and most impeded their progress, are reported
in frequency tables. The results of the open-ended
questions show that the most frequent factor reported by
the respondents to enhance their progress was the motiva
tion to succeed. The most frequent factor that was
reported by the respondents to impede progress was
financial resources.
When comparing the two subgroups used in this study,
those who had completed the degree and those who had not
completed the degree, Table 74 reports the perceptions of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
214
Table 73
Summary .gf. the. Factors -as-Reported.to .Have Affected
Progress. . Towards , the. .Completion, of . the Doctoral .Degree for
all. Respondents
Factors Mean SD
Enhanced
Motivation to succeed 4.667 .700
Support from family 4.345 .927
Choice of dissertation topic 4.182 .983
Self-concept 4.182 4.182
Support from significant other 4.173 1.080
Choice of committee chairperson 4.130 1.065
Choice of institution 4.113 1.121
Ability 4.091 .908
Sense of cultural identity 4.055 .951
Previous academic achievement 4.055 .726
Academic preparation for dissertation 4.018 .871
Ld Not Affect
University commitment to student 3.818 1.090
Support from employer 3.636 1.007
Utilization of University support
services 3.473 .813
Cultural setting of institution 3.382 1.045
Economic investment in doctorate 3.380 .987
Employment 3.377 1.130
Promotions/career advancements 3.333 .911
Availability of support services 3.327 .904
Age 3.309 .690
Responsibility to career 3.218 1.243
Financial resources 3.204 1.250
Gender 3.185 .552
Presence of Hispanic faculty 3.140 .990
Changes in committee 3.130 .825
Responsibility to children 3.130 1.166
Responsibility to spouse 3.057 1.200
Participation in community service 3.036 .838
ipeded
Extracurricular activities 2.782 .786
Note. The scale used for this table utilized 1 = Strongly
Impeded, 2 = Impeded, 3 = Did Not Affect, 4 = Enhanced, and
5 = Strongly.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
215
Table 74
Perception bv.Those Who Had Completed the Degree of Factors
that Affected Progress Towards the Completion
Factors Percent
Strongly Enhanced
Motivation to succeed 73.5
Support from family 57.1
Support from significant other 52.9
Choice of dissertation topic 51.4
Choice of committee chairperson 51.4
Choice of institution 48.5
Sense of cultural identity 40.0
Financial resources 25.7
Enhanced
Previous academic achievement 48.6
Ability 51.4
Academic preparation for dissertation 54.3
Self-concept 48.6
University commitment to student 45.7
Faculty-student relationship 40.0
Support from employer 42.9
Employment 42.9
Did Not Affect
Participation in community service 71.4
Gender 65.7
Extracurricular activities 62.9
Age 62.9
Utilization of University support
services 57.1
Changes in committee 57.1
Presence of Hispanic faculty 54.5
Economic investment in doctorate 51.6
Promotions/career advancements 50.0
Cultural setting of institution 45.7
Responsibility to spouse 42.4
Responsibility to children 37.1
Responsibility to career 31.4
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
216
the respondents as to the affect of these same personal and
institutional variables on their progress. This table
reports the highest column percent from the crosstabula
tions, which represents the most frequent response for each
factor as revealed by each subgroup.
Table 74 reveals that for the perceptions as reported
by the subgroup who had completed the degree, there were no
factors that were reported to have impeded or strongly
impeded their progress. The factor motivation to succeed
was again reported by more respondents in this subgroup to
have strongly enhanced their progress.
The perceptions of the respondents of the two sub
groups— those who had completed the degree and those who
had not completed the degree— show similarities and
differences. Those who had not completed their degree
reported four factors that strongly enhanced their progress
that were not reported by the other group (Table 75); self-
concept, ability, university commitment to student, and
academic preparation for dissertation. Only those who had
completed the degree reported that financial
responsibilities strongly enhanced their progress.
The results of a i test that was conducted between the
means of the two subgroups, those who had completed the
degree and those who had not completed the degree revealed
that only three personal variables were significantly
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
217
Table 75
Esrcegtioa,_of -Factors by-Those Who ..Had-Nat-Completed the
Degree
Factors Percent
Strongly Enhanced
Motivation to succeed 80.0
Self-concept 65.0
Support from family 60.0
Support from significant other 55.6
Choice of institution 50.0
Ability 45.0
Sense of cultural identity 45.0
University commitment to student 45.0
Choice of committee chairperson 42.1
Academic preparation for dissertation 35.0
Choice of dissertation topic 35.0
Enhanced
Previous academic achievement 47.4
Faculty-student relationship 35.0
Availability of support services 35.0
Support from employer 35.0
Did Not Affect
Changes in committee 94.7
Gender 84.2
Age 70.0
Participation in community service 65.0
Presence of Hispanic faculty 58.8
Utilization of University support services 40.0
Promotions/career advancements 40.0
Cultural setting of institution 40.0
Did Affect
Economic investment in doctorate 31.6
Responsibility to spouse 30.0
Impeded
Extracurricular activities 60.0
Financial resources 52.6
Employment 38.9
Responsibility to career 35.0
Responsibility to children 31.6
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
different between these two c
employment and responsibil ti
The next segment of t^.is*
question on the survey, wh^cli
policy changes for univers^t:
completion of the doctoral^ds
students, is reported by free
Finally, this chapter rt
interviews that were conduct^-
responses are reported in tat
quency of responses.
The findings of the sur»i
to understanding the factors
perceive to affect their proc
the doctoral degree in educat
results, conclusions of this
further research will be disc
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
219
Chapter 5
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
In this chapter, the study is summarized and the major
findings are highlighted. A discussion reports the con
clusions of this study to determine the factors that
enhance and impede the progress towards the completion of
their doctoral degrees in education for Hispanic students.
Finally, recommendations for further research and
implications for policy and practice are suggested.
The purpose of this study was to identify the factors,
as perceived by Hispanic degree recipients, doctoral
candidates and doctoral students, that enhanced and impeded
progress towards the completion of the doctoral degree in
education; to identify the factors that affected progress
towards the completion of the degree that were signifi
cantly different between those who completed the doctoral
degree and those who had not completed the degree; and to
propose policies to improve the completion rate for
Hispanic students in doctoral programs in education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
This study surveyed Hispar
recipients, doctoral candidates
education, who were currently v
district or county office of ec
California, in order to determi
factors that enhanced and impec
the completion of the degree.
The study was designed to
selected group of factors that
review of literature to affect
graduate programs. It was cons
investigation of the factors th
progress of Hispanic students t
doctoral degree, it would provi
improvements.
This investigation was cor
survey questionnaires to 260 pu^
superintendents and county off!
tendents in Southern California
asked to identify Hispanic pers
completed a doctoral degree in
currently working on a disserta '
doctoral degree in education,
three surveys. Responses to th
82, with only 55 surveys that a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
221
this study. There were 13 school districts that returned
all of the surveys and five school districts which called
the researcher because of a lack of personnel in their
school districts that met the criteria for this study.
Upon the analysis of the data of the survey instru
ment, an interview guide was developed to further probe the
significant results of the survey. Ten individuals who had
completed the survey instrument were selected to parti
cipate in a recorded telephone interview.
The interview asked interviewees to respond to the
three significant factors, as revealed in the £ test
analysis of the survey instrument, as well as two more
questions that asked about additional factors that affected
their progress toward the completion of the doctoral
degree. Finally, the respondents were asked to identify
any suggestions for policies that would improve the
completion rate for Hispanic students in doctoral programs
in education.
Summary of the Results of the Survey Instrument
Background Information .of Respondents
Some of the significant data regarding the respondents
were as follows:
1. The ratio of those who had completed the degree to
those who had not completed the degree was about two to one
among the respondents who met the criteria for this study.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2. The ratio of men to w
among the respondents.
3. The ratio of those wh
were divorced or single was ab
respondents.
4. The number of respond
children was about 47%.
5. The ratio of Mexican-
Hispanic cultures was one to o
respondents.
6. Of those who responde
those who were pursuing the Ed
one to one and a half.
7. The majority of the r
on a part-time basis indicated
8. The most frequent res
26.4% and assistant superinten
9. The average responden
from high school in 1965, gradi
degrees in 1971, received thei:4
and for those who have completi
received the doctoral degree ii
10. The average responden
approximately 17 years old upo
24 years old at the time of re
1
1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
223
degree, 30 years old upon receipt of the master's degree,
and those who had completed the doctoral degree were 41
years old at the receipt of the doctoral degree.
11. The average respondent to the survey had an
approximate GPA from high school of 3.28, a GPA from the
bachelor's degree of 3.34, a GPA from the master's degree
of 3.69, and for those who have completed the doctoral
degree, a GPA of 3.72 from the doctoral degree.
12. The average respondent attended public high
school, a public university for the bachelor's degree, a
public university for the master's degree and a private
university for the doctoral degree.
13. During the coursework and the dissertation stage
of the doctoral degree, the average respondent was employed
full-time.
14. Based on frequency of response, the family back
ground profile of the average respondent can be suggested
as a mother who was a homemaker, a father who was a
laborer, and whose parents' highest level of education was
some secondary without receipt of a high school diploma,
but who emphasized the value of an education.
15. The average respondent was involved in community
service and professional organizations while not involved
in graduate student activities during the course of the
doctoral program.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
224
The Findings of the Survey Instrument
As reported in the preceding chapter, the mean value
of each variable was used to determine the perceived affect
of each factor along a continuum that ranged from strongly
enhanced (5.0), enhanced (4.0), did not affect (3.0), to
impeded (2.0) and strongly impeded (1.0) in regards to
progress made towards the completion of the doctoral
degree. The respondents rated each selected variable along
this continuum. Following are the results of this
instrument.
Selected Factors that Were Perceived
to Enhance Progress
The following findings, from the survey instrument,
reveal the results of the perceptions of the respondents to
selected personal and institutional variables used in the
survey, that they reported had enhanced their progress
towards the completion of the doctoral degree.
1. The variable, motivation to succeed, as reported
in the survey findings, was perceived by the respondents as
the most frequent variable that enhanced the progress
toward the completion of the doctoral degree. This
variable was reported most frequently in both the Likert
Scale selection, and the open-ended question of the survey.
2. The variable, support from family, was the second
most frequent response, in regards to the frequency of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
225
response for the factors selected for the survey, that was
perceived by the respondents to enhance their progress
toward the completion of the doctoral degree as indicated
in both the Likert Scale section and the open-ended
question on the survey.
3. Additional variables that were perceived by the
respondents in the Likert Scale section of the survey to
enhance their progress toward the completion of the
doctoral degree in education were; choice of dissertation
topic, self-concept, support from significant other, choice
of committee chairperson, choice of institution, ability,
sense of cultural identity, and previous academic
achievement as presented in the order determined by each
variable's mean value of frequency of response.
4. The results of the open-ended question on the
survey also indicated that 23.1% of the respondents
perceived that promotions and career advancements enhanced
their progress toward the completion of the degree.
Selected Factors that Were Perceived
to.Impede Progress
The following findings from the survey instrument
report those selected variables that were perceived by the
respondents in this study to impede their progress towards
the completion of the doctoral degree.
1. Only extracurricular activities were reported by
the respondents, in the Likert Scale questions of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
survey, to impede progress t,
doctoral degree in education
2. The findings of the
survey revealed that financi.
responsibilities to children,
topic was perceived by the r
progress toward the completi
Selected Factors that Were P
to Not Affect Progress
The following factors w
the respondents, to not affe
completion of the degree. T
selected variables listed be
between did not affect at 3.
(enhanced = 4.0). The indiv
variable is reported in the ]
1. The variable univer
as defined as the university
the student, had a mean valu<
did not affect category (3) ,
category (4).
2. Other variables who
the respondents were found t
continuum between enhanced a
following; support from empl
support services, cultural sq
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
economic investment in doctorate, •
career advancements, availability c
responsibility to career, financiaJ
presence of Hispanic faculty, chanc.
responsibility to children, responj]
participation in community service i
The findings of the survey inJ|
individual responses made by the r6
reported that selected factors had
strongly impeded their progress; hcf
the mean value of response for eaclf
factors whose mean value placed it
extreme categories, strongly enhanc
Findings of the Perceptions of ThoSi
Who. Had Completed the Degree for
Selected Factors
The following findings are reg
tabulation analysis between each oi
used in the survey instrument and c
the purposes of this analysis, call
determined from whether the respond
doctoral degree or had not complete
The following findings are reF
respondents who had completed the d
respondents reported that there wen.
strongly enhanced, enhanced, or did
1
- W
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
228
progress; however, there were no factors that they reported
that had strongly impeded or impeded their progress. The
findings indicate that:
1. Motivation to succeed was reported by approxi
mately three-quarters of the respondents, who had completed
the degree, to have strongly enhanced their progress.
2. A majority of the respondents who had completed
the degree to have strongly enhanced their progress toward
the completion of the degree: Support from the family,
support from significant other, choice of committee chair
person, and choice of dissertation topic.
3. Approximately two-fifths of the respondents who
had completed the degree reported that the following
factors strongly enhanced their progress: Choice of
institution, and a sense of cultural identity.
4. Approximately one-quarter of the respondents in
this subgroup reported that financial resources strongly
enhanced their progress toward the completion of the
degree.
5. An approximate majority of the respondents in this
category, perceived that the following factors enhanced
their progress toward the completion of their degree:
Academic preparation for dissertation, ability, previous
academic achievement, self-concept, university commitment
to student, and faculty-student relationship.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
229
6. A majority of the subgroup utilized in this study,
who had already completed their doctoral degree in
education, reported that they perceived that the following
factors did not affect their progress: Participation in
community service, gender, extracurricular activities, age,
utilization of university support services, changes in
committee, presence of Hispanic faculty, economic invest
ment in doctorate, and promotion/career advancements.
7. Approximately one-third of the respondents in this
subgroup reported that the cultural setting of the
institution, responsibility to spouse, responsibility to
children, and responsibility to career did not affect their
progress toward the completion of the degree.
Findings of the Perceptions of Those
Who Had, .Not .Completed the Degree
Ear . aelftcted. Factors
The following findings are based on the cross tabula
tion analysis between each of the selected factors used in
this study, and the variable not completed, created to
indicate those respondents who had not completed the
doctoral degree. The following findings are reported for
this subgroup, those who have not completed the degree,
that indicated that there were factors that strongly
enhanced, enhanced, did not affect and impeded their
progress; however, there were no factors that were reported
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
by thi
findir
]
four-f
degree
pleted
the fa
instit
comple
3
this s
report
univer
chairp
choice
progre.
4
who ha
academ
abilit;
enhanci
degree
5
subgroi
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
by this subgroup to strong^
findings indicate that:
1. Motivation to suci
four-fifths of the responded
degree, to have strongly er
2. A majority of the
pleted the degree reported
the family, support from si
institution strongly enhanc
completion of the degree.
3. Approximately two-|
this subgroup of those who
reported that ability, sens
university commitment to st
chairperson, academic prepa
choice of dissertation topi
progress toward the complet
4. Slightly more than
who had not completed the d
academic achievement, facul
ability of support services
enhanced their progress tow
degree.
5. More than a majori
subgroup of respondents, wh>
)
I
•r
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
231
reported that changes in committee, gender, age, partici
pation in community service and presence of Hispanic
faculty did not affect their progress toward the completion
of their doctoral degree.
6. Approximately one-third of the respondents in this
subgroup, perceived that utilization of university support
services, promotions/career advancements, cultural setting
of institution, economic investment in doctorate, and
responsibility to spouse did not affect their progress
toward the completion of the degree.
7. A majority of this subgroup, who had not completed
their doctoral degree in education, reported that they
perceived that extracurricular activities, and financial
resources impeded their progress.
8. Approximately one-third of the respondents in this
subgroup reported that employment, responsibility to
career, and responsibility to children, impeded their
progress toward the completion of the degree.
Summary of the Results of the Interview
The variables reported from the interviews to affect
progress toward the completion of the degree for the
respondents, support the selection of variables taken from
the review of the literature and utilized in the survey
instrument. The results of the interviews also support the
findings of the survey, which indicated that the selected
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
232
variables financial resources, responsibilities to spouse,
employment affected, either positively or negatively, the
progress of the respondents towards the completion of their
degree.
Background on Respondents to
the Interview
In summary, the respondents who participated in the
interviews were:
1. Sixty percent female.
2. Eighty percent had already completed the doctoral
degree in education.
3. In professional positions as one superintendent,
two principals, two directors, two assistant principals,
one publisher's sales representative, one teacher, and one
businessman.
4. Fifty percent had children who were adults.
Results of the Interviews
The results of the interview indicate that the
findings of these three variables; financial resources,
responsibilities to spouse, employment, that were
identified by a t test to be significantly different
between those who had completed the degree, and those who
had not completed the degree, support the results of the
survey which found that these same variables had impeded or
enhanced progress toward the completion of the degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Financial Resources
The results of
reported that there
between those who h^
had not completed th
resources. Most of
reported that this v
yet most did need to
burden of the progra
loans. For others,
their time to degree
From the result
clear distinction wh
who had completed th
had not completed th
the interviews for t
findings of the L te
the sample (eight re
degree) and the size
Responsibilities to
The results of
reported that there i
between those who ha<
had not completed the
sibilities to spouse;
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
234
that this variable had had an affect on their progress, in
that, those whose spouses were supportive and helpful
throughout the doctoral process indicated that this
variable had enhanced and even greatly enhanced their
progress. For others, it produced a hardship that added to
the pressures that were already inherent in the nature of
being a doctoral student.
Again, from the results of the interviews, there was
not a clear distinction whether this variable had affected
those who had completed the degree any differently from
those who had not completed the degree. Therefore, the
results of the interviews for this variable do not support
the findings of the £. test, due in part to the biased
nature of the sample (eight respondents had already
completed the degree) and the size of the interview sample.
Employment
The results of the £. test from the survey analysis
reported that there was a significant difference (p. < .05),
between those who had completed the degree and those who
had not completed the degree for the variable employment.
Most of the respondents reported that this variable had had
an impeding affect on their progress, in that, through
promotions and career advancements their time commitments
had increased during the extent of their participation in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
235
the doctoral program, which tended to lengthen the time to
complete the degree.
Progress was also affected, both positively and
negatively, for some respondents by the support or lack of
support given by their employer. For those whose employers
did not understand or support their efforts, they reported
a hardship in managing the two roles of professional and
student. For those whose employers did understand and
support their efforts, they reported that their progress
was definitely enhanced through their ability to schedule
their time and manage their workload.
For others, who had made a conscious decision to
remain in a familiar professional position throughout the
doctoral program and forego advancement, their employment
tended to enhance their progress towards completion.
Again, from the results of the interviews, there was
not a clear distinction whether this variable had affected
those who had completed the degree any differently from
those who had not completed the degree. Therefore, the
results of the interviews for this variable do not support
the findings of the £ . test, due in part to the biased
nature of the sample (eight respondents had already
completed the degree) and the size of the interview sample.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
236
Single Greatest.Factor Influencing
Time to Obtain,.the.Degree
The results of the interview question, that asked
respondents to indicate the single greatest factor that
influenced their time to obtain the degree, found that
overwhelmingly, job responsibilities; followed by a lack of
an established university cohort group, especially during
the post-coursework phase of the program; personal
relationships; personal and business distractions outside
of the doctoral program; and choosing the right chair
person, negatively impacted the time that these respondents
took to complete the degree.
Suggestions for Policy Development
In summary, the suggestions for policy development at
the university level in order to increase the number of
Hispanics who complete the doctoral degree were:
1. Develop cohort groups that meet on a regular basis
that include professors and students to mentor and support
students.
2. Hire faculty at the universities, including
Latinos, who have an interest in assisting and care for
Hispanic students.
3. Offer workshops for spouses to better prepare them
to understand and empathize with the rigors of the life a
student.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
237
4. Update university teaching methodologies to
include the systemic reforms that are occurring at
elementary and secondary levels, such as relating learning
to life and student strengths.
5. Develop mentor programs within school districts to
support doctoral students' efforts.
6. Develop committee chairpersons to better advise
and assist doctoral students with the dissertation process.
7. Provide financial assistance in the form of loans,
fellowships, and scholarships to students.
Conclusions
Given the limitations of this type of investigation,
there are conclusions that can be drawn from the findings
and inferences that can be made. The findings support the
conclusions that there are factors that are perceived by
the respondents to enhance, not affect and impede their
progress toward the completion of the degree. Furthermore,
it can be concluded that for both subgroups, utilized in
this study, the most frequently reported factor that
enhanced or strongly enhanced progress toward the
completion of the degree was motivation to succeed. The
interviews support this premise that those who completed
the degree succeeded as a result of their own individual
motivating circumstances. Respondents reported that they
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
would not let it (impeding fac
succeeded because of my person
In concluding whether the
ences in factors, between thos
degree and those who had not c
results of the £. test of the s
the variables employment, resp
financial resources were signi'
the results of the interviews
the £. test, however, the size
and the bias towards those who
degree (eight), may account fo
Conclusions Regarding the
Review of the Literatu
for Doctora
Personal Factors
Support. The results of :
agree with the literature that
in positively affecting progrej
the degree for all doctoral stx
spouse, committee chairperson,
recurring themes as reported ir J
open ended questions and the ir:
family was the second most free
both the Likert scale (53.8%) &
i
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
(57.1%), as well as a freqc
interviews.
The results of this st
on Hispanic students that s
was a supportive home envii
sized education (Gandara, 1
reported that 88.7% of the
education. In response to
respondents who reported eir
it is important to mention
respondents to the survey a
interview had already compl
Financial Resources.
chapter, the results of the
survey, the open-ended ques
interviews support the find
suggest that financial reso
the degree. As reported in
financial resources with a
to affect the progress of t
However, there is support i
which suggested that there
the affect of financial res
completed the degree and th
degree. There were 25.7% o
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
240
completed the degree that reported that this variable had
strongly enhanced their progress. Additionally, in the
open-ended questions, 57.4% of the respondents reported
that financial resources had impeded their progress. In
the interviews, financial resources was frequently
discussed as both an enhancing factor and an impeding
factor. Particular reference was made, in both the open-
ended questions, and the interview responses, to the
importance of the availability of financial resources for
Hispanic students in order to increase their number
representing those who have completed doctoral degrees in
education.
Employment. The results of the Likert scale items on
the survey, the open-ended questions and the interviews
support the literature on the affects of employment on
progress towards the completion of a doctoral degree. This
study found that from the survey, 38.9% of those students
who had not completed the degree reported that this
variable had impeded their progress, and from the open-
ended questions, 44.7% of the respondents felt that
employment impeded their progress. Of those who had
completed the degree, employment was reported to enhance
progress for 42.9%. The interviews reported that many of
the respondents had either made career advancements which
affect their time to work on the degree, or they had made a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
conscious decision t<
degree.
Previous Academ.
suggests that previoi
indicator of success
program (Astin, 1982,
The results of this :
variable previous ac<
in the results of th<
factor that enhanced
degree. Of those who[
that this variable hi
accordance to these 3
completed the degree
enhanced their progre
Background char;
survey indicated that
completed the degree
bachelor's degree, 3.
the doctoral program,
completed the degree J
bachelor's program, 2
the doctoral degree,
literature that sugge
school was a strong i
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
242
doctoral level (Clewell, 1987). For this particular group
of Hispanic respondents, although their GPAs in previous
academic programs were not outstanding, the doctoral degree
rate of completion was 68.6%, with only 3.9% of the
respondents self-reported as A.B.D.s (All But Disserta
tion), without an intention to complete the degree.
Without any particular reason, it appears that this group
of respondents were typically very successful profes
sionally, and reported a higher success rate for the
completion of the doctoral degree.
Extracurricular Activities. The literature suggested
that for minority students, previous experience with
leadership roles were predictors of persistence in academic
programs (Sedlacek & Webster, 1978) and participation in
extracurricular programs such as professional organizations
affect success in graduate school (Allen, Haddad, &
Kirkland, 1984; Clewell, 1987).
The results of this study support these findings in
many facets. This variable was the only factor reported
with a mean value of 2.78 that placed it on the continuum
in the category impeded of the Likert scale items. For
those who had already completed the degree, 62.9% reported
that this variable did not affect their progress. For
those who had not completed the degree, 60% reported that
it had impeded their progress. The professional
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
243
occupations of the respondents is another indicator of
their degree of participation in extracurricular
activities.
Overwhelmingly, the pool of respondents for this study
were successful professionally, in occupations such as
principal (26.4%) and assistant superintendent (22.6%)
which in the nature of the job, require many hours of
extracurricular activities. The interviews also supported
this profile of the respondent as professionally success
ful. Ninety percent of the respondents to the interviews
could be considered as professionally successful by their
position and accomplishments in extracurricular activities.
Cultural Identity. The literature suggested that a
strong sense of cultural identity and a feeling of
commitment to the community positively served as an impetus
for attainment of degrees (Astin, 1982; Gandara, 1979;
Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974; Webster, 1978). This study
found that the variable sense of cultural identity was
reported by 60% of the respondents to have strongly
enhanced or enhanced their progress for both those who had
completed the degree and those who had not completed the
degree. The open-ended questions revealed many responses
in which the respondents reported that a factor that had
enhanced their progress was a commitment to the Hispanic
community and the desire to serve as a role model for other
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
245
their program, their completion had been strongly enhanced
by their own tenacity to succeed against all odds.
Personal Responsibilities. Much attention in the
literature has been given to personal responsibilities that
deter from the time and attention to research during a
doctoral program. This study also found that for those who
had not completed the degree, the variables responsibili
ties to children and responsibilities to family were
reported by 35% and 31.6% of the respondents, respectively,
to impede their progress. Although, these two variables,
responsibilities to children and responsibilities to
family, were not reported in the Likert scale items to
enhance or impede progress for the overall pool of
respondents. The open-ended questions reported that
responsibilities to children impeded progress for 27.7% of
the respondents.
It is interesting to suggest that although the popula
tion in this study was Hispanic, the typical stereotype of
the Hispanic family with many children did not prevail.
The overall population was 50% female, and all female
respondents were employed in professional positions. The
average number of children was 2-3 and the variable respon
sibilities to children was not reported as a significant
deterrent to the completion of the degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
246
In the interviews, many reported that a motivating
factor that encouraged their completion was to again parti
cipate in the lives of their children and grandchildren,
who basically were on hold during the course of this
program.
Marital Status. The literature reports ambiguous
findings to the affects of marital status on the completion
of the doctoral degree. Earlier studies had reported a
relationship between attrition and marital status
(Renetzky, 1966; Tucker et al., 1964), however, Valentine
(1987) did not report a relationship. Of the respondents
to this study, 84.6% were married. For the purposes of
this study, marital status was combined with responsibili
ties to spouse since responsibilities to a spouse is
usually inherent in a marriage.
This variable responsibilities to spouse was reported
by 37.7% of the respondents to not affect their progress,
32% to have impeded or strongly impeded their progress, and
by 30.2% to have enhanced or strongly enhanced their
progress. These results are distributed evenly across the
continuum for this pool of respondents.
The £. test analysis of the means indicated that there
was a significant difference in the variable respon
sibilities to spouse between these two subgroups, those who
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
247
had completed the degree and those who had not completed
the degree.
When respondents were asked about the affect of this
variable, responsibilities to spouse, in the interviews,
many who had completed the degree, reported their inability
to have finished without the support and understanding of
their spouse who had assumed many responsibilities around
the home and children. Others reported hardships due to
the lack of support and their personal responsibilities to
their spouse.
Age. Early research indicated that age was a factor
in the probability of success (Feick, 1969; Renetzky, 1966;
Rosenhaupt, 1958), although, later studies (Valentine,
1987) found that age was not a significant factor. This
study found that the majority of the respondents (65.5%)
reported that age did not affect their progress, and 25.5%
reported that their age had enhanced their progress.
The mean age of the respondents upon entrance to the
doctoral program was 38.8 years of age. However, it must
be remembered that the average doctoral student in educa
tion is somewhat older, since the majority are working
professionals who may need the degree for further advance
ment. Of these respondents, the majority were working
professionals who had reached the higher levels of their
profession. These findings did support the recent
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
literat
success
QS
of a dc
student!
(1990)
higher
longer
are mor
In
male ap
reporte
value
complet
the deg*
degree
progres
gender
of the
of the i
Th
which s'
towards
Munoz, :
female
1
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
had affected their progr«
degree. The affects of
1
Hispanic women in the fi
Ability. The intel
long been considered the
do not complete the degn
Tucker et al., 1964; Val3
studies that do not suppc
lectual ability is signi:
(Franklin, 1970; Reeble,
This study found th.
respondents, when asked J
progress, reported a meai
in the category of facto
those who had completed t1
ability had enhanced the^
had not completed the dec
strongly enhanced their c
these data, it can be sue
that their ability was a
towards the completion off
reported GPAs for these
These findings support tl.
affect the persistence ar
degree, although it may hi
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
from motivation, as evidenced by the lo^
and the high level of respondents who h?
degree.
Self-concept. The variable self-Cj
in the literature to divide students int
successful and those who are unsuccessfv
Roth, 1954). Many studies have reportec
academic ability (Jackson, 1985), a strc
confidence towards studies (Renetzky, 19
assurance of academic ability (Clewell,
persistence until completion of the doct
This study found that the variable
reported by 48.6% of those who had comp.'
have enhanced progress, and by 65% of tt
completed the degree to have strongly er
The overall mean value of this variable
indicates that this factor, on the avera
progress for these respondents.
The interviews further supported tl
respondents may have implied that they r
positive self-concept through reports tY
let (negative variables) affect their pi
they were advancing to higher levels of
enrolled in the doctoral program, and th
determination to succeed (7 and 9) . Alt!
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
252
The results of the survey found that for those who had
completed the degree, 57.1% reported that this relationship
had enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress, and for
those who had not completed the degree, 60% had reported
that this variable had enhanced or strongly enhanced their
progress. There were only 20% who had not completed the
degree, who reported that this factor had impeded or
strongly impeded their results.
This study found support for the literature as
reported in the findings of the survey, that reported the
factor faculty/student relationships had enhanced or
strongly enhanced their progress. Interview response also
voiced a need for support from faculty and the success of
students who had developed a positive relationship with
faculty (7, 9, and 10) .
Utilization of Support Services. The literature
suggested that the success of Hispanic students is affected
by a reluctance to seek out university services
(Friedlander, 1980; Payan et al., 1982; Trujillo, 1981).
The findings of this study report that for those who had
completed the degree, 4 0% reported that this variable had
enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress. Another
variable, availability of support services looked at the
perceptions of the respondents as to whether these services
were available at their universities. For both those who
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
253
had completed the degree (40%) and for those who had not
completed the degree (35%) reported that this variable had
enhanced their progress.
It can be concluded that they were aware of the
services, and utilized these services to positively affect
their completion. As reported in the interviews, many of
the respondents had received federal grants, scholarships,
or fellowships, which would imply that this population had
utilized university services to meet their financial needs.
These results do not support the literature, however, the
particular characteristics of this population of educators
may be more prone to accessing the system than the typical
Hispanic student.
Dissertation. The literature suggested that there are
a variety of factors associated with the dissertation
process with affects, positively and negatively, progress
towards the completion of the degree (Cunningham, 1970;
Renetzky, 1966; Valentine, 1987). To fully understand the
factors associated with the dissertation process, this
study looked at a variety of variables under this heading,
choice of committee chairperson, changes in committee,
choice of dissertation topic, and academic preparation for
the dissertation.
The results of the survey suggested that for those who
had not completed the degree, these respondents felt that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
three of thes
(42.1%), chol
preparation £
progress. On
affect their 1
For thos
reveal that 5
chairperson a
enhanced prog
for dissertat
that changes
results of th
that choice o
significant f
this populati
The inte
of the affect
completion of
questions rep
associated wi
lack of avail
or committee 1
writing the d
dissertation
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
255
Characteristics of the Institution. The literature
has suggested that the success of the Hispanic student may
be affected by the institutional characteristics of the
institution, such as cultural setting of the institution
(Payan et al., 1982). For the purpose of this study, the
survey asked respondents to evaluate the affect of the
cultural setting of their institution to their progress
towards the completion of the degree.
For both those who had completed the degree and those
who had not completed the degree, the most frequent
response was did not affect progress. There were 42.9% of
those who had completed the degree who reported that this
variable had enhanced or strongly enhanced their progress.
There were 25% of those who had not completed the degree
who reported that this variable had impeded or strongly
impeded their progress, however, the reason why is still
inconclusive. It can be determined that some part of this
variable did affect a portion of those students who had not
completed the degree.
Presence of Hispanic Family. Another variable
associated with the relationship between Hispanic doctoral
students and faculty, presence of Hispanic faculty, was
reported by 54.5% of those who had completed the degree,
and 58.8% of those who had not completed the degree to not
affect their progress. These findings do not support the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
256
literature which suggests a need for minority faculty
(Clewell, 1987).
Although this variable, presence of Hispanic faculty
was not supported in the findings of the survey, many of
the responses to the open-ended question and interview
question suggested policies to increase the completion rate
of Hispanic doctoral students by improving the support of
faculty for Hispanic students and increasing the presence
of Hispanic faculty.
Institutional Commitment to the Student. The findings
of this study support the literature on the importance of
the university's commitment to the student as evidenced by
assistance to students, support for students, instructional
practices that encourage learning, and understanding of
specific students. The results of the survey reported that
for those who had completed the degree, 68.9% reported that
this variable had enhanced or strongly enhanced their
progress. For those who had not completed the degree, 20%
reported that this variable had impeded or strongly impeded
their progress, and 70% reported that their progress had
been enhanced or strongly enhanced by their university's
commitment to them.
Interviews found a general dissatisfaction for the
component of doctoral programs that make students, who are
successful professionals, jump through hoops (7) instead of
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
257
showing a true commitment to helping the student learn and
succeed. Other comments supported the findings that
universities generally do not facilitate the completion of
the doctoral degree through program or instructional
practices that focus on the successes of the student (4, 7,
and 9) .
Due to the lack of innovation in many established
university programs for doctoral degrees, many pro
fessionals are turning to newer, innovative programs, such
as weekend programs, even at the expense of flying across
state for classes (4, 9, and 10), or the endurance of an
accelerated pace for the program. Many of these respon
dents reported a sense of camaraderie in these close knit
programs, that nurture, support and practice learning
principles that are reflective of good teaching.
Recommendations
Further Research
Much remains to be studied in the areas of attrition
and retention, and in particular, the factors that enhance
and impede progress towards the completion of the doctoral
degree. The research on Hispanic students at the graduate
level is limited and inconclusive. Further study in this
area would help educators at all levels of academic
programs to better understand, support and to plan
instructional programs to increase the success of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
students' population. Further research
factors that enhance program completion
in a more extensive study.
This study focused on the Hispanic
Further research focused on the
staff and program and instructional prad
universities who have been successful in
completion rate for all doctoral studentl
to this study, particularly for all Hisd
students.
Due to the bias of this study towai
already completed the degree, further re
students who do not persist in a doctoral
completion, would allow universities, an
advisors, a better understanding of the
influence attrition.
Recommendations for Policy Development
The final part of this study focusJ
tions for universities' development of c
that would increase the completion rate
dents. As part of the open-ended questi
the survey, respondents were asked to id
suggestions. Respondents who participatl
process were also asked to recommend pol
university program development. The fol
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
recor
tatior
«
ness t i
sions
better!
discus
]
sional;
requir
beginn
studen
encour
have n
A
Hispan
reconun
studen
models
I
improv
'i
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
260
lower levels of academic programs are struggling with
increasing the success rate for Hispanic students, the
entire system should work together to focus on changes that
will present universities with Hispanic students who are
fully prepared for academic success at the university
level. Recruitment strategies should encourage increased
participation of Hispanic students at the elementary,
middle school, and high school levels in pre-university
experiences at the universities. It is never too early to
begin focus on even graduate programs.
Improve the quality of the advisors, whose role it is
to facilitate the writing and research of the doctoral
student rather than to impede success. Regular evaluations
of advisors by university administrators might encourage
advisors and chairpersons to focus on the students.
This study found that many respondents recommend that
universities treat students with respect to culture as well
as professional successes. As indicated in this study, the
sample population was compiled of individuals, who had had
much success professionally, however, at the university
level they may not be recognized or valued as a profes
sional. It was further recommended that a grievance
procedure for the mistreatment of students be developed at
the universities. Students do not really have anywhere to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
take their concerns, frustrations and mistreatments by
faculty.
Universities should work with school districts, who
supply the doctoral students in education for the most
part, to build an understanding with the employer that the
students will need to make arrangements for time to conduct
research and to write the dissertation. The research will
benefit both the university and school district eventually.
In considering the life of the doctoral student, the
university could provide assistance to spouses of doctoral
students, either through meetings, a retreat, organized
activities or counseling. The degree of understanding helc
by the spouse will directly affect the progress of the
doctoral student and positively reflect on the university
faculty and program. If students are successful, the
school is successful.
It is hoped that the results of this study have added
to the initial contribution of other studies in the area ofi
factors that enhance and impede progress towards the com
pletion of a doctoral degree for Hispanic students. This
study is a small contribution to the body of research on
the minority student, whose previous successes have been
minimal in contrast to the majority population. It is
hoped, that further research and development of policy for
all levels of educational programs can increase the
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
successes of
built on sou
As the
graphic rese
levels of ed
administrati
have some re
programs to
university 1
Element
of tomorrow,
preparing th
successes ar
secondary in
programs, ho
way to gradu
of articulat
programs all
tomorrow, an
more success
by all educa
to teach all
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
263
References
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
264
References
Abedi, J., & Benkin, E. (1987). The effects of students'
academic, financial, and demographic variables on time
to the doctorate. Research in Higher Education.
21(1), 3-14.
Abrams, H. G., & Jernigan, L. P. (1984). Academic support
services and the success of high-risk college
students. American Educational Research Journal.
21(2), 261-274.
Allen, W. R., Haddad, A., & Kirkland, M. (1984).
Preliminary report: 1982 graduate professional survey,
national study of Black college students. Ann Arbor,
MI: The University of Michigan Center for Afro-
American and African Studies.
Astin, A. W. (1982) . Minorities in American higher
education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Astin, A. W. (1975) . Preventing.students from drooping
out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Astin, H. S., & Cross, K. P. (1979). Student financial aid
and persistence in college. Los Angeles: Higher
Education Research Institute.
Astin, H. W., & Burciaga, C. P. (1982). Chicanos in higher
education: A summary of progress and recommendations.
Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute.
Barela, A., & Others. (1976). Chicanos in higher
education: Status and issues. Albuquerque, NM:
University of New Mexico Press.
Bean, J. P. (1982a). Conceptual models of student
attrition: How theory can help the institutional
researcher. In E. Pascarella (Ed.), Studying student
attrition: New directions for institutional research
(pp. 29-36). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Bean, J. P. (1982b). Student attrition, in
confidence: Interaction effects in a c
Research in Higher Education. 12, 291-
Bean, J. P. (1985). Interaction effects ba
level in an explanatory model of colla
dropout syndrome. American Educational
Journal. 22.(1)/ 35-64.
Benkin, E. M. (1984). Where have all the d
gone?: A study of doctoral student att.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uni
California, Los Angeles.
Berelson, B.
States.
(1960). Graduate education in
New York: McGraw-Hill Book C
Berger, J. (1989, May 3).
worry on filing job.
Slowing pace to
New.._York Times.
Best, J. W. (1981). Research in education.
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Blackwell, J. E. (1983). Networking and me
of..cross-generational experiences of B
graduate and professional schools. At
Southern Education Foundation.
Braddock, J. H.
attrition,
(1981). Desegregation and :
Urban .Education, 15. , 403-4
Bundy, S. M. (1968) . Prediction of success
program of the school of education of
of Southern California. Unpublished d[
dissertation, University of Southern C'
Angeles.
Calathes, R. (1991) . The perpetuation of si
inequality. NEA Higher Education Jour:
Calkins, D. S., & Whitworth, R. (1974). Pi:
prediction of freshman grade point ave
two ethnic classifications at a southwi'
university. El Paso: University of Te*
Document Reproduction Service ED 102 1
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
266
Camara, K. (1992). Minority students get help in seeking
advanced degrees. In K. Lieb (Ed.), Chronicle of
higher education: Education.almanac (p. 48).
Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Carmichael, 0. (1961). Graduate education, a critique and
a program. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1961.
Carrington, C. H., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1976). Attitudes and
characteristics of Black graduate students. College
Park, MD: Maryland University, Cultural Study Center.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 132 234)
Carter, D. J., & Wilson, R. (1992). Minorities in higher
education (1991 Tenth Annual Status Report).
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education
Publications Dept.
Carter, T. P., & Segura, R. D. (1979). Mexican-Americans
in school; A decade of_change. New York: College
Entrance Examination Board.
Centra, J. A. (1974). Women, men, and the doctorate.
Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Chacon, M. A., Cohen, E. G., & Strover, S. (1986).
Chicanas and chicanos: Barriers to progress in higher
education. In M. A. Olivas (Ed.), Latino college
students (pp. 48-52). New York: Teachers College,
Columbia University.
Civian, J. T. (1990). Examining duration of doctoral study
using proportional hazards models. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
Clewell, B. C. (1987). Retention of Black and Hispanic
doctoral students. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing
Service.
Coleman, J. A., & Others. (1966). Equality of educational
opportunity. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare.
Cook, M. M. & Austin, S. (1978). The interaction of
student and program variables for the purpose of
developing a model for predicting graduation from
graduate programs over a 10-year period. Research in
Higher Education. &, 83-91.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
267
Cooper, H. M., Baron, R. M., & Lowe, C. A. (1975). The
importance of race and social class information in the
formation of expectancies about academic performance.
Journal of Educational Psychology. £2, 312-319.
Cortes, J., & Others. (1989). Bevond language: Social and
cultural factors in schooling Language minority
students. Sacramento, CA: State Department of
Education.
Cronbach, L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological
testing. New York: Harder.
Cross, P. (1974). The woman student. In W. T. Furniss &
P. A. Graham (Eds.), Women in higher education (pp.
24-56). Washington, D.C.: American Council on
Education.
Cummings, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the
education of bilingual children. Bilingual Education
P . ap.e. F Series./ 1(2), 22-25.
Cummings, J. (1976). The influence of bilingualism on
cognitive growth: A synthesis of research findings and
explanatory hypothesis. Working Papers on
Bilingualism, 1, 22-40.
Cummings, J. (1981). The role of primary language
development in promoting educational success for
language minority students: A theoretical framework.
Los Angeles, CA: Evaluation and Dissemination and
Assessment Center, California State University.
Cunningham, P. (1970). Completion study report on
completion problems in the PhD program at the
University of Chicago. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Chicago.
D'Arms, J. H. (1990). Universities must lead the effort to
avert impending national shortages of PhD's.
Chronicle of Higher Education. 1(17), 43.
De Baca, R. (1975). Participation of Hispanics in
administration and review of educational programs..
In R. P. Duran (Ed.), Hispanics' education and
background: Predictors of college achievement (pp. 12-
13). New York: College Board Publications.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Duncan, B. L. (1976)
T. Hartnett (Ed(
development . . o f
227-241)
Company.
Camb
Duran, R. P. (1983)
Predictors of q
■ft
Board Publicati
Edmunds, R. R. (1983
learning: Schoo
C. Smith (Ed.),
educators (pp.
Association of
Feick, R. (1969) . d!
universities co
Unpublished doc
Feldman, S. (1974) .
graduate and or
McGraw-Hill.
Fraenkel, J. R., & W.
evaluate, .reseat
Inc.
Franklin, J. (1970).
students in the
at Arizona Stat
dissertation, A
Freedman, J. (1972).
prejudice as de
Journal of Eexs
228.
Friedenberg, E., & Ri
university- ch
Friedlander, J. (198| j
services reachi"
College Student
Gandara, P. C. (1979 | |
high academic aif
socio-economic ji
dissertation, U ■
I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6 T
269
Gann, L. H., & Duignan, P. J. (1986). The Hispanics in the*
United States. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Garcia, S. A. (1980) . Problematic issues for Blacks in
doctoral psychology programs. Professional
Psychology. 11(5), 812-817.
Gilbert, M. G. (1982). The impact of graduate school on
the family system: A systems view. Journal of College
Student Personnel. 2 1 , 128-135.
Goldman, R. E., & Hewitt, B. (1975). An investigation of
test bias for Mexican-American college students.
Journal of Educational Measurement. 12, 187-196.
Goldman, R. E.f & Richards, R. (1974). The SAT prediction
of grades for Mexican-American versus Anglo-American
students of the University of California, Riverside.
Journal of Educational Measurement. 11(2), 129-135.
Gosman, E., & Others. (1982). Student progression and
attrition in college: Does race make a difference?
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Association for the Study of Higher Education,
Washington, D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 219 042)
Grossman, H. (1984). Educating Hispanic students.
Springfield, IL: Thomas Publishing.
Gutierrez, J. (1981) . Study of attrition of Chicano
students at the University of Southern Colorado.
Denver: Mid Continental Regional Laboratory, Inc.
Hall, M., & Allen, W. R. (1982). Race consciousness and
achievement: Two issues in the study of Black
graduate/professional students. Integrated Education.
2£(4), 56-61.
Hamaker, M. L. (1986). Mexican-American language minority
college performance and persistence. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles.
Hamilton, I. B. (1973). Graduate school programs for
minority/disadvantaged students l Report of. .an. initial
survey. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
270
Haro, C. M. (1977). Truant and low-achieving Chicano
student perceptions in the high school system,
aztlani—International Journal Qf.ChicaoQ _S.tudien
Research. £, 99-131.
Hartnett, R. T., & Katz, J. (1977). The education of
graduate students. Journal of Higher Education.
42(6), 646-664.
Hobish, T. (1979). Psychological predictors of attrition
in doctoral study: The ABD phenomenon. (ERIC Document
Reproduction, ED 188552, September)
Isaac, S., & Michael, W. (1971). Handbook on research and
evaluation. San Diego, CA: Robert R. Knapp, Inc.
Jacks, P., & Others. (1983). The ABCs and ABDs: A study of
incomplete doctorates. Improving College and
University Teaching/ 21(2), 74-81.
Jackson, H. T. (1985). Factors contributing to attrition
and retention of minority students in engineering
degree programs in the Pacific Northwest. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Washington State University.
Janes, R. W., & Seeman, C. M. (1975). Factors associated
with trends in time spent to acquire the sociology
doctorate. The American Sociologist. 12, 118-122.
Kehle, T. J. (1974). Teachers expectations: Ratings of
student performance as biased by student
characteristics. The Journal of Experimental
Education/ M(3), 54-60.
Kolman, E. M., & Others. (1987). The outcomes of doctoral
education: An institutional study. Research in Higher
Education, 21(2), 107-118.
Laosa, L. M. (1977). Inequality in the classroom:
Observational research on teacher-student
interactions. Aztlan: International Journal of
Chicano Studies Research. 2, 51-67.
Lenning, 0. T., Sauer, K., & Beal, P. E. (1980). Student
retention strategies. Georgetown University, Higher
Education Research Report No. 8. (ERIC Clearinghouse
on Higher Education)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Lenning
Jo
(1
fifi'
Ell
&L
Pr
Levin, ]
ed
Ed
Wa
Lopez, I
co
Magner,.
mi ■
2£
Mannman
at'
1Z\
McLaugh.]
un
£&
McNamari
edi
Hi*
Mestre,
Eft
Hi;
Minatoye
the
UnJ
dis
Minium,
anc-
Sor
Minoritj
Jar
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Mooney, J
anal;
Jourj
Munoz, D.
chic;
£ . 0.11 <
CollJ
National
DOCtt
Sciec
Noboa-Rios
recij
spec
Z
\
Pascarells*
in Spj
dropdj
Payan, R.
in
att.
F.rosi
til
: i t |
Ramirez, P
Spani
(Ed.y
39-4S
Ramirez, N
Bicoc
Acads
Reeble, B.
candi,
Coluic
of Mj^
Renetzky,
the f
Unpuh
South!
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
273
Rist, R. C. (1970). Student social class and teacher
expectations: The self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto
education. Harvard Educational Review. M/ 411-451.
Robertson, N. (1971). The doctorate in education in
Canada. Phi. I>.eltsLitePpa/ 1 1 , 22-23.
Roby, P. (1973) . Institutional barriers to women students
in higher education. In A. S. Rossi & A. Calderwood
(Eds.), Academic women on the move (pp. 2-18). New
York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Rosenhaupt, H. (1958). Graduate students: Experience at
Columbia University. 1940-1956. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Schultz, M. C. (1983). ABD doctoral students from off-
campus centers of the University of Southern
California. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Sedlacek, W. E., & Webster, T. (1978). Attitudes and
character!sties of-Black-graduate students. College
Park, MD: Maryland University, Cultural Study Center.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 132 234)
Sproull, N. (1969). The relationship of research
preparation to duration, attrition, and research
communication of doctoral candidates in education.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University.
Stewart, M. R. (1972). The doctoral program in educational
administration and supervision at the University of
Southern California. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles.
Strategy Research Corporation. (1991). U.S. Hispanic
market. Irvine, CA: Strategy Research Corp.
Taylor, H. (1959). Graduate education in the national
interest. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Princeton University.
Thomas brothers mao for southern California (rev. 8th ed.).
(1990). Irvine, CA: Thomas Brothers, Inc.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
274
Tinto, V. (1982). Defining dropout: A matter of
perspective. In E. Pascarella (Ed.), Studying student
attrition (pp. 36-68). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A
theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of
Educational Research. 15, 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Trujillo, H. E. (1981). Factors influencing the attrition
of Mexican-American students at the University of
Southern Colorado. Dissertation Abstracts
International. 12., 01-A.
Tucker, A., Gottlieb, D., & Pease, T. (1964). Factors
related to attrition among .doctoral students
(Cooperative research project no. 1146, publication
no. 8). MI: Michigan State University.
Tyan, R., & Carranza, T. (1975). Teachers' attitude
towards Spanish language accents. In R. P. Duran
(Ed.), Hispanics' education and background:
Predictors of college achievement (pp. 36-85). New
York: College Board Publications.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1992). Statistical abstract of
the United States: 1990 (106th ed.). Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. (1978). U.S. Commission
on Civil Rights 1971-1973. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Education, Center for Education
Statistics. (1987). Trends in bachelor's and higher
degrees. 1974-1986. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Education. (1992). The chronicle of
higher .education: -Education, almanac. Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Valentine, R. (1987) . Academic support services and the
success of high-risk college students. American
Educational Research Journal., 21(2), 261-274.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
275
von Destinon, M. A. (1989). The integration, involvement,
and persistence of Chicano students. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.
Walker, M. (1953). An analysis of the doctoral program in
education at the University of Southern California.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles.
Weil, R. L. (1990) . Factors affecting doctoral students'
time to degree. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Claremont Graduate School, Claremont.
Whitefield, M. (1995, November 4). Census bureau update.
Ihe.Qraage County..Eegistar/ p. 10.
Whitefield, M. (1995, October 19). In U.S., 1 in 10 is
Hispanic, survey shows. The Orange Countv Register,
p. 10.
Williamson, J. B., Karp, D. A., Dalphin, J. R., & Gray, P.
S. (1982). The research craft: An introduction to
social research methods (2nd ed.). Boston: Little,
Brown and Company, Inc.
Wilson, K. (1965) . Of time and the doctorate. Report of
an inquiry into the duration of doctoral study (SRFB
research, Monograph No. 9). Atlanta, GA: Southern
Regional Educational Board.
Wong, H. Y., & Sanders, J. M. (1983). Gender differences
in the attainment of doctorate. Sociological
Perspectives. 2£(1), 29-49.
Wood, D. (1978) . Internal and external indicators of
attrition in the college of education doctoral program
at the University of Toledo from 1962 through 1976.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Toledo.
Wright, C. R. (1964) . Success or failure in earning
graduate degrees. Sociology of Education. 2£(1), 73-
97.
Wright, R. (1972) . A study of doctoral level programs for
the training of teachers for undergraduates colleges:
The doctor of arts (DA) degree. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Washington.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
276
Appendices
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
277
Appendix A
Survey
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
278
SURVEY O F FA CTORS THAT AFFECT THE PROGRESS OF HISPANIC
STUDENTS TOWARD THE COMPLETION OF A DOCTORAL PROGRAM IN EDUCATION
Did tha following factora affect your troaraaa
toward _co«rolation of a doctoral d«grM?
(Mac* aa mXm oa tbe beat anawar) Strongly
Bihanced Enhanced
Did Not
Affect
Strongly
Impeded Impeded
a. SUPPORT FROM FAMILY: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
2. SUPPORT FROM EMPLOYER: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
3. SUPPORT FROM SIGNIFICANT OTHER: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
4. FINANCIAL RESOURCES:: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
5. EMPLOYMENT: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
6. PROMOTIONS/CAREER ADVANCEMENTS: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
7. PREVIOUS ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
8. EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES: (5! (4) (3) 12) (1)
9. SENSE OF CULTURAL IDENTITY: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
10.PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY SERVICE: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
11.ECONOMIC INVENSTMENT INDOCTORATE: <5) (4) (3) 12) (1)
12.MOTIVATION TO SUCCEED: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
13.RESPONSIBILITIES TO CHILDREN: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
14.RESPONSIBILITIES TO CAREER: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
15.RESPONSIBILITIES TO SPOUSE: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
16.AGE: (5) (4) (3)' (2) (1)
17.GENDER: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
18.ABILITY: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
19.SELF-CONCEPT: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
2 0.FACULTY-STUDENT RELATIONSHIPS: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
21-UTILIZATION OF UNIVERSITY SUPPORT SERVICES: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
22.CHOICE OF COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
23.CHOICE OF DISSERTATION TOPIC; (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
24.CHANGES IN COMMITTEE: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
25.ACADEMIC PREPARATION FOR DISSERTATION: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
26.CHOICE OF INSTITUTION: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
27.CULTURAL SETTING OF INSTITUTION: 15 J (4) (3) (2) (1)
28.PRESENCE OF HISPANIC FACULTY: (5) (4) (3) 12) (15
29.UNIVERSITY'S COMMITMENT TO STUDENT: (S) (4) (3) (2) (1)
30.AVAILABILITY OF SUPPORT SERVICES: (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
279
70. Please list, in order of importance, the five most significant factors that enhanced the
progression toward your doctoral degree:
n. . - — - . . . . . ■ , . ■ -
£
71. Please list, in order of importance, the five most significant factors that impeded the
progression toward your doctoral degree:
L.__________________________________________________________________
C___________________________________________________________________
2,__________________________________________________________________
L.__________________________________________________________________
72. What suggestions for policy implementation would you make to institutions in order to
increase the number of Hispanic students who complete the doctoral dissertation:_________
Thank you for your assistance in this research.
Any additional comments you wish to make would be most helpful!
Please fold and staple this queetlonaire w ith the address label on the outside.
Please mail this survey as soon as possible.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
280
PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS tln rtm rtio n * Plate an"X" on the line in front o f vouraM wcr.)
31 .Sex: Female 32-M irital Status: 33 .Number of children?_____
Male _____ Single M arried
Divorced O th e r______________
34.Cultural Heritage:
Mexican (from Mexico) Latino (other than Mexican)
Mexican-American (bom in the U S .) From what country of origin?_________
O th er_______________________________
35.Doctoral degree objective: 36.Year qualifying examinations (written and oral) were passed:
P h D EdD ________________________
37.During the majority of your program, on what basis did you attend classes?
Part-tim e Full-tim e
38.What is your current professional position?________________________________
39-58indicate the year each degree was conferred, your age upon entrance to the program, your age upon receipt of the
degree, your aproximate overall GPA and type of institution (public or private) attended during each program:
Year Degree Age Upon Age At GPA Public/
Conferred Entrance Completion Private
High School ___________ _________________ ________________ _________ _________
Doctorate ___________ _________________ ________________ _________ _________
59.1f you were employed during the classes phase of your doctoral study, indicate your employment status:
______ P art-tim e_____ Full-tim e
60.1/ you were employed during the dissertation phase of your doctoral study, indicate your employment status:
______ Part-tim e Full-tim e
61-62. Parents' occupations: Mother:__________________ Father:___________________
63-64. Parents' highest level of education:_ _ M other_________________ Fath er:________________
65. Did you parents emphasize education?: Yes No Comments:_______________
Curing doctoral study, vaere you invalved in the fsllpwiag-
66.Community service? 67.Graduate student activities? 68.RrQfgS5ignal organizations?
Yes fcic Yes ____________________ YeS _ .N fl
69.Which statement best applies to you? (Please choose one)
I have already completed the degree.
I am currently working on the course work phase of the doctoral program.
I air currently working on my dissertation, and I have not exceeded the time lim it.
I have exceeded the time limitation for completing the degree, but I have an extension or I intend to ask for an
extension and complete the degree.
I have exceeded the time limitation for completing the degree, and do not intend to ask for an extension.
the dissertation and the degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
281
Appendix B
Correspondence
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
282
Studebaker Elementary
11800 Halcourt Avenue
Norwalk, CA 90650
(310) 868-7882
August 30, 1995
Dear Superintendent:
It would be greatly appreciated if you would help me with
the research for my doctoral dissertation. I am looking at
factors that enhance and impede progress towards the
completion of the doctoral degree in education for Latino
students.
Due to the nature of this study, it was difficult to obtain
a sample population. My superintendent suggested that I
ask district and county superintendents for their
assistance. It would be greatly appreciated if you would
disseminate these surveys to 3 district employees who are
Latino and have either completed a doctoral degree in
education or are working towards this degree.
If possible, I would like to begin analyzing the data
during the week of October 2, 1995.
Again, I am very grateful for your help in completing this
research. Please let me know if you have any questions or
concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary M. Martinez
Principal
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
283
11800 Halcourt Avenue
Norwalk, CA 90650
(310) 868-7882
August 30, 1995
Dear Colleague:
It would be greatly appreciated if you would help me with
the research for my doctoral dissertation. I am currently
working on a doctoral degree in education. My research
focuses on factors that enhance and impede progress towards
the completion of the doctoral degree in education for
Latino students.
I hope that you will take the time to answer this
questionnaire. All responses shall remain anonymous. Once
completed, please fold the survey and staple it with the
address label on the outside.
If possible, I would like to begin analyzing the data
during the week of October 2, 1995.
As this is such a busy time of the school year, thank you
in advance for your participation. Please let me know if
you would like a follow-up report on this study. I can be
reached at (310) 868-7882.
Sincerely,
Mary M. Martinez
Principal
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
284
Appendix C
Interview Guide
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
285
INTERVIEW GUIDE
I will be recording this interview. Do you understand that
I am recording this interview? Do I have your permission
to record this interview? The information gained in this
interview will be kept anonymous and confidential.
Background
The data collected from my recent survey suggested that
there are three factors that are most significant in
affecting progress towards the completion of the doctoral
degree for Hispanic students. I would like to ask you if
any of these three factors played a role in enhancing or
empeding your progress towards completion of your degree.
(Question asked as appropriate to each interviewee.)
You have completed your degree?
You have not completed your degree?
Financial Resources
How did financial resources affect your progress towards
the degree?
Responsibilities to Spouse
How did responsibilities to spouse affect your progress
towards the degree?
Employment
How did employment affect your progress towards the degree?
lime
What do you think was the single greatest factor
influencing the time it took to obtain your degree?
Additional Information
What kind of additional pressures did you feel, if any,
about completing your doctoral work, especially the
dissertation, and where did those pressures originate?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
286
Suggested Policies
What advise would you give for policy development to assist
Hispanic students' in the completion of a doctoral degree
in education?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Auroville: Problems in language communication. Is Suggestopedia the solution?

PDF

Aspirations For Career Advancement In Public Organizations: The Case Of South Korean Bureaucracy.

PDF

A study of Chinese-Malaysian students' choices to attend a private college, American university transfer program

PDF

An assessment of racial climate at a racially integrated campus

PDF

A comparison between Thai student attitudes toward English as a Foreign Language and their English proficiency at four public (state) universities in Bangkok, Thailand

PDF

Alternative spring break and social responsibility: Is there a relationship?

PDF

California superintendents and their views of the Challenge School District Reform Initiative

PDF

A scenario for a beginning screenwriting class utilizing an interdisciplinary approach to learning and creativity.

PDF

An investigation into the need for creativity and individualism in Japanese elementary education

PDF

Voices in the mirror: Sacrifice and the theater of the body in the dramatic monologues of Ai and Frank Bidart

PDF

Canaries in the coal mine: Perceptions of threat and media system dependency relations.

PDF

A profile of presidents of evangelical Christian colleges: congruence and variance with national norms of presidents in higher education

PDF

A history of California community college governance and trustees' perceptions of the faculty role in district and college (shared) governance

PDF

Assessing effectiveness in four corporate universities

PDF

A "stacked for success" sustained silent reading program for high school English language development (ELD) students: its impact on reading comprehension, attitudes toward reading, frequency of o...

PDF

A study of teacher motivation in a public California university

PDF

An evolution in listening: An analytical and critical study of structural, acoustic, and phenomenal aspects of selected works by Pauline Oliveros

PDF

A paradigm for designing a safety curriculum in American higher education

PDF

A descriptive study of the recruitment of students of color for secondary accelerated programs

PDF

A factor-analytic study of symbolic-memory abilities

Asset Metadata

Creator McCabe-Martinez, Mary Catherine (author)

Core Title A study of the perceptions of factors that enhanced and impeded progress towards the completion of the doctoral degree in education for Hispanic students employed in public school systems

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, higher,education, sociology of,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Rideout, William M. (committee chair), [illegible] (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c17-505191

Unique identifier UC11350026

Identifier 9636729.pdf (filename),usctheses-c17-505191 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 9636729.pdf

Dmrecord 505191

Document Type Dissertation

Rights McCabe-Martinez, Mary Catherine

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 au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA