University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Native Hawaiians and college success: Does culture matter?

(USC Thesis Other)

Native Hawaiians and college success: Does culture matter?

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

NATIVE HAWAIIANS AND COLLEGE SUCCESS
DOES CULTURE MATTER?

by

Lui Kealii Hokoana

____________________________________________________________

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

December 2010

Copyright 2010 Lui Kealii Hokoana

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Eia aʻe ka Nalu Pae i ka Nuʻu
Here comes the wave, surf ʻem.
In traditional times the Pailolo channel was traveled for many reasons, for
adventure and sometimes for war. That sums up the effort that was put into this
dissertation. At the onset it was an adventure in learning; it was so exciting to be in a
classroom again and learn the theory behind what I had been practicing at my job for
many years. But towards the end it was like war. The adventure had worn out and it
was difficult to see this final project to completion. But as my professor says:
“Almost there” and here it is.
I want to first thank the University of Southern California for giving me the
opportunity to study in Hawaii. Thank you to all the professors that I have had the
honor and privilege to learn from. I want to thank Team Dom for helping me
through the process; I could not have made it without your support and assistance.
Mahalo to my proofreader Lance, my writing assistants Sue and Richard, and Jayne
for your help with the data analysis. I am grateful to Aunty Rose and Uncle Myles
who took time to read through my dissertation and offer comments. I am most
grateful for your candor, your inspiration and hope that you have for our people. I
appreciate the support from my Windward and Maui Community College
colleagues—thanks for filling in for me when I had to attend class. A sincere thanks
to my committee members Dr. Larry Picus, Dr. Judy Oliveira, and chair Dr. Dominic
Brewer. It’s been an exciting ride.

iii

Lastly, I want to give thanks to my ʻohana. They should know that I do this
because of them, because I want them to aspire to do something good with their
lives, and I hope my degree will help them on this journey. This would not have
been possible without the support of my parents LeRoy and Juanita Hokoana. My
father should have been afforded educational opportunities that were denied him
because of his race. He wanted to make sure that his children would not face the
same discrimination. He insisted on sending his children to private high school and
go to college at his expense. Even though he passed away 10 years ago, my mother
continues to honor his commitment to education. I dedicate this work to my mom
and dad. I know that if he was here today he would be very proud and happy that
one of his children received a doctorate degree; he always wanted me to aspire to get
one. With this study I honor my commitment to my father and continue the good
work that he did for his family and community.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ii
List of Tables v
List of Figures vi
Abstract vii
Chapter One: Introduction 1
Chapter Two: Literature Review 11
Chapter Three: Methodology 51
Chapter Four: Results 60
Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations 89
References 112
Appendices 129
Appendix A: Student Survey 129
Appendix B: Guiding Questions for Student Interviews 131

v

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: UHCC Students’ Readiness for College 38
Table 2: Headcount Enrollment of Credit Students, University of Hawai’i, 55
Fall 2008
Table 3: Statistical Significance Summary Among Comparison Groups 69
Table 4: Statistical Significance Summary 73

vi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Educational Pipeline: Best-Performing State, National, and 5
Hawai‘i Data
Figure 2: UHCC Student Engagement 39
Figure 3: CCSSE Benchmark Scores 40
Figure 4: Na Pua Noeau Learning Model 47
Figure 5: Ethnic Breakdown of Survey Respondents 62
Figure 6: Age Distributions of Survey Participants 63
Figure 7: Pell & Non-Pell Survey Participants 64
Figure 8: Problems Encountered by Students 66
Figure 9: Percent Seeking Assistance 67
Figure 10: How Large a Problem was Paying for College? (Native 71
Hawaiians only)
Figure 11: When Experienced Difficulty Sought Assistance from 74
a Counselor
Figure 12: When Experienced Difficulty Sought Assistance from 76
a Friend? Yes
Figure 13: Experienced Different College Barriers than Students Who Are 78
Not of the Same Culture As Me, Pell vs non-Pell Students
Figure 14: College Programs and Cultural Integration, Does It Matter? 80
Figure 15: Does Culture Matter? 82
Figure 16: Does Culture Matter, Non-Hawaiian Groups 83

vii

ABSTRACT
Forty years ago, the United States led the world in innovation, driven by its
successful educational system. Since that time the United States’ lead has slowly
deteriorated. President Obama has called our low high school graduation and college
persistence rates a prescription for economic failure. There is a leak in the
educational pipeline in America. For this country’s minority students and
indigenous populations, the pipeline is hemorrhaging at an accelerated rate.
The intent of this study is to investigate whether Native Hawaiian students at
Windward Community College face the same types of barriers to college that other
students do, and whether Native Hawaiians seek assistance from the same types of
support networks. This study also asks whether Native Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian
students believe that having a good understanding of their culture helps them be
successful in college. The results of this study add to the limited literature on Native
Hawaiians and college success.
The study found that Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians experience the
same barriers to college success and go to similar networks for assistance. However,
there were differences based on socio-economic status. The study also found that
Native Hawaiians, unlike non-Hawaiians, believe that having a good understanding
of their culture assists them to be successful in college, and that program services
that integrate Native Hawaiian pedagogy assist them better than those that do not.
The findings of this study will assist policymakers and educational
administrators to develop policies and procedures to improve Native Hawaiian

viii

college success. This study recommends that federal, state, and private institutions
conduct studies on Native Hawaiian students in college to expand the literature on
the topic. Lastly, this study recommends that Windward Community College expand
its Hawaiian studies course offerings, create a program based on Hawaiian pedagogy
for Native Hawaiians students, and evaluate the program to ascertain whether this
type of program increases Native Hawaiian college success.

1

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Globalization is changing how countries and communities view and support
economic development, how companies seek talent and offer services and products
across borders, and how individuals earn their daily wages. Shirley Ann Jackson,
President of Rensselaer Institute, contends that America is caught in a quiet crisis
that involves the steady erosion of America’s scientific and engineering base, which
has always been the source of American innovation and of our continued rise in
standard of living (Friedman, 2007. p. 253).
In February of 2009, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
(ITIF) released a report titled “The Atlantic Century, Benchmarking EU and U.S.
Innovation and Competiveness.” The study assesses a nation’s innovation based on
global competiveness on 16 indicators that fall into six broad categories: 1) human
capital, 2) innovation capacity, 3) entrepreneurship, 4) IT infrastructure, 5) economic
policy, and 6) economic performance.
Unlike studies conducted by RAND and World Economic Forums that found
the U.S. to be the global leader in innovation and competitiveness, the ITIF study
ranked the U.S. 6
th
among the 40 nations studied. Moreover, the ITIF study found
that all of the 39 countries have made faster progress toward the new knowledge-
based innovation economy in recent years than the United States (Achieve, 2008).
Continuing on its current path could, in fact, lead the U.S. to economic
disaster. In a May 2004 speech, Rensselaer president Shirley Ann Jackson uses the

2

metaphor of the “perfect storm” to describe the problem facing America’s scientific
and technological capacity. A perfect storm is a confluence of unlikely natural
conditions that cause great destruction. In her speech, she argues that America is
facing an unprecedented series of events that if left unchecked will devastate the U.S.
economy and the American standard of living: “The forces at work are multiple and
complex. They are demographic, political, economic, cultural, even social.
Individually, each of these forces would be problematic. In combination, they could
be devastating. For the first time in more than a century, the United States could find
itself falling behind other countries in the capacity for scientific discovery,
innovation, and economic development” (Friedman, 2007. p. 255).
Education is important in ensuring competiveness and prosperity in this age
of globalization. Recent economic studies show that high skills lead to better wages,
more equitable distributions of income, and substantial gains in economic
productivity. Higher math performance at the end of high school translates into a 12
percent increase in future earnings. If the U.S. raised students’ math and science
skills to global norms over the next two decades, it would realize a corresponding
increase in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 36 percent (Achieve, 2008).
American education has not adequately responded to these new challenges.
The U.S. is falling behind other countries in the resource that matters most in the
new global economy: human capital. American fifteen-year-olds ranked 25
th
in math
and 21
st
in science achievement among international students in 2006. At the same
time, the U.S. placed 3
rd
on a ranking of inequality in science scores of students from

3

different socioeconomic groups (Achieve, 2008). In much the same way as it is
losing ground in innovation, the U.S. is rapidly losing its historic edge in educational
attainment. As recently as 1995, America tied for first in college and university
graduation rates, but by 2006 had dropped to 14
th
. That same year it had the second-
highest college dropout rate of 27 countries (CCSSO, 2008).
Innovation and education are important not only for the country but also for
the individuals who comprise it; education is important for individuals as well as for
the country as a whole. In the U.S., a college graduate is four times less likely to be
unemployed than a high school graduate is. The college graduate is likely to earn
higher wages than the high school graduate, and is more likely to participate in the
democratic process, to stay out of jail, and to live longer (Bridgespan Group, 2006).
The transformative effect of higher education is clear.
To regain its innovative and educational dominance, America must develop a
plan to address the problems and failures of its current educational system. If
America is to address the crisis that President Obama believes is a prescription for
economic decline, it must first be able to answer critical questions about student
transitions. What percentage of high school graduates go on to postsecondary
education? How many of these graduates need remediation once they arrive at a
postsecondary institution? How did these students do in high school courses and on
state assessments in their problem area subject(s)? How do students perform in
college level courses? How many persist and earn degrees? How is postsecondary

4

access and success correlated with various student demographics? The answers to
these questions lie in a framework referred to as the educational pipeline.
The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS)
has identified the following transitions in the U.S. educational pipeline: 1) graduation
from high school, 2) entry into postsecondary education, 3) persistence in
postsecondary education, 4) prompt completion of a degree, and 5) entry into the
workforce. At each new transition point, the number of students who continue in the
educational pipeline decreases significantly. Of 100 U.S. ninth graders, only 67 will
graduate from high school. A complex series of decisions and environments must be
in synchronization for a student to attempt postsecondary study, and of those 67 high
school graduates, only 38 will go directly into college. Unlike high school, college is
not compulsory. Research tells us that the greatest attrition in college occurs during
the first year (Tinto, 1997). Of the 38 college entrants, only 26 will enroll in their
college sophomore year. Of the original 100 ninth graders, only 18 will graduate on
time with a college degree. Finally, the concept of the educational pipeline is
premised on the fact that it allows institutions the opportunity to increase educational
capital in their surrounding communities, and Carnevale & Rose (1997) assert that a
bachelor’s degree, a traditional pipeline terminal, leads to higher earning potential.
Data collected by NCHEMS (2006) show that of young U.S. workers (age 25-44),
26.7% had a bachelor’s degree or higher.
Hawai‘i ranks 48
th
out of 50 states for pipeline success (National Center for
Public Policy and Higher Education, 2004). In Hawai‘i, of an initial 100 ninth

5

graders, 65 will graduate from high school, 34 of which will go straight to college.
Of those going to college, 22 will remain enrolled after their first year, and only 12
will graduate within 150% of the time in which degree completion is traditionally
expected (i.e. six years for a bachelor’s degree). Approximately 27% of the
population between the ages of 25-44 have a bachelor’s degree or higher.

Figure 1: Educational Pipeline: Best-Performing State, National, and Hawaiʻi Data

Today, a high school diploma is not enough because two-thirds of new jobs
will require some form of post-secondary training (Carnevale, 2006). Empirical
evidence has linked education to earning power. A high school dropout can expect

6

to earn 1.1 million dollars in his or her lifetime, a high school graduate 1.4 million.
A student with an associate’s degree can expect $1.8 million, a student with
bachelor’s degree $2.5 million (Achieve, 2006).
There is value in having a college education. Higher education enhances
individual and group life chances, and over time facilitates economic and societal
advancement (Bowen and Bok, 1998). Outcomes of college enrollment and
completion result in gains of factual knowledge, moral reasoning, aesthetic and
cultural understandings, and psychological and personal growth (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1991). For these reasons fixing the leaky educational pipeline is
essential.
Native Hawaiians
Native Hawaiians are the indigenous people of Hawai‘i. Like other
Indigenous U.S. citizens, many have not experienced the American dream (Benham,
2007). The educational pipeline results for Native Hawaiians are even worse than
for non-Hawaiians. Native Hawaiians have lower transition rates between middle
school and high school, are retained in high school more often, and are less likely
than non-Hawaiians to graduate, to enroll in college, or to complete a bachelor’s
degree in the expected timeframe (Benham, 2007). These facts illustrate that Native
Hawaiians are among the most underserved, with the lowest test scores, with less
than suitable high school graduation rates, with disproportionately high rates of
grade retention, and with low rates of post-secondary enrollment. It appears that
they consistently fall below the average, which in the end may deprive them of

7

opportunities to engage in academic activities that may provide the widest selection
of life choices (Benham, 2007).
The involuntary colonization and the influence of missionary thought on
Native Hawaiian education create a context similar to the historical context
experienced by Native American Indians and Alaskan Natives (Benham & Heck,
1998). Today, the generational effect of the loss of identity, the displacement of land
base, and the upheaval of religious beliefs manifests in the disparities that exist in the
health, wellness, and educational attainment of peoples of Hawaiian ancestry.
Statement of the Problem
Unlike their indigenous counterparts and minorities, limited studies exist
focusing on the educational successes, such as college enrollment and persistence
behaviors of Native Hawaiians. No studies exist specifically focusing on Native
Hawaiian students’ perceptions of college success or on how these perceptions
impact their graduation from college. However, the studies are clear that a college
degree is beneficial economically and socially (Adelman, 1999; Choy, 2001; Trusty,
2004).
But Native Hawaiians are not as successful in college as their non-Hawaiian
counterparts. At the University of Hawaii at Mānoa and Hilo, after six years, Native
Hawaiians have the lowest success rate among Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, and other
Asian students. The Native Hawaiian success rate is more than 20% lower than their
peers (UH IRO, 2007). While the educational pipeline for all students in Hawaii is
poor, it is dismal for Native Hawaiian students. Understanding the perceptions of

8

Native Hawaiian students will help to inform service providers that in turn can
develop support programs to increase the success of Native Hawaiian students.
The primary purpose of this study is to gauge Native Hawaiian perceptions of
college barriers and whether or not they perceive knowledge of culture to be
essential for success in college. Based on these findings new programs can be
developed to address the needs of the Native Hawaiian students and to remedy the
poor success they currently experience in higher education. The secondary purpose
of this study is to contribute to the literature of studies focusing on models of success
of minority and indigenous students. In exploring student perceptions, this study
will provide a framework for educators and policy makers to examine existing
institutional policies and address student needs to ensure the success of Native
Hawaiian students in higher education.
Research Questions
This qualitative study will examine how Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiian
students perceive the barriers to college persistence.
Question 1: Do Native Hawaiian students perceive barriers to college
success differently than non-Hawaiian students?
A sub-question for this item is: Do Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians
seek support from similar programs when they experience difficulty in college?
Question 2: Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiians students,
perceive that college support programs that integrate their cultural values and
practices assist them better than those that do not?

9

Question 3: Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiian students,
perceive that having a good understanding of their culture will help them be
successful in college?
Hypothesis 1: Native Hawaiian students will perceive different barriers to
college success than non-Native Hawaiian students. And Native Hawaiian students
will access different social and institutional networks, when they experience barriers
in college, than non-Native Hawaiian students.
Hypothesis 2: Native Hawaiians, unlike non-Hawaiians, believe that
programs that integrate their culture and values assist them better than those that do
not.
Hypothesis 3: Native Hawaiians will have different perceptions than non-
Hawaiians about culture and college success.
Limitations
1. This study is limited to subjects who agree to participate voluntarily.
2. It is limited to the number of subjects surveyed and interviewed and the
amount of time available to conduct this study.
3. Validity of this study is limited to the reliability of the analysis and
instruments used to analyze the survey data.
Definition of Terms
There are five key terms related to this study: Native Hawaiian; pre-college
experience; students’ behaviors; institutional conditions; and college success.

10

Native Hawaiian is defined as “any person who is a descendant of the
aboriginal people, who prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area
that now comprises the State of Hawaii” (Benham & Heck, 1998).
Pre-college experience relates to the experiences students had before they
enrolled in college, such as K-12 school choice, family background, college
enrollment choices, and applying for financial aid.
Student behavior is the time and effort students put into their studies,
interaction with faculty, and peer involvement.
Institutional conditions include resources, educational policies, programs and
practices.
College success for the purpose of this study is completion of at least three
fourths of the credits the student enrolled in, a minimum grade point average of 2.0,
and persistence from the fall to the spring semester.

11

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Understanding what conditions foster student success in college has never
been more important. As many as four-fifths of high school graduates need some
form of postsecondary education to prepare them to live economically self-sufficient
lives and to deal with the increasingly complex social, political, and cultural issues
they will face (McCabe, 2000). If current trends in the granting of bachelor’s
degrees continue, a shortfall of 14 million college-educated working adults is
predicted by the year 2020 (Carnevale & Desrochers, 2003).
There is hope, however; interest in attending college is at an all-time high in
the U.S. In 1992, 97 percent of high school graduates reported they planned to
continue their education, and 71 percent aspired to earn a bachelor’s degree (Choy,
1999). However, at issue is the fact that high school preparation is not keeping pace
with students’ desire to attend college. In 2000, 48 percent of high school seniors
scored at remedial levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Only
five states have fully aligned high school academic standards with the demands of
colleges and employers (Achieve, 2006). Only 51 percent of high school graduates
have the reading skills they need to succeed in college (American College Testing
Program [ACT], 2006). This fact is disturbing because 70 percent of students who
took at least one remedial reading course in college do not obtain a degree or
certificate within 8 years of enrollment (Adelman, 2004).

12

A student’s chance for graduating can vary widely. As the number of
required developmental courses increases, so do the odds that the student will drop
out (Burley, Butner, & Cejda, 2001: CCSSE).
About 45 percent of students fail to complete their degree. Of this group
about a quarter of these students are dismissed for poor academic performance. The
majority leave for other reasons. Change in the family structure is one of these
reasons. Mental health is another—more than ever, students are going to college
with psychological challenges that, if unattended, can have a debilitating effect on
their academic performance (Kuh, 2005).
College costs are increasing faster than family income and are probably
adversely affecting student success. From 1990 to 2000 tuitions rose at public
universities by 84 percent, and at public 2-year colleges they rose by 62 percent
(Johnstone, 2005). Those hit hardest by cost increases are least able to pay. For
example it has been estimated that for every $150 increase in the net price of college
attendance, the enrollment of students from the lowest income group decreases by
almost 2 percent (Choy, 1999).
Specific groups of Americans, notably non-traditional students and ethnic
minorities, face disproportionate challenges in attaining a college degree. Native
Hawaiians’ experiences often mirror those of better-studied populations. A summary
of factors affecting minority students will lay the groundwork for a specific, if
limited, discussion of the Native Hawaiians’ situation.

13

College Success
College success can include a broad range of criteria. Degree attainment,
grade point average, persistence to the sophomore year, scores on standardized tests,
and personal development are a few examples of how one could measure college
success.
In the area of student persistence, new concepts have emerged about the
factors that influence the student’s ability to continue. Studies of non-traditional
students and other underrepresented populations have identified external factors that
affect student persistence, such as parental encouragement, support of friends, and
finances (Swail, 2005). The studies of first-generation students suggest the
important role that student characteristics and behaviors, including expectations and
student effort, play in persistence (Pascarella, 2004).
Student persistence can be studied in two frames. The first is precollege
experience. The body of research covers preparation in K-12 schools, family
background, enrollment choices, and financial aid and assistance policies on various
dimensions of student success. These mediating conditions are known as transitions
that students must successfully navigate to continue their education and that can
interfere with students’ full engagement in the college experience. Transitions
include remediation courses that do not count toward graduation but which are
necessary to acquire college level academic skills, financial aid policies that help or
hinder their continued enrollment, and the need to work many hours off campus. If

14

students cannot find their way through these transitions, they may be disconnected,
temporarily or permanently, from the college experience.
The second frame includes the college experience itself. College experience
includes students’ behaviors, or the time and effort students put into their studies,
interaction with faculty, and peer involvement. The college experience also includes
institutional conditions, or the support services that the institution provides. These
services include counseling, library, tutoring, and other support services.
The result of students behaving in various ways under certain institutional
conditions is often called student engagement. Student engagement is important
because it represents aspects of student behavior and institutional performance that
colleges can do something about, whereas many other factors such as precollege
characteristics are typically beyond the direct control of the college or the student.
High levels of student engagement are associated with a range of educational
conditions and practices, including purposeful student-faculty contact, and active and
collaborative learning, which encourage college persistence (Astin, 1991).
Precollege Experiences
What students do before starting their postsecondary education can make a
difference in how likely they will be to obtain a baccalaureate degree or another
postsecondary credential. The literature on this issue suggests that Native
Hawaiians, like other indigenous, minority students, face a variety of barriers to
earning their academic credentials. The National Center for Educational Statistics
(NCES) identified the following elements as educational risk factors: delayed

15

enrollment, part-time attendance, financial independence, single parent status,
working full-time, caring for dependents, and receiving a General Education
Development (GED) certificate. Using NCES (2008) data, 35 percent of American
Indians/Alaskan Natives (who can serve as a loose proxy for Native Hawaiians) had
four or more risk factors, in contrast to 22 percent for White students.
This section will detail major findings from the literature about precollege
experiences related to student persistence and success in various college settings.
The variables that will be covered in this section are academic preparation, aptitude
and college readiness, educational aspirations and family support, financial aid, and
student motivation.
Academic Preparation
The quality and intensity of the high school curriculum affect almost every
dimension of success in postsecondary education. Students who are best prepared in
high school are best positioned to do well in college, regardless of who they are, how
much money they have, or where they go (Gladieux & Swail, 1998).
High school rigor as indicated by students grades have consistently been a
strong predictor of first-year college grades, accounting for 25 percent of the
variance between students (Pike & Saupe, 2002). Almost 87 percent of students who
complete 4 years of math, science, and English in high school stay on track to
graduate from college, whereas 62 percent of those who do not complete that level of
high school coursework stay on track in college (Adelman, 1999). Completing high-
level mathematics classes in high school, such as algebra II, trigonometry, or

16

calculus, is the single best high school predictor of successful college performance
(Adelman, 2006).
While the importance of high-level high school math is widely
acknowledged, access to these types of math classes is not equally distributed. For
example, Latino students and those from any Socio-Economic Status (SES) other
than the highest are less likely to attend a high school that offers calculus. It is
unsurprising, then, that Latino math students are concentrated in classes below
algebra II, whereas White students are concentrated at algebra II and trigonometry.
Swail (2005) found that pre calculus and calculus coursework increased Latino
students’ likelihood of college completion by 12 percent.
Hoffman, Llagas, & Snyder (2003) reported that African American students,
who are more likely to attend public high schools with large percentages of minority
and low-income students, were less likely than White students to take advanced
mathematics and science courses, and were less likely than White or Hispanic
students to take advanced placement classes.
A number of recent studies have shown that high school experience has a
high correlation with college success for the Native Hawaiian student (Hagedorn,
2006, Oliveira, 2005, & Makuakane-Drechsel, 2000). Oliveira (2005) found three
significant predictors of college success for Native Hawaiian students: 1) science
coursework, 2) high school GPA, and 3) attendance at Kamehameha Schools. These
studies correlate with empirical findings for all students (excluding attendance at
Kamehameha schools).

17

Finally, regardless of the rigor of their high school coursework,
underrepresented student populations have lower odds of completing high school and
enrolling in college in general (Carter & Wilson, 1997; Social Science Research
Council Project 2005). In their high school completion rates, African Americans (77
percent) and Latinos (57 percent) significantly trailed Whites (82 percent). Latino
and African American college participation rates were equal at 35 percent, whereas
the White participation rate was 43 percent (Carter & Wilson).
First Generation Students’ College Readiness
Approximately 30 percent of college students are in their families’ first
generation to attend college (NSSE, 2005). First generation students are more likely
than other students are to be female, to be older, to have a low income, to be married,
and to have dependents (Nunez & Cuccaro-Alamin, 1998). Racial and ethnic
minority groups are overrepresented among first-generation students, Latino students
especially (Warburton, 2001). About 42 percent of Latino students had parents
whose highest level of education was less than high school, contrasted with only 18
percent of Whites (Swail, 2005).
The enrollment and graduation rates of first generation students suggest that
they face various odds to college success (Baum & Paea, 2004). In 1996, high
school completers’ enrollment rates in college ranged from 45 percent for those with
parents who had less than a high school education to 85 percent for those students
with parents who had a bachelor’s degree or higher (Choy, 1999). First-generation
students were less likely to take advanced math, were less knowledgeable about how

18

to apply for college and financial aid, had lower grades, and were less engaged
overall in high school (Terenzini, 1996). These students were more likely to enroll
in public universities and attend part time (Choy, 2001), and were twice as likely to
take remedial courses.
Terenzini reported that first generation students had lower educational
aspirations than their second-generation counterparts did. Data from the High
School Survey of Student Engagement (2005) showed that students whose fathers
had completed college were three times more likely to list a college degree as an
educational goal than students whose fathers had not; respondents whose mothers
had completed college were twice as likely (McCarthy & Kuh 2006). Parental
college education has a direct positive influence on students’ predisposition to attend
college. However, for Hispanic male and White students in similar school
environments, parental college education had only indirect positive effects. For
Hispanic males, parental education directly influenced parents’ expectations for their
child’s college attendance, which had a positive effect on students’ desire to enroll in
college. For White students, parental college education had a significant positive
influence on parents’ expectations for college and composite grades, which
influenced students’ college aspirations. Parental education is an important variable
for predicting college predisposition among all low SES students. Of the 1999-2000
Bachelor’s degree recipients whose parents did not complete high school, 31 percent
were American Indian/Alaskan Native and 27 percent were Native Hawaiian (NCES,
2003).

19

First generation students have different priorities. For example, they are
more likely than other students are to want to be well off financially (Nunez &
Cuccaro-Alamin, 1998). In choosing an educational institution, they are more
heavily influenced than other students are by offers of financial aid, by perceived
amounts of homework, and by logistical calculations—whether they will be able to
live at home and work while going to school. First-generation students are also more
likely 1) to delay enrollment after high school, 2) to attend 2-year institutions, 3) to
attend part time and work full time, and 4) to live off campus, all of which contribute
to their being less likely to join campus organizations and more likely to have
difficulty adjusting to college (Choy, 2001). It appears that managing college tuition
may underlie these aforementioned decisions as working during college is not a
choice but a necessity for many first generation students. As a result, they are less
likely to finish their degrees within 5 years.
First generation students typically have less well developed time management
and other personal skills, less family and social support for attending college, less
knowledge about higher education, and less experience navigating bureaucratic
institutions (Terenzini, 1996). In addition, students who enter a college environment
where the predominant racial, ethnic, or religious culture differs from their own
encounter an additional set of adjustments (Allen, 1992); these dynamics are to a
certain degree similar for first generation, low-income White students because of
their socioeconomic status. For these reasons, first generation college students are

20

more likely to drop out or to have breaks in attendance (Warburton, Bugain, &
Nunez, 2001).
Educational Aspirations and Family Support
Student aspirations and family support are important in predicting college
success (Perna & Titus, 2005). Planning for college at an early age increases the
prospects for completing college (Swail, 2005). In fact, among White students that
attended low income, high minority schools, parental expectations were the strongest
predictor of college access (Hamrick & Stage, 2004). Naumann, Bandalos, and
Gutkin (2003) found that for first-generation students, educational aspirations were
the best predictor of first semester GPA.
Although the majority of students of all races expect to enroll in college,
many do not follow through (US Department of Education 2003b). Only 60% take
the minimum coursework recommend for college (Venezia, Kirst, & Antonio 2003).
High school teachers may diminish a student’s aspirations as teachers’ expectations
for their students are lower than those of parents and students themselves.
Apparently, many teachers believe that certain groups of students are limited in what
and how much they can learn, and they lower their performance expectations for
these students (USDOE 2004).
Studies of the influence of Latino students’ educational aspirations have
resulted in mixed findings. Immerwahr (2000) showed that Latino parents of high
school seniors place nearly twice as much emphasis on the necessity of a college
education for success than do African American or White parents. However, these

21

parents’ real contributions to their children’s education did not result in a
corresponding college enrollment rate. A different study showed that Latino parents
were less likely to have postsecondary expectations for their children: less than 58
percent expected their children to go to college, in contrast to more than 82 percent
of White parents. Similarly, more White students aspired to a college degree than
did Latino students (Swail, 2005). A third study showed parents’ expectations to be
a strong direct indicator of Latino eight graders’ predispositions for college,
particularly among students at low-income, high minority schools (Hamrick & Stage,
2004).
Perna and Titus (2005) assert that parents and peers influence both student
enrollment and persistence decisions, though African American students apparently
benefit less than others do from conversations with their parents about college. In a
related finding, the parents of African American eighth graders who attended low-
income, high minority schools had a greater expectation of college attendance when
their children, under certain environmental conditions and challenges, achieved high
grades and demonstrated other college-preparatory achievements and behaviors
(Perna and Titus 2005). It appears that students perform better and are more likely to
succeed when their families affirm their choices and encourage them to stay the
course; this is especially important for underserved populations (Tierney, Corwin, &
Colyar, 2005). Thus, an appropriate amount of parental involvement and support can
help offset the negative impact of students’ precollege disadvantages (Chrispeels and
Rivero 2001).

22

Financial Aid
Predictors of college success - rigorous high school preparation, high
educational aspirations, and family support - are easier to come by if the family has
economic resources. Put another way, the chance that a student will enjoy these
advantages increases as family income increases, because family SES sets the stage
for students’ academic performance by directly providing resources at home and
indirectly providing the social capital necessary to succeed in college (Coleman,
1988). Demonstrating the long-term impact of income on college student success,
Astin (1993) found that students’ socioeconomic status was the best predictor of
earning a bachelor’s degree.
Indigenous students are likely to report receiving some form of financial aid
to pay for college. In 2007, American Indians/Alaskan Natives accounted for 31.4
percent of the Pell grants received at 4-year public institutions, and Native
Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders received more than 32 percent of the grants; Whites
received 17.9 percent (NCES, 2008). Additionally, more American Indian/Alaskan
Native (69.9) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (68.3) students take out loans for
their undergraduate degrees than White (60.1) and Asian (52.9) students (NCES,
2003).
Student Motivation
Prior to the 1990s, much of the discussion about access and educational
success focused on academic preparation and financial aid policies (Tierney, 2005).
More recently, it has become clear that too many students, especially those from

23

historically underserved backgrounds, lack accurate information about college
options. They are confused about expectations for academic work, actual tuition
costs, and the content of college entrance and placement tests (Venezia, Kirst, &
Antonio, 2003). As a result pre-college encouragement programs were developed.
Considerable information is now available about how college encouragement
programs can help increase access and success for students from low-income
families, as well as for first-generation students (Tierney, 2005). These initiatives
have been implemented in every state (Tierney & Hagedorn 2002). Parental
involvement and college outreach programs seem to be particularly effective. For
example, several high profile programs in California that serve underrepresented
groups have successfully brought together Latino families, students, teachers, and
counselors to learn more about postsecondary options and financial aid (Chrispeels
& Rivero, 2001).
There is research that early college awareness programs like GEARUP,
Upward Bound, Student Support Services, and Educational Talent Search increase
college enrollment and success for its participants (IHEP 2001). For example,
students in the Upward Bound program are four times more likely to earn an
undergraduate degree. Students in Student Support Services programs are more than
twice as likely to remain in college as those students from similar backgrounds who
did not participate in the program (Hossler, Schmit, & Vesper, 1999). Students with
lower educational aspirations tend to benefit the most, as do those who participate
longer. For example, for each additional year of Upward Bound completed, the

24

chances increase by 9 percent that the student will attend college (Meyers, 2004).
Programs such as Upward Bound that have a strong residential component, allowing
students to become familiar with the physical, social, and cultural environments of
the campus, are particularly effective.
Summary of College Success
The major themes from this section of the literature review highlight the
complex ways that students’ pre-college experiences interact to influence enrollment
patterns and, subsequently, student success:
• The quality of high school academic preparation strongly predicts
chances for postsecondary success.
• Family educational background is related to students’ higher
postsecondary aspirations and greater likelihood of persistence.
• Socioeconomic status influences prior academic preparation,
postsecondary enrollment and admission, enrollment, and degree
completion.
Understanding what the factors are and how they work together provides
information that various groups can use to help better prepare students for college
success. Students from at-risk populations face additional challenges, some of which
can be ameliorated by the activities in which they engage in college and by programs
and practices institutions provide for their enrichment.

25

While the empirical studies on Native Hawaiian students are limited in
regards to pre-college experience, they confirm that high school experience, financial
aid, and family support are correlated with success for Native Hawaiian students.
Student Behaviors, Activities, and Experiences in Post-Secondary Education
As discussed in the previous section, pre-college experiences influence how
students will perform academically, and whether they will persist and attain their
educational objectives. However, another key factor to their success is “student
engagement.” In their landmark publication, Principles of Good Practice for
Undergraduate Education, Chickering and Gamson (1987) underscored seven
categories of effective educational practices that directly influence student learning.
They are student-faculty contact, cooperation among students, active learning,
prompt feedback, time on task, high expectations, respect for diverse talents, and
ways of learning. The more students engage in these kinds of activities, the more
likely they learn and the more likely they are to persist and graduate from college
(Astin, 1984).
At colleges where faculty use these and other effective educational practices
more frequently in their classes, students are engaged overall and gain more from
college (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). The nature and quality of first-year students’
experiences in the classroom, with faculty and with peers, are better predictors of
college success than pre-college characteristics (Gerken & Volkwein, 2000). Also
important to student learning are college environments that students perceive to be

26

inclusive and affirming, and performance expectations that are clearly stated and set
at reasonably high levels (Kuh, 2005).
Student engagement embodies two critical features. First, the amount of time
and effort students put into their studies and other educational activities matter.
“Learning is strongly influenced by the degree to which an individual is invested in
the learning process” (Alexander & Murphy, 1994, p 12). The second component of
student engagement is how the institution deploys its resources and organizes
curriculum, learning opportunities, and support services to induce students to
participate in activities that lead to desired experiences and outcomes such as
persistence, satisfaction, learning, and graduation (Kuh, 2001). As Pascarella and
Terenzini (2005, p 602) contend, “the impact of college is largely determined by
individual effort and involvement in the academic, interpersonal, and extracurricular
offerings on a campus….”
Expectations for College
Understanding what students expect from their college experiences is crucial
for colleges to employ instructional approaches that help students become
“intentional learners” (AACU, 2002) and to fashion policies and practices that
address students’ learning needs (Miller, 2005). When students’ expectations and
experiences are aligned and match the reality they encounter, students are more
likely to be satisfied with their college experience and to persist to graduation
(Braxton, Vesper, & Hossler, 1995). But as Schilling and Schilling (1999) have
found from their analysis of College Student Expectations Questionnaire results,

27

many students enter college with uninformed expectations that diverge substantially
from those of the faculty.
Another reason it is important to learn more about the extent to which college
expectations and experiences are congruent is that the first-generation students
pursuing higher education in increasing numbers have limited knowledge of what
college is like. As a result, if their perceptions are off the mark, they will not be
prepared to deal with the challenges they encounter, which will make it more
difficult for them to perform well academically, adjust socially, and persist to
graduation.
Many traditional-age students also appear to begin college disengaged from
the process acclimating to college, having acquired a cumulative deficit in terms of
attitude, study habits, and academic skills (Levine & Cuureton, 1998). McCarthy
and Kuh (2006) found that high school seniors reported studying only about six
hours per week on average, well below the amount most assume is needed to do well
in college. Today’s college students report they are bored in class, and they miss
more classes due to oversleeping or other obligations than 1990’s students did (Sax,
2003). However, record numbers report B+ or better high school grades and expect
to earn at least a B average in college. Because behavioral patterns established in
elementary and secondary school tend to persist during college (Schilling &
Schilling, 1999), it is not surprising that the majority of first-year students—about 70
percent—report working just hard enough to get by (NSSE 2005).

28

Pre-college characteristics and experiences shape college expectations. Olsen
(1998) found that students with strong academic high school records were more
likely to get involved in extracurricular activities during college. Students with low
college expectations were more likely to report poor college experiences than were
students with high expectations. Furthermore, students who indicated a desire to
participate in a wide range of intellectual, social, and cultural activities during their
first year of college were more likely to do so than were others who had more
narrowly defined plans. Because of their somewhat broader range of interests, these
wide-ranging students were also more likely to subsequently participate in activities
predictive of academic success (Kuh, 2005).
Braxton, Vesper, and Hossler (1995) found that first-generation students’
expectations of college were especially incongruent with what they actually
experienced. And there is evidence that what students actually do in the first year of
college falls short in many areas of what they expected to do (Kuh, 1999). That is,
when starting out, most first-year students say they will engage in more academic
and other purposeful activities, and more frequently, than they had actually engaged
in during their first year.
Educational professionals agree that student-faculty interaction is an
important factor in student success (Astin 1993; Kuh, 1991), and entering college
students think so too. For example, 94% of students say they will occasionally ask
their instructor about their performance. However, less than two-thirds actually do
so (Kuh, 2005). The majority (70%) expect to socialize at least occasionally with

29

faculty members outside the classroom, but only about 41% report doing so. More
than 77% expect that they will frequently ask their teachers for information about the
course, but only about 54% do so. Perhaps the difference is that students are not
certain how often they will need to ask faculty members for information, so they err
on the high side in their reported expectations.
Counseling is also important for helping students find their way through
college (Cohen & Brawer, 1996; Kramer & Associates, 2003). Advising takes many
forms in post-secondary education, and it is difficult to tease out its effects; however,
it does seem that high quality counseling seems positively related to student success
(Aitken 1982, Brigman, Kuh, and Stager, 1982; Kowalski, 1977). Tinto (2004)
found that advising positively affects retention and graduation when advisors address
the needs of undecided students, of those who decide to change their major, and of
first generation students, who may not have the same knowledge of how to
successfully navigate higher education. In contrast, Metzner (1989) found
counseling, like other support programs, may only have an indirect effect when
factors such as high school grades, gender, and age are taken into account.
Student Engagement
The College Student Expectations Questionnaire (CSEQ), the National
Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), and the Community College Survey of
Student Engagement (CCSSE) focus primarily on students’ participation in activities
that are associated with desired learning outcomes, persistence, and satisfaction.

30

Taken together, the studies using these measures point to seven conclusions about
student engagement as an intermediate outcome and as a proxy for student success.
Student engagement in educationally purposeful activities is positively
related to both grades and persistence. NSSE annually obtains information from 4-
year colleges and universities nationwide about student participation in programs and
activities that institutions provide for their learning and personal development.
Survey items represent empirically confirmed “good practices” in undergraduate
education. Data regression statistics used to analyze student information suggests
there is a significant correlation between student engagement and the first-year
students’ GPA. Remarkably, grades of lower-ability students are positively affected
by engagement in educationally effective activities to a greater degree than are
higher-ability students.
Though smaller schools generally engage students more effectively, colleges
and universities of similar sizes can vary widely. Smaller schools are generally more
academically challenging because they have lower student-faculty ratios, more full-
time faculty, and more classes with fewer than 20 students (NSSE 2005). At the
same time, some large universities are more engaging than many smaller colleges.
Student engagement varies more within any given school or institutional type
than between schools or institutional types. In comparing 12 liberal arts colleges,
Kuh (2003) demonstrated that there are great variations in student engagement
between institutions. This suggests that instead of a fairly uniform pattern of high

31

student-faculty interaction at small liberal arts colleges, there are instead very large
differences between them.
Student engagement in effective educational practice is unrelated to
selectivity (Kuh & Pascarella, 2004; NSSE, 2003). The combined SAT or ACT
scores of entering students are independent of student participation in educationally
purposeful activities. That is, while highly selective institutions can claim that their
students are likely to benefit from being around highly able peers, there is no
evidence that they interact more with faculty members, have more experiences with
diversity, or participate more frequently in active-learning or collaborative-learning
activities (Kuh and Pascarella, 2005).
Some groups of students are typically somewhat more engaged than others.
Full-time students and students who live on campus are more engaged. This is to be
expected, as these students take more classes, read and write more, and spend more
time preparing for classes than their part-time counterparts. Because they live on
campus, they have easier access than their commuting peers do to faculty members,
other students, and other institutional resources. In addition, full-time students tend
to have fewer obligations such as family responsibilities and off-campus work that
might preclude them from taking part in enriching educational/extracurricular
activities (Kuh, 2003).
Some single-mission institutions often confer engagement advantages to their
students. Studies show that in general, women at single-sex colleges are more
engaged than women at private coeducational institutions (Kinzie, 2004). These

32

women report higher levels of academic challenge, more active and collaborative
learning, more interaction with faculty members, and more diversity-related
experiences.
Bridges (2005) used the NSSE database to examine the nature of student
engagement at minority-serving institutions, analyzing records from about 16,000
Hispanic/Latino students from 36 Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) and 639
primarily White institutions (PWIs) as well as 23,000 African American students
from 37 Historically Black Colleges and Universities. It appears that cultural capital
plays a role in the type of institution a student chooses to attend.
While differences in student engagement for Hispanic students at HSIs and
PWIs are generally quite small, there appears to be a slight compensatory effect of
attending an HSI. Although the effects on a Hispanic student of attending an HSI
tend in general to be unfavorable with statistical controls for student background
characteristics only, with additional controls for gender, mother’s education,
enrollment status, and transfer status, the HSI results improve slightly. Notably, at
HSIs where Hispanics made up 10 percent or more of the faculty, students interacted
more often with faculty and participated more frequently in active and collaborative
learning activities and enriching educational experiences such as community service
(Bridges, 2005). This finding is consistent with other research showing that minority
faculty members across all institutional types are more likely to use effective
educational practices than are White faculty members (Kuh, 2004).

33

Limitations of Mainstream Theory
Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) interactionalist theory is the dominant
sociological perspective on student engagement. Grounded in Van Gennep’s (1960)
anthropological model of cultural rites of passage, Tinto concludes that students
must separate from the group with which they were formerly associated, such as
family members, friends, and cultural values. They must then undergo a period of
transition “during which the person begins to interact in new ways with the members
of the new group into which memberships is sought” (Tinto, 1993, p. 93), and must
adopt the normative values and behaviors of the new group, or college. Tinto
suggests that students who are not successful are unable to distance themselves
effectively from their families’ values and behavior patterns to adopt those of the
institution they are attending. The literature contends that students need, or should be
expected, to conform to prevailing norms (Tinto, 1993) if they conflict with those of
their family of origin (Tierney, 1992), and to undergo a period of transition. Jalomo
(1995) found that Latino community college students were able to successfully
operate in the multiple contexts of home and school, but the transitions were
challenging.
Despite its popularity, Tinto’s theory has only modest empirical support.
Kuh (2005), for example reports that only 8 of the 11 multi-institutional studies that
attempted to link academic integration and persistence provided support for the
relationship. Braxton (1997) and others concluded that the operational definitions
for academic and social integration are inadequate and methodologically flawed.

34

This suggests more refined measures are needed: “Perhaps survey items developed to
measure these constructs do not capture the complexities and subtleties of the survey
items developed to measure these constructs of the interactions between students and
institutions that affect persistence” (Kuh & Love, 2000, p. 197). One school of
thought is that student-institution fit models of adjustment such as Tinto's may be
framed by culturally biased assumptions about what is necessary to thrive in college
(Attinsai, 1989; Gonzalez, 2000; Kuh & Love; Rendon, Jalomo, and Nora, 2000;
Tierney, 1992, 1993).
There is a need, then, for more research to be undertaken on student
engagement in general. Research on Native Hawaiian students, and on whether
existing models of student engagement can accurately describe their requirements for
college success, has been somewhat limited. Kamehameha Schools, a non-profit
trust established to educate Hawaiians, has conducted two studies on Native
Hawaiians and college success. Hagedorn (2006) found there was a positive
correlation between students that boarded and college success. Hagedorn and
Makuakane-Dreshel (2000) reported that financial aid was a predictor of college
success among Native Hawaiians, more than parent encouragement and high school
GPA. These two studies should serve as the basis for expanded research on Native
Hawaiian student engagement and college success.
If something approaching scholarly consensus exists on the topic of college
success and student engagement, it is this: the single best predictor of college success
is the degree to which students perceive the college environment to be supportive of

35

their academic and social needs. Perceptions of the college environment seem to
matter to various forms of student engagement and other dimensions of student
success (Astin, 1993). How students feel about their school does not necessarily
directly affect how much they learn. But perceptions do directly affect student
satisfaction and how much effort students will expend on educationally purposefully
activities, which consequently have direct effects on their learning and personal
development (Hu & Kuh, 2002). Expanded research on Native Hawaiian student
engagement would do well to investigate the topic of perception.
Peer Interactions
Who students choose for friends, and how they spend time together, is
important to the overall variety of their experiences and to how they feel about those
experiences (Kuh, 1993). A large part of the impact of college is determined by the
extent and content of one’s interactions with major agents of socialization on
campus, namely faculty members and student peers (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991).
In fact, according to Astin (1993, p 398), peers are “the single most potent source of
influence,” affecting virtually every aspect of development—cognitive, affective,
psychological, and behavioral. The differences in the experiences of students who
commute to college and live in campus residences are likely to be indirect influences
through the interactions that students have with faculty, staff, and peers.
Peer interactions are particularly important with regard to social integration
because students are more likely to stay in school when they feel comfortable and
connected to other students with similar interests and aspirations (Bean, 1980). For

36

this reason, fraternity and sorority membership are positively related to persistence
(Astin, 1975). In addition, institutions with higher levels of student social interaction
also have higher levels of student educational aspirations (Pascarella, 1985).
Co-curricular Activities
Participation in co-curricular activities is positively related to persistence
(Carroll, 1988). Hanks and Ecland (1976) suggest that involvement in co-curricular
activities may influence persistence in two ways: 1) students are connected
psychologically and socially to an affinity group that is achievement-oriented and
reinforces the desire to graduate, and 2) students engage in activities that help them
develop skills and competencies that enable them to succeed in college (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 2005).
Although involvement in co-curricular activities is positively associated with
persistence and other desirable outcomes (Astin, 1977), more than 43 percent of
students at 4-year colleges and 84 percent of students at 2-year colleges spend no
time on these activities (CCSSE, 2008; NSSE, 2007).
Native Hawaiians and Student Engagement
The final section of this literature review provides information about Native
Hawaiians—socially, culturally, economically, and educationally. This section also
introduces a quick historical perspective on Native Hawaiians and concludes with a
description of their unique history and how it might relate to their college success.
Native Hawaiian culture emphasizes collective well-being over individual
well-being (Meyer, 2003). This emphasis is implied in terms as ʻohana and hānai

37

(fostering and adoption). It finds expression today in the prevalence of extended
family relations and supportive networks among the Native Hawaiian community.
Research shows that, like all students, indigenous students achieve superior
outcomes when their parents, families, and community actively participate in the
educational system (Mokuau, 1990). Thus, for both cultural and educational reasons,
many Native Hawaiian educational programs actively cultivate ʻohana (family)
involvement.
Oliveira (2005) studied predictive factors of college completion for Native
Hawaiian students. The study found that parent encouragement was a significant
predictor of bachelor’s degree completion for Native Hawaiian students. A lack of
support and encouragement of a student’s college attendance and attainment of a
bachelor’s degree decreased the probability of completion for that particular student.
These findings are similar for non-Hawaiian students (Oliveira).
In the fall of 2006, there were 25,260 students enrolled at one of the seven
campuses that comprise the University of Hawaii Community College system.
Eighteen percent of these students identified themselves as Native Hawaiian (UHCC
MAPS Report, 2007). In the 2008 Community College Survey of Student
Engagement (CCSSE) conducted at Windward Community College, 83% of the
Native Hawaiians reported that an associate’s degree was their primary goal,
compared with 82% of non-Hawaiians. Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians
displayed similar college aspirations. Seventy four percent of Native Hawaiians and
78% of the non-Hawaiians reported they would transfer to a four-year college.

38

Forty-five percent of Native Hawaiians reported working more than 21 hours per
week versus 48 percent of non-Hawaiians.

Table 1: UHCC Students’ Readiness for College

Academic Area
Native Hawaiians who
scored below college level
Non-Hawaiians who
scored below college level
Math 66% 61%
Reading 45% 42%
Writing 52% 39%

UHCC students’ readiness for college (CCSSE, 2006). Table 1 shows that
Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians have different levels of college preparation.
Sixty-six percent of Native Hawaiians placed below college level math, compared
with 61% of the general population. In reading, 45% of Native Hawaiians placed
below college level, compared with 42% of non-Hawaiians. Fifty-two percent of the
Native Hawaiians placed below college level writing, versus 39% of the general
population. Terenzini (1997) and other scholars have concluded that students who
must take remedial education classes are less likely to be successful in college.

39

Figure 2: UHCC Student Engagement

The CCSSE has found that student engagement is highly correlated with
student success. Their collection of data over 20 years has proved that highly
engaged students are the ones who survive to the second term. However, students
who are high-risk are more engaged in their college experience than their low-risk
peers, but are less successful in achieving their goals. It is unlikely this phenomenon
happens by accident; it is more likely attributable to other factors like remediation,
social economic status, etc. CCSSE found that students persist when they: Are
active and engaged learners; feel connected to the college; navigate through college
systems, processes and procedures; set goals effectively; and establish meaningful
relationships with faculty, staff, and peers. In all these areas, the 2008 UHCC

40

CCESSE survey found that Native Hawaiian students are more engaged than their
non-Hawaiian peers. Table 3 shows that the CCSSE benchmark scores for UHCC
students’ have increased over the last two years with all UHCC benchmarks above
the national average.

Figure 3: CCSSE Benchmark Scores

Summary
The evidence from studies over several decades strongly indicates that
student engagement in effective educational practices seems to benefit all types of
students in varying degrees.
Table 3

41

• Student engagement is related to a host of positive outcomes including
persistence, grades, and satisfaction.
• Student-faculty interaction matters most to learning when it encourages
students to devote greater effort to other educationally purposeful
activities during college.
• Student engagement varies more within institutions than between
institutions.
• Some students are generally less engaged than others, such as first
generation students, males, transfer students, and those who live off
campus.
• In the UHCC system, Native Hawaiians have a higher engagement rate
than non-Hawaiian students.
• In the UHCC system, Native Hawaiians are more likely to place into
remedial math and English.
Some emerging research suggests that student engagement may have compensatory
effects for at-risk students, including low income, first generation, and students of
color attending PWIs.
If Native Hawaiian students are engaged at the UHCC campuses at a higher
rate than non-Hawaiians, why is it that Native Hawaiians take longer to complete
college and are less likely to persist (UHCC MAPS, 2005) than their non-Hawaiian
counterparts? The literature tells us that Native Hawaiian students are more likely to
come from low SES families and other abusive situations (Benham, 2007) than non-

42

Hawaiian students. The literature also suggests that college support programs may
not mitigate the poor pre-college experience of the student.
The State of the Native Hawaiian Community
In 2005 the Kamehameha Schools published Ka Huakaʻi—Native Hawaiian
Educational Assessment. Following are excerpts from the report covering the many
needs of the Native Hawaiian community:
• On the whole, Native Hawaiian public school students from low-income
families score lower on achievement tests, are more often retained in
grade, and are less likely to graduate from high school within four years
than Native Hawaiian students from more financially secure families.
Educational Well-Being
• The test scores for Native Hawaiian children lag behind statewide
averages by approximately 10 percentile points in reading and math. The
achievement gap widens as students progress to higher grades.
• Academic disparities are pronounced in rural regions with very high
concentrations of Native Hawaiians.
• The percentage of Native Hawaiian adults who have obtained a
bachelor’s degree is half the statewide rate (12.6 percent versus 26.2
percent, respectively).
• Native Hawaiian students at the University of Hawai‘i–Mānoa are least
likely of the major ethnic groups to graduate within six years and are

43

most likely to be working full time while attending school (22.3 percent
versus 17.8 percent statewide).
The Ka Huakaʻi—Native Hawaiian Assessment Report (2005) findings
confirm Benham’s (1997) assessment that “Native Hawaiians are not fairing well in
their own homeland.” The Ka Huakaʻi report and many other scholars argue the way
to address this issue is to reinforce cultural identity.
He Hawaiʻi au mau a mau – I am Hawaiian
A substantial body of research documents the beneficial effects of cultural
identity on the self-esteem and resilience of children (Phinney, 1995; Phinney &
Alpuria, 1990; Phinney, Cantu, & Kurtz, 1997; Phinney & Chavira, 1992). Among
Native Hawaiian adolescents, who are particularly vulnerable to depression (Saka &
Lai 2004), a strong and positive ethnic identity acts as a protective influence on
children’s emotional health (McCubbin, 2003) and their educational outcomes
(Kanaʻiaupuni & Else, 2005). Educational programs that incorporate elements of
indigenous students’ culture have achieved promising results with historically
disadvantaged student populations. For example, in the Yupik Eskimo community in
Alaska, indigenous children have made substantial gains in math achievement under
a newly developed form of “Yupik Mathematics,” which builds on the math
principles embedded in the Yupik language, traditions, and practices (Lipka, 1994;
Lipka & Adams, 2004; Lipka, 2001). Among the Māori of New Zealand, Rubie
(1999) found that children who participated in a culturally intensive program
exhibited improvements in self-esteem, social skills, academic performance, and

44

attitudes toward school, compared with a control group. These findings on the
positive effects of ethnic and cultural identity are not limited to elementary and
secondary students. For example, Huffman, Sill, and Brokenleg (1986) found that
adherence to cultural traditions and practices were associated with higher grade point
averages among Navajo college students.
The benefits of cultural identity are especially important to indigenous groups
such as Native Hawaiians, many of whom struggle with negative views of
themselves and their people stemming from a history of colonization and oppression,
from the misrepresentation and commercialization of their culture, from and ongoing
sociopolitical inequities (KS Press, 2005). Pukui (1972) argued that “shame or denial
of cultural ways” among Native Hawaiians “stems in part from handed-down
attitudes that began with initial encounters with Westerners, both missionaries and
laymen” and from a “fragmented and distorted knowledge of the culture” (p. 311).
Vestiges of these historical injustices remain in the ongoing socioeconomic,
physical, and educational disadvantages Native Hawaiians face, as well as the
persistence of negative stereotypes about Native Hawaiians in the larger society
(Kanaʻiaupuni, 2005). Consistent with these trends, research suggests that Native
Hawaiian students contend with negative stereotypes on an ongoing basis and too
often internalize these distortions, developing unhealthy beliefs about themselves,
their ethnic background, and their cultural roots (Mayeda, Chesney-Lind, and Koo,
2001).

45

To address the educational attainment of Native Hawaiians, a plethora of
Native Hawaiian programs have been created. Kamehameha Schools, a private non-
profit trust established by the late Bernice Pauahi Bishop, is one of the main
stakeholders in Hawaiian education. The organization spends a sizeable amount of
their 8 billion dollar trust to support Native Hawaiian education. The primary focus
of the trust is on high schools located on three of the seven populated islands in
Hawaii. In 2005, Kamehameha Schools enrolled 5,398 students at its three
campuses, served an additional 1,317 preschool-aged students via extension
programs, and gave out an estimated 12 million dollars in scholarships to 1,211
Native Hawaiian college students (KSBE website). Since its inception,
Kamehameha Schools has educated Native Hawaiians exclusively, using mainstream
pedagogy (Benham, 2004). However, there has been a movement among Native
Hawaiian educators, spurred by the 1988 Native Hawaiian Education Act (NHEA),
to create a more culturally appropriate learning environment.
The NHEA’s purpose is to develop innovative education programs to assist
Native Hawaiians and to supplement and expand programs in the area of education.
Authorized activities include, among others: early education and care programs;
family-based education centers; beginning reading and literacy programs; activities
to address the needs of gifted and talented native Hawaiian students; special
education programs; professional development for educators; and activities to enable
native Hawaiian students to enter and complete postsecondary education programs.
The act appropriates 34 million dollars annually. The result of this has been a

46

hodgepodge of Native Hawaiian-serving programs, many of which claim to use a
Hawaiian educational perspective in the implementation of their programs.
One such program is Nā Pua Noʻeau (NPN), which has been in existence since 1988.
The program’s philosophical model is based on three perspectives. Firstly,
Hawaiians have not failed; rather, the educational system has failed Hawaiians. The
center suggests that because of colonization, Hawaiians have had very little exposure
to their history, culture, language, and thinking. NPN works to change the current
educational climate in order to optimize the learning of Hawaiian students.
Secondly, the Hawaiian perspective of giftedness lies in nurturing the gifts of
all children, not in determining who is gifted and who is not. The conventional
perspective of gifted and talented programming tends to set exclusive parameters and
limits participation. The center focuses its resources in nurturing the gifts of all
students it serves with a participation perspective of openness to all who share
interest with the capability of the center’s resources. Thirdly, the center understands
the role culture plays in the education and growth of children. The center promotes
wide coverage of disciplines and depth of educational experience; three factors link
these topics and experiences: 1) the self or the person and how individuals view
themselves; 2) the family or ‘ohana, the notion of having responsibility within a
family and that all members are important for success; 3) the Hawaiian culture and
its history and values. Each topic or discipline is integrated with the Hawaiian
perspective, culture, and/or history. Na Pua No‘eau was one of the first programs

47

that created program pedagogy that suggests Native Hawaiians experience learning
differently than non-natives do (Sing, 1990).

Figure 4: Na Pua Noeau Learning Model

48

Charter schools have also embraced this concept. Kanu o Ka ‘Āina is one of
eighteen charter schools in Hawai‘i using a Native Hawaiian educational perspective.
According to one of the pages of the Kanu o Ka ‘Āina’s (KANU) web site: “As
Hawai‘i’s first native designed and controlled public charter school, KANU is based
on over a decade of indigenous action research, integrating native values and
traditions with the latest in 21st century educational technology. KANU is designed
to provide a culturally driven, academically rigorous choice in public education to
children from K-12 and involves families and communities at a very high level. The
vision of KANU is to expand our quality K-12, standards-driven charter school into
a comprehensive Native Hawaiian learning center or kauhale, which addresses the
educational and cultural needs of our community from the womb to the tomb. As a
Hawaiian-focused model of education, guided by a philosophy of excellence, KANU
has become a beacon of hope for those who believe that education can be both
academically rigorous and culturally-driven, allowing students to walk comfortably
in two worlds.” It is clear that these educators believe Native Hawaiians learn better
with Native Hawaiian pedagogy than with mainstream pedagogy.
Indigenous students are more likely to lack the necessary social and cultural
capital needed to navigate through the networks of the educational institution
(Horvat, 2001; Tierney, 2002). The Native Hawaiian Education Act and other
federal funding gave rise to many programs at the college level engineered to meet
the needs of Native Hawaiian students. In 1987, the Native Hawaiian Vocational
Education program was started at the seven community colleges in the University of

49

Hawaii system. The program created services to address the needs of Native
Hawaiian students in seven areas: 1) financial problems; 2) personal problems; 3)
inadequate childcare; 4) absence of community networking; 5) poor self-image; 6)
institutional inadequacies; and 7) insufficient student assessment and monitoring
(University of Hawaii 1988). In a report from Maui Community College, the
program described holding a scholarship fair that invited students and their extended
family members to attend and included food, entertainment, and music. The report
concluded that the event was successful because of the higher turnout of students
over the previous year’s scholarship fair. In addition, the report contended that the
added features of the scholarship fair such as food and music were the reason for its
success (Muʻo Aʻe Annual Report, 2008).
Conclusion
The current literature on the Native Hawaiian population, although limited,
illustrates that it has unique characteristics. It is clear from the Kamehameha study
and other literature that Native Hawaiians face many barriers to economic self-
sufficiency. Some of these barriers are being addressed in culturally sensitive
programs.
Having an education is one of the ways to remedy the woes that the Native
Hawaiian community faces every day. There is empirical data that people who attain
a college degree earn more money, are more involved in their community, and live
longer than those without a college degree. Encouraging college success among

50

Native Hawaiian students is one way to address the negative statistics they confront
as a group.
This literature review provides a glimpse of what is important to increasing
college success among students. The literature first points to the importance of
students’ pre-college experience: their high school courses, their grades, their
parents’ encouragement, and their SES status are important for college success. The
second fundamental element is student engagement; the more a student engages with
the institution, with faculty, and with their peers, the greater their likelihood of
college success. Data from the UHCC CCSSE report document that Native
Hawaiians are more engaged in college than their non-Hawaiian peers. Granted,
Native Hawaiians have a lower SES than most non-Hawaiians, but is this fact
enough to explain their low achievement in college?
The literature would argue no. Hawaiians are unique because of their distinct
political and social history. This complicates the factors that increase the success of
Native Hawaiian students. Understanding how this phenomenon impacts their views
on pursuing a college degree is critical to addressing their specific needs. This study
will help to inform policy and program providers on the perspectives of Native
Hawaiians and how they are related to college success. This understanding is critical
to addressing the leaky educational pipeline for Native Hawaiian students.

51

CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study is to determine whether Native Hawaiian students
perceive barriers to college differently than their non-Hawaiian peers and whether
they believe culture helps them to be successful in college. This chapter describes
the methodology used in this study, including the design, instrumentation, sample,
data collection, and data analysis. The study focuses on Native Hawaiians and non-
Hawaiian students at Windward Community College, with additional attention to
those students who were on financial aid probation—students who did not pass ¾ of
their coursework and/or did not maintain a 2.0 semester GPA. The results of the
study will help to improve Native Hawaiian achievement by informing Native
Hawaiian service providers about student perceptions of college barriers and success.
It will answer the basic question: Do Native Hawaiian students require educational
services tailored differently from services for non-Hawaiian students?
Specifically, this study addressed the following overarching questions:
Question 1: Do Native Hawaiian students perceive barriers to college success
differently than non-Hawaiian students? A sub-question for this item is: Do Native
Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians seek support from similar programs when they
experience difficulty in college? Question 2: Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike
non-Hawaiians students, perceive that college support programs that integrate their
cultural values and practices assist them better than those that do not? Question 3:

52

Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiian students, perceive that having a
good understanding of their culture will help them to be successful in college?
The study was conducted using a mixed-method approach. First, a survey of
students in the general population was conducted (n=375). Second, an in-depth
interview was held with 10 underperforming students.
The study was conducted among students attending Windward Community
College. Windward Community College is one of seven Community Colleges in the
University of Hawai‘i System. It was chosen for this study because the college has
the highest percentage of Native Hawaiian students within the University of Hawaiʻi
ten-campus system (WCC IRO, 2009). The college offers only one degree, an
Associate of Arts in Liberal Arts. The campus also has the highest proportion (47%)
of financial aid recipients within the UH system (UH IRO, 2007).
The respondent pool for this study was comprised of students who self-
identified as Native Hawaiian or non-Hawaiian. Survey questionnaires were
distributed to groups of in-class respondents. Participants in the interview phase
were Pell recipients during the 2008 school year, which started in August 2008 and
ended in May 2009. The interviewed students had been at Windward Community
College at least one year. These interviewees had not made satisfactory academic
progress; that is, they had not earned a cumulative grade point average of 2.0, and/or
had not completed at least 70% of their coursework. As a result, they had been
placed on financial aid probation. Twenty five students were selected randomly
from the financial aid probation list, and 10 agreed to participate: 6 Hawaiian and 4

53

non-Hawaiian. All interviews were conducted face-to-face at Windward Community
College. Dexter (1970) has summarized when to use interviewing: “Interviewing is
the preferred tactic of data collection when… it will get better data or more data or
data at less cost than other tactics!” (p. 11). The most common form of interview is
the person-to-person encounter, in which one person elicits information from another
(Merriam, 1998). The main purpose of the interview was to find out what is “in and
on someone else’s mind” (Patton, 1990, p. 278). All interviews were tape recorded
and transcribed, and data were coded.
Mixed-Method
According to Connelly (2009) and others, mixed methods use both
quantitative and qualitative methods to add richness to a study. Mixed methods have
many advantages such as adding depth to numbers and including a broader range of
questions in the study format. Yoon (2009) studied a community in Hawai‘i
rebuilding after a flood using mixed methods to allow exploration of information
from different levels of source (respondents) and Powell (2008) noted that mixed
methods can give a triangulation of responses to research questions, resulting in
more accurate answers.
The quantitative portion of the study is a survey of students. The survey
instrument was a questionnaire (Appendix A) that was developed based on prior
work conducted by Kamehameha Schools’ researchers. The questions on problems
were augmented and refined through a number of iterations in methodology classes

54

and fieldwork. Three questions crucial to this study, the questions on barriers and
cultural perceptions, were added and adjusted based on in-class pretests.
The qualitative case study (interviews) broadens the study towards “an
intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single instance, phenomenon, or
social unit” (Merriam, 1988, p. 21). Smith’s (1978) notion of the case as a “bounded
system” comes closest to Merriam’s (1988) definition. As Yin (1994) observes, case
study is a design particularly suited to a situation in which it is impossible to separate
the phenomenon’s variables from their context. The researcher selected this
qualitative case study design because of the nature of the research problem and the
questions that were asked to capture the perceptions of students who had faced
barriers while attending Windward Community College. The case study approach
allowed for an in-depth examination of the perceptions of students and the results
provided a thick and rich description of barriers students might face while in college
and what services the student sought out to address their dilemma. The researcher’s
goal was to offer insights and illuminate meanings that expand the educators’
understanding of the perceptions of Native Hawaiian students.
Sample and Population
This study focuses on Windward Community College. WCC was founded in
1972 as part of the University of Hawai’i system. The college is one of seven
community colleges in the 10-campus system, which also includes one research and
two liberal arts baccalaureate degree granting institutions. The UH system enrolled

55

53,426 students in Fall 2008. Table 2 shows the distribution of students in the
system.
Table 2: Headcount Enrollment of Credit Students, University of Hawai'i, Fall 2008

Regular Special Total
Headcount
%
Sub Total Regular
Students
Sub
Total
Early
Admit
UH System Total 53,526 100
%%
52.985 52,985 541 541
UH – Manoa 20,169 37.7 20,169 20,165 4 4
UH- Hilo 3,773 7.0 3,773 3,729 44 44
UH- West Oahu 1,140 2.1 1,140 1,140
UH Community College Total 28,444 53.1 27,951 27,951 493 493
Hawaii CC 2,884 5.4 2,783 2,783 101 101
Honolulu CC 4,218 7.9 4,170 4,170 48 48
Kapiolani CC 8,221 15.4 8,167 8,167 54 54
Kauai CC 1,104 2.1 1,043 1,043 61 61
Leeward CC 6,771 12.6 6,700 6,700 71 71
Maui CC 3,287 6.1 3,149 3,149 138 138
Windward CC 1,959 3.7 1,939 1,939 20 20

Windward Community College is located on the island of O‘ahu, where four
of the seven community colleges are located – Kapiolanʻi, Honolulu, Windward, and
Leeward. The service area for the college extends from Kahuku to Waimānalo, and
the population base is considered rural. Its primary feeder high schools are Kahuku,
Kalaheo, Castle, and Kailua. Windward Community College is unique in several
ways. First, it has only one Associate of Arts degree--a liberal arts degree; second, it
has the highest percentage of Native Hawaiians in the UH system, 42%; and third, it
has the highest proportion of financial aid recipients in the UH system, 47%.

56

Because of its unique characteristics and its relatively small size, Windward
Community College was chosen for this study. Using purposeful sampling (Patton,
1990), Windward Community College was selected on the basis of sampling
intensity and stratification for garnering perceptions of Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian
students.
Determination of the Samples
For the quantitative portion of the study, a cluster sample was drawn from
Windward Community College students. Cluster samples are useful when engaging
in research on populations that come in convenient groupings (Summers, 1981).
Eleven randomly selected college classes were presented the questionnaires. Three
hundred seventy-five responses were gathered, representing 100% participation.
For the qualitative portion of the study, the sample for the interview study
was composed in the following manner:
1. A list of all Pell recipients (N=499) was compiled and categorized by
ethnicity, class standing, cumulative grade point average, and percentage
of credits completed.
2. The list was narrowed to include only students who were on financial aid
probation (N=89).
3. From that list, only students who were on financial aid probation for the
first time in Fall 2009 were selected to participate in the study (N=40).
Students had been placed on financial aid probation because they did not
maintain a minimum 2.0-semester grade point average and/or did not

57

complete at least 70% of their credits. For example, a student enrolled in
12 credits must have satisfactorily completed at least 9 credits to remain
in good standing for continued financial aid.
4. Lastly, 6 Native Hawaiians (3 females and 3 males) and 4 non-Hawaiians
(2 females and 2 males) consented to be interviewed for this study.
In general, the students interviewed had characteristics of being: poor or needy based
on their Pell financial aid status; attend Windward Community College at least 1
year; on financial aid probation because of an academic problem; and enrolled at the
college at the time of their participation in the study.
Data Collection Procedures
The survey was conducted through in-class questionnaire distribution and
collection. The questionnaires were distributed and collected by the author of this
study.
The qualitative aspect began with structured individual interviews conducted
on WCC campus. The face-to-face interviews were divided into four parts. The first
part asked demographic information (e.g., gender, age, etc.) The second part asked
about the student’s academic background, type of high school attended, academic
rigor, and cumulative high school GPA, as well as the kinds of participation in
extracurricular activities. The third part of the interview asked why they were put on
financial aid probation. Follow-up questions sought reasons they were experiencing
difficulty in college. These questions evolved around finances, personal problems,
and time on task. The last part of the interview asked what services, if any, they

58

sought to assist them with the barrier they faced. Interviews lasted anywhere from
45 minutes to two hours. Each interview was taperecorded. Appendix B includes a
list of questions in the interview protocol.
Data Analysis Procedures
All questions on the questionnaire are nominal scaled (see Appendix B).
Therefore, analysis consists of proportions and chi-square tests of variable
relationships in contingency tables.
Essentially, all qualitative data analysis is content analysis in that the content
of interviews and field notes are analyzed (Merriam, 1998). The process involves
the simultaneous coding of raw data and the construction of categories that capture
relevant characteristics of the document’s content (Altheide, 1987). All interviews
were transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed by coding the transcribed interviews,
looking for common themes, and cross-referencing findings. The data were first
coded according to the general research questions and conceptual frameworks
guiding this study. Then, more detailed codes were developed to help themes to
emerge. The researcher did not use any software in sorting the themes; the work was
done manually. Charts or tables were used to facilitate the data analysis process.
Ethical Considerations
Qualitative research, with its data collection and interviewing processes,
entails its own challenges. Stake (1994) states, “qualitative researchers are guests in
the private spaces of the world. Their manners should be good and their codes of
ethics strict” (p. 244). Throughout this research, ethical considerations were adhered

59

to strictly. Prior to all interviews, consent forms were obtained and participants were
assured of confidentiality. In addition, all data gathered from the interviews (e.g.,
tapes, phone conversations, or e-mails) as well as transcripts and other documents
were kept confidential unless consent was given by the student to disclose such
information. Thus, the report of findings does not have any names and
confidentiality of the participants was preserved. At all times during the data
gathering and analysis, the researcher complied with the University of Southern
California’s and University of Hawaii Institutional Review Board’s procedures.
Specifically, the researcher complied with all the guidelines required for ethical
conduct in research.
Limitations of the Study
The case studies were conducted at Windward Community College over a
period of two and a half months. Some of the limitations may be due to the small
sample size of the research and the results may not be generalizable. Certain factors
unique to WCC may impact the transferability of this study to other districts. The
study gathered qualitative data from WCC because of its uniqueness as a small
college with a large Native Hawaiian population and a high rate of financial aid
access among its students. The samples and units of analysis were purposefully
selected in anticipation of adding more to the field research concerning Native
Hawaiian students.

60

CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
In chapter one it was argued that Native Hawaiian students do not succeed in
college as well as non-Hawaiians students; the intent of this study is to understand
their perceptions of cultural elements of education to 1) better align support services
to Native Hawaiian students’ needs and 2) bring Native Hawaiian students’ college
success rates closer to parity. Kuh (2005) contends that student engagement is at the
root of student success. Student engagement takes place on two planes: the first
plane is the “individual” plane, which pertains to student behaviors such as study
habits, motivation, peer involvement, and faculty interaction. The second plane
pertains to institutional conditions, such as academic support, counseling services,
and teaching and learning approaches. This study adds to this field of research by
proposing possible student behaviors and institutional conditions that may encourage
Native Hawaiian college success.
The following research questions drive the discussion of results. Question 1:
Do Native Hawaiian students perceive barriers to college success differently than
non-Hawaiian students? A sub question for this item is: Do Native Hawaiians and
non-Hawaiians seek support from similar programs when they experience difficulty
in college? Question 2: Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiians
students, perceive that college support programs that integrate their cultural values
and practices assist them better than those that do not? Question 3: Do Native

61

Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiian students perceive having a good
understanding of their culture will help them be successful in college?
This chapter will be presented in the following manner. A section on the
demographics of the study will be presented. Then, for each research question
statistical and qualitative data collected via the surveys and interviews will be
presented in narrative and graph forms.
Sample
Three hundred eighty-five Windward Community College students
participated in this study.
1
Three hundred seventy-five participated by filling out a
survey questionnaire and ten additional students were interviewed for this study.
The following figures may not add up to 375 because students may have left the
question blank. The surveys were conducted in 11 randomly selected Windward
Community College classes during the first week of Fall 2010. Although the
students were told that participating in the survey was voluntary, all students filled
out the questionnaire. The 10 students participating in the interviews were chosen
randomly from a list of Windward Community College students who were on
financial aid probation, due to poor grades.

1
As discussed earlier, Windward Community College is an open admissions campus founded in 1973
and is a part of the ten-campus University of Hawai’i system.

62

Demographics
Respondents
Of the 375 students who completed questionnaires, 210 identified themselves
as Native Hawaiian, 157 identified as non-Hawaiian (Figure 5) and 8 did not
respond. The students that did not answer the Hawaiian ancestry question were
automatically excluded from comparison groups based on Hawaiian ancestry.

Figure 5: Ethnic Breakdown of Survey Respondents

Over two-thirds of the respondents, two hundred fifty-two, were female.
Three hundred thirty were pursuing an associate’s degree and 44 were pursuing a
certificate.
One hundred and thirty-three students identified themselves as first time
students, 182 as continuing students, and 27 were previously enrolled students

63

(others were transfers or “Do Not Know”). The majority of students (61%) that took
part in the survey were between 18-24 years of age (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Age Distributions of Survey Participants

Two hundred nineteen students who responded to the questionnaire received
a Pell grant; 130 of the Pell recipients were Native Hawaiian (Figure 7).
Receipt of a Pell Grant is used in this analysis as a low-income identifier.
Students who received a Pell grant, a federal subsidy paid by the government to the
most needy college students, met low-income federal guidelines. The high
proportion of students at the college who receive these grants is an indicator of
accessibility and ubiquity among low-income students. This reduces the likelihood
that students who do not get the grants are low-income.

64

Figure 7: Pell & Non-Pell Survey Participants

Of the ten students who were interviewed for this study, four were non-
Hawaiian and five were males. Three were between 18 and 24 in age, one was
between 25-30, three were between 31-39, two were between 40-49, and one was
above 50 years of age. All interviewed Pell grant recipients were continuing
students who had been in college more than 1 year.
Native Hawaiians
The Native Hawaiians in the sample were more likely to be over 24 years of
age. Forty-four percent were 25 years or older, while only 23 percent of the non-
Hawaiians in the sample were in this age group. The Native Hawaiians were also
more likely to be female (71% vs. 64% for non-Hawaiians). The Native Hawaiians
were similar to the non-Hawaiians in class grade level. However, they were more
likely to receive Pell Grants (62% vs. 56% for non-Hawaiians).

65

Pell Grantees
Pell grantees also tended to be older than the non-grantees. Forty-nine
percent of grantees were 25 years or older, while only 21% of the non-grantees were
of that age. Pell grantees tended to be female (73%) at a greater rate than non-
grantees (62% female). The Pell grantees were similar in class grade level to non-
grantees.
Problems Encountered by Students
Figure 8 displays responses to a series of questions regarding problems the
students encountered. The largest proportion of students (76%) responded that they
encountered problems in paying for college. More than sixty percent of the students
responded that they had trouble with the difficulty of classes and with job related
responsibilities. Paying for college and job related responsibilities, taken together,
indicate that the respondent group is struggling to pay for an education.
The only other problem encountered by over half the students was with
scheduling classes. This is a problem throughout the Hawaiʻi system as enrollment
trends are rising in the current economic times.

66

Figure 8: Problems Encountered by Students

Assistance
The dominant forms of assistance sought by the students were from friends
and counselors (63% and 61%, respectively). Figure 9 displays responses to
questions regarding assistance students sought out and/or received. Instructors and
family/friends were sought out by fifty-five percent of the students. Along with
Financial Aid (48%), these were the dominant forms of assistance.

67

Figure 9: Percent Seeking Assistance

Data Analysis
Statistical treatment of data for this study was done using SPSS 18. A simple
Chi Square analysis was run for each question. Salkind (2008) writes that anything
less than a .05 (p<. 05) probability rate with a sample error less than 20% should be
considered significant. This standard is used in this study.
To isolate for Socio-Economic Status (SES) the data analysis for this study
was done in four silos. First, the data was run comparing responses of Hawaiians
and non-Hawaiians (NH vs. NNH). Second, it compared Pell and non-Pell recipients
(Pell vs. No Pell). Third, Native Hawaiians who received a Pell grant were

68

compared with Native Hawaiians who did not receive a Pell grant (NH Pell vs. NH
no Pell). Fourth, Non-Hawaiians who received a Pell grant were compared with
Non-Hawaiians who did not receive a Pell grant (NNH Pell vs. NNH no Pell).
Within each cell of every matrix is a “Y” or “N.” These represent whether there was
a statistically significant difference between respective groups on the survey
question. The ten interviews were transcribed and Nvivo 8 software was used to find
themes within the interviews conducted for this study.
Findings
Question 1: Do Native Hawaiian students perceive barriers to college success
differently than non-Hawaiian students?
Based on the findings of this study the answer to this question is no.
While there were no significant differences between Native Hawaiians and
non-Hawaiians when asked about college barriers, there were differences between
Pell recipients and non-Pell recipients for some of the specific “barriers” identified in
the questionnaire.
Students surveyed generally were concerned about paying for college.
Quantitative analysis looked across the key groupings and found the problem to be
medium/large for 57% of the respondents; i.e., more than half of the students felt
paying was of moderate or high concern.

69

Table 3: Statistical Significance Summary Among Comparison Groups

NH vs.
NNH
Pell
vs. No
Pell
NH
Pell vs.
NH No
Pell
NNH
Pell vs.
NNH
No Pell
How large of a Problem was Paying for
College?
N Y N Y
Difficulty of classes? N N N N
How large a problem was scheduling
classes?
N N N N
How large a problem was relating to the
Teacher?
N N N N
How large a problem was the Relevance to
What I am Learning?
N N N N
How large a problem was Family
responsibilities?
N Y Y Y
How large a problem was Job Related
Responsibilities?
N N N N
How large a problem was transportation? N N N N
How large a problem was
socializing/making friends?
N N N N
NH=Native Hawaiian, NNH=Non Hawaiian, Pell=Pell recipient,
No Pell= Non Pell recipient, NH Pell=Native Hawaiian Pell recipient,
NH No Pell= Native Hawaiian not receiving Pell,
NNH Pell=Non Native Hawaiian receiving Pell, &
NNH No Pell=Non Native Hawaiian not receiving Pell

70

Students were asked how large a problem paying for college was. Those who
received a Pell grant were more likely to respond “yes” than were those who did not
receive a Pell grant. The reason for this is obvious—students who received a Pell
grant were less likely than non-Pell recipients to already have the resources
necessary to attend college. Similarly, there was a statistically significant difference
between Pell recipients and non-Pell recipients asked how large a problem were
family responsibilities. Interestingly, the survey analysis found a statistically
significant difference between the non-Hawaiian Pell recipients and non-recipients,
while there was no difference between Native Hawaiians who received and did not
receive a Pell grant. The data showed that both Native Hawaiian groups, Pell
recipients and non-recipients, believed that paying for college was a problem. This
is probably due to the low SES of Native Hawaiians as a whole (Kana‘iaupuni,
2008).
The interviews conducted for this study reinforced what was found in the
survey data. There were no clear differences found about college barriers except for
two that were found in the survey which were: 1) paying for college; and 2) family
responsibilities. Interviewees, who were all Pell recipients, expressed that money
was an issue because most were from single income and/or single parent households.
All the students interviewed said college would not be possible if they were not able
to receive financial aid.

71

Figure 10: How Large a Problem was Paying for College? (Native Hawaiians only)

Almost all the students interviewed had children and were raising them alone.
Students discussed their difficulty in managing their children’s lives and attending
college at the same time. Thus, it is to be expected that Pell recipients would have
family issues at a higher incidence than those who did not, because this study would
suggest students receiving Pell were more likely to be part of a single parent
household.
Overall, students indicating family responsibilities as medium/large problems
constituted about 21% of all surveyed. However, within certain groups, this
proportion increased. For the NH students, 33% viewed this problem to be of
moderate or high concern. For students with Pell grants, about 40% shared this
moderate/high concern. This concern was magnified by the researcher’s findings

72

when he interviewed the NH Pell students. Most were responsible for families. The
expressed concern for family responsibilities by Pell students, overall and within the
NH and NNH groups, was found to be significantly different statistically from their
respective No-Pell counterparts.
Although none of the statistical iterations about difficulty of classes resulted
in significant findings in the comparison groups’ perceptions, this area is worthy of
discussion. From other studies, we know that course failure (especially in math) is
commonplace. We also know that course failure often precludes the students from
enrolling in other, higher-level courses. A quantitative review of the primary
comparison groups’ responses (NH v. NNH; Pell v. Non-Pell) and of all responses
found that about 1 out of every 3 students considered difficulties in class to be a
medium or large problem.
Similarly, job related concerns were expressed by approximately 1 out of 3
students across the primary groups. None of the comparisons studied were found to
be statistically significant; that is, the responses were relatively close. Overall, 31%
of the students surveyed found job-related responsibilities to be a medium/large
problem.
Sub question for question 1: Do Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians seek support
from similar programs when they experience difficulty in college?
The answer to this question is no. There was no statistical significant
difference found between Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian students. The interview
responses were in-line with the survey findings.

73

Table 4: Statistical Significance Summary

NH vs.
NNH
Pell
vs. No
Pell
NH Pell
vs. NH
No Pell
NNH
Pell vs.
NNH No
Pell
When experience difficulty sought
assistance from a counselor?
N N Y N
When experience difficulty sought
assistance from financial aid?
N Y Y Y
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from Student Support
Services?
N N Y Y
When experience difficulty sought
assistance form the Library?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from an Instructor?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from family?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistant from Educational Talent
Search?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from an administrator?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from the Learning Center?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from Upward Bound?
N N N N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from friends?
N Y Y N
When experienced difficulty sought
assistance from Admissions and
Records?
N N N N

74

Although there was no statistically significant difference between Hawaiians
and non-Hawaiians who sought help when in difficulty, there was a significant
difference between Native Hawaiian Pell recipients and non-recipients. Sixty-eight
percent of Native Hawaiian Pell recipients surveyed had sought assistance from a
counselor when experiencing difficulty at college, in contrast to only fifty-three
percent of Native Hawaiian non-Pell recipients.

Figure 11: When Experienced Difficulty Sought Assistance from a Counselor

75

Native Hawaiians who received a Pell grant were more likely to engage a
counselor when they experienced difficulty—according to the literature on student
success, students that possess this characteristic should be successful in college.
Why, then, was this not the case for these students? The literature on College
Success suggests that student engagement may not be enough to overcome the pre-
college barriers that students experience before enrolling in college (Metzner 1989).
Another possible explanation from this study’s data is that although Native Hawaiian
Pell students see a counselor more often than the other groups (68%), they are the
least likely to seek assistance from other sources, such as the library, their
instructors, or the learning center. Thus, although their engagement may have been
high in one area, their engagement was the lowest in all other areas covered by the
survey.
The Pell recipients reported that when they experienced difficulty in college
they sought assistance from the Financial Aid office. This would seem logical, since
students who are Pell recipients would have less financial resources to pay for
school. Because these students had fewer resources, they were more likely to seek
assistance from financial aid than were students who could afford to pay for college
on their own or with assistance from family members.
All the students interviewed said they went to Student Support Services for
assistance when they experienced difficulty. The survey data supported this
difference between Pell and non-Pell students. This is due to the fact that if a student
is put on financial aid probation the student must enroll in the Student Support

76

Services program to receive their financial aid award for the ensuing term. In
addition, the financial aid office works very closely with the Student Support
Services program, so it is likely that those students that receive financial aid would
be Student Support Services’ clients.

Figure 12: When Experienced Difficulty Sought Assistance from a Friend? Yes

Both Pell recipients in general and Native Hawaiians who received Pell were
less likely to seek assistance from their friends when they experienced difficulty in
college. The students interviewed clearly stated that their life priority was providing
for their children. These students have very little time for socializing and most
interviewed said they sacrificed their social lives to pursue their education. Because
of their busy schedules, students with Pell are less likely to have a support network

77

of peers or friends because they do not have time to invest in cultivating such
relationships. Thus, these students would be less likely to have a peer network and
therefore less likely to go to that network for assistance when they encountered
barriers in college.
More than half of the students surveyed indicated that they would go to an
instructor for help. The group with the highest positive response was the NNH
students (59.4%). The lowest response rate was for the NH (52.9%). None of the
silos had responses that differed significantly since the positive levels were within 3
percentage points of each other.
The fourth and last area where more than 50 percent of the surveyed students
indicated they would go for help is to the family. This individual relationship is
consistent across groups at about 55%, which explains why the silo analyses were
not significant. It is also consistent in view of how the Hawaiian family relationships
are close locally. The NH group as a whole responded positively at the 57% level
and the NH Pell subgroup at the 63% level.
Besides asking questions about specific barriers, the survey also asked a
broad-based question about college barriers in general. The question asked students
whether they experienced different college barriers than did students who were not
of the same culture. The survey did not find a significant difference between Native
Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians, but did find a significant difference between Pell
recipients and non-Pell recipients in general and between Native Hawaiian Pell
recipients and non-recipients. However, the survey results did not show a

78

statistically significant difference between non-Hawaiian Pell recipients and non-
recipients. This would suggest that poor Native Hawaiians, unlike Hawaiians who
did not receive a Pell grant, perceive that they experience different college barriers
than do students who are not of the same culture.

Figure 13: Experienced Different College Barriers than Students Who Are Not of
the Same Culture As Me, Pell vs non-Pell Students

In conclusion, it appears from this study that Native Hawaiians do not have
different barriers to college than non-Hawaiians; neither do they utilize different
support services. However, the study suggests that poor Native Hawaiians may
perceive barriers to college differently than other Native Hawaiians and other
students in general.

79

Question 2: Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiians students, perceive
that college support programs that integrate their cultural values and practices
assist them better than those that do not?
Based on the results from this study the answer to this question is yes.
On the Chi Square run for this question, there was a statistically significant
difference between the perceptions of Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians. The
Chi Square for this question is >.001, the highest possible significance using this
analysis (Salkind 2008). Fifty-three percent of the Native Hawaiian students,
compared with only 32% of non-Hawaiians, agreed that college support programs
that integrate their cultural values and practices assist them better than those that do
not.
There was no statistically significant difference between students who
received or did not receive a Pell grant. These results suggest that this question does
not have to do exclusively with SES. Similarly, there was no statistically significant
difference between Hawaiians who did or did not receive a Pell grant; likewise for
the non-Hawaiians.
One student captures the sentiment well for the other Native Hawaiians
interviewed in this study; he said: “I believe it is important because, you know, let’s
just say you are new to college or did not know anybody who attended college
before—you might shy away from being exposed as not knowing what to expect. If
the people who ran the program understood this, they might provide services to help
deal with this issue. If they understood my culture, they would know the program

80

they create should be more collaborative than competitive, should be multi-
generational, open to my ‘ohana (family), and provide food. They would know that
Hawaiians not only engage the mind but the na‘au (spirit) too.” All the Native
Hawaiian students interviewed for this study were able to articulate an answer to this
question, and 5 of the 6 had been a part of a program that they perceived to be
aligned to their culture. Interestingly, the student says that a collaborative and
inclusive environment is conducive to Hawaiian learning. The literature about
college success implies that an inclusive and collaborative learning environment
encourages student success (Kuh 2008). This is a good example of what the student
believes to be Hawaiian being potentially universal and beneficial to all students, not
just Native Hawaiians.

Figure 14: College Programs and Cultural Integration, Does It Matter?

81

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, all interviewed students were
participants of the Student Support Services (SSS) program at Windward
Community College. The Native Hawaiians considered SSS as a program that was
aligned to their culture, although it was not exclusively for Native Hawaiians. One
of the students described SSS as a Pu‘uhonua (place of refuge). She said that when
she is in trouble with school, she knows SSS is the place to go, no matter what kind
of problem she is experiencing. The student said: “The people at SSS are open and
helpful, they no make you feel shame, they no scared sit and pray with me when I
need it.”
Three of the four non-Hawaiian students were not able to articulate an answer
to this question. It was not because they did not understand the question, but more
that they did not understand the concept of learning via cultural values and practices.
The student that did give an answer is a first generation Filipina to America. She
said: “…I know of programs like that and I think they are not good. When I went to
Manoa I was part of Operation Manong. Although I felt comfortable while
participating in the program I did not think it helped me. We spent too much time on
being Filipino, but being Filipino does not help me be successful in college. I wish
they taught me how for be American because I think that is what I need to be to be
successful in college”.
The findings from this study suggest that Native Hawaiians, unlike non-
Hawaiians perceive programs that integrate their culture and values assist them better

82

than those that do not. Both the statistical analysis and interviews support this
notion.
Question 3: Do Native Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiian students, perceive
that having a good understanding of their culture will help them be successful in
college?
Based on the findings of this study the answer to this question is yes.
Seventy-three percent of the Native Hawaiians surveyed, in contrast to 46% of non-
Hawaiians, said they believe having a good understanding of their culture will help
them be successful in college (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Does Culture Matter?

83

Among the other comparison groups, there was no significant difference. It is
obvious from the graphs presented for the non-Hawaiian groupings that none of
those respondent groups came close to the 73% affirmative response rate of the
Native Hawaiian survey respondents (Figure 16).

Figure 16: Does Culture Matter, Non-Hawaiian Groups

The non-Hawaiians who were interviewed for the study said that learning
about their culture was not important to be successful in college. In fact, many
thought the contrary was true. All the non-Hawaiians said their culture was a
hindrance to their success in college. One student said: “When I went to school I
tried my hardest to not be Filipino. I did not hang out with Filipinos. I even stopped
speaking my own language. I came to believe that anything Filipino was backwards

84

so tried my best to stop doing anything Filipino. In fact I was shame to be Filipino.
I don’t feel like that anymore but when I was young I felt like that. And today I see a
lot of young Filipinos going through the same thing that I went through”. Another
non-Hawaiians student said: “Well, for my culture, for my Cambodian roots, my
family and friends they do not think that education is important. In fact they look
down at me because they think I should go to work to help support the family,
because culturally that is what I should do. It’s hard for them to see that in the long
run I will make more money because they do not understand what a college degree
can do for me. So for me it’s hard to be inspired by my culture because it does not
value education.” All the non-Hawaiians who were interviewed agreed that culture
played no role in their success in college.
The Native Hawaiians who were interviewed for the study confirmed the
survey results. This question prompted strong emotions from these students. One
student said: “It’s almost like we’re connected to our culture and we want it to live.
We want to instill that and just preserve it, I guess. And feel proud because for a
long time, we were considered lazy and stupid. But after learning the culture, I
learned my ancestors were intelligent and we didn’t have to work long hours to
survive because of our subsistence lifestyle. By learning about my culture it helps
me deal with the negative stereotypes I grew up with.” Another student said, “Yeah,
it does affect it but you know what I mean, some people might not have that kind of
mentality. And they could probably go through college and do quite well, whereas
they might be lacking something personally, a little more spirit, and a little more

85

heart than somebody else who knows who they are and where they come from and
being prideful with that. You have more, I think, confidence. Especially if you take
pride in what you are, you going walk with your head tall, you’re going to feel better.
You have purpose for yourself, your family, your community, and your country. I
think having an understanding of your culture has a lot to do with that.” Another
student said: “I think my grandma knew that it was important to pass cultural
traditions down to me. I did not appreciate it when I was younger but now I do,
because I can use what she taught me to be successful in life. She taught me the art
of feather lei making and from that I learned patience, perseverance, and
commitment. These are all important for me to be successful in college. This is
what culture can do for the Hawaiian”.
It was clear, from the interviews, there was a distinct difference between
Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians when discussing culture. The Hawaiian students had
a very positive view about their culture. At the other end of the spectrum were the
non-Hawaiian students, many of them detesting their culture. However, one of the
students, a Cambodian nationalist, said that he believes that maintaining his culture
is important but it would not help him be successful in college. His last statement
was very telling; he said: “…and anyway there are millions of Cambodians
preserving my culture back home, the Hawaiians on the other hand—this is the only
place their culture is, if it is lost here it is lost forever, that is why I think culture is so
important to the Native Hawaiian.”

86

This student was able to articulate the sentiments on behalf of the Native
Hawaiian students. Many of the Hawaiian students who were interviewed said that
learning about their culture was important. When I asked why, there were varying
answers. One student said it was important because his grandmother said so, and
another said it was important because he saw a television show about it. It was clear
that the motivation to learn about their culture was not always intrinsically
motivated. But all the students agreed that there was a sense of urgency to preserve
and learn their culture. Perhaps this sense of urgency is related to the perception that
their culture will be obliterated by the dominant culture.
This phenomenon was clearly distinguishable between the Native Hawaiians
and non-Hawaiians that were interviewed. All the Native Hawaiians said that it was
important for them to preserve their cultural heritage. The students articulated that
their culture was almost lost and that they owed it to their ancestors to perpetuate
their legacy. None of the non-Hawaiian students expressed similar affinity for their
culture. It is almost as if the Native Hawaiian student carries an additional burden
that other non-Hawaiian students do not. Could this burden be a barrier to success?
Tinto (1991) would argue yes: the reason Native Hawaiians may not be persisting in
college is that they are not integrating themselves into the college culture. Many
Native Hawaiians cannot see themselves separated from their culture and may even
forgo college to perpetuate their culture if left to choose between the two.
From the survey and interview findings, Native Hawaiians, unlike non-
Hawaiians, perceive having a good understanding of their culture as beneficial to

87

their success in college. The survey results overwhelmingly supported this
conclusion, as did the responses from the Native Hawaiian students who were
interviewed for this study.
Conclusion
In summary, data from quantitative and qualitative measures show the extent
of differing perceptions about culture and college success between Hawaiians and
non-Hawaiian students at Windward Community College. Firstly, Native Hawaiians
and non-Hawaiians do not face different barriers to college success. However, it is
worth further investigation to discover why Native Hawaiians Pell grant recipients
believe they face different barriers to college than do Native Hawaiian non-Pell
recipients. Secondly, Native Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians seek assistance from
similar support networks when they experience difficulty in college. Thirdly, Native
Hawaiians, unlike non-Hawaiians, perceive that college programs that integrate their
culture and values assist them better than programs that do not. Lastly, Native
Hawaiians, unlike non-Hawaiians, believe that having a good understanding of their
culture will help them to be successful in college.
Understanding the dynamics of Native Hawaiians and their culture can serve
as the framework for programs that will encourage Native Hawaiian college success.
As covered in the beginning of this chapter, student engagement is at the root of
student success. The findings from this study can be used to develop program
services that will enhance student engagement and encourage Native Hawaiian
college success. Chapter 5 of this study will suggest programmatic characteristics

88

that may increase success among Native Hawaiian students at Windward
Community College.

89

CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Numerous stakeholders have attempted to address Native Hawaiian success
in higher education. Within the past 30 years, increased focus on this population of
students has resulted in federal and state legislation to examine the challenges that
hinder students of Hawaiian ancestry in accessing and persisting in college. Last
year, the federal government provided $20 million to address this issue (NHEA
2009).
Within the University of Hawai‘i system, there are dozens of programs that
address the poor success rates of Native Hawaiians. These can be categorized into
two types of programs. The first type focuses on the issue by addressing the needs of
all students, basically using an approach that is not specific to any particular culture.
The second type of program addresses Native Hawaiians specifically, fully
integrating their culture and values into the program. While these values may be
generic and applicable to other cultures, this type of program usually refers to itself
as a Native Hawaiian program. Understanding Native Hawaiian perceptions about
college, and learning what these students perceive to be important, will facilitate
better programming at the institutions Native Hawaiians attend.
The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether Native
Hawaiians perceive barriers to college differently than non-Hawaiians. Secondly, it
sought to determine whether Native Hawaiians, unlike non-Hawaiians, perceive
culture as integrally related to college success. The study addresses the discourse

90

that is currently occurring in Hawaiian education, and its results shed some light on
what Native Hawaiians students perceive to be important. The secondary purpose of
this study was to contribute to the literature of studies focusing on college success
among Native Hawaiians and indigenous students.
This study is based on a mixed-methods approach based on surveys and
student interviews. Three hundred and seventy-five surveys were completed and
analyzed, as were 10 interviews of students. To get a more robust statistical analysis
and to isolate for social-economic status, data were analyzed in these categories:
Native Hawaiians vs. non-Hawaiians, all Pell recipients vs. all non-Pell recipients,
Native Hawaiians who received a Pell grant vs. those who did not, and non-
Hawaiians who received a Pell grant vs. those who did not.
Windward Community College, founded in 1973, a primarily liberal arts
college with a Fall 2010 enrollment of approximately 2,300 students, was the site for
this study. The college is one of seven community colleges in the University of
Hawai‘i system, which also includes two baccalaureate campuses and a research
institution. Windward Community College has the distinction of having the highest
percentage of Native Hawaiian students, 42% (954 students) in the University of
Hawai‘i system.
Summary of the Results
The first research question of this study asked whether Native Hawaiians face
similar or different barriers to college success than do non-Hawaiians. The survey
and the interviews found relatively few differences between the two groups. There

91

were some differences between those who received Pell grants and those who did
not. For instance, students who received a Pell grant cited problems with finances
and family responsibilities as barriers to college more frequently than did students
who did not receive a Pell grant. It would appear in this case that the difference had
more to do with social-economic status than with differences in cultural background.
An interesting note from the study is that there was a statistically significant
difference between Pell and non-Pell students, and between Native Hawaiians who
did and did not receive Pell. For some reason there was no significant difference
between the non-Hawaiians who did and did not receive Pell. Unfortunately, the
interviews did not provide additional information on the reason for this difference.
This issue of why non-Hawaiian Pell recipients do not see paying for college as a
barrier, unlike Hawaiian Pell recipients, is worthy of further study.
A sub question of question 1 is whether Native Hawaiians and non-
Hawaiians seek assistance from different or similar support services at the college.
The sub question’s findings were similar to those of the main question: there were no
significant differences between Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians. However, there were
some differences within the other sub groups. Students who received a Pell grant
were more likely to seek assistance from financial aid and Student Support Services
than were students who did not receive a Pell grant. Another interesting finding
from the study is that Native Hawaiian Pell recipients were more likely to seek
assistance from a counselor than were Native Hawaiian non-Pell recipients. In

92

addition, students who did not receive a Pell grant were more likely to seek
assistance from their friends than were those that did receive a Pell grant.
The study’s second research question asked whether Hawaiians students,
unlike non-Hawaiian students, believe that programs that integrate their culture into
program pedagogy assist them better than those that do not. The statistical analysis
for the study found significant differences between the responses from Hawaiian and
non-Hawaiian groups. There was no statistical significance found between any of
the other groups. This finding would suggest that social economic status is not a
factor in the results of this analysis.
The third question asked whether Hawaiians, unlike non-Hawaiian students,
thought that learning about their culture would assist them in being successful in
college. As in the question #2 results, there was statistically significant difference
between the Hawaiian and Non-Hawaiian groups only, and not among the other
groups (Pell vs. non-Pell, Hawaiians that received a Pell and did not, and non-
Hawaiians that did and did not receive a Pell grant). These results suggest Native
Hawaiian students, unlike non-Hawaiian students, regardless of their social
economic status, perceive that culture is an important determinant of college success.
The limitations of this study result from it having been conducted at a single
college. Firstly, the data in this study cannot be used to generalize about all Native
Hawaiian students. Secondly, only a simple statistical analysis was done on the data
for the study. Perhaps more comprehensive data analysis may have found additional
perception differences between Hawaiian and non-Hawaiians. Lastly, the pool of

93

interviewees for this study was small—a larger interview poll may have gathered
richer qualitative data—and the pool only included students who were on financial
aid probation. A more diverse pool may have resulted in a deeper narrative of
student perceptions about college barriers and the impact of culture on their college
success.
The next section will briefly connect the existing literature on college success
with the findings of this study, based on the three research questions. It is important
to note that although a lot of money has been spent to improve college success for
Native Hawaiians, there is very little literature available about Native Hawaiians and
college success. There does exist a plethora of research about minorities and low-
income students, both of which Native Hawaiians would be considered.
Research Question #1: Do Native Hawaiian students perceive barriers to college
success differently than non-Hawaiian students?
The literature on this issue suggests that Native Hawaiians, like other
indigenous, minority students, face a notable set of educational barriers. The
National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) has identified the following
elements as their risk factors: delayed enrollment, part-time attendance, financial
independence, single parent status, working full-time, caring for dependents, and
receiving a General Education Development (GED) certificate. Using NCES (2008)
data, 35 percent of American Indians/Alaskan Native students had four or more risk
factors, in contrast to 22 percent of White students. Data for Native Hawaiians alone
were not reported. This study found that Native Hawaiians faced many of the

94

barriers cited in the NCES study; however, it did not find that Native Hawaiians,
unlike non-Hawaiians, had a higher incidence of these factors.
Indigenous groups often face an additional risk factor in being first-
generation college students. Of the 1999-2000 bachelor’s degree recipients whose
parents did not complete high school (NCES 2003), 31 percent were American
Indian/Alaskan Native, and 27 percent were Native Hawaiian. Being the first in
their families to attend college puts students at risk because family members cannot
provide understanding and support for the challenges that indigenous groups face in
higher education. Indigenous students are more likely to lack the necessary social
and cultural capital to navigate the networks of the educational institution (Horvat,
2001; Tierney, 2002). The Native Hawaiians who were interviewed for this study
reported they were alienated from their parents or had very little contact with their
parents. Based on information from this study, it would appear that Native Hawaiian
students do not receive support from their parents for college or for other essential
needs such as housing, childcare, and financial assistance.
Indigenous students are also likely to report receiving some form of financial
aid to pay for college. In 2007, American Indian/Alaskan Native students accounted
for 31.4 percent of the Pell grants received at 4-year public institutions, while Native
Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders received more than 32 percent of the grants in contrast
to 17.9 percent of Whites (NCES, 2008). Additionally, more American
Indian/Alaskan Native (69.9) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (68.3) students
borrow for their undergraduate degrees than White (60.1) and Asian (52.9) students

95

(NCES, 2003). This study found that students who received a Pell grant were more
likely to experience barriers related to financing a college education. This literature
could also explain why the survey results for this study found that non-Hawaiians
who received a Pell and did not receive a Pell did not believe paying for college was
a problem. This was unlike Hawaiian Pell recipients and non-recipients, between
whom there was an obvious difference. The NCES study suggests that Whites are
less likely to need financial aid than other minority groups; thus, their perceptions of
paying for college are different than those of minorities.
Underrepresented populations have lower odds of completing high school
and enrolling in college (Carter and Wilson 1997; Social Science Research Council
Project 2005). The high school completion rates of African Americans (77 percent)
and Latinos (57 percent) trailed that of Whites (82 percent). Latino and African
American college participation rates were equal at 35 percent, whereas the White
participation rate was 43 percent (Carter and Wilson). This study would concur with
these findings: many of survey respondents reported that they were not prepared for
college. However, there was no significant difference between Hawaiians’ and non-
Hawaiians’ responses.
Understanding that Native Hawaiians do not experience different college
barriers than non-Hawaiians is important because college administrators can use best
practices they have already developed to support Native Hawaiian students.
However, it is important not to generalize or to assume that because students face
similar barriers to college success they would automatically benefit from an

96

undifferentiated pedagogical philosophy. This study would argue that this is not the
case.
The research literature on barriers to college success shows that minority
students and low-income students face similar barriers to college success, unlike
White students. These barriers include pre-enrollment risk factors and financial and
family barriers. This study found similar results, but the results were not
significantly different between Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians when studying
perceptions about barriers to college success.
The sub question of question #1 is: Do Native Hawaiians seek support from
similar programs than non-Hawaiians when they experience difficulty in college?
Kuh et al. (2005) suggest that financial aid is essential to college success.
Not having enough money to pay for college is always a constant threat to
persistence and graduation from college. The students who were interviewed for this
study consistently said their families came first. If the students had to choose
between paying for books for their college work and paying for a field trip for their
child, the student would choose pay for the field trip even if it were detrimental to
their studies.
Counseling is important for helping students find their way through college
(Cohen and Brawer 1996 Kramer and Associates 2003). Advising takes many forms
in post-secondary education, and while it is difficult to tease out the effects, it does
seem that high quality counseling is positively related to student success (Aitken
1982, Brigman, Kuh, and Stager 1982; Kowalski 1977). Tinto (2004) found that

97

advising positively affects retention and graduation when advisors address the needs
of undecided students, of those who decide to change their major, and of first
generation students, who may not have sufficient knowledge to successfully navigate
higher education requirements.
Interestingly, among students who reported that they sought assistance from a
counselor when faced with a problem in college, there was no statistical difference
between Hawaiians and non-Hawaiians, between Pell and non-Pell recipients, or
between Non-Hawaiians who did and did not receive a Pell grant. However, there
was significant difference between Hawaiians who received and did not receive a
Pell grant. The Hawaiian students who received a Pell grant were more likely to
seek assistance from a counselor than were Hawaiian students who did not receive
one. In chapter four, the author posed the question: The literature says that seeing a
counselor has a positive effect on college success, so why do Hawaiian Pell
recipients not have greater success in college than other students? The literature
answers this question. Metzner (1989) found that counseling, like other support
programs, might have an indirect effect when factors such as high school grades,
gender, and age are taken into account. In the case of this study, it could be that
Native Hawaiians who received a Pell grant had a poor pre-college experience that
could not be mediated by meeting with a counselor. Kamehameha Schools (2006)
studies on Native Hawaiian elementary school students would confirm that Native
Hawaiians, as a group, have poor pre-college experiences. Another explanation is
that Native Hawaiians who received a Pell grant were more likely to see a counselor,

98

but were least likely, of all groups, to seek assistance from the library, learning
center, instructor, etc.
The study also found that students who did not receive a Pell grant were more
likely to seek assistance from a friend. However, all students believed support from
a friend was important; averaged together, approximately 68% of students reported
that they had sought assistance from a friend when they experienced difficulty in
college. Tinto (1975) would argue that this is bad because it precludes the student
from inserting themselves into the culture of the college. However, the students
believe that their friendships are important and need to be honored. They reported
that their friends help them, encourage them, and build them up rather than dragging
them down. The perceptions of the students counter Tinto’s argument.
In this study, all students who received a Pell grant were likely to utilize the
Student Support Services program at Windward Community College, whether the
student was Hawaiian or not. The literature about student support services says that
programs that provide early intervention, intrusive counseling, and sensitivity to the
diverse needs of students are likely to increase student success (Kramer and
Associates 2003). Windward Community College’s Student Support program would
meet this muster. WCC’s Student Support Services program has posted higher
success rates than the general WCC population (WCC SSS Annual report 2009).
WCC’s Student Support Services has found the proper support initiatives that
remediate poor pre-college experiences among low-income students.

99

The literature about college success describes many types of support
programs that help to facilitate college success. This study found that Native
Hawaiians who received a Pell grant were more likely to seek assistance from
counselors than were other students, and that poor students were more likely to seek
assistance from Student Support Services and the financial aid office than students
who were not poor. In addition, the study found that assistance from friends was
important. However, the data are clear that although these support programs may be
helpful, sometimes they are not enough to mitigate students’ poor college
experiences.
This study also asked students about culture, and about whether they thought
programs aligned to their own cultural values served them better than those that did
not. The study asked whether Native Hawaiians thought learning about their culture
helped them to be successful in college. Understanding the perceptions Native
Hawaiian students have about their culture is an important aspect of designing
support programs or strategies that will work to increase student success for this
indigenous population. Distinguishing whether these perceptions are similar to those
of non-Hawaiians is important; knowing that Native Hawaiians have different
perceptions of what will assist them in college may lead to more effective student
engagement programs. Hopefully, those who are responsible for developing
programs to support Native Hawaiians may use this information to inform the
practices developed to serve this group.

100

Tinto’s (1975,1987, 1993) interactionalist theory is the dominant sociological
perspective. Grounded in Van Gennep’s (1960) anthropological model of cultural
rites of passage, Tinto concludes that students must separate from the group with
which they were formerly associated, such as family members, friends, and cultural
values, undergo a period of transition “during which the person begins to interact in
new ways with the members of the new group into which memberships is sought”
(Tinto 1993, p. 93), and adopt the normative values and behaviors of the new group,
or college. Tinto suggests that students who are not successful are unable to distance
themselves effectively from their family, values, and to adopt the behavior patterns
of the institution they are attending.
Despite its popularity, Tinto’s theory has only modest empirical support.
Kuh (2005), for example, reports that only eight of the eleven multi-institutional
studies that attempted to link academic integration and persistence provided support
for the relationship. Braxton (1997) and others concluded that the operational
definitions for academic and social integration are inadequate and methodologically
flawed. This suggests more refined measures are needed: “Perhaps survey items
developed to measure these constructs do not capture the complexities and subtleties
of the survey items developed to measure these constructs of the interactions
between students and institutions that affect persistence” (Kuh and Love, p. 197).
The literature about Cultural perspectives and college suggest that many
historically underrepresented students encounter challenges when they get to college
that make it difficult for them to take advantage of their school’s resources for

101

learning and personal development. Student perceptions of the dominant norms and
values influence how students think and spend their time. Together, these properties
influence the extent to which students take part in educationally purposeful activities
(Astin 1977; Kuh et al. 2005; Pascarella and Terenzini 1991, 1995). One school of
thought is that student-institution fit models of adjustment such as Tinto’s may be
framed by culturally biased assumptions about what is necessary to thrive in college
(Attinsai 1989; Gonzalez 2000; Kuh and Love 2000; Rendon, Jalomo, and Nora
2000; Tierney 1992, 1993). The contention is whether students need or should be
expected to conform to prevailing norms and more if they conflict with those of their
family or origin (Tierney 1992). Jalomo (1995) found that Latino community
college students were able to successfully operate in the multiple contexts of home
and school, but the transitions were challenging.
More than 70% of the Native Hawaiian survey respondents participating in
this study said that culture was important for their college success. This is probably
the great divide between Native Hawaiian students and institutions where Native
Hawaiian students enroll. Native Hawaiian students are coming to college holding
very tightly to their cultural values and traditions and searching for different avenues
to expand their understanding, while institutions are embracing the model of
assimilation and forcing Native Hawaiian students to align to the institutional
culture, thus alienating the students they hope to serve. Rendon, Jalomo, and Nora
(2005) argue that it is the responsibility of both the individual and institution to close
this divide. Students should not be left to manage and resolve these cultural

102

differences on their own, especially if students perceive the college culture to be
alien to their own.
The prevailing literature about culture and college success suggests that
students who are able to distance themselves from their culture and assume the
culture of the institution are more likely to persist and be successful in college.
Some of the literature about Latino students reports that it is possible for these
students to navigate the institutional culture without leaving their own culture
behind; this however is a difficult task. This study adds light to research by
suggesting that Native Hawaiians may not be able to separate themselves from their
culture because they have an intrinsic interest in protecting their culture from
extinction. Because of this, are Native Hawaiians doomed to not be successful in
college? The author of this study thinks not, and hopes recommendations from this
study can be implemented to increase the success of Native Hawaiians in college.
Implications for Policy and Practice
This study proposes several recommendations to improve Native Hawaiian
success in college. In 2007, the University of Hawai‘i adopted this statement as goal
one of its strategic plan: To increase the educational capital of the state by increasing
the participation and completion of students, particularly Native Hawaiians, low-
income students, and those from underserved regions. These recommendations are
needed to improve existing policy and practice so that the University of Hawai‘i can
meet its strategic goal and improve its Native Hawaiian students’ success rate. To do
this the federal government, Office of Hawaiians Affairs, Kamehameha Schools,

103

University of Hawai‘i Windward Community College, and Native Hawaiian
Education Association should consider implementing the following
recommendations:
1) Federal Government
a. Through Title III, the Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
act, congress allocates 12 million dollars a year to increase
success among Native Hawaiians at colleges that have a
Native Hawaiian enrollment of at least 10% of their total
enrollment. All colleges in the UH system receive Title III
funds (NHEA 2009). While this act has been existence for 10
years, there has been little data collected or reported on the
efficacy of the initiatives funded through this act. It is
recommended that the USDOE mandate evaluation of all
initiatives funded through Title III and publish this
information.
b. In addition to Title III funds, congress also provides 34 million
dollars each year to fund Native Hawaiian educational
programs through the Native Hawaiian Education Act. It is
recommended that the USDOE allocate a specific amount of
these funds to address the success rates of Native Hawaiians in
college and issue a white paper that ascertains what kinds of

104

programs and pedagogy improve college success for Native
Hawaiian students.
2) Kamehameha Schools and Office of Hawaiian Affairs
a. Kamehameha schools provided 15 million dollars in college
scholarships for Native Hawaiians in 2009 (KSBE website).
The school has provided scholarship funding for the last 20
years. Yet it has only produced two studies about Native
Hawaiians and college success. The first study by Hagedorn
found a positive correlation between students who boarded
and college success. The second study by Hagedorn and
Makuakane-Dreshel reported that financial aid was a predictor
of college success among Native Hawaiians, more so than
parent encouragement and high school GPA. It is
recommended that Kamehameha Schools leverage its
resources to fund additional studies to expand the literature
available on Native Hawaiian college success. The Office of
Hawaiian Affairs should also use its resources to do the same
and perhaps concentrate on niche areas, like community
college Native Hawaiian students. These studies should focus
on successful programs that improve college success. Enough
information is already available on how poorly Native
Hawaiians do in college.

105

3) Department of Education/Kamehameha Schools/University of
Hawai‘i
a. The literature on college success suggests that the pre-college
experience is a predictor of college success. The Hawaii DOE
& Kamehameha Schools have established partnerships with
Waianae High School, which has an 80% Native Hawaiian
student population. The partnership is aimed at introducing
Native Hawaiian values and practices into the Waianae school
culture. Kamehameha and Waianae High School should
partner with their feeder community college, Leeward
Community College, and determine how well these students
do and whether or not a pre-college experience that includes
Native Hawaiian values actually leads to better success in
college.
4) Windward Community College/University of Hawai‘i
a. Create a Native Hawaiian support program based on Native
Hawaiian pedagogy. This program should include all the
recommendations from the literature of this study except the
Tinto school of thought, which suggests assimilation. At
Windward Community College, the saying is “Raise the boat
and all students will rise and be successful.” That strategy has
worked well for non-Hawaiians, but not for Native Hawaiians.

106

It is recommended that WCC use Native Hawaiian pedagogy
to purposefully raise the achievement of Native Hawaiians
rather than concentrating on a strategy to raise the
achievement for all students. The author does not argue that
non-Hawaiians should not be provided the same opportunity
to succeed in college, but that the institution should not use
one strategy to address the needs of its diverse student
population. Once this program is up and running, data should
be gathered that compares Native Hawaiian students who did
and did not receive the intervention.
b. Expand the Hawaiian studies offerings across the curriculum.
In this study, Native Hawaiian students said they believe that
learning about their culture will assist them to be successful in
college. Providing more courses in Hawaiian studies and
spreading them across multiple disciplines will give Native
Hawaiians the opportunity to gain greater cultural
understanding, even though their major may not be Hawaiian
studies.
c. Windward Community College must also consider the diverse
needs of its minorities and Native Hawaiian students and
create an environment that embraces their diversity and allows
them to flourish in environments most compatible with their

107

cultural values. This task is difficult because of the multi-
culturalism of Hawai‘i. Yet to maintain the status quo and to
expect students to adapt to the school culture has proven
detrimental to minority and Native Hawaiian students. The
college should implement a survey that measures whether
Native Hawaiian students feel the college is aligned to their
cultural norms. By establishing a baseline and measuring this
every year, the college can determine whether it is making
gains in creating an environment that is conducive to Native
Hawaiian learning. More importantly, the college will be able
to make inferences about whether this environment boosts
Native Hawaiian success at the college.
d. Lastly, in line with recommendation 4.c, the college should
develop a Student Learning Outcome for cultural competency
for the college. Like all other campus SLOs, the cultural SLO
should be assessed yearly and reported in the campus’s annual
program review.
5) Native Hawaiian Education Association
a. The author of this study has been involved in Native Hawaiian
education for the last 20 years. There is an assumption held
by Native Hawaiian educators that using Native Hawaiian
pedagogy increases college success. It is no longer enough to

108

continue to make these assumptions and invest millions of
dollars to fund these types of programs. It is recommended
that the Native Hawaiian Education Association, a consortium
of Native Hawaiian Educators and those who educate Native
Hawaiians, provide quantitative and qualitative data analysis
of whether Native Hawaiian pedagogy affects student success
for the Hawaiian student. The group should publish a report
every other year evaluating at least one program that purports
to use Native Hawaiian pedagogy to increase Native Hawaiian
college success.
b. The Native Hawaiian Education Association has a
membership of 1,000; approximately 80% are Native
Hawaiian. Within the organization are many successful
educators, chancellors, vice-chancellors, teachers, counselors
and grassroots educators. NHEA should commission a study
of its own membership to determine whether there are
characteristics among these successful educators that can lead
to better programming for Native Hawaiians.

109

Implications for Future Research
There is very little literature relating to Native Hawaiians in college. This
study adds to the sparse literature and, to the knowledge of the author, is the only
study ever conducted to examine perceptions of Native Hawaiians in regards to
college barriers and culture.
This study is a good start that should be replicated throughout the University
of Hawai‘i system. Collecting data across the University of Hawai‘i system will
allow for broader generalizations about barriers that Native Hawaiians face and
about their perceptions of culture relative to college success.
Further, this study suggests that Native Hawaiian students believe culture is
important to them. Additional research should be conducted to get a better
understanding of what this really means. This would require a comprehensive
qualitative study based on focus groups and a larger interview sample.
Additional research needs to be conducted on the pre-college experience of
Native Hawaiian students. Studies from Kamehameha Schools have noted that
Native Hawaiians fare poorly compared with their peers in grade school. However,
there is no data about Native Hawaiians who are transitioning to college. Having a
better understanding of the pre-college experience of Native Hawaiians will provide
for dialog between the University of Hawai‘i and the DOE to improve learning
conditions for Native Hawaiian students. This research could also assist in the
development of bridge programs to help students’ smooth transition to college.

110

Lastly, additional research should be conducted into the concept the author
calls Ko Kuleana, which in Hawaiian means “your responsibility.” Throughout the
interviews for this study, Native Hawaiian students were adamant about cultural
preservation, saying it was their duty to perpetuate their culture. It would be worthy
to study what carrying this burden means to Native Hawaiians and why, unlike non-
Hawaiians, they feel it is so important.
Conclusion
In February of 2009, President Obama said, “In a global economy where the
most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good education is no longer
just a pathway to opportunity—it is a prerequisite. And yet, we have one of the
highest school dropout rates of any industrialized nation. And half of the students
who began college never finish. This is a prescription for economic decline.” In
order to stop this decline, the leaky educational pipeline must be fixed so that all
students can pursue higher education opportunities. All students must be afforded
the opportunity to increase their earning potential, including low-income and
minority students. This study analyzed what may assist Native Hawaiians to be
successful in college. The study found that Native Hawaiians believe that learning
about their culture is a critical component for them to be successful in college. The
deficiencies and problems facing learners are amorphous, but within the ever-
changing shapes of these ills are spines of poverty and emotional dissonance. The
Native Hawaiian learners are caught up in these counterproductive waves, created by
institutions and the people at institutions who do not respect where our students

111

come from or their personal worldviews. Having respect for learners, for
Polynesians who looked to the stars to cross one of the largest oceans on this planet,
will lead to the promulgation of strategies that will encourage college success. It is
time to stop gazing into the stars and prove whether or not Native Hawaiian
pedagogy improves college success.

112

REFERENCES
Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU). (2002). Greater
Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to College.
Washington, DC: Author.

Achieve, Inc. (2006, February) Closing the Expectations Gap 2006: An annual 50-
State Progress Report on the Alignment of High School Policies with the
Demands of College and Work. Washington, DC: Author.

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the Toolbox: Academic Intensity, Attednace Patters,
and BAcherlor‘s Degree Attainment. U.S. Department of Education.
Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Adelman, C. (2004) Principal Indicators of Student Academics Histories in
Postsecondary Education, 1972-2000. U.S. Department of Education.
Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.

Aitken, N.D. (1982). College Student Performance, Satisfaction, and Retention:
Specifications and Estimation of Structural Equation Model. Journal of
Higher Education, 53; 32-50.

Alexander, P.A., and Murphy, P.K. (1992, April. The Research Base for APA‘s
Learner-Centered Psychological Principles. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans,
LA.

Allen, W.R. (1992). The Color of Success: African-American College Student
Outcomes at Predominately White and Historically Black Public Colleges
and Universities. Harvard Educational Review, 62 (1): 26-44.

Astin, A.W. (1975). The Power of Protest: A National Study of Student and Faculty
Disruptions With Implications for the Future (1
st
ed.). San Francisco: Josey-
Bass.

Astin, A.W. (1984). Student Involvement: A Developmental Theory for Higher
Education. Journal of College Student Development, 25(4): 297-308.

Astin, A.W. (1991). The Changing American College Student: Implications for
Educational Policy and Practice. Higher Education, 22(2): 129-143

Astin, A.W. (1993). What Matters in College. Liberal Education, 79(4): 4-15.

113

Astin, A. W. (1993b). What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited (1st
Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Baum, S., and Payea, K. (2004). Education Pays 2004: The Benefits of Higher
Education for Individual and Society. New York: The College Board.

Bean, J. P. (1980). Dropouts and Turnover: The Synthesis and Test of a Causal
Model of Student Attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(2): 155-187.

Benham, Maenette K. P. (2007) A Challenge to Native Hawaiian and Pacific
Islander Scholars: What Research Literature Teaches Us About Our Work.
Race, Ethnicity, & Education, v9: 29-50.

Benham, Maenette K. P., Heck, Ronald H. (1994). Political Culture and Policy in a
State-Controlled Educational System: The Case of Educational Politics in
Hawaii. Educational Administration Quarterly, v30: 419-450.

Bowen, W. G., and Bok, D. C. (1998). The Shape of the River: Long-Term
Consequences of Considering Race in College and University Admissions.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Braxton, J. M. (2003). Student Success. In Student Services: A Handbook for the
Profession, 4th ed., edited by S. R. Komives and D. B. Woodard, Jr., 317-
338. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Braxton, J. M., Vesper, N., and Hossler, D. (1995). Expectations for College and
Student Persistence. Research in Higher Education, 36(5): 595-612.

Bridges, B., Cambridge, B., Kuh, G. D., and Leegwater, L. H. (2005). Student
Engagement at Minority Serving Institutions: Emerging Lessons From the
BEAMS Project. In Minority Retention: What Works? New Directions for
Institutional Research, 125, edited by G. H. Gaither, 25-43.

Bridgespan Group. (2006). The Strong Field Framework: A Guide and Toolkit for
Funders and Nonprofits Committed to Large-Scale Impact. A Field
Assessment Guide for the James Irvine Foundation. California: Author.

Brigman, S., Kuh, G. D., and Stager, S. (1982). Those Who Choose to Leave: Why
Students Voluntarily Withdraw From College. Journal of the National
Association of Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors, 45(3): 3-8.

114

Burley, A., Cejda, B., and Butner, B. (2001). Dropout and Stop out Patterns Among
Developmental Education Students in Texas Community Colleges.
Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 25(10): 767-782.

Carnevale, A. P., and Desrochers, D. M. (2002, April). The Missing Middle: Aligning
Education and the Knowledge Economy. Paper presented at the Preparing
Americaʻs Future: The High School Symposium, Washington, DC.

Carnevale, A. P., and Desrochers, D. M. (2003). Preparing Students for the
Knowledge Economy: What School Counselors Need to Know. Professional
School Counseling, 6(4): 228-236.

Carroll, J. (1988). Freshman Retention and Attrition Factors at a Predominately
Black Urban Community College. Journal of College Student Development,
29(1): 52-59.

Carter, D. J., and Wilson, R. (1997). Minorities in Higher Education: 1996-1997
Fifteenth Annual Status Report. Washington, DC: American Council on
Education, Office of Minority Concerns.

Chickering, A. W., and Gamson, Z. F. (Eds.). (1987). Seven Principles for Good
Practice in Undergraduate Education. AAHE Bulletin: March: 3-7.

Choy, S. P. (1999). College Access and Affordability. Education Statistics
Quarterly, 1(2):74-90.

Choy, S. P. (2001). Students Whose Parents did not go to College: Postsecondary
Access, Persistence, and Attainment. (NCES 2001-126). U.S. Department of
Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Chrispeels, J. H., and Rivero, E. (2001). Engaging Latino Families for Student
Success: How Parent Education can Reshape ParentsÆ Sense of Place in the
Education of Their Children. Peabody Journal of Education, 76(2): 119-169.

Cohen, A. M., and Brawer, F. B. (1996). Policies and Programs That Affect
Transfer. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American
Journal of Sociology, 94: 95-120.

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE). (2004). Engagement
by Design: 2004 Findings. Austin, TX: Author.

115

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE). (2005). Engaging
Students, Challenging the Odds: 2005 Findings. Austin, TX: Author.

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE). (2006). Engagement
by Design: 2006 Findings. Honolulu, HI: Author.

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE). (2008). Engagement
by design: 2008 Findings. Honolulu, HI: Author.

Conley, D. T. (2003). Connecting the Dots: Linking High Schools and
Postsecondary Education to Increase Student Success. Peer Review, 5(2): 9-
12.

Dexter, C. (1970). Mixed Methods Research in School Psychology: A Mixed
Methods Investigation of Trends in the Literature. Psychology in Schools,
v45, 291-309.

Friedman, T. (2007). The Fallacies of Flatness: Thomas Frideman’s “The World is
Flat.” Journal of Philosophy Education, v41, 471-481.

Gerken, J. T., and Volkwein, J. F. (2000, May). Pre-College Characteristics and
Freshman Year Experiences as Predictors of 8-Year College Outcomes.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Institutional
Research, Cincinnati, OH.

Gladieux, L. E., and Swail, W. S. (1998). Financial Aid is Not Enough: Improving
the Odds of College Success. College Board Review, (185): 16-21, 30-32.

Gurrerro, Benjamin. (2008). Muo Ae Annual Report. Submitted to the USDOE.
Maui College, Kahului, Hawaii.

Hagedorn, L. (2006). Native Hawaiian Community College Students: What
Happens? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, v30: 21-39.

Hamrick, F. A., and Stage, F. K. (2004). College Predisposition at High-Minority
Enrollment, LowIncome Schools. The Review of Higher Education, 27(2),
151-168.

Hanks, M. P., and Eckland, B. K. (1976). Athletics and Social Participation in the
Education Attainment Process. Sociology of Education, 49(4): 271-294.

116

Hoffman, K., Llagas, C., and Snyder, T. D. (2003). Status and Trends in the
Education of Blacks (NCES 2003-034). U.S. Department of Education,
Institute for Education Sciences. Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Statistics.

Horvat, E. M. (2003). The Interactive Effects of Race and Class in Educational
Research: Theoretical Insights From the Work of Pierre Bourdieu. Penn GSE
Perspectives in Urban Education, 2(1): 1-25.

Hossler, D., Schmit, J., and Vesper, N. (1999). Going to College: How Social,
Economic, and Educational Factors Influence the Decisions Students Make.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hu, S., and Kuh, G. D. (2002). Being (Dis)Engaged in Educationally Purposeful
Activities: The Influences of Student and Institutional Characteristics.
Research in Higher Education, 43(5): 555-575.

Huffman, T. (1986). College Achievement among Sioux and White South Dakota
Students. Journal of American Indian Education, v25: 32-38.

Immerwahr, J. (2000, May). Great Expectations: How the Public and
ParentsùWhite, African American, and HispanicùView Higher Education.
New York: Public Agenda Foundation.

Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP). (2001, February). Getting Through
College: Voices of Low Income and Minority Students in New England.
Washington, DC: Author.

Jalomo, R. (1995). Latino Students in Transition: An Analysis of the First-Year
Experience in Community College. Unpublished PhD diss., Arizona State
University.

Johnstone, D. B. (2005). Fear and Loathing of Tuition Fees: An American
Perspective on Higher Education Finance in the UK. Perspectives: Policy and
Practice in Higher Education, 9(1): 12-16.

Kamehameha Schools Press. (2005). Ka Huakai: 2005 Native Hawaiian Educational
Assessment. Honolulu: Author.

Kana‘iaupuni, S. M. and N. Malone (forthcoming). This land is my land: The role of
place in Native Hawaiian identity. In Race, ethnicity and place in a changing
America, ed. J. Frazier and E. Tetty-Fio, 291–305. New York: Global Press.

117

Kanu o Ka Aina Website. (2009). Retrieved at: http://www.kalo.org/.

Kinzie, J., Palmer, M., Hayek, J. C, Hossler, D., Jacob, S. A., and Cummings, H.
(2004). Fifty Years of College Choice: Social, Political and Institutional
Influences on the Decision-Making Process. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina
Foundation for Education.

Kolderie, T., & McDonald, T. (2009) How Information Technology Can Enable 21
st

Century Schools. Information and Technology and Innovation Foundation
Report.

Kowalski, C. (1977). The Impact of College on Persisting and Nonpersisting
Students. New York: Philosophical Library.

Kramer G. L., and Associates (2003). Student Academic Services: An Integrated
Approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kuh, G. D. (1993). In Their Own Words: What Students Learn Outside the
Classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 30(2): 277-304.

Kuh, G. D. (1995). The Other Curriculum: Out-Of-Class Experiences Associated
With Student Learning and Personal Development. Journal of Higher
Education, 66(2): 123-155.

Kuh, G. D. (1996). Guiding Principles for Creating Seamless Learning Environments
for Undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 37(2): 135-
148.

Kuh, G. D. (1999). A Framework for Understanding Student Affairs Work. Journal
of College Student Development, 40(5): 530-537.

Kuh, G. D. (2000). Do Environments Matter? A Comparative Analysis of the
Impress of Different Types of Colleges and Universities on Character.
Journal of College and Character.
http://collegevalues.org/articles.cfm?a=l&id=239 (accessed January 3, 2006).

Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing What Really Matters to Student Learning: Inside the
National Survey of Student Engagement. Change, 33(3): 10-17, 66.

Kuh, G. D. (2003). What We’re Learning About Student Engagement From NSSE:
Benchmarks for Effective Educational Practices. Change, 35(2): 24-32.

118

Kuh, G. D. (2004). The Contributions of the Research University to Assessment and
Innovation in Undergraduate Education. In The Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education: The Contributions of Research Universities,
edited by W. E. Becker and M. L. Andrews, 81-98. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press.

Kuh, G. D. (2005). Student Engagement in the First Year of College. In Challenging
and Supporting the First-Year Student: A Handbook for Improving the First
Year of College, edited by M. L. Upcraft, J. N. Gardner, and B. O. Barefoot,
86-107. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kuh, G. D. (2006). Built to Engage: Liberal Arts Colleges and Effective Educational
Practice. In Liberal Arts Colleges in American Higher Education (ACLS
Occasional Paper), edited by F. Oakery, 122-150. New York: American
Council of Learned Societies.

Kuh, G. D., Douglas, K. B., Lund, J. P., and Ramin-Gyurnek, J. (1994). Student
Learning Outside the Classroom: Transcending Artificial Boundaries.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 8. Washington, DC: The George
Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human
Development.

Kuh, G. D., Gonyea, R. M., and Williams, J. M. (2005). What Students Expect From
College and What They Get. In Promoting Reasonable Expectations:
Aligning Student and Institutional Thinking About the College Experience,
edited by T. Miller, B. Bender, J. Schuh and Associates, 34-64. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass/National Association of Student Personnel
Administrators.

Kuh, G. D., Hayek, J. C., Carini, R. M., Ouimet, J. A., Gonyea, R. M., and Kennedy,
J. (2001). NSSE Technical and Norms Report. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning.

Kuh, G. D., and Hu, S. (1999, April). Learning Productivity at Research
Universities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Kuh, G. D., and Hu, S. (2001a). The Effects of Student-Faculty Interaction in the
1990s. Review of Higher Education, 24(3): 309-332.

119

Kuh, G. D., and Hu, S. (2001b). The Relationships Between Computer and
Information Technology Use, Selected Learning and Personal Development
Outcomes, and Other College Experiences. Journal of College Student
Development, 42(3): 217-232.

Kuh, G. D., Hu, S., and Vesper, N. (2000). They Shall Be Known by What They Do
An ActivitiesBased Typology of College Students. Journal of College Student
Development, 41(2): 228-244.

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., and Whitt, E. J. (2005a). Assessing Conditions
to Enhance Educational Effectiveness: The Inventory for Student
Engagement and Success. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., and Whitt, E. J. (2005b). Student Success in
College: Creating Conditions That Matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kuh. G. D., and Love, P.G. (2000). A Cultural Perspective on Student Departure. In
Reworking the Student Departure Puzzle, edited by J.M. Braxton, 196-212.
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Kuh, G. D., and Lund, J. P. (1994). What Students Gain From Participating in
Student Government. New Directions for Student Services, (66): 5-17.

Kuh, G. D., Nelson Laird, T. F., and Umbach, P. D. (2004). Aligning Faculty
Activities and Student Behavior: Realizing the Promise of Greater
Expectations. Liberal Education, 90(4): 24-31

Kuh, G. D., and Natalicio, D. S. (2004). Forging a New Direction: How UTEP
Created its Own Brand of Excellence. About Campus, 9(5): 9-15.

Kuh, G. D., Pace, C. R., and Vesper, N. (1997). The Development of Process
Indicators to Estimate Student Gains Associated With Good Practices in
Undergraduate Education. Research in Higher Education, 38(4): 435-454.

Kuh, G. D., and Pascarella, E. T. (2004). What Does Institutional Selectivity Tell Us
About Educational Quality? Change, 36(5): 52-58.

Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., Andreas, R., Lyons, J., Strange, C. C.,
Krehbiel, L. E., and MacKay, K. A. (1991). Involving Colleges: Successful
Approaches to Fostering Student Learning and Development Outside the
Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

120

Kuh, G. D., and Siegel, M. J. (2000). College Student Experiences Questionnaire:
Tentative Norms for the Fourth Edition. Bloomington, IN: Center for
Postsecondary Research and Planning, Indiana University.

Kuh, G. D., Vesper, N., and Krehbiel, L. (1994). Student Learning at Metropolitan
Universities. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol.
10, edited by J. C. Smart, 1-44. New York: Agathon.

Kuh, G. D., and Whitt, E. J. (1988). The Invisible Tapestry: Culture in American
Colleges and Universities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1.
Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education
and Human Development.

Kuh, G. D., and Umbach, P. D. (2004). College and Character: Insights From the
National Survey of Student Engagement. In Assessing Character Outcomes in
College, New Directions in Institutional Research, (122), edited by J. Dalton
and T. Russell, 37-54. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kuh, G. D., and Umbach, P. D. (2005). Experiencing Diversity: What Can We Learn
From Liberal Arts Colleges? Liberal Education, 91(1): 14-21.

Levine, A., and Cureton, J.S. (1998). Collegiate Life: An Obituary. Change, 30(3):
12-17, 51.

Lipka, Jerry. (1994). Culturally Negotiated Schooling: Toward Yupik Mathematics.
Journal of American Indian Education, v33: 14-30.

Lipka, Jerry. (2001). The Relationship between Academic and Practical Intelligence:
A Case Study of the Tacit Knowledge of Native American Yupik People in
Alaska. Information Analyses; Reports. Alaska: Author.

Makuakane-Drechsel, Theresa, & Hagedorn, Linda, S. (2000) Correlates of
Retention among Asian Pacific Americans in Community Colleges: The Case
for Hawaiian Students. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, v24: 639-655.

Mayeda, David T.,Chesney-Lind, M., & Koo, J. (2001). Talking Story with
Hawaii’s Youth: Confronting Violent and Sexualized Perceptions of
Ethnicity and Gender. Youth & Society, v33: 99-128.

McCabe, R. H. (2000). No One to Waste: A Report to Public Decision-Makers and
Community College Leaders. Washington, DC: American Association of
Community Colleges.

121

McCarthy, M. M., and Kuh, G. D. (2006). Are Students Ready for College? What
Student Engagement Data Say. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(9), 664-669.

McCubbin, Hamilton. (2003). Resiliency in African-American Families. Resiliency
in Families Series, Volume 3.

Merriam, Sharan, B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in
Education, Revised and Expanded from “Case Study Research in
Education.”

Metzner, B. (1989). Perceived Quality of Academic Advising: The Effect on
Freshman Attrition. American Educational Research Journal, 26(3): 422-
442.

Meyer, Manu, A. (1998) Native Hawaiian Epistemology; Exploring Hawaiian Views
of Knowledge. Cultural Survival Quarterly, v22: 38-40.

Meyers, D., Olsen, R., Seftor, N., Young, J., and Tuttle, C. (2004). The Impacts of
Regular Upward Bound: Results From the Third Follow-Up Data Collection
(NCES 2004-13). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Statistics.

Miller, T., Kuh, G. D., Paine, D., and Associates. (2005). Taking Student
Expectations Seriously: A Guide for Campus Applications. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Mokuau, Noreen. (1990). Ethnic Minority Curriculum in Baccalaureate Social Work
Programs. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, v1: 57-75.

National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (2009). Student
Pipeline –Transition and Completion Rates from 9
th
Grade to College.
Retrieved March 6, 2009 From
http://www.higheredinfo.org/dbrowser/index.php?submeasure=119&year=20
06&level=nation&mode=data&state=0

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (2005). Educational
Pipeline FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about the Educational Pipeline.
Retrieved March 1, 2009 from
http://www.highereducation.org/reports/pipeline/faq.shtml.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (2004). The Educational
Pipeline: Big Investment, Big Returns (Policy Alert, April 2004). Retrieved
March 3, 2009 from www.highereducation.org/reports/pipeline.

122

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (2008). Is College
Opportunity Slipping Away? (Policy Alert, August 2008). Retrieved March
6, 2009 from
http://www.highereducation.org/pa_college_opp/College_Opportunity.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics (n.d.). Fast Facts. Retrieved May 26, 2009
from http://nces.ed.gov/FastFacts/display.asp?id=31.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2001). Improving the College
Experience: National Benchmarks For Effective Educational Practice.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)). (2002). From Promise to
Progress: How Colleges and Universities Are Using Student Engagement
Results to Improve Collegiate Quality. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University
Center for Postsecondary Research.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2003). Converting Data Into
Action: Expanding the Boundaries of Institutional Improvement.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2004). Student Engagement:
Pathways to Collegiate Success. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center
for Postsecondary Research.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2005). Student Engagement:
Exploring Different Dimensions of Student Engagement. Bloomington, IN:
Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.

Native Hawaiian Vocational Education Project (1998). College Barriers for Native
Hawaiian Students in the University of Hawaii Community College system.
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI.

Naumann, W. C, Bandalos, D., and Gutkin, T. B. (2003). Identifying Variables That
Predict College Success for First-Generation College Students. Journal of
College Admission, 181: 4-9.

Nunez, A. M. (1998, November). First-Generation Students: A Longitudinal
Analysis of Educational and Early Labor Market Outcomes. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education,
Miami, FL.

123

Oliveira, Judy. (2005) Native Hawaiians’ Success in Higher Education: Predictive
Factors and Bachelor’s Degree Completion. (Doctoral Dissertation) USC,
Los Angeles, California.

Olsen, D., Kuh, G. D., Schilling, K. M., Schilling, K., Connolly, M., Simmons, A.,
and Vesper, N. (1998, November). Great Expectations: What First-Year
Students Say They Will Do and What They Actually Do. Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education,
Miami, FL.

Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-Faculty Informal Contact and College Outcomes.
Review of Educational Research, 50(4): 545-595.

Pascarella, E. T. (1985). College Environmental Influences on Learning and
Cognitive Development: A Critical Review and Synthesis. In Higher
Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. 1, edited by J. C. Smart,
1-62. New York: Agathon.

Pascarella, E. T. (2001). Cognitive Growth in College: Surprising and Reassuring
Findings. Change, 33(6): 20-27.

Pascarella, E. T., Bohr, L., Nora, A., Desler, M., and Zusman, B. (1994). Impacts of
On-Campus and OffCampus Work on First-Year Cognitive Outcomes.
Journal of College Student Development, 35(5): 364-370.

Pascarella, E. T., Bohr, L., Nora, A., and Terenzini, P. T. (1995). Cognitive Effects of
2-Year and 4-Year Colleges: New Evidence. Educational Evaluation and
Policy Analysis, 17(1): 83-96.

Pascarella, E. T., Bohr, L., Nora, A., Zusman, B., Inman, P., and Desler, M. (1993).
Cognitive Impacts of Living on Campus Versus Commuting to College.
Journal of College Student Development, 34(3): 216-220.

Pascarella, E. T., and Chapman, D. (1983). A Multi-Institutional, Path Analytic
Validation of TintoÆs Model of College Withdrawal. American Educational
Research Journal, 20(1): 87-102.

Pascarella, E. T., Cruce, T., Wolniak, G. C., Kuh, G. D., Umbach, P. D., Hayek, J.
C., Carini, R. M., Gonyea, R. M., and Zhao, C-M., (2005). Institutional
Selectivity and Good Practices In Undergraduate Education. Journal of
Higher Education, 77(2): 251-285.

124

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1976). Informal Interaction with Faculty and
Freshman Ratings of Academic and Non-Academic Experience of College.
Journal of Educational Research, 70(1): 35-41.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1977). Patterns of Student-Faculty Informal
Interaction Beyond the Classroom and Voluntary Freshman Attrition. Journal
of Higher Education, 48(5): 540-552.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1979a). Interaction Effects in SpadyÆs and
TintoÆs Conceptual Models of College Dropout. Sociology of Education,
52(4): 197-210.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1979b). Student-Faculty Informal Contact and
College Persistence: A Further Investigation. Journal of Educational
Research, 72(4): 214-218.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1980). Student-Faculty and Student-Peer
Relationships as Mediators of the Structural Effects of Undergraduate
Residence Arrangements. Journal of Educational Research, 73(6): 344-353.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1983). Predicting Voluntary Freshman Year
Persistence/Withdrawal Behavior in a Residential University: A Path
Analytic Validation of TintoÆs Model. Journal of Educational Psychology,
75(2): 215-226.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How College Affects Students:
Findings and Insights From Twenty-Years of Research (1st ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1995). The Impact of College on Students:
Myths, Rational Myths, and Some Other Things That May Not Be True.
NACADA Journal, 15(2): 26-33.

Pascarella, E .T., and Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How College Affects Students: A Third
Decade of Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3
rd
Edition).
CA: Sage Publications.

Perna, L. W., and Titus, M. A. (2005). The Relationship Between Parental
Involvement as Social Capital and College Enrollment: An Examination of
Racial/Ethnic Group Differences. Journal of Higher Education, 76(5): 485-
518.

125

Phinney, Jean S. (1995). Understanding Ethnic Diversity: The Role of Ethnic
Identity. American Behavioral Scientist, v40: 143-152.

Pike, G. R., and Saupe, J. L. (2002). Does High School Matter? An Analysis of Three
Methods of Predicting First-Year Grades. Research in Higher Education,
43(2): 187-207.

Powell, Douglas, R. (2008). Assessing the Quality of Family, Friend, and Neighbor
Care: The State of Research. Zero to Three, v28: 33-38.

Pukui, Mary Kawena. (1972). Nana I Ke Kumu. Published by Queen Lilikuokalani
Childrens Center. Honolulu. HI.

Rubie, Christine. (1999). Kia Kaha: Improving Classroom Performance through
Developing Cultural Awareness. Report. Auckland, New Zealand.

Saka, T., Lai, M. (2004). Pacific Research Journal. Honolulu, Hawaii.

Sax, L. J., Astin, A. W., Lindholm, J. A., Korn, W. S., Saenz, V. B., and Mahoney,
K. M. (2003). The American Freshman: National Norms for Fall 2003. Los
Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles, Higher Education Research
Institute.

Schilling, K. M., and Schilling, K. L. (1999). Increasing Expectations for Student
Effort. About Campus, 4(2): 4-10.

Sing, David, K. (1990). Native Hawaiian Education: Talking Story with Three
Hawaiian Educators. Journal of American Indian Education, v39: 4-13.

Smith, L.M. (1978); An Evolving Logic of Participant Observation, Educational
Ethonography and Other Case Studies. In L. Schuman (Ed.), Review of
Research in Education (Vol. 6, pp 316-377). Itasca, IL: Peacock.

Stake, Jayne, E. (1994). Development and Validation of the Six-Factor Self-Concept
Scale for Adults. (1994). Educational and Psychological Measurement, v54:
56-72.

Summers, K. (1981). Partners: Math, Science, Social Studies, Language Arts. Ideas
for the Art Part of the Interrelated Curriculum of the Elementary Classroom
Teacher. Classroom Guide. Springfield, Missouri.

126

Swail, W. S. (with Redd, K. E., and Perna, L. W.). (2003). Retaining Minority
Students in Higher Education: A Framework for Success. ASHE-ERIC
Higher Education Report No. 2. Washington, DC: The George Washington
University, School of Education and Human Development.

Swail, W. S., Cabrera, A. F., Lee, C., and Williams, A. (2005). Latino Students and
the Educational Pipelines: A Three-Part Series. Part III: Pathways to the
BachelorÆs Degree for Latino Students. Stafford, VA: Education Policy
Institute.

Tierney, W. G. (1992). Official Encouragement, Institutional Discouragement:
Minorities in Academeù The Native American Experience. Norwood, NJ:
Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Tierney, W. G. (1993). Building Communities of Difference: Higher Education in the
Twenty-First Century. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Tierney, W. G. (1999). Building the Responsive Campus: Creating High
Performance Colleges and Universities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Tierney, W. G., Corwin, Z. B., and Colyar, J. E. (Eds.) (2004). Preparing for
College: Nine Elements for Effective Outreach. Albany, NY: State University
of New York Press.

Tierney, W. G., and Hagedorn, L. S. (2002). Increasing Access to College:
Extending Possibilities for All Students. Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout From Higher Education: A Theoretical Synthesis of
Recent Research. Review of Educational Research, 45: 89-125.

Tinto, V. (1986). Theories of Student Departure Revisited. In Higher Education:
Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. 2, edited by J.C. Smart , 359-384.
New York: Agathon Press.

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student
Attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student
Attrition. (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

127

Tinto, V. (1996). Reconstructing the First Year of College. Planning for Higher
Education, 25(1): 1-6. Tinto, V. (1997a). Classroom as Communities:
Exploring the Education Character of Student Persistence. Journal of Higher
Education, 68(6): 599-623.

Trusty, J. Realized Potential or lost talent: high school variables and Bachelor’s
degree completion. The Career Development Quarterly 53, 2-15.

Tinto, V. (1997b). Enhancing Learning Via Community. Thought & Action, 13(1):
53-58.

Tinto, V. (2004). Student Retention and Graduation: Facing the Truth, Living With
the Consequences. (Occasional Paper 1). Washington, DC: The Pell
Institution for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.

Tinto, V., and Love, A. G. (1995). A Longitudinal Study of Learning Communities at
LaGuardia Community College. University Park, PA: National Center on
Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.

Tinto, V., Love, A. G, and Russo, P. (1995). Building Learning Communities for
New Students: A Summary of Research Findings of the Collaborative
Learning Project. University Park, PA: National Center on Postsecondary
Teaching, Learning, and Assessment.

University of Hawaii (2005). Enrollment Report: Peer and Benchmark Group
Comparisons, University of Hawaii, Fall 1990 to Fall 2005 Cohorts as of
2006. (Available from the University of Hawaii Institutional Research Office,
http://www.hawaii.edu/iro).

University of Hawaii (2007). Graduation and Retention Rates: Peer and Benchmark
Group Comparisons, University of Hawaii System, Fall 1990 to Fall 2005
Cohorts as of 2006. (Available from the University of Hawaii Institutional
Research Office, http://www.hawaii.edu/iro).

University of Hawaii (2007). Enrollment Report: Peer and Benchmark Group
Comparisons, University of Hawaii, Fall 1990 to Fall 2005 Cohorts as of
2006. (Available from the University of Hawaii Institutional Research Office,
http://www.hawaii.edu/iro).

University of Hawaii (2009). Enrollment Report: Peer and Benchmark Group
Comparisons, University of Hawaii, Fall 1990 to Fall 2005 Cohorts as of
2006. (Available from the University of Hawaii Institutional Research Office,
http://www.hawaii.edu/iro).

128

U.S. Department of Education (2004). The Condition of Education 2004 (NCES
2004-077). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education (2003b). Digest of Education Statistics, 2002 (NCES
2003-060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Venezia, A., Kirst, M. W., and Antonio, A. L. (2003, March). Betraying the College
Dream: How Disconnected K-12 and Postsecondary Education Systems
Undermine Student Aspirations. Stanford, CA: National Center for
Postsecondary Improvement.

Warburton, E. C., Bugarin, R., and Nu±ez, A. M. (2001). Bridging the Gap:
Academic Preparation and Postsecondary Success of First-Generation
Students. Education Statistics Quarterly, 3(3): 73-77.

Yin, R.K., (2006) Mixed methods research: Are the methods genuinely integrated or
merle parallel? Research in the Schools, 13, 41-47.

Yoon, Intae. (2009). A Mixed-Method Study of Princeville’s Rebuilding from the
Flood of 1999: Lessons on the Importance of Invisible Community Assets.
Social Work, v54: 19-28.

129

APPENDIX A
STUDENT SURVEY

130

131

APPENDIX B
GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR STUDENT INTERVIEWS
1. What is your Name?
2. What is your date of birth?
3. What high school did you attend? Is it a public or Private School?
4. Are you a male or female?
5. What is your class standing? How many college credits have you
accumulated?

6. What is your ethnicity? If multiple ethnicities, which race do you most
identify with and why?

7. I can tell from your acedemic record that you had some trouble in school, in
your own words what was the biggest reason for these problems?

8. When you experienced these difficulties where did you go for help?
The following questions have to do with culture...
9. What is your definition of culture?
10. Do you believe that students like yourself (of the same culture) face different
barriers to college than students from a different culture?

11. Do you beleive that programs that promote your cultural identity and use
your cultural values to deliver services are important? Why?

12. Do you believe having a better understanding of your culture helps you be
successful in college?

13. Does your culture hinder or promote college success?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Forty years ago, the United States led the world in innovation, driven by its successful educational system. Since that time the United States’ lead has slowly deteriorated. President Obama has called our low high school graduation and college persistence rates a prescription for economic failure. There is a leak in the educational pipeline in America. For this country’s minority students and indigenous populations, the pipeline is hemorrhaging at an accelerated rate.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Hawaiian language and culture in the middle level math class

PDF

Factors affecting native Hawaiian student persistence in higher education

PDF

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

PDF

The influence of counselors and high school organization on the selection of participants for a dual credit program

PDF

Who do we tell? School violence and reporting behavior among native Hawaiian high school students

PDF

The perceptions and attitudes of “low-router” students in developmental math

PDF

Understanding measures of school success: a study of a Wisconsin charter school

PDF

Designing an early warning system for Hawaii: identifying indicators of positive high school outcomes

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy in an elementary school for indigent native peoples

PDF

Reporting differences among sexually assaulted college women: a cultural exploration

PDF

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

PDF

The perceptions of faculty and administrators of remedial mathematics education in two higher education institutions

PDF

Accreditation and accountability processes in California high schools: a case study

PDF

Toward school improvement and fiscal equity: examining educational adequacy in a Southern California school district

PDF

Factors inhibiting application for financial aid by low-income students at the University of Hawaii at Manoa

PDF

Factors contributing to self control for incarcerated youth

PDF

Kū i ke ao: Hawaiian cultural identity and student progress at Kamehameha Elementary School

PDF

Sustaining student achievement: Six Sigma strategies and successful urban school district superintendents

PDF

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

PDF

Successful resource allocation in times of fiscal constraint: case studies of school-level resource use in southern California elementary schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Hokoana, Lui Kealii (author)

Core Title Native Hawaiians and college success: Does culture matter?

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 10/25/2010

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

Tag Native Hawaiians,OAI-PMH Harvest

Place Name Hawaii (states), Kaneohe (city or populated place)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Brewer, Dominic J. (committee chair), Oliveira, Judy (committee member), Picus, Lawrence (committee member)

Creator Email lhokoana@hawaii.edu,lhokoana@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m3418

Unique identifier UC1146085

Identifier etd-Hokoana-3954 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-387637 (legacy record id),usctheses-m3418 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Hokoana-3954.pdf

Dmrecord 387637

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Hokoana, Lui Kealii

Type texts

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

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu