University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Academic performance and persistence of Asian American students in the Los Angeles Community College District

(USC Thesis Other)

Academic performance and persistence of Asian American students in the Los Angeles Community College District

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AND PERSISTENCE OF ASIAN AMERICAN
STUDENTS IN THE LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
by
Shuang Wu
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
- In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
EDUCATION
August 2005
Copyright 2005 Shuang Wu
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 3219886
Copyright 2005 by
Wu, Shuang
All rights reserved.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI
UMI Microform 3219886
Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to Shusen Wu, Yawen Lu, and
Samuel J. Barone.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the following individuals who have been most helpful
in the completion of this study: Dr. Linda Serra Hagedom, Dr. Shaun Harper, and Dr. Maura
O’Keefe. Dr. Hagedorn advised me during the writing process, and Dr. Harper and Dr.
O ’Keefe continuously encouraged and supported me. This dissertation would not have been
possible without the invaluable feedback of these individuals.
In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Ruth Chung, Dr. M ark Pavelchak, and Dr.
Richard Brown for their intellectual insights. Dr. Melora Sundt, Dr. Lawrence Picus, Dianne
Morris, and Tamara McKenzie also deserve my recognition for being so gracious toward me
during the dissertation process.
I would also like to express my gratitude to my friends and colleagues at the Rossier
School of Education: Lan Hao, Karri Holley, Stephen Quaye, Dr. Felicia Hunt,
Dr. Miki Carpenter, and Dr. Athena Perrakis. These individuals were sacrificial in providing
me with help when I really needed it.
Dr. Susan Rose was a continuous source of encouragement and support. Her care
helped me persist and made the writing of my dissertation more enjoyable.
Finally but not lastly, I thank Dr. Alexander Jun for always being an inspiration and
Dr. Melora Sundt for being a great mentor throughout the years in which I worked to
complete my program at USC.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................................................................iii
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................vi
ABSTRACT............................. vii
CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM AND THE CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT................... 1
Background of the Problem 2
Statement of the Problem 11
Purpose of the Study 14
Significance of the Study 15
Research Questions 16
Methodology 17
Assumptions 18
Limitations 18
Delimitations 19
Definition of Terms 19
Organization of the Study 20
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................22
Retention of Asian American Community College Students 24
Conclusion 48
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................50
Conceptual Framework 50
Research Questions 52
Methodology 53
Data Analysis 57
Descriptive Tables of Student Population 60
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS..............................................................................................62
Description of the Sample 62
Construct Validity and Scale Development 64
Results 72
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................. 92
Purpose of the Study 93
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
V
Summary of Findings 93
Discussion 96
Conclusion 100
REFERENCES................................................................................................................103
APPENDIX.....................................................................................................................110
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Enrollment Percentages of Asian Americans by Campus 1972 to 2004..... 60
Table 2: Transfer Rates by Ethnicity 2003 to 2004...................................................... 61
Table 3: Matrix of Scales................................................................................................ 65
Table 4: Gender and Ability Groups.............................................................................. 73
Table 5: Age and Ability Groups....................................................................................74
Table 6: International Student Status and Ability Groups........................................... 75
Table 7: English as the Native Language and Ability Groups.....................................75
Table 8: Generation Status and Ability Groups............................................................ 76
Table 9: Marital Status and Ability Groups...................................................................77
Table 10: Parental Education Levels and Ability Groups............................................ 78
Table 11: Transfer as the Goal and Ability Groups...................................................... 79
Table 12: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable College GPA: Full Sample...................................................81
Table 13: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable Course Completion: Full Sample........................................ 83
Table 14: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable College GPA: Asian American Sample..............................85
Table 15: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable College GPA: Three Ability Groups...................................88
Table 16: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable Course Completion: Asian American Sample...................90
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ABSTRACT
Four decades after its inception, the “model minority” image of Asian
American students is still impacting the perceptions of teachers and administrators
on Asian American students’ academic ability and performance. Particularly, in the
realm of higher education, such a successful image of Asian American students
obscures the diversity within this group of students with respect to academic
background, college performance, and postsecondary destination. The majority of
the limited number of research studies on the college experience of Asian American
students have focused on those in four-year institutions. The experience of Asian
American community college students, who constitute half of all Asian American
undergraduates in the United States, is not well known to academics.
This study examines the higher education experience of Asian American
community college students in a major metropolitan area—Los Angeles. Specifically,
this study seeks to reveal the differences among Asian American community college
students with various academic abilities. It also explores factors that predict the
academic performance and persistence of these students.
The three ability groups of Asian American community college students are
found to be significantly different in gender, age, international student status, English
as the native language status, generation status, marital status, parental education
level, and whether transfer was the goal for community college attendance; but not in
ethnicity, parental status, household income, or degree aspiration.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
This study also reveals that factors predicting college performance for the
three ability groups differ; factors predicting persistence for the three ability groups
do not differ. For the low-ability group, the most important factors predicting college
performance are being older and speaking English as the native language. For the
middle-ability group, the most important factor predicting college performance is
again being older. In addition, being Southeast Asian negatively predicts the college
performance of the middle-ability group. For the high-ability group, perceptions of
level of academic obstacles and being male negatively predict college performance.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM AND THE CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT
On May 13, 2004, President George W. Bush signed Executive Order1 13339
in an effort to improve the quality of life and increase economic opportunities for
Asian Americans in the United States (The White House, 2004). This decision
reflects the federal government’s recognition that many Asian Americans, far from
being the publicly minded “model minority,” achieving phenomenal educational and
financial success in American society, are actually in great need of help to improve
their socioeconomic condition.
Despite such recognition from the upper echelons of the government, the
“model minority” image of Asian Americans still prevails in the realm of education.
Many faculty and administrators perceive Asian Americans on college campuses as
high-achieving students who experience minimal or little difficulty excelling
academically. This over-generalized and simplistic perception of Asian American
students obscures the diversity within this group, particularly with respect to
academic background, college performance, and postsecondary destination. While
the success stories of Asian Americans graduating from the top of their class in Ivy
League institutions may make news headlines, the experience of Asian American
community college students, who constitute half of all Asian American
undergraduates, is not well known to academics. This study examines the higher
education experience of Asian American community college students in a major
1 A rule or order having the force of law, issued by the President.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
metropolitan area—Los Angeles. Specifically, this study seeks to reveal the
differences among Asian American community college students with various
academic abilities, and to explore factors that predict the academic performance and
persistence of these students.
This chapter presents the background and statement of the problem; the
purpose and significance of the study; the research questions and methodology;
assumptions, limitations and delimitations of the study; definition of terms; and the
organization of the study.
Background of the Problem
The growing and diversifying Asian American population
“Asian” refers to those individuals having origins in the Far East, Southeast
Asia, or the Indian subcontinent (Reeves & Bennett, 2004). Countries within these
regions include: Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the
Philippine Islands, Thailand, Vietnam, and Laos. Although Hmong is not a country,
it is reported in U.S. census as an Asian ethnicity, like those mentioned above. Asian
Americans are immigrants to the U.S. from Asia or the descendents of these
immigrants. The Asian American population has increased dramatically in recent
decades. Between 1980 and 1990, the population doubled from 3.5 million to 6.9
million (U.S. Census Bureau, 1993). It continued to increase in the 1990s and
reached 10.2 million in 2000. The Asian American population constituted 3.6
percent of the total U.S. population (Reeves & Bennett). Although the percentage is
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
small relative to other minorities such as Hispanics, the rapid growth of the Asian
American population is projected to continue such that by the year 2050, Asian
Americans will constitute lOpercent of the total U.S. population (Reeves & Bennett).
The dramatic population increase of Asian Americans is the result of massive
immigration from Asia during recent decades, which has been made possible by
three legislative policies: 1) the Immigration Act of 1965, which eliminated the
discriminatory quota provisions for Asians by the 1924 Immigration Act; 2) the
Indochinese Refugee Resettlement Program Act of 1975; and 3) the Refugee Act of
1980. The latter two acts permitted immigration of nearly one million refugees from
Southeast Asia to the United States (Nakanishi, 1995). While in 1965 fewer than 7
percent of all immigrants to the U.S. were from Asia, between 1980 and 1984,
Asians constituted 48 percent of all legal immigrants to the U.S. The Asian
immigrant population continued to rise in the 1990s, although the percentage of all
immigrants during this time period declined to 22 percent, due to the legalization of
many immigrants of Hispanic origin (Cheng & Yang, 1996; Nakanishi). The influx
of immigrants from Asia shifted the Asian American population from being largely
American-born to predominantly foreign-born. Such a shift has had profound
educational and social ramifications for the Asian American population, especially
on such basic issues as linguistic and social adjustment (Nakanishi). For example, 40
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4
2
percent of Asian Americans are limited English proficient (Reeves & Bennett,
2004).
The Asian American population is extremely heterogeneous. Individuals
within this group vary in national origin, generational status, length of residence in
the United States, socioeconomic status, and cultural and linguistic background. For
example, some groups such as the Chinese and the Japanese have been in the United
States for generations, while others, such as Laotians, Vietnamese, and Cambodians
are recent immigrants. With respect to major socioeconomic indicators such as
poverty rate and education, Asian ethnicities likewise vary greatly. Poverty rates
range from 6.3 percent for Filipinos to 37.8 percent for Hmongs (Reeves & Bennett,
2004). While very few students of Indian and Japanese descent are educationally at-
risk3 (Siu, 1996), those of Southeast Asian origin, many of whose parents arrived in
the U.S. as political refugees, struggle economically and academically in U.S.
schools (Nakanishi, 1995). For example, less than 6 percent of Cambodians, Laotians,
and Hmongs have completed college; the high school graduation rate for Hmongs is
31 percent (Reeves and Bennett).
Despite such great diversity among Asian ethnicities, data on Asian
American educational experience are often aggregated. Conclusions drawn from
these data are in turn considered generalizable to every ethnicity within this
heterogeneous group. In rebuking the validity of such research practice, Chang and
2 Persons who speak English less than “very well.”
3 See Definition of Terms in this chapter for definition.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
Kiang (2002) indicate that the Asian American higher education experience is
“extremely varied” and should not be reduced to “simplistic, one-dimensional
categories” (p. 145).
Asian American college students and the “ model minority ”
Asians are the fastest-growing racial group in the country’s college-going
population (National Center for Education Statistics, 2003). Asian American
undergraduate and graduate enrollment tripled from 150,000 in 1976 to 448,000 in
1986 (Nakanishi, 1995), and then, more than doubled to reach 978,000 in 2000
(NCES). Asian Americans represented 6.4 percent of the total U.S. higher education
enrollment in 2000 (NCES). Given their percentage in the total U.S. population—3.6
percent—Asians, as a group, are overrepresented in higher education. On the
grounds that they are already overrepresented in higher education, Asian Americans
are either eliminated from inquiry on minority student college experience, or
grouped together with other minorities in data analysis. What contributes to such
treatment of the Asian American college experience in research literature is the
belief that Asian Americans are “model minority” students who experience minimal
or no problems excelling academically (Nakanishi, 1995).
The “model minority” thesis claims that Asian Americans have achieved
tremendous educational, occupational, and financial success, unparalleled by any
other racial minority group in the United States and possibly outperforming
Caucasians (Suzuki, 2002). However, during their previous 150 years of history in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6
the United States, Asian immigrants and their descendents, quite contrary to the
“model minority” image, were seen as “social pariahs” and “an invading ‘yellow
peril’,” whose existence threatened the American way of life (Suzuki, 1989, p. 13).
Asians suffered discrimination and injustice in many areas of social life including
education. The conditions of the earliest Asian immigrants to the United States—the
Chinese—are an example. In the 1880s, in San Francisco, children of Chinese
parents, even those who were U.S.-bom, were prohibited from attending public
schools with white pupils (Wollenberg, 1995).
Through persistent demands during the late 1880s and the first several
decades of the twentieth century, Asian Americans gained more access to equal
educational opportunities than before (Wollenberg, 1995). A more positive view of
Asians in the United States began to develop in the 1960s as media articles portrayed
Asians as extremely successful. One of the very first of these articles was entitled
“Success Story, Japanese-American Style,” in the New York Times, written by
William Peterson (1966). Others followed suit, such as “Success Story of One
Minority Group in U.S.” in U.S. News and World Report (1966), which described the
“extraordinary” educational and occupational success of Chinese Americans. News
articles like these quickly spurred a national trend of viewing Asians in the United
States as the “model minority” whose “phenomenal” educational and occupational
success was worthy of emulation by other minority groups.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
7
The “model minority” thesis also came into being during a period of time
when other minorities in the United States, such as African Americans, protested for
more civil rights. Some Asian American political activists argued that the media used
the “success stories” of Asian Americans to discredit the demands of other minorities
for equal rights and opportunities. After all, Asians, as the media claimed, “made it”
in American society through “hard work, uncomplaining perseverance, and quiet
accommodation” (Suzuki, 1989, p. 14).
The “model minority” thesis has been controversial since its inception. In
order to test its accuracy, researchers have analyzed quantitative data to compare
Asian Americans with other minority groups and Caucasians on major
socioeconomic indicators such as income, education, and occupation. For example,
using 1970 and 1980 census data, it was found that the median years of schooling
and median family income were higher for Asian Americans than for the total U.S.
population (Suzuki, 1989). However, a more detailed analysis revealed that
education did not provide Asian Americans with as much earning power as it did
Caucasians after considering variables such as education, age, region of residence,
and weeks worked per year. In addition, Asian Americans’ higher family income
was due to more working adults in the household contributing to family income
(Suzuki). The findings of later research studies were again inconclusive because of
the different sample selection criteria, statistical techniques, and research premises
employed by researchers (Suzuki).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
More recently, the 2000 census indicated that although Asian American
median family income is higher than that of the total U.S. population ($59,324
versus $50,046), Asian American families have a larger average household size than
that of the total U.S. population (3.08 versus 2.59). Data on poverty rate and
homeownership rate also reveal the inaccuracy of the “model minority” image of
Asian Americans. Specifically, Asian Americans have a poverty rate of 12.6 percent,
in comparison to 12.4 percent for total U.S. population. Moreover, only 53 percent of
Asian-occupied housing units are owned by occupants, compared to 66 percent for
the total U.S. population (Reeves & Bennett, 2004).
It is undeniable that in the realm of education, some Asian Americans have
achieved impressive accomplishments. Nationally, 63.9 percent of Asian Indian and
48.1 percent of Chinese Americans had a bachelor’s or higher degree in 2000, in
comparison to 24.4 percent for the total U.S. population (Reeves & Bennett, 2004).
However, not all individuals within the extremely diverse group of Asian Americans
achieve at a similar rate, as the monolithic “model minority” view suggests. In fact,
the educational condition of some Asian ethnic groups should pose special concerns
for educators and policy makers. Southeast Asian students, for instance, many of
whom are children of refugees, had their prior schooling interrupted by war, and are
therefore academically ill-prepared. In 1999, 7.5 percent of Hmongs and 9.2 percent
of Cambodians had a bachelor’s or higher degree (NCES, 2003). Other Asian
students, who immigrated from more stable societies, may be better prepared
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
academically than those from war regions. However, they still face issues of social
and linguistic adjustment, as any new immigrants would. These challenges make it
difficult for newly arrived Asian American students to succeed in college (Nakanishi,
1995).
The over-generalization of Asian Americans as the “model minority”
conceals the substantial variations among this group of students in terms of academic
ability and background. Because of the “model minority” image, higher education
faculty and administrators often assume that Asian Americans are high-achieving
students who experience no difficulty on college campuses. Consequently, Asian
Americans are often eliminated from the onset programs that may fully benefit this
misconstmed population of students (Yeh, 2002).
This study is not intended to prove whether or not Asian Americans have
achieved the level of educational, occupational, and financial success that qualifies
them for the “model minority” image. Rather, it is to acknowledge that the “model
minority” stereotype does exist in the minds of the general public, and more
importantly, in the minds of faculty, administrators, non-Asian students, and Asian
American students themselves. This study is based on the premise that Asian
Americans, especially those in higher education, do internalize the “model minority”
stereotype (R. G. Chung, personal communication, January 20, 2005). However, not
all Asian Americans can live up to the expectations that follow. Thus, this study
acknowledges that some Asian Americans will not achieve at the highest levels. It is
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
within such a conceptual context that the issue of Asian American community
college experience is studied.
Student diversity in the community college
The limited research literature on Asian American higher education
experience focuses predominantly on those attending four-year institutions
(Nishimoto & Hagedom, 2004). However, almost half (46 percent) of all Asian
American undergraduates enroll in the community colleges (American Association
of Community Colleges, 2005). The educational experience of these students should
not be overlooked.
The community college is an important institution in the U.S. educational
system, enrolling 44 percent of all undergraduates in the nation (AACC, 2005). The
community college provides affordable education to the diverse student population,
particularly for individuals seeking transfer to four-year institutions, enhancement of
job skills, or fulfillment of personal interest. The community college’s open-door
admissions policy gives all who wish to participate in higher education the
opportunity to do so. The challenges that the community colleges face, however, also
partly derive from this open-door policy, which provides the opportunity to
traditionally underrepresented groups in higher education to enroll. These groups
include ethnic minorities; women; older students (aged 25 and above), many of
whom have families to care for and have full-time jobs; students from families of
low socioeconomic status; and those whose parents did not have college education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
11
Many of these students choose the community college to gain additional academic
preparation before studying at a more competitive four-year institution (Inman &
Mayes, 1999).
It is argued in this study that the “model minority” image exemplifies a
mismatch with Asian American community college students. The mismatch is
especially evident among those with low academic ability. This study focuses on the
differences among Asian American community college students of various academic
abilities in terms of demographics and the factors that predict their performance and
persistence.
Statement of the Problem
Asian American students are often associated with high achievement in the
minds of higher education faculty and administrators, as the result of the “model
minority” image (Siu, 1996). Such an association creates a perceived mismatch
between membership in the Asian race and enrollment in the community college.
The perceived mismatch is especially evident for community college students who
have low academic ability. In addition to struggling with postsecondary academic
demands, these individuals have to cope with the pressure derived from the
discrepancy between their low ability and the successful “model minority” image.
The problem is aggravated by higher education institutions’ “systematically
neglecting” the needs of these low-ability students (Yeh, 2002, p. 61).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
12
California has the largest Asian American population—four of the 10.2
million Asian Americans resided in the state in 2000. California’s Asian American
population is projected to reach nine million by the year 2025 as a result of
increasing immigration from the Pacific Rim (Asian Pacific American Legal Center
of Southern California, 2005). Although Asian Americans in the state are more likely
than Caucasians to have a college degree (41 percent versus 34 percent), they are
also more likely to have less high school education (19 percent versus 10 percent).
Four Southeast Asian ethnicities—Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong—
have educational levels far below state average (APA Legal Center). In other words,
the educational attainment of Asian Americans in California is polarized. The
community college system in California is important to the education of many Asian
Americans who do not qualify for admission to four-year institutions or choose the
community college for other reasons, such as affordable tuition, or the availability of
certain vocational or English as a Second Language (ESL) courses.
As the largest community college district in California and the second largest
in the nation, the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) has 77 years
of history. It is located in metropolitan Los Angeles, a main port of entry for
immigrants from the Pacific Rim (Cheng & Yang, 1996). Two-thirds of all
immigrants in Los Angeles County reside in the Los Angeles Community College
District’s service area (Fujimoto, 1999). Twenty percent of the Los Angeles
Community College District students have limited English proficiency (LACCD,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
2004), compared to 9.5 percent for California’s total population and 3 percent for the
United States. The Fall 2004 credit enrollment figure for all nine campuses in the
district was 115,000, a 15 percent increase from 1995 (LACCD). The current student
demographics are quite different from the time of the inception of the district. In fact,
during the past three decades, the district student population has undergone dramatic
changes. Hispanic and Asian population has increased substantially, while Caucasian
population has declined. The African American population has remained relatively
steady during this period of time. With respect to the Asian American population, in
1972, 5.5 percent of the students in the Los Angeles Community College District
were Asian. Less than a decade later, in 1980, Asians constituted 10.9 percent of the
total district student population. In 2004, Asian enrollment reached 16,973,
representing 14.9 percent of the total student population. In that same year, 16.8
percent of the student population was African American, 46.5 percent was Hispanic,
and 19 percent was Caucasian (LACCD).
Students in the Los Angeles Community College District represent diverse
goals for attending the community college (LACCD, 2004). For example, 35 percent
are seeking vocational education; while 32 percent wish to transfer to four-year
institutions. Asian Americans are more likely than other racial groups to focus on
transfer as their enrollment objective (Fujimoto, 1999). The existence of diverse
student demographics and goals makes it imperative that more research examine the
college experience of distinctive community college student populations.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
Asian Americans are a numerical minority in the Los Angeles Community
College District— 14.9 percent, although on some of the campuses in the district,
Asian American student population exceeds those of African American or Caucasian.
Los Angeles City College, for example, has the largest proportion of Asian
American population—20.7 percent. At Mission, Trade Tech, West, and Southwest
College, however, Asians constitute less than 10 percent of the population.
Specifically, at Southwest College, Asian Americans only represent 1.2 percent of
total student population. It is important to explore if Asians experience isolation on a
college campus when they constitute the numerical minority and if such feelings of
isolation may contribute to their low performance.
Purpose of the Study
This is an exploratory study with the purpose of quantifying the Asian
American urban community college experience. The emphasis of this study is the
difference among Asian American students of various academic abilities. High-
ability students are defined as those with a 3.5 and above high school grade point
average (GPA); middle-ability students are those with a 3.0-3.49 high school GPA;
and low-ability students in this study are defined as those with a 2.99 or lower high
school GPA. This study seeks to identify factors and combinations of factors that
best predict Asian American students’ academic performance and persistence as
measured by community college GPA and course completion ratio, respectively. The
purpose was achieved by analyzing the relationship among Asian American student
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
demographics, pre-college and college factors, and college GPA and course
completion ratio. Course completion ratio is the number of courses completed with a
grade of C or better to the total number of courses attempted.
Significance of the Study
There is a notable lack of research on Asian American college students.
Asian American college students have often been disregarded or aggregated with
other minorities in research studies (Nishimoto & Hagedom, 2004). There is even
less research on Asian American students in the community college. For example, a
rigorous literature search has only yielded two recent studies on Asian American
community college students (Nishimoto & Hagedom, 2004; Makuakane-Drechsel &
Hagedom, 2000). The growing and diverse Asian American community college
student population necessitates more research to discover this group of students’
unique set of strengths and barriers as they pursue their educational goals. In turn,
new research will provide insight into this specific group so as to increase the ability
of community colleges to better serve their needs. To such ends, this study will
provide a more sophisticated understanding of Asian American community college
students and their collegiate experience.
In addition, most studies on low-achieving students have focused on African
American and Hispanic students, or students at the elementary or secondary school
level (e.g., Saenz, 2002; Siu, 1996). This study will fill the gap in research by
investigating the community college experience of low-ability Asians.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
Retaining students in higher education is essential. Institutions have the moral
responsibility to provide appropriate services to keep their students enrolled until
they achieve their educational objectives (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). In addition, the
costs associated with losing current students and recruiting new students warrant
inquiry as to how to maintain and improve enrollments. This study will contribute to
community college retention research by identifying factors and combinations of
factors that predict student performance and persistence.
California has the largest Asian American college population— 42 percent of
all Asian American students in the United States attend college in California. The
community colleges play an important role in the higher education system not only
in the state, but also in the nation—22.3 percent of all U.S. community college
students are enrolled in California (AACC, 2005). The community college system in
California bears the responsibility to successfully educate all students, including
Asian Americans, by providing them with the necessary academic and social support.
This study addresses the experience of students in the Los Angeles Community
College District. The research results may be generalized to urban community
colleges in California, or in other states, with similar student demographic profiles.
Research Questions
This study seeks to answer two research questions:
QUESTION 1: Are there significant differences in demographic and pre
college variables among three ability groups of Asian American community college
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
17
students? Group 1 is high-ability group, defined as those with a 3.5 or higher high
school GPA; Group 2, referred to as the middle-ability group, includes those with a
3.0 to 3.49 high school GPA; Group 3 is low-ability, defined as those with a 2.99 or
lower high school GPA.
QUESTION 2: What are the differences among the three ability groups (as
defined in Research Question 1) of Asian American community college students in
terms of independent variables’ ability to predict academic performance and
persistence?
The two research questions generated the following hypotheses:
HYPOTHESIS 1: There are significant differences in certain demographic
and pre-college variables among three ability groups of Asian American community
college students.
HYPOTHESIS 2: There are differences among the three ability groups of
Asian American community college students in terms of independent variables’
ability to predict academic performance and persistence.
Methodology
This study employed a quantitative approach to study the research questions.
The purpose of the analysis was to identify factors that predict the performance and
persistence (as measured by college GPA and course completion ratio) of Asian
American students in the Los Angeles Community College District. The Los
Angeles Community College District 2000 Student Survey data and survey
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
respondents’ transcript data were analyzed. Variables in the survey data relevant to
the study of the research questions were selected to represent student demographics,
pre-college and college factors that would potentially predict performance and
persistence. Transcript data were used to calculate college GPA and course
completion ratio, the measures of community college performance and persistence.
Assumptions
For this study, the following assumptions were made:
1. The measures are reliable and valid indicators of the constructs to be studied,
2. The subjects were assessed in a proper environment,
3. The subjects responded in an honest manner and to the best of their ability,
4. The data were accurately recorded and analyzed,
5. The study results have a reasonable degree of applicability and generalizability to
community colleges in urban areas in the United States,
6. The research, data gathering, and findings and conclusions of the study represent
“good research.”
Limitations
1. This study is limited to subjects who agreed to participate voluntarily,
2. It is limited to subjects in classes selected for the survey based on the sampling
design,
3. It is limited to the number of subjects surveyed and the amount of time available
to conduct this study,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
4. Validity of this study is limited to the reliability of the instruments used.
Delimitations
1. This study confined itself to students in the Los Angeles Community College
District surveyed by the district in 2000.
2. Subjects of any race other than Asian were not the focus of this study, although
the full sample which includes students of all races was analyzed in regression
analyses for the purpose of comparison.
3. Determined by the research questions, this study only examined students’ certain
demographic, pre-college, and college characteristics that would potentially
relate to college performance and persistence.
Definition of Terms
Retention - Students remain enrolled in education institutions until they
achieve their objectives for attendance, such as graduation from a degree program,
or obtaining a certificate. “Retention” and “persistence” are used interchangeably.
Attrition - Students leave education institutions before the accomplishment
of their objectives for attendance. “Attrition” is used interchangeably with “drop
out” and “departure.”
Limited English proficient - Persons who speak English less than “very well”
are considered limited English proficient.
A low-achieving student - The definition is borrowed from “educationally at-
risk student,” which refers to a student whose academic background or prior
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
20
performance may cause the individual to be perceived as a candidate for future
academic failure.
Organization of the Study
Chapter I presents the introduction; the background and statement of the
problem; the purpose and significance of the study; the research questions and
methodology; assumptions, limitations and delimitations of the study; definition of
terms; and the organization of the study.
Chapter II is a review of relevant literature. Topics that were addressed
include: 1) the community college as an educational enterprise that provides open
access to students, and the challenges it faces in lieu of increasing student diversity;
2) important theories and models that informed the study of higher education student
retention; and 3) the academic experience of Asian American community college
students.
Chapter III presents the methodology employed in the study, including a
description of the sample, the data collection procedures, the instrument, and the
methods of data analysis.
Chapter IV presents the results and findings. This chapter includes a
description of the sample; a discussion of the construct validity and reliability of the
principal component analysis; and the results of chi-square tests and regression
analyses.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
21
Chapter V summarizes the study, draws conclusions, and offers
recommendations for future research and education policies.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
Asian American community college students are an understudied population
(Nishimoto & Hagedom, 2004). While research on the Asian American higher
education experience is limited, even fewer studies have examined issues involving
the Asian American community college experience. What contributes partly to the
lack of attention on the fast growing and diversifying Asian American student
population is the “model minority” thesis, which proclaims that Asians are high-
achievers in the academic arena (Suzuki, 2002). Contrary to this over-generalized
and simplistic labeling on the basis of race alone, compelling empirical evidence has
shown that a large number of Asian American students, especially those from
Southeast Asia, are struggling with such basic issues as linguistic and social
adjustment (Nakanishi, 1995). Academic achievement can be even more difficult for
these students.
The Asian American student population is extremely diverse in terms of
academic ability, educational goals, and higher education destination. While many
Asian Americans are participating in and graduating from the most selective four-
year institutions, about half (46%) of Asian American postsecondary students attend
community colleges (American Association of Community Colleges, 2005). This
study focuses on the academic experience of Asian American community college
students. Specifically, attention is given to the differences among students with
various academic abilities.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
To help community college students succeed, open access to the community
college education is insufficient. Retaining these students—keeping them enrolled
until they achieve their educational objectives—is an indispensable measure.
Research has established that community college students are more likely than four-
year college students to have a lower high school GPA, represent an ethnic minority,
come from low-income families with parents who did not receive a college education,
work full-time while attending college, and have family responsibilities (Inman &
Mayes, 1999). These characteristics of community college students contribute to
their higher attrition rates compared to their four-year college counterparts (Summers,
2003).
Asian American community college students not only live under the pressure
derived from their mismatch with the “model minority” image, but also share the
above mentioned attributes of the average community college student, which makes
it more difficult for them to persist in college. Such a proverbial double-edged sword
poses unique challenges for these students to achieve educational success and for
community colleges to retain them.
The purpose of this literature review is to provide a conceptual framework for
the present study. Such a purpose is achieved by exploring Asian American students’
community college experience as a function of their dual memberships in: 1) a racial
group portrayed as high-achievers; and 2) an institutional setting generally
characterized by less academic competitiveness. The literature reviewed falls into the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
24
following three overarching topics: 1) the community college as an educational
enterprise that provides open access to students, and the challenges it faces in lieu of
increasing student diversity; 2) important theories and models that informed the
study of higher education retention; and 3) the Asian American community college
experience, especially with regard to their academic performance and persistence.
Retention of Asian American Community College Students
The open-door policy o f the community colleges and student diversity
In the history of American higher education, three philosophies have
established which individuals were eligible for college attendance (Cross, 1971). The
aristocratic perspective, which was dominant in the early years of American higher
education, implied that only white males from the upper socioeconomic stratum
qualified for college attendance. However, as individual ability gained increasing
recognition in college admissions, the meritocratic notion became acceptable, which
suggested that those exhibiting high academic ability would gain college entrance.
With the advent of the revolutionized community college in the early twentieth
century, the determination for enrollment eligibility is the egalitarian philosophy,
advocating that every member in society has an equal opportunity to participate in
postsecondary education, regardless of academic ability or socioeconomic status.
Specifically, any individual with a high school diploma or equivalent qualifies for
admission into a community college. Such an open-door admissions policy is the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
foundation for the community college’s success as an education institution in the
United States (Lane, 2003).
Due in part to their open-door admissions policy, the community colleges
experienced dramatic expansion in the twentieth century in terms of number of
institutions and size of student enrollment. The first community college, then called
junior college, was established in 1901. A century later, in the year 2005, there are
1,173 community colleges in the United States, of which 997 are public, 145 are
private, and 31 are tribal. Total community college enrollment increased from 16,000
in 1909 (Lane, 2003) to 10.4 million in 2005 (American Association of Community
Colleges, 2005). Today, 44 percent of all undergraduates in the United States enroll
in a community college. The expansion of the community colleges is an indication
that an increasing number of students utilize these institutions in order to reach their
educational and career goals.
The community colleges differ from four-year institutions with respect to at
least two areas: student goals and student demographics. Community college
students have much more diverse goals than that of the four-year institutions.
Whereas four-year students generally aspire to a bachelor’s degree, the community
college students may enroll for one or more of the following four purposes: to
transfer to a four-year institution, obtain necessary skills for employment, upgrade
skills for better career opportunities, or pursue personal interest (Cohen & Brawer,
2003). Indeed, it is these diverse student objectives that define the community
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
college functions: 1) an equalizer for social inequities, through which every citizen
has an opportunity to pursue postsecondary education; 2) a pathway to four-year
institutions through transfer; and 3) a provider of qualified workforce for local
communities (Lane, 2003). The community colleges strive to fulfill all of the above
functions, although depending on individual colleges, the priority placed on a
particular function may be different.
The community colleges are different from four-year institutions, also
because the community college student population is more representative of the
increasingly diverse national demographics than any other higher education
institution (Lane, 2003). Community colleges in urban areas, in particular, serve a
much more ethnically diverse student population than those in the suburbs and most
four-year institutions (Smith & Vellani, 1999). For example, in 2004, in the nine
colleges of the Los Angeles Community College District, which the present study
focuses on, 14.9 percent of the student population were Asian; 16.8 percent were
African American; 46.5 percent were Hispanic; and 19 percent were Caucasian. Such
an ethnic distribution of enrollment mirrors the population composition of the
district’s service area in Los Angeles County (LACCD, 2004). In the mean time,
older students are enrolling in the Los Angeles Community College District at a high
rate. Almost half (48%) of the students enrolled in the LACCD in 2004 were age 25
and above.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
Such diverse student demographics pose challenges for urban community
colleges in their effort to successfully educate these students. Specifically, many
racial minorities or recent immigrants enrolled in urban community colleges are
underprepared for college and academic achievement is a struggle for them (Smith &
Vellani, 1999); older students have competing demands associated with employment
and family that may pull them from their academic endeavors (Cohen & Brawer,
2003). These challenges also create unique opportunities for urban community
colleges to help these students succeed. It is, however, worth noting that the measure
of success is multifaceted for urban community college students. As discussed
previously, unlike those in four-year institutions, for whom success is usually
measured by completion of the baccalaureate degree, urban community college
students have more diverse goals for attending. As Hagedom (2004) indicates, for
urban community college students, the measures of success are as diverse as the
student population. It is therefore important to determine student objectives (i.e.,
transfer, vocational training, or personal interest) when measuring educational
success.
A discussion o f minority students in the community colleges
Community colleges are often the initial postsecondary destination for many
of the racial minorities. For example, 46 percent of Asian and Black undergraduates
and 55 percent Hispanic and Native American undergraduates enroll in a community
college (American Association of Community Colleges, 2005). Nationally, minority
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
28
students, including Asian, Black, Hispanic, and Native American, constitute 30
percent of all community college enrollments, compared to 24 percent of all four-
year institution enrollments (Bragg, 2001). Many of these racial minorities are low-
income, nontraditional-age (25 years of age and above), or are the first generation in
their family to attend college (Grimes & David, 1999).
These racial minorities choose the community colleges for at least two
reasons. First, they are more likely than their more advantaged peers to have low
high school grades (Riehl, 1994), and therefore would experience difficulty in
admission to more competitive four-year institutions (Inman & Mayes, 1999). The
community colleges’ open admissions policy makes it possible for these students
who would otherwise not have access to higher education to enroll. Second, these
minority students are more likely to be constrained by finances (Bui, 2002) and
community colleges’ low tuition rates make it easier for them to pay for their
education.
A heated debate regarding minority students in the community college
centers on whether the community college promotes or hinders the academic success
of these individuals. Proponents of community colleges’ positive effects on minority
students argue that these institutions provide the opportunity to higher education for
minority students who would otherwise not enroll at all (Cohen & Brawer, 2003;
Lane, 2003). However, the counterargument is that the community college hinders
students’ progress toward obtaining a baccalaureate degree. Evidence for this
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
29
argument is found in research studies (Brint & Karabel, 1989; Dougherty, 1992;
Christie & Hutcheson, 2003) which conclude that students who initially enrolled in a
community college are less likely to obtain a baccalaureate degree than those with
equal ability who enrolled in a four-year institution. The differential is more evident
for minority students than Caucasians. Although the debate will remain on whether
the community college is beneficial or detrimental to minority students’ success,
Cohen and Brawer’s (2003) statement sheds important light to the discussion—“[f]or
most students in two-year institutions, the choice is not between the community
college and a [four-year institution]; it is between the community college and
nothing” (p. 53). Clearly, the community colleges provide access to students who
otherwise would not have the opportunity to participate in higher education. Equally
important to access is the issue of retention—to motivate students to stay enrolled
until they achieve their educational objectives. To this end, the following sections of
the literature review discuss research on higher education retention.
Tinto’ s integration model o f college student retention
Tinto’s integration model (1975) is the most widely recognized and tested
model of college student retention (Braxton, 2000), although there is little consensus
as to how effective this model captures the experiences and achievement orientations
of community college students. The model was developed in the mid 1970s in lieu of
a lack of theoretical formulations to account for college student departure. Tinto
states that students enter college with characteristics that influence their persistence
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
or departure decisions. These characteristics include family background, individual
attributes, and pre-college academic experiences. Family background refers to such
variables as family socioeconomic status, parental educational level, and parental
expectations. Individual attributes are defined by Tinto as academic ability, race, and
gender. Finally, pre-college academic experiences are students’ secondary schooling
experiences and high school grades. These three sets of characteristics influence
students’ initial commitment to an institution and to the goal of college graduation.
The initial commitment then influences students’ integration into the academic and
social systems of the institution.
Academic and social integration is a central concept in Tinto’s (1975) model,
which is based in part on Durkheim’s (1951) suicide theory. Durkheim argues that
suicide is more likely to occur when individuals perceive themselves to not fit into
the social and cultural fabric of the society. Similarly, Tinto postulates that students
depart their institutions when they perceive themselves to be not integrated into the
social and intellectual cultures of the institution. Furthermore, integration into the
academic and social arenas of the higher education institution best predicts students’
continuance in college.
Academic integration refers to “the full range of individual experiences
which occur in the formal and informal domains o f.. .the academic system of the
university” (Tinto, 1993, p. 118). Some retention studies on four-year college
students have confirmed that higher levels of academic integration contribute to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
31
higher persistence rates (e.g., Beil, Reisen, Zea, & Caplan, 1990; Cabrera, Nora, &
Castaneda, 1993). However, Braxton and Lien (2000), after analyzing studies of
community college retention using academic integration as an independent variable,
conclude that influence of academic integration on community college students’
persistence is less consistent.
Social integration involves “the interaction between the individual with given
sets of characteristics (backgrounds, values, commitments, etc.) and other persons of
varying characteristics within the college” (Tinto, 1975, p. 107). Tinto argues that
similar to academic integration, social integration also increases the likelihood that
the student will remain in college. Social integration occurs primarily through
informal peer group associations and interaction with faculty. Specifically, the
development of new friendships and peer interaction is most related to higher levels
of social integration, and consequently, persistence (Swail, Redd, & Pema, 2003;
Tinto). Furthermore, Tinto states that when perceptions of social integration via
friendship are taken into account, perceptions of social fit with the prevailing culture
of the institution become unimportant in explaining drop out behavior. That is, even
for students who do not perceive themselves to fit into the prevailing campus culture,
the presence of friendship is significant enough for them to decide to stay enrolled.
Informal student-faculty interaction is another important way of achieving
social integration. Such interaction has been identified as a primary agent of the
college environment that influences the attitudes and interests of students and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
contributes to their satisfaction toward the collegiate experiences and to persistence
(Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Thompson (2001), in a study that examines
community college students in science- and mathematics-based courses, concludes
that informal student-faculty interaction predicts perceived educational gains. That is,
those who are more satisfied with their interaction with faculty perceive higher levels
of educational gains as the result of enrolling in the community college. However,
overall, community college students are found to be less likely to interact with peers
and faculty. For example, a national survey conducted by the National Center for
Education Statistics indicates that of the students entering the community college in
Fall 1989 and leaving by the end of Fall 1999, 39 percent indicated that they had
never been in a study group and 45 percent had never spoken with faculty outside
class (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). The lack of interaction with peers and faculty may be
detrimental for community college students’ persistence.
Other factors identified in the literature as contributors to academic and social
integration are support from family, role models, and mentors (Tinto, 1993;
Thompson, 2001) and on-campus residence (Astin, 1977). Researchers have
challenged Tinto’s (1987) contention that separating ties with family and past
communities is a precondition for successful integration into college. For example,
Cabrera and colleagues (1999) found that support and encouragement from parents
facilitated students’ transition into the social and academic realms of the institution,
enhanced their commitments to the goal of college completion and to the institution,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
and increased their likelihood to persist. Similarly, Bank, Slavings, and Biddle
(1990), in examining the effects of social impact on persistence, concluded that
parental influences mattered substantially in a student’s decision to stay or to leave
the college. Furthermore, they found parents, along with peers, to be even more
influential than faculty in this respect.
Similar to family support, having positive role models and mentors
significantly contributes to students’ integration and the lack of those resources
limits students’ ability to do well in college (Swail et al., 2003). In higher education
institutions, role models and mentors are often faculty members. Interaction with
faculty, as discussed previously, is instrumental in enhancing students’ levels of
integration into the campus life. Similarly, on-campus residence contributes to higher
levels of academic and social integration because this housing option provides
students with more opportunities for involvement in the campus community (Astin,
1977; Pantages & Creedon, 1978).
Tinto’s integration model, in addition to being extensively tested for both
four-year and two-year institutions, has received criticisms with respect to its limited
applicability to the diverse student demographics in today’s higher education and to
the community college student population. More than ever before, numerically and
proportionally more historically underrepresented students are participating in higher
education. These students include racial and ethnic minorities, and those from
families with low income, and those whose parents did not receive college education
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
34
(Swail et al., 2003). The applicability of Tinto’s model to the changing student
demographics is called into question, because it was developed in the 1970s, with
Caucasian college students as its main research subjects. The limitation of Tinto’s
model in explaining community college students’ persistence is also noted by
researchers (Hagedom, Maxwell, & Hampton, 2001), because such a model was
based exclusively on the experiences of four-year college students living on campus.
Beyond the limited applicability of the Tinto model to today’s diverse college
population, and in particular, to the community college students, researchers have
questioned the validity of the foundation of this model—integration into the
mainstream culture of the institution. For example, Tierney (1992) argues that it is
detrimental for minority students if college participation is a “rite of passage,” as
implied by Tinto’s model, where students of diverse cultural backgrounds have to
integrate into the dominant college culture. Conversely, Tierney suggests that higher
education institutions should celebrate the diversity that their students bring, instead
of stifling such diversity and conforming all to a uniform standard.
The role o f cultural capital in college student retention
With increasing numbers of traditionally underrepresented students groups,
such as racial and ethnic minorities, low-income students and first-generation
students, participating in higher education, it is important to understand the
challenges facing these students, some of whom are marginalized or disadvantaged
in their college persistence. A social reproduction lens (Bourdieu, 1977) has often
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
been adopted by researchers (e.g., McDonough, 1997) to examine inequities in
educational access and outcomes not as a function of different degrees of integration
but as manifestations of different levels of cultural capital.
A social reproduction perspective posits that both individuals and
organizations seek to optimize their capital resources (Bourdieu, 1977). Applying
such a notion to the analysis of student participation in higher education, researchers
argue that both students and institutions seek to optimize their capital resources by
using existing resources. Students accumulate their capital resources through
matriculating in the right colleges—those that maximize their chance of success after
college. Institutions accumulate their capital resources through enrolling the right
students—those who best represent the status and possibly increase the prestige of
the institution. Echoing Bourdieu’s position, Berger (2000) indicates that students’
college persistence is best explained as the interaction between individual and
organizational social reproduction processes. Students who possess the maximum
amount of capital tend to have access to institutions that rank higher in the hierarchy
of higher education, such as prestigious four-year institutions. Conversely, students
who possess minimal amount of capital are more likely than their more advantaged
peers to enroll in community colleges, which rank at the bottom of the higher
education hierarchy in terms of prestige.
Capital, as a central concept in the social reproduction theory, refers
primarily to economic and cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1977). Economic capital is
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
36
evidenced by monetary and material objects, whereas cultural capital includes
informal interpersonal skills, habits, manners, linguistics, educational credentials,
and lifestyle preferences (Berger, 2000). Students from high-income families—those
who possess greater amount of economic capital, have a higher chance of success in
college (Berger). Similarly, greater amount of cultural capital contributes to students’
higher chance of college success. Since cultural capital and economic capital are
often intertwined—those who possess a significant amount of cultural capital are
also likely to be economically wealthy—the following discussion only focuses on
cultural capital, which is also the main emphasis of the social reproduction theory as
it applies to issues of higher education access and outcomes.
Cultural capital is defined as a non-material resource or socially valued
knowledge of “highbrow” culture and cultural cues (Roscigno & Ainsworth-Damell,
1999), which is gained primarily through the home, but also through secondary
socialization such as school and peers. Lamont and Lareau (1988) further describe
cultural capital as “widely shared, high status cultural signals (attitudes, preferences,
formal knowledge, behaviors, goods and credentials) used for social and cultural
exclusion” (p. 156). It is important to note that the terms “high” or “low” in the
discussion on cultural capital are used to describe amount of capital, and not
intended to imply inherent superiority of one group to another (Berger, 2000).
Cultural capital has two important characteristics. First, it has no intrinsic value.
Rather, it is transformed and invested in securing other highly valued resources, such
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
as economic capital (McDonough, 1997). Second, cultural capital is cumulative in
nature (Bourdieu, 1977), as with economic capital. That is, initial cultural capital is
needed in order for accumulating more cultural wealth and higher levels of initial
cultural capital contribute to more effective accumulation.
Cultural capital is manifested through habitus—the medium through which
members of a specific social class demonstrate their level of access to cultural capital
(Berger, 2000). Habitus is also a mechanism for excluding and marginalizing those
who possess different amounts and types of capital than one’s own group.
Individuals with similar types and amounts of capital share a common habitus
(Bourdieu, 1977), which may take the form of a community, or networks that
members have built and sustained in order to maintain their status or to gain more
cultural wealth.
Using cultural capital theory to analyze student participation in higher
education, researchers argue that greater educational success is associated with
higher levels of cultural capital possessed by both the individual student and by the
institution (McDonough, 1997; Roscigno & Ainsworth-Damell, 1999). At the
individual level, a student’s habitus largely determines perceptions on the
appropriate kind of college he or she should attend (Berger, 2000). Specifically,
those from a middle- or upper-class habitus, who naturally possess greater amount of
cultural capital, may consider themselves to be entitled to attending a selective
university and obtaining a degree from that institution. Conversely, those from a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
habitus characterized by lower socioeconomic status and less shared cultural capital,
many of whom tend to be ethnic minorities and first-generation college students,
may perceive themselves to be less entitled to an elite institution and to a college
degree. Choosing a community college or dropping out from college, therefore,
becomes more acceptable for these individuals than for their more advantaged peers
(Berger).
At the institutional level, colleges and universities reproduce and reinforce
existing class structure by transforming class distinctions into various academic and
social expectations of their students (Bourdieu, 1977). Such expectations of the
colleges, or the socially constructed and legitimized definitions of their graduates,
are called social charters (Berger, 2000). Berger further illustrates that social charters
can be perceived as socially agreed upon assessments of the cultural capital of an
institution. Institutions with stronger social charters, as reflected by their greater
amounts of cultural capital, are more likely to retain their students, because: 1) these
institutions tend to attract students from a habitus where graduation from college is
perceived as an inevitable outcome; and 2) these institutions’ power to optimize their
graduates’ cultural and economic capital resources provides a compelling reason for
students to persist through degree completion. Conversely, for those from the lower
socioeconomic origins, many of whom are ethnic minorities and first-generation
college students, unfamiliarity with an educational environment that emphasizes the
values of the middle- and upper-class reduces their chance of success (Roscigno &
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
39
Ainsworth-Damell, 1999). In the case of the community college students, attrition is
more common than four-year colleges because the community colleges tend to
attract and afford to enroll those who may feel less entitled to a college degree than
their four-year counterparts (Perrakis & Hagedom, 2003).
Cultural capital theory as it applies to higher education participation
underscores the importance of students sharing cultural values of the middle- and
upper-class in the process of completing college. However, for Asian Americans,
increasingly more of whom are recent immigrants, adapting to the mainstream
culture can be difficult, primarily due to such issues as linguistic barriers and cultural
differences. For this reason, Asians in college who are first-generation immigrants to
the United States can face formidable challenges in their pursuit of higher education.
Zhou and Bankston (1994), in their study that examines the adaptation and academic
experience of second-generation Vietnamese youth, conclude that immigrant culture
can serve as a form of capital resources to facilitate the adaptation process of
immigrants. Specifically, they find that students who exhibit strong adherence to
traditional Asian cultural values such as family orientation and commitment to a
work ethnic, and a high degree of involvement in their ethnic community, tend to
receive high grades in high school, and to have definite college plans. Such a finding
also provides additional insight to the integration view of college experience. That is,
one of the ways immigrant students can successfully integrate into the campus
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
40
culture is through actively involving in and obtaining support from their ethnic
community.
A psychological perspective on college student retention
College departure is a complex process and understanding it requires the
adoption of multiple theoretical lenses. Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) point out that
retention models informed by perspectives other than sociological, are needed in
order to develop a holistic view of the college departure process. In response to such
a call, Bean and Eaton (2000), from a psychological point of view, theorize that
student departure is a behavior and that a behavior is “psychologically motivated”
(p. 49). The psychological model of student retention developed herein is not a
negation of the sociological model of integration proposed by Tinto; rather, it
provides psychological explanations for behavioral outcomes such as academic and
social integration.
Bean and Eaton’s (2000) theory of retention views persistence as the result of
an array of psychological processes that students experience prior to and during
college attendance. Students enter college with certain personal characteristics, such
as motivation to attend college and academic abilities. As they interact with the
institutional environment, several psychological processes occur. Specifically,
students assess their self-efficacy, develop coping strategies for the environment, and
form locus of control. Locus of control is defined as an individual’s ability to
attribute outcomes to internal or external causes (Rotter, 1966). Students with an
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
41
internal locus of control perceive themselves to have control over their performance,
and hence, are more likely to be motivated to succeed in college. On the contrary,
those with an external locus of control attribute outcomes, such as poor grades, to
forces that are beyond their control, such as the instructor failed to explain the
content well. Those who are successful in these processes experience positive self-
efficacy, reduced stress and increased internal locus of control. These psychological
outcomes then influence academic and social integration, which in turn, impacts
students’ attitudes toward the institution. For example, who whose are more
integrated into the academic and social arenas of the institution perceive a higher
level of institutional fit and institutional commitment. The positive attitudes would
lead to intention to persist. Such intention then causes the behavior of persist.
It is extremely complex to explain psychological processes, and as Bean and
Eaton acknowledge, the psychological model they propose is a simplification. A
thorough explanation of how factors are related to each other depends on further
research. Despite the incompleteness of the psychological model of student retention,
it provides insights into the understanding of college retention and opens up
opportunities for future research to explore retention from more diverse perspectives.
Community college student retention
Retaining students in the community college is important, because both
public call for institutional accountability and the high costs associated with
recruiting new students necessitate doing so (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
42
consistently high attrition rates at the community colleges also make a compelling
case for these institutions to take measures to retain their students (Summers, 2003).
Despite the urgent need, in the research community, retention in the community
college is not studied as extensively as that of four-year institutions. In fact, most of
the higher education retention models are based on students in four-year institutions;
the ability of these models in explaining community college students’ persistence
and drop out decisions is questionable (Hagedom, Maxwell, & Hampton, 2002).
It is difficult to define “dropout” in the community college context. Whereas
in four-year colleges, a dropout is a student who leaves higher education
permanently without obtaining a baccalaureate degree, the definition of a community
college dropout is much more elusive. Students enter community colleges with
various goals—transfer, job training, or personal interest. Such diverse goals cause
community college students’ enrollment patterns to be more diverse than their four-
year counterparts. For example, those in the community college who wish to transfer
to a four-year institution may enroll for several semesters until they complete all the
courses that enable them to transfer. Students who are seeking vocational training or
enrolling for personal interest, on the other hand, may take one course, achieve their
goal, and leave. It is important to understand students’ enrollment objectives in order
to accurately measure the state of retention in a given college. Generally, studies on
community college student retention target only students who indicate a degree or
certificate as their objective for attending the college (Summers, 2003).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
43
In community college retention research, factors that have been studied in
relation to students’ persistence or attrition include student demographics, academic
preparation, noncognitive factors, and institutional factors (Summers, 2003).
Variables that have been subject to study include demographics, such as age, gender,
ethnicity, employment status, marital status, socioeconomic status, and parental
education; academic preparation, including high school GPA, class rank, and
admission test scores; noncognitive factors such as motivation, intent to return, and
career aspirations; and institutional factors, including student satisfaction with
campus services, student-faculty interactions, and campus climate.
Research has identified that the community college students are more likely
to drop out if they work full-time and enroll in college part-time (Cohen and Brawer,
2003). Those having family responsibilities are also more likely to drop out (Bers &
Smith, 1991). In addition, high school GPA and the presence of definite educational
goals are predictive of persistence (Hagedom, Maxwell, & Hampton, 2002). Taken
together, researchers conclude that community college student attrition is a complex
process that cannot be explained or predicted by single variables (Summers, 2003).
Hagedom, Maxwell, Pickett and Moon (2002) developed a model of
community college student life and retention that is applicable to urban community
college environments like that of the LACCD. The independent variables are those
established in integration models of retention and student life (Tinto, 1975; Bean and
Metzner, 1985). Student life as a construct mediates the relationship between
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
44
demographic and social variables and persistence, defined as course completion.
Applying this model to a diverse community college population in an urban setting,
Hagedom and colleagues found that limited English proficiency and the presence of
obstacles to postsecondary education negatively influenced course completion.
Asian American community college students
Theories, such as cultural determinism (Liu, 1991) and relative functionalism
(Sue & Okazaki, 1995), have been advanced to explain Asian American students’
academic achievement patterns. Cultural determinism (Liu) attributes Asian
Americans’ academic achievements to their socialization to Asian cultural principles
that value education performance. Relative functionalism (Sue & Okazaki), however,
argues that Asian Americans invest heavily in academic endeavors because they
perceive barriers to success in American society as a result of their linguistic
limitations and minority group status, and therefore use education as a particularly
salient means to achieve upward mobility. Although these theories represent a
meaningful step toward better understanding the educational condition of Asian
Americans, both of them attempted to provide an explanation for the academic
achievements of only a segment of the Asian American student population—high-
achieving students. Specifically, they sought to explain why high-achieving Asian
Americans accomplished the level of academic success they did. Little research,
however, has been done to explain the low achievement of many individuals in the
Asian American group, for example, community college students, and especially
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
45
those with poor grades. Yeh (2002) and Siu (1996) are among the very few
researchers who have examined low-achieving Asian American students’ education
experience. Both, however, reviewed literature rather than conducted original
research. In addition, Siu’s work focuses only on low-achieving Asian American
students at the elementary and secondary level.
Research studies on Asian American college student retention mostly focus
on four-year students (e.g., Tan, 1994; Gloria & Ho, 2003). There are, however, two
exceptions: Nishimoto and Hagedom’s (2004) study on Asian and Pacific Islander
community college students; and Makukane-Drechsel and Hagedom’s (2000) study
on Hawaiian community college students. Nishimoto and Hagedom’s study has two
major findings: 1) different student demographics exist among Asian ethnic groups;
and 2) age, education goals, and gender are predictive of retention. Makukane-
Drechsel and Hagedom’s study finds college GPA, financial aid, and average credit
hours to be predictive of liberal arts and vocational majors’ retention.
Due to the paucity of literature on Asian Americans in the community college,
the conceptual base for the present study was drawn partly from research on
retention of Asian Americans in four-year institutions. The ways that the results of
these studies may contribute to the understanding of Asian Americans in the
community college will be discussed. Several studies have investigated factors that
are predictive of retention and of college GPA. The following three studies are
representative among those.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
46
Sue and Abe (1995) studied factors predictive of freshman year GPA for
4,000 Asian American students attending the eight campuses of the University of
California. They concluded that the single best predictor of freshman year GPA was
high school GPA. This finding is consistent with other studies that confirmed the
positive impact of pre-college academic preparedness on college performance
(Adelman, 1999; McDonough, 1997). Such a finding holds true to all students,
regardless of race or ethnicity (Adelman; McDonough). The research finding
underscores the importance of higher high school performance in promoting college
success. However, many community college students choose the community college
possibly because their high school performance does not qualify them to enter more
selective four-year institutions. So the community colleges must develop strategies to
help these students succeed despite the obstacles they face.
Tan (1994) conducted a survey study at a large, predominantly white, public
research university in the Southwest. The research population included 78 Asian
American students and 66 African American students. Factors that were found to be
predictive of academic achievement as measured by college GPA were: level of
importance placed on the value of education; and degree aspirations. Specifically,
those who placed higher values on education and who aspired to higher degrees were
more likely than their peers to have higher college GPA. Another finding was that
social integration and academic integration did not predict academic performance of
Asian Americans. Such a finding is important, because it can direct future research to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
47
test the role that academic and social integration plays in academic performance and
persistence for a larger sample. Moreover, future research can examine if academic
and social integration impacts the academic performance and persistence of
community college students. Due to the small sample size of this study, Asian
ethnicities were grouped together, and therefore, potential within-group differences
were disguised. Future research can examine the variations among Asian ethnicities.
In a recent study of college persistence of Asian Americans attending four-
year institutions, Gloria and Ho (2003) adopted sociological and psychological
approaches to examine Asian American college students’ persistence. Specifically,
they explored the relationship among three composites of college experience—
comfort in the university environment, perceptions of social support, and efficacy
beliefs; and the relationship between each of these three composites and persistence.
Comfort in the college environment refers to the quality of student life, which
includes such areas as perceptions of the receptivity of the institutional environment,
cultural fit with the institutional environment, and stress created by the university
environment. Social support includes support from family, friends, and academic
mentors. Self-beliefs refer to the self-concept and self-appraisal regarding one’s
college experience. Each composite is collectively reflected by multiple variables.
The study finds that the three composites: comfort in the college environment,
perceived social support, and self-beliefs, are significantly related to each other. For
example, higher levels of perceived social support from family, friends, or mentors
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
48
are related to more positive self-beliefs. Such a finding is not surprising, because
those who perceive higher levels of support, for example, are more likely to indicate
greater feelings of self-worth. Most importantly, this study finds that each of the
composites: comfort in the college environment, perceived social support, and self
beliefs, significantly predicts college persistence.
The above three studies offer insights into the understanding of the Asian
American higher education experience. However, they focused exclusively on
students attending four-year institutions. The present study explores the Asian
American community college experience.
Conclusion
This review of the literature addressed three topics: 1) the challenges that the
community college students face in achieving academic success; 2) factors that have
been found to promote or hinder the academic performance and persistence of
college students; and 3) forces that impact Asian American college students’
performance. Asian American community college students share the characteristics
of many community college students, such as low family income, working full-time,
and enrolling part-time. These characteristics are impediments to academic success.
Asian American community college students’ difficulty in the academic environment,
is aggravated by the pressure they experience as a result of not living up to the
“model minority” image. It is in such a context that the present study examines
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
49
factors that predict the academic performance and persistence of Asian American
community college students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
50
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to quantify the Asian American urban
community college experience by identifying individual and institutional factors that
would predict the college academic performance and persistence of Asian American
students. College academic performance was measured by college GPA. Persistence
was measured by course completion ratio, which is the number of courses completed
with a grade of C or better to the total number of courses attempted.
The purpose of this study was achieved by employing a quantitative
approach to analyze data on responses to a community college student survey and on
survey respondents’ transcripts. The sample population included students in the nine
colleges of the Los Angeles Community College District.
This chapter presents the conceptual framework that forms the research
premise of this study; research questions and methodology; data analysis procedures;
and descriptive tables of student population.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework of this study was informed by research on
community college student characteristics, higher education retention, and Asian
American college students’ retention. Asian American community college students
are an understudied population (Nishimoto & Hagedom, 2004). What contributes
partly to the lack of attention on the fast growing and diversifying Asian American
community college student population is the “model minority” thesis, which implies
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
51
that most Asian American students are attending selective four-year institutions and
are high-achievers in the academic arena (Suzuki, 2002). However, half of all Asian
American undergraduates enroll in the community colleges (American Association
of Community Colleges, 2005).
Research has established that community college students face challenges in
achieving academic success, partly due to student characteristics that may pull them
from their academic endeavors. These characteristics include working full-time and
attending college part-time, having family responsibilities, and being constrained by
finances (Inman & Mayes, 1999). In addition, community college students face
additional difficulty in college success because they are less prepared for college
work than their four-year counterparts.
Research on higher education retention has identified factors that predict
college students’ retention. These factors include high school performance, academic
and social integration into the college culture, and psychological aspects such as
intent to graduate (Adelman, 1999; Tinto, 1993; Beil et al., 1999). English language
proficiency has been found to influence community college student performance and
persistence (Hagedom et al., 2002). This study was informed by research on
retention of community college students and on Asian American students. Factors
identified by research literature to impact academic performance and persistence
were examined on the sample populations.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
52
Hagedom (2003) has stated that academic diversity should challenge the
traditional emphasis on race, class, and gender as categories of difference among
students in the study of college student retention. To this end, this study explored the
role of academic diversity in influencing student performance and persistence.
Research Questions
This study sought to answer the following two research questions:
QUESTION 1: Are there significant differences in demographic and pre
college variables among three groups of Asian American community college
students? Group 1 is high-ability, defined as those with a 3.5 or higher high school
GPA; Group 2, referred to as the middle-ability group, includes those with a 3.0-3.49
high school GPA; Group 3 is low-ability, defined as those with a 2.99 or lower high
school GPA.
QUESTION 2: What are the differences in independent variables’ ability to
predict academic performance and persistence among the three groups (as defined in
Research Question 1) of Asian American community college students?
The above research questions generated the following two hypotheses:
HYPOTHESIS 1: There are significant differences in demographic and pre
college variables among three ability groups of Asian American community college
students.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
53
HYPOTHESIS 2: There are differences among the three ability groups of
Asian American community college students in terms of independent variables’
ability to predict academic performance and persistence.
Methodology
Research population
The research population consists of students who enrolled into one of the
nine campuses of the Los Angeles Community College District and filled out the
LACCD Student Survey in 2000. The nine colleges in the LACCD are: 1) Los
Angeles City; 2) East Los Angeles; 3) Los Angeles Harbor; 4) Los Angeles Mission;
5) Los Angeles Pierce; 6) Los Angeles Southwest; 7) Los Angeles Trade-Tech; 8)
Los Angeles Valley; and 9) West Los Angeles.
The full sample includes 18,759 students who answered the LACCD student
survey. Of the full sample, 2,678 identified themselves on their college application
as being one of the following Asian ethnicities: Chinese (N=654), Japanese (N=208),
Korean (N=347), Laotian (N=31), Cambodian (N=35), Vietnamese (N=247),
Filipino (N=651), Indian sub-continent (N=125), or other Asian (N=380). The Asian
American sample in this study consisted of those students who identified themselves
as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Cambodian, and Vietnamese. Students of
Filipino, Indian, and other Asian origins were eliminated because individuals of
these ethnic backgrounds are dissimilar culturally and geographically to those
ethnicities included in the sample, and their inclusion may confound the results.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
54
Laotian, Cambodian, and Vietnamese were grouped together as Southeast Asian,
because these countries are closely related geographically and individuals of these
ethnicities resemble each other. For this study, Asian respondents were broken
down numerically as follows: 654 Chinese, 208 Japanese, 347 Korean, and 313
Southeast Asian.
Research design
This study employed a quantitative approach to data analysis. The statistical
procedures included 1) selecting variables in the student survey data based on the
retention literature to reflect the constructs in the research questions; and 2)
conducting statistical analyses on those variables. A detailed description of the data
analysis procedures and techniques that were used in this study is presented in the
Data Analysis section of this chapter.
For comparison purposes, the Asian American sample was divided into three
groups based on self-reported high school GPA: high-ability group (3.5 or higher
high school GPA); middle-ability group (3.0-3.49 high school GPA); and low-ability
group (2.99 or lower high school GPA). The three groups were compared in terms of
demographic and pre-college variables, and the independent variables that predicted
each group’s performance and persistence.
The dependent variables in this study were college GPA and course
completion ratio. College GPA measured student academic performance and course
completion ratio measured persistence. These two dependent variables can be related,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
55
and yet are distinct measurements of academic success. In this study, each was
analyzed in relation to the independent variables.
Course completion ratio was a measurement used by researchers (Hagedom,
Maxwell, Pickett, & Moon, 2002) of the Transfer and Retention of Urban
Community College Students project at the University of Southern California as an
indicator of community college student retention. Course completion ratio is defined
as the ratio of the number of courses successfully completed with an A, B, C, or P
(pass) grade to the total number of courses attempted with grades of A, B, C, P (pass),
D, F, I (incomplete), NC (no credit) or W (withdrawal) during a given period of time:
Number of courses completed with an A, B, C or P
Number of courses attempted with an A, B, C, P, D, F, NC, or W
The highest possible value for course completion ratio is 1, which indicates
that during a given period of time, the student completed all the course(s) attempted
with a grade of A, B, C, or P. The lowest possible ratio is 0, which describes a
situation where the student completed none of the course(s) attempted with an A, B,
C, or P.
Instrumentation
Since Fall 1976, the Los Angeles Community College District has
administered district-wide surveys to its students every three or four years in order
for the colleges in the district to better understand student demographics and needs,
and to evaluate how effectively the colleges have been meeting these needs. During
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
56
the past three decades, the survey has been continuously modified to more accurately
assess student realities and their perceptions of campus services. Students’ answers
to the survey questions have been analyzed by research personnel at the LACCD and
such analyses have provided meaningful policy implications for the district (LACCD,
2002). The survey data analyzed in this study are results of the Los Angeles
Community Colleges 2000 Student Survey (the Student Survey). These are the most
recent survey data available from the LACCD. The present study was from the
LACCURL project which is part of the Transfer and Retention of the Urban
Community College Students project at the University of Southern California.
The Student Survey was administered during class time on the nine
campuses of the LACCD in Fall 2000. Classes were randomly selected by applying
a random number generator in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)
software to the inventory of classes in that semester. These administrators prompted
students to fill out the survey on a voluntary basis; answered any student questions
about the process; and collected and returned the surveys to the district for data
entry (LACCD, 2002).
The Student Survey includes 103 questions in a total of 11 categories,
encompassing such areas as student demographics, pre-college educational
experience, and college experience. The questions are informed by theories
pertaining to college student retention and student development. The following is a
description of the 11 categories:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
57
a. Educational Goals and Plans
b. Student Background
c. Financial Resources
d. College Attendance
e. College Services
f. Educational Programs
g. Campus Involvement
h. Gains in Skills and Knowledge
i. Instructional Support
j. Campus Facilities and Service
k. Computer Use
An additional 10 questions apply to the specific college in which the student
respondent was enrolled, and the content of those questions vary from college to
college. Since those college-specific data were not relevant to this study, they were
not analyzed for this study. College transcript data for the survey respondents were
obtained from the LACCD. These data were used to calculate students’ community
college GPA and course completion ratio.
Data Analysis
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), Version 12.0 for Windows
was used to analyze the data for this study. A p. value of .01 and .05 was observed
for statistical significance for chi-square tests and regression analyses, respectively.
This study used both descriptive and inferential statistics to examine: 1) if the low-
ability, middle-ability, and high-ability groups of Asian American community
college students were significantly different from each other in terms of
demographic and pre-college variables; and 2) the differences in independent
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
58
variables’ ability to predict academic performance and persistence among these
three groups of students.
The analysis consisted of three broad methodological steps. The first step was
the reporting of descriptive statistics for the entire sample as well as the Asian
American sample. The entire sample included students of all races and the Asian
American sample included those who self-identified as Chinese, Japanese, Korean,
and one of the three Southeast Asian ethnicities: Laotian, Cambodian or Vietnamese.
Descriptive statistics included frequencies, means, and standard deviations; ranges,
minimums, and maximums; and percentages.
The second step involved conducting chi-square tests to compare the
demographic and pre-college variables among the three ability groups of Asian
American students. Twelve chi-square tests were conducted for this purpose. The
three academic ability groups of Asian American students were: high-ability group
(3.5 or higher high school GPA); middle-ability group (3.0-3.49 high school GPA);
and low-ability group (2.99 or lower high school GPA). The three groups were
compared by ten demographic variables and two pre-college variables. The ten
demographic variables were: gender, age, ethnicity, international student status,
English as the native language status, generation status, marital status, parental status,
household income, and parental education level. The two pre-college variables
examined were: whether transfer was the goal for college attendance and degree
aspiration.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
59
The third methodological step involved isolating demographic, pre-college
and college factors that would predict the three ability groups of Asian American
community college students’ college GPA and course completion. For this purpose,
a total of seven regression analyses were conducted. Independent variables were
grouped into three clusters, labeled as demographic, pre-college, and college.
Demographic variables included: gender, age, ethnicity (Chinese, Japanese, Korean,
or Southeast Asian), international student status, English as the native language
status, generation status, marital status, parental status, household income, and
parental education level. Pre-college variables included: high school GPA, whether
transfer was the goal for college attendance, and degree aspiration. College
variables included: perceptions of academic obstacles, satisfaction with counseling
services, relationship with faculty; the frequency with which one studies with peers;
satisfaction with instructional support, and satisfaction with campus facility.
Dependent variables were community college GPA and course completion ratio.
The full sample was studied in the first two regression analyses to determine
factors that would predict academic performance and persistence for all students
regardless of race. These two analyses had college GPA and course completion as
the dependent variable, respectively. Another two regression analyses were
conducted on the Asian American sample, again with college GPA and course
completion as the dependent variable, respectively. For this second set of analyses,
a fourth block of interactions between academic ability, as measured by high school
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
60
GPA, and other independent variables, was included later on in the regression
model to determine if splitting the sample by academic ability to test independent
variables’ influence on college GPA and course completion was necessary.
Descriptive Tables of Student Population
Table 1 presents a detailed picture of Asian American student enrollment by
campus at the LACCD from 1972 to 2004. The Asian American student population
has increased dramatically since 1972. Although there was a 1.1 percent decrease in
the percentage of Asian American enrollment from 1995 to 2004, the enrollment
number increased by over 1,300 during this time period. Such enrollment increase
over the past three decades necessitates research for the purpose of studying this
distinct group of students’ educational experience.
Table 1: Enrollment Percentages of Asian Americans by Campus 1972 to 2004
Campus 1972 1985 1995 2004
City 11.6 27.2 21.5 20.7
East 8.0 20.3 18.1 18.9
Harbor 8.3 14.3 18.7 18.8
Mission
—
5.0 6.9 7.9
Pierce 0.7 10.7 20.9 19.8
Southwest 0.4 1.0 1.1 1.2
Trade Tech 5.4 15.5 12.6 8.5
Valley 1.5 10.1 17.2 13.2
West 4.0 8.4 9.6 9.3
District 5.5 14.5 16.0 14.9
Number 5,591 13,333 15,621 16,973
Source: LACCD (2004).
Table 2 presents the transfer rates in percentages by ethnicity and by campus
from 2003 to 2004. Asian American students in the LACCD had lower transfer rates
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
61
than Asian Americans in all California community colleges. In contrast, Hispanics in
the LACCD had more satisfactory transfer rates than the overall Hispanic
community college population in California. These data make a compelling case to
study the academic performance and persistence of Asian Americans in the LACCD.
Table 2: Transfer Rates by Ethnicity 2003 to 2004
Los Angeles Community College District (Percentages)
Asian Hispanic White
UC 29.3 29.6 33.6
csu 14.5 47.1 23.5
Total 17.8 44.1 26.2
California Community Colleges (Percenta ges)
Asian Hispanic White
UC 35.6 17.3 43.2
CSU 19.8 27.3 45.7
Total 23.3 25.1 45.1
Source: LACCD (2004).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
62
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS
This chapter includes three sections. The first section provides a description
of the sample; the second section presents the construct validity and reliability of the
principal component analysis. The third section, which includes two subsections,
presents the results of chi-square and regression analyses.
The two research hypotheses tested in this study were:
HYPOTHESIS 1: There are significant differences in demographic and pre
college variables among the three ability groups of Asian American community
college students. Group 1 is the high-ability group, defined as those with a 3.5 or
higher high school GPA; Group 2, referred to as the middle-ability group, includes
those with a 3.0 to 3.49 high school GPA; Group 3 is low-ability, defined as those
with a 2.99 or lower high school GPA.
HYPOTHESIS 2: There are differences among the three ability groups of
Asian American community college students in terms of independent variables’
ability to predict academic performance and persistence.
Description of the Sample
In 2000, 18,759 students were randomly selected by the Los Angeles
Community College District to answer the Los Angeles Community College Student
Survey. Survey responses were coded and entered into an SPSS database which also
included corresponding respondents’ demographic information obtained from their
college application. Individuals in this sample represented all races: Caucasian
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
63
(20.3%), Hispanic (47.4%), African American (16.7%) and Asian (15.6%). The
representation of Asian American students in the full sample reflects the enrollment
percentage of Asian Americans in the LACCD in the year 2004— 14.9 percent.
For the purpose of this study, The Asian American sample4 consisted of
students who self-identified as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or one of the following
three Southeast Asian ethnicities: Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian. The Asian
American sample had a sample size of 1,522. Of these, 654 were Chinese, 208 were
Japanese, 347 were Korean, and 313 were Southeast Asian.
In terms of gender distribution, females constituted 57.1 percent of the total
Asian American sample population, or 869. With respect to age, 18 percent were age
20 or younger; 34 percent were age 20 to 24; 28 percent were 25 to 34; and 20
percent were 35 and older. Three quarters (75.1 percent) of the students in the Asian
American sample were non-native English speakers. In addition, 20.2 percent were
married; and 16.2 percent had children.
The mean college GPA for the Asian American sample was 2.92 and the
mean course completion was .59. In comparison, the mean college GPA and mean
course completion for the full sample was 2.59 and .58, respectively. Therefore, the
Asian American sample had an average college GPA of 1/3 of a grade higher than
the full sample and a slightly higher average course completion ratio.
4 See Chapter III for a description of sample selection.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
64
Construct Validity and Scale Development
Twenty-two subscales were included in this study. These subscales were
selected from the Student Survey dataset based on literature on higher education
retention, and community college retention in particular. The variables were grouped
into three clusters labeled as: demographic, pre-college, and college. Demographic
variables included: gender, age, ethnicity (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or Southeast
Asian), international student status, English as the native language status, generation
status, marital status, parental status, household income, and parental education level.
Pre-college variables were: high school GPA, whether transfer was the goal for
college attendance, and degree aspiration. College variables included: perceptions of
academic obstacles, satisfaction with counseling services, relationship with faculty;
the frequency with which one studies with peers, satisfaction with instructional
support, satisfaction with campus facility; and frequency of computer use.
Dependent variables were community college GPA and course completion ratio (the
number of courses completed with a grade of C or better to the total number of
courses attempted).
Five of the above subscales, which evolved from the literature, were
submitted to factor analyses that yielded Eigenvalues of greater than 1, and reliability
tests that yielded Cronbach’s Alphas of greater than .7. Table 3 presents a matrix of
the variables and scales.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 3: Matrix of Scales
Scale Item/Variable Full sample Asian American sample
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES
gender Your gender: N 18759 N 1522
Mean 1.6219 Mean 1.5710
l=Male SD .48492 SD .49510
2=Female Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Minimum 1.0 Minimum 1.0
Maximum 2.0 Maximum 2.0
age Your age at the beginning of Fall 2000 semester: N 18758 N 1522
Mean 2.50 Mean 2.50
l=Under 20 SD 1.080 SD 1.005
2=20 to 24 Range 3.0 Range 3.0
3=25 to 34 Minimum 1.0 Minimum 1.0
4=35 and above Maximum 4.0 Maximum 4.0
Chinese What is your ethnicity? N 18656 N 1522
10=Chinese Mean .0351 Mean .4297
SD .18393 SD .49520
0=no Range 1.0 Range 1.0
l=yes Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 3.5 Percent 43.0
Japanese What is your ethnicity? N 18656 N 1522
1 l=Japanese Mean .0111 Mean .1367
SD .10500 SD .34360
0=no Range 1.0 Range 1.0
l=yes Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 1.1 Percent 13.7
ON
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 3: Continued
Korean What is your ethnicity? N 18656 N 1522
12=Korean Mean .0186 Mean .2280
SD .13511 SD .41967
0=no Minimum .0 Minimum .0
l=yes Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Percent 1.9 Percent 22.8
Southeast Asian What is your ethnicity? N 18656 N 1522
13=Laotian, 14=Cambodian, 15=Vietnamese Mean .0168 Mean .2057
Southeast Asian=13, 14 or 15 SD .12844 SD .40431
Range 1.0 Range 1.0
0=no Minimum .0 Minimum .0
l=yes Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 1.7 Percent 20.6
Intemation Are you an international student? N 18549 N 1522
Mean .0696 Mean .2694
0=no SD .25448 SD .44378
l=yes Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 7.0 Percent 26.9
Engnativ Is English your native language? N 18595 N 1519
Mean .5932 Mean .2475
0=no SD .49125 SD .43172
l=yes Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 59.3 Percent 24.8
O n
O n
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table 3: Continued
genstat Q10 Choose the ONE response that most nearly describes the length
of time you and your family have lived in the United States.
l=Have lived in the U.S. less than 5 years; 2=Have lived in the
U.S. between 5 and 10 years; 3=Not bom in the U.S. but have
lived here more than 10 years; 4=Bom in the U.S. but neither
of parents was; 5=At least one of the parents was bom in the
U.S., but some of the grandparents were not; 6=All of the
grandparents were bom in the U.S.
N
Mean
SD
Range
Minimum
Maximum
18154
3.82
1.579
5.0
1.0
6.0
N
Mean
SD
Range
Minimum
Maximum
1476
3.34
1.229
5.0
1.0
6.0
married Q11 Are you currently married? N 18460 N 1492
Mean .2356 Mean .2017
0=no SD .42438 SD .40144
l=yes Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 23.6 Percent 20.2
children Q12 Do you have children? N 17452 N 1473
Mean .2927 Mean .1623
0=no SD .45504 SD .36881
l=yes Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 29.3 Percent 16.2
housincom Q14 What was your total family income in 1999, not including N 16666 N 1355
loans, grants or scholarships? Mean 6.30 Mean 6.21
SD 4.308 SD 4.405
l=0-$9,000; 2=$9,001-$11,000; 3=$11,001-$13,000; Range 12.0 Range 12.0
4=$ 13,001-$ 17,000; 5=$17,001-$20,000; 6=$20,001-$24,000; Minimum 1.0 Minimum 1.0
7=$24,001-$26,000; 8=$26,001-$28,000; 9=$28,001 -$31,000; Maximum 13.0 Maximum 13.0
10=$31,001-$36,000; 11=$36,001-$41,000; 12=$41,001-
$55,000; 13=$55,001 or more
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table 3: Continued
parented Q9 What is the highest level of education that your parents have
achieved?
l=Elementary school or less;
2=Some high school/secondary school; 3=Completed high
school/secondary school; 4=Some college but no degree; 5=
Two-year college degree; 6=Four-year college degree;
7=Advanced degree
N
Mean
SD
Range
Minimum
Maximum
17594
3.6344
2.03002
6.0
1.0
7.0
N
Mean
SD
Range
Minimum
Maximum
1415
4.1272
1.96596
6.0
1.0
7.0
PRE-COLLEGE VARIABLES
hsgpa Q8 What was your high school grade point average? N 14966 N 1074
Mean 1.7657 Mean 2.0056
1=2.99 or below SD .73601 SD .74652
2=3.0-3.49 Range 2.0 Range 2.0
3=3.5-4.0 Minimum 1.0 Minimum 1.0
Maximum 3.0 Maximum 3.0
goaltransfer Q2_a Is transfer your goal for attending this college? N 16168 N 1361
Mean .77 Mean .73
0=no SD .420 SD .444
l=yes Range 1.0 Range 1.0
Minimum .0 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 1.0
Percent 77.1 Percent 73.1
degasp Q5 What is the highest degree or certificate that you intend to N 11528 N 987
obtain at any college? Mean 4.6552 Mean 4.3708
SD 1.33066 SD 1.55894
l=High school diploma or GED; 2=Certificate in an Range 5.0 Range 5.0
occupational program; 3=Associate degree; 4=Bachelor’s Minimum 1.0 Minimum 1.0
degree; 5=Master’s degree; 6=Doctoral degree Maximum 6.0 Maximum 6.0
a \
00
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table 3: Continued
COLLEGE VARIABLES
acaobst: mean (Q7e,
Q7f, & Q7g)
Alpha .835*
.834
To what extent have the following been an obstacle to reaching
your educational goals?
Q7_e: Academic difficulties (e.g., low grades); Q7_f: Lack of
study skills; Q7_g: Lack of motivation to study.
(1= Not an obstacle; 2= Minor obstacle; 3= Moderate obstacle;
4= Major obstacle)
N 17150
Mean 1.8463
SD .85698
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
N 1375
Mean 2.1326
SD .86427
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
counseling: mean
(Q28, Q36, & Q44)
Alpha .856*
.850
Would you agree that the counseling staff are readily available,
knowledgeable and helpful?
(l=Strongly disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Agree; 4=Strongly
agree)
N 16719
Mean 3.0715
SD .70924
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
N 1321
Mean 3.0121
SD .68864
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
faculty: mean
(Q49...Q61, & Q65)
Alpha .938*
.940
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Q49: Faculty are supportive of my education; Q50:1 admire
one or more instructors or staff; Q51: Students are treated
fairly; Instructors: Q52: give me honest feedback; Q53: are
willing to spend time to discuss issues with me; Q54:
encourage me to explore different viewpoints; Q55: treat me
with respect; Q56: Textbooks are appropriate; Q57: Grading is
fair; Q58: Course outlines are provided and followed; Q59:
Instructors give me advice; Q60: Instructors are up-to-date in
their field; Q61: Tests are relevant; Q65:1 would encourage
others to attend.
l=Strongly disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Agree; 4=Strongly agree)
N 18010
Mean 3.1611
SD .48471
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
N 1440
Mean 3.0392
SD .47400
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
stuwith Q66 How often do you study with others rather than alone?
(l=Rarely or never; 2=Sometimes; 3=Frequently;
4=Almost always)
N 15860
Mean 1.94
SD .975
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
N 1271
Mean 1.96
SD 1.000
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table 3: Continued
instrsup: mean
(Q85...Q90)
Alpha .882*
.866
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Q85: The campus library’s collections of books and magazines
are modem and well maintained; Q86: The library is available
and open at convenient times; Q87: Computers are available
for use on campus when I need them; Q88: Computers and
software on campus are up-to-date; Q89: Instructional
equipment for lectures is sufficient and up-to-date; Q90:
Instructional equipment in the lab or machine shop is sufficient
and up-to-date.
(l=Strongly disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Agree; 4=Strongly agree)
N 16146
Mean 2.9400
SD .62419
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
N 1345
Mean 2.8362
SD .60514
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
facility: mean (Q92,
Q94, Q95, Q96, Q98)
Alpha .845*
.846
To what extent do you agree with the following statements?
Q92: The classrooms, lecture halls, and labs are clean and well
maintained; Q94: The restrooms on this campus are clean and
well maintained; Q95: The grounds and public areas on this
campus are clean and well maintained; Q96: The campus has
adequate outside lighting after dark; Q98: The parking lots are
safe, well lighted, and well maintained.
(l=Strongly disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Agree; 4=Strongly agree)
N 17753
Mean 2.6739
SD .68078
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
N 1435
Mean 2.5358
SD .63894
Range 3.0
Minimum 1.0
Maximum 4.0
D EPENDENT VARIABLES
collpga Community college GPA N 17709
Mean 2.5897
SD .81234
Range 4.0
Minimum .0
Maximum 4.0
N 1431
Mean 2.9159
SD .76510
Range 4.0
Minimum .0
Maximum 4.0
-a
o
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table 3: Continued
courcompl Course completion=
number of courses completed with a C or above
number of courses attempted
* Alpha for the full sample.
N 17709 N 1431
Mean .5830 Mean .5943
SD .19062 SD .18049
Range .99 Range 4.0
Minimum .01 Minimum .0
Maximum 1.0 Maximum 4.0
72
Results
The first subsection presents the results of twelve chi-square analyses that
tested the first research hypothesis. The second subsection presents the results of
seven regression analyses that examined independent variables’ relation to academic
performance and persistence.
Chi-square results
Cross tabulations were formed in response to testing the first research
hypothesis. Specifically, demographic and pre-college variables were examined in
relation to academic ability, as measured by high school GPA. The three ability
groups were defined as: high-ability (3.5 or above high school GPA), middle-ability
(3.0 to 3.49 high school GPA), and low-ability (2.99 or below high school GPA).
The sample size for the high-, middle-, and low-ability group was 302, 476, and 296,
respectively. Four hundred and forty-eight students, or 29.4 percent of the sample did
not provide their high school GPA on the survey.
Demographic variables included gender, age, ethnicity, international student
status, English as the native language status, generation status, marital status,
parental status, household income, and parental education level. Pre-college
variables included whether transfer was the goal for community college attendance
and degree aspiration.
The chi-square results indicated that the three ability groups were
significantly different in gender, age, international student status, English as the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
native language status, and generation status (p.<.001); and in marital status, parental
education level, and whether transfer was the goal (p.<.01); but not in ethnicity,
parental status, household income, or degree aspiration.
Table 4 indicates that males and females were unequally represented in the
three ability groups. The high-ability group consisted largely of females (63.2
percent). In contrast, males constituted close to 3/5 (59.1%) of the low-ability group.
Table 4: Gender and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Male 175 195 111 481
59.1% 41.0% 36.8% 44.8%
Female 121 281 191 593
40.9% 59.0% 63.2% 55.2%
Total 296 476 302 1074
100% 100% 100% 100%
Chi-Square Value________ df
35.285** 2
**p<.001
Table 5 suggests that the differences in age distribution among the three
ability groups were significant. In comparison to the middle- and high-ability groups,
the low-ability group had the largest percentage (65.5%) of traditional-age students
(under 25). The middle-ability group had the largest percentage (22.5%) of older
students (35 and above). The high-ability group, however, had the largest percentage
(27.8%) of mid-age students (25-34).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
74
Table 5: Age and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Under 20 83 80 60 223
28.0% 16.8% 19.9% 20.8%
20-24 111 171 100 382
37.5% 35.9% 33.1% 35.6%
25-34 70 118 84 272
23.6% 24.8% 27.8% 25.3%
35 and above 32 107 58 197
10.8% 22.5% 19.2% 18.3%
Total 296 476 302 1074
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Chi-Square Value________ df
26.933** 2
**p<.001
Table 6 suggests that the differences in international student status among the
three ability groups were significant. The low-ability group consisted largely of U.S.
citizens and permanent residents (84.8%). The middle-ability group, in contrast, had a
higher percentage (26.5%) of international students than the low- and high-ability
groups.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
75
Table 6: International Student Status and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
U.S. citizen or 251 350 234 835
permanent resident 84.8% 73.5% 77.5% 77.7%
International 45 126 68 239
15.2% 26.5% 22.5% 22.3%
Total 296 476 302 1074
100% 100% 100% 100%
Chi-Square Value________ df
13.410** 2
**p<.001
Table 7 indicates that the differences among the three ability groups in terms
of English as the native language status were significant. Overall, 70.1 percent of the
Asian American students in the sample were non-native English speakers. The
middle-ability group had a higher percentage (76.0%) of non-native English
speakers than the other two ability groups. The low-ability group, however, had a
higher percentage (38.6%) of native English speakers.
Table 7: English as the Native Language and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Non-native 181 361 209 751
61.4% 76.0% 69.2% 70.1%
Native 114 114 93 321
38.6% 24.0% 30.8% 29.9%
Total 295 475 302 1072
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Chi-Square Value________ df
18.748** 2
**p<.001
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
76
Table 8 indicates that the differences in the distribution of generation
status among the three ability groups were significant. The middle-ability group,
compared to the low- and high-ability groups, had a higher percentage (57.8%)
of students who had lived in the U.S. for less than 10 years. The low-ability
group, however, had a higher percentage of students who had either lived in the
U.S. for more than 10 years, or had been bom in the U.S.
Table 8: Generation Status and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Less than five years 39 144 84 267
13.4% 30.5% 28.6% 25.2%
Between five and ten years 64 129 63 256
21.9% 27.3% 21.4% 24.2%
More than ten years, but not bom in
the U.S. 107 130 99 336
36.6% 27.5% 33.7% 31.8%
Bom in the U.S., but not parents 50 47 37 134
17.1% 10.0% 12.6% 12.7%
At least one parent bom in the U.S.,
but not grandparents 18 18 1 1 47
6.2% 3.8% 3.7% 4.4%
All grandparents bom in the U.S. 14 4 0 18
4.8% 0.8% 0.0% 1.7%
Total 292 472 294 1058
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Chi-Square Value________ df
64.930** 10
**p<.001
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
77
Table 9 suggests that the differences in marital status among the three ability
groups were significant. The low-ability group had a larger percentage (87.8%) of
the unmarried (single or divorced) students than the other two ability groups. The
high-ability group, however, had a larger percentage (21.3%) of married students
than the other two ability groups.
Table 9: Marital Status and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Single or
divorced 259 376 233 868
87.8% 80.0% 78.7% 81.8%
Married 36 94 63 193
12.2% 20.0% 21.3% 18.2%
Total 295 470 296 1061
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Chi-Square Value df
10.043* 2
*p.<.01
Table 10 indicates that parental education levels were significantly different
among the three ability groups. The low-ability group, compared with the middle- and
high-ability groups, had a higher percentage (51.6%) of students whose parents had
high school or less education. In contrast, the high-ability group had a higher
percentage (45.2%) of students whose parents had at least a bachelor’s degree.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
78
Table 10: Parental Education Levels and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Elementary school or less 44 45 23 112
15.9% 10.1% 7.9% 11.0%
Some high school/secondary school but did
not graduate 38 61 30 129
13.7% 13.6% 10.3% 12.7%
High school/secondary school 61 95 48 204
22.0% 21.3% 16.6% 20.1%
Some college but no degree 29 58 40 127
10.5% 13.0% 13.8% 12.5%
Two-year college degree 19 28 18 65
6.9% 6.3% 6.2% 6.4%
Four-year college degree 69 107 83 259
24.9% 23.9% 28.6% 25.5%
Graduate or professional degree 17 53 48 118
6.1% 11.9% 16.6% 11.6%
Total 277 447 290 1014
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Chi-Square Value_________ df
19.538* 12
*p.<.01
Table 11 indicates that the number of students aspiring to transfer was
significantly different among the three ability groups. Overall, three quarters of the
Asian American students in the sample aspired to transferring to four-year
institutions. The high-ability group, compared to the low- and middle-ability groups,
had a higher percentage (30.9%) of students who did not aspire to transfer. The low-
ability group, in contrast, had a higher percentage (80.0%) of students who wished to
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
79
transfer.
Table 11: Transfer as the Goal and Ability Groups
Low Middle High Total
Transfer was not goal 50 113 82 245
18.0% 26.3% 30.9% 25.2%
Transfer was goal 228 317 183 728
82.0% 73.7% 69.1% 74.8%
Total 278 430 265 973
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Chi-Square Value________df
12.586* 2
*p.<.01
The above eight tables (Table 4 through Table 11) presented chi-square tests
that yielded significant results. Of the 12 demographic and pre-college variables
examined in relation to academic ability, there were four variables with respect to
which the three academic ability groups did not differ significantly. These four
variables were ethnicity, parental status, household income and degree aspiration. In
other words, there were no significant differences among the three ability groups in
terms of ethnicity, parental status, household income, or degree aspiration.
Regression results
A total of seven regression analyses were conducted to determine factors that
would predict the two dependent variables: college GPA and course completion.
These regression analyses also suggested the extent of such prediction. The full
sample was studied in the first two regression analyses to determine factors that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
80
would predict academic performance and persistence for all students regardless of
race. These two analyses had college GPA and course completion as the dependent
variable, respectively. Another two regression analyses were conducted on the Asian
American sample, again with college GPA and course completion as the dependent
variable, respectively. For this second set of analyses, a fourth block of interactions
between academic ability, as measured by high school GPA, and other independent
variables, was included later on in the regression model to determine if splitting the
sample by academic ability was necessary.
Table 12 gives the results and Coefficients of a full-sample multiple
regression of GPA on the series of factorial constructs. The independent variables
were grouped into three clusters—demographic, pre-college, and college. Table 12(a)
presents the model summary of this first regression analysis. The regression model
after the final entry was significant. Upon entry of the first block, 9.2 percent of the
variance in college GPA was explained. After adding block 2, 18.4 percent of the
variance in college GPA was explained. Block 3 raised the R square to .236. Thus,
the independent variables in this analysis explained a total of 23.6 percent of the
variance in college GPA for the full sample. Significant variables in predicting the
dependent variable, college GPA, were: age, being Chinese, Japanese, Korean, or
Southeast Asian, generation status, marital status, parental status, household income,
parental education; high school GPA; perceptions of academic obstacles, satisfaction
with counseling services, relationship with faculty, and satisfaction with instructional
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
81
support and campus facility. Of these, the most significant variables predicting
college GPA based on the standardized Beta were: high school GPA (.263) and age
(.169).
Table 12: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable College GPA: Full Sample
Variable Unstandardized Standardized
Model Name B Coef. SE Beta Coef.
1 (Constant) 2.186 0.114
Gender 0.014 0.021 0.009
*Age 0.133 0.012 0.170
*Chinese 0.382 0.058 0.088
♦Japanese 0.316 0.104 0.040
*Korean 0.154 0.072 0.028
♦Southeast 0.157 0.080 0.026
Intemation 0.066 0.047 0.020
Engnativ -0.011 0.027 -0.007
♦Genstat -0.025 0.009 -0.048
♦Married 0.090 0.033 0.043
♦Children -0.085 0.030 -0.046
♦Housincom 0.010 0.003 0.056
♦Parented 0.018 0.005 0.047
2 ♦Hsgpa 0.277 0.014 0.263
Goaltransfer -0.005 0.033 -0.002
Degasp 0.015 0.008 0.024
3 ♦Acaobst -0.199 0.013 -0.216
♦Counseling -0.057 0.016 -0.052
♦Faculty 0.124 0.025 0.076
Stuwith -0.008 0.010 -0.010
♦Instrsup -0.057 0.020 -0.045
♦Facility -0.066 0.018 -0.057
' indicates a significant variable
fable 12(a): Model Summary
Model R square R square change F change df Sig. F chang<
1 0.092 0.092 35.978 13,4625 0.000
2 0.184 0.092 172.962 3,4622 0.000
3 0.236 0.053 53.368 6,4616 0.000
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
82
F_______ Sig._ _
64.982 0.001
Table 13 gives the results and Coefficients of a full-sample multiple
regression of course completion on the series of factorial constructs. Table 13(a)
presents the model summary of this regression analysis. The regression model after
the final entry was significant. Upon entry of the first block, 3.4 percent of the
variance in course completion was explained. After adding the second block, 4.7
percent of the variance in course completion was explained. The third block raised
the R square to .062. Thus, the independent variables in this analysis explained a
total of 6.2 percent of the variance in course completion for the full sample.
Significant variables in predicting the dependent variable, course completion,
included: gender, age, being Korean, household income; high school GPA; and
perceptions of academic obstacles. Of these, the most significant variables based on
the standardized Beta were: household income (.137) and perceptions of academic
obstacles (-.118).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
83
Table 13: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable Course Completion: Full Sample
Variable Unstandardized Standardized
Model Name B Coef. SE Beta Coef.
1 (Constant) 0.701 0.029
*Gender -0.036 0.005 -0.101
*Age -0.010 0.003 -0.058
Chinese 0.014 0.015 0.014
Japanese 0.035 0.026 0.020
*Korean -0.044 0.018 -0.035
Southeast 0.012 0.020 0.009
Intemation 0.010 0.012 0.014
Engnativ -0.006 0.007 -0.017
Genstat 0.001 0.002 0.010
Married -0.002 0.008 -0.004
Children -0.012 0.007 -0.028
*Housincom 0.006 0.001 0.137
Parented -0.003 0.001 -0.029
2 *Hsgpa 0.021 0.004 0.089
Goaltransfer -0.016 0.008 -0.027
Degasp -0.003 0.002 -0.022
3 *Acaobst -0.025 0.003 -0.118
Counseling -0.007 0.004 -0.029
Faculty 0.010 0.006 0.027
Stuwith -0.005 0.003 -0.025
Instrsup -0.001 0.005 -0.004
Facility -0.006 0.004 -0.022
‘ indicates a significant variable
fable 13(a): Model Summary
Model R square R square change F change df Sig. F change
1 0.034 0.034 12.603 13,4625 0.000
2 0.047 0.014 21.369 3,4622 0.000
3 0.062 0.015 12.199 6,4616 0.000
13.939
Sig.
0.001
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
84
The two regression analyses presented in Table 12 and Table 13 provide a
comparison to the analyses presented in Table 14 and Table 15. Specifically, the
former two analyses examined factors that would predict performance and
persistence for all students, regardless of race. In contrast, the latter two analyses
examined factors that would predict performance and persistence for the Asian
American sample only.
Table 14 gives the results and Coefficients of a multiple regression of college
GPA on the series of factorial constructs for the Asian American sample. Table 14(a)
presents the model summary of this regression analysis. The regression model after
the final entry was significant. Upon entry of the first block 9.2 percent of the
variance in college GPA was explained. After adding the second block, 20.6 percent
of the variance in college GPA was explained. The third block raised the R square
to .237. Thus, the independent variables in this analysis explained a total of 23.7
percent of the variance in college GPA for the Asian American sample. Factors that
were significant in predicting college GPA for the Asian American sample were:
high school GPA, generation status, being Southeast Asian and perceptions of
academic obstacles. Of these, the most significant variables based on the
standardized Beta were: high school GPA (.313) and generation status (-.152).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
85
Table 14: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable College GPA: Asian American Sample
Variable Unstandardized
Model Name B Coef.
1 (Constant) 2.449
Gender 0.141
Age 0.069
Japanese 0.053
Korean -0.143
♦Southeast -0.278
Intemation -0.101
Engnativ 0.076
♦Genstat -0.094
Married 0.103
Children 0.113
Housincom -0.010
Parented 0.016
2 *Hsgpa 0.296
Goaltransfer -0.054
Degasp 0.015
3 *Acaobst -0.113
Counseling 0.012
Faculty 0.157
Stuwith -0.029
Instrsup -0.074
Facility -0.089
* indicates a significant variable
Table 14(a): Model Summary
Model R square R square change
1 0.092 0.092
2 0.206 0.114
3 0.237 0.031
F Sig.
5.232 0.001
Standardized
SE Beta Coef.
0.373
0.072 0.094
0.046 0.088
0.124 0.024
0.094 -0.084
0.097 -0.150
0.103 -0.058
0.099 0.047
0.042 -0.152
0.137 0.045
0.143 0.047
0.009 -0.059
0.020 0.041
0.048 0.313
0.106 -0.026
0.024 0.031
0.043 -0.135
0.058 0.011
0.085 0.102
0.033 -0.041
0.074 -0.058
0.065 -0.074
F change df Sig. F change
3.066 12,362 0.000
17.190 3,359 0.000
2.398 6,353 0.028
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
86
A fourth block of high school GPA interactions was later on added to the
regression model presented in Table 14. This block was significant, indicating that
splitting the Asian American sample by high school GPA to examine each ability
group was necessary. Table 15 presents the results and Coefficients of three
multiple regressions of college GPA on the series of factorial constructs, for the
three ability groups of the Asian American sample, respectively. Table 15 (a) and
Table 15 (b) present the model summaries of these three regression analyses and the
ANOVAs, respectively. For the regression analyses represented in Table 15,
missing values were replaced by mean in order to generate a sample size that was
sufficiently powerful. After replacing the missing values with the mean, the low-
ability, middle-ability, and high-ability group had a sample size of 296, 476, and
302, respectively. The final entry for each of the ability groups was significant.
As indicated in Table 15(a), the model explained 12.0 percent of the variance
in college GPA for the low-ability group; 12.0 percent of the variance in college
GPA for the middle-ability group; and 13.1 percent of the variance in college GPA
for the high-ability group. Factors that predicted college GPA differed among the
three ability groups. Variables that were significant in predicting college GPA for the
low-ability group, in the order of the strength of the prediction, were: age, English as
the native language, generation status, satisfaction with counseling services, and
being Korean. Of these, two variables that best predicted college GPA, based on the
standardized Beta, were: age (.227) and English as the native language (.171).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
87
Variables that were significant in predicting college GPA for the middle-ability
group were: age, being Southeast Asian, and satisfaction with campus facility. Of
these, two of the most significant variables based on the standardized Beta were: age
(.137) and being Southeast Asian (-.120). The only two variables that were
significant in predicting college GPA for the high-ability group were perceptions of
academic obstacles (-.190) and gender (.143).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced w ith permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.
Table 14: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on Dependent Variable College GPA:
Three Ability Groups
Model
1
Low-
ability
Middle-
ability
High-
ability
Variable Beta Beta Beta
Name B Coef. SE Coef. Sig. B Coef SE Coef Sig. B Coef SE Coef. Sig.
(Constant) 2.260 0.495 0.000 2.762 0.315 0.000 3.716 0.428 0.000
Gender 0.106 0.095 0.066 0.265 0.119 0.061 0.088 0.052 0.196 0.079 0.143 0.013
Age 0.186 0.058 0.227 0.002 0.089 0.035 0.137 0.012 -0.050 0.048 -0.077 0.293
Japanese 0.049 0.155 0.022 0.751 -0.015 0.096 -0.008 0.874 -0.019 0.148 -0.008 0.896
Korean -0.261 0.127 -0.139 0.041 -0.125 0.078 -0.082 0.108 0.095 0.093 0.064 0.311
Southeast -0.138 0.125 -0.071 0.269 -0.194 0.082 -0.120 0.018 -0.206 0.106 -0.123 0.053
Intemation -0.045 0.159 -0.020 0.779 0.056 0.087 0.037 0.519 -0.114 0.111 -0.072 0.308
Engnativ 0.277 0.121 0.171 0.023 -0.100 0.089 -0.064 0.264 0.009 0.104 0.006 0.930
Genstat -0.101 0.051 -0.161 0.048 -0.022 0.038 -0.038 0.565 -0.024 0.046 -0.041 0.603
Married -0.045 0.183 -0.019 0.805 0.015 0.098 0.009 0.877 0.119 0.124 0.073 0.338
Children -0.048 0.197 -0.018 0.807 0.169 0.101 0.097 0.095 -0.086 0.138 -0.045 0.536
Housincom -0.004 0.012 -0.023 0.727 0.011 0.008 0.066 0.180 -0.016 0.010 -0.105 0.118
Parented 0.027 0.028 0.065 0.331 -0.013 0.017 -0.038 0.436 0.004 0.021 0.011 0.856
Goaltransfer 0.013 0.125 0.006 0.919 -0.067 0.075 -0.042 0.372 -0.114 0.091 -0.075 0.213
Degasp 0.002 0.037 0.003 0.962 0.007 0.024 0.013 0.776 -0.052 0.033 -0.093 0.115
Acaobst -0.104 0.054 -0.115 0.057 -0.062 0.039 -0.074 0.111 -0.152 0.047 -0.190 0.002
Counseling -0.180 0.082 -0.150 0.028 0.008 0.054 0.007 0.888 0.036 0.062 0.036 0.565
Faculty 0.157 0.109 0.099 0.150 0.105 0.083 0.069 0.204 0.103 0.087 0.078 0.236
Stuwith 0.066 0.048 0.080 0.174 0.019 0.033 0.026 0.566 0.023 0.043 0.031 0.595
Instrsup 0.033 0.088 0.026 0.707 -0.039 0.066 -0.031 0.562 -0.006 0.084 -0.005 0.940
Facility -0.021 0.077 -0.018 0.790 -0.107 0.053 -0.103 0.044 -0.150 0.077 -0.130 0.052
oo
00
89
Table 15(a): Model Summary
Ability
Group Model R square R square change F change df Sig. F change
Low 1 0.086 0.086 2.218 12,283 0.011
2 0.086 0.000 0.050 2, 281 0.951
3 0.120 0.033 1.731 6, 275 0.114
Middle 1 0.099 0.099 4.219 12,463 0.000
2 0.100 0.001 0.339 2,461 0.713
3 0.120 0.020 1.699 6, 455 0.119
High 1 0.068 0.068 1.759 12,289 0.055
2 0.082 0.014 2.180 2, 287 0.115
3 0.131 0.049 2.614 6,281 0.018
Table 15(b): ANOVA
Ability Group____ F______ Sig.____
Low 1.867 0.015
Middle 3.091 0.001
High 2.109 0.004
In order to explore the factors that would predict persistence of Asian
American students in the sample, a multiple regression of course completion on the
series of factorial constructs was conducted. Table 16 gives the results and
Coefficients of the regression. The regression model after the final entry was
significant. Upon entry of the first block 6.1 percent of the variance in course
completion was explained. After adding the second block, 8.7 percent of the
variance in college GPA was explained. The third block raised the R square
to .099. Thus, the independent variables in this analysis explained a total of 9.9
percent of the variance in course completion for the Asian American sample.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
90
Significant variables included: being Korean, age, having transfer as the goal for
community college attendance, and high school GPA. Of these, two of the most
significant variables based on the standardized Beta were: being Korean (-.152) and
age (-.127).
Table 16: Block Entry Analysis of the Impact of Independent Variables on
Dependent Variable Course Completion: Asian American Sample
Model
Variable Unstanderdized Standardized
Name B Coef. SE Beta Coef.
(Constant) 0.590 0.096
Gender -0.007 0.019 -0.019
*Age -0.024 0.012 -0.127
Japanese 0.008 0.032 0.014
*Korean -0.061 0.024 -0.152
Southeast -0.013 0.025 -0.030
Intemation 0.042 0.026 0.102
Engnativ 0.003 0.025 0.009
Genstat 0.017 0.011 0.116
Married 0.036 0.035 0.067
Children -0.041 0.037 -0.073
Housincom 0.003 0.002 0.066
Parented 0.002 0.005 0.021
*Hsgpa 0.024 0.012 0.108
*Goaltransfer -0.058 0.027 -0.119
Degasp 0.001 0.006 0.005
Acaobst 0.001 0.011 0.003
Counseling -0.007 0.015 -0.027
Faculty 0.029 0.022 0.080
Stuwith -0.014 0.009 -0.085
Instrsup -0.008 0.019 -0.027
Facility -0.004 0.017 -0.013
* indicates a significant variable
Table 16(a): Model Summary
Model R square R square change F change df Sig. F change
1 0.061 0.061 1.967 12,362 0.026
2 0.087 0.026 3.387 3,359 0.018
3 0.099 0.012 0.784 6, 353 0.583
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
91
F Sig.
1.848 0.014
A fourth block of high school GPA interactions was later added to the
regression model. This block was not significant, indicating that splitting the sample
by high school GPA to test independent variables’ ability to predict course
completion was not necessary. Therefore, the three academic ability groups did not
differ in terms of the factors influencing their course completion.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
92
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Four decades after its inception, the “model minority” image of Asian
American students is still impacting the perceptions of teachers and administrators
on Asian American students’ academic ability and performance. Particularly, in the
realm of higher education, such a successful image of Asian American students
obscures the diversity within this group of students with respect to academic
background, college performance, and postsecondary destination. The majority of
the limited number of research studies on the college experience of Asian American
students have focused on those in four-year institutions. The experience of Asian
American community college students, who constitute half of all Asian American
undergraduates in the United States, is not well known to academics. It was argued
in this study that the “model minority” image exemplifies a mismatch with Asian
American community college students, many of whom choose the community
college because they have not met the admissions requirements of more competitive
four-year institutions.
This chapter includes a review of the purpose of the study; a summary of
research findings; a discussion on the factors that predict Asian American
community college students’ performance and persistence; implications for
education policies; and recommendations for future research.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
93
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify factors and combinations of factors
that best predict the academic performance and persistence of Asian American
students on the nine campuses of the Los Angeles Community College District.
Performance was measured by community college GPA and persistence was
measured by course completion ratio. Different from traditional higher education
retention studies that focused on racial or gender difference as a function of
performance and persistence, this study highlighted the role academic diversity plays
in the performance and persistence of Asian American community college students.
Specifically, this study examined differences in demographics and in predictors of
performance and persistence among three academic ability groups of Asian
American students, as defined by high school GPA.
Summary of Findings
HYPOTHESIS 1: There are significant differences in demographic and pre
college variables among the three ability groups of Asian American community
college students.
The three ability groups of Asian American students were found to be
significantly different in gender, age, international student status, English as the
native language status, and generation status (p.<.001); and in marital status, parental
education level, and whether transfer was the goal (p.<.01); but not in ethnicity,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
94
parental status, household income, or degree aspiration. This finding provides insight
into the different characteristics possessed by groups with diverse academic abilities.
The low-ability group, in comparison to the middle- and high-ability groups,
consisted of a larger proportion of students who were male, traditional-age (24 or
younger), and unmarried; who were U.S. citizens or permanent residents, native
English speakers, second- or third-generation Asian Americans (those who or whose
parents were bom in the U.S.), or those who had lived in the U.S. for more than ten
years; those whose parents had an education at the high school level or less; and
those who wished to transfer to a four-year institution.
The middle-ability group consisted of a larger proportion of students who
were older (35 or older), international students, non-native English speakers, or those
who had lived in the U.S. for less than 10 years. The high-ability group consisted of
a larger proportion of female, mid-age (25-34), and married students; those whose
parents had at least a bachelor’s degree; and those who did not wish to transfer.
The above findings suggest that Asian American students with various
academic abilities have distinct demographic characteristics. Higher education
institutions need to consider these differences when creating programs to assist
particular groups of students. For example, a higher percentage of the low-ability
students in the present study had parents with an education at the high school level or
less; while a higher percentage of the high-ability students had parents with at least a
bachelor’s degree. This finding suggests that the community colleges should equip
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
95
their students, especially those who are the first generation in their family to attend
college, with the necessary knowledge and skills in order for these students to
succeed. To achieve this goal, community colleges need to strengthen their
counseling services and transfer center services. Beyond providing accurate
information on college requirements, counselors and staff members should
proactively initiate programs to help first-generation college students, most of whom
have limited college information. Parents of traditional-age students (24 or younger)
can also be involved to foster student achievement. For example, newsletters or other
campus publications can be sent to parents, and an environment welcoming to
parents can be created at campus functions such as college fairs.
, HYPOTHESIS 2: There are differences among the three ability groups of
Asian American community college students in terms of independent variables’
ability to predict academic performance and persistence.
Factors predicting college performance for the three ability groups differed.
However, factors predicting persistence for the three ability groups did not differ.
Therefore, the second research hypothesis is partially supported. For the low-ability
group, being older or native English speaker positively predicted college
performance; being Korean and having lived in the U.S. for a longer period of time
negatively predicted college performance. For the middle-ability group, being older
positively predicted college performance and being Southeast Asian negatively
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
96
predicated college performance. For those with high academic ability, being female
positively predicted college performance.
Discussion
Consistent with previous retention studies on students of all racial
backgrounds (e.g., Adelman, 1999), high school academic performance was found to
be the most important factor that influenced the college performance of Asian
American students in this study. In other words, academic preparation best predicted
Asian American students’ college performance regardless of gender, ethnicity, or
socioeconomic status. High school GPA also predicted Asian American students’
persistence, although it was not the most important predictor.
Certain Asian American ethnic groups were found to be at a disadvantage
with respect to college performance and persistence. For example, students of
Southeast Asian origin were more likely to have a lower college GPA compared to
their counterparts of other ethnicities; Korean American students were more likely to
have lower course completion rates. Research has concluded that Southeast Asian
students, many of whom had their prior schooling interrupted by war and came to the
United States with parents who were political refugees, are experiencing linguistic
and social hurdles in education institutions (Nakanishi, 1995). Therefore, community
colleges need to provide these students with assistance in adapting to the college
culture. Examples of interventions are: include knowledge on the diversity of Asian
American students in the professional development curriculum of the counseling
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
97
staff; instill a multicultural education perspective in instruction by providing faculty
with cultural awareness training and learning resources; offer tutoring services to
students in need; and offer courses on effective study strategies and successful
transition from high school to college.
The role that generation status plays in college performance has not been
studied extensively by prior research. The present study explored the effect of
generation status in college performance and concluded that length of residence in
the United States negatively influenced college GPA. In other words, those who
were second- and third- generation Asian Americans were more likely to have a
lower college GPA than their more recent immigrant counterparts. This finding was
consistent with that of students of all races. It is premature, however, to interpret this
finding as simply meaning that the longer Asian American students and their family
have lived in the U.S., the less well they will perform in college. Rather, researchers
and educators should take into consideration the fact that community college
students are very different from those in four-year institutions, especially highly
selective ones. For those in selective four-year institutions, being second- or third-
generation Asian Americans, rather than recent immigrants, may contribute to higher
levels of assimilation and higher performance. In addition, second- or third-
generation Asian Americans may attend the community college for purposes that are
different from recent immigrants. For example, while the former may pursue a
variety of interests, such as transfer, vocational training and personal enrichment, the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
98
latter may enroll in the community college for improving their English skills. Due to
the complexity of this issue, more research is needed to explore the role generation
status and other related factors play in Asian American community college students’
performance.
Age was found to impact course completion. Older students had less
satisfactory course completion rates than their younger counterparts. This may be
attributed to the fact that older students tend to have family and job obligations,
which may pull them from their academic endeavors. Such a finding indicates the
need for community colleges, which enroll a higher percentage of adult students than
four-year institutions, to provide support services for their adult student population.
Such support may include flexible course schedules and convenient registration
process.
Having no children, a higher household income, parents with higher levels of
education, or positive relationship with faculty, were factors found to predict college
performance for all students regardless of race. However, none of the above four
factors predicted college performance for Asian American students. This finding
confirms that Asian American students are different from students of other races
with respect to predictors of their performance. It further indicates the importance for
future research to specifically study Asian American students and investigate the
unique factors that impact their performance.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
99
Beyond examining Asian American students as a group, this study
highlighted the differences in individual and institutional factors that predict college
performance for Asian Americans with various academic abilities. For those of low-
or middle-ability, age was the most important influence on college GPA. Specifically,
older students were more likely to have higher college GPA. This may be that older
students have more definite goals for attending the community college, such as
career advancement, which motivates them to perform well in their courses. Being
native speakers of English positively influenced the college GPA of the low-ability
group. This suggests the need for more effective ESL education, especially for
students with less satisfactory high school performance. Examples of such ESL
courses are those taught by faculty who are culturally aware and who celebrate the
diversity in students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Ethnicity was found to influence the college GPA of certain academic ability
groups. Being Korean had a negative effect on the college GPA of the low-ability
group; being Southeast Asian had a negative effect on the college GPA of the
middle-ability group. In addition, gender was found to predict college GPA for the
high-ability group—high-ability female students were more likely than their
counterparts with similar academic ability to have higher college GPA. This finding
suggests the need for community colleges to better help their male students succeed
academically. Community colleges can, for example, do more to encourage male
students to seek support services when needed.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
100
Conclusion
Implications fo r education policies
Yeh (2002) states that educators need to develop a higher level of awareness
on the educational experience of Asian American college students. The monolithic
view of all Asian Americans as successful students in higher education is inaccurate,
as confirmed by this study. The consequence of such a perspective is the exclusion of
Asian American students from equal-opportunity admissions opportunities and
programs designed to help students with academic difficulty. In contrast, recognizing
the academic diversity of Asian American college students allows higher education
institutions to reach out to these individuals, especially those who are educationally
disadvantaged. For example, at the University of California, Los Angeles, Asian
American applicants who came from low-income families and were first-generation
college students were given the same consideration for admission as other minorities
from similar backgrounds. In 1993, Asian Americans comprised one-third of all
students who participated in a program seeking to enhance graduation rates for
historically underrepresented and low-income students (Nakanishi, 1995).
It is important to improve the English skills for Asian American students who
are non-native English speakers. For those in the present study who were low-ability,
being non-native speakers further hindered their academic performance. Fifteen
years ago, Lou (1989) suggested the importance of ESL education for Asian
American college students. Such suggestions as still valid today, as more and more
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
101
Asian immigrants with limited English proficiency come to the U.S. and participate
in higher education.
Certain Asian American ethnic groups, such as those from Southeast Asia,
are achieving at a lower rate than their counterparts of other ethnic origins.
Community college faculty and staff should be aware of these students’ academic
needs. Support programs, such as those that seek to improve Southeast Asian
students’ adaptation to the college environment should be implemented to help these
students succeed academically.
Recommendations for future research
This study represents a step forward towards better understanding the Asian
American community college experience. Future research should continue to explore
factors that influence performance and persistence of this group of students.
Specifically, future research should investigate the following questions:
What are the differences in demographics and goal orientations between
Asian American four-year college students and those in the community college?
What are the differences in community college performance and persistence
between Asian American and Caucasian students, and between Asian American and
other racial minority students?
If interaction with peers and faculty does not seem to promote the
performance or persistence of Asian American community college students, as this
study suggested, what other factors, beyond high school performance, influence
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
102
these students’ college performance and persistence? Psychological approaches, for
example, can be adopted to investigate this question.
In addition, future research can explore the differential impact of the “model
minority” image on Asian American students in four-year institutions and those in
the community college.
Perrakis and Hagedom (2003) point out that the most distinct form of
diversity within the Los Angeles Community College District is academic diversity.
These researchers have called the research community to explore the role of
academic diversity, beyond race and gender, in college enrollment and retention.
This study was an attempt to pinpoint the role that academic diversity plays in the
performance and persistence of Asian American community college students. Future
studies should continue to explore how academic diversity influences the
performance and persistence of other racial groups in the community college and in
four-year institutions.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
REFERENCES
Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance
patterns, and bachelor’ s degree attainment. Washington DC: Office of
Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
American Association of Community Colleges (2005). Retrieved January 19, 2005,
from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/
Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California (2005). The diverse
face o f Asians and Pacific Islanders in California: Asian and Pacific Islander
demographic profile. Retrieved March 28, 2005, from http://www.apalc.org/
Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bank, B. J., Slavings, R. L., & Biddle, B. J. (1990). Effects of peer, faculty, and
parental influences on students’ persistence. Sociology o f Education, 63(3),
208-225.
Bean, J. P., & Eaton, S. B. (2000). A psychological model of college student
retention. In J. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the student departure puzzle (pp.
48-61). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional
undergraduate student attrition. Review o f Educational Research, 55(4), 485-
540.
Beil, C., Reisen, C. A., Zea, M. C., & Caplan, R. C. (1999). A longitudinal study of
the effects of academic and social integration and commitment on retention.
NASPA Journal, 57(1), 376-385.
Bers, T. H., & Smith, K. E. (1991). Persistence of community college students: The
influence of student intent and academic and social integration. Research in
Higher Education, 32(5), 539-556.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Bragg, D. D. (2001). Community college access, mission, and outcomes:
Considering intriguing intersections and challenges. Peabody Journal o f
Education, 76(1), 93-116.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
104
Braxton, J. M. (2000). Introduction. In J. Braxton (Ed.). Reworking the student
departure puzzle (pp. 1-10). Nashville: Vanderbilt UP.
Braxton, J. M., & Lien, L. A. (2000). The viability of academic integration as a
central construct in Tinto’s interactionalist theory of college student departure.
In J. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the student departure puzzle (pp. 11-28).
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Brint, S., & Karabel, J. (1989). The diverted dream: Community colleges and the
promise o f educational opportunity in America, 1900-1985. New York:
Oxford Press.
Bui, K. V. (2002). First-generation college students at a four-year university:
Background characteristics, reasons for pursuing higher education, and first-
year experiences. College Student Journal, 36(1), 3-11.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., & Castaneda, M. B. (1993). College persistence: Structured
equation modeling test of an integrated model of student retention. The
Journal o f Higher Education, 64(2), 123-139.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E., & Hagedom, L. S. (1999).
Campus racial climate and the adjustment of students to college: A
comparison between white students and African-American students. The
Journal o f Higher Education, 70(2), 134-160.
Chang, M. J., & Kiang, P. N. (2002). New challenges of representing Asian
American students in U.S. higher education. In W. Smith, P. Altbach, & K.
Lomotey (Eds.), The racial crisis in American higher education (Rev. ed.)
(pp. 137-158). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Cheng, L., & Yang, P. Q. (1996). Asians: The “model minority” deconstructed. In R.
Waldinger, and M. Bozorgmehr (Eds.), Ethnic Los Angeles (pp. 305-344).
New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Christie, R. L., & Hutcheson, P. (2003). Net effects of institutional type on
baccalaureate degree attainment of “traditional” students. Community College
Review, 31(2), 1-21.
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
105
Cross, K. P. (1971). Beyond the open door. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dougherty, K. J. (1992). Community colleges and baccalaureate attainment. Journal
o f Higher Education, 63(2), 188-214.
Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide. Trans. J.A. Spaulding & G. Simpson. Glencoe, NJ:
The Free Press.
Fujimoto, J. (1999). The Los Angeles community colleges: Pathways to urban
change. New Directions fo r Community Colleges, 27(3), 55-66.
Gloria, A. M., & Ho, T. A. (2003). Environmental, social, and psychological
experiences of Asian American undergraduates: Examining issues of
academic persistence. Journal o f Counseling and Development, 81, 93-105.
Grimes, S. K., & David, K. C. (1999). Underprepared community college students:
Implications of attitudinal and experiential differences. Community College
Review, 27(2), 73-92.
Hagedom, L. S. (2003). Seeking the definition of academic diversity in the
community colleges: Highlights from the Transfer and Retention of Urban
Community College Students Project (TRUCCS). Urban Education, Spring,
2003.
Hagedom, L. S. (2004). The role of urban community colleges in educating diverse
populations. New Directions for Community College, 127, 21-34.
Hagedom, L. S., Maxwell, W., & Hampton, P. (2001). Correlates of retention for
African American males in community colleges. Journal o f College Student
Retention Research, Theory, and Practice, 3(3), 243-263.
Hagedom, L. S., Maxwell, W., Pickett, M. C., & Moon, H. S. (2002). Community
college model of student life and retention. Unpublished manuscript.
Inman, W. E., & Mayes, L. D. (1999). The importance of being first: Unique
characteristics of first generation community college students. Community
College Review, 26(4), 3-22.
Lamont, M., & Lareau, A.(1988). Cultural capital: Allusions, gaps, and glissandos.
Sociological Theory, 6, 153-168.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
106
Lane, J. E. (2003). Studying community colleges and their students: Context and
research issues. New Directions for Institutional Research, 118, 51-67.
Liu, I.-M. (1991). A distinction between early and late educational achievements.
American Psychologist, 46, 876-877.
Los Angeles Community College District (2002). Los Angeles Community Colleges
institutional research and information: Fall 2000 student survey. Retrieved
January 6, 2005, from http://research.laccd.edu/research/
Los Angeles Community College District (2004). Retrieved December 30, 2004,
from http://research.laccd.edu/research/
Lou, R. (1989). Model minority? Getting behind the veil. Change, 21(6), 16-17.
Makuakane-Drechsel, T., & Hagedom, L. S. (2000). Correlates of retention among
Asian Pacific Americans in community colleges: The case of Hawaiian
students. Community College Journal o f Research and Practice, 24, 639-655.
McDonough, P. M. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools
structure opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press.
Nakanishi, D. T. (1995). Growth and diversity: The education of Asian/Pacific
Americans. In D. Nakanishi and T. Nishida (Eds.), The Asian American
educational experience: A source book for teachers and students (pp. xi-xx).
New York: Routledge.
National Center for Education Statistics (2003). Digest o f Education Statistics.
Retrieved November 27, 2004, from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d03/tables/dt213.asp
Nishimoto, J. K., & Hagedom, L.S. (2004). Retention, persistence, and course taking
patterns o f self-identified Asian Pacific students in urban community colleges.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Pantages, T. J., & Creedon, C. F. (1978). Studies of college attrition: 1950-1975.
Review o f Educational Research, 48( 1), 49-101.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings
and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107
Perrakis, A. I., & Hagedom, L. S. (2003). Retention o f white male students in the Los
Angeles Community College District: When the majority becomes the
minority. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles.
Peterson, W. (1966, January 9). Success story, Japanese-American style. New York
Times, 21.
Reeves, T., & Bennett, C. (2004). We the people: Asians in the United States.
Retrieved Febmary 18, 2005, from
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/censr-17.pdf
Riehl, R. J. (1994). The academic preparation, aspirations, and first-year
performance of first-generation students. College and University, 70(1), 14-
19.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Gemalized expectancies for internal versus external control of
reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 50(1), 1-28.
Saenz, V. B. (2002). Hispanic students and community colleges: A critical point for
intervention. ERIC Digest. Accession No: ED477908.
Siu, S. (1996). Asian American students at risk: A literature review. ERIC
Digest. Accession No: ED404406.
Smith, J. L., & Vellani, F. A. (1999). Urban American and the community college
imperative: The importance of open access and opportunity. New Directions
for Community Colleges, 107, 5-13.
Sue, S., & Okazaki, S. (1995). Asian American educational achievements: A
phenomenon in search of an explanation. In D. Nakanishi and T. Nishida
(Eds.), The Asian American educational experience: A source booh for
teachers and students (pp. 133-145). New York: Routledge.
Sue, S., & Abe, J. (1995). Predictors of academic achievement among Asian
American and White students. In D. Nakanishi and T. Nishida (Eds.), The
Asian American educational experience: A source book fo r teachers and
students (pp. 303-321). New York: Routledge.
Summers, M. D. (2003). Eric review: Attrition research at community colleges.
Community College Review, 30(4), 64-84.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
108
Suzuki, B. H. (1989). Asian Americans as the “model minority”: Outdoing whites?
Or media hype? Change, 21(6), 13-19.
Suzuki, B. H. (2002). Revisiting the model minority stereotype: Implications for
student affairs practice and higher education. New Directions for Student
Services, 97, 21-32.
Swail, W. S., Redd, K. E., & Pema, L. W. (2003). Retaining minority students in
higher education: A framework for success. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education
Report, 30(2).
Tan, D. L. (1994). Uniqueness of the Asian American experience in higher education.
College Student Journal, 28(A), 412-421.
The White House (2004). Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Asian
American and Pacific Islander facts. Retrieved December 9, 2004, from
http://www.aapi.gov/resources/aapifacts.htm
Thompson, M. D. (2001). Informal student-faculty interaction: Its relationship to
educational gains in science and mathematics. Community College Review,
29(1), 35-57.
Tierney, W. G. (1992). An anthropological analysis of student participation in
college. The Journal o f Higher Education, 63,606-618.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout form higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent
research. Review o f Higher Education, 45(1), 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures o f student
attrition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures o f student
attrition (2n d ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
U.S. Census Bureau (1993). We the Americans: Asians. Retrieved January 4, 2005,
from http://www.census.gov/apsd/wepeople/we-3 .pdf
U.S. News and World Report (1966, December 26). Success story of one minority
group in U.S., 73-76.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
109
Wollenberg, C. M. (1995). “Yellow peril” in the Schools (I & II). In D. Nakanishi
and T. Nishida (Eds.), The Asian American educational experience: A source
book for teachers and students (pp. 3-29). New York: Routledge.
Yeh, T. L. (2002). Asian American college students who are educationally at risk.
New Directions for Student Services, 97, 61-71.
Zhou, M., & Bankston, C. L. Ill (1994). Social capital and the adaptation of the
second generation: The case of Vietnamese youth in New Orleans. The
International Migration Review, 25(4), 821-845.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
110
APPENDIX
Los Angeles Community College District Fall 2000 Student Survey
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
I l l
FALL 2000 STUDENT SURVEY
Los A n g e le s C o m m u n ity C o lle g e s
YOUR EXPERIENCES AND OPINIONS ARE IMPORTANT!
P lease fielp your college' to d o a b e tte r job by telling us a b o u t your background, a n d your e x p erien ces with th e e d u c a tio n t h a t
you a re receiving here. This optional survey takes a b o u t 30 minutes to co m plete a n d your responses are strictly con fid en tial
Results will b e used only for institutional statistics a n d research. Please re a d th ese instructions carefully. If yo u h a v e q u estio n s,
ask your instructor for help.
A. Write in your STUDENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER), CLASS SECTION NUMBER. COLLEGE, a n d d a rk e n
th e ap p ro p riate bubbles in items I., II., a n d III.
B. If you h a v e co m p leted this survey In an o th er class, m ark YES in item IV. a n d give th e survey to your instructor.
or> cid 0) I
CD CD c p 1
C 2> CD
<£> [
3
(S3 (90 • !
m GD
■s}
61
C 5 >
cs> $ I
CD CD C7) 1
S .
(S3
(S3
.Jr...
15 NUM
at) an O City
■ p
CD M f lp CD O East LA
(23 K S ff ' CD 0 H arb o r
(3) CD O Mission
d ) 1 1 1 1 1 (S3 0 P ie rc e
(S3 [ P jP f (S3 O S o u th w est
(S3 w i m (S3 O T rade-Tech
cd .fBjflR CD O Valley
< s> H l g i (S3 O W est LA
< 33 . M M (S3
If y o u
c o m p l e t e d this
s u rv e y In a n o th e r
c la s s , b u b b le
YES a n d STOP.
O YES
C. N ow , p le a s e an sw er th e q u estio n s b elow . Thdrik y o u very m uch.
I. Which area of study Interests you most? (Select One)
Social and Behavioral Sciences......................................... O
Mathematics. Physical and Ufe Science............................o
Business....................................................’.*..........................o
Computers* o
Office Occupations ’.’..Y.Y.Y.Y.Y.Y.*.*. .*.................... 0
Languages/Ltferature/Human’ities , ...........................O
Health Occupations.................. .. *.*.*.*....................0
Family & Consumer Studies/Ch8d Deveiopmenr. . ................. O
Trades & Applied Technology........................... o
Physical Education........................... o
Fine Arts/Muslc/Theatre.................................... ...0
Other .O
2. Choose the reasons below that describe why you are attending
T H IS college.
(M ark o n e a n sw e r for e a c h item )
To tra n sfe r to a four-year c o ll e g e ......................................0 0
To o b ta in a n A sso ciate d e g r e e . . . . . iO CD
To h e lp m e c h o o s e a c a re e r . Q O -
To tra in for m y first jo b or c a re e r ’ *” ’ ] ’ ’ [ ] * [ ] ’ .*** jfQ o
To tra in for a d ifferent j o b . ' ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! . . ! . * ! ! ! Q 0
To u p g r a d e Jo b skills . . . . . * [ ’ [ [ \ [ [ Q o
To o b ta in or. m ain taln a lic e n s e o r c ertifica te .C P o
To im p ro v e English a n d /o r M ath skills.................. ” .<3 o
To c o m p le te High S chool o r GED req u irem en ts *"".. o
To p u rsu e p e rso n a l in terests, ........................................................ O
O th e r re a s o n or u n d e c id e d ’ .................................................. ; jE3 O
S S a S S T R O N • FORM NO. F-8409-LACCD
3. How important were the following sources of
information In vour decision to attend this * '
coitege?
(Mark o n e an sw er for e a c h Item )
Class s c h e d u le / o th e r c o lle g e p u b lic a tio n . ■ ,,
N ew sp ap ec radio, or television a d v e rtis e m e n t *
Nigh sch o o l ad visor or c o u n selo r .................... ’
C o lleg e advisor/ co u n selo r c o m in g t o m y high*
sch o o l ........................
C o lleg e or District w ebsife
Family o r friends
C urrent or form er stu d en ts
S pecial e v en ts for high sc h o o l’stu d eh ’ ts a n d th e
com m unity a t this c o lle g e
W orkplace n o tice, p ro g ram , o r'e m p lo y e r’s
re c o m m e n d a tio n
A thletic c o a c h recru itm en t
4. How important to YOU Is each, of the
reasons Bsted below In your decision td
’ enroll at T H IS college?
Minimal adm ission req u irem en ts
Low c o s t................................................
Specific e d u c atio n al’ pr6grdm (s)
R eputation for g o o d te a c h in g
Close to hom e.
C lose to work, ]
C om position of th e ’sluclent Hocty
Athletic o r o th er s tu d e n t activity,
5. What Is the highest degree or certificate that you
intend to obtain?
(Mark all th a t a p p ly )
High school diploma or GED ................ o c
Certificate in an occupational program * (
An occupational associate (AA or AS) degree ....................................! O c
Other AA or AS d e g re e ..........................................................! ! ! ! " ! ! * *
Bachelor’s Degree ............................................................................... ’
M aster's D e g re e ........................................... .................................
Professional Degree (MD, Law, etc.).................................................
Academic Doctorate (Ph.D, E d .D .)...............................
Undecided .................... [[
Not seeking a degree/certificate or already have o n e ................. ’
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
112
What best describes the nature of your current enrollment at this
college? (Mark one answer)
Pursuing a defined degree or certificate full-time and
expect .to.spend.twQ to three years here. ........... 0
. Pursuing a decree or certificate part-time and expect to
' spend three or more years here. ........ . .......... 0
Taking classes which I plan to apply to a degree or
certificate program at another college ..................... 0
Taking classes that are of special interest to me but- not
pursuing a degree or certificate. ......................................... a
Trying out to see if I like college and can do. well................. 0
This college does not meet my needs, and I do not expect
to enroll in the future.................................................................
7. T o what extent have the following factors been obstacles to
reaching your educational goals?
11. What is your current marital status?
o Single, never married
o Married or domestic partner
O Separated, divorced or widowed
12. Do you have children?
O No
. o . Yes. pre-school age (under 6) dependents)
O Yes. school age (6-18) dependents)
(Mark one answer for each item)
Class teaching styles..................................................... y ° |
Student support services ..............................................H ° i
College rules and regulations......................................Q o |
Cannot get classes I n e e d ............................................0 0 |
A cadem ic difficulties e.g.. low grades........................Q ° l
Lack o f study skills........................................................... 0 ] 0 fe
Lack o f motivation to study...........................................P ° |
Financial factors................. O p l
Job obligations. ..................................................... P ° |
Family obligations. ............ * .................................Q q I
Uncertain about my personal or career goals........... • O c= > |
Other peilpnal problems r .................. O o g
13. Did your parent(s) claim you as an Income tax dependent in 1999?
O Yes o No
14. What was your total family income in 1999. not including loans,
grants.or scholarships? (If your parents claimed you as an income
tax dependent in 1999. your total earnings are w hat you and your
parents made together.)
O $0 - $9,000
O $9,001 -$11,000
O $11,001 -$13,000
O $13,001 -$17,000
O $17,001-$20,000
O $20,001 - $24,000
O $24,001 - $26,000
O $26,001 - $28,00d
O $28,001 - $31,000
o $31,001 -$36,000
O $36,001 -$41,000
O $41,001 -$55,000
O $55,001 or mote
15. How many people are In the household reported in question 14?
8. What was your high school grade point average?
o 3.50 - 4.00 (A.average)
O 3.00- 3.49 (B average)
O 2.50 - 2,99 (C average)
O 2.00 - 2.49 (C-or D)
O Below 2.00 (D- or F)
o Don't know
O Not applicable (different grading system)
9. What is the highest level of education that each of your parents
achieved?
(Mark one answer for each parent)
Elementary school or less.........................................................
Some high school/seconclary school but’dicf not graduate .fjc
Completed high school/secondary school.................
Some college b ut no d egree ................ . . ! ! ! ...................... ..
Two-year college d e g r e e . S
Four-year college degree* [. . [ ..............................
Advanced degree (graduate’or* profes^onal) * ” [ *............ ^ 3
10. Choose the ONE response that most nearly describes the length of
time you and your family have lived in the United States.
Have lived In this country less than 5 years.................................... o
Have jived in this country between 5 and ’iQ’years’ [ [ .................o
Not born in this country but have lived here more tiiah 10
y e a r s . .............................. 0
I was born* in’this country but neither o f my parents w a s o
A t least one of m y parents was born here, but some of my
grandparents were n o t....................... o
All of my grandparents were born in * this country..........................o
o 1
O 2
O 3
O 4
o 5
O 6
O 7
O 8
O 9
16. Are you receiving money from any public assistance program
(TANF/Cal W O R K S, SSI/SSP, or GA)?
o Yes o No
17. In which type of class session do you ieam best?
(Mark one)
O One hour class
o One and one-half hour class
O Three hour class
18. Which of these course terms do you prefer?
(Mark one answer)
O 18 week semester-length
O 15 week semester-length
o intensive 6-10 week module
O intensive 1 -5 week module
19. How convenient for you are the following times for classes?
(Mark one answer for each item)
Before 9 AM ............. ............................................
9 AM -12 noon* ‘ .. / O
12 noon-4P M .............................................* ........................^
4 PM - 7 PM ....................................................................... cb
7 pm -10 pm; ; ” ; * .* ! " ! ! ! ! ! ! ! " ! ” !!!!! o
On Saturdays ” ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! . ' !] . * ! ! . * ! !! " !! ' o
On Sundays . * i i i i i i I . * ! ! ! ! ! ] ! ! . ' ! ! * ' '
&
o
o
O s
Q
o
o.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
for a class ? (MQrk one answer for each item)
One day a w eetf. . . I . . - . .......... ........... ..
Two days a week,. ..............'..............
■ « §O a
■ ■ ■ ■ O
o a
o
o
a
(Mark one answer for each item)
Would you agree that the following college
services are readily available?
21. Business/Fiscal O ffice . ............................................O o E
22. Registration.............................................................
23. Admissions and Records ....................................... Q O |
24. Campus orientation programs...............................O Q |
25. Financial A id .......................... O P l
26. Tutoring s e rv ic e s , ................................................ H ° |
27. Transfer C ente[ ................ 0 0 &
28. Counseling.................................... ..
Would you agree that the staff of the following
college services are knowledgeable?
29. Business O ffice....................... ...............
30. Registration ..............................
31. Admissions and Records ..........
32. Campus orientation programs............
33. Financial A id ..................................
34. Tutoring services....................................
35. Transfer Cente( .............. ..
36. Counseling .......... ...............................
(Mark one answer for each item)
49. Faculty on this campus are supportive of my
.education. .......................
50. I greatly admire and respect one or more
instructors or staff at this college.
51. Students are treated fairly a t this college,
regardless of gender, ethnicity, or sexual
preference.............................................................
52. Instructors give me honest feedback abouf'my’ '
abilities and skills.....................................................
53. Instructors are willing to spend time outside of"
class to discuss issues with m e. .....................
54. Instructors encourage me to explore different’
viewpoints. ............ ................................................
55. Instructors treat me with respect and dignity., [ ’ ‘
56. Textbooks and reading materials are
appropriate for the courses..................................
57. Grading practices In the courses are fair. J ‘
58. Course outlines are provided and are followed* ]
59. Instructors give me advice and guidance
about my educational program. .......................
60. instructors are up-to-date In their field..................
61. Tests are relevant to the course material being
. coverect ..................................................
62. I would like more "hands on" experience in the
classroom, when appropriate, ................
63. I would like more relevant experience outside
the classroom as part of courses, when
appropriate.............................................. ..
64. I would like to take more courses about other
cultures and ethnic groups*...................................
65. I would encourage others to attend this college. 1
Would you agree that the staff of the following
college services are pleasant and helpful?
37. Business.Office.................................. O O l
38. Registration .................................................. Q O
39. Admissions and Records ........................................ jO O
40. Campus orientation programs................................. jO < p
41. Financial A id ......................................................... .O jo
42. Tutoring services........................................................ g 3Jo
43. Transfer C enter. ] ......................................................y O
44. Counseling............................................... O l ^
In regard to other college services
45. Other non-Faculty Staff on this campus are ”
supportive of my education., ......................
46. The College's catalog, schedule of classes, and
website clearly and accurately reflect the
college's practices*................................................
47. Enough sections of General Education courses
are offered so that I am able to take the courses
I need in the semester of my choice. ...................
48. All the advanced courses required for my
program are offered frequently enough to let
me complete my program without delay..............
otO
(Mark one answer for each item)
66. I study with others rather than alone...................
67. I attend campus events (sports, music, theater)
or otherwise participate in student activities
including clubs and student government, e tc *. .
68. I meet with instructors outside class to discuss
various matters,
69. I use the library and/or computer labs.
70. Outside of class/lab time, how many hours a week do you spend
on campus? (Include studying, work, library, cultural and/or
leisure activities.) (Mark one answer)
None............................................................................................o
Three hours or less............. *‘ o
Three to six hours . . . ........................................................* o
S ix to nine hours .......................................................................cD
Nine to twelve hours .................................................................o
Twelve or more hours................... o
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
114
To what extenfdo you think you have gained or made progress in
each of the follpwihg areas due to your experiences at this college?
(Mark on e answer for e a c h item)
71. Acquiring know ledge a n d skills applicable to a
specific job or type of w ork ................... . Q
72. Developing clear c a re e r goals ........................................... £ 3
73. Writing clearty a n d effectively ......................•............. O
74. Presenting ideas a n d information effectively in
speaking to o th e rs .................................................................... O
75. Acquiring the ability to use com puters................................O
76. Improving my ability in m a th em atic s ................... O
77. Becoming aw are of different philosophies, cultures, . r1 j
a n d ways of life. ................... O
78. Becoming clearer a b o u t my own values an d ethical i
standards..............................................................................
79. Understanding myself - my abilities an d Interests
80. Understanding m athem atical co n c ep ts such as
probabilities, proportions, etc.
81. Understanding th e role of science an d technology
in society .................................................................
82. D eveloping the ability to learn on my ow n
pursue Ideas, a n d find information I n e e d ...............
83. Understanding other p e o p le a n d th e ability to
g e t along with different kinds of p e o p le . .
84. Gaining a better aw areness of my civic or community
responsibilities............................... ........................................
M ost of the item s dealing w ith student perceptions of gains In know ledge and sk ill are taken fro m
' C om m unity C ollege Student Experiences Q uestionnaire, copyright 1990 by Jack Ftfedtander, C . R obert
Pace and Penny W . L ehm an, and are used by perriiisslon.
(Mark one answer for each item)
(Mark one answer for each item)
85. The campus library's collections of books and
magazines ore modern and well maintained...
86. The library Is available and open a t convenient
times. ..................................................
87. Computers are available for use on campus
when I need them................................................
88. Computers and software on campus are
up-to-date..........................................................
. 89. Instructional equipment for lectures, e.g.,
audio/visual equipment. Is sufficient and
up-to-date............................................................
90. Instructional equipment In the lab or machine
shop is sufficient and up-to-date........................ .
91. I feel safe and secure on this campus.................
92. The classrooms, lecture halls, and laboratories" are
clean and well maintained.......................................
93: Food service on this campus is sufficient.
94. The restrooms on this campus are clean and* well*
maintained. ....................... ...................................
95. The grounds and public areas on this campus" are
clean and well maintained......................................
96. The campus has adequate outside lighting'after'
dark.................................................... .......................
97. Sufficient parking is available, on campus. ] m ,/m
98. The parking lots are safe, well lighted, and well"
maintained...................................................
An issue of increasing concern is whether community college students
have access to computers and the Internet.
.ale c = > lo
o
..o
00
a
o
00
o o o
• * \
_oOo o
.a
. o 00
o
o 00
o
o o
*«&
(Mark one answer for each item)
99; How frequently do you use a com puter?................. O lo fc p jc D
100. How frequently do you use the Internet?............ , ] *^ |o {£ b J c D
Where do you do each of the folowlng?
(Mark as many as appty for each item)
101. Use a computer ..................... 6Q|r~i|F
102. Use the Internet................. ....................
103. Have an email address........................................... " o o E
Your coflege may. have up to ten addrtiond
questions specific to your campus. Use the
separate sheet of questions but enter your
answers here.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
1 1 1 .
1 1 2 .
113.
Please use the space below to make any suggestions that can help the college to improve its instructional programs
or student services.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Asian students in community colleges: A study of intersecting effects of student characteristics, construct models of retention, social reproduction and resulting variables as applied to the stud...

PDF

A qualitative examination of the nature and impact of three California minority engineering programs

PDF

Academic, environmental and social integration variables that maximize transfer preparedness for Latino community college students: An application of academic success models to the study of Tran...

PDF

Academic success and student-parents in the Los Angeles Community College District

PDF

Academic success for African -American male community college students

PDF

Course -taking patterns of Chinese students native and non -native speakers of English at community college

PDF

Factors influencing academic success of Chinese international students in Los Angeles community colleges

PDF

Border crossing: the experience of international students from Latin America in a California community college

PDF

A comparative study of the family processes of youth of Mexican descent who have dropped out of high school and those who have remained in school

PDF

Community college students and achievement in mathematics: Predictors of success

PDF

A cultural study of shared governance at two community colleges

PDF

Evaluating the California Community Colleges Registry

PDF

A cross -cultural comparison of achievement motivation among college students in South Africa

PDF

Adult urban community college student success: Identifying the factors that predict course completion and goal attainment for students aged 25 years and older

PDF

Course-taking patterns of Latina community college students: On the transfer path

PDF

An exploration of the gateway math and science course relationships in the Los Angeles Community College District

PDF

Assimilation and ethnicity: Adaptation patterns and ethnic identity of Armenian -Americans in central California

PDF

*Class and place within the Los Angeles African American community, 1940--1990

PDF

Interfaith family process and the negotiation of identity and difference

PDF

In church with my ancestors: The changing shape of religious memory in the Republic of Armenia and the North American diaspora

Asset Metadata

Creator Wu, Shuang (author)

Core Title Academic performance and persistence of Asian American students in the Los Angeles Community College District

School Graduate School

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

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

Tag education, community college,OAI-PMH Harvest,sociology, ethnic and racial studies

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Hagedorn, Linda Serra (committee chair), Harper, Shaun (committee member), O'Keefe, Maura (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-601009

Unique identifier UC11342178

Identifier 3219886.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-601009 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3219886.pdf

Dmrecord 601009

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Wu, Shuang

Type texts

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

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

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

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