University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

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

(USC Thesis Other)

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

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content FACTORS INFLUENCING ACADEMIC SUCCESS OF CHINESE INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS IN LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGES by Pi-Han Chen A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION December 2003 Copyright 2003 Pi-Han Chen Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMI Number: 3133248 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 3133248 Copyright 2004 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. U niversity o f S outhern California Rossier S ch ool of E ducation Los A ngeles, C alifornia 90089-0031 This dissertation w ritten by p i- h W under the discretion of h € ■ ' * ' ' D issertation Committee, and approved by all members of the Committee, has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty of the Rossier School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education Dissertation Committee Mil A As Q j. /fji Chairperson Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my dearest parents A-Yin Chen and Ching-Yuan Lai, whose pursuit of a lifelong education for themselves and influencing in their children made my own achievement possible. To my soul mate and husband Hsien-Che Liao who supports me in the way of pursuit the personal dream and career. And, to my daughters, I-Chu and I-Mei (Joy and Amy), and son, I-Yang (Victor), who shared in the belief that we can make it- we should keep trying even when we frustrated by hard living and learning in the host country. They always encourage me even they are just elementary school and kindergarten children. Finally, this dissertation is dedicated to the students, faculty and staff at The National Taiwan College of Physical Education where I am privileged to serve as professor in Dance Education Department; a professional college where students, in their daily pursuit of educational access, persistence, and achievement, challenge any and all the limits of physical, mental, and spiritual of a human about to achieve the maximum of possibilities. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to those Individuals who have been most helpful in the completion of this study. My deep gratitude to Dr. Melora Sundt, chair of my dissertation committee and the Individual most responsible for pulling me out of frustrations wherein I adjusted to U.S. life and transited my owned cultural and social capital to the U.S. Institutional contexts. To Dr.s Linda Serra Hagedom and William Maxwell also members of my dissertation committee for their invaluable advise and patience. To the Transfer and Retention of Urban Community College Students (TRUCCS) research team including from USC; Linda Serra Hagedom, Ph.D., William Maxwell, Ph.D., Scott Cypers, Research Assistant. Finally, special thanks go to my friends, to Chia-Yi Chen and Robert Yuan for helping me to tackle the statistical techniques for this study, and to Ka-Ying Tse, Annie Lin, and Charles Liu for their foundational support in helping me to revise and proofread the manuscript, without whose assistance my doctoral program would not have been completed successfully. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii LIST OF TABLES t viii LIST OF FIGURES xiv ABSTRACT xv CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND I Introduction 1 Background of the Problem 4 Statement of the Problem 12 Purpose of the Study 14 Significance of the Study 15 Research Questions 17 Methodology 18 Assumptions of the Study 21 Definition of Terms 22 Delimitations 26 Limitations - 26 Organization of the Study 27 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE • 28 Introduction 28 International Student Demographics 28 The Leading Countries of Origin 31 Distribution of Sectors 34 Academic Success Considerations 41 Summary and Conclusions 56 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V CHAPTER III: REVIEW OF LITERATURE 59 Cultural Capital Theory in Education 59 Cultural Capital Defined 60 Bourdieu’s General Theoretical Framework 67 Social Capital Defined 76 Past Research on Cultural and Social Capital 80 Implication for Underrepresented Groups of Students 85 Implication for International Students 89 Summary and Conclusions 92 CHAPTER IV: METHODOLOGY 96 Introduction 96 Research Questions 96 Methodology 97 Research Design 97 Instrumentation 98 Data Collection 99 Sample and Population 99 Data Analysis 107 CHAPTER V: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 109 Introduction 110 Construct Validity and Reliability 109 Description of Populations 112 Findings by Research Questions 112 Research Question No. 1 112 Populations by Age 113 Populations by Gender 114 Populations by the Highest Academic Degree One Desired to 114 Obtain Populations by the Attendance of an Orientation Program at 115 the College Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vi Research Question No. 2 116 Differences in Academic Success 116 Differences in Independent Variable Between Academically 118 Successful Students Research Question No. 3 175 Pearson Correlation in Relation to Academic Success 175 Unanalyzed Correlated Variables to the Successful Chinese 179 International Students Unanalyzed Correlated Variables to the Successful Domestic 190 Students Predictors to Academic Success for Chinese International 199 Students Predictors to Academic Success for Domestic Students 199 Summary and Conclusions 200 CHAPTER VI: SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND 204 RECOMMENDATIONS The Purpose of the Study 204 Summary of Findings 205 Research Question No. 1 206 Research Question No. 2 204 Research Question No. 3 208 Discussion 211 Cultural Capital, Educational Attainment, And Asian Cultural 213 Background Factors Influencing Academic Success of Chinese International 215 Students Factors not Found in Previous Research 215 Best Predictors to Academic Success for Chinese International 219 Students Factors in Varied Variable Sets of Chinese International 222 Students Recommendations 230 To Community College Personnel 230 To International Students 235 For Further Research 236 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vii REFERENCES APPENDIX A: TRUCCS Questionnaire APPENDIX B: Summary of the Results of the Significant Mean Difference in the Significantly Differed Independent Variable for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students APPENDIX C: Complete Analysis of All Significant Different Variables for the Successful Chinese International Student Group and Domestic Student Group APPENDIX D: Pearson Correlation Analysis Output Tables APPENDIX E: Complete Analysis of Unanalyzed Correlated Variables for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students APPENDIX F: Summary of the Significant Mean Differences in Academic Success by the Correlated Variables for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students 239 261 268 269 286 288 296 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. viii LIST OF TABLES Table _____ , ___ Page 1 Percentage of Foreign Students in U.S. by Asian Countries Between 3 Academic Years 1994 - 95 and 2002 - 02 2 Distribution of Population 101 3 Distribution of Population by Age 102 4 Distribution of Population by Gender 103 5 Distribution of Population by Attendance of an Orientation Program at the 104 College 6 Distribution of Population by High School GPA 105 7 Distribution of Population by College GPA 106 8 Construction of Validity and Reliability of Selected Independent Variables 111 9 Frequency Distribution by Four Age Categories 113 10 Frequency Distribution by Gender 114 11 Frequency Distribution by the Highest Academic Degree One Desired to 115 Obtain 12 Frequency Distribution by the Attendance of an Orientation Program at the 116 College 13 Analysis of Variance for Academic Success Among Student Groups 117 14 Summary of the Results of Chi-Square Analysis by the Independent 119 Variables Which Were not Significant Different Between the Academically Successful Chinese International Student Group and Domestic Student Group 15 Summary of the Results of Chi-Square Analysis by the Independent 120 Variables Which Were Significant Different Between the Academically Successful Chinese International Student Group and Domestic Student Group Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ix Table ________ Page 16 Chi-Square Analysis by Age Groups 121 17 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Age Groups 122 18 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Age Groups 123 19 Chi-Square Analysis by Mother’s Education Level 125 20 Means of the Successful Chinese Internationa! Students by Mother’s 126 Education Level 21 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Mother’s Education Level 127 22 Chi-Square Analysis by Father’s Education Level 129 23 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Father’s 130 Education Level 24 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Father’s Education Level 131 25 Chi-Square Analysis by High School GPA 132 26 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by High School 133 GPA 27 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by high School GPA 134 28 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Read in English 136 29 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Read in 137 English 30 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Read in English 138 31 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Write in English 139 32 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Write in 139 English 33 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Write in English 140 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table x Page 34 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Understand a College Lecture 141 35 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to 142 Understand a College Lecture 36 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Understand a 143 College Lecture 37 Chi-square Analysis by Ability to Read a College Textbook 144 38 Means of the Successful International Students by Ability to Read a College 145 Textbook 39 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Read a College 146 Textbook 40 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Write an Essay Exam 147 41 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Write 148 an Essay Exam 42 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Write an Essay 148 Exam 43 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Write a Term Paper 150 44 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to 150 Write a Term Paper 45 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Write a Term 151 Paper 46 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Participate in Class Discussions 152 47 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to 153 Participate in Class Discussions 48 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Participate in 154 Class Discussions Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table XI Page 49 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Communicate With Instructors 155 50 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to 156 Communicate With Instructors 51. Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Communicate 156 With Instructors 52 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “I am very 158 Determined to Reach My Goals” 53 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to 159 the Statement “I Am Very Determined to Reach My Goals” 54 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the 159 Statement “I Am Very Determined to Reach My Goals” 55 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “I Keep Trying Even 161 When Frustrated by a Task” 56 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to 162 the Statement “I Keep Trying Even When Frustrated by a Task” 57 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the 162 Statement “I Keep Trying Even When Frustrated by a Task” 58 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “Understanding 164 What Is Taught Is Important to Me” 59 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to 165 the Statement “Understanding What Is Taught Is Important to Me” 60 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the 166 Statement “Understanding What Is Taught Is Important to Me” 61 Chi-square Analysis by Response to the Statement “Success in College 168 Is Largely Due to Effort” 62 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to 169 the Statement “Success in College Is Largely Due to Effort” Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table xn Page 63 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the 170 Statement “Success in College Is Largely Due to Effort” 64 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “I Can Leam All 172 Skills Taught in College” 65 Means of the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to 173 the Statement “I Can Leam All Skills Taught in College” 66 Means of the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the 174 Statement “I Can Leam All Skills Taught in College” 67 Correlated Variables for The successful Chinese International students 177 and Domestic Students 68 Independent Sample t-Test of the Successful Chinese International 179 Students by Gender 69 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Chinese International 180 Students by “The Highest Academic Degree One Desired to Obtain” 70 Independent Sample f-Test of the Successful Chinese International 181 Students by “I Have Attended an Orientation Program at the College” 71 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Chinese International 182 Students by “I Will Get a Bachelor’s Degree” 72 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Chinese International 184 Students by “I Will Transfer to a Four-Year College or University” 73 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Chinese International 186 Students by “I Always Complete Homework Assignments” 74 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Chinese International 188 Students by “I Enjoy Doing Challenging Class Assignments” 75 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Chinese International 189 Students by “I Expect to Do Well and Earn Good Grades in College” 76 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Domestic Students by 190 “It Is Important to Finish Courses in Program of Studies” Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table xiii Page 77 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Domestic Students by “I Always Complete Homework Assignments” 78 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Domestic Students by “I Enjoy Doing Challenging Class Assignments” 79 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Domestic Students by “I Expect to Do Well and Earn Good Grades in College” 80 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Domestic Students by “How Often I Have Talked With an Instructor Before or After a Class” 81 One-Way ANOVA Analysis of the Successful Domestic Students by “How Often I Have Helped Another Student Understand Homework” 82 Univariate Analysis of Correlated Variables for Chinese International Students 83 Univariate Analysis of Correlated Variables for Domestic Students 192 194 195 196 198 202 203 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. xiv LIST OF FIGURES Figure____________________________________________________________ 1 Total International Enrollment Between 1954 and 2002 2 The Leading Countries of Origin in Academic Year 2001 - 02 3 Taiwan Students in the U.S. Between 1950 and 2002 4 The Distribution of All International Enrollments in Academic Year 2001 -02 5 Foreign Student Enrollments by Institutional Type Between 2000 and 2002 6 The Percentage of Change in Distribution of Sectors Between 1994 and 2002 7 The Leading Host Institutions in Academic Year 2000 - 01 8 Percentage of International Enrollment by Academic Level in Academic Year 2001 -02 9 The Proportion of Gender of Selected Countries in Academic Year 1997 -98 10 Source of Funds of All Foreign Students in Academic Year 2000 - 01 11 Student Populations of This Study 12 Populations by All Age Groups 13 Populations by Gender 14 Populations by Attendance of an Orientation Program at the College 15 Populations by High School GPA 16 Populations by College GPA Page 31 32 33 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 101 102 103 104 105 106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. XV ABSTRACT By using the Los Angeles Transfer and Retention of Urban Community College Students (TRUCCS) survey dataset and the frameworks of cultural and social capital theory, this study (1) examined the factors influencing academic success of East Asian international students, especially Chinese students, who attended the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) Spring semester 2001; (2) investigated the extent to which individual characteristics such as demographics, family background, academic ability, English language proficiency, educational aspiration, and social interaction of Chinese international students affect their academic success; and (3) explored the similarities and differences between Chinese international student group and other student groups at LACCD. A sample of 85 Chinese international students, 71 other East Asian foreign students, 503 non-East Asian international students and 1,925 domestic students were compared across academic success indicators and pre-collegiate characteristics. The results of the study indicate that the aspirations of obtaining a higher level academic degree and transfer to a four-year college or university are the best predictors of academic success for Chinese international students. English language proficiency was a weak factor and social interaction factors were not correlated to Chinese international students’ academic success at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER I i THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND Introduction The number of international students enrolling In American colleges and universities is increasing; it has risen 1,703 percent since 1954, yielding 582,996 students in academic year 2001-02 (Institute of International Education [HE], 2002). The Chronicle o f Higher Education (November 22, 2002) notes that this represents a 6.4 percent increase from a year earlier, the largest increase in the past 20 years. International students comprise over 4% of America’s total higher education population. Their enrollment has increased by nearly 30% across every type of higher education institution, particularly at community colleges, which saw an increase of more than 61%, in the eight years since 1993. Specifically, In each of the past two years (academic year 1999 - 00 to 2000 - 01 and 2000 - 01 to 2001 - 02), the number of international students attending community colleges has grown by 7%, bringing the total of international students in community college to 98,813, representing about one fifth of all international students in the U.S. (HE, 2002). According to Davis (2002), since 1970s, observable changes have occurred in foreign students’ enrollment at various institutions of higher education throughout the U.S. In the late 1970s, Iran and Nigeria were the leading sending countries, while during the 1960s Canada was the lead. More recently in the mid ‘80s as Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2 Asia’s economies started to improve, Taiwan, Malaysia and Korea were the three leading places of origin, sending almost 20% of all international students to the U.S. Currently, the greatest number of international students comes from Asia (HE, 2002) (as shown in Table 1). China and India are the major countries of origin for international students In the U.S, particularly for graduate programs. Internationa! students study primarily In the areas of the physical sciences and engineering. Japan, mired in economic troubles, has seen its rate of growth essentially stagnate since the early ‘90s. Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia appear to have been significantly hit by the financial crisis in the late ‘90s, hence, their enrollment rates remain relatively weakened. For Malaysia and Hong Kong, U.S. higher educational enrollment options have been under considerable competition from Australia, the United Kingdom (U.K.) and Canada (Altbach, 2002; Davis, 2002). From the European region (Turkey included), Davis (2002) states that: The absolute number of students enrolled in the United States is far fewer than from Asian and the relative growth of enrollments over the recent past has been relatively modest. The U.K., France and Germany have showed relatively flat enrollments, while those from Russia, Spain, Sweden and Turkey are actually showing enrollment rate deceleration. Russian enrollments grew dramatically in the early 90’s following the collapse of the Soviet Union. More recently its enrollment growth rate has fallen back to levels consistent with other European countries, (p.2) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 1 Percentage o f Foreign Students in U. S. by Asian Countries Between Academic Years 1994 - 95 and 2001 - 02 Place of Origin 94 - 95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 China 8.7% 8.7% 7.8% 9.8% 10.4% 10.6% 10.9% 10.8% Japan 10.0% 10.0% 10.1% 9.8% 9.5% 9.1% 8.4% 8.0% Korea |7.4% 8.0% 8.1% 8.9% 8.0% 8.0% 8.3% 8.4% Taiwan 8.0% 7.2% 6.7% 6.4% 6.3% 5.7% 5.2% 5.0% Hong Kong 2.9% 2.6% 2.4% 2.0% 1.8% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% India 7.4% 7.0% 6.7% 7.0% 7.6% 8.2% 9.9% 11.5% Indonesia 2.6% 2.8% 2.7% 2.8% 2.5% 2.2% 2.0% 2.0% Thailand 2.4% 2.7% 2.9% 3.1% 2.5% 2.1% 2.0% 2.0% According to the literature on international students, their primary reasons for studying in the U.S. are: (1) the quality and availability of American higher education; (2) the emergence of English as the primary language of the world; (3) the industrial and technological advances of the U.S.; and (4) the position of the U.S. as a business and industrial leader (Bomsztein, 1986; Cieslak, 1955; Eid & Jordan-Domschot, 1989; Spaulding & Flack, 1976). Other reasons include: (1) the perceived prestige of U.S. degree related to economic advancement in their home country; (2) the competitiveness of admission in their own university system (Eid & Jordan-Domschot, 1989); (3) lack of adequate higher education infrastructure in some developing countries (Il’Chenko, 1993; Lulat & Altbach, 1985; Spaulding & Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 4 Flack, 1976); and (4) the increasing ability of foreign governments and individual families to support individuals who want to study overseas (Agarwal & Winkler, 1985). International students who choose to attend community colleges are attracted for a different reason: community colleges’ open-door admissions policy and low educational cost (Cohen & Drawer, 1996; Davis, 2001). Community colleges serve as an alternative to prepare these students not only to improve their English, save money, build their academic self-confidence, but also make a more gradual transition to a four-year college. Chase and Mahoney (1996) suggest that the enrollment of international students in community colleges is expected to continue to increase. Background of the Problem Institutions of higher education generally agree that foreign students contribute to higher education in the U.S. in a variety of ways (Davis, 2002). For example, international students may serve as teaching and researching assistants during their stay, and as proponents of American ways upon their return home (Davis, 2002). Students can leam to value cultural differences through the promotion of intercultural learning on campus and abroad. Foreign students not only diversity of institutions but they also contribute financially. Specifically, foreign students make higher education one of this country’s leading exports and bring nearly $12 billion to the U.S. economy in tuition, fees, living expenses and related costs (The Association of International Educators, [NAFSA], 2002). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 5 Colleges and universities implement many policies and curricular and co-curricular initiatives to support diverse students (Bowen & Bok, 1999; Morey, 2000; Tatum, 2000). Generally, the primary focus of these initiatives is on American minorities and immigrants. Although international students are an important element of diversity in U.S. institutions, they are generally ignored, invisible, under-served (Mori, 2000, p. 143), and they tend to be looked upon as one giant international student mass by many American college campuses. International students come from countries with varied cultural orientations, and diverse political, economic, and institutional structures. According to Lin and Yi (1997), international students face the same problems that confront anyone living in a foreign culture, for example, racial discrimination, language problems, accommodation difficulties, financial stress, loneliness, and misunderstandings. Psychosocial stressors such as academic demands, lack of familiarity with U. S. culture and customs, and changes in their social support system might all lead to social isolation among international students. Like some domestic students, they may share characteristics of being “at-risk” (Educational Resources Information Center, 1987). These may include being specially admitted, non-English speaking, learning disabled, ethnic minorities, and/or poorly prepared. Neither group typically shares the norms, behaviors and attitudes dominant in American institutions of higher education, resulting in a potential conflict and adjustment difficulties, which could affect achievement and persistence (Evans, 2001; Ting, 1998). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6 International students’ attitudes, satisfaction and perception of the curriculum (Desai & Brieland, 1970; Getingok & Hirayama, 1990); adjustment (Altbach, 1990; Barratt & Huba, 1994; Fletcher & Stren, 1989; Huntley, 1993); stress (Ghalamrezaei, 1996; Shin, 1996); well-being (McKinley.et al., 1996; Yu & Liese, 1991); recruitment and retention (Buuck, 1996; Byrd, 1991; Tonapson & Tompson, 1996); academic achievement (Jochems et al., 1996; Vogel, 1989); and cross-cultural re-entry (Rohrlich & Martin, 1991; Rogers & Ward, 1993) have been the subject of studies; however, most of the research has focused on students attending four-year colleges and universities. Little attention has been directed toward the needs of international students studying in community colleges. Despite over 80% of community colleges having international students on campus, only a few two-year colleges have deemed international education and services as an important mission (Barker & Smith, 1996; Chase & Mahoney, 1996). Yet, they may look upon international students as one category, a giant student mass, to the exclusion of the diversity existing between and within international students (Carey & Mariam, 1980). This categorical treatment of international students adds to the negative experiences of international students in studying in the host country as their individual merits, needs, and assets might be neglected in this approach. Academic achievement is a multidimensional phenomenon. It is the product of a relational process in which a student’s cultural identity and sociocultural background and the norms and expectations of families, institutions, and teachers play especially important parts. In an effort to explain the existing differences in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. educational performance across ethnic groups in the U.S., researchers have offered a variety of perspectives. Many researchers have noted the potential influence of ethnic differences in cultural values, particularly those related to the valuation of educational success (Sue & Okazaki, 1990), class (Bourdieu, 1984; Foley, 1990; Willis, 1977), socioeconomic status (Ogbu, 1983, 1990), and ability (Steinberg, Dornbush, & Brown, 1992). In a similar approach, others have proposed that ethnic differences in cultural values and beliefs may affect students’ academic success through achievement-related socialization practices, for example parental discipline (Mordkowitz & Ginsberg, 1987), parenting style (Steinberg et al., 1992), and student-teacher interactions (Mehan, 1992; Mehan et al., 1985); and through achievement-related motivational practices, for example task choice (Bandura, 1986; Eccles, 1983), effort expended (Dweck & Leggett, 1988), and use of cognitive strategies (Pintrich, 1987; Pressley, 1986). Most of these studies acknowledge that the influence of ethnic differences on students’ academic success will vary both across and within ethnic groups as a function of social class standing (Cooper, 1990; Haveman & Wolfe, 1994). The factors influencing academic success of international students may vary widely depending on the institution, the student, and the country of origin. Studies on international student academic success and persistence in community colleges are few in number, not to mention the fact that little information was provided in any of the studies regarding entry-level characteristics in terms of cultural, social, and family backgrounds, and academic and linguistic preparation, which could affect Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. outcomes. Based on studies of domestic student success in schooling, pre-entry characteristics may influence a student’s likelihood of persistence and determination. These characteristics may include personal attributes, family background, socioeconomic status, academic ability background, and commitment to the institution and the goal of graduating. With regard to international students, they come from cultures that may be different from those of their American peers. Accordingly, they may possess dissimilar pre-entry characteristics, which embrace cultural values and beliefs about education, differing amounts of exposure to higher education, expectations about education and social life at colleges in the host country, and personal and academic behaviors. These characteristics may affect the degree to which international students transition to a college and a host country, and consequently their academic success and persistence. In an effort to understand the differences in academic success across international students and non-English speaking domestic students (both groups share characteristics of being at-risk) in the American two-year institutions of higher education, to determine factors of international student success, and to distinguish among the background variables of students, cultural and social capital theory may offer useful lenses in highlighting the role of culture in academic success and educational attainment across ethnic groups. Cultural capital is an important part of Bourdieu’s theory of social reproduction (1977, 1986, 1990). Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital focuses on the class-based variation both in the meanings and uses of the various types of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 9 capital. Bourdieu refers to cultural capital as the set of linguistic and cultural competencies of the dominant class. Three forms of capital such as embodied, objectified, and institutionalized were existed in sequence. Embodied capital exists in the “dispositions of the mind and body” (p.243) and is evident by an individual’s seeking to become more cultured. Objectified capital relates to material objects such as art, music, and literature. Institutionalized capital consists of academic qualifications such as a credential. Families are primary producers and reproducers of cultural capital. The families of each social class transmit distinctive cultural knowledge; as consequence, the higher the social class of the family, the closer the culture it transmits is to the dominant culture. Nevertheless, educational institutions are the place where employ the set of linguistic and cultural competencies of the dominant class mostly; and aid in the reproduction of the dominant social class by rewarding students who possess the attitudes, preferences, knowledge, and behaviors of the dominant class (Bourdieu, 1977; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). The ability of the dominant social class to reaffirm its status through the educational system is known as social reproduction. DiMaggio (1982) indicates that cultural capital mediates the relationship between family background and school outcomes. Also, McDonough (1997) states that cultural capital is the knowledge that social elites value yet schools do not teach. This implies that parental influence is an important factor to consider. Although each class has its own form of cultural capital, the most socially and economically Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 0 valued forms are those possessed by the dominant classes. Parents with high SES and levels of education are quite often strategic in maximizing the likelihood that their children will gain acceptance to top institutions of higher learning. Conversely, this type of support for higher education is missing in families of lower SES or from non-college attending families (Mehan, 1996). Lamont & Lareau (1988) note that individuals without the required cultural capital might lower their educational aspirations, self-select out of particular situations, or “overperform” in order to compensate for their less valued cultural resources. On the one hand, Bourdieu’s social reproduction theory provides insight into how relationships of power are perpetuated through families, communities, schools and other agencies. On the other hand, examining the notion of cultural and social capital as a theoretical perspective in understanding foreign students’ academic success in community colleges requires an understanding of the rooted social interactions between individual students and their colleges, families, peers, and community. Bourdieu’s social capital theory has been elaborated on in terms of access to institutional resources. Bourdieu’s social capital is decomposable into two elements: (1) the social relationship that allows the individual to claim resources possessed by the collectivity, and (2) the quantity and quality of those resources (Portes, 1998). Ultimately, Bourdieu sees social capital as the investment of the dominant class to maintain and reproduce group solidarity and preserve the group’s dominant position (Lin, 1999a). His work emphasizes structural constraints and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. unequal access to institutional resources based on class, gender, and race (Lareau, 2001). International students in particular may have varying degrees of cultural capital, which affect their ability to be successful within the existing structures of the institution. Likewise, cultural capital in one country may not serve as cultural capital in another. The cultural capital concepts employed in this study allow for a more detailed examination of international students’ individual attributes and their interactions within the school contexts. As mentioned previously, academic success is likely a multidimensional phenomenon that has consistently been shown to have an impact on minority or underrepresented groups includes cultural background (ethnicity, values, beliefs), family background (parental education level, SES, expectation), English language proficiency (linguistic ability), academic ability background (high school GPA), educational aspiration (attitudes, determinations), and social interaction (significant others, supportive programs). In examining the factors influencing academic success of Chinese international students in Los Angeles community colleges, I focused on the factors of cultural and social capital that influence their academic success in that school context, and how those factors differ from those for other international students, and non-English speaking domestic students at the LACCD. In other words, by examining aspects of cultural and social dimensions specifically, the study explored the relationships between predictors of academic success and selected countries of origin. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 12 Statement of the Problem International students may come to the U.S. with varied cultural and social capital. When they enroll in a college in the U.S., some students experience success, while some others do not. There are many barriers to successful cultural and academic adjustment for foreign students. Language barriers are generally thought to be the primary difficulty international students may encounter In the host country (Antanaitis, 1990; Elosiebo, 1987; Gabriel, 1973; Meyer, 1984; Schram & Lauver, 1988; Surdam & Collins, 1984). Research (Cui & Awa, 1992; Kim, 1988) suggests that facility with the host language is the most important factor to successful international adaptations. The greater one’s command of the host country’s language, the easier and more stable the adjustment process is and the more meaningful and profound is the contact with the host country’s people (Hammer, Gudykunst, & Wiseman, 1978). Certainly, students who speak English as a second language may be at a disadvantage. Limited English-speaking ability may hinder students’ willingness to request support services, speak to instructors, and socialize with classmates; and may also restrain them from representing their true academic abilities in college. These restrictions can often result in a sense of isolation and a growing frustration with the host country. Ultimately, it may impact on their academic achievement in college. Other studies reveal that language proficiency, while important to international students’ success, is a weak predictor of international student achievement (Evans, 2001; Stoynoff, 1997). According to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. several instructors who teach English as a second language in the American Language Institute of University of Southern California, the students from East Asian countries, such as China, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, are typically more successful in their classes than other regional foreign students. They point out that although many East Asian students started their study with limited English ability, they achieve remarkable success in their programs after a short period (A. Clemons, personal communication, January 09, 2002; P. Plummer, personal communication, March 18, 2003). Further, some research suggests that students from Western countries adjust more easily to American higher education than international students from Third World and Eastern Hemisphere countries (Surdam & Collins, 1984). These studies suggest that the more a student’s culture differs from American culture, e.g., Asian cultures, the more difficult the adjustment process (Barratt & Huba, 1994, p. 433). These studies imply that East Asian students face a more difficult adjustment process; even so, most of them are much more successful in their study than other western foreign students. These differences in educational outcomes lead one to ask: Why do some international students who attend the same institution succeed in pursuing postsecondary education while others fail? Why do some international students, who face more traditional barriers to successful adjustment, succeed in academics and others, who face relatively fewer barriers fail? What makes these students different? What are the structural, social, and cultural factors that enable some to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 14 excel while other flounder? Research, therefore, should explore additional factors, such as the role of social support in international students5 academic success and the attitudes and beliefs of international students about seeking social assistance. ft is essential to identify factors that contribute to international students5 success in academics within the host institutional contexts from the perspective of cultural capital, and better establish the relationships between academic success and ethnicity, family background, academic ability, English language proficiency, educational aspiration, and social interaction. Purpose of the Study This study will use data from the TRUCCS study (2001) to predict what cultural and social capital factors affect Chinese foreign students5 academic success in the Los Angeles community colleges. The purposes of the study are: (1) to explore the principal factors influencing academic success of Chinese students in particular and other East Asian international students generally in their studies at LACCD; (2) the extent to which personal, cultural, and social capital characteristics such as family background, academic ability background, English language proficiency, educational aspiration, and social interaction of these students affect their academic success while studying at LACCD; and (3) to understand the differences or similarities between successful Chinese international students in particular and successful others: other East Asian international students, non-East Asian foreign students, and non-English speaking domestic students in the LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 15 Significance of the Study While America is the world’s largest provider of education for foreign students, International education is still marginal to the core operations of most American colleges and universities (Altbach, 2002)). Most institutions have established specific practices and created a supportive environment to assist diverse students, however, the primary focus is on American minorities and immigrants. The institutional practices often ignore the international students who come from . different cultures and social systems and who potentially share the characteristics of being at-risk. Identification of factors contributing to the success of international students in the U.S. is particularly important to institutions with significant percentages of foreign students, and institutions with goals to increase their international student enrollments. Knowing the factors students attribute to success will help institutions strengthen and/or create appropriate programs and more informed policies. Deutsch (1970) believed that institutional practices should vary in terms of responding to international students. He noted that the creation of a proper climate for international students could not be directed by some external report or blueprint. Rather each institution should define its policies and programs for dealing with international student issues by reflecting the needs of its student population, among which the number of international students continues to increase. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 16 Despite the trend of increasing enrollment of international students at community colleges (Chase & Mahoney, 1996; Davis, 2002), very little data have been complied that enhance our understanding of the needs of international students enrolled at these institutions. Although a small body of research exists on the academic adjustment and success of international students, retention and persistence statistics and research on the academic success of international students in the U.S. two-year colleges, is almost non-existent. As a result we know little about the academic achievement and retention and persistence of international students, specifically in areas such as pre-entry characteristics, social and academic integration, and initial and subsequent commitment to the institution and the goal of graduating. Since knowing and collecting this information about international students may help institutions make better programs and practices to serve this unique population in transitioning to college in the host country, the subject of this study is significant. Community colleges are primarily open-access institutions enrolling students from all segments. Contributing to the challenge to the college’s students affairs and decision makers to meet their goal, to promote student learning and success, are the fact that more multi-ethnic, immigrant, underprepared, and international students with different cultural backgrounds, pre-entry characteristics, and diverse needs are enrolling in the community colleges. These differences make it difficult to satisfy their college’s population, especially the international students who bear both cultural and social gaps when studying in the institutional contexts. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 17 International students “have always remained one of the most quiet, invisible, underserved groups on the American campus” (Mori, 2000, p.143), who possess a different cultural capital that generally differ greatly from the norms, values and attitudes dominant in American institutions of higher education, resulting in a potential conflict and adjustment difficulties, which could affect achievement and persistence. Assisting students to succeed in colleges is one of all educators’ responsibilities. If community colleges value foreign students as critical to institutional diversity goals, internationalization programs, and finances. They must make an effort to understand the needs of their foreign students and try to accommodate their needs as best as possible. When the needs of foreign students are taken into account, better services may be provided. If a community college offers integrated, quality services, foreign students will be more likely to succeed in that college. Not only can integrated and quality services affect retention, but it can also affect future enrollments. When foreign students succeed, they may inspire other foreign students to enroll in that institution in the future. Research Questions This study is focused on the factors that influence the academic success of Chinese international students in the Los Angeles community colleges. Based on previous research, I propose using these variables: Demographics (age and gender), Personal and Situational Status (the highest academic degree one desired to obtain, and the attendance of an orientation program at this college), Family Background Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 1 8 (mother and father’s education level), Academic Ability (high school GPA), English Language Proficiency (self-rated English skills), Educational Aspiration (attitudes and beliefs in education), and Social Interaction (interaction with instructors, peers, and counselors) to explore the following questions: 1. What are the characteristics of international students at LACCD? To what extent are Chinese International students’ characteristics same as or different from those of other international student groups? 2. Does the Chinese international students’ academic success rate differ from other East Asian international students, non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students? How do they differ on individual variables? 3. What factors predict success, if any? To what extent are these factors different across groups (Chinese international students and the other student groups)? Methodology This study employs a quantitative approach performing a secondary analysis of the TRUCCS survey and transcript data. From this data set, I will operationalize the latent variables of academic success, and variables that were generated from cultural and social capital theory. Using statistical procedures including frequencies, comparisons, correlations, and factor analysis, I will analyze the secondary data collected. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 19 Research Design The TRUCCS survey is a three-year, longitudinal and comprehensive study of the goals, success and academic patterns of 5,000 Community College students in urban Los Angeles. The survey administration for the first year of the TRUCCS study began in the Spring 2001 semester. The surveys were administered from March 5, 2001 to April 28, 2001 at each of the nine Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) campuses close to 300 classrooms. Approximately 35 survey administrators were trained on specific procedures and provided a script to help ensure consistent administration in each of the classrooms. Participating classrooms were identified through a stratified random sampling method that relied heavily on three levels of English courses (2 levels below transfer, 1 level below transfer, and transfer level), occupational programs stratified by gender predominance, remedial courses, regular courses, learning communities, and traditional gateway courses. While a total of 5,000 surveys was collected, there were 4,581 surveys for which transcript data could be accessed. Sample The sample of students participating in the survey represented the diversity of the population within the LACCD campuses in terms of age, ethnicity, and academic abilities, representative of community colleges students enrolled for the first time in the Spring 2001 at LACCD. The Asian population (including Asian international students and Asian American students) of TRUCCS survey is about 15.3% of the total (4,720) sample, and the Chinese population is approximately 4.2% of the total Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 20 sample (USC Rossier School of Education Research Project, 2001). Further, the population of the secondary data analysis study consisted of 659 international students (25.5% of the final sample) and 1,925 non-English speaking domestic students (74.5% of the final sample). The final sample of this analysis is 2,584 (56.4% of the total sample), with the remaining 1,997 English speaking domestic students comprising 43.6 percent of the total. International students were categorized into three groups, including Chinese international students (N= 85), other East Asian international students (Japanese and Korean) (N= 71), and non-East Asian international students (IV= 503). Instrumentation The questionnaire contained 47 questions designed to identify the goals,; activities and actions of community college students that promote success, as a means of underscoring the community college function in an urban setting. Each question subdivided into detailed items that asked participants to rate the most - appropriate answer as accurately as possible. In the first survey administration for the TRUCCS project, the survey administrators were asked to also take field notes about their experiences during this process. In addition, interviews, and focus groups with participating faculty, and students’ transcripts were collected. Method o f Data Treatment The administrators of the TRUCCS Survey team collected data. The data was coded and prepared for computerized analysis using SPSS-PC 10.5. Several procedures were used to analyze the data from this study, including (1) Descriptive Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2 ! Statistics (percentages, means, frequencies, and standard deviations) to yield information about the basic features of the data of each variable, such as demographics; (2) Comparisons (Chi-Square, /-Test, and ANOVA) to yield information about making comparisons when data are categorical, or continuous, and compare Chinese international students to other East Asian international students, non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students; (3) post hoc follow up tests where appropriate; (4) Correlations (Pearson product-moment) to yield information about the inter-correlation between academic success and individual independent variables such as personal and situational status, family background, academic ability, educational aspirations, and social interactions, to Chinese international students and to the population who are significantly different from Chinese international students in academic success; and (5) Factor Analysis to yield information about what factors is the best predictors of Chinese international students’ academic success at LACCD. Assumptions of the Study For this study, the following assumptions are made: 1. The participants responded accurately to all measures. 2. The measures employed are reliable and valid indicators of the constructs to be studied. 3. The data were accurately recorded and analyzed. 4. Ail relationships among selected variables are linear. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 2 2 5. The community colleges, which participated in the study, are representative of community colleges which have East Asian international students in the U.S. 6. The subjects who participated in the study are suffciently representative of East Asian, and in particular Chinese, international students enrolled in community colleges in California. 7. Given the established validity of the TRUCCS data, it is expected that generalizations may be made to Chinese interantional students of community colleges who are the target population of this study. 8. The purposes, processes, and elements of the framework studied have a degree of applicability and generalizability to community colleges and districts throughout the country. 9. The factors of academic success can be measured. There are relationships between academic success variable and personal and situational status variables, family background variables, academic ability variables, English language proficiency variables, eudactional aspiration variables, and social interaction variables. Definition of Terms For the purpose of the study the following terms are clarified: Academic Ability: High school GPA. Academic Adjustment: The process of making changes in oneself or one’s Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 23 environment to meet fairly well the academic demands, which the college puts on the international students while they study abroad. Included here are studying habits, classroom activities, preparation for examinations, assignments, library use, and interaction with students and faculty. Academic Success: The status of academic performance according to college grade point average (GPA) with scores equal to 2.0 or above, the scores needed for a community college student transfer to a four-year college or university. At Risk Student: A student with normal intelligence, whose academic background or prior performance may cause her or him to be perceived as a candidate for future academic failure or early withdrawal (Educational Resources Information Center, 1987, p.116). Chinese Student: Chinese students come from all over the world. While the majority does come from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Hong Kong (now part of the PRC), and Taiwan (the Republic of China/ ROC), many also come from Southeast Asian and Pacific Island countries such as Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines. A small number comes from Latin America and the Caribbean. Mandarin Chinese is the common writing system that loosely connects the many dialects used by Chinese (Tang & Dunkelblau, 1998). For this study, a student whose native language is Mandarin Chinese and has attended K-12 schools out of U.S. will be designated as the Chinese student population. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 24 Community College: Community colleges comprise the statewide system of two-year public institutions that are accredited to provide educational programs, which lead to the Associate of Arts and/or Associate of Science degrees and variety of vocational certificates. Community colleges also provide general educational classes that will transfer to four-year state college or university. Culture: Defined as the sum of total ways of living, including values, beliefs, aesthetic standards, linguistic expression, patterns of thinking, behavioral norms, and styles of communication which a group of people has developed to assure its survival in a particular physical and human environment (Pusch, 1979). For the purpose of this study, culture specifically refers to the background of international students in terms of the effect it has on the academic achievement of the students at the community college. Cultural Capital: Cultural capital as the set of linguistic and cultural competencies that individuals from the dominant class usually inherits and learns. The acquisition of cultural capital, and consequent access to academic rewards, depends on the cultural capital transmitted by the family, which is a largely dependent on social class. English Language Proficiency: Proficiency in English measured by the self-rated English language skills on a eight-item scale: read, write, understand a college lecture, read a college text book, write an essay exam, write a term paper, participate in class discussions, and communicate with instructors. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 25 Ethnic: People who connected with or relating to a particular racial or cultural group, especially when referring to the native people of a particular region or to racial minorities within a particular country or city (Collins Cobuild English Dictionary, 1998, p.564). Ethnicity: The state or fact or belonging to a particular ethnic group (Collins Cobuild English Dictionary, 1998, p.564). F-l, 1-1 or M-l Visa: A visa issued by a foreign government to a student for the purpose of undertaking study or vocational training in another country. International Student: For this study, an international student is defined not only as a student who is not a citizen or an immigrant (permanent resident) and is enrolled in the U. S. under a student visa (FI), dependent of student (F2), exchange student (Jl), dependent of exchange student (J2), vocational training (Ml), or dependent of vocational training student (M2); but who also attended school (from K - 12) another country and whose native language is not English. Race: One of the major groups which human beings can be divided into according to their physical features, such as the color of their skin or hair they have (Collins Cobuild English Dictionary, 1998, p. 1531). Social Capital: For this study, based on Bourdieu’s perspective, social capital defined as a tool to international students to access to institutional resources. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 26 Delimitations The following delimitations are noted: 1. The sample is limited to students enrolled in nine community colleges of Los Angeles District of California in 2001. 2. Subjects answered the surveys anonymously. 3. The sample comprises students who volunteered to participate in the study. 4. The secondary sample is limited to East Asian international students enrolled at LACCD. And the comparative secondary sample is drawn from only one ethnic group (Chinese international students) whose native language or dialects are loosely connected to Mandarin Chinese and their ancestries were Chinese. Limitations The following limitations are noted: 1. Self-reported measures were utilized which have been widely acknowledged as limited due to vulnerability to common response biases (Isaac & Michael, 1995; Trochim, 2001). 2. The general limitations of using a pencil-and-paper test to measure attitudes and perceptions may compromise the validity and reliability of this study (Fink & Kosecoff, 1985; Light, Singer, & Willett, 1990). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 27 3. It is acknowledged that parents, peers, and. instructors account for only part of the influences that shape a student’s perceptions, expectations and motivations in college. 4. This survey was given to the students who attended at the regular English courses in LACCD. Thus the International students who in these English courses shall own a certain level degree of English language proficiency. As a result, the findings of this study may not be generalizable to all the international students who are enrolled in ESL programs in community colleges in U.S. Organization of the Study In order to understand better what factors influence academic success of Chinese and East Asian international students in the Los Angeles community colleges, in Chapter II, I explore the international student demographics in the higher education in the U. S. And, present how cultural capital develops in relation to social capital in education, in Chapterlll. Chapter IV presents the research methods and analysis techniques for this study. I present findings and discussions in Chapter V. Finally, Chapter VI summarizes the dissertation and proposes a college policy agenda as well as directions for future research on international students at the community college level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 28 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Introduction Systematic research on foreign students began in the late 1940s (Walton, 1968). It was during the 1950s when social scientists recognized the significance of adjustment problems in the education of international students. Successful adjustment to the academic environment in the U.S. is crucial to the academic success of foreign students. Because of the inherent complexities in analyzing foreign student sojourners, it is worthwhile to consider the broader issue of the international students, study abroad from cultural and social capital perspectives. In accordance with the variable sets and research questions proposed, I have organized this review of the literature with the following considerations in mind: (1) international student demographic; (2) academic success considerations of international students; (3) evidence for applying cultural capital theories in education; and (4) research exploring factors that influence the academic success of international students. International Student Demographics International students are considered non-immigrants who are temporarily staying in the U.S. for a period of time (between two to ten years) and are in pursuit Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 29 of a higher education, after which, they are expected by law to return to their respective countries of origin. These students come from ail over the continents with different educational expectations and with differential academic, cultural, and socioeconomic needs (Ikegulu, 1999). International students have a long history in the U.S. The first students came in 1784 (Jenkins, 1983), and after World War II, their numbers skyrocketed. Formal international educational exchange programs were established under the Fulbright Act, which was signed into law by President Harry Truman on August 1, 1946 (Michie, 1967). The purpose of Fulbright Acts (Johnson & Colligan, 1965) was: To increase mutual understanding between the peoples of United States and the peoples of other countries; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interest, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations and the contribution being made towards a peaceful and fruitful life for people throughout the world, to promote international cooperation for education and cultural achievement; and this is to assist the development of friendly, sympathetic, and peaceful relations between the United States and other countries of the world, (p. viii) The Fulbright program awarded scholarships to students studying in different parts of the world. Many students from developing countries have taken advantage of these scholarships and studied at various institutions for higher education in the U.S. The U.S. issues three types of “non-permanent” visas for those who wish to study in the country: The “F -l” visa for academic studies, “J-l” visa for exchange students, and the “M-1 ” visa for vocational training. To qualify for a student visa, foreigners must meet the following criteria: the students must be approved by the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 30 Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) as a full-time students participating in the proposed educational, vocational, or language program; the students must have sufficient funds for self-support during the entire course of study; and the students must maintain a residence abroad, with no intention of relinquishing that residency (INS, 2002). In the past four decades, large numbers of international students have participated in the American system of higher education. Figure 1 shows the increase in foreign students in the U.S. between 1946 and 2002. During academic year 2001 - 02, there were 582,996 international students studying in the U.S. higher educational institutions (HE, 2002). The ease of travel, advances of technology, and influence of progressive countries have all contributed to the growth of international students in the U.S. Although there has been a 1703 percent increase in their enrollment since 1954, international students comprised only 4.3% of total U.S. postsecondary education in 2002 (HE, 2002). Asia has consistently been the prime region from which to attract international students. Besides the U.S., other countries target Pacific Rim nations in their marketing effort, for example, the U.K., Canada, and Australia (Altbach, 2002; Davis, 2002; Marginson, 2002). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 31 — ■ — Student No. — ♦— % Foreign 600,000 12,996 500,000 3.10! 452,653 400,000 2.7% raK^ J a 342,113 300,000 154,580 1.5% ‘ f r - s G i? * ’ ' 82'0 4 5 0 54-55 64-65 74-75 84-85 94-95 01-02 Academic Year Figure 1. Total international enrollment between 1954 and 2002. The Leading Countries o f Origin According to “Open Doors” (HE, 2002), India has surpassed China as the leading sending country in academic year 2001 - 02. India’s 66,836 students represent 12% of the total number of international students in the U.S. China, which had been the leading sending country for the previous three years, increased by 6% to 63,211. The Republic of Korea is the third-leading sender, increasing by 7% to 49,046 students, marking the third year of large increases, after decreases in the late 1990s reflecting the Asian economic crises. Japan, which had been the leading sending country from 1995 - 96 until 1998 - 99, when it was surpassed by China, showed a slight increase of 0.7% to 46,810 students and is the fourth-leading country. Taiwan is once again the fifth leading place of origin for students in the U.S., increasing by 1.3% to 28,930 students. Among the ten leading sending nations, Mexico also showed a strong increase of 17% to 12,518 students, up from number 10 to the 7th , and Turkey, with an increase of 10%, moved ahead of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 32 Indonesia and Thailand, into 8th place. Figure 2 shows the enrollments of the top 10 senders in academic year 2001 - 02 and its percentage of change from academic year 2000 -01. 70,000 60,000 d 50,000 2 40,000 £ Z -S 30,000 c d 20.000 10,000 0 - 10,000 „ 66,836 63.221 46.810 -Enrolled Student No. - % Change ^ , 9 3 0 26,51 4 Ssj_2,518 223% 5.5% 7.4% 0.7% 1.3% 4.9% 12.3% 10.1% 0 ------- 1 -- - - - - - $ - - - - - - - 1 -------- § -------------- 1 -§ . ---------------1 -§ --------------- 1 -$ - - - - - - - 1 - ---- 0 --------- i ------0 ------- 12,091 11,614 ^ 000 m ta & c f ' w Top 10 Leading Countries of Origin - 0 . 1% . ^rp $ > ■ Figure 2. The leading countries of origin in academic year 2001 - 02. Among these senders, there was a continued slump in enrollments from several parts of Asia including Japan, Taiwan (data shown in Figure 3), especially Malaysia, which dropped off the list as one of the top ten senders since 1999, and Indonesia, which is down less than 1 percent from the previous academic year 2000 - 0 1. One reason for their decrease in the number of enrollments in U.S. is their economic depression (Davis, 2001). There were other reasons such as, using Taiwan as an example, the number of higher education institutions had increased in the past 10 years, and the government was planning to recognize the collegiate diploma and credential that could be more conveniently pursued and received from mainland China; other countries such as the U.K., Australia, and Canada had Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 33 employment marketplace have increased (http://www.edu.tw/bicer The Ministry of Education of Taiwan, 2002). 40.000 35.000 30.000 30,855, 29,234 28,566 30960 28,930 § 25,000 20,000 - 15,000 03 10,000 5,000 s : G X J 3 17,560 12,029 3.637, 4'5?4 02 50 60 70 80 90 94 96 98 00 01 Academic Year Figure 3. Taiwan students in the U.S. between 1950 and 2002. Figure 4 indicates that the flow of students overseas moves largely from developing countries to industrialized nations by 2003 (HE, 2002). There has been considerable stability in this pattern for the past few decades. ■ Asian □ Europe B Middle East M Africa UN. America M Latin & S. America Latin & S. America - '2 % N. America Africa 5% 6% Middle East 7% Europe 14% Asian 56% Figure 4. The distribution of all international enrollments in academic year 2001 - 02. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 34 Distribution o f Sectors International students were enrolled in six-different types of educational institutions: Research I & II, Doctoral I & II, Master’s I & II, Baccalaureate Colleges I & II, two-year institutions and “Other” institutions. Just as the sending pattern is not evenly distributed, neither is the concentration of these students across these institutional types. Figuer 5 summarizes the enrollments of foreign students in the different types of educational institutions in academic years 2000 - 01 and 2001 - 02 (HE, 2002). ■ Research O Doctoral B Master's 0 Baccalaureate 0 Associate Degree B Other 2000-01 2001-02 Academic Year Figure 5. Foreign student enrollments by institutional type between 2000 and 2002. While research institutions host the largest numbers of international students, the community colleges have experienced the largest increases recently. Davis (2002) noted the changing demographic trends of international students in the 2002 Open Doors Press Conference: International student enrollment increased by near 30% across every type of higher institution in the eight years since 1993. International student enrollment growth is particularly strong at U.S. community colleges, which saw an increase of more than 61% over the same period. In each of the past two years, the number of international students at community colleges has grown by 7%, bring their 2001 - 02 total to 98,813, representing about Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 35 one-fifth of all international students in the U.S. (Davis, 2002, November 13). As shown in Figure 6, associate degree institutions showed the strongest percentage increases between 1995 and 2000 (HE, 2002). Relative to the Los Angeles community colleges, Open Door 2002 also reported that in academic year 2001 - 02, 2,336 international students studied in LACCD. The distribution of foreign students attending the nine community colleges of the LACCD was: East Los Angeles College (529), Los Angeles City College (800), Los Angeles Harbor College (114), Los Angeles Pierce College (365), Los Angeles Southwest College (12), Los Angeles Trade-Technical College (93), Los Angeles Valley College (235), West Los Angeles College (94), and Los Angeles Mission College (94). 4—Research - 8 - Doctoral Master — #—Bacca 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 ^ 20 0.0 - 2.0 -4.0 _ £ T o 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 Academic Year Figure 6 . The percentage of change in distribution of sectors between 1994and 2002. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 36 In terms of the leading host institution, in 2001 - 02, of the six institutional types, the top institution with the largest enrollments of international students was the University of Southern California. New York University’s foreign student enrollment was the second largest, followed by Columbia University, Purdue University Main Campus, University of Texas at Austin, and Boston University, as shown in Figure 7. There were 29 campuses that hosted more than 3,000 international students each (IIE, 2002). Additionally, California is the leading host state for international students (up 6% to 78,741), followed by New York (up 7% to 62,053), Texas (up 17% to 44,192), Massachusetts (uo 2% to 29,988), Florida (up 12% to 28,303) and Illinois (up 5% to 25,498). Of the leading host states, Texas had the strongest growth in international student enrollment from 2000 - 01 to 2001 - 02 (IIE, 2002). Figure 7 . The leading host institutions in academic year 2000 - 01. In terms of academic level, the number of international students who studied at the graduate level in U.S. postsecondary institutions was far less than those who studied at the undergraduate level during the academic year 2001 - 02, with some notable exceptions. For example, the percentages of the undergraduate, graduate, ■ use □ NY U II Columbia 0PU M C » UTA S B U 5.504 4.695 AR7'? a a- 1 9 0 Top 6 Leading Institutions Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 37 and other students by the selected Asian countries of origin are shown in Figure 8 (IIE, 2002). This somewhat complex pattern of acadmic enrollment from individual countries was believed to be related to the development of the home country’s tertiary system of education and the perceived advantages of a U.S. degree. ) ■ % Undergraduate - - A- - - % Other 100 r Selected Countries of OrigirfP Figure 8. Percentage of international enrollment by academic level in 2001 - 02. Furthermore, in specific fields such as business and management, engineering, and mathematics and computer sciences, international student graduate enrollments exceeded 50% (IIE, 2002). These above-average growth rates were due to economic growth and competitiveness in the global marketplace. Thus, nations and regions that were in the process of developing technologically based economies tend to have more U.S. enrollments. Asian countries such as China, Malaysia, India, and Indonesia followed this category. Conversely, developed countries have less need for U.S. higher education in academic areas related to economic and technical activity, and tend to enroll in fields such as the humanities, arts, and social sciences (IIE, 2002). Nations with poor economies and little investment in building their educational and social infrastructures have higher proportions of students enrolling Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 38 In fields such as agricultural fields, as these could potentially make significant contributions to their home country economy as they rely heavily upon their natural resources (Davis, 1997). In terms of the distribution of gender in the U.S. higher educational Institutions, the percentage of male foreign students In the U.S. was generally substantially higher than female foreign students. For some Asian countries, only Japan and Taiwan sent a larger proportion of females than males, in 1997 - 98. Other Asian countries had substantially different percentages by gender, as shown in Figure 9. By contrast, a much smaller proportion of women from the nations of South Asia, the Middle East and most of Africa have access to education in the U.S. For those who are lucky enough to obtain education in the U.S., in academic year 1997 - 98, the majority of them majors in arts (58.7%), humanities (52.2%) and in “helping” fields such as education (67.2%), and health sciences (55.0%). However, student enrollments from a number of countries throughout the world were fairly equally divided between men (58.9%) and women (41.1%)(IIE, 1998). Japan Taiwan China S. Korea Indonesia Malaysia Selected Asian Countries Figure 9. The proportion of gender of selected countries in academic year 1997 - 98. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 39 The economics of foreign student exchange indicate that, in 2001 - 02 (in Figure 10), over two-thirds of all foreign students received the majority of their funds from family and personal sources. Over three-quarters received most of their funding from sources outside the U.S. (IIE, 2002). The most significant source of funding within the U.S. for foreign students was the postsecondary institution the students attended. For example, U.S. colleges and universities provided funding for about 21% of all foreign students, which was more than about six times as much as all other U.S. sources combined. Since 1979 - 80, the most important change in source of funds has been the increased support by U.S. universities (20.6% now compared to about 9% in 1980), and the decreased support by foreign governments, about 3.7% now compared to 13% 22 years ago. B Personal & Family HU. S. College/Univ. HHome Government/Univ. □ U.S. Private Sponsor □ Foreign Private Sponsor S Other % of All Foreign Students Figure 10. Source of funds of all foreign students in academic year 2000 - 01. Open Doors 2002 reports that a record total of 582,996 international students studied in the U.S. in academic year 2001 - 02, making higher education one of this country’s leading exports and bringing nearly $12 billion to the U.S. economy in tuition, fees, living expenses and related costs. The Association of International Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 40 Educators pointed out that the total net contribution to the U.S. economy from international students increased by 8.2%. Most of this increase can be accounted for by an increase in the number of foreign students in the U.S. Most or 67.9% of those contributions originated from family and other personal sources, and 76% of the source of funds were from outside of U.S. Relative to California, NAFSA (2002) also reports that in 2001 - 02: (1) about 78,741 foreign students studied in California postsecondary institutions; (2) an inflow of about $1629,647,000 into California’s economy resulted from international students and their families. In fact, the Department of Commerce considers educational services for international students to be one of the country’s largest service sector exports. In terms of the impact of September 11th attack, according to the ID E ’s October 2002 on-line survey and the posted comments, nearly 324 international educators suggest that the events of September 11th have raised student awareness in world affairs. The reports of international student enrollments fall 2002 showed a more complex picture. Over half (57%) of the international education professionals responding reported either increased or unchanged numbers of international students enrolled in fall 2002 compared to the same term in 2001. Of these respondents, 33% reported an increase in the number of international students compared to last year, while 24% reported no noticeable change. Of those respondents reporting a decline, only 3% report it to be a substantial decline. Twenty-five percent reported a slight decline (10% or less) and 15% reported a decline of 11 - 30%. Nevertheless, the IIE’s 2002 telephone follow-up with 10 of the institutions that host Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 41 the highest numbers of international students shows that the overall international student numbers seem to be holding steady or even increasing. However, enrollments from the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia may have been negatively impacted, and other nations such as India, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Pakistan have not seen a substantial or dramatic change in enrollments by students from most of these countries. During other troubling passages in U.S. history, such as the Korean war conflict, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Oil crisis of the 70’s, and the Persian Gulf War, enrollment flows have shifted between particular countries and places. Yet, in spite of these events, international enrollments have grown. The U.S. is still the world’s largest provider of education for foreign students (Marginson, 2002), and the U.S. sustains this role largely because of its size and its worldwide economic and cultural leadership. Moreover, its educational system has remained the door open to those who wish to study in the U.S. Therefore, American international enrollments continue to grow. Academic Success Considerations With reference to the study of international students, Church (1982) reviewed 30 years of research, finding a consistent hierarchy of problems among international students, including language difficulties, financial problems, adjustment to a new educational system, homesickness, and adjustment to social customs or norms. Relative to academic adjustment, studies pointed out that when international students Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 42 arrive at a host country’s college or university, the circumstances suddenly and simultaneously impose a variety of competing and sometimes contradictory roles that must be learned. Although international students come from a wide diversity of cultural backgrounds, they are expected to “adjust” to a narrowly defined set of behaviors requiring them to learn their new and “proper” roles rapidly (Spradley & Phillips, 1972). When the requirements of those roles are realistically perceived and effectively learned, the student’s experience is likely to be “successful” (Pedersen, 1991). Others offer insight into international student adjustment from a culturally different viewpoint; for instance, Barratt and Huba (1994) note that the regions from which the student came indicated different degrees of adjustment experiences. They found that students from outside the Western Hemisphere generally had more problems adjusting. In other words, those students from non-Western countries, whose cultures are likely to be very different from the U.S. host culture, have increasing difficulty in adjusting proportionately. When cultural differences were taken into account; the greater the cultural difference, the more complicated the international student’s adjustment is likely to be (Pedersen, 1991). Others have compared international students with domestic students in their study in the host colleges. Researchers stated that international students face not only many of the transitional challenges of domestic students, such as academic pressures, financial difficulties, interpersonal conflicts, difficulty in adjusting to change, and problems with developing personal autonomy (Baker & Siryk, 1986); Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 43 but they are also likely to experience more problems than their U.S. counterparts who go to college away from home but do not experience as much culture change, such as a new language, culture, education system, and sometimes immigration (Lin & Yi, 1997; Mori, 2000; Wan, 2001). In addition to experiencing greater change, international students have less access to resources, such as their families and friends for coping with these new problems (Pedersen, 1991). In their adjustment to these problems, the international students have had to rely more on one another than perhaps any other source. Fumham and Bochner (1982) reviewed the literature on international student friendship networks and developed a functional model of three distinct social networks, these are: (1) a primary monocultural network of close friendships with other co-nationals, to provide a setting where ethnic and cultural values can be rehearsed and expressed; (2) a secondary bicultural network bonding the international students and significant host nationals, to instrumentally facilitate the academic and professional needs of the student; and (3) a third multicultural network of friends and acquaintances, to provide companionship for recreational and non-task oriented activities. In terms of academic success, Elosiebo (1987) designed a study to identify academic concerns and needs that might be common to all foreign students, or unique to certain segments of postsecondary foreign students enrolled in six public universities in a southeastern state. The results of his research indicated that: (1) language deficiency was one of the most compelling obstacles to the academic - success of foreign students from Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East because Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 44 of difficulties in auditory comprehension, writing, and speech: (2) foreign students from these regions believed that they had problems with the testing methods used by U.S. universities; (3) students from Asia and the Middle East found reading assignments to be difficult, confusing, and frustrating; (4) foreign students from the geographic regions surveyed believed that they could use their institution’s library as well as their American peers; (5) a foreign student’ age, sex, and whether they were working or not did not affect their perceptions of their academic endeavors; (6) both graduate and undergraduate foreign students had similar perceptions of the academic preparation needed to face the difficulties of their academic goals; and (7) foreign students enrolled in colleges of education and engineering believed that they were prepared as well as their peers enrolled in colleges of business and arts and sciences. Elosiebo (1987) concluded also that when one discussed the academic needs and concerns of foreign students, foreign students could not be thought of as coming from one homogeneous group. Coming from different cultures and regions of the world, some of these foreign students had concerns and problems that others might not. Antanaitis (1990) examined the effects of culture on the classroom performance of 50 foreign graduate students in education at three universities near Washington, D.C. These students were interviewed using a structured questionnaire; some of the questions dealt directly with academic achievement and problems. She stated that unsatisfactory academic performance, or failure, was frequently (but perhaps incorrectly) attributed to a lack of intelligence or an English Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 45 language deficiency by faculty and sometimes by the students themselves, who viewed this as an “adjustment problem.” Further, Antanaitis stated that it was highly unlikely that lack of intelligence was to blame for foreign students’ academic difficulties because the caliber of foreign, students admitted to U.S. degree programs was generally high (Hull, 1978, cited in Antanaitis, 1990). Regarding English language deficiencies, foreign students were often diagnosed by faculty as deficient in vocabulary skills, listening comprehension, or writing. She noted that these same students were accepted based on satisfactory scores on TOEFL tests, and yet most foreign students who had studied English for a considerable length of time in their home countries experienced difficulties in writing term papers and taking exams. Students interviewed felt that the major reason for their academic difficulties was lack of proficiency in English (54%). Students who had lived in the U.S. for longer periods also believed more frequently that lack of proficiency in English caused their academic difficulties; for less than one year, 40%; for one to two years, 43%; for two to three years, 55%, and over three years, 62%. Asian students most often believed that their difficulties were due to English (76%), while only 20 - 29% of foreign students from other geographic regions did the same. Asians (50%) and Europeans/Australians (50%) were the least likely to report. Asians who stated that they had not discussed academic difficulties with their advisors said that this was unnecessary because they resolved these problems by discussing them with their fellow countrymen (Antanaitis, 1990). Antanaitis (1990) concluded, therefore, that the American educational system Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 46 caused problems and concerns for most foreign students, which they . commonly attributed to a lack of proficiency in English. However, while this result might be expected of students from regions with distinctive cultures such as Asia and the Middle East, students from the Caribbean and English speaking countries also experienced extensive difficulties. Thus, foreign students’ academic difficulties could not be primarily language based, but involved other cultural differences as well. Relative to the academic considerations of adult international students, Huntley (1993) addressed a number of factors, including the effects of age on foreign student academic performance. She noted that prior studies had produced varying results. For example, older foreign students were found to perform better academically than younger students (El-Laken, 1970; Siriboomna, 1978,cited in Huntley, 1993, p.5). In contrast, Hjizalniddin (1974, cited in Huntley, 1993, p.5) concluded, however, that international graduate students demonstrated consistently higher indicators of academic quality compared to their American peers. Goodwin and Nacht (1983) reported that some of the more prestigious U.S. postsecondary institutions claimed that their foreign students were consistently among the best on their campuses. In addition, Huntley (1993) cited a study conducted by NAFSA (1972, p.6) which characterized foreign students as being thought of by their departments as being among both the best and poorest of their graduate students; more successful as research assistants than as teaching assistants, more theoretical and analytical than Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 47 their U.S. peers; and more industrious and hard-working than their U.S. peers. She also reported that many international students experienced heavy academic pressure because they were financially liable to either their homeland governments or their families. Thus, to fail or perform pooriy could result in feelings of shame not only for the individual students, but their families as well. Students with sponsorships and/or homeland governmental grants had higher academic performance ratings than students who lacked these types of financial support (El-Lakeny, 1970; Siriboomna, 1978,cited in Huntley, 1993, p.9). Huntley also notes that many foreign students had limited financial resources and few work opportunities because of visa restrictions. Therefore, they tended to cram as many courses as possible into as short a time as possible, which sometimes resulted in a negative cycle of stress and overwork. In a study of academic stress experienced by foreign students attending U.S. universities, Wan, Chapman, and Biggs (1992) investigated factors thought to be associated with this stress. Their investigation was grounded in a cognitive framework whereby academic stress was the consequence of a students’ appraisal of stressfulness of role demands and their individual ability to cope with those demands. These two appraisals were postulated to be a function of cultural distance, students’ social support systems, and competencies in their roles. Their analysis indicated differences in the primary factors of the two types of appraisal. Self-perceived English language skills and cultural distance were found to be predictors of the primary appraisal, and self-perceived English language, problem-solving skills and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 48 academic along with a social support network were the primary factors in the other appraisal. According to Wan, Chapman, and Biggs (1992), the resulting stress could exert a strong, negative impact on the experiences of foreign students in a U.S. educational environment and also on their ability to effectively transfer the knowledge and skills learned in a U.S. postsecondary institution to their home countries. However, individuals differed in their perceptions of the degree of severity for the same academic demands as well as in their perceptions of the resources available to them for coping with these demands. They found that the contribution of perceived skills in language outweighed the contribution of all the other variables they studied. Thus, students with strong language skills were apt to believe that they could cope successfully with stressful academic situations, which they experienced. Students who had a functional, effective social support network believed too that they could cope with stressful academic situations. Although the importance of having a social network was recognized at the undergraduate level, its importance was not always as apparent to foreign students at the graduate level despite the existence of programs aimed at ameliorating their discomfort. One reason might have been the perception that the new educational contexts was very ambiguous, and overwhelming, which caused some students to focus intently on their academic struggles, and thus they appeared to be indifferent to other aspects of campus life (Wan, Chapman, & Biggs, 1992). The degree to which foreign students become socially integrated within a Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 49 postsecondary community depended on many factors. For some foreign students adjustment to American culture come easier than for others, while for many, adjustment proved to be very difficult. Barratt and Huba (1994) reported that motivation was one of the key variables which identified the reasons that international students came to the U.S. to study. However, they reported essentially no relationship between motivation and adjustment. The study found a relationship between English language skills and interpersonal relationships with Americans, even though it was not clear if good English skills produced the ability to communicate effectively enough to form such relationships or if having the relationships enhanced the acquisition of increased proficiency in English. There also appeared to be a relationship between foreign students’ relationships with Americans and their own perceptions of present day self- esteem, e.g., the more interest and success they had in building these relationships, the higher their perceived self-esteem. Further, Barratt and Huba found that perceived self-esteem did not seem to change significantly since these students had been in the U.S., perhaps indicating a strong personality and ego which withstood any adjustment difficulties, and which might have encouraged them to undertake the challenges of studying and living in the U.S. Barratt and Huba (1994) concluded that adjustment to the community could only be predicted from the students’ evaluation of their experience with people in the community which, in turn, was related to their evaluations of their experience with the city, gender, interpersonal relationships, and written and spoken language skills. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 50 Also, the regions from which the student came also indicated different degrees of adjustment experiences. This meant that students from outside the Western Hemisphere generally had more problems in adjusting (Surdam& Collins, 1984, cited in Barratt & Huba, 1994, p.433). In her study of the adjustment problems of adult foreign students, Huntley (1993) stated that poor language skills were detrimental not only to the academic process but to social interactions with Americans as well. While undergraduate students made the most successful adjustments, graduate students had the least success. Also, Huntley stated that married students were reported to attained had higher levels of academic achievement than unmarried students (El-Lakeny, 1970, cited in Huntley, 1993, p.8), greater satisfaction with their U.S. experience (Siriboonma, 1978, cited in Huntley, 1993, p.8), and fewer major problems (Han, 1975, cited in Huntley, 1993, p. 9). She felt that the social impetus of these students came from within the family rather than in the outside community, leading her to conclude that married students adjusted less effectively to a foreign community than unmarried students who had been acculturated well. Huntley (1993) also believed that adult, married foreign students might have better support systems than their unmarried counterparts, as they probably suffered less homesickness, and avoided loneliness. Relative to gender, Huntley believed that married men suffered less than married women, which was likely due to a much greater role conflict as a result of their responsibilities as wives and mothers in addition to their responsibilities as students. Huntley then noted that American Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 51 adult students must confront a variety of problems in returning to academic life after a period of absence, and so too must foreign students in the way they must also adjust to a new culture, a new language, and a new academic environment in addition to common problems strongly related to their national heritage. With respect to cultural difference, Saeke and Borow (1987, cited in Park, 1991, p.6) compared Western and Eastern philosophy: Western positions emphasized the uniqueness of the individual, self-assertion, and the strengthening of the ego. Eastern culture, however, emphasized interdependence, downplayed individuality, and the loss of oneself in the totality of the cosmos. While Western philosophy encouraged using rational means to resolve emotional conflicts, Asian spiritual disciplines advocated the virtues of a harmonious union with the environment and of transcending conflict. The Western position, however, advocated the strategy of changing objective reality to improve one’s lot or place. In contrast, Eastern philosophy promulgated more passive acceptance of reality and a modification of one’s perceptions of it and attitudes toward it. Especially, Confucian dynamism, the fundamental philosophy of Asian culture promoted the degree to which countries believed in the importance of unequal status relationships (Hofstede & Bond, 1988, cited in Brislin & Yoshida, 1994, p.99). Cultural differences, which might cause potential difficulties within the academic setting, were found in several areas which included (1) foreign students’ classroom behavior and the ways that American students assessed this behavior, (2) the way in which they completed assignments, and (3) their overall understanding Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 52 of class material. Asian students are often judged as passive by Americans (Hawkey & Nakomchai, 1980, cited in Antanaitis, 1990, p.21), and lacking in originality (Kuo, Paschal, & Schur, 1979, cited in Antanaitis, 1990, p.21) based on American cultural standards. Since they were raised in a more restrictive home ' environment, these students behaved properly within their own cultural setting (Kuo, Paschal, & Schur, 1979, cited in Antanaitis, 1990, p.21). Thus, these students expected professors to act in an authoritarian manner rather than more informally as is often the case in the U.S. (Bail& Soledad, 1986, cited in Antanaitis, 1990, p.21), and that the course material would be presented in a traditional way, such as a lecture, rather than through student-centered activities (Smart, 1983; Kuo, 1987, cited in Antanaitis, 1990, p.21). Also, Asian students, who were more group oriented or cooperative than competitive, might experience discomfort when confronted with the extreme individualism and competitive environment in the American university classroom (Eliram, & Schwarwald, 1987; Stigler, 1985; Zander, 1983). Relative to communication patterns, foreign students were likely used to a specific writing style within their own language, and they employed different modes of reasoning which were distinct from the American mode of deductive reasoning. When these distinct modes were used on writing in English, American professors evaluated foreign students writing as illogical and stylistically incorrect (Matalene, 1985). Often, differences in Asian students’ use of emotive intuition in place of logic to avoid personal attack when discussing issues resulted in Asians taking personal offense at statements directed toward them during discussions. This was Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 53 an example of the all-encompassing nature of culture, which supplies each individual with master programming (Fisher, 1988, cited in Antanaitis, 1990, p.23). Considering cultural differences relative to individual versus group orientation and cooperative versus competitive tendencies, Antanaitis (1990) reported that Chinese students were group oriented, had a lower self-concept due to pressure to conform, were less creative, were motivated to succeed by family pressures, and exhibited more diligence when working in groups. Korean students felt that Korean instructors judged traditionally and were group oriented, while American instructors took context into account. Taiwanese students, because of Western influences in their homeland, were similar to U.S. students in competitiveness. Japanese students felt that groups functioned to promote harmony, so direct confrontation could be avoided. Cultural differences were a function of cognitive styles (emotional versus rational orientations) reflected in oral communications. Japanese students manifested an emotional orientation in oral communication and used pattern recognition rather than linear logic. Other Asians appeared to use emotive intuition in place of logic in public speaking; thoughts began with an aura or feeling. Cultural differences were also a function of an internal (belief that actions were within the individual’s control) or external (belief that actions were controlled by outside forces) locus of control. In Asia, generally, failure was felt to be due to individual weakness and success due to external luck. However, the Japanese believed that male success was due to internal factors, and the misbehavior of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 54 children was the fault of the mother instead of the school. The Chinese seemed to believe that an external iocus of control affected story writing, and people from Singapore believed that success on business was based on fate, and an external locus of control (Antanaitis, 1990). Pedersen (1991) noted that the literature on international students has been so “varied, divergent, and unrelated in its approaches that it is difficulty to draw any theoretical consistency among the research results”(p.l4). The variation in academic success patterns may exist among international students, as they are such a diverse population within themselves. It should be clear, however, that international students have different profiles from American students. Some differences, such as language and culture, are readily apparent, while others, such as motivations, determinations, and purposes for pursing an education, may not be. The conflict between values inherent in traditional theories such as college student development, retention and persistence, and values inherent in the home cultures of international students makes it necessary for researchers, policy makers, administrators, instructors, counselors, and staffs to recognize each individual international student as a special case (Story, 1982). As this is the case, researchers pointed out that many traditional theories might not apply to these foreign students (Bulthuis, 1986; Stewart & Hard, 1987; Story, 1982). Nevertheless, Altbach (1990) stated that the research based on international students was not insignificant in either quantity, with more than 3,400 books, dissertations, and articles published since 1970. Yet, he contended that the available research was inadequate to grasp a full Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 55 understanding of the complex realities of foreign study and recommended that except for the field of educational studies and psychology, social scientists from a variety o f perspectives should be involved in new research on international students. Generally speaking, academic success is likely a multidimensional phenomenon. Students’ academic achievement relies greatly upon the links between their schooling experiences, social integration, and social mobility (Alva, 1993). In other words, the factors influencing the academic success of international students may vary widely depending on the student’s cultural identity, sociocultural background, and motivation. The norms and expectations of families, institutions, and teachers play especially important parts. To understand the unique and complicated factors influencing international students’ success, it may be necessary either to modify theories now in use, or to develop new theories. Cultural capital theory has been identified as an area to be addressed in preparing urban minority students for college (Jun & Tierney, 1999; Tiemey, 1999), as influencing enrollment decisions for minorities (Pema, 2000), and as an explanation for the challenges faced by nontraditional students in community colleges (Valadez, 1993, 1996). As both minority student and international student groups potentially share common characteristics of being at-risk, cultural capital theory may have bearing on an increased understanding of the ability of international students to adjust, succeed academically, and persist as well. Namely, cultural capital theory may allow for a more detailed examination of international students’ dispositions and their interactions within the host school context, and then may Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 56 deepen our understanding into how these unique and complicated factors influencing international students navigate their way through the host educational system, how the existing differences in academic success are across all international students and other ethnic groups, and how the variation in academic success patterns are among international students. It is critical for policy makers, administrators, educators, counselors, and staffs to understand the international student population and help them succeed in studying abroad. Summary and Conclusions In this chapter, I interpreted and summarized the data and literature related to the international students enrolled in U.S. higher education. The areas reviewed were (1) the definition of international students; (2) historical international education; (3) the demographics of international students, including foreign enrollment, the leading countries of origin, the distribution of sectors, the leading host institutions and states, the distribution of academic levels, fields, genders, and source of funds; (4) benefits of international education to the U.S.; and (5) the impact of the September 11th attack. Regarding the history of international educational exchange programs, I examined the identity of international students, the reasons they came to study in the U.S., and the trends of international students’ demographics in light of recent developments. The data reported that there has been a 1703 percent increase in foreign enrollment since 1954; international students comprised 4.3% of total U.S. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 57 postsecondary education in 2001 - 02. The great number of international students is coming from the Asia. India is the leading sending country in 2001 - 02. While research institutions host the largest numbers of international students, the community colleges have experienced the largest increases recently, representing about one-fifth of all international students in the U.S. In terms of study field, specific fields such as business and management, engineering, and mathematics and computer sciences, international student graduate enrollments exceeded 50%. The percentage of male foreign students in the U.S. was generally substantially higher than female foreign students. In Asian countries, only Japan and Taiwan sent a larger proportion of females than males, using the academic year1997 - 98 for example. With respect of source of funds, over two-thirds of all international students received the majority of their funds from family and personal sources. Regarding the benefits of international education, a record total of 582,996 international students studied in the U.S. in academic year 2001 - 02, bringing nearly $12 billion to the U.S. economy in tuition, fees, living expenses and related costs. The Department of Commerce considers educational services for international students, to be one of the country’s largest service sector exports. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 58 In terms of the impact of September 11th attack, the reports of international student enrollments this fall showed a more complex picture. ■ However, enrollments from the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia may have been Impacted, other nations such as India, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Pakistan have not been a substantial or dramatic change in enrollments by'students from most of these countries. Based on the results of this review of relevant literature, it was reasonable to conclude that many traditional theories might not apply to international students, as they have different profiles from American students and even are such a diverse population within themselves. To understand the unique and complicated factors influencing international students’ success, it is a necessary to modify theories now in use, to meet the needs of international student populations in the host colleges. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. CHAPTER III 59 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Cultural Capital Theory in Education International students have received little attention in academic success studies and related pre-entry background and first-year experience researches in American two-year institutions. Similar to minority students, foreign students have characteristics defining them as at-risk such as being ethnic minorities, non-English speaking, disadvantaged, or poorly prepared (Ting, 1998). Yet, they have not been sharing the norms, values, behaviors, and attitudes dominant in American institutions of higher education. Foreign students face not only many of the transitional challenges of traditional college students, but also likely to experience greater change of adjustment in culturally, socially, and institutionally. Besides, foreign students have less access to resources, such as their families and friends for coping with them (Pedersen, 1991). Even with these obstacles, foreign students excel in colleges (Goodwin & Nacht, 1983) and more likely to attain advanced degrees. This puzzle was found in many foreign studies as mentioned in previous chapters. Determining the effects of both one’s view of the host school context and one’s place in it and cultural capital on foreign students’ academic success will help researchers understand this problem. It is an important consideration in trying to understand how foreign students navigate their way through the host educational system. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 60 Cultural capital theory was stimulated largely by the work of sociologist Pierre Bourdieu in the 1970s and 1980s. Bourdieu’s theoretical contributions have been important in understanding the roles that class status, race, and gender play in educational achievement. The study draws on Bourdieu’s cultural capital theory (1974; 1977; 1986) with its concepts of cultural capital, habitus, and social and cultural reproduction to explain why international students succeed in a host country even when they encountered great difficulties. Cultural Capital Defined Cultural capital is an important part of Bourdieu’s theory of social reproduction. Bourdieu’s cultural capital theory was developed from Max Weber’s notion of status groups, which were considered to be social collectives that generated or appropriated distinctive cultural traits and style as a means to monopolize scarce social and economic resources (Bourdieu, 1974; 1977). Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital focuses on the class-based variation both in the meanings and uses of the various types of capital. His notion of cultural capital covers a wide variety of resources, such as verbal facility, general cultural awareness, aesthetic preferences, scientific knowledge, and educational credentials. Bourdieu (1989) conceptualizes resources as capital when they function as a “social relation of power” (p. 375) by becoming objects of struggle as valued resources. His point is to suggest that culture (in the broadest sense of the term) can become a power resource. In his view, cultural knowledge, skills, abilities, norms, values, and behaviors are possessed and often inherited by certain groups in society, and that these particulars Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 61 are distributed culturally and socially. Bourdieu has referred cultural capital as a set of “linguistic and cultural competencies” (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990, p. 73) that individuals from the dominant class usually inherit and sometimes learn. For instance, language is a major component of education as cultural capital. Schools are constantly seeking to improve the literary component of their programs, including the arts. They emphasize language and the development of broader categories of thought. To acquire cultural capital, a student must have the capacity to receive and decode language. Although schools require that students have this ability, they do not provide the techniques for receiving and decoding culture, even though they implicitly demand them from everyone. Thus, the acquisition of cultural capital, and consequent access to academic rewards, depends on the cultural capital transmitted by the family, which, in turn, is largely dependent on social class. Cultural capital is the system of factors derived from one’s parents that defines an individual’s class status (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). The families of each social class transmit distinctive cultural knowledge, and as a result children of upper class families inherit substantially different skills, abilities, manners, style of interaction, and facility with language. For instance, in a society that has very few literate members, knowing how to read and write gives one an enormous advantage over those who are illiterate (Bourdieu, 1977). Similarly, in a culture that depends increasingly on computers, those with early training in sophisticated computer skills may have valuable advantages over those who do not (Persell & Cookson, 1987). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 6 2 Members of the dominant class possess the most economically and symbolically valued kinds of cultural capital (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; McDonough, 1997). Thus the cultural capital of middle and upper class students privilege them in terms of economic security, organizational contexts, and personal support systems (Bourdieu, 1977). From this viewpoint, cultural experiences of the higher social statuses facilitate a child’s adjustment to school and influence academic achievement, thereby transforming cultural resources into cultural capital. In consequence, the higher the social class of the family the closer the culture it transmits is to the dominant culture, and the greater the attendant academic rewards. As described by Bourdieu, cultural capital is the vehicle through which background inequalities are translated into differential academic rewards, which in turn lead to unequal social and economic rewards, thereby maintaining and legitimizing the stratification of class. The cultural capital theory argues that the culture transmitted and rewarded by the educational system reflects the culture of the dominant class (Bourdieu, 1977; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). Other scholars have defined cultural capital in different ways. DiMaggio (1982) indicates that cultural capital not only mediates the relationship between family background and school outcomes, but it also has its greatest impact on educational attainment through affecting the quality of colleges attended. He concludes that cultural capital may play different roles in the mobility strategies of different classes and genders. Cultural capital, measured as the composite of cultural activities, attitudes, and knowledge, had been shown to increase the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 63 frequency of interactions about postsecondary plans between high school students and “high status” individuals, including teachers, school counselors, and peers (DiMaggio & Mohr, 1985). Moreover, Mohr and DiMaggio (1995) gave the following definition: “By cultural capital, we refer to prestigious tastes, objects, or styles validated by centers of cultural authority, which maintain and disseminate societal standards of value and serve collectively to clarify and periodically revise the cultural currency” (p. 168). This definition is vague enough to allow a wide number of interpretations, all of which connect to Bourdieu’s concept on at least some level. According to Lamont and Lareau (1988), cultural capital is commonly shared, high status cultural “signals” used for social and cultural exclusion. Signals include. attitudes, preferences, knowledge, behaviors, possessions, and credentials and may function as informal academic standards, as well as characteristics of the dominant class. The notion of social exclusion might encompass the denial of access to certain jobs or other resources available to some but not others, while cultural exclusion prompts segregation from high status groups. Specifically, research has revealed that students from low-SES backgrounds have lower educational aspirations, persistence rates, and educational attainment than do their peers from high-SES backgrounds prior to and during college (Astin, 1993; Boatsman, 1995; DiMaggio & Mohr, 1985; Hassan & Reynolds, 1988; Lareau, 1993; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Jencks et ah, 1972; Rubin, 1976; Sennett & Cobb, 1973). The differences begin at a young age and are cumulative, resulting from Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 64 many forces including individual agency and group values, and are shaped by the SES differences such as parental interaction styles and expectations, school structure, and school experiences and expectations (Astin, 1984, 1985, 1993; Boatsman, 1995; Cicourel & Kitsuse, 1963; Clark, 1960; Lareau, 1987, 1993; MacLeod, 1987; McDonough, 1991), and by the sociohistorical experience of different racial groups such as immigrant groups and people of color (Liberson, 1980; Ogbu, 1978). Parental expectations and definitions of success vary with group values and social status as well, and mediate student aspirations. The sociohistorical inequality of a group not only affects its success but also results in the development of an “oppositional identity” that rejects the dominant group’s values and cultural traits (Ogbu, 1978). According to Ogbu, this oppositional identity allows disadvantaged groups to maintain a positive self-image in the face of harsh treatment and attacks on their culture. This is especially true for group, such as African and Native Americans. Ogbu contends that the opposition identity of these groups defines cultural differences as insurmountable barriers, and sees that perseverance does not bring about the same social and occupational rewards for their groups. With respect to education, these groups believe that effort in school has little reward and consequently are often self-select out of particular situations such as not enrolling in higher education. On the other hand, low-SES parents are more likely to view a high-school diploma as the norm for their children than are high-SES parents, to whom a bachelor’s or advanced degree is considered the norm (Halle, 1984; Lareau, 1987, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 65 1993; MacLeod, 1987; Willis, 1997). Low-SES parents are also more likely to define success as a secure full-time job after graduating from high school, with no firm expectation of college attendance for their youngsters (Lareau, 1987; Rubin, 1976). College attendance to these parents often means enrolling in a community college or technical school; by contrast, for high-SES parents it implies entering a good four-year college (Rubin, 1976). However, according to Astin (1975, 1993), low-SES students who attend a four-year college are less likely to persist to a bachelor’s degree or to aspire to a graduate degree. Yet, those from low-SES backgrounds who are able to persist to graduation and receive their bachelor’s degree, though, often get fewer rewards compared to their high-SES peers. For example, Bowles and Ginitis (1976) found that college graduates from higher-SES backgrounds have higher incomes and overall socioeconomic statuses than those from low-SES backgrounds. These findings are matched with the conclusions that are proposed by Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) and Lamont and Lareau (1988): individuals who lack the required cultural capital may (1) lower their educational aspirations, self-select out of particular situations (e.g., not enroll in higher education); (2) overperform in order to compensate for their less valued cultural resources; or (3) receive fewer rewards for their educational investment. Mehan and his colleagues (1996) challenge Bourdieu’s framework that perceives change as a difficult process. They assert that if children of low-status families can learn the skills, manners, and norms presumably inherited by elite Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 66 students, then the immutability of cultural capital comes into question. Mehan and others contend that cultural capital should be flexible enough to allow less fortunate members of society to have access, and that the exchange of social capital should not be limited to agencies connected to elite families. Finally, McDonough (1997) defines cultural capital as the knowledge that social elites value yet schools do not teach. This implies that parental influence is an important factor to consider. Cultural capital is transmitted from one generation to the next by parents who inform their children about the value, importance, and process of securing a college education. McDonough (1994) has documented that parents with high SES are quite often strategic in maximizing the likelihood of their children will gain acceptance to top institutions of higher learning. Middle- and upper-class families highly value a college education and advanced degrees as a means of ensuring continued economic security. She notes that individuals of the middle and upper classes inherit cultural capital through their families and neighborhoods. Although each class has its own form of cultural capital, the most socially and economically valued forms are those possessed by the dominant classes. In the U.S., resources to access and succeed in higher education are part of the dominant class’ cultural capital. Conversely, the resources for accessing higher ■ education maybe missing in families of lower SES or from non-college attending families (Mehan, 1996). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 67 Bourdieu ’ $ General Theoretical Framework Bourdieu (1984) notes that cultural capital, habitus, and field (discuss later) all work together to generate practice, or social action. Along with economic, social, and symbolic capital, cultural capital serves as a power resource or a way for groups to remain dominance or gain status. Cultural capital can exist in three states: embodied (dispositions of mind and body), objectified (cultural goods), and institutionalized (educational qualifications) (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 243). Embodied capital pertains to the disposition to appreciate and understand cultural goods. It refers to the preference of an individual, particularly one’s ability to internalize capital. Individuals who attempt to reach an embodied state make efforts to become more cultured or cultivated. They might attend self-enriching activities such as lectures, music events, dance performances, or museums. Parents and teachers may also attempt to instill embodied capital in children by bringing them to various cultural events and on field trips. Objectified capital refers to objects that require special cultural abilities to appreciate what individuals possess such as works of arts. To appropriate and use objectified cultural capital, one needs embodied cultural capital (Bieber, 1999; Bourdieu, 1997). Institutionalized capital is best associated with the attainment of educational credentials. Bourdieu notes that institutionalized capital is “academically sanctioned,” and the qualifications are “legally guaranteed” (Bourdieu, 1986, p. 248). With regard to higher education investment decisions, cultural capital in its three forms refers to the value placed on obtaining a bachelor’s degree, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 68 as well as the information available about the means of acquiring a college education (DiMaggio & Mohr, 1985; McDonough, 1997). The field is “a network or a configuration of objective relations between positions” (Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992, p. 97). Fields are spaces in which dominant and subordinate groups struggle for control over resources, each field is related to one or more types of capital. The field is characterized by the “rules of the game,” which are neither explicit nor codified. Because the field is dynamic, valued forms of social and cultural capital are also dynamic and arbitrary (see Barker, 1984; MacLeod, 1987, Willis, 1977). Certain forms of cultural capital are valued more than others, and each person brings a different set of dispositions (habitus) to the field of interaction. Habitus is one’s view of the world. It is one’s disposition, which influences the actions that one takes. Habitus is generated by one’s place in the social structure; by internalizing the social structure and one’s place in it, one comes to determine what is possible and what is not possible for one’s life and develops aspirations and practices accordingly. The notion of habitus provides the basis for developing internalized values that define an individual’s orientation toward the world (Bourdieu, 1977; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977). Bourdieu utilizes the notion of “habitus” to explain how individuals come to formulate and change their aspirations and expectations. Bourdieu argues that the reproduction of the social structure results from the habitus of individuals. To Bourdieu, “habitus” presents “a system of lasting, transposable dispositions which, integrating past experiences Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 69 and actions, functions at every moment as a matrix of perceptions, appreciations, and actions.” (1973, p. 83). Therefore, past experiences, which include the effects of socialization processes as well as the individual’s actions and observations cumulate to produce one’s worldview, of which aspirations and expectations are a key component. For Bourdieu (1973), aspiration represents, in part, an “internalization of objective probabilities for success”- a calculus each individual performs, perhaps more unconsciously than consciously, of the likelihood he or she has of achieving a given goal. Culture and structure play an interactive role in this regard. Socialization processes can orient individuals toward particular goals and, via the transmission of cultural capital, provide the means necessary to achieve them; however, through the calculus of the probable, such influences are constantly mediated by structural constraints in the form of perceptions of the opportunity structure. Overall, one’s practices or actions are the result of one’s habitus and capital within a given field. In terms of schooling, Bourdieu and Wacquant (1992) describe the school system as a field. Doing one’s schoolwork and attempting to get good grades are kinds of practices in this field. Within the educational field, the most valuable form of capital is cultural capital: “academic success is directly dependent upon cultural capital and on the Inclination to invest in the academic market” (Bourdieu, 1973, p. 96). Namely, habitus plays a large role in students’ success in school. Students’ aspirations toward education, study hard, and go to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 70 college depend on students’ place in the class system and their expectations of whether people from that class tend to be successful academically (Swartz, 1997). Students from the lower class, who aspires to succeed in studying and reaching their goals, may see the accumulation of cultural capital as a way to overcome the obstacles that are typical for those in their class position. Yet, individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds who fail to develop or maintain high aspirations do not simply need a single individual (role-model) to point out the appropriate path to them, they need to be surrounded by enough examples of success to believe that it is actually possible for them to attain it. The foregoing description addressed class difference in cultural capital, habitus, and schooling. Gender, however, has been a neglected area, even though gender differences are existed in reality. Boys and girls have different experiences in the schooling system that may lead to their different positions in society. Although boys and girls receive the same cultural training if they are in the same social class, their habitus may be quite different, on the basis of their socialization and the views they form of the opportunity structure available to them. According to Bourdieu (1984), cultural capital is important for women for two reasons: (1) women make use of capital for acquiring husbands, and (2) women play the key role of transmitting cultural capital to their children. Men are more inclined to use cultural capital for educational qualifications and for getting jobs. These different uses of cultural capital imply that social actions take place in different fields for men and women, with different forms of capital serving as Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 71 currency. Bourdieu (1984) hints at this possibility: In every relationship between educational capital and a given practice, one sees the effects of the dispositions associated with gender which help to determine the logic of the reconversion of Inherited capital into educational capital, that is, the “choice” of the type of educational capital which will be obtained from the same initial capital, more often literary for girls, more often scientific for boys. (p.105) In other words, one’s habitus, determined by the available opportunity structure or field, shapes the type of class-based capital that men and women have, resulting in gendered forms of cultural capital (Laberge, 1995). Moreover, one’s habitus is also gendered as a result of the possibilities available to each group. In her study, using subsample data from the National Longitudinal Study of the High School Class of 1972 (NLS-72) (a national sample of over 22,000 students who were first studied in the spring of their senior year in high school 1972) which are sorted out in the seven years following high school graduation (reinterviewed in 1973, 1974, 1976, and 1979), examines the process of the occupational expectations of high school seniors men and women, McClelland (1990) states that men who have professional ambitions are following their habitus, while women with the same ambitions are violating what their traditional habitus may be dictating. Despite the significant changes in attitudes toward women’s roles since the 1960s, studies point out that there is still evidence that girls receive different messages than do boys about the likelihood of their success in the world (Cherlin & Walters, 1981; Thornton, Alwin, & Camburn, 1983; Thornton & Freedman, 1979). At home as well as in school, girls are more likely than are boys to attribute success to effort or Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 72 luck and failure to their lack of ability, and they are also less likely to receive praise for their abilities (Gitelson, Petersen, & Tobin-Richards, 1982; Parsons, Adler, & Kaczala, 1982; Sadker & Sadker, 1985; Sandler & Hall, 1982). With such attitudes deep-rooted in their habitus, one might well expect young women to be less likely than their male counterparts to aspire to do well in school, to go far in school, or to develop high-status professional goals or persist in the struggle to turn ambitious occupational dreams into reality. Robinson and Garnier (1985) also note that while men and women may begin their lives with similar class positions and cultural capital, the social reproduction process functions in such a way that women attain less-privileged positions than men do. Specifically, even those who have similar experiences will not respond to them in the same way, the impact of life experiences is filtered through the habitus, which represents the past as well as present. Many educational inequalities between men and women seem to be disappearing to date. However women are still at a disadvantage. Even when they have majored in the same subject in college, women do not fare as well as men in the labor market. Mickelson (1989) provided four possible hypotheses to explain why female students would continue to do well in school despite these obstacles. The first, the reference group hypothesis, states that although female students are aware of male advantage, they base their successes on the successes of other women. The Pollyanna hypothesis states that girls assume that gender inequality is a thing of the past, while the social powerlessness hypothesis states that girls assume the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 73 opposite, believing that education is the only way to attain high-status husbands (this assumes that getting a high status husband is their goal in pursuit of high status. Marital selection is vital to individual life chances and well-being). The sex-role socialization hypothesis argues that girls do well in school because they have been socialized to be good and follow orders. Each hypothesis depicts a different habitus that young women may possess. Empirical research is needed to determine how habitus may affect the performance of female students. Bourdieu uses the concepts of cultural capital and habitus to explain the ways in which individual agency combines with socially structured opportunities and aspirations to reproduce the existing social structure (field). Individuals inherit and learn cultural capital from families where the primary place transmits distinctive cultural knowledge such as skills, abilities, manners, styles of interaction, and facility with language. The dominant class transmits the most economically and symbolically valued kinds of cultural capital to their next generation. Educators differentially value high-status cultural capital, rewarding the students from higher-SES backgrounds who possess this capital, leaving those students with low-status cultural capital at-risk for lower success rates in colleges, thus, the higher the social class of the family, the closer the culture it transmits is to the dominant culture, and the greater the attendant academic rewards. Conversely, people from the class possessing scarce cultural capital are unlikely to succeed educationally. The habitus of a student from that social class, such as low-SES background, generally would lead that student to have lower aspirations as well as predispose Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 74 students to utilize educational strategies that may not be as successful in attaining the desired educational profits. Accordingly, the student could make choices that will result in maintenance of their lower social position. Otherwise they can learn to make different choices, choices that could facilitate educational mobility, whereas the habitus has a dynamic component and an individual can adopt new elements as a result of new experiences, historical changes in the material environment, exposure to another individual’s habitus, or associating with people who originate from a different habitus, all of which are possible in the college environment (Harker, 1984; Lamont & Lareau, 1988). Generally, international students’ native cultural capital is different from the dominant culture of their host country. In a way they come to study in the U.S. without a cultural capital “match”, despite disadvantageous many international students have still succeeded in U.S. colleges. Also, in terms of the relationship between the degree of cultural difference and academic reward, while the Eastern cultures are more different than Western cultures to the U.S., many East Asian students are still leading in academic successes over other international students, in particular those from the Western countries. What makes them succeed in the host college? Beyond the culture capital, is there something else making East Asian international students different from others in succeeding in colleges in U.S.? It seems that the factors influencing the academic success of East Asian international students in U.S. higher education are multidimensional, and need to be explored in more depth. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 75 While Bourdieu’s cultural capital provides Insight into understand how relationships of power are perpetuated between actors In a field (social structure), and there Is evidence that cultural capital and habitus facilitate adjustment to school and influence academic success, it does not account for the relationships of power are exist between the individual agency and the institution. For example, cultural capital theory has not explained how a student access to the institutionalized resources or relationships to increase their opportunities to succeed in college, under what considerations institution allocates their resources among the student populations, and through what kind of channels the resources can be transmitted to a student. Such relationships are thought to be especially important to international students, who often lack of resources to coping with the difficult situations that they encountered in a host college, accordingly, they require guidance and assistance from any significant others including instructors; counselors; and peers; to access to the institutionalized resources and relationships which may have potential benefits to them in pursuit of the ultimate goals of success in studying abroad. For this study, to understanding what factors influencing academic success of international students in particularly the Chinese international students in LACCD, beyond the dimensions of race, class, gender, and cultural differences, it is necessary for a researcher to pay special attention to the interaction of the individual and the college organizational and cultural context. In general, social capital is defined as resources that result from relationships between people. There are two conceptualizations of social capital have been Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 76 widely employed In educational research. The term “social capital” originated as early as 1920, the Initial theoretical development of the concept Is attributed to French sociologist Bourdieu and American sociologist Coleman (Fortes, 2000). Bourdieu wrote about the interaction of three sources of capital: economic, cultural, and social capital. Coleman (1988) focused on the role of social capital In the creation of human capital. Although both scholars concentrated on the benefits accruing to individuals or families by virtue of their ties with others, there are significant variations in their theories. Social capital has been elaborated in two principal ways: in terms of norms (Coleman) and in terms of access to institutional resources (Bourdieu). Social Capital Defined Bourdieu (1986) was the first sociologist to systematically analyze the concept of social capital. He (1977b) defines social capital as the aggregate of the actual or potential resources, which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition. These relationships or social networks are constructed through investment strategies oriented to the values and goals of the collectivity and produce resources that have potential benefits. For example, the Catholic Church values education and working for a common good. Catholics have set up several institutions, which work to affirm their values and norms; these include schools at all educational levels, hospitals, nursing homes, and other charitable organizations. Through these institutions, people establish relationships or social capital, which support the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 77 Catholic Church’s mission (Bryk, Lee, & Holland, 1993; Coleman & Hoffer, 1987). This group membership provides members with the backing of the collectively owned capital. Relations may exist as material or symbolic exchanges. Social capital is made up of social obligations or connections. In certain conditions, it is convertible into economic capital. In the same way that money can be exchanged for valued goods and services, a social relationship is converted into valued outcomes such as gaining access to college admission or acquiring employment. Thus social capital, like economic capital, produces profits or benefits in the social world, and is converted into other forms of capital, accumulates, and reproduces itself in an identical or in expanded form (Bourdieu, 1986). Bourdieu (1986) suggests that the volume of social capital possessed by a person depends on size of the network of connections that he/she can mobilize and on the volume of capital- economic, cultural, and symbolic- possessed by each person whom he/she is connected. Therefore, Bourdieu’s social capital is decomposable into two elements: (1) the social relationships that allow the individual to claim resources possessed by the collectivity, and (2) the quantity and quality of those resources (Portes, 1998). Ultimately, Bourdieu sees social capital as the investment of the dominant class to maintain and reproduce group solidarity and preserve the group’s dominant position (Lin, 1999a). On the other hand, James Coleman views social capital as consisting of norms and social control (Coleman, 1988). It originates in the structure of relations between and among actors. Coleman’s social capital is defined by its function, and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 78 it concerns structures and actors across a variety of different entities. He (1988) states: It is not a single entity but a variety of different entities, with two elements in common: they all consist of some aspect of social structures, and they facilitate certain actions of actors- whether persons or corporate actors- within the structure, (p. SI08) Like other forms of capital, social capital is productive, making possible the achievement of certain ends that in its absence would not be possible. The relationships, which foster social capital, are constructed for creating resources. These relationships form social networks that allow one to obtain resources by virtue of social network membership. These relationships are the social capital, not the resources themselves, inheres in the social structure. Furthermore, Coleman proposes that social capital is intangible and has three forms: (1) level of trust, as evidenced by obligations and expectations, (2) information channels, and (3) norms and sanctions that promote the common good over self-interest (Coleman, 1988). Both Bourdieu and Coleman highlight the importance of social networks. Coleman particularly emphasizes intergenerational closure, such as parental involvement in developing social capital, as a social structure that facilitates the emergence of effective norms. On the other hand, two major differences are evident in the definition of social capital stated by Bourdieu and Coleman. First, according to Portes (1998), the distinction of resources from the ability to obtain them in the social structure is explicit in Bourdieu (1986) but obscured in Coleman. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 79 The second difference stems from the authors’ differing orientations. Bourdieu sees social capital as a tool of reproduction for the dominant class, whereas Coleman sees social capital as social control, where trust, information channels, and norms are characteristics of the community. Therefore, Coleman’s work supports the idea that it is the family’s responsibility to adopt certain norms to advance children’s life chances, whereas Bourdieu’s work emphasizes structural constraints and unequal access to institutional resources based on class, gender, and race (Lareau, 2001). The effects of social capital vary with the social context. The most effective social capital is that which is useful across social contexts. This will enable the owner of the social capital to benefit from social capital in numerous social settings. Interpersonal and institutional relationships build on each other across social contexts, thus generating more social capital. The more social capital one has the more she or he is able to create. Whereas cultural capital would be what a student brings to school, and social capital is the networks one creates while in school. For Chinese international students, as discussed in foregoing, Asian culture is distinct from the U.S. culture in terms of knowledge, values, language, educational systems, and institution contexts. Their possessed cultural capital is not equivalent to the cultural capital needed to do well in the U.S. educational system. Also, they lose their social networks and supports during studying in the U.S. Under such as challenges, it interested one to know how Chinese international students rebuild required capitals across social contexts in order to maximizing their successes in the U.S. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 80 Bourdieu’s theories of social reproduction and of cultural and social capital were developed as explanations of unequal academic achievement to skill deficit and human capital theories. The use of a Bourdieuian approach has been adopted in many areas of educational research, Including language in the classroom, career decision-making, academic discourse, and family-school relations. Also, sociologists of education have extended Bourdieu’s theory of cultural and social capital to explain differential experiences in schools based on class, gender, and race. Past Research on Cultural and Social Capital No real consensus has been reached among educational researchers regarding an operationalization of cultural and social capital. Lamont and Lareau (1988) noted that even Bourdieu, who coined the term, was not entirely clear about its meaning. Thus, cultural and social capital has been operationalized in a number of ways. The default has been to define cultural capital according to the types of variables available in the data set being analyzed and the researchers’ ideas about how cultural capital functions. The result is three main categories in which cultural capital has been defined. The first and most common is to use variables that indicate participation in cultural activities, such as visiting museums or going to the ballet. Some studies have focused on these activities at the student level (Katsillis & Rubinson, 1990). Others have focused on the parents’ activities (Kalmijn & Kraaykamp, 1996). With this definition, one can conceive of cultural capital as arbitrary, something established by one group to prevent another from gaining power. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 81 With regard to education, the capital itself does not alter the students in any meaningful way but rather serves as a “signal” to teachers that they will relate better to these students and should promote them (DiMaggio, 1982; Farkas et a!., 1990). There have also been conflicting conclusions regarding the effects of cultural capital on educational outcomes, in whatever form it has been operationalized. Some have found strong support for a cultural capital effect on dependent variables like grades and years of education attained of minority groups (DiMaggio, 1982; DiMaggio & Mohr, 1985; Farkas et al., 1990; Kalmijn & Kraaykamp, 1996). Others have found that particular types of activities, such as taking long-term lessons or reading, matter more than others for the minority groups (Aschaffenberg & Mass, 1997; De Graaf et al., 2000). Still others have found no support for a cultural capital effect (Katsillis & Rubinson, 1990; Robinson & Gamier, 1985). Proxies for cultural and social capital that have been shown to be related to educational attainment include: educational aspirations (Alexander & Eckland, 1974; Sewell, Haller, & Ohlendorf, 1970; St. John, 1991; Thomas, 1980), parental encouragement (Alwin & Otto, 1977), strong self-concept and confidence in academic ability (Arnold, 1993), mother’s expectations for the child’s education (Jackson, 1990), encouragement from significant others (Sewell, et al., 1970; Thomas, 1980), peer college plans and behaviors (Alexander, Eckland, & Griffin, 1975; Alwin & Otto, 1977), ability to find role models (Arnold, 1993), interpersonal skills (Arnold, 1993), and frequency of religious attendance (Borus & Carpenter, 1984). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 82 Generally speaking, individual, family, and school factors are often used to explain the success of this relationship. Research in individual based explanations has examined the student’s academic ability backgrounds, language proficiency, attitude, motivations and aspirations; and in family based explanations has examined the parent’s level of education, occupational standing and/or income (Blau & Duncan, 1967; Sewell & Hauser, 1975), select aspects of the home environment such as the availability of cultural capital resources (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; DiMaggio, 1982; Teachman, 1987), and the relevant social support system (Coleman, 1987, 1988; Coleman & Hoffer, 1987). Each of these elements has been found to positively affect academic attainment. Some studies have used measures that seem more obviously reflective of SES, such as whether the parents provide a specific place to study (Teachman, 1987), or noncognitive traits, such as the way one carries himself or herself and communicates with others (Farkas et al., 1990). These measures support the argument that higher-SES students do better in school, but do not really address the process of social exclusion described in the definition of cultural capital presented earlier. With respect to Bourdieu’s idea of field, Lareau and Horvat (1999) developed a framework of moments of inclusion and exclusion, emphasizing the role of the school in accepting or declining the activation of social and cultural capital by families. Lareau (2001) suggests that researchers have generally overlooked the institutional standards or “rules of the game” to which Bourdieu referred in his notion of “field”. Stanton-Saiazar (1997) developed a social capital conceptual Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 83 framework for studying the socialization of racial minorities and identified intrinsic mechanisms of mainstream institutions that account for the problems in accumulating social capital for low-status and minority children and youth. This framework was further articulated and elaborated in Ms recent study of the school and kin support networks of Mexican American youth (Stanton-Salazar, 2001). His model highlights the embeddedness of the adolescent in a social network, affected by counterstratification and stratification forces. Research has shown the effects of cultural capital on aspirations, persistence, and attainment at multiple locations in the educational system (DiMaggio, 1982; DiMaggio & Mohr, 1985; Lareau, 1987, 1993; McDonough & Antonio, 1996). These studies provide evidence that family background and cultural capital have a significant impact on educational aspirations, persistence, and attainment from the earliest schooling experiences, through high school, to college, and extending beyond college. With respect to parenting practices, academic achievement, and educational attainment, empirical findings seem most inconsistent on this area. While much research supports the claim that parent involvement leads to improved academic achievement (Coleman, 1991; Epstein, 1991, 1992; Ho & Willms, 1996; National Association of Secondary School Principles, 1992; Topping, 1992), other research indicates that parent involvement is associated with lower levels of achievement (Horn & West, 1992; Milne et al., 1986) or does not affect achievement (Epstein, 1991; Keith, 1991). Furthermore, parent involvement’s effect on academic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 84 achievement varies with the minority or social status of the student (Lareau, 1989; Madigan, 1994). The variation in levels of parent involvement by ethnicity and social class, as well as the variation in how parent involvement affects achievement, may be one potential explanation for these inconsistent findings. In sum, the nature of the relationship between parent involvement and various outcomes during adolescence remains unclear. The literature tends to ignore group differences, particularly gender differences (Dumais, 2002). Much of the research has included gender as a control variable but has not discussed it in any detail (see De Graaf et al., 2000; Lareau, 1989; Lareau & Horvat, 1999). In studies that have discussed gender, the findings have not been consistent. For example, Katsillis and Rubinson (1990) did not find cultural capital effects for either sex, but Teachman (1987) found that cultural capital has a positive and significant effect for the educational attainment to female but not for male. In DiMaggio and Mohr studies, using data from Project Talent, DiMaggio (1982) found that male students have low levels of interest in cultural activities, while female students have moderately higher levels. He also found that female students from high-status families have the greatest return from having cultural capital, a phenomenon he labeled the “cultural reproduction model”, but the male students tend to follow the “cultural mobility” model, benefiting more from cultural capital if they are from lower-status groups. DiMaggio explained the gender difference in high-status females are culturally prescribed into the activities that would give them cultural capital, while high-status males tend to rebel against Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 85 their parents’ cultural values; he further argued that women may use cultural capital as a way to attract high-status men. Mohr and DiMaggio (1995), using the same data set, analyzed the intergenerational transmission of cultural capital and found that gender has a greater effect on the possession of cultural capital than do any family background variables including parental education, income, household cultural climate, and father’s occupation. These arguments matched Bourdieu’s perspective that has been described previously. More recently, Aschaffenburg and Maas (1997) used data from the Survey of Public Participation in the Arts from 1982, 1985, and 1992, focusing on training in high cultural activities. While they stated that females are more likely than males to participate in cultural classes, they found that with regard to making educational transitions, cultural capital benefits male and female students equally. This finding is disagreement with DiMaggio’s (1982). They suggested that the greater number of educational opportunities that exist for girls today may be one reason why cultural capital is no longer more important for them than it is for boys, as it was in the early 1960s. However, since they used a different dependent variable than did DiMaggio, it is difficult to say whether the gender differences in cultural capital have disappeared. Implication fo r Underrepresented Groups o f Students Student differences in cultural and social capital create varying enrollment, retention, persistence, and graduation rates (McDonough, 1997). Research has revealed that the amount of cultural and social capital, as well as the ability to convert this capital into educational attainment, differs by social class and race Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 86 (Arnold, 1993; Lareau, 1987; Orfield, 1988; Wells & Crain, 1994). In a qualitative study of educational attainment among African American and Mexican American valedictorians, Arnold (1993) concluded that racial, class, and gendered social structures and cultural norms restrict educational attainment for minority students. In the analysis of college access in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, Orfield (1988) found that the percentage of African American and Hispanic high school graduates who attended four-year colleges and universities declined during the early 1980s, whereas the percentage of Asian high-school graduates, many of whom were first generation college students, increased suggesting cultural differences in the value of educational success across racial groups. Studies have shown that Asian American parents believe the road to success was through education and effort (Chen & Stevenson, 1995; Kim, 1993). From the group values perspective, Ogbu (1995) indicated that Asian Americans interpret cultural differences as obstacles to overcome, conversely, groups such as African and Native Americans who have seen that perseverance does not bring about the same social and occupational rewards for their group do not encourage their children to work hard in school. Based upon the review of 21 studies on the long-term effects of school desegregation, Wells and Crain (1994) concluded that attending a school with students of other racial/ethnic groups provided African Americans with access to the information and sponsorship networks that are required for educational attainment. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 87 SES of families is viewed by much research as a predictor of educational performance and attainment (Blau & Duncan, 1967; Coleman et ah, 1966; Sewell, Halier, & Ohlendorf, 1970; Sewell & Shah, 1967). The lower SES minority families (particularly African American and Hispanic families) imply that minority students will have fewer resources to apply toward their education (Williams, 1992). This translates directly to fewer learning opportunities for students in low SES families (Entwisle, 1992; Haveman & Wolfe, 1994). As a result of the combined effects of low SES and inadequate preparation, underrepresented groups of students have low rates of access and persistence in college. Studies found that Latinos experience inequities in the transition from early schooling to college because of social and economic disadvantages, inadequate instruction, and disproportionate tracking into low-level courses and two-year colleges (Bennett, 1995; Romo, 1995). Freeman (1997) found that his interviewees pointed to the potential influence of physical conditions of the schools attended by African Americans, interest and assistance from teachers and counselors, belief at an early age that pursuing postsecondary education was a realistic option, and African American role models. Current research indicates that the provision of economic assistance is indeed a factor for those who cannot afford or perceive they cannot afford college (Gladieux & Swail, 1998; Pema & Swail, 2001). Jackson (1990) showed that receiving financial aid had a stronger positive effect on the probability of enrolling in college for Black and Hispanic college applicants in 1980 than for their White counterparts, but that the positive effect of financial aid for Hispanics Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 88 disappeared when background and academic characteristics were also taken into account. Besides SES factor, lower class status does not necessarily imply a lower level o f either performance or attainment for students. Previous studies have noted that academic success among lower class and working class students is significantly associated with parents’ efforts to instill good study habits in their children, as well as an emphasis on self-discipline (Clark, 1983). Hence, while students’ academic success will certainly be affected by their social class standing, it must also be considered in conjunction with the potential impact of culture-specific qualities such as language, cultural differences and group values. Group values may influence parents’ attitudes toward goals for their children (Luster & Okagaki, 1993). Parental aspirations for and interest in children’s education significantly impact the educational success and persistence (Bank, Slavings, & Biddle, 1990; Biddle, Bank, & Marlin, 1980; Kerckhoff, 1986). Thus, certain differences in educational performance between ethnic groups may result from differences in their respective cultural values (Luster & Okagaki, 1993). Studies revealed that Asian American parents place considerable value on education (Chao, 1996; Schneider & Lee, 1990), set lofty educational standards for their children (Chen & Stevenson, 1995; Crystal et al., 1994; Fejgin, 1995), and closely monitor their children’s coursework (Fejgin, 1995). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 89 Implication fo r International Students With respect to international students, while Bourdieu’s cultural and social capital theory has been found to be important in examining college access, mobility, and persistence, and providing an insight into how relationships of power are perpetuated through racial, families, communities, schools and other agencies in the postsecondary environment in a certain country, researches have scarce applied cultural and social capital theory to explaining the lives of foreign students facing in a host country. As a result, the explanation of relationship of power between international students’ academic success and cultural and social capital remains absent. It is clear that international students inherit and leam their cultural capital privileges from their home societies. For some, this means they bring values about education that are similar to those among high SES U.S. students. However, foreign students, no matter what social class they belong to, may experience difficulty in transiting their possessed privileges to the host country culturally and socially, because structural and environmental factors such as norms, values, linguistic patterns, authority structures, interaction dynamics, and educational systems are inherently different from theirs. Yet, in spite of an international student’s possibly high willingness to make the investments in time, effort and money necessary to success in higher education in host country, there still maybe a lot of significant barriers such as educational system, style of interaction, social norms and obligations, language that have to be overcome. Besides the economic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 90 security, the lack of privilege of organizational contexts and personal support systems are often viewed as the main challenges that face to international students in host country. While some international students may bring significant cultural capital to higher education in the U.S., most will come with a deficit in social capital. Traditionally, most Asian families believe that education is very important for success in life, and more importantly, they believe doing well in education will lead to even greater achievements in the future (Chao, 1994, 1996; Chen & Stevenson, 1995). Nevertheless, due to the higher educational elitism policy, in order to maximize one’s cultural capital and economic security, parents and children must make the investments in time, effort, and money necessary to succeed in higher education. Therefore, most Asian families not only encourage their children to work hard in study but also invest great amount of financial capital by sending their children to get more academic skills after school (Economist, 1996). International students from these countries often succeed in school. By contrast, during studying abroad international students lack much more of social connections and resources than domestic students possess to advance and succeed in the host country. Consequently, the determinant factors of academic success of Asian international students in college may be highly hinged on the socialization and cultural adjustment more than academic skills. Social capital may influence educational achievement and attainment above and beyond the effects of economic and cultural capital to foreign students particularly who come from Asia. Social capital is the means of access to the institutionalized capital (Ellinger & Carlson, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 91 1990). It is crucial to the academic success of international students in colleges in host country. To examine how different forms of cultural and social capital affect international students’ lives in host country, we also need to understand how socializing agents can prepare them for success in higher education. In reality, international students usually lose their home support network of friends, family and other acquaintances while facing uncertainty over the new cultural they are heading toward. To aid international students’ adjustment to and success in the academic setting, international student advisors and counselors are given the responsibilities to help these students work through the loss of social support experienced in coming to America and to develop the social networks necessary to support them academically. Studies have shown that motivational support from a third party is a key factor in the school achievement of low-income and minority students (Jacobi, 1991; LeCluyse, Tollefson & Borgers, 1985; Smith & Davidson, 1992). Mentors have been also found to be important in assisting in a student’s transition process (Jacobi, 1991). Mentors provide a crucial link between academic and cultural capital. Mentors may also play an important role in bridging the gap between foreign students’ social and cultural adjustment and the goals of education attainment. While the domestic students can navigate through the educational system with relative ease, those foreign students without easy access to the cultural and social connections that make college a natural path are forced to use other means to accomplish the same things. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 92 To International students, the difficulty In building a strong social network can be mitigated by college counselors, assuming students chose to access them and that those, counselors are culturally sensitive and understand those inhibitors and stimulators that affect international students’ interaction with the host society. In addition, participation in social activities such as orientation, informative programs and services are viewed as a means to help one to access social resources where it exists between individuals and school contexts. These programs can improve the awareness of international students of cultural and social expectations, responsibilities, availability of opportunities, and other aspects of life in the U.S. In other words, through participation in social support programs, foreign students may acquire a familiarity with the dominant culture that the educational system implicitly requires of its students for academic success. As a result, international students’ involvement in social activities, as well as the use of mentors may strengthen their ties to privileged social networks, and then increase their opportunities of success in their study abroad. Summary and Conclusions In this chapter, I discussed several theoretical studies related to the cultural capital and social capital, which provide the rational for this present study. The areas reviewed were: (1) the definition of cultural capital; (2) Bourdieu’s general theoretical framework, including field, cultural capital, and habitus; (3) gender difference; (4) the definition of social capital; (5) the comparison of Bourdieu’s Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 93 and Coleman’s social capital theory; (6) past research on cultural and social capital; and (7) the implication for underrepresented groups of students and international students. In this chapter, theoretical studies of cultural and social capital were demonstrated, in turn, very broad in its scope with reference to the educational practices and academic success of underrepresented groups of students and international students. Cultural capital is one of the conceptions of Bourdieu’s social reproduction theory. Many of the authors developed their assertions of cultural capital on this groundwork. Bourdieu’s cultural capital theory provides insight to how relationships of power are perpetuated through families, societies, schools, and other agencies, how cultural knowledge and competences that certain families possess and pass down to their progeny, and how cultural capital facilitate a child’s adjustment to school and influence academic achievement. Also Bourdieu’s cultural and social capital theory was developed as explanations of unequal academic achievement to skill deficit and human capital theories. The use of a Bourdieuian approach has been adopted in many areas of educational research, including language in the classroom, career decision-making, academic discourse, and family-school relations. Also, sociologists of education have extended Bourdieu’s theory of cultural and social capital to explain differential experiences in schools based on class, gender, and race. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 94 In terms of the social capita! theory, I reviewed in detail various viewpoints that were proposed by the sociologists Coleman and Bourdieu. While Coleman’s model has structural-functionalist roots, Bourdieu’s conceptualization is grounded in theories of social reproduction and symbolic power. As a result, social capital has been elaborated in two principal ways: in terms of norms and in terms of access to institutional resources. Bourdieu sees social capital as a tool of reproduction for the dominant class, whereas Coleman sees social capital as social control, where trust, information channels, and norms are characteristics of the community. Therefore, Coleman’s work supports the idea that it is the family’s responsibility to adopt certain norms to advance children’s life chances, whereas Bourdieu’s work emphasizes structural constraints and unequal access to institutional resources based on class, gender, and race (Lareau, 2001). The effects of social capital vary with the social context. The most effective social capital is that which is useful across social contexts. The more social capital one has the more she or he is able to create. I have found that no real consensus has been reached among educational researchers regarding an operationalization of cultural capital. Participating cultural activities; family backgrounds, including parental education, SES of families, expectation; and interpersonal interactions, such as interacting with peers, instructors, counselors, mentors; are viewed by much research as a predictor of educational performance and attainment. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 95 Some researches have revealed that the amount of cultural and social capital, as well as the ability to convert this capital into educational attainment, differs by social class and race (Arnold, 1993; Lareau, 1987; Orfield, 1988; Wells & Crain, 1994); the lower SES minority families imply that minority students will have fewer resources to apply toward their education (Williams, 1992); academic success between lower class and working class students is significantly associated with parents’ efforts to instill good study habits in their children, as well as an emphasis on self-discipline (Clark, 1983); and parental aspirations for and interest in children’s education significantly impact the educational success and persistence. With respect to international students, foreign students experience difficulty in transiting their possessed cultures to institutional contexts culturally and socially, because their cultures are quite different to the U.S. dominant culture, and they lost their social networks and supports when they study in the U.S. In spite of some international students bringing significant cultural capital to higher education in the U.S., most will come with a deficit of social capital. As a result, I noticed that, the determinant factors of academic success of Asian international students in college might highly hinge on the socialization and cultural adjustment more than academic skills. Due to the explanation of relationship of power between international students’ academic success and cultural and social capital remains absent. Further studies were requested by its necessity in order to gain more insight in to the process of academic success of international students in the colleges in host country. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 96 CHAPTER IV METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this study is to compare a sample of international students attending Los Angeles Community College District by selected countries to determine whether there are significant (1) differences in academic success between Chinese international students, other East Asian international students, non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students. (2) Relationships between academic success variable and traditional indicators of cultural and social capital, such as family background (parental education level), academic ability (high school GPA), English language proficiency (English ability), educational aspiration (beliefs and attitudes), and social interaction (academic integration); and (3) predictors of academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD. In this chapter I discuss the research questions and a description of the research methodology. Research Questions The research questions in this study are designed to explore the following areas: 1. What are the characteristics of international students at Los Angeles Community College District? To what extent are Chinese international Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 97 students’ characteristics the same as or different from those of other international student groups? 2. Does the Chinese international students’ academic success rate differ from other East Asian international students, non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students? How do they differ on individual variables? 3. What factors perdict success, if any? To what extent are they different across groups (Chinese international students, and the other student groups)? Methodology Research Design This is secondary data analysis research. The data are derived from the TRUCCS Project. The final sample for this secondary data analysis study consists of 2,584 students (about 51.7% of total sample) from all nine colleges within the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) that participated in the TRUCCS survey and for whom'transcript data could be accessed. According to Hagedom and Maxwell (2002), this database used in this study has been validated and refined through data analysis processes using a sampling design that maximized variation in the independent variables in the sample to allow researchers to make internally valid comparisons of subgroups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 98 This is an inferential study using a quasi-experimental design based on comparison design comparing the differences between Chinese international students and other population groups, including other East Asian international students, other non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students, on academic success. In addition, this study employed a series of correlation and factorial analyses to identify the relationships between academic success variable and independent variables of the Chinese international students. Scales previously identified by factor analysis and submitted to reliability analysis will represent these constructs. The study seeks to identify which factors can strongly predict Chinese international students’ academic success in community college. For the purposes of this study, academic success is defined as having a cumulative GPA A 2. Instrumentation In the Fall 1999 semester, the instrument was designed for a district where only 43 percent of students are native English speakers. The questionnaire (Appendix A) contained 47 questions designed to identify the goals, activities and actions of community college students that promote success, as a means of underscoring the community college function in an urban setting. Each question subdivided into detailed items that asked participants to rate the most appropriate answer as accurately as possible. For example, the ethnicity question had 22 choices plus a write-in just in case a respondent couldn’t find a suitable category. In addition, there were other items pertaining to language.ability and usage. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 99 Data Collection The survey instrument was piloted and revised in the Spring 2000 semester. The final instrument was administered during the Spring 2001 semester from March 5, 2001 to April 28, 2001 at each of the nine LACCD campuses to about 5,000 students across 241 classrooms. Participating classrooms were identified through a stratified random sampling method that relied heavily on three levels of English courses (2 levels below transfer, 1 level below transfer, and transfer level), occupational programs stratified by gender predominance, remedial courses, regular courses, learning communities, and traditional gateway courses. Approximately 35 survey administrators were trained on specific procedures and provided a script to help ensure consistent administration in each of the classrooms. In the first survey administration for the TRUCCS project, the survey administrators were asked to also take field notes about their experiences during this process. In the summer of 2001, transcript data were collected for all students who signed the required consent forms (96% of the sample). There are 4,581 students from the LACCD that participated in the TRUCCS survey and for whom transcript data could be accessed. Sample and Population This study utilized data collected through the TRUCCS project. The sample of students participating in the TRUCCS survey represented the diversity of the population within the LACCD campuses in terms of age, ethnicity, and academic abilities, representative of community colleges students enrolled for the first time in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 100 the Spring 2001 at LACCD. The Asian population (including Asian international students and Asian-American students) of TRUCCS sample is about 15.3% of the total (4,720) sample, and the Chinese population of this total sample is approximately 4.2% (USC Rossier School of Education Research Project, 2001). The population of the secondary data analysis study consisted of 659 international students (25.5% of the final sample) and 1,925 non-English speaking domestic students (74.5% of the final sample). The final sample of this analysis is 2,584 (56.4% of the total sample), with the remaining 1,997 English speaking domestic students comprising 43.6 percent of the total. In this study, by utilizing the variables of ethnicity, attended school another country, and native language is not English, international students were categorized into three groups, including Chinese international students (3.3%, N= 85), other East Asian international students (Japanese and Korean) (2.7%, N — 71), and non-East Asian international students (19.5%, N= 503). The frequency distribution of populations is presented in Table 2 and Figure 11. To clarify the nature of the sample of this secondary data analysis study, distributions of the population are summarized on a number of factors, such as age, gender, attendance an orientation program at this college, high school GPA, and college GPA, are presented in Tables 3 - 7 and Figures 12 - 16, respectively. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 101 Table 2 Distribution o f Populations Populations Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Chinese I. S. 85 1.9 3.3 3.3 Other E. A . I. S. 71 1.5 2.7 6.0 Non-E. A. I. S. 503 11.0 19.5 25.5 Domestic S. 1925 42.0 74.5 100.0 Total 2584 56.4 100.0 Missing System 1997 43.6 Total 4581 100.0 Populations 60 - c c l 20 • -V ///7//W /A W / / / / M Chinese I. S. Other E. A. I. S. Non-E. A. I. S. Domestic S. Student Groups Figure 11. Student populations of this study. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 102 Table 3 Distribution o f Population by Age Count Populations Total Chinese I. S. Other E. A. I. S . Non-E. A. I. S. Domestic S . Age 19 or younger 8 1 28 380 417 20-29 51 47 183 1204 1485 30-39 16 17 160 224 417 40 or older 9 6 129 93 237 Total 84 71 500 1901 -2 5 5 6 1400 1200 - 1000 c 13 800 - 600 - 200 - j i _ Populations B B Chinese I. S. □HUother E. A. I. S. B U N on-E . A. I. S. E ^fcom estic S. 19 or younger 20-29 30-39 40 or older Age Figure 12. Populations by ail age groups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 103 Table 4 Distribution o f Populations by Gender Populations Total Chinese I. S. Other E . A. I. S. Non-E. A. I. S. Domestic S. Gender Male Count 22 25 171 756 974 Row % 2.3% 2.6% 17.6% 77.6% 100% Column % 26.5% 36.2% 34.8% 40.1% 38.5% Female Count 61 44 320 1130 1555 Row % 3.9% 2.8% 20.6% 72.7% 100% Column % 73.5% 63.8% 65.2% 59.9% 61.5% Total Count 83 69 491 1886 2529 Row % 3.3% 2.7% 19.4% 74.6% 100% , , Column,,% ,,,, 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100% 1200 Populations ■ illChinese I. S. UHJother E. A. I. S. Male Female Gender Figure 13. Populations by gender. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 104 Table 5 Distribution o f Population by Attendance o f an Orientation Program at the College Populations Chinese I. S. Other E . A. I. S. Non-E. A. I. S. Domestic S. Total I have attended No an orientation at this college. Count Row % Column % 45 3.8% 53.6% 34 2.9% 48.6% 229 19.5% 47.2% 865 73.7% 46.1% 1173 100% 46.6% Yes Count 39 36 256 1012 1343 Row % 2.9% 2.7% 19.1% 75.4% 100% Column % 46.4% 51.4% 52.8% 53.9% 53.4% Total Count 84 70 485 1877 2516 Row % 3.3% 2.8% 19.3% 74.6% 100% Column % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% © 6 o T -l ..1 0 0 % , 1200 1000 800 3 600 8 4 0 0 200 0 No Yes 1 have attended an orientation program at this college Figure 14. Populations by attendance o f an orientation program at the college. D O Populations i l l l Chinese I. S. fTTTiother E. A. I. S. JS lN on-E . A. I. S. K^Dornestic S. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 105 Table 6 Distribution o f Population by High School GPA Populations Chinese Other E. Non-E. Domestic I. S. A. I. S. A. I. S. S. Total High D or lower Count 1 20 21 school GPA Column % .2% 1.1% .8% C- Count 1 1 1 54 57 Column % 1.2% 1.4% .2% 2.9% 2.3% C Count 3 3 8 226 240 Column % 3.7% 4.3% 1.6% 12.1% 9.6% c+ Count 3 7 32 326 368 Column % 3.7% 10.0% 6.6% 17.4% 14.6% B- Count 11 15 75 317 418 Column % 13.4% 21.4% 15.4% 16.9% 16.6% B Count 20 10 111 353 494 Column % 24.4% 14.3% 22.7% 18.9% 19.7% B+ Count 15 15 120 330 480 Column % 18.3% 21.4% 24.6% 17.6% 19.1% A- Count 12 12 86 159 269 Column % 14.6% 17.1% 17.6% 8.5% 10.7% A Count 17 7 54 87 165 Column % 20.7% 10.0% 11.1% 4.6% 6.6% Total Count 82 70 4 8 8 1872 2512 .. % ............... 1 0 0 .0 % 1 0 0 .0 % 1 0 0 .0 % ... ! 0 0 J % _ 100% = 200 - 100 - Populations ^ ■ C h i n e s e I. S . I I 1 1 1 1 O t h e r E. A . I. S . mWN o n -F . A. I . S . iT /x '/to oroestic S. D or lower C+ A - High School GPA Figure 15. Populations by high school GPA. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 106 Table 7 Distribution o f Population by College GPA Chinese I. S. Populations Other E. Non-E. A. I. S. A. I. S. Domestic 5. Total College > 0 <1 Count 2 8 75 85 GPA Row % 2.4% 9.4% 88.2% 100% Column % 2.8% 1.6% 4.1% 3.4% S 1 <2 Count 2 6 53 337 398 Row % .5% 1.5% 13.3% 84.7% 100% Column % 2.4% 8.5% 10.6% 18.2% 15.9% 2: 2 <3 Count 21 21 166 774 982 Row % 2.1% 2.1% 16.9% 78.8% 1 0 0 % Column % 24.7% 29.6% 33.3% 41.8% 39.2% 5 3 <4 Count 53 34 223 584 894 Row % 5.9% 3.8% 24.9% 65.3% 1 0 0 % Column % 62.4% 47.9% 44.7% 31.6% 35.7% = 4 Count 9 8 49 80 146 Row % 6.2% 5.5% 33.6% 54.8% 100% Column % 10.6% 11.3% 9.8% 4.3% 5 .8 % Total Count 85 71 499 1850 2505 Row % 3.4% 2.8% 19.9% 73.9% 100% Column % 1 0 0 .0 % 1 0 0 .0 % 100.0% 100.0% 1 0 0 % 1000 e 3 O < _ > 800 - 600 400 200 > 0 <1 > 1 <2 2 <3 ^ 3 <4 —ail Populations M ill Chinese I. S. II11 Ho tte r E. A. I. S. Mon-E. A. I. S. Domestic S. College G PA Figure 16. Populations by college GPA. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 107 Data Analysis This study uses both descriptive statistics and inferential statistics to investigate the existence and extent of relationships among selected variables using the statistical software package SPSS. An Alpha value of greater than .6 is considered to be reliable. Several procedures were used to analyze the data from the study: (1) Descriptive Statistics including frequencies, means, and standard deviations to yield information about the basic features of the data of variable such as demographics; (2) Factor Analysis to yield information about which features or combinations of features of the variables have an effect; (3) Comparison Analyses including one way analysis of covariance (ANOVA) to yield information about the difference in academic success among the Chinese international students group, other international student groups, and non-English speaking domestic student group, and then Post Hoc Tests follow up tests where appropriate; and by comparing the observed frequencies against expected frequencies, Pearson Chi-Square to yield information about the differences relative to academic success and individual variables between the Chinese population group and the population group which is significantly different from Chinese population; (4) Correlation Analysis to yield information about the correlation between the academic success variable and individual independent variables. Two different sets of Pearson Correlation Analysis were conducted. One was applied to the successful Chinese international students and another one was applied to the significantly different population group; Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. and (5) Univariate Analysis to yield information about what factor is the best predictor to predict Chinese international students’ academic success. To better understand of Chinese International students’ academic success, the same analysis was applied to the domestic student group, which showed significant difference in academic success from the Chinese international student group. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 109 CHAPTER V RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSES Introduction The findings of the study are presented in this chapter. The results of descriptive and inferential statistics are presented in relation to answering the research questions. Descriptive findings, which include demographic Information necessary to frame the remainder of the findings, are presented first. Statistical findings, evaluated in relation to the two-tailed significance tests of zero-order correlation coefficients, follow. Results are discussed within the context of the cultural capital theory presented as the conceptual framework for this study. The first section of this chapter presents the construct validity and reliability of each variable set. The second section presents the descriptive statistics of observed variables. The third section presents the results of comparison analysis to examine the difference in academic success between study population groups and between individual independent variables. The fourth section presents the correlation analysis relative to the academic success variable and Independent variables comparing the Chinese international students group and the other population groups which are different from Chinese international students group, and presents the results of univariate analysis to examine the factors that predict Chinese international students’ academic success at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 110 Construct Validity and Reliability Construct validity of the independent variables was established through factor analysis. Based on cultural and social capital theory, five variable sets were - included in this analysis. Each set was submitted to reliability item analysis which yielded a > .6 Cronbach’s Alpha. These variables included: Parental Education Levels. High School GPA, English Ability, Attitudes and Beliefs, and Academic Integration. Table 8 lists the 38 subscales selected for this study grouped in the seven clusters (Demographics, Personal and Situational Status, Family Background, Academic Ability, English Language Proficiency, Educational Aspiration, and Social Interaction) used in this study. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Ill Table 8 Construction o f Validity and Reliability o f Selected Independent Variables Scale and Cronbach’s Alpha Items/ Variables Comprising Scale Family Background Highest formal education of parents: 6th grade or less Junior high or middle school Some high school Finished high school or GED Some community college Completed community college Some four-year college Completed four-year college degree Some graduate school Graduate degree Parental Education Levels Alpha =.8301 English Language Proficiency Not at all to very well: Read in English Write in English Understand a college lecture Read a college textbook Write an essay exam Write a term paper Participate in class discuss Communicate with instructor English Abilities Alpha = .9233 Educational Aspiration Strongly agree to strongly disagree: I always complete homework assignments I keep trying even when frustrated by a task Understand what is taught is important to me Success in college is largely due to effort I can learn all skills taught in college I enjoy doing challenging class assignments I expect to do well and earn good grades Attitudes Alpha = .7791 Beliefs Alpha = .6142 Strongly agree to strongly disagree: Zscore: It is import to finish courses in program of studies Zscore: I am very determined to reach my goals As things stand, do you think you will Zscore: I will get a Bachelor’s degree Zscore: I will transfer to a 4-year college/ university Social Interaction 0 or didn’t have time to 5 times or more: Talk with an instructor before or after class Talk with an instructor during office hours Help another student understand homework Study in small groups outside of class Speak with an academic counselor Academic Integration Alpha = .7330 Academic Ability High School GPA* Demographics Age* Gender* Personal and Situational Status The highest academic degree one desired to obtain* The attendance of an orientation program* Note. * Items simply represent factors entered. Therefore, do not contain Cronbach’s A lpha reliability scores. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 112 Description o f Populations As mentioned in Chapter IV, the international student population of this study included Chinese international students (3.3%, N= 85), other East Asian international students (2.7%, N — 71) (combined with Japanese and Korean international students), and non-East Asian international students (19.5%, N = 503). The number of all international students in this study was 659 (25.5% of the final sample), with the remaining 1,925 being domestic students whose first language is not English (74.5% of the final sample). The final sample of this study is 2,854 (56.4% of the total sample), with the remaining 1,997 English speaking domestic students comprising 43.6 percent of the total. Findings by Research Questions Research Question No. 1: What are the characteristics o f international students at LACCD? To what extent are Chinese interantional students ’ characteristics the same as or different from those o f other international student groups? To answer Research Question No. 1, data were collected on (1) Demographics (age and gender), and (2) Personal and Situational Status (the highest academic degree one desired to obtain, and the attendance of an orientation program at the college). The data identifying the characteristics of international students at LACCD are presented in descriptive tables for each of the variables described above. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 113 Populations by age. Respondents provided their age as of December 31, 2001. While ages were separated into 10 categories in the original TRUCCS survey, in this study, four age categories were reformed: age 19 or younger, age 20 - 29, age 30 - 39, and age 40 or older, to allow for equal distances in the frequency cells. The frequency distribution by four age categories is presented in Table 9. Close to half of the international students (42.9%, N — 281) were ages 20 - 29. The youngest age group was observed in Chinese population group, with more than two thirds (70.2%, N — 59) being classified as younger than age 29. The highest percentage (25.8%, N= 129) of non-East Asian international students clustered in the 40 or older age category. Table 9 Frequency Distribution by Four Age Categories Population Groups Chinese Other E. Non-E. I. S. A. I. S. A. I. S. Total Age 19 or younger Count 8 1 28 37 Column % 9.5% 1.4% 5.6% 5 .6 % 20-29 . Count 51 47 183 281 Column % 60.7% 66.2% 36.6% 42.9% 30-39 Count 15 17 160 193 Column % 19.0% 23.9% 32.0% 29.5% 40 or older Count 9 6 129 144 Column % 10.7% 8.5% 25.8% 2 2 .0 % Total Count 84 71 500 655 Column % 100.0% 100.0% m o % _ ! 0 0 % Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Populations by gender. In Table 10, close to two thirds of all international students (66.1%, N= 425) were female, and more than one third (33.9%, N= 218) were male. Chinese international student group had the highest percentage of female students among student groups (73.5%, N= 61). Table 10 Frequency Distribution by Gender Population Groups Other E. Chinese I. S. A. I. S. Non-E. A. I. S. Total Gender Male Count 22 25 171 218 Column % 26.5% 36.2% 34.8% 33.9% Female Count 61 44 320 425 Column % 73.5% 63.8% 65.2% 66.1% Total Count 83 69 491 643 Column % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100% Populations by the highest academic degree one desired to obtain. According to Table 11, about one fourth (25.7%, N = 167) of the total population would like to obtain a Master’s degree if there were no obstacles. The highest academic degrees desired of Chinese international students (28.6%, N = 24) were the “Master’s” and “Maybe Bachelor’s” degree, respectively. Other East Asian international students reported the “Bachelor’s” and “Maybe Bachelor’s” degrees (20.0%, N = 14). Most of the non-East Asian international students (26.2%, N = 130) would like to have “Master’s” degree if there were no obstacles. It is important to note that none of the Chinese students would like to take classes without also seeking a degree. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 115 Table 11 Frequency Distribution by the Highest Academic Degree One Desired to Obtain _ __________Population Groups______________ Chinese Other E. Non-E. I. S. A. I. S. A. I. S. T otal The Take class/no degr Count 3 12 15 highest academic degree one Column % 4.3% 2.4% 2 .3 % Voc Cert Count Column % 1 1.2% 1 1.4% 16 3.2% 18 2.8% desired Associate Count 13 13 53 79 Column % 15.5% 18.6% 10.7% 1 2 .2 % Bachelor's Count 8 14 72 9 4 Column % 9.5% 20.0% 14.5% 1 4 .5 % Maybe > Bach Count 24 14 102 140 Column % 28.6% 20.0% 20.6% 21.5% Master's Count 24 13 130 167 Column % 28.6% 18.6% 26.2% 2 5 .7 % Doctoral Count 10 11 74 9 5 Column % 11.9% 15.7% 14.9% 14.6% Medical Count 4 1 37 42 Column % 4.8% 1.4% 7.5% 6.5% Total Count 84 70 496 650 Column % 1 0 0 .0 % 1 0 0 .0 % 100.0% 1 0 0 % Populations by the attendance o f an orientation program at the college. In Table 12,more than half of the group (51.8%, N = 331) had attended an orientation program at the college. By contrast, more than half of the Chinese international students (53.6%, N = 45) did not attend these programs. Table 12 Frequency Distribution by the Attendance o f an Orientation Program at the College Population Groups Other E . Non-E. Chinese I. S. A. I. S. A. I. S. Total I have attended No Count 45 34 229 308 an orientation Column % 53.6% 48.6% 47.2% 4 8.2% proyrsrn o i unjs college ^ es Count 39 36 256 331 Column % 46.4% 51.4% 52.8% 51.8% Total Count 84 70 485 639 ■ Column,% § 1 o d o ^4 § © ,1 0 0 % .. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 116 Research Question No. 2: Does the Chinese international students ’ academic success rate differ from other East Asian international students, non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students? How do they differ on individual variables? To answer Research Question No. 2, the analysis was divided into two stages. In the first stage, by using One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), data were collected on differences in the academic success (college GPA scores greater than and equal to 2) between Chinese international students and all other student groups. In the second stage, by utilizing Pearson Chi-Square analysis, data were collected on differences in independent variables between the academically successful Chinese international student group and the other student group, which had showed a significant difference in academic success from the Chinese foreign student group. Findings on the differences in academic success are presented by descriptive and inferential statistics in Tables 13 -6 6 . The full discussion appears in Appendix C but for the purpose of addressing the research question, only statistically significant findings will be discussed here. The following findings are in response to Research Question No. 2: Differences in academic success. In Table 13, Chinese international students have the highest level of academic success (N = 83, M = 3.28); other East Asian international students were the second (N = 63, M = 3.19); non-East Asian international students were the third (N = 438, M = 3.10); and the lowest level of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. academic success was reported by domestic students (N = 1,439, M = 2.96). While more than one fifth domestic students (22.3%) had GPA scores below 2.0 at LACCD, the study found that 10.8% of all international students had GPA scores below than 2 at LACCD (the percentages for the Chinese, other East Asian, and non-East Asian international student groups were 2.4%, 11.3%, 12.2%, respectively). No significant differences in academic success were found between the Chinese international student group and the other East Asian and non-East Asian international student groups. By contrast, a significant difference in academic success was found between the Chinese international student group and domestic student group. Domestic students were significantly different from all international student groups when measuring academic success. Table 13 Analysis o f Variance for Academic Success Among Student Groups Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Chinese I. S. 83 3.2807 .5776 6.340E-02 3.1545 3.4068 Other E. A. I. S. 63 3.1887 .6197 7.808E-02 3.0326 3.3448 Non-E. A. I. S. 438 3.1045 .5860 2.800E-02 3.0494 3.1595 Domestic S. 1439 2.8859 .5734 1.512E-02 2.8562 2.9155 2023 ...2;?588... .5896 ...L H IE -O ? ... ...................2.9331 2.9845 ANOVA GPA 2 or ab o v e _____________ ______________ ___ ______________ _________________ ___ Sum of S q u ares df M ean Square F S ig. B etw een G roups 2 8 .8 8 1 3 9 .6 2 7 2 8 .8 3 7 .0 0 0 Within Groups 6 7 4 .0 1 9 2 0 1 9 .3 3 4 Total 7 0 2 .9 0 0 2 0 2 2 ____________________________________________ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 118 Table 13 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: G PA 2 or above Tukey HSD___________________________________ (I) Academically Successful Students (J) Academically Successful Students Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Chinese I. S. Other E. A. I. S. 9.195E-02 9.655E-02 .776 Non-E. A. I. S. .1762 6.917E-02 .053 Domestic S. .3948* 6.522E-02 .000 Other E. A. I. S. Chinese I. S. -9.1950E-02 9.655E-02 .776 Non-E. A. I. S. 8.424E-02 7.785E-02 .701 Domestic S. .3029* 7.437E-02 .000 Non-E. A. I. S. Chinese I. S. -.1762 6.917E-02 .053 Other E. A. I. S. -8.4237E-02 7.785E-02 .701 • Domestic S. .2186* 3.153E-02 .000 Dom estic S. Chinese I. S. -.3948* 6.522E-02 .000 Other E. A. I. S. -.3029* 7.437E-02 .000 -.2186* ^ .153E -02^ . o o o *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Differences in independent variable between academically successful students. According to the Chi-Square analyses, the academically successful Chinese international student group and domestic student group were not significantly different from each other in 14 of the 31 independent variables, as shown in Table 14. On the other hand, the academically successful Chinese international student group and domestic student group were significantly different from each other in the remaining 17 independent variables, indicated in Table 15. A detailed summary of significant mean differences relative to the 17 independent variables for both academically successful student groups appears in Appendix B. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 119 Table 14 Summary o f the Results o f Chi-Square Analysis by the Independent Variables Which Were Not Significantly Different Between the Academically Successful Chinese International Student Group and Domestic Student Group Variables d f P Gender 3.544 1 .060 The highest academic degree one desired to obtain 13.088 7 .070 I have attended an orientation program at the college 2.030 1 .154 It is important to finish courses in program of studies 10.606 6 .101 I will get a Bachelor’s degree 2.131 4 .712 I will transfer to a four-year college/ university 2.235 4 .693 I always complete homework assignments 7.394 6 .286 I enjoy doing challenging class assignments 3.075 6 .799 I expect to do well and earn good grades 12.223 6 .057 How often talk with an instructor before or after class 3.131 5 .680 How often talk with an instructor during office hours 2.819 5 .728 How often help another student understand homework 7.420 5 .191 How often study in small groups outside of class 5.091 5 .405 How often speak with an academic counselor 2.339 5 .801 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 120 Table 15 Summary o f the Results o f Chi-Square Analysis by the Independent Variables Which Were Significantly Different Between the Academically Successful Chinese International Student Group and Domestic Student Group Variables I 2 d f P Age 9.513 3 .023 Mother’s education level 33.741 9 .000 Father’s education level 72.594 9 .000 High school GPA 46.241 8 .000 Ability to read in English 70.062 3 . .000 Ability to write in English 83.298 3 .000 Ability to understand a college lecture 60.307 3 .000 Ability to read a college textbook 44.694 3 .000 Ability to write an essay exam 33.696 n 3 .000 Ability to write a term paper 21.065 3 .000 Ability to participate in class discussions 45.840 3 .000 Ability to communicate with instructors 47.831 3 .000 I am very determined to reach my goals 35.197 6 .000 I keep trying even when frustrated by a task 15.810 6 .015 Understand what is taught is important to me 22.261 6 .001 Success in college is largely due to effort 26.311 6 .000 I can learn all skills taught in college 37.403 6 .000 The breakdown of the Pearson Chi-Square analyses between the successful Chinese student group and domestic student group by 17 “significantly different” independent variables is presented in Tables 16 - 66. One-Way ANOVA analyses were applied when it is a necessary. The statistically significant findings follow: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 121 Relative to the age variable, the most common age between the two successful student groups was found in the 20 - 29 age group (see Table 16). The total mean value of academic success of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N= 82, SD = .5812). With the exception of the 40 or older age group, the older Chinese international students had higher GPA scores (see Table 17). On the other hand, the total mean values for the successful domestic population group was 2.89 (N = 1,423, SD = .5731) (see Table 18). It can be concluded that the older domestic students had higher levels of academic success at LACCD. Based on the findings of Post Hoc Tests, there are significant mean differences between the age groups of the successful domestic students at LACCD. Table 16 Chi-Square Analysis by Age Groups Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S . Successful Domestic S. Total Age 19 or younger Count 7 260 2@7 Column % 8.5% 18.3% 17.7% 20-29 Count 50 886 936 Column % 61.0% 62.3% 62.2% 30-39 Count 16 195 211 Column % 19.5% 13.7% 14.0% 40 or older Count 9 82 91 Column % 11.0% 5.8% 6.0% Total Count 82 1423 1505 Column % 100.0% ....... ... 100% Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 122 Table 16 (Continued) Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association 9.513a 9.612 9.459 .023 .022 .002 a. 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.96. Table 17 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Age Groups Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound 19 or younger 7 3.1634 .4402 .1664 2.7563 3.5705 20-29 50 3.2995 .6200 8.768E-02 3.1233 3.4757 30-39 16 3.3883 .4162 .1040 3.1666 3.6101 40 or older 9 3.0805 .7159 .2386 2.5302 3.6308 - H M - — — S 2 _ 3.2812 — J5P2- 6.418E-02 3.4089 ANOVA GPA scores equal to 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .660 3 .220 .643 .590 Within Groups 26.697 78 .342 Total — 27452L. 81 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 123 Table 13 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Age Groups Descriptives G PA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound 19 or younger 260 2.7960 .5571 3.455E-02 2.7279 2.8640 20-29 886 2.8568 .5605 1.883E-02 2.8198 2.8937 30-39 195 3.0533 .5666 4.057E-02 2.9733 3.1333 40 or older 82 3.1247 .6422 7.091E-02 2.9836 3.2658 Total ,1,423 2.8880 .5731 1.519E-02 2.8582 2.9178 Domestic ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups Within Groups Total 12.987 454.090 mm.. 3 4.329 13.528 1419 .320 1422 .000 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD Ages (J) Age & GPA2 Mean Difference (W) Std. Error Sig. 19 or younger 20-29 -6.0817E-02 3.990E-02 .423 30-39 -.2573* 5.359E-02 .000 40 or older -.3287* 7.165E-02 .000 20-29 19 or younger 6.082E-02 3.990E-G2 .423 30-39 -.1965* 4.475E-02 .000 40 or older -.2679* 6.530E-02 . .000 30-39 19 or younger .2573* 5.359E-02 .000 20-29 .1965* 4.475E-02 .000 40 or older -7.1408E-02 7.446E-02 .773 40 or older 19 or younger .3287* 7.165E-02 .000 20-29 .2679* 6.530E-02 .000 .......30-39..................... ........................................................... ........ ...7 ,;i!Si.02....... .773 *. The m ean difference is significant at th e .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 124 With reference to the education level of students’ mothers, while the highest frequency of both successful population groups (38.2%, N — 506) reported a level of 6th grade or lower, the successful Chinese international students (19.7%, N= 15) mostly reported that their mothers had finished at a high school level (see Table 19). The successful Chinese foreign students reported higher mother’s education levels than successful domestic students. The total mean value for the successful Chinese international students by mother’s education level was 3.28 (77= 76, SD - .5743). The highest mean value of the successful Chinese foreign students responded as being part of the “Completed four-year college degree” group (M= 3.54, 77= 9), whereas the lowest was the “Some graduate school” group (M - 2.00, N = 1) (see Table 20). On the other hand, the total mean value of academic success of the successful domestic students was 2.88 (77= 1,248, SD = .5715). The highest mean value of the successful domestic students was computed as being the “Completed four-year college degree” group (M= 2.98, 77 =61, SD = .6451), whereas the lowest was computed as being the “Some four-year college” group (M = 2.75, 77= 25, SD = .6396) (see Table 21). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 19 Chi-Square Analysis by Mother ’ $ Education Level Academically Successful Students Successful Successful Chinese I. S. Domestic S. T otal Mother's education 6th Grade or less Count Column % 14 18.4% 492 39.4% 506 38.2% level Jr High/Mid School Count 7 190 197 Column % 9.2% 15.2% 1 4 .9 % Some HS Count 8 130 138 Column % 10.5% 10.4% 10.4% HS Grad/GED Count 15 149 164 Column % 19.7% 11.9% 12.4% Some cmty coll Count 6 81 87 Column % 7.9% 6.5% 6.6% completed cmty coll Count 5 39 44 Column % 6.6% 3.1% 3.3% Some 4yr coll' Count 6 25 31 Column % 7.9% 2.0% 2.3% 4yr coll degree Count 9 61 70 Column % 11.8% 4.9% 5.3% Some grad school Count 1 16 17 Column % 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% Grad degree Count 5 65 70 Column % 6.6% 5.2% 5 .3 % Total - Count 76 1248 1324 Coiumn% 100-a% ao0 -00/0 100% Chi-Square Tests Asymp, Sig. Value df (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 33.741a 9 .000 Likelihood Ratio ■ 29.331 9 .001 Linear-by-Linear Association 19.087 1 .000 N of Valid Cases ...... 1324 ...... a. 6 ceils (30.0%) have expected count less than 5 . The minimum expected count is .98. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 126 Table 20 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Mother’ s Education Level Descriptives GPA 2 or above 35% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound 6th grade or less 14 3.2602 .5631 .1505 2.9351 3.5854 Junior high or middle school y 3.4235 .4913 .1857 2.9692 3.8779 Some high school 8 3.3543 .4762 .1684 2.9562 3.7525 Finished high school o GED 15 3.1065 .4976 .1285 2.8310 3.3821 Some community college 6 3.4456 .4003 .1634 3.0255 3.8657 Completed community college 5 3.4946 .3113 .1392 3.1081 3.8810 Some four-year colleg 6 3.0816 .8569 .3498 2.1823 3.9809 Completed four-year college degree 9 3.5448 .6625 .2208 3.0356 4.0541 Some graduate school 1 2.0000 - . . Graduate degree 5 3.0795 .7066 .3160 2.2021 3.9569 Total 76 J.2Z60 ...-5743 6,588E-02 3.1448 3.4073 GPA2 or above ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.746 9 .416 1.308 .250 Within Groups 20.994 66 .318 ...T otal 24.740 75 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 127 Table 21 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Mother’ s Education Level Descriptives GPA 2 or above 35% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound 6th grade or less 492 2.8927 .5521 2.489E-02 2.8438 2.9417 Junior high or middle school 190 2.8366 .5781 4.194E-02 2.7538 2.9193 Some high school 130 2.8876 .5420 4.754E-02 2.7935 2.9816 Finished high school o GED 149 2.9106 .5974 4.894E-02 2.8138 3.0073 Some community college 81 2.8754 .6240 6.933E-02 2.7374 3.0134 Completed community college 39 2.8930 .5659 9.062E-02 2.7096 3.0765 Some four-year collegt 25 2.7540 .6396 .1279 2.4900 3.0180 Completed four-year college 61 2.9822 .6451 8.260E-02 2.8170 3.1474 Some graduate school 16 2.7673 .5852 .1463 2.4554 3.0791 Graduate degree 65 2.8732 .5405 6.704E-02 2.7393 3.0072 Total 1248 2.8836 - ....-5715,,L618E-02..„ 2.8519..... .... 2,9154 ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 1.818 9 .202 .617 .784 Within Groups 405.503 1238 .328 .Total . . 407,.321,, 1247 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 128 In terms of father’s education level, while the highest frequency in the two successful population groups (34.0%, N= 428) indicated their father’s education level was 6th grade or lower, the successful Chinese foreign students (16.7%, N= 12) mostly reported that their father was at the “Completed community college” level. On average, the successful Chinese foreign students responded a higher education level for their father than the successful domestic students did (see Table 22). The total mean value of the successful Chinese foreign students by father’s education level was 3.32 (N= 72, SD = .5628). The highest mean value of the successful Chinese students was computed for the “Completed four-year college degree” category (M= 3.59, N - 11, SD = .5559), whereas the lowest was computed for the “Some four-year college” category (M = 2.90, N=5,SD = .5280) (see Table 23). On the other hand, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by father’s education level was 2.89 (N= 1,188, SD = .5747). The highest mean value of the successful domestic students was computed for the “Graduate degree” group {M- 3.04, N - 91, SD- .6043), whereas the lowest was computed on “Some graduate school” (M= 2.71, N= 16, SD = .4450) (see Table 24). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 129 Table 22 CM- Square Analysis by Father's Education Level Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total Father's education level 6th Grade or less Count Column % 8 11.1% 420 35.4% 428 34.0% Jr High/Mid School Count 6 157 163 Column % 8.3% 13.2% 12.9% Some H S Count 9 138 147 Column % 12.5% 11.6% 11.7% H S Grad/GED Count 10 136 146 Column % 13.9% 11.4% 11.6% Some cmty coil Count 3 80 83 Column % 4.2% 6.7% 6.6% completed cmty coll Count 12 30 4 2 Column % 16.7% 2.5% 3.3% Som e 4yr coll' Count 5 46 5 1 Column % 6.9% 3.9% 4.0% 4yr coll degree Count 11 74 85 Column % 15.3% 6.2% 6.7% Som e grad school Count 4 16 2 0 Column % 5.6% 1.3% 1.6% Grad degree Count 4 91 95 Column % 5.6% 7.7% 7.5% Total Count 72 1188 1 0 0 .0 % 1260 100% Chi-Square Tests Value df. Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 72.594a 9 .000 Likelihood Ratio 52.938 9 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 21.147 1 .000 N of Valid Cases 1260 a. 5 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.14. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 130 Table 23 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Father’ s Education Level Descriptives GPA 2 or above ______ ?5% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound 6th grade or less Junior high or middle school 8 6 3.0842 3.5759 .6804 .4892 .2406 .1997 2.5153 3.0625 3.6530 4.0892 Some high school Finished high school o GED 9 10 3.3880 3.1916 .4014 .4956 .1338 .1567 3.0795 2.8370 3.6966 3.5461 Some community college 3 3.2237 .5383 .3108 1.8864 4.5610 Completed community college 12 3.4856 .4429 .1278 3.2042 3.7670 Some four-year colleg Completed four-year college 5 11 2.8979 3.5853 .5280 .5559 .2361 .1676 2.2422 3.2119 3.5535 3.9588 Some graduate school Graduate degree Total 4 4 72 3.3404 2.9686 3.3222 .9237 .4618 ‘ .7051 .3525 .5628 6.633E-02. 1.8706 1.8467 3.1900 4.8102 4.0906 . 3.4545.. GPA2 or above ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.562 9 .396 1.296 .257 Within Groups 18.930 62 .305 Total .. J 2 J 8 L 71 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 131 Table 24 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Father’ s Education Level Descriptives GPA2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound 6th grade or less 420 2.8443 .5482 2.675E-02 2.7917 2.8969 Junior high or middle school 157 2.8878 .6045 4.825E-02 2.7925 2.9831 Some high school 138 2.9312 .5841 4.972E-02 2.8329 3.0295 Finished high school or GED ' 136 2.9165 .5541 4.751E-02 2.8226 3.0105 Some community college 80 2.8807 .6115 6.836E-02 2.7446 3.0168 Completed community college 30 2.8898 .5076 9.267E-02 2.7002 3.0793 Som e four-year college 46 2.8769 .6091 8.980E-02 2.6961 3.0578 Completed four-year college 74 2.8877 .6155 7.155E-02 2.7451 3.0303 Some graduate school 16 2.7136 .4450 .1112 2.4765 2.9507 Graduate degree 91 3.0399 .6043 6.334E-02 2.9140 3.1657 Total 1188 2.8892 .5747 1 -6 6 7 M 2 2.8565 2.9219 ANO VA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.765 9 .418 1.269 .249 Within Groups 388.322 1178 .330 With reference to high school GPA, the highest frequencies of both successful student groups (20.5%, N = 303) showed a GPA in the “B” category. On average, the successful Chinese international students had higher high school GPA scores than the successful domestic students (see Table 25). The total mean value of the successful Chinese foreign students was 3.29 (N = 80, SD - .5855). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese students was computed as falling Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. within the “C+” group {M - 3.59, N= 3, SD = .5246), whereas the lowest group was computed as being at the “B” level (M= 3.04, 77 = 20, SD = .6289) (see Table 26). In Table 27, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by high school GPA was 2.89(77= 1,401, SD = .5720). The highest mean value of the successful domestic students was computed as being in the “A or A+” group (M= 3.10,17= 75, SD = .5927), whereas the lowest was computed as being in the “C” group (M = 2.77, 77 = 146, SD = .5595). According to the Post Hoc Tests, there was a significant mean difference between academic success and high school GPA for the successful domestic students at LACCD. Table 25 Chi-Square Analysis by High School GPA Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total High school D or lower Count Column % 16 1.1% 16 1.1% vsrA C- Count 1 33 34 Column % 1.3% 2.4% 2.3% C Count 3 146 149 Column % 3.8% 10.4% 10.1% C *r Count 3 226 229 Column % 3.8% 16.1% 15.5% B- Count 10 222 232 Column % 12.5% 15.8% 15.7% B Count 20 283 303 Column % 25.0% 20.2% 20.5% B+ Count 14 260 274 Column % 17.5% 18.6% 18.5% A- Count 12 140 152 Column % 15.0% 10.0% 10.3% A Count 17 75 92 Column % 21.3% 5.4% 6.2% Total Count 80 1401 1481 ^ ,..C olum n — -----------LQO-Oya— .........................100,0% ............ .......... Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 133 Table 25 (Continued) Chi-Square Tests Asymp, Sig, Value df (2-sided) 46.2413 8 .000 39.804 8 .000 29.723 1 .000 M SI.................... - .......... _ a. 3 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .86. Table 26 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by High School GPA Descriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound c- 1 3.4000 . c 3 3.0833 .9382 .5417 .7527 5.4139 c+ 3 3.5917 .5246 .3029 2.2885 4.8949 B- 1 0 3.0547 .5149 .1628 2.6863 3.4230 B 20 3.0440 .6289 .1406 2.7497 3.3384 B+ 14 3.3802 .4111 .1099 3.1428 3.6176 A- ' 12 3.4322 .6241 .1802 3.0356 3.8287 A or A+ 17 3.4969 .5660 .1373 3.2059 3.7879 Total o 0 0 3.2851 .5855 6.546E-02 ........... 1,1548.. .......3,4154.. Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of _______ Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.259 7 .466 1.407 .216 Within Groups 23.819 72 .331 . 27.078 79___________ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 134 Table 27 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by High School GPA Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound D or lower 16 2.7990 .4873 .1218 2.5394 3.0587 C- 33 2.9420 .5750 .1001 2.7381 3.1459 C 146 2.7726 .5595 4.630E-02 2.6811 2.8641 c+ 226 2.7867 .5751 3.825E-02 2.7113 2.8621 B- ' 222 2.8592 .5534 3.714E-02 2.7860 2.9324 B 283 2.8628 .5443 3.236E-02 2.7991 2.9265 B+ 260 2.9380 .5954 3.693E-02 2.8653 3.0107 A- 140 3.0512 .5525 4.669E-02 2.9589 3.1435 A or A+ 75 3.0986 .5927 6.844E-02 2.9623 3.2350 2.8871 .5720 1.528E-02 ............2,8511.. 2.9171 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 12.554 8 1.569 4.904 .000 Within Groups 445.437 1392 .320 Total 457.991 1400 .......... Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 135 Table 27 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons D ependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD_______________________________________________ Mean Difference (I) High school GPA (J) High school GPA (I-J) Std. Error Sig. C A- -.2786* 6.691E-02 .001 A or A+ -.3260* 8.036E-02 .002 C+ A- -.2645* 6.084E-02 .000 A or A+ -.3119* 7.538E-02 .001 B- A- -.1920* 6 .105E-02 .044 A or A+ -.2394* 7.555E-02 .041 B A- -.1884* 5.845E-02 .035 A or A+ -.2358* 7.347E-02 .036 A- C .2786* 6.691E-02 .001 C-f .2645* 6.084E-02 .000 B- .1920* 6.105E-02 .044 B .1884* 5.845E-02 .035 A or A+ C .3260* 8.036E-02 .002 C+ .3119* 7.538E-02 .001 B- .2394* 7.555E-02 .041 B .2358* 7.347E-02 *. T h e m ea n d ifferen ce is significan t a t th e .0 5 level. In all, on eight variables of English language proficiencies, the successful domestic students rated themselves as having higher language ability than the successful Chinese international students rated on the same eight variables. Also, the successful Chinese international students rated themselves as falling in the “Fairly well” category, and in a similar proportion in the “With difficulty” category. In terms of ability to read in English, more than half students (52.5%, N = 781) showed in “Very well” category (see Table 28). The total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N= 81, SD — .5826). The highest mean value of the successful Chinese international students was computed as Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 136 being in the “Very well” group (M= 3.37, N= 11 ,SD = .4819), whereas the lowest mean value was computed for “Not at all” (M= 2.79, N - 1) (see Table 29). On the other hand, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by ability to read in English was 2.89 (N = 1,422, SD = .5735). The highest mean value of the successful domestic students was computed as being in the “Not at all” group ( M - 2.97, N= 10, SD = .7645), whereas the lowest one was computed as being in the “With difficulty” group (M= 2.82, N = 101, SD = .6120) (see Table 30). Table 28 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Read in English Academically Successful Students Successful Successful Chinese I. S. Domestic S. Total Read Not at all Count 1 10 11 Column % 1.2% .7% .7% With difficulty Count 22 101 123 Column % 27.2% 7.1% 8.2% Fairly well Count 47 541 588 Column % 58.0% 38.0% 39.1% Very well Count 11 770 781 Column % 13.6% 54.1% 52.0% Total Count 81 1422 1503 Column % 100.0% 100.0% 100% Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. Value d f (2 -sid ed ) . Pearson C hi-Square 7 0 .0 6 2 3 3 .0 0 0 Likelihood Ratio 6 5 .2 1 9 3 .0 0 0 Linear-by-Linear A ssociation 6 4 .5 2 5 1 .0 0 0 N of Valid C ases 1503 a. 1 cells (12.5% ) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .59. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 137 Table 29 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Read in English Descriptives G PA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 1 2.7857 W ith difficulty 22 3.1415 .5678 .1211 2.8898 3.3933 Fairly well 47 3.3261 .6115 8.920E-02 3.1465 3.5057 Very well 11 3.3730 .4819 .1453 3.0492 3.6967 Total ............. . C O H 4 3.2757 .5826 6.474E-02 3.1468 3.4045 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .860 3 .287 .839 .477 Within Groups 26.296 77 .342 Total ........... E d ™ . 80 Table 30 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Read in English D escriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 10 2.9694 .7645 ' .2417 2.4225 3.5162 W ith difficulty 101 2.8229 .6120 5.090E-02 2.7021 2.9437 Fairly well 541 2.8891 .5771 2.481E-02 2.8404 2.9379 Very w ell 770 2.8939 .5635 2.031E-02 2.8541 2.9338 1422 2.8876 .5735 1.521E-02 2.8578 2.9174 ANOVA G PA 2 or above ______________________________ _________ Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .522 3 .174 .529 .663 W ithin Groups 466.790 1418 .329 Total 467.312 1421 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 138 With reference to the ability to write in English, shown in Table 31, while the highest frequency of the two successful population groups (47.1%, N= 709) was indicated as falling in the “Fairly well” category, more than half of the successful Chinese foreign students (50.6%, N= 41) fell in the “With difficulty” category. The total mean value of the successful Chinese foreign students was 3.29 (N = 81, SD = .5813). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese foreign students was computed as falling within the “Very well” category (M = 3.55, N = 7, SD = .4566), whereas the lowest was computed as falling within the “With difficulty” category (M= 3.23, N= 41, SD = .5858) (see Table 32). In Table 33, the total mean value for the successful domestic students by ability to write in English was 2.89 (N= 1,424, SD = .5739). The highest mean value of domestic students was computed as belonging to the “Very well” group (M = 2.92, N = 536, SD = .5636), whereas the lowest mean value was computed as belonging to the “With difficulty” group {M= 2.84, N = 200, SD = .5909). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 139 Table 31 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Write in English Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total Write Not at all Count Column % With difficulty Fairly well Very well Count Column % Count Column % Count Column % 41 50.6% 33 40.7% 7 8.6% 12 .8% 200 14.0% 676 47.5% 536 37.6% 12 .8% 241 16.0% 709 47.1% 543 36.1% Total Count llumn % 8 1 100-Q % 1424 100.0 % 1505 - 100- % . . Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 83.298a 69.397 60.263 a. 1 cells (12.5% ) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .65. Table 32 .000 .000 .000 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Write in English Descriptives GPA2 or above Mean Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for _________Mean_________ Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound With difficulty 41 3.2250 Fairly well 33 3.3108 Very well 7 3.5514 .5858 9.149E-02 3.0401 3.4099 .5965 .1038 3.0993 3.5223 .4566 .1726 3.1291 3.9737 6.459E-02 3.1596 3.4167 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 140 Table 32 (Continued) ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. B etw een Groups .666 2 .333 .985 .378 Within Groups 26.366 78 .338 Total 80 Table 33 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Write in English D escriptives GPA 2 or above ____________________________ 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 12 2.8526 .6121 .1767 2.4637 3.2415 With difficulty 200 2.8408 .5909 4.178E-02 2.7584 2.9232 Fairly well 676 2.8775 .5754 2.213E-02 2.8340 2.9209 Very well 536 2.9207 .5636 2.434E-02 2.8729 2.9685 Total 1424 2.8884 .5736, 1.520E-02 2.8586 2.918,2... ANOVA G PA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 1.108 3 .369 1.123 .339 Within Groups 467.021 1420 .329 Total With reference to the ability to understand a college lecture, as shown in Table 34, while the highest number of the two significantly different groups (47.7%, N =714) occurred in the “Fairly well” category, a large number of domestic students (43.9%, N= 622) rated their English skills at the “Very well” level. The total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD - .5828). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese foreign students was computed as Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 141 belonging to the “Very well” group {M= 3.45, N = 11, SD = .5066), whereas the lowest was computed as belonging to the “With difficulty” group (M= 2.99, N = 24, SD = .5569) (see Table 35). On the other hand, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N — 1,417, SD = .5735). The highest mean value was computed as belonging to the “Very well” group (M= 2.93, N = 622, SD - .5703), whereas the lowest was computed as belonging to the “With difficulty” group (M= 2.79, N= 110, SD = .5577) (see Table 36). The successful Chinese foreign student group had a significant mean difference relative to ability to understand a college lecture. Table 34 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Understand a College Lecture A cadem ically S u ccessfu l _________________ Stu d en ts__________________ S u ccessfu l S u ccessfu l ___________________________________________ C hin ese I. S. D om estic S.________ Total N ot a t all Count 16 1 6 _______________________Colum n % 1.1% 1 .1 % W ith difficulty C ount 2 4 110 1 3 4 _______________________Colum n %_____________________ 30.0% _______________ 7.8% 9 .0 % Fairly w ell Count 4 5 66 9 714 _______________________Colum n %_____________________ 56 .3 % ______________ 47 .2 % 47.7% Very w ell C ount 11 622 6 3 3 _______________________Colum n %_____________________ 13.8% 43.9% 42.3% T o ta l Count 80 1 4 1 7 1497 Colum n % ' 100-0% 100.0% 1 0 0 % Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 6Q,307a 3 .000 likelihood Ratio 51.502 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 41.531 1 .000 N of Valid Cases . ... IS9 7 - a. 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .86. Understand a college lecture Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 142 Table 35 ■ Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Understand a College Lecture D escrip tiv es GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for _________________ N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound With difficulty 24 2.9876 .5569 .1137 2.7525 3.2228 Fairly well 45 3.3982 .5666 8.446E-02 3.2279 3.5684 Very well 11 3.4540 .5066 .1527 3.1137 3.7943 Total 80 3.2827 .5828 6.516E-02 3.1530 3.4124 ANOVA GPA 2 or above _________________________________ Sum of ________________Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Betw een Groups 3.012 2 1.506 4.868 .010 Within Groups 23.824 77 .309 26-83? -a> ................................... Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons D ependent Variable: GPA 2 or above TukeyHSD______________________________________ (I) How well to understand a college lecture (3) How well to understand a college lecture Mean Difference d-3) Std. Error Sig. With difficulty Fairly well -.4105* .1406 .013 Very well -.4664 .2025 .061 Fairly well With difficulty .4105* .1406 .013 Very well -5.5837E-02 .1871 .952 Very w ell With difficulty .4664 .2025 .061 .. - E a ld o t s lL ........... . 5.584E-02 .1871 ■ 9 5 2 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 143 Table 36 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Understand a College Lecture Descriptives GPA2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 16 2.8939 .6164 .1541 2.5654 3.2224 With difficulty 110 2.7853 .5577 5.317E-02 2.6799 2.8906 Fairly well 669 2.8693 ,5763 2.228E-02 2.8255 2.9130 Very well 622 2.9260 .5703 2.287E-02 2.8811 2.9709 Total 1417 2.8879 .5735 .T524E-02.. ......... „2J580„.„ 2.9178 ANOVA G P A 2 or above Sum of __________________Squares_____df____ Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2.293 3 .764 2.330 .073 Within Groups 463.455 1413 .328 465-748 1416 With reference to the ability to read a college textbook, as shown in Table 37, while the highest frequencies of the two successful population groups (46.5%, N = 696) were indicated as lying within the “Fairly well” category, close to one third of the successful Chinese international students (31.3%, N - 25) rated their English skill at the “With difficulty” level. The total mean value for Chinese foreign students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828). The highest mean value was computed as being part of the “Very well” group (M= 3.50, N= 11, SD - .3111), whereas the lowest was computed as being in the “With difficulty” group (M= 3.01, N= 25, SD = .6089) (see Table 38). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 144 On the other hand, the total mean value of academic success for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,418, SD = .5735). The highest mean value o f academic success for the ability to read a college textbook was computed as belonging to the “Not at all” group (M= 2.98,7/= 18, SD = .6162), whereas the lowest was computed as belonging to the “With difficulty” group (M= 2.81, N = 151, SD = .5961) (see Table 39). According to the Post Hoc Tests, there was a significant mean difference between academic success and the ability to read a college textbook for the successful Chinese foreign students. Table 37 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Read a College Textbook Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total Read a college text book Not at all Count Column % 18 1.3% 18 1.2% With difficulty Count 25 151 176 Column % 31.3% 10.6% 11.7% Fairly well Count 44 652 6 9 6 Column % 55.0% 46.0% 4 6 .5 % Very w ell Count 11 597 608 Column % . 13.8% 42.1% 4 0 .6 % Total Count SO 1418 1498 ....Column % , ............. " 0 ;0 % ... .......... 10 0 ;? % 100% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 44.694a 3 .000 Likelihood Ratio 42.369 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 32.505 1 .000 N of V alid Cases .................... 14?8........ a. 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .96. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 145 Table 38 Means o f Academic Success o f Chinese International Students by Ability to Read a College Textbook Descriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound With difficulty 25 3.0057 .6089 .1218 2.7543 3.2570 Fairly well 44 3.3861 .5720 8.624E-02 3.2122 3.5600 Very well 11 3.4984 .3111 9.380E-02 3.2894 3.7074 80 3,2827............5828 6.516E-02 , ,3,1530..... _ 3.4124, GPA 2 or above ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2.901 2 1.451 4.666 .012 Within Groups 23.936 77 .311 Total ........26.83L ........ Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey H SD_______________________ ____ (I) How well to read a college text book (3) How well to read a college text book Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. With difficulty Fairly well -.3804* .1396 .021 Very well -.4927* .2017 .044 Fairly well With difficulty .3804* .1396 .021 Very well -.1123 .1879 .822 Very well With difficulty .4927* .2017 .044 Fairly well .1123 ....._ s,1879... .822 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 146 Table 39 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Read a College Textbook Descriptives . GPA 2 or above________________ ______ ________ _______________ 95% Confidence Interval for Std. Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at ail 18 2.9757 .6162 .1452 2.6692 3.2821 With difficulty 151 2.8120 .5961 . 4.851E-02 2.7161 2.9078 Farily well 652 2.8798 .5625 2.203E-02 2.8365 2.9231 Very well 597 2.9190 .5773 2.363E-02 2.8726 2.9654 Total 1418 .......2-8903 .5735 1.523E-02 ............... 2:8604 „ ...............2.9202 ANOVA GPA 2 or above ___________ • Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Betw een Groups 1.621 3 .540 1.646 .177 Within Groups 464.366 1414 .328 -lo ta j-------------------------_465j98Z----- 1417 _ _ With reference to the ability to write an essay exam, as shown in Table 40, while the highest number of the two successful population groups (46.2%, N = 691) reported in the “Fairly well” category, the majority of the successful Chinese foreign students (55.0%, N= 44) rated themselves as being at the “With difficulty” level. The total mean value of academic success for the successful Chinese foreign students was 3.28 (N - 80, SD = .5828). The highest mean value of academic success was computed as being at the “Very well” level (M - 3.50, IV = 7, SD = .4178), whereas the lowest was computed as being at the “Fairly well” level (M= 3.26, V = 29, SD = .6326) (see Table 41). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 147 On the other hand, the total mean value of academic success for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (Ar= 1,416, SD = .5735). The highest mean value of academic success was computed for the “Not at all” group (M = 2.97, N - 24, SD = .5723), whereas the lowest was computed for both the “With difficulty” and “Fairly well” groups (M= 2.86, N= 374, SD = .5848; M = 2.86, N = 662, SD = .5636, respectively)(see Table 42). According to the Post Hoc Tests, there was a significant mean difference between academic success and the stated ability for the successful domestic students at LACCD. Table 40 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Write an Essay Exam Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total Write an Not at all Count 24 24 essay exam Column % 1.7% 1.6% With difficulty Count 44 374 4 1 8 Column % 55.0% 26.4% 27.9% Fairly w ell Count 29 662 6 9 1 Column % 36.3% 46.8% 46.2% Very w ell Count 7 356 363 Column % 8.8% 25.1% 24.3% Total Count 80 1416 1496 ...Colum n^ 100.0% 100.0% 100% Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 33.696® 3 .000 Likelihood Ratio 33.079 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 22.508 1 .000 N of V alid Cases 1496 _ a. 1 ceils (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.28. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 148 Table 41 Means o f Academic Success o f Chinese International Students by Ability to Write an Essay Exam Descriptives G PA 2 or above , ,, . 95% Confidence Interval for Std. — ___-......^ a n N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound W ith difficulty 44 3.2616 .5749 8.667E-02 3.0868 3.4364 Fairly well 29 3.2613 .6326 .1175 3.0207 3.5019 Very well 7 3.5038 .4178 .1579 3.1174 3.8902 Total ..80... 3.2827 .5828 6.516E-02 3.1530 _ 3.4124 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .375 2 .188 .546 .582 Within Groups 26.462 77 .344 Total 26.837 ... _ 7 9 Table 42 Means ofAcademic Success o f Domestic Students by Ability to Write an Essay Exam Descriptives GPA 2 or above________________________ 95% Confidence Interval for N M ean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 24 2.9688 .5723 .1168 2.7271 3.2104 W ith difficulty 374 2.8617 .5848 3.024E-02 2.8022 2.9212 Fairly w ell 662 2.8617 .5636 2.190E-02 2.8186 2.9047 Very well 356 2.9620 .5754 3.050E-02 2.9020 3.0219 Total........ „ 1416 2.8887 .5735 T:524E:02 _ 2.8588 2.9186 ANOVA G PA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2.822 3 .941 2.871 .035 Within Groups 462.594 1412 .328 Total 465.416 . 1415 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 149 Table 42 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above (I) How well to write an essay exam (J) How well to write an essay exam Mean Difference (I-j) Std. Error Sig. Fairly well Very well -.1003* 3.762E-02 .038 Verv well Fairlv w ell ..................-1003* 3.762E-02 .038 *. T he m ean difference is significant a t th e .05 level. With reference to the ability to write a term paper, while the highest frequency of the two successful student groups (45.2%, N = 673) reported as falling in the “Fairly well” category, most of the successful Chinese foreign students (51.3%, N = 4!) rated themselves within the “With difficulty” category (see Table 43). Also, the total mean value of academic success for the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N = 80, SD= .5828) (see Table 44). The highest mean value of academic success was computed as belonging to the “Not at all” category (M=3.80, N= 1), whereas the lowest was computed as belonging to the “ Fairly well” category (M= 3.22, N= 32, SD= .6544). On the other hand, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,408, SD = .5737) (see Table 45). The highest mean value of academic success was computed as belonging to the “Very well” group (M= 2.97, N = 324, SD = .5721), whereas the lowest was computed as belonging to the “With difficulty” group (M = 2.82, N ~ 412, SD = .5635). Based on the findings of Post Hoc Tests, there was a significant mean difference between academic success and the stated ability for the successful domestic students at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 150 Table 43 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Write a Term Paper Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total Write a term Not at all Count Column % 1 1.3% 31 2.2% 32 2.2% W ith difficulty Count 41 412 453 Column % 51.3% 29.3% 30.4% Fairly well Count 32 641 673 Column % 40.0% 45.5% 45.2% Very well Count 6 324 3 3 0 Column % 7.5% 23.0% 22.2% Total Count 80 1408 1488 ...Column %...... ... ...........io p -0 % ... Chi-Square T ests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 21.065® 3 .000 Likelihood Ratio 21.887 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 16.071 1 .000 N of Valid Cases 1488 a. l cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.72. Table 44 Means o f Academic Success o f Chinese International Students by Ability to Write a Term Paper D escriptives G PA 2 or above .- I . - — , I M a .r i, ,,, ^ >n. ;....... in ; I, 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at al! 1 3.8000 With difficulty 41 3.2675 .5356 8.364E-02 3.0984 3.4365 Fairly w ell 32 3.2184 .6544 .1157 2.9824 3.4543 Very w ell 6 3.6433 .4234 .1729 3.1990 4.0877 Total 80 3.2827 .5828 6.516E-02 ......... 3,1530 . . . 3.4124 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 151 Table 44 (Continued) ANOVA G PA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups ^ 1.190 3 ~ 397 1.175 3 2 5 Within Groups 25.647 76 .337 Total________________ 26.837 79______________ Table 45 Means ofAcademic Success o f Domestic Students by Ability to Write a Term Paper D escriptives GPA 2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 31 2.9009 .6497 .1167 2.6626 3.1392 With difficulty 412 2.8296 .5635 2.776E-02 2.7751 2.8842 Fairly well 641 2.8825 .5735 2.265E-02 2.8380 2.9269 Very well 324 2.9721 .5721 3.178E-02 2.9095 3.0346 Total 1408 2.8880 .5737 1.529E-02 2.8580 2.9180 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.718 3 1.239 3.788 .010 Within Groups 459.384 1404 .327 Total 463.102 1407 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD (I) How well to (3) How well to write a term paper write a term paper Mean Difference (1-3) Std. Error Sig. With difficulty Very well -.1424* 4.247E-02 .004 Jw ™ *1 _ ■ , ------------ Mh,difficulty,..........._ .................4424* . 4.247E-02 . •0 -04 * ■ The mean difference is significant at the .05 ievei. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 152 With reference to the ability to participate In class discussions, shown in Table 46, while the highest frequency of the two successful student groups (42.7%, N - 639) reported as lying within the “Fairly well” category, close to half of the successful Chinese international students (45.0%, A r= 36) reported as being at the “With difficulty” level. The total mean value of academic success for the successful Chinese foreign students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD - .5828) (see Table 47). The highest mean value was computed as being part of the “Very well” group (M= 3.54, N = 5, SD = .3956), whereas the lowest was computed as being part of the “Not at all” group ( M - 3.00, V = 1). On the other hand, the total mean value for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N = 1,415, SD = .5726) (see Table 48). The highest mean value of academic success was computed as being part of the “Very well” group (M= 2.93, N - 473, SD = .5758), whereas the lowest was computed as being part of the “Not at all” group (M= 2.77, N = 74, SD = .5562). Table 46 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Participate in Class Discussions Academically S u e Students Successful Successful C hinese I. S. D om estic S. Total Participate N ot a t all Count 1 74 7 5 in d a ss discussions Column % 1.3% 5.2% 5.0% With difficulty Count 36 267 303 Column % 45.0% 18.9% 20.3% Fairly well Count 38 601 6 3 9 Column % 47.5% 42.5% 4 2 .7 % Very well Count 5 47 3 4 7 8 Column % 6.3% 33.4% 32.0% Total Count 80 1415 1495 Column % 100.0% 1 0 0 .0 % ....1 2 * * .. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 153 Table 46 (Continued) Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 45.8403 3 .000 Likelihood Ratio 48.818 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 21.529 1 .000 N of Va|d Cases....... , M 2 L ..... a, 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.01. Table 47 Means ofAcademic Success o f Chinese International Students by Ability to Participate in Class Discussions Descriptives GPA2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 1 3.0000 • . With difficulty 36 3.2960 .5269 8.782E-02 3.1177 3.4743 Fairly well 38 3.2437 .6580 .1067 3.0274 3.4600 Very well 5 3.5396 .3956 .1769 3.0484 4.0307 Total 80 3.2827 ....... ,5828 ,6.516E-02i m . 3.1530 3,4124 ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .474 3 .158 .456 .714 Within Groups 26.363 76 .347 Total 26.837 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 154 Table 48 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Ability to Participate in Class Discussions Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 74 2.7691 .5622 6.536E-02 2.6389 2.8994 With difficulty 267 2.8455 .5761 3.526E-02 2.7761 2.9149 Fairly well 601 2.8874 .5678 2.316E-02 2.8419 2.9329 Very well 473 2.9281 .5758 2.647E-02 2.8761 2.9802 Total 1415 2,8869 .5726 1.522E-02 ........... 2;8571 2.9168 ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2.289 3 .763 2.334 .072 Within Groups 461.298 1411 .327 Total „ m ......„ „ 463,587 m 1414 With reference to ability to communicate with instructors, as shown in Table 49, the highest frequencies of the two successful student groups (46.4%, N = 695) responded that their English language skills were at the “Fairly well” level. The total mean value of academic success for the successful Chinese international students was 3.29 ( N - 80, SD = .5828) (see Table 50). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese foreign students was computed as being part of the “Not at all” group (M= 3.68, JV = 1), whereas the lowest was computed as being part of the “Fairly well” group (M= 3.26, N= 49, SD = .6529). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 155 On the other hand, the total mean value of the ability to communicate with instructor for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N =1,417, SD - .5730) (see Table 51). The highest mean value of academic success for the successful domestic students was computed as being part of the “Very well” group (M = 2.95, N = 590, SD = .5750), whereas the lowest mean value was computed for the “With difficulty” group (M — 2.82, N - 146, SD = .5425). According to the Post Hoc Test, there was a significant mean difference between academic success and the stated ability for the successful domestic students at LACCD. Table 49 Chi-Square Analysis by Ability to Communicate With Instructors Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Domestic S. Total Communicate with instructors Not at ail Count Column % 1 1.3% 35 2.5% 36 2.4% With difficulty Count Column % 23 28.8% 146 10.3% 169 11.3% Fairly well Count Column % 49 61.3% 646 45.6% 695 46.4% Very well Count Column % 7 8.8% 590 41.6% 597 39.9% Total Count Column% 80 100.0% 1417 100.0% 1497 Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 47.831s 3 .000 Likelihood Ratio 50.190 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 32.813 i .000 .N of V alid Cases . . . .. v » z ._ a. l cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minim um expected count is 1.92. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 156 Table 50 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Ability to Communicate With Instructors Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 1 3.6842 . . With dificulty 23 3.2747 .4825 .1006 3.0661 3.4834 Fairly well 49 3.2615 .6529 9.327E-02 3.0740 3.4490 Very well 7 3.3997 .4028 .1522 3.0272 3.7722 Total 80 ..,3.2827 .5828 6.516E-02 3.1530 3.4124 ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .281 3 9.351E-02 .268 .849 Within Groups 26.556 76 .349 Total.......... 26.837 79 Table 51 Means ofAcademic Success o f Domestic Students by Ability to Communicate with Instructors Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Not at all 35 2.8306 .5976 .1010 2.6253 3.0358 With difficulty 146 2.8155 .5425 4.489E-02 2.7268 2.9042 Fairly well 646 2.8531 .5723 2.252E-02 2.8089 2.8973 Very well 590 2.9516 .5750 2.367E-02 2.9051 2.9981 T otal . ........ 1417 2.8897 •573<L_ 1.522E-02 2.8598 2.9196 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 157 Table 51 (Continued) ANOVA G PA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups Within Groups 4.055 3 460.804 1413 1416 1.352 4.145 .326 .006 ost Hoc Tests Multiple Com parisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD (I) How well to (J) How well to Mean communicate communicate Difference with instructors with instructors (I-J) Std. Error Sig. With difficulty Very well -.1361* 5.279E-02 .049 Fairly well Very well -9.8532E-Q2* 3.252E-02 .013 Very well With difficulty .1361* 5.279E-02 .049 ..... faW y well............ 9.853E-02* 3.252E-02 •013 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. With reference to the expression, “I am very determined to reach my goals,” the highest frequency of the two significantly different population groups (56.0%, N = 819) responded within the “Strongly agree” category. It is important to note that 16.5% of the successful Chinese international students (N= 13) rated themselves at the “Not sure” category (see Table 52). The total mean value of academic success for the successful Chinese foreign students by their determination to reach personal goals was 3.30 (N= 79, SD = .5681). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese students was computed as falling within the “Strongly agree” category (M= 3.50, N = 29, SD - .5963), whereas the lowest was computed as falling within the “Slightly agree” category (M= 2.89, N = 7, SD = .4898) (see Table 53). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. For the successful domestic students, the total mean value by the student’s determination to reach their personal goals was 2.89 (N= 1,384, SD = .5732). The highest mean value was within the “Disagree” (M= 2.99, N= 4, SD = .2659) category, whereas the lowest was measured for the “Slightly disagree” category (M= 2.74, N = 15, SD = .5820) (see Table 54). Table 52 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “ 1 Am Very Determined to Reach My Goals ” Academically Successful Students Successful Successful Chinese I. S. Domestic S. Total I am very determined to reach my goals Strongly disagree Count Column % 6 .4% 6 .4% Disagree Count 1 4 5 Column % 1.3% .3% .3% Slightly disagree Count 2 15 17 Column % 2.5% 1.1% 1.2% Not sure Count 13 55 68 Column % 16.5% 4.0% 4.6% Slightly agree Count 7 119 126 Column % 8.9% 8.6% 8.6% Agree Count 27 395 4 2 2 Column % 34.2% 28.5% 28.8% Strongly agree Count 29 790 819 Column % 36.7% 57.1% 56.0% Total Count 79 1384 1463 Mm Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 35.197a 6 .000 Likelihood Ratio 25.663 6 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 20.018 1 .000 N of Valid Cases 1463 a. 5 cells (35.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .27. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 159 Table 53 Means o f the Successful Chinese InternationaI Students by Response to the Statement “ I Am Very Determined to Reach My Goals ” G PA 2 or above D escriptives Mean Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean____________ Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Disagree 1 3.3448 Slightly Disagree 2 3.3250 .1061 7.500E-02 2.3720 4.2780 Not Sure 13 3.0410 .5406 .1499 2.7143 3.3677 Slightly Agree 7 2.8900 .4898 .1851 2.4369 3.3430 Agree 27 3.3052 .5188 9.984E-02 3.0999 3.5104 Strongly Agree 29 3.5041 .5963 .1107 3.2772 3.7309 Total 79 3.2989 ■5681 ... 6,391E-02........... 3.1717 .......3,4261 ANO VA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df M ean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.260 5 .652 2.173 .066 Within Groups 21.910 73 .300 Total .............. 25.171 78 Table 54 Means o f Academic Success o f Domestic Students by Response to the Statement “ I Am very Determined to Reach My Goals ” GPA 2 or above Descriptives 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 6 2.7780 .6172 . .2520 2.1303 3.4257 Disagree 4 2.9893 .2659 .1329 2.5662 3.4124 Slightly Disagree 15 2.7448 .5820 .1503 2.4225 3.0671 Not Sure 55 2.9696 .5587 7.534E-02 2.8185 3.1206 Slightly Agree 119 2.7650 .5727 5.250E-02 2.6610 2.8689 Agree 395 2.8628 .5916 2.977E-02 2.8043 2.9214 Strongly Agree 790 2.9173 .5635 2.005E-02 2.8780 2.9567 Total .... ...... . .5732 . 2.8583 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 160 Table 54 (Continued) ANOVA G PA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.518 6 .586 1.791 .098 Within Groups 450.857 1377 .327 With reference to the statement “I keep trying even when frustrated by a task,” as shown in Table 55, the highest percentage of the two successful student groups (41.1%, N = 608) indicated that they fell within the “Agree” category. It is important to note that 35.1% of the successful domestic students responded, “Strongly agree” which was higher than the successful Chinese foreign students (18.8%) at LACCD. The total mean value for the successful Chinese students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828), and the highest mean value was computed as falling in the “Strongly agree” category (M = 3.72, N= 15, SD = .3082), whereas the lowest fell in the “Disagree” category (M ~ 2.41, N = 1) (see Table 56). In Table 57, the total mean value for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N = 1,398, SD = .5739). The highest mean value for the successful domestic students fell in the “Slightly disagree” group (M = 2.91, N= 43, SD = .6107), whereas the lowest fell in the “Disagree” group (M= 2.79 , N - 25, SD = .4793). There was a significant mean difference in attitudes towards encountering frustration for both successful student groups (see Appendix B). The Post Hoc Tests could not be performed to compare the levels of academic success among the successful Chinese students who selected “Disagree,” as there was only one case. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 55 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “ I Keep Trying Even When Frustrated by a Task” Academically Successful Students Successful Successful Chinese I. S. Domestic S. Total I Keep Strongly disagree Count 8 8 trying even when Column % .6% .5% Disagree Count 1 25 26 frustrated Column % 1.3% 1.8% 1.8% by a task Slightly disagree Count 3 43 4 6 Column % 3.8% 3.1% 3.1% Not sure Count 7 69 76 Column % 8.8% 4.9% 5.1% Slightly agree Count 20 189 209 Column % 25.0% 13.5% 14.1% Agree Count 34 574 608 Column % 42.5% 41.1% 41.1% Strongly agree Count 15 490 5 0 5 Column % 18.8% 35.1% 34.2% Total Count 80 1398 1478 .........Coi™n% _ 100.0% .............. ........ . C hi-Square T ests Value Asymp. Sig. df (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 15.8103 6 .015 Likelihood Ratio 15.744 6 .015 Linear-by-Unear Association 5.771 1 .016 .N of Valid C ases 1478 a. 4 cells (28.6%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .43. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 162 Table 56 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to the Statement "IKeep Trying Even When Frustrated by a Task” Descriptives G PA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Disagree 1 2.4138 Slightly Disagree 3 2.9551 .3883 .2242 1.9905 3.9196 Not Sure 7 3.3979 .5029 .1901 2.9328 3.8629 Slightly Agree 20 2.9851 .6002 .1342 2.7042 3.2660 Agree 34 3.2972 .5793 9.935E-02 3.0950 3.4993 Strongly Agree 15 3.7162 .3082 7.958E-02 3.5456 3.8869 Total ................. 80 3.2827 ..........5828... 6.516E-02 3.1530 . 3.4124 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Betw een Groups 5.767 5 1.153 4.051 .003 Within G roups 21.070 74 .285 26.,937.............7 9 ............................................................................. Table 57 Means o f Academic Success o f Domestic Students by Response to the Statement “I Keep Trying Even When Frustrated by a Task” D escrip tives GPA 2 or above _____ _____ _________________________________ 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 8 2.9521 .5441 .1924 2.4972 3.4070 Disagree 25 2.7939 .4793 9.585E-02 2.5961 2.9917 Slightly Disagree 43 2.9104 .6107 9.313E-02 2.7225 3.0984 Not Sure 69 2.8515 .5739 6.909E-02 2.7137 2.9894 Slightly Agree 189 2.7971 .5388 3.919E-02 2.7198 2.8745 Agree 574 2.8655 .5717 2.386E-02 2.8187 2.9124 Strongly Agree 490 2.9601 .5859 2.647E-02 2.9081 3.0121 . J M . ' . . 1398 2,8893 .5739 1.535E-02 , ..............2:.85?2^ 2.9194 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 163 Table 57 (Continued) ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. B etw een Groups 4.759 6 .793 2.423 .025 Within Groups 455.320 1391 .327 Tota! ........... 460.079 1397 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD___________________________ (I) Keep trying (J) Keep trying Mean even when even when Difference frustrated by a task frustrated by a task (1-3) Std. Error Sig. Slightly Agree Strongly Agree -.1629* 4.899E-02 .015 Stronqlv Agree Slightly Agree....... .1629* 4.899E-02 .015 *. T he m ean difference is significant at th e ,05 level. With reference to “Understanding what is taught is important to me,” while more than half of the two successful student groups (56.4%, N - 836) counted themselves as being part of the “Strongly agree” category, 16.3% of the successful Chinese foreign students reported themselves as being part of the “Slightly agree” category (see Table 58). In Table 59, the total mean value for the successful Chinese foreign students was 3.28 (N = 80, SD = .5828). The highest mean value of the successful Chinese students was computed as falling within the “Strongly agree” category (M = 3.41, N= 35, SD = .5258), whereas the lowest fell within the “Strongly disagree” category (M = 2.41, N= 1). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. The total mean value for the successful domestic students by “Understanding what is taught is important” was 2.89 ( N - 1,401, SD = .5741). The highest mean value for the successful domestic students was computed as failing within the “Strongly disagree” category (M= 3.31, N - 2 , SD = .4389), whereas the lowest was computed as falling within the “Slightly agree” category (M = 2.61, N = 79, SD = .4654) (see Table 60). According to the Post Hoc Tests, there was a significant mean difference in the beliefs that understanding what is taught is important for the successful domestic students at LACCD. Table 58 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “ Understanding What Is Taught Is Important to Me ” Academically Successful Students Successful Chinese I. S. Successful Dom estic S. Total Understanding what is taught is impt to me Strongly disagree Count Column % 1 1.3% 2 .1% 3 .2% Disagree Count Column % 2 .1% 2 .1% Slightly disagree Count Column % 11 .8% 11 .7% Not sure Count 3 31 34 Column % 3.8% 2.2% 2.3% Slightly agree Count 13 79 92 Column % 16.3% 5.6% 6.2% Agree Count 28 475 503 Column % 35.0% 33.9% 34.0% Strongly agree Count 35 801 836 Column % 43.8% 57.2% 5 6 .4 % Total Count Column % 80 1401 100.0% 1481 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 165 Table 58 (Continued) Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 22.261a 6 .001 Likelihood Ratio 16.685 6 .011 Linear-by-Linear Association 9.790 1 .002 N of Valid C ases 1481 a. 7 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .11. Table 59 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to the Statement “Understanding What Is Taught Is Important to Me ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 1 2.4138 . Not Sure 3 3.3718 .3764 .2173 2.4367 4.3070 Slightly Agree 13 3.1901 .5258 .1458 2.8723 3.5078 Agree 28 3.1844 .6250 .1181 2.9421 3.4268 Strongly Agree 35 3.4128 .5671 9.586E-02 3.2180 3.6077 Total 80 ..3,2827„i i r ...„»„j5828 6.516E-02 3.1530 3-4124 ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 1.753 4 .438 1.311 .274 Within Groups 25.083 75 .334 Total 26.837 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 166 Table 60 Means o f Academic Success o f Domestic Students by Response to the Statement “ Understanding What Is Taught Is Important to Me ” Descriptives G PA 2 or above _________ _____________ 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error 1 Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 2 3.3103 .4389 .3103 -.6330 7.2536 Disagree 2 3.1645 .3112 .2201 .3681 5.9610 Slightly Disagree 11 2.9399 .6085 .1835 2.5311 3.3487 Not Sure 31 2.6262 .5442 9.774E-02 ■ 2.4265 2.8258 Slightly Agree 79 2.6080 .4654 5.236E-02 2.5038 2.7123 Agree 475 2.8565 .5855 2.686E-02 2.8037 2.9092 Strongly Agree 801 2.9446 .5672 2.004E-02 2.9053 2.9839 Total _ MO! 2.8895 .5741 1.534E-02 2.8594 2.9196 ANOVA G PA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 11.892 6 1.982 6.145 .000 Within Groups 449.592 1394 .323 Total .......................... 1400 ... Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey H SD Mean (I) Understanding what is taught is important (j) Understanding what is taught is important Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Not Sure Strongly Agree -.3184* .1040 .036 Slightly Agree Agree -.2484* 6.900E -02 .006 Strongly Agree -.3366* 6.597E-02 .000 Agree Slightly Agree .2484* 6.900E-02 .006 Strongly Agree Not Sure .3184* .1040 .036 „,..S|gjTt!y_Aflgg^ — ... . -3 3 6 6 1 .000 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 167 For the belief that success in college is largely due to effort, shown in Table 61, the highest frequency of the two successful student groups (48.2%, N — 705) occurred at the “Strongly agree” level. It is important to note that 18.8% of the successful Chinese international students (N = 15) indicated “Not sure.” The total mean value for the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N = 80, SD = .5828). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese international students was computed as falling within the “Disagree” category (M= 3.86, N = 2, SD = .1928), whereas the lowest was computed as falling within the “Slightly agree” category (M= 2.80, Ar= 8, SD = .4677) (see Table 62). In Table 63, the total mean value for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N - 1,384, SD = .5744). The highest mean value was computed as being at “Strongly disagree” level (M — 3.17, N = 9, SD = .4584), whereas the lowest was computed as being at “Slightly agree” level (M= 2.71, N ~ 107, SD = .5725). Based on the findings of Post Hoc Tests, there was a significant mean difference in beliefs that success in college was largely due to effort for the successful Chinese international students as well as for domestic students at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 168 Table 61 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “ Success in College Is Largely Due to Effort” Academicaliy Successful Students Successful Successful Chinese I. S. Domestic S. Total Success Strongly disagree Count 9 9 in college is largely due to Column % .7% .6% Disagree Count 2 12 14 effort Column % 2.5% .9% 1.0% Slightly disagree Count Column % 14 1.0% 14 1.0% Not sure Count 15 79 9 4 Column % 18.8% 5.7% 6.4% Slightly agree Count 8 107 115 Column % 10.0% 7.7% 7 .9 % Agree Count 25 488 513 Column % 31.3% 35.3% 3 5 .0 % Strongly agree Count 30 675 705 Column % 37.5% 48.8% 48.2% Total Count 80 1384 1464 Column % 100.0% 100.0% ...MW/® Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sid ed ) Pearson Chi-Square 2 6 .3 1 1 s 6 .000 Likelihood Ratio 20.608 6 .002 Linear-by-Linear Association 10.195 1 .001 N o f Valid C ases 1464 a. 3 cells (21.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .49. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 169 Table 62 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to the Statement “ Success in College Is Largely Due to Effort” Descriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Disagree 2 3.8636 .1928 .1364 2.1310 . 5.5963 Not Sure 15 3.2480 .5202 .1343 2.9600 3.5361 Slightly Agree 8 2.8039 .4677 .1654 2.4129 3.1949 Agree 25 3.2201 .5540 .1108 2.9915 3.4488 Strongly Agree 30 3.4411 .6085 ' .1111 3.2138 3.6683 Tota! ................ 80 3.2827 .5828 „6-516E:02.. .........3,1530 .... 3.4124 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.377 4 .844 2.699 .037 Within Groups 23.459 75 .313 Total ......... .... ......26.837.... 79 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD_________________________ (I) Success in college largely due to effort (j) Success in college largely due to effort Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Slightly Agree Strongly Agree -.6372* .2225 .042 Strongly Aqree Sliqhtly Aqree .6372* .2225 .042 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 170 Table 63 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the Statement “ Success in College Is Largely Due to Effort ” D escriptives GPA 2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 9 3.1693 .4584 .1528 2.8169 3.5216 Disagree 1 2 2.7237 .3899 .1126 2.4760 2.9714 Slightly Disagree 14 2.7427 .5519 .1475 2.4240 3.0614 Not Sure 79 2.9190 .5859 6.592E-02 2.7877 3.0502 Slightly Agree 107 2.7112 .5725 5.535E-02 2.6015 2.8210 Agree 488 2.8881 .5751 2.603E-Q2 2.8370 2.9393 Strongly Agree 675 2.9203 .5725 2.204E-02 2.8770 2.9635 Total , , 1384 2.8908 -5Z44„, ,,1,544E;02,.. 2.8605 2.9211 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of _____________________ Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 5.442 6 .907 2.771 .011 Within Groups 450.827 1377 .327 Post Hoc Tests Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD____________________ (I) Success in college largely due to effort (J) Success in college largely due to effort Mean Difference (1-3) Std. Error Sig. Slightly Agree Strongly Agree -.2090* 5.954E-02 .008 Stronoiv Aqree ......... ■2090* 5.954E-02 ■008 *. The m ean difference is significant at th e .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 171 In terms of responding to the statement “I can leam all the skills taught in college,” shown in Table 64, most of student groups (39.9%, 17 = 588) selected “Agree,” and 31.6% of the successful Chinese foreign students (N= 25) responded “Slightly agree.” The total mean value for the successful Chinese foreign students to the statement “I can leam all the skills taught in college” was 3.29 (N= 79, SD = .5857). The highest mean value for the successful Chinese foreign students was computed for the “Disagree” group (M - 3.90, 77 = 2, SD = .1414), whereas the lowest was computed for the “Slightly disagree” group (M — 3.15, 77 = 4, SD = .7950) (see Table 65). In Table 66, the total mean value for the successful domestic students was 2.89 (77 = 1,395, SD = .5740). The highest mean value for the successful domestic students was computed for “Strongly disagree” ( M - 3.05, 77 = 7, SD = .6844), whereas the lowest was computed for “Slightly disagree” (M — 2.80,17= 35, SD = .5966). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 172 Table 64 Chi-Square Analysis by Response to the Statement “ I Can Learn All Skills Taught in College ” Academically Successful Students Successful Successful Chinese I. S. Domestic S. Total I can Strongly disagree Count 1 7 8 learn all skills taught in Column % 1.3% .5% .5% Disagree Count 2 16 18 college Column % 2.5% 1.1% 1.2% Slightly disagree Count 4 35 39 Column % 5.1% 2.5% 2.6% Not sure Count 15 140 155 Column % 19.0% 10.0% 10.5% Slightly agree Count 25 195 220 Column % 31.6% 14.0% 14.9% Agree Count 23 565 588 Column % 29.1% 40.5% 39.9% Strongly agree Count 9 437 446 Column % 11.4% 31.3% 30.3% Total Count 79 1395 1474 Column % ..... “ 0:.00/o„ „........................ 100% C hi-Square T ests Asymp. Sig. Value df (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 37.403a 6 .000 Likelihood Ratio 35.061 6 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 28.141 1 .000 „.M.ofVa)MCases------------ 147ft a. 3 cells (21.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .43. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 173 Table 65 Means o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Response to the Statement “ I Can Learn All Skills Taught in College ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 1 3.2500 • • Disagree 2 3.9000 .1414 . 1 0 0 0 2.6294 5.1706 ■ Slightly Disagree 4 3.1457 .7950 .3975 1.8807 4.4107 Not Sure 15 3.2982 .5187 .1339 3.0110 3.5855 Slightly Agree 25 3.2347 .5293 .1059 3.0162 3.4532 Agree 23 3.1853 .6442 .1343 2.9067 3.4639 Strongly Agree 9 3.5976 .6334 .2 1 1 1 3.1107 4.0845 Total 79 3.2863 .5857. J,589E-02 , ..........3.1551...— ... 3-4174 ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 2.009 6 .335 .974 .449 Within Groups 24.747 72 .344 Total „ 26,756 78 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 174 Table 66 Means o f the Successful Domestic Students by Response to the Statement "I Can Learn All Skills Taught in College ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 7 3.0535 .6844 .2587 2.4205 3.6864 Disagree 16 2.9153 .6743 .1686 2.5560 3.2746 Slightly Disagree 35 2.7965 .5966 .1008 2.5915 3.0014 Not Sure 140 2.8859 .5795 4.898E-02 2.7891 2.9828 Slightly Agree 195 2.8356 .5503 3.941E-02 2.7579 2.9133 Agree 565 2.8918 .5710 2.402E-02 2.8446 2.9390 Strongly Agree 437 2.9136 .5805 2.777E-02 2.8590 2.9682 Total 1395 2.8889 .5740 1.537E-02 2.8587 2.9190 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 1.326 6 .221 .670 .674 Within Groups 458.006 1388 .330 Total ........ „459333„„ 1394 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 175 Research Question No. 3.: What factors predict success, if any? To what extent are these factors different across groups (Chinese international students and the other student groups)? To answer Research Question No. 3, two statistical steps were employed. In the first step, Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compute the relationships between the academic success variable and individual independent variables that originated from the cultural capital theory, considered a factor in estimating the academic success of students and, in particular the Chinese international student group. As correlations measure only the strength of relationships, significant correlations should not be interpreted as implying causality. In the second step, a Factorial Analysis of Variance regression technique was used to enter significant correlative variables to identify which factors were the best predictors for the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD. Furthermore, to better understand the extent to which the factors influenced the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD, the same processes of analysis were applied to the domestic students so that a contrast to the Chinese international students could be observed. The strength of relationships for both student groups is presented in Appendix D. Pearson correlation in relation to academic success. In the first step’s analysis, seven variable sets were entered into the Pearson Correlation analysis for the successful Chinese international students and domestic students. Results of the correlation analyses suggest that the academic success of Chinese international Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 176 students and domestic students is significantly related to the 12 and 16 independent variables, respectively (as shown in Table 67). Five of all correlated variables impacted the academic success of both population groups. For Chinese international students, 11 correlated variables were positively related to their academic success in college, but the variable “I have attended an orientation program at college” was an exception (see Appendix D). To further examine the significant mean difference relative to academic success and the correlated variables, which had not been analyzed in the previous sections, an Independent Sample i-Test or One-Way ANOVA analysis was employed. The complete analysis of these unanalyzed correlated variables appears in Appendix E. A detailed summary of the significant mean differences in correlated variables for both successful student groups appears in Appendix F. For the purpose of addressing the research question, only statistically significant findings will be discussed here. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 177 Table 67 Correlated Variables for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students Paired with academic success variable Chinese I. S. Domestic S. Age X Gender X The highest academic degree desired X I have attended an orientation program at this college X Mother’s education level Father’s education level X High school GPA X Ability to read in English Ability to write in English Ability to understand a college lecture X X Ability to read a college text book X Ability to write an essay exam X Ability to write a term paper X Ability to participate in class discussions X Ability to communicate with instructors X Note. X: Correlated variable for the successful student group. X: Correlated variable for both successful student groups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 178 Table 67 (Continued) Paired with academic success variable Chinese I. S. Domestic S, It is important to finish courses in program of studies X I am very determined to reach my-goals X I will get a Bachelor’s degree X I will transfer to a four-year college/ university - X I always complete homework assignments X X I keep trying even when frustrated by a task X X Understanding what is taught is important to me X Success in college is largely due to effort I can leam all skills taught in college I enjoy doing challenging class assignments X X I expect to do well and earn good grades X X How often talk with an instructor before/after a class X How often talk with an instructor during office hours How often help another student understand homework X How often study in small groups outside of class How often speak with an academic counselor Note. X: Correlated variable for the successful student group. X: Correlated variable for both successful student groups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 179 Unanalyzed correlated variables to the successful Chinese international students. Relative to gender factor, female Chinese students had a higher level of academic success than male students (see Table 68). Table 68 Independent Sample t-Test o f the Successful Chinese International Students by Gender Group Statistics Std. Std. Error ________ Gender N Mean Deviation Mean _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .5 5 3 2 .1179 Female 59.„_,33844 5510 7.173E-02_ Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means Sig. Sig. t df (2-tailed) GPA g 2 Equal variances ™ assumed -185 -668 ' 2-337 79 -022 Equal variances not assumed In terms of the highest academic degree one desired to obtain, shown in Table 69, the highest level of academic success for Chinese international students was the “Doctoral degree” (M= 3.59, jV= 10), whereas the lowest was the “Medical degree” (M= 2.92,7/= 4). There was no pattern to the levels of academic success and the types of academic degrees that were desired by Chinese international students at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 180 Table 69 One-Way ANOVA Analysis o f ihe Successful Chinese International Students by “ The Highest A cademic Degree One Desired to Obtain ” Descriptives GPA 2 o r above_______________________________________________ _______ ___ 95% Confidence Interval for Std. ^ n . N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound A ssociate 13 2 .9 8 7 3 .7 179 .1991 2 .5 5 3 5 3 .4 2 1 2 B achelor's d eg ree 8 3 .2 4 7 3 .5738 .2 0 2 9 2 .7 6 7 6 3 .7 2 7 0 At le a st a B acheior's or more 23 3 ,1 8 3 6 .5825 .1215 2 .9 3 1 7 3 .4 3 5 5 M aster's d eg ree 24 3 .4 7 0 3 .4177 8.526E -02 3 .2 9 4 0 3 .6 4 6 7 D octoral d eg ree 10 3 .5 9 3 0 .4 3 1 4 .1 3 6 4 3 .2 8 4 3 3 .9 0 1 6 Medical d e g r e e 4 2 .9 2 0 1 .8177 .4 0 8 9 1 .6 1 8 9 4 .2 2 1 3 Total 8 2 3 .2 7 9 7 .5811 .64 417E-02.. mom GPA 2 or above _________ _____________________ ________________ Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.703 5 .741 2.380 .046 Within Groups 23.650 76 .311 Total • 27.353 81............................................................ ..... Table 70 shows that a negative relationship was found between academic success and “ I have attended an orientation program at the college” for Chinese international students. Chinese international students who had attended an orientation program at the college (M - 3.12, N = 38) had a lower level of academic success than those who had not attended a program (M= 3.42,77= 44). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 181 Table 70 Independent Sample t-Test o f the Successful Chinese International Students by "I Have Attended an Orientation Program at the College ” Group Statistics Attendance of an orientation program N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean GPA ^ 2 Yes 38 3.1190 .6401 .1038 No 44 3,4212 , ___,4903. 7.391E-02 ' Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2 -tailed) G PA 2=2 Equal variances _ assumed .051 -2.418 80 .018 Equal variances not assumed -2.371 68.799 .0 2 1 With reference to the statement “I will get a Bachelor’s degree,” as shown in Table 71, the greatest number of Chinese international students selected “Definitely” (M= 3.51, N - 43, SD = .4780), whereas smallest number selected “Probably not” (M= 2.89, N= 4, SD = .7549). Chinese international students who were in the “Probably” group differed significantly in their academic success from those in the “Definitely” group (p= .004). The two greatest categories of academic successes for Chinese international students occurred in the opposite extremes. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 182 Table 71 One- Way ANO VA Analysis o f the Successful Chinese International Students by “ I Will Get a Bachelor’ s Degree ’’ Descriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Definitely Not 3 3.4167 .5204 .3005 2.1239 4.7095 Probably Not 4 2.8854 .7549 .3774 1.6842 4.0865 Maybe 9 3.2959 .3735 .1245 3.0088 3.5831 Probably 19 2.9681 .6450 .1480 2.6572 3.2789 Definitely 43 3.5054 .4780 7.289E-02 3.3583 3.6525 Total ........... 78 3.3151 ,5706 6.461E-02 ...... 3:1865 3.4438 ANOVA GPA 2 or above ___________ ____ Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 4.619 4 1.155 4.122 .005 Within Groups 20.450 73 .280 Total 25.069 77 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 183 Table 71 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD__________________________________ (I) Get a Bachelor's degree (J) Get a Bachelor's degree Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Definitely Not Probably Not .5313 .4042 .683 Maybe .1207 .3529 .997 Probably .4486 .3288 .652 Definitely -8.8750E-02 .3161 .999 Probably Not Definitely Not -.5313 .4042 .683 Maybe -.4106 .3181 .698 Probably -8.2702E-02 .2912 .999 Definitely -.6200 .2767 .176 Maybe Definitely Not -.1207 .3529 .997 Probably Not .4106 .3181 .698 Probably .3279 .2142 .546 Definitely -.2095 .1940 .816 Probably Definitely Not -.4486 .3288 .652 Probably Not 8.270E-02 .2912 .999 Maybe -.3279 .2142 .546 Definitely -.5373* .1458 .004 Definitely Definitely Not 8.875E-02 .3161 .999 Probably Not .6200 .2767 .176 Maybe .2095 .1940 .816 Probably .5373* *. The mean difference is significant at the' .05 level. With respect to the statement “I will transfer to a four-year college or university,” as shown in Table 72, the highest level of academic success was related to “Definitely” on the scale (M= 3.43, N= 44, SD = .5026), whereas the lowest was related to “Definitely not” on the scale (M= 2.67, N = 6, SD = .6165). Chinese students who were part of the “Definitely not” group differed significantly in their Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 184 academic success when compared to those in the “Definitely” group. A positive relationship was found between the levels of academic success and the degrees of determination to transfer to a four-year college or university. Table 72 One-Way ANOVA Analysis o f the Successful Chinese International Students by “ I Will Transfer to a Four-Year College or University ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Definitely Not 6 2.6658 .6165 .2517 2.0188 3.3128 Probably Not 4 3.1630 .3078 .1539 2.6732 3.6528 Maybe 1 1 3.2509 .5421 .1635 2.8867 3.6151 Probably 12 3.3697 .6137 .1772 2.9797 3.7597 Definitely 44 3.4307 .5026 7.577E-02 3.2779 3.5835 Total ............. 77 3.3220 ........-5551 J3 2 6 E -0 2 , ......... 3A960„, 3.4480 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.288 4 .822 2.940 .026 Within Groups 20.129 72 .280 Total 23.417 76 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 185 Table 72 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSP _____________________ (I) Transfer to a four-year college/ university (J) Transfer to a four-year college/ university Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Definitely Not Probably Not -.4972 .3413 .593 Maybe -.5851 .2683 .199 Probably -.7039 .2644 .070 Definitely -.7650* .2301 .0 1 2 Probably Not Definitely Not .4972 .3413 .593 Maybe -8.7901E-02 .3087 .999 Probably -.2067 .3053 .961 Definitely -.2677 .2761 .8 6 8 Maybe Definitely Not .5851 .2683 .199 Probably Not 8.790E-02 .3087 .999 Probably -.1188 .2207 .983 Definitely -.1798 .1782 .850 Probably Definitely Not .7039 .2644 .070 Probably Not .2067 .3053 .961 Maybe .1188 .2207 .983 Definitely -6.1026E-02 .1722 .997 Definitely Definitely Not .7650* .2301 . 0 1 2 Probably Not .2677 .2761 . 8 6 8 Maybe .1798 .1782 .850 Probably ..... 6:103E-°2 , . . ..... - m .997 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. In terms of responses to the statement “I always complete homework assignments,” shown in Table 73, the highest level of academic success of Chinese international students was related to “Not sure” on the scale (M = 3.60, N= 2, SD - .2787), whereas the lowest was related to “Disagree” on the scale (M= 2.62, N= 2, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 186 SD = .2967). Chinese international students who were in the “Slightly agree” group differed significantly in their academic success from those in the “Strongly agree” group. No pattern was found between the levels of academic success and the attitudes toward completing homework assignments for Chinese international students. Table 73 One-Way ANOVA Analysis o f the Successful Chinese International Students by “ I Always Complete Homework Assignments ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above _________________________ __ _______________ 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Disagree 2 2.6235 .2967 .2098 -4.1819E-Q2 5.2889 Slightly Disagree 2 2.8826 .5196 .3674 -1.7860 7.5511 Not Sure 2 3.5971 .2787 .1971 1.0932 6.1009 Slightly Agree 11 2.8566 .5996 .1808 2.4537 3.2594 Agree 24 3.2081 .4907 . 1 0 0 2 3.0009 3.4153 Strongly Agree 38 3.4756 .5679 9.212E-02 3.2889 3.6623 Total 79 3.2746 . . .5821 ,6.549E-02 3.1442 3.4050 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 4.927 5 .985 3.345 .009 Within Groups 21.500 73 .295 Total 26.427 78 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 187 Table 73 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: G PA 2 or above Tukey HSD Mean (I) Always complete homework assignm ents (J) Always complete homework assignm ents Difference (H ) Std. Error Sig. Disagree Slightly Disagree -.2590 .5427 .997 Not Sure -.9735 .5427 .476 Slightly Agree -.2330 .4172 .993 Agree -.5845 .3994 .688 Strongly Agree -.8520 .3937 .267 Slightly Disagree Disagree .2590 .5427 .997 Not Sure -.7145 .5427 .775 Slightly Agree 2.600E-02 .4172 1.000 Agree -.3255 .3994 .964 Strongly Agree -.5930 .3937 .661 Not Sure Disagree .9735 .5427 .476 Slightly Disagree .7145 .5427 .775 Slightly Agree .7405 .4172 .488 Agree .3890 .3994 .925 Strongly Agree .1215 .3937 1.000 Slightly Agree Disagree .2330 .4172 .993 Slightly Disagree -2.6003E-02 .4172 1.000 Not Sure -.7405 .4172 .488 Agree -.3515 .1976 .486 Strongly Agree -.6190* .1858 .016 Agree Disagree .5845 .3994 .688 Slightly Disagree .3255 .3994 .964 Not Sure -.3890 .3994 .925 Slightly Agree .3515 .1976 .486 Strongly Agree -.2675 .1415 .416 Strongly Agree Disagree .8520 .3937 .267 Slightly Disagree .5930 .3937 .661 Not Sure -.1215 .3937 1.000 Slightly Agree .6190* .1858 .016 —agree------------ --- --------- ........... ._ ^ 6 7 5 .... .1415 .416 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 188 Relative to responses, to the statement “I enjoy doing challenging class assignments,” as shown in Table 74, the highest level of academic success was related to “Strongly agree” on the scale (M = 3.65, N — 10, SD = .6097), whereas the lowest was related to “Strongly disagree” on the scale { M - 2.00, N = 1). While there was a positve relationship between level of academic success and attitude toward challenging class assignments for Chinese international students, it was hard to say what pattern it was. Table 74 One- Way ANO VA Analysis o f the Successful Chinese International Students by “ I Enjoy Doing Challenging Class Assignments ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 1 2 . 0 0 0 0 • . . Disagree 3 3.4058 .2785 .1608 2.7140 4.0976 Slightly Disagree 7 2.9924 .6473 .2447 2.3938 3.5911 Not Sure 1 1 3.2385 .5955 .1795 2.8384 3.6385 Slightly Agree 2 1 3.2292 .5550 .1 2 1 1 2.9766 3.4818 Agree 27 3.3155 .5327 .1025 3.1047 3.5262 Strongly Agree 1 0 3.6495 .6097 .1928 3.2134 4.0857 Total .................. ' 80 ,,,3.2827... .5828 6.516E-02 3.1530..... • -3.4124.. ANOVA GPA2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.737 6 .623 1.968 .081 Within Groups 23.100 73 .316 Total 26.837 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 189 With reference to responses to the statement “1 expect to do well and earn good grades in college,” as shown in Table 75, the highest level of academic success was computed to “Not sure” on the scale (M= 3.58, N - 2, SD = .3070), whereas the lowest was computed to “Strongly disagree” on the scale (M = 2.41, N= 1). While there was a significant mean difference found among group means, the “Strongly disagree” scale had fewer than two cases, it failed in comparing the mean differences in academic success among the groups. However, a positive relationship was found between academic success and attitudes toward doing well in college for Chinese international students. Table 75 One-Way ANOVA Analysis o f the Successful Chinese International Students by "I Expect to Do Well and Earn Good Grades in College ” D escriptives GPA 2 or above 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 1 2.4138 . Slightly Disagree 2 2.9576 .6257 .4424 -2.6640 8.5791 Not Sure 2 3.5771 .3070 .2171 .8191 6.3351 Slightly Agree 10 2.8790 .6038 .1909 2.4470 3.3109 Agree 25 3.1567 .4554 9.109E-02 2.9687 3.3446 Strongly Agree 40 3.4808 .5806 9.180E-02 3.2951 3.6665 Total ... 80, __ M M L ■5806 ....6.491E-02 „ 3,1511 3.4095 ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig, Between Groups 4.737 5 .947 3.202 .011 Within Groups 21.893 74 .295 Total ...... ....... 26.629 79 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 190 Unanalyzed correlated variables to the successful domestic students. By response to the statement “It is important to finish courses in program of studies,” the highest level of academic success was computed to “Strongly agree” on the scale (M = 2.93, N = 814, SD = .5725), whereas the lowest was computed to “Slightly agree” on the scale (M = 2.71, N = 74, SD = .5204) (see Table 76). Based on this finding, domestic students who were part of the “Slightly agree” group differed significantly in their academic success from those who were part of the “Strongly agree” group (p- .021). While a positve relationship was found between academic success and response to the statement “It is important to finish courses in program of studies,” still it is hard to say what kind of pattern exists. Table 76 One-Way ANO VA Analysis o f the Successful Domestic Students by “ It Is Important to Finish Courses in Program o f Studies ” Oescrlptives GPA 2 or above _________________________________________ 95% C onfidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly D isagree 4 2.8515 .6296 .3148 1.8497 3.8533 D isagree 3 2 .7944 .9184 .5302 .5131 5.0758 Slightly D isagree 16 2.8362 .6615 .1654 . 2 .4 8 3 7 3.1887 Not Sure 40 2.7773 .5845 9.242E -02 2.5903 2.9642 Slightly A gree 74 2 .7075 .5204 6.049E -02 2 .5 8 6 9 2.8281 A gree 446 2.8528 .5693 2.696E -02 2 .7 9 9 8 2.9057 Strongly A gree 81 4 2.9319 .5725 2.007E -02 2 .8 9 2 5 2.9712 Total 1397 2,8887........ _____ 5730 1.533E -02 ...........JL,8586 2.9188 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 191 Table 76 (Continued) ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum o f Squares df Mean Square F Sig. B etw een Groups 5.095 6 .849 2 .6 0 4 .016 Within Groups 4 5 3 .2 2 7 1390 .326 Total 458.322 1396 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD______________________ Mean (I) Impt to finish courses (J) Impt to finish course' in program of studies in program of studies Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Slightly Agree Strongly Agree -.2244* 6.933E-02 . 0 2 1 Stronqlv Aqree SliqhtSv Aqree .2244* 6.933E-02 .0 2 1 *. T he m ean difference is significant at the ,05 level. With reference to responses to the statement “I always complete homework assignments,” as shown in Table 77, the highest level of academic success was computed to “Strongly agree” on the scale (M = 3.03, IV= 493, SD - .5709), whereas the lowest was computed to “Disagree” on the scale (M= 2.60,77= 16, SD = .4299). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 192 Table 77 One- Way ANOVA Analysis o f the Successful Domestic Students by “ I Always Complete Homework Assignments" Descriptives GPA 2 or above ___________ 95% Confidence Interval for N Mean Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 7 3.2626 .6799 .2570 2.6338 3.8914 Disagree 16 2.6021 .4299 .1075 2.3730 2.8312 Slightly Disagree 63 2.7982 .5599 7.054E-02 2.6572 2.9392 Not Sure 44 2.6224 .5799 8.742E-02 2.4461 2.7987 Slightly Agree 233 2.7291 .5488 3.595E-02 2.6583 2.7999 Agree 539 2.8670 .5582 2.404E-02 2.8198 2.9142 Strongly Agree 493 3.0288 .5709 2.571E-02 2.9782 3.0793 Total 1395 2.8892 .5739 1.537E-02 2.8591 ........ 2.9194, ANOVA GPA 2 or above Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 21.789 6 3.631 11.526 . 0 0 0 Within Groups 437.307 1388 .315 Total 459.095 1394 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 193 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD Mean (I) A lw ays com plete hom ew ork assign m en ts (3) Always com plete hom ew ork assignm ents Difference . (I-J) Std. Error Sig. D isagree Strongly A gree -.4 2 6 7 * .1426 .044 Slightly Disagree Strongly Agree -.2 3 0 6 * 7.510E -02 .035 Not Sure Strongly A gree -.4 0 6 3 * 8.832E -02 .000 Slightly A gree A gree -.1 3 7 9 * 4.401E-Q2 .029 Strongly Agree -.2 9 9 7 * 4.462E -02 .000 Agree Slightly Agree .1 379* 4.401E -02 .029 Strongly Agree -.1 6 1 8 * 3.498E -02 .000 Strongly A gree D isagree .4 2 6 7 * .1426 .044 Slightly D isagree .2 306* 7.510E -02 .035 Not Sure .4 063* 8.832E -02 .000 Slightly A gree .2 997* 4.462E -02 .000 Aqree .1618* ..,3.498E-02„.. ■ooo *. The m ean difference is significant a t th e .05 level. Responses to the statement “I enjoy doing challenging class assignments,” as shown in Table 78, reveal that the highest level of academic success was related to “Strongly agree” (M= 2.95, N= 193, SD = .5761), whereas the lowest was related to “Disagree” (M = 2.73, N - 50, SD = .5140). The two most academically successful domestic students fell in the opposite extremes. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 194 Table 78 One- Way ANO VA Analysis o f the Successful Domestic Students by “ I Enjoy Doing Challenging Class Assignments Descriptives GPA2 or above Std. Deviation 95% Confidence Interval for Mean N Mean Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 32 2.9367 .5693 .1006 2.7314 3.1420 Disagree 50 2.7264 .5140 7.270E-02 2.5803 2.8725 Slightly Disagree 87 2.8687 .5658 6.066E-02 2.7481 2.9892 Not Sure 136 2.7994 .5660 4.854E-02 2.7034 2.8953 Slightly Agree 356 2.8272 .5740 3.042E-02 2.7673 2.8870 Agree 549 2.9370 .5768 2.462E-02 2.8887 2.9854 Strongly Agree 193 2.9521 .5761 4.147E-02 2.8703 3.0339 Total 1403 2.8861 . . -5745 1.534E-02 2.8560 2.9162 ANOVA GPA 2 or above ________ _ ___________________________ Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 5.906 6 .984 3.008 .006 Within Groups 456.767 1396 .327 Total 462.673 1402 In terms of responses to the statement “I expect to do well and earn good grades in college,” as shown in Table 79, the highest level of academic success was associated with “Strongly agree” (M= 2.95, N = 692, SD = .5662), whereas the lowest was “Disagree” (M = 2.54, N = 5, SD = .4276). Domestic students who were part of the “Slightly agree” group differed significantly in their academic success from those in the “Strongly agree” group at LACCD (p — .013). The two most academically successful domestic students fell in the opposite extremes. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 195 Table 79 One-Way ANOVA Analysis o f the Successful Domestic Students by “ I Expect To Do Well and Earn Good Grades in College ” Descriptives GPA 2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Strongly Disagree 3 3.2455 .3442 .1987 2.3906 4.1005 Disagree 5 2.5404 .4276 .1912 2.0094 3.0714 Slightly Disagree 8 2.6859 .6749 .2386 2.1217 3.2502 Not Sure 44 2.7165 .5376 8.104E-02 2.5530 2.8799 Slightly Agree 96 2.7408 .5742 5.860E-02 2.6244 2.8571 Agree 552 2.8560 .5787 2.463E-02 2.8076 2.9043 Strongly Agree 692 2.9501 .5662 2.152E-02 2.9078 2.9924 Total 1400 2.8889 ■5746 .1,536EJ2„ 2.8588 2.9191 ANOVA GPA 2 or above _____ __ ________________ Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 7.924 6 1.321 4.053 .000 Within Groups 453.944 1393 .325 .Total 461.868 1399 Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: GPA 2 or above Tukey HSD _ ___________ (I) Expect to do well / earn good grades in college (J) Expect to do well / earn good grades in college Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Slightly Agree Strongly Agree -.2093* 6.217E-02 .013 Stronqlv Aqree Sliqhtlv Aqree ■2093* 6,217E:02,™...J 1 3 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 196 Responses to the statement “How often I have talked with an instructor before or after a class,” shown in Table 80, the highest level of academic success for domestic students was associated with “5 times or more” on the scale (M= 2.98, N = 74, SD = .5531), whereas the lowest was associated with “0 or didn’t have time” on the scale (M= 2.79, N - 421, SD = .5725). Domestic students who were part of the “0 or didn’t have time” group differed significantly from the “ 1 time” (p = .043), the “2 times” (p = .007), and the “3 times” (p = .037) groups in their academic success at LACCD. A positive relationship was found between the academic success and the frequency of talks with an instructor, except for the “4 times” group. Table 80 One- Way ANO VA Analysis o f the Successful Domestic Students by “How Often I Have Talked With An Instructor Before or After A Class ” Descriptsves GPA2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound 0 or didn't have time 421 2.7877 .5725 2.790E -02 2.7329 2.8425 1 time 406 2.9030 .5770 2.863E -02 2 .8467 2.9593 2 times 301 2.9371 .5549 3.198E -02 2.8742 3.0000 3 tim es 152 2.9473 .5635 4.570E -02 2.8570 3.0376 4 tim es 44 2.9065 .6442 9.711E -02 2.7106 3.1023 5 tim es or more 74 2.9798 .5531 6.430E -02 2.8517 3.1080 Total 1398 2.8846 .5733 J P & S L . 2 .8545 2.9147 A N O V A GPA 2 or above ______________________ ___________________________ Sum of Squares df_______ Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 6.210 5 1.242 3.817 .002 Within Groups 452.955 1392 .325 M - - ............. M . ...... * 397 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 197 Table 80 (Continued) Post Hoc Tests Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: G PA 2 or above Tukey HSD _________ (I) Talk w ith an instructor before or after a cla ss (J) Talk with an instructor before or after a class Mean D ifference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 0 or didn't have tim e 1 tim e -.1 1 5 3 * 3.968E -02 .043 2 tim es -.1494* 4.306E -02 .007 3 tim es -.1 5 9 6 * 5.398E -02 .037 1 tim e 0 or didn't h ave tim e .1 1 5 3 * 3.968E -02 .043 2 tim es 0 or didn't h ave tim e .1 4 9 4 * 4.306E -02 .007 3 tim es 0 or didn't h ave tim e .1596* 5.398E -02 .037 *. T he mean difference is significant at the .05 level. Domestic students help others with homework, as indicated by their responses to the statement “How often I have helped another student understand homework,” shown in Table 81. The highest level of academic success was associated with “5 times or more” on the scale { M - 2.97, N= 96, SD = .5333), whereas the lowest was associated with “0 or didn’t have time” on the scale (M - 2.82, hT z = 425, SD = .5883). A positive relationship was found between the level of academic success and the frequency with which a student talked with an instructor, except for the “3 times” and “4 times” groups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 198 Table 81 One-Way ANOVA Analysis o f the Successful Domestic Students by “ How Often I Have Helped Another Student Understand Homework" Descriptives GPA2 or above N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound 0 or didn't have time 425 2.8221 .5883 2.854E-02 2.7660 2.8781 1 time 369 2.8877 .5847 3.044E-02 2.8279 2.9476 2 times 294 2.9298 .5518 3.218E-02 2.8665 2.9932 3 times 147 2.9208 .5209 4.296E-02 2.8358 3.0057 4 times 66 2.8950 .6319 7.778E-02 2.7396 3.0503 5 times or more 96 2.9732 .5333 5.443E-02 2.8651 3.0812 Total 1397 2.8863 .5725 1.532E-02 2.8562 2.9163 GPA 2 or above ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 3.216 5 .643 1.969 .080 Within Groups 454.361 1391 .327 Total 457.576 1396 ....,.... Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 199 Predictors to academic success for Chinese international students. To further identify which variables contributing to the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD, the 12 correlated variables serving as predictors of academic success were computed by means of univariate regression. As shown in Table 82, based on the Factorial Analysis of Variance, it can be concluded that the regression of the 12 variables arrived at from the main effects model explained 80.4% of the variance in academic success (F= 2.761, df= 43, p = .003, R 2 = .804). Response to the statements: (1) “I will get a Bachelor’s degree” (F = 3.058, df= 4,p = .032), and (2) “I will transfer to a four-year college or university” (F - 2.873, df= 4,p = .040), contributed more significantly than any other factors to the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD. Both factors belonged to the Educational Aspiration variable set. It is important to note that although significant relationships were found with respect to the 12 variables examined in relation to the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD, the main effects model did not produce better predictors than the two indicated above. The results of the comparison analysis of these two factors appeared in Tables 71 and 72, respectively. Predictors to academic success for domestic students. To further identify which variables contributed to the academic success of domestic students at LACCD, the 16 independent variables that showed significant “r” and “p” values in the first step analyses, as predictors of academic success, were used in a univariate regression analysis. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 200 As shown in Table 83, the Factorial Analysis of Variance predicting those 16 variables was significant (F = 2.137, df= 80,p = .000, and R 2 = .145) and explained 14.5% o f the variance in academic success for domestic students by way of the main effects model. The finding suggested that three factors: (1) age (F = 7.136, df= 3, p = .000), (2) “I always complete homework assignment” (F = 3.471, df= 6, p - .002), and (3) high school GPA (F = 2.820, df= 8,p — .004) contributed more than other factors to the academic success of domestic students at LACCD. These three factors belonged to different variable sets: Demographics, Educational Aspiration, and Academic Ability. Although significant relationships were found with respect to the 16 variables examined in relation to academic success of domestic students, the main effects model did not produce better predictors than the three indicated above. The results of the comparison analysis of these three factors appeared in Tables 18, 77, and 27, respectively. Summary and Conclusions There were 12 and 16 independent variables related to Chinese international students and domestic students’ academic success, respectively. All the correlated variables had positive relationships with both student groups in their academic success in college, except for the attending an orientation program for Chinese international students. Yet, none of the social interaction factors correlated academic success with Chinese international students. Obviously, the most Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. significant factors in predicting the academic success of both student groups were totally different from each other. English language proficiency factors were found that it is not as important as Educational Aspiration factors to influencing Chinese international students’ success in college. A further discussing will be given in following chapter. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 202 Table 82 Univariate Analysis o f Correlated Variables for Chinese International Students Tests of B e tw een -S u b jects Effects Dependent Variable: G PA scores equal to 2 or above Source Type III Sum o f Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model 18.4423 43 .429 2.761 .003 Intercept 13.735 1 13.735 88.407 .000 ability to understand a college lecture 6.588E-03 2 3.294E-03 .021 .979 enjoy doing challenging class assig. .287 6 4.786E -02 .308 .928 always com plete homework assig. .181 4 4.532E-02 .292 .881 very determ ined to reach goals .194 4 4.847E-02 .312 .868 keep trying even when frustrated by a task .245 4 6.133E-02 .395 .811 ability to read a college textbook .236 2 .118 .759 .477 the highest academic degree desired .793 5 .159 1.021 .423 attendance of an orien. .257 1 .257 1.657 .208 program gender .276 1 .276 1.777 .193 expect to do well/ earn good grades .876 3 .292 1.880 .155 will transfer to a four-year college/univ. 1.785 4 .446 2.873 .040 will get a Bachelor's degree 1.901 4 .475 3.058 .032 Error 4.505 29 .155 Total 827.026 73 Corrected Total 22.948 72. a. R Squared = .804 (Adjusted R Squared = .513) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 203 Table 83 Univariate Analysis o f Correlated Variables for Domestic Students Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: G PA Type III Sum Source of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model 6 0 .6 10a 77 .787 2.642 .000 Intercept 178.233 1 178.233 598.137 .000 how often have helped another student .535 5 .107 .359 .876 understand homework ability to understand a college lecture .352 3 .117 .394 .757 ability to write a term paper .406 3 .135 .454 .714 expect to do well/ earn good grades 1.164 6 .194 .651 .689 ability to write an essay exam .466 3 .155 .521 .668 important to finish bourses in program of studies 1.345 6 .224 .752 .608 ability to participate in class disscussions .751 3 .250 .840 .472 ability to communicate with instructors .870 3 .290 .973 .404 understanding w hat is taught is important 1.758 5 .352 1.180 .317 keep trying even when frastrated by a task 2.782 6 .464 1.556 .157 enjoy doing challenging class assig. 2.794 6 .466 1.562 .155 how often have talked with an instructor before/ 2.791 5 .558 1.873 .096 after a class High school G PA 6.547 8 .818 2.747 .005 Always complete homework assig. 7.810 6 1.302 4.368 .000 Age 15.830 9 1.759 5.903 .000 Error 362.940 1218 .298 Total 11255.037 1296 Corrected Total 423.550 1295 a. R Squared = .143 (Adjusted R Squared = .089) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 204 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter includes a summary of the purpose, findings, and conclusions regarding those findings including a discussion about the significance of the investigation and implications for further research. The purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to examine the effect that cultural and social capital factors have on international students’ academic success. Specifically, the study looked at these factors as they affect Chinese international students in particular, in the Los Angeles community colleges, and to what extent the factors vary across groups. These cultural and social capital factors were categorized into seven variable sets: (1) Demographics, (2) Personal and Situational Status, (3) Family Background, (4) Academic Ability, (5) English Language Proficiency, (6) Educational Aspiration, and (7) Social Interaction. The intent was that findings from this study could suggest programmatic strategies to mitigate the transition from their host institutions to U.S. institutions among international students. In particular, the study focused on community colleges because this segment has attracted more international students seeking a solid education at a low cost and these colleges represent the primary path for transfer to four-year colleges and universities. In addition, the findings resulting from this study have the potential to impact future Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 205 policy to assist international students succeed culturally, socially, and academically, and, in turn, to increase community colleges’ international student enrollments. Summary of Findings The summary of results is presented in order of the research questions. Research Question No. 1: What are the characteristics o f international students at Los Angeles Community College District? To what extent are Chinese international students ’ characteristics same as or different from those o f other international student groups? The international students at Los Angeles Community College District were found to be similar to those in other research studies on international students. Specifically, this study found: 1. Chinese students were the youngest group, with more than two-thirds being classified as younger than age 29. 2. While the majority of international students were female, an even larger proportion of Chinese international students were female (73.5%, N = 61). 3. The Chinese and non-East Asian students had higher educational aspirations than the other East Asian students. None of the Chinese ■ students would like to take classes without also seeking a degree. 4. Unlike other international student groups, Chinese students were less likely to attend orientation. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 206 Research Question No. 2: Does the Chinese international students ’ academic success rate differ from other East Asian international students, non-East Asian international students, and non-English speaking domestic students? How do they differ on individual variables? For the purpose of the study, academic success was defined as the college GPA score greater than and equal to 2.0. Data were collected on differences in academic success among the student groups at LACCD, which were included the Chinese, other East Asian, non-East Asian international student and the non-English speaking domestic student groups. Furthermore, data were collected on differences in the academic success relative to the individual independent variables between the successful Chinese international student group and the domestic student group, which was significantly different from the Chinese international students in academic success at LACCD. The following conclusions have been made in response to Research Question No. 2: 1. Chinese international students reported the highest level of academic success, whereas domestic students reported the lowest level of academic success among the whole population groups at LACCD. 2. A significant difference in academic success was found between the Chinese foreign student and domestic student groups. Yet, there was no significant difference in academic success between Chinese students and other East Asian students and non-East Asian students at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 3. Academic success was more similar between Chinese international students and “other East Asian” international students (with p -.116) than it was for Chinese students and “non-East Asian” international students (withp = .053). 4. Domestic students were significantly different from all international students in academic success at LACCD. 5. Both successful Chinese international student and domestic student groups were consistent in 14 independent variables (see Table 26); by contrast, they were inconsistent in 17 independent variables (see Table 27). Namely, there was found a significant difference between academic success and the variations of significant different variables such as, English-related academic areas: understand a college lecture and read a college textbook; the determination to keep trying when frustrated by a task; and the belief that success in college is largely due to effort; within the successful Chinese foreign students. And, for the successful domestic students, they were significantly different from each other between academic success and the significantly different variables such as: age; high school GPA; English-related academic areas: write an essay exam, write a term paper, and communicate with instructors; the determination to keep trying when frustrated by a task; the belief that understanding what is taught is important; and the belief that success in college is largely due to effort (see Appendix B). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 208 6. In general, the older successful Chinese international students had higher levels of academic success except for the 40 - older age group. 7. The successful Chinese international students had not only a higher mother and father’s education level but also a higher level of academic ability background, high school GPA, than the successful domestic students. 8. While the successful Chinese international students rated lower on English language competencies than the successful domestic students in all eight language related variables, they scored higher than the successful domestic students in eight academic performance variables. 9. While the successful Chinese students rated conservative in response to the educational aspiration variables than the successful domestic students, they scored higher than the successful domestic students in those educational aspiration variables. Research Question No, 3: What factors predict success, if any? To what extent are they different across groups (Chinese international students, and the other student groups)? By using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient Analysis, there were 12 and 16 independent variables found that significantly related to Chinese international students and domestic students’ academic success, respectively. The following summarizes those variables: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 209 1. Five of the 12 or 16 variables were related to both student groups’ academic success at LACCD (see Appendix D, E, and F). 2. All correlated variables had a positive relationship to both student groups’ academic success, except for the variable that “I have attended an orientation program at the college” of Chinese international students’ academic success at LACCD. 3. Female Chinese international students showed better academic performance than male Chinese international students at LACCD. 4. A positive relationship was found between the academic success and the highest academic degree one desired to obtain. While a positive relationship was found between academic success and “I will get a Bachelor’s degree,” the two highest level of academic success for Chinese international students fell in the opposite extremes. A positive relationship was also found between academic success and “I will transfer to a four-year college or university” for Chinese international students at LACCD. 5. By contrast, the successful Chinese foreign students were found less likely to attend an orientation program at this college than other students. 6. The statements “I will get a Bachelor’s degree” and “I will transfer to a four-year college or university” were found to be the most significant factors of the 12 correlated factors in predicting the academic success of Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 210 Chinese international students at LACCD. Both factors are clustered in the Educational Aspiration variable set in this study. While both factors had strongly positive relationships to academic success for Chinese international students, the distribution of the levels of academic success by the factor of “I will get a Bachelor’s degree” was quite varied. By contrast, the distribution of the levels of academic success by the factor of “I will transfer to a four-year college or university” made it quite obvious that Chinese international students who had a greater determination to transfer to higher-level institutions had a higher level of academic success in the study at LACCD. 7. Three factors including age, “I always complete homework assignments,” and high school GPA, were the most significant factors of the 16 correlated variables in predicting the academic success of domestic students at LACCD. They are respectively belonged to the Demographics, Educational Aspiration, and Academic Ability variable sets. It had positive relationships to academic success for domestic students. In terms of age factor, the older domestic students had higher levels of academic success in their studies at LACCD. Relative to the attitudes toward the completion of homework assignments, the two highest levels of academic success for domestic students scored in opposite directions. With respect to high school GPA, domestic students who possessed a better academic ability background had a Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 211 higher level of academic success in college, except the “C-“ and “D or lower” groups. In this study, the effects of the seven variable sets, which were included 31 independent variables, were investigated. Twelve of the 31 independent variables showed significant “r” or “p” values on academic success for Chinese international students, likewise 16 of 31 independent variables were found related to academic success for domestic students at LACCD respectively. Surprisingly, none of the social interaction variables was related to Chinese international students’ success in colleges. However, some similarities were found between Chinese international students and domestic students. The five same variables of the 12 or 16 correlated variables affected academic success for Chinese international students as well for domestic students at LACCD. These five variables were included English language proficiency: ability to understand a college lecture in English; and Educational Aspiration: “I always complete homework assignments,” “I keep trying even when frustrated by a task,” “ I enjoy doing challenging class assignments,” and “I expect to do well and earn good grades in college.” Obviously, the most significant factors influencing the academic success of Chinese international students were different from those influencing domestic students’. Discussion In this study, international students came to study at LACCD at various ages, with a large percentage being female, following a similar U.S. demographic shift, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 212 where the current college generation is more female than previous generations, and a large percentage wishing to pursue graduate studies. Weaker English language skills were major characteristic of most students from the Far East, while most non-East Asian international students reported higher English language competencies. Both the Chinese and other East Asian international student groups reported higher parental education levels than the non-East Asian international student and domestic student groups. Also, like earlier studies of international students, this one found that most international students are in “good” academic standing in the host college (Akpakpan, 1980, Motarassed, 1981). Specifically, the present study indicated that Chinese international students had the highest college GPA among all students in the sample. It was quite obvious that foreign students had better academic performance than non-English speaking domestic students at LACCD. Interestingly, the finding of this study raised a question that if there has any generation effect upon the academic success between the international students (first generation) and the second or third-generation students of country of origin. In examining the similarities and differences between the successful Chinese international students and domestic students, although both groups had common variables that were related to their academic success in college, the most significant factors influencing the academic success of Chinese international students were different from those influencing domestic students. This finding implies that the groups are significantly different from each other in regards to cultural competencies, abilities, knowledge, and beliefs - the elements of cultural capital. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 213 Cultural Capital, Educational Attainment, and Asian Cultural Background Based on the perspective of Bourdieu, these cultural differences of both groups generate different cultural capital that is passed down by the family, which, in turn, influences their worldview (habitus) and their place in the educational system. By internalizing the experiences of habitus, one develops aspirations and practices that lead toward success in the college context (field). The amount of one’s cultural capital and the orientation one has toward using those resources (habitus) and the ability to convert one’s capital into educational attainment differs among students of different ethnic groups and social class. Therefore, in order to adequately evaluate the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD, the Chinese international students’ culture must be taken into account (see Klein, et al., 1971). It is especially important to consider the influence of ethnic cultural values, because such values may influence parents’ attitudes toward goals for their children (see Luster & Okagaki, 1993), and thereby influence the educational performance of their children. Thus, certain differences in educational performance between specific ethnic groups may result from differences in their respective cultural values. With reference to Asian cultural background, East Asian international students come from China, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, where countries neighbor each other geographically and have common cultural roots, such as Confucianism, that influence their lives and values deeply. As with all religions and value systems, the practice of the cultural values may vary from group to group, but generally a value system with a broad scope, such as Confucianism, has Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 214 fundamental influences that transcend group differences. As a result, while East Asian international students come from different countries and have their own group differences, they also have many common characteristics whose source is their cultural capital. For example, most researchers believe that the cultural roots of Confucianism influence East Asian students in regards to maintaining order, forming a moral belief system, a cultural value system, engaging in collectivist behavior, respecting authority (Elkins, 1994), and dedicating themselves to schooling and education (Caplan et al., 1992). Studies suggest that students from Asian cultural backgrounds typically achieve at higher levels than non-Asian students (Coleman et al., 1966; Flynn, 1991; Hsia, 1988; Suzuki, 1980; Vernon, 1982). One of the explanations for the high achievement is that socio-cultural influences, including the role of education for social mobility (Sue & Okazaki, 1990), Confucian beliefs in the value of education and achievement through working hard, play an important part in this (Caplan et al., 1992). From the perspective of cultural capital, the middle class, which is the dominant group in America, embraces a strong work ethic, has high achievement motivation, patience, discipline, respect for authority, and conformity. East Asians tend to exhibit Confucian beliefs, values and traits similar to the middle class and as a group, tend to go far in school. The Confucian/ Eastern cultural characteristics, which are common among East Asians, may explain why there is not a significant difference in the academic success between Chinese international students and other East Asian international Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 215 students, and why these East Asian international students greatly distinguish themselves from other student populations in host colleges. Factors Influencing Academic Success o f Chinese International Students Factors not found in previous research. In explaining what factors affect the academic success of Chinese international students in the Los Angeles community colleges, it is important to note that while there are many barriers to academic success for foreign students, in this study we found different results regarding the role of English language proficiency and social interaction that previous research had not stated. First, many studies propose that language barriers are the primary difficulty facing international students in their study in the host country (Win, 1971; Motarassed, 1981; Bourdieu, 1997; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1997). This study’s findings, however, do not support this conclusion. It is true that the international students in this study were in “main stream” English classes, and were not sampled from the English as a second language (ESL) courses, and that the Chinese international students and particularly the other East Asian international students encountered greater difficulties in practicing the English language than did domestic students. The results from the successful East Asian international students indicated that their English ability (according to the all eight self-rating items) was much lower than that of other student groups. In contrast to the conclusions of other studies however, the vast majority of the academically successful East Asian international students, even those with lower language Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 216 proficiency, appeared to succeed at LACCD. Specifically, the successful Chinese international student group surpassed the successful domestic students at LACCD in across academic success categories in 17 independent variables. It may be that the Chinese and other East Asian students under estimate their language ability relative to other students. Or it may be that this study has revealed that English language proficiency may affect educational outcomes in a limited way, and is not a significant barrier as previously thought. It may not be as much a matter of whether international students with limited language proficiency will succeed but rather to what extent, and what the other important factors are which will contribute to their academic success. Previous researchers, Bourdieu and Passeron (1997) and Lamont and Lareau (1988), have noted that individuals who lack the required cultural capital may overperform to compensate for their less-valued cultural resources. No information was available for this study regarding the language scores with which these students were initially admitted or the amount of time students invested in studying. For a better understanding for the relationship between academic success, the amount of time spent studying, and the degree of English language proficiency for international students (especially those with limited English language abilities), further study is needed. Second, the finding that academic success is not related to social Interaction factors, such as turning to a counselor, visiting an instructor during office hours, or attending an orientation program, for Chinese international students is in Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 217 disagreement with previous research. It was a surprise to find in the present study that Chinese international students were less likely to attend an orientation program in college than other students, yet, the Chinese students who had a higher levels of academic success were less likely to attend an orientation program than other Chinese students at LACCD. Studies show that a social support system has been found to positively affect academic attainment (Boyer & Sedlacek, 1988; Coleman, 1987, 1988; Coleman & Hoffer, 1987; Johnson, 1988). The acquisition of cultural and social capital may allow students from non-dominant social classes to overcome barriers and enhance their achievement. It is true for international students as well. Generally, international students come to study in the U.S. without a cultural capital “match,” and often lack of resources to cope with the difficult situations that they encounter in a host college. Accordingly, they require guidance from significant others in accessing the institutionalized resources and relationships that may facilitate their pursuit of the ultimate goal: success in studying abroad. But the findings of this - study do not support this practice. While researchers and educators view the various functions of social support as important, East Asian foreign students, and Chinese international students in particular, were found to not utilize the social support system as much as other students, and yet they consistently do well, academically. The Chinese emphasis on things likes self-transcendence, fitting in, not standing out, and saving face (Scollon & Scollon, 1995) probable may explain why Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 218 Chinese international students seldom use these services than other students. Or study has the highest priority over other issues, such as associating with others and engaging in social activities, to Chinese foreign students. Yet, the following statement probable may explain the relationship between academic success and attending an orientation program for Chinese students. For those Chinese foreign • students who have attended an orientation program at college may possess weaker pre-entry characteristics, such as being under-prepared in academic ability or unfamiliar with the educational system and institutional structures in a host college, than those who had not attended an orientation program. The purpose of their attending an orientation program in college is to access to any sources and opportunities available in college to promote them succeed in study in college. It is important to keep in mind that none of the significant variables related to academic success for Chinese international students correlated with the Social Interaction variable set. Results of this study suggest that: (1) utilizing a social support system and socially integrating with significant others in college may be not very important factors for explaining why Chinese international students succeed in LACCD, and (2) measuring the conceptualization of social capital in this study maybe is too narrow and restricted by the variables available in the data sets. However, these findings raise a question about the effectiveness of orientation for Chinese students. Policy makers, administrators, instructors, and staff may need to rethink both the delivery and content of these services for international students, as well as how to increase their utilization. Also, problems in the conceptualization Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 219 and measurement of social capital may be the key issue for this study. It is important to develop and apply alternative indicators of social capital for revealing how social capital is accessed and utilized by Chinese and other foreign students in the host educational institutions, and how it influences students success In the institutional contexts. Best predictors o f academic success for Chinese international students. The most influential factors contributing to the academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD are found in response to the statements: “I will get a Bachelor’s degree” and “I will transfer to a four-year college or university.” These two most significant predictors of academic success for Chinese international students were associated with the Educational Aspiration variable set. In contrast, the most significant factors influencing the academic success of domestic students at LACCD were: age, “I always complete homework assignments,” and high school GPA. The factors that positively influenced the academic success of Chinese international students were totally different from domestic students’. Furthermore, in an effort to examine the attitudes of domestic students toward obtaining institutionalized capital, the only factor related to that was: “It is important to finish courses in program of studies.” Compare this with Chinese international students who demonstrated more aggressive attitudes and clearer intentions to come to the U.S. for higher-level study. Chinese students weigh institutionalized capital heavily, because none of the Chinese international students intended to take classes without earning a degree or obtaining a vocational certificate. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 220 Accordingly, the higher the level of academic degree desired by Chinese international students, the higher their level of academic. These findings are not only in agreement with previous research on the cultural background of East Asian international students, which indicate that Chinese and East Asian international students highly valued on education (Chao, 1996; Schneider & Lee, 1990; Peng, 1993); but they were also in agreement with the argument that attitudes and values of an ethnic group affect their overall level of attainment (Luster, & Okagaki, 1993; Ogbu, 1978, 1983, 1990; Sue & Okazaki, 1990). Studies mention that parental expectations and definitions of success vary with social status as well, and mediate student aspirations. Low-SES parents are more likely to view a high-school diploma as the norm for their children where as high-SES parents, consider a bachelor’s or advanced degree the norm (Halle, 1984; Lareau, 1987, 1993; MacLeod, 1987; Willis, 1977). For high-SES parents, the definition of success for their children is tightly tied to four years of college attendance, and attendance at a “good” college (Lareau, 1987; McDonough, 1991; Rubin, 1976). Many East Asian parents believe that the road to success passes through education and effort. As a result, parental aspirations for, and parental interest in, children’s education significantly impacts the educational attitude and persistence of a student (Bank, Slaving, & Biddle, 1990; Biddle, Bank, & Marlin, 1980; Kerckhoff, 1986). Specifically, East Asian parents, regardless of their SES and social class backgrounds, have expectations and definitions of success for their children that are Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 221 closest to those of the high-SES parents in the U.S. society. Students from East Asian countries, if enrolled in institutions positioned lower in the stratified higher education system in the beginning, are often strongly committed to graduating and transferring to a higher-level educational institution in the end. As a result, educational aspirations are essential to academic success for Chinese international students at LACCD. Beyond parental expectations, the individual’s habitus may play a large role in their success in school. Students’ aspirations toward education, their willingness to study hard, and go to college depend on students’ place in the class system and their expectations of whether people from that class tend to be successful academically (Swartz, 1997). Most East Asian students believe that effort and perseverance, rather than one’s own innate ability, account for most of the differences in school achievement. Thus, East Asian students in general are more determined to study hard, are more disciplined and motivated, have better attitudes toward learning and school and have outperformed their non-East Asian counterparts on many commonly accepted indices of educational achievement (Hess, McDevitt, & Chang, 1987; Park, 1990). The habitus of a student from a particular social class generally would lead that student to have specific aspirations as well as predispose students to utilize educational strategies that may/not be as successful in attaining the desired educational profits. Accordingly, the student could make choices that will result in maintenance of their specific level social position. They may also ieam to make Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 222 different choices, choices that can facilitate educational mobility. Habitus is a dynamic component; an individual can adopt new elements as a result of new experiences, historical changes in the material environment, exposure to another individual’s habitus, or associating with people who originate from a different habitus, all of which are possible in the college environment (Harker, 1984; Lamont & Lareau, 1988). The practices or actions that an individual performs in the school field probably may explain why international students could succeed in a host college despite other disadvantages. Factors in the varied variable sets o f Chinese international students. Further discussion of the factors in varied variable sets will be looked into the in following sections. First, with reference to the Educational Aspiration variable set, while the Chinese international students answered more moderately than domestic students, they scored higher than the successful domestic students in their academic success at LACCD. A close examination of the distributions of the Educational Aspiration variable set found that the levels of academic success for each variable varied from scale to scale. It is important to note that many of the highest two academic success means fell on opposite extremes. For example, for the variables such as “I am very determined to reach my goals,” “Understanding what is taught is important to me,” and “I keep trying even when frustrated by a task,” the most successful Chinese international students responded, “Strongly agree.” In addition, students with the second highest level of academic success responded across all other levels such as “Disagree,” “Not sure,” Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 223 and “Strongly disagree” for the same variables. On the other hand, in variables such as “Success in college is largely due to effort” and “I can learn all the skills taught in college,” both Chinese international student and domestic student groups who answered most positively showed the highest level of academic success. Interestingly, the two student groups had opposite outcomes on variables such as, “I am very determined to reach my goals” and “Understanding what is taught is important to me.” The highest level of academically successful Chinese international students reported, “Strongly agree” to these two variables, whereas the successful domestic students wrote in “Disagree” and “Strongly disagree,” relatively. The findings of the Educational Aspiration variable set suggest that aspiration may vary widely depending on the country of origin, ethnicity, and the cultural values, beliefs and attitudes that are held by the respondent. Based on Bourdieu’s view, aspiration represents, in part, an internalization of objective probabilities for success. Specifically, students’ aspirations toward education, studying hard, and attaining a higher degree depended on the students’ place within the structural system and their expectations as to whether people from that structure tended to be successful academically or not (see Swartz, 1997). Individuals come from cultures with varied past experiences and the socialization and internalization processes are abstract, determining the relationship between academic success and educational aspiration for a foreigner in a host institution context is complicated. In this study, determining the pattern of academic success for those whose educational aspiration variables varied requires more analytical work to further Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 224 differentiate the degree to which educational aspiration affects achievement, especially across various ethnic groups. There are also needs to be ways to further quantify and measure the various latent constructs of educational aspiration as well as determine of the effects of cultural values, beliefs, and attitudes on a student’s academic outcomes. Second, in regards to Family Background variables, it was found that the other East Asian foreign students had the highest parental education levels among all student groups; likewise the successful Chinese students reported a higher level of parental education than domestic students and other non-East Asian students. This finding is in agreement with the cultural capital theory that posits a relationship between academic success and parental education level (Blau & Duncan, 1967; Sewell & Hauser, 1975). Generally, parental education level is positively related to students’ academic performance. In this study, a complex pattern relative to the mother and father’s education levels for each student group was observed. For example, the successful Chinese student whose mother’s education was at the graduate school or graduate degree level and whose father’s education included some four-year college or a graduate degree achieved, the lowest level of academic success. Similarly, the successful domestic student whose mother’s education was at the “Some graduate school” category and whose father’s education level was at the “Some graduate school” category also had the lowest level of academic success. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 225 The probable explanations are that: (1) the influence of both groups’ mother’s and father’s education level on their children’s educational performance was possibly more indirect than direct. (2) Parents who have a higher academic degree may have higher employment status, and consequently may be more concerned with advancing their careers and so they give little attention to their children. In other words, there may be a failure in the transfer of the parents’ high level of capital to the next generation. Studies suggest that the quality and amount of time parents spend with their children is crucial (Ho & Willms, 1996). It may be that parents’ level of education is really a proxy for parents’ efforts to instill good study habits in their children, as well as an emphasis on self-discipline (Clark, 1983) - parenting philosophies that can transcend level of education. These elements are likely more important than a parents’ socio-economic status or level of education to a child’s academic attainment. Besides, (3) using Asian culture as an example, the Asia of the past was a gender-oriented society, which discouraged women from attaining a high academic degree. As a result, on average, female education levels were much lower than males’. But this did not mean that women lacked knowledge, intelligence, or the ability to leam and earn a living. In other words, the level of education of a mother is not absolutely related to the quality and amount of effort a mother may instill into her children. Therefore, a mother’s level of education is not absolutely directly and positively associated with a children’s level of academic success in schooling. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 226 Third, relative to the Academic Background variable set, the Chinese international students who had higher high school GPA’s achieved better academic success in college than did domestic students overall. The finding is in agreement with the cultural capital theory that a student with a stronger academic background would be more likely to succeed in college than a student with a weak academic background. This study revealed that there was a positive relationship between academic background and academic success in college. Even across cultures, educational systems, and institutional contexts, international students who exhibited stronger pre-entry academic ability performed at a higher academic success level in college. Fourth, in terms of the Demographics variables: for age, it was found that while the older domestic students achieved higher levels of academic success at LACCD, Chinese international students did not follow this pattern exactly. With the exception of the oldest group, 40 or older, the older Chinese international students achieved higher levels of academic success at LACCD. With regard to relating this finding to the cultural capital theory, as there was no specific discussion on the relationship between academic success and age brackets, further study is necessary. In this case, a probable explanation for Chinese international students at LACCD is that East Asians, in general, believe that building academic skills in children enables them to be better managers of their own schooling. Thus, the development of good study habits as early as possible is a cultural belief in Asian societies. It is well known that East Asians emphasize education as a passport to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 227 upward social mobility, particularly for those individuals with disadvantaged backgrounds. This emphasis has made the East Asian education system extremely competitive and meritocratic. As a result, students may build their study habits and abilities through parents, teachers, and peers from an early age. “Vainly regret in old age one’s laziness in youth” is a proverb for Asians. This may reflect why there was no significant difference in academic success among age groups for Chinese international students. A close examination of the distributions of the 40 or older age group by marriage and by who is the primary wage earner in household items found that 28.0% of the successful Chinese international students (N- 23) were married. More than one-third of married students (34.8%, N= 8) were in the 40 or older age group, close to a half of married students (47.8%, N= 11) were in the 30 - 39 age group, and 17.4% of married students (N = 4) were in the 20 - 29 age group. For the 40 or older age group, six of the eight married students (75.0%) are the primary wage earners in their household. In the 30 - 39 age group, four of the eleven married students (36.4%) are the primary wage earners in their household. Accordingly, the 40 or older age group may be more greatly pressured into earning a wage for their household than others who have financial support, and, in turn, these older students may not have sufficient time or energy for their study. This may explain why the 40 or older age group had the lowest level of academic success among all age groups of Chinese international students in LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Lastly, relative to the gender, it is true that female Chinese students have higher GPAs than male Chinese international students at LACCD. Studies of the effects o f cultural capital on the educational success of male and female students have reached contradictory conclusions. Studies argue that traditional gender stereotypes play a role in the lack of cultural participation by male students and that female students may be more encouraged to make use of their cultural capital to succeed in school (Dumais, 2002). Studies also assert that the ways in which gender interacts with race, class, and institutional contexts affect educational attainment. Levels of trust, social engagement and types of engagement (formal or informal) can vary considerably between men and women as they face different social networks and levels of access to information. According to Moore (1990), men’s networks tend to be more formal since men are more often involved in formal employment, whereas women’s networks tend to be more informal and include more kin. Women tend to nominate more kin as people with whom they “discuss important matters” (Marsden, 1987; Moore, 1990). Gilligan (1982) argued, in her book focused on the moral strength issue across gender, women were concerned with maintaining relationships. Women feared the loss of connection and relationship to others that occurred in individualistic, competitive situations. Dill’s study (1983), the examination of how the social conceptions influencing Black women’s educational and employment opportunities, pointed out that racial discrimination played heavily even into women’s aspirations. All of the subjects in Dili’s study used whatever resources available to do as well as they could do. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 229 In the present study, a closer look within the attitudes of successful Chinese female students toward obtaining an academic degree revealed that they appeared to have a clearer determination to get a Bachelor’s degree than male Chinese students. More than half of the female Chinese students (61.8%, N = 34) reported they would get a Bachelor’s degree at the “Definitely” category, while two-fifths of the males (40.9%, N = 19) reported within the same category. A further examination of the statement about “The highest academic degree one desired to obtain” if there were no obstacles; 32.8% of female Chinese students (N ^ 19) would like to attain at least a Bachelor’s, maybe more than this degree, and 18.2% of male Chinese students (N = 4) reported at the same scale. These findings suggest that female Chinese international students have more focused attitudes and stronger aspirations toward attaining a higher degree than their male Chinese peers at LACCD. These are probable explanations for why female Chinese international students had higher levels of academic success than male Chinese international students at LACCD, but additional qualitative research could explore this hypothesis further. On the other hand, when looking at the distributions of social interactions for the female Chinese international students, they were similar to male Chinese international students. As a result, it is hard to explain how the ways female Chinese international students interact with others and institutional contexts caused them to have higher academic achievement than male Chinese international students at LACCD. Further qualitative research is needed. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 230 Recommendations In response to the conclusions, two sets of suggestions are recommended: (1) to community college personnel (administrators, faculty, and students) and (2) to future researchers. To Community College Personnel The overall results of the present study can be generalized to typical U.S. higher education two-year institutions, which have comparable numbers of students from East Asian countries similar in characteristics to those surveyed at the nine community colleges participating in this study. This study established that there are meaningful relationships between academic success and the chosen sets of cultural and social capital variables. It is also appropriate to note that the nine two-year institutions in which international students were surveyed were located in Los Angeles, California, however, the study results are believed to extrapolate at least in part to other higher education two-year institutions even with somewhat different international student to total student ratios, different numbers of international students from East Asian countries, and which are located in other geographic areas outside of California. It may seem odd to make recommendations for improvement when the target population, the Chinese international students, turned out to be the most academically successful of all student groups. However, in a number of areas, these students reported feeling less capable than other students, and clearly made less Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 231 use of institutional resources. Addressing these issues could help these and other international students be more successful, and could strengthen college services overall. Further, it must be noted again that the sample population was drawn from students with greater English skill by virtue of their having tested into the “main stream” English classes. We do not know to what extent the international students with weaker English skills are like or unlike this sample. It may be that their needs are even greater than this group’s. One of the most important recommendations that can be made is to encourage the administration and faculty of two-year institutions enrolling international students from East Asian countries to pay particular attention to the culture and values which each student brings with them on their educational sojourn in the U.S. This means that the administrators and faculty need to take care to ensure that they and their support staff possess intercultural knowledge, truly understand other cultures, and exhibit appropriate behavior toward international students, as the students perceive it. The community college must develop and maintain an ongoing relationship with and create a mandated multidimensional programming response to its international students, so that their goals are known, encouraged, and monitored. Thus, administration and faculty should not merely point to their college’s mission or other similar statement as proof of intercultural understanding. Higher educational professionals should not only understand the cultures and values of each of their East Asian student constituencies, but they must let these students know that they are competent to work professionally and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 232 effectively outside of their U.S. cultural framework. Therefore, institutional administrative, academic, and support staffs such as the office of international student affairs should possess the requisite skills to utilize this cultural knowledge in ways recognized and appreciated by their international student constituencies. Traditionally, student services have functioned separately from academic services and the teaching faculty. However, in the community college setting, if international student success is to be understood and achieved, it is essential that student and academic services work as a team fostering a holistic and comprehensive educational environment in which students can excel. Accordingly, the responsibility of community college administration should be to provide an academic, cultural, social, and campus environment conducive to an enjoyable and compatible sojourn for East Asian international students and all foreign students enrolled. This study found that factors influencing the academic success of Chinese international students were different from those influencing domestic students. The best factors in predicting the academic success for Chinese international students all pointed to educational aspirations. To help these students persist to goal completion, all faculty need to learn about their foreign students’ culture and values and to appreciate their cultural capital, such as academic ability backgrounds, learning styles, and habitus, and in turn, exhibit the corresponding flexibility to adapt their teaching methodology and style to better match the expectations and legitimate needs of their East Asian international students and other foreign students. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 233 On one hand, this study found that most of the Chinese international students had not attended an orientation program at the college. As attending an orientation program at a college may help foreigners get used to the new environment and engage themselves into the institutional contexts easier than who did not, it is important that colleges systematically attempt to strengthen their orientation program to serve their foreign student constituencies. Gregory (1997) suggested what a university should do to introduce foreign students to U.S. culture, language, and higher learning. She recommended that international student orientation programs be redesigned to give these students information on an alien culture and its educational system: (1) the establishment of intensive English classes based on assessed needs of international students before taking regular classes, (2) provide trained counselors and advisors who understand the cultures of international students and speak their native language, (3) provide training to faculty and staff to help them recognize and deal appropriately with multicultural differences to learning, and (4) provide various forms of financial aid to foreign students. Beyond the issues given above, providing update information on transferring to four-year colleges or universities is essential. The data showed that most of the Chinese international students had not interacted with instructors and counselors very much at the college. Although low student/faculty interaction may be a common phenomenon in community colleges, administrators and faculty should explore why the relationships between students and college significant others have not been widely accessed, and to create ways to Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 234 decrease students’ reluctance for utilizing the support service system which could assist them in reaching their goals. In other words, community colleges need to be aware of the perceptions of their international students when evaluating support services such as counseling programs, especially relative to their desire to using these programs and/or for culture-knowledgeable counselors and related support staff. If this group of international students is typical of East Asian students, satisfaction with specific support services may not extend to support services per se as the results of the present study indicated. Community colleges are primarily open-access institutions enrolling all who desire a college education. In the community college context, success involves something different for each student. For some it means transferring to another institution, for others attaining an associate degree, certificate, or additional training. As community college grapple with the diversity of students and their widely differentiated goals, the two-year setting becomes both complex and challenging for the students affairs community, whose goal is to promote student learning and success. It is recommended that higher education institutions enrolling students from East Asian countries and other foreign countries at the community college level have administrators and faculty who are aware of the perceptions of these students, what gives rise to them, and what they can reasonably do to anticipate and lessen any potentially negative consequences. Institutional policy must be matched by institutional practice in many areas, which means that mere lip service to cultural awareness will not do in the long run. Given that many of the perceptions and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 235 attitudes o f students from East Aslan countries are not likely to change substantially regardless of what the Institution’s administration and faculty do, It is nevertheless their duty and responsibility to continually reassess their ongoing relationships with international students to ensure that the entire institutional staff is doing all it can to make their educational sojourns as rewarding and enjoyable as possible. To International Students Based on the results of this study, it is recommended that international students develop fluencies in both oral and written English. Although English language proficiency is not the significant factor influencing the academic success of international students, who were in the “main stream” English courses, in the host college, it may make a great impact on their learning, socialization, and adjustment to the host college. The home country of international students can provide opportunities for the students to practice the English language. It is recommended that students prior to coming to the U.S. develop fundamental English language skills. International students are advised to gather information about program requirements and differences in educational practices in the U.S. so that they become informed about academic options and choices of program of studies. Also, they should exchange information with those who have visited the country so they are better prepared to understand cultural and social differences. It is recommended that International students familiarize themselves with American educational practices prior to coming to the U.S., especially regarding Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 236 differences in testing, classroom activities, projects, and research skills, and reading and writing requirements. It is recommended that the home country of the international students provide assistance to the student in finding information about educational practices in the U.S. It would be highly advisable to provide academic survival tips and possibly a description of a typical day at an American college. For Further Research Like many areas in social science, cross-cultural education has a number of areas, which can be further explored: 1. It is recommended that differences by country of origin can be further explored including countries, which were not classified in the study. Also, differences by the degrees of English language proficiency can be further explored including ESL program international student who were not including in this study. 2. Similar studies can be conducted concentrating on other program of studies such as occupational, remedial, or transferring programs, to inspect to what extent the patterns and factors of academic success of these student groups are same as or different from the present study. 3. Similar studies can be conducted to explore the complexities of variables in cultural and social capital framework and academic success of foreign students at another two-year institutions and other level of institutions. 5. Similar studies can explore theoretical concepts of gender difference, motivation, self-efficacy, parenting practices, generation effect, and Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 237 learning stress, etc. with particular attention to academic success factors of international students. 6. Course completion rate can be used as a dependent variable to explore the factors of academic success of these student groups in colleges. One of the deficiencies of almost all research studies examined related to international students, was their excessive reliance on quantitative analyses, for example, questionnaire survey, to explain, interpret, and provide meaningful answers to the research questions posed. This study was no exception. While gathering and statistically analyzing survey data is usually efficient, expedient, and relatively easy, qualitative information not specifically addressed in the survey responses was absent. To remedy this situation, the researcher considered the possibility of conducting small focus groups or structured interviews among the students surveyed from East Asian countries and other foreign students. However, such an undertaking would have required considerably more time, effort, and substantial use of personal resources. Conversely, employing only qualitative methodology would have ignored the benefits of quantitative analysis altogether. Ideally, a blend of these two methodologies would be desirable in future studies. Therefore, it is recommended that in future research efforts in this particular area of inquiry, researchers recognize the benefits of using both quantitative and qualitative analyses in an appropriate manner. In the present study, some of the survey responses viewed in the aggregate would have been better interpreted had qualitative data been available. Also, an equally strong impetus for using a blended Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 238 methodology has to do with the propensity of many East Asian students to respond to a survey questionnaire according to their perceptions of what the surveyor would like to read. While it is obvious that this cultural propensity cannot be eliminated from their responses, the use of structured interviews would tend to minimize this source of bias as well as provide more data from which better, more accurate, results could be derived and interpreted. ■ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 239 REFERENCES A, Clemons (personal communication, January 09, 2002). Agarwal, B., & Winkler, D. R. (1985). Migration of foreign students to the United States. Journal o f Higher Education 56 (5), 509-522. Akpakpan, B. (1980). International Student s Perceptions o f American Higher ■ Education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Tennessee. Alexander, K.L., & Eckland, B. K. (1974, October). Sex differences in the educational attainment process. American Sociological Review,39, 668-682. Alexander, K.L., Eckland, B.K., & Griffin, L.J. (1975). The Wisconsin model of socioeconomic achievement: A replication. American Journal o f Sociology, 81 (2), 324-342. Altbach, P. (1990). The Pacific Rim: A growing force in the global community. Educational Record, 71 (2), 42-46. Altbach, P. (2002, May-June). Perspectives on international higher education. Change, 34(3), 29-31. Alva, S. A. (1993). Differential patterns of achievement among Asian-American adolescents. Journal o f Youth and Adolescence, 22 (4), 407-423. Alwin, D.F., & Otto, L.B. (1977). High school context effects on aspirations. Sociology o f Education, 50, 259-273. Antanaitis, C. A. (1990). Cultural variances as they affect classroom performance and behavior of foreign graduate students in education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51, 04A. Arnold, K.D. (1993). The fulfillment of promise: Minority valedictorians and salutatorians. The Review o f Higher Education, 16(3), 257-283. Aschaffenburg, K., & Mass, I. (1997). Cultural and Educational Careers: The dynamics of social reproduction. American Sociological Review 62, 573-87. Astin, A. W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 240 Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal o f College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308. Astin, A. W. (1985, July-August). Involvement: The cornerstone of excellence. Change, 17 {4), 35-39. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bail, F., & Soledad, M. (1986). Filipino and American students perceptions of teacher effectiveness. Research in Higher Education, 14 (2), 135-145. Baker, R. W., & Siryk, B. (1986). Exploratory intervention with a scale measuring adjusting to college. Journal o f Counseling Psychology 33, 31-38. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. NJ: Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall. Bank, B. J., Slavings, R. L., & Biddle, B. J. (1990). Effects of peer, faculty, and parental influences on student’ persistence. Sociology o f Education, 63, 208-225. Barker, T. S., & Smith, H. W. (1996, Fall). A perspective of a new taxonomy for international education. International Education 26, 40-55. Barratt, M., & Huba, M. (1994). Factors related to international undergraduate student adjustment in an American community. College Student Journal, 28, 422-436. Bennett, C. I. (1995). Research on racial issues in American higher education. In J. A. Banks, & C. A. McGee Banks (Ed.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Biddle, B. J., Bank, B. J., & Marlin, M. M. (1980). Parental and peer influence on adolescents. Social Forces, 58, 1057-1079. Bieber, J. (1999). Cultural capital as an interpretive framework for faculty life. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Vol. 14, Handbook o f theory and research (pp. 367-397). New York: Agathon. Blau, P., & Duncan, O. (1967). The American Occupational Structure. New York: Wiley. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 241 Boatsman, K.C. (1995). Predicting American college student degree aspirations: The role o f cultural, social and economic capital. Unpublished paper, University of California Los Angeles. Bogden, R., Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Bomsztein, B. (1986). Why did they come? A study o f the major factors which influence the foreign students 'decision to apply for admission to selected graduate schools o f education in the U.S. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The University of Minnesota. Boms, E., & Carpenter, S.A. (1984). Factors associated with college attendance of high school seniors. Economics o f Education Review, 5(3), 169-176. Bourdieu, P. & Passeron, J. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.). London: Sage. Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. Brown. (Ed.), Knowledge, Education and Cultural Change. London: Tavistock. Bourdieu, P. (1974). The school as a conservative force: Scholastic and cultural inequalities. In J. Eggleston (Ed.), Contemporary research in the sociology o f education. London: Metheun. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In J. Karabel & A. H. Halsey (Ed.), Power and ideology in education (pp.487-511). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique o f the judgment o f taste. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook o f theory and research fo r the sociology o f education (pp. 241-258). NY: Greenwood Press. Bourdieu, P. (1989). La noblesse detat. Grandes ecoles et esprit de corps. Paris: Les Edition de Minuit. Bourdieu, P. (1990a). In other words: Essays toward a reflexive sociology. Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1990b). The logic o f practice. Stanford University Press. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 242 Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. IL: The University of Chicago Press. Bowen, W. G., & Bok, D. (1999, Winter). Get in, get ahead: Here’s why. Student A id Transcript 10 (2), 12-15. Boyer, S. P., & Sedlacek, W.E. (1988). Noncognitive predictors of academic success for international students: A longitudinal study. Journal o f College Student Development, 29, 218-233. Brislin, R. W., & Yoshida, T. (Ed.). (1994). Improving intercultural interactions: Modules for cross-cultural training programs. Multicultural Aspects o f Counseling Series 3, (pp. 99). Bryk, A., Lee, V. E., & Holland, P. B. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bulthuis, J. D. (1986). The foreign student today: A profile. In K. R. Pyle (Ed.), Guiding the Development o f Foreign Students (pp. 19-28). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Buuck, P. D. (1996). Foreign students in Japan: A qualitative study o f interpersonal relations between North American university exchange students and their Japanese hosts. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts. Buuck, P. D. (1996). The recruitment and retention o f international undergraduate students at selected colleges and universities in the State o f Wisconsin. Doctoral dissertation, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI. Byrd, P (1991). Issues in the recruitment and retention of international students by academic programs in the United States. Paper presented at the OSEARS European Conference, France. Capian, N., Choy, M., & Whitmore, J. (1992, February). Indochinese refugee families and academic achievement. Scientific American, 266 (2), 36-42. Carey, P., & Mariam, A. (1980). Minoritization: Toward an explanatory theory of foreign student adjustment in the United States. Negro Educational Review 57(3-4), 127-136. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 243 Chao, R. T. (1994). Chinese and European American cultural models of the self reflected in mothers’ childrearing beliefs. Ethos, 23, 328-354. Chao, R. T. (1996). Chinese and European mothers’ beliefs about the role of parenting in children’s school success. Journal o f Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 403-423. Chase, A. M., & Mahoney, J. R. (Ed.). (1996). Global awareness in community colleges: A report of a national survey. Chen, C., & Stevenson, H. W. (1995). Motivation and mathematics achievement: A comparative study of Asian American, Caucasian-American, and East Asian high school students. Child Development, 66, 1215-1234. Cherlin,A., & Walters, P. B. (1981). Trends in United States’ men and women’s sex role attitudes 1972-1978. American Sociological Review 46, 453-460. Church, A. T. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91 (3), 540-572. Cicourel, A., & Kitsuse, S. (1963). The educational decision makers. Bobbs Merrill Company. Cieslak, E. C. (1955). The foreign student in American Colleges. Detroit: Wayne University Press. Clark, B. (1960). The cooling out function in higher education. The American Journal o f Sociology, 65, 569-576. Clark, R. (1983). Family life and school achievement: Why poor black children succeed or fail. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1996). The American community college (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Coleman, J. (1991). Parent involvement in education: Policy perspective. Office o f educational Research and improvement. U.S. Department of Education. Coleman, J. S. (1987). Families and schools. Educational Researcher 16, 32-38. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal o f Sociology, 94 (suppi.), S95-S120. Coleman, J. S., & Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and private high schools: The impact o f communities. New York: Basic Books. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 244 Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q. et al. (1966). Equality o f educational opportunity. U. S .. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Collins Cobuild English Dictionary. (1998). New ed. (pp. 564, 1531.) Taipei: Don-Hwa Publisher. Cooper, A. M. (1990). Fallacy of a single model for school achievement: Considerations for ethnicity. Sociological Perspectives 33 (1), 159-184. Crystal, D. S., Chan, C., Fuligni, A. J., Stevenson, H. W., et al. (1994). Psychological maladjustment and academic achievement: A cross-cultural study of Japanese, Chinese, and American high-school students. Child Development, 65, 38-753. Cui, G. & Awa, N. E. (1992). Measuring intercultural effectiveness: An integrative approach. International Journal o f Intercultural Relations (pp. 311-328). David, L. W. (2002, November 22). Boom times for border crossing: As foreign enrollments grow, India becomes the largest exporter of students to the U.S. The Chronicle o f Higher Education, (p. A62). Davis, T. M. (2001, November 13). Open Doors Press Conference. Washington, D. C.: National Press Club. Retrieved 9/18/2002 from http:// www.opendoorsweb.org. Davis, T. M. (Ed.). (1997). Open Doors 1996/1997: Report on international educational exchange. New York: Institute of International Education. Retrieved 9/18/2002 from www.opendoorsweb.org Davis, T. M. (Ed.). (2001). Open Doors 2000/2001: Report on international educational exchange. New York: Institute of International Education. Retrieved 9/18/2002 from www.opendoorsweb.org Davis, T. M. (Ed.). (2002). Open Doors 2001/2002: Report on international educational exchange. New York: Institute of International Education. Retrieved 1/18/2003 from www.opendoorsweb.org De Graaf, N. D., De Graaf, P. M., & Kraaykamp, G. (2000). Parental cultural capital and educational attainment in the Netherlands: A refinement of the cultural capital perspective. Sociology o f Education, 73, 92-111. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 245 Desai, A. S., & Brieland, D. (1970). An empirical study of foreign students: Implications for social work education in the United States. Social Work Education Reporter 18 (3), 36-40. Deutsch, S. E. (1970). International education and exchange, Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve Press. Dika, S. & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational literature: A critical synthesis, Review o f Educational Research, 72 (1), 31-60. Dill, D. T. (1983). Race, Class and Gender: Prospects for an all-inclusive sisterhood. Feminist Studies 9 (1), 131-150. DiMaggio, P. & Mohr, J. (1985). Cultural capital, educational attainment, and marital selection. American Journal o f Sociology, 90 (6), 1231-1261. DiMaggio, P. (1982). Cultural capital and school success: The impact of status culture participation on the grades of U.S. high school students. American Sociological Review, 47, 189-201. Dumais, S. (2002). Cultural capital, gender, and school success: The role of habitus. Sociology o f Education, 75 (1), 44-69. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95,256-273. Eccles, J. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behavior. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco: Freeman. Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC). (1987). Thesaurus o f ERIC Descriptors (pp. 116). Phoenix, Az: Oryx. Eid, M. T., & J ordan-Domschot, T. (1989). Needs assessment o f international students at Eastern Oregon State College. Oregon: Eastern Oregon State College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED326098) Eli ram, T., & Schwarwaid, J. (1987, March). Social orientation among Israeli youth: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal o f Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18 (1), 31-44. Elkins, M. (1994). Chinese students avoid interpersonal communication: An analysis o f the problem and suggestions for retention. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374474) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 246 El-Lakeny, R. (1970). The prediction of freshman year academic performance of foreign students from preadmission data. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University. Ellinger, T. R., & Carlson, D. L. (1990, June). Education In Korea: Doing well and feeling bad. Foreign Service Journal, 67 (6), 16-18. Elosiebo, A. O. (1987). A study of academic problems encountered by foreign students at selected public universities in a Southeastern state. (Doctoral dissertation, Memphis State University, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 1 1 A. Entwisle, D., & Alexander, K. (1992, February). Summer setback: Race, poverty, school composition, and mathematics achievement in the first two years of school. American Sociological Review, 57 (1), 72-84. Epstein, J. (1991). Effects on student achievement of teachers’ practices of parent involvement. Advances in Reading/Language Research 5, 261-276. Epstein, J. (1992). School and family partnerships. In M. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia o f Education Research (6th ed., pp. 1139-1151). Macmillan. Evans, J. E. (2001). Journey towards cultural competency: Lessons learned. Farkas, G.., Grobe, R., Sheehan, D., & Shuan, Y . (1990, February). Cultural resources and school success: Gender, ethnicity, and poverty groups within an urban school district. American Sociological Review, 55 (1), 127-142. Fejgin, N. (1995). Factors contributing to the academic excellence of American Jewish and Asian students. Sociology o f Education, 68, 18-30. Fink, A., & Kosecoff, J. (1985). How to conduct survey. CA: Sage Publication. Fletcher, J. F., & Stren, R. E. (1989). Language skills and adaptation: A study of foreign students in a Canadian University. Curriculum Inquiry, 19 (3), 294. Flynn, J.R. (1991). Asian American: Achievement beyond IQ. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Foley, D. (1990). Learning capitalist culture: Deep in the heart o f tejas. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 247 Freeman, N. (1997). Experiencing multiculturalism first hand: Looking at early childhood education in China teaches us about ourselves. U.S. South Carolina. Furnham, A,, & Bodmer, S. (1982). Social difficulty in a foreign culture: An empirical analysis of culture shock. In S. Bodmer (Ed.), Cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction (pp. 161-198). Oxford, England: Pregamon. Gabriel, R. L. (1973, Summer). Characteristics of foreign students on an American campus. Journal o f the National Association o f Women Deans and Counselors 36 (4), 184. Getingok, M., & Hirayama, H. (1990). Foreign students in social work schools: Their characteristics and assessment of programs in the U.S. International Social Work 33, 243-253. Ghalamrezaei, A. (1996). Acculturation and self-esteem as predictors o f acculturative stress among international students at the University o f Wollongong. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wollongong, Australia. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gitelson, I. B., Petersen, A. C., & Tobin-Richards, M. H. (1982, April). Adolescents’ expectations of success, self-evaluations, and attributions about performance on spatial and verbal tasks. Sex Roles: A Journal o f Research, 8 (4), 411-419. Gladieux, L., & Swail, W. S. (1998, Summer). Financial aids are not enough: Improving odds of college success. College Board Review, 185, 16-21. Goodwin, C. D., & Nacht, M (1983). Absence of decision: Foreign students in American college and university. A report on policy formation and the lack thereof. HE Research Report Number One (p.58). U.S. New York. Gregory S. (1997). Planning for the increase in foreign-born students. Planning for Higher Education, 26, 23-28. Hagedom, L. S. & Maxwell, W. (2002). Research on urban community college transfer retention: The Los Angeles TRUCCSproject. U.S. California. Hagedom, L. S. (2001, Fall). Federal Grant: Drives new research on community college students. The Navigator: Directions and Trends in Higher Education Policy, 1, 6. USC Rossier School of Education. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 248 Hagedom, L. S. et al. (2002, August). Faculty research productivity: Exploring the role of gender and family-related factors. Research in Higher Education, 43 (4), 423-446. Halle, D. (1984). America’ s working man. University of Chicago Press. Hammer, M. R., Gudykunst, W. B., & Wiseman, R. (1978). Dimensions of intercultural effectiveness: An exploratory study. International Journal o f Intercultural Relations, 2, 383-393. Han, O., & Pyung, E. (1975). A study o f goals and problems offoreign students from the Far East at the University o f Southern California. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Southern California. Barker, R. K. (1984). On Reproduction, Habitus, and Education. British Journal o f Sociology o f Education, 5,117-127. Hassan, T. E., & Reynolds, J. E. (1989-1988). Working class students as selective colleges: Where have they gone? The College Board Review, 146, 4-9. Haveman, R., & Wolfe, B. (1994). Succeeding generations: On the effects o f investments in children. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Hess, R. D., McDevitt, T. M., & Chang, C. (1987). Cultural variations in family beliefs about children’s performance in mathematics: Comparison among People’s Republic of China Chinese-American, and Caucasian-American families. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 79, 179-188. Ho, E. S., & Willms, J. D. (1996, April). The effects of parental involvement on eight-grade achievement. Sociology o f Education, 69 (2), 126-141. Horn, L., & West, J. (1992). A profile ofparents o f eight graders: Statistical analysis report (pp.92-488). National Center for Education Statistics. Hsia, J. (1988). Asian Americans fight the myth of super student. Educational Record, 68, 94-97. Hull, W. F. (1978). Foreign students in the United States of America: Coping behavior within the educational environment. New York: Praeger. Huntley, H. S. (1993). Adult international students: Problems o f adjustment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED355886) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 249 Ikegulu, T. N. (1999). Multicultural and globalized education: International students ’ perspective. LA: Grambling State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 442417) Il’Chenko, V. (1993). International education: The problem of integration. Russian Education and Society, 35(12), 81-95. Immigration and Naturalization Service. (2002). Immigration classifications and visa categories. Retrieved 9/18/2002 from http:// www.ins.gov Institute of International Education. (2002). Snapshot o f impact o f September I I th attack: A report o f a national on-line survey. New York: Institute of International Education. Retrieved 9/18/2002 from http:// www. opendoorsweb. or g Isaac, S., & Michael, W. (1995). Handbook in research and evaluation fo r education and the behavioral sciences (3 rd ed.). CA: Educational and Industry Testing Services. Jackson, G.A. (1990, August). Financial aid, college entry, and affirmative action. American Journal o f Education, 523-550. Jacobi, M. (1991, Winter). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review o f Educational Research, 61 (4), 505-532. Jencks, C.; Smith, M.; Acland, H.; Bane, M.; Cohen, D.; Gintis, H.; Heyns, B.; Michelson, S. (1972). Inequality: A reassessment o f the effect offamily and schooling in America. Basic Books. Jenkins, H. M. (1983). Growth and impact of educational interchanges. In H. M. Jenkins & Associates (Ed.), Educating students from other nations (pp. 4-30). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Jochems, W., Srippe, J., Smid, EL, & Verwey, A. (1996). The academic progress of foreign students: Study achievement and study behavior. Higher Education 31, 325-340. Johnson, P. (1988). English language proficiency and academic performance of undergraduate international students. TESOL Quarterly, 22 (1), 164-168. Johnson, W., & Colligan, F. J. (1965). The Fulbrightprogram: A history (p. viii). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 250 Jun, A., & Tierney, W. G. (1999). At-risk students and college success: A framework for effective preparation. Metropolitan Universities 9 (4), 49-60. Kaimijn, M., & Kraaykamp, G. (1996). Race, cultural capital, and schooling: An analysis of trends in the United States. Sociology o f Education, 69, 22-34. Katsillis, I., & Rubinson, R. (1990). Cultural capital, student achievement, and educational reproduction: The case of Greece. American Sociological Review 55, 270-279. Kerckhoff, A. (1986, December). Effects of ability grouping in British secondary schools. American Sociological Review, 51 (6), 842-858. Kim, E. (1993, September). Career choice secondary-generation Korean-Americans: Reflections of a cultural model of success. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24 (3), 224-418. Kim, Y . (1988). Communication and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Klein, M. H., Alexander, A. A., & Tsent, K. (1971, Winter). The foreign student adaptation program: Social experiences of Asian students. International Educational and Cultural Exchange, 6 (3), 77-90. Kuo, Y . (1987, Summer). Environmental factors associated with the growth of Chinese literary genius: A test of Rogerian assumption. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly 12 (2), 93-102. Laberge, S. (1995). Toward an integration of gender into Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital. Sociology o f Sport Journal 12, 132-146. Lamont, M., & Lareau, A. (1988). Cultural capital: Allusion, gaps, and giissandos in recent theoretical developments. Sociological Theory 6 (3), 153-168. Lareau, A. (1987, April). Social class differences in family-schooi relationships: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology o f Education, 60 (2), 73-85. Lareau, A. (1989). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. London: The Falmer Press. Lareau, A. (1993). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. New York: The Falmer Press. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 251 Lareau, A. (2001). Linking Bourdieu’s concept of capital to the broader field: The case of family-school relationships. In. B. J. Biddle (Ed.), Social class, poverty, and education: Policy and practice (pp. 77-100). New York: Routledge Falmer. Lareau, A., & Horvat, E. M. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion: Race, class, and cultural capital in family-school relationships. Sociology o f Education, 72, 37-53. LeCluyse, E. E., Tollefson, N., & Borgers, S. B. (1985). Differences in female graduate students in relation to mentoring. College Student Journal, 10, 411-415. Liberson, S. (1980). A Piece o f the Pie: Black and white immigrants since 1880. Berkeley: University of California Press. Light, R. J., Singer, J. & Willett, J. B. (1990). By design: Planning research on higher education. Harvard University Press. Lin, J. G, & Yi, J. K. (1997, December). Asian international students’ adjustment: Issues and program suggestions. College Student Journal, 31, 473-479. Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22 (1), 28-51. London: Sage. Lulat, Y. G. M., & Altbach, P. G . (1985). International students in comparative perspective: Toward a political economy of international study. In J. Smart (Ed.). Higher Education Handbook o f Theory and Research: Vol. 1, (pp. 439-495). New York: Agathon Press. Luster, T., & Okagaki, L (1993). Parenting: An ecological perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. MacLeod, J. (1987). Ain’t no makin’ it: The leveled aspirations of a low-income neighborhood. Westview Press. Madigan, T. (1994, April 7). Parent involvement and school achievement. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans. Marginson, S. (2002, May-June). The phenomenal rise of international degrees down under: Lucrative lessons for U.S. institutions? Change, 34 (3), 34-43. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 252 Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review 52, 122-131. Matalene, C. (1985, December). Contrastive rhetoric: Among an American writing teacher in China. College English, 47 (8), 789-808. McClelland, K. (1990, April). Cumulative disadvantage among the highly ambitious. Sociology o f Education, 63 (2), 102-121. McDonough, P. (1991). Who goes where to college: Social class and high school organizational context effects on college: Choice decisionmaking. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. Stanford University. McDonough, P. (1994). Buying and selling higher education. Journal o f Higher Education, 65, 427-446. McDonough, P. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity. New York: State University of New York Press. McDonough, P., Antonio, A. (1996, April). Racial and ethnic differences in selectivity of college choice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting o f American Educational Research Association. New York. McDonough, P., & Antonio, A. (1996, August). College choice as capital conversion and investment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting o f American Educational Research Association. New York. McKinley, N. J., Pattison, H. M., & Gross, H. (1996). An exploratory investigation of the effects of cultural orientation program on the psychological well being of international university students. Higher Education 31, 379-395. Mehan, H. (1992). Understanding Inequality in Schools: The contribution of interpretive studies. Sociology o f Education 65 (1), 1-20. Mehan, H., Herfweck, A. J., & Meihls, J. L. (1985). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' careers. Stanford,CA: Stanford University Press. Mehan, H., Hubbard, L., Lintz, A., & Villanueva, I. (1996). Constructing school success: The consequences o f untracking low-achieving students. New York: Cambridge University Press. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 253 Meyer, C. R. (1984). A survey o f the concerns o f international students at Texas Woman’ s University in relation to selected student personnel services. Master thesis, College of Education, Texas Women’s University. Michie, A. A. (1967). Higher education and world affairs. In A. S. Knowles (Ed.). Handbook o f College and University Administration, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Mickelson, R. A. (1989). Why does Jane read and write so well? The anomaly of ■ women’s achievement. Sociology o f Education 62,47-63. Milne, A., Myers, D., Rosenthal, A., & Ginsberg, A. (1986). Single parents, working mothers, and the educational achievement of school children. Sociology o f Education 59, 125-139. Mohr, J., & DiMaggio, R (1995). The intergenerational transmission of cultural capital. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 14, 167-199. Moore,G. (1990, October). Structural determinants of men’s and women’s personal networks. American Sociological Review 55, 726-735. Mordkowitz, E., & Ginsburg, H. (1987) Early academic socialization of successful Asian-American college students. The Quarterly Newsletter o f the Laboratory o f Comparative Human Cognition, 9 (2), 85-91. Mori, S. (2000, Spring). Addressing the mental health concerns of international students. Journal o f Counseling and Development, 78 (2), 137-144. Motarassed, A. (1981). Adaptation o f foreign students to a land-grant university in the United States. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University. NAFSA. (1972). National association o f foreign student advisors: Report on the economic benefits o f international education to the United States o f America: A statistical analysis. New York: NAFSA. NAFSA. (1998). National association o f foreign student advisors: Report on the economic benefits o f international education to the United States o f America: A statistical analysis. New York: NAFSA. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 254 NAFSA. (2002): Association o f International Educators. The economic benefits o f international education to the United States o f America: Net contribution to U . S. economy by foreign students (2001-02). Washington D. C. Retrieved July 10, 2003, from http://www.nafsa.org/content/publicPolicv/DataonIntemationalEducation/Stat eListing.htm National Association of Secondary School Principles. (1992). School and family partnerships. Practitioner 18, 1-8. Ogbu, J. (1978). Minority education and caste. New York: Academic Press. Ogbu, J. (1983). Minority status and schooling in plural societies. Comparative Education Review, 27, 168-190. Ogbu, J. (1990). Overcoming racial barriers to equal access. In J. Godlad (Ed.), Access to Knowledge: An agenda for our nation’ s schools (pp. 59-89). Princeton, NJ: The College Entrance Examination Board. Ogbu, J. (1995, December). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and consequences-part two. Urban Review, 27 (4), 271-297. Ogbu, J. (1995, September). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and consequences-part one. Urban Review, 27 (3), 189-205. Orfield, G. (1988). Exclusion of the majority: Shrinking college access and public policy in metropolitan Los Angeles. The Urban Review, 20 (3), 147-183. P. Plummer (personal communication, March 18, 2003) Park, H. (1990). Interpreting the high educational achievement and socioeconomic status of Aslan Americans. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Parsons, J., Adler, T., & Kaczala, C. (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development 53, 322-339. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. • Pedersen, P.B. (1991). Counseling international students. The Counseling Psychologist, 19 (1), 10-58. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 255 Peng, S., & Wright, D. (1993, January). Learning programs at home: An explanation o f the high academic achievement o f Asian American students. Paper presented at the winter conference of the American Statistical Association, FL: Ft Lauderdale. Pema, L. (2000, March - April). Differences in the decision to attend college among African Americans, Hispanics, and Whites. Journal o f Higher Education, 71 (2), 117-141. Persell, C. FL, & Cookson, P. (1987, April). Microcomputers and elite boarding schools: Educational innovation and social reproduction. Sociology o f Education, 60 (2), 123- 134. Pintrich, P. R. (1987, April). College students ’ motivated strategies and learning. Paper presented at the American Educational research Association convention, Washington, DC. Portes, A (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modem sociology. Annual Review Sociology, 24,1-24. Portes, A. (2000). The two meanings of social capital. Sociological Forum, 15 (1), 1- 12. Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of good strategy use model to the teaching of mathematics. Educational Psychologist, 21, 139-161. Pusch, M. D. (Ed.). (1979). Multicultural Education. NY: Intercultural Press, Inc. Robinson, R. V., & Gamier, M. A. (1985). Class reproduction among men and women in France: Reproduction theory on its home ground. American Journal o f Sociology 91, 250-258. Rogers, J., & Ward, C, (1993). Expectation-experience discrepancies and psychological adjustment during cross-cultural re-entry. International Journal o f Intercultural Relations 17, 185-196. Rohrlich, B. F., & Martin, J. N. (1991). Host country and reentry adjustment of student sojourners. International Journal o f Intercultural Relations, 15, 163-181. Romo, H. (1995, 11- 15 August). Multicultural climate and adolescent achievement: An ecological perspective. Paper presented at the American Psychological association annual meeting. NY: New York. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 256 Rubin, L. (1976). Worlds ofpain: Life in the working class family. Basic Books. Sadker,M. P., & Sadker, D. M. (1985). Sexism in the Schoolroom of the 80’s. Psychology Today 19, 54-57. Sandler, B. R., & Hall, R. M. (1982). The classroom climate: A chilly one for women? Project on the status and education o f women. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges. Schneider, B., & Lee, Y . (1990). A model of academic success: The school and home environment of East Asian students. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 21, 358-377. Schram, J. L., & Lauver, P. J. (1988). Alienation in international students. Journal o f College Student Development, 29, 14-150. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. B. (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Oxford, UK: Mass: Blackwell. Sennett, R., & Cobb, J. (1973). Hidden injuries o f class. Vintage Books. Sewell, W. H., Haller, A. O., & Ohlendorf, G . W. (1970). The educational and early occupational status attainment process: Replication and revision. American Sociological Review, 35, 1014-1027. Sewell, W., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). Education, occupation, and earnings: Achievement in the early career. New York: Academic Press. Sewell,W. H., & Shah, V. P. (1967). Socioeconomic status, intelligence, and the attainment of higher education. Sociology o f Education 41, 1-23. Shin, H. (1996). Family stress and adjustment experienced by Chinese and Korean graduate students and their spouses in an American university. Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University. Smart, P . (1983). Using a western learning model in Asia: A case study. AFS Occasional Papers in Intercultural Learning, No. 4. U.S. New York. Smith, E. P., & Davidson, W. S. (1992). Mentoring and the development of African American graduate students. Journal o f College Student Development 33, 531-539. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 257 Spaulding, S., & Flack, J. M. (1976). The world’ s students in the United States: A review and evaluation o f research on foreign students. New York: Prager Publishers. Spradley, J. P., & Phillips, M. (1972). Culture and stress: A quantitative analysis. American Anthropologist, 74, 518-529. St. John, E.P. (1991). What really influences minority attendance? Sequential analyses of the high school and beyond sophomore cohort. Research in Higher Education, 32(2), 141-158. Stanton-Salazar RD. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67 (1), 1-40. Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair: The school and support networks o f U.S. - Mexican youth. New York: Teachers College Press. Steinberg, L., Dombush, S. M., & Brown, B. B. (1992). Ethnic Differences in Adolescent Achievement: An Ecological Perspective. American Psychologist 47 (6), 723-729. Stevenson, H. W., & Stigler, J. W. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are failing and what we can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Summit Books. Stewart, G. M., & Hartt, J. (1987). Multiculturalism: A community among differences. Bulletin o f the Association o f College Unions-lnternational, 55, 4-8. Stigler, J. et al. (1985, October). The self-perception of competence by Chinese children. Child Development, 56 (5), 1259-1270. Story, K. E. (1982). The student development of profession and the foreign student: A conflict of values? Journal o f College Student Personnel, 23, 66-70. Stoynoff, S. (1997). Factors associated with international students’ academic achievement. Journal o f instructional psychology, 24 (1), 56. Sue, S., & Okazaki, S. (1990). Asian American educational achievements: A phenomenon in search of an explanation. American Psychologist, 45, 913-920. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 258 Surdam, J.C., & Collins, J. R. (1984). Adaptation of international students: A cause for concern. Journal o f College Student Personnel, 25 (3), 240-245. Suzuki, B. (1980). Education and the socialization of Asian Americans: A revisionist analysis of the “model” minority theses. In: R. Endo, S. Sue & N. Wagner (Ed.), Asian Americans: Social and psychological perspectives (pp. 155-178). Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavioral Books. Swartz, D. (1997). Pierre Bourdieu: The cultural transmission of social inequality. Harvard Educational Review 47, 545-555. Tang, E, & Dunkelblau, H. (1998, November- December). Chinese students in the U.S.: Myths and reality. ESL Magazine, 1 (6), 26-29. Tatum, A. W. (2000). African American adolescent readers in low-level tracks. Journal o f adolescent & adult literacy, 44 (1), 52. Teachman, J. (1987, August). Family background, educational resources, and educational attainment. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 548-557. The Ministry of Education, Taiwan, (2002). The annual statistics report on international educational exchange. Retrieved 9/18/2002 from http: //www.edu.tw/bicer. Thomas, G.E. (1980). Race and sex differences and similarities in the process of college entry. Higher Education, 9, 179-202. Thornton, A. F., & Freedman, D. (1979). Changes in the sex-role attitudes of women 1962-1977: Evidence from a panel study. American Sociological Review 44, 831-842. Thornton, A.F., Alwin, D.F., & Cambum, D. (1983). Causes and consequences of sex-role attitudes and attitude change. American Sociological Review 48, 211-227. Tierney, W. G. (1999, Winter). Models of minority college going and retention: Cultural integrity versus cultural suicide. Journal o f Negro Education, 68 (1), 80-91. Ting, S. R. (1998, Winter). Predicting first-year grades and academic progress of college students of first-generation and iow-income families. Journal o f college admission, 158, 14-23. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 259 Tompson, H. B., & Tompson, G. H. (1996). Confronting diversity issues in the classroom with strategies to improve satisfaction and retention of international students. Journal o f Education for Business 72, 53-57. Topping, K.J. (1992). Short-and long-term follow-up of parental involvement in reading projects. British Educational Research Journal 18, 369-379. Trochim, W. (2001). The research methods knowledge base (2nd ed.). OH: Atomic Dog Publishing. Valadez, J. (1993, Spring). Community college culture and its role in minority student academic achievement. Community education Journal, 20 (3), 21-23. Valadez, J. (1993, Winter). Cultural capital and its impact on the aspirations of nontraditional community college students. Community College Review, 21 (3), 30-43. Valadez, J. (1996, Summer). Educational access and social mobility in a rural community college. Review o f Higher Education, 19 (4), 391-409. Vernon, P. E. (1982). The abilities and achievements o f Orientals in North America. NY: Academic Press. Vogel, Z. (1989). A meta-analysis o f studies on the academic success offoreign students. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Walton, B. J. (1968). Foreign student exchange in perspective: What the research tells us. International Educational and Cultural Exchange, 4, 1-14. Wan, G . (2001). The learning experience o f Chinese students in American universities: A cross-cultural perspective. U. S. Illinois. Wan, T., Chapman, D. W., & Biggs, D. A. (1992). Academic stress of international students attending U.S. universities. Research in Higher Education, 33, 607-623. Wells, A.S., & Crain, R.L. (1994). Perpetuation theory and the long-term effects of school desegregation. Review o f Educational Research, 64(4), 531-555. Williams, B. F. (1992). Changing demographics: Challenges for educators. ■ Intervention in School and Clinic, 27 (3), 157-163. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 260 Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working-class kids get working-class jobs. Columbia University Press. Win, U. K. (1971). A study o f the difficulties Indian and Japanese students encountered in six problem areas at the University o f Southern California, 1969-1970. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California. Yu-Wen King, & Liese, L. H. (1991). Emotional well-being of Taiwan students in the U.S.: An examination of pre-to post arrival differential. International Journal o f Intercultural Relations 15, 345-366. Zander, A. (1983, February). The value of belonging to a group in Japan. Small Group Behavior, 14 (1), 3-14. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 261 APPENDIX A TRUCCS QUESTIONNAIRE .Comntuhity College Student Survey : Dear Stuaent: This information is being collected by researchers from the University of Southern California and the University of California at Los Angeles in conjunction with the Los Angeles Community College District as part o f a large study of community college students in Los Angeles. You have been selected as a participant in a multi-year project. Your cooperation will assist researchers to help Los Angeles Community College students to be successful in their educational pursuits. Your assistance is crucial to the project; we thank you for your participation in this important research. s_ : ' * ■ c 5 - s r . . ' r -'-c rgtely as possible* Bqcaus? your t N a m e :. Your primary em ail a d d r e s s :. Your phone num ber: _______ Social Security Number '^co fK®*jsa>fia> e k > |J® jj©|§®flt®!.. . . ;®||fflg©|||a)lg ® i||® jg ® !^ ^ We want to follow your progress for the next tw o years; yet we realize that many students will move from time to tim e. Please provide the names of two people who are likely to know your address even if you move. We request the name, address, a n d phone number of tw o persons. C o n ta c t 1 : A relative or friend who d o e s not live with you and who is likely to know your ad d ress at all tim es: Nam e: ’ . ..... A d d r e ss:______________ _____ __________________________ City, State, Zip: _____________ _______________________ __ P h on e N um ber:__________________________ ______________ Email a d d re ss:______________ _____________________ ______ C o n ta c t 2: Another relative or friend w ho d o e s not live with you and who is likely to know your a d d ress at all tim es: N am e: ____________ _________ __________________________ A d d r e ss:_________________ , ________ _ City, State, Zip: _______________________ P h o n e Number: ____________________________________________ Email a d d re ss :_____________________ _ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 262 . Below are som e reasons that might have influenced your decision io attend this particular college. How important was each reason In your decision to come here? My parents wanted me to come here.. - if c o ■ t f i o o o o o My spouse, partner or other family member wanted me to come here c o o o O o This college has a good reputation........ o o o o o o o i wanted fo no to a different college than many of my friends........................ o o o w n o o This college has good social activities .. o o o o I couldn't find a job.................................. o o Q o o o o This college is affordable........................ o o o o o o o A high school or other counselor advised m e............................................ o r-v o o o o o This college is close to my home. . . . . . . o o o o o o This college's graduates get good jobs.. o o p o o o o This college’ s students transfer to good 4-year schools............................ o o o o o o o 1 couldn't find anything better to d o ........ o o Q o o C Jp 1 want to get a better job.......................... o o o o o o a My friends are attending h ere............ o o o o lo o o This college is close to where 1 work . .. a o o o o o o This college offers educational programs of special interest to me that other colleges do NOT have.......... o o o o o o o i want to get a college degree................ o o o o o o Q To learn English for work........................ o o a o C Oo o My employer encouraged me to enroll r ~ j n p p o O rr This college offers the program or certificate i need for w ork.................... o o o o p o o 2. How many of your closest personal friends are also currently attending this college? (M ark one.) None of my closest friends..................... O One of my closest friends....................... O A few of my closest friends ................O About half ol my closest friends.............Q Most of my closest friends.......................O A U of my closest friends..............- ......... O 3. In general, what do the following people think about this particular college? (Mark one for each statement.) You .......................................................... Your closest friends..................................... Your spouse or partner................................. Your parents or guardians.............................. Your other relatives....................................... Your high school teachers............................ Others............................................................. !*r " 7 p * 7 o p as o o o o o o o o p p o o p o o o o o o o Q o o l o o o o o o o o o 4. Which of the following statements best describes your college plans for next sem ester? (Mark one.) [ w iil attend only this college.......................................................... o } w ifi attend this college and 1 other college................................. Q ) w ill attend this college and 2 or more other colleges................. O I will not attend here, but I will attend 1 other college................... o \ w ill not attend here, but 5 will attend 2 or more other colleges .. Q 1 will not attend any college............................................................ q 5. Where did you attend school? United Another {Mark aH that apply in each column.) States Country Elementary school or equivalent (Ages 4 to 11).. . O ...............O Junior high school (Ages 12 to 14).......................... O .................O High school (Ages 15 to 18)....................................O .................O College..................................................................... . O ................O 6. Not including this college, how many other colleges or universities have you ever attended? (Mark one.) None (I have attended only this college).................O 1 o th er.......................................................................O 2-3 o thers.................................................. - ...........O 4 or more others.......................................................O 7. How many credits have you earned at this college in previous sem esters? (Mark one.) None .........................................................................O 1 - 3 .............................................................................O 4 - 9 .......................................................... O 10-18............................................................ O 19-27....................................................- ...................O 28-36................................................................. O 37-60......................................................... O More than 6 0 .............................................................O 8. Since leaving high school, have you ever taken courses at any other Institution? (Mark aH that apply.) Yes, at another community or junior college . Yes, at a 4-year college or university............ Yes, at some other postsecondary school (for example, technical, vocational, business) O .................O 9. \n addition to this college, are you taking courses at another school or college this semester? (Mark al[ that apply.) For Not for Credit Credit . . . . Q . . . . . . . . a . . . . O .... . - . . O Yes at Yes at Yes at Yes at Yes at • O i vocational or trade school..........................O Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 263 10. As things stand today, do yoy think you will . . . ? (Mark one for each statement) Change your career choice Graduate with h onors................................ Play varsity/intercollegiate athletics.......... Get a bachelor’ s degree.............................. Permanently stop attending college.......... Leave this college temporarily and return la te r................................................ Transfer to another community college— Transfer to a 4-year college or university.. Develop dose new relationships with students at this college............................ Talk regularly with the instructors at this college...................................... Change your college major.............. /o r O o p o o n o o o o r> o Q o o n o o o o o o o o o o o Q o O o o o o p o o o o o o o CJ o o n o o o o a o o o o Indicate all cortege decrees earned United Another (if any). (Mark al[ that apply.) States Country Associate degree (AA. or equivalent) . . . . O ... .... O Bachelor's degree (B.A., B.S., etc.) .. - . . . o ... , . . . o Graduate degree (M.A., M.S., Ph.D., Ed.D., J.D., M.D., etc.)........................ . . . o ... . . . . o Certificate.............................................. . . . o ... .... C D 12. If there were no obstacles, what Is the highest academic degree you would like to attain in your lifetime? (Mark one.) W ill take classes, but do not intend to earn a d eg ree O Vocational certificate........................................................... O Associate (AA or equivalent)............................................. O Bachelor's degree (B.A., B.S., etc.)..................................... O At least a Bachelor's, maybe m ore..................................... O Master's degree (M.A., M.S., etc.)....................................... O Doctoral degree (Ph.D., Ed.D., J.D., etc.)................. O Medical degree (M.D., D.D.S., D.V.M ., e tc .).................. O 13. Approximately how many times in the past 7 days, did you: l i r / j C (Mark one for each statement.) / j 0 < & Is £ / ® /.§ » / Is * 9 ii <J n o o CJ o Talk with an instructor before or after r> H n n CJ n Talk with an instructor during office o r ', n n o n Use email or the internet for homework . O o O o o o Help another student understand r>r> CJ C JCJ r> Study in small groups outside of d a s s .. o o o o o O Speak with an academic counselor........ o o o o o o 14. For this course oniv. approximately how many times In the past 7 days, did you: (Mark one for each statement.) Work in small groups during class time Telephone or email another student to ask a question about your studies . .. Ask the instructor questions................ Speak up during class discussion___ 15. In the past 7 days, approximately how many hours did you: (Mark one for each statement.) Work at a job.................................... Do housework or childcare........ Watch TV.......................................... Spend on this campus (including time in class).................................. Spend talking with students about things not related to a course___ Study alone at h o m e...................... Study alone in the college library... Study with students from this course.............................................. Study with students from other courses (not this course)................ O O 16. How large a problem do you expect each of the following to be while getting your education at this college? (Mark one for each statement.) Parking.................................................... Transportation (access to public transportation, sharing cars, etc.)........ Family responsibilities (e.g., child care, parent care).......................................... Job-related responsibilities.................... Paying for college.................................... Scheduling classes for next sem ester.. Understanding the English language. . . Difficulty of classes................................ / i / r / # / ^ I i £ o o o o o C? o o o o o G >o o O o o p o O o o b p O o o o o O o o o o o o o o o 17. How often do you use English with the foSSowing people? (Mark one for each statement.) With my parents.............................................. With friends.................................................... With teachers or professors at this college .. 8 B fo o o o o o o o o o o o o Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 264 18. How often do you use a language other than English with the following people? (Mark one for each statement.) With my parents............................ With friends.................................. With teachers or professors at this 19. How well are you able fo do the following In English? (Mark one for each item.} Bead............................................ Write............................................ Understand a college lecture . .. Read a college text book.......... Write an essay exam ................ Write a term p a p e r.................... Participate in class discussions . Communicate with instructors .. ?/#/#/# ... O £ CDo o o C Do o o O o o o O o o Q o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 20. is English your native language? Yes O Go to question 22 N o O Continue to question 21 21. How w eSS are you able to do the following in your native language? (Mark one for each item.) Read........................................... Write............................................ Understand a college lecture . .. Read a college text boo k.......... Write an essay e x a m ................ Write a term p a p e r.................... Participate in class discussions . Communicate with instructors .. i O O 22. How long does if take you to travel to this college? (Mark one.) Less than 15 m inutes................................................O 15 to 30 m inutes........................................................O 31 to 45 minutes........................................................O 45 to 60 minutes........................................................O Between 1 and 2 hours..............................................O More t|ian 2 hours................................... O 23. Do you have a disability? (Mark all that apply.) Hearing........................................................................... O S peech..............................................................................................O Mobility impaired..............................................................................O Attention deficit disorder.................................................................. O Psychological disorder.......................................... O Learning disability............................................................................O Vision problem that cannot be corrected by glasses or contact len ses............................................................................ O Other................... O No disabilities.................................................................................... O 24. What was your average grade In high school? (Mark one.) A or A* (Extraordinary)...................................................................Q A-(Superior Quality).......................................................................O B -s - (Excellent)................................................................................... O B (Very Good)................................................................................... O B- (Good).........................................................................................O C+ (Above Average) ....................................................................... O C (Average) ..................................................................................... O C- (Below Average)......................................................................... O D or lower (Poor)................................................... O 25. Before this semester, what mathematics courses have you taken? Include courses In high school or previous college work. (Mark aH that apply.) Basic math, Business math, or Pre-algebra..................................O Algebra I ................................................................................... O Geometry............................................................... .C> Algebra II .........................................................................................O Trigonometry....................................................................................O Pre-calculus......................................................................................O Calculus........................................................................................... O 26. Before this semester, what science courses have you taken? Include courses an high school or previous college work. (Mark aH that apply.) General Biology...............................................................................O Chemistry.........................................................................................O Physics........................................................... O Biology specialty (i.e., microbiology, genetics, botany, ceil biology, marine biology, e tc .).................................................O Other Earth science (i.e., geology, meteorology, e tc .)................. O 27. With whom do you iive while attending this college? (Mark aH that apply.) With my spouse or partner...................................... O With my parents or guardians......................................................... O With my children/stepchildren.........................................................O With siblings (brothers) and/or sister(s)}....................................... Q With other relatives...................................................... O With a roommaie(s) or a friend(s) .................................................O I live alone .......................................................................................O 28. Your gender: Mate ................. O F em ale O 29. How old wilt you be on December 31 of this year? 16 years dr younger.........................................................................O 1 7 ..................................................................................................... O 1 8 '. .. ., ...........................................................................................O 19 ...................................................................................................O 2 0 ..................................................................................................... O 21-24 ...............................................................................................O 25-29 ............................................................................................... O 30-39 . . . ! ........................................................... O 40-54 ............................................................................................... O 55 or o ld e r.......................................................................................Q Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 265 30. What is your ethnic group(s)? (Mark atithat apply.) Chinese..........................................................................O Filipino.................. .......................................................O Japanese........................— . ......................................O Korean........................................................................... O T hai................................................................................O Laotian ........................................................................ O Cam bodian................................................................... O Vietnamese............................, ..................................... O South Asian (Indian Subcontinent) ..................O Arab.......................................... .....................................O African-American/Black................................................O Mexican..........................................................................O Mexican-American/Chicano..........................................O South American ............................................................O Central American ......................................................... O Other Latino/Hispanic ..............................................O Alaskan Native ....................................................... O American Indian........................................................... O Pacific Islander/Samoan, Hawaiian, or Guamanian . . . G Other Pacific Islander....................................................O Caucasian/W hite..........................................................O O ther.................................... .........................................O 31. Are you currently married? Yes.................................................................................O No ..................................................................................Q 32. Who is {are) the primary wage earners) in your household? (Mark aH that apply.) Yourself........................^...............................................O Partner/Spouse........................ ....................................O Parents/Guardians........................................................O Children/Stepchildren.................................................. O O ther..............................................................................O 33. How many of your children/stepchildren are living in your household? {Mark one.) N o n e..............................................................................O 1 -2 ................................ '. .............................................. O 3 -4 ..................................................................................O 5 or m ore........................................................................O 34. Excluding yourself, how many people (children, grandchildren, brothers, sisters, parents, etc.) are you financially supporting? (Mark one for each item.) Under 5 years of age..................................... JO Q 5 to 18 years of age ................................... .JO Over 18 years of ag e.....................................jO 35. Which one of the following best describes your employment status at this time? (Mark one.) Employed full-time (including self-employed). . . O Employed part-time (including self-employed)............. O Not employed but looking for work................................. O Not employed and not presently looking for work.. . . . O 36. How do you think of yourself? (Mark one.) Primarily as a student who is employed .......... 6 ~ ~ ) Primarily as an employee who is going to college........................... O Primarily as a parent who is going to college......................................O Solely as a student....................................... O 37. For the following Items, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements. (Mark one for each statement.) My teachers here give me a lot of encouragement in my studies............ i enjoy doing challenging class assignments........................................ What other people think of me is very important............................................ I start to study at least 2 or 3 days prior to te s ts .................................................. I expect to do well and earn good grades in college ...................................................... Understanding what is taught is important to me ................................................................ I always complete homework assignments___ 1 keep trying even when I am frustrated by a task............................................................ Learning can be judged best by the grade one g e ts .................................................... It is important for me to finish the courses in my program of studies ........................ Things are harder for me because of my race or ethnicity........................................ S frequently have difficulty meeting deadlines.................................................. I am very determined to reach my goals .. I was initially very nervous about attending college..................................................... I feel most satisfied when I work hard to achieve something .................................. My family is more important than my Success in college is largely due to effort (has to do with how hard you try)........ J feel I belong at this college................. I wait until the day before an assignment is due before starting i t ............................ I know I can learn all the skills taught in college ...................................... I want to become involved In programs to clean up the environment................ i have declared a college major................ O o o o o b o o o b o b O o o p b b o o Q © o Q O o q o o o a o b o o o o o o. o o o Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 266 38.1 have attended an orientation session at this college. Yes .................. O No ...................... . .................. O 39. Are you receiving the following types of financial assistance? (Mark al[that apply.) Loan......................................... O Scholarship or grant............... O 40. Do you own your own . . . ? (Mark one in each column.) Yes No Home (not renting)................................................. O ......... O Computer (with Internet access)............................O ..........O Computer (without Internet access) ......................O ......... O C ar........................................................................... O ......... O 41. What Is the highest level of formal education obtained by your parents either in the U.S. or in another country? (M ark one in each column.) Mother Father 6th grade or le ss..................................................... O ..........O Junior high or middle sch ool..................................O ......... O Some high school.................................................... O ..... O Finished high school or GED..................................O .........O Some community college........................................O ......... O Completed community college................................O .........O Some four-year college............................................O ......... O Completed four-year college degree......................O .........O Some graduate school............................................O .........O Graduate degree ....................................................O .........O I do not know............................................................O .........O 42. While you were growing up, mark the job that best describes your parent's major occupation. (Mark one in each column.) Mother Father Retired................................................................... . O .........O Day laborer (cleaning, construction, farm, factory, ©to.).................................... O .O Worker or hourly employee (service, hotel, hospital, agriculture, truck driver, clerical, retail sales and service, laundry or maintenance, etc.).. O .........O Factory worker (manufacturing, warehousing, shipping, operations, telephone operator, etc.). .. O ......... O Skilled tradesman (machinist, plumber, tile setter, electrician, auto mechanic, nurse, secretary, chef, technician)............................... O .O Supervisor or manager (professional) O ..........O Small business owner (retail, construction, service, e tc .).......................................................... O .........O Professional, white collar (sales, finance, teaching, consulting, engineer, accounting, doctor, lawyer, etc.) ......................................... Q .......... O Housework (taking care of children or home) O O Unemployed or on welfare.......................................O ........O Do not know...............................................................O ........O 43. Write In your father's main job (or, if not working now, his most recent job). 44. Write in your mother's main job (or, If not working now, her most recent job). 45. Describe your present work/career. 46. Describe the type of work/career you plan to be involved In 7 or 8 years from now. 47. How much education do you think is needed for the above type of work you are planning? (Mark one.) High school diploma or GED .........................................................O Some community college...............................................................O Completion of Associate degree (A.A. or equivalent)................... O Some four-year college work .................................................O Completion of a four-year college degree (B.A., B .S .)................. O Completion of more than a four-year college degree................... O Completion of a professional degree or credential....................... O Completion of a graduate degree (Master's D egree)................... O Completion of an advanced professional degree (Doctorate, Ph.D., M.D., e tc .).......................................................O Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 267 Code: RECORDS RET .P.ASF. AUTHORIZATION RQSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION Dear Student, We request your participation in an important study. The information we are gathering from this project will be used to improve college teaching and learning and improve the student experience in community colleges. It would be helpful if we could examine records pertaining to educational preparation, demographic characteristics and course enrollment information along with your responses to this survey. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA) provides that an educational institution may not release confidential information about a student without the student’s consent. Please provide us with permission to access these portions of your records with the Los Angeles Community Colleges. Your consent will also allow us to contact you for follow-up research. Thank you. Linda Serra Hagedom PhJO. 1 Associate Professor & Chair, Community College Leadership 213-740-7218 I hereby authorize the research team headed by Dr. Linda Serra Hagedorn to obtain from the Los Angeles Community Colleges the records of course registration, the final course grades I receive, information from my college application, scores from my assessment tests, and other records directly pertaining to my academic experience at the Los Angeles Community Colleges. This permission is valid only for the purposes of the research described herein. I understand that my name and other information that may identify me individually will not be released by the researchers. I provide my permission freely without coercion or threat. Student's Signature Date Your full name (please print) USC UPIRB #00-05-181 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDIX B 268 Table 1 Summary o f the Results o f the Significant Mean Difference in the Significantly Differed Independent Variable for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students Significantly Differed IVs A Mean Difference Sig. Diff. P a ir of Group Means Chinese Domestic Age X D: Age 19 or younger vs. 30 - 39 (p = .000) 40 - older (p = .000) Age 20 - 29 vs. 30 - 39 (p = .000), 40 - older (p = .000) Mother’s education level Father’s education level High school GPA X D: C vs. A- (p = .001), A or A+ (p = .002) C+ vs. A- (p = .000), A or A+ (p = .001) B- vs. A- (p = .044), A or A+ (p = .041) B vs. A- (p = .035), A or A+ (p = .036) The ability to read in English The ability to write in English The ability to understand a college lecture X C : With difficulty vs. Fairly well (p = .013) The ability to read a college textbook X C : With difficulty vs. Fairly well (p = .021), Very well (p = .044) The ability to write an essay exam X D: Fairly well vs. Very well (p = .038) The ability to write a term paper X D: With difficulty vs. Very well (p = .004) The ability to participate in class discussions The ability to communicate with instructors X D: With difficulty vs. Very well (p = .049) Fairly well vs. Very well (p = .013) I am very determined to reach my goals I keep trying even when frustrated by a task X X C: Cannot compute as disagree had only one case D: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .015) Understanding what is taught is important X D: Not sure vs. Strongly agree (p = .036) Slightly agree vs. Agree (p = .006), Strongly agree (p = .000) Success in college is largely due to effort X X C: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .042) D: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .008) I can learn all the skills taught in college Note. X : Had a significant mean difference relative to significantly differed independent variable within the population group. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 269 APPENDIX C Complete Analysis of All Significant Different Variables for the Successful Chinese International Student Group and Domestic Student Group Age The 20 - 29 age category was prevalent between the successful Chinese international student group and domestic student group (62.2%, A = 936) (see Table 16). The observed frequencies of the age variable were significantly different from the expected frequencies between two significantly different population groups %2 (3, A = 1,505) = 9.513,/? = .023. In Table 17, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by age group was 3.281 (N - 82, SD = .5812). In order, means for scales 1 through 4 were 3.38, 3.30, 3,16, and 3.08 (As = 7, 50, 16, and 9, respectively). According to the results of the ANOVA there was no significant mean difference among the age groups of the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F = .643,p = .590, df= 3 and 78). In Table 18, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by age groups was 2.89 (A= 1,423, SD - .5731). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.80, 2.86, 3.05, and 3.12 (As = 260, 886,195, and 82, respectively). Based on the results of the One-Way ANOVA, there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 13.528, p = .000, df= 3 and 1,419). As indicated in the Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 270 Post Hoc Tables, the Tukey tests suggested that students who were in the 19 or younger age group differed significantly from the 30 - 39 age group, and the age 40 or older group (p = .000, respectively); and those who were part of the 20 - 29 age group differed significantly from the 30 - 39 age group, and the 40 or older age group (p = .000, respectively), in their academic success in colleges. Mother’s Education Level In Table 19, while the highest frequency of both successful population groups (38.2%,N= 506) reported a level of 6th grade or lower, the successful Chinese international students (19.2%, N= 15) mostly reported that their mothers had finished at a high school level. According to the Chi-Square analysis, the observed frequencies of variability in the mother’s education level was significantly different from the expected frequencies between the two successful population groups X2 (9, N= 1,324) = 33.741,p = .000. In Table 20, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by their mother’s education level was 3.28 (N = 76, SD = .5743). Means for scales 1 through scale 11 were 3.26, 3.42, 3.35, 3.10, 3.45, 3.49, 3.08, 3.54, 2.00, and 3.08 (Ns = 14, 7, 8, 15, 6, 5, 6, 9,1, and 5, respectively). According to the results of ANOVA, there was no significant mean difference among education levels for the mothers of the successful Chinese international students (F =1.308,/? = .250, d f - 9 and 66). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 271 In Table 21, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.88 (N = 1,248, SD = .5715). The means for scales 1 through scale 11 were 2.892, 2.83, 2.890, 2.91, 2.88, 2.893, 2.75, 2.98, 2.77, and 2.87 (Ns - 492, 190, 130, 149, 81, 39, 25, 61, 16, and 65, respectively). The One-Way ANOVA showed no significant mean difference among the education levels for the mothers of the successful domestic students at LACCD (F = .617,/? = .784, df=9 and 1,238). Father’s Education Level In terms of father’s education level, shown in Table 22, while the greatest frequency of the two successful population groups (34.0%, N = 428) occurred at the level of 6th grade or lower, the successful Chinese international students (16.7%, N = 12) reported that most of their fathers had completed community college. Based on the Chi-Square analysis, there was a significant difference between both student groups x 2 (9, N= 1,260) - 72.594,/? = .000. In Table 23, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by father’s education level was 3.32 (N = 72, SD = .5628). The means for scales 1 through 11 were 3.08, 3.58, 3.39, 3.19, 3.22, 3.49, 2.90, 3.59, 3.34, and 2.97 (Ns = 8, 6, 9, 10, 3, 12, 5, 11,4, and 4, respectively). The One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant mean difference among the fathers’ education levels of the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F = 1.296, p = .257, df= 9 and 62). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 272 In Table 24, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by father’s education level was 2.89 (N = 1,188, SD - .5747). The means for scales 1 through 11 were 2.84, 2.89, 2.93, 2.92, 2.88, 2.89, 2.88, 2.89, 2.71, and 3.04 (Ns = 420,157, 138, 136, 80,30,46, 74,16, and 91, respectively). There was no significant difference among the group means of the successful domestic students (F = 1.269, p = .249, df= 9 and 1,178). High School GPA Table 25 shows that the highest frequencies of both successful student groups (20.5%, N= 303) showed a GPA in the “B” category. There was a significant difference between the student groups x 2 (8, Ar= 1,481) = 46.241, p = .000. In Table 26, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by high school GPA was 3.29 (N= 80, SD = .5855). The means for scales 2 through 9 were 3.40, 3.08, 3.59, 3.05, 3.04, 3.38, 3.43, and 3.50 (Ns = 1, 3, 3,10, 20,14, 12, and 17, respectively). The results of the One-Way ANOVA showed that there was no significant mean difference among high school GPA categories for the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F - 1.407,/? = 2.16, df= 7 and 72). In Table 27, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by high school GPA was 2.89(N- 1,401, SD = .5720). The means for scales 1 through 9 were 2.80, 2.94, 2.77, 2.79,2.86, 2.86, 2.94, 3.05, and 3.10 (Ns = 16, 33,146,226, 222,283,260, 140, and 75, respectively). There was a significant mean difference Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 273 for at least a pair of group means (F = 4.90, p - .000, df= 8 and 1,392). B y- using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tables suggested that the successful domestic students whose high school GPA was at a “C” level differed significantly in their academic success in college than students whose high school GPA was at an “A-” level (p = .001), and “A or A+” level (p = .002); students whose high school GPA fell into the “C+” category differed from students whose high school GPA fell into the “A-” (p = .000) category, as well as the “A or A+”(p = .001); those who had a high school GPA in the “B-” category differed from students whose high school GPA was an “A-” (p = .044), and “A or A+” as well (p = .041); and those who had a high school GPA in the “B” category differed significantly from students whose high school GPA was in the “A-” category (p = .035), and the “A or A+” category as well ip = .036). The Ability to Read in English Table 28 shows that while the highest frequency of both successful population groups (52.0%, N= 781) was reported as falling in the “Very well” category, the majority of the successful Chinese international students (58.0%, N = 47) reported their English reading skill as being at the “Fairly well” level (see Table 41). The results of the Chi-Square analysis were that the observed frequencies based on the ability to read in English were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the successful Chinese international student group and domestic student group %2 (3, V = 1,503) = 70.062,/? = .000. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 274 In Table 29, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by ability to read in English was 3.28 (N - 81, SD = .5826). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.79, 3.14, 3.33, and 3.37 (Ns = 1, 22, 47, and 11, respectively). The results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant difference among the group means of the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F= .839, p = .477, # = 3 and 77). In Table 30, the total mean of the successful domestic students by ability read in English was 2.89 (N= 1,422, SD = .5735). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.97, 2.82, 2.89, and 2.89 (Ns = 10, 101, 541, and 770, respectively). The result of the One-way ANOVA found that there was no significant difference among group means of successful domestic students at LACCD (F - .529, p = .663, d f = 3 and 1,418). The Ability to Write in English As shown in Table 31, while the highest frequency of the two successful population groups (47.1%, N= 709) was indicated as falling in the “Fairly well” category, more than half of the successful Chinese international students (50.6%, N= 41) fell in the “With difficulty” category. The result of the Chi-Square analysis found that the observed frequencies of the ability to write in English were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the significantly different population groups %2 (3,N= 1,505) = 83.298, p = .000. In Table 32, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 275 students by ability to write in English was 3.29 (N= 81, SD = .5813). Means for scales 2 through 4 were 3.23, 3.31, and 3.55 (Ns = 41, 33, and 7, respectively). According to the results, there was no significant difference among group means for the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F= .985,p — .378, df= 2 and 78). In Table 33, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by ability to write in English was 2.89 (N= 1,424, SD = .5739). Means for scales 1 . through 4 were 2.85, 2.84, 2.88, and 2.92 (Ns = 12, 200, 676, and 536, respectively). There was no significant mean difference of the successful domestic students at LACCD (F= 1.123, p = .339, df= 3 and 1,420). The Ability to Understand a College Lecture In Table 34, while the highest number of the two significantly different groups (47.7%, N - 714) occurred in the “Fairly well” category, a large number of domestic students (43.9%, IV = 622) rated their English skills at the “Very well” level. Results from the Chi-Square analysis found that observed frequencies of the “How well to understand a college lecture” were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the successful Chinese international student and domestic student groups x 2 (3, N= 1,497) = 60307, p - .000. In Table 35, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by ability to understand a college lecture was 3.28 ( N - 80, SD = .5828). The means of academic success, for scale 2 through 4, was 2.99, 3.40, and 3.45 (Ns = Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 276 24,45, and 11, respectively). The result of the One-Way ANOVA found that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F= 4.868, p — .010, df= 2 and 77). As indicated in Post Hoc Tables, Tukey tests suggested that students who reported being at the “With difficulty” level were significantly different from those who reported being at the “Fairly well” level (p = .013) in their academic success at LACCD. In Table 36, the total mean value of academic success of domestic students by ability to understand a college lecture was 2.89 (N = 1,417, SD = .5735). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.89, 2.79, 2.87, and 2.93 (Ns = 16, 110, 669, and 622, respectively). The results of the One-Way ANOVA Indicated that there was no significant difference among group means of the successful domestic students at LACCD (F = 2.330,/? = .073, df= 3 and 1,413). The Ability to Read a College Textbook As shown in Table 37, while the highest frequencies of the two successful population groups (46.5%, N= 696) were indicated as lying within the “Fairly well” category, close to one third of the successful Chinese international students (31.3%, N = 25) rated their English skill at the “With difficulty” level. Results from the Chi-Square analysis observed that frequencies of the “How well to read a college textbook” were significantly different from the expected frequencies between significantly different population groups %2 (3, N = 1,498) = 44.694,/? = .000. In Table 38, the total mean value of academic success of Chinese Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 277 international students by the ability to read a college textbook was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828). In Table 39, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by ability to read a college textbook was 2.89 (N= 1,418, SD = .5735). Results from the One-Way ANOVA found that there was a significant mean difference (F = 4.666, p = .012, df— 2 and 77) between those successful Chinese students who rated English competency at the “With difficulty” level and those who indicated their English competency as being at the “Fairly well” level (p = .021) and the “Very well” level (p - .044) in regards to their academic successes at LACCD. The Ability to Write an Essay Exam Table 40 shows that while the highest number of the two successful student groups (46.2%, N= 691) reported in the “Fairly well” category, the majority of the ■ successful Chinese international students (55.0%, N ~ 44) rated themselves as being at the “With difficulty” level. According to the Chi-Square analysis, the observed frequencies of the ability to write an essay exam in English were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the significantly different population groups x 2 (3, V - 1,496) = 9.513,p = .023. In Table 41, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by ability to write an essay exam was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828). There was no significant mean difference of the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F = .546, p = .582, df= 2 and 77). In Table 42, the total mean value of academic success of domestic students Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 278 by ability to write an essay exam was 2.89 (TV= 1,416, SD = .5735). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.97, 2.86, 2.86, and 2.96 (T V s = 24, 374, 662, and 356, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 2.871, p = .035, df = 3 and 1,412). As indicated in Post Hoc Tables, the Tukey tests suggested that students who had English skills at the “Fairly well” level were significantly different from those who had English skills at the “Very well” level (p — .038) in regards to their academic success at LACCD. The Ability to Write a Term Paper In Table 43, while the highest frequency of the two successful population groups (45.2%, N = 673) reported as falling in the “Fairly well” category, most of the successful Chinese international students (51.3%, N= 41) rated themselves within the “With difficulty” category (see Table 56). Result of the Chi-Square analysis indicated that there were significant difference between the two student groups x 2 (3 ,N = 1,488) = 21.065,p = .000. In Table 44, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students by ability to write a term paper was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828). The means for scales 1 through 4 were 3.80,3.27, 3.22, and 3.64 (T V s = 1,41, 32, and 6, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant mean difference for the table measuring Chinese international students by their ability to write a term paper (F = 1.175, p = .325, df= 3 and 76) at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 279 In Table 45, the total mean value of domestic students was 2.89 (T V = 1,408, SD = .5737). The means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.90, 2.82, 2.88, and 2.97 (T V s = 31, 412, 641, and 324, respectively). The results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F= 3.788,p = .010, d f- 3 and 1,404). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tables suggested that students who reported their English competency as being at a “With difficulty” level were significantly different from those who indicated their English competency as being “Very well” level (p = .004) when it came to measuring in their academic success at LACCD. The Ability to Participate in Class Discussions Table 46 reveals that while the highest frequency of the two successful population groups (42.7%, TV = 639) reported as lying within the “Fairly well” category, close to half of the successful Chinese international students (45.0%, T V = 36) reported as being at the “With difficulty” level. There was a significant mean difference between the two student groups %2 (3, T V = 1,495) = 45.840, p - .000. In Table 47, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (TV= 80, SD = .5828). The means for scales 1 through 4 were 3.00, 3.30, 3.24, and 3.54 (Ns = 1, 36, 38, and 5, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA found that there was no significant difference among group means when studying the varying ability levels of the successful Chinese international students to participate in class discussions in English at LACCD (F Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 280 = .456, p = .714, # = 3 and 76). In Table 48, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N = 1,415, SD = .5726). The means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.77, 2.85, 2.89, and 2.93 (Ns = 74, 267, 601, and 473 respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA found that there was no significant mean difference when studying the varying ability levels of the successful domestic students to participate in class discussions (F = 2.334, p = .072, df— 3 and 1,411). The Ability to Communicate with Instructors As shown in Table 49, the highest frequencies of the two successful student groups (46.4%, N — 695) responded that their English language skills were at the “Fairly well” level. Results of the Chi-Square analysis observed that there was a significant difference between the student groups %2 (3, N = 1,497) = 47.831,/? = .000. In Table 50, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.29 (N= 80, SD = .5828). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 3.68, 3.27, 3.26, and 3.40 (Ns = 1, 23,49, and 7, respectively). Results of a One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant mean difference among groups of the successful Chinese international students at LACCD (F = 2.68, p = .849, d f- 3 and 76). In Table 51, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,417, SD = .5730). Means for scales 1 through 4 were 2.83, 2.82, 2.85, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 281 and 2.95 (Ns = 35, 146, 646, and 590, respectively). There was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 4.145, p = .006. df — 3 and 1,413). The Tukey tests suggested that students who rated at the “With difficulty” level were significantly different from those who rated at the “Very well” level (p = .049); and those who rated themselves at the “Fairly well” level were significantly different from those who rated themselves at the “Very well” level (p = .013), in their academic success. I Am Very Determined to Reach My Goals Table 52 presents that the highest frequency of the two significantly different population groups (56.0%, N = 819) responded within the “Strongly agree” category. It is important to note that 16.5% of the successful Chinese international students (N = 13) reported themselves at “Not sure” category. According to the Chi-Square analysis, the observed frequencies were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the two student groups x 2 (6, N = 1,463) = 35.197, p= .000. In Table 53, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.30 (N= 79, SD= .5681). The means for scales 2 through 7 were 3.34,3.33, 3.04,2.89, 3.31, and 3.50 (Ns = 1, 2, 13, 7,27, and 29, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA found that there was no significant mean difference among categories (F - 2.113,p = .655, df= 5 and 73). In Table 54, the total mean value of the successful domestic students by their determinations to reach personal goals was 2.89 (N = 1,384, SD = .5732). The Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 282 means for scales 1 through 7 were 2.78, 2.99, 2.74, 2.97, 2.77, 2.86, and 2.91 (Ns = 6, 4, 15, 55, 119, 395, and 790, respectively). There was no significant difference among group means of the successful domestic students at LACCD (F= 1.791, p = .098, d f - 6 and 1,377). I keep Trying Even When Frustrated by a Task In Table 55, the highest percentage of the two successful student groups (41.1%, N= 608) indicated that they fell within the “Agree” category. According to the Chi-Square analysis, the observed frequencies were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the two significantly different population groups x 2 (6 ,iV= 1,478) = 15.810,/? = .015. In Table 56, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N - 80, SD = .5828). Means for scales 2 through 7 were 2.42, 2.96, 3.40, 3.00, and 3.72 (Ns = 1, 3, 7,20, 34, and 15, respectively). There was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F — 4.051, p = .003, df = 5 and 74). Because the “Disagree” category only had one case, it could not perform the Post Hoc Tests for comparing the levels of academic success of Chinese international students at LACCD. In Table 57, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,398, SD = .5739). The means for scales 1 through 7 were 2.95, 2.79, 2.91, 2.85, 2.80, 2.87, and 2.86 (Ns - 8, 25, 43, 69, 189, and 574, respectively). There was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 2.423, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 283 p = .025, d f- 6 and 1,391). ■ In Post Hoc Tables, the Tukey tests suggested that students who responded within the “Slightly agree” category differed from those who replied “Strongly agree” (p = .015) significantly in their academic success at LACCD. Understanding What Is Taught Is Important to Me Table 58 shows that the highest frequency of both population groups (56.4% N - 834) indicated that they strongly agree. Results of Chi-Square analysis found that the observed frequencies were significantly different from the expected frequencies for the two significantly different population groups %2 (6, N = 1,481) -22.261, p = .001. In Table 59, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828). The means for scales 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were 2.41, 3.37, 3.19, 3.18, and 3.41 (Ns = 1, 3,13, 28, and 35, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant difference among group means ( F - 1.311,/? = .274, df= 4 and 75). In Table 60, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,401, SD = .5741). The means for scales 1 through 7 were 3.31, 3.16, 2.94, 2.63, 2.60, 2.86, and 2.94 (Ns = 2, 2, 11, 31, 79, 475, and 801, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 6.145, p = .000, df= 6 and 1,394). In Post Hoc Tables, the Tukey tests suggested that students who responded “Not Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 284 sure” were significantly different from those who indicated “Strongly agree” (p = .036); and students who responded “Slightly agree” were significantly different from those who indicated “Agree” (p= .006) and “Strongly agree” (p — .000) when it came to measuring their academic success at LACCD. Success in College Is Largely Due to Effort Table 61 reports that the highest frequency of the two successful population groups (48.2%, N= 705) was in the “Strongly agree” category, 18.8% of the successful Chinese international students (N = 15) indicated “Not sure.” According to the Chi-Square analysis, the observed frequencies were significantly different from the expected frequencies between the two student groups x 2 (6, N= 1,464) = 26.311,/? = .000. In Table 62, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5828). Means for scales 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were 3.86, 3.25, 2.80, 3.22, and 3.44 (As = 2, 15, 8, 25, and 30, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F — 2.699, p = .037, df= 4 and 75). In Post Hoc Tables, the Tukey tests suggested that students who indicated “Slightly agree” were significantly different from those who responded “Strongly agree” (p - .042) when their academic success at LACCD was measured. In Table 63, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,384, SD = .5744). Means for scales 1 through 7 were 3.17,2.72, 2.74, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 285 2.92, 2.71, 2.89, and 2.92 (T V s = 9, 12, 14, 79, 107,488, and 675, respectively). According to the One-Way ANOVA, there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F= 2.111, p = .011, df= 6 and 1,377). Post Hoc Tables indicated that students who responded, “Slightly agree” were significantly different from those who responded, “Strongly agree” (p - .008) in their academic success at LACCD. I Can Learn All the Skills Taught in College Table 64 presents that most of student groups (39.9%, N = 588) selected “Agree.” According to Chi-Square analysis, there was a significant difference between the two student groups %2 (6, IV = 1,474) = 37.403,/? = .000, df= 6). In Table 65, the total mean value of the successful Chinese international students was 3.29 (A = 79, SD = .5857). Means for scales 1 through 7 were 3.25, 3.90, 3.15, 3.30, 3.23, 3.19, and 3.60 (As = 1, 2, 4, 15, 25, 23, and 9, respectively). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant difference among group means (F = .914, p = .449, d f - 6 and 72) of the successful Chinese international students. In Table 66, the total mean value of the successful domestic students was 2.89 (A = 1,395, SD = .5740). Means for scales 1 through 7 were 3.05, 2.92, 2.80, 2.89, 2.84, 2.89, and 2.91 (As = 7,16, 35, 140,195, 565, and 437, respectively). Result of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant difference (F = .670,p = .674, df= 6 and 1,388) of the successful domestic students at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. APPENDIX D Table 2-1 Pearson Correlation of Independent Variables to Academic Success for Chinese International Students Paired W ith Academic Success V ariable r P N Age -.004 .975 82 Gender .254* .002 81 The highest academic degree desired .222* .045 82 I have attended an orientation program -.261* .018 82 Mother’s education level -.042 .722 76 Father’s education level .026 .830 72 High school GPA .219 .051 80 The ability to read in English .162 .147 81 The ability to write in English .147 .191 81 The ability to understand a college lecture .302** .007 80 The ability to read a college text book .310** .005 80 The ability to write an essay exam .082 .469 80 The ability to write a term paper .058 .608 80 The ability to participate in class discussions .047 .678 80 The ability to communicate with instructors .007 .951 80 It is important to finish courses in program o f studies .180 .108 81 I am very determined to reach my goals .277* .014 79 I will get a Bachelor’s degree .227* .045 78 I will transfer to a four-year college/ university .346** .002 77 I always complete homework assignments .350** .002 79 I keep trying even when frustrated by task .345** .002 80 Understanding what is taught is important .202 .072 80 Success in college largely due to effort .085 .452 80 I can learn all skills taught in college .012 .916 79 I enjoy doing challenging class assignments .266* .017 80 I expect to do well/ earn good grades .335** .002 80 Talk with an instructor before or after a class .203 .075 78 Talk with an instructor during office hours .092 .421 78 Help another student understand homework .212 .064 77 Study in small groups outside o f class .072 .530 78 Speak with an academic counselor .095 .411 77 Note. * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Table 2-2 Pearson Correlation o f Independent Variables to Academic Success for Domestic Students Paired With Academic Success Variable r P N Gender .024 .371 1,409 Age .158** .000 1,423 The highest academic degree desired .009 .744 1,416 Have attended an orientation program .005 .843 1,406 Mother’s education level .003 .926 1,248 Father’s education level .068* .020 1,192 High school GPA .143** .000 1,401 The ability to read in English .018 .492 1,422 The ability to write in English .048 .071 1,424 The ability to understand a college lecture .064* .016 1,417 The ability to read a college text book .045 .088 1,418 The ability to write an essay exam .052* .049 1,416 The ability to write a term paper .081** .002 1,408 The ability to participate in class discussions .069** .009 1,415 The ability to communicate with instructors .086** .001 1,417 It is important to finish courses in program o f studies .087** .001 1,397 I am very determined to reach my goals .047 .078 1,384 I will get a Bachelor’s degree .029 .283 1,371 I will transfer to a four-year college/ university -.039 .146 1,384 I always complete homework assignments .163** .000 1,395 I keep trying even when frustrated by task .065* .015 1,398 Understanding what is taught is important .115** .000 1,401 Success in college largely due to effort .043 .112 1,384 I can learn all skills taught in college .026 .332 1,395 I enjoy doing challenging class assignments .077** .004 1,403 I expect to do well/ earn good grades .112** .000 1,400 Talk with an instructor before or after a class .097** .000 1,398 Talk with an instructor during office hours .011 .687 1,380 Help another student understand homework .072** .007 1,397 Study in small groups outside of class .015 .564 1,387 Speak with an academic counselor -.049 .070 1,391 Note. * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 288 APPENDIX E Complete Analysis of Unanalyzed Correlated Variables for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students For Chinese International Students Gender Result of the /-test indicated that there was a significant mean difference in academic success between Chinese male and female students (/ = 2.337,p = .002) (see Table 68). The mean of academic success for male students (M= 3.06, N = 22, SD = .5532) was significantly lower when compared to female Chinese international students (Af= 3.38, N= 59, SD = .5510) at LACCD. The Highest Academic Degree One Desired to Obtain Table 69 shows that the total mean value of academic success for Chinese international students was 3.28 (77= 82, SD = .5811). Means for Chinese students for scales 3 through 8 were 2.99, 3.25, 3.18,3.47,3.59, and 2.92 (As = 13, 8,23,24, 10, and 4, respectively). The highest level of academic success was “Doctoral degree” category, whereas the lowest was “Medical degree” category. Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a marginally significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 2.3 80, p = .046, df= 5 and76). It did not matter whether Tukey or Scheffe tests were employed, somehow the Post Hoc Tables did not indicate any significant difference among group means. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 289 I Have Attended an Orientation Program at the College Results of the r-test indicated that there was a significant mean difference between Chinese international students who had attended and had not attended ait orientation program at their college (t = 2.42, p = .018) (see Table 70). The total mean value of academic success for students who had attended an orientation program (M= 3.12, N = 38, SD = .6401) was significantly lower compared to students who had not attended an orientation program (M - 3.42, N = 44, SD - .4903) at LACCD. I Will Get a Bachelor’s Degree Table 71 reveals that the total mean value of academic success for Chinese International Students was 3.32 (N = 78, SD = .5706). Means for scales 1 through 5 were 3.42, 2.89, 3.30, 2.97, and 3.51 (Ns = 3, 4, 9, 19, and 43, respectively). The greatest number of Chinese international students selected “Definitely” (M — 3.51, N - 43, SD = .4780), whereas smallest number selected “Probably not” (M = 2.89, N = 4, SD = .7549). Results of the One-Way ANOVA found that there was a significant mean difference for at least one pair of group means (F = 4.122,/? = .005, d f- 4 and 73). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tables suggested that Chinese international students who had marked “Probably” differed significantly in their academic success than the “Definitely” group (p= .004). I Will Transfer to a Four-Year College or University As shown in Table 72, the total mean value of academic success for Chinese international students was 3.32 (N = 77, SD = .5551). Means for Chinese Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 290 international students for scales 1 through 5 were 2.67, 3.16, 3.25, 3.37, and 3.43 (T V s = 6, 4, 11, 12, and 44, respectively). The highest level of academic success was related to “Definitely” on the scale (M= 3.43, N= 44, SD = .5026), whereas the lowest was related to “Definitely not” on the scale (M= 2.67, N - 6,SD = .6165). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 2.940, p - .026, df= 4 and 72). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tables suggested that Chinese international students who had marked “Definitely not” differed significantly in their academic success when compared to the “Definitely” group (p= .012). I Always Complete Homework Assignments The total mean value of academic success for Chinese international students was 3.27 (N = 79, SD = .5821) (see Table 73). Means for scales 2 through 7 were 2.62, 2.88, 3.60, 2.86, 3.21, and 3.48 (T V s = 2, 2, 2, 11, 24, and 38, respectively). The highest level of academic success of Chinese international students was related to “Not sure” on the scale (M= 3.60, N= 2, SD = .2787), whereas the lowest was related to “Disagree” on the scale (M= 2.62, N= 2, SD = .2967). Results of the One Way ANOVA found that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 3.346, p = .009, df= 5 and 73). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tables suggested that Chinese international students who were part of the “Slightly agree” group differed significantly in their academic success when compared to the “Strongly agree” group (p= .016). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 291 I Enjoy Doing Challenging Class Assignments Table 74 presents that the total mean value for Chinese international Students was 3.28 (N— 80, SD = .5828). Means for scales 1 through 7 were 2.00, 3.41, 2.99, 3.24, 3.23, 3.32, and 3.65 (Ns = 1, 3, 7, 11, 21, 27, and 10, respectively). The highest level of academic success was computed to “Strongly agree” on the scale (M = 3.65,N = 10, SD — .6097), whereas the lowest was computed to “Strongly disagree” on the scale (M = 2.00, N= 1) (as there was only one case in this scale, it failed to compute SD). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant mean difference in academic success among the scales of this variable (.F= 1.968, p = .081, # = 6 and 73). I Expect to Do Well and Earn Good Grades in College As shown in Table 75, the total mean value of academic success for Chinese international students was 3.28 (N= 80, SD = .5806). Means for scales 1, and 3 through 7 were 2.41, 2.96, 3.58, 2.88, 3.16, and 3.48 (Ns = 1, 2, 2, 10, 25, and 40, respectively). The highest level of academic success for Chinese foreign students was “Not sure” (M= 3.58, N = 2, SD = .3070), whereas the lowest was “Strongly disagree” (M - 2.41, N= 1). While there was a significant mean difference found among group means (F = 3.202, p = .011, df= 5 and 74), the “Strongly disagree” scale had fewer than two cases, it failed in comparing the mean differences in academic success among the groups. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 292 For Domestic Students It Is Important to Finish Course in Program of Studies Table 76 shows that the total mean value of academic success for the successful domestic students was 3.28 (17= 80, SD = .5806). Means for scale 1 through 7 were 2.85, 2.79, 2.84, 2.78, 2.71, 2.85, and 2.93 (Ns = 4, 3, 16, 40, 74, 446, and 814, respectively). The highest level of academic success was related to “Strongly agree” on the scale (M= 2.93, IV = 814, SD = .5725), whereas the lowest was related to “Slightly agree” on the scale (M= 2.71, N= 74, SD — .5204). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 2.604, p = .016, df=6 and 1,390). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tables suggested that domestic students who belonged to the “Slightly agree” group differed significantly in their academic success when compared to the “Strongly agree” group (p= .021). I Always Complete Homework Assignments In Table 77, the total mean value of academic success for domestic students was 2.89 (IV = 1,395, SD - .5739). Means for scale 1 through 7 were 3.26, 2.60, 2.80, 2.62, 2.73, 2.87, and 3.01 (Ns = 7, 16, 63, 44, 233, 539, and 493, respectively). The highest level of academic success was related to “Strongly agree” (M= 3.03, N = 493, SD = .5709), whereas the lowest was related to “Disagree” (M = 2.60, IV = 16, SD = .4299). The One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F= 11.526, p = .000, d f— 6 and 1,388). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tests suggested that domestic students who were Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 293 in the “Disagree” group, differed significantly in their academic success when compared to the “Strongly agree” group (p= .044); the “Slightly disagree” group differed from the “Strongly agree” group ip — .035); the “Not sure” group differed from the “Strongly agree” group (p = .000); the “Slightly agree” group differed from the “Agree” group ip = .029) and the “Strongly agree” group (p = .000); the “Agree” group differed from the “Slightly agree” group (p = .029) and the “Strongly agree” group (p = .000); and students who were in the “Strongly agree” group differed significantly in their academic success when compare to all other groups except the “Strongly disagree” group. I Enjoy Doing Challenging Class Assignments As shown in Table 78, the total mean value of academic success for domestic students was 2.89 (N — 1,403, SD = .5745). Means for scales 1 through 7 were 2.94, 2.73, 2.87, 2.80, 2.83, 2.94, and 2.95 (As = 32, 50, 87, 136, 356, 549, and 193, respectively). The highest level of academic success was related to “Strongly agree” (M= 2.95, A = 193, SD = .5761), whereas the lowest was related to “Disagree” (M= 2.73, N = 50, SD = .5140). Results of the One-Way ANOVA found that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 3.008,/? = .006, df= 6 and 1,396). Even after using Tukey and Scheffe tests, somehow the Post Hoc Tables did not indicate any significant difference among group means for domestic students in their academic success at LACCD. I Expect to Do Well and Earn Good Grades in College Table 79 shows that the total mean value of academic success for domestic Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 294 students was 2.89 (N~ 1,400, SD = .5746). Means for scales 1 through 7 were 3.25, 2.54, 2.69, 2.72, 2.74, 2.86, and 2.95 (Ns = 3, 5, 8, 44, 96, 552, and 692, respectively). The highest level of academic success was associated with “Strongly agree” (M= 2.95, N = 692, SD = .5662), whereas the lowest was associated with “Disagree” (M= 2.54, N — 5, SD - .4276). Results of the One-Way ANOYA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F = 4.053, p = .000, df= 6 and 1,393). By using Tukey tests, the Post Hoc Tests suggested that domestic students who were part of the “Slightly agree” group differed significantly from those who were part of the “Strongly agree” group (p = .013) in their academic success at LACCD. The two most academically successful domestic students fell in the opposite extremes. How Often I Have Talked With an Instructor Before or After a Class As shown in Table 80, the total mean value of academic success for domestic students was 2.88 (IV = 1,398, SD = .5733). Means for scales 1 through 6 were 2.79, 2.90, 2.94, 2.95, 2.91, and 2.98 (Ns = 421, 406,301, 152,44, and 74, respectively). The highest level of academic success was related to “5 times or more” (M= 2.98, N = 74, SD = .5531), whereas the lowest was related to “0 or didn’t have time” (M = 2.79, N= 421, SD = .5725). Results of the One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was a significant mean difference for at least a pair of group means (F= 3.817, p = .002, df= 5 and 1,392). Domestic students who were part of the “0 or didn’t have time” group differed significantly from the “1 time” (p - .043), “2 times” (p = .007), and “3 times” (p = .037) groups in their academic success at LACCD. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 295 How Often I Have Helped Another Student Understand Homework Table 81 reveals that the total mean value of academic success of domestic students was 2.89 (N= 1,397, SD — .5725). Means for scales 1 through 6 were 2.82, 2.89, 2.93, 2.92, 2.90, and 2.97 (Ns = 425, 369,294, 147, 66, and 96, respectively). The highest level of academic success was associated with “5 times or more” (M - 2.97, N= 96, SD = .5333), whereas the lowest was associated with “0 or didn’t have time” (M= 2.82, N = 425, SD = .5883). Results ofthe One-Way ANOVA indicated that there was no significant mean difference for domestic students at LACCD (F = 1.969, p = .080, df= 5 and 1,391). Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 296 APPENDIX F Table 3-1 Summary the Significant Mean Difference in Academic Success by the Correlated Variables for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students Correlated IVs Correlated With Sig. Diff. Pair of Group Means Chinese Domestic Age X D: Age 19 or younger vs. 30 - 39, 40 - older (p = .000) Age 20-29 vs. 3 0 -3 9 ,4 0 - older (p — .000) Gender X C: p = .022 Female > Male The highest academic degree one desired X C: Cannot compute I have attended an orientation program at this college X C: jo = .018 No > Yes Father’s educational level X High school GPA X D: C vs. A- (p = .001), A or A+ (p = .002) C+ vs. A- (p = .000), A or A+ (p = .001) B- vs. A- {p = .044), A or A+ (p = .041) B vs. A- ip = .035), A or A+ (p = .036) Ability to understand a college lecture X X C: With difficulty vs. Fairly well (p = .013) Ability to read a college textbook X C: With difficulty vs. Fairly well (p = .021), Very well (p = .044) Ability to write an essay exam X D: Fairly well vs. Very well (p = .038) Ability to write a term paper X D: With difficulty vs. Very well (p = .004) Ability to participate in class discussions X Ability to communicate with instructors X D: With difficulty vs. Very well ip = .049) Fairly well vs. Very well (p = .013) Note. X : Variable is correlated to the successful student group. X : Variable is correlated to both student groups. Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 297 Table 3-1 (Continued) Summary the Significant Mean Difference in Academic Success by the Correlated Variables for the Successful Chinese International Students and Domestic Students Correlated IVs C o rrelated With Sig. Diff. Pair o f Group Means Chinese Domestic It is important to finish courses in program of studies X D: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .021) I am very determined to reach my goals X I will get a Bachelor’s degree X C: Probably vs. Definitely (p =.004) I will transfer to a four-year college/ univ. X C: Definitely vs. Slightly agree (p = .016) I always complete homework assignments X X C: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .016) D: Disagree vs. Strongly agree (p = .044), Slightly disagree vs. Strongly agree (p = .035), Not sure vs. Strongly agree ( p =.000) I keep trying even when frustrated by a task X X C: Cannot compute D: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .015) Understanding that what is taught is important X D: Not sure vs. Strongly agree (p = .036) Slightly agree vs. Agree (p - .006), Strongly agree ip = .000) I enjoy doing challenging class assignments X X D: Cannot compute I expect to do well and earn good grades X X C: Cannot compute D: Slightly agree vs. Strongly agree (p = .013) How often talk with an instructor before/ after a class X D: 0 or did not have time vs. 1 time (p = .043), 2 times ip = .007), 3 times ip = .037) How often help another student understand homework X Note. X : Variable is correlated to the successful student group. X : Variable is correlated to both successful student groups. Reproduced with permission ofthe copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Community college English courses: The road less traveled by community college students

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

Community college students and achievement in mathematics: Predictors of success

PDF

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

PDF

Examining the factors that predict the academic success of minority students in the remedial mathematics pipeline in an urban community college

PDF

Faculty characteristics: What are their relationships with academic outcomes of community college students?

PDF

Community college students: The effect of parenthood and selected variables on degree -seeking aspirations

PDF

International students: Patterns of success

PDF

Community college students' perceptions of collaborative learning in developmental writing classes: Identifying the factors that promote positive active learning

PDF

Assessment of Taiwanese business students' learning styles using the Myers -Briggs Type Indicator

PDF

Improving the transfer rates of minority students: A case study

PDF

Fulfilling the mission to serve the underserved: A case study of a private, Catholic, urban college's two -year program

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

A study of the profile and leadership traits of vice presidents of instruction in the California community college system

PDF

Academic success for African -American male community college students

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 study of the Navy College Program for Afloat College Education: Implications for teaching and learning among nontraditional college students

PDF

Assessment of nursing college students' learning styles in Taiwan using the Myers -Briggs Type Indicator

PDF

An examination of the contract education program in a multi-college community college district in Southern California: A descriptive and qualitative case study investigation

PDF

A cultural study of shared governance at two community colleges

Asset Metadata

Creator Chen, Pi-Han (author)

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

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

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

Tag anthropology, cultural,education, bilingual and multicultural,education, community college,education, higher,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Sundt, Melora (committee chair), Hagedorn, Linda Serra (committee member), Maxwell, William (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-477494

Unique identifier UC11335076

Identifier 3133248.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-477494 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3133248.pdf

Dmrecord 477494

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Chen, Pi-Han

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