Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Using social capital in examining program leaders of intervention programs
(USC Thesis Other)
Using social capital in examining program leaders of intervention programs
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
USING SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY IN EXAMINING THE ROLES OF
PROGRAM LEADERS OF INTERVENTION PROGRAMS
by
Tung-Yuang Liou
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2007
Copyright 2007 Tung-Yuang Liou
ii
DEDICATION
For my wife, Li-chun Hou (Mary);
my daughter, Yu-chieh Liou (Jessica);
my parents, Tzu-ciou Liou and A-lan Chen;
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
To my chairperson, Dr. Hirabayashi; my dissertation committee members Dr. Baca and
Dr. Jun; USC Civic and Community Relations; I give my unending gratitude and heartfelt
appreciation for your support, guidance, and time through this study.
To my intellectual mentor, Dr. Stanton-Salazar; my friend of thematic group, Dr. Ward;
I give my deep-felt appreciation and gratitude for your inspiration, guidance, and sharing
from the start until the finish of this study.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledges iii
List of Tables vii
Abstract viii
Chapter 1:
Introduction of Problem 1
Background of the Problem 5
Poverty, Neighborhoods, and Family 5
Social Stratification vs. Counter-Stratification 9
Theoretical Frameworks and Theories of Social Capital 13
Neighborhood Academic Initiative 15
Purpose of the Study 17
Research Questions 19
Importance of the Study 19
Definitions 20
Chapter 2
Literature Review 22
Two Perspectives of Social Capital 22
Normative Perspective 23
Normative Perspectives in Education 25
Drawbacks of the Normative Perspective 27
Resource-oriented Perspective 28
Resource-oriented Perspective in Education 31
Drawbacks of Resource-oriented Perspective 33
Empowering Students-in-Need 35
The Vehicle of Resources for Students-in-Need 39
Institutional Agents 45
Limitations of Social Capital 50
Chapter 3
Methodology 53
Rationale and Methodology 54
Sample and Population 57
Data Collection Procedures 62
Instrumentation 63
Name Generator/Interpreter 65
v
Position Generator 67
Resource Generator 68
Trustworthiness and Confidence 70
Data Analysis 72
Chapter 4
Results 73
Research Question 1 74
Basic Structural Characteristics of Networks 75
Strength of Ties of Activated Network 76
Variable Network Characteristics: Between
the Director and Staff 82
Mobilizing Connections with Ties Posited in
Prestigious Class 86
Research Question 2 90
Closed Interaction among Work Associates 91
Mobilizing Social Capital through a Referral System 98
Consciously Networking 103
Research Question 3 105
Psychological Alienation and Relational Receding 106
Drawbacks of the Referral System 108
Motivated Participation in a Meaningful Program 109
Shared Belief Building Process 113
An Expanding Family—Growing Influence of
NAI Graduates 115
Conclusion 119
CHAPTER FIVE
Discussion 120
Mutual Respect and Social Bonding 120
Physical vs. Psychological Space 123
Bridging Resources through a Referral Strategy 125
Former Students and Expanding Family 127
Personal and Institutional Capital 128
Implications 133
Affiliation with Educational Institution 133
Increasing Participation in USC 136
Consciously Expand Networks 137
A Resource Referral System for Small Programs 138
A Program Alumni Association 140
Future Research 141
Limitations 143
Conclusion 144
vi
REFERENCE 146
APPENDICES
Appendix A 151
Appendix B 154
Appendix C 161
Appendix D 164
Appendix E 166
Appendix F 168
vii
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Interviewee Characteristics 58
Table 2: Summary of Data Collected by Three Instruments 75
Table 3: Ties by Ethnicity 79
Table 4: Ties by Social Class 80
Table 5: Ties by Source of Support 81
Table 6: Comparison of Support Providers in Ethnicity 84
Table 7: Comparison of Source of Support 85
Table 8: Comparison of Elected Ties with Social Class across Multiple Surveys 85
Table 9: Network Data Gathered by Position Generator Divided by Social Class 87
Table 10: Network Data Gathered by Resource Generator Divided by
Social Class 88
Table 11: Comparison of Surveys with Social Class 89
viii
Abstract
This study examines the role of program leaders through the social capital theory. A
critical role of program leaders is to mobilize personal social capital to assist low-status
students meet objectives through academic achievement. In particular, this paper focuses
on three points: 1) What are the structural characteristics of the program leaders’
networks? 2) How do they mobilize their personal social capital on behalf of the program
and its young participants? 3) What factors influence the mobilization of social capital?
In addition, a discussion is presented about the nature of social capital. The discussion
challenges the importance of individual social capital and institutional resources.
Instrumentation in this study includes three surveys and an ethnographic interview.
The networks of program leaders are compared: the director and program staff have ties
to different social classes and ethnic groups. Analyses from the study reveal that program
leaders adopt multiple strategies to bridge outside resources on behalf of the program.
The director is very strategic in creating and activating the connections with ties that are
accessible to resources. Likewise, program staff mobilizes social capital by using an
effective resource-bridging system in which program participants are directed to key
departments in the university.
Several critical factors are examined that may promote or inhibit the mobilization of
personal capital by program leaders, among them participation in the NAI program which
has advanced personal passions to utilize social capital. In particular, a shared belief
building process (through interview recruiting) and a contract help bind all stakeholders
together to work for the success of program participants.
ix
And finally, the student intervention program observed in this study is affiliated with
a major university. Although the affiliation offers benefits to the program, findings from
this reveal a critical imbalance in influence that may inadvertently allow the institution to
hinder further development of the program as shaped by the program’s mission statement.
1
Chapter One
Introduction of Problem
Low-status students, particularly racial minority students from low-income
families, are at risk to underperform in academia more often than “majority” students
in the same age group (Croninger & Lee, 2001; Horvat & Lewis, 2003; Goddard,
2003; Leventhal, et al., 2005; Schneider, Teske, & Marschall, 2002; Stanton-Salazar,
2001). This risk is almost always expressed across the board. For example,
according to the Department of Education (National Report Card, May, 2006), test
score results among fourth
and eighth
grade students in both mathematics and
reading showed gains on average for the 2005 academic year over assessment scores
for 2003. Nationwide academic reports also showed an increase in science
assessment scores among twelfth graders. Two-percent of students have improved
from the level of “Below Basic” to “Basic” while percentages at the other
proficiency levels remain the same for the national science assessment. However, a
large low-income segment of twelfth graders achieved lower scores than their age
group peers for the same year.
Significantly, reports continue to show that fourth and eighth grade students
eligible for free/reduced-price lunch programs achieve the lowest average scores
among other peer groups. In 2005, 71% of students who were not eligible for the free
lunch program achieved above “Basic” and above levels of “Proficient” and
“Advanced” on the national science assessment. Comparatively, only 37% of
2
students identified as low status reached the level of “Basic” or higher (e.g.,
“Proficient” and “Advanced”) (http://nces.ed.gov/annuals/).
Social scientists have proposed two solutions to the problem of closing these
academic gaps. One is a hypothesis from a psychological perspective, which
proposes that there are significant associations between both an individual’s intrinsic
motivations and formal learning. The theory contends that by manipulating positive
intrinsic intentions through learning activities, the student’s cognitive efforts will
correspondingly increase. Encouraging individuals to actively engage in learning
depends on how well students connect with learning activities provided by
instructors or educational institutions. The greater the student’s intention to engage
in specific learning activities, the better their ability to perform will be. However,
this perspective overlooks the fact that accessibility to educational resources is
problematic for low-status students (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Thus pervasive societal
inequities and cultural barriers might block students identified as low status, from
achieving success.
The other perspective proposes policy planning as a means to foster educational
reforms and an emphasis on closing achievement gaps. This hypothesis contends that
policy enforcement and proportionate budget distribution will lead to desired
outcomes. This is because, the implementation of policy will allow stakeholders
within the educational system to work to ameliorate existing problems. Most
importantly, this perspective maintains that proportional funding will lead to
supportive solutions to existing problems.
3
Facilitated student interventions are common methods that provide extra
curriculum and educational support of targeted population as a means to bridge
performance gaps (Kahne & Bailey, 1999; Stanton-Salazar, 2003). Policymakers and
advocates in education have adopted the use of enhancement programs as a way of
promoting inherent equity within educational opportunities. These student
interventions provide services, which include academic assistance, counseling,
academic decision-making, and other opportunities through which to practice
behaviors appropriate to an academic setting. Within deliberately planned programs,
students-in-need, namely low-status students, share opportunities to overcome
inequities they have experienced due to limited social and academic resources.
Student interventions simultaneously involve giving students an opportunity to
participate in social webs that regularly develop across educational settings.
Therefore, students participating in these programs are frequently asked to build
personal supportive social webs. Generally, a majority of students participating in
facilitated student intervention programs are from low-income families.
Consequently, these adolescents often face developmental challenges due to limited
resources available to poorer communities and families. The element of social webs
embedded in intervention programs provides these students with opportunities to
access levels of support to mitigate the negative impact of their social status. This is
because supportive webs include individuals able to provide direct and indirect
assistance.
4
Although there is a growing body of literature that has identified the significant
roles played by program staff in such intervention programs, one aspect of their
function that has not received enough scholarly attention is their ability to introduce
material resources in support of participating students (Maeroff, 1999; Stanton-
Salazar, 2003). In this way, program staff becomes critical to the successful function
of such programs. Through the trained and professional staff, students obtain
program services, which include academic assistance, guidance, counseling and
access to all other available resources of the programs.
Program staff act as key persons or agents whose daily performance and
mobilization of social resources go a long way toward determining the effectiveness
of a youth-oriented program—particularly those serving low-status youth. Likewise,
a staff supports those who ensure that a program meets its objectives. Kahne and
Bailey (1999) conclude that both the program staff’s performance and turnover rates
within the staff correlate with the program’s effectiveness. The program staff
manages program activities, solves problems, and in general, makes a difference. A
significant difference arises when program staff and students work with program
resources collaboratively in a way that interweaves social resources within a wider
social context.
In addition, Maeroff (1999) suggests that previous studies have not sufficiently
examined the roles of program leaders. Although program leaders are the key
persons who determine the success or failure of a program, Maeroff’s study (1999)
has pointed out the need to further explore the roles of program leaders. Indeed, a
5
program’s effectiveness depends heavily on its leaders. Specifically, general
leadership ability and personal charisma can lead to the successful evolution of
performance in an existing program. That is to say, although program staff manages a
variety of services for participating students, what is done beyond the prescribed
program parameters is also important. This is evident in that a program’s staff
frequently needs to activate outside resources to solve the students’ problems. One
way to understand the significance of program staff is to examine their function to
bridge outside resources to enable a program internally.
Background of the Problem
Poverty, Neighborhoods, and Family
Living in poverty, children are exposed to a deleterious environment in which
resource are limited or even unavailable. Whereas the residents of a middle-class
neighborhood might take public services for granted, people from a low-status
neighborhood may struggle to gain access to the same social resources. For example,
when we look at public facilities (e.g., parks, libraries, and so on) in one community,
it is clear that accessibility to similar facilities may vary substantially across
communities.
Access to both common services ranging from healthcare to adequate
transportation, and facilities such as public parks and public libraries are often
problematic for residents in low-status community. Since there are fewer economic
opportunities and activities in such neighborhoods, they are not able to attract private
investments to their communities. Therefore, with fewer investments in such local
6
neighborhoods, related public services are likely to suffer, as well. For instance,
clinics and hospitals may move to wealthier communities in order to serve patients
able to afford expensive medical services with medical insurance. Likewise, business
enterprises and local retailers may be more wary to establish businesses in such areas.
Thus even finding employment in the local neighborhood economy becomes difficult
for residents, too. In this scenario, government investment is essential and critical for
the development of the communities with a higher population of poor residents.
A lack of public services in poorer neighborhoods can make the area more
dangerous, as well. Generally found in urban areas, these neighborhoods are often
associated with high crime rates and are considered to be unsafe communities.
Strong gang activity, crime, and drugs are prevalent features often of impoverished
communities. Maeroff (1999) describes students who live in such poor
neighborhoods as having: “A pervasive fear of violence and crime [which affects]
their behavior, expectations, and school performance, causing these teenagers to miss
school, get bad grades, and carry weapons” (p.130). Stanton-Salazar (2001)
delineated familiar daily risks associated with poor neighborhoods in his study. In so
doing, he demonstrated that recreation centers or parks could be places for gang
activity where vandalism, theft and drug dealing can occur. Therefore, staff members
at recreation centers need to supervise young people when they participate in
programs at these facilities because of negative messages and values not taught in
schools. Symbolically, vandalism and graffiti can represent territorial boundaries of
hostile groups, warning of dangers and intimidation. Indeed, such symbols are rarely
7
seen in upper middle-class neighborhoods. Rather, middle- and upper middle-class
residents often have the collective resources to deter what they understand as
potential dangers threatening their communities. Accordingly, it may not necessarily
feel like a problem to walk the streets in a middle-class neighborhood, but it may
definitely cause worries to go jogging in a poorer community at night.
Choosing a school is, of course, an important decision for parents, because
education is viewed as a one factor determining a child’s future and opportunities.
Therefore, a high performing school with competitive academic indexes, such as a
strong API rating, college admissions scores and the like, become important criteria
in a parent’s decision as to where to enroll a child (Schneider et al 2002). Low-
income families do not have the freedom to choose competitive schools because
these school districts are generally located in middle-class and upper middle-class
neighborhoods where the high cost of housing discourages low-status families from
moving within the boundaries of well-regarded school districts. Contrary to the
privileged community, poor neighborhoods tend to have schools which have less
funding, high staff turnover rates, inappropriate curriculum and overcrowded
classrooms (McGee, 2004) Disadvantages like these create yet another “invisible
barrier” for low-status minority students further hindering their ability to
successfully pursue quality education and achieve personal goals.
Familial support for these students in the academic arena are often limited due
to the challenges faced by their parents, since low-income parents are often poorly
educated themselves, and correspondingly, the guidance they are able to provide is
8
limited as well. The inability of these parents to assist their children does not mean
these parents are not concerned about their children’s education. Rather, their
possible modes of assistance are restricted by their own lack of educational
attainment. Their educational background may not equip them to effectively assist
the next generations’ educational pursuits.
Given these familial circumstances, combined with the multiple social risks
from the communities in which they live, low-status students are at risk of falling
behind in academic performance. Distressed neighborhoods are likely to seriously
damage minority students’ schooling years and consequently affect their potential for
academic achievement. In particular, the multiple risks faced by these students in
distressed communities contribute to the high dropout rates and the much lower
college matriculation rates within this population, (Crowder & South, 2003). Again,
these statistics should not be taken to mean that low-status adolescents pay less
attention to their schooling, but the ill effects of the communities in which they live
can negatively impact their lives in a way that middle class students generally do not
have to worry about. For adolescents in poor communities, street violence and
multiple social risks force them to daily focus on basic issues of survival. Such
realities in daily living naturally intrude on the time and attention they can give to
their academic pursuits.
In sum, the impact of living in poverty can be profound and significant. Living
in a neighborhood with a high concentration of the poor strongly correlates with less
access to social resources and less opportunities. Exclusion from opportunities and
9
social resources isolates those who are living in poverty. No doubt such isolation
may lead these low-status students to feeling less confident in their school
performance and their ability to realize future goals. In turn, this may also keep
students from putting in the necessary effort to achieve success, resulting in a lack of
confidence that may specifically manifest itself as underperformance in school.
Eventually, these students come to feel stratified in a culture that is hierarchically
arranged by the social and economic status.
Social Stratification vs. Counter-Stratification
What I have been discussing above delineates some of the personal plights
faced by students who live in poverty. Compared with their middle-class peers, there
is an invisible line that separates these adolescents. This often intangible but acutely
real line impacts the lives of these students mainly in two dimensions. The first is the
social isolation these individuals experience from mainstream society. What they
have experienced in their communities and family only validates their sense of
despair. As a result, low-status adolescents often replicate the poverty and living
conditions from which they came, once again generating a sense of psychological
despair that traps these adolescents at the bottom strata of society.
The second dimension is the reality of barriers to social mobilization. In other
words, there is an unequal distribution of social resources in a hierarchical society.
Higher social classes tend to control a large proportion of social resources and their
prestige helps them warehouse resources beyond the reach of lower classes. The
result contributes to social stratification due to the inequitable distribution of social
10
and educational resources (Grusky, 2000). Notably, social stratification reserves
access to resources for those who are already privileged, while limiting lower classes
to limited resources. Thus, upward social mobility is a limited option for certain
groups who are negatively impacted by the limited control and distribution of valued
resources.
Although there are negative factors that may impact low-status students’
performance in schools, some students do survive the experience of poverty and
social obstacles erected by that environment. Through their own efforts, these
students become successful in their academic pursuits and find their way to a college
or university. Through my research, I have noticed that student inventions play a
critical role in helping these students-in-need. Students participating in educational
programs or student interventions have an optimal chance of achieving their
educational goals (Maeroff, 1999). However, there is a need to understand how
effective intervention works and why it is effective.
Successful programs create close and dense relationships among all participants,
in terms of students, program staff, tutors, counselors, parents, school, and
community (Kahne & Bailey, 1999; Stanton-Salazar, 2003). The dense relationships
of the programs bind the students and the program together. The relationships build
up strengths for these participating students to resist those external impacts, which
have impeded their progress in the past. In addition, the students receive assistance
that is generally not accessible within their communities and families. In intervention
11
programs, participating students find the necessary social support from sources
outside their families and communities.
Caring relationships are often reported as features of effective interventions
(Kahne & Bailey, 1999; Stanton-Salazar, 2003; Worthy, Prater, & Turner, 2002).
Kahne and Bailey (1999) note that often program staff is expected to manage the
immediate needs of participating students. These needs may include family
emergencies, probation, and personal difficulties of these young youths. According
to the study, adolescents in need viewed the program as another home and
maintained close relationships to program providers. In a work by Worthy et al.
(2002), some tutors developed caring relationships and even parental behaviors
towards their tutees. Tutors were willing to spend weekends in bookstores and sought
appropriate books for their tutees. It is apparent that strong and close relationships
were what made the difference for these students.
These caring relationships transform other key elements that may be necessary
for success among these students. The supportive relationship facilitates participating
students to reverse negative influences and obstacles through supportive emotional
and social interactions. Participating students find role models in the program,
because the influence of informal role models supports students and leads them to
more productive pathways by which to achieve their goals in school and the future.
Indeed, the program staff likewise offers useful information enabling at-risk
students to be successful in educational programs and opportunities. Additionally,
institutional agents play multiple roles in both the social and academic life of
12
students. Worthy and colleagues (2002) traced a group of resistant readers at the
elementary school level to discover factors that influenced the readers’ participation.
One concern of the study was to understand the effect of the tutors’ efforts and
interactions with children.
Findings of the study showed that as some tutors developed personal, or even
“parental,” connections with their students, that relationship became the most
promising influence to increase reading motivation. These tutors demonstrated a
level of involvement that extended into significant time searching for appropriate
reading materials and tailoring instruction to students’ needs and interests. What
they devoted to the project went beyond what the program designers expected. This
research would suggest that the tutors’ willingness to take personal responsibility for
their students’ progress was the most important factor influencing the success of the
reading project. So again, what enables low-status youth is greatly dependent on the
attitude and effort of the people in their lives who take on the role of “informal
mentor” and “institutional agent.” (Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003).
In addition to caring relationships, group norms enforce collective goals in
intervention programs. The collective goal of the program compels participants to
align individual effort with program objectives. In general, goals defining academic
expectations and pro-social behaviors, become the norm for students among their
shared beliefs. For example, the “I Have a Dream” program, with close relationships
to the program and providers, minority adolescents followed emerging norms and
shared beliefs. Students felt obligated to achieve goals, because peers as well as,
13
providers expected each participant to do so. Program norms included attending
classes regularly, earning acceptable grades, and following expected pathways.
Therefore, relationships with students in the program were both embedded within the
material resources of the program as well as supported by the close personal ties with
program staff.
In general, adolescents from low-income families face barriers to success due to
fewer social resources and educational opportunities. Social resources that middle-
class peers take for granted are often unavailable in poorer communities. In response,
student interventions are a means to counter the impact of deleterious environments.
Adolescents participating in such programs receive resources when they engage in
program activities and services. Also, the social networks available within the
programs provide opportunities to create constructive, positive associations for all
participants in the program activities. As relationships build between program staff
and peers, opportunities arise for key persons from middle-class environments to be
significant allies to participating adolescents. This is because caring adults are given
the means to influence students by providing needed assistance in education and
career opportunities.
Theoretical Frameworks and Theories of Social Capital
Social capital theory concentrates on individuals’ (or groups’) relationships with
other individuals (or groups). The concept of social capital has the potential to
transfer the actors’ relational capital to their expected returns (Lin, 2001; Stanton-
Salazar, 2004). The egocentric social network contains relationships underlying
14
mutual interactions. These relationships are described as having either robust (e.g.
with family members) or obscure (e.g. with a new friend) connections. Close
relationships involve family members and kinship networks. Obscure relationships
are usually delineated as more extended networks.
In addition, such networks have the potential to become intangible capital for
individuals. Through resourceful relationships, it is possible to transform certain key
forms of capital as a means to achieve purposeful acts. Sociologists define the capital
embedded in egocentric relationships as social capital. Social capital theory has been
efficacious in analyzing individual achievements. In particular, the framework has
been applied in education since pioneering sociologists noticed favorable
implications in explaining achievement gaps among students from different
backgrounds (Coleman, 1988).
The concept of social capital has been exported to the educational field, since it
has been an effective tool in determining how and why individuals benefit from
certain types of intervention projects. Researchers use the tool to analyze an
individual’s ability to transform the quality and quantity of their social networks into
key forms of capital. A study that illustrates the application of this analytical tool is
one conducted by Maeroff (1998), who focused on a successful local program in
New York, the El Puente Academy, where students are encouraged to develop
connections. Using the network-analytical framework, it was possible to determine
whether or not the effectiveness of the program was due to the enhancement of
15
participants’ social networks. The study enabled researchers to see, perhaps for the
first time, the complexities that underlie network-oriented behaviors.
More specifically, the social capital framework enables researchers to examine
the source of significant individuals involved in student interventions. Stanton-
Salazar (1997) proposed the importance of relationships among minority students
and identified some key persons who significantly influence student success in
school. Those key persons are described as individuals who are able to negotiate and
lead students to assess institutional resources. In his words, Stanton-Salazar (1997)
classified these key persons as “institutional agents.”
Institutional agents are defined as “those individuals who have the capacity and
commitment to transmit directly, or negotiate the transmission of, institutional
resources and opportunities.” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997, p 6) Institutional agents are
those who are able to assume the role-set that entails mobilizing resources on behalf
of others, such agents. Thus, they are assumed to have accumulated a stock of social
capital—access to high-status resources by way of key relations, with those who
control and distribute such resources. These agents are also in a position to provide
their charges with support in the context of authentically-caring relations from
accumulated resources they now possess.
Neighborhood Academic Initiative
Established in 1988, Neighborhood Academic Initiative (NAI) is a student
intervention program designed to help local youth at the University of Southern
California (USC). The primary purpose of the program is to increase participating
16
students’ educational attainment and improve motivation. The vision of NAI is to
increase participating students’ access to postsecondary education (i.e., college
enrollment) and to improve the high school graduation rate of low socioeconomic,
underrepresented students. Student participants primarily come from the poorer
neighborhoods surrounding the USC campus. The positive recognition that this
program has garnered comes not only from an increase in the number of college
bound students, but also from the positive commentary of research scholars who
focus on the area of intervention programs. Maeroff (1999) offered a very positive
assessment of this program stating that “the Neighborhood Academic Initiative …
developed a sense of connectionness among students to fortify and enhance their
academic achievement.” (p.24). Maeroff’s comments would suggest that the program
was able to accomplish many of its goals because it created a network of
interconnections among students and also, connections between students and the
program itself. For instance, former students of the program stated that they felt they
were very much part of the fabric and purpose of the program. These graduates of the
program pointed out that they were not just participants of the program, but also
lifelong friends of the program.
Indeed, NAI appears to be achieving its intended goal of helping neighboring
students at USC, by making a difference for these at-risk adolescents. Through NAI,
the students from the poor neighboring communities are not only encouraged to
apply to universities or colleges, but also to develop new perspectives for their lives.
17
With the full support and abundant resources from a committed university, NAI
has become widely regarded among educational intervention programs. Since USC is
the major provider of financial and educational resources for the program, NAI
maintains a close connection with USC. Meanwhile, participating students feel not
only closely tied with the program itself, but also with the university—a vital
component of the neighborhood. This is because bridged resources substantiate the
program’s potential to enforce its mission. Ultimately, participating students have the
opportunity to talk to faculty whose knowledgeable answers can provide inquisitive
students with an important resource. The result can be a dwindling gap between
future dreams and the reality of opportunity through college enrollment that students
can picture and grasp.
Purpose of the Study
Effective interventions can also be examined in terms of the influence they exert
over participating adolescents’ social connections. In other words, students in an
effective program will likely become closely tied to the program and other
participants. This study hypothesizes that adolescents’ efforts at improving their lives
most effectively align with the program’s vision when interactions between the
students and the program staff are closely connected. In addition, staff working in an
effective student intervention program often becomes the essential resource
committed to providing assistance to adolescents striving for academic success. Staff
plays the role of institutional agent mobilizing their own social capital as resources
for participating adolescents.
18
Given this feature of staff involvement in an intervention program, there is a
need to gain a better understanding of the specific role of program leaders. Although
the influence of leaders on students’ positive performance is readily acknowledged,
the complex dynamics of the role they play in the lives of these students have not
been clearly articulated (Maeroff, 1999; Stanton-Salazar, 2003). The presence of a
program leader does not automatically ensure the effective operation of a program,
since a key function of program directors is problem solver as a program encounters
obstacles. Program leaders must know how to effectively mobilize social capital to
solve problems.
In short, the major focus of this study will center on the multiple roles of
program leaders and on the various ways they mobilize resources from their own
networks for either the program as a whole and/or for individual participants. When a
student intervention is defined to provide assistance to students-in-need, the program
will serve as a vehicle distributing resources to mitigate the impact of limited
resources on families and communities. Program staff becomes an intermediary
providing direction and assistance to students with regard to valuable resources.
Consequently, that role of conduit is significant to participating students, since
resources flowing from staff to students will be essential, beneficial currents of
resources in an effective program.
19
Research Questions
This study will attempt to answer the following questions:
1. What are the basic structural characteristics of the resource networks of
program leaders (size, composition, diversity of ties)?
2. In what ways do program leaders mobilize social capital on behalf of
program participants?
3. What are the principal factors that might inhibit or promote program
leaders’ potential to fulfill their capacity to utilize social capital?
Importance of the Study
The research focus of this study is to establish a better understanding of the role
of program leaders as institutional agents. I specifically address the scope of the role
of program leaders as caring institutional agents and their ability to mobilize
resources on behalf of program participants. Maeroff (1999) points out that the
inadequacy of a program leader to effectively manage directly correlates to the
effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of a program. Baker (2000) emphasizes that social
capital is dynamic, requiring individuals to accumulate and mobilize for their own
good. When program leaders act as institutional agents, they mobilize their social
capital for the benefit of participating students. Therefore, it is important to conduct
research in an attempt to understand how program heads can mobilize their social
capital to benefit the program and all the participants in it. Unfortunately, as
researchers, we know very little about social capital networks of those who run youth
20
intervention programs. Therefore, this may be the first research project investigating
this issue.
The findings of this study will contribute to our appreciation of how blind we
have been to the importance of the social capital of teachers and youth workers. With
a clear articulation of the role of program leaders, we will know much more about
the influence of leaders’ social capital in terms of how it benefits participating
adolescents and the program as a whole. In addition, for student interventions and
educational programs to be effective, program leaders must be conscious of their role
in making programs effective through curricular decisions. An agenda in this regard
may mainly include knowledge provision and experience reproduction. The findings
of this study will draw attention to the general process of nurturing a program leader
must engage in. Thus, training processes for program leaders should include ways of
developing their social networks and ties. In other words, training programs should
sensitive to the importance of quantity and quality of trainees’ social networks.
Definitions
Program leader: This study operationally defines institutional agents as program
leaders who are able to bridge outside resources by mobilizing their social capital for
participating students, or who themselves possess resources they may provide for
youth/students with whom they work with. Program leaders are responsible with the
functioning praxis of the program. When he/she assumes the job as the head of a
student intervention or educational program, it is his/her responsibility to apply
strategies and solutions to make the program effective.
21
Student interventions. Student interventions in this study refer to programs that
provide activities for their participants for particular purposes. The interventions are
organized so as to change some aspect of human behavior and increase the
possibilities for the participants to succeed. In addition, student interventions are
viewed as a vehicle of empowerment for low-status youth and students.
22
Chapter Two
Literature Review
This chapter is organized as follows: the literature review begins with a current
explanation of social capital theory that articulates two different perspectives
defining the theory. The second section addresses the empowerment theory and its
applications in educational programs. This review narrows its focus to the roles of
institutional agents and its applications.
Social capital theory has become a promising framework of analysis over past
decades (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988; Dika & Singh, 2002; Lin, 2001; Maeroff,
1999; Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Portes (2000) noted “the concept of social capital is
arguably one of the most successful exports from sociology to other social sciences
and to public discourse” (p.1). Indeed, the concept of social capital has been
extended to education, economics, anthropology, business, and political science. It
provides an exclusive framework for analyzing and understanding how and why
multiple kinds of capital accumulate through the process of network development.
Two Perspectives of Social Capital
Since Bourdieu (1986) and Coleman (1988) have proposed different approaches
to define the concept of social capital, scholars have critiqued and analyzed these
concepts and potential applications. Two major perspectives can be identified
relative to social capital. Dika and Singh (2002) demonstrate distinctions among the
varying concepts of social capital. Their article categorizes scholars across two
camps: a) in terms of norms and, b) in terms of resources. One perspective views that
23
social capital as group assets can be shared when group norms are enforced
(Coleman, 1988; Putnam, 1993; Zhou & Bankston, 1996; Goddard, 2003). The other
perspective perceives social capital as resources embedded in individual
relationships. The benefit of resourceful relationships can favor individuals’ actions
(Lin, 2001; Stanton-Salazar, 2003; Van Der Gaag, Snijders, & Flap, 2004). The
following section entails two perspectives of scholars on social capital and their
applications in education.
Normative Perspective
The normative perspective emphasizes that using social capital as the lens of
analysis has to concentrate on those characteristics, such as social norms, rules, and
social trust (Kahne & Bailey, 1999; Portes, 1998; Putnam & Feldstein, 2003).
Coleman (1988) defines social capital by its function. The characteristics of a dense
group show are norms enforcement, shared beliefs, and trust, which make social
capital productive. These produce group assets, which members can then share (Dika
& Singh, 2002).
This perspective is rooted in Durkheim who focuses on social integration.
Durkheim proposed that the importance of an individual depends on his/her identity
within the group. Through network development and activity participation, the
individual and the group reassure their mutual identity by repeated interactions with
group members. The individual feels connected with other individuals and group.
Coleman (1988) borrows Durkheim’s social integration theory to identify the
characteristics of groups. Social norms, rules, and social trust produce group assets
24
for group members. In Coleman’s (1988) example of a Jewish community, a bag of
precious diamonds can be exchanged among wholesale merchants without any form
of insurance. If one merchant is found stealing one diamond out of the bag, he/she
will lose all the privileges of the group. When norms and rules are effectively
enforced within a group, trust will be engendered among all the members.
Putnam (1993) describes a declining American society wherein the citizens’
networks have become disconnected. The work of this political scientist presents
statistical evidence of documenting less political participation, church attendance,
less interests in clubs and unions, and less time spent with friends and family. The
author asserted that the social fabric of American society has declined because
citizens have joined less, trusted less, and voted less. Indeed, he believes
participation in formal and informal organizations help individuals construct dense
networks. Participation in organizations makes individuals more apt to benefit from
networks and contacts.
In a revealing publication, Putnam and Feldstein (2003) extend their focus from
civil participation to that of the concept of reciprocity. The authors present several
cases to illustrate their notion of reciprocity at the community level. The political
scientists argue that networks of community engagement foster intangible but strong
norms of reciprocity. According to the authors, reciprocity is specific. They contend
that while the return may not be substantial, return is nevertheless guaranteed by
mutual expectations and obligations among the alliances.
25
Portes (1998) also illustrated the enforcement of norms at a community level.
He states that in a safe community, senior citizens can take walks on the street
without fear of being exposed or being victimized by other dangers. It is a norm that
gangs and crime do not present in the community. Residents are active about
vigilant about crime. Similar beliefs of effective norm enforcement at the community
level were reported in a community with a large population of Vietnamese. Zhou and
Bankston (1996) examined the shared belief existing in the Vietnamese community
living in the US. They point out that “if a child flunks out or drops out of a school, or
if a boy falls into a gang or a girl becomes pregnant without getting married, he or
she brings shame not only to himself or herself but also to the family” (p. 207).
Therefore, norms are viewed as collective beliefs either for individuals or for a
community. Given the implied constraints of norms, expected behaviors are
performed and collective goals will be achieved.
Normative Perspectives in Education
One of the strengths of social capital theory lies in its ability to analyze the
processes of educational attainment and academic achievement. The norm, rules and
trust conform to individuals’ performance of group expectations. Horvat and Lewis
(2003) were interested in the socialization of African American students with regards
to academic success. In particular, the researchers looked at how African American
students who achieved academic success navigated between social interactions with
their African American peers, and the types of positive or negative attitudes they
experienced regarding their academic performance. The African American students
26
were accused of “acting White” because of their academic successes, which
overshadowed the less successful academic performances of their critical African
American peers. The research found that those students with high academic
performance developed strategies to manage these negative social interactions with
their critics. The students used camouflaging strategies to avoid the barrage of
“acting White” accusations. By doing so, the students were able to maintain
connections but avert potential sanctions from their unsupportive peer group.
Conversely, when the same high achievers interacted with supportive African
American peers, the students readily engaged in productive discourse regarding their
academic activities and aspirations. Therefore, camouflaging strategies helped these
students counter negative interactions with one peer group, while seeking affirmation
for their academic success from a different peer group. In short, they strategically
embraced the norms, but avoided sanctions.
Balatti and Falk (2002) reviewed 10 adult programs, which aimed to promote
the well-being of individuals and the community. Their findings reported that
individuals in the group under observation acted to change their behaviors in order to
conform to shared values after an initial consensus endorsement. The individuals
were required by their initial commitment and, sort of, compete with other
participants. In the work by Balatti and Falk (2002), participants in the programs
accumulated social capital and built up their social networks.
27
Drawbacks of the Normative Perspective
Although the normative perspective provides a strong framework for
understanding how individuals function coherently with groups and communities and
explains the benefits that follow, the perspective fails to consider the significance of
the structure of a society and the resources embedded within it. The significance of a
society stratified by social class, racial assignment, and gender, resides in the way
groups are positioned at different strata in the social structure. Groups at various
levels of influence and prestige have different degrees of access to highly valued
institutional resources.
In a stratified society, advantaged individuals tend to align closely to protect
their prestige, position, and resources in that society. Lin (2001) stated that the
valued capital recognized by the mainstream becomes scarce, since it is horded by a
few individuals with access to it. Influential individuals with advantageous social
positions tend to form particular interest groups with the individuals who also have
resources to offer. Thus disadvantaged individuals remain outside of these beneficial
circles because they have little opportunity to interact with such individuals or the
social resources they represent (Lin, 2001).
The normative perspective does not address how to empower low-status
individuals and groups. For those individuals of low status, enforced norms, rules,
and social trust do not necessarily guarantee upward mobility in social class. The
work by Stanton-Salazar (2001) demonstrated that low-status minority students who
live in severe poverty, likely experience daily life in communities where resources
28
are limited or even unavailable. These poor communities with very limited resources
can only provide the adolescent population with very little assistance to construct
their social networks that could provide fruitful access to social resources. This kind
of environment leads adolescents to develop social skills and strategies that focus on
combating the problems presented by a lack of resources, as best they can. Such
strategies will likely pose multiple risks affecting well-being. Moreover, the parents
of these adolescents are limited in their role as supporters of their children’s
academic success.
The findings of Stanton-Salazars’s (2001) quantitative survey suggest that the
minority students’ help-seeking behaviors are negatively associated with their
perceived supports from families. His interview data reveals that low-status parents
are unable to provide help for the adolescents due to parents’ cultural background
and language deficiencies with the English language. Moreover, these parents’
specific social networks likely include contacts with people of a similar cultural
background and social class. These social networks are as dense as middle class ones.
However, although the study clearly reveals that the parents have strong values and
convictions with regards to their children’s education and have great expectations for
their children’s future, the parents and their social networks are unable to generate
little more than limited social resources to help their children advance.
Resource-oriented Perspective
Dika and Singh (2002) proposed that the resource-oriented perspective of social
capital refers to access to the social resources. The constellation of resource group
29
access scholars is consistent with Bourdieu’s (1986) concept of social capital which
proposed that social capital depends on two elements: a) access to the resources
possessed by the contacts, and b) the volume of social networks and the amount of
crucial contacts that are possessed by institutional resources. In addition, Lin (2001)
defined social capital as “resources embedded in a social structure that are accessed
and/or mobilized in purposive actions” (p. 29). According to Lin (2001), social
capital is defined in terms of economic and institutional resources. Bourdieu and
Lin’s social capital concentrates on two elements. First, social capital is a social asset
embedded in relationships. Second, resources exist in a socially hierarchical structure.
It is important to recognize that our society is hierarchical and inequities exist in
many ways. Lin (2001) has suggested that most societies are hierarchical in term of
the distribution of valued resources and occupants. A hierarchical society can be
categorized by its distribution of valued resources and occupants across hierarchical
levels. Since valued resources and the positions embedded within these resources are
appreciated, individuals who possess the resources tend to protect their advantageous
positions and to exclude others from sharing with them. Eventually, society assumes
a pyramidal structure.
Burt’s (2000) concept of social capital is defined as the “structural holes” which
are capable of bridging resources between groups. The author has proposed that
within dense networks, there are relative absences of ties. He has labeled these
absences as “structure holes” and noted that these structural holes can advance
individual mobility. However, Burt’s concept of bridging groups together overlooks
30
the structure of a society. In fact, most societies are hierarchical and pyramid shaped
by class and resource holders. The upper class tends to closely connect with
individuals of that class. Doing so protects the collective valuable resources they
possess. Often, bridging happens only between groups in the same class.
Strong ties and weak ties refer to the quality of relationships (Granovetter,
1983). The quality of relationships with strong ties is shown as a densely knit
structural clump or network. Strong ties, such as close friends and family members,
are usually the sources of emotional and social supports. Weak ties refer to
individuals who are acquaintances. Granovetter (1983) has suggested that the
strength of weak ties is in bridging information across groups. Employment and
educational opportunities, as well as certain important information are more likely to
spread through the ego’s weak ties. Weak ties are different from strong ties in that
dormant ties often play a part in extending the individuals’ densely knit clump of
social structures. On the other hand, active ties tend to maintain the closure of social
relationships.
The concept of dormant ties has been applied to the process of minority
students’ socialization. Stanton-Salazar (2004) has argued that by building dormant
ties, minority students could benefit from a wider and more resourceful middle-class
network. He states that some working-class parents executed connections with
upper-class friends by becoming affiliated with organizations, such as church and
Catholic schools. The parents’ dormant ties may not provide immediate support
31
emotionally or socially. Yet, friends in various organizations could offer academic
information and career opportunities for working-class students.
Resource-oriented Perspectives in Education
Indeed, social capital theory from a resource-oriented perspective is powerful in
understanding why students perform differently in different schools. Gaps in
achievement and school behavior are significantly associated with an individual’s
contacts whether they possess resources or not.
Horvat (2003) found that parents of different classes used different approaches
to manage school situations. She concluded that middle-class parents were more
aware of resources embedded in social structures than were low-status parents. The
study found that middle-class parents tended to seek more influential contacts within
the school system to assist them in dealing with school situations. Unlike middle-
class parents who are actively engaged with key personnel at an institution, working-
class parents are apt to manage situations that arise in school on an individual, rather
than institutional level. Middle- and upper-class parents understand the system and
are more knowledgeable in terms of accessing resources. The pathway to obtain
resources and the mechanisms that make the institution function seem more
accessible to advantaged classes. In addition, those who possess influential resources
in the system are mostly peers, who are occupants of the middle- and upper-classes.
Emmerik (2006) has explored the effect of gender differences in his application
of social capital theory in his investigation of faculty members. The findings of his
study noted that men are better able to both create emotional intensity in ties and
32
manipulate collective resources to create social capital of their own. Consequently,
findings from the study justify concerns that gender does mediate the accumulation
of social capital. However, the study failed to address the mechanisms of how and
why gender differences became a variable within the inequities of social capital. Yet,
a similar study by Lee (2003) supports Emmerik’s findings.
Lee argued that women encountered more barriers when earning tenured
professorships, because of their general exclusion from the dominant male group and
the subsequent difficulty in constructing social networks within faculty groups.
Therefore, since women are expected to experience more barriers during the process
of gaining tenure, the consequences have been apparent in the disparity of female-to-
male faculty members in higher education. There are fewer tenured female faculty
members, but more part-time female instructors overall than their male peers (Curtis,
2005).
As I have previously mentioned, Lin (2001) defines social capital as resources
embedded in social relations and structures. These resources can be mobilized when
an individual intends to utilize them in a purposive action. Lin’s notion of social
capital contains three aspects:
1) Resources embedded in a social structure; the structural (embeddedness)
2) Accessibility to such social resources by individuals; opportunity
(accessibility)
3) Use or mobilization of such social resources by individuals in purposive
actions; (action-oriented (use) aspects.
33
The notion of social capital has been applied to minority students’ educational
processes. Stanton-Salazar (1995) has suggested that working-class students of color
found it more difficult to accrue school resources than their middle-class peers.
Resources embedded in the social networks of working-class minorities are often
limited or even unavailable, because the working student experience can be
hampered by inaccessibility to social resources through parents and through their
own social networks. Therefore, Stanton-Salazar (1997) highlight the importance of
key school personnel available to increase the likelihood of minority students’
success in school. For these low-status students of color, the effective avenue for
such students to gain resources is to include resourceful personnel in their social
networks.
Drawbacks of the Resource-oriented Perspective
One major concern of the resource-oriented perspective is to lead readers to
available resources embedded in social structure. The concern encourages
disadvantaged populations to advance to a higher social status. Through an
investment in social relationships, disadvantaged individuals may actually be able to
mobilize social capital to move to a higher social status (Lin, 2001).
This perspective is a powerful argument against social reproduction and societal
inequities. However, it does not explain the reasons why group members are socially
tied to a specific group and socially bound by that group (Dika & Singh, 2002).
Bourdieu (1986) has suggested that social capital is the tool that can be used to defy
the dominant culture. Likewise, Lin (2001) has proposed that an individual’s social
34
capital is one mediating factor in determining the social status that an individual
attains. The resource-oriented perspective emphasizes the powerful influence that
social capital wields and suggests that once mobilized, it is the key factor in
determining an individual’s potential for social change.
Ironically, the perspective may be blind in knowing the social impact of a group.
Dika and Singh (2002) have pointed out that the resource-oriented perspective does
not address the issue of social control. Why do group members connect socially to a
group and follow similar beliefs? Why do members choose to stay within a group in
which members can find few social resources? Instead, the normative perspective
explicitly addresses the critical element of social control—social sanctions. For
instance, in Coleman’s (1988) account of New York Jewish diamond merchants, if
one tries to cheat, he/she will be expelled from the Jewish community. This
articulation should provide solid evidence for the formation of dense groups, such as
youth gangs, school clubs. Instead, the resource-oriented perspective does not
provide much theoretical explanation about the dynamic of the dense groups.
All in all, articulation of the differential perspective of social capital gives us the
strengths and weaknesses of the two camps. The normative perspective is
particularly strong in addressing the production of social capital. Individuals obtain
their identities recognized by other individuals in the group by following the norms,
rules established by the group, and by the trust invested in that group. These
characteristics of the group make social capital productive, which benefits
individuals by transferring one type of capital into other key forms of capital, such as
35
economic capital or human capital. The normative perspective, however, has less
potential to empower individuals from lower status groups. For those individuals
with little or no access to social resources, the normative perspective does not
provide solutions for them in status attainment. Contrary to the normative
perspective, the resource-oriented perspective considers the significant role of social
resources embedded in the social structure itself. Advantaged individuals preserve
resources by forming dense groups in which members of the group share information,
money, authority, and access to social resources. In order to accumulate social capital,
low-status individuals have to expand their social network and include contacts
embedded in social resources. Therefore, social capital will be bridged and mobilized
when individuals have purposive actions.
Empowering Students-in-Need
One of the goals of this chapter is to make a connection between the two
theoretical frameworks as a lens that can be utilized in understanding the mechanism
of an effective student intervention. More clearly, this study hypothesizes that low-
status students will be empowered from the process of their network development
embedded in student interventions. The process would steer individuals to engage
social resources and social supports through assistance from new contacts of their
social networks.
Empowerment is about enabling individuals to develop capacities and strengths
as well as with helping individuals engage in resources that will alleviate the impacts
from a deleterious environment (Ambrosino, Hefferman, Shuttlesworth, &
36
Ambrosino, 2005). There are two strategies to empower low status students: social
psychological strategies and sociological strategies. Social psychological strategies
put forth efforts to enhance students’ intentions to counter the negative impacts. This
strategy hypothesizes that individuals with high resiliency are more likely to recover
from the negative influences of unhealthy environment (Zimmerman, Ramirez-Valles,
Zapert, & Maton, 2000). This hypothesis leads to efforts to identify those factors that
are in association with individuals’ resilience. However, this strategy is limited by its
focus on individuals’ internalization and overlooks the influence of interpersonal
interaction and social exchange.
The sociological approach is supported by the premise that individuals must
engage with institutional resources. Ambrosino and colleagues (2003) define the role
of social worker as a person whose responsibility it is to bridge individuals with
existing services. Social workers need to work as brokers who align clients with
perspective “buyers” that may be useful to them. This strategy stands on the
viewpoint that individuals in need will be empowered when they engage with
resources. With the provision of resources, individuals can be empowered to resist
the impact of deleterious environments.
A critical element of empowerment resides in the process of participation. For
instance, Speer and his colleagues (2001) proposed that individuals benefit from the
positive effects of social cohesion. Their study defined social cohesion as
participation with trust, connectedness, and civic engagement. The process of social
cohesion is to move individuals from socially segregated phrases to active
37
participation in the mainstream of society. The study by Speer and colleagues (2001)
shows that those community members who were perceived to be disconnected from
the community were also perceived as significantly different from other groups in the
community. The authors suggest that participatory experience within the community
may be a critical factor in understanding the mechanism of empowerment.
Indeed, after reviewing salient studies of enhancement programs, the literature
review reveals that adolescents in need can be empowered by caring relationships
with institutional agents. Relationships with institutional agents become buffers in
their plight of impoverished segregated adolescents (Maeroff, 1999; Stanton-Salazar,
2001). The buffering mechanism includes emotional support and resources from
school personnel. Emotional attachment strengthens the adolescents’ abilities to cope
with incidents inside and outside the school. Institutional resources are transformed
into key forms of capital for adolescents in need, thus helping them to progresses in
their schooling.
Croninger and Lee (2001) conducted quantitative research to examine whether
normative social capital is inversely related to the high school dropout rate. The
authors were interested in finding out whether social capital contributes to a
reduction in the dropout rate of high school students. The study operationally defined
“social capital” as student-teacher relations and students’ trust in their teachers. The
study drew data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study to examine the
influence of perceived social capital. Their findings suggested that those students
who are at-risk socially and academically were more likely to drop out than their
38
peers not categorized as at-risk. However, those at-risk students can possibly reverse
negative influences by constituting institutional relationships with their teachers. If
there is a high level of trust in their teachers and the underlying teacher-student
relationships, the possibility of dropping out is reduced considerably. In particular,
the study reported that rate of dropping out by low-status students of color often
decreased because of these relationships.
Muller (2001) explored the influence of caring relationships between teachers
and students with regard to math achievement. The research analyzed the teachers’
and students’ perceptions of their relationships and the effects of the perceptions on
students’ math progress. The findings suggested that those at-risk students who
perceived their teachers’ care benefited from the accumulated caring relationships.
The author surmised that the students were particularly vulnerable to their teachers’
opinions if their math achievement was barely at the passing level. In such
circumstances, encouragement from their teachers helped make a difference with
regard to their future in school.
We need to be careful with the implication of caring relationship between
educators and students. Muller’s (2001) finding presented a picture that
disadvantaged students are likely to benefit from caring relationships. However,
Stanton-Salazar (2001) called for an alert that the supportive relationship would not
necessarily guarantee positive behaviors. The author agreed with the positive effects
of caring relationships, forming buffers for low-status students of color. The
empirical data of his study did not support similar findings—that caring relationships
39
authentically produced help-seeking behaviors. Only when the educators commit and
introduce resources to the students-in-need, do the supportive relationships have the
potential to transform into positive buffers for students-in-need. In other words,
regular and positive interactions with institutional agents allow students to develop a
fondness for and a psychological attachment to these school agents. This
psychological attachment and emotional support becomes a critical feature in student
resilience and academic motivation. However, only with the presence of resources
introduced to students-in-need, can students benefit from supportive relationships to
achieve academic success.
The Vehicle of Resources for Students-in-Need
In my own research I have noticed that student interventions have produced a
promising number of high achievers. These participating students are better able to
advance their educational objectives and to better achieve academically (Kahne &
Bailey, 1999; Maeroff, 1999). Maeroff (1999) states that efforts to create social
capital for schoolchildren in-need have to do with building a community. The
community is resourceful, when children in-need receive needed direct support and
guidance. Therefore, student interventions are the vehicle through which to deliver
necessary resources to build community for low-status students.
Student interventions are designed for disadvantaged students to mitigate the
impact of absent resources. These programs serve as vehicles to empower students in
many ways. Studies have reported that these student interventions have provided
mentoring and academic assistance (Kahne & Bailey, 1999; Maeroff, 1999, Worthy
40
et al, 2002). Program services are generally intended to close the gap between
working-class and upper middle-class students whose accessibility to resources is
their distinguishing feature. After-school tutoring, for instance, provides direct
academic assistance to low-status students who have limited opportunities to obtain
effective learning skills.
Caring relationships embedded in student interventions secure participating
students from alienation. Muller (2001) investigated both students’ and teachers’
perceptions of their relationships. The study hypothesized that student achievement
in mathematics could be correlated with their perception of the teacher-student
relationship. The author suggested that students at-risks of dropping out of high
school were particularly vulnerable to their teachers’ opinions and feedbacks. In
other words, the students’ perceptions toward teachers play a critical role in their
academic success. In Muller’s study, caring teachers did orchestrate a classroom
environment where achievement among at-risk students was advocated through
successful completion of class work and homework. The caring relationships create
trust between teachers and students. Given the safety blanket of caring relationships,
students are more willing to engage in learning skills. However, Muller (2001) did
not address the effect of opinions and feedback from caring teachers outside the
context of authentic empowering and trust-filled relationships. Empowering students,
in some scenarios, means having to provide constructive criticism of the students’
performance along with the personal commitment to help them improve. The depth
of this kind of relationship is truly different from relationships shaped by simple
41
daily greetings between teachers and students. Additionally, in his study, Muller was
unclear as to how a caring teacher-student relationship could be promoted. If caring
relationships have the potential to make a difference for at-risk students, then the
opportunity to create this scenario should be increased for students-in-need.
Maeroff (1999) has also addressed the importance of caring relationships in her
book where she reviews the efficacy of student interventions. Caring relationships
with program staff in successful cases will allow the process of modeling to develop
in the program. Most important is that participating students find a resourceful
community with which to connect. This is another designed community connecting
students, schools, neighboring communities, and parents where learning is
accomplished together (Maeroff, 1999).
Kahne and Bailey (1999) have explored how effective programs work and why
they perform better than other programs, which are considered less successful. They
studied the I Have a Dream (IHAD) program in Chicago by conducting two
successful subprograms. Through the lens of social capital, the authors found that
effective programs must be able to encourage the development of long-term
supportive relationships between participating students and program staff. These
long-term relationships secure the provision of emotional support and institutional
resources, such as crisis assistance and academic consulting. The relationships are
avenues for driving motivation and reinforcing prosocial norms of behavior and
academic commitment. In addition, they suggest that effective intervention depends
on two themes. One is the strong trusted relationship. The other is mutual
42
commitment and careful maintenance. Close relationships among program providers
(i.e., directors, staff, and tutors) and participating students support trust and
understanding.
Incorrectly, programs have often assumed that basic relationships could develop
among participants and program providers after they have gone through several
program activities. The assumption has been that friendships would be initiated
automatically among participating students. However, most of the time, the
outcomes have not been consistent with these assumptions. Resulting relationships,
either among participating students or between students and program providers, did
not necessarily appear to correlate with the institution’s objectives.
Kahne and Bailey’s study (1999) identified two major influences that
contributed to program failure: a) high staff turnover during the data collection
periods, and b) insufficient staff. With program staff, for example, who only serve in
the program for a short time, there is not enough time for participants to develop
close relationships strong enough to make promised commitments to each other. In
addition, a limited staff often becomes exhausted due to job overload. Therefore, an
overloaded staff can lack the energy to give proper care to low-status, students-in-
need.
Maeroff (1999) examined the effects of various programs on participating
students across the country. His findings described four senses critical to effective
projects: a sense of connectedness, a sense of well-being, a sense of academic
initiative, and a sense of knowing. The work by Maeroff explains why and how
43
programs across the country work effectively according to his four-sense theme. First,
his study concluded that participating students in effective programs made significant
connections to program staff and the institutions. For example, the El Puente
Academic program exemplifies how an intervention helps students make connections
with the program. Such connections strengthen them in direct and indirect ways.
Connections to program personnel and to the institutions provide guidance and
resources. Moreover, close relationships create an avenue for the students to obtain
program staff’s social capital, which is mobilized to meet participating students’
academic or emotional needs. Connections to the institution benefit students with
direct assistance, such as financial support and tutoring services. Second, student
interventions also play a role in providing emotional and health support by offering
the potential for programs to directly put students in contact with social welfare
services and resources. The programs ensure that these participating students are
under health care both physically and psychologically. Third, a sense of academic
initiative is there to facilitate that the students learn “how to.” The knowledge of
“how-to” is imparted by interventions with role models and mentors. At last, the
sense of knowing is to enhance the other three senses because it involves full
coverage of the students’ academic dimensions and social knowledge. The sense of
knowing is an essential knowledge that connects the schooling with future objectives.
For instance, youths in the I Have a Dream Program in Chelsea-Elliott are required
to cooperate with adults in the house cleaning, but they also need to schedule time to
complete homework in this after-class program. In other words, although academic
44
success is a significant goal for most programs, to be able to transfer youths’
knowledge to real life is also important for these youths in need.
Ultimately, there is a need to be cautious of the effectiveness of student
interventions. Hernandez (1995) has called attention to the fact that student
interventions need to be more alert to every aspect of their on-going practice. The
author investigated the effects of role models adopted in a mother-daughter program.
His findings suggested that the “one-shot” presentation by so-called “role models” is
only effective for a few participating students who are already highly motivated. For
most of the students, they believe the role model’s success was beyond their reach.
Although the conclusion of the study is limited because of its relatively small
samples, the study provides a caution to student interventions when they intend to
use role models to encourage participating students. Thus, if student interventions
intend to empower students-in-need, they need to be more cautious of program
practices, and carefully determine which practices are meaningful and beneficial to
students.
In summary, I view empowerment as a process rather than merely a result.
Through the process of network development, individuals build social relationships
with resources embedded in contacts. Specifically, students in intervention programs
constitute the social relationships with program staff and peers. The dense
connections underlying these caring relationships get the students closely engaged
with institutional resources of the programs. In other words, the process of network
development encourages the participating students to be involved with program
45
activities and services. Through their participation in the program services, the
institutional resources of the program enable the students to counter the deleterious
effects of their past environment.
Institutional Agents
It is important to give our attention to the positions serving a significant role in
the students’ well-being. As discussed above, school teachers and program staff play
important roles in promoting student academic success, as well as encouraging them
psychologically. For low-status adolescents, schoolteachers and staff may not always
function as helpful resources. This does not mean that the educational system leaves
these low-status students unattended. The truth is that students from disadvantaged
socioeconomic backgrounds may have significant barriers that hinder them from
fully accepting the assistance offered to them. Stanton-Salazar (1995; 1997)
addressed the inequities in distribution of institutional resources both embedded in
school and in society. In particular, his studies focused on minority students’
socialization in school (Stanton-Salazar & Dornbusch, 1995, Stanton-Salazar, 1997,
Stanton-Salazar, 2004). He has suggested that due to cultural barriers and societal
inequities, accessibility to institutional resources for low-status minority students is
problematic. His model suggests that low-status students of color need to construct
instrumental relationships with those individuals, namely, school personnel who have
access to school resources and leaders in church and other organizations within the
local community to act as informal mentors for low-status students.
46
Stanton-Salazar (1997) defines institutional agents as those individuals who
have the capacity and commitment to transmit directly, or negotiate the transmission
of institutional resources and opportunities” (p. 6). In other words, institutional
agents are those caring individuals who are able and willing to lead students-in-need
to institutional resources. Additionally, institutional agents should be defined by their
functions. Those caring adults can be seen as institutional agents when they are
acting to provide access to institutional resources. Hence, institutional agents may
include school personnel, counselors, social workers, community leaders, and
middle-class family members (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
When school resources become unavailable or access becomes severely limited
to these low-status minority students, their disadvantaged status easily transforms
into low performance as measured by many academic indexes in terms of years of
schooling, standardized tests, college admission, and so on (Ream, 2005). Stanton-
Salazar (1997) has suggested that empowering students depends on the instrumental
relationships with key persons who are capable of, and committed to, negotiating
access to educational opportunities. In his model (Stanton-Salazar, 1997), he
proposed two avenues to empower minority students of low status: “decoding the
system” and “join the power.” First, the school system constitutes mainstream culture
as embedded in both the curriculum and the school structure. The very barriers that
hinder culturally diverse low-status students from understanding mainstream culture,
are also the barriers embedded in the curriculum and the school on a systemic level.
These barriers keep students from achieving success in school. Therefore, the
47
primary goal of positive student achievement begins with helping them make sense
of the school system. Integrating their own cultures with the mainstream culture
enables students to develop social cohesion, in which the process encourages
students to put more effort into their school performance and achievement (Speer et
al., 2001).
In addition, those caring characteristics are to be found in the key persons who
will help the students merge with the mainstream system in place at school (Stanton-
Salazar, 1997). The caring characters are the key persons who have access to
institutional resources for students of low status. Establishing instrumental
relationships with these key persons is important because the relationships will
enable the students to gain access to key forms of “institutional support.” For low-
status adolescents of color, the ability to overcome the impact of the cultural barriers
they have experienced, allows them to develop through supportive ties with
institutional agents within the community and family (Stanton-Salazar, 2001).
Stanton-Salazar’s (2001) quantitative and qualitative data has reflected the good
nature of school staff, such as teachers and counselors, on behalf of low-status
minority students (Stanton-Salazar, 2001). Helping adolescents from impoverished
communities not only depends on their talent and determination, it also has to
involve the caring persons who will mobilize their social capital to bring the needed
resources to these adolescents. The significance of an adolescents’ changes come
from the quality and quantity of the connections with caring institutional agents and
informal mentors in communities. Stanton-Salazar (2003) conducted his research
48
utilizing mixed methodologies to explore how adolescents of Mexican origin, seek
help in finding and connecting to social networks. His study found that in such an
endeavor, individual access provides more substantial support than group access.
Those informal mentors and role models, who have overcome similar environments
as their low-status students, play a meaningful role in the empowerment of these
low-income, immigrant adolescents.
Maeroff (1999) has stated that student interventions create social capital for
participating students, because the program extends student networks to provide
wider opportunities to make contacts. The strength of contacts enables students to
transform social networks into key forms of capital. It is like a ladder constructed to
enter the upper levels of a warehouse. Also, bridging outside sources allows these
working-class adolescents to ascend from poverty.
The concept of bonding and bridging social capital was Putnam’s (1993) focus
in his study on social capital. The result of bridging members between groups can
often be found in the activities of organizations and also the political activities they
engage in (Putnam, 1993). The exchange of information and opportunities provide
better chances for individuals to achieve their career objectives or simple self-
improvement. Of course, resources embedded within the group might not be
applicable to dealing with every member’s needs. Through members’ contacts
outside the group, other individuals are invited. More resources are bridged for
individuals to realize purposive actions.
49
There is a need to clarify the roles of institutional agents. Since these key
persons lead the low-status students to a metaphorical warehouse of resources, their
identities assume many different forms for the students such as teachers, counselors,
staff, social workers, church leaders, peers, and the like (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Stanton-Salazar defines those caring characteristics accessible to social resources as
institutional agents. However, the author’s definition seems a static approach to
delineate those characteristics that are able to provide institutional resources for the
students-in-need. However, when those characteristics are not helpful, the definition
of institutional agent does not apply. Although they are assigned to positions
designed to be helpful to students, they do no necessarily act as institutional agents.
Therefore, we should further embrace the definition of institutional agents from a
dynamic approach. Only individuals, who commit to transmitting authentic forms of
social capital and are acting to materially help students-in-need, can be recognized as
institutional agents.
Maeroff (1999) points out a problem that contributes to the failure of student
interventions. The author implies that the instability of program leaders directly leads
to the quality of performance of student interventions or programs. He found that
many programs are unsuccessful due to the inactive role of program leaders. In other
words, when program leaders are not fulfilling determined roles within an
intervention program, the lack of leadership can damage services provided by the
programs. Program leaders are to guarantee the provision of services. The role of
program leaders is more than administrative and extends beyond solely monitoring
50
program performance. One of their roles is to activate existing resources both within
and outside the program. Baker (2000) has articulated that business leaders not only
recognize the importance of accumulating social capital, the critical part of the
leaders’ job is to mobilize that social capital. In this sense, program leaders are the
same as business leaders. When program heads assume the role to lead the program,
they are expected to establish social networks, which may potentially benefit the
program in multiple ways.
Limitations of Social Capital
Even though social capital has been recognized as the most promising export of
contemporary sociology (Dika & Singh, 2002), there are debates on the concept and
its applications. First, social capital is not a new concept emerging in the field of
sociology. The concept of social relationships was rooted in theorists who
emphasized the importance of significant relationships within an egocentric network.
Bourdieu, Coleman, Lin and other scholars have synthesized sub-concepts within
such relational dynamics. These concepts are not new concepts, either, for these
sociologists. Some critics have stated that the recent hoopla about social capital can
also described as “old wine in new bottles.”
Second, it is extremely difficult to measure the effectiveness of social capital.
Unlike other forms of capital (e.g., economic and human capital), social capital is
less tangible and consequently difficult to quantify. Both the normative and resource-
oriented perspectives of social capital are criticized by their ineffective measures. If
the norms and sanctions, mutual reciprocity, and informational channels can be
51
quantified, the concept of social capital has to be defined with some common
indicators that can be measured. However, critics have been addressed by Croninger
and Lee (2001). The authors point out the limitations of applying social capital
theory to examine the area of educational attainment. The study complained about
the conceptual ambiguity of social capital. The ambiguity does not allow the
operational definition of the study to sufficiently capture the full explanatory
potential of social capital.
Nevertheless, the debate over the indexes of social capital continues among
scholars. If the observable index of social capital is about the quantity and quality of
egocentric networks, how do we measure them by defining social relationships? On
the one hand, if the level of norms and mutual reciprocity are the core values of
social capital, how does the social capital transform into a language that scholars can
communicate to the public? However, this debate would be compromised with the
development of instrumentation to measure the social capital theory. The social
capital theory has a relatively short history; so, it is anticipated that the development
of instrumentation to analyze the application of the theory is expected to be
profitable for publishers in the near future. Accordingly, with the development of
measurement instruments, the conceptual ambiguity of social capital would be
clarified.
In conclusion, this chapter was a review of previous studies on the social capital
theory within several domains.
52
First, this literature review began by articulating a distinction between different
theoretical perspectives of social capital. This articulation was designed to enable
readers to understand the foci of two differential perspectives of social capital theory,
their strengths and weakness, and their applications in education. Followed by the
distinction of differential theoretical perspectives of social capital, I borrow the idea
of empowerment theory as a lens to review the studies that investigated low-status
student experience in school and educational programs. Those studies analyzed
participating students’ socialization in student interventions. Studies indicate how
and in what ways student interventions can be utilized as vehicles to impact the lives
of participating students by providing them access to institutional resources. In other
words, those studies reviewed in the chapter show that participating students are
empowered through a network development in which key persons who have access
to social resources can be included within intervention programs. The network
development within the intervention programs steers those participating students to
engage in resources by including the resourceful key persons.
Second, I reviewed studies that call attention to the persons who are key to
enabling the lives of low-status students. The instrumental relationships with the
institutional agents are critical to empowering students-in-need. And last, after
reviewing these studies, I have identified a gap in the field, namely that these studies
have not made the effort to understand the critical role of the program leader.
53
Chapter Three
Methodology
This chapter provides a detailed description of the methodology adopted by this
study. It includes the rationale for the methodology as well as a qualitative inquiry to
answer the research questions. I then present a description of the student intervention,
which includes an introduction to the program itself and its key staff. In this section,
demographic information of the program is presented. Finally, this chapter will
describe the multiple instruments employed by this study, the process of data
collection, and the data analysis.
As discussed in Chapter One, the purpose of this study is to obtain a better
understanding of the roles of program leaders, particularly when we examine them in
the role of institutional agents. When the program leaders assume the role-set of
institutional agents, they mobilize personal sources of social capital to help
participating students in the student intervention better perform in school and/or deal
with personal crises. In other words, program leaders bridge outside resources, make
their own accumulated resources accessible and provide their students with this
support in the context of authentically-caring relations.
In particular, the collected data answered the following research questions:
1. What are the basic structural characteristics of the resource networks of
program leaders (size, composition, diversity of ties)?
2. In what ways do program leaders mobilize social capital on behalf of
program participants?
54
3. What are the principal factors that might inhibit or motivate program
leaders to realize their capacity to utilize social capital?
Rationale and Methodology
Determining the methodological choice of a given study is dependent on
researchers’ beliefs and research interests. Merriam (1998) argues that the distinction
between quantitative and qualitative inquiries has to do with some fundamental
attitudes: what does a researcher believe about the nature of reality, about knowledge,
about the production of knowledge? Indeed, researchers with different
methodological perspectives hold varying beliefs. Researchers who employ
quantitative inquiry in education believe that reality is stable, observable, and
measurable (Patton, 2002; Merriam, 1998). Quantitative researchers hold firm beliefs
that education is considered to be the object, phenomenon, or delivery system that is
studied. In addition, knowledge is established through testing scientific and
experimental research. This belief led them to employ standardized surveys to collect
the necessary data and develop standardized questionnaires to conduct a large
number of research samples. The data collected is used to test the preset hypotheses
or models established by researchers. This perspective is deductive and mainly deals
with numbers and hypotheses. The advantages of a quantitative inquiry primarily
have to do with economic feasibility both in terms of time and money.
However, quantitative inquiry is not holistic with regards to knowledge
constitution. The inquiry constructs knowledge through testing the relationships
among variables. The findings of a quantitative inquiry could be limited by its
55
presumed hypothesis. In addition, the inquiry does not recognize the truth that
education is a meaningful process of lived experience. On the contrary, qualitative
inquiry holds a viewpoint that reality is multiple rather than stable. Understanding
the meaningful process of an individual’s experience allows social scientists to
constitute appropriate knowledge in their field. The techniques that qualitative
researchers usually employ to collect their data are 1) in-depth, open-ended
interviews; 2) direct observation; and 3) written documentation.
Qualitative inquiry requires the particular study to collect data with depth and
detail (Patton, 2002). It increases the depth of understanding of the cases and
situations. However, the inquiry pays for this detailed information by having to draw
from a small number of cases. The disadvantages of this method of inquiry include
its material costs and less capability to generalize findings.
This specific study employed a mixed method, comprised of a large set of
ethnographic interviews as well as quantitative measurements. The purpose of this
research was to seek a better understanding of the role of the program leader as
potential institutional agent in student intervention programs. The data collected was
expected to be in-depth and should be able to inform our understanding of program
leaders as institutional agents. A set of interviews and multiple quantitative surveys
were administered. Information drawn from these interviews was analyzed in
conjunction with the data collected by quantitative measures.
Merriam (1998) suggests that ethnography is one form of qualitative research to
study human society and culture. Ethnography is employed by anthropologists to
56
understand human culture. Culture refers to the beliefs, values, and attitudes that
structure the behavior patterns of a specific group of people (Patton, 2002). Quantz
(1992) argues:
Each society constructs a range of different visions given their particular
cultural [dynamics.] The ethnographer enters the research project with the
distinct intent to discover what that particular vision is. When located, the
job of the ethnographer is to describe that vision as carefully as possible to
give outsiders an insiders’ view. (p. 467)
Quantz (1992) proposes a critical ethnography that indicates an empirical
project related to critical discourse. It is a new ethnographical approach in which a
research implements field methods that allow the researcher to re-present the
“culture,” the “consciousness,” or the “live experiences.” Therefore, critical
ethnographical researchers enter the organization with preparation. In other words,
researchers know something about the subgroups’ cultures before they enter the field.
Furthermore, Stanton-Salazar and Spina (2003) employ critical ethnographic
methods from a viewpoint that it “aims to understand, analyze…[and question to]
affect the sociopolitical and economic realities that shape our lives” (p.237). The
hypothesis that ethnographical researchers assume is that when people experience
their realities, they do not necessarily apply their consciousness. With the theoretical
framework and analytical lens, researchers can discover realities that even people
they studied were not aware of.
Since the nature of ethnography to study human culture, the form of qualitative
research is in line with this study’s purpose to understand an organizational culture
57
and participants’ interactions. Thus, I implemented an ethnographical approach with
regard to the data collection and the data analysis that follows.
Sample and Population
Patton (2002) states, “Cases for qualitative inquiry are selected because they are
information rich and illuminative. That is, they offer useful manifestations of the
phenomenon of interest; sampling, then, is aimed at insight about the phenomenon,
not empirical generalization from a sample to a population” (p. 40). Qualitative
inquiry determines its samples by the criteria of whether the samples are informative.
Therefore, the sampling strategy of a qualitative inquiry is purposive selection.
Samples of this study included the NAI program director, and two program staff
members. The program director and staff have worked for years in the NAI program.
Table 1 illustrates the personal data of three NAI program leaders, which include age,
ethnicity background, education, and so on.
Kelly, the program director, was born in a middle-class family and
neighborhood. She was an alumna of USC and taught in Los Angeles Unified School
District. Kelly was a well-connected person, having participated in multiple
professional associations that aimed to help at-risk students get admitted to a college
or university. At the time of interview, she was the chairperson of two associations.
Katherine, the program specialist, had dedicated herself to USC for over two
decades. Her senior experience in the NAI program facilitated her expertise as an
academic consultant. She was also experienced in student career development at both
the high school and college levels due to her previous jobs in student career
58
development. Katherine was in charge of tracking student academic performance and
communications with local school districts.
Unlike Kelly and Katherine, Barbara was born in Mexico and received her
education in California. Katherine’s immigrant background and bilingual facility
reinforced her ability to communicate with participants and their families with
similar immigrant backgrounds. Katherine had a warm personality that made it easy
for program participants to approach her.
Table 1: Summary of Interviewee Characteristics
Age Gender Ethnicity
Background
Length of
Working in
NAI
Education
Background
Kelly
(Program Director)
46 Female African American
5 years Master
Katherine
(Program Specialist)
52 Female African American
7 years Bachelor
Barbara
(Program Staff)
41 Female Latino American 5 years High
School
Diploma
This study examined a promising student intervention, Neighborhood Academic
Initiative (NAI). NAI has been described by Maeroff (1999) as an effective program.
The work by Maeroff states that the NAI program has significantly promoted its
participating students’ achievement by helping mobilize their social capital.
The University of Southern California (USC) established NAI in 1988 with the
purpose of helping the local neighborhood schoolchildren get into college or
university. USC, located in downtown Los Angeles, started to integrate itself into the
59
community surrounding the USC campus after the 1992 race riots in Los Angeles.
One of its efforts was to establish a university community, which was to include the
university, neighboring communities, and schools. NAI became the program that
mainly provided multiple resources for schoolchildren from middle school to high
school level. Those resources were academic assistance and financial support. NAI
was designed to prepare participating students for entrance to USC. Those students
who maintained a competitive grade level average and earned competitive scores on
the SAT would be eligible for admission to USC with a full scholarship throughout
their college career at the university.
The neighborhood community surrounding USC can be described as low status,
with a high crime rate, and a large population of immigrants (Maeroff, 1999). All the
schools that NAI cooperated with are in the Los Angeles Unified School District
(LAUSD). LAUSD was considered one of the largest school districts in the U.S. The
school district consisted of 1,131 schools, which included regular K-12 schools,
preschools, adult schools, and charter schools. The district enrolled 877,010 students
in 2005. The ethnicity of the student population was also diverse. In 2004, the
student population of LAUSD consisted of Native Americans (.03%), Asians (6.3%),
African Americans (11.6%), Hispanics (72.8%), and Whites (9%)
(http://notebook.lausd.net).
There were several local districts within the LAUSD. NAI primarily cooperated
with one of these local districts. The local district that this study investigated had a
large student population from low-income families. Federally categorized Title I
60
schools numbered 62 out of 66 schools in the local district (93.9%), which meant
that most schoolchildren in the district were facing economic challenges.
Cultural barriers and English proficiency were problems for the school district.
As discussed above, the largest ethnic group in the local school district was Hispanic
(72.8%). Many of them were first or second generation immigrants
(http://notebook.lausd.net). The students were not native English speakers and were
required to attend English enhancement programs. This also reflected the fact that
many schoolchildren in the USC neighborhood were from immigrant families.
Parents of the schoolchildren came from many different cultural backgrounds.
In addition, the neighborhood schools were struggling with a high dropout rate
at the high school level. According to the accountability report card 2004-2005 of the
local district #7, its dropout rate was 8.0%, which was much higher than the state
level of 3.3%. It had been a major concern of the school district that caused it to
develop several dropout intervention and prevention programs. In addition, the
schoolchildren of the local district performed lower than other students in California.
The California Standards Test showed that this local district had a much lower
percentage of students who reached the proficient and advanced levels in English-
Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and History/Social Science.
The description above provides a demographic picture of the local school
district and the student population at the time of this study. In general, students in the
local district were mostly minorities, low status, and low achieving. The impact of
living in the poor community was not likely to generate students motivated to be
61
successful in school. Also, these students tended to have access to far fewer
resources to support their educational aims.
NAI helped participating students to complete their schooling with outstanding
academic outcomes. According to statistical data from 1997 to 2004
(http://www.usc.edu/ext-relations/nai), 328 students had successfully graduated from
the NAI program. Among them, 257 students entered four-year colleges or
universities (79%). In particular, 113 students who graduated from NAI enrolled in
USC (34.9%). The survey showed that NAI had successfully changed participating
students’ futures, which were otherwise destined to be bleak, as would be the case
with other schoolchildren from poor communities.
NAI was located in a business compound outside the USC main campus. At the
time of the interview, it had four administrative staff members serving all the
participants. Three of them were considered key staff, directly responsible for the
administration of the NAI. The key staff was experienced and had served NAI for a
few years. Their roles in NAI were essential and significantly related to the
effectiveness of the program.
In summary, NAI made a promising difference for schoolchildren in the
neighboring communities. These schoolchildren faced multiple social and economic
challenges. A large proportion of the schoolchildren came from low-income families.
Low performance in school, as indicated by the dropout and academic achievements
rates, was a major concern of the local school district. NAI, however, had become a
resource provider with institutional support, and providing academic assistance to
62
participating students. What NAI had accomplished was promising and had made a
difference for schoolchildren in the neighboring communities.
Data Collection Procedures
Data collection was an on-going process, constituted by several methodological
segments and a data-collection time schedule. Instrumentation consisted of three
phases in this study: personal background survey, three questionnaires, and a follow
up interview schedule. Phase One of data collection included a personal background
survey to collect respondents’ personal demographic information, working
experience, and organizational affiliations (See Appendix A). Phrase Two consisted
of two meetings to administer three survey questionnaires to measure the quantity of
individual social capital in terms of the composition of respondents’ social networks
and resources embedded therein. I administered three network generators: the Name
Generator, Position Generator, and Resource Generator. The Name Generator (See
Appendix B) was employed first. The administration of this survey lasted from one
hour to one-and-one-half hours. After the survey, the respondent received two self-
administered questionnaires: the Position Generator (See Appendix C) and the
Resource Generator (See Appendix D).
During Phase Three, I conducted two face-to-face interviews with respondents.
One interview focused on follow-up questions from the Name Generator. The other
interview focused on the subjects’ thoughts on the challenges of their roles. These
qualitative interview questions (See Appendix E) collected information about
whether those interviewees are assuming the role of institutional agents. The
63
interviews also investigated the factors that could hinder or promote key staff to
become institutional agents or contribute to their influence in interactions with other
NAI staff. The process of data collection was estimated to be lengthy at the outset.
The data collection occurred from December 2006 through January 2007 with
approval to conduct the research given by Institutional Review Board. All interviews
were tape-recorded. I also took notes during the interview sessions. Those notes
combined with the transcripts provided the primary source of information to answer
the research questions.
Instrumentation
During the past decades, social scientists have developed instruments for
measuring social capital (Lin & Dumin, 1986; Flap, 1999; Van Der Gaag & Snijders,
2005). There are many instruments available for measuring social capital. Many of
them are defined as having specific purposes, which are not necessarily relevant to
the purposes of this study. While determining the instruments for this study, I
believed that several considerations determined the instruments chosen.
First, the instruments must be able to measure the composition and size of
egocentric networks. The volume of the network might determine the individual’s
social capital. The purpose of the instrument must be able to map the full ego
network. The second criterion looked at the diversity of the ego’s network, which
delineated the diverse social contacts and the quality of the relationships. This
criterion did not seek to map the ego’s network. Instead, it purposively collected
information about people known and the number of relationships there were. Third,
64
the instruments needed to include resource items, to probe useful and agreeable
resources for both ego and contacts for mutual exchange. These criteria led me to
adopt three instruments that were promising measurement tools among those in the
network literature. They were the Name Generator/Interpreter, Position Generator,
and Resource Generator.
These instruments differed in two specific ways: 1) the way these resources
were approached, and 2) the way they retrieved this information from respondents.
The Name Generator was a time consuming instrument, which generated data to
delineate the individual’s social network. The Position Generator and Resource
Generator were used to investigate the accessibility of social resources to large
groups of individuals. The Position and Resource Generator produced data
supplemental to the Name Generator, which served as the main network instrument.
Also, these two instruments collected data that allowed researchers to get a sense of
respondents’ social worlds.
Lin (2001) suggests two methods of data collection often used in network
literature: Name Generator/Interpreter and Position Generator. The Name
Generator/Interpreter, in particular, has been more extensively used by social
scientists than the position generator. The instrument requires individuals to provide
contacts to sources of support in terms of several dimensions: role relationship,
content area, and intimacy. This study adopted two instruments, position and
resource generators, adopted by the works of Van Der Gaag and colleagues (Van Der
Gaag, et al., 2004; Van Der Gaag & Snijders, 2005). Van Der Gaag and Snijders
65
(2005) have put effort into developing instruments to measure social capital with
resource-oriented perspectives for large populations. Their integrated research
project sought choices to measure if an individual’s social capital could be defined as
positive social resources embedded in personal networks. The following paragraphs
give descriptions of the three instruments. The instruments are Name
Generator/Interpreter, position generator, and resource generator.
Name Generator/Interpreter
The Name Generator/Interpreter is the network survey questionnaire most
extensively used in measuring social capital (Lin, 2001). The instrument consisted of
two sets of questions: name generator and name interpreter. The part of Name
Generator, which mapped the individual’s network, involved the technique of asking
the respondent questions. The interpretation part collected deeper information about
the specific network member and relationships with respondents. Thus, during the
administration of the instrument, the name generator generated a respondent’s
network members, and questions on the part of the interpreter gathered information
on the individual’s perception of the relationships with the members. In addition,
interpreter was able to probe the availability of the individual’s social capital because
the questions were to inquire into the quality of social relationships that each specific
member generated.
The Name Generator consisted of fourteen items whereas the interpreter part
had six items. The items of the name generator were as follows “When you have a
student who has ongoing developmental issues and needs guidance and/or close
66
mentoring, who are the people you would most likely call to assist you? May I have
the first name of the person?” The questions enabled respondents to generate names
that were important and helpful and were embedded in respondents’ networks. The
interpreter part was to elaborate the relationships with the persons generated. The
questions followed this format: “Let’s talk about your relationship with________.
When did you first meet, and how were you acquainted?” This allowed the
researcher to collect data to evaluate various relationships with the social ties.
The guideline for the Name Generator was flexible. Those items that were
consistent with the nature of generating social ties to map the individual-centric
network were considered suitable. For example, the questions were structured like
these: “I would like to know who helped you to get this job. May I have the first
name and the first letter of the family name of the person that helped you to get your
current/last job?” or “Who are the two colleagues with whom you work most often?
May I again have the first name and the first letter of the family name (or initials) of
those colleagues?”
Although the Name Generator has been widely adopted and tested within
network studies, researchers have reported the drawbacks of the instrument. Van de
Gaag and colleagues (2004) have pointed out that the cost of implementing the
instrument is often too high. The items of the Name generator drew too much
information from individual’s network, which made it difficult for researchers to
analyze the data. The duration of the process because of its influence on cost was
another problem that exhausted researchers while collecting data. In this case, it
67
took a long time to complete the survey items on the Name Generator. So, the length
of the process was inconvenient for participants, as well.
This technique had been criticized in that the collected data primarily included
strong ties (Lin, 2001). In other words, those social ties that were not closely
connected to the individual would not necessarily appear. Social ties with weak
relationships were less likely to be addressed in the Name Generator. Consequently,
this study was designed with follow-up interviews, to investigate the diversity of
respondents’ social ties. Specifically, information about respondents’ friends with
dormant relationships would be collected during the interview sections. Thus, the
drawbacks of the Name Generator would be compensated for by the follow-up
interviews.
Position Generator
The Position Generator was another common method used within network
studies. The position generator was not meant to measure the volume of contacts
salient to individuals. Instead, the instrument was to count and to measure access to
resourceful positions embedded in a hierarchical society.
Lin and Dumin (1986) suggested that the information collected indicates three
social resource measures: the highest status access, the range of the status accessible,
and the number of different positions accessed. The Position Generator consisted of
30 items, which were based on five domains of school resources. The five domains
of support comprised:
68
1. Medical or Mental Health Wellness
2. Social Service
3. Educational/College Gateway
4. Legal Issue
5. Business, Financial, or Economic
The Position Generator was a self-administered survey. A respondent was asked
whether he/she knew a family member in a specific occupation. If no, the respondent
was asked about friends in the occupation. Again, if the answer was no, then the
respondent was asked whether he/she knew an acquaintance in the occupation. For
example, an interviewer would ask a respondent whether he/she knew of any family
member being a physician. If not available, the interviewer would present the same
question as to whether he/she knew any friend who was a physician. How many were
there? If still unavailable, then the interviewer asked the same of an acquaintance.
Responses were written down: how many of the contacts are physicians in each
column of acquaintance, friend or, family member.
Resource Generator
The Resource Generator was created by Van Der Gaag and Snijder (2003). The
instrument was particularly designed to investigate access to social resources rather
than to measure the prestige of the occupations accessed. It is similar in structure to
the position generator. I used the measurement instrument with thirty-three items. It
was administered quickly and retrieved valid and easily interpretable representations
of social capital.
69
The format of the instrument was quite similar with the Position Generator.
Items included a fixed list of resources that each represents a vivid, concrete
subcollection of social capital. Questions begin with “Do you know anyone who
can…….?”. And, respondents were provided with a set of choices, from which to
decide a suitable answer. The resulting measure collected information on the social
tie’s strength, through which the resources were accessed. This was indicated by the
role of these ties. Finally, it checked the availability of each of these resources:
family members, friends, acquaintances, and/or respondent. For example,
respondents were asked: “Do you know anyone who is a college admissions director?
Interviewers asked respondents to rate one of the choices based on the density of the
relationship. If a respondent was an admissions director, then the item code would be
(4). If there were two answers rated as an acquaintance, then the response was coded
as (2) in the column of acquaintances.
In summary, these instruments were different in a) the way they retrieved
information from respondents, and b) the way resources were approached. The
retrieved information of these instruments showed specific resource configuration as
a) the volume of social capital, b) diversity in relationship, and c) diversity in
resources. Name Generator/Interpreter collected data related to an individual
network. It explored the versatility of an individual’s resources within the social
support network. The instrument enabled interviewers to map respondents’ social ties
and the quality of relationships. The Position Generator allowed interviewers to
retrieve information in which access to prestigious occupations could be identified.
70
Also, the difference between the highest and lowest positions accessed could be
delineated. Finally, the Resource Generator overcame the shortage of both the Name
Generator/Interpreter and Position Generator, which did not directly measure access
to social resources. Interviewers were able to use the Resource Generator to collect
data from an individual with accessible social resources.
Trustworthiness and Confidence
Contrary to the shortages inherent in multiple instruments, the multiple
measurement survey would increase the trustworthiness of the study’s findings. The
instruments were used to investigate respondents’ social worlds. Therefore, using
multiple measurement tools was a critical method for improving the trustworthiness
of the findings. Patton (2002) argues:
Studies that use only one method are more vulnerable to errors linked to
that particular method (e.g., loaded interview questions, biased or untrue
response) than studies that use multiple methods in which different types of
data provide cross-data validity checks. Using multiple methods allows
inquiry into a research question with “an arsenal of methods that have
nonoverlapping weaknesses in addition to their complementary strengths”
(p. 248)
To ensure the confidence of a study, triangulation is a critical approach to
strengthen a study’s validity by combining methods (Patton, 2002). Triangulation
means using multiple kinds of methods or data. In this study, it involved
implementing multiple theories, collecting multiple data and analyzing data in
multiple statistical methods, using multiple investigators, and conducting multiple
research designs. By conducting several methods, bias in the study was reduced and
the validity of the study was ensured.
71
The second part of the methodology of this study was to adopt a qualitative
interview schedule. These interviews aimed to probe respondents’ perceptions of
other key staff assuming the institutional agents. There was a need to know when
personal social capital is to be mobilized to bridge outside resources into the program,
and how varied influences, such as interactions among the program leaders might
impact the mobilization. Since each staff was responsible for different tasks within
the program, cooperation was necessary to ensure the performance of tasks.
Fortunately, cooperation was commonplace.
Patton (2002) stated that interviews produce direct quotations from people
about their experiences, opinions, feelings, and knowledge. Qualitative interviewing
allows researchers to obtain another person’s perspective. When I conducted the
qualitative interviewing, it allowed me to find out what interviewees thought, and to
gather their stories from their unique perspectives.
Before interviewing respondents, I prepared an interview guide that contains
questions and issues that were to be explored. Patton (2002) stated that an interview
guide provides topics on subject areas that require researchers to explore, probe, and
ask questions that elucidated and illuminated particular subjects.
When conducting the interview sessions, I chose a lunch break or office hours
depending on what was convenient for respondents. The whole process of
interviewing was tape-recorded and the interviewer took notes during the course of
the interview. According to Patton (2002), the interview guide approach helps to
increase the comprehensiveness of the data and to facilitate the collection of data in a
72
systematic way for each respondent. However, one disadvantage of this method is
the neglect of important and salient topics. In other words, an interviewer’s
flexibility in wording questions and sequencing can elicit a range of responses. Thus,
this decreases the comparability of responses.
With these disadvantages of the interview guide approach in mind, I planned to
design a set of interview questions to accommodate these issues. Thus, the
qualitative interviewing questions used in this study included fifteen open-ended
items. The questions followed the general format: “How do you feel when a staff
member calls upon his/her friends to manage students’ problems? Does it influence
your interactions with him/her in any way?
Data Analysis
As discussed above, this study employed a qualitative inquiry to collect data
that informs our knowledge of the roles of program leaders who also act as
institutional agents. Information drawn from the instruments was analyzed to
construct respondents’ social networks and the quality of those relationships. In
addition, the recorded tapes were transcribed right after the interview sessions. I read
the transcription several times in order to obtain a general picture of the collected
data.
Again, this chapter illuminated the methodology adopted by this study. It
summarized the rationales for the methodological choices, the setting, sample
selection, instruments, the process of data collection, and data analysis. Chapter Four
will discuss the findings of this study as well as analyze their significance.
73
Chapter Four
Results
The object of this study was to explore the influence of program leaders’
multiple roles in a student’s academic development. Program leaders are critical
components that may make a difference in the progress of program participants. The
importance of their roles in a student intervention program goes beyond staff
maintenance of day-to-day practical procedures. Rather, they are expected to help
student participants manage difficult issues or problems, as well.
As discussed in previous chapters, social capital refers to access to social
resources bridged by program leaders for program participants. Social resources
bridged by program leaders enable program participants to overcome barriers and
achieve their academic goals.
This chapter reveals the findings of this study in two parts. First, I present the
descriptive findings on the structural characteristics of the respondents’ social
resource network. Several network variables are included to illustrate the structure of
the individuals’ networks. In addition, staff networks are analyzed with network
variables. The analysis portrays differences in individual social ties to key resources
or support and reveals clues to an individual’s preferred approach to activating
relationships with ties in their networks.
Another major function of Chapter Four is to display a relational analysis of the
program leaders’ networks. In this section, I explore the subtle social processes that
underscore, if not govern, decisions to seek support and the development of ties
74
among program staffers. Findings were extrapolated from interviews clarifying a
program leader’s approach to bridging resources for program participants. Within the
context of these approaches, I plan to show institutional agency among the three
program leaders.
As I report my findings in the following sections, I will organize the data in
ways that will provide answers to the research questions proposed in Chapter One.
Research Question #1: What are the basic structural characteristics of the resource
networks of program leaders (size, composition, diversity of ties)?
This section delineates individual networks by presenting structural
characteristics of program leaders’ networks. The first part of this section illustrates
activated networks associated with an individual’s working environment. In this
regard, several network factors were featured to examine the structural
characteristics of individual networks.
The second part is a comparison of the director’s networks with those of the
staff. This comparison was initiated because of a supposition that program leaders’
duties and responsibilities may influence the development of social networks.
The last part of this section examines network data collected through three
instruments. I speculated that this approach would allow me to understand the degree
of mobilization of program leaders’ relationships with ties positioned in prestigious
social classes.
75
Basic Structural Characteristics of Networks
This study employed multiple instruments to collect information regarding
program leaders’ networks. The instruments used were the following: Name
Generator, Position Generator, and Resource Generator. The data gathered from these
investigative instruments disclosed different elements in each program leader’s
networks.
Table 2 : Summary of Data Collected by Three Instruments
Name Generator Position Generator Resource Generator
Kelly
(Program Director)
30 110 129
Katherine (Program
Specialist)
19 94 99
Barbara (Staff) 14 81 89
Total Number of
Elected Ties
63 285 317
Average Tie
for Each
Respondent
21 95 106
Range of
Respondent
’s Elected
Ties
14-30 81-110 89-129
A data summary is presented in Table 2, demonstrating results from the three
instruments. By administering the Name Generator, three respondents reported, in
total, 63 ties in their networks. Respondents elected ties that ranged from 14 to 30.
76
On the average, each respondent elected 21 ties that provided different types of key
support. For the Position Generator, respondents reported 285 ties in total. Each
respondent has 95 ties on the average. For the Resource Generator, respondents
reported 317 ties in total and each respondent reported an average 106 ties.
Interestingly, the program director, Kelly, reported 129 ties, the most ties among the
program leaders.
Strength of Ties of Activated Network
The following section presents network data collected by the Name Generator.
The network data describes each respondent’s key resource of support enlisted when
faced with student incidents. The information identifies a program leader’s preferred
inner network relevant to responsibilities and confrontations at work.
Multiple ties and weak ties in program leaders’ networks confirm tie strength
between program leaders and their contacts. Likewise, multiplex ties involve the
exchange of multiple resources. The exchange requires frequent interaction and
strong trust among individuals. Therefore, the relationships with multiplex ties are
stable and close (Granovetter, 1973). Such close relationships can become substantial
resources, as well as emotional support for individuals. However, relationships with
multiplex ties require effort to develop and sustain. Normally, the number of multiple
ties in an individual’s network is limited to a number an individual is feasibly able to
develop and sustain. In this study, each multiplex tie provided respondents at least
three types of support or resources. The multiplex of the program leaders ranged
from 2 to 3. Each program leader had 2.7 multiplexes on the average. All
77
respondents indicated each other as multiplex when asked for key resources or
support. This finding suggested a closed relationship among these program leaders.
Interestingly, all the respondents reported their peers in the NAI program as
multiplexes. This suggested that peers in the NAI program are the immediate and
major source of resources or support. Previous research suggests that what the
multiplex relations convey is associated with the provision of forms of support
(Stanton-Salazar, 2001). However, the analysis of interview data from this study will
show that multiple ties function as emotional support and information sources for
program leaders.
Granovetter (1973) emphasized the value of “weak ties” in bridging access to a
wider range of information. According to his study, connections with weak ties were
valuable in bringing information or creating opportunities for individuals. Since the
relationships with weak ties are relatively casual, individuals are able to maintain
slight connections with weak ties through less effort than to relationships with
multiplex ties. Normally, the number of weak ties is large and represents the majority
in personal networks. Survey data revealed that NAI respondents reported a number
of weak ties that proved to be key resources to program leaders.
Specifically, weak ties are defined as persons who provide only one kind of
resource or support. Generally, they are acquaintances that respondents can confer
with on social occasions. The number of weak ties noted in the results of the study
ranged from 10 to 17. On the average, each respondent had 13.3 weak ties in any
network. In order to express the network data in a meaningful way, several factors
78
were adopted to examine the structural characteristics of the networks: gender,
ethnicity, social class, and source of support.
Gender
Research has shown that gender appears to influence an individual’s preference
in accruing social capital (Emmerik, 2006). Given previous research findings and
that the respondents of this study were all women of color, the opportunity to explore
the influence of gender differences on NAI program leaders’ network behavior was
embraced. The preponderance in the research suggests that these NAI program
leaders would be more likely to activate connections with female rather than male
ties in their networks when seeking key resources. Interestingly, among 63 elected
ties, 49 (78%) of all ties were female; whereas, only 14 (22%) were male. Therefore,
the data did reflect this preference among program leaders with regard to their
general network behavior in mobilizing connections.
Ethnicity
In Table 3, the pattern of ethnicity reveals another likely influence among
respondents. The data reflects a pattern among these women of color to seek help
from people who share the same ethnicity or race. The respondents included two
African Americans and one Latina. In particular, I discovered that African Americans
were the largest population providing support to program leaders. The next largest
group was Latina (Hispanic). Whites were about a quarter of all elected ties and
Asian Americans provided the least support.
79
Interestingly, demographic data suggests another major difference among
respondents. That is, the director’s network significantly differed from each staff’s
networks. For instance, a Latina staff member, reported Hispanics as her primary
support followed by African Americans. Katherine, an African American staff
member reported that the majority of her network ties are also African American, but
only a quarter of her ties are Hispanics.
Table 3: Ties by Ethnicity (N=63)
Ethnicity Number of elected ties Percentage (%)
African American 25 40
Hispanic 18 28
White 17 27
Asian American 3 5
Social Class
The term “social class” refers to the hierarchical distinctions between groups of
people based on social and economic status in a society. Social scientists have
adopted this term to distinguish between societal issues emanating from such
groupings. As discussed in Chapter 3, I first adopted Duncan’s Scale to develop both
the Position Generator and Resource Generator, then defined the survey relative to
three social classes: upper, middle, and working classes. In Table 4, elected ties are
also categorized relative to the same social classes. Resources ranked in the middle-
class appear to be the largest level of elected ties at more than half of all elected ties.
80
About one-third of the elected ties are from the upper class. All respondents report
the least number of elected ties from the working-class rank.
The respondents in this study represent the middle and upper classes of society.
Therefore, I anticipated that their networks would include a fair number of contacts
embedded in the same social class. In addition, since the intervention program that is
at the core of this study is affiliated with a major university, most respondents’
contacts also worked in the university or local school districts. Therefore, it seems
reasonable to anticipate that most respondents’ elected ties will be from the middle or
upper classes.
Table 4 Ties by Social Class (N=63)
Social Class (SEI score) Number of elected ties Percentage (%)
High Class (75 & up) 22 35
Middle Class (74 to 53) 32 51
Working Class (52 &
below)
9 14
Sources of Support
Fisher (1982) discussed how social context influences personal relations and the
ways individuals think and act socially. Social context, in addition to an individual’s
personality and preferences, determines with whom (given various structural
opportunities and constraints) an individual will associate. His work defines a
primary social context as the major setting for personal relationships: kinship, work,
neighborhood, friends, and acquaintances. Although context is typically the setting in
81
which people interact, it more importantly describes the terms under which they
maintain their connection. For example, where people see each other, the tasks they
share, and the number of others involved, all influence how close their relationships
are. Fisher’s research aroused my interest in analyzing the relationships between
elected ties and the respondents under the factor of social context.
In Table 5, a descriptive analysis reveals a pattern of elected ties along three
categories: family members, friendship, and work associates. The table shows that
friendship was one primary resource among program leaders. A second primary
source originated from work associates.
This study makes it apparent that when respondents managed student incidents,
they tended to find support from their friends. In interview sessions, all respondents
expressed that they were least likely to seek support from family members. Therefore,
what the body of interviews suggests is that each program leader’s general intent is
to clearly draw a line between one’s job and personal life.
Table 5: Ties by Source of Support
Sources of Support Number of elected ties Percentage (%)
Family Members 5 8
Friendship 34 55
Work Associates 24 37
Total 63 100
By analyzing the survey data under multiple factors, what clearly appears from
the NAI program leaders is their preferred manner of activating connections with ties
82
from their personal networks. Their network behavior with potential resources or
support shows a pattern among program leaders to mobilize relationships with
people sharing similar demographic characteristics. Female ties with those of the
same ethnicity represent program leaders’ primary source of support. In addition, the
general preference seemed to be for program leaders to seek support from
individuals who share ethnicity, gender, and social class standing. Considering the
social context defining respondents’ primary setting is an urban educational
association, program leaders in their networks may include ties from the workplace
and/or professional organizations. Therefore, what we found is consistent with the
conclusion made by Fisher (1982) that social context influences an individual’s daily
life, including their networks. This finding explains why there were few family
members relied upon by respondents.
Variable Network Characteristics: Between the Director and Staff
These analyses also uncovered several unexpected findings. One of them was a
distinction between networks of the director and staff. When analyzing the network
data, I clearly see the influence of social structure over an individual’s network. Lin
(2001) emphasizes that social capital has to be associated with the social structure
that involves a hierarchical society and a power dynamic.
In this section, I include a comparison of the director’s network with that of the
staff. The comparison helps to distinguish the multiple roles that program leaders
play. In depicting these roles, I am identifying the structural characteristics that are
83
embedded in an implicit socialization process that is fundamental in the NAI student
intervention program.
Indeed, program leaders play different roles in the program. The director’s
responsibility has to do with supervising the program practice. The director’s role is
the most important—the key position in the program. How well the director plays the
leadership role strongly influences the program’s effectiveness. One important
responsibility of the NAI director is to communicate with the outside world about the
program. Consequently, this communication role affects the composition of the
director’s network, which may reflect a wider diversity than those of other staff.
As indicated before, this racially and ethnically diverse staff tended to seek
support from ties with similar backgrounds. Table 6 displays the program leaders’
networks as defined by ethnicity. Again, both program staffs elected almost half of
their ties from a pool representing the same ethnicities.
On the other hand, the director’s network was more diverse than those of staff.
Her network included proportionate ties to contacts representing multiple races. The
director elected White (33%) contacts as her primary group to provide support,
followed by African American (33%) and Hispanics (23%). Although all the program
leaders elected ties among multiple races, their networks include different levels of
ethnic diversity. The director had proportionate, relatively balanced ties across
multiple races in her active network. The staff members tended to find the support or
resources provided by ties with the same background without a noticeable balance
reflecting diversity.
84
As mentioned earlier, the director is responsible for bridging communications
across different groups of people for the NAI program—a branch of the Department
of External Public Relations at USC. Therefore, given the context of the program’s
affiliation, having a proportionately diverse network was consistent with
expectations for the director of the program. The director’s role is to bridge different
groups of people for the program. Her network is expected to be diverse so that she
can communicate knowledgeably across different populations. In addition, her
network would become increasingly resourceful given its level of diversity. When
the director successfully brings together different groups of people, she also brings in
multiple resources for the program. The director’s network of ethnically diverse
resources enables her to manage student incidents and emergencies.
Table 6: Comparison of Support Providers in Ethnicity (N=63)
African
American
Latino
American
White Asian
American
Total
Kelly (Director)
(African-American
Female)
33% 23% 37% 7% 100%
Barbara
(Latina American)
36% 43% 14% 7% 100%
Katherine
(African-American
Female)
53% 26% 21% 0% 100%
In addition, various sources provided the program leaders with types of key
support or resources. Data in Table 7 reveals each program leader’s elected ties
categorized by multiple sources of support. The table indicates a complex finding
that the NAI program leaders sought support from two different sources. Staff
85
members, Barbara and Katherine, reported “Work Associates” as their primary
sources of support, while the director tended to not utilize that source (7%).
Table 7: Comparison of Source of Support
Family Friendship Work Associates Total
Kelly
(Director)
10% 83% 7% 100%
Barbara 0% 29% 71% 100%
Katherine 11% 26% 63% 100%
As shown in Table 4, program leaders reported the middle class as their primary
source of support. About one-third of the elected ties were from the upper class,
followed by the working class (14%). Information in Table 8 illustrates allows for
comparisons, as each respondent’s elected ties can be divided into multiple social
classes. I found that respondents had disproportionate ties across multiple social
levels. Especially, the program specialist, Katherine, reported more than half of her
elected ties came from the upper class. Her elected ties in the middle class appeared
disproportionate to the other program leaders.
Table 8: Comparison of Elected Ties with Social Class across Multiple Surveys
High Level Middle Level Working Level Total
Kelly
(Director)
30% 63% 7% 100%
Barbara
21% 43% 36% 100%
Katherine
53% 37% 10% 100%
86
Mobilizing Connections with Ties Positioned in Prestigious Class
Undeniably, some connections are more valuable to the advancement of
individual interests than other connections. Particularly, connections with ties in
prestigious classes may easily facilitate access to social resources (Lin 2001). The
analysis here includes network data collected by three primary instruments. Social
class is used as a measure to understand whether these program leaders mobilize
relationships with ties positioned in prestigious classes.
Lin (2001) commented on the nature of the Name Generator, that the survey
tends to draw close ties from individual networks. Indeed, the use of the Name
Generator tool was intended to reveal networks, which provide program leaders with
institutional resources and support to handle the demands of the job (i.e., student
incidents). When I asked respondents to list the first names of ties that provided or
were highly likely to be resources for respondents, the resulting data displayed
respondents’ active networks.
Unlike the Name Generator, which illustrates close personal ties, both the
Position Generator and Resource Generator in this study are able to uncover a
respondent’s social network in which more ties are included. The networks measured
by the surveys are broader than the network measured by the Name Generator.
Actually, the broader networks refer to respondents’ networks that might have
nothing to do with the job or the program. Yet, the networks measured by multiple
surveys might overlap each other.
87
In Table 9, the respondent’s virtue network is displayed. It was collected
through the Position Generator. The networks were measured by the ties’ occupations.
The findings suggest that ties in a respondent’s networks are likely embedded in the
middle class for the most part, because more than half of the ties in the network
originate from that social class. Upper class positions were the second largest
population. The working class has the least number of ties to the respondents.
Table 9: Network Data Gathered by Position Generator Divided by Social Class
Level of Social Status Strong Ties
(Family + Friend)
Weak Ties
(Colleague / Acquaintance)
Total
High Class Barbara: 3
Kelly: 18
Katherine: 3
Total: 24
Barbara: 25
Kelly: 19
Katherine: 16
Total: 60
84
(29.5%)
Middle Class Barbara: 8
Kelly: 22
Katherine: 5
Total: 35
Barbara: 25
Kelly: 38
Katherine: 52
Total: 115
150
(52.6%)
Working Class Barbara: 5
Kelly: 8
Katherine: 3
Total: 16
Barbara: 15
Kelly: 5
Katherine: 15
Total: 35
51
(17.9%)
Total: 75
(26.3%)
Total: 210
(73.7%)
285
(100%)
Table 10 indicates the respondents’ network collected through the Resource
Generator. The survey used social resource to examine the respondents’
cosmopolitan network. The information precisely reveals multiple social resources
potentially available to the respondents. Again, I categorized the data around social
88
classes. The data reflects a similar trend in Table 9. The middle class was the largest
population at 47.3% followed by the upper class at 36%, and finally the working
class at 16.7%.
Table 10: Network Data Gathered by Resource Generator Divided by Social Class
Level of Social Status Strong Ties
(Family + Friend)
Weak Ties
(Colleague / Acquaintance)
Total
High Class Kelly: 26
Barbara: 6
Katherine: 20
Total: 52
Kelly: 17
Barbara:28
Katherine: 17
Total: 62
114
(36%)
Middle Class Kelly: 24
Barbara: 8
Katherine: 11
Total: 43
Kelly: 36
Barbara: 34
Katherine: 37
Total: 107
150
(47.3%)
Working Class Kelly: 17
Barbara: 5
Katherine: 9
Total: 31
Kelly: 9
Barbara: 8
Katherine: 5
Total: 22
53
(16.7%)
Total: 126
(39.7%)
Total: 191
(60.3%)
317
(100%)
One of this study’s concerns is to understand whether the program staff
mobilizes relational capital as a reaction to managing students’ problems or in
response to the program itself. Specifically, this study aimed to find out whether
program leaders sought help from ties embedded in prestigious social classes. To do
so, we need to examine the data collected from multiple surveys.
Table 11 is a comparison of data collected through multiple surveys. Again, I
used social classes as a way to group respondents in order to examine the data. Data
89
collected by the Name Generator shows that 35% of elected ties are from the upper
classes and 51% are from the middle classes, while 14% of the resources come from
the working class. The data from the Position Generator indicates that 29% of ties
were from the upper social ladder followed by 52.6% in the middle and 17.9% in the
working class. At last, the Resource Generator shows 36% in the upper class, 47.3%
in the middle class and 16.4% in the working class.
Table 11: Comparison of Surveys with Social Class
High Level Middle Level Working Level
Name Generator 35% 51% 14%
Position Generator 29.5% 52.6% 17.9%
Resource Generator 36% 47.3% 16.7%
The table displays the respondents’ help-seeking behavior analyzed by social
class. The data indicated proportionate percentages across multiple social class levels.
For example, the results shown for upper social classes were slightly different among
those derived from multiple surveys. This trend is similar with data for the middle
class as well as the working class. Similar proportions in each social class offered
evidence that when respondents seek social resources or key persons to solve
problems on behalf of students or the program, they may also mobilize personal
capital embedded within their networks.
In summary, the analysis shows complex findings regarding respondents’
networks. The data suggests that these NAI program leaders activated connections
with ties that share similar backgrounds. Ties within their networks include a large
90
proportion of middle-class women of color. These ties provided most support and
resources for the NAI program leaders due to the demands of their work.
Comparisons between the director and staff show the differences of respondents’
networks. The director’s network differs from that of the program staff in quantity of
ties and the constituents, through networks. In addition to depicting respondents’
personal networks, this study examines whether the NAI program leaders utilize
their personal social capital on behalf of the program, since data suggests that they
do mobilize connections with ties and networks measured by multiple instruments.
Research Question #2: In What Ways Do Program Leaders Mobilize Social
Capital on Behalf of Program Participants?
Interview data presented in the following sections of this chapter, clarify how
program leaders activated their connections with ties accessing resources or support.
The valuable data shows patterns when program leaders mobilize social capital on
behalf of the program or program participants. Findings are organized in two parts.
First, the NAI program leaders show particular interactions in a closed way but they
clearly know the boundary of the interactions. Their interactive pattern functions as a
solid basis of social solidarity. It promotes trusted relationships that guarantee full
support from their work associates. The other part of the findings describes two
particular methods that program leaders use in unique ways to accrue social capital: a
resource referral system and an instrumental accruing resource method.
91
Closed Interaction among Work Associates
The sections that follow present an interactive pattern that characterizes the
way program leaders work together in the office. The interaction describes a unique
way in which the program leaders cooperate with each other and provide support for
each other. This particular interactive function, in many ways, is a supportive system
in which key resources are provided for the program leaders. On the one hand,
evidence shows that the interaction is developed by their shared commitment to their
different duties and responsibilities of the program.
The program leaders suggested that they would work as a team. Even though
each staff member was assigned primary tasks, they often shared each other’s tasks
during busy hours. For example, the staff was responsible for finishing program
recruitment. The entire process included lengthy interview sessions and required
coordination with multiple departments. Their responses were straight and clear
when they described the recruitment process. What they said presented a strong team
work ethic when they cooperate together in the office. A closed relationship
apparently existed among program leaders.
As indicated in the Name Generator, all three respondents marked each other as
multiple resource suppliers. Interview data reconfirmed what the program leaders
reported in the survey. That is, the program leaders felt very confident about their
shared commitment to teamwork. If they requested assistance from each other, they
could go to each other and obtain help.
92
Their roles in the program were clear. When Barbara was asked about her
interaction with the director, she said:
She (the director) is the director of the department. As a matter of fact, there
are a lot of things I can do on my own without really informing her, but I
choose not to do that. Because we are such a small staff, she may not be in the
office when certain situations happen. So I may have to act on that…you
know…I communicate with her and reach her wherever she is and call her cell
phone and tell her, “You know what? This is what has occurred.” This is the
way I handle it. Do you think I should do something else? I try to inform her of
what the situation is and what happened.
Friendly and emotional was my initial image of Barbara. Barbara was born in
Mexico and raised in Los Angeles. That she is bilingual helps her to play the role of
bridge-builder between the program and parents with Mexican-roots. When I
interviewed Barbara, her passion for the program showed on her face. Her laughter
was always loud and clear through the entire office. Her high-pitched voice always
got my attention the first moments I walked into the office. The director described
her in the following manner: “That is Barbara. You can hear her from every corner
of the office.” She has a warm heart for helping children-in-need. On holidays, she
would travel all the way to Mexico to help children-in-need. She called herself “soft”
because she tended to become emotional whenever students were about to be
dismissed from the program. When telling stories about herself and the students she
could not help, tears would well-up in her eyes.
Barbara respects Kelly as the program director. She would inform her
supervisor of each incident she handled and would ask for feedback. Barbara called
it “mutual respect” between her and her supervisor. Barbara recognizes her role in
93
the program as a staff member. Whatever her action with regard to student incidents,
they have to be first approved through the supervisor. If the director does not grant
approval of intervention in specific incidents, she withdraws and instead follows the
director’s instruction. Barbara indicated that such a withdrawal does not happen
often. Yet, that is her way of handling a student incident under the director’s
supervision.
This interaction with the supervisor was developed through mutual respect.
Initially, Barbara believed that Kelly would provide positive feedback regarding her
actions with student’s incidents. If she has Kelly’s approval, she knows that she may
go ahead with Kelly’s full support. Even though, at times the supervisor’s feedback
opposed Barbara’s decision, she believed that her supervisor must have good reasons
to withdraw the action. In this way, Barbara respects Kelly as the program director
and as her supervisor. Therefore, she respects the director’s role in the program and
strongly believes the director would firmly back her.
In addition, evidence from Katherine’s interview likewise shows a mutual
respect. As with Barbara’s response to the survey, Katherine also marked Barbara as
a multiple support supplier. Katherine recognized Barbara as a supportive colleague
as well as a friend. With her senior experience in the program, Katherine became
Barbara’s consultant while managing student incidents. Katherine was usually an
objective voice to Barbara. When asked about a disagreement between her and
Barbara, Katherine said:
Sometimes, she (Barbara) has a tendency to really get involved. Sometimes, I
tell her to step back, not do as much as she wants to do…to pull her back. She
94
tends to be emotional sometimes. She is very thorough sometimes. She needs to
pullback. I let her know when she needs to pull back.
Katherine, the program specialist in her early 50s, has worked in the program
for over 7 years. She was the most senior colleague among the program staff.
Katherine was in charge of students’ academic performance and Saturday Academy
activities. Contrasting Barbara’s outgoing personality, Katherine’s reserved attitude
shows in her low-pitched voice. Her desk is organized and clean. Files in her office
are organized and well-placed. Unlike Barbara’s piles of files scattered in the corners,
Katherine puts files in boxes and stores them in alphabetical order. Her office
appears to be in order because there are no piles of files that might block the pathway.
When asked about any disagreements with the program director, Katherine
explains a recent disagreement over a student dismissal from the program. She first
explained the program’s academic standards to me with a slow and persistent voice.
Then she started to describe the controversy over several students’ falling grades.
The students’ grades were below the program standards. So, they were no longer
eligible for the program. Kelly and Barbara also addressed this incident in their
interviews. However, their responses to the incidents were quite different. Barbara
supported a probationary period for students. Her opinion was to give the students a
second chance rather than a critical dismissal. Barbara thought it was a tragedy to
dismiss several students at one time. Kelly seemed to agree with Barbara’s opinion at
the beginning and was about to keep these students in a probationary program. As the
program specialist, Barbara reminded staff that any solution might impact the
95
program’s academic standards and bring negative consequences to the program. The
meeting finally resulted in a compromise. That is, the students who did not meet
academic standards would be dismissed from the program but could be given the
option to participate in academic activities in the Saturday Academy. Although
Katherine argued this issue with other staff, she respected Kelly’s role as the director.
She said: “You know…she (Kelly) always has the final say. I have to defer to her
decision.”
Regarding the disagreement over the student’s dismissal, Katherine’s attitude
toward the academic standards was persistent. Although other program leaders hoped
to negotiate with the standards to keep students in the program, they respected
Katherine’s role in the program and her insightful views. Like Barbara, Katherine
would respect the director’s decision when they manage issues in the program.
When Kelly was asked about working with other staff in the office, her response
was consistent with the responses from Barbara and Katherine. She described
interactions with other staff in this way: “We rely on each other. We are all hands.”
said Katherine. She also acknowledged that they work in the office as a very close
group.
In addition, Kelly discussed interactions with Barbara. She suggested that they
had worked in the office as close colleagues with reciprocal respect. Kelly pointed
out aspects of her relationship with Barbara:
I think she respects me as a supervisor. I definitely respect her as an integral
part of what’s going on in our program. And I rely on her. She relies on me. It’s
a reciprocal respect that goes on…so I think that builds the relationship. …this
is the person I should be working with.
96
Unlike the relationship with Barbara, Kelly respected Katherine as a senior
consultant. Moreover, the relationship between Kelly and Katherine differed from
the relationship with Barbara.
Besides the relationships between supervisor and employees, the relationships
between Kelly and Katherine are embedded with respect for senior experiences.
When Kelly was asked about her feelings regarding her relationship with Katherine,
the program director praised Katherine’s ability as well as her role in the program.
Katherine has worked in the university over 25 years and is also the most senior staff
in the program. In her role on staff, Katherine has provided critical insight into
student issues.
Interestingly, these three staff members identified each other as multiple
resource suppliers. In the meantime, program leaders all confirmed that they are like
a family in the program. However, data showed that they saw each other differently.
Both Barbara and Katherine marked Kelly as a supervisor and a work associate in
the survey. Barbara gave her opinion about the relationship with the program director.
That’s a professional relationship but at the same time, there is something like
trust and friendship, too. I can trust her [Kelly]…you know…like comments on
my personal life. We do share personal information …like family information
among each other.
What Barbara said described a close relationship with the program director. Likewise,
Barbara’s note on the relationship between her and her supervisor was consistent
with the supervisor’s note. They both agreed that their relationship originated in a
97
professional context from the first moment, but eventually developed into a
friendship, too.
When Katherine was asked to define her relationship with her supervisor, her
answer was simple and straightforward. “Well, fine, we are able to work
together....No, we are not close friends, just colleagues.” What Katherine said about
the relationship with her supervisor indicates that theirs is a professional relationship
in the workplace.
On the other hand, Barbara and Katherine were much closer to each other than
to the program director. Although they perceived each other as colleagues in the
survey, what they said presented a picture of a friendship more than a professional
relationship in the workplace. When they were asked to define their relationship,
Barbara and Katherine both reported the relationship as a friendship. They spend
most of their time together during office hours. Moreover, they have carpooled to the
office for a few years.
The staff’s views of the supervisor differ from the program director’s view of
them. For instance, Kelly considers Barbara and Katherine colleagues and
characterizes theirs as a close relationship. The program director considers the
relationships with her staff as a collection of close friendships. She describes Barbara
as a trusted friend who is the only one who could competently manage the office’s
day-to-day practice. Kelly described Barbara as a “trusted and capable” friend in the
program. When asked about her relationship with Katherine, Kelly described
Katherine as “an important staff” who had been a senior staff member in the program,
98
in charge of several important components of the program. Notably, Kelly had a little
hesitation before she responded. She seemed careful of giving her answer at that
moment. Interestingly, these program leaders needed to rely more on their networks
and each other’s networks as this staff decreased in size.
The previous section delineates an effective interaction among the NAI program
leaders. The interaction characterizes mutual respect within the boundaries of
supportive relationships. Every program leader knows her role in the program and
understands she needs to follow a pattern of interaction with the others. This mutual
respect fosters trust among program leaders. This closed relationship becomes the
basis for a solid source of support that promotes mutual reliance between program
leaders.
Bourdieu emphasizes that solidarity within a network is only possible because
membership gives rise to profits, both material and symbolic (Field, 2003). The
interaction among the NAI program leaders requires mutual respect and this supports
Bourdieu’s thesis. With regard to mutual relationships, a social trust can develop
within the close group and transform it into a solid foundation of mutual support.
Mobilizing Social Capital through A Referral System
As addressed in previous sections, the program staff utilizes resources
embedded in the university to help students in the program. The staff developed
strategies to manage student incidents because of the complexity of incidents and
limited program resources. A staff priority was to refer students-in-need to
departments where key resources were available. For example, when a student had a
99
medical need but could barely afford the cost of medication, the staff searched for
key departments in the university that provided social welfare information. In many
cases, the staff found key persons with access to resources or professional knowledge
to help students-in-need. Thus, staff plays a role to bridge outside resources to
students-in-need. It is a unique system that was developed by the staff to manage
various student issues or problems.
Moreover, I found a clear pattern in the program leader’s involvement with
student incidents. Given the shortage of staff in the workforce, the program could
barely handle incidents on its own and all of them complained about that
circumstance. This situation forced the program staff to find a solution to deal with
the challenges of student incidents. Accordingly, they started to look for outside
resources that would provide key support. Katherine offers her point of view on the
program’s referral system.
Before we downsized the program, we dealt with a social model…We did have
licensed school psychologists on board and those persons handled students’
social problems…you know…like social welfare. We had school psychology
students to help deal with home issues. Now we’ve moved to an academic
model. We provide more academic support and more support to help them with
their SAT...but students have more problems at home. We tried to handle them
as best as we can. But we are not the experts in this area. We have to refer the
kids out a lot...to outside agencies to get the support.
This particular system was developed by several factors impacting the program.
As we discussed previously, the stressful workload, staff’s professional capability,
and the physical inconvenience all influenced the program leaders’ help-seeking
behaviors. Most of all, the program’s affiliation with a resourceful university has
100
facilitated the particular help-seeking behaviors in the program. The system was a
solution to solve student problems and has proven an effective way to manage the
incidents.
A stressful workload demands that program leaders find a quick solution for the
students they serve. The system was not only a convenient way to serve students, but
also an effective way to solve student problems. The referral system created a
shortcut for the program staff. What the program leaders needed to do was to use the
phone directory to navigate through the university. As a branch of the USC public
relationships department, the program was able to coordinate with other departments
and obtain key resources. It was a convenient way to deal with different kinds of
student incidents. Barbara described how she looked for key resources to help
students-in-need:
I just looked for the book and found the telephone number. And then I made the
phone call. Even though I don’t even know the person on the phone
sometimes…even though I may not get what I want. You know, eventually, I
will find someone and I can tell the student “go talk to that person.”
In addition, most student incidents were beyond the program leaders’
professional expertise. What happens in a family might involve complex social
issues, because most incidents are complex and require practitioners from multiple
professions to manage the issues. As Barbara and Katherine suggested in interviews,
family matters could be the most compelling factor on student performance. That is
why I have seen anxious parents waiting in the reception area of the office. The
parents have limited knowledge in seeking resources or key individuals who could
101
assist them. Most parents do not know what the resources are or how they can
contact them.
Recently, all program leaders described an incident that was successfully
managed through the cooperation of multiple departments. The program leaders
appreciated the successful cooperation with departments. When I asked for the
details describing key individuals involved in cooperation with the program, Barbara
and Katherine were unable to recall one of the assistants’ names. However, their
explanations were straightforward, though surprising: “I don’t really know the guy in
the department. I just call the office…you know…they know who I am and my
department. I only saw him once. But I will recognize him next time I see him.”
The university provides diverse resources for the people it serves. It is like a
resourceful community in which many institutional supports are available. The
program leaders utilized these institutional resources for their students-in-need.
Therefore, program staff conducted an effective and efficient way to manage student
incidents.
In the resource referral system, program staff functions as referral agents who
seek resources and match students with resource suppliers. They direct students-in-
need to resource suppliers. Yet, bridging the gap between resources and the students
may not be as simple as referring to a phone directory. Doing so requires knowledge
of where and how to acquire resources in a complex institution. Resoundingly, these
program leaders seem perfectly fit to be referral agents.
102
The mission of the program is to help neighborhood lower socio-economic
ranked students gain admittance to college. In many cases, the program needed to
manage problems or issues affecting the students and their families in order to
achieve the goals of the program. How well program leaders managed student
incidents depended greatly on a strong familiarity with resources embedded within
the university. Each of the three program leaders reported close relationships with the
university years before they worked in the program. Barbara and Katherine had
worked in other departments in the university after they left the school. Kelly, as the
director, earned her masters degree in the university and collaborated with the
university to help neighborhood schoolchildren. Therefore, what these individuals
brought to the program is knowledge of this complex university institution.
Therefore, staff experience in the university has enabled program leaders to find
access to key resources. Program leaders need to find the right department and
communicate to the right people—those with access to key resources. So, staff
knowledge of resources and the ability to navigate to them successfully has been
more than a superficial reference to the yellow pages. Knowing how the system
works and also building personal networks to sustain an updated familiarity with the
system is a requirement in the successful operation of the program. The university is
a complex administrative and educational organization, but also a key resource
provider for the people it serves. However, getting access to the resources might be
difficult.
103
Since program leaders have worked in the university for years, their knowledge
of university resources has enabled them to competently navigate through the
complex organization to look for key resources. As Boudieu (1986) asserts through
the concept of “cultural capital,” people who possess cultural capital know how to
use the right key to open the right door. They may also know that a door could lead
to nowhere. With many years working in USC, program leaders know the key
departments and key personnel who have access to resources. Accumulated cultural
capital makes possible a connection with key individuals and likewise the right
resource within only a few attempts.
Consciously Networking
The program director used a strategic method to build connections with ties that
possess or control access to social resources. Her strategic move to invest in social
relationships and likewise mobilize social capital on behalf of the program can differ
from strategies use by her staff. As the program director, Kelly was responsible for
the day-to-day function of the program. She supervises the staffing as well as the
practice of the program. In addition, fundraising is a primary part of her job.
Part of Kelly’s primary responsibilities is to bring in financial support for the
program. Fundraising is challenging, but it is extremely important to the program. In
response, Kelly has a practical view to her fundraising responsibility. The program
director suggests that reputation is essential to a program when searching for
financial support. Therefore, she has strategically put the program on television news
and thereby helped to shape the program’s public image. I was amazed by Kelly’s
104
enthusiastic attitude when she was telling the story of how she built up connections
with news reporters.
Kelly, the program director in her mid-40s, decorated her office with her
diplomas, awards, and credentials. She put her family photos on the table next to
awards from her supervisor and the local community. She carried a laptop computer
everywhere she went. She joked about herself: “I always carry my notebook
wherever I go, even on my vacation. That’s what my kids always complain about.”
When I interviewed Kelly, I strongly sensed her confidence. Born in a middle-class
family in the USC neighborhood, Kelly was expected to be successful in her
education and career. The director knew exactly the personal goals to strive for.
Kelly was skillful in making friends and intelligently mobilized those
relationships. She had a natural way of making connections with strangers. When
asked about strategies to sell the program, she suggested that she would grasp every
opportunity to talk about the program. She offered an example of a strategic
connection she made with news reporters. The strategic moves were transformed into
newspaper articles and a featured story on a local television channel.
Oh, the young lady I bumped into first. Channel 7 called the news service
at USC because that’s where everybody calls first from the outside. They have
to call USC news services first and the public relations. One of them was “Vista
LA” on Channel 7 on Sunday. Then they went through the news nerve to that
lady. I took them for a lunch. They did a story about NAI. After a while, the
same channel came again. It was the same person, the director, who did a story
in the CPC downstairs. And I had NAI students and he ended up giving up the
CPC. He ended up doing NAI.
105
Interview data suggests two unique methods the director and staff have adopted
to mobilize their personal social capital on behalf of the program and its participants.
A referral system refers to a resource-bridging method that staff uses to direct
participants in need to specific departments where key resources are available. On
the one hand, the director uses a strategic way to build up the connections with ties
accessible to social resources. The instrumental relationships have created a public
feature and good reputation for the program.
In short, NAI program leaders have developed an effective interaction in which
mutual respect fosters trust among colleagues. The close relationship among them
has promoted interdependency in the staff. Data suggests that program leaders have
come to rely on each other’s networks. In addition, due to a downsizing of personnel,
a particular resource-bridging strategy was developed to cope with the demands of
growing task loads. This effective and efficient strategy helped the program staff to
bridge resources embedded in the affiliated university for program participants in
need. However, results in this study did find that the director’s network behavior was
different from that of her staff. She used strategic ways both to build up connections
and to activate connections with ties that have access to social resources.
Research Question #3: What are the principal factors that might inhibit or
promote the program leaders’ potential to fulfill their capacity to utilize social capital?
The analysis illustrates factors that might decrease or promote program leaders’
capability to utilize social capital. A relational receding, caused by psychological
106
alienation has inhibited the program leaders’ capacity to utilize social capital. On the
one hand, several factors that prompt program leaders to utilize social capital are
presented: personal-motivated participation, shared-belief building process, and the
growing influence of NAI graduates.
Psychological Alienation and Relational Receding
In the interview with Katherine, she complained of her inactive role in the
organization due to her remote office site. The remote office site decreased her
opportunities to make connections with other members of the professional
organization and to maintain friendships with colleagues in the university. The senior
program specialist indicated how she felt about the off-campus office:
It’s kind of difficult at times because I used to hear about what’s going on on
campus. Just for personal reasons….to meet with different people who are from
different, other types of areas, outside. ….for the university itself, I don’t really
get out to hear what’s happening with either my own personal
development…you know…what other thing is going on. So, that’s the only
disadvantage, I think. I was more involved with my other department…hearing
gossip, what’s going on up there. I sort of miss that kind of thing.
Katherine suggested that the off-campus office was physical isolation. The
isolation consequently caused a psychological alienation from peers on campus.
Moreover, the office site was physically inconvenient for program leaders’
socialization with colleagues on the university campus. The inconvenience would
make it difficult to maintain relationships with other departments and may even
impact friendships with peers. Indeed, the distance between the main campus and the
office decreased the staff’s interactions with their colleagues on campus. According
to the survey data, Barbara and Katherine both indicated that the most common
107
method to interact with the elected ties is through telephone or email instead of
meeting them in person.
Barbara’s network demonstrates the mechanism of physical distance to
psychological alienation from her peers on campus. With Barbara’s outgoing
personality and years of work experience on campus, her network should contain a
fair number of close relationship ties. However, what she reported was not consistent
with the ideal situation either in aspect of the size of her active network or the
density of the relationships with her elected ties. Barbara reported the least number
of networks among the program leaders. Some of her elected ties were comprised of
alienated acquaintances that she had never met before.
Barbara complained that some ties from her active network were like strangers.
She pointed out that the conversation with the ties only happened when they
cooperated to manage student incidents. On most occasions, they didn’t see each
other in person but only talked by phone. The relationships between the staff and the
elected ties did not necessarily transform into friendships. Realistically, if incidents
happen and they are not related to the students or the program, these ties might easily
turn down her inquiry.
The physical inconvenience and its psychological isolation influenced the
program leaders’ help-seeking behaviors as well. The next few sections describe
methods used to gain resources or support when the program leaders manage student
incidents. The staff developed a referral system to direct students-in-need to key
108
departments in the university. Likewise, the director conducted a highly motivated
approach to bridge outside resources for the program.
Drawbacks of the Referral System
The referral system does have its limits, though. The staff complained about the
unavailable feedback from departments regarding referrals. Cooperation between the
intervention program and the departments could fail in some cases, especially, as
program leaders point out unsatisfactory feedback from a variety of departments.
The information on problematic consequences and follow-up cautions were mostly
un1available. This was most evident when a program leader complained about
missing feedback from a department when she had to refer students to the counseling
center:
Right, I am giving them (students) the resource. But doing so, we don’t know
what’s going on and the consequences in the future. If I have known
something…..like the mother would say “something’s happening at home
because of this.” But what if there is something deep [and] the
program…requires some longer term… family counseling…the entire family
or it could be the child. Well, we could say, “Try this, try that.” But now what
they receive is “2 sessions instead of 10 sessions.”
In addition, the referral system may become ineffective because of low
department cooperation. So, although the program was a branch in the External
Relations of the university, the coordinated departments might not respond to the
program’s inquiry. One of the respondents summarized the difficulty when they
asked for assistance from outside resources in the university:
There is a tricky thing. There is a personality thing. “I am too busy!!!” Literately,
everybody is overworked. They have plenty of things to do. You make contact
with someone…you know…they would be more open. They might happen to be
109
more influential. You talk to someone and that person can convince someone to
help you out……Maybe it is territory you haven’t got involved in and know.
You have not tried the water yet. Maybe the first time you might fail. You might
not be successful.
The referral system is a solution developed by a combination of impacting
factors. The program staff used the approach to handle student incidents. Their
knowledge of the university facilitated staff developed solutions as they manage
student incidents. The system is a convenient approach to deal with emergencies by
arriving at an effective solution. However, information, feedback and levels of
cooperation do impact the function of the system. The program staff was dissatisfied
with the limited feedback and lack of information to handle consequences. In
addition, levels of cooperation from assisting departments could be a factor
impacting the referral system.
Motivated Participation in a Meaningful Program
Barbara and Kelly both indicated that their work in the program was meaningful
to them. This was especially true of Barbara who became emotional when asked
about her educational background and the children she served. She came from an
immigrant family in which both of her parents were born in Mexico and later
immigrated to California. Her parents’ immigrant status hindered them from
providing her with favorable opportunities for academic success. At the time of this
interview, Barbara expected that she could do something for neighborhood children
with similar backgrounds. In the interview sessions, she talked repeatedly about the
importance of helping the children in the program, as well as their families. Through
the interview, Barbara emphasized a parent’s influence on student performance:
110
We want to give pieces to show how important education is, what the parents’
responsibilities are during the child’s educational timeframe? How they can
reach the goal? ……Because the program not only makes sure the children are
successful, reaching their goals. It’s also for the family. We know that we help
them out by educating them in different areas. When you’re helping the entire
family, you’re not helping one child in the program but you are helping those
who stand behind the child.
I sensed her emotions while she acknowledged her regrets regarding her own
education. She hoped that her regrets would not repeat in these children who have
the same background as hers. Indeed, the program recruited neighborhood students
who have the potential to go to college. Additionally, eighty percent of the students
qualify for the free lunch program. Most of the students are minorities, too. Barbara
came from a low-status immigrant family. Her parents used to struggle to support the
entire family’s daily life. Their low-status immigrant background was not a way to
transform circumstances into support for a college education.
In addition, Barbara’s regrets over her childhood experiences are embodied in
her current participation in philanthropic activity. When asked about her
organizational affiliations, Barbara admits that she regularly participates in church
activities to help impoverished children across the border. She thought that her
participation in church activities would ignite hope among these children who live in
poverty. When asked about how they are recognized or rewarded for exceptional or
notable performance in the program, Barbara said:
I think that when the kids graduate from the program and we are notified that
they get into USC… that is the reward. Just to see that they are able to get
admitted into the university is a personal reward to me. To see them
achieve….There are different times. Their kids even didn’t get the scholarship
and go to other university. They have come to thank us. They came to talk to
111
Kelly, Ms Ammos, and myself. Sometimes, the kids have gone to the university
after one or two semesters, they still come back to visit us.
What she did for the children in Mexico, she did with the students in the program.
Barbara put her effort and passion into helping children with backgrounds similar to
her own. In her office, I could always hear students laugh and talk. Undoubtedly, her
personality and her commitment to students with similar backgrounds make Barbara
a favorite staff member to program participants.
Unlike Barbara’s participation in church activities, the organizational affiliations
of Katherine and Kelly are motivated by different intentions. Katherine confirmed
that her organizational participation is not extensive. She complained of weak
connections with the organization due to the physical distance between the remote
NAI office site and the university’s main campus. The distance became a barrier to
her active participation in professional activities and casual social events on the USC
campus. On the other hand, Kelly demonstrated a highly active social life in her
organizational affiliation. Kelly’s passion for the program differed from Barbara’s
regrets of college dreams long gone. Kelly was more aggressive in constructing her
resourceful network. She was highly motivated to achieve her goals.
Kelly came from a middle-class family in the USC neighborhood. Her parents
had advanced degrees and served in education for years. Her parents’ social and
educational backgrounds built a solid base for her success in education and
ultimately her career. Kelly is an alumna of USC. She holds a bachelor’s degree in
psychology and obtained a teaching credential from there, as well. So, growing up in
a middle-class environment with resourceful networks helped Kelly understand the
112
importance of networking and how to utilize resources. For example, Kelly
explained how she found assistance from her university instructors to help her build
a student intervention program. She strategically maintained relationships with the
university originally cultivated during her academic career there. From these
relationships, she finally landed the leadership job in the program.
Kelly has been highly motivated to achieve her goals. I was surprised by her
response when she was asked about the mission of the program and her current
position. Kelly’s response was straightforward and confident: “I was made for this
program.” In fact, her previous working experience carved a path to her current
success. Kelly actively participated in an academic promoting program in the local
school district as her first job. Her participation in the promoting program won her an
opportunity to be a chief consultant in a federal program. These previous work
experiences facilitated her development and skill with personal resource networks.
Kelly’s well-connected network shows through her multiple titles in multiple
associations. In response to organizational affiliations, the program director’s active
participation surprised me. Kelly was entitled to be chairperson of three different
professional organizations. The purposes of these organizations are similar, in that
they aim to help students gain admission to colleges and universities. Kelly was a
very active participant and played a critical role in the organizations. Her critical
roles in these associations enabled her to bridge multiple resources. What she
intended to do was to integrate different resources embedded with these associations
for students who have limited access to social resources. Her critical titles in these
113
professional associations also gave her a reputation for managing student
intervention programs. Without a doubt, Kelly’s active participation and the
professional reputation helped her to build a resourceful network.
Compared with the director’s active participation in professional organizations,
the program’s staff reported disproportionate organizational affiliations. Barbara
suggested her organizational participation only in church philanthropic activities.
Katherine attended regular meetings in a female development program at the
university. However, the staff consistently reported very little participation in
professional associations.
Shared Belief Building Process
As addressed in previous chapters, normative camp scholars think that social
capital is productive when norms and rules are enforced in the close group
(community). In the case of the NAI program, we clearly see how participants agree
on certain codes, how the norms and sanctions are enforced, and how the social trust
is produced. Components of the program were integrated into a close community and
worked toward the same goal.
The program designed a system in which all stakeholders were expected to play
active roles. For example, in the recruitment interview, the program leaders advised
parents and students about their responsibilities in the program. Their participation in
the program was encouraged and necessary for student achievement. The collective
responsibility to each participant was documented in writing. The written document
titled Neighborhood Academic Initiative Contract (see Appendix H) bound all
114
stakeholders together and required their active participation in the students’
educational journey. The stakeholders were required to make their commitment when
they signed the document in which their rights and responsibilities were clearly
addressed. This deliberately designed contract became a repository of norms. The
contract sets up standards for participants. All participants start their journey with the
clearly delineated regulations and responsibilities. Their journey in the program
begins with a shared belief stated in the written document.
Of course, student academic performance is closely tracked, especially since the
program’s sanctions revolved around student academic performance. The program
now monitors each student’s grade point average each semester. Students who fall
behind program standards will be put on academic probation or dismissed from the
program. Although, it is a sad moment when the program has to dismiss a student,
program leaders know it is the rules that everyone needs to follow. Barbara described
her feelings regarding this issue:
The bottom line is that we want them all to succeed. It might be minor
differences. … I give an example: there is one kid [who] had not done very well
academically. He is very close. There were just…there were a few points a little
bit. Just a little bit. It is like 2.75 that was the requirement of the program and he
was 2.70… You know… just give him another semester. You know, Katherine
might say: yes, he is close. But we can’t save everybody. You let them go, but
sometimes letting them go is good. Because they would go back and come back
to us and show us. They prove to us that they have made differences.
The norms need to be carefully maintained even though it means losing
someone from the program. If the standards are negotiable, the students might try to
shake them up. So, program leaders make the effort to maintain the integrity of an
academic norm. Kelly offered her thoughts on the norms of the program:
115
When you’re helping students to understand …helping them to connect their
goals with their academic behaviors…the work ethnics. Well, they have to be
here early, sometimes, they have to be late. You have to walk back and have
tutoring. Then they have to come back on Saturday. It’s like a boot camp, like
the Marines. They’re not at war, but they are going to college.
The program integrates a parent component as an essential part of the program.
Doing so is not only to promote parents’ participation in their children’s education,
but also to purposely build a close community. Parents are required to attend regular
meetings and likewise encouraged to play active roles in the parents’ association.
The parents’ participation in children’s education is essential to that process.
Consequently, the program conducted a strategic plan to integrate parent’s into the
program.
An Expanding Family--Growing Influence of NAI Graduates
In data collected through surveys and interviews, each program leader reported
the same person as a close friend embedded in their networks. Her name is Julie and
she has provided critical information on various legal issues for the program leaders
as an elected tie. She is a alumna of the program who has consistently offered her
services to the program. She received an undergraduate degree in USC and was later
admitted into USC’s law school. Her on-going relationship with the program and
staff members has remained extremely close, to the extent that each program leader
has kept a copy of the alumna’s high school graduation photo in their offices. One of
the program leaders proudly presented the photos to me and said: “The girl is Julie.
She is like my daughter.” Other program leaders described her as a family member of
the program. Indeed, her role in the program was very unique and remains so. The
116
purpose of Julie’s role in the program is to show evidence of a close relationship
between program graduates and the program.
In fact, many former students maintained close relationships with the program.
Some of them became tutors or part-time assistants in the program after
matriculating to USC. They might be receptionists greeting visitors in the office or
tutors who help tenth graders with math. Some might show up in the office and
spend a whole afternoon there. This is remarkable given that their days of meeting
the challenge of the program are far removed. Still, it seems that there are strong
emotional bonds connecting them with the program.
The NAI student intervention program has done a great job of maintaining
strong positive relationships with its graduates. The presence of alumni in the office
has mostly become a daily feature of the program. Part of the reason is because
program leaders have purposefully encouraged their presence. The program hired
them to be assistants for program activities—paid part-time tutors or activities
coordinators with a budget specifically to support their presence. During these
interviews, Barbara summarized the important role of program graduates:
So they are like constant reminders to those pipelines [of current students]. Like,
you will be tutoring some days. So that’s one constant reminder.… They are
right there. They are in your face. That’s one. I think, a very strong way.
Another way is to talk to them. To tell them positive. You know, it’s like a pep
talk. Try to find what’s happening in their homes. Because when kids are not
doing well, something might happen at homes. You know, you just try to
motivate them, try to tell them. “You could do it, what’s the problem? Do you
need help?
117
Here, Barbara is suggesting that the presence of former students’ in the office is
critical to the success of current students. This is because the presence alumni is a
vivid model of potential success for current students. It is so powerful when these
role models share their past experiences in the program and current ones at the
university level. “Those former students said to the students: you’d better listen to
them (the staff) because they are not kidding,” Barbara added.
The sharing of experiences effectively promotes student motivation. As I
discussed in previous sections, the program required students to adhere to
nonnegotiable standards. Throughout, these academic standards were difficult to
maintain by students from families with limited support. Therefore, behavior is
effectively modeled through personal interactions between the graduates and current
students. Current students learn important information and develop through
conversation with peers who have gone through the program. Therefore, this
mentoring has become a network extending as well as empowering process, helping
these peers build connections with each other. Ultimately, what current students learn
from the interactions helps them to overcome barriers and go through the program
successfully. Barbara offered an example of a common interaction between an
alumnus and student: “I know the program is tough, but think about it this way. I was
just like you. If I can do it, you can do it.”
Since the program helped a good number of graduates get admitted to colleges
and universities, the graduates start a cycle of feedback to the program. This is a
118
planned feature of the program. These graduates become resource suppliers by
offering their services to the program. When the program calls upon these former
students, they show up quickly and provide a key resource. That is, these former NAI
students may become the program’s virtual assets after completing their professional
training and university education.
In conclusion, the data presented in this chapter explored factors that might
inhibit or promote a program leaders’ capacity to utilize social capital. In one
instance, the off-campus office contributed to at least one staff member losing close
contacts with work associates on the USC main campus. A potential result could be
that this impacting factor might weaken the activation of relationships with work
associates in the university.
On the other hand, this study found factors that prompted the mobilization of
program leaders’ social capital. Participation in the NAI program by leaders was
motivated in some of them by impassioned personal goals which also prompted the
utilizing of social capital. A shared belief of helping participants achieve academic
success was discussed in a recruitment process and a legal contract. This shared
belief binds all stakeholders together and requires them to perform to a agreed
standard. At last, this study revealed an emerging influence of program graduates.
These former students are able to bridge different types of key resources for the
program.
119
Conclusion
This chapter provides an analysis to answer the questions: What are the program
leaders’ networks like? How do they mobilize their social capital? What factors
would inhibit or prompt them to mobilize their personal social capital on behalf of
the program? The findings suggest that there are differences in the networks of
program leaders and in the ways they activated the connections with ties. Several
factors were presented in this chapter that could facilitate or prompt a decrease in
respondents to mobilize their social capital.
120
Chapter Five
Discussion
This study was designed to examine the roles of the program leaders in an
effective college-gateway intervention program. In particular, the study adopted the
social capital theory to explore an understanding of the influence of the program
leaders’ networks on the academic development of the adolescent student
participants. The specific college gateway program targeted in this study has an
outstanding professional reputation and is affiliated with a major university. This
study presents complex and unique findings regarding the program leaders’ networks
and the roles these structures played in the development of program participants.
Likewise, this chapter includes a follow-up discussion of the findings presented
in Chapter Four. In this discussion, the findings are primarily examined using the
resource approach of social capital theory discussed in Chapter Two. Yet, this study
also adopts the normative approach of social capital theory to understand the
interactions among program leaders. In addition, broad implications for education
practitioners and recommendations for future research are noted and discussed
following a review of the findings. The last part of this chapter summarizes the
limitations of this study, as well as some factors that might have impacted this study.
Mutual Respect and Social Bonding
Evidence in the previous chapter confirms that interactions among program
leaders are based on a shared value in this close group. The shared value is a
reciprocal relationship through which program leaders respect each other’s role in
121
the program. They know how to interact with each other and avoid overstepping the
boundary of this particular relationship. The analysis shows that mutual respect
promoted a social solidarity among NAI program leaders. This social solidarity
fosters the development of trust within the close group. It has helped to build a solid
basis for program leaders to confidently rely on each other given the demands of
their work. In particular, this social solidarity encourages program leaders to share
resources within their networks and to mobilize personal social capital for their
colleagues.
The mutual relationships reflect interactions among the program leaders as
indicated by data presented in the previous chapter. Notably, all program leaders
reported each other as major support suppliers. They were confident in depending
upon each other while seeking resources or asking for support beyond the staff. It is
like what Putnam (2003) suggests: social capital becomes most powerful when
embedded in a sense network of reciprocal social relation. The reciprocal relation
becomes a collective asset that may advance members’ interests in this close group.
It can be understood that among the NAI program leaders, a reciprocal relation
develops through interdependency as they start to share resources embedded in
personal networks.
In addition, reciprocal respect fosters trust among peers in the program. The
interview data suggests that the reciprocal respect builds a solid foundation for
mutual trust among program leaders. Mutual trust among the NAI program leaders,
according to the definition of Coleman’s social capital, refers to “a resource because
122
it involves the expectation of reciprocity, and goes beyond any given individual to
involve wider networks whose relationships are governed by a high degree of trust
and shared values” (Field, 2003, p20). With reciprocal respect, these program leaders
have developed particular patterns of interaction with peers. The interaction patterns
reflect on the way that they manage student incidents, in that they believe that their
peers would provide strong and trustworthy support for them.
Putnam (2000) distinguishes between two forms of social capital: bonding and
bridging. He points out that bonding social capital is especially effective for both
constituting specific reciprocity and mobilizing solidarity. It serves as a kind of
sociological superglue in maintaining strong in-group loyalty and reinforces specific
identities. Bridging ties from different groups involves a linkage to outside resources
and information diffusing. For NAI program leaders, their mutual respect and trust
serve as sociological glue that bonds them together. The social solidarity within this
close group is sustained through an interdependence of demands from their tasks.
The findings suppport an emerging case for social solidarity being a means for
program leaders to share resources within their networks.
The interest here, in social solidarity between NAI program leaders, is about
how it develops. The analysis derived from interview data suggests that a contextual
factor promotes the devlelopment of this particular interaction among program
leaders. A small staff fosters these program leaders to work closely and furthermore,
to share resources within their persoanl networks. Kahne and Bailey (1999) suggest
that a shortage of program staff might impact the development of a student
123
intervention program due to an overload of tasks and limited energy. This study
suggests that the negative impact of increased workloads on reduced staff could
impair the successful development of student intervention programs. However, an
unexpected finding did point out an effective interaction developing within this close
group. Personnel downsizing in the NAI program indirectly promoted close
relationships to develop among these program leaders. For instance, these work
associates are required to overlap tasks and support each other. So, through such
frequent interactions and cooperation, relationships have become characteristically
closer, because the number of tasks has encouraged them to work together closely.
This outcome likewise reveals dynamics promoting close relationships and social
solidarity.
Physical vs. Psychological Space
The findings also revealed the program staff’s overall dissatisfaction with the
NAI off-campus office site. It became apparent that the physical inconvenience of an
off-campus site consequently has cultivated a psychological alienation among
program leaders as their colleagues remain on the university’s main campus.
Therefore, by implication former professional and social relationships require greater
effort to build and sustain, since the off-campus site has decreased the frequency of
interaction with peers on campus. Specifically, a decline in opportunities for
interpersonal interactions has consequently created an alienated group of program
leaders with regard to relationships with their contacts on the USC campus.
124
Moreover, alienation may foster a weakness to mobilize the connections that may
advance the program leaders’ interests.
The decreasing presence of the NAI staff on the main campus to interact with
peers and colleagues reflects their diminishing participation in mainstream activities.
The staff used to be active both in the professional arena and in social activities.
Their role in the university was clear and closely connected with ties in the university.
Active participation in social activities helped the program staff to also build new
relationships. Moreover, such interactions helped leaders forge relationships
connected with network ties. However, with the new office location, the staff’s role
in the university has gradually diminished.
Bourdieu (1986) argued that the density and durability of ties are equally vital.
Social capital represents an “aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are
linked to possession of a durable network” (p. 249). In this regard, emerging as a
finding is the impact of physical isolation on program leaders’ perception of their
connection with ties in the university. That perception can be one of alienation,
because these ties are most likely to provide key resources or support for program
leaders. Therefore, alienation as significant ties deteriorate can diminish program
leaders’ social capital. Consequently, there is a negative impact on the quality of
relationships sustained by the program staff, because inadvertent withdrawal from
socialization opportunities could further influence the mobilization of social capital.
Contrary to the staff’s diminishing role in campus life at USC is the director’s
expanding role in the university. Interview data indicate that the director actively
125
participates in both professional associations and regular meetings on campus. So,
although the director is working in the NAI off-campus office, the physical isolation
created by the site of the office does not diminish or negatively impact her
socialization with the ties in the university. Rather, the role she plays in the
university is growing stronger because of regular participation in various meetings
with colleagues at USC. Her active role in professional associations outside the
university also facilitates her versatile role in the professional arena. Her multiple
leadership titles facilitate the shaping of connections with other ties embedded in
upper and influential social classes. These connections transform into invitations to
social events where mostly socially influential persons are invited.
Bridging Resources through a Referral Strategy
Surprisingly, interview data indicate a unique resource-bridging strategy used
by staff members. The program staff conducted an effective and convenient strategy
to connect students-in-need with key resources embedded in the university. They
directed students-in-need to departments where key resources, such as support are
available for the student. This unexpected finding is consistent with a previous study
by Pescosolid (1986) who examined a medical referral strategy in Southern Asia.
New residents in a community were directed to medical resources by neighbors who
had cultural knowledge of local medical resources. What Prescosolido argues in his
study is that a social adjustment process in which social context could significantly
impact an individual’s socialization, personal values, and social assimilation.
126
The evidence in the previous chapter indicates that a change of staff members
fostered the development of a referral strategy tailored to their needs. The NAI staff
developed an effective referral strategy to direct program participants to accessible
key resources at the university. The strategy was developed because of a change in
the social context. Specifically, after staff was downsized, leaders needed an
effective and efficient method to manage the needs of student participants—
particularly those needs that would seriously influence student academic
performance.
The referral strategy requires not only the participation of coordinated
departments, but also a particular knowledge of the ways to search for key resources
(to manage incidents) in the complex institution. That knowledge is what Bourdieu
(1986) proposed as “cultural capital,” or activities in a social relation within a system
of exchange that include the accumulated cultural knowledge that confers power and
status (p. 218). Previous work experience on campus equipped program leaders with
the knowledge to cultivate networks and familiarity with the system, well. Staff had
developed personal relationships with key department personnel across the campus,
facilitating staff’s navigation of the complex institution in search of key resources.
However, unsatisfactory feedback or varying levels of cooperation could impact
this particular resource-bridging system. In particular, the NAI staff complained
about one-way feedback from the network of coordinated departments in the
university. The limited feedback from the department keeps the staff from knowing
the outcome regarding student incidents. Generally, the level of collaboration with a
127
department is influenced by the quality of relationships sustained between the NAI
staff and the contacts in those departments. Reasonably, student incidents or
emergencies may not be the primary concern of other coordinated departments in the
university. Therefore, cooperation is highly dependent on staff’s relationships with
key personnel in these departments, because within close relationships, the level of
collaboration is high.
Former Students and Expanding Family
Program graduates do become significant assets to this program. The findings of
this study support comments by Maeroff (1999) on the NAI program. Maeroff points
out that the program successfully fosters close relationships between current students
and former students. Moreover, the findings of this study also suggest that former
students do become additional threads within the fabric of a program that expands
with new “family” members annually. They maintain family-like relationships with
the NAI program.
In my study, the findings likewise show the critical role of program graduates
relative to current students. Past academic achievements and their regular presence
facilitate the alumni’s role as encouragers and supporters of current participants. The
active presence of these alumni role models produced direct motivation and strong
incentives to current students. A previous study suggested that a role model needs to
relate with program participants (Hernandez, 1995). A few other intervention
programs encourage their participants to achieve their goals by inviting successful
public figures to give motivational speeches. Such “one-shot” presentations, however,
128
only reach the psychological dimension of students who are already highly motivated.
Hernandez suggests that role models only become meaningful to program
participants when they are related in a particular way. Otherwise, most participants
perceive such presentations as meaningful but unrelated stories.
Surprisingly, former NAI students are not just role models to current students
in the program, but also offer their professional knowledge to the program. For
example, former student Julie exemplified how a program graduate can maintain a
close relationship with the program. The benefit of close relationships served to
transform Julie’s successful academic attainment into a psychological incentive for
current students to achieve their goals. Moreover, as Julie’s case suggests, former
students can become resource providers in the program as graduates obtain
professional knowledge through higher learning. Also, Julie demonstrated that a
graduate may become a significant tie that can directly transform or negotiate
accessibility to resources or support for the program. Stanton-Salazar (2003)
suggests that those caring people could function as significant bridges to information
with regard to low-status students. As this study revealed, some NAI graduates
function as agents to provide professional knowledge for program participants
concerning various given incidents.
Personal and Institutional Capital
One significant factor that makes the NAI program successful is its affiliation
with USC. The university fulfills its promise to provide resources for neighboring
children through the academic enhancement program. This study praises the
129
university’s efforts to maintain its relationships with local community by helping
neighboring schoolchildren. However, its special affiliation may impact the
development of the program in potentially significant ways.
Notably, the university’s interest in the program could influence the
development of the NAI program. So far, the university has respected the program’s
decisions regarding its development. The daily practices of NAI align with the
mission of the program. However, due to its affiliation with the university, the
interests of the university may create influencing factors that will directly affect the
program. For example, if the university’s interests are not consistent with the mission
of the program, what will be the priority of the program’s concentration? The NAI
program was initiated by a concern that USC should improve its relationship with the
local community. Consequently, the university has been a major source of support to
the program. And, in many cases, the program needs to utilize the resources provided
by the university. Of course, the program relies greatly on its affiliation with the
institutional resources in the university. Yet, whether the university’s interests do or
do not focus on issues that align with the mission of the NAI program, those interests
will nevertheless likely influence the program. In other words, if the university wants
to increase diversity in the program, will this interest become the first priority goal of
the NAI? Or is it possible that program leaders could refuse the requirement from the
university?
This study wants to raise a question about the nature of social capital. The
concept of social capital in this study is defined as accesses to social resources
130
embedded with the program leaders’ social networks. The findings of the study point
out that the university is the major source of key resources for the program and its
participants. Program leaders’ social capital is closely related to the resources
embedded in the university. In other words, program leaders’ ability to mobilize their
social capital is partly based on a premise that USC promises to open access to its
institutional resources for program participants. In this regard, a potential
opportunity is raised to challenge the nature of program leaders’ social capital. So, in
reality does personal social capital really matter? If the mobilization of program
leaders’ social capital is closely related to the university’s commitment, does the
staff’s social capital really matter since it is the university’s institutional resources
that influence the nature of social capital for program participants. The program
leaders’ personal social capital may only matter when they bridge the social
resources outside both the program and the university.
Likewise, personnel attrition affects the availability of social capital for the
program, too. Personnel replacement will cause loss of many things, especially
resources embedded with those personal networks, particularly if the program’s
network depends on the multiple resources in the network of a charismatic leader.
Moreover, new staff would need to build connections with program participants,
parents and their colleagues before their social capital become viable. This is because
program staff utilizes its social capital to negotiate key resources for the program
participants. Without a doubt, program leaders are critical components of the
program and its participants. However, the reality is, like other student intervention
131
programs, the NAI will experience personnel relocation, retirement, and attrition.
Therefore, in the interim replacing staff members also means missing social capital.
In the long run, this may become the significant factor that makes the program
inefficient in practice.
Actually, the NAI program experienced a personnel downsizing which impacted
the program. After the downsizing, NAI became a program with a small staff. The
personnel downsizing, of course meant the loss of social capital to the program. For
example, the counseling component was one of the significant segments of the
program. The absence of the department makes counseling service unavailable, but
also closes access to program leaders’ social capital.
Very few studies discuss the impact of the loss of human resources with regard
to social capital. Of course, the loss of human resources has an apparent impact on a
program. However, did the program downsizing produce all the resulting problems?
The interview data suggests that a smaller but overloaded staff, with large work
demands, now relies on a resource referral strategy. In response, this study wants to
provide reminder of the consequence of downsizing. The downsizing may directly or
indirectly promote the development of a referral strategy. For example, the
connections between ex-colleagues in the counseling department of the program and
existing program staff might inspire the utility of a referral strategy or in other words,
outsourcing. When program leaders need to find counseling resources, strong
relationships with their previous colleagues may create a safety net of help in seeking
access to needed but absent resources.
132
Lastly, this study needs to raise the issue of ethics in the use of social capital.
When we address the importance of adding ties with resourceful access to our
personal networks, do we suggest to our audience to consider intentionally adding or
dropping someone from these networks? Bourdieu (1986) suggested that social
capital could be measured by the quality and quantity of one’s social network. That is,
the more valuable ties one has, the more social capital one owns. If it is the way to
evaluate one’s social capital, is it ethical to suggest to exploit people for personal
gain? Baker (2000) discussed this ethical issue in business networking. The author
suggested that doing business is about networking. The ethical issue is not about
choosing ties to include in one’s network. Rather, it is about managing one’s effort in
networking. However, his argument does not provide a solution to the issue.
In summary, several interesting or unexpected findings were discovered in this
study. These findings include the following: 1) A supportive interaction among
program leaders. 2) Diminishing opportunities to nurture relationships with on-
campus colleagues due to the physical constraints of an off-campus office site. 3)
Psychological alienation from peers and the affiliated university because of the off-
campus isolation. 4) The introduction of creative strategies to bridge outside
resources for program participants. 5) The critical role of program graduates. 6) The
role of personal versus institutional capital. The discussion enables the researcher to
consider solutions and recommendations for educational issues facing practitioners.
On the other hand, this study also raises issues that may impact the development of
133
the program. The next section will review implications for policymakers and
educational practitioners.
Implications
There are emerging issues in the discussion of this study’s findings. In
particular, social context must be considered when examining the roles of the
program leaders no matter whether the ostensible issue concerns supportive
interactions or office location—on or off-campus. As I explored the NAI program
leaders’ roles, I found that the interrelationship between the program and the
university is extremely critical to the success of program leaders. In addition, the
networking strategies and the role of program graduates are also important for the
development of student intervention programs. This is the social context to be
considered.
In this section, several implications will be offered to education practitioners.
These implications are based on findings of this study that can promote the
effectiveness of student intervention programs similar to the NAI program.
Affiliation with Educational Institution
This study calls attention to possible ways to build close relationships between
educational institutions. The relationship of a program to a higher educational
institution may promote program success through effective systems of bridging
resources embedded in the institution for the program with program participants.
Unique university-affiliation programs should become the models for student
intervention programs. In the case of the NAI program, its mission is to help
134
neighborhood youths with limited resources gain admittance to universities. Given
that mission, USC has made a commitment to provide resources for program
participants. The successful NAI model should inspire policymakers and educational
practitioners to consider ways student intervention programs can be initiated in
partnership with an affiliated resource institution. Higher education institutions, like
USC, could embrace the social responsibility to become resource providers for
selected neighborhood communities lacking the resources to help its youth gain
access to higher education.
Such an affiliation could benefit both the school and the local community. It is
a “win-win” partnership when a school and local community start to collaborate to
improve children’s academic performance. The local community benefits when a
university takes care of their children’s academic enrichment and even provides
solutions for students-in-need. Such assistance from a university might go further to
address the needs of students’ families or the local community as a whole. In the NAI
program, as this study has discovered, resources or support do not just benefit
program participants who are in-need, but also provide assistance that can provide
critical solutions for participants’ families. Similarly, such a partnership is very likely
to deepen relationships between the university and community. A close relationship
with local communities could benefit the university in many ways: fundraising,
lifting school cache in local areas, cooperation with local communities over shared
concerns, and so on.
135
This study also calls attention to the connection between current student
intervention programs and participants, family, as well as the local community. Most
student intervention programs put an emphasis on student achievement or
professional skill development. These programs invest resources to promote student
academic enrichment. Yet, my study affirms the observation that what happens in a
students’ family or with a student’s personal needs will have an impact on the
students’ academic performance—whether positively or negatively. To manage
student emergencies and/or family issues requires professional knowledge of key
resources, which are usually unavailable within the program. For example, the A VID
program is a nationwide academic enrichment program that aims to help students go
to a college or university. The program is also affiliated with public educational
institutions and receives support and resources in that context. This study suggests
that program success requires more strategies addressing need to create a close
community for participants, program leaders, family, and local community.
Although this study suggests that such a student intervention program
affiliated with a major educational organization will bring benefits to the program,
such affiliation may have drawbacks with regard to the development of the program.
This is because some interests beside student academic enhancement may not be the
priority of the affiliated program. For example, engaging cultural cultivation among
minority students may become a minor issue in the pedagogy of student development.
However, the mission of intervention programs is set-up based on the university’s
136
interest in efforts leading toward the goal of meeting a student’s dream to gain
admission to college.
Ironically, in spite of a university’s interest in student success, the influence
of affiliation with a university may create a potential risk to the development of the
program. The affiliated institution in many ways determines the program’s
development. Given that the university determines personnel and major financial
resources, the development of a program can be directly related to the degree of
support from an affiliated university.
Increasing Participation in USC
The off-campus office site has its advantages and limitations. The office is
located in a business compound where it is conveniently accessible to program
participants. The program office is perfect for program participants to visit at their
convenience. Yet, as I mentioned before, the physical isolation caused by its remote
location consequently alienates the program leaders from their peers and other
resources on campus. Therefore, because of the diminishing presence and interaction
by staff on campus, I recommend that strategies must focus on ways to overcome the
limitations of a remote office site from its affiliated institution. It is essential to adopt
strategies to improve staff interactions on campus. One way to address this problem
is to promote staff participation in campus organizations and encourage regular
attendance in professional development meetings. Through more participation in
campus organizations, the program staff may find opportunities to build connections
137
with colleagues and invest effort into sustaining relationships with peers on the USC
campus.
In addition, I also recommend specific strategies to include the coordinated
departments’ active participation in NAI program activities. The NAI program may
invite the coordinated departments or key personnel with access to resources or
support to participate in NAI program activities. This kind of invitation may be
presented as an award or an honor in gratitude of their support. Likewise, this
strategy could encourage departments or key personnel to grow closer to program
participants, thereby allowing the nurture of close relationships with the NAI
program staff. In addition to promoting this work-related social atmosphere between
the university and off-site office location, this strategy should also decrease the
staff’s psychological alienation from the university.
Consciously Expand Networks
With the data presented in the previous chapter, NAI program leaders have
adopted different strategies to build and sustain relationships with their ties. For
example, the director is well-connected with both university networks on campus or
with professional associations outside the school. On the other hand, physical and
psychological constraints do make it generally harder to maintain relationships with
peers on the USC campus, because the off-campus office site decreases opportunities
for interaction with peers on campus, and spurs a psychological alienation from the
social life on campus. This problem limits the development of productive networks
for the program staff, in general. For example, the consequences of network
138
behaviors reflect on their roles in USC. The roles of program staff in USC are
gradually disappearing. Their relationships with peers are diminishing or simply
weakening.
Given the different consequences related to the development of staff networks,
this study offers suggestions for program leaders. The way in which the NAI
program director has built her connections can serve as an excellent example for all
program leaders who seek to expand their networks. That is, program leaders may
think of strategic ways to construct connections with ties. For example, the NAI
director’s conscious movement to maintain and activate connections with her ties
exemplifies a practical way for those who work in educational arenas to do the same.
An intentional and conscious awareness of network behaviors is very critical for
people to advance their interests either in their current situation or for potential
interests arising in the future. Therefore, more training and education on practical
and effective ways to observe and evaluate individual network behaviors is
recommended. Specifically, the training should target practical strategies for
expanding networks.
A Resource Referral System for Small Programs
For most student intervention programs, the number of program staff is
usually limited. The insufficient depth in human resources can create a response
among program staff who may choose to invest greater effort in their primary
program tasks. In general, these primary tasks are directly related to the program’s
mission, including academic tracking or activities managing, and so on. Issues
139
regarding participants’ personal and/or family needs and emergencies are unlikely to
become an overworked program leader’s primary concern, even though these issues
may profoundly impact academic achievement.
Program leaders could find an effective way to bridge outside resources for
program participants. According to the findings of this study, a resource referral
system may be a useful tool in student intervention programs. In particular, for small
programs with an insufficient number of staff, the system could quickly bridge
outside resources and effectively manage participants’ incidents. Program leaders
need to develop their own referral system to direct program participants to outside
agents that provide key support. For example, small programs could develop
collective information pools in which participants can quickly access resources
and/or be directed to the appropriate party. These information pools require
cooperation and systematic organization. Program staff need to build up
systematically the information pools. The way to constitute the shared information
pools has to consider the program’s needs and its participants’ inquiries. Like the
NAI program, counseling service, legal issues, and academic information are most
frequent inquired by its participants. The accesses to the key resources become
urgent and necessary for the program staff. Second, share personal social capital is
the key to constitute the information pool. Personal social capital is limited by their
efforts and social lives they have. To build up shared information pool could only
rely on teamwork and staff’s generality to share their person social capital to
colleagues.
140
Likewise, further strategies would probably be needed to decrease any
drawbacks to a referral system. For instance, possible limited collaboration and
insufficient information feedback from resource providers could create a frustrating
system. Therefore, this study suggests strategies to bring resource providers into the
program community itself. In other words, program leaders could regularly invite
departments or key personnel (those who control and possess access to resources) to
program activities. Or they may adopt strategies to improve close relationships with
those same departments or personnel.
A Program Alumni Association
Former students are vital role models for current students because they can
speak with students from personal experiences about the program. The relationships
between graduates and current students transform into motivational incentives for
students. The role of graduates may also evolve into resource providers for the
program in the future due to strong bonding with the program. Since more and more
program graduates will become professionals in the future, their influence on the
alumni association may become noticeable in the development of the NAI program.
The NAI program needs to put effort into forming alumni associations to embrace its
former students and their particular connections with the program, because the
participation of this kind of association in the program would be critical and
ultimately benefit the program.
In fact, student intervention programs can refer to successful alumni
associations at the university. The program’s alumni can provide excellent
141
testimonials that should be sustained in close relationship within an organized
association for them. USC provides a great model for this kind of organization in that
it maintains a well-connected alumni association that has successfully built a virtual
family for the school and its graduates. The school maintains close and frequent
communication with its graduates by active invitation, newsletters, volunteer
opportunities, and so on. Graduates feel connected with the school even years after
their graduations. Of course, the school and its current student population benefit
from the close relationship with alumni through fundraising, job opportunities,
positive school reputation, and so on.
Future Research
Although the social capital theory is expanding its influence on disciplines at a
surprising speed, research on its function in the education field is limited. This is
reflected in the literature review of this study, which shows few studies exploring the
program leaders’ interactions and development of the program under that theoretical
context. Previous studies examine the relationship between program leaders and
student academic enrichment. Most studies concentrate on leadership to understand
interactions among program leaders. However, very few studies adopt the social
capital theory to examine the interactions among colleagues. Future research should
focus on the relationships between program leaders’ mutual trust and development of
academic intervention programs.
Likewise, future research can explore the network behaviors of those in
leadership roles. As discussed in previous sections, the expectations toward leaders
142
can encourage a director to seek connections with different prestigious groups. In
reality, a director is not simply responsible for the staffing or monitoring of day-to-
day administrative tasks. Rather, the leadership position can be expected to bring
outside resources to the table for the development of the program. Therefore, given
the expectations regarding a director’s role, the implications in this study support the
suggestions by Stanton-Salazar and Spina (2003). Their research suggests that
network behaviors should be included in staff training courses because of the
significant influence of networks on the development of adolescents. This study
would suggest more research on the selection of leadership positions. If the
leadership position is expected to bring outside resources into the program, the
expectation may play a critical role in the process of candidate selection. The
director’s network may be one determining factor in the selection standards for that
position.
More research is needed to explore the quality of relationships with weak ties to
respondents. Stanton-Salazar and Dornhusch (1995) suggest that the quantity and
range of weak ties within an individual’s network could be significantly related to a
minority student’s school achievement. The researchers specify that those weak ties
could bring people into contact with both non-kin and individuals from various
ethnic backgrounds. However, this study does not include exclusive measures
exploring the influence of weak ties on the development of networks among program
leaders.
143
Since this study is part of an integrated project, researchers with similar
research interests should examine the roles of program leaders in student intervention
programs within multiple educational arenas. An integrated analysis is needed to
examine the findings across multiple student intervention programs. For example,
following one finding of this study, I reflect on the influence of relationships
between the program and the affiliated university. However, more evidence is needed
to fully examine the influence of the affiliated relationship.
Limitations
There are a number of limitations to this study. As discussed in the previous
sections, the unique setting of the program’s affiliation with a university appears to
be an advantage to the NAI program. This is because the luxury of sharing university
resources creates a good opportunity for the NAI program to achieve its goals. Yet,
since the contextual structure of most student intervention programs differs from that
of the NAI program, the findings of the study are limited to the description of
intervention programs that are affiliated with a resourceful institution—whether a
university or otherwise. In other words, the findings of this study may only be
applicable to programs with a similar contextual structure as that of the NAI program.
Factors from instruments may impact this study as well. Van de Gaag and
colleagues (2004) point out that although the Name Generator tool is capable of
mapping personal networks in detail, the lengthy process might exhaust participants.
While administering the survey, both the interviewer and interviewees appear bored
and exhausted. The physical fatigue could conceivably cause respondents to
144
withdraw from deep disclosure. The respondents might shift their intentions to fully
complete the survey, and create shortcuts to finish as early as possible. Although
there is no evidence to indicate the impact of physical fatigue on the effectiveness of
this tool, this study needs to point to that likely drawback in the data collection
process.
In addition, when this study examines the influence of social class, we refer to
Duncan’s Social Status Scale to distinguish between levels of social class. However,
we have experienced barriers while referring to the scale. Since the scale was not yet
updated at the time of this study, the version we adopted caused some difficulties
with reference to some specific occupations (e.g. computer specialists). I believe one
way to ensure the accuracy of the referring scale is to develop a triangle
measurement. In other words, for those occupations that we cannot directly refer to
on the scale, we derive an estimation by selecting three similar occupations and
calculating the average score. For example, for computer related occupations, this
study would calculate an estimate when the specific occupation is not referred to in
Duncan’s scale. By using this mathematical estimation, errors caused by an outdated
scale can be diminished.
Conclusion
An effective intervention program can be understood as an arena in which its
participants build close connections within the program and with other participants.
This suggests that a student intervention program can be a place where its
participants can create inner networks.
145
Network participants create ties with resources who share similar ethnic and
socio-economic backgrounds. These ties also represent caring program personnel.
Previous research encourages the fostering of instrumental relationships between the
program personnel and its participants. Furthermore, we encourage program leaders.
In this study, program leaders did act as caring personnel to provide substantial
support for program participants. This study further explored the roles of program
leaders with respect to their ability to bridge resources. The effective program,
according to this study, could be defined as one in which social resources are
transmitted though its program leaders. Therefore, program leaders not only become
caring mentors to program participants, but also play an important role in bridging
social resources with the program for the benefit of program participants.
146
Reference
Ambrosino, R., Hefferman, J., Shuttlesworth, G. & Ambrosino, R. (2005). Social
work and social welfare: An introduction. Belmont: Wadsworth
Publishing.Baker, W. E. (2000). Achieving success through social capital:
Tapping hidden resources in your personal and business networks. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Balatti, J. & Falk, I. (2002). Socioeconomic contributions of adult learning to
community: A social capital perspective. Adult Education Quarterly, 52(4),
281-298.
Bali, V . A & Alvarez, R. M. (2004). The race gap in student achievement scores:
Longitudinal evidence from a racially diverse school district. Policy Studies
Journal, 32(3), 393-415.
Bourdieu, J. & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture.
Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.). Handbook of
theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood
Press.
Burt, R. S. (Ed.). (2002). Social capital of structure holes. New Economic Sociology:
Developments in an emerging field. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American
Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120.
Croninger, R. G. & Lee, V . (2001). Social capital and dropping out of school:
Benefits to at-risk students of teachers’ support and guidance. Teachers
College Record, 103, 548-581.
Crowder, Kyle and Scott J. South. 2003. Neighborhood distress and school dropout:
The variable significance of community context. Social science research, 32,
659-698.
Curtis, J. W. (2005). Inequities persist for women and non-tenure-track faculty: The
annual report on the economic status of the profession 2004-05. Academe,
91(2), 21-29.
Dika, S. L. & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational
literature: A critical synthesis. Review of educational research, 72(1), 31-60.
147
Dryfoos, J. G. (1998). Safe passage: Making it through adolescence in a risky society.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Emmerik, H. V . (2006). Gender differences in the creation of different types of social
capital: A multilevel study. Social networks, 28(1), 24-37.
Field, J. (2003). Social capital. New York: Routledge.
Fisher, C. S. (1982). To dwell among friends: Personal networks in town and city.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Flaap, H.D, V olker, B., Snijders, T. and Van der Gaag, M. (2003). Measurement
instruments for social capital of individuals. Universities of Utrecht,
Groningen, and Amsterdam (The Netherlands).
Goddard, R. D. (2003). Relational networks, social trust, and norms: A social capital
perspective on students' chances of academic success. Educational evaluation
and policy analysis, 25(1), 59-74.
Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited.
Sociological theory, 1, 201-233.
Grusky, D. B. (2000, ed). Social stratification. Encyclopedia of Sociology. New York:
Macmillan Reference.
Hernandez, A. E. (1995). Do role models influence self efficacy and aspirations in
Mexican American at-risk females? Hispanic journal of behavioral science,
17(2), 256-263.
Horvat, E. M. & Lewis, K. S. (2003). Reassessing the “Burden of ‘acting white’: The
importance of peer groups in managing academic success. Sociology of
education, 76, 265-280.
Kahne, J. and Bailey, K. (1999). The role of social capital in youth development:
The case of “I have a dream” programs. Education evaluation and policy
analysis, 99(3), 321-343.
Lee, F. J. (2003). Social capital and tenure: The role of race and gender in academic
promotion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles.
148
Leventhal, T., Fauth, R. C., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2005). Neighborhood poverty and
public policy: A 5-year follow-up of children's educational outcomes in the
New York City moving to opportunity demonstration. Developmental
psychology, 41(6), 933-952.
Lin, N. (1999). Social networks and status attainment. Annual review of sociology,
25, 467-487.
Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Maeroff, G. I. (1999). Altered destinies: Making life better for schoolchildren in need.
New York: St. Martin’s Griffin.
McCallister, L., & Fischer, C. (1978). A procedure for surveying personal networks.
Sociological methods and research, 7, 131-148.
McGee, G. W. (2004). Closing the achievement gap: Lessons from Illinois' golden
spike high-poverty high-performing schools. Journal of education for
students placed at risk. 9(2), 97-125.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in
Education: Revised and expanded from case study research in Education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Muller, C. (2001). The role of caring in the teacher-student relationship for at-risk
students. Sociological inquiry, 71(2), 241-255.
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publication.
Portes, A. (1998), Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology.
Annual review of sociology, 24(1), 1-24.
Portes, A. (2000). The two meanings of social capital. Sociological forum, 15, 1-12.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American
community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Putnam, R. D. & Feldstein, L. M. (2003). Better together: Restoring the American
community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Ream, R. K. (2005). Toward understanding how social capital mediates the impact of
mobility on Mexican American achievement. Social forces, 84(1), 201-224.
149
Schneider, M.; Teske, P., & Marschall, M. (2002) Choosing schools: Consumer
choice and the quality of American schools. New Jersy: Princeton University
Press.
Speer, P. W., Jackson, C., & Peterson, N. A. (2001). The relationship between social
cohesion and empowerment: Support and new implications for theory. Health
education & behavior, 28 (6), 716-732.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (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 kin
support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New York: Teachers College
Columbia University.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2003). Informal mentors and role models in the lives of urban
Mexican-origin adolescents. Anthropology & educational quarterly, 34(3),
231-254.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2004). Social capital among working-class minority students.
In school connections: U.S. Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement.
Edited by Margaret A. Gibson, Patricia Gandara, and Jill Peterson Koyama.
New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. & Dornbusch, S. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction
of inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school
students. Sociology of education journal, 68(2), 116-135.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. & Spina, S. U. (2003). Adolescent peer networks as a context
for social and emotional support. Youth & society, 36(4), 379-417.
Van Der Gaag, M. & Snijders, T.A.B. (2005). The resource generator: Social capital
quantification with concrete items. Social networks, 27(1), 1-29.
Van Der Gaag, M., Snijders, T.A.B., & Flap, H. D. (2004). Position generator
measures and their relationship to other social capital measures.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~gaag/work/
Worthy, J., Patterson, E., Salas, R., Prater, S., & Turner, M. (2002). “More than just
reading”: The human factor in reading resistant readers. Reading research
and instruction, 41(2), 177-202.
150
Zhou, M. & Bankston, C. L. (Eds.) (1996). Social capital and the adaptation of the
second generation: the case of Vietnamese youth in New Orleans. In the new
second generation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Zimmerman, M. A., Ramirez-Valles, J., Zapert, K. M., & Maton, K. (2000). A
longitudinal study of stress-buffering effects for urban African-American
male adolescent problem behaviors and mental health. Journal of community
psychology, 28(1), 17-33.
151
APPENDIX A
Personal Background Survey
Name of Respondent:_________________ Date:___________
Demographic Information
1. How old are you?
2. What is your marital status?
3. Do you have any children? If
yes, how many?
4. What is your ethnic
background?
Educational Background
1. What degree or degrees do you
hold? In what area(s)?
2. From which institutions were
your degrees granted and in
what year(s)?
(Skip this question if respondent
doesn’t have any degrees.)
3. What is your parents’
educational background?
Note: If the respondent’s parents
attended college, ask question #2
in reference to their parents
[including where their degree(s)
were granted and in what area(s)].
Current Job
1. Please explain your current
position or role in the (name of
program)
152
2. What is the mission of the (name
of program)?
3. What kinds of students/youth are
targeted in the (name of
program)?
4. What are the most fundamental
core aspects of [name of
program]?
Probe for:
Goals
Activities
One or two key features
(e.g. mentorship,
leadership building)
Employment History
1. What are the two most important
employment experiences that
you have had that apply to your
current job in [name of
program]?
2a. How long have you worked in
your current position?
2b. Have you held any other
positions in this program?
153
Type of Affiliation
(A thru F)
Actively Involved?
(Yes or No)
Name(s)
A
Professional
Association
1.______
2.______
3.______
1.__________________________
2.__________________________
3.__________________________
B
Trade or Industry
Association
1.______
2.______
3.______
1.__________________________
2.__________________________
3.__________________________
Type of Affiliation
(A thru F)
Actively Involved?
(Yes or No)
Name(s)
C
Political Party or
Organization (e.g.,
Black Caucus
neither
Republican or
Democrat)
1.______
2.______
3.______
1.__________________________
2.__________________________
3.__________________________
D
Church or
Religious
Organization
1.______
2.______
3.______
1._______________
2._______________
3._______________
Type of
Affiliation
Could you briefly describe the nature of your
involvement?
154
Appendix B
Name Generator
1. Social Developmental Mentoring and Support:
• When you have a student who has ongoing developmental issues and needs
guidance and/or close mentoring, who are the people you would most likely
call to assist you ?
• In the past year, which of these people have actually helped you this way?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
2. Medical Health and Wellness Support:
• One of your students has a medical or dental need that is not being
adequately attended to. Who would you call upon?
• In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon to
assist you?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
3. Crisis Support:
• Who are the people you would most likely call upon for assistance in
dealing with psychological/ emotional the crisis?
• Which of these people have you actually called upon or referred someone to
for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
4. Educational and/or Gateway Support:
• When you have an educational concern or need for any one of your students
or program participants, who are the people you would likely call upon to
assist you in helping your student?
155
• In the past three months, which of these people have you actually called
upon or referred to for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
5. Legal Assistance:
• If one of your students has legal issues or questions, who are the people, you
would call upon?
• In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon or
referred to for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
6. College Information and Support:
• If one of your students needs to obtain college information who are the
people you would likely call upon for assistance?
• In the past year, which of these persons have you actually contacted and/or
referred to receive assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
7. Financial Information and Support:
• When one of your students needs information or assistance regarding
financial matters, who are the people you would call upon?
• In the past years, which of these persons have you actually contacted and/or
referred to receive assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
156
8. Executive or Administrative Educational Support:
• If one of your students needs assistance and/or information from a person in
Administrative leadership and/or Executive leadership (e.g., Principal,
Superintendent, Dean or Provost, etc.), who are the people you would most
likely call upon for assistance?
• In the past year, which of these persons have you actually contacted and/or
received assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
9. Job or Career Placement Support
• If one of your students needs assistance and/or information regarding
employment options and/or prospects, who are the people you would likely
call upon?
• In the past years, which of these persons have you actually contacted and/or
referred to receive assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
10. Political Support:
• If one of students needs some assistance with a political issue, who are the
people you would most likely call upon( e.g., Board Member, state, local, or
federal government, union leaders)
• In the past year, which of these persons have you actually contacted and/or
referred to receive assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
11. Mentoring Assistance and Support:
• When one of students needs specific mentoring assistance for one of your
157
students or program participants, who are the people you would most likely
call upon?
• In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon or
referred to for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
12. Mental Health and Wellness Support:
• If one of your students is in need of ongoing emotional and/or moral support,
who are the people you would most likely call upon?
• In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon or
referred someone to for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
13. Law Enforcement Support:
• If one of your students needs assistance with specific law enforcement
concerns, who are the people you would most likely call upon?
• In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon or
referred someone to for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
14. Scholarship or Grant Funding Support:
• If one of your students needs assistance with grant or scholarship funding,
who are the people you would call upon?
• In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon or
referred someone to for assistance?
• Is there anyone who actually helped that you did not expect to help you?
• Have you ever been in a position where you EITHER directly
158
provided this resource to one of your students, or directly provided
this resource to one of your program colleagues?”
Follow-up Interview on Relationships Identified in the Name Generator
1. Let’s talk about your relationship with________. When did you first meet,
and how were you acquainted?
a. Is this person an immigrant to the United States?_____
b. If so, how old were they when they first settled in the United States?____
c. (If applicable) Do you know if one or both of their parents settled in the
United States?_____; if so, from what country or countries?______
d. (If not an immigrant) Do you know what part of the country this person is
originally from?_______
2. How often do you get together or have personal conversations with_______?
3. (Applicable for alters indicated as sources of multiple forms of support) You
indicated that _____ was a source of support for (name the different types of
supports), do you ever feel uncomfortable about asking_______ for help for any
of the sources of support you indicated them as a resource for? (explain the
circumstances)
4. Has any event occurred in the context of this relationship that has either
improved the relationship, or made it more complicated or conflicted? (If yes,
explain the circumstances).
5. (Applicable for providers of three or more types of support) It appears
that_____ is an important source of support for you
a. How would you describe your relationship with________
b. Tell me about the last time______ helped you. Describe the situation that
you needed help with.
159
c. How did you feel about the support he/she gave you?
d. Did the support or assistance actually fulfill your needs? Why or why not?
e. Would you turn to them again for the same type of help in a similar
situation? Why or why not?
f. Has ______ ever asked you for assistance with an issue or problem?
i.If so, what kind of help?
ii.If not, why do you suppose they did not ask you for help?
g. Have you ever been upset at, or had disagreements with _______?
i.If yes, explain.
ii.How did you resolve your differences?
6. This next question is similar to the last one, but much more specific. I would like
to know whether you have ever provided specific forms of support to
__________, whether or not [he/she] explicitly asked for such support or
assistance. Let me elaborate.
[immediately follow with]:
a. Can you scan the list of ‘support categories’ we covered earlier [Phase IIB2],
and tell me whether you ever provided one or two of these forms of assistance to:
_____________ . If you have never provided any of these forms of assistance to
[______ ], that’s fine as well.
[NOTE: If there appears to be instances of the respondent acting as a ‘source of
support’ to ‘alter,’ try to get two instances.]
b. [For each instance—linked to the list of ‘support categories,’ [e.g., “Crisis
Support”] ask the following questions:]
160
o Can you elaborate on this instance where you provided __________
[‘name of alter’] with ____________ [indicate the ‘category of
support’]; for example, what was the situation?
o Was ____________ receptive to your assistance?
o What was the outcome?
c. Do you see yourself as a major source of support for __________________ ?
161
Appendix C
Position Generator
Name of respondent: _____________________ Date:__________________
Same Work Place: someone employed by the same
institution/organization. At a minimum, someone that you have regular
small talk or share opinions with (e. g., faculty member, campus
administrator).
Different Work Place: someone not employed by the same
institution/organization, but that you attend meetings within a
professional context (e.g., conferences, professional development) and
have regular small talk or share opinions with.
If there are more than 10 persons that you can think of in a column,
then mark 10+.
Colleague/
Acquaintance
Job/Occupations
Family
Friend
Same
workplace
Different
workplace
None
College/University Professor
School Counselor
Child Care Worker
University Dean
Principal
School Athletic Coach
162
College/University
Admission Director
School Faculty (High/Middle
school
Teacher Aid
Author
College Scholarship
Coordinator
Janitor
Financial Manager in
Educational Credit Union
Academic Advisor in
University
Auto Mechanics
City Council Members
Social Worker
Electricians
High Level Foundation
Officer (make decisions who
get grants)
Computer Technician
Policemen
Judge
Test Taking Consultant
Security
Lawyer
Real Estate Agents
Firemen
Corporate Executive Officer
CEO
163
Therapist
Cook
164
Appendix D
Resource Generator
Name :______________________ Date:________________________
Same Work Place: someone employed by the same institution/organization.
At a minimum, someone that you have regular small talk or share opinions
with (e. g., faculty member, campus administrator).
Different Work Place: someone not employed by the same
institution/organization, but that you attend meetings within a professional
context (e.g., conferences, professional development) and have regular
small talk or share opinions with.
If there are more than 10 persons that you can think of in a column, then
mark 10+.
Acquaintance or
Colleague
Do you know anyone who…
Family
Friend
Same Different
None
Yourself
1 …..who has broad knowledge
in computer programming or
technology.
2 …..can provide therapeutic
service related to occupational
or physical condition.
3 …knows how to do household
repairs and home
improvements.
4 …has a vacation home.
5 is an entrepreneur.
6 …knows how to prepare a wide
range of food [ethnic food]
(extremely good at cooking).
7 …can speak and write a foreign
language that was learned in
school [not from family, or
national origin].
8 ……could help with counseling
on every day problem.
9 ..is an expert gardener (‘funds of
165
knowledge’ pertaining to
gardening and plants, trees,
shrubs, and commercial products
for garden).
10 Has traveled to a foreign country
(e.g. Europe: not returning to
visit relatives in Mexico).
11 …have professional knowledge
referring to service or agency
that deal with social welfare.
12 …..has knowledge of printing
service.
13 …is a contact of local media.
14 ….knows about local
bureaucracies work, and how
to “work bureaucracies”
(e.g., city hall; school district,
school board; state assembly,
etc.)
15 ….who can provide custodial
service.
16 ….teaches in a college or
university.
17 knowledge about the
acquiring college scholarship.
18 ….is an accomplished
musician [reads music].
19 …has a Law Degree
20 ….knowledge about the college
admissions process.
(technical details).
21 …..who is associate with the
theatrical work.
22 ….holds political office.
23 ….is coaching /coached a sports
in college.
24 is a “talented artist
25 …invests in real estate.
166
Appendix E
Individual Ethnographic Interview Questions
1. Describe the mission of this program.
a. Do you agree or disagree with the mission? Why?
b. Do the students you serve influence your interpretation of the mission?
Why?
c. When you are talking with your colleagues, do you ever talk about the
mission of the program? Does you view of the mission differ from your
colleagues? Please describe.
d. What factors help you to achieve the mission of the program?
In the context of the program (bureaucratic)
Consider the factors of interpersonal interaction
e. What factors prevent you from achieving this mission of the program?
In the context of the program (bureaucratic)
Consider the factors of interpersonal interaction
2. Describe the types of activities your program conducts for students.
3. Does the program have norms and sanctions with students? If so, how are
they enforced?
4. Describe the duties and responsibilities of:
The program coordinator
The program staff
a. What would be ideal?
b. How does the reality compare with ideal?
5. In your view, how do people get rewarded or recognized for:
a. Program coordinators
b. Program staff.
6. What do you do to:
167
a. Motivate students to make commitment.
b. Help students overcome barriers to success.
c. Help students develop essential skills that help academic
developmental success.
d. Help students develop essential skills that help social developmental
success.
7. How do you assess what works and what do not work in your program?
8. Do you seek out opportunities for students to advance themselves
academically or socially? How…
9. Do you use anyone in your personal network of contacts to achieve this?
Describe a condition or situation in which you do so…
168
Appendix F
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (USC)
Neighborhood Academic Initiative Program
CONTRACT
This contract explains terms and conditions for participation in the USC Neighborhood Academic
Initiative Program. It is intended to be a partnership among interested parties to assure that the
undersigned student may be able to receive a high-quality education at the University of Southern
California.
A) STUDENT:__________________________
I agree to:
1. Maintain no less than 95% attendance in all Academy-sponsored classes, activities and
programs, unless I am prevented from doing so because of illness, in which case I will attend
no less than 90%.
2. Maintain a satisfactory grade point average in all academic subjects as condition of remaining
in the Academy.
3. Abide by the Code of Ethics.
4. Meet admission requirements set forth by both the University of Southern California and the
USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative, and current at the time of my application, in order
to qualify for the four and one half year USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative Scholarship.
I understand that I will be admitted to USC through the Structured Curriculum Program
which has been designed to assist students who may benefit from additional support during
the first two years of their college program. I will comply with the guidelines of the
Structured Curriculum Program.
5. Never involve myself in any form of cheating. As a scholar, I will NEVER give my peers the
answers or conclusions to homework assignments, tests, quizzes, projects and activities until
after the assignments, tests or quizzes have been turned in and graded or when the teacher
gives me permission to do so.
Cheating will result in immediate expulsion from the Academy.
6. Sustain a consistently positive attitude and well-disciplined behavior pattern in the Academy,
169
at home and in the community.
7. Honor the Pre-College Enrichment Academy’s dress code, including the use of make-up and
jewelry.
8. Strive diligently to perform at the highest possible academic and social skills level I can attain.
9. Enroll in college preparatory courses through high school, and commit energies to acquiring
the skills I will need to gain admission to and flourish in a college or university of my choice.
10. Notify the USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative in writing should I decide to withdraw
from the program.
11. Refrain from indulging in any from of drug possession or use (including alcohol),
possession of a weapon or any form of criminal activity. This will result in immediate
expulsion from the program.
12. Follow the rules of my home school.
13. Never engage in any activity resulting in vandalism, including graffiti.
14. Never, under any circumstances, engage in fighting. This will result in immediate expulsion
from the program.
15. Refrain from gang involvement or wearing of any gang-affiliated colors or paraphernalia.
16. Refrain from using any racial or sexist epithets, slurs or engaging in any form of racist and
sexist behavior.
17. If I elect to attend the University of Southern California as an undergraduate student. I
agree to fulfill my community service obligation through work-study as a peer counselor in a
middle or senior high school, tutor in the Academy, worker in a community service-oriented
program or as a member of the Initiative’s recruitment team.
18. If I elect to attend the University of Southern California as an undergraduate student, I agree
to meet all state, federal and university financial aid deadlines as a condition of eligibility for
the USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative Scholarship.
B) PAENT, GUARDIAN OR ADVOCATE
I/We agree to:
1. Share with the Initiative staff any problems my child may have at home, school or in the
community, or changes in behavior/attitude which may negatively affect his/her academic,
social and emotional development.
2. Share with the Initiative staff pages one and two of the recent year’s federal income tax forms
or other income documentation by the end of first semester 9
th
grade in order to gauge
income levels for scholarship information.
3. Participate in the Family Development Institute and maintain no less than an 80% rate of
attendance or have a family representative-parent, guardian or advocate –participate
170
regularly on behalf of the student.
4. Attend or have a family representative (parent, guardian or advocate attend) all Academy-
sponsored, student-focused activities.
5. Take advantage of the educational and employment skills enhancement opportunities
available to me in the Family Development Institute.
6. Serve as volunteer for at least one Academy-sponsored program.
7. Sign a note of affirmation should the student decide to withdraw from the program.
C) INITIATIVE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Agrees to:
1. Provide well-trained professional staff, educationally sound curriculum materials and learning
assistance services that collectively address the individual needs of students and parents in
both quantity and quality.
2. Meet with the student and his parents, guardians or advocates to discuss any problems or
concern they may have about any aspect of the USC Neighborhood Academic Initiative or
Family Development Institute.
3. Maintain a high degree of respect, compassion, honesty and dignity in every interaction with
students, parents and representatives from the community.
D) UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Agree to:
1. Provide financial aid to those Initiative scholars who meet admissions requirements-as pre-
determined by NAI and USC officials-current at the time of their application to USC and,
who apply for financial aid in accordance with University financial aid policies in place for
the year the student applies for admission to USC.
2. Guarantee students-based on determined need - admitted through the Neighborhood
Academic Initiative, financial aid to cover full tuition, mandatory, orientation and course fees
and cost of books for nine semesters of undergraduate study at USC.
+Tuition (full-time tuition up to 18 units per semester)
+Books and supplies (average)
+Mandatory Fees (health, programming, orientation and Topping fees)
+Course Fee
TOTAL GUARANTEED FINANCIAL AID
171
3. Calculate amount of additional financial aid-to cover cost of room and board, transportation
and personal expenses-on the basis of every individual student’s need. Need is calculated by
subtracting the students and parent contributions from an average cost of education for one
academic year at USC. The cost of education is constructed as follows:
+Room and Board (student housing accommodation: double room in residence hall with
standard board meal plan-for those on-campus; board-meal plan-allowance for those living at
home.
+Transportation (allowance fro transportation from home to school-but, NOT parking if car
brought to student housing accommodation)
+Personal Expense
=TOTAL COMST OF EDUCATION
TOTAL COST OF EDUCATION
-Parental Contribution (based on income)
-Student Contribution (minimum of $1,200 for first year)
=NEED
4. Guarantee students not admitted to USC as freshmen, but as transfer students, financial aid to
cover full tuition, mandatory, orientation and course fees and cost of book for whatever the
maximum duration for financial aid is when the student enrolls at USC, but not exceeding six
semesters as determined by financial need. For example, if a student transfers to USC as a
sophomore, he/she will be awarded financial aid under the terms of the Neighborhood
Academic Initiative Scholarship for a maximum of six semesters. If a student transfers to
USC as a junior, he/she will be awarded financial aid, under the terms of the Neighborhood
Academic Initiative Scholarship, for a maximum of four semesters
5. Prepare for these students financial aid packages that consist of scholarship, grant and work
study assistance per family income.
6. Provide financial aid for a maximum of fifty students per year.
E) LOS ANGELLES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Agrees to:
1. Grant all students permission to attend the two sessions at the USC pre-College Enrichment
Academy.
2. Give full credit for all subjects taught at the USC Pre-college Enrichment Academy.
172
3. Give access to school records of all students participating in the USC Pre-College Enrichment
Academy to authorized NAI staff.
4. Create interdisciplinary teaching teams for students involved in the Academy; provide an
additional common conference period for those teachers participating in the team.
5. To work in cooperation with the Executive Director of the Neighborhood Academic Initiative
to select all school staff assigned to the Pre-College Enrichment Academy.
Student ID#:_______________________________
Student Signature Print Date
Parent/Guardian/Advocate Signature Print Date
Neighborhood Academic Initiative Signature Title Date
Vice President of External Relations
University of Southern California Signature Title Date
Principal
Participating School Official Signature Title Date
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Examining the networks of program leaders in the community college component of the Puente Project within the context of a social capital framework
PDF
The manifestation of social capital within the mathematics, engineering, and science achievement (MESA) program
PDF
Social capital networks of institutional agents and the empowerment of low-status youth in a federally funded intervention program
PDF
An AVID program investigation: examining an intervention program within the context of social capital theory
PDF
Impact of required parental involvement on African American male students and families: a qualitative study of the USC-NAI program
PDF
Defining the mobilization of social capital for low-SES minority youth participants in the Summer Bridge program by program leaders
PDF
Social capital, institutional agency, low-status, urban youth, and empowerment: an investigation of School on Wheels, Inc.
PDF
Social capital networks of institutional agents and the empowerment of African American youth
PDF
Imparting social capital to educationally disadvantaged students: A study of the early academic outreach program
PDF
Noncredit programs: catalyst for development of social capital in adult students
PDF
Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence
PDF
The impact of cultural capital on advancement via individual determination students from two southern California high schools
PDF
The influence of social networking sites on high school students' social and academic development
PDF
The intersection of grit and social capital: a mixed methods examination of successful first-generation college students
PDF
An online strategic career planning and leadership development curriculum for women in upper-division undergraduate and graduate programs
PDF
Social capital, institutional agency, minority or low-status youth empowerment, and AVID implementation
PDF
The impact of social capital on economic performance: lessons from small and medium size enterprises (SMEs)
PDF
The experiences of successful higher education Latino administrators and educational leaders in selected western United States community colleges
PDF
Intersectional equity in higher education leadership: leveraging social capital for success
PDF
Social media and health: social support and social capital on pregnancy-related social networking sites
Asset Metadata
Creator
Liou, Tung-Yuang
(author)
Core Title
Using social capital in examining program leaders of intervention programs
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
09/20/2007
Defense Date
07/11/2007
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
academic enhancement,NAI,OAI-PMH Harvest,program leader,social capital
Language
English
Advisor
Hirabayashi, Kimberly (
committee chair
), Baca, Reynaldo R. (
committee member
), Jun, Alexander (
committee member
)
Creator Email
tungyuang@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m832
Unique identifier
UC178757
Identifier
etd-Liou-20070920 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-580918 (legacy record id),usctheses-m832 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Liou-20070920.pdf
Dmrecord
580918
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Liou, Tung-Yuang
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
academic enhancement
NAI
program leader
social capital