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
/
The manifestation of social capital within the mathematics, engineering, and science achievement (MESA) program
(USC Thesis Other)
The manifestation of social capital within the mathematics, engineering, and science achievement (MESA) program
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE MANIFESTATION OF SOCIAL CAPITAL WITHIN THE MATHEMATICS,
ENGINEERING, AND SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT (MESA) PROGRAM
by
David Angel Martínez
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2007
Copyright 2007 David Angel Martínez
ii
DEDICATION
This study is dedicated to my parents and sisters, Edmond, Margaret, Raquel,
and Rosalinda, who have inspired me to reach as high as possible while standing tall.
In addition, I could not have completed this work without the constant support and
encouragement of my love, Amalia bella.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I give thanks to my very own institutional agents who have provided the
support and guidance that made this study possible. Drs. Ricardo Stanton-Salazar,
Raul Cardoza, and Reynaldo Baca, my mentors of graduate school and professional
endeavors. My fellow members of the social capital dissertation group, especially,
Cristina Castelo Rodriguez and Imelda Quintanar. And to the institutional agents
that have inspired this study.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vi
Abstract vii
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Chapter 2: Literature Review 22
Chapter 3: Methodology 62
Chapter 4: Data Analysis 88
Chapter 5: Discussion 127
References 164
Appendices 170
Appendix A: Resource Domains and Essential Resource and 170
Relationship Groupings
Appendix B: Personal Background Survey 172
Appendix C: Staff Worksheet 174
Appendix D: Survey of the Program 176
Appendix E: Name Generator 177
Appendix F: Name Generator (Respondent’s Copy) 182
Appendix G: Code Sheet for Relationship Type Column 183
Appendix H: Ethnicity Coding Sheet 185
Appendix I: Code Sheet for Name Generator Settings 188
Appendix J: Code Sheet for Name Generator Setting 190
(Respondent’s Copy)
Appendix K: Code Sheet for Frequency Column 191
Appendix L: Occupations Descriptions for Name Generator 192
(Interviewer’s Copy)
Appendix M: Organizational Affiliations (Interviewer’s Copy) 194
Appendix N: Organizational Affiliations (Respondent’s Copy) 196
Appendix O: Organizational Affiliations Response Sheet 197
(Interviewer’s Copy)
Appendix P: Position Generator 198
v
Appendix Q: Rationale for the Position Generator 200
Appendix R: Resource Generator 201
Appendix S: Rationale for the Resource Generator 203
Appendix T: Follow- up Interview on Relationships Identified 205
in the Name Generator (Interviewer’s Copy)
Appendix U: Ethnographic Interview Questions 207
Appendix V: Social Network Survey (“Name Generator”) 209
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Potential Institutional Agents 71
Table 2: Areas of Institutional Support 73
Table 3: Position Generator – Access to High-, Medium-, 94
and Low-status Alters
Table 4: Name, Position, and Resource Generators – Percentage (%) of 98
High-, Medium- and Low-Status Instances Identified
Table 5: Position Generator – Alter Relationship to Program Leader 101
Table 6: Resource Generator – Alter Relationship to Program Leader 101
Table 7: Position Generator – Alter Status and Relationship 102
Table 8: Resource Generator – Alter Status and Relationship 102
Table 9: Name Generator – Ethnic Representation 103
Table 10: Name Generator – Percentage(%) of multiple 104
relationships and weak ties
vii
ABSTRACT
This study analyzed the presence of social capital within the context of a
specific community college program, called Mathematics, Engineering, and Science
Achievement (MESA), a retention program that serves underrepresented and low-
income community college students in an effort to increase persistence and transfer
rates to four-year institutions in the science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Institutional agency refers to persons who use
their influence, capacity, and resources relative to their position to assist others in
gaining access to networks, resources, information, and opportunities essential for
social mobility. Five research questions guided the study: (1) What are the
characteristics, features, and composition of the social resource networks of
intervention program coordinators? (2) What are some of the factors that facilitate or
constrain the program leader’s access and mobilization of resources on behalf of
themselves, students, program associates, and program agenda? (3) How do these
institutional agents work to enhance program participants’ social networks so that
students themselves become independent and learn to network and access resources?
(4) Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally draining task. How do
institutional agents deal with this pressure and time consuming task?
An inductive analytical methodological orientation was utilized within this
study. The inductive segment of this study revolved around the mindset and ideas
learned from the interviewing of MESA administrators and students. A clear vision
was established as to how social capital can permeate the MESA program based on
viii
these interviews. However, the question remains as to how underrepresented college
students can be empowered to persist on to graduation and enter STEM careers. The
empowerment of students relies heavily on the involvement of institutional agents on
a college campus and how these agents can mobilize resources on behalf of students.
The problem that plagues underrepresented college students within STEM majors is
one of ensuring that these institutional agents have strong social networks that serve
as conduits to beneficial resources for minority students. As a consequence to the
scope of this study, analysis of every instance of emotional connection, identity
creation, and institutional agency on a college campus extends beyond the limitations
of this study.
1
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction of the Problem
Trends in persistence with respect to traditionally underrepresented (African-
American, Latino, and Native American) college students pursuing degrees within
the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines present
an interesting problem. Within STEM disciplines at institutions of higher education
throughout the country, diversity has not maintained parity with the rest of the
campus. Analysis of overall college student statistics shows that underrepresented
students comprise only 18% of all first-year college students (American Council on
Education, 2006). In 2000-01, according to the American Council on Education
(ACE), roughly 13% of all bachelor’s degrees awarded to African American and
Latino students were STEM degrees. This data is in stark contrast to the percent
amounts of Asian American (31%) and white college students (16%) awarded STEM
degrees. A lack of representation during first-year college studies and lower
persistence rates has created a large disparity between non-minority students and
underrepresented students in terms of degree completion. The problem is further
magnified within the STEM disciplines as minority representation within these fields
is considerably less as compared to non-STEM disciplines (American Council on
Education, 2006).
2
Background of the Problem
The importance of the STEM fields within the United States cannot be
denied. Education, research, and employment within the STEM fields have
constituted 50% of U.S. economic growth for the past 50 years (Malcolm, Chubin, &
Jesse, 2004). Currently, 39% of all people under the age of 18 are considered an
underrepresented minority and this figure will continue to increase with the
continuation of trends in population growth (American Council on Education, 2006).
The data above suggests that, in order for the United States to maintain its global
competitiveness, people of color will have to assume an increased number of jobs
and careers within STEM. The U.S. faces stiff global competition in terms of the
production of bachelor’s degrees in STEM mainly from India and China. According
to the ACE, Chinese institutions of higher education award 130,000 more
undergraduate engineering degrees than U.S. universities on a yearly basis. As a
consequence, minority student representation and graduation within STEM must
increase to keep pace with global and industrial demand.
Congress has played an active role in promoting diversity in STEM and
making minority access a national issue. The Science and Engineering Equal
Opportunities Act of 1980 made equal opportunity in STEM a national priority. The
act mandated the development of more domestic talent in STEM and it charged the
National Science Foundation (NSF) with its implementation, particularly in its
approval of STEM research grants. In the 1990s, the Hart-Rudman commission
found that the number two threat to national security was a failure to invest
3
adequately in STEM fields to produce more qualified domestic scientists and
engineers.
The call for increased representation in the STEM workforce requires a larger
pool of minority STEM college graduates. With the passage of Proposition 209 in
1996 and its subsequent implementation in 1998, California public higher education
could not consider race, sex, color, or ethnicity in any admissions policies. As a
substitute, states have adopted percentage plans in which the top percent of every
high school within the state would be guaranteed admission to a public university. In
California, the Eligibility in Local Context (ELC) guarantees UC admission to the
top 4% of the state’s public and private high schools. These race-neutral admissions
policies aim to create a “critical mass” or the representation of minority students that
a university deems sufficient to realize the educational benefits of a diverse campus
(Malcolm et al., 2004).
So what kind of impact, if any, has policy had on minority representation in
California higher education and, more specifically, within the STEM disciplines? In
1997, the year before Proposition 209 was put into effect, minorities pursuing higher
education were more likely to attend community colleges than 4-year institutions
nationally with nearly 55% of all minorities in higher education enrolled in two-year
colleges (Phillippe & Patton, 1999). The magnitude of this is greater in California,
which has the largest community college and most diverse system in the world
(CCLC, 2003).
4
The current race-neutral practices do not consider the discrepancies in social
capital between minorities and non-minorities, as there exists a tendency to equate
university preparedness with performance on standardized tests. Valencia et al.
(2002) states that schools with a majority of Chicano students tend to have many
students of low-income status, high dropout rates, lack of funding resources, poor
achievement test scores, low persistence on to college and little to no college
preparatory classes. Furthermore, Hurtado et al. (2003) indicates that standardized
test scores are overly emphasized within college admissions policies and that more
attention must be focused on high school and college grade point averages as well as
a student’s desire to succeed academically. The arguments presented above support
the use of race-based admissions policies since minorities are more at risk of being
denied admission using current race-neutral policies.
The University of California Office of the President (UCOP) released figures
in 2002 showing that even though Latino students make up 42.3% of California’s K-
12 enrollment only 3.8% of Latinos in the state are eligible for the UC system. For
African Americans, only 2.8% are UC eligible. Thirty percent of Asian high school
graduates and 13% of white high school graduates are UC eligible for 2004. UC
eligible signifies that students are in the top 12.5% of their high schools and does not
guarantee that they will gain admission to any UC institution.
The impact created by policy and legislators to create more minority
representation within higher education and, more specifically, within the STEM
disciplines may not have the desired effect due to the lack of parity that still persists
5
within higher education. Ensuring that a “critical mass” of underrepresented
students exists to pursue STEM studies through university admissions policies is
only scratching the surface when discussing the retention and persistence of minority
college students. The vital elements that are missing within the discussion of
minority representation within higher education are the intellectual and emotional
connections students make with learning material that enables student empowerment
and persistence. The distinction between STEM and non-STEM disciplines in this
study is important since the intellectual and emotional connections made by students
with STEM learning material, student peers, faculty, and mentors are unique as a
result of the rigorous nature of STEM curricula and the level of dedication required
to obtain a STEM degree.
An understanding of the problem facing underrepresented STEM students
may be found within social capital theory. Social capital is the resources within a
social network of an institutional agent that can be utilized by students for academic
success (Lin, 2001). Within social capital theory, issues of empowerment,
institutional agency, identity creation, and school membership are addressed that are
applicable to the academic success of underrepresented college students. In
particular, social capital theory can be tailored to address the specific characteristics
of the STEM disciplines in an effort to identify the sources of social capital that are
most beneficial to STEM college students. Social capital theory is well-suited to
address the intellectual connections that STEM students must invest into their
education so that they are better prepared to handle the heavy academic and
6
emotional demands of the STEM disciplines. As a result of the potential benefits to
college students and, in particular, STEM students, social capital theoretical
frameworks formed the basis for this study.
Within social capital theory, there are two main camps: the critical network-
analytic camp and the normative-functionalist camp. The critical network-analytic
camp maintains a focus on the disparities in social capital between the dominant and
minority social classes. The critical network-analytic approach to social capital
theory identifies the social capital that a student brings into the learning environment
via external factors such as family, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity. Bourdieu
(1986) further defines the critical network-analytic viewpoint and states that students
with lower levels of parental education are at a disadvantage compared to students
whose parents have higher education levels. Dominant societal values, attitudes, and
language and interaction skills tend to be less prominent in students who come from
families that do not possess higher levels of education. The past, current, and future
trends dictate that minorities will continue to come from families without higher
education. These trends are based on the low minority representation in higher
education and high representation in K-12. Dika and Singh (2002) explore the
question of whether social capital in the network-analytic framework is positively
linked to educational attainment and achievement. Their notions of what types of
social capital students require in order to gain access to education include parents’
cultural capital, teacher interest and expectations of student, and discussions about
jobs and education with other adults. In the end, Dika and Singh (2002) state that
7
positive connections exist between the amount of social capital a student has (using
various measures and indicators) and the extent to which they achieve long-term
success in school.
For the normative-functionalist approach to social capital theory, the main
focus is on institutional norms, interpersonal trust, social networks, and organizations
as the main elements of social capital. The normative-functionalist approach to
social capital theory differs from the critical network approach in that the former
dissects the social capital created within the campus environment that is engendered
by campus institutional agents. For example, institutional agents within the
Mathematics, Engineering, and Science Achievement (MESA) program, a retention
program for underrepresented community college STEM students, exist in the form
of program director, staff, and advisors whose involvement with students expands
existing networks of resources through strong and weak ties (Granovetter, 1983). An
example of a strong tie between a student and beneficial resources can be a family
member that has attended college and can guide the student through their college
career. An example of a student’s weak tie may be acquaintances or colleagues of
MESA program staff that may not be as accessible as family members, but who are
willing to assist the MESA program and students in a smaller capacity. Assistance
from weak ties can be in the form of job shadowing, career workshops for students,
donations for books and scholarships, and volunteering. As the student becomes
more involved within the MESA program, the strong ties of program staff become
the weak ties of the student, adding to their social capital. As students near degree
8
completion or conduct searches for summer employment, they can draw from these
weak ties to increase their opportunities for employment in a desired discipline. An
effective institutional agent within the MESA program will create a conduit between
their strong and weak ties to students in an effort to promote persistence and eventual
degree completion within STEM (Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003). Inasmuch as
underrepresented STEM student have to dedicate themselves to their education and
become socially involved in the campus to increase the likelihood of success, MESA
staff must also work on expanding their own network of connections so that students
can identify more with course material and future career possibilities.
Coleman (1988), a major player within the normative-functionalist camp,
introduces three forms of social capital that explain why different groups of students
performed better than other groups. The three forms of social capital include
obligations and expectations, information channels, and social norms. STEM
obligations and expectations are delineated to students via technical course study
skills, financial aid, STEM course planning, and technical career counseling
workshops in an effort to give students a general understanding of the level of
commitment necessary for success within STEM disciplines. The resources made
available to STEM students are different than those resources provided to non-STEM
students since each resource is tailored to STEM curricula, career, and financial aid
issues. Information channels serve as conduits for necessary resources that students
need to survive and succeed academically. Social norms, as defined by Coleman
(1988), create an unwritten agreement between institution and student that delivers
9
rewards and success if obligations and expectations are adhered to. The presence of
all three of these forms of social capital and the institution’s ability to create an
atmosphere (i.e. MESA) in which students can access these resources will help to
empower the student. In addition, the notion of the student as a social agent whose
actions are dictated by norms, rules, and obligations is introduced by Coleman
(1988). Basically, students who subscribed to the three forms of social capital of
expectations, information channels, and norms set forth by the institution were more
likely to succeed; whereas students who set their own norms independently were
more likely to drop out.
The establishment of a student’s identity on the college campus as it pertains
to their success and achievement within the STEM disciplines is also important. Not
only must there exist key institutional agents, as introduced by Granovetter (1983),
to motivate and empower students to achieve, the students must create for
themselves an identity that equates to success within the classroom. STEM-related
identities are defined by the future careers that STEM disciplines lead into (e.g. civil
engineer, biochemist, and mathematics professor). The problem that many students
face as they pursue STEM studies is that of dedicating themselves to achieving an
identity that carries high value and social status. It is very easy for students to
assume an identity, whether it is academic or career-driven, that does not require the
rigorous and mentally-challenging coursework, study time, and out-of-classroom
learning that have come to typify the STEM disciplines. The process of high value
multiple identity creation among MESA students is an essential aspect of this study
10
that can enhance the academic and emotional connection between STEM disciplines
and students.
The unique nature of the demands that STEM disciplines place on college
students is derived from the technical nature of most STEM courses that require a
minimum level of scholastic aptitude prior to course enrollment. As students
progress through their STEM curricula, they must have completed certain
prerequisites within their core technical courses (i.e. mathematics, physics, and
chemistry) in order to move on to higher level technical courses (i.e. molecular cell
biology, engineering, and biochemistry). Data shows that African American and
Latino STEM students actually persist at the same rates as Asian American and
white STEM students for the first three years of their undergraduate education
(American Council on Education, 2006). It is not until the third year that a
significant portion of minority students veers off the prescribed track leading to
graduation. Six years after starting their college education only 62.5% of
underrepresented students that had persisted into their third-year of STEM studies
had received a bachelor’s degree. Once again, this is in stark contrast to Asian
American and white student persistence rates which are significantly greater at
94.8% and 86.7%, respectively. On a positive note, the data assembled by ACE
shows that the majority of underrepresented students unable to complete their STEM
degree within six years from the start of college had not dropped out, but were still
enrolled and working on their degree at a considerably slower pace.
11
Many factors affect the persistence rates of underrepresented students within
the STEM disciplines. The degree to which a student persists in their college
education has much to do with the amount of college preparation received, the age at
which a student starts college, the level of parental education and family income, the
level of institutional involvement, and whether or not a student attends on a full-time
basis (American Council on Education, 2006). Students who undergo a more
rigorous high school curriculum are twice as likely to earn a bachelor’s degree in
STEM as found by a study conducted by ACE. Almost all students (97.6%) who
receive a STEM bachelor’s degree started college before the age of 19. Students
who have at least one parent with a bachelor’s degree or higher are nearly twice as
likely to complete their bachelor’s degree (American Council on Education, 2006).
A similar statistic was found by the ACE study for students that come from families
with above average income levels where higher family income students are a little
less than twice as likely to receive a STEM bachelor’s degree. Institutional
involvement on behalf of the student is also common amongst STEM degree
completers. Nearly 30% of all STEM degree recipients were socially involved with
their institution as compared to 14% for STEM non-completers. And finally, ACE
found that 75% of STEM completers attended college on a full-time basis. Many
STEM non-completers were more likely to work while attending college and less
likely to receive financial aid assistance in the form of grants during their first year
of college studies (American Council on Education, 2006).
12
Underrepresented college students within the STEM fields, in general, have
to overcome many barriers before and during their college education. Minority
students from working class families and communities are more likely to come from
low-income families and be first-generation college students than their Asian
American and white counterparts (America Council on Education, 2006). In
addition, low-income students are less likely to have undergone an intense and
rigorous high school curriculum than middle- and upper-income students (King,
2002). Low-income students, as a result of their socioeconomic status, may feel
more of an obligation to work to financially support their college education and
family income. Underrepresented students can also feel isolated from the campus
community as a result of an inability to identify with students and faculty that do not
resemble the communities that underrepresented students come from (American
Council on Education, 2006). This lack of identification within the campus
environment is even more pronounced within the STEM classroom since minority
student representation within STEM courses is less than non-STEM courses
(American Council on Education, 2006).
Statement of the Problem
The question remains as to how can underrepresented college students be
empowered to persist on to graduation and enter STEM careers utilizing practices
based on social capital theory. The social resource networks of institutional agents
must be understood, in terms size and access to resources, to see if program leaders
13
are mobilizing resources on behalf of underrepresented students. Underrepresented
student empowerment is not a result of admitting as many minority students as
possible into the higher education pipeline. Such actions would not guarantee that
students make intellectual and emotional connections with their learning material
and, just as importantly, the college campus. The empowerment of students relies
heavily on the involvement of institutional agents on a college campus and how these
agents can mobilize resources on behalf of students. The problem that plagues
underrepresented college students within STEM majors is one of ensuring that these
institutional agents have strong social networks that serve as conduits to beneficial
resources for minority students.
The courses of action that a college campus can take to empower
underrepresented students and eliminate educational barriers are limited. It is
impossible for student service and retention programs to alter the socioeconomic and
parental education levels of college students. Attempting to increase the college
preparedness of underrepresented students to the levels of students who entered
college having completed a rigorous high school curriculum can also be a nearly
impossible task for colleges. Fortunately, the amount of hours of employment that
students assume during the school year and their level of campus social integration
remain as variables that can be influenced by college student service programs to
increase persistence rates. These variables revolve around concepts of campus
involvement, integration, and connectedness that have high connection to academic
success and lend themselves nicely to firmly established theoretical frameworks.
14
Purpose of the Study
The rigorous nature in terms of coursework of the STEM disciplines
separates itself from non-STEM studies and requires a significant level of dedication
and commitment from students that pursue STEM degrees. The level of dedication
and commitment varies from student to student within the MESA program and
creates a tight-knit community in which social capital can be cultivated and nurtured.
The purpose of the environment in which MESA students grow academically,
intellectually, socially, and emotionally is to empower students from lower social
class backgrounds, to accelerate their academic preparation, to build on what they
bring from their communities, and to make them ‘competitive’ on the playing field
with non-MESA students. Typically, this playing field is racist, male-chauvinist, and
classist (Bourdieu, 1986) that maintains its unbalanced position to perpetuate elite
domination within society and makes it difficult for minorities and women to
succeed.
Analysis of every instance of emotional connection, identity creation, and
institutional agency on a college campus extend beyond the limitations of this study.
As a result, this study focused on the social capital cultivated by program leaders of
a retention program based within California community colleges. The Mathematics,
Engineering, and Science Achievement program is dedicated to ensuring that
underrepresented and low-income students pursuing STEM studies are provided the
necessary resources to transfer to a four-year institution and persist within STEM.
15
The resources provided by MESA include tutoring, mentorship, course advisement,
career planning, faculty and industry involvement, a dedicated study space with
computer and printing access, book and calculator loans, scholarships, and university
field trips just to name a few. The program is grant supported and operates on a
limited budget that is maintained via state and college funding. Due to the types of
familial and fostering relationships that are the defining features of the MESA
program, the program connects with students on a more personal level than most of
the existing student services programs. As a result, this program provides a fertile
environment for the incorporation of those empowering processes that have been
highlighted by the application of social capital theory in the study of student
interventions (Maeroff, 1998; Stanton-Salazar, Vásquez, and Mehan, 2000). MESA
activities and the overall program culture have the objective to increase student
connections with learning material and can be enhanced by the incorporation of
institutional agency which lies at the core of social capital theory as defined by the
network-analytic frame of social capital theory. The manifestation and engendering
of social capital within the MESA program is the focus of this study.
Both the critical network-analytic and normative-functionalist approaches to
social capital theory are highly applicable for the empowerment of students from
lower socioeconomic status to make the transition from high school to higher
education. As a result, the focus of this study incorporated aspects of institutional
agency and identity development pertaining to program leaders of the MESA
program. In addition, this study applied both the normative-functionalist and critical
16
network-analytic camps of social capital theory to the practices and social networks
of MESA program leaders. This study also clarified the importance of social capital
within the MESA program and how it is utilized to enhance achievement and the
social networks of STEM students. In particular, the study analyzed how
institutional agents develop the relationship between MESA students and
institutional norms, interpersonal trust, and social networks. The existing or non-
existing relationships were discussed to understand the types of resources and forms
of “institutional support” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997) that MESA students have access
to that may very well go a long way to accounting for their success in this program.
The role of identity creation within MESA was also introduced to determine the
extent to which the MESA program develops and engenders multiple roles amongst
STEM students. The institutional agents that work within the context of the MESA
program (director, staff, faculty, volunteers, and students) are essential to this study
since they provided insight into the types of networks conduits that the MESA
program provides access to for the benefit of the students.
An analytical induction methodological orientation was utilized within this
study. The analytical induction orientation worked appropriately with study
respondents to understand their mindsets and the internally-developed framework
they use to make sense of what they do. A clear vision was established as to how
social capital can permeate the MESA program based on these interviews. The type
of analysis conducted within this study incorporated a mixed methods, qualitative
research study with ethnographic components.
17
Research Questions
This study used the following questions to guide its purpose:
What are the characteristics, features, and composition of the social
resource networks of intervention program coordinators?
What are some of the factors that facilitate or constrain the program
leader’s access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and program agenda?
How do these institutional agents work to enhance program participants’
social networks so that students themselves become independent and
learn to network and access resources?
Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally draining task.
How do institutional agents deal with this pressure and time consuming
task?
Importance of the Study
This study shed light on the role of ‘social capital processes’ within the
MESA program---with a particular emphasis on the activities of MESA personnel
that have to do with the mobilization of social support and ‘social capital’ on behalf
of MESA students and other MESA colleagues. With respect to the low retention,
persistence, and graduation rates of underrepresented minorities within STEM fields,
this study approached the cause of these problems with a focus on social networks,
18
identity creation, and institutional involvement. The narrow yet important focus of
this study will be of use for similar retention programs that exist at nearly every
institution of higher education (including community colleges) that has a
commitment to diversity retention and graduation within their respective mission
statements. It is expected that the analysis provided by this study will give evidence
of a relationship between effective applications of social capital and institutional
agency within the STEM fields. The information provided in this study will be new,
as the social capital lens has not been formally associated with STEM retention
programs in the past. Possible outcomes for students include a deeper understanding
of the connection between MESA students and STEM learning material, and the
effective resources that promote student graduation and career-path persistence. The
goal is to have MESA students define and achieve their established goals and set
them at level that is attainable, yet of high value.
Definition of Terms
Alter: A person identified by an institutional agent on any network
instrument survey administered during the data collection phase of this
study.
Bridging: The ability of persons to function as a ‘human bridge’ to other
agents and networks where students have access to resources,
information, and opportunities outside of their individual embedded
networks (Noguera, 2002; Stanton-Salazar, 2004). It includes the
19
relational activities on the part of program agents to ensure that these
outside agents provide the support needed by the student.
Complex Role Sets: A set of connected behaviors, rights and obligations
as conceptualized by actors in a social situation. It is mostly defined as an
expected behavior in a given individual social status and social position
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Critical Mass: The representation of students from an underrepresented
group that a university deems sufficient to realize the educational benefits
of a diverse campus (Malcolm et al., 2004).
Embedded Networks: Individual membership in a social or economic
structure or community whereas, the community or structure facilitates
viability and access to resources or benefit within the structure (Stanton-
Salazar, 1997, 2001).
Empowerment: A psychological state involving active participatory
processes by which individuals gain essential resources or competencies
to increase self-efficacy and accomplish set goals (Maton & Salem, 1995)
Institutional Agent (Agency): Persons who use their influence, capacity,
and resources relative to their position to assist others in gaining access to
networks, resources, information, and opportunities essential for social
mobility (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
MESA: Mathematics, Engineering, and Science Achievement program.
A retention program that serves underrepresented and low-income
20
community college students in an effort increase persistence and transfer
rates to four-year institutions in the STEM disciplines.
Role Identity Creation: The assumption of multiple identities, with each
identity pertaining to a particular social position and value (Flores-
Gonzalez, 2002).
School Membership: The creation of social bonds by students that create
a connection to the internal social network of the school (Wehlage et al.,
1989).
Social Capital: The resources embedded in social relations and social
structure, which can be mobilized when an actor wishes to increase the
likelihood of success in a purposive action (Lin, 2001).
STEM majors/disciplines: Mathematics, statistics, computer/information
science, computer programming, electrical, chemical, mechanical, civil,
or other engineering; engineering technology; electronics. Natural
resources, forestry, biological science (including zoology), biophysics,
geography, interdisciplinary studies including biopsychology,
environmental studies, physical sciences including chemistry, and physics
(American Council on Education, 2006).
Organization of Chapters
The subsequent chapters include a review of relevant literature that are vital
for this study, a description of the methodology used in the study, analysis of the data
21
collected in the study, and a discussion of future implications that the data results
have on higher education. The literature review introduces theory on social capital,
identity theory, and school membership in an effort to provide a solid base for
application of this study. Chapter 3 includes a detailed description of the
methodology, rationale of the sample, data gathering process, and methods of
analysis for the study. Chapter 4 presents any significant findings learned from the
study and Chapter 5 delves into the relationship between social capital, STEM
student achievement, and identity theory.
22
CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review
This study focused on the institutional agents and the social capital they
possess at three intervention programs, specifically the MESA programs at Eastern
Community College, Foothill Community College and Rolling Hills College. One
objective of this study was to understand how these institutional agents act to
mobilize vital resources and individuals on behalf of the students they serve. The
relationships that MESA program staff possesses provides much of the valued
resources and funds of knowledge that allows the MESA program to effectively
operate to encourage and empower students to succeed. However, there can be
institutional and individual obstacles that prevent program leaders from mobilizing
the resources they have access to. The leaders of MESA programs and other
intervention programs are not automatically considered institutional agents. Program
leaders must be proactive and choose to be an institutional agent that focuses their
attention solely on mobilizing social capital for their program participants.
This chapter introduces the underlying principles and objectives that have
defined the MESA program as a higher education intervention program. It is
important to understand the purpose and the mission of the MESA program to
pinpoint the appropriate theoretical frameworks that provide structure to this study.
In addition, this chapter cites key works within social capital and related theories that
are employed as the theoretical frameworks within this study. Once the theoretical
frameworks have been identified, research questions are introduced that will
23
incorporate key theories and guide the instrumentation, data collection, and data
analysis sections of this study.
The theoretical frameworks utilized within this study include social capital,
student empowerment, institutional agency, school membership, and identity
development. There are two main camps that have emerged out of social capital
research. The first camp, engendered by Coleman, is classified as the Normative-
Functionalist approach. Within this camp, there exists a focus on the properties or
characteristics of social mediums – such as the strength of the relationship, trust, and
social closure. The second camp, the Network-Analytic approach, is espoused by
Bourdieu and focuses on resources and forms of empowering social support
(Stanton-Salazar, 2006). In addition, theories of institutional agency are utilized
within this study to create a complementary theoretical framework to the established
theories of social capital. The concept of institutional agency was first
acknowledged by Stanton-Salazar (1997) in which he identifies institutional agents
as individuals that occupy positions of moderate to high status within a specified
social hierarchy or other system of stratification. As a result of Stanton-Salazar’s
research, this study focused on program leaders of the MESA program to understand
if they are utilizing their institutional agent positions for the benefit of program
participants.
In addition, empowerment theory was utilized to determine how institutional
agents can motivate and empower underrepresented students of color majoring in the
STEM fields to succeed within the STEM fields. Since the MESA program is also a
24
retention program, program leaders can benefit from the incorporation of
empowerment techniques into their programmatic functions to increase transfer and
persistence rates. Theories of school membership were also utilized to understand
how program leaders encourage MESA students to establish connections within their
college communities. This is a crucial aspect for the success of students since
campus involvement enhances an individual’s social capital and ability to access
resources. Finally, the foundations of identity development were uncovered to
understand if program leaders are utilizing such theories and practices to connect
program participants to their future careers within the STEM fields. Students will
not be able to succeed if they cannot visualize themselves as successful; which is
especially important within the rigorous curriculum and coursework demands of the
STEM fields.
The MESA Program
Retention programs exist in virtually every institution of higher education.
Programs can be integrated into the existing student services that the college already
provides. In this manner, services such as counseling, tutoring, group study, and
career development are afforded to the entire student body. More specialized
retention programs provide resources that cater to student socioeconomic status,
major, ethnicity, gender, religion, or athletic program involvement. Examples of
underrepresented students within each respective category include: a working class
student, a STEM student, an African American student, a female student, a Muslim
25
student, and a black athlete. The existence of specialized retention programs is in
response to discrepancies in academic success amongst underrepresented students
within certain student categories. Even though institutions of higher education are
unable to discriminate in terms of what type of student can be provided specialized
resources, these retention programs make extra effort to market and attract their
target populations through phone campaigns, summer campus immersion programs,
student ambassadors, and student orientations.
One such specialized student retention program, the MESA program,
provides STEM discipline enrichment to underrepresented students in an effort to
promote transfer to four-year institutions as STEM majors. The ways in which
MESA has demonstrated positive results is a result of the innovative resources and
programs that community colleges have implemented. These resources include
academic excellence workshops, orientation courses, transfer process assistance,
career advising, student and professional organization connections, a study center,
professional development workshops, and an Industry Advisory Board (MESA,
2006). Via the academic excellence workshops, MESA students take many of the
same math and science classes together and learn how to maintain their academic
success through group study. Orientation courses teach college survival skills to
incoming STEM students. Transfer process assistance provides college application
workshops and field trips to four-year universities to make the transfer process as
seamless as possible. Student participation in MESA career advising exposes
students to the various STEM career options through industry mentors, industry
26
tours, job shadowing, career fairs and internships. Student and professional
organization networks further strengthen the bonds of students to industry mentors
and provide students the opportunity take more specialized and informal tours of
local STEM companies. The key feature of the MESA program is the student study
center because it provides a central location for student study, workshops, and
networking. Professional development workshops have students participate in mock
job fairs, resume and job interview workshops, and tips on how to secure part-time,
full-time and summer employment. Lastly, the Industry Advisory Board serves as a
vital connection between students and professionals that provides scholarships,
strategic planning, internships, and field trips (MESA, 2006).
An effective and distinguishing feature of the MESA program is the amount
of industry involvement that has proven beneficial to the human development and
academic success of program participants (MESA, 2006). The MESA program
utilizes industry exposure and interaction at an early stage in the development of
MESA students to create connections that are vital in the academic success in the
STEM disciplines for its participants. Another interesting feature is the highly
specialized nature of the academic and transfer workshops provided by MESA staff
and volunteers. For the workshops to be effective, they must be tailored to the
majors and universities that students are interested in. Study skills workshops for the
STEM disciplines are much different than non-STEM discipline workshops due to
the nature of the learning material in STEM classes. In addition, a university with a
high national reputation for quality education does not necessarily always equate to a
27
strong program in the STEM disciplines. The MESA program provides the
necessary guidance for students to make informed decisions about their transfer
institutions and attend high quality STEM universities.
When analyzing programs such as MESA, it is useful to classify and analyze
the program’s resources and supportive activities using sound typologies that are
common across similar retention programs to aid in the evaluation and possible
strengthening of existing STEM retention programs. Even though many of the key
resources provided by the MESA program have an industry slant that distinguishes
themselves from resources provided by many retention programs, some resources
fall into common typologies that are also present in other retention programs. An
example of a similar type program with common typologies to that of the MESA
program is the Meyerhoff Scholars Program.
Student Empowerment: Meyerhoff Scholars Program
A study conducted by Maton & Salem (1995) provides an in depth analysis
of the effectiveness of the MSP and the different typologies that exist within the
program. Issues of student empowerment, institutional agency, and identity creation
were identified within the study and serve to fortify a connection with the essential
underpinnings of social capital theory. The study does an excellent job of detailing
why and how the essential features of MSP empower African American students to
succeed academically. As demonstrated from MSP, student empowerment,
institutional agency, and identity creation can lead to a promising future within the
28
STEM disciplines and gives students a desire to give back to students that are
attempting to follow in their footsteps.
In addition, the study conducted by Maton and Salem (1995) provides insight
into the common empowering characteristics of different community settings. One
particular community setting is especially appropriate for the development of social
capital, with respect to key resources and forms of social and academic support
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997), amongst students within STEM disciplines. The Meyerhoff
Scholars Program (MSP) provides educational support for African American
students with an interest in studying science-related fields. Similar to the MESA
program, MSP resources include group studying, educational advisors for students,
academic and financial scholarships, a freshman summer bridge program, and school
administrator and parental involvement (Maton & Salem, 1995). Within MSP the
typologies that are identified include a strong belief system, a common role structure,
and inspirational leadership. A main objective for the program is to have students
strive for the highest levels of academic achievement and achieve psychosocial
growth. This has been achieved by the development of skills that achieve success
within the STEM fields.
Upon further analysis of MSP, Maton and Salem (1995) distinguish different
types of support structures that maximize the academic potential of participating
students. One such support structure is the belief system instituted by MSP that
serves to unite program culture, values, and ideology. Within an effective belief
system, students are given opportunities for personal growth and directed motivation
29
that will allow them to achieve desired goals. In particular to MSP, three strengths
of an effective belief system are relevant to this study. First, MSP has a group-based
belief system that can inspire growth amongst students by challenge and motivation
that not only defines goals but delivers the “means of reaching those goals” as well
(Maton & Salem, 1995). Second, MSP incorporates a strengths-based strategy with
their belief system that empowers the student to believe that they can in fact achieve
their own goals. More specifically, students are made to believe that they possess
the ability to succeed in science and serve an important role in helping others do the
same. Lastly, the MSP belief system is “based beyond the self” and allows students
to view their journey as “part of a larger humanity-based and/or spiritually based
group mission” (Maton & Salem, 1995, p. 640). Since MSP deals with mainly
African-American females, many students within the program feel that they are
enhancing and empowering the black community through their persistence within the
sciences.
Another type of support structure within MSP that contributes to the success
of the program is role structure. In the context of MSP, role structure is defined as
the “availability and configuration of roles within a setting that provide meaningful
opportunities for participants to develop, grow, and participate” (Maton & Salem,
1995). MSP has a highly accessible and multifunctional role structure in which
students receive constant encouragement to utilize MSP study groups and resources.
Community service and internship opportunities are highly publicized and
encouraged by MSP staff since experiential learning has the ability to expose
30
students to academic and industry careers at an early age. MSP is considered
multifunctional because opportunities exist for both the learning and for the utilizing
of skills (Maton & Salem, 1995). Students are on the receiving and giving ends of
mentorship, tutoring, and advisement. During the exchange process of these
program resources learning is taking place in which students can utilize in their
academic and professional careers. Skill utilization is enhanced through experiential
learning activities such as internships and community service.
Maton & Salem (1995) define the support system as a “social support
resources within a setting that contribute to individuals’ quality of life and to their
ability to cope with stressful life situations” (p. 646). The connection to social
capital within this support structure is apparent as the authors detail two ways in
which this structure can empower students. Maton & Salem (1995) places the role of
a support system as a vital resource for people “lacking power in society” to “deal
with current disempowering condition in their lives” (p.646). This is very important
for minority students, especially in the STEM disciplines, since a lack of
representation in higher education can be disempowering for them. The second way
that a support system can empower students stems from the challenge and stress that
arises when students embark on the journey to achieve life goals and exert more
control over one’s life. In cases where this is exhibited, like that of MESA, it is
crucial to have a support system in place to alleviate those stresses. The unique
features of MSP allow the program to exhibit three vital components of an effective
support system: encompassing, peer-based, and community engendering.
31
Encompassing refers to the variety of resources available to students. MSP provides
support both formally and informally via staff, roommates, and friends that serve to
monitor student performance and create a network of “proactive” and “reactive”
support (Maton & Salem, 1995). A peer-based support system is one which peers
reciprocate the support given each other to create an environment conducive to
success. This component is the most vital within MSP since students align academic
aspirations, challenges, and even ethnicity to create a strong support system. The
last component of the MSP support system, community engendering, ensures that the
program provides more than basic resources (i.e. tutoring, advising, scholarships),
but a “sense of community” in which students feel comfortable. MSP students take
similar classes, live with one another, and have groups of friends that are comprised
mainly of MSP students. In addition, students see the MSP staff as “parental
figures” that nurture, challenge, and guide them through their academic careers.
The final support structure that contributes to the success of MSP is
leadership. Maton & Salem (1995) define leadership within a program as “the
qualities of key individuals with formal and/or informal responsibility for a setting”
(p. 650). Leaders of student programs can lead in two styles of involvement: directly
and indirectly. As the styles suggest, direct leadership involves the “empowering
influence” that leaders exert over program participants and indirect leadership
focuses more on the leader’s ability to motivate and secure the buy-in of staff
members. The authors detail four characteristics of effective leadership displayed
within MSP: inspirational, talented, shared, and committed. The notion that effective
32
leadership must inspire people is one of the four frames of leadership as introduced
by Bolman & Deal (2003). MSP was founded by an African American
mathematician whose life accomplishments include serving as a university president.
His compelling vision is instilled into MSP staff and students any chance he can get
through one-on-one meetings, group talks, and lectures. His impressive resume and
accessibility serve as an inspiration to all that are involved in the program. Talented
leadership is vital in order to balance the heavy demands and constant instability of
program management. As an example of effectively talented leaders in addition to
the various talents of the founding father of MSP, management within MSP is
consistently “engaging, personally affirming of students, and able to relate
effectively to diverse individuals” (Maton & Salem, 1995, p. 652). Leadership must
share responsibilities with subordinates in order to empower new leaders committed
to seeing students rise to their full potential. Responsibilities within MSP are
consistently shared as the number of leadership staff on the rise since MSP’s
founding. Lastly, committed leadership will ensure that members are fully involved
in, not only program activities, but also in programmatic decision making. MSP
leadership effectively mobilizes resources to meet student needs in an effort to
enhance student achievement.
Through the various support structures and resources utilized by MSP, Maton
& Salem (1995) isolated key items that were instrumental in the success of program
participants:
33
Observation and interviews reveal that integral to achieving these positive
academic outcomes is the development of higher levels of self-confidence in
one’s capability to cope with and succeed in the (predominantly white)
setting of the university in general, and with mastering difficult math/science
content in particular. Students now in graduate school indicate that integral
to the empowering process was learning to work well in groups, be assertive,
utilize available resources, relate to diverse individuals, and maintain a
consistent academic focus. (p. 636)
The effective methods that ensure student success within MSP coincide with
building student social capital through effective peer, administrative, and faculty
networks. The research and findings presented above regarding MSP underscore the
need for these types of program dynamics to be instilled in programs throughout
higher education in an effort to empower minority students within STEM disciplines.
Unfortunately, a similar type of study that relates programmatic resources to
social capital theory has not been conducted for the MESA program. This is
unfortunate since MESA has been implemented at more colleges than MSP.
Currently, MSP exists only at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County and
MESA is present at 28 community colleges throughout California (MESA, 2006).
Since, MESA serves a larger number of institutions and students than MSP, it is
important to understand just exactly what role, if any, social capital plays in the
development and academic success of MESA participants. The understanding of the
social structures and networks of MESA may lead to program improvement that can
have positive effects on the achievement gap between minority and non-minority
college students in STEM.
34
Theoretical Frameworks
The utilization of social capital in the network-analytic and normative-
functionalist frames within this study has the potential to offer a new paradigm of
effective retention programs in higher education that go beyond simply providing
resources for students, but actually take the next step and create meaningful
connections between students, mentors, and STEM. Since this study ventured into
uncharted territory in terms of STEM student development, it was necessary to
anchor the study in empirically verified theoretical frameworks that can provide a
means to rigorously analyze program features and, in particular, to examine the key
role played by program leaders.
Social Capital Theory
Social capital is the various social networks one belongs to that provide
access to resources. Robert Putnam (2000) notes, “whereas physical capital refers to
physical objects and human capital refers to the properties of individuals, social
capital refers to connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of
reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them” (p. 19). Alejandro Portes
(1998) expands on this idea of social capital when he states, “[t]o possess social
capital, a person must be related to others, and it is those others, not himself, who are
the actual source of his or her advantage” (p.7). Social capital has to do with the
amount and quality of resources an individual has access to within her social
network. Bourdieu (1985) comments, “the volume of social capital possessed by a
35
given agent...depends on the size of network connections he can effectively mobilize
and on the volume of the capital (economic, cultural, or symbolic) possess in his own
right by each of those to whom he is connected” (p.249). As compared to economic
capital, social capital is intangible as it “inheres to the structure of relations between
and among persons” (Coleman, 1990 p. 302). While social capital is intangible it has
the ability to be productive and facilitate action within the social structure. Social
capital networks must be constructed and maintained through strategic investments
and a particular “network orientation” on the part of the interacting parties (Stanton-
Salazar, 2001). For instance, a second or multi-generational college student may
construct a social network of family members that have attended college, the student
can then gain advice about such issues as: the benefits of early application, how and
when to apply for financial aid, college choice, or how to write a compelling college
essay.
The formation of social capital is linked to a student’s social class
background. Annette Lareau (2003) has explored how social class impacts the
accumulation of social capital in child rearing. She indicates that middle and upper
income children go through a process termed concerted cultivation, in that the
children are purposefully placed in environments and structured activities that
increase their social capital. By placing children in multiple social situations they
develop the necessary social networks prior to college. They also develop a tacit
knowledge for generating future social capital. On the other hand, children from
lower income families undergo a process of natural development; meaning children
36
are in charge of how they spend their leisure time and therefore, have fewer
structured interactions with peers and professionals. While natural development may
lead to greater responsibility, it hinders children in the amount of social capital
networks they develop, and their ability to create future social capital. Based on
Lareau’s (2003) work, there is sufficient evidence to contend that underrepresented
students are lacking the sufficient social capital networks to succeed in higher
education due to natural development.
Since conventional notions of how social capital is developed amongst
students are deeply lodged within traditional, or functionalist, theories of sociology,
there has been no consensus as to the theoretical concepts of social capital.
According to Stanton-Salazar (2004), one traditional notion of social capital theory,
called the normative framework, is linked with the connections that students have
with parents, school personnel, and other students that help shape identity. As will
be described later, the normative framework, espoused by Coleman (1988, 1990),
introduces notions of institutional norms and sanctions, trust, and information
channels that motivate students to engage in desirable behaviors (e.g. studying,
attending class, seeking tutoring). Since the normative framework does not take into
account all aspects of social structure within societal social relations, Stanton-Salazar
(2004) details the critical network-analytic framework. In contrast to the normative
framework, the critical network-analytic framework attempts to understand society
not just on the school campus, but as a whole. This framework introduces the
limitations to access and networks as a result of a student’s low-status. Low-status
37
can be a factor of a student’s low socioeconomic status, parental education, ethnicity,
or gender.
As a result of the more holistic view of social capital theory, proponents of
the critical network-analytic framework view the normative framework as
incongruent with social capital theory due to the latter’s dependence on values,
norms, and identities. In addition, the critical network-analytic framework identifies
the social capital that is present amongst privileged students and how such social
capital is used to support and secure their status in society (Stanton-Salazar, 2004).
Lastly, the normative framework fails to highlight the common practices of
discrimination and exclusion as a result of the stratification of social capital (Portes
& Landolt, 1996; Stanton-Salazar, 2004). The critical network-analytic approach to
social capital theory provides the possibility of understanding how processes of
social capital development and mobilization can be instrumental in closing the
achievement gap between minority and non-minority students. In particular, this
camp of social capital theory can attempt to mitigate the negative effects that a low
socioeconomic status, in addition to class and racial segregation, have on STEM
students of color.
In a seminal synthesis on the applications of social capital in education
literature, Dika and Singh (2002) state that current social capital frameworks
describe rather than explain the effects of inequity within educational outcomes. The
study describes traditional social capital as faulted since it blurs the lines between
power and domination by avoiding apparent ties to institutional agents. Dika and
38
Singh (2002) identify a discrepancy within the data that Coleman (1988) used to
strengthen the normative framework of social capital. The two High School and
Beyond studies utilized by Coleman (1988) were not designed to measure social
capital even though social capital measurements were drawn from each study. Dika
and Singh (2002) bring to light other discrepancies in social capital literature
including poor and unreliable indicators and validity concerns. In summary, Dika
and Singh (2002) state that the majority of social capital literature “does not
acknowledge differential access to social networks and social resources” (p. 46).
As seen from the two “camps” of social capital theory, there still exists
critical literature as to the true definition of social capital and how it applies to
minority students. In fact, many educational researchers of social capital theory do
not mention other classifications of social capital theory that may differ from their
own conceptions of social capital. An example of this is the omission of Nan Lin’s
(2001) important contributions to social capital in literature that attempts to present a
holistic view of social capital theory. Nevertheless, both camps of social capital
theory will be drawn from in this study as they provide two separate lenses in which
to view and treat the achievement gap of underrepresented STEM students.
There are two defined camps within social capital: the normative-
functionalist camp and the critical network-analytic camp. For this study, a major
focus will be on the normative-functionalist camp championed by Coleman (1988)
and Portes (1998) that emphasizes norms, interpersonal trust, social networks, and
organizations as the main elements of social capital. A second camp of social capital
39
theory, the critical network-analytic camp, espoused by Bourdieu (1985), Lin (1999),
and Stanton-Salazar (1997), emphasizes the social relationships and networks that
provide access to resources for students of varying social status and economic
background. For the second camp, eliminating cultural, racial, and socioeconomic
status within the discussion of social capital and access to resources creates an
incomplete picture of social capital. The critical network-analytic approach provides
overwhelming support and justification for its theories due to the inequities that exist
within higher education. As a result, this study incorporated the key elements of the
critical network-analytic approach to social capital in addition to maintaining a focus
on the creation and adherence to traditional forms of social capital for college
students.
The Normative-Functionalist Approach
The first camp of social capital theory provides a strong platform on which to
build this study. This is because the environment in which MESA students gain the
social capital vital to STEM degree completion is almost entirely contained within
the college campus. The student is introduced to new norms, trust systems,
networks, and organizations on the college campus that grows the more the student is
involved and active within the college community. Of course, there inevitably exists
differing levels of access for student resources on the university campus based upon
such factors as whether students are first-generation college students or have
underrepresented student status that may play more to the second camp of social
40
capital that was discussed. The creation of a community within a sheltered
community environment that is the college campus can help to even the playing field
for students that may be entering STEM disciplines with less math training or
Advanced Placement (AP) classes completed. Since the mission of the MESA
program is to create comfortable and nurturing environments for underrepresented
and underserved student success, the normative-functionalist approach to social
capital theory will be one framework utilized within this study. In addition to
incorporating key elements from the critical-network analysis approach to social
capital theory, the study will emphasize the importance of norms, social networks,
and institutional agent trust that currently exist within college STEM retention
programs.
Coleman’s (1988) study of high school students examined the types of social
capital high school drop outs had as compared with their graduating counterparts to
understand the social resources that differed between the two populations. Within
the study, Coleman analyzed three forms of social capital: obligations and
expectations, information channels, and social norms. With these three forms of
social capital, Coleman was able to establish two differing intellectual streams of
social capital that helped to explain why some students were more susceptible to
dropping out than others. The first intellectual stream treats the students as a social
agent whose actions are governed by institutional and social norms, rules, and
obligation. Students who subscribed to this stream of social capital were more likely
to persist through high school. The second intellectual stream of social capital has
41
the student or actor assuming goals that were independently arrived and of a self-
interested nature. Students following along with this intellectual stream were more
likely to have misplaced, unreasonable, or underachieving goals that led to eventual
dropping out of high school.
The three forms of social capital that Coleman (1988) analyzed above are
critical for the study of STEM students in higher education. In essence, the focus is
on persistence and retention amongst students in the later stages of education and the
extent to which students continue on to graduation. For persistence within the
STEM fields to occur, students must be made aware of the expectations and
obligations required to do so (American Council on Education, 2006). An example
of this takes place during MESA program workshops and events that make student
participants aware of the extraordinary amount of commitment required to get to
graduation. Such activities such as study skills, financial aid, course planning, and
counseling workshops are necessary for students to receive a formal understanding
of STEM expectations and obligations. The expectations and obligations can be
overwhelming to students who were not made aware of them beforehand. A
student’s course of study can be greatly impacted if the informal and formal
requirements for success within STEM are delineated from the onset of one’s college
education. The most common types of consequences for students that are
uninformed of expectations and obligations for STEM success are changes in major
and drop out (American Council on Education, 2006).
42
Coleman (1988) also discusses information channels as conduits for vital
information and resources that students will require for academic success. In this
case, institutional agents play crucial roles as facilitators of information
dissemination to student participants. With the expanding capabilities of technology,
various means of information dissemination are at the disposal of retention program
directors and campus administrators. Since the typical MESA program at
community colleges within California have study centers for the use of registered
members, a steady stream of academic, social, and financial information can be
exposed to students through billboards, announcements, and flyer distribution.
Information channels as a form of social capital goes hand in hand with expectations
and obligations since the information channels must be utilized to make students
aware of crucial requirements for STEM preparation and success.
The last piece of social capital as defined by Coleman (1988) is the social
norms associated with the campus environment. According to Coleman, effective
social norms “support and provide effective rewards for high achievement” (p. 104).
In addition, effective social norms are ones in which the interests of the whole or
team take precedence over self-interests. The connection between STEM students
and social norms comes from the agreement amongst students and institutional
agents that the maintenance of one’s obligations to STEM and to the school will lead
to positive rewards upon degree completion. The norms also serve as the balance to
students who may have a carefree attitude towards their academic career inasmuch as
the norms detail the consequences for students who stray from the prescribed
43
academic path. As with any choice in a student’s life, choosing to pursue STEM
studies can close off other options or opportunities for students. In this case,
students must be made aware of benefits that come with degree completion within
STEM as well as the lost opportunities that had to be sacrificed as a result of their
decision. The social norms provide justification for the student to pursue STEM
studies with the backing of institutional agents and college administrators creating a
more unified and supportive environment for the student.
Another key figure within the normative-functionalist camp of social capital
is Portes (1998) who provides further definition of social capital and its benefits
within education. Portes notes that group participation and collective learning
positively affecting the individual and group is not a novel concept; referencing
Durkheim (1893) and Marx (1894) as two authors whose work and publications have
brought this notion to a wider audience. However, Portes (1998) acknowledges that
social capital has a certain attractiveness that differs from recycled notions of
positive group participation for two reasons. First, only the positive results of
sociability are dissected; paying little to no attention to any negative consequences of
group participation. Second, social capital links non-monetary forms of capital that
can create and provide access to “power and influence” (Portes 1998, p. 1). Another
distinguishing characteristic of social capital is its lack of certainty in terms of the
types of obligations placed upon the people involved in transactions. Ambiguous
responsibilities, unspecified deadlines, and reciprocity violations create a stark
44
contrast to monetary or economic capital transactions and serve to make social
capital a less popular means to achieve power and influence (Bourdieu 1979, 1980).
Portes (1998) argues that social capital stems from the structure of
relationships. For a person to truly possess social capital, the person must be linked
or have connections to others and it is these persons that act as the source of benefit
from social capital. The connections to others, although necessary for the acquisition
of social capital, serve as conduits to access and should not be considered as the
source of advantage with regards to social capital. Students can have many
connections to others, but it is only when the connections are with individuals of
high-status does social capital enhance one’s power and status. For the college
students in MESA, social capital can be created through connections with such high-
status individuals as faculty, MESA administrators, and professionals.
Similar to Coleman (1988), Portes (1998) describes the roles that norms play
within social capital. There exist two types of motivations that influence why people
choose to follow particular norms within a group: consuming motivation and
instrumental motivation. Collectively shared norms are the main feature of the
consuming motivation in which internalized norms are common to people within a
group, community, or society. People feel that an obligation must be made to follow
the norms of a group for the greater good. Examples of norms within the consuming
motivation include: timely payment of debt, giving to charity, and obeying traffic
laws. Instrumental motivations include the norm of reciprocity in which people
satisfy their obligations in the expectation that repayment will be made in the future.
45
Examples of instrumental motivations abound within low-income Latino
communities in which “favors” are done by individuals with specialized skills for
other individuals or families in return for a service or repayment in the future.
The Critical Network-Analytic Approach
Another major focus of this study was the critical network-analytic approach
to social capital theory that is championed by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu.
Bourdieu (1985) defines social capital as the sum of all resources that form a
network of meaningful relationships within an institution. A person can possess and
mobilize three forms of capital (economic, cultural, and symbolic) of which the
dominant class is able to reproduce and maintain dominance within society (Lin,
1999). In addition, Bourdieu (1985) views social capital as a structure of obligations
and connections that can be converted into economic capital. The introduction of
non-monetary capital as an alternative for achieving status and power has led to the
discussion of various “investment strategies” that schools or organizations can utilize
to ensure the presence and effectiveness of social capital (Bourdieu 1985, p. 249).
For example, working-class parents may become involved in local organizations,
such as private schools or churches. Within these organizations, parents are able to
socialize with persons of high power and influence and participate in rituals with
high deference to key individuals (Portes, 1998). The connections made with
persons of high-status are an investment strategy that parents can utilize to gain
access to resources or to put themselves into high-status positions. The common
46
thread amongst the investment strategies to produce social capital is the tapping of
groups, networks, and associations that can provide access to or help in obtaining
resources. Within the higher education arena, the resources that are gained from
investment strategies will help students to persist and graduate from their institution.
Relevant to the critical network-analytic approach are the concepts of strong
and weak ties and institutional agency as introduced by Granovetter (1982) and
Stanton-Salazar (1997). Institutional agents are individuals who have the ability to
connect students to institutional resources and opportunities (Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
These resources can include information about undergraduate programs, tutoring and
mentoring, career planning, and college admission. Agents can come from a
student’s family, but generally they are people associated with a school or college
including: MESA program staff, faculty, college administrators, and student mentors.
Institutional agents allow segments of society to gain “resources, privileges, and
support necessary to advance and maintain their economic and political position in
society” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997, p. 6). In particular to low-status youth who have
only a few avenues for forming supportive, resourceful ties to institutional agents, it
is very important that institutional agents mobilize their resources and social capital
to increase student academic success and development. Institutional agents exist in
the form of people whose involvement with students expands existing networks of
resources through strong and weak ties (Granovetter, 1982). An example of a strong
tie between a student and beneficial resources can be a family member that has
attended college and can guide the student through their college career. An example
47
of a student’s weak tie may be acquaintances or colleagues of MESA program staff
that may not be as accessible as family members, but who are willing to assist the
MESA program and students in a smaller capacity. Assistance from weak ties can be
in the form of job shadowing, career workshops for students, donations for books
and scholarships, and volunteering.
Effectively, as the student becomes more involved within the MESA
program, the strong ties of program staff become the weak ties of the student, adding
to their social capital. As students near degree completion or conduct searches for
summer employment, they can draw from these weak ties to increase their
opportunities for employment in a desired discipline. An effective institutional agent
will create a conduit between their strong and weak ties to students in an effort to
promote persistence and eventual degree completion (Stanton-Salazar & Spina,
2003). Inasmuch as underrepresented STEM students have to dedicate themselves to
their education and become socially involved in the campus to increase the
likelihood of success, MESA staff must also work on expanding their own network
of connections so that students can identify more with course material and future
career possibilities.
Institutional Agency
Further definition of how exactly an institutional agent can increase the
academic success of students can be found in the work of Stanton-Salazar and Spina
(2003). The study conducted by Stanton-Salazar and Spina (2003) dissects and
48
analyzes the influence that institutional agents have on minority youth. The study
focuses on adult, non-familial informal mentors and role models and their ability to
empower youth to achieve and succeed. To maintain effective social capital between
mentor and student there must be in existence “resourceful relationships and
activities socially organized within a network of peers and institutional agents”
(Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003, p. 231). As a result of the relationships and
activities, students gain a positive psychosocial development that reinforce student
resiliency. Student resiliency is necessary, especially amongst minority students, to
combat “racial segregation, economic marginality, and institutionalized racism”
(Salazar & Spina, 2003, p. 233). The role model or mentor must realize their
position as a conduit for students to develop socially and academically. As a
conduit, the role model’s main function is to connect the student with resources and
people that will promote academic and social success. Role models that do not
provide this function to their students run the risk of doing harm to students since
there is a lack of social connections that must not only guide students to success, but
also prove to students that they can actually attain the high-status of their role
models. Mentors and role models are crucial participants in the developmental
process of students. They must display an ability to provide “instructive example”
along with “having achieved meaningful success” in adulthood (Salazar & Spina,
2003). An example of a negative type of role model is a gang leader in the inner
city. This person may provide excellent instructive examples to youth in his
community of how to survive and be feared, but the “success” experienced by the
49
gang leader is not meaningful when taken beyond the inner city and is equated with
failure in the eyes of the proponents of higher education.
School Membership
To increase the success rate of STEM students, a sense of inclusion needs to
be present within the campus community. Wehlage et al. (1989) term this kind of
inclusion, “school membership” in which students create social bonds that create a
connection to the internal social network of the school. The network is inclusive of
the “norms, activities, and people of an institution” in which the student is “attached,
committed, and involved” (Hirschi, 1969). According to Wehlage et al. (1989), four
conditions of social bonding must be met to achieve this inclusion within a school:
attachments, commitment, involvement, and belief. Strong attachments between
students, faculty and administrators provide positive expectations of the student that,
when met, associate with “good” or “proper” behavior as defined by the institution
(Wehlage et al., 1989). The process that the student undertakes to meet expectations
creates an internal student investment that helps secure educational success and, in
time, translates into more investments leading to higher grades, more degrees, and
professional success. The condition of commitment as defined by Wehlage has been
previously discussed above. The third condition of involvement maintains contact
between student, faculty, and administration, such that students embed themselves
into the social network of the school and “sustain psychological engagement”
(Wehlage et al., 1989). At schools with particularly large enrollments, it is often
50
difficult for underrepresented students to involve themselves within the campus
environment in such a way that attracts faculty or administration attention. Programs
such as MESA must initiate this involvement by seeking out students to participate
in their activities and utilize resources. The final condition is belief in institutional
efficacy in which a deterioration of this belief leads to student disengagement and a
questioning of the entire schooling process. Fortunately for the STEM disciplines,
students understand that degree completion is vital in order to pursue a career within
STEM. The professionals that students meet and interact with at various MESA
workshops and activities emphasize the importance of obtaining a bachelors degree
and the opportunities that come with a diploma. The adherence of STEM students to
the conditions set forth by Wehlage creates a safety net for students who may be
easily distracted or discouraged from pursuing STEM disciplines that draws the
student into the complex social network of the school.
Since a majority of the most popular STEM disciplines require two years
worth of college-level prerequisites in mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology,
the disciplines tend to distance themselves from non-STEM disciplines in terms of
course rigor. Amongst students who are trying to decide which career path to take
into college, the “special” nature of STEM disciplines can turn many students off to
the careers that require STEM knowledge even before they start college coursework.
This situation is similar to that detailed in Hernandez’ (1995) study in which he
examined “at-risk” Mexican American females and their response to successful
Latina role models representing the business, academic, and professional aspirations
51
of the young females. The study found that since the role models were not
expounding on the series of successes that laid the foundation for continued success,
the setbacks and mistakes made on their way to the top, and the diversity of
approaches that students could take to achieve their current level of success, that the
female students were being misled to think that reaching the role models’ levels
would take “superhuman” knowledge and effort (Hernandez, 1995). Since the study
conducted by the American Council on Education (2006) indicates that minority
students are enrolling in the STEM disciplines at the same rates as their white and
Asian American counterparts, it can be concluded that STEM, by itself, is not the
sole reason persistence rates are lower amongst underrepresented students. The
results of Hernandez (1995) and the American Council on Education (2006) make
the case for increased effective communication of students’ obligations and
expectations to deemphasize the “superhuman” nature of higher education.
For underrepresented students, the perception of what is required to pursue a
career in these fields can be even more distorted due to many societal factors. These
factors can include the student’s desire to attend college over the immediate need to
earn a living to sustain family income, a lack of identifiable role models that attended
college in an area of low college student attendance out of high school, or feelings of
being under prepared due to a low quality high school education. Whatever the
factor may be that is contributing to a student’s dislike, disaffection, or avoidance of
STEM studies, Hernandez’ article makes the case that the “superhuman” nature of
academic success must be toned down so that underrepresented students are more
52
likely to consider pursuing higher education. Programs such as MESA should do
their best to demystify the myths behind pursuing studies in STEM in an effort to
reverse the “superhuman” stigma behind these disciplines.
Student Empowerment
The social capital frameworks presented above require reformulation in order
to make them applicable to the focus of student empowerment within retention
programs for this study. This is a result of the lack of social capital theory that has
actually been applied to retention programs within higher education. Student
empowerment is essential for student persistence and eventual graduation within
STEM because of its ability to connect students to institutional obligations and
norms. In essence, the two approaches to social capital theory must work together to
create and enhance social capital that empowers students to succeed. Making the
transition from social capital theory to student empowerment to create effective
retention programs requires an understanding of key student empowerment literature
Empowerment theory focuses on how people can contribute to individual,
community, and social change (Gutierrez, 1989; Kieffer, 1984; Swift & Levin, 1987;
Zimmerman & Rappaport, 1988). Contributing to empowerment are three
psychological processes that incorporate evolving perceptions of one’s self within
society. These processes are group identification, group consciousness, and self and
collective efficacy. Within the group identification process, membership is essential
in the enhancement of one’s self concept. Group identification includes
53
identification of common experiences within a group, a preference for a group’s
shared culture and norms, and the development of shared fate (Gurin et al., 1980).
This is reminiscent of Coleman’s (1988) theories of social capital as related to an
institution’s values, norms, and belief system. Group consciousness involves the
understanding of differences in status and power within a group. For oppressed
students within a group, feelings of deprivation, power discontent, and resentment
towards the established system are common (Gurin, et al., 1980; Klein, 1984). Once
again, social capital theory is present this time in the critical network-analytic
framework in which social capital serves to maintain the dominant status of the elite
and maintain the low-status of oppressed individuals. The last process, self and
collective efficacy, empowers students to believe that they can affect positive change
in their lives. Gutierrez (1990) argues that the three processes can be mutually
reinforcing in that group identification is necessary but insufficient for the
development of both group consciousness and collective efficacy. Similarly, group
identification and group consciousness are necessary but insufficient for the
development of collective efficacy (Gutierrez, 1990). The mutual reinforcement of
these processes leads to the conclusion that individuals with the greater self-efficacy
or belief in ability to affect change have greater potential to empower themselves. In
addition, it is crucial for individuals to understand that a more complete
comprehension of their ability to empower themselves will come from an
understanding of the structure of power in society (Gutierrez, 1990). In summary,
empowerment and social capital theories rely on the utilization of resources to
54
empower and increase social capital, respectively. According to empowerment
theory, resources are mobilized within the group setting that engenders the process of
empowerment. The group setting within empowerment theory is tantamount to the
social networks that enhance underrepresented students within social capital theory.
Identity Development
Supplemental to the framework for this study were theories that address
identity development amongst adolescent youth. Identity development is a crucial
aspect of student motivation that must be explored since students pursuing science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) studies should identify with their
future profession or career opportunities to maintain student motivation throughout
higher education. In an effort to increase college retention rates and, more
importantly, unlock the paradigm that has held underprivileged and underserved
student representation to a status quo within technical careers and fields, programs
like MESA must empower college students to persist in their education through
identity and role creation.
According to Flores-Gonzalez (2002), people assume multiple identities, with
each identity pertaining to a particular social position and value. In the case of the
STEM student, possible identities can be formed based on the financial stability,
prestige, and peer respect that comes with graduation within the STEM fields. For
MESA students, students will come in contact with professionals or mentors through
organized college events and campus involvement that enhance identity creation
55
(Kane et al., 2004). In addition, academic and social connections with faculty have
been shown to enhance student persistence in college (Tinto, 1987 & 1993;
Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991). However, not all connections between students and
professionals can prove beneficial towards the student’s social capital. In a study
conducted by Hernandez (1995), it was found that effective role models describe
their “cumulative nature of success, the occasional setbacks, and the availability and
approaches for obtaining and using external support” (p. 262). The goal for the
MESA program is to have students create an identity for them that may enhance their
likelihood of persistence through college.
Unfortunately, not all underrepresented STEM students assume the
aforementioned identities of professionals as a result of the rigorous nature of
coursework and a lack of minority representation (American Council on Education,
2006). Whereas the identity of the STEM professional is of high value in today’s
society due to above average salary and job stability, a low-value identity lead to a
lack of persistence within the STEM disciplines (American Council on Education,
2006). These low-value identities are associated with a perceived inability to
understand STEM material or identify with students that excel in these majors and
place underrepresented students in lower social positions as a result of the low status
careers that are a result of such identities. As a result, students require high levels of
validation to envision their identity as someone who can excel through the most
rigorous of coursework and daunting classroom challenges.
56
There exists a clear hierarchy that places value on success that meets one’s
desired career objectives and less value on the avoidance of academic challenges that
lead to unfulfilled life aspirations. The placement of role-identities within the
hierarchy is in accordance to evaluations from peers, levels of prestige, and rewards
gained from that particular role-identity (Flores-Gonzalez, 2002). This placement is
aligned with the social views on successful professionals that have been educated
within the STEM fields since there exists a sense of stability and prosperity for
students who have graduated with STEM degrees.
In addition to the assumption of chosen identities amongst STEM students,
there must exist a certain level of commitment to identity, especially to those
identities that have the highest value and social position (Wehlage et al., 1989). A
dominant commitment must exist amongst STEM students that immerses students
into social relations supporting one’s own identity (Stryker, 1968). Strong levels of
commitment translate into campus organization and activity involvement, academic
resource utilization, and other conduits that support the student’s identity (Burke &
Reitzes, 1981). When students become emotionally tied to the material that they are
studying or learning for the sake of learning, students will dedicate a high level of
commitment to their identity in order to maintain it (Kiecolt, 1994). The emotional
connection to one’s own identity in the case of STEM students has to be strong
enough to carry them through the rigorous learning process. Even though the
identity associated with successful STEM graduates carries a certain amount of
wealth, prestige, and job potential that may cause a student to pursue STEM studies,
57
it is assumed that a continued commitment to STEM education facilitates an
emotional connection to the learning material that reprioritizes STEM student
objectives. This is a rare feature of the STEM fields since students realize that the
material they are studying is rigorous and requires an extraordinarily high level of
commitment to reach graduation. The sense of accomplishment upon completion of
a STEM degree empowers students to think beyond the identity they had set for
themselves during their undergraduate career and can lead to the continuation of
education or the passing down of knowledge to other underserved communities.
This rare feature of STEM must be cultivated by retention programs like MESA to
create that emotional commitment amongst underrepresented student in an effort to
increase their connection with a high value identity.
For STEM students, it is important for them to accumulate multiple roles.
According to Sieber (1974), multiple roles increase the number of rewards and
privileges gained by an individual. Rewards and privileges come out of cultivated
relationships that exist due to the individual’s identity status. The STEM student
must have these multiple high value identities because of the demands that are placed
upon the student to maintain the identity. At any given moment during a student’s
academic career, his perceived identity, whether it is a doctor, engineer, or university
mathematics professor, can fail as a result of the stress and rigors that are inherent
within STEM curriculum. Identity options must be delivered to students through
programs such as MESA, since the main objective of these types of programs is to
increase the number of students graduating with STEM degrees. Students must have
58
a contingency plan when students fail to maintain a given identity, especially since
this failure can lead to psychological stress and overall identity deterioration or loss
(Flores-Gonzalez, 2002). In addition, students coming from a lower social status in
terms of gender, age, minority status, or socioeconomic status face more “identity-
threatening” factors and less “identity enhancing” experiences than higher status
peers that tends to add stress to the maintenance of identity (Thoits, 1991). Identity
development is difficult for underrepresented students pursuing STEM related
disciplines since their traditionally low social status combines with the rigorousness
of coursework that contribute to the complete failure and erasure of high value
student identity.
Theoretical Framework Application
The focus of this study was to understand how the MESA retention program
functions as a vital context for student access to institutional agents and to the social
capital these agents possess. More importantly for this study, examination of the
problem included how the organizational environment enhances the institutional
agency of program leaders in four categories: the social capital of program leaders,
the degree to which program leaders have been able to develop social capital, the
degree to which program leaders mobilize their social capital on behalf of program
participants, and the effectiveness of the program.
Problematic to this study may be whether or not the MESA program has
sufficient capacity to empower students on a consistent basis. This capacity is
59
closely linked to the social capital of the personnel that run the program. This may
be contingent upon their capacity and willingness to occupy the role of institutional
agent and on whether these programs leaders have connections to high-status agents
who occupy “positions” in “high places” within the social structure (Lin, 2001).
Such agents may be college administrators or tenured faculty that carry much weight
within the institution.
Research Questions
Based upon the literature review, four research questions were generated that
guided its purposes. The rationale behind the utilization of these four questions
focused on the theories described above in an effort to understand whether or not the
institutional agents in this case study are incorporating such theories into the
operation of their respective MESA programs. Each research question is introduced
below with its theoretical rationale.
Research Questions #1: What are the characteristics, features, and composition of
the social resource networks of intervention program coordinators?
This question is based on social capital theory and institutional agency. A
better understanding of whether or not a program leader has the potential to be an
effective institutional agent can be created through analysis of their social resource
network. Program leaders have the potential to become effective institutional agents
60
based upon the size and characteristics of their accessible relationships and
resources.
Research Question #2: What are some of the factors that facilitate or constrain the
program leader’s access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and program agenda?
This question stems from social capital and institutional agency theories that
establish social capital as a crucial link to educational success when mobilized by
institutional agents. Even though a program leader has access to social capital, it is
of no value to students if the social capital is not activated by the program leader.
The question brings to light internal and external factors that might limit a program
leader’s ability to access the entirety of their social resource network on behalf of
program participants. In addition, factors that limit a program leader’s ability to
grow and enhance their own networks may also be discovered from this question.
Research Question #3: How do these institutional agents work to enhance program
participants’ social networks so that students themselves become independent and
learn to network and access resources?
School membership, identity development, student empowerment, and
institutional agency theories are the basis for Research Question #3. This question
uncovers whether or not program leaders are acting as institutional agents by
employing proven and thoroughly researched student success methods. These
61
methods include making connections between students and their campus community,
introducing complex role-sets for students to assume and become more independent,
and empowering students to succeed. In addition, the definition of an institutional
agent is one that enhances the social networks of others and, as a result, this question
can further clarify whether or not individuals are acting as institutional agents. In
addition, this question attempts to understand whether or not institutional agents are
attempting to offset the reproduction functions of society and schools towards
minorities and other underrepresented groups as described within the Network-
Analytic approach to social capital.
Research Question #4: Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally
draining task. How do institutional agents deal with this pressure and time
consuming task?
Once again, it is important to have an understanding of the limitations and
obstacles that are placed upon potential institutional agents. In addition, obtaining an
understanding of the motivation behind why program leaders assist students in their
current capacity is equally as important. Based upon social capital theory, this
question dives into the mental and emotional state of program leaders in an attempt
to gain insight into the efficiency utilized by individuals when accessing their social
resource networks on behalf of students.
62
CHAPTER THREE
Methodology
This study focused on the social capital cultivated by the MESA programs at
three community colleges located in Southern California. The names of the colleges
and respondents were been altered to protect the anonymity of this study and the
privacy of the volunteers who participated in the study. The colleges are the Rolling
Hills College (RHC) located in northern Los Angeles County, Eastern Community
College (ECC) located in an urban part of Los Angeles, and Foothill City College
(FCC) located in the San Gabriel Valley. The MESA program is dedicated to
ensuring that underrepresented and low-income students pursuing science,
engineering, technology, and mathematics (STEM) studies are provided the
necessary resources to transfer to a four-year institution and persist within STEM.
The resources provided by MESA include tutoring, mentorship, course advisement,
career planning, faculty and industry involvement, a dedicated study space with
computer and printing access, book and calculator loans, scholarships, and university
field trips just to name a few. The program is grant supported and operates on a
limited budget that is maintained via state and college funding. Due to the types of
familial and fostering relationships that are the defining features of the MESA
program, the program connects with students on a more personal level than most of
the existing student services programs. As a result, this program provides a fertile
environment for the incorporation of social capital theory into MESA activities and
program culture since student connections with learning material, ‘institutional
63
agents’, and the institution are at the core of social capital theory. The manifestation
and engendering of social capital within the community college MESA program was
the focus for this study.
This study clarified the importance of social capital within the MESA
program and how it could be utilized to enhance achievement and the social
networks of STEM students. In particular, the understanding of the relationship
between MESA students and institutional norms, interpersonal trust, and social
networks was analyzed. The existing or non-existing relationships were analyzed to
understand the types of resources that MESA students have access to that contribute
to their success. The role of identity creation within MESA was also interpreted to
determine the extent to which the MESA program develops and engenders multiple
roles amongst STEM students. The institutional agents that work within the context
of the MESA program (i.e. director, staff) were essential to this study since they
provided insight into the types of network conduits that the MESA program
possesses for the benefit of the students. Intervention program leaders are not
automatically ‘institutional agents’ simply because they are associated with a
particular program. Institutional agents must assume a complex role-set that has as
one of its fundamental features the mobilization of social capital and ‘institutional
support’ on behalf of students (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). As a result, the study
maintained a focus on how MESA personnel assume their role as potential
institutional agents and the resources these agents provide. A key goal for this study
was to understand the level of social capital mobilization provided by institutional
64
agents for MESA participants that serves as a source of institutional support. As a
result of the low socioeconomic status of many program participants, an analysis was
conducted to study the social resource networks of those personnel who coordinate
and run the MESA program, and to explore how these program leaders use such
networks to advance MESA’s special student empowerment agenda. The study
relied on the two major models of social capital theory, the normative model of
social capital (e.g., Coleman, 1988) and the ‘critical social resources’ model of social
capital. Although the study design elaborated in this chapter clearly shows this
study’s emphasis on the ‘critical social resources’ model of social capital (Bourdieu,
1985; Lin, 2001; Stanton-Salazar, 2001) whenever possible and appropriate, the
study also highlighted those empowerment processes best articulated by the
normative model of social capital (e.g. identity development and trust between
MESA personnel and students).
This study utilized following questions to guide its purpose:
What are the characteristics, features, and composition of the social
resource networks of intervention program coordinators?
What are some of the factors that facilitate or constrain the program
leader’s access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and program agenda?
How do these institutional agents work to enhance program participants’
social networks so that students themselves become independent and
learn to network and access resources?
65
Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally draining task.
How do institutional agents deal with this pressure and time consuming
task?
Research Design
This study required a ‘mixed method, qualitative’ approach that incorporated
ethnographic interview questions and utilized three sets of methodological devices.
The first set involved measurements of social networks in which three distinct
methods were used to construct independent descriptive profiles of the social and
resource networks of program leaders. Of the two main methodological paths
proposed by Van der Gaag & Snijders (2004), this study depended most heavily
upon the oldest method, usually referred to as the ‘Name Generator/Interpreter’
approach (McCallister & Fischer, 1978). The Name Generator approach maps the
ego-centered social network as a starting point for a subsequent social resource
inventory and, depending on the inclusion of name interpretation questions, can
result in very detailed and informative social capital descriptions (Van der Gaag &
Snijders, 2004). For purposes of triangulation, this study employed two other
measurements of ‘social capital,’ the Position Generator and Resource Generator,
which were developed by network analysts to address efficiency issues of variations
in social capital within large populations.
The second methodological device was the qualitative interview. Following
the work of Stanton-Salazar (1995, 2001), the use of the ‘Name
66
Generator/Interpreter’ network survey was followed by a quasi-standardized set of
qualitative questions that explored the relationships generated by the Name
Generator network survey. The third methodological device involved the
ethnographic interview method in and effort to more fully explore those complex
factors that facilitate or constrain the program leader’s access and mobilization of
resources, in addition to those factors that influence the ability of the program leader
to assume the role of “institutional agent” (Stanton-Salazar, 2001).
Case Study Approach
The focus of this case study was on program personnel and not on the
students in the program. The foci also included the role of ‘program’ context and the
role of the program leader’s orientations regarding the mobilization of social capital
and their capacity to function as ‘institutional agents’. Given the dearth of research
on this issue, a case study approach was appropriate since it permits the delving into
‘context’ and the agent’s ‘habitus’. The definition of ‘habitus’ includes a person’s
‘network orientation’, their notions of the program’s ‘theory of change’, their
inclination to assume the role of an ‘institutional agent’ and the complexities
involved in assuming this role (Stanton-Salazar, 2001).
Theoretical Rationale for Mixed-Method Methodological Approach
The type of study is mixed method and qualitative that incorporates
ethnographic interview questions. This type of analysis allowed the study to explore
67
specific observations and form general patterns for institutional agent conduct and
networks (Patton, 2002). Observational and pattern data was gathered through
interviews conducted with potential institutional agents. The basic methodological
approach employed an inductive analytical orientation. Inductive analysis involved
the discovery of patterns within a study’s data in which findings emerge (Patton,
2002). Inductive analysis was an appropriate methodology for this study since data
was collected from program leader interviews and applied to the normative
functionalist and critical network-analytic frameworks of social capital theory.
Inductively, the study explored 1) how program leaders view the achievement gap
amongst underrepresented students within the STEM disciplines, 2) how program
leaders understand how the program works and 3) why they think MESA works.
The inductive analysis attempted to bring forth a conceptual perspective of the
MESA program from institutional agents. This study was developed, in large part,
following the perspective of Quantz (1992) which aims to understand, analyze, pose
questions, and affect the sociopolitical and economic realities that shape our lives.
This study accepted the challenge posed by critical ethnographers which is to use
social science not only to uncover the most profoundly buried structures of the
various social worlds which constitute the social universe, but also to uncover and
help generate the mechanisms by which we may ensure their transformation
(Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003). This study focused on the social networks of
program leaders because program leaders, program leaders’ social networks, peers
68
and the social capital that peers possess represent a key context of human
development for youth in effective intervention programs.
As a critical qualitative project, the underlying goal of the study was not to
produce merely an unoriginal view of culture within an intervention program, but to
provide a new and hopefully insightful perspective on how countervailing forces
play themselves out in the lives of urban minorities, particularly in terms the
composition and social dynamics entailed in support and resource networks of
program leaders. This study introduced an analytical framework that provides a
compelling view of how effective processes moderate the impact of harsh conditions
that many low-status minorities must contend with.
Criteria for Selection
Due to the differences that exist between MESA programs in terms of the
diverse communities served and distinct institutional cultures, it was important to
collect data from more than one program to provide a broader and richer analysis.
The three colleges chosen belong to three distinct community college districts and
serve very different student bodies. Even though the MESA programs at each
college serve underrepresented and minority students, it is worthwhile to have an
understanding of the demographics of each college to incorporate into the study’s
results.
Rolling Hills College is located in a suburban upper middle class area of
northern Los Angeles County. With a grand total of 16,500 students currently
69
enrolled, the ethnic breakdown of the student body at RHC is 47% white, 24%
Latino, 6% Asian American, 5% African American, and 1% Native American (RHC,
2006). The MESA program at RHC serves a population of over 100 students with
Latinos comprising the majority of MESA program participants.
Eastern Community College is located in a working class neighborhood near
downtown Los Angeles. The college has 24,000 students currently enrolled. The
ethnic breakdown of the student body stands in stark contrast to many community
colleges due to its urban locale. The residents living in the area served by ECC are
nearly 80% Latino and 15% Asian American. As a result, the ethnic breakdown of
the student body at ECC is comprised of 70% Latino, 16% Asian American, 10%
white, and 5% African American (ECC, 2006). The MESA program at ECC has
over 100 participants the majority being Latino.
Foothill City College serves a mainly middle class area of eastern Los
Angeles County. Of the three colleges utilized within this study, FCC has the largest
and most diverse student body in terms of more equitable representation of
underrepresented communities. With a student body totaling more than 25,000, the
ethnic breakdown at FCC is 40% white, 25.4% Asian American, 25% Latino, 7.2%
African American, and 0.2% Native American (FCC, 2006). The MESA program at
FCC serves over 70 students that are comprised of Latino, African American, and
Asian American students.
The MESA program at each college plays an important role in maintaining
the diversity of potential employees and enhancing the economic vitality within Los
70
Angeles County. In addition, MESA is a nationally recognized program that has
dedicated its efforts to the realization of a diverse workforce and college population
within STEM for the past 30 years. Due to the importance of the MESA community
college programs and the benefits that they bring local communities, these three
programs were chosen as the key participants within this study.
Potential institutional agents were identified through their involvement with
the MESA program and program participants at each institution. In terms of the
criteria for selecting the potential institutional agents that were interviewed for this
study, persons with a constant level of involvement with either the MESA program
or program participants were identified to participate in this study. Involvement with
MESA can be in the form of program administrator, counselor, tutor, volunteer,
advisor, faculty mentor, or workshop leader. It was very important to identify those
potential institutional agents that created social capital for student participants as a
result of the agent’s involvement with MESA. Connections made between school
administrators, students, and institutional agents that were not a result of MESA
involvement were not relevant within this study.
Process of Selection
To qualify for participation in this study, MESA program leaders, as potential
‘institutional agents,’ must have provided consistent service and assistance to the
program. The selection of the actual individuals from the list of potential
institutional agent candidates was based on the level of involvement of the
71
individuals. Individuals that demonstrated a ‘high level of involvement’ with MESA
and program participants were selected to participate within the study. A ‘high level
of involvement’ means that the program leader was involved in the day-to-day
operations of the program and took on ‘complex role sets’ to mobilize resources on
behalf of program participants (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Interviews were conducted
with the potential institutional agents listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Potential Institutional Agents
Name
Title & Institution Involvement w/ MESA
1.
Sally
MESA Director
Rolling Hills College
Manages MESA budget,
resources, and activities
2.
Julia
MESA Staff Member
Rolling Hills College
Assists director with
administrative duties
3.
Amalia
MESA Director
Eastern Community
College
Manages MESA budget,
resources, and activities
4.
Jose
MESA Director
Foothill City College
Manages MESA budget,
resources, and activities
Instrumentation
The utilization of interviews as a data collection instrument within this
ethnography allowed for in-depth interviews based on observation, descriptive
indicators, and interviewer-led discussions (Spradley, 1979). The intent of the
instrumentation within this study was to collect only the rich data that, upon analysis,
72
delves into a deeper understanding of the institutional agent’s personal network,
access to social capital, and ability to act as a source of ‘institutional support’
(Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Within the interview, additional instrumentation was
utilized to guide the interview questions and organize data to assist in answering
applicable research questions. The additional instruments included three separate
data generators that provide varying assessments of an institutional agent’s social
network. The data generators includes a Name Generator, a Position Generator, and
a Resource Generator.
Name Generator
In an effort to understand the extent of an institutional agent’s social capital,
it was important to understand the individuals that comprise the networks that the
agent belongs to. The most traditional type of instrumentation that allows the
interviewer to collect the names of such individuals in small-scale studies is termed
the Name Generator (Fischer, 1982). The Name Generator has its origins from Lin
& Dumin (1986) and Flap & Völker (2003) in which the instrument was utilized a
subject’s ego-centered social network to generate names. The advantage of the
Name Generator approach is that the instrument efficiently generates a great deal of
detailed information on the ego-centric support networks of respondents (McCallister
& Fischer, 1978; Stanton-Salazar, 1995, 2001).
For the Name Generator utilized within this study, fourteen distinct areas of
institutional support were identified that pertain to the academic, emotional, and
73
social resources provided at the institution in which the MESA program operates
(see Appendix F). These areas are linked to resources that increase the likelihood of
student academic success. The areas of institutional support are also listed in Table
2.
Table 2: Areas of Institutional Support
1.
Social Integration Development
Support
8. Academic and Student Affairs
Support
2. Medical Health and Wellness
Support
9. Career, Internships, and
Employment Opportunities
Support
3. Crisis Support 10. Political Support
4. Educational and/or Gateway
Support
11. Academic Integration
Assistance and Support
5. Legal Assistance
12. Mental Health and Wellness
Support
6. College Services and Support
13. Law Enforcement Support
7. Financial Information and Support
14. Program/Grant Funding
Support
Each area of institutional support contains four questions that were asked of
program leaders to identify names for the Name Generator. The questions asked of
the program leaders provided evidence as to whether or not they function as
‘institutional agents’ and as sources of ‘institutional support’ (Stanton-Salazar,
1997). In addition, the questions provided opportunities to explore their own
capability for mobilizing resources in their direct possession and to see how they
engaged in the “give and take” process of resource mobilization. The first three
questions identified people that have provided resources for the MESA program
74
besides the program leader. The fourth question determined whether or not program
leaders have themselves served as a direct source of support for students in the
program and/or program colleagues.
Position Generator
The Position Generator is used to measure access to the numerous
occupations that exist within an institutional agent’s network. Depending on the
Socioeconomic Index (SEI) of the occupation as defined by Miller (1977), certain
occupations carry with it high-, medium-, or low-societal status that contribute to the
social capital of an institutional agent. The categories of high-, medium, and low-
status positions were developed using Duncan’s Socioeconomic Index Scores for
Major Occupation Groups (Duncan, 1961) in which scores of 75 or higher on the
Duncan Scale were considered to be high-status, 53 to 74 were middle-status, and 52
and below were low-status. In this study, the range of the middle-status has been
expanded to 60 to 74, so that the instrument includes positions with higher
socioeconomic index scores. Occupations that could not be found on the scale were
assigned a score by taking the average of three similar occupations on the Duncan
Scale. For this study, the Position Generator contained 30 positions of which 10
were classified as high-status positions, 9 were medium-status positions, and 11 were
low-status positions according to the Duncan Scale (See Appendix Q).
The existence of strong or weak ties can indicate the level of accessibility an
institutional agent has with a person in a certain occupation. Of course, most
75
beneficial to the academic success and human development of the student are the
relationships that exist between institutional agents and individuals in high-status
occupations. The Position Generator utilized within this study was tailored to reflect
those occupations that institutional agents on a college campus were most likely to
have connections to.
The Position Generator was populated with 30 occupations that are relevant
to the anticipated networks of the agents (see Appendix A). The occupations were
classified across occupational categories to ensure a good range of possible
connections between occupation and institutional agent. To ensure a balanced range
of occupation by social status, 33.3% of the positions listed in the Position Generator
were of low, medium, and high SEI scores, respectively. For a complete breakdown
of position status levels and SEI scores please refer to Appendix Q.
It was also imperative to define what exactly constitutes a connection
between institutional agent and an individual in a certain occupation. Therefore, the
criteria for establishing a connection must fall into at least one of the following three
categories: family member, friend, and acquaintance. The definition of a friend is
someone that the subject has repeatedly confided in regarding both personal and
professional issues. The definition of an acquaintance is someone who is either
employed by the same institution that one has regular small talk with or someone not
employed by the same institution, but that one meets regularly with.
76
Resource Generator
The last instrument, the Resource Generator, was utilized to broaden the
richness of data obtained from just the Name and Position Generators. The Resource
Generator combines the beneficial aspects of both the name and Position Generators
in an effort to inquire about a subject’s access to resources (Snijders, 1999). This
type of instrumentation makes it possible to identify different avenues to similar
types of resources that are accessible within the Position Generator. For example, a
community college student might have a family member who transferred to a four-
year institution and understands the transfer application process. This same student
might not have identified transfer counselor in their Position Generator but identified
their family member as an individual that understands the transfer process in their
Resource Generator.
The Resource Generator was populated with 25 items that are relevant to the
anticipated resource networks of the agents. The resources fall into similar
categories as the occupations in the Position Generator, but do not align exactly with
individual occupations (e.g. person who understands physics/physics teacher). To
ensure a balanced range of valuable resources, 80% of the resources positions listed
in the Resource Generator were of high value, but not necessarily accessible for the
institutional agent. The remaining 20% of the resources within the Resource
Generator were resources that all respondents are expected to have access to. This
was mainly because access to these low-status resources was relevant to the MESA
program. An example of this can be the custodian that manages the building that
77
particular MESA academic workshops are being held in. For a complete breakdown
of resource status levels please refer to Appendix S.
The possibilities for answers available to potential institutional agents for the
Resource Generator included one more option than the Position Generator. The
additional answer response catered to those agents that may not consider the MESA
leaders as friends or acquaintances, but know that they possess those resources. To
minimize confusion, the Resource Generator defined “friends” and “acquaintances”
in the same manner as the Position Generator.
A major reason that the position and Resource Generators were utilized as
supplements to the Name Generator is that the additional generators provide clues to
the different social and cultural worlds that program leaders participate in. The
difference between the position and Resource Generator may seem subtle, but it has
major implications for the extent of the institutional agent’s network. Furthermore,
access to specific people who control high-status institutional resources was
measured by the Resource Generator. The Position Generator has to do with
participating in exclusive social networks, exclusive social circles, & high-status
institutional milieus. By participating in “high-status” milieus, institutional agents
have opportunities to learn forms of cultural capital they can in time transmit to the
students in their program and have opportunities to develop ties to key agents in
these milieus that they can later mobilize on behalf of their students in the program.
78
Validity and Reliability
The interview protocol used for this study is both valid and reliable. Given
the scope and range of questions, the interview protocol should accurately yield an
operational description of MESA. However, it was assumed that subjects have
responded in a truthful manner to the interview questions. Thus, the study was
limited to the honest responses of the subjects. In addition, the study was restricted
by the possibility of interviewee bias towards MESA. Finally, the study was limited
by the small number of subjects interviewed and therefore the findings should not be
generalized.
Data Collection
Each interview was conducted on the MESA programs’ respective
community college campuses either in offices or workshop rooms that are routinely
utilized by the programs. The interviewer met individually with each program leader
on four separate occasions corresponding to the four interview phases. On average,
the duration of each interview was between 20-30 minutes for the first two phases
and 30-40 minutes for the last two phases. Even though two interviews during the
first two phases were interrupted by telephone calls, the majority of the interviews
ran without interruption. Only the interviewer and interviewee were present during
each interview so as to eliminate any distractions and background noise during the
actual interviews. The respondent was aware of the interviewer’s presence
throughout the entire duration of the interview.
79
The purpose of the study was explained to the respondent at the beginning of
the Phase I interview via a script. The introduction script includes the following
points to ensure that the respondent has a firm grasp of the intentions of the study:
One focus of the study is on the relationships that MESA leaders develop
with different people, both inside and outside of the MESA program, as
part of the job function associated with running such a program.
The emphasis of the study is on the complexities and challenges of
managing diverse relationships, and the need to sometimes sever some
relationships
Another focus of the study is on the reality that many program leaders
have a finite network; in other words, sometimes program leaders do not
yet have the social ties to people they would like to have in their own
network as it takes time and energy to build one’s own personal network.
Events
Each interview phase posed a series of questions in an effort to learn vital
information about the social network, program resources, and background
information of each MESA program leader. In addition to the recording of program
leader’s responses during each phase, various instruments (Name, Position, and
Resource Generators) were utilized to group data into a format that facilitates
analysis and generates a clearer picture of one’s social resource network. To present
an understanding of the events that transpired during each phase of the interview
80
process, a progression of events with general descriptions is listed below. The actual
interview questions of each phase are included in Appendices E, T, and U.
Phase I
Introduction Script: The interviewer introduces himself and details the
purposes of the study. In addition, the rights of the study participant are
addressed.
Personal Background Survey: Demographic and educational background
information is asked of the study participant. Educational background
information also includes parental educational background. Interviewer
records responses manually. (Appendix B)
Staff Worksheet: Study participant provides professional information on
the key staff members that assist in running the MESA program.
Interviewer records responses manually. (Appendix C)
Personal Background Survey #2: Study participant is asked about their
current position within the MESA program, the mission and target
population of the program, and the fundamental aspects of the program
that distinguishes it from other campus retention programs. Interviewer
records responses manually. (Appendix D)
81
Phase II
The Name Generator: The interviewer details the types of people to be
identified within the Name Generator. In general, these are people that
the study participant can receive program and student support with
genuine confidence and trust. The interviewer asks the study participant
to name people within their social network that pertain to one of fourteen
distinct areas of institutional support as described within the Methodology
chapter of this study. Interviewer populates the Social Network Survey
based upon the study participant’s responses. (Appendix E)
Social Network Survey: Names of people pertaining to each of the
fourteen areas of support are listed in this survey. In addition, the survey
contains columns for the inclusion of demographic and program leader
relationship information for each person identified. Program leader
relationship information includes the duration of the relationship, the
setting in which the program leader meets the person, and how often the
two meet. Interviewer records data into the survey grid manually.
(Appendix V)
Code Sheet for Relationship Type Column: Provides codes for all
possibilities of relationship types that can exist between the program
leader and the people identified in the Name Generator. The code is
identified by the study participant and entered manually into the Social
Network Survey by the interviewer. (Appendix G)
82
Ethnicity Coding Sheet: Provides codes for possible ethnicities of people
identified in the Name Generator. The code is identified by the study
participant and entered manually into the Social Network Survey by the
interviewer. (Appendix H)
Code Sheet for Setting Main Social Interaction Take Place: Provides
codes for possible meeting locations between study participant and the
people identified in the Name Generator. The code is identified by the
study participant and entered manually into the Social Network Survey by
the interviewer. (Appendix I)
Code Sheet for Frequency Column: Provides codes for the frequency of
encounters between the study participant and the identified in the Name
Generator. The code is identified by the study participant and entered
manually into the Social Network Survey by the interviewer. (Appendix
K)
Occupation Descriptions for Name Generator: Documents the
occupations of each person listed in the Social Network Survey.
Interviewer records occupations manually. (Appendix L)
Organizational Affiliations: Lists the names of professional, political,
religious, charitable, and recreational organizations that the respondent is
currently involved in. Interviewer records the organizations manually.
(Appendix M)
83
Code Sheet for Organizational Affiliations: Provides codes for the
different types of organizations that program leaders are potentially
involved in. The codes are utilized in the Organizational Affiliations
Response Sheet. (Appendix N)
Organizational Affiliations Response Sheet: Describes the nature of
involvement within each organization that the study participant is
currently involved in. Interviewer records the descriptions manually.
(Appendix O)
The Position Generator: Introduces the Position Generator worksheet and
informs the study participant to indicate the number of family members,
friends, colleagues, and acquaintances that hold any occupations listed on
the worksheet. In addition, the script defines two types of colleagues that
the study participant might have in their social network. The study
participant indicates the number of family members, friends, and
acquaintances that hold particular occupations. The Position Generator
lists 30 occupations that vary in their socioeconomic index scale as
determined by Miller (1997). The study participant completes the
Position Generator worksheet manually. (Appendix P)
The Resource Generator: Introduces the Resource Generator worksheet
and informs the study participant to indicate if any family members,
friends, colleagues, and acquaintances have resources listed on the
worksheet. The interviewer also informs the study participant that
84
indicating one’s self as having a resource listed on the worksheet is
allowed. The study participant indicates if any family members, friends,
or acquaintances have resources listed on the worksheet. The study
participant completes the Resource Generator worksheet manually.
(Appendix R)
Phase III
Follow-up Interview on Relationships Identified in the Name Generator:
Questions are posed to the study participant pertaining to each
relationship identified in the Name Generator. The questions attempt to
create a better understanding of the support provided by the identified
person to the study participant and vice versa. For relationships identified
as multiple sources of support, study participants are asked to elaborate
on specific instances. An audio recording device is utilized and the entire
interview is transcribed by the interviewer. (Appendix T)
Phase IV
Individual Ethnographic Interview: The interview emphasizes questions
that inquire into the perspective of the program leader and the individual
characteristics of the MESA program. More specifically, the topics
covered by the questions include: student developmental issues, student
educational concerns, and student access to college services. An audio
85
recording device is utilized and the entire interview transcribed by the
interviewer. (Appendix U)
During the first two phases (Phases I & II), the interviewer was responsible
for filling-in the personal background surveys, the staff worksheet, the organizational
affiliation worksheet, and the Name Generator on behalf of each respondent. In
addition, Phase II required the program leader to manually complete the position and
Resource Generator worksheets with minimal assistance from the interviewer. An
audio recording device was utilized to assist in the transcription of responses to
interview questions. However, only responses during the last two phases (Phases III
& IV) were recorded using the audio recording device. The last two phases consist
of follow-up information to the Name Generator data and the ethnographic
interview.
Data Analysis
This study analyzed the data collected to examine the ways in which
institutional agents mobilize their own social capital to benefit MESA program
participants. The information collected from the Name, Position and Resource
Generators corresponded to the specific research questions as presented above.
Specifically, the generators delved into the characteristics, features, compositions of
the social resource networks of those adults who coordinate and run student
intervention programs. In addition, the subsequent interviews attempted to
86
determine the factors that facilitate or constrain the program leader’s access and
mobilization of resources on behalf of self, students, program associates, and
program agenda. Lastly, the follow-up questions explored those factors that
influence the ability of the program person to assume the role of ‘institutional agent’.
The instrument surveys and interview questions were analyzed to discover
exact relationships and access to social networks of institutional agents that are
beneficial to students. A separate descriptive analysis was conducted of all data
collected from the Name, Position, and Resource Generators. Within this descriptive
analysis, frequency and statistical data was recorded to provide insight into possible
themes that could be drawn from this study. From the Name Generator, the
frequency information recorded for each program leader included: net size, activated
net size, multiplex relationships, uniplex relationships, types of relationship, duration
of relationships, and settings for alter interaction. The Name Generator statistical
information that was calculated included: percentage of dormant alters, percentage of
activated alters, female to male alter ratio, alter ethnicities, and alter SEI data.
Position Generator statistical data was also calculated for each campus. This
data included: the highest SEI score accessed, the range of SEI scores, mean SEI
score, median SEI score, mode SEI score, percentage of high-status accessed
positions, the percentage of weak ties and strong ties, and the total number of
positional contacts. In addition, Resource Generator statistical data was recorded for
each community college. This data included: the percentage of accessed resources,
the percentage of strong tie/weak tie resources, and the percentage of resources that
87
the program leaders could provide themselves. Themes were identified during the
Name, Position, and Resource Generator data analysis that were of particular interest
and incorporated into the Findings section of Chapter 4. Lastly, follow-up and
ethnographic interview transcriptions were analyzed for recurring themes that existed
amongst program leaders. Even though the ethnographic interview questions were in
accordance with the research questions of this study, it was important to use an
analytical induction methodology to identify the themes and inferences that can
possibly provide answers to each research question. This process was conducted
through the implementation of a coding system in which instances of particular
themes that surfaced during the transcription analyses were identified.
88
CHAPTER FOUR
Data Analysis
The purpose of this chapter is to present a logical analysis of the information
gathered in all phases of the data collection process. First, a situation assessment
provides key background information on the respondents’ age, gender, and
educational background. Second, data analysis is conducted in an effort to answer
the five research questions introduced earlier that have provided guidance and
purpose to this study. For reference, the research questions are listed below:
1. What are the characteristics, features, and composition of the social
resource networks of intervention program coordinators?
2. What are some of the factors that facilitate or constrain the program
leader’s access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and program agenda
3. How do these institutional agents work to enhance program participants’
social networks so that students themselves become independent and
learn to network and access resources?
4. Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally draining task.
How do institutional agents deal with this pressure and time consuming
task?
89
Situation Assessment
Data gathered from the initial interview phase yielded a wide range of results
that can possibly provide clues into the social networks of MESA program leaders
and the degree to which the leaders mobilize resources on behalf of their students.
Three of the four program leaders are female and above the age of 45 with one of the
female program leaders, Amalia, over the age of 55. In addition, all of the female
interviewees are married with children. The remaining interviewee, Jose, is male,
single with no children, and under the age of 30. In terms of ethnicity, Sally and
Julia are of white European descent, whereas Amalia is Mexican American and Jose
is Cuban American. All four program leaders were born in the United States.
A grand total of one associate’s degree (Julia), three bachelor’s degrees
(Amalia, Jose, Sally) and two master’s degrees (Amalia, Sally) have been earned
amongst all four of the interviewees. Jose, Amalia, and Sally earned their
undergraduate degrees at the following institutions, respectively: the University of
California at Riverside, the University of California at Los Angeles, and the
California State University at Northridge. Julia reached junior status at the
University of Southern California but did not complete her undergraduate degree.
Findings
Interviewee parental educational background was much more varied than the
educational background of the potential institutional agents. The educational history
for the parents of the program leaders included the completion of third grade level,
90
completion of the 9
th
grade level, high school graduation, the completion of some
community college, and the earning of a Ph.D. degree in sociology. Sally, the
MESA program director at Rolling Hills College, was the respondent with the parent
that has earned a doctoral degree. Besides the one parent that earned a Ph.D. degree,
no other parent obtained a bachelors degree at the university level.
In terms of professional experience, all program leaders tied in their past
positions of leadership to their current duties within the MESA program.
Interestingly, only one program leader, Amalia, made a connection between her
ability to access resources on behalf of students in a previous job to her current
position as MESA director. Amalia was employed as a community college
counselor prior to accepting the MESA director position at Eastern Community
College and undoubtedly has utilized her counseling skills within the MESA
program. With respect to the four program leaders’ current positions within their
respective MESA programs, the interviewees have worked a minimum of four years
and a maximum of nine years as MESA program leaders.
As is the case with many state-funded student based programs, budgetary
constraints limit the amount of staff that is able to provide resources to program
participants. At a minimum, each MESA program is assigned a full-time director, a
part-time counselor, and a part-time administrative assistant. The program director is
typically in charge of executing program objectives which can include submitting
mid-year and year-end program reports, academic counseling and tutoring for
program participants, hiring tutors and academic workshop leaders, organization of
91
an industry advisory committee, student recruitment, and fundraising. The MESA
counselor is responsible for meeting with students for one-on-one counseling
sessions and creating academic plans for students. The academic plans are designed
to guide students through their community college career so that students understand
which courses to take and when to take them to facilitate the transfer process in a
STEM discipline. The part-time administrative assistant performs clerical duties,
database and budget management, and event coordinating for the MESA program.
Even though some interviewees included academic excellence workshop leaders and
tutors in the Staff Worksheet (Appendix C), these employees are not considered as
key personnel within the MESA programmatic decision-making process. As a result,
each of the MESA programs has, on average, one full-time director and no more than
two other key staff members that assist in programmatic decision-making.
When asked about the specific mission of their respective MESA programs,
there was agreement on behalf of all interviewees that the MESA program is
designed to be a resource to underserved students, including minority, low-income
and first-generation college students, and assist in the development of skills
necessary to be successful in STEM disciplines. Two of the program leaders, Jose
and Amalia, specifically mentioned math-based or calculus-based fields instead of
the term “STEM disciplines” to emphasize the focus on mathematical skill
development within their MESA programs. Jose also mentioned that the target
population for his respective MESA program included students “that work hard.”
This is interesting since this particular program leader opens the MESA doors to all
92
STEM students regardless of their economic or minority status in an effort to
enhance the study environment for all students that participate in the program.
The final segment of the questions that generate a general picture of each
individual MESA program detailed the fundamental cores aspects and activities that
distinguish the programs on their respective community college campuses. Not
surprisingly, the first item that was listed for each respondent was the “community of
learners” atmosphere that is created by a dedicated study space on each campus for
program participants. According to the interviewees, the study space allows program
participants to support, help, and mentor each other to achieve academic excellence.
Two respondents, Sally and Julia, talked about an annual MESA leadership retreat
on their campus and the positive influence that it can have on the academic and
social development of their program participants. Such a retreat displays the extent
of a program leader’s social networks as keynote speakers, workshops leaders,
faculty, and industry representatives are called upon to share leadership and
educational experiences that contributed to their high-status attainment.
Research Question 1: What are the characteristics, features, and composition of the
social resource networks of intervention program coordinators?
Net size and access to resources. The data supplied by the respondents
varied significantly in terms of the net sizes of the Name and Position Generators. It
was found that the program director at Eastern Community College, Amalia, had a
much larger social network than any individual respondent at the other two
93
campuses. The data collected from the Name Generator indicated that Amalia had a
net size of 70 while the next largest net size was 28. Sally of Rolling Hills College
had the net size of 28 while Jose and Julia had net sizes of 25 and 13, respectively.
This means that Amalia’s net size was at least 250% larger than any other than any
other study participant.
In addition, comparing Position Generator data amongst all study participants
presents differing results. Recall that the Position Generator contains 30 positions of
which 10 are classified as high-status positions, 9 are medium-status positions, and
11 are low-status positions. Table 4.1 illustrates the number of people in high-,
medium-, and low-status positions that each respondent listed in the Position
Generator. These people represent the positions that each respondent has access to
and contributes to the amount of social capital the respondent has. The number in
superscript represents the number of times the respondent indicated that they knew
10 or more alters for the same position in the Position Generator. This statistic is
important since respondents were asked to write “10+” on the Position Generator
survey each time they knew 10 or more family, friends, or colleagues that have the
same position. Essentially, if the respondent knew more than 10 people for a
particular position there was no procedure to record exactly how many people the
respondent knew due to the inference that such an amount of alters is adequate social
capital for that position. The superscript provides more detail into the social capital
of each respondent in terms of the number of people in high-, medium-, and low-
status positions they have access to. For example, Jose’s results show 34
3
medium-
94
status alters that were identified in the Position Generator. This means that Jose has
at least 34 people in his social network that work in medium-societal status
professions. In addition, the superscript signifies that he knows 10 or more people in
three different medium-societal status positions, respectively. In total, Jose has at
least 71 people in varying societal status positions in his social network.
Table 3
Position Generator – Access to High-, Medium-, Low-status Alters
Site ECC FCC RHC
Status Amalia Jose Sally Julia
High 68
2
22
1
51
2
29
1
Medium 64
2
34
3
30 15
Low 34
1
15 24 18
Total 166 71 105 62
The disparities in the Position Generator total net sizes are displayed in Table
3. Not surprisingly, the Position Generator corroborates the results of the Name
Generator since Amalia has a very large net size as compared to the other
respondents. Amalia had a Position Generator net size of 166 alters with the next
highest net size being that of Sally at 105 alters. Amalia also had the highest number
of 10 or more relationships overall with five, followed closely by Jose with a
subscript total of four. Furthermore, the two smallest net sizes of Jose and Julia are
also the closest; having the smallest difference between the two with 9 alters.
Upon further analysis of the data presented in Table 3, there exists a direct
relationship between a MESA director’s net size tabulated from the Position
Generator and the number of years the respondent has worked in higher education.
Since Julia is not a MESA director working full-time, she is not included in this
95
particular connection as her net size is more reflective of her secretarial position
within MESA. From the Personal Background Survey administered in Phase I, it
was found that Amalia has the longest duration of employment within higher
education at almost 30 years of service. Before becoming MESA director nine years
ago, Amalia served as a counselor for Eastern Community College. Another MESA
director, Sally, taught Biology courses at Rolling Hills College for a year before
assuming MESA duties in 1998. In total, Sally has 10 years of full-time employment
within higher education. Jose, the MESA director from Foothill Community
College, has worked nine years total in higher education in multiple roles including
departmental secretary, mentor, and tutor. Accordingly, Table 3 reflects nets sizes of
166, 105, and 71 for these three individuals, respectively. In addition, the Personal
Background Survey indicated that the MESA directors Amalia, Sally, and Jose are
58, 49, and 29 years of age, respectively.
In contrast to the findings of the Position Generator, the Resource Generator
produced similar results among all four MESA program leaders in terms of access to
resources. Recall from Chapter 3 that the Resource Generator contains 25 items that
inquire into the program leader’s access to resources. These resources represent
varying levels of social status, similar to the position listed in the Position Generator.
In addition, the strength of a tie to a particular resource was measured by asking
about whom in the program leader’s social network also has access to that resource:
family members, friends, acquaintances, or the participant.
96
Upon further analysis of the data pertaining to the resources that program
leaders have access to, it was found that all four respondents have access to an
overwhelming majority of the 25 items in the Resource Generator. Jose and Amalia
indicated that they did not have access to two of the 25 items of the Resource
Generator. Closer inspection of Jose’s Resource Generator reveals that these two
items were access to someone “who is licensed to do plumbing and household
repairs” and “is active in a political party”. Jose’s items correspond to low- and
medium-societal status resources, respectively. The two items that Amalia did not
have access to were someone “who handles and processes mail” and “who knows
how to prepare food for sale”; both of which are low-status resources. Sally
indicated that she did not have access to the licensed plumbing and household repair
resource only; whereas, Julia stated that she had access to every item on the
Resource Generator.
Status-level access to alters and positions. The Name and Position
Generators also indicated that differences exist in the respondents’ access to varying
status positions. According to the Name Generator, Amalia and Sally identified the
largest amount of high-status individuals in their social networks. Amalia identified
23 and Sally identified 17 high-status professionals in the Name Generator.
However, Sally’s Name Generator results differ from Amalia’s in that Sally has a
higher percentage of high-status professionals represented in her net size. In fact,
Sally’s high-status percentage of 61% is almost double that of Amalia’s who has a
97
high-status percentage of 33%. Another 32% of Sally’s net size and 51% of
Amalia’s are persons that have medium-status professions.
Recall that the Name Generator identified people within a program leader’s
social network that have provided assistance in 14 areas of institutional support (see
Chapter 3). The statistics presented above mean that even though Amalia can access
more high-status individuals than Sally, the majority of individuals that can assist her
in any of the 14 areas of institutional support are of medium-status professions. In
addition to Amalia, the results of Jose and Julia indicated that they also tend to seek
the assistance of medium-status individuals. Sally, on the other hand, has the ability
to seek the assistance of predominantly high-status individuals to provide
institutional resources and support to MESA students. Since Sally has one of the
largest high-status net sizes from her results on the Name Generator, she can access a
larger number of high-status individuals than Amalia, Jose, and Julia.
The results of the Position Generator appear to support the findings of the
Name Generator in terms of determining the level of access to high-status
individuals that each program leader possesses. Table 4.1 indicates that even though
Sally does not have access the highest number of alters, she maintains the largest
percentage of high-status professionals in her Position Generator net size at 49%.
The high-status percentages for Julia, Amalia, and Jose were 47%, 41%, and 31%,
respectively. The percentages for Julia and Jose may be a bit misleading since their
Position Generator net sizes were much smaller than Sally’s or Amalia’s.
Nevertheless, the results of the Position Generator echo the findings of the Name
98
Generator in that Sally has the ability to access the largest portion of her high-status
professional network if she so chooses.
Social capital activation. The results of the Name, Position, and Resource
Generators suggest that program leaders have access to many high- to medium-status
resources, but have not fully activated key relationships to facilitate the delivery of
these resources to program participants. To further understand this point, Table 4
presents the percentage of high-, medium-, and low-status instances of the Name,
Position, and Resource Generators in which a program leader gave a positive
response to at least one item per category. Percentages were averaged for Rolling
Hills College since Sally and Julia have differing generator results.
Table 4
Name, Position, and Resource Generators – Percentage (%) of High-, Medium-
and Low-Status Instances Identified
Eastern Community College
Name Generator
Status Alters Identified Alters Accessed
Position
Generator
Resource
Generator
High 33 65 70 100
Medium 56 90 89 100
Low 11 100 73 71
Foothill Community College
High 40 70 90 90
Medium 56 86 56 92
Low 4 100 45 86
Rolling Hills College (* percent average of Sally and Julia)
High 44 41 90 100
Medium 51 60 100 100
Low 5 100 82 100
99
The “Alters Identified” column presents percentages based upon the Name
Generator net size for each program leader. The “Alters Accessed” column
identifies the percentage of high-, medium-, or low-status alters that have been
accessed within the past year by the respondent. The results of the Name Generator
indicate that, at most, 70% of high-status alters were accessed within the last year.
This figure corresponds to Jose who has the least tenure as a MESA program leader
of only four years. RHC owns the least percentage of high-status alters that have
been accessed within the last year. This is surprising since RHC has a very large
high-status net size that, if accessed effectively, can undoubtedly benefit program
participants. According to Table 4, the Resource Generator results indicate that all
program leaders are able to access nearly every high- and medium-status resource
available. However, the percentage of the accessed high-status Name Generator
alters is lower than the medium- and low-status percentages for any program.
In addition, Table 4 shows that respondents accessed medium-status
professionals and resources at a slightly higher percentage than any other status
category. The Name Generator results indicate that program leaders not only
identified more medium-status alters than any other category, but also accessed these
alters at a greater percentage than they did high-status individuals. Even though
program leaders accessed every low-status individuals identified in their respective
Name Generators, these net sizes are small compared to high- and medium-status
alters. The Position Generator also indicates that, for the most part, program leaders
have access to a wider range of medium-status positions than any other positional
100
status. FCC is the only college of the three that has access to a wider range of high-
status positions than either the medium- or low-status positions.
Collegial acquaintances. Data gathered from the Name, Position, and
Resource Generators show that an overwhelming majority of alters are colleagues or
acquaintances that have the same workplace as the program leader. From the results
of the Name Generator, Jose and Sally indicated that the percentages of their alters
that work for the same employer were 80% and 82%, respectively. Similarly, Julia’s
and Amalia’s percentages were just as high at 92% and 79%, respectively. In
addition, Table 5 displays the total number of acquaintances/colleagues, friends, and
family that were identified by each college in the Position Generator. The results for
RHC is a composite of Sally’s and Julia’s Position Generator data. The number in
superscript indicates the number of times the participant indicated that they knew 10
or more people in a particular position. Table 5 shows that the majority of
relationships between program leaders and alters are collegial with the same
workplace shared by the respondent and the alter. This indicates that program
leaders were more likely to access resources from people at their own college as
opposed to accessing individuals at a different campus.
101
Table 5
Position Generator – Alter Relationship to Program Leader
* Sally/Julia combined data
Colleague or Acquaintance
Site
Family
Friend Same
Workplace
Different
Workplace
ECC 7 22 69
4
69
4
FCC 0 9 49
3
14
1
RHC* 5 30
1
75
2
52
1
Table 6 displays the total number of acquaintances/colleagues, friends, and
family that were identified by each college in the Resource Generator. The results
for RHC is a composite of Sally’s and Julia’s Resource Generator data.
Table 6
Resource Generator – Alter Relationship to Program Leader
Colleague or Acquaintance
Site
Family
Friend Same
Workplace
Different
Workplace
Self
ECC 9 7 15 14 7
FCC 7 18 15 9 12
RHC 18 36 38 28 19
The results from the Resource Generator are similar to those of the Position
Generator in that, with the exception of Jose from FCC, the majority of resources
were accessed from relationships with colleagues or acquaintances from the same
workplace. Once again, this indicates that respondents were more inclined to access
resources from people at their own college rather than seek advice from another
institution of higher education.
Further analysis of the alter relationships within the Position and Resource
Generators requires consideration of the status level of the individuals and resources.
Table 7 displays the composite total of relationships by status and relationship from
102
the Position Generator. This table provides convincing evidence that MESA
program leaders are more likely to have family, friends, and colleagues that work in
high-status positions since high-status alters outnumber medium- and low-status
alters in each column.
Table 7
Position Generator – Alter Status and Relationship
* All campus composite
Colleague or Acquaintance
Status
Family
Friend Same
Workplace
Different
Workplace
High 7 31 68 69
Medium 6 20 61 45
Low 4 9 51 21
Table 8 illustrates the results of the Resource Generator in terms of overall
number of relationships by status and relationship. In this case, colleagues or
acquaintances provided a majority of medium-status resources at the same
workplace. Since this statistic is 35% greater than the amount of medium-status
resources provided by colleagues from different workplaces, it further corroborates
that program leaders have the most relationships with colleagues or acquaintances
from the same workplace.
Table 8
Resource Generator – Alter Status and Relationship
* All campus composite
Colleague or Acquaintance
Status
Family
Friend Same
Workplace
Different
Workplace
Self
High 6 11 15 14 6
Medium 17 29 42 31 26
Low 10 18 10 6 6
103
Relationships with persons of similar backgrounds. Analysis of Name
Generator data shows that three of four program leaders have a social network
having a majority of individuals with the same ethnic background as the program
leader. Table 9 lists each program leader, their ethnicity, and the percentage of alters
with the largest ethnic representation.
Table 9
Name Generator – Ethnic Representation
Program
Leader
Program Leader
Ethnicity
Largest Ethnic Group
in Network
% of Largest Ethnic
Group in Network
Amalia Mexican American Mexican American 74
Jose Cuban American Caucasian 40
Julia Caucasian Caucasian 69
Sally Caucasian Caucasian 61
Table 9 shows that all program leaders, save for one, have a network that is at
least 60% the same ethnic group as the program leader. Jose, who is Latino,
identified the second largest ethnic group in is network as Latino, comprising 16% of
his entire Name Generator net size. Conversely, Amalia identified her second largest
ethnic group as Caucasian, comprising 10% of her entire network. The table shows
that program leaders have not maintained as many relationships with alters from
different ethnic backgrounds. In addition, program leaders have primarily
established relationships with individuals of Caucasian background. Lastly, it was
also found that all four program leaders have more females in their networks than
males. The networks of Amalia, Jose, Julia, and Sally consist of 67%, 52%, 57%,
and 57% women, respectively.
104
Multiplex relationships and weak ties. Table 10 indicates that participants
had more than three times as many weak ties than there were multiplex relationships
between alters in their respective net sizes. According to Granovetter (1983), weak
ties serve an important purpose with a person’s social capital inasmuch as the weak
ties contribute to the movement of information between social networks. Recall
from Chapter 2 that weak ties are uniplex relationships between an institutional agent
and an alter that is not a family member and provides only one source of support.
Multiplex relationships, on the other hand, are relationships between an institutional
agent and an alter that provides three or more different sources of support. Table 10
illustrates that program leaders are more inclined to seek advice from many
individuals as opposed to receiving assistance from a handful of individuals that
provide multiple sources of support.
Table 10
Name Generator – Percentage(%) of multiple relationships and weak ties
Program Leader Percent multiplex relationships Percent weak ties
Amalia 17 69
Jose 20 80
Julia 23 62
Sally 7 43
Respondents as resources. On average, program leaders indicated that they
have provided less than half of all the resources listed in the Name and Resource
Generators. Even though the areas of support varied for each program leader on the
Name Generator, there were a few common support categories that all four program
leaders had in common. These areas were social integration development support
105
(Support #1), financial information support (Support #7), and academic integration
assistance (Support #11). The two common Resource Generator items amongst all
the program leaders were “can fill out a college application” (Resource #2) and “has
information about internship opportunities” (Resource #17). The data collected from
the Name and Resource Generators indicate that program leaders are slightly more
inclined to turn to their social network to access resources than provide the resource
themselves.
Alters as established groups. A frequent occurrence in the Name Generator
results of all four program leaders was the identification of a group of alters as a
source of institutional resource support as opposed to any one single individual or
individuals that was identified by name. The most common groups identified by the
program leaders were math & science faculty, MESA program leaders at other
colleges, and their own students. Program leaders indicated that faculty and MESA
program leaders provided college service support (Support #6) and academic
integration support (Support #11) for their respective MESA programs. An example
of a college service can be tutoring whereas academic integration support includes
graduate school mentoring programs or transfer programs. It may seem strange that
students have been identified by program leaders as sources of MESA program
support, but all three programs utilize the services of their students to tutor and
conduct academic workshops in subjects they have already mastered.
106
Organizational affiliations. The program leaders indicated that they had
limited to moderate activity in organizational activities. Recall from the interview
protocol from Chapter 3 that all of the program leaders were asked about their
professional affiliations in five separate categories: professional, trade or industry,
political party or organization, church or religious, charitable or philanthropic, and
sports club or recreation. The majority of respondents were involved in higher
education professional organizations that focused mainly on student retention in the
STEM fields
Amalia, Jose, and Sally each indicated that they were a member of at least
three different higher education professional associations. The three program leaders
identified these common organizations that they were involved in: the Society for the
Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in Science (SACNAS), the Society
or Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE), and the California Association of
MESA directors. Sally is also a member of two different professional teaching
organizations: the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). Julia was not able to
identify any professional organization that she was a part of.
None of the participants reported affiliations with trade or industry
organizations. Jose was very active in recreational basketball leagues in at least two
different cities. Amalia, Julia, and Sally reported involvement in charitable or
philanthropic organizations. Amalia and Julia conduct their volunteer work through
their religious affiliations while Julia promotes breast cancer awareness through
107
volunteering at fundraisers. Julia is also a member of the California League of
Conservation Voters in which she participates in letter writing campaigns to help
reduce pollution and waste within the state of California.
Research Question 2: What are some of the factors that facilitate or constrain the
program leader’s access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and program agenda?
Program leader access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and agenda is primarily connected to the size and
effectiveness of the program leader’s social network. Analysis of Research Question
1 provided key factors and insights into how large each program leader’s network
was, the social status of individuals and resources within the network, and how often
the program leader was mobilizing their network. In addition to the characteristics
of a program leader’s net size, key insights were gathered from each respondents’
biographical sketches, Name Generator follow-up interview, and the ethnographic
interview. Further analysis of program leader interview responses provided
information regarding administrative and bureaucratic processes that can either
facilitate MESA programmatic functions or debilitate them. In addition, it is
important to know how much each program leader is motivated by student success
that will, in turn, contribute to their commitment to students, program associates, and
the MESA program itself. Lastly, whether or not MESA program leaders are able to
108
provide program guidance on a full-time basis can have major implications on their
ability to access and mobilize resources.
Professional experience. Major findings from Jose’s biographical sketch that
contribute to his ability to access resources include his experience as a student, tutor,
mentor, instructional aide, and clerical assistant at Foothill Community College. In
addition, Jose’s ethnographic interview provided a key insight into his college
experience at FCC and how it has influenced his approach to directing the MESA
program.
Jose: I guess maybe the student I would have liked to have been when
I was coming to FCC is what I see in them. In terms of work ethic, I
think they would have outworked me at this point when I was coming
to school here. I see them now as I did my academic career in its
latter stages at UC Riverside, but not when I was coming here to FCC.
I wouldn’t have been part of the program; I wouldn’t have been
scholar of the year.
Experience at the same college that currently employs him has given Jose an
understanding of the campus culture and has enabled him to establish alter
relationships that allow him to mobilize resources for MESA program
participants.
Amalia’s and Sally’s experience is slightly different than Jose’s in terms of
work experience. As mentioned before in the Research Question 1 analysis, both
Amalia and Sally were full-time tenured faculty members at their respective
colleges. Their experience at ECC and RHC is a major reason why they have the
two largest net sizes from their Name Generator results. In Julia’s case, she
109
indicated that her decision to drop out of the University of Southern California as an
undergraduate for financial reasons has given her a greater understanding of the
college experience for students whose parents did not attend college.
Limited staff. The staff worksheet that each program leader completed during
Phase I indicates that the majority of MESA programs have limited staff that assists
in the organization and execution of programmatic operations. The MESA programs
leaders at FCC and RHC indicated that only a part-time administrative assistant and
a part-time counselor are on the MESA staff besides the directors, Jose and Sally.
Recall that Julia is the part-time administrative assistant for the MESA program at
RHC. Amalia at ECC operates with five other part-timers that specialize in
academic excellence workshops organization, peer advising, technical assistance,
administrative assistance, and database management, respectively. Jose is the only
program leader that dedicates 100% of their time to MESA duties. At the time these
interviews were conducted, both Amalia and Sally were given reassign time of 40%
to operate their MESA programs and teach courses in their respective departments.
Amalia has since retired from ECC and Sally was made a full-time administrator
who can now focus all of her attention on MESA activities. A limited amount of
staff available for daily operation can put serious constraints on the effectiveness of
the MESA program. At the same rate, the amount of staff available for each MESA
program is determined by budgetary limitations and administrative decisions of
110
which most MESA program leaders are generally in no position to make decisions
upon.
Healthy relationships with high-status individuals. The Phase III interviews
for each program leader provided some insight into the relationships that were
identified in the Name Generator. In terms of access and mobilization of resources
on behalf of program participants and staff, it is essential that program leaders
maintain positive and healthy relationships with their supervisors and individuals of
high-status. A crosscheck was made of all high-status individuals listed in the Name
Generator for each program leader with statements that were made about these
individuals in the Phase III follow up interview. In each case, the program leader
indicated that there existed a professional and productive working relationship with
the identified alters. Furthermore, when asked if they would seek out the services of
the alter for future advice or assistance, the program leaders provided positive and
affirmative responses in each and every case. This indicates that assistance that may
come from high-status campus administrators or individuals will not be complicated
by strained relationships or negative attitudes from either side.
Bureaucratic limitations and successes. When the program leaders were
asked about the process of securing more resources and funding from campus
administrators, there was no consensus as to how this process was carried out as well
as the overall feelings towards such processes. In one example, Jose was able to
111
secure new furniture, student lockers, a kitchen area with microwave, and new
computers for MESA program participants through grant writing. Campus
administrators at Jose’s campus are very supportive of increasing the quality of a
student’s learning environment especially if it comes from an external funding
source. The new equipment, however, does come with a price since students are
locked into an informal contract with the FCC MESA program that expects a
minimum amount of program involvement and achievement from the students. Jose
also has first-hand experience of inadequate tutoring services for students of
educationally disadvantaged and financial disadvantaged backgrounds since he was a
product of such services. As a result, through grant writing and the utilization of his
social network he was able to create a MESA program that mirrors what he would
have wanted when he was coming to school.
Attempts to secure resources from campus administrators through
bureaucratic processes have not been as smooth an experience for Sally and Amalia.
Both program leaders indicated an increase in negative stress and frustration over
administrators that have not been receptive to MESA initiatives that require high-
level approval. Program leaders indicated that such fundamental program resources
as funding, computing equipment, and study space have been negatively affected due
to minimal levels of administrative support.
Regardless of the behavior of campus administrators, program leaders have a
natural ability to understand what students need and draw from their extensive social
network to mobilize resources for students. On more than one occasion, Sally has
112
responded to the individual needs of students in need of help by accessing her
internal social capital. Sally stated that she knew she had the resources available and
that the students would benefit from them even though the delivery of such resources
had not been previously documented by MESA administrators. Even though stress
and its effects on MESA program leaders will be discussed later in Research
Question 4, stress caused by campus administrators is definitely another constraint
on the program leader’s ability to access and mobilize resources on behalf of
themselves, students, program associates, and the overall MESA program agenda.
Program leader motivation. It is important to understand the motivation of
individuals as they carry out programmatic duties to ensure a quality program. In
many cases, motivation can be basic in that individuals view their position solely as a
job that brings food to the table or as a stepping stone for a more prestigious role.
From the responses of the program leaders, the motivation to carry out their duties is
as equally fulfilling for themselves as it is for the students they assist.
Jose details his motivation for directing the MESA program at FCC as
something that comes from within him. He sees himself as the driving force behind
student success and, in some cases, student failure.
Jose: I see the MESA program as a way to get these students, little
pieces of coal if you will, and pressurize them for two to three years
and hopefully after you are done with that they turn into nice little
diamonds that all these universities want to scoop up…I guess it’s
more motivated through me; I want to empower the student as much
as possible. The object of when I run this program is not to make
them successful at the community college [level], it’s to make them
113
successful at the university they transfer to…I’m not too concerned
about them passing classes here because I know that will happen; I’m
more concerned about what happens at the next step. It depends on
the focus of who’s running it, I could do a half-ass job and just do
what the grant requires me to do and make sure they are prepared for
FCC, but that’s not ultimately the goal, we’re trying to create students
that are interested in getting a graduate degree.
Jose finds motivation from the trust that students put in him and vice versa; a trust
that will put students on a path to transfer to a university in the STEM disciplines.
Amalia and Julia provided small glimpses into the causes of their motivation.
Each excerpt was taken from the program leaders’ ethnographic interviews.
Amalia: Because of my experience as a career counselor, I realized
that internships, community involvement, and teaching students how
to be collaborators was the way to succeed…so I took an interest
because of life experiences of my own, plus the way I saw people
succeeding were the ones that were more connected, socially
connected.
Julia: I have an understanding, I know what it feels like to be in their
shoes and I know that I probably could have been more successful
had I had a different kind of support structure, so having been in the
program for almost seven years I can see that it does make a
difference. We’ve seen students transfer and they say that [MESA]
just felt like their home, so it works! It’s something that’s close to my
heart.
The fact that this information was uncovered during the ethnographic interview in
which no direct question was asked regarding program leader motivation speaks
volumes to the quality of individuals that the colleges have in their respective MESA
programs.
114
Research Question 3: How do these institutional agents work to enhance program
participants’ social networks so that students themselves become independent and
learn to network and access resources?
Common threads exist in the ways that institutional agents engender their
participants’ social networks so that students become independent learners and
enhance networking skills. Some of these methods are in the form of annual events
that bring students, faculty, and mentors together to enhance social skills and
networks while other methods are incorporated into preexisting programmatic
functions. Regardless of the methods utilized within each program, program leaders
are indeed mobilizing their social networks to create independent students that can
access resources on their own.
Campus involvement & accessing campus services. Analysis of Phase IV
interviews suggests that program leaders encourage their students to become more
involved in campus activities in an effort to increase their interaction with the
campus community and be exposed to campus resources. This is a vital component
for Amalia’s MESA program in which she understands the importance of
incorporating both academics and social integration into the program.
Amalia: What I try to do is have the student not only spend all their
energy on school and work, but also get involved in student clubs,
organizations, and community service so that they could be able to
develop a resume portfolio; so when they go into the work
development stage they’ll already understand some of the
expectations in the work environment.
115
In addition to trying to get students involved in the campus community, she
also provides a personal development class to program participants where
students are taught strategies for academic and career success. The
professional development class includes curriculum on applying to
internships and universities, writing personal statements, creating a resume,
securing letters of recommendation, and tools necessary to succeed as a
professional. The professional development aspect of Amalia’s program
touches upon the expectations of the work environment that her students will
eventually transition into. If students can understand these expectations
before reaching the workplace, they will have become more independent and
less likely to be thrust into a work environment that is unfamiliar or forced
upon them. Amalia’s developmental class is similar to Sally’s program in
which she encourages her struggling program participants to take a college
success skills class and a transfer success skills offered by RHC. If a student
is unable to fit these classes within their schedule, then Sally will assign a
mentor for that particular student to work with them on a one-on-one basis.
Amalia also mentions that some students who serve as MESA tutors are also
tutors for the on-campus learning center at ECC which is open to all students on
campus. In this regard, students take the tutoring skills learned within the MESA
program and seek out opportunities outside of MESA that allows them to serve a
larger audience. Amalia’s program also provides direct links to on-campus
counseling and special services in which MESA participants can receive direct
116
referrals to meet with these specialized services. The MESA program at ECC refers
program participants to academic counseling at least two times a semester, which is
double the average number of times a non-participant meets with a counselor.
Similarly, Julia from RHC encourages her students to not be afraid when asking for
help and go to the counseling office to set up an appointment if they can not meet
with the MESA counselor. Julia will then follow-up with the student and ask
questions regarding the meeting the student had with the counselor to ascertain
whether or not the meeting was productive. She also mentions that the student’s
ability to assert one’s self needs to be displayed at every available opportunity and is
something that is engendered by the RHC MESA program. Once again, the
specialized services provided by MESA programs facilitate the process by which
students can seek out their own services.
External resources. Program leaders have exposed their program and
their students to resources that are external to the campus at which the MESA
program operates so that students themselves become independent and learn
to network and access resources. In particular, Sally describes a situation
with one of her program participants in which interaction with outside
individuals and resources helped the student to get back on track
academically.
Sally: The one individual that I am thinking of was very bright, but
he didn’t stay motivated in any classes. He’d lose interest, his grades
would plummet, and he would wind up having to repeat the class. I
117
think for individuals like that, that are just struggling in the academic
environment we have encouraged them to participate in statewide
events, statewide leadership events where they are able to interact
with many different students from across the state and sort of see that
their problems are common problems, everybody has those, people
from other schools have those same set of problems. I think getting
the folks that are more at risk, more uncomfortable in the academic
environment and plugging them into the social network that will
support them; that is a really big piece of what we do.
Sally utilizes her social network to connect her program participants with outside
resources and individuals. She uses this programmatic tactic to take students out of
their comfort zone and access resources that they would not otherwise be exposed to
on campus. In addition, Jose admits to consulting with MESA programs within
California to understand the components and mechanisms that other programs are
utilizing that might be of benefit to his program. He goes on to mention that his
consultations with other programs have enhanced his academic excellence
workshops at FCC since the workshops now have more of a focus on group work;
something that he was not really keen on as an English major in college.
Establishing university relationships. Program leaders also indicated that
they have established relationships with four-year schools to expose students to
graduate students and to assist in the transfer process. Amalia has graduate students
from local universities on her MESA staff that give their expertise to program
participants on the transfer process and applying to graduate school. In addition, her
program actively finds contacts with alters at universities that their participants are
118
likely to attend to encourage a smoother transition from community college to
university.
Amalia: We provide the contacts and the links to the universities
where they will be able to have a name so they can contact
[individuals] at various places. If we don’t know a person, we found
out ahead of time and make phone calls. We, as a team, myself and
the graduate students, are always looking for educational
opportunities for the students.
The relationships that Amalia and her staff make with university also create transfer
scholarship opportunities that further encourage students to seek contacts at their
transfer institution.
Making resources readily available. Program leaders do their best to make
sure that the educational process is a problem-free one in which students can access
resources at a central location, namely the MESA center. The respondents have
indicated that making resources readily available for their program participants
enhances the students’ ability to access resources independently. For example, Jose
makes sure that students have all resources needed to be successful; this includes the
MESA study center, tutoring, solution manuals, peer mentors & study partners, and a
sense of community. Jose goes on to say that he is an advocate for the students in his
program and takes time out of his schedule to address student issues as they arise.
Jose: I am expecting them to work as hard as they have ever worked
in their lives and, in return, I try to resolve any issue that’s stopping
them from working hard. I want to be notified so I can yell at
whoever needs to be yelled at. I have to be in that position of being
able to advocate for them, because they don’t know the process or I
might have a significant more amount of social capital. So, if it
119
doesn’t get done with whoever has to do it, then I take the next step.
If I have to talk to the [FCC] president to get it done, I will get it
done...and [the students] respect me for that because I stop whatever I
am doing in order to make sure that it happens immediately. If you
tell me you have a problem at 10 a.m., I stop whatever I’m doing and
I try to resolve it by 10:30 a.m. I tell them, “look, you see, it was only
half an hour and you were worrying about this the whole weekend.”
Now they believe in my vision, they believe in me and now they are
willing to do what I am asking them to do, which is get out of their
comfort zone and attack their studies.
In this respect, students do not have to wait for a counselor’s email message to arrive
to set up an appointment or a message from the financial aid office telling them that
the FAFSA is due; they can go directly to Jose, whom they trust, and have that
resource readily available to them.
Jose also serves as a learning resource by delegating tasks that are normally
his responsibility to his program participants. These are typical tasks that usually
take Jose about a half an hour to complete, but may take a student a couple of days to
complete since students have to figure out the task using their own social network
and accessible resources. An example of one of these tasks may be calling other
MESA programs to inform them of upcoming academic and social events happening
at the FCC MESA program.
Peer mentor training and establishing networks. Sally mentions that her
ability to connect her academic excellence workshop facilitators to the needs of
students and not the demands of the course material enhances the academic and
social performance of program participants. In addition, she introduces guest
120
speakers to program participants that have profound impacts on students’ academic
and professional careers.
Sally: Our facilitators are asked to be facilitators, not just teachers that
are delivering content. They are required to structure the situation so
that students are working together as a collaborative team, developing
their communication skills, and developing their problem solving
skills instead of just having things handed to them.
Also, we had a number of cases where we have invited guest
speakers and the students have actually contacted the guest
speakers…we had one young man that did a series of workshops for
us about professional development like things. This is all an effort to
get the students actually engaged and interacting with people in the
field to form networks that will benefit them for the future.
Sally’s techniques described above provide an enhanced learning environment for
program participants in which students learn more than just the course material that
can enable them to excel in a particular class, but also learn the skills necessary to
succeed at the next level and develop an effective social network. Through
interaction with facilitators and guest speakers, students are building upon their
established social network that will, in turn, allow students to be more independent
and resourceful.
Research Question 4: Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally
draining task. How do institutional agents deal with this pressure and time
consuming task?
Program leaders reported differing viewpoints on the causes of pressure
experienced as a result of their involvement with MESA. There were three causes of
pressure that MESA program leaders mentioned: constant multitasking,
121
administrative and bureaucratic barriers, and the fear of letting the students down.
However, there was a consensus on how program leaders chose to deal with the
pressure of such a time consuming task. Specifically, the motivation behind being a
MESA program leader is the main coping technique when pressure levels exceed
their normal levels.
Amalia from ECC details her main sources of frustration as a result of
multitasking within her MESA program. She compares her position as MESA
director to other high profile positions on campus that do not have as many
multitasking duties such as a professor or counselor. According to Amalia, the main
responsibilities of a professor at ECC are curriculum preparation and teaching,
whereas a counselor mainly focuses on the one-on-one aspect of assisting a student.
She goes on to say that being MESA director involves much more tasks including:
fundraising, community & campus relations, monitoring student success & failure,
and budgeting. The budgeting process, in particular, is a major source of frustration
for Amalia since money frequently arrives late to her program and she is forced to
borrow money from the main campus budget to pay for MESA employees. Since
Amalia is an effective institutional agent, she had to learn how to delegate her MESA
responsibilities and contributes her ability to share the load with MESA staff as a
major pressure reliever during her MESA directorship.
Furthermore, Amalia sums up her feelings regarding bureaucratic policies
during her ethnographic interview in which she indicates that the motivation no
longer exists within her to put up with such policies at the college and state level.
122
Amalia: I am at the point in my career where I don’t want to handle it
anymore, I’ve done it for nine years and I am maxed out. This is the
common complaint with a lot of directors that have been at it for a
long time. Its dealing with the bureaucracy across the state, because
when you apply for grants there are so many factors involved, then
you have to deal with the school bureaucracy and their support.
Handling it in the first six or seven years, I really had a lot of energy
and I could do it pretty well, but now I am at the point where I don’t
feel like I want to do it anymore. Its too draining, its too much
backtracking…monies from last year maybe didn’t get recorded as
being spent, now they are telling me to resubmit another budget…I
don’t want to do it anymore, its really stressful, and that’s what most
directors say.
During the time needed to complete this study, Amalia had since retired from her
position at ECC. As a result, her statements reflect somebody who has a tremendous
amount of experience as a MESA program leader, but also somebody who is eager to
hand over the reins to the next program leader. In addition, her words also reflect the
less glamorous administrative side of being a MESA program leader. As a result, the
bureaucratic part of keeping the MESA program funded, staffed, and in operation
may be viewed as a necessary evil by some program leaders.
Sally from RHS indicated a different kind of frustration that stems more from
campus administrators than bureaucratic policies.
Sally: Where I get drained and bogged down is when I see an injustice
in the environment here that’s hurting my students and that drains me,
that causes me a significant amount of stress. That’s been happening
on and off, I had a sweet run when we had a vice president that was
very supportive of the MESA program…I was spoiled…now I am
really struggling having to interact with personalities and people that
don’t get the program and aren’t completely supportive of the
program.
123
In this case, Sally claims that unsupportive administrators can be difficult to work
with and cause an unnecessary amount of stress.
Jose displays much emotion when assisting and advocating for his students.
As a result, it comes as no surprise that he too can get emotionally drained as a
program leader of MESA. In addition, Jose mentions that being a program leader is
also mentally draining. Similar to Amalia, Jose feels the pressure build when he has
to handle multiple tasks at one time.
Jose: I think maybe the first couple of years it was emotionally
draining because the program was getting started. I used to take it
very personally when a student would fail or withdrew from a class. I
didn’t really like that too much, because I thought that was in terms of
failure…but now I am starting to realize that as long as they come
back the following semester we are still in a good place, because they
are still alive, I have to get back to basics…This job is significantly
mentally draining. You have so many students, you always have to
be thinking. When a student asks me “I have a quick question,” I tell
them “just write down your name and I will get with you in a minute,”
because there are just too many students for one person to manage.
Even though Jose places a lot of the pressure on himself based on the performance of
his students, he has always maintained his commitment to his students. He is always
willing to work with students as long as they continue taking courses and
participating within the MESA program.
The interviews of all program leaders indicated that the main motivation for
becoming involved in MESA was to see students succeed and be involved in that
success. The program leaders use this motivation as a way to reduce the pressure
that builds up as they carry out their commitments to the students.
124
Amalia: In my case, I was rewarded because I really saw a lot of
growth in the students, so I just kept doing it.
Jose: I am able to see things on a larger scale. I used to look at it in
terms of a micro scale and now I am able to look at it on a macro
scale. So lets suppose there are two or three students that get an F,
well for those that get an F there’s another 12 that got A’s. I really
can’t be kicking myself in the ass too hard because there’s some
responsibility that the student has to take. I already know that I am, at
least to some degree, providing a level of service where these students
can be successful. So the biggest questions are, “How do we get these
other students to be more successful? How would we keep them from
duplicating this effort? How do we minimize those three F’s?”
Julia: I feel that it’s not draining at all. I think that it’s invigorating
actually, especially when you see at the end of the semester the long
list of students that are transferring and you hear back from the ones
that have successfully graduated from the universities. So it’s
great…a wonderful program and it really works.
Sally: Every time I get stressed out over here and things are ridiculous
and upsetting to me, I pull out that picture that of the 2003 [MESA]
class…he’s going to this university, and he’s going to that
university…I know six of those guys, I know where they are, I know
that they are being successful and I know that they are still friends and
that that happened here…that’s what its all about…if there’s political
nonsense, if there’s ego related nonsense, turf related nonsense, I just
have to saddle through it because it is all about the students.
It is interesting to note that of the four respondents, Jose is the only one to verbally
indicate that student failure is a key factor in his motivation to assist every student in
his program. In addition, he is able to rationalize that, no matter how hard he tries,
not every student will succeed every semester. He concedes that student success can
sometimes be a gradual process and that some students will fail while a large
majority is likely to succeed. At the end of the day, each program leader deals with
125
such an emotionally draining task as running a community college program by
recognizing the past and future successes of program participants.
Conclusions
The size of the program leader’s network was important to ascertain since a
smaller net size may limit the amount of access to resources a program leader has,
whereas a larger net size increases the likelihood a program leader has access to
more resources that can benefit program participants. A comparison of the results
from the Position and Resource Generators showed disparities in the position
networks and access to resources. The net sizes collected from the Position
Generator corresponded with the amount of higher education professional experience
of the respondents. Even though the Position Generator produced differing net sizes
amongst the respondents, the Resource Generator showed that all program leaders
have access to similar types of high-status resources. This may indicate that MESA
program leaders are, at a minimum, adept at mobilizing essential resources while
continuously expanding their social networks for the benefit of MESA participants.
Program leader access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves,
students, program associates, and agenda was primarily connected to the size and
effectiveness of the program leader’s social network. Administrative and
bureaucratic processes can either facilitate MESA programmatic functions or
debilitate them which will, in turn, affect program leader access and mobilization of
resources. In addition, a high level of program leader motivation can contribute
126
greatly to their commitment to students, program associates, and the MESA program
itself. Lastly, MESA program leaders are most effective when they are able to
provide program guidance on a full-time basis.
Common threads exist in the ways that institutional agents engendered their
participants’ social networks so that students become independent learners and
enhance networking skills. Some of these methods were in the form of annual events
that bring students, faculty, and mentors together to enhance social skills and
networks while other methods were incorporated into preexisting programmatic
functions. In addition, program leaders reported differing viewpoints on the causes
of pressure experienced as a result of their involvement with MESA. There were
three causes of pressure that MESA program leaders mentioned: constant
multitasking, administrative and bureaucratic barriers, and the fear of letting the
students down. However, the motivation behind being a MESA program leader was
the main coping technique when pressure levels exceeded normal levels.
127
CHAPTER FIVE
Discussion
This study delved into the role of ‘social capital processes’ within the MESA
program; with a particular emphasis on the activities of MESA program leaders that
mobilize social support and ‘social capital’ on behalf of MESA students and other
MESA colleagues. With respect to the low retention, persistence, and graduation
rates of underrepresented minorities within STEM fields, this study approached the
causes of these problems with a focus on social networks, identity creation, and
institutional involvement. In addition, this study examined the MESA program in an
effort to understand the role of program leaders as institutional agents. In particular,
this study analyzed how program leaders mobilize their resources to guide
underrepresented community college MESA students through the transfer process so
that they can succeed academically and professionally. This chapter discusses
general trends regarding institutional agency and social capital that were recognized
during the analysis phase of this study in which respondents’ social networks were
exposed. This chapter also discusses implications for intervention programs, future
research needed as a result of the findings of this study, limitations, and conclusions.
The data analysis portion of this study has uncovered substantial findings in
terms of program leader social capital and institutional agency. First, it was found
that social network characteristics had an impact on the amount of social capital of
each program leader. For example, the larger the net size of a program leader the
more access to resources and individuals that program leader was able to mobilize on
128
behalf of their students. A program leader must ensure that they have a substantial
social network at their disposal since a limited net size will impact the amount of
access to resources a program leader has. In addition, a connection was discovered
between the net size and professional experience of the program leader. As a result,
program leaders must make the most of every opportunity to exponentially expand
their network and not rely on years of experience to build their network in a linear
fashion. Even though program leaders have a high net size, it may not necessarily
indicate access to high-status individuals. Program leaders have to ensure that the
alters within their networks are of social status levels that allow the alters to be
effective resources for program participants.
It is also important that program leaders take the next step and access these
resources on behalf of their students. There were various instances of program
leaders having dormant social capital that was not accessed within the last year
despite substantial high-status net sizes and access to resources. Program leaders
must learn to access their high-status resources and individuals more frequently as
this social capital is readily available for them to utilize. Another focus for program
leaders is to diversify their weak ties and establish relationships with alters from
other social circles and ethnicities. They must also have a broad-range of contacts
that are not limited to their own campus so they can properly assist students with
various support services. Program leaders also must not rely on particular
departments or groups of alters to assist program participants as this is not social
capital. Social capital will exist when the program leader establishes a relationship
129
with at least one alter from that department or group Program leaders must also
increase their involvement in organizations that do not pertain to higher education
and look into joining organizations focused on trades or industries, recreational
activities, and political causes.
Second, there are several factors that facilitate or constrain the program
leaders’ access and mobilization of resources. Program leaders must utilize their
higher education academic and professional experiences to effectively assist program
participants through the transfer process. A limited staff can be detrimental to the
services that are offered by the MESA program and, as a result, program leaders
have to operate their programs as efficiently as possible without sacrificing quality
resources to students. Program leaders must also maintain positive relationships
with high-status individuals associated with the campus and local community as
these alters have influence over the institutional stability of the MESA program.
Lastly, program leaders must also motivate themselves and take a personal interest in
their students to truly act as an institutional agent.
Third, common threads exist in the ways that institutional agents engender
their participants’ social networks so that students become independent learners and
enhance networking skills. Program leaders can employ effective techniques such as
conducting academic excellence workshops and basic skills courses for program
participants. Within these academic excellence workshops, the MESA program
connects workshop facilitators to the needs of the students so that they learn basic
skills needed for future classes. In addition, the MESA program can encourage
130
students to get involved within the campus community and seek assistance from
campus counselors in an effort to create more independent learners. Program leaders
can also utilize external resources to diversify the learning experience and increase
social contacts for program participants. Lastly, leaders must establish relationships
with local universities so that a welcoming environment is created when students
transfer to a new institution.
Fourth, program leaders indicated that their position does have a high level of
pressure associated with delivering quality service to students while maintaining the
institutional viability of the program. The MESA program can benefit from
instituting a support system in which program leaders learn how to deal with the
pressures of their position and the importance of mobilizing their social capital on
behalf of program participants. Each program leader must continue to deal with such
an emotionally draining task by recognizing their role in the past and future
successes of program participants.
Social Capital and Network Characteristics
Net size and professional experience effects on social capital. The size of a
program leader’s social network has an effect on the amount of social capital that
individual is able to mobilize on behalf of program participants. In addition, it was
found that a connection exists between professional experience of the program leader
and their net size. As a result, logical conclusions are made regarding how the size
131
of social networks can be increased and how a larger net size can benefit MESA
students.
The combined number of alters, or people identified in the Name, Position,
and Resource Generators, for each respondent represents the respondent’s net size.
A quick tally of the names and resources provided in each generator will produce a
net size quantity and, therefore, it is an easily calculable statistic that provides
important information regarding the size of the respondent’s network. The size of
the program leader’s network is important to ascertain since a smaller net size may
limit the amount of access to resources a program leader has, whereas a larger net
size increases the likelihood a program leader has access to more resources that can
benefit program participants. It is important that program leaders continuously work
to increase their net size so that resources and individuals can be readily accessed on
behalf of their students. Moreover, program leaders must also ensure that their net
size contains effective alters that can access and mobilize the resources that students
require to succeed at the community college level and beyond.
The data comparisons between program leaders reflected a direct connection
between the net size and professional experience of the respondent. This logical
connection can be attributed to the time and experience required to accumulate a
sizable network of alters. Within the dynamic environment of a community college
campus, growth is vital to stay current with the demands of curriculum and student
needs. As a result, additional faculty, administrators, and staff are needed to
maintain the quality of student and academic services as student enrollment
132
increases. In Amalia’s case, her numerous years of experience at Eastern
Community College has allowed her to work with and meet new faculty, staff, and
administrators on a yearly basis and has served to build upon her established social
capital. In addition, MESA program leaders with the largest Position Generator net
sizes are also current or former faculty members. Amalia has a counseling
background and Sally has a Biology background that has allowed them to serve in a
faculty capacity at their respective colleges. Since faculty has been classified as a
high-status position by Duncan (1961), Amalia and Sally are at distinct advantages
over other program leaders in terms of securing access to other high-status
individuals to enhance their social networks. Program leader access and
mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves, students, program associates, and
agenda was primarily connected to the size and effectiveness of the program leader’s
social network.
The connection established between professional experience and an
institutional agent’s net size indicated that, especially in the cases of Jose and Julia,
program leaders must make the most of every opportunity to exponentially expand
their network and not rely on years of experience to build their network in a linear
fashion. Program leaders with a limited number of years of professional experience
within higher education and the MESA program were at a distinct disadvantage
compared to their more seasoned counterparts at other community colleges in terms
of net size. Just as program leaders must ensure that their net sizes are growing for
the benefit of their students, neophyte program leaders have to work extra hard to
133
establish connections with key individuals and access essential resources that might
not exist in their current networks.
In addition, a comparison of the results from the Position and Resource
Generators showed disparities in the position networks and access to resources.
Even though the net sizes collected from the Position Generator correlate with the
amount of higher education professional experience of the respondents, the
instrument did not take into account institutional agents’ academic experiences that
contributed to their net size. For example, experience at the same college that
currently employs him has given Jose an understanding of the FCC campus culture
and has enabled him to establish alter relationships that allow him to mobilize
resources for MESA program participants. As a result of Jose’s example, program
leaders must utilize any past educational experience that established access to
resources or contact with alters so that program participants can also benefit from
those experiences. In addition, many program leaders indicated that negative
educational experiences at the community college and university level were prime
motivators for them to help students at the professional level. As a result, program
leaders must learn how to turn negative educational and professional experiences
into positive learning experiences for their program participants.
Accessing social networks and resources. On average, the program leaders’
interviews have access to many forms of high- to medium- status resources. In
addition, program leaders have access to a sizable amount of high- to medium-status
134
alters within their social networks. However, having access to certain high-status
alters does not guarantee that program leaders have actually accessed these
individuals and resources within the past year. Findings show that program leaders
have accessed a small percentage of their high-status alters as compared to
individuals in other social classes. As a result, institutional agents must analyze the
efficiency at which they access their own social networks and resources to
understand how they can serve program participants in a greater capacity.
Not every resource is accessible by all four program leaders, individually.
However, every high-status resource and virtually every medium-status resource,
save for one, is accessible by each program leader. Even though the Position
Generator produced differing net sizes amongst the respondents, the Resource
Generator showed that all program leaders have access to similar types of high-status
resources. This may indicate that MESA program leaders are, at a minimum, adept
at mobilizing essential resources while continuously expanding their social networks
for the benefit of MESA participants. An important piece of information that one
should take away from the Resource Generator results is that the program leaders can
either access medium to high-status resources themselves or call upon someone in
their immediate social network to provide that resource. This is very important for
the success of the students that participate in the MESA programs because it signifies
that the program leaders have access to resources that can benefit not only the quality
of the MESA program, but also the academic and professional career paths of the
students. The low-status resources of the Resource Generator provide limited
135
benefits to MESA students and are not of high importance when evaluating effective
and substantive program leader social capital. Program leaders must maintain their
ability to access medium- to high- status resources especially when off-campus weak
ties are the only connection between the program leader and the resource. These
weak tie relationships are less stable than relationships with friends, family, and on-
campus colleagues since it may be harder to keep in contact with such individuals
over the course of an academic year.
Recall that social capital is resources embedded in their social networks that
are accessed and used by individuals for actions (Lin, 2001). However, the
possession of social capital is not enough. As described by Lareau and Hovart
(1999), there is a difference between possessing and activating capital or resources.
Individuals must make the choice as to whether or not they will mobilize their social
capital on behalf of other individuals. It is this choice that transforms dormant social
capital into effective social capital.
The percentage of the accessed high-status Name Generator alters is lower
than the medium- and low-status percentages for any program. A possible reason for
this may be that program leaders defer to medium- or lower-status individuals to
provide high-status resources. At any rate, the disconnect that exists for some
program leaders between their ability to access high-status resources and to activate
high-status relationships can aversely affect the amount of social capital a program
leader possesses.
136
Data analysis provided a better understanding of the efficiency that is utilized
amongst MESA program leaders when accessing their social networks. The logical,
but incorrect, assumption can be made that since Amalia has the largest net sizes on
both the Name and Position Generators that she is able to provide the most amount
of effective social capital to her program participants. However, there is a possibility
that a program leader with smaller net sizes on the Name and Position Generators
may have access to a comparable amount of high-status individuals, as was the case
with Sally of RHC. The results of the Position Generator echo the findings of the
Name Generator in that Sally has the ability to access the largest portion of her high-
status professional network if she so chooses. Program leaders must ensure that
high-status resources and individuals continue to be activated on a yearly basis to
prevent such resources from becoming dormant social capital. Effectively, social
capital that is dormant and not being accessed on behalf of program participants is
the same as not having access to that social capital and provides no benefit to the
students.
The social-status differences found in the Name and Position Generators is of
importance since high- and medium-status individuals can provide knowledge to
students, either directly or through program leaders, that will allow them to set the
highest academic and career goals. MESA programs strive to harness the academic
and professional experience of high- and medium-status individuals in an effort to
relay key knowledge to program participants. As a result of their knowledge and
experience, high- and medium- status individuals are instrumental in building
137
effective social capital for MESA students. Therefore, these results showed that
even though a program leader may have an extensive network based upon the
accumulation of net size on a given generator, net size alone does not indicate the
level at which a program leader activates resources and individuals on behalf of
MESA program participants. Once again, program leaders must ensure that the
social capital they possess is effective and utilized in an efficient manner so that
program participants can receive optimal benefit from the institutional agents’ social
resource network.
Similar characteristics amongst weak ties. Similarities existed across all four
program leaders in terms of weak ties. First, institutional agents were more likely to
consult alters on their own campuses as opposed to alters at other institutions or
organizations. Second, program leaders have learned to seek assistance from alters
that specialize in particular resources rather than going to high-status individuals that
have knowledge of a multitude of resources. Third, program leaders mainly seek
assistance from alters of the same ethnicity. Lastly, the Organizational Affiliations
assessment revealed that most of the participants had little involvement in
organizations outside of higher education professional organizations.
The data collected from the Name and Resource Generators indicated that
program leaders are slightly more inclined to turn to their social network to access
resources than provide the resource themselves. Furthermore, data analysis revealed
that program leaders were more likely to access resources from people at their own
138
college as opposed to accessing individuals at a different campus. Even though it is
important that program leaders have access to every available resource and alter on
their own campus, it is equally as important that program leaders possess a social
network that exists external to their campus to enhance the integrity of their own
network. There is an obvious limit to the amount of alters that can be accessed at a
program leader’s own campus. As a result, an institutional agent’s social resource
network will be unable to grow without access to individuals and resources that exist
external to the program leader’s own college campus. By accessing external
resources, program leaders can follow a best practices strategy and employ other
student success practices within their own program.
It is important to note that even though colleagues contribute to the amount of
institutional agent social capital through weak ties, it is the fully developed
relationships that exist between friends and family that provide the greatest amount
of social capital for institutional agents. Since colleagues and acquaintances
outnumber family and friends by nearly 100% in each status level, program leaders
must continue to strengthen their weak ties and maintain the integrity of their social
network. According to Granovetter (1983), weak ties serve an important purpose
within a person’s social capital inasmuch as the weak ties contribute to the
movement of information between social networks. Recall from Chapter 2 that weak
ties are uniplex relationships between an institutional agent and an alter that provides
only one source of support. In addition, the uniplex relationship cannot be between
the program leader and a family member since, generally speaking, a unique and
139
unbreakable connection exists between family members. Multiplex relationships, on
the other hand, are relationships between an institutional agent and an alter that
provides three or more different sources of support.
As determined by the data results, program leaders were more inclined to
seek advice from many individuals as opposed to receiving assistance from a handful
of individuals that provide multiple sources of support. This technique is vital to the
maintenance of a large social network in that weak ties are utilized on a regular
basis. The stronger ties that may exist between family members and friends are
dependable relationships that are more likely to endure through a program leader’s
professional career. Even though weak ties are vital within an institutional agent’s
social network, they are less likely to endure throughout a program leader’s
professional career. Therefore, it is imperative that program leaders continue to
access their weak ties to prevent that resource from becoming dormant and perhaps
severing that tie altogether after years of inactivity.
Program leader relationships were also mainly consistent of alters from the
same ethnic background. This may be detrimental to the quality of service that
program leaders provide program participants. Even though the MESA program
serves a diverse student population, program leaders may be accessing resources
using methods that are not sensitive to the cultural needs of all program participants.
Similarly, alters within the program leader’s social network might provide direct
assistance to program participants that can also be insensitive to students. Program
140
leader must make a genuine effort to include different ethnicities within the social
network for the benefit of their program participants.
Data results also showed that the majority of organizational affiliations held
by program leaders were with higher education professional organizations.
Participation within these types of organizations is undoubtedly beneficial in that
they provide academic success strategies that program leaders can utilize within their
respective MESA programs. However, program leaders must also establish
relationships with other organizations that will enhance their social resource
network. The lack of participant involvement in other organizations appears to
contradict what the program leaders try to teach their students, since encouraging
students to get involved in campus organizations is a main component of the MESA
program. It is very important that program leaders can reach into their social capital
toolbox and access certain religious, political, industrial/trade, and recreational
organizations to enhance the social capital of their students.
Identifying alters as groups, not individuals. Upon further inquiry into why
the program leaders chose to identify the alter group instead of the individual alters,
it was discovered that these alter groups frequently provide certain resources to their
MESA programs and, as a result, it would take too much time to list every alter that
provided that resource. This information suggests that program leaders have
effectively utilized their social network to provide a consistent level of support from
faculty and program administrators, which are classified as high-status positions.
The resources that faculty and students provide have been institutionalized by the
141
program leaders so that program participants can come to expect focused academic
support that will help them succeed.
In some cases, however, program leaders identified alters as groups because
they could not identify a single person from that group, but connected program
participants with certain group services through a referral process. Program leaders
must learn to fortify relationships with groups, departments, or organizations that can
provide resources to program participants. The referral system can not be classified
as true social capital since the resources that these groups provide are accessible by
any student, eliminating the need for the program leader. It is only when a program
leader-to-alter relationship exist that social capital can be accessed and mobilized on
behalf of the student. The social networks of program leaders are vital to the
effectiveness of the MESA program’s ability to serve minority STEM students. It is
through the program leaders’ social networks with individual alters that program
resources and services are created and enhanced.
As a result, program leaders must create ties with individuals in departments
that provide key resources and information to program participants. These
relationships will allow program leaders to refer students to key individuals rather
than entire departments. In addition, program leaders can stay connected and follow-
up on the progress of that student through future interactions that the alter will have
with the program leader. A program leader would have difficulty ensuring that the
student was assisted properly if they did not know the person that provided services
to that student.
142
Factors that Facilitate or Constrain the Program Leader’s Access and Mobilization
of Resources
Staff constraints and limitations. A limited amount of staff available for
daily operation can put serious constraints on the effectiveness of the MESA
program. Of the three MESA programs that participated in this study, only the ECC
MESA program had staff that consisted of a full-time director, a full-time
administrative assistant, a part-time counselor, and three part-time
technical/academic support staff. The other two programs had a full-time director, a
part-time administrative assistance, and a part-time counselor. On average, the
MESA programs provide service to over 100 students per academic year. This
means that the limited staff at RHC and FCC has to spread themselves thin in order
to maintain the objectives of the MESA program, as well as rely heavily on their
social resource network to provide resources for program participants. MESA
program leaders must be aware of grant funding and additional institutional support
opportunities that will allow for more support staff for their programs. Institutions
tend to employ cost-saving activities by giving release time to regular counselors to
assist with the counseling of MESA students and having the MESA program call
upon the main campus Information Technology department whenever there is a
problem with the computers or telephone system. Such tactics can interrupt the
objectives of the MESA program and are detrimental to maintaining a supportive
learning environment within MESA.
143
Maintaining high-status relationships. Recall from Chapter 2 that Bourdieu
(1985, p. 249) referred to relationships with high-status individuals as “investment
strategies.” For the most part, program leaders have maintained positive
relationships with their immediate supervisors and other campus administrators. As
a result, assistance that may come from high-status campus administrators or
individuals will not be complicated by strained relationships or negative attitudes
from either side. In addition, data taken from the social networks of program leaders
indicated positive encounters with high-status individuals. This information bodes
well for the MESA programs since high-status individuals are in unique positions to
mobilize high-status resources on behalf of the program. In addition, it is important
that program leaders communicate and maintain their relationships with high-level
campus administrators so that the value that the MESA program brings to
community college does not diminish. Campus administrators are continuously
thinking about bringing growth to their campus, so program leaders must continue to
push for the MESA program so that it becomes an institutionalized program as
opposed to a grant funded one.
Program leader motivation to carry out responsibilities. Besides the one
parent that earned a Ph.D. degree, no other parent obtained a bachelors degree at the
university level. In addition, Amalia indicated that her parents had the least amount
of education than any of the other three respondents. Amalia also has the largest net
144
size of all the program leaders in this study. This information suggests that there is a
possible link between parental education and program leader motivations to get
involved with the MESA program. Parental education has influenced the motivation
of program leaders to enter a position of positive reinforcement, leadership, and
motivation on behalf of students, since they are first in family to earn higher
education degrees.
Program leader motivation to carry out MESA objectives and responsibilities
was also influenced by a certain satisfaction received when students become
successful. From the responses of the program leaders, the motivation to carry out
their duties was as equally fulfilling for themselves as it is for the students they
assist. It comes as no surprise, but the common thread across all program leaders
was that student success, namely university success, served as the main motivation
behind doing what they do for MESA program participants. The motivation of the
program leaders serves as a facilitator to their ability to access and mobilize
resources on behalf of their MESA programs. Program leaders must have a genuine
desire to help students and to mobilize resources on behalf of their students and the
program. Students can not truly benefit from the mobilization of social capital
without this commitment to see students succeed.
Enhancing Students’ Networks and Access to Resources
Getting students internally and externally connected. Recall from Chapter 2
that to maintain effective social capital between mentor and student there must be in
145
existence “resourceful relationships and activities socially organized within a
network of peers and institutional agents” (Stanton-Salazar & Spina, 2003, p. 231).
Program leaders have instituted inventive ways in which to connect students with
resources that exist outside the campus walls. Institutional agents have connected
students with academic and professional organizations to enhance their social
networks. Effective success strategies of other MESA programs have been
researched by program leaders to teach students how to be independent learners. In
addition, relationships are made with local universities to ease the transfer process
for program participants.
The specialized services provided by MESA programs facilitated the process
by which students can seek out their own services. In particular, Sally utilized her
social network to connect her program participants with outside resources and
individuals. Through interaction with facilitators and guest speakers, students are
building upon their established social network that will, in turn, allow students to be
more independent and resourceful. She uses this programmatic tactic to take
students out of their comfort zone and access resources that they would not otherwise
be exposed to on campus. It is important for program leaders to expose students to
organizations, conferences, and individuals that provide academic and professional
resources to program participants. This method allows students to experience the
program leader’s diverse social resource network that is crucial for student success at
the university level.
146
In addition, program leaders themselves can enhance the ability of their
students to access resources on an individual basis by utilizing effective methods
from other colleges and organizations. MESA programs at various community
colleges have a common objective to plug students into the larger professional and
academic STEM network that exists at the university level. By discovering the
STEM organizations and societies that are accessed by other MESA programs,
program leaders provide opportunities for students to build upon their own social
network. As mentioned before, this method is also useful to facilitate a program
leader’s ability to mobilize resources on behalf of their students.
Program leaders wisely made relationships with alters that work at
universities MESA students are most likely to transfer to. Even though students that
participate within the MESA program gain admission to various universities, they
tend to transfer to local universities due to housing and transportation costs and local
university recruitment efforts. As a result, MESA program leaders have analyzed the
transfer trends of program participants and can predict the universities that will have
the highest MESA student transfer rate on a yearly basis. The establishment of
relationships at the next level of higher education for program participants gives the
students an edge on establishing their own social network at a new institution. This
new university social network will be the first step in the students’ ability to access
resources at the university level.
Recall from Chapter 2 that the social bonds that are created by students to
connect to the internal social network of the school is called school membership
147
(Wehlage et al., 1989) Of course, preparation for the utilization of university
resource does not start the moment the student steps foot into the university campus.
The preparation actually starts the moment they step foot into the MESA study
center at their respective community college. The MESA study center, tutoring,
solution manuals, peer mentors & study partners, and a sense of community are
available for them to take advantage of. Making these resources readily available at
the community college level allows the student to understand that these resources are
available at the university level and to seek them out if not readily available. MESA
program leaders must transform the community college experience into the
university experience so that the campus transition is less of a shock to newly arrived
transfer students.
Program leader as student advocate. All of the program leaders have taken
it upon themselves to be an advocate for their program participants. Recall the
distinguishing characteristics of empowering retention programs as described by
Maton and Salem (1995) as characteristics that invite personal growth and
motivation. Not only does this create more access to resources for students, but it
also sets an example for students that they too can secure essential resources by
using the appropriate channels. In addition, program leaders realize that STEM
students require different resources and attention than does the general student
population.
148
In particular, Jose’s advocacy approach to his position is refreshing because it
lets his students know that somebody is on their side and that it is not up to the
student alone to solve all their academic and developmental issues. Jose serves as a
gateway for his students in that students can come to him with their issues and he
either provides the resource himself or points the student in the right direction.
Program leaders must show their students what it takes to secure resources at the
university level and, most importantly, after receiving their Bachelors of Science
degree. After graduation, graduates must learn to utilize their own resource
networks as they embark on their professional careers.
Half of the program leaders specifically mentioned math-based or calculus-
based fields instead of the term “STEM disciplines” to emphasize the focus on
mathematical skill development within their MESA programs. Math-based courses
are required for STEM degrees and also happen to be the courses that determine
whether or not a student will persist and earn a degree in a STEM discipline. This is
because students who can not get past these courses will invariably change their
major to something that is not STEM related. Therefore, program leaders must
continue to be an advocate for their students by focusing the majority of their
resources and time on ensuring that students excel in math-based courses.
Social networking and delegation. According to Flores-Gonzalez (2002),
people assume multiple identities, with each identity pertaining to a particular social
position and value. Similar to how program leaders teach lessons to their students
149
through advocacy, students can assumer multiple identities that are vital skills for
their academic and professional careers by observing the delegation techniques of
program leaders. Task delegation teaches the student a valuable lesson in accessing
resources independently and allows the student to see the end result of the work they
put into a particular task or project. Program leaders can benefit their program
participants by incorporating delegation techniques into their daily tasks and
allowing students to participate and complete their own delegated tasks.
Providing students with opportunities to network. Most of the program
leaders mentioned the importance of providing students with opportunities to
network in this study. Sally mentioned an annual MESA leadership retreat that her
program hosts for MESA students. This event provides students with an opportunity
to network with college faculty, motivational speakers, STEM professionals, and
other MESA students. MESA program leaders need to make a conscious effort to
help students recognize the importance of social capital and accessing resources.
Helping students understand social capital and the importance of networking is
crucial so that students can continue to cultivate their social capital once they leave
the program for the university.
Dealing with Program Pressures and Stresses
Stress caused by campus administrators was definitely a constraint on the
program leader’s ability to access and mobilize resources on behalf of themselves,
150
students, program associates, and the overall MESA program agenda. Sally and
Amalia, in particular, mentioned that administrative oversight and bureaucratic
processes have been overbearing at certain times during their tenure as MESA
directors. The bureaucratic part of keeping the MESA program funded, staffed, and
in operation may be viewed as a necessary evil by some program leaders. Positive
relationships between administrators and MESA program leaders may seem
unnecessary especially within the context of providing academic and social resources
for students. However, these relationships are vital for the survival of the MESA
program at the community college level especially when space is limited on a
community college campus. A program that may be viewed as ineffective or
unnecessary by campus administrators is typically earmarked as prime real estate for
new programs and initiatives.
Each program leader deals with such an emotionally draining task as running
a community college program by recognizing the past and future successes of
program participants. The program leaders mentioned that the pressures associated
with leading a community college MESA program pale in comparison to the pride
and enjoyment they receive when their very own students transfer and graduate at the
university level. In particular, students that receive Doctorate of Philosophy or
Masters of Science degrees in the STEM fields are extreme sources of pride for
program leaders. For program leaders that may be more susceptible to program
pressures it may be necessary to establish a support system for campus program
leader to create a flow of necessary information between program leaders and
151
provide opportunities for them to increase their social capital by expanding their
network.
Implications
This study focused on institutional agency and the main factors that facilitate
MESA program leaders’ social capital. This research provided significant findings
and new directions for different groups, programs, and future research.
Institutional agents must be aware of the benefits that social capital can
deliver to their program participants, program staff, the program agenda, and
themselves. A program leader must ensure that they have a substantial social
network at their disposal since a limited net size will impact the amount of access to
resources a program leader has. They must find ways to assess their current social
networks via self or external assessment that will show the program leaders how
large and effective their social capital is. Program leaders must make the most of
every opportunity to exponentially expand their network and not rely on years of
experience to build their network in a linear fashion. Substantial social networks of
program leaders have the power to enhance the social resource networks of program
participants that promote academic success.
When assessing their own social capital, program leaders have to ensure that
the alters within their networks are of social status levels that allow the alters to be
effective resources for program participants. Institutional agents must analyze the
efficiency at which they access their own social networks and resources to
152
understand how they can serve program participants in a greater capacity. Having a
large network to call upon for social capital is important for program participant
success. However, it is the relationships with high- to medium-status individuals that
mobilize the greatest amount of social capital on behalf of program participants. If
program leaders have exhausted the number of relationships possible with alters at
their own campus and still lack a critical mass of high-status weak ties, they will
have to look to external institutions and organizations to forge more effective
connections with alters.
Of utmost importance for any program leader’s social capital beyond net size
and having access to high-status individuals is the process of accessing these
resources on behalf of their students. Program leaders must learn to access their
high-status resources and individuals more frequently as this social capital is readily
available for them to utilize. Program leaders must ensure that high-status resources
and individuals continue to be activated on a yearly basis to prevent such resources
from becoming dormant social capital. Program leaders must also maintain
positive relationships with high-status individuals associated with the campus and
local community as these alters have influence over the institutional stability of the
MESA program. Program leaders can conduct their own Name Generator survey to
list every alter that exists in their network that assists them in mobilizing resources
and social capital for their program participants. From the Name Generator results,
program leaders can then identify high- and medium-status individuals that they have
not accessed within the past year. Program leaders have to take the initiative and
153
mobilize their dormant alters that can enhance the quality of resource access for their
students.
Another focus for program leaders is to diversify their weak ties and establish
relationships with alters from other campuses, ethnicities, and organizations.
Program leaders must possess a social network that exists external to their campus to
enhance the integrity of their own network. They must also have a broad-range of
contacts that are not limited to their own campus so they can properly assist students
with various support services. These types of relationships can be forged through
professional development conferences, STEM-based seminars at local universities,
college career fairs, and community events. Program leaders can also tap into local
chapters of the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE), the Society of Hispanic
Professional Engineers (SHPE), and the Society of Women Engineers (SWE) in an
effort to diversify their social networks. In addition, it is very important that
program leaders can reach into their social capital toolbox and access certain
religious, political, industrial/trade, and recreational organizations to enhance the
social capital of their students.
Program leaders must utilize their higher education academic and
professional experiences to effectively assist program participants through the
transfer process. This implies that program leaders store their educational and
professional experiences that pertain to accessing resources. For most program
leaders, this may be a tedious process since their college curriculum may not have
informed them about how to access resources. However, the process is also a
154
rewarding one since program leaders can turn negative educational and professional
experiences into positive learning experiences for their program participants.
MESA program leaders must be aware of grant funding and additional
institutional support opportunities that will allow for more support staff for their
programs. Program leaders have to be proactive when comes to securing more
resources that can enhance the operation of the MESA program. Securing money for
computers, chairs, desks, supplies, and food is important in maintaining the study
environment of the MESA program. However, receiving funding to hire more staff
that can assist with day-to-day programmatic operations is more important. Program
leaders can benefit from searching local, state, and federal grant agencies that
specialize in funding educational support services.
Program leaders must be able talk about the importance of empowerment
with their students. This can be done in the classroom through various activities that
help students reflect on their self-worth and enhance their self-concepts. The
program leaders need to encourage the students to work in groups and help each
other with the class material, especially in STEM-based courses. As a result,
students will be empowered with a sense of pride as they conquer new material since
they are learning and teaching the material at the same time within their work
groups. In addition, program leaders can employ effective techniques such as
conducting academic excellence workshops and basic skills courses for program
participants.
155
Program leaders must also motivate themselves and take a personal interest in
their students to truly act as an institutional agent. Program leaders must have a
genuine desire to help students and to mobilize resources on behalf of their students
and the program. In addition, program leaders must continue to be an advocate for
their students by focusing the majority of their resources and time on ensuring that
students excel in math-based courses. Program leaders can also benefit their
program participants by incorporating delegation techniques into their daily tasks
and allowing students to participate and complete their own delegated tasks.
Program leaders themselves can enhance the ability of their students to access
resources on an individual basis by utilizing effective methods from other colleges
and organizations. MESA directors who are also faculty members can apply for a
semester sabbatical leave to engage in professional and academic development
activities. During this time, program leaders can take a tour of other MESA
programs within California to understand the best practices of successful programs.
If MESA directors are unable take a sabbatical leave, it would be in their best
interest to get to know individuals at other MESA programs and plan separate visits
during the summer or winter sessions, when student participation within MESA is
reduced.
MESA program leaders must transform the community college experience
into the university experience so that the campus transition is less of a shock to
newly arrived transfer students. Program leaders must show their students what it
takes to secure resources at the university level and, most importantly, at the
156
professional level. Helping students understand social capital and the importance of
networking is crucial so that students can continue to cultivate their social capital
once they leave the program for the university. Program leaders can go further than
establishing weak tie connections with local universities and invite university
representatives to their respective community college campuses. Recall from
Chapter 2 that academic and social connections with faculty have been shown to
enhance student persistence in college (Tinto, 1987 & 1993; Pascarella and
Terenzini, 1991). Inviting a STEM professor or dean to the community college to
talk about their departments can have a profound impact on the academic trajectory
of MESA students.
The MESA program can benefit from instituting a support system in which
program leaders learn how to deal with the pressures of their position and the
importance of mobilizing their social capital on behalf of program participants. This
must be a concerted effort between the MESA program and campus administrators
so that every student services program leader on the campus can rely upon an
established support structure to help them deal with the pressures that are placed
upon them on a regular basis. In addition, each program leader must continue to deal
with such an emotionally draining task by recognizing their role in the past and
future successes of program participants. As mentioned before, this is the main
motivation behind the program leaders’ willingness to be involved with the MESA
program.
157
Recommendations
The implications detailed above give focused suggestions for MESA program
leaders to better utilize and access their social capital for the benefit of their program
participants. The suggestions are based upon the generation of themes that were
identified in the data analysis section of the study. As a result, general
recommendations can be made that would be useful for the program leaders to help
in improving their MESA programs. These recommendations incorporate the
suggestions made in the implications section of this chapter and detail what the
findings mean for their programs and possibly other MESA programs.
First, it is very important that program leaders recognize the importance of
continuously creating social capital for themselves and their students. This can come
in the form of creating their own social networks and providing students with
opportunities to network with medium- to high-status alters. This should be an
integral part of the MESA program since it has been established that an institutional
agent’s ability to access their own social network may have serious ramifications on
the success of their own program participants. Program leaders have to take
advantage of every opportunity to connect with high-level campus administrators,
politicians, local industry representatives, union and labor organizers, and STEM
professionals. High-status individuals provide numerous benefits for program
participants and leaders in that they can advocate for the MESA program and make
connections with students that can guide them academically and professionally.
158
More specifically, the program leader must seek out opportunities to create
complex role sets for their program participants. Students must understand that to
succeed at the next level they must learn how to be an effective student and
professional. However, within these two idealizations there exist multiple role-sets
that students must assume in order to be the student and professional that is going to
succeed. Within the student idealization, program participants must assume the roles
of effective learner, teacher, mentor, employee, volunteer, and leader. Within the
professional idealization, program participants must assumer the roles of
communicator, delegate, mediator, manager, and employee. The list of role-sets is
numerous and program leaders would benefit their programs greatly if students
learned to assume these roles within MESA activities and workshops.
Second, program leaders can not solely rely on internal resources for student
success. As mentioned before, program leaders must learn to spread their wings and
connect with individuals that operate outside the college campus that they work in.
Effective connections exist in the form of community relationships that are easily
accessible and strengthen the bond between the community and the college. The
advice and counseling that is provided to program participants must also be practiced
by those that are providing such advice, namely the program leaders. Such advice
must include skills that facilitate networking with other individuals. For the program
leader, consistent networking is crucial to the vitality of the MESA program and
must be practiced consistently within the local community.
159
Third, MESA programs can not and should not rely on only one person’s
network to provide access to key resources and individuals on behalf of program
participants. This study shows that even the most seasoned veteran of higher
education support services has deficiencies in their network in terms of access and
social-status variety. MESA program leaders must insure that there is other staff or
volunteers that can fill in the gaps in terms of social resource network deficiencies.
Even though the hiring of new MESA program leaders is an infrequent occurrence,
campus hiring committees need to be conscious of social capital and assess a
potential candidate’s level of social capital and willingness to seek help prior to any
job offerings. Current program leaders must utilize this technique when hiring new
staff or academic excellence workshop facilitators to ensure that program
participants are receiving an optimal level of social capital.
Limitations and Delimitations
Certain limitations were present during the data collection phases that could
not be controlled. The main limitation of this study was that the focus was on the
social capital of MESA program leaders and not on the positive impact that social
capital had on MESA students. Even though program leaders are in a unique
position to empower students and mobilize social capital resources, this study does
not determine whether these resources are actually benefiting program participants.
Limitations also included the short time allotted to collect pertinent data. There is
the possibility that interview data could have been affected by personal bias, recall
160
error, and other factors. In addition, program leaders may have distorted some facts
to create a positive picture of their program and services. Since interviews were
conducted at the program leaders’ college campuses, they may not have felt that they
could respond honestly due to the repercussions that might occur if someone was to
overhear and spread information through the campus. It is also possible that
respondents misunderstood certain questions during the interview process which
undoubtedly affects the validity of such answers. The protocol and agenda for the
interviews may have fatigued the respondents which can, in turn, affect the responses
of the program leaders.
This study utilized qualitative methods to collect and gather data that is vital
in understanding how students are being empowered through interviewing and
surveying. The unit of analysis for this case study approach was three intervention
programs situated in three different community colleges. The study’s findings
should not be generalized to other STEM retention programs in higher education.
The data collected in this study are only relevant to the institutions where the study is
being conducted and do not necessarily portray an entirely accurate depiction of
paradigms from which broader generalizations regarding institutional agency within
a social capital framework can be made. Regardless, the intent of the study was to
provide intellectual and theoretical insight into the problem facing underrepresented
STEM college students that can have profound impact on student achievement,
persistence, and learning outcomes. The analytical induction utilized within this
study sought to generate propositions that can be tested by other types of methods.
161
As a consequence of the subject matter and theoretical applications that have
been utilized within this study, there is potential to make a major contribution to
literature on student retention and on social capital theory as applied to
underrepresented college students pursuing STEM degrees. Virtually no published
study has taken on this intellectual agenda, and the future implications of this study
may cause a paradigm shift within STEM retention programs in higher education.
Future Research
Further research is required to truly understand the relationships between
social capital and student serving retention and persistence programs. In particular,
future research should focus on the direct benefits that mobilized social capital can
have on MESA program participants. This type of research can bridge the gap
between the social capital that institutional agents possess and its utilization for
student success. In addition, this study focuses on a single retention program that is
designed to assist underrepresented students of color majoring in the STEM fields.
Within this small community of learners there is much more to be discovered about
how this narrow population of students learn STEM material and what barriers exist
when they attempt to access resources on their own without the assistance of MESA
program resources. This study does not focus on the students within the MESA
program, but on the program leaders that operate, staff, and advocate for the
program. A very small amount of research exists on institutional agents’ ability to
access resources on behalf of the students that they serve. Future research should
162
focus more on the social capital that institutional agents possess as opposed to the
social capital that the students possess. This is because students will undoubtedly
less social capital than the institutional agents that are there to access resources on
their behalf. This study makes no attempt to uncover all there is to know about the
institutional agents ability to mobilize resources. Therefore, further research needs
to be conducted to quantify the importance of institutional agents.
Future research should also focus on a larger number of MESA programs
within California. This would create a larger and more complete picture of how such
programs nurture institutional agency and social capital. By looking at the social
resource networks of program leaders over a multitude of programs and student
populations, more concrete conclusion can be made about the effect that institutional
agents have on STEM students of color. In addition, this study utilizes outdated
instruments since more recent and current instruments do not exist. Future research
should ensure that the SEI scale is up to date to increase the reliability of the
instruments.
Conclusions
This study focused on institutional agency and the main factors that facilitate
MESA program leaders’ social capital. First, it has been concluded that institutional
agents must be aware of the benefits that social capital can deliver to their program
participants, program staff, the program agenda, and themselves. Second, program
leaders must ensure that high-status resources and individuals continue to be
163
activated on a yearly basis to prevent such resources from becoming dormant social
capital. Third, program leaders must maintain positive relationships with high-status
individuals associated with the campus and local community as these alters have
influence over the institutional stability of the MESA program. In addition,
institutional agents must learn to diversify their weak ties and establish relationships
with alters from other campuses, ethnicities, and organizations. Program leaders
must utilize their social resource networks to empower their students to persist and
succeed. Lastly, program leaders must also motivate themselves and take a personal
interest in their students to truly act as an institutional agent. The institutional agent
is undoubtedly a vital component within the social capital acquisition process and
students of underrepresented status can benefit from effective institutional agent
practices. This study invites further research to be conducted on the importance of
institutional agents and their ability to access and mobilize resources on behalf of the
students they serve.
164
REFERENCES
American Council on Education (2006). Increasing the success of minority students
in science and technology. In P. D. Eckel (Ed.), The Unfinished Agenda:
Ensuring Success for Students of Color. Washington, DC: Author.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: artistry, choice and
leadership (3
rd
ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bourdieu, P. (1979). The three states of cultural capital. Acres Rech. Sci. Soc. 30:3-
6.
Bourdieu, P. (1980). Le capital social: notes provisoires. Acres Rech. Sci. Soc. 31:2-
3.
Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of
theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood
Press.
Burke, P. J., & Reitzes, D. C. (1981). The link between identity and role
performance. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44(2): 83-92.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American
Journal of Sociology, 94: S95-S120.
Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Community College League of California (2000). Achieving the diversity
commitment: A policy and resource paper of the California Community
College Trustees. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Dika, S. L. & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social capital in educational
literature: A critical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 72(1): 31-60.
Duncan, Otis Dudley. (1961). A socioeconomic index for all occupations. In A.J.
Reiss (Ed.), Occupations and Social Status. New York: The Free Press.
Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. New York: Free Press.
Eastern Community College (2006). Background and Demographics. Retrieved
September 23, 2006, from http://www.elac.edu.
165
Fischer, C. S. (1982). To dwell among friends. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Flap, H. & Völker, B. (2003). Creation and returns of social capital. UK: Routledge.
Flores-Gonzalez, N. (2002). School kids/street kids: Identity development in Latino
students. Sociology of education series. New York: Teachers College Press.
Foothill City College (2006). Fact Sheet. Retrieved September 23, 2006, from
http://www.pasadena.edu.
Freire, P. (2003). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Granovetter, M. S. (1982). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. In
Peter Marsden and Nan Lin (eds.), Social Structure and Network Analysis.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 105-130.
Gurin, P., Miller, A., & Gurin, G. (1980). Stratum identification and consciousness.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 43: 30-47.
Gutierrez, L. (1989). Ethnic consciousness, consciousness raising, and the
empowerment process of Latinos. Unpublished Dissertation, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Gutierrez, L. (1990). Working with women of color: An empowerment perspective.
Social Work, 35: 149-154.
Hernandez, A. E. (1995). Do role models influence self efficacy and aspiration in
Mexican American at-risk females? Latino Journal of Behavioral Sciences,
17(2): 256-263.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Oakland, CA: University of California
Press.
Hurtado, S., Milem, J. F., Clayton-Pedersen, A. R., & Allen, W. R. (1998).
Enhancing campus climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy
and practice. Review of Higher Education. 21(3): 279-302.
Kane, M. A., Beals, C., Valeau, E. J., Johnson, M. J. (2004). Fostering success
among traditionally underrepresented student groups: Hartnell College’s
approach to implementation of the Math, Engineering, and Science (MESA)
program. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 28: 17-26.
166
Kieffer, C. (1984). Citizen empowerment: A developmental perspective. In J.
Rappaport, C. Swift, & R. Hess (Eds.), Studies in Empowerment: Toward
Understanding and Action, (pp. 9-36) New York: Haworth Press.
Kiecolt, J. K. (1994). Stress and the decision to change oneself: A theoretical model.
Social Psychology Quarterly. 57:49-63.
King, J. (2002). Crucial choices: How students’ financial decisions affect their
academic success. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Klein, E. (1984). Gender politics: From consciousness to mass politics. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods: Race, class, and family life. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Lareau, A. & Horvart, E.M. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and exclusion:
Race, class, and cultural capital in family-school relationships. Sociology of
Education, 72, 37-53.
Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28-
51.
Lin, N. (2001). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Lin, N. & Dumin, M. (1986). Access to occupations through social ties. Social
Networks, 8:365-85.
Malcolm, S. M., Chubin, D. E., & Jesse, J. K. (2004). Standing our ground: A
guidebook for STEM educators in the post-Michigan era. Washington, D.C.,
AAAS Publication Services.
Maton, K. I. & Salem, D. A. (1995). Organizational characteristics of empowering
community settings: A multiple case study approach. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 23(5).
Marx, K. (1894). Capital, Vol. 3. New York: International.
McCallister, L. & C. E. Fischer (1978). A procedure for surveying personal
networks. Sociological Methods and Research, 7(2):131-148.
167
MESA (2006) Mathematics, Engineering, and Science Achievement. Retrieved
August 1, 2006, from http://www.ucop.edu/mesa/home.html
Miller, D. C. (1977). Handbook of research design and social measurement (3
rd
edition). New York: David McKay Company, Inc.
Noguera, P. (2002). Racial isolation, poverty, and the limits of local control as a
means of holding public schools accountable. Williams Watch Series:
Investigating the Claims of Williams v. State of California. Los Angeles:
UCLA Institute for Democracy Education and Access.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3
rd
edition).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Phillippe, K.A., & Patton, M. (1999). National Profile of Community Colleges:
Trends & Statistics (3rd edition). Washington, DC: Community College
Press; American Association of Community Colleges.
Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology.
Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 1-24.
Portes, A., & Landolt, P. (1996). The downside of social capital. The American
Prospect, 26: 18-21, 94.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American
community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Quantz, R. A. (1992). On critical ethnography. In M. D. LeCompte, W. L. Millroy,
& J. Preissle (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 337-
404). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Rolling Hills College (2006). Profile Sheet. Retrieved September 23, 2006, from
http://www.canyons.edu.
Santa Clarita Magazine (2006). Santa Clarita Profile. Retrieved August 5, 2006,
from http://www.santaclaritamagazine.com/Pages/scvdemo02.html
Sieber, S. D. (1974). Toward a theory of role accumulation. American Sociological
Review, 39(4): 567-578.
168
Snijders, T.A.B. (1999). Prologue to the measurement of social capital. La Revue
Tocqueville, XX(1): 27-44.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of inequality: The
formation of information networks among Mexican-origin High School
students. Sociology of Education Journal, 68(2).
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: School and kin
support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth. New York: Teachers College Press.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2004). Social capital among working-class minority students.
In M. A. Gibson, P. Gandara, & J. P. Koyama (Eds.), School connections:
U.S.-Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement. New York: Teachers
College Press, Columbia University.
Stanton-Salazar, R.D., & Spina, S.U. (2000). The network orientations of highly
resilient urban minority youth: A network analytic account of minority
socialization and its educational implications. The Urban Review, 32(3):
227-261.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D., & Spina, S. U. (2003). Informal mentors and role models in
the lives of urban Mexican-origin adolescents. Anthropology & Education
Quarterly, 34(3): 231-254.
Stryker, S. (1968). Identity salience and role performance: The relevance of
symbolic interaction theory for family research. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 30(4): 558-564.
Swift C., & Levin, G. (1987). Empowerment: An emerging mental health
technology. Journal of Primary Prevention, 8(1 & 2): 71-94.
Thoits, P. A. (1991). On merging identity theory and stress research. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 54(2):101-112.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student
attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
169
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student
attrition (2
nd
ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Valencia, R., Menchaca, M., & Donato, R. (2002). Segregation, desegregation, and
integration of Chicano students: Old and new realities. In R. Valencia,
Chicano School Failure and Success: Past, Present, and Future (Second
Edition), (Ed.).
Van der Gaag, M.P.J. & Snijders, T.A.B. (2004). Proposals for the measurement of
individual social capital. In H. D. Flap & B. Vöelker (Eds.), Creation and
returns of social capital. London: Routledge.
Wehlage, G. G., Rutter, R. A., Smith, G. A., Lesko, N., & Fernandez, R. R. (1989).
Reducing the risk: Schools as communities of support. Philadelphia: Falmer
Press.
Zimmerman, M. & Rappaport, J. (1988). Citizen participation, perceived control, and
psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology,
16: 725-750.
170
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Resource Domains and Essential Resource and Relationship Groupings
Medical or Mental Health and Wellness
Physician
Dentist
Nurse/LVN
Health educator
Substance abuse counselor
Psychiatrist
Marriage and family therapist
Crisis counselor
Social Service
Licensed clinical social worker/Social worker
Veterans’ office
Child care
Mentor/Community volunteer
Military recruiter
Peace Corps recruiter
Campus Specific/College Gateway
Mentorship coordinator
Cafeteria/Food service worker
Campus janitor
Career counselor
Campus facilities
Board of Trustees member
Academic or Student Affairs Clerk
Campus Computer Technician
Graduate School Mentor Coordinator
College admissions director
Degree evaluator/clerk
Tutor
College counselor
College professor
College recruiter
College Dean or Provost
College President or Chancellor
Scholarship coordinator or chairperson
Financial aid advisor
Campus program director
171
Grant writing department coordinator
Department chairperson
Principal or Assistant Principal
College athletic director/coach
Law and Politics
Judge
Executive Law Enforcement personnel, e.g., Captain, Lieutenant, or Sergeant
Police Officer or Sherriff
City or government official
Union representative
Probation officer
Attorney
Business, Financial, or Economic
Banking or financial advisor
Loan officer
Computer programmer
Union representative
172
Appendix B: Personal Background Survey
Script: At this time, I would like to ask some questions about your personal
background.
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.)
173
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)).
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?
174
Appendix C: Staff Worksheet
Interviewer: This worksheet is useful for providing context for a conversation with
the respondent regarding the program. Ask the respondent to give information about
the main staff members and/or other leaders of your intervention program. These
individuals must be key people that the respondent works with and that help him/her
run the intervention program.
Script: Now I would like to find out about who is on the [name of program] staff.
Please tell me who are the key people that you work with who help you run this
program.
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
175
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
Staff #______
Name:
Gender:
Title/Position:
Brief Job Description:
Length of Employment:
176
Appendix D: Survey of the Program
Script: I would like to now ask you to talk informally about your program, the kind
of youth/students you serve and your role in program.
Current Job
1. Please explain your
current position or role in
the (name of program)
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,
key features
177
Appendix E: Name Generator
Preface interview session with the following introduction:
Over the course of our conversation, I would like to get an idea of the people
who are important to you in your efforts to help students, in various ways. I will
preface each topic with a description of the ways that people assist you in helping
you figure out how to get your students the help they need. After reading each
description, I will be asking you to provide me with only the first names of these
people who you would go to with confidence, if you needed this type of assistance
on behalf of your students. These people could be your friends, family, colleagues,
supervisors, mentors, or other people you might know.
If you feel that there isn’t anyone you would go to with confidence, for a
specific type of assistance described on behalf of your students then let’s talk about
that as well. If there are any descriptions or questions that may be unclear, please
don’t hesitate to ask me to clarify anything. Are you ready?
1. Social Integration Development Support:
When you have a student who has an ongoing developmental issue
and is in need of long-term counseling, who would be some of the
people that you would contact first for assistance to get support for
this student?
In the past year, which of these people have actually helped you this
way?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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:
If one of your students has a medical problem, such as eating
disorders, STDs, physical wellbeing, etc. or a substance abuse
problem that he/she is aware of but does not know how to seek
assistance, who can you call with confidence to assist you in getting
the proper attention the student needs?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
to assist you?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
178
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:
If one of your students is experiencing psychological or emotional
crises, such as suicidal tendencies, depression, etc. who are the people
you would most likely call upon for assistance in dealing with the
crisis?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred someone to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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 need specific information or assistance, regarding an
educational concern related to one of your program participants, who
are the people you would most likely call upon or refer to for
assistance before you would ask anyone else for help?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the year?
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 most likely call upon or refer to for assistance?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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?
179
6. College Services and Support:
If one of your program participants needs access to college services,
such as tutoring, etc., who are the people you would most likely call
upon or refer to for assistance?
In the past year, which of these persons have you actually contacted
and/or referred to receive assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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 aid, who are the people you would most likely call upon for
assistance?
In the past years, which of these persons have you actually contacted
and/or referred to receive assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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?
8. Academic and Student Affairs Support:
If one of your program participants needs assistance and/or
information from a person in Academic or Student Affairs (i.e.
academic petitions, academic withdrawals, grade changes), 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 you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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?
180
9. Career, Internships, and Employment Opportunities Support:
If one of your program participants needs assistance or information
regarding career, internship, or employment opportunities, who are
the people you would most likely call upon or refer to for assistance?
In the past years, which of these persons have you actually contacted
and/or referred to receive assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
years?
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 your program participants needs assistance with a political
issue, who are the people you would most likely call upon or refer to
for assistance, i.e., Associated Students group, Administration,
external advisors, City Council members, State Assembly members?
In the past year, which of these persons have you actually contacted
and/or referred to receive assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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. Academic Integration Assistance and Support:
When one of your program participants needs specific academic
integration assistance, such as Graduate school mentoring programs
or transfer programs, who are the people you would most likely call
upon for assistance before you would ask anyone else for help?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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?
181
12. Mental Health and Wellness Support:
If one of your program participants is in need of ongoing emotional or
moral support, such as family or relationship problems, who are the
people you would most likely call upon for assistance before you ask
anyone else.
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred someone to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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 or refer
to for assistance?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred someone to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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. Program/Grant Funding Support:
If one of your program participants needs assistance with grant or
program funding for a student group, who are the people you would
call upon or refer to before you would ask anyone else for assistance?
In the past year, which of these people have you actually called upon
or referred someone to for assistance?
Is there anyone who you would not normally rely upon for this type of
assistance, but who actually did help you in this way during the past
year?
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?
182
Appendix F: Name Generator (Respondent’s Copy)
Categories
1 Social Integration Development Support
2 Medical Health and Wellness Support
3 Crisis Support
4 Educational and/or Gateway Support
5 Legal Assistance
6 College Services and Support
7 Financial Information and Support
8 Academic and Student Affairs Support
9 Career, Internships, and Employment Opportunities Support
10 Political Support
11 Academic Integration Assistance and Support
12 Mental Health and Wellness Support
13 Law Enforcement Support
14 Program/Grant Funding Support
183
Appendix G: Code Sheet for Relationship Type Column
Immediate Family
1. Mother
2. Father
3. Sister
4. Brother
5. Daughter
6. Son
7. Step-Daughter
8. Step-Son
9. Wife
10. Husband
11. Ex-Wife
12. Ex-Husband
13. Girlfriend
14. Boyfriend
15. Step-Mother
16. Step-Father
17. Step-Sister
18. Step-Brother
19. Half-Sister
20. Half-Brother
Nuclear Family
21. Sister-in-Law
22. Brother-in-Law
23. Niece
24. Nephew
25. 1
st
Cousin
26. 2
nd
Cousin
27. Aunt
28. Uncle
29. Grandmother
30. Grandfather
31. Granddaughter
32. Grandson
33. Great Grandmother
34. Great Grandfather
35. Great Aunt
36. Great Uncle
Fictive Kin
37. Godmother
38. Godfather
184
39. Comadre
40. Compadre
41. Mentor/Kinship
Friendship
42. Friend
43. Acquaintance/Colleague
Work
44. Work Associate
45. Supervisor
46. Program Associate
47. Mentor
Organizational/Fraternal
48. Peer
Residential Community
49. Landlord/landlady
50. Neighbor
Church
51. Priest/minister
Business Relationship
52. Attorney
53. Accountant
54. *Other (Write in title of relationship)
________________________________
185
Appendix H: Ethnicity Coding Sheet
Interviewer’s Instruction: In completing the information needed for the ethnicity
columns (e.g., Eth 1 and Eth 2) in the Social Network Survey (“Name Generator”),
ask the subjects to identify what is their ethnic background. Place the letter code
found next to the ethnic label (e.g., A1) in the column labeled Eth 1. If the subject
identifies a second label, then place the corresponding code in the column labeled
Eth 2.
Racial/Ethnic/National Origin Background Categories
The boxed racial/ethnic/national origin designations are the categories and
definitions detailed in “Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting
Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity” (Federal Register, 62FR 58781 – 58790). The
categories under the boxed categories include those that are specified in the box, as
well as the racial/ethnic reporting categories specified in AB 813, which created
Section 8310.5 and an amendment to Section 19799 of the California Government
Code. The CSU provides employees, prospective students, and current students with
the opportunity to self-identify. Individuals are not required to specify a
race/ethnicity/national origin.
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA NATIVE: A person having origins in any of
the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and
who maintains tribal or community attachment.
Alaska Native A1
North American tribal affiliation or
community attachment
A2
Central American tribal affiliation or
community attachment
A3
Other South American tribal affiliation
or community attachment
A4
ASIAN: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East,
Southeast Asian, or the Indian subcontinent, including, for example, Cambodia,
China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and
Vietnam.
Asian Indian B1
Cambodian B2
Chinese B3
Filipino B4
Japanese B5
Korean B6
186
Laotian B7
Malaysian B8
Pakistani B9
Thai B10
Vietnamese B11
Other Asian B12
BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN: A person having origins in any of the black
racial groups of African. Terms such as “Haitian” or “Negro” can be used in
addition to “Black or African American”
http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000phc-2-a-B.pdf
African American C1
Caribbean/West Indian C2
African Continental C3
Other African American/Black C4
LATINO or HISPANIC: A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Central or
South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
Central American D1
Cuban D2
Mexican, Mexican American/Chicano D3
Puerto Rican D4
South American D5
Other Latino/Hispanic D6
NATIVE HAWAIIAN OR OTHE PACIFIC ISLANDER: A person having origins
in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.
Guamanian E1
Hawaiian E2
Samoan/Chamorro E3
Other Pacific Islander E4
WHITE: A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the
Middle East, or North Africa.
White European F1
White Western European (e.g., French,
Italian, Spanish, Portuguese)
F2
Eastern European (e.g., Greek,
Albanian, Czechoslovakian)
F3
Middle Eastern F4
North African F5
187
Jewish Heritage F6
Arabic F7
Other White F8
DECLINE TO STATE
Decline to state G1
* If respondent wants to make it clear that alter is Catholic (C), or Protestant (P),
then indicate this with the ethnicity in the coding (e.g., Catholic White European is
F1C).
RETRIEVED INFORMATION FROM:
http://www.calstate.edu/PA/racialprivacy.shtml
Content Contact:
Public Affairs
(562) 951-4800 publicaffairs@calstate.edu
188
Appendix I: Code Sheet for Name Generator Settings
Where Main Social Interactions Take Place
(Note: We will only ask for the top three settings)
Date
Name of
Respondent
Location of
Administration
Instructions:
1. What is the most important setting in which you
interact with this person?
2. What do you see as the second most important setting
in which you interact with this person?
3. Are there any other settings in which you interact with
this person?
Codes
Set 1 = most
impt.
Set 2 = second
Set 3 = other
Setting A: Intervention Program/Context
#Examples Label
1 Program staff meetings A1
2 Meetings pertaining to outside evaluations A2
Setting B: Collaborative Meetings with Outside Entities
#Examples Label
1 Cross-program participation in planning and
organizing activities
B1
2 Program-community collaborative meetings (e.g.,
church/temple; social service agencies; recreation
center)
B2
Setting C: Community Context/ “personal network”
#Description Label
1 Residential Neighborhood C1
2Church C2
3 Volunteer Organization C3
4 Community Civic Organization (e.g., political
lobby)
C4
5 Social Circle/ Personal Network (e.g., film club) C5
6 Health and Fitness (e.g., gym, bicycle club) C6
189
7 Children/oriented activities (e.g., soccer games) C7
8 Children/oriented activities—School gatherings
(e.g., plays, science fair)
C8
Setting D: Professional Context/ External to intervention program (related to
professional role as “youth worker”/ ‘institutional agent’ for students
#Description Label
1 Attendance and participation in Professional
Associations (including committees)
D1
2 Departmental staff meetings (wider institutional
context in which program is situated)
D2
3 Staff training and development activities (wider
institutional context in which program is situated)
D3
4 Union activities D4
Setting E: Professional Context/ External to intervention program (NOT related to
professional role as “youth worker”/ ‘institutional agent’ for students
#Description Label
1 Attendance and participation in Professional
Associations (including committees) (e.g., actors
guild)
E1
2 Departmental staff meetings (e.g., theatre) E2
3 Staff training and development activities (wider
institutional context in which professional role is
situated) (e.g., acting classes)
E3
4 Union activities (not related to program) E4
Setting F: Family/Kinship Context
#Description Label
1 Gathering/reunion for special occasions (e.g.,
weddings, baptisms, funerals, camping)
F1
2 Children/oriented activities (e.g., soccer games) F2
3 Children/oriented activities—School gatherings
(e.g., plays, science fair)
F3
4 Adult-kin-oriented activities (i.e., concerts, dinner,
theatre, baseball)
F4
Setting G: Electronic/Technology
#Description Label
1E-mail G1
2 Cell Phone G2
190
Appendix J: Code Sheet for Name Generator Setting
(Respondent’s Copy)
Setting A
Intervention Program/Context
Setting B
Collaborative Meetings with Outside Entities
Setting C
Community Context/ “personal network”
Setting D
Professional Context/ External to intervention program (related
to professional role as “youth worker”/ ‘institutional agent’ for
students
Setting E
Professional Context/ External to intervention program (NOT
related to professional role as “youth worker”/ ‘institutional
agent’ for students
Setting F
Family/Kinship Context
Setting G
Electronic/Technology
191
Appendix K: Code Sheet for Frequency Column
Prompt for Respondent: How often do you interact with person X?
Description Code
Everyday
1
Bi-weekly
2
Once a week
3
Every 2 weeks (bi-
monthly) (more or less)
4
Once a month (more or
less)
5
Every 2-3 months
6
Twice a year (more or
less)
7
Once a year
8
Every couple years (or
less frequently)
9
192
Appendix L: Occupations Descriptions for Name Generator (Interviewer’s Copy)
Interviewer: Use this form to document the occupations of the individuals named in
the Name Generator. Do not give a copy to the respondent. The number on this
form corresponds to the number of the alter identified on the Name Generator.
NumberName Occupation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
193
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
194
Appendix M: Organizational Affiliations (Interviewer’s Copy)
Instructions for interviewer: 1) Provide copy to respondent.
Script: I am interested in your current involvement in professional organizations.
Specifically, name the three most important professional organizations that you are
currently involved in. By current involvement, I mean attendance at least once a year
at meetings held by a group and has face-to-face interactions.
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.______________________________________
C
Political
Party or
Organiza-
tion (e.g.,
Black
Caucus
neither
Republican
or
Democrat)
1._____
2._____
3._____
1.______________________________________
2.______________________________________
3.______________________________________
195
Type of
Affiliation
(A thru F)
Actively
Involved?
(Yes or
No)
Name(s)
D
Church or
Religious
Organization
1.______
2.______
3.______
1.______________________________________
2.______________________________________
3.______________________________________
E
Charitable or
Philanthropic
Organization
1.______
2.______
3.______
1.______________________________________
2.______________________________________
3.______________________________________
F
Sports Club or
Recreation
Organization
1.______
2.______
3.______
1.______________________________________
2.______________________________________
3.______________________________________
196
Appendix N: Organizational Affiliations (Respondent’s Copy)
Description Type of Affiliation
Professional Association
A
Trade or Industry Association
B
Political Party or Organization (e.g., Black
Caucus neither Republican or Democrat)
C
Church or Religious Organization
D
Charitable or Philanthropic Organization
E
Sports Club or Recreation Organization
F
197
Appendix O: Organizational Affiliations Response Sheet (Interviewer’s Copy)
Respondent’s Name ___________________________________________
Date _______________
Type of
Affiliation
Could you briefly describe the nature of your involvement?
________
Type of
Affiliation
Could you briefly describe the nature of your involvement?
________
198
Appendix P: Position Generator
Name:_____________________________________
Date:___________________
Same Workplace = 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 Workplace = 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.
Job Function Family Friend Colleague or Acquaintance None
Same
Workplace
Different
Workplace
1 Attorney
2 Career
Counselor
3 Payroll Clerk
4 College
Admissions
Director
5 Librarians
6 Nurse
7 Social Worker
8 Mail Carrier,
Post Office
9 Foundation
Grant Director
10 Marketing
Research
Consultant
11 Police Officer
12 Accountant
13 Firefighter
14 Internship
Coordinator
199
15 City or
Government
Official
16 Probation
Officer
17 Health Care
Administrator
18 College
President or
Chancellor
19 Psychiatrist
20 Sales Manager
21 Receptionist
22 College Dean or
Provost
23 Academic
Counselor
24 Religious
Worker
25 Computer
Technician
26 Janitor
27 College
Professor
28 Real Estate
Agent
29 Cafeteria/Food
Server
30 Physician
200
Appendix Q: Rationale for the Position Generator
Job Function SEI
Score
High-
status
Medium-
status
Low-
status
1 Attorney 92 X
2 Career Counselor 65 X
3 Payroll Clerk 44 X
4 College Admissions
Director
79 X
5 Librarians 60 X
6 Nurse 44 X
7 Social Worker 64 X
8 Mail Carrier, Post Office 53 X
9 Foundation Grant
Director
82 X
10 Marketing Research
Consultant
66 X
11 Police Officer 41 X
12 Accountant 77 X
13 Firefighter 37 X
14 Internship Coordinator 74 X
15 City or Government
Official
80 X
16 Probation Officer 31 X
17 Health Care
Administrator
74 X
18 College President or
Chancellor
81 X
19 Psychiatrist 77 X
20 Sales Manager 72 X
21 Receptionist 44 X
22 College Dean or Provost 78 X
23 Academic Counselor 65 X
24 Religious Worker 57 X
25 Computer Technician 65 X
26 Janitor 13 X
27 College Professor 84 X
28 Real Estate Agent 62 X
29 Cafeteria/Food Server 11 X
30 Physician 92 X
201
Appendix R: Resource Generator
The purpose of this survey is to find out what resources you have access to.
The survey will be conducted in two phases. For the first phase, please go through
the list answering the prompt, “Do you know anyone who…”, and please indicate
whether or not you know someone that has access to each resource. If you do know
people that have access to these resources, please indicate how many are family
members, friends, and/or acquaintances. Please consider only two types of
acquaintances:
Type I: 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).
Type II: Someone not employed by the same institution/organization, but that
you attend the same meetings within a professional context (e.g.
conferences, professional development) and have regular small talk or
share opinions with.
In the second phase, respond to the prompt, “Are you someone who (is)…”,
and indicate your respond in the last column for each resource.
I.
Do you know anyone
who…***************
no Family
Member
Friend Colleague/
Acquaintance
Your-
self?
(I) (II)
II.
Are you someone who (is)… ** ****** ***** ***** *****
1
…can fill out a college
application…
2
…attended college…
3
…has knowledge about
immigration law…
4
…can provide advice for new
students…
5
…reads a professional journal…
6
…has knowledge about financial
matters…
7
…has knowledge about
employment opportunities…
8
…is active in a political party…
9
… knows how to write a grant…
10
… knows how to register for
classes…
202
11
… is familiar with campus
policies…
12
… can use college online
resources for course
equivalency…
13
… has knowledge about health
issues…
14
… has knowledge about health
and fitness…
15
… has successfully secured a
grant…
16
…can fix a computer…
17
…has information about
internship opportunities…
18
…has a professional degree…
19
… provides emotional support…
20
… knows the penal code
system…
21
… works in city hall…
22
… has negotiated student
crises…
23
… has knowledge about
personal development….
24
…donates money…
25
…who has knowledge about
academic/progress probation…
203
Appendix S: Rationale for the Resource Generator
I.
Do you know anyone
who…***************
High-status Medium-status Low-status
II.
Are you someone who (is)…
2
…teaches in college/university with a
masters’ degree or above…
X
3
…has knowledge about immigration
law…
X
4
…white collar professional who
collaborates with public officials to
create new educational policies (e.g.,
director of student programs at state
level)…
X
5
…reads a professional journal (e.g.,
Chronicle of Higher Education)…
X
7
…has authority over educational
departmental budget…
X
8
…is active in a political party… X
9
… makes decisions on awarding
grants…
X
11
… enforces college campus policies
(e.g., academic dismissals) …
X
18
…has a professional degree (e.g.,
MBA, Ed.D, Ph.D, MD, OD, DDS)…
X
1
…can fill out a college application… X
6
…has knowledge about financial aid
(e.g., Cal grants, PELL grants)
matters…
X
10
… knows how to register for classes… X
12
… can use college online resources for
course equivalency…
X
13
… owns a small family-run business… X
16
…can fix a computer… X
17
…has information about internship
opportunities…
X
25
…who has knowledge about
academic/progress probation…
X
14
… who is a member of a trade union
(e.g., janitor, custodian)…
X
15
… who is an expert gardener… X
19
…has a collection of power tools… X
20
… who is licensed to do plumbing and
household repairs…
X
204
21
… who can give advice on physical
fitness and nutrition (e.g. trainer,
nutritionist)…
X
22
… who is a self-employed artist (e.g.,
muralist)…
X
23
… who handles and processes mail…. X
24
…who knows how to prepare food for
sale…
X
205
Appendix T: Follow- up Interview on Relationships Identified in the Name
Generator (Interviewer’s Copy)
Interviewer: Read the following questions to the respondent for each individual
identified in the Name Generator. No copy should be given to the respondent.
Principal questions do not include probe or follow-up questions, but you may ask
them.
Script: This is a meeting where I will need to tape record our conversation. Is that
ok?
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.
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?
206
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. I would like to know whether you’ve ever acted as a source of support for
__________ and whether or not she/he explicitly asked for such support or help.
(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 for _____________ .
If you’ve never experienced such an instance, 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):
Can you elaborate on this instance where you provided __________
(name of alter) with ____________ (name of category of support); for
example, what was the situation?
Was ____________ receptive to your assistance?
What was the outcome?
c. Do you see yourself as a major source of support for __________________?
207
Appendix U: Ethnographic Interview Questions
Program Coordinator Exploratory Interview Framework
1. We spoke about you seeking assistance for students in your program when they
are facing developmental issues – give me an example of how you helped the student
deal with this challenge.
A. Is this standard procedure of the program to help students overcome
developmental issues or is that something that you take on as an individual?
Depending on response, the following will be asked:
i. Tell me more about how the program teaches you to deal with this
issue.
ii. Tell me more about why you chose to take a personal interest in
this.
2. We spoke about you seeking assistance for students in your program when they
have educational concerns – give me an example of how you helped the student deal
with this challenge.
A. Is this standard procedure of the program to help students overcome
educational concerns or is that something that you take on as an individual?
Depending on response, the following will be asked:
i. Tell me more about how the program teaches you to deal with this
issue.
ii. Tell me more about why you chose to take a personal interest in
this.
3. We spoke about you seeking assistance for students in your program that need
access to college services, such as tutoring, etc. – give me an example of how you
helped the student deal with this challenge.
A. Is this standard procedure of the program to help students with access to
college services or is that something that you take on as an individual?
Depending on response, the following will be asked:
i. Tell me more about how the program teaches you to deal with this
issue.
ii. Tell me more about why you chose to take a personal interest in
this.
4. Is teaching students strategies or skills that enhance their ability to become
independent and learn to network and access resources on their own something that
you do in your program? Why or why not?
5. Is your role as a program leader a very emotionally draining task?
208
Depending on response, the following will be asked:
i. How do you deal with this pressure and time consuming task?
209
Appendix V
210
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This study analyzed the presence of social capital within the context of a specific community college program, called Mathematics, Engineering, and Science Achievement (MESA), a retention program that serves underrepresented and low-income community college students in an effort to increase persistence and transfer rates to four-year institutions in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Institutional agency refers to persons who use their influence, capacity, and resources relative to their position to assist others in gaining access to networks, resources, information, and opportunities essential for social mobility. Five research questions guided the study: (1) What are the characteristics, features, and composition of the social resource networks of intervention program coordinators? (2) What are some of the factors that facilitate or constrain the program leader's access and mobilization of resources on behalf of themselves, students, program associates, and program agenda? (3) How do these institutional agents work to enhance program participants' social networks so that students themselves become independent and learn to network and access resources? (4) Serving as an institutional agent can be an emotionally draining task. How do institutional agents deal with this pressure and time consuming task?
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
An AVID program investigation: examining an intervention program within the context of social capital theory
PDF
Using social capital in examining program leaders of intervention programs
PDF
Shoring up the pipeline: a case study of female navigation throughout the science instructional pathway (SIP)
PDF
Peers as institutional agents: acquiring social capital through peer interactions
PDF
Mathematics, Engineering, Science, Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher a...
PDF
Undocumented students' personal reflections on the role institutional agents play in providing social capital towards post-secondary education
PDF
Social capital networks of institutional agents and the empowerment of African American youth
PDF
Defining the mobilization of social capital for low-SES minority youth participants in the Summer Bridge program by program leaders
PDF
The search for transformative agents: the counter-institutional positioning of faculty and staff at an elite university
PDF
Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher advis...
PDF
Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence
PDF
Staff members’ transfer of social capital to first-generation, low-income Latino/a students of Mexican descent
PDF
Noncredit programs: catalyst for development of social capital in adult students
PDF
Faculty as institutional agents for low-income Latino students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields at a Hispanic-serving institution
PDF
A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers’ perceptions and impact in their dual immersion classrooms
PDF
AB 540 community college students in Southern California: making connections and realizing dreams
PDF
Institutional agents' impact on tranfser student success through the avenue of social capital
PDF
Social capital networks of institutional agents and the empowerment of low-status youth in a federally funded intervention program
PDF
Engineering my community cultural wealth: testimonios of male Latino community college engineering students
Asset Metadata
Creator
Martínez, David Angel
(author)
Core Title
The manifestation of social capital within the mathematics, engineering, and science achievement (MESA) program
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
10/01/2009
Defense Date
09/11/2007
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
institutional agency,institutional agent,Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement,OAI-PMH Harvest,social capital
Language
English
Advisor
Baca, Reynaldo R. (
committee chair
), Cardoza, Raul J. (
committee member
), Peña-Vallejo, Edlyn (
committee member
)
Creator Email
david.martinez@canyons.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m833
Unique identifier
UC167501
Identifier
etd-Martinez-20071001 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-585734 (legacy record id),usctheses-m833 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Martinez-20071001.pdf
Dmrecord
585734
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Martínez, David Angel
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
institutional agency
institutional agent
Mathematics, Engineering, Science Achievement
social capital