University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Factors impacting retention rates amongst underrepresented students: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Factors impacting retention rates amongst underrepresented students: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION

FACTORS IMPACTING RETENTION RATES AMONGST UNDERREPRESENTED
STUDENTS: AN EVALUATION STUDY

by

Jaclyn Nicole Whitner

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

December 2018

Copyright 2018 Jaclyn Nicole Whitner
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables 4
List of Figures 5
Abstract 6
Chapter One: Introduction 7
Background of the Problem 7
Importance of Addressing the Problem 8
Organizational Context and Mission 9
Organizational Goal 10
Description of Stakeholder Groups 11
Stakeholder Performance Goal 12
Stakeholder Group for the Study 13
Purpose of the Project and Questions 13
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 14
Definitions 15
Organization of the Project 15
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 17
Review of the Literature 17
Student Retention Statistics Literature 18
Student Development Theory Literature 20
Clark and Estes’ Organizational Problem Solving Framework 23
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Factors 23
Knowledge and Skills 24
Motivation 27
Organization 29
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and the
Organizational Context 32
Summary 34
Chapter Three: Methods 36
Participating Stakeholders 36
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 41
Explanation for Choices 42
Data Collection 42
Interviews 43
Documents and Artifacts 45
Credibility and Trustworthiness 46
Ethics 46
Summary 47
Chapter Four: Results and Findings 49
Participants 50
Results 50
Knowledge Results 50
Motivation Results 59
Organization Results 64
Synthesis 70
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 3
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations 72
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences 73
Being Informed of Issues Affecting Underrepresented Students 73
Discussion of Solutions 78
Training to Address Underrepresented Student Retention 79
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 83
Implementation and Evaluation Framework 83
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations 84
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 85
Level 3: Behavior 86
Level 2: Learning 88
Level 1: Reaction 90
Evaluation Tools 90
Data Analysis and Reporting 91
Summary 92
Strengths and Weaknesses of Approach 94
Limitations and Delimitations 95
Future Research 95
Conclusion 96
References 98
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 105
Appendix B: Email sent to unfamiliar colleagues 106
Appendix C: Email sent to familiar colleagues 107
Appendix D: Information Sheet included as email attachment 108
Appendix E: Survey 109
Appendix F: Manager Rubric 110
Appendix G: Survey 111

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 4
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Assumed Knowledge Influences 25
Table 2: Assumed Motivation Influences 28
Table 3: Assumed Organization Influences 30
Table 4: Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 74
Table 5: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 77
Table 6: Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 80
Table 7: Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes 85
Table 8: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 86
Table 9: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 87
Table 10: Components of Learning for the Program. 89
Table 11: Components to Measure Reactions to the Program. 90
Table 12: Dashboard 92

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Interaction of KMO Influences and Stakeholder Goal 34
Figure 2: Organizational Chart 37
Figure 3: Interview Participation 40

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 6
ABSTRACT
As it pertains to the American education system, equal has proven not to be synonymous
with equitable. Equal works under the premise that everyone starts in the same position, thereby
making it fair to offer everyone the exact same resources and opportunities for success.
Education, in this sense, is supposed to be the great equalizer. By this theory of equality, smart
and talented individuals should be able to work their way to success by earning a college degree,
regardless of their background. In a 2010 speech to the National Urban League, former President
Barack Obama used the descriptor “prerequisite to prosperity” to describe the role of education,
noting that the ongoing achievement gap for underrepresented students dominoes into gaps in
financial security and wealth. In today’s globalized economy, inroads to education mean more
than just knowledge attainment for those who are able to engage in it directly and, subsequently,
to the communities and industries they contribute to. The purpose of this project was to evaluate
the degree to which a small private art and design college is meeting its goal of increasing the
percentages of underrepresented students amongst the student body. This goal is filtered through
the lens of staff as the primary stakeholder group. The analysis focuses on knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goals. While a
complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the
primary stakeholder group in this analysis is the staff.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 7
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
While college admissions rates for historically underrepresented students have seen
increases in recent years, retention rates for these populations do not follow the same trend
(Complete College America, 2011). Among Black and Latino students, gaps in educational
achievement are remnants of a historically elitist interpretation of who could and could not
access higher education (Altbach, Gumport, & Berdahl, 2011). Various programs and laws have
been implemented to address this inequity, yet the gap in retention persists (Aud, Fox, & Kewal-
Ramani, 2010). This project is a case study of how underrepresented student retention issues
have an impact on a small private arts institution. Underrepresented students at the study site
include those who identify as racially or ethnically Black or African-American and/or individuals
who identify as Hispanic or Latino.
To address this problem of practice, it is important to first define the term retention. For
the purposes of this project, retention is differentiated from persistence using the definition
offered by Hagedorn (2005), which specifies that institutions retain, while students persist. This
delineation places emphasis on retention being defined by the efforts exerted by institutions to
support students in staying in college with hopes of degree attainment. Specifically, the purpose
of the project is to evaluate how staff contribute to the organizational goal of retaining these
populations at the study site in order to determine which factors have an impact on retention rates
and make recommendations for how to address existing gaps.
Background of the Problem
As it pertains to the American education system, equal has proven not to be synonymous
with equitable (Stephens, 2014). Equal works under the premise that everyone starts in the same
position, thereby making it fair to offer everyone the exact same resources and opportunities for
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 8
success (Foxhail, 2016). Education, in this sense, is supposed to be the great equalizer. By this
theory of equality, smart and talented individuals should be able to work their way to success by
earning a college degree, regardless of their background. This is likely why 79% of Black
parents and 86% of Latino parents place extreme importance on their children earning degrees
(Stepler, 2016). However, statistics show that the retention and degree attainment gaps between
students of color and their White peers are growing (Espinosa, Chessman, & Wayt, 2016),
despite the efforts to level the playing field. If a measureable percentage of American citizens are
continuously impacted by this educational inequity, it poses a problem for the United States’
ability as a nation to remain competitive, as a lack of education creates a workforce that is not
prepared to meet the needs of the changing economy (Aud et al., 2010). In a 2010 speech to the
National Urban League, former President Barack Obama used the descriptor “prerequisite to
prosperity” to describe the role of education, noting that the ongoing achievement gap for
underrepresented students dominoes into gaps in financial security and wealth (The White House
Office of the Press Secretary, 2010). In today’s globalized economy, inroads to education mean
more than just knowledge attainment for those who are able to engage in it directly, and
subsequently to the communities and industries they contribute to.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
Bridging any gaps that may exist for certain students because of circumstances outside of
their control is, by definition, equitable (Bowman, 2013; Kirova, 2008). If educators wish to
address the ongoing retention issues, they are best served by pursuing solutions in consideration
of increasing equity. Approaching education from an equitable standpoint at the institutional
level means more than just recognizing that people have differences; it also means understanding
that those differences will have an impact on how and if students learn (Carnevale & Strohl,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 9
2013). Chickering (2006) insists that every student can succeed if the institution itself is
committed to living their mission and addressing the students on their level. However, the
students that institutions are unable to retain do not have the opportunity to benefit from this
commitment to a mission, vision or purpose.
In a most ideal setting, retention efforts would be institution-wide. High-level
organizational goals like retention should be intentionally connected to individual and team goals
to be most effective (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizations that are successful at achieving
articulated goals find strategic ways to create a culture that emphasizes the small- and large-scale
actions that each stakeholder can take to ultimately move the organization closer to the larger
goal. Addressing this problem of practice is a step working towards achieving a goal, and goal
attainment pushes the organization towards its success milestones. This cycle of progress is what
keeps organizations running and ensures success (Clark & Estes, 2008). Thus, addressing the
challenge of underrepresented student retention as an organizational goal has the overall impact
of benefitting these students by providing them the education they deserve and ultimately
helping institutions become more aligned with their mission.
Organizational Context and Mission
West Coast Art and Design (WCAD) is a private, non-profit, art college. The mission of
WCAD is to provide students with the opportunity to create and develop a body of work that
exhibits a commitment to both social responsibility and critical thinking. The college seeks to
engage students as creative artist-citizens to contribute to the betterment of their communities
through sustainable practices and innovative change-making.
WCAD was founded at the threshold of the 20th century as a cornerstone of the arts and
crafts movement. Since its inception, the college has grown immensely to accommodate the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 10
demand for arts education and the need for design-thinking across professions and disciplines.
The population consists of approximately 2,000 undergraduate and graduate students, with over
700 staff and faculty members, most of whom are also artists and professionals in their
respective fields. The college offers over 30 graduate and undergraduate degree programs in fine
arts, design, architecture and the humanities.
WCAD’s student body has unique qualities that have a significant impact on the culture
of the community. International students from over 50 different countries represent
approximately a third of the student population at WCAD. Additionally, transfer students
represent over 40% of undergraduate students. While the two populations may not directly
overlap, approximately a third of the student body identifies as first-generation, and the same
proportion of students are Pell Grant eligible, indicating higher financial need or lower
socioeconomic status. Many of the students defined by this study as underrepresented also
overlap in the categories of higher financial need and being first in their families to pursue higher
education; however Black and Latino students, respectively, only represent 6% and 12% of the
overall student body at WCAD.
Organizational Goal
WCAD has a goal of increasing the percentage of underrepresented students by 5% over
4 years. This goal was initially established by the senior cabinet and board of trustees in response
to recommendations handed down by the regional accrediting body in 2009. The previous
iteration of the strategic plan included initiatives to increase international student enrollment
from 9% to 12% in 5 years. However, there were no quantifiable or time constrained goals in
relation to underrepresented populations. The result was an increase of international enrollment
to 29% at the end of 5 years, while enrollment for underrepresented students remained stagnant.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 11
The college added specific quantifiable goals in the newest version of the strategic plan because
no progress was made without them in the past. Thus, it is even more timely for the institution to
consider how retention of current underrepresented students will be an important component of
this projected increase.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder groups for the college are the students, staff, and faculty at the
institution. Students are the stakeholder group that is most directly affected by issues of
retention. In particular, underrepresented students tend to be the most in need of supplemental
resources in order to stay in school (Aud et al., 2010). WCAD articulated a goal to better serve
this specific student population, making retention of these students a measure of the college’s
effectiveness in reaching their goals. Faculty also represent a major stakeholder group when
evaluating the college’s success in attaining these goals because of how impactful their role in
students’ lives can be. For example, there is a positive correlation between faculty mentorship of
students and student retention, (Reddick, 2012), which means this stakeholder group has the
potential to have a great impact on the desired goal. Finally, staff also play a significant role in
attaining the goal of student retention, considering they are usually the key to finding or offering
the very resources that students need (Wilson, 2011). Whether they serve as coaches, academic
advisors, counselors or mentors, many institutional staff members are in positions meant to
directly support students. These individuals are also generally aware of the challenges presented
when trying to provide certain students access to their services and know how to work beyond
those barriers. Other cursory stakeholders could be parents or guardians of students, alumni of
the college, the board of trustees, donors, and community partners. However, the consistent
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 12
presence of students, staff and faculty each as major components of the campus community
prioritize their roles as being germane to this study.
Stakeholder Performance Goal
At WCAD, the organizational goal relevant to this study is clearly articulated in the
strategic plan, but how that goal relates to individual stakeholders is less clear. A symptom of
this unclear goal is a lack of progress on achieving the desired enrollment and retention results.
For an organization to improve performance, it must examine where gaps exist and assess how
they can be closed (Clark & Estes, 2008). The gap analysis process to address this disconnect
within organizations is reflexive and requires regular assessment and reassessment of progress
(Clark & Estes, 2008). As previously indicated, the organization is falling short of its goal to
retain underrepresented students, which would mean the stakeholder goal for this study should
reflect specific behaviors that would lead stakeholders to contribute to achieving this goal. For
this purpose, it has been determined that the aspirational stakeholder goal is defined as “Staff
who work to support underrepresented students will develop their advising and supporting
competencies in order to increase underrepresented student retention.” This aspirational
stakeholder goal is supported by both the organizational goal and the professional competencies
that guide staff within student affairs (College Student Educators International [ACPA] &
Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education & [NASPA], 2015). Although student
affairs staff have been excluded from this study (see Chapter Three, Participating Stakeholders),
the competencies outlined by the two professional non-profit organizations that represent the
field, NASPA and ACPA, are based on practices that develop and support students with retention
serving as a leading desired outcome.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 13
Stakeholder Group for the Study
For the purposes of this study, staff members were the primary stakeholder group to
focus on. Many student support services provided at institutions today are the direct result of
research revealing their necessity and impact on the student experience (Complete College
America, 2011). These services are offered and monitored by para-professional and professional
staff and administrators, who hold much of the responsibility for retention efforts. Whether the
focus is on improving academic performance through coaching, increasing graduation rates
through academic advisement, or long-term career preparedness through career development,
each of these efforts work collectively to retain and support students through graduation (ACPA
& NASPA, 2015). These professionals are often working collaboratively to resolve issues of
retention in balance with faculty efforts to maintain academic rigor and challenge students’
critical thinking and learning. It is not to say that faculty do not care to retain students, but their
efforts to teach students new skills may challenge students in ways that expand beyond their
learning and challenge their entire understanding of how they can be successful (Chickering,
2006). Staff know that this kind of challenge in students’ lives at this juncture of their
development may manifest behaviors or misbehaviors that they, as professionals, are often
charged with helping the student through. Staff efforts may make the difference for a student
struggling to understand their place in a higher education institution. Therefore, for the purposes
of this study, these staff practitioners were identified as the stakeholder group to focus on.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which WCAD is meeting its goal
of increasing the percentage of underrepresented students amongst the student body. This goal is
filtered through the lens of staff members as the primary stakeholder group. The analysis focuses
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 14
on knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational
goals. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical
purposes the primary stakeholder group in this analysis is the staff. As such, three questions
guided this study:
1. To what extent are stakeholders meeting the goal of developing advising and supporting
competencies in effort to increase underrepresented student retention?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
This project utilizes the knowledge, motivational and organizational gap analysis for the
conceptual framework as described by Clark and Estes (2008). The methodological framework is
a qualitative study of a unique site that has been analyzed using descriptive statistics. The goals
of this framework are to connect the high-level organizational goal to individual stakeholder
goals, build an effective analysis, and subsequently propose a solution. The analytical method
created and explained by Clark and Estes has been adapted to fit the evaluative model of this
study. Specifically, the research questions dictate how staff—as stakeholders—have an impact
on the organizational goal and determine whether or not there are knowledge, motivation or
organizational factors that impede their ability to attain the aspirational stakeholder goal of
increased underrepresented student retention. Through the use of interviews and document
analysis, the study evaluates and assesses the various knowledge, motivation and organizational
factors influencing WCAD staff members’ ability to impact underrepresented student retention.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 15
Existing literature on college student development and underrepresented student retention trends,
in conjunction with existing knowledge of the organization on behalf of the researcher, are
utilized to further this study by guiding recommendations for solutions.
Definitions
The following terms are used regularly throughout the study, specifically in the context of
the following definitions.
Equality: Universal provision of the same fair and equal resources to all.
Equity: Intentional provision of resources to address individual needs.
Persistence: Efforts exerted by an individual student to stay enrolled in higher education
despite any obstacles that arise.
Retention: Efforts exerted by institutions to retain or keep students enrolled from year to
year, ultimately through to graduation.
Staff: Employees of the study site who do not work primarily in a classroom or studio-
based teaching capacity.
Underrepresented: Also referred to as underrepresented minority, referring to ethnic
minorities in the United States who are present in communities like higher education at rates that
are disproportionate to their representation in the country.
Organization of the Project
This project is organized into five chapters. This first chapter serves as an introduction to
the project, the study site, and the stakeholder group. The next chapter is a review of the
literature, including an exploration of college student development theory and research
conducted to better understand the trajectory of underrepresented college students. The third
chapter details the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements to be explored as well as
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 16
the methodology used to conduct this study at WCAD, which is also present in portions of the
second chapter. The fourth chapter is an analysis of the qualitative data collected. Finally, the
fifth chapter details the findings, implications, limitations, recommendations, and conclusion of
the study.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 17
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter serves as the literature review, exploring the factors that can have a negative
impact on underrepresented student retention. To begin, there is an examination of the statistical
factors that affect student retention, such as academic preparedness and barriers to reaching
educational milestones. The research also considers cornerstones of student development theory
to uncover best practices in helping students reach educational milestones and attain academic
goals. To conclude, an analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
(Clark & Estes, 2008) on the staff members’ ability to support underrepresented students with
the goal of increasing retention will be provided. Clark and Estes (2008) provide a conceptual
framework to specifically address the research questions, which include whether WCAD is
meeting the goal to increase underrepresented student presence through retention of current
students, how the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences may affect this goal, and
what the organization can do moving forward.
Review of the Literature
To illustrate the importance of this study, this project includes an exploration of relevant
literature on factors affecting underrepresented student retention. There are several public and
non-profit entities that report on the statistics for college student performance and retention, like
the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center (NSCRC, 2015), Complete College
America (2011) as well as Excelencia in Education and the United Negro College Fund (2014).
These reports point to clear patterns that make a compelling argument for further evaluation of
underrepresented student retention trends. With disproportionately lower representation and
performance in higher education institutions, Black and Latino students represent two
populations who would benefit from increased equity in educational systems. This review also
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 18
offers some insight into why these circumstances exist. There are a number of theories
underscored by Chickering and Reisser (1993), as well as Chiang, Hunter, and Yeh (2004), that
point to important components of college student development that have an impact on student
persistence throughout their educational pursuits, including sense of belonging and self-efficacy.
Specifically, the research from educators like Carnevale and Strohl (2013), Museus (2011), and
Strayhorn, Lo, Travers, and Tillman-Kelly (2015) clarifies how underrepresented minority
students, particularly Black and Latino students, are uniquely affected by these theoretical
components of college student development. Collectively, both the statistics and the theoretical
evaluation help to frame the problem of practice for this study.
Student Retention Statistics Literature
An important component of any valid study is the presence of statistics to support the
need for further investigation. There are several important developmental moments that have an
impact on students’ engagement with their educational experience which occur before they even
reach their post-secondary endeavors. Many educational inequities begin with the quality of
primary and secondary education students receive. Students coming from underserved schools
with fewer resources can find themselves under-prepared for the challenges of higher education
(Poesen-Vandeputte & Nicaise, 2014). Nearly 75% of Black and Latino K-12 students attend
schools that are considered low-income, compared with only a third of White students (NSCRC,
2015). This figure increases the likelihood that Black and Latino students will be less prepared
for college. As a result of this under-preparedness, students may opt to start at a community
college, which can end up being a major delaying factor, if not a complete deterrent, to pursuit of
a bachelor’s degree (Tovar, 2015). The desire to seek a baccalaureate degree can decrease by up
to 40% in community college students (Tovar, 2015). This is significant considering that 44% of
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 19
the Black undergraduate population and 56% of national Latino undergraduate population were
enrolled in 2-year public institutions in 2014 (Ma & Baum, 2016). Alternatively, minority
students who do attend 4-year colleges immediately after high school more commonly enroll in
less-selective institutions (Carnevale & Strohl, 2013). While this does increase their access to
education, it does not conversely increase their rates of completion. In fact, these students at less-
selective institutions are less likely to complete their degrees than students who enroll in more
selective schools (Casselman, 2014).
The students who do enroll at selective 4-year colleges may find that, if they are
academically uncompetitive, they are expected to complete remedial coursework to account for
their under-preparedness (Tinberg, 2012). While remediation efforts at the college level are
intended to arm students with the skills needed for success, they can simultaneously delay
students’ progress towards earning a degree (Carnevale, & Strohl, 2013). As a result, institutions
may find it challenging to retain this population. One study conducted by the non-profit
organization Complete College America (2011) concluded that the longer a student takes to get
through their coursework, the less likely they are to finish their degree. This is evidenced by
statistics indicating that only 38% of Black students and 45% of Latino students earn a
bachelor’s degree within 6 years of enrolling in college (Shapiro, et al., 2017).
In summary, student retention statistics literature reveals that underrepresented students
disproportionately begin their pursuit of higher education in need of academic remediation
(Tinberg, 2012), which is generally the result of coming from geographic areas that are
underserved and under-resourced (Poesen-Vandeputte & Nicaise, 2014). There is also the added
challenge of addressing the gaps that students carry over from their secondary and primary
education (Altbach et al., 2011). These gaps at the post-secondary level disproportionately affect
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 20
underrepresented minorities, particularly Black and Latino students. This has the potential to
affect their pursuit and timely attainment of a post-secondary degree (Tovar, 2015). The trends
reveal that, while access to college is increasing for underrepresented students, the retention rates
are not following that pattern (Bowman, 2013). This is where the examination of underlying
factors, including psychosocial development of the students themselves, can help to further
illuminate challenges in order to advance towards solutions.
Student Development Theory Literature
There are theorists who explain that identity development, specifically cultural and ethnic
identity development, represents a major element of the underrepresented college student
experience. This is particularly relevant when discussing the development of self-efficacy
(Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010) and sense of
belonging (Hagedorn, 2005; O’Keeffe, 2013; Strayhorn et al., 2015). Self-efficacy is defined by
one’s belief that one can be successful at a task or achieve one’s goals (Chickering & Reisser,
1993; Pajares, 2006). Students develop self-efficacy under conditions that affirm their positive
feelings about themselves, including spaces that celebrate their identity (Evans, et al., 2010).
Similarly, sense of belonging is fostered through environmental factors like institutional climate
and relationships with peers and mentors (Strayhorn et al., 2015). The draw of acquiring these
feelings can lead students to seek out an environment that is conducive to helping them establish
identity—including aspects such as gender and ethnic background—based on what is most
relevant to them (Evans, et al., 2010). Cultural differences may present an unanticipated
challenge for students who place more significance on their racial or ethnic identities and happen
to attend institutions where they are in the ethnic minority.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 21
There are various strategies that Black and Latino students employ to manage their
conflicting feelings of being in the ethnic minority at their institutions. For example, the process
of exploring aspects of identity can be facilitated by seeing themselves represented within their
community. If an underrepresented student is unable to find representation at a predominantly
White institution, they are inclined to find other means to fill that gap (Chiang et al., 2004).
Creating a support network of trusting individuals is a major element of acclimation or
assimilation in college (Museus, 2011). That task can be difficult for students who are looking
for community members who are like them amongst a more homogenous population (Rodgers,
2013). It is common for Black and Latino students to cope with the challenges of acclimating to
college by reaching out to their family and friends, instead of staff members like their college
counselors and advisors (Chiang et al., 2004). Reconnecting to a familiar community is affirming
because there is a level of cultural literacy that already exists within their informal networks, and
there is an inclination to believe that a familiar person will understand them better than a stranger
from a completely different background (Chiang et al., 2004). As far as campus communities are
concerned, a growing number of minority students are responding to these feelings of
disconnection or isolation through resistance efforts at colleges across the nation (Jaschik, 2015),
causing higher education administrators to take notice.
A recent survey of 4-year college and university presidents revealed that 47% of them
saw campus protests concerning racial issues (Ruff, 2016). Students are using these protests to
show institutions that issues concerning race still exist in higher education systems, presenting
another barrier to their ability to succeed (Jaschik, 2015). This issue of race at institutions centers
around the lack of minority representation, uncovering a trend where institutionally perpetuated
systems of inequality only have an impact on a relatively small number of students, slowing the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 22
progress made towards change. Statistics indicate that White students represent 75%
undergraduates enrolled at the top 468 institutions nationwide (Carnevale & Strohl, 2013), which
creates a compelling statistical argument for the occurrence that underrepresented students would
feel further marginalized by their environments.
The identity development challenges that Black and Latino students face specifically are
often culturally centered. If underrepresented students come from an environment where their
community reflects their own personal identity, the reality of being placed in an environment that
no longer reflects that culture can be a challenge (Casselman, 2014; Museus, 2011). Having the
opportunity to build connections to staff and faculty has a direct impact on student retention
(Museus, 2011; Tovar, 2015), so it is imperative to not only work towards addressing issues of
representation, but to also ensure that staff or faculty who are not culturally representative of
these students are equipped with the knowledge and skills needed to meet students where they
are.
Both the statistical evidence and the theoretical and social indicators paint a picture of
possible challenges that institutions will need to consider when working to retain
underrepresented students. In order to determine how these factors manifest at WCAD, the study
will investigate specifically how the stakeholder group is contributing to the institution’s ability
to retain students. This is done by evaluating the knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences on the stakeholders’ ability to address the problem of practice (Clark & Estes, 2008).
To obtain this information, data were collected in a manner that was conducive to revealing
trends amongst employees of the organization who have contact with students and how their
actions contribute to or detract from the organizational goal.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 23
Clark and Estes’ Organizational Problem Solving Framework
This problem of practice regarding underrepresented student retention at WCAD is
explored utilizing the analytical framework offered by Clark and Estes (2008). The authors
provide structure to identify and analyze gaps between an organization’s performance and its
articulated goals. This framework also provides a systematic process for assessing stakeholder’s
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on goal attainment. Before utilizing the
analytical framework provided by Clark and Estes, it is important to first define the relevant
terms.
Knowledge, also referred to as skill, in this area is defined as basic information needed to
complete a job function, which includes job aids, training and education (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Knowledge types can generally fit into four categories of factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002). Motivation influences are defined as the reasons why
stakeholders contribute to organizational performance, which can be broken down into areas of
active choice, persistence and mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008). Finally, the organizational
influences can be affected by underlying forces, like organizational culture, which can
sometimes be challenging to pinpoint (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Factors
The knowledge, motivation and organizational (KMO) elements of the Clark and Estes
(2008) gap analysis are applicable to many problems of practice, including the issue of
underrepresented student retention explored in this study. The initial analysis focuses on
assumed knowledge influences over the primary stakeholder group of staff at WCAD. Following
the KMO model, the next section of the analysis focuses on the assumed motivational influences
over staff at the college. Finally, there is an exploration of the assumed organizational influences
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 24
affecting staff members’ ability to positively contribute to underrepresented student retention at
the college.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge theory. In examining the knowledge influences on staff members’ ability to
address underrepresented student retention, it is initially important to consider the different levels
of knowledge. Krathwohl (2002) illustrates that knowledge fits into four major categories of
factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. Factual knowledge represents the most basic
level of understanding for a specific area or discipline (Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual knowledge
builds on factual knowledge by adding the examination and understanding of relationships
amongst basic elements and how these each relate to a bigger picture (Krathwohl, 2002).
Procedural knowledge refers to understanding of process and technique (Krathwohl, 2002).
Finally, metacognitive knowledge is understanding and awareness of cognition, or thinking
about thinking (Krathwohl, 2002).
While each of these areas serve a purpose in relation to the problem of practice, for this
study and this stakeholder group, procedural and conceptual knowledge are the most relevant.
For this study, factual knowledge also plays a small role. Table 1 illustrates the potential
knowledge influences on stakeholders at WCAD. Procedural knowledge in this study refers
specifically to staff members’ interactions with underrepresented students and their retention
efforts. Conceptual knowledge is relevant to the subject of underrepresented student retention
because the study is evaluating whether staff understand their role in underrepresented student
retention, as it relates to their job functions. Additionally, at its most basic level, factual
knowledge of the college’s resources and how to properly refer students to them is important to
consider.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 25
Table 1
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence Assessment
Staff need to understand how
their actions help
underrepresented students
develop a sense of belonging.
Conceptual Interview Items:
“How do you think your work impacts
the underrepresented student
experience?”
“How do you think you might
particularly influence
underrepresented student retention?”

Staff need to know how to
properly identify and refer
students who need additional
academic support or
intervention.
Procedural Interview Items:
“What kinds of challenges or issues do
students commonly encounter in your
department/division?”
“How do you respond to those student
concerns or challenges?”

Connecting stakeholder actions to retention. There is generally a wealth of literature
produced on topics regarding student development and how to best serve various populations
within institutions (Jones & Abes, 2013; Wilson, 2011). One of those prominent concepts as it
pertains to student success is developing a sense of belonging (O’Keeffe, 2013). Building these
connections to a community or institution is even more important for students who are
potentially at risk for not completing their degree (O’Keeffe, 2013). A key factor in helping
students develop a sense of belonging requires that they feel the institution cares about them
(O’Keeffe, 2013), which is exhibited by the actions on behalf of stakeholders. As previously
iterated, staff members often work with students in capacities that relate to accessing resources.
The quality of these interactions can shape students’ perceptions of others’ care for their success
and subsequently have an impact on their sense of belonging (Strayhorn et al., 2015). Without
guidance governed by theory and best practices, individual efforts are less likely to align with
overall goals. This issue represents a shortage of procedural knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002),
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 26
specifically because the staff members are unaware of how and why to vary their approaches or
methodology when supporting students. The staff at WCAD may not be equipped with the skills
or knowledge to properly support students in gaining a sense of belonging, specifically outside of
the division of student affairs where study of the subject of retention may not be commonplace.
Importance of referrals. The number and types of resources available to college
students has increased as higher education institutions have evolved and professional staff
presence has grown (Carlson, 2014). While having increased resources and access is ideal for the
students, it can be confusing for staff and faculty who are not aware of how each of these
resources work. Staff and faculty at WCAD tend to conflate responsibilities of departments like
counseling services with departments with similar sounding names like access and wellness,
directing students to the wrong resource for the wrong reasons. This is important because a
proper referral is an example of staff showing a vested interest in students’ success (Hagedorn,
2005). Additionally, proper referrals help students get to the right place to meet their needs.
These referrals fill a need for students who often approach their higher education journey
lacking necessary resources. Underrepresented students are statistically more likely to come from
lower socio-economic status (Excelencia in Education & United Negro College Fund, 2014),
which could present financial barriers for an expensive undertaking like a college education.
However, in a study conducted by Rickinson and Rutherford (1995), financial issues were not
amongst the top listed for reasons why students did not persist. Assiter and Gibbs (2007)
attribute many of the struggles underrepresented students face to low self-efficacy (Kirkpatrick,
2006). Self-efficacy dictates whether an individual believes their actions will help them reach a
desired goal (Pajares, 2006). The word “self” in this theory is somewhat misleading as self-
efficacy is not solely attained independently of others’ actions. Students’ ability to connect with
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 27
staff can have an impact on their ability to develop self-efficacy (Hagedorn, 2005; Rickinson &
Rutherford, 1995). Building those connections creates opportunities for students to succeed
based on guidance provided by a staff member. Their success at each task can serve to further
affirm their belief that they can succeed overall.
Motivation
Motivation theories. Beyond the knowledge factors affecting stakeholders there are
potential motivational influences as well. Motivation can be defined in various capacities, one
being value (Pajares, 2006). Individuals need to see value in the task or work to remain actively
engaged in it (Eccles, 2006). Value can be affected when stakeholders have the opportunity to
choose, which activates personal interest or intrinsic value in the task (Eccles, 2006). Motivation
can also be measured in terms of self-efficacy (Pajares, 2006). If individuals have high self-
efficacy, they are more motivated to complete or engage in a task (Pajares, 2006). Self-efficacy
is attained when individuals believe their efforts will likely lead to desired outcomes, which
pushes them to persevere through any challenges that may arise (Pajares, 2006).
At WCAD, these motivational theories apply to staff engaging in retention efforts
through their work with students. For this study, value is defined by the stakeholder’s ability to
see the importance of targeted retention efforts for underrepresented students. Similarly, staff
members may not feel confident in their ability to contribute to retention efforts, feeling as
though they have low self-efficacy, which is why they may not engage in them. Both of these
aspects of motivation are addressed by interview items as illustrated in Table 2. These two
factors are assumed to represent potential motivational influences amongst the stakeholder
group.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 28
Table 2
Assumed Motivation Influences
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivation Influence Assessment
Value – Staff need to feel it is important to
consider retention efforts when working with
underrepresented students.
Interview Items:
“What do you feel your role and your
department’s role is in supporting
underrepresented student retention?”

Self-Efficacy – Staff need to feel confident in
their ability to refer underrepresented students
to resources that will help them resolve their
concerns.
Interview Item:
“How confident do you feel in referring
students to appropriate resources to help them
with their concerns or challenges?”

Stakeholder role in retention. Retention is a multi-pronged problem of practice that
higher education institutions have to evaluate from various angles. Successful retention efforts
span different areas of the college and require buy-in from all stakeholders. With regard to
retention, it is important for stakeholders to not only see value in their work in the general sense,
but also as it pertains to their ability to have an impact on retention efforts for underrepresented
students specifically (Pajares, 2006). Value is defined in terms of importance and utility,
meaning the task holds a personal relevance or serves a common observable purpose (Eccles,
2006; Pintrich, 2003). Seeing value in playing an active role in retention efforts for
underrepresented students will serve as an impetus for engaging in practices that help students
retain, like fostering success through offering equitable support (Museus, 2011).
Confidence in ability. It can be argued that individuals who work for an educational
organization generally see value in the work they do. However, when retention efforts do not
meet articulated goals, there is a question of whether stakeholders feel empowered to address
them. This is why it is also important to consider whether staff members feel confident in their
ability to help underrepresented students address challenges or obstacles that may arise (Pajares,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 29
2006). The same self-efficacy that can affect an underrepresented student’s ability to persist can
have an impact on stakeholders’ efforts to retain them. Stakeholders need challenging but
attainable goals around retention and guidance on how to achieve them in order to feel motivated
to exert the effort (Pajares, 2006). Without those structures, stakeholders may doubt whether any
effort on their behalf will lead to desired outcomes (Pajares, 2006). This lack of confidence can
determine whether stakeholders are motivated to engage in tasks that support underrepresented
student retention at WCAD.
Organization
Organizational theories. As with knowledge and motivation influences, it is important
to consider the relevant organizational theories when evaluating organizational influences.
Within organizations, there is an overarching concept of culture, which is generally structured
around the concepts of cultural settings and cultural models (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
The concrete aspects of an organization like employees and their respective responsibilities are
considered elements of cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001), whereas the less
tangible aspects, like ethos, and shared ideals are elements of cultural models (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001). Collectively, both cultural models and settings shape how an organization
and its members function as a whole. Table 3 illustrates how these theories manifest at WCAD
with regard to stakeholders’ perceptions of where responsibility for retention efforts lie, and the
absence of training on this subject.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 30
Table 3
Assumed Organization Influences
Assumed Organization Influences Organization Influence Assessment
There is a perception amongst non-student
affairs staff and faculty that all issues
affecting student success (personal, academic,
behavioral, etc.) can and should be resolved
by someone in student affairs.

Interview Items:
“How do you feel other departments approach
support for underrepresented students.”
The organization needs to provide training
and information related to the support of
underrepresented students and their retention.
Interview Items:
“What training or information have you
received about the retention of
underrepresented students, including
strategies to support them?”
“What kind of training do you feel you would
be helpful to support underrepresented student
retention?”

Retention outside of student affairs. At WCAD, there is a clear cultural model as it
pertains to the importance of arts education in the 21st century. Similarly, in certain areas of the
college, there is a cultural model in relation to the study topic of underrepresented student
retention, specifically in student affairs. In this context, it is a smaller model, centralized within
specific areas of the college that are perceived to have a more direct impact on the issue at hand,
but it should not be limited to these departments alone. To be universally applicable, a cultural
model that shifts all student retention goals to become part of the ethos of each functional area in
the college would be necessary (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). The research indicates that
student retention is heavily tied to the characteristics of the institution (Hagedorn, 2005; Museus,
2011). This points to the importance of establishing retention as an institution-wide initiative.
Each stakeholder represents someone a student may potentially interact with, which means each
of these departments or individuals should have the same expectations and goals around student
retention as the student affairs professionals do.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 31
Training and clear expectations. Currently, the organization does not consistently offer
clear explanations of how and when to support and refer students to resources and, instead, relies
on individual departments that offer the resources, to educate others. This culture of relying on
departments is not entirely ineffective, as it is flawed because these departments are not
consistently notified when new staff members have arrived and need to be informed of the
expectations. The literature utilized in this study reflects the need for underrepresented students
to connect to campus resources to have an impact on retention efforts (Carnevale, & Strohl,
2013; Complete College America, 2011). Connecting students to resources can be challenging if
members of the campus community are not clear on what those resources are and how students
can access them. While aspects of this disparity can certainly be perceived as a knowledge gap
(Carnevale, & Strohl, 2013), this is also evidence of an organizational issue. The lack of
communication regarding training leads to information being passed on via second or third
parties who have a minimally functional understanding, but tend to unintentionally offer
misinformation. If this misinformation is passed on to students, especially those who are most
vulnerable, it cannot only deter them from seeking information in the future, but it can derail
their progress in various ways that may lead to attrition (Bowman, 2013). The other concern with
misconceptions of resources is the expectation that the college has a resource that supports
students in a manner that it does not. This can stall progress in assessing, evaluating and
expanding resources where there is need (Espinosa et al., 2016).
By examining each component of the KMO influences that have been uncovered through
data collection, and evaluating how they interact with each other, this study is able to determine
the changes necessary to reach articulated goals. These influences collectively provide a
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 32
framework around which this study was formed. Ultimately, that framework can be utilized to
implement recommendations for addressing the problem of practice.
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context

The conceptual framework is the portion of a research project that lays the infrastructure
needed in order to effectively examine data. The conceptual framework is comprised of the
various aspects of the research process, including assumptions, theories and expectations, that
influence the overall research design (Maxwell, 2013). Each of these components of the
framework are what make a research project unique and relevant to the researcher(s). The
researcher’s personal experience and beliefs also serve as an influence on the construction of the
conceptual framework (Maxwell, 2013). For this study, the researcher’s experience within the
organization and observations in relation to retention trends, as well as leadership’s
conversations on retention issues, were key factors in defining the research topic.
At WCAD, overall student retention rates trend closely with those on the national level
(Bowman, 2013). The national retention rate for first-time freshmen at 4-year private institutions
was 81% in Fall 2015 (NSCRC, 2017), which is identical to WCAD’s retention from Fall 2015
to Fall 2016. This trend is also true of disaggregated data when evaluating how certain groups,
namely Black and Latino students, perform, which trends even lower than national averages and
lower than their White peers (Complete College America, 2011; Aud et al., 2010). Nationally,
Black students at private 4-year institutions retain at a rate of 67% and Latino students retain at a
rate of 75%, both figures being lower than retention for White students, which is at 78%. WCAD
data trends slightly higher than national numbers, but with the same pattern of Black and Latino
students retaining at comparatively lower rates. While considering these statistics and revisiting
the concept that persistence represents efforts exerted by students while retention represents the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 33
efforts of an institution (Hagedorn, 2005), it is important to evaluate how stakeholders’ actions
affect retention outcomes. Museus (2011) cites campus culture as a primary influence in
generating ethnic minority success. If campus culture is potentially having an impact on success,
it is up to institutions to establish and maintain a culture amongst staff and faculty that is
conducive to this success (Museus, 2011).
To evaluate these concepts, this study utilizes a modified gap analysis framework as
illustrated by Clark and Estes (2008). The purpose of this model is to identify the potential KMO
factors affecting stakeholders’ ability to address the problem of practice, and subsequently
evaluate how those factors interact with the stakeholder and organizational goals (Clark & Estes,
2008). The study sought to identify whether the knowledge and motivation influences identified
in Tables 1 and 2 are the result of organizational influences shown in Table 3 or, perhaps, the
reverse or a combination thereof. The stakeholders, who are staff members at the college, are
influenced by knowledge issues of understanding their role in underrepresented student retention
and properly referring students to resources as issues arise. Stakeholders’ ability to see value in
retention efforts and also feel confident in their own ability to contribute to retention are both
relevant motivational influences. In general, it appears that the assumed organizational
influences, identified as misperceptions of responsibility for retention efforts and lack of training,
are perpetuating knowledge and motivation issues. All of these assumed influences collectively
have an impact on attainment, or lack thereof, of the stakeholder goal.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 34

Figure 1. Interaction of KMO Influences and Stakeholder Goal
Figure 1 is a visual representation of how the KMO influences interact with the
stakeholder goal. The stakeholder goal serves as an impetus for addressing knowledge and
motivation gaps. The knowledge and motivation influences work collectively to have an impact
on the stakeholders’ ability to positively contribute to the goal of increased underrepresented
student retention. The organizational influences of providing training and expectations of
responsibility for retention efforts have a bidirectional correlation to the knowledge and
motivation influences. The goal of developing competencies to support and increase retention is
heavily reliant on each of the influences as a whole, since the influences themselves interact with
each other, allowing the problem of practice to persist.
Summary
This section of the study gathers the relevant literature on underrepresented student
retention within higher education to gain better insight on the problem of practice. This portion
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 35
of the study also explains how the KMO framework applies specifically to the problem of
practice and WCAD as the study site. Next, the conceptual framework utilized for the study, with
structure and guidance provided by Clark and Estes (2008), outlines how the KMO factors
interact with aspirational stakeholder goal. These components collectively inform the
development of the methodology for this study, as outlined in the next chapter.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 36
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
This chapter is meant to explain how data were collected and provide explanations for the
researcher’s decisions of what to collect. First, there is a discussion of the stakeholder group,
who were staff members at a small private arts institution on the west coast of the United States,
and an explanation of who the researcher collected data from. This is followed by an explanation
of how data were collected and analyzed. Also discussed in this section is the credibility and
validity of the research study.
Participating Stakeholders
Members of the stakeholder group for this study are staff members at WCAD. For the
purposes of this study, staff members were defined as individuals employed by the college
whose primary job responsibilities are outside of traditional classroom instruction. Having a role
in classroom instruction was not exclusionary criteria, but was a means for distinguishing faculty
from staff. For example, the associate provost is traditionally considered an academic or faculty
role, but their leadership over both faculty and staff, as well as responsibility for handling student
complaints about faculty, would make this individual a candidate for interviews. Additionally,
staff members who may be called upon to advise other staff members on how to address issues
of student retention or support students directly were interviewed. For example, each academic
division has a staff member serving in a director role who oversees the administrative aspects of
running the division and supports the academic leadership. These individuals do not regularly
have student contact, but they supervise program managers who coordinate the student-facing
programmatic aspects of their respective department(s). In addition to the unique situations listed
above, the core of this sample was comprised of staff members in direct service roles like
financial aid counselors, student accounts representatives and staff in the registrar’s office.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 37

Figure 2. Organizational Chart
Figure represents a truncated version of the college’s organizational chart, specifically
highlighting reporting structures of areas that are relevant to the study. In Figure , the president,
who is accountable to the board of trustees who are excluded from the chart, sits at the head of
the organization. The president was not included in study sample and has been designated in
black. Although the president’s role is considered a staff position, it is the primary responsibility
of the president to guide the strategic plan for the organization, making it reasonable to assume
that this individual would have a very different perspective of the organization as a whole.
The next level consists of the various senior cabinet positions that report directly to the
president. It is important to note that there is a lateral hierarchy amongst the cabinet members,
with the exclusion of the president. There are members of cabinet who do not report directly to
the president for logistical reasons, to minimize the amount of direct management the president
has to perform in addition to other high-level responsibilities. However, a vice president or chief
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 38
officer reporting to a senior vice president or similarly titled position does not minimize their
autonomy over their unit or the weight of their input on cabinet. An example of this as shown in
Figure is that the vice president of student affairs (VPSA) reports to the provost; however, both
positions sit on senior cabinet. While the VPSA, associate provost and divisional deans all report
to the same person, only the VPSA has the designation as being executive leadership.
The next levels of Figure illustrate, for clarity, the various areas and departments within
the college that are relevant to the study. In Figure , the light grey box with black text indicates
faculty members who, for the purposes of this study, are not considered staff and are thereby left
out of the study sample. The boxes in dark grey with white text indicate staff members who do
not meet the study criterion of interfacing with students or supervising staff who interface with
students in a manner that is relevant to the study. Finally, the white boxes with black text
represent the departments wherein staff members do fit the study criteria and were contacted to
participate in the study.
I utilized the college’s internal directory to obtain contact information for staff members
who worked in the various academic divisions, the office of admissions, financial aid, student
records and student accounts. Having previously worked in one of these departments, I did not
want the participant sample to be too heavily skewed towards that area based on existing
relationships with the majority of the team. I determined, based on that team’s staff size, staff
vacancies and scope of work, to only include staff in management positions from that area. I also
excluded individuals whom I knew were temporary staff members or soon to be departing, which
ended up being a total of five individuals, although the final list still had a few staff members
who were leaving the organization within the study time frame.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 39
I decided to utilize a mail-merge to send the emails, as I wanted them to be automated yet
customizable enough to address the varying levels of relationships and familiarity I had with the
participant pool. The mail-merge is a tool that allowed me to send multiple emails, en masse,
with personalized fields for each recipient. The total list of 42 eligible participants was divided
into two, one group consisting of colleagues who knew me or had worked with me prior to the
outreach, and the other consisting of those who I had not previously been introduced to. The
messages were crafted in a way that allowed the greeting to accurately reflect the context of our
working relationship. The primary difference between the emails was a slightly varied opening
sentence (see Appendices B and C).
Once sent, one of the emails bounced back due to the email address being incorrectly
typed, but, by the time I began working with those who responded, many within fewer than 24
hours, it became less relevant to resend the undelivered message. Figure 3. Interview
Participation below represents the distribution of responses to the email outreach. The mail-
merge tool also tracks interactions with the emails, which revealed that all but one of the 41
successfully delivered messaged were opened.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 40

Figure 3. Interview Participation
A total of 16 individuals did not reply to the emails, which represents the largest
percentage of the participant pool. One of these individuals did later approach me in person to
ask if it was too late to be interviewed; however conflicting schedules did not permit their
participation. The majority of this group came from the list of staff members with whom I did
not previously have a working relationship. The next largest group is the 11 individuals who
agreed to participate but were not interviewed for various reasons. One potential participant from
this group was originally scheduled to be interviewed but had to cancel due to a schedule
conflict. That individual did not respond to attempts to reschedule the interview.
The smallest group in the participant pool were the six individuals who declined to be
interviewed. Four of the participants who declined were unavailable for varying reasons,
including leaving the college or being too overwhelmed with work or personal commitments.
The other two participants declined and indicated that they did not feel they had valuable input
on the subject of underrepresented student retention because they believe strongly in offering
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 41
identity-blind service to all students they interact with. One of these staff members recommended
another person in their department be interviewed instead.
Ultimately, nine participants were interviewed for the study. I focused on having
balanced representation across all of the campus departments and divisions, with the goal of
avoiding a high concentration of participants all working in the same area of the college. I also
tried to ensure that participants had varying levels of seniority and years of experience with the
organization. The final participant pool represented each of the staff departments and a broad
selection of the academic divisions and departments. Only one of the participants was a staff
member with whom I did not previously have a working relationship.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1: Staff members who did not work within the division of student affairs. The
work and goals within student affairs are more directly aligned with student retention efforts than
those departments whose student interactions are more transactional. For this study, it was
important to determine if there was a focus on retention in other departments within the college
and, if so, how it manifested.
Criterion 2: Staff who each represented different departments within the college. This
choice was, in combination with the first criterion, made to ensure that the data collected
presented a purposive sample of the participants and their various roles (Johnson & Christensen,
2015).
Criterion 3: Staff who had varying levels of direct and indirect service to students. This
choice was made to create a typical-case sample of the participants, as each stakeholder
represented different kinds of interactions with students (Johnson & Christensen, 2015).

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 42
Explanation for Choices
Because the college and, subsequently, the interview pool were relatively small,
interviews served as the primary data collection method. This method has been determined to be
best for acquiring rich data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The moderately personal and
individualistic elements of student retention lent themselves toward focusing on qualitative
interviews of stakeholders, with support from document analysis instead of quantitative
approaches.
Within the staff population comprised of approximately 350 individuals, there were
several departments, like operations, facilities, human resources, and others, that did not have
direct student interaction or work with students in a service capacity. The criterion helped to
address the research questions by directing them at individuals whose job functions align with
retention efforts. Of the departments that worked directly with students, student affairs was one
that had articulated values and goals that align with student retention efforts, especially for
marginalized populations (ACPA & NASPA, 2015). Student affairs was intentionally excluded
from the participant pool so as not to potentially skew the data. There was existing evidence that
this group had already assigned value to underrepresented student retention and had goals that
align with their respective job functions (ACPA & NASPA, 2015).
Data Collection
Data for this study were collected through interviews and review of relevant documents.
The interview protocol is included in Appendix A as well as redacted versions of relevant
documents. The goal of the interview items was to address the research questions in determining
what, if any, KMO factors were contributing to the fact that the college was falling short of the
articulated underrepresented student retention goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 43
Interviews
For this study, I conducted one-time interviews with a cross-section of staff from various
departments outside of the division of student affairs. The intention was to speak with staff who
represent various types of roles across the college at various reporting levels in order to obtain a
broad view of the knowledge, motivational and organizational factors affecting the effectiveness
of their efforts to support underrepresented students (Clark & Estes, 2010). I had a goal of
interviewing between six and ten (15% to 25%) participants to attain a broad perspective of
stakeholders’ understanding of their respective responsibility for underrepresented student
retention. Ultimately, there were a total of nine participants. The interviews were conducted once
per participant, as it was not believed that additional interviews would offer more substantial or
useful data to be considered. It was determined that initial thoughts and perspectives on the
subject of underrepresented retention would be more valuable to the study than those curated
after participants are exposed to the interview questions.
The stakeholders participated in a semi-structured interview and were asked each of the
10 primary interview questions, with occasional follow-up questions, both planned and
improvised. This choice was made intentionally to allow the interview to provide rich data that
may exist beyond the specific questions in the interview protocol. The study topic focuses
heavily on the stakeholders’ ability to encourage, support, refer and empower underrepresented
students. Some staff complete these tasks in recognition of the general importance of helping
students reach their goals, and others do it for personal reasons (Reynolds, 2011). In either
context, those efforts are fueled by emotions or feelings that may not always overlap with
assigned job duties. This is the kind of data the study sought to capture and analyze, as research
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 44
points to this practice of additional or supplemental support as a retention factor (Museus, 2011;
Reddick, 2012).
All members of the stakeholder group conducted their work at the college utilizing
English as the primary language, so all data collection methods were conducted in English.
Interviews were conducted in private office spaces and took anywhere from 15 to 50 minutes to
complete. The college owns and operates on multiple properties, so conducting interviews
required me to travel between campuses across the interview timeline. The interviews happened
on the campus that corresponded to the participant’s primary office location. Each individual
interview was scheduled for 90 minutes, reserving 60 minutes for the interview itself, and a
buffer of 15 minutes at the beginning and end to allow for an explanation of the project and
protocol (Appendix A) as well as questions afterward. These interviews were recorded and
transcribed for documentation purposes and later coded during data analysis.
The interview questions were written in a manner that intended to deduce which
knowledge, motivational and organizational factors were affecting stakeholders’ ability to
positively contribute to the goal of increased underrepresented student retention (Clark & Estes,
2010). As outlined in the conceptual framework section of the project, my assertion is that staff
are at the center of retention efforts. Retention is specifically defined by the efforts institutions
employ or exert to keep students enrolled through to graduation (Hagedorn, 2005), which is why
it is imperative to measure the effectiveness of these efforts. The overall desired outcome is to
align institutional goals with stakeholder performance outcomes.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 45
Documents and Artifacts
As a supplement to the data collected via interview, I conducted a document analysis of
relevant student data, collected via survey. The college participates in several national surveys,
including the National Survey on Student Engagement (NSSE) and CIRP Freshman Survey,
which provide quantitative data on student perceptions of their college experience. These surveys
included questions about their interactions with members of the college, many from the
departments that the study participants represented. Analysis of this data helped to clarify
whether there is alignment between staff actions and student perceptions of those actions
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This is an important step in consideration of the fact that the data
collected by interview was all personally reported, which presented a challenge to objectivity.
While the same can be said of data collected from students via survey, the perspectives, offered
from two different stakeholders on the same matter adds further insight.
Not all questions on these surveys were relevant to the study, so analysis began by
determining which questions were likely to address the study’s research questions. Relevant
survey questions included references to student interactions with various departments, whether
they felt supported by staff or departments at the college, and others that provided a narrative for
likelihood to retain, especially in relation to their demographics. Ultimately, the value of these
documents was determined to be greater than other kinds of documents that would be more
personal in nature, like meeting notes. There were fewer limitations using data collected from
previously distributed surveys than there would have been when using other types of personal
documents, like digital or handwritten notes. However, in either context, the data collected
would not have provided rich enough data to answer the research questions without additional
data collected via the interviews.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 46
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Qualitative data can be interpreted as having questionable credibility because of the
incorporation of various worldviews and philosophical assumptions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
For this study, it was necessary to build credibility and trustworthiness regarding the data
collected via interviews and documents. To start, the study first addressed any potential for
researcher bias (Maxwell, 2013). The subject matter itself is personally driven by the interests
and assumptions of the researcher, so it is easy to inadvertently infuse bias into the protocol.
Thus, it is important to be transparent about these connections to the research and expressly
detail the measures taken during data collection to remove bias from the reporting and analysis
of the data.
Triangulation is an effective means for increasing credibility of qualitative data for this
study, (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Triangulation, or diversification of data
collection methods as well as research subjects, was outlined in the protocols and sampling
descriptions earlier in this section. Gathering information on the subject matter via various
sources as well as cross-checking validity of information obtained by each method, helped to
increase reliability of the data. The data analysis portion of the project also served as an
opportunity to draw important conclusions about the qualitative data collected, to acknowledge
potential discrepancies.
Ethics
The format of this study put me in a position to ask interview questions that required
participants, who were also my colleagues, to explain their knowledge of and motivation for
addressing the needs of underrepresented students at the institution. It was always possible that
the line of questioning might reveal gaps in these staff members’ understanding of necessary job
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 47
functions, policies and procedures that could have been perceived as having the potential to
negatively affect their job security. As with any situation, ethics were crucial in this scenario to
responsibly handle and report on the data obtained (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The participants
were assured that candid responses would not be relayed to their superiors in a manner that could
have an impact on them individually. This meant expressly sharing the standards of informed
consent and stressing that participants could withdraw from the study at any time (Rubin &
Rubin, 2012). It was, however, my hope that the participants would not choose to withdraw, but
rather consider the importance of gathering the information and how the study could yield
valuable data that could inform the college’s practices. Ultimately, all participants remained
engaged in the data collection process through to the end.
I relied on the University of Southern California’s institutional review board to ensure
that aspects of ethical considerations were evaluated to the highest standard. For the qualitative
data collected via interview, I explained the aspects of a typical research interview, including the
use of a recording device, the transcription of the interview and the use of quotes from the
interview in the dissertation, all of which remained devoid of any identifying information
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I also ensured that all participants knew that they had the right to end
their participation in the interview at any time.
Summary
The methodology for this study was crafted in a manner that allows the researcher to
address the research questions and garner a sense of what KMO influences are affecting the
stakeholder group’s ability to attain the desired goal of underrepresented student retention.
Paramount to any study, including this one, is the need to collect and analyze data in the most
ethical way possible, taking into account all potential barriers to obtaining rich and reliable data.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 48
With the collection of documents and conducting interviews, I hoped to draw connections to
uncover gaps and subsequently evaluate what best practices and solutions can address these gaps
at WCAD.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 49
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
As initially stated in Chapter One, this study evaluates the general topic of
underrepresented student retention in higher education by focusing on the practices amongst
stakeholders at a specific institution. The purpose of this study is to determine the KMO factors
affecting underrepresented student retention at WCAD. The literature details the various theory-
backed best practices for underrepresented student retention in light of existing inequities in the
current educational landscape. The methodology of this study is shaped in a manner that applies
the concepts within the literature to the study site at WCAD. This produces data that better
explains what circumstances impede underrepresented student retention at WCAD so that the
recommendations can be crafted to fill specific gaps. As such, the study is guided by the
following research questions:
1. To what extent are stakeholders meeting the goal of developing advising and supporting
competencies in effort to increase underrepresented student retention?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
The findings of this study are also explored in this chapter specifically in reference to
how they align with the conceptual framework. The aspirational stakeholder goal serves as an
overarching measure for how the KMO influences interact with each other to have an impact on
the problem of practice. With staff designated as the primary stakeholder group for the study, the
aspirational stakeholder goal is identified as “Staff who work to support underrepresented
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 50
students will develop their advising and supporting competencies in order to increase
underrepresented student retention.”
Participants
The participants for the study are members of the stakeholder group of staff members at
WCAD. As outlined in Chapter Three, there were a total of nine participants interviewed from
the participant pool. For the purposes of protecting their identities, the participants have been
assigned pseudonyms and referred to with gender-neutral pronouns. For general context of who
the participants are, one-third of the participants identified as male, experience working at the
college ranged from 2 to 15 years of service, each of the participants worked in different
departments, and all but two of the stakeholders had held more than one position during their
time at the college.
Results
The findings for this study revealed the themes that emerged from the interview protocol
as they relate to the assumed influences. The study participants had varying years and levels of
experience with the college and varying levels of oversight in their respective departments, as it
was important to try and obtain a broad perspective of staff experiences. Even though their
individual experiences as employees of the organization had many differences, their insight on
the subject of underrepresented student retention at the college offered several parallels.
Knowledge Results
The knowledge portion of the study focused on determining if staff at WCAD understood
how their actions could have an impact on underrepresented students by helping them develop a
sense of belonging, and also determining if they could offer appropriate referrals to students in
need of additional support or intervention. The interview items for the knowledge influences
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 51
were also structured to tie back to the aspirational stakeholder goal. Analysis of previously
distributed student survey data served to further underscore some of the knowledge findings
from the interviews.
Connecting stakeholder actions to retention. The general consensus with the first
knowledge influence was that staff were only superficially aware of how their actions could help
underrepresented students develop a sense of belonging in order to positively affect retention of
this population. With a few exceptions, the participants interviewed were only able to stress the
importance of retaining underrepresented students and also their own desire to know more about
how to do so. However, they were often unable to articulate their influence on or how they might
have an impact on underrepresented student retention in practical ways.
As expressed in Chapter Two of this study, a prominent component of student success
and retention is the development of a sense of belonging (O’Keeffe, 2013; Strayhorn et al.,
2015). One approach staff members can take to help students develop this sense of belonging is
to showcase the ways the institution cares about students’ success. When asked about how they,
as staff, could have an impact on the underrepresented student experience or how they influenced
retention, in general, the participants’ answers only broadly addressed components of students
developing a sense of belonging. However, these responses did not directly address the
knowledge influences.
A few participants were able to illustrate how they practice concepts that tie back to
components of developing a sense of belonging. For example, during certain informal encounters
with students, Harper intentionally sought to “understand in general, in this unofficial poll way,
where those spots of support are and warmth for the student, where they are feeling safe and
engaged.” Harper achieved this by asking students about their work and which professors they
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 52
were learning from to determine where they were finding positive interactions and having
successful encounters. This connects back to developing an environment where students feel
supported and welcome (Vaccaro & Newman, 2016). Similarly, Ryan acknowledged the
challenges underrepresented students might face as they try to work through bureaucratic
educational systems and discussed the positive response from students when they receive an
added level of outreach:
Some of them are real grateful to understand “[T]his is what’s going to happen next if
you continue on this path. These are some of the pitfalls that it looks to me like you’re
about to fall into.” That [they] can do these things to avoid exacerbating an issue. Then
conversely, too, just giving them a little kudos when they’re doing good.
Ryan discusses “looking out for” students who may have more challenges due to being first-
generation, on academic probation or being in other at-risk populations, by helping students
preemptively prepare for potential outcomes of their decisions. Ryan made it a point to
encourage students when they had successes, which is a component of the relationship building
aspect of developing a sense of belonging (Vaccaro & Newman, 2016). Both Ryan and Harper
were able to practically and directly explain ways they contributed to retention through helping
students develop a sense of belonging.
In contrast, a majority of the participants instead expressed how they could be advocates
for increasing practices that may have an impact on students developing a sense of belonging,
but did not discuss actionable ways in which they directly practice helping students develop a
sense of belonging. For example, Taylor, Casey and Monroe referenced their roles in hiring
diverse faculty in response to the knowledge protocols. Monroe felt the college had “a deep
understanding that our faculty need to be diverse for us to be able to serve a diverse student
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 53
body.” This statement emphasizes that representation is a component of students developing a
sense of belonging at the college and is an aspect of the organization that these three participants
felt was within their sphere of influence. While advocating for more staff and faculty diversity is
certainly an important component of any organization, it does not subsequently mean that these
staff members have the knowledge needed to address issues of retention.
This concept of representation broadly connects to components of sense of belonging in
that some students describe their environment as an indicator of whether or not they feel like
they fit in. In some cases, a student’s being the only one who holds their particular identity
contributes to feelings of isolation (Vaccaro & Newman, 2016). However, this response from
participants fell short of affirming their own knowledge in the area of addressing retention. This
opinion instead pointed to an expectation or assumption that employees with similar
backgrounds would inherently be able to serve the needs of underrepresented students and that
the students would be able to access these staff and faculty in a capacity that would meet their
needs.
Several participants were able to articulate a feeling that they may not know how they
affect underrepresented students at WCAD, but they had a desire to have more information about
it. It seemed that participants felt it was important for staff to have an understanding of students’
unique experiences in order to best support them in developing a sense of belonging. Interview
participant Ryan felt there needed to be more exposure to students’ varied life experiences at the
college in regular intervals, specifically citing moments where students were misunderstood or
had their experiences dismissed because of the culturally specific way they communicated.
According to Ryan,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 54
[The issue was] that [if] a student is angry, they don’t have the money or they don’t even
understand what you’re saying to them. They’re in some kind of trouble and there’s anger
and that this is immediately dismissed. That the student is not listened to at all because
they’re expressing anger.
Ryan’s comments about having more exposure to students’ varied life experiences also aligned
with thoughts expressed by Harper, who thought there needed to be a general increase in
awareness around issues of culture and diversity at the college. Harper spoke about awareness as
a concern in two contexts: (a) that the general campus community needed more awareness
around what issues affect underrepresented students, and (b) people who work to support these
students needed to increase their awareness of potential cultural differences and how they
inevitably have an impact on the students as well as staff member’s work with the students. This
concept of awareness connects back to the relationship component of sense of belonging, putting
the onus on staff to create those connections by expressing interest in students’ experiences.
Importance of referrals. The interview items that asked what issues students commonly
face when working with participants or the participants’ departments and how they or their staff
responded revealed mixed results. In general, participants were able to identify the ways in
which their own department might support a student through a particular challenge. However,
few participants expressed comfort with addressing the ways in which these challenges might
overlap or intertwine with other departments. While many were able to express the desire for
increased collaboration and information-sharing between departments, several participants
shared feeling uninformed or unconfident in themselves or their staff when it came to offering
the appropriate referrals.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 55
A few participants, like Monroe, expressed that they have regular contact with staff in
other areas of the college. Monroe was able to appropriately refer students because they were
often called upon to specifically collaborate on addressing high-level student concerns. Monroe
thought a similar practice could be effective when it comes to addressing appropriate referrals for
underrepresented students as a retention effort across departments. Similarly, Parker noted
strategic partnerships with other campus departments that were major components of success for
the departments in their division. This desire for increased collaboration and information-sharing
is important to note because it not only indicated that staff wanted to increase their knowledge in
order to be more effective in their work, but also that they recognized the fact that offering
appropriate referrals for students is an exercise in teamwork. The more they knew about another
department’s services or processes, the more strategic they could be in connecting students to the
resource that would best serve their needs.
Alternatively, most of the participants spoke of student concerns that required support
from or collaboration with another department or division at the college to get the student the
help they needed. Many of those collaborations involved one or more student affairs
departments. The general consensus from the participants was that there was not as much
collaboration or information-sharing as there could be at the college, but some areas were better
than others. For example, Ryan felt like there were certain offices they naturally collaborated
with, but, in general, there needed to be more cross-training between departments and divisions.
Ryan even mentioned the idea of forming a committee with representation from different areas
of the college to discuss retention concerns. Taylor specifically emphasized the importance of
collaboration amongst academic affairs and student affairs, especially in light of the fact that
both divisions report to the provost. Taylor said,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 56
[It’s] interesting [because] I always forget that just from an organizational perspective
that student affairs reports to the provost. And schools do that intentionally when they
really want academic affairs and student affairs, those two divisions, to be more succinct
[sic]. But, culturally, I don’t feel that way.
Taylor went on to discuss feeling as though there was a disparate commitment to or experience
with underrepresented student retention, as student affairs appears to have retention on their
radar as a concern but it does not appear the same is true for academic affairs. This disparity
spoke to at least one potential barrier to offering students appropriate referrals to other offices.
Another participant, Jamie, spoke about a lack of transparency in college processes which
made them unsure how or if referrals to other offices or other processes and policies actually
addressed students’ concerns. Jamie spoke specifically about their experience referring students
to the policy petition process, saying,
I never feel confident that it’s going to go through. I never try to give any sort of advice
with that because I have no idea how [the committee] base[s] their decisions. It just
seems like it’s a committee that just kind of says “yes, no, yes, no.” I have no idea how it
works.
In this case, Jamie’s confidence in their ability to offer a student support was rooted in the level
of clarity or collaboration around issues that were affecting the students’ experiences. Jamie’s
comments connect to both the goal and the research question for this study, which are framed by
the ACPA and NASPA (2015) professional competency area in advising and supporting. This
competency is relevant to the study because the behaviors associated with this competency align
with goals of increased retention. ACPA and NASPA (2015) explain that “[t]hrough developing
advising and supporting strategies that take into account self-knowledge and the needs of others,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 57
we play critical roles in advancing the holistic wellness of ourselves, our students, and our
colleagues.” This potential for impact with advising and supporting as an applied skill amongst
higher education professionals is also confirmed by the literature utilized within the study, which
points to the importance of students developing relationships with staff and faculty in order to
support their success (Museus, 2011; Strayhorn et al., 2015; Tovar, 2015).
Developing advising and supporting competencies is evidenced by behaviors like
knowing and using the appropriate referral sources, establishing rapport with others that
acknowledges differences in lived experiences, and exhibiting culturally inclusive active
listening skills (ACPA & NASPA, 2015). The ability to properly refer students and acknowledge
their cultural experiences helps students develop self-efficacy and a sense of belonging
(Chickering, 2006). The findings indicated that many of the participants had a strong sense of
how advising and supporting skills could help them in their work, but they were not always
confident in practicing those skills. Comments from Ryan represented a good example of this
dissonance between values and actions. Ryan spoke of practicing the rapport and cultural
inclusivity aspects of the competency area, specifically recalling challenges that students have
faced within their office:
They’re in this setting that’s kind of formalized and codified as different than any other
setting that they’ve been in. That they’re having to struggle, that their communication is
not going well, that they are getting a little angry and is making that person, the
administrator, react. Sometimes often in an angry way or just close them down because
they’ve expressed something with anger. It just exacerbates the whole problem.
However, in contrast, Ryan specifically shared feeling hesitant to make certain kinds of referrals
for students, stating that “sometimes it’s obvious [a student] should go get free counseling, that
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 58
would be great. The students react to that in different ways and we don’t really, my staff at least
don’t really have a lot of background in that.” Ryan spoke directly to training their own staff
members on how to diffuse and interpret students’ emotional expressions into solutions to their
issues, but still lacked confidence in determining when it is appropriate to leverage that kind of
conversation into a referral to other campus offices. Instead, that level of support became
relegated to the academic advisor, as their position exists within student affairs and appears to
have more direct experience with how to make that connection. However, the ideal scenario is
that a student could reasonably expect to receive the same referrals to the appropriate campus
resource for their specific concern, regardless of whom they speak to (Hagedorn, 2005). This is
also relevant because repeated referrals to a person or office reinforces the perception that it is a
viable resource.
The documents analyzed for this study affirmed what the participants shared as perceived
knowledge influences. The NSSE is administered to first-year and senior students at institutions
to determine how, if and when students are feeling engaged at their institutions. A majority of the
engagement indicators reported focus on classroom learning, but the indicators that inquire about
extracurricular and co-curricular experiences align with basic principles of retention practices,
which is why these results were chosen for the study. The 2017 NSSE survey results for WCAD
indicated that only a third of both populations surveyed ranked their interactions with staff
highly, compared to interactions with faculty which garnered positive rankings from more than
half of the students surveyed. These results and the overall average results for questions in the
“Quality of Interactions” portion of the survey were lower than WCAD’s peer institutions and
national averages. While the surveyed population consisted of more than just underrepresented
students, the results highlight the average experience of students at the college. However, as it
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 59
pertains to this study, it is relevant to note that Black and Latino students were proportionately
overrepresented in this survey population relative to their representation at the institution.
Having more Black and Latino students participating in this survey increases the likelihood that
the results still capture a statistically relevant portion of the underrepresented student population.
This is important because the underrepresented student experience was the primary focus of this
study, however the college does not have substantial disaggregated data from these populations.
In summary, the participant responses to the knowledge interview items were generally
theoretical and broad. Staff were able to articulate how they could see retention efforts as
beneficial for underrepresented students, but commonly did not reference practical or direct
approaches. This result could be attributed to the fact that the majority of the participants served
in managerial or supervisory roles. However, this was also true of the responses from
participants who were not supervisors. In general, there was more emphasis placed on ideas they
espouse or things the participants would like to do in order to have an impact on
underrepresented student retention. Because there was an absence of conversations about
tangible ways they, as staff members, affect the underrepresented student experience or their
rates of retention, it can be concluded that the participants do not possess knowledge in this area.
Motivation Results
The sections of this study that focus on motivation influences were designed to determine
how confident participants feel connecting students to the right resources, and what role they feel
they play in underrepresented student retention at WCAD. The interview items for the
motivation influences were structured to determine how these influences related to or were
affected by the stakeholder goal. The responses to the interview items revealed the potential for
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 60
perceived gaps in self-efficacy amongst staff but also pointed to increasing value for retention
practices.
Stakeholder role in retention. Each of the participants interviewed for this study was
able to articulate some aspect of retention that they felt they could or should influence in their
role. While each participant shared varying levels of perceived responsibility and also varying
levels of success in executing those responsibilities, no one spoke of retention as not being
relevant to their work at the college. Several participants spoke of their role as a collaborative
one, relying more on other departments to lead, guide and perhaps even train them on best
practices in retention. However, all participants were able to attribute value to considering
retention efforts when working with underrepresented students.
When asked what role staff felt they played in underrepresented student retention, many
participants spoke of increasing accessibility to educational resources. Several of the participants
acknowledged that students likely face challenges during their pursuit of an education and, with
underrepresented students specifically, that simply accessing the resources created to help them
overcome those challenges can become a challenge itself. For example, Parker said their
division’s role in underrepresented student retention was at the front end of the student’s
experience with the college, and part of making students’ choice to enroll at WCAD possible.
Parker said,
The first and biggest challenge for the enrollment side, and it starts very early on in the
funnel for us from admissions and even marketing, is how do we bring awareness of
WCAD to population groups that are underrepresented?
The staff member who report to Parker also played a role in ensuring students have what they
need to stay at the college, including financial support when needed. One way they have been
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 61
able to address potential needs or challenges is through working with their team to preemptively
identify indicators of potential financial need, in order to address the fact that these students were
not always likely to ask for help. Along those lines, Morgan viewed the role of their department
as one of providing access for underrepresented students. They expressed that they were there to
help students get the financial resources needed to pursue the dream of getting an art school
education, and they used annual data to help them develop a clearer understanding of how to use
institutional funds most effectively and equitably.
This practice of creating access is not limited to just campus resources, but extended to
student learning experiences and outcomes as well. Taylor felt it was important to remove
barriers to access so that students could move through their academic experience seamlessly and
focus on their learning during their time at the college. Taylor specifically reported working with
faculty to ensure they made space for students to learn about and create work that was
meaningful to them and possibly rooted in their identity as artists of color. Taylor said,
I think innately, being an education facility, my department is providing students a safe
space to say what’s on their mind and to talk about how they grew up and how they
struggled, or any issue in the world. And the faculty embrace that. And what’s great is
that they can professionalize and intellectualize everything that they’ve been learning
about the world.
Similarly, Monroe saw their role in underrepresented student retention as assessing the
accessibility of the curriculum to ensure that it is salient for students who have a diverse set of
experiences and backgrounds. This meant taking time to disaggregate data to see how different
groups responded to and performed under the current curriculum. Monroe thought it was
important to publicize this information by way of learning outcomes for increased transparency
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 62
and accessibility because the research they have encountered indicated that increasing
accessibility and relevance of curriculum for specific learners has an overall positive impact on
all learners, including underrepresented students.
Confidence in ability. The next motivation related interview item asked participants to
speak about their confidence in connecting students to the correct resources to address their
specific concerns. This is where responses began to vary more widely. Revisiting the fact that the
majority of the participants served in supervisory roles, many of them seemed confident in their
own ability to properly refer students to the right resources, but had varying levels of confidence
in the people who report to them. This confidence was based on factors like length of time at the
college and capacity for training. There was a general consensus amongst the participants that
this was a potential area of growth, as the overall rating of confidence was moderate. While
several of the participants felt self-efficacious, there was concern that their own lack of
confidence in certain areas, paired with the potential for their staff to lack confidence in this area
would produce less than ideal outcomes with retention efforts for underrepresented students.
One participant, Monroe, said that their confidence in offering the proper referrals was
rooted in knowing that the college offered a wealth of resources for students. Monroe said,
I feel fairly confident that I can refer people. I feel like the college has taken that kind of
support fairly seriously and that I’m able to get students to who they need to get to. Yeah.
I guess I would say I don’t feel totally at a loss of what to do.
Monroe had higher self-efficacy in this area because they were familiar with the resources
available to students. Similarly, Morgan’s staff was used to offering consistent referrals to
certain offices or resources, and very clearly knew where to draw the line between issues they
could address internally and those that would require students to seek other resources. As
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 63
indicated in the knowledge section, Ryan felt confident in their ability to connect students to
offices in their areas but relied on referring a student to their academic advisor to then connect
them to specific student affairs resources like counseling services for mental health support or
the learning resource center for academic coaching.
Taylor brought up a relevant concern for students when describing some of the
challenges they may face in their department. Specifically, Taylor discussed concerns with
students feeling bounced around by staff while trying to get answers to their questions, or only
getting partial answers to their questions because the person they speak to does not know more.
Taylor said,
Not everyone can answer their questions. Not every person in our office can be that one-
stop shop. So, I think students get really frustrated with like half responses, and then they
have to get bounced to the next office.
With high staff turnover in this department, it is reasonable to assume that some of Taylor’s
concern was tied to staff having a lack of confidence in their ability to support a student in
distress or offer the student the proper referrals. Jamie discussed the fact that they commonly
referred students in unique circumstances to the college’s policy petition process, even though it
was not clear what specifically makes a petition a viable option for a student, and they were not
generally informed of the outcomes from the petition process. This subsequently affected
Jamie’s self-efficacy because they were not confident that pointing the students elsewhere
actually helped them reach the solutions they needed.
From another perspective, Bailey felt that the lower enrollment numbers for
underrepresented students meant that the staff had fewer interactions with underrepresented
students, and thus had fewer learning opportunities to better understand how to support them.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 64
Bailey felt their staff essentially lacked confidence in this area because of their lack of
experience, where, alternatively, Bailey’s many years of service and formal education gave them
confidence in their own ability to refer students appropriately. This response was supported by
Morgan’s statements which refer to training as an issue that affected their confidence in their
staff. Having staff who were not just new to the organization but new to the profession as a
whole meant it would take time and capacity to build up training and, subsequently, self-efficacy
in the area of getting to the root of a student’s concerns.
Similar to the knowledge section, the interview items related to motivation influences
yielded broadly relevant responses, rather than answers that spoke more directly to the
participants’ practice. There were no participants who stated that they did not feel that they play
a role in underrepresented student retention at WCAD; however confidence in their ability to do
so was less certain. Most answers indicated feeling that something they do in their work could, in
theory, have an impact on retention efforts. Additionally, some responses frequently pointed to
practices within their department that could be considered a retention effort; however multiple
participants indicated being unsure of whether or not those efforts, or their own efforts, were
actually effective or impactful.
Organization Results
The organization section of the study examined whether there was a common perception
that student affairs has primary oversight of retention efforts and also uncover what role training
played in addressing underrepresented student retention as an issue. Several participants reported
an absence of training for staff outside of student affairs regarding issues of retention as a
potential barrier. While the knowledge and motivation portions of the study revealed that
participants do not hold the belief that the student affairs division is solely responsible for
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 65
retention, responses to the interview items on organizational influences revealed organizational
structures that may unintentionally foster that expectation.
Retention outside of student affairs. The interview items that allowed participants the
opportunity to discuss their impression of the other departments’ approach to underrepresented
student retention revealed the desire to know more and to do more. Several participants felt that
student affairs staff members were keenly aware of issues affecting underrepresented students
and, thus, well equipped to handle them. However, few participants were able to speak directly
to how other departments achieved this and also shared feeling that they or their department did
not have the same level of impact.
A third of the participants led with the positive comments, acknowledging that retention
was a priority for the college and that strides have been made over the past few years to increase
retention as a whole. Casey noted that there has been a concerted effort to assess retention rates
in order to determine how to increase performance. Casey pointed out specific areas of the
college, like the first-year program and the student affairs division, as having addressed retention
concerns through targeted programming. Casey noted that there had been opportunity for
strategic partnerships amongst new hires in leadership roles within academic affairs to capitalize
on these initiatives. From Casey’s perspective, the faculty in academic areas that support first-
year students “should know more than anybody else what resources are, who the staff are, [and]
what the org charts are. There’s a real deep training that group of faculty needs to get first.”
Similarly, Harper viewed the shared values around retention efforts across various areas
of the college as a commodity in fueling progress in the future. Morgan also felt that the goals
were properly identified, but the execution needed adjusting. Morgan said,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 66
I definitely think [the college is] in a good place in terms of goals and where they want to
go. Could we do better at actually putting an action plan in place? Absolutely. Now, I
think we’re charging along that path, but we do have some roadblocks.
The remainder of the participants either expressed feeling out of the loop regarding how other
departments in the college are performing in the area of underrepresented student retention or led
with their constructive criticisms of performance thus far.
Both Jamie and Taylor felt less informed about what was happening with
underrepresented student retention at the college, but reported feeling as though more could be
done. Jamie said,
I feel like, if our services were more accessible to the students, then I feel like the
retention would be greater because, on my end, I see a ton of leave of absences come
through for whatever reason. My perspective is that the retention is really low, but I don’t
know if it really is. Because that’s all that I see.
Jamie had the perception that retention could be higher if the college were more financially
accessible, while Taylor felt that people were not talking about retention efforts beyond the
conversations centered on the international student population. Monroe, Bailey and Parker each
led with saying they would like to see more happening with underrepresented student retention
efforts at the college. Monroe thought it would be helpful to hear more about what other
departments had done well to support and retain underrepresented students to serve as examples
of how staff could have an impact on the student experience, stating,
I think hearing success stories and what created those, what made the difference for
students would be really helpful to everybody and motivating if [a student says], “This
person in student records made all the difference for me staying here or leaving.” The
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 67
next time someone’s doing something, they would recognize they might have a role to
play.
With more directly critical feedback, Ryan reported feeling like retention efforts were scattered
and that the evidence of institutional focus outside of student affairs on this issue was minimal.
Overall, participants expressed limited understanding of or confidence in retention efforts
broadly across the college.
Training and clear expectations. Participants were asked specifically about their
exposure to training in the area of underrepresented student retention, and nearly all of the
participant responses fit neatly into two categories. First, there were a few staff who recalled
having training a few years back; however they clarified that that training was more of a
diversity workshop rather than a tool for retention. This category of participants seemed to
conflate the general concepts of sessions focused on diversity or cultural competence with
training on how to support underrepresented students. Ryan characterized the cultural
competency workshop as one of the few times important conversations have happened. Ryan
said it was helpful, specifically because it brought in external providers who were able to offer a
different perspective. Casey discussed that same training in a more neutral light, explaining that,
while that sessions did not speak to underrepresented student retention specifically, it provided
them with culturally relevant information they did not previously know. Alternatively, Harper
thought the training felt disconnected from topics that were relevant to the college community.
However, even after bringing up this training, these three participants’ follow-up responses all
aligned with the consensus from the rest of the participants.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 68
The remaining responses fit under the umbrella of feeling that training has been
inadequate or non-existent. Casey and Parker both felt that there was still work to be done in the
area of training. Casey’s opinion was that broader training would be most impactful:
I feel like we’re constantly in a state of reaction and response, which at least we’re doing
that and we’re not shying away from that, but to be more strategic and to really put those
values out there in a really specific way […] like to develop some real co-curricular or
extracurricular programming that staff, faculty and students engage with simultaneously.
Monroe and Jamie said that they could not recall any training that involved learning about
retention strategies as a whole, let alone specific retention strategies for working with
underrepresented students. Specifically, Monroe stated that in their more than 10 years of tenure
with the college, there has not been a targeted training. Monroe said, “The training I’ve received
has been not standalone-type training, like a training on retention of underrepresented students.
In fact, I don’t think I’ve really had any training on retention generally.” Bailey and Ryan both
referenced doing their own outside research, reading higher education publications to stay
informed of what issues could have an impact on these students. Morgan referenced professional
development conferences they attended with institutional support, that provided them with some
tools and strategies to address the needs of underrepresented students. Ultimately, while the
overall consensus was that more training is needed, the participants were generally unsure of
what kind of training would help them address underrepresented student retention concerns.
As illustrated by the conceptual framework for this study (Chapter Two, Figure 1),
organizational leadership should be responsible for emphasizing retention as a priority for the
organization as a whole. Clark and Estes (2008) provide guidance on which support systems are
necessary to achieve this organization-wide alignment, including having a clear vision for
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 69
success and how to measure it, consistent involvement from top management, and providing
adequate training. Study participants were unable to recall having received any training on
retention efforts or on supporting underrepresented students that they could practice in their
respective roles. In response to the interview item about receiving training, Taylor indicated that
they have not received any guidance, and stated,
I’m definitely part of the group of administrators that need to be talking about it, and we
don’t talk about it enough. [...] Maybe people are thinking about it, but I think we are so
focused on so many other things [...] I maybe, I can recall a couple meetings or focus
groups on retaining underrepresented students.
Taylor and other participants expressed that staff were looking for more opportunity to be trained
on retention and to collaborate with their colleagues as stakeholders on retention issues. The idea
of creating a committee or offering a focus group to discuss retention efforts was presented by
several participants as a solution to this challenge. Harper even suggested “tying [retention
efforts] in more frequently, I guess, to institutional values in terms of creating a diverse
community” as a recommendation. This concept of embedding goals into practice is an example
of what Chickering (2006) refers to as “living your mission.” In spite of the absence of training,
participants still felt that the organization possessed a culture that values retention, which is one
less obstacle to overcome. Clark and Estes (2008) guidance indicates that the next step for this
kind of gap analysis is to ensure that behaviors, policies and process are aligned with the culture
of the organization.
The organizational influences as a whole represented an area where participants seemed
to come to a consensus, regardless of their length of service or level of leadership. Training
emerged as a prominent organizational influence on underrepresented student retention.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 70
Responses to interview items about training in this area revealed a consensus of concern for a
lack of training as well as a desire for more. Additionally, participants shared varying opinions
about the college’s current retention efforts but all ultimately felt that more could be done to help
achieve articulated goals and align with values.
Synthesis
The data collected for this study, as outlined in this chapter, revealed the KMO influences
on the stakeholder group. Both assumed knowledge influences were validated by the study
participants. The staff at WCAD who were interviewed for the study struggled to connect their
actions, as stakeholders, to necessary retention efforts for underrepresented students. These
stakeholders were also generally unable to articulate whether they or their staff teams possessed
adequate knowledge of the campus resources at a level that allowed them to offer students
referrals to the corresponding departments or individuals who could help them address their
specific needs. This conclusion was further supported by the document analysis, which showed
that students offered generally low ratings for their interactions with staff at the college on
student engagement surveys. The data pertaining to the motivational influences yielded mixed
results. The staff participants were all able to articulate some level of value in practicing
retention efforts within their job responsibilities and even provided examples of how they do so,
but, while the first motivation influence was invalidated, the second motivation influence,
regarding self-efficacy, was validated. The participants expressed moderate to low confidence in
their ability, or their staff members’ ability, to contribute to underrepresented student retention.
This is less than ideal considering that low confidence, or general absence of self-efficacy can
discourage individuals from engaging in or persisting in a task. Finally, both organizational
influences were validated by the interview results. The participants were able to articulate the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 71
ways in which they observed or felt that the student affairs division prioritized retention efforts
through their work, but could not confidently make the same claims for their own areas. This is,
perhaps, the result of the absence of training provided for staff on the subject of underrepresented
student retention, presenting another organizational barrier to goal attainment.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 72
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Retention of underrepresented or other marginalized populations in higher education
within the United States presents an ongoing challenge, evidently fueled by a series of internal
and external factors. WCAD is no different than other institutions who wish to mitigate these
gaps in the education system by evaluating their own practices in order to cultivate a diverse and
equitable educational experience for all of their students. The study has uncovered that the
concerns surrounding the issue of underrepresented student retention are broadly relevant to
several members of the WCAD community. However, the most appropriate and effective
approach to address this problem of practice has yet to be determined.
This chapter illustrates whether or not the KMO influences were validated through the
data collection. For this study, validation means that the assumed influence, as it is written (see
Chapter Three), is true or applicable to the problem of practice at WCAD. This chapter also
utilizes the findings to make appropriate recommendations for addressing any gaps that have
emerged in the research. The information in this section is organized into two major components,
the first of which is the recommendations for practice to address the KMO influences. The
findings in Chapter Four of this study point to two primary recommendations, each of which is
explained with appropriate recommendations for relevant KMO influences. Each influence was
evaluated by its level of validity based on the data, and accompanied by appropriate
corresponding theories and context-specific recommendations. The data were then examined as it
relates to the literature review section of the study. The next section of the chapter is the
integrated implementation plan, which utilizes the new Kirkpatrick approach to outline a plan
with applicable tools, protocols and resources affiliated with each of the four levels of
implementation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Finally, this chapter closes the study with an
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 73
evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of this research, the limitations and delimitations, and
recommendations for future research.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Being Informed of Issues Affecting Underrepresented Students
Findings of this study, as illustrated in Chapter Four, revealed that a significant
proportion of the study participants felt generally uninformed about issues affecting
underrepresented students at WCAD. Many participants shared that they were not sure what the
retention rates for underrepresented students were in comparison to their peers at WCAD.
Similarly, participants expressed not being familiar with how their work has affected or could
affect underrepresented student retention. This is characterized by staff who expressed desire to
know more about the stories of students who retain or do not retain, and also to feel more
confident in their, or their direct reports’, ability to offer students the appropriate referrals to
address their concerns. The following section explores the recommendation that staff should be
more informed of issues affecting underrepresented students in relation to both knowledge
influences for the study and one of the motivation influences, as they each have collective
influence over the recommendation. While organizational influences do not have a significant
role in this recommendation, they can be seen as a major component of the second
recommendation.
Knowledge recommendations. As discussed previously, both knowledge influences for
the study can be addressed by the recommendation for staff to be more informed of issues
affecting underrepresented students. Being informed is simply another way of stating that
someone should have increased knowledge, which is why the knowledge influences easily align
with this particular recommendation. The following table addresses if and how each of the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 74
knowledge influences for the study were validated by the data collected. Table 4 illustrates the
relevant conceptual and procedural knowledge influences, as supported by the theoretical
framework and the conceptual framework offered by Clark and Estes (2008). In reference to
underrepresented student retention at WCAD, it has been determined that the knowledge
influences have been verified and are each therefore a priority to address. Staff need to obtain the
functional knowledge necessary (C) to effectively support underrepresented students by
identifying their needs (P). Each of these influences are shown in Table 4 with the corresponding
context-specific recommendations.
Table 4
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence: Cause, Need,
or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probabilit
y, or No
(V, HP, N)
Priorit
y
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Staff need to understand
how their actions help
underrepresented students
develop a sense of
belonging. (C)
V Y Information on
underrepresented
student retention
needs to be
presented in a
meaningful way and
related to prior
knowledge on the
subject (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Managers need to
present
information and
provide job aids so
staff can better
understand the
impact of their
efforts on
underrepresented
student retention.
Staff need to know how to
properly identify and refer
students who need
additional academic
support or intervention. (P)
V Y To develop mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply
what they have
learned (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Develop training in
conjunction with
job aids that show
staff how to
properly identify
students in need of
support.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 75
Conceptual knowledge solutions. Staff need to understand how their actions help
underrepresented students develop a sense of belonging. Schraw and McCrudden (2006)
emphasize that information needs to be presented in a meaningful way and also related back to
prior knowledge in order for it to be stored and quickly recalled when needed. Therefore, it
would seem most appropriate that job aids be provided to address this knowledge influence. For
staff to address this knowledge gap, the recommendation is that they be provided literature about
retention efforts and a visual aid that relates best practices in retention to their specific job duties.
While many participants could articulate the role that their departments played in general
student retention, the data pointed to a general unawareness of individual contribution to
underrepresented student retention specifically. Research specifies that having personal
connections to a staff (or faculty) member at their institution helps students gain a sense of
belonging, which, in turn, helps them self-actualize (Museus, 2011; O’Keeffe, 2013; Tovar,
2015). For staff, shifting to best practices can be as incremental as moving away from a purely
transactional interaction and taking a moment to show interest in the student’s work. Another
example would be making a proper referral while sharing specific institutional knowledge that
will help them navigate their situation (Hagedorn, 2005). This requires staff to have the
knowledge, not just of the institutional resources, but also of how and when to share it with
students in need.
Procedural knowledge solutions. Staff need to know how to properly identify and refer
students who need additional academic support or intervention. Schraw and McCrudden (2006)
specify that individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know
when to apply what they have learned in order to develop mastery. This procedural knowledge is
the how to aspect of learning, which Clark and Estes (2008) explain requires tools like training
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 76
and job aids to address gaps. Thus, similar to the conceptual knowledge solution, this particular
knowledge gap can be addressed through the use of job aids.
While it is evident that participants acknowledged the importance of ensuring
underrepresented students have the support they need, the data showed that many did not know
specifically how to achieve that goal. These staff members would benefit from first acquiring the
knowledge then learning how to apply it (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006) and subsequently
practice it (Mayer, 2011) in their interactions with underrepresented students specifically. Many
participants acknowledged that they had not received specific tools or strategies to achieve the
stakeholder goal which illustrates a gap in their procedural knowledge (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Thus, an appropriate step towards resolving this issue involves the creation of job aids to
facilitate learning.
Motivation recommendations. One of the motivation influences, self-efficacy, as
illustrated in Table 5, was determined to be validated based on the data collected. However, the
second influence, value, has limited probability, and has only minor implications for this study
and is thus not explored as a significant component of the recommendations. Clark and Estes
(2008) highlight active choice, persistence and mental efforts as the three primary facets of
motivation. Active choice is defined by the choice to take action based on an intention to
do/achieve something. Persistence means one is not dissuaded from continuing a task even when
there are barriers. Both active choice and persistence are likely to influence a staff member’s
ability to consider retention efforts in their work with underrepresented students. Mental effort is
the amount of energy invested into a task, which is influenced by confidence in one’s ability to
complete the task. As illustrated by Table 5, if staff members do not feel that they can make the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 77
proper referrals for students because it requires an inordinate amount of mental effort, they may
simply choose not to perform this task and subsequently affect students.
Table 5
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Staff need to feel
confident in their
ability to refer
underrepresented
students to resources
that will help them
resolve their concerns.
(Self-Efficacy)
V Y People need to believe
that their actions will
produce desired
outcomes (Pajares)

People need to feel
confident in their
ability to do well at a
task (Eccles)
Staff engaged in
work that
addresses retention
efforts, like
collaborating with
other staff to help
students problem-
solve, will be
recognized by
managers

Self-efficacy solutions. Staff need to feel confident in their ability to refer
underrepresented students to resources that will help them resolve their concerns. Pajares (2006)
indicates that individuals need to believe that their actions will produce desired outcomes in
order to be motivated to engage in certain activities. Additionally, Eccles (2006) shares that
people need to feel confident in their ability to do well at a task to feel engaged or fulfilled by it.
Recognition of staff who are successful at achieving the desired goal is one approach to
addressing this motivational influence. For example, there could be a system that recognizes staff
who are engaging in behaviors that align with underrepresented student retention as a goal. In
this example, staff gain confidence not only in their ability to complete the task, but also in their
ability to achieve the goal associated with that task, which encourages them to continue to work
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 78
towards it. This recommendation then has a cumulative impact on increasing self-efficacy, where
higher self-efficacy serves to increase motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008; Pajares, 2006).
Clark and Estes (2008) refer to motivation as the element that helps individuals choose to
pursue a goal, persist at it even in spite of distractions, and determine how much energy to
expend. Staff need to feel confident in their ability to refer underrepresented students to
resources that will help them resolve their concerns, and continue to do so even when
distractions arise, or the task at hand becomes more complicated. Self-efficacy as a motivational
theory is characterized as a method of self-regulation where individuals opt in to or out of tasks
based on their belief, or lack thereof, in their ability to succeed at them (Eccles, 2006; Pajares,
2006; Pintrich, 2003. This theory offers a framework for an individual internal feedback loop
that is also affected by external circumstances. This process is heavily affected by confidence
and thus contributes to motivation as a whole, indicating that increasing staff self-efficacy can
influence underrepresented student retention.
Discussion of Solutions
The college can employ various techniques to address this recommendation of ensuring
staff are informed of issues affecting underrepresented students. Some solutions are more
accessible than others, and must be chosen based on existing factors germane to this study and
others that have an impact on the organization but are unrelated to the study. Being cognizant of
both the limitations of time and resources, as well as the needs of implementing the second
recommendation for this study, it would be best to employ solutions that require fewer resources.
The college can utilize the expertise of relevant members of the community to create a
committee focused on addressing this issue at the intuitional level. This committee can focus on
gathering literature, creating job aids and benchmarking retention efforts to highlight staff who
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 79
engage in retention-oriented behaviors. This recommendation was discussed by at least one study
participant and represents an example of a common, and accessible approach that the college
already uses to address various needs with multiple stakeholders. Setting the foundation for this
work through committee engagement would be consistent with the organizational culture at
WCAD. However, while forming a committee would be relatively easy to achieve, committee
work as a sole solution would be limited in scope and impact. In practical terms, committees can
only be effective in their work when organizations and leaders provide capacity to do so.
Training to Address Underrepresented Student Retention
The second recommendation for this study is very closely aligned with the first. Increased
knowledge is a desired outcome of training, which is why it is makes sense that the second
overall recommendation for this study is to create training for staff to learn how they can help
retain underrepresented students at WCAD. While the study participants had varying
interpretations of training as it relates to retention practices or supporting underrepresented
students, the general findings indicated that the organization had not provided participants
training or guidance on how to address underrepresented student retention. The knowledge
portion of the findings had a few connections to training, but, ultimately, it was the organization-
related findings that had the most influence over training as a recommended solution. Thus, the
following section explores the recommendation of training is it relates to the organizational
influences and findings.
Organizational recommendations. The organizational influences listed in Table 6
represent the findings that have been validated by the data collected for the study. Cultural
models and cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001) can play a large role in an
organization’s ability to address gaps. For this study, the perception that the primary
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 80
responsibility for addressing student concerns lies with one division presents a barrier to
implementing retention efforts institution-wide. Additionally, Clark and Estes (2008) point to
resources as a common reason for gaps, with training representing a relevant resource for this
stakeholder group, as shown in Table 6.
Table 6
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence: Cause,
Need, or Asset*

Validated
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)
Priorit
y
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
There is a perception
amongst non-student
affairs staff and faculty
that all issues affecting
student success can and
should be resolved by
someone in student
affairs. (Cultural
Models)
V Y Effective change
begins by addressing
motivation influencers;
it ensures the group
knows why it needs to
change. It then
addresses
organizational barriers
and then knowledge
and skills needs (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

The organization
needs to reinforce
the expectation of
and support the
execution of
engaging in
retention efforts at
the departmental
and individual
levels.
The organization needs
to provide training and
information related to
the support of
underrepresented
students and their
retention. (Cultural
Setting)
V Y Effective change
efforts ensure that
everyone has the
resources (equipment,
personnel, time, etc.)
needed to do their job,
and that if there are
resource shortages,
then resources are
aligned with
organizational priorities
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

The organization
needs to build
capacity for staff
to gain more
experience with
issues affecting
underrepresented
student retention.
Both time and
training are
presented as
barriers that need
to be addressed.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 81
Cultural models. Within the organization, it has become easy for staff in areas of the
college outside of the student affairs division to assume that all student related concerns should
ultimately be resolved by student affairs. Clark and Estes (2008) explain that, in order to address
organizational barriers in a specific context, the group needs to know why it is important to
change it. Strategies that might address this barrier include uncovering evidence that indicates
there is a problem, determining the conditions that allowed this barrier to arise, and determining
what change is needed (Clark & Estes, 2008). To address this challenge of retention efforts being
institutionalized across all areas of the college, the organization needs to reinforce the
expectation of and support the execution of engaging in retention efforts at the departmental and
individual levels.
Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) describe cultural models as mental schema on how
things work, or perceptions of how they should work. Participants articulated beliefs that student
affairs staff were experts in the areas of retention and the aspects of care that lead to retention,
thus leaving them with less confidence in their own ability to support retention in this way.
While this challenge can be characterized as a motivational concern on an individual level, in
this capacity, it becomes an organizational influence as the cultural model reflects this schema
across multiple stakeholders. Museus (2011) also explains that staff represent one of many
cultural agents on campuses who both influence and are influenced by institutional ethos. The
result of this ethos is a cultural model that effectively shifts the responsibility for executing a
goal of the organization to just one area. Clark and Estes (2008) articulate that successful change
at the organizational level requires alignment of processes with goals, indicating a culture shift.
Furthermore, as Rueda (2011) reiterates, culture should not be static, which means these ideals
can and should shift with the proper organizational supports in place.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 82
Cultural settings. The organization needs to provide training and information related to
the support of underrepresented students and their retention. Clark and Estes (2008) stress the
importance of people having all the resources necessary to do their jobs in order to avoid
organizational gaps. With a task as important and daunting as underrepresented student retention,
it can be difficult to determine where to start, which is why organizations have to determine what
the priorities are so that teams are not derailed by obstacles (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
organization needs to build capacity for staff to gain more experience with issues affecting
underrepresented student retention. Both time and training are presented as barriers that need to
be addressed.
Staff need more training and resources on underrepresented student retention in order to
work towards goals at any level. Cultural settings are the more tangible aspects of an
organization like policies and processes (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). The lack of relevant
training represents an organizational gap within the cultural setting. The participants consistently
answered questions about the training they have received on underrepresented student retention
in a manner that either alluded to or outright stated that they had little to no exposure to these
concepts. Multiple participants referenced participating in diversity training, which they
attributed to the topic of retention, even in the absence of specific conversations about
underrepresented student retention. Others reported exposure to training they received while
working for the organization but which was not tied to or provided by the college itself.
Ultimately, the participants saw value in training but had concerns about where to start and how
to accommodate the added expectations. This speaks to the concept of effort, illustrated by
Sirkin, Keenan, and Jackson (2005), which not only requires organizations to provide the most
relevant resources or training, but to also make space for employees to engage with them.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 83
Discussion of solutions. As illustrated by the next section of this study, training has
several components of success and levels of implementation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The college can approach this solution of implementing training in conjunction with the efforts
of increasing knowledge, as the two operate in concert with each other. To find the best
approach, the organization will have to determine its priorities and limitations. If financial
resources are limited, a solution might require more time and participation from more members
of the community to spread out responsibility. If time is a determining factor, the solution might
require the institution to invest more resources by way of cost in order to maintain a quality of
outcome. Either approach could be effective if given the right direction and guidance from
organizational leadership.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The implementation and evaluation plan for this study is informed by the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The authors frame this model using four
levels of training and evaluation. The modern take on their approach reverses the order of
evaluation, instead beginning with Level 4, which is referred to as results, leading into Level 3
which represents behavior, then to Level 2 which is learning, and finally to Level 1, which is
reaction (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model defines Level 4 measures using leading
indicators as progress towards connecting training to organizational performance outcomes
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level 3 measures critical behaviors that indicate whether a
training has provided individuals the ability to transfer what they have learned to their actual job
duties (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Knowledge, skill, attitude, confidence and
commitment all represent the components of learning that are measured in Level 2 through
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 84
various methods and activities (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Finally, Level 1 is the simplest
evaluation of training, which focuses on how participants respond to training through measures
of favorability, engagement, and relevance to their job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). These
four levels collectively create the framework for an evaluation and implementation model for
change, the success of which relies very heavily on incorporating the organizational goal into the
recommendations for change (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
WCAD has a goal of increasing underrepresented student enrollment numbers that has
been articulated in the strategic plan with a recruitment focus. However, this study focuses on the
importance of retention as a major component in attaining that goal. Staff are the primary
stakeholders for this study, and thus their aspirational goal is articulated as “Staff who work to
support underrepresented students will develop their advising and supporting competencies in
order to increase underrepresented student retention.” Staff often interact with and support
students as they attempt to navigate the processes and policies of the college. The nature of these
interactions can have an impact on student’s confidence, their self-efficacy, and their sense of
belonging, which can subsequently challenge their understanding of their ability to succeed at the
task at hand, and sometimes at college as a whole (Chickering, 2006). Thus, staff members need
to work towards gaining more knowledge on how to properly refer students in need to resources,
increasing their understanding of retention efforts for underrepresented students, and increasing
their confidence in their ability to support these students. These internal outcomes are proposed
as a catalyst to meeting external outcomes of increased retention and higher graduation rates.
The proposed solutions for this problem of practice include job aids, training and manager
observations.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 85
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
The leading indicators help to frame desired results of training and evaluation by
providing individuals with appropriate targets that connect directly back to organizational goals
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Staff members increasing their understanding, improving
their ability to offer referrals, and elevating their confidence in their general ability to provide
support are all internal indicators that will also have an impact on the external factors of
increased retention and graduation rates. The methods and metrics illustrated in Table 7
showcase an effective approach of ensuring outcomes align with desired goals, specifically the
stakeholder goal for this study.
Table 7
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)

Internal Outcomes
Increased staff understanding of
retention methods for
underrepresented students

Additional supervisor
feedback on staff
members’ appropriate
responses to retention-
related issues
Comments on annual
performance review
Increase in appropriate referrals to
proper resources for students’
needs

Fewer reports of students
being delayed in finding
solutions or being
misdirected
Compare student satisfaction
survey data regarding
familiarity with campus
resources
Increase in staff confidence in
their ability to support
underrepresented student retention

Staff self reporting of
increases in confidence on
Compare staff satisfaction
survey data
External Outcomes
Increased retention of
underrepresented students
Represented on annual
facts and figures report
displayed on website

Draw comparisons between
previous years, peer
institutions and national data
Increased graduation rates
amongst underrepresented
students
Represented on annual
facts and figures report
displayed on website
Draw comparisons between
previous years, peer
institutions and national data
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 86
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. With staff members as the primary stakeholder group, critical
behaviors are focused on ways that they can adjust their practice to address and meet
organizational goals. The first critical behavior addresses the gap created in student retention by
students who are not appropriately connected to campus resources that can address their specific,
retention-related needs. The second critical behavior creates expectations for staff members to
reflect on their work with underrepresented students in order to actually understand their impact
on underrepresented student retention. The final critical behavior dictates that staff members
document their interactions in order to effectively address the opportunities to contribute to
retention, however frequent or infrequent they may be. Table 8 outlines the metrics, methods and
timing that will be utilized to assess these behaviors.
Table 8
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
1) Staff will offer
students referrals to
campus resources that
appropriately match
their concerns

The frequency at
which students report
positive interactions
with staff regarding
their specific needs
Student satisfaction
survey data will be
compared to staff self
reporting
Annual review of
survey data
2) Staff will reflect on
how their work
impacts
underrepresented
student retention

Number of reflections
in note-taking (case
management)
software
Rubric utilized for
reflecting on specific
aspects of student
interactions
Monthly, prior to
check-ins with
supervisor
3) Staff will document
their interactions
supporting
underrepresented
students

Number of
documented
interactions with
underrepresented
students
Staff will use
documented student
encounters to assess
trends
Regular note-taking
during and after
student interactions
for a full semester

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 87
Required drivers. Staff members will require supervisor support to align their behaviors
and actions with organizational goals. This required support for staff from their supervisors also
infers that the supervisors will need training and continued development as managers on the
topic of underrepresented student retention. The institution will need to build capacity to achieve
the required drivers through training that is ongoing and incorporated as a component of
onboarding, as well as engagement at consistent intervals. The four drivers of reinforcing,
encouraging, rewarding and monitoring are not mutually exclusive, as they work together and
must be integrated as such. These processes and systems offer methods for accountability and
tools for support (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 9 showcases the required drivers that
will support critical behaviors for staff addressing underrepresented student retention.
Table 9
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing Critical Behaviors Supported
Reinforcing
Provide training for staff at all
levels regarding how to retain
underrepresented students

Before each semester and over
the summer (3 times/year)
1
Provide job aids that support
knowledge gained through
training

Ongoing 1, 2
Staff will be reminded of how
their role connects to retention
efforts

Monthly 2, 3
Encouraging
Managers will coach staff
through retention-related
scenarios

Ongoing 1, 3

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 88
Table 9, continued
Method(s) Timing Critical Behaviors Supported
Rewarding
Staff engaged in retention
efforts are recognized by
managers

Mid-semester and end of
semester
1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Manager observations will
provide opportunity for
connecting staff member’s
actions to retention efforts
Ongoing 1, 2, 3

Organizational support. There are always perceived potential challenges for garnering
organizational support for implementing a complete required driver package. To combat the
challenges of time, access and outcomes, there are specific needs to be addressed. The
organization would need to present underrepresented student retention as a priority for staff to
practice in their regular job duties. For these organizational recommendations, both time and
training are presented as barriers that need to be addressed.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Once the recommended solutions have been achieved, staff at WCAD
will be able to
1. Apply the knowledge gained regarding how to offer students appropriate referrals to
campus resources for their unique needs (P)
2. Identify underrepresented students who are in need of support (P)
3. Analyze impact of their beliefs on their work with underrepresented students (M)
4. Demonstrate self-efficacy in providing students the appropriate referrals to students in
need of support. (Self-Efficacy)
Program. The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved through
development of a training program that addresses the needs of current staff as well as a
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 89
component that can be integrated into onboarding for new staff. This effort will be paired with
the creation of job aids for staff to utilize in support of their work with underrepresented student
retention.
Components of learning. Staff members need to have both the knowledge of how to do
a job as well as the motivation to persist at it if they are going to successfully apply what they
have learned. The components of learning for this program will be assessed by both conceptual
knowledge and procedural skills necessary to do the job, alongside attitude about and confidence
in their ability to do the work. As Table 10 illustrates below, these activities serve as indicators
of whether the training program is effective in increasing learning and subsequently goal
attainment.
Table 10
Components of Learning for the Program.
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Staff meeting dedicated to reviewing skills and
knowledge related to retention efforts

Once each semester
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Case studies as part of training efforts Annually during staff retreat/training
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Staff discuss motivation during 1:1 meetings
with managers
Mid-year performance review
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Managers offer feedback from observations At least once a semester or with each observed
encounter with underrepresented students
Managers discuss time management practice to
build capacity for staff to engage in retention
efforts
Twice each semester
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Managers discuss staff efforts during 1:1
meetings
Monthly
Staff share thoughts during reflections via
rubric
Regularly

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 90
Level 1: Reaction
One measure of whether participants have accepted learning components is to gauge their
reactions. For this study, it will be important to assess how staff engage with the tools and
training provided as a supplement to their learning. Table 11 indicates the timing and methods
used to measure staff reactions to training and job aids.
Table 11
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program.
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Student satisfaction surveys completed after
interactions with staff
Ongoing
Training evaluations After each training
Relevance
Training evaluations After each training
Manager 1:1 check-ins After observations
Customer Satisfaction
Training evaluations After each training
Pulse-check on effectiveness of job aids Once per semester

Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. After each training, staff
members will be asked to complete evaluations (See Appendix E) of the session(s), which will
broadly address each of the Level 1 (Table 11) and Level 2 (Table 10) components. The
evaluation will be sent electronically within 72 hours of the training to give enough distance
from the session for participants to digest the material but also soon enough after the training
itself for their answers to be relevant. Manager observations of staff may be challenging to
arrange, but it will be up to each team to determine when and how to coordinate them. During
observations, managers will take notes on staff interactions with underrepresented students
utilizing a rubric to measure staff’s ability to engage in retention-oriented behaviors.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 91
Level 1 components of the evaluation will be evaluated for applicability and adaptability
to future training sessions. For both Level 1 and Level 2, managers will utilize a rubric for
assessing observations (See Appendix F). The rubric will utilize a rating system to measure staff
member’s engagement with various behaviors which correlate with learning goals.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. It will also be relevant to
reference the feedback provided in student satisfaction surveys (See Appendix G). The surveys
will be distributed each time students interact with staff, which means responses will be received
on an ongoing basis throughout the year, at various stages in the training program. The data
should be assessed each year to determine if, from a student perspective, the training measures
have addressed learning goals (Level 2). Managers should also conduct regular pulse-checks on
the effectiveness of the job aids (Level 1). This pulse-check should happen at least once each
semester so adjustments can be made by and explained through the next training program, with
the focus on ensuring adjustments address the need to connect actions back to retention efforts
(Level 3). An ideal format would involve utilizing team meetings to conduct an informal focus
group as a pulse-check
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 aspirational stakeholder goal for this study is tied to the existing
organizational goal to increase enrollment of underrepresented students. It is believed that
honing staff members’ skills in increasing their advising and supporting competencies will have
an impact on the larger organizational goal of increased retention and enrollment of
underrepresented students. While the ultimate measure of success will be reflected in the
retention numbers, success within the stakeholder goal will be evidenced through staff members’
performance in the areas of advising and supporting underrepresented students. Managers will
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 92
have to work with staff to determine individual performance goals that align with the Level 4
goal and are supported through the training and job aids that will be offered throughout the year.
To analyze this goal, managers will utilize the rubric from Appendix B during observations,
which will also be considered during the performance review process and monitor progress using
the dashboard below.
Table 12
Dashboard
Dashboard
Fall 2018
Total
Spring 2019
Total
2018 – 2019
Annual Total Goal
Staff have increased
understanding of retention
methods for
underrepresented students
XX% XX% XX% 75%
Staff are offering
appropriate referrals for
students based on their needs
XX% XX% XX% 90%
Staff have increased
confidence in their ability to
support underrepresented
students
XX% XX% XX% 80%
Retention rates for
underrepresented students
XX% XX% XX% 85%
6-year graduation rates for
underrepresented students
XX% XX% XX% 70%

Summary
At the culmination of this study, with data collected and analyzed and recommendations
made, arises the opportunity for WCAD to decide what can feasibly be done with the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 93
information detailed in the final report. The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) offers the framework for the recommendations in this study with an outline of
how they can be achieved. The desired outcome of this research is to identify the KMO barriers
affecting staff member’s ability to contribute to underrepresented student retention, utilizing the
framework provided by Clark & Estes (2008). The four levels of training and evaluation
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) directly link the organizational goal of increased retention and
the aspirational stakeholder goal of increased advising and supporting competencies when
working with underrepresented students, to the appropriate methods and metrics needed to attain
those goals. However, it is important to remember that this is a cyclical process, that will require
adapting and evolving the recommendations based on the reactions, successes and failures of the
evaluation program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Implementing this process of evaluation would be new to the institution, in that it
provides metrics and methods of assessing a specific goal within the strategic plan. The
implementation of this model would also have to be accompanied by a relevant shift in culture.
With fiscal responsibility existing at the forefront of any institutional endeavors, this plan was
specifically crafted not to require exorbitant spending or even excessive use of external
resources. However, while this plan is cost efficient, it requires a considerable initial investment
in time. It may be difficult to build capacity for this much depth in training and evaluation while
also balancing other organizational priorities. Depending on when and where challenges arise,
there may be a need to recalibrate goals, conduct formative assessments of trainings, offer
additional support for managers or more collaborative learning events for staff to increase
relevance of trainings. Yet, the benefits of attaining both the stakeholder and organizational goals
makes this practice worth the investment of time, resources and energy. Furthermore, the
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 94
potential internal and external outcomes have greater implications for changing the landscape of
higher education as a whole.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Approach
The methodology of this study has both strengths and weaknesses that define the viability
and applicability of the findings and recommendations. The study utilizes the Clark and Estes
(2008) KMO influences as a conceptual framework. This approach is effective for evaluating and
assessing gaps in organizational practices and performance. This study is an evaluation of
WCAD and specific stakeholders within the organization and their influence over a specific
problem of practice. Evaluation is a key component of both the study and the framework, which
is why the Clark & Estes (2008) approach is a strong fit for the study.
The problem of practice itself is not unique to the organization, nor is this study the first
to examine the issue of underrepresented student retention as it relates to staff efforts within
organizations. Other case studies rely on frameworks that may have been crafted especially for
their type of organization, perhaps with more emphasis on educational organizations and
systems. The fact that this study utilized an organizational evaluation that can be applied broadly
to all sectors can be used objectively as an argument for both its strengths and weaknesses. On
one hand, the generalizability of the Clark and Estes (2008) framework could be seen as being
too unspecific for the unique aspects of an educational institution, and more specifically a higher
education institution. In contrast, the fact that the Clark and Estes (2008) framework was crafted
to be broadly applied to various professional sectors may serve as a means for further
legitimizing the strength of this approach.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 95
Limitations and Delimitations
It is important to note the potential limitations of this study as it was constructed. The
primary concern is truthfulness on behalf of the stakeholder group (Maxwell, 2014; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016), as all data were collected in a manner that asks participants to self-identify or
self-rate their performance and understanding of the college. It is not unlikely that some
participants in the study may have felt compelled to answer the interview questions in a manner
that makes them appear more favorable. This study also specifically details what is happening
within WCAD as an organization which, based on size and type of institution and the study
sample, does not produce generalizable data (Maxwell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
same is true for the sample size, since staff are the smallest stakeholder group within this
organization, and this study has only collected data from a portion of them.
Delimitations for this study present various implications for the outcome of the data
collection. The choice to limit data collection to staff members as the primary stakeholder group
and to only collect data via interview and documents affects the amount of rich data (Fink, 2013)
the study was able to obtain. Because there was only one point of contact with the participants,
the interview items had to be crafted in a way that provided a wealth of insight, without
overwhelming the participants intellectually or taking too much of their time. If interviews were
too short, it might not have helped progress the research; however, if they were too long, it might
have deterred the participants from continuing through to the end, producing the same result
(Fink, 2013). It was crucial to find balance within the data collection efforts.
Future Research
The limitations and delimitations in conjunction with the strengths and weakness of the
study highlight potential pathways for future research on this subject. The study was conducted
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 96
with a small subsection of an already small stakeholder group, which only represents a fraction
of the larger organization. Future research might seek to engage a greater portion of the staff who
met the study criterion, the entire stakeholder group of staff at the organization, or even
incorporate faculty into the evaluation of the greater impact of employee actions on the
underrepresented student experience. Continued research could also seek to more broadly
evaluate retention as a whole, as a few study participants spoke to their gaps in understanding
retention rates at the organization, not just specific to retention of underrepresented students.
Widening the scope of either the stakeholder group or the research subject has the potential to
provide more generalizable findings and further research on the topic of retention efforts.
Conclusion
This study sought to evaluate the potential factors affecting the stakeholder group’s
ability to influence an organizational goal. While the organization and language of the articulated
goal are unique to this specific study, the problem of practice that necessitated this study has
been and remains an ongoing challenge across the profession of higher education administration.
This study serves as one additional research-based perspective on underrepresented student
retention with the designation of focusing on the environment of an art and design institution.
The study provides information on a widely researched topic within a unique organization,
generally minimally present within this particular body of research. The result is a study that
offers recommendations for WCAD to evaluate its retention efforts amongst staff and implement
solutions specific to the current conditions. The desired outcome is that this information can be
presented to WCAD leadership as a tool to implement changes that will help the organization
achieve one of its goals. An additional desired outcome of conducting this study was to offer this
information as a contribution to the larger body of research on higher education, arts education,
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 97
underrepresented student retention and staff as influencers on the student experience. The hope is
that there can be a continued conversation about and exploration of the intersections of these
subjects and their impact on the practices and policies within higher education as a profession
and the greater implications of these topics on our society.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 98
REFERENCES
College Student Educators International & Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education
(2015). ACPA/NASPA professional competency areas for student affairs practitioners.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/main/ACPA_NASPA_Professional_Competencie
s_FINAL.pdf
Altbach, P. G., Gumport, P. J., & Berdahl, R. O. (2011). American higher education in the
twenty-first century: Social, political, and economic challenges (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University Press.
Assiter, A., & Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Student retention and motivation. European Political
Science: EPS, 6(1), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210108
Aud, S., Fox, M., & Kewal-Ramani, A. (2010). Status and trends in the education of racial and
ethnic groups (NCES 2010-015). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics.
Bowman, N. (2013). How much diversity is enough? The curvilinear relationship between
college diversity interactions and first-year student outcomes. Research in Higher
Education,54(8), 874–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9300-0
Carlson, S. (2014, February 5). Administrator hiring drove 28% boom in higher-ed work force,
report says. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Administrator-Hiring-Drove-28-/144519
Carnevale, A. P., & Strohl, J. (2013). Separate and unequal: How higher education reinforces
the intergenerational reproduction of White racial privilege. Washington, DC:
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 99
Georgetown Public Policy Institute. Retrieved from https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2014/11/ SeparateUnequal.FR_.pdf
Casselman, B. (2014). Race gap narrows in college enrollment, but not in graduation. Retrieved
from http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/race-gap-narrows-in-college-enrollment-but-not-
in-graduation/
Chiang, L., Hunter, C. D., & Yeh, C. J. (2004). Coping attitudes, sources, and practices among
black and Latino college students. Adolescence, 39(156), 793–815.
Chickering, A. (2006). Every student can learn – if…. About Campus: Enriching the Student
Learning Experience, 11(2), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/abc.161
Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Complete College America. (2011). Time is the enemy. Washington, DC. KSA Plus
Communications. Retrieved from
http://completecollege.org/docs/Time_Is_the_Enemy.pdf
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.
education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/.
Espinosa, L., Chessman, H., & Wayt, L. (2016, March 8). Racial climate on campus: A survey of
college presidents. ACE: Higher Education Today. Retrieved from
http://higheredtoday.org/2016/03/08/racial-climate-on-campus-a-survey-of-college-
presidents/
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 100
Evans, N., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Excelencia in Education & United Negro College Fund. (2014) Black and brown: Institutions of
higher education. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.edexcelencia.org/hsi-cp2/research/black-brown-institutions-higher-education
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Foxhail, K. (2016). ‘No child left behind’ finally catches up. Contemporary Pediatrics, 33(2), 9–
10.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Hagedorn, L. S. (2005). How to define retention: A new look at an old problem. In A. Seidman
(Ed.), College student retention (pp. 89–105). Westport: Praeger.
Jaschik, S. (2015, November 13). Responses on race. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/11/23/latest-developments-campus-racial-
protests-and-responses-those-protests
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Jones, S. R., & Abes, E. S. (2013). Identity development of college students: Advancing
frameworks for multiple dimensions of identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 101
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation. Performance
Improvement, 45(7), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.2006.4930450702
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, VA: ATD Press.
Kirova, A. (2008). Critical and emerging discourses in multicultural education literature: A
review. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 40(1), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1353/ces.0.0065
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Ma, J., & Baum, S. (2016, April). Trends in community colleges: Enrollment, prices, student
debt, and completion. The College Board. Retrieved from
https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/trends-in-community-colleges-research-
brief.pdf
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Museus, S. D. (2011). Generating ethnic minority student success (GEMS): A qualitative
analysis of high-performing institutions. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4(3),
147–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022355
National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. (2015). Snapshot report: First year persistence
and retention. Retrieved from http://nscresearchcenter.org/wp-
content/uploads/Snapshot.Report 28a.pdf
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 102
O’Keeffe, P. (2013). A sense of belonging: Improving student retention. College Student
Journal, 47(4), 605–613.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/
article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Poesen-Vandeputte, M., & Nicaise, I. (2014). Rich schools, poor schools. Hidden resource
inequalities between primary schools. Education Research, 57(1), 91–109.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2014.983722
Reddick, R. J. (2012). Male faculty mentors in Black and White. International Journal of
Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 1(1), 36-53.
https://doi.org/10.1108/20466851211231611
Reynolds, A. L. (2011). Helping competencies of student affairs professionals: A Delphi study.
Journal of College Student Development, 52(3), 362-369.
Rickinson, B., & Rutherford, D. (1995) Increasing undergraduate student retention rates. British
Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 23(2), 161–172.
Rodgers, T. (2013). Should high non-completion rates amongst ethnic minority students be seen
as an ethnicity issue? Evidence from a case study of a student cohort from a British
university. Higher Education, 66(5), 535–550.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 103
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Ruff, C. (2016, March 10). 3 highlights from a survey of presidents on the campus racial climate.
The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/3-
Highlights-From-a-Survey-of/235652
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/.
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P. K., Yuan, X., Nathan, A. & Bhimdiwali, A.
(2017). Completing college: A national view of student completion rates – Fall 2011
cohort (Signature Report No. 14). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse
Research Center. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/wp-
content/uploads/SignatureReport14_Final.pdf
Sirkin, H. L., Keenan, P., & Jackson, A. (2005). The hard side of change management. Harvard
Business Review, 83(10), 108–118.
Stephens, J. (2014, October). An unfortunate education in prop. 13. California Planning &
Development Report, 29(10). Retrieved from
http://bi.galegroup.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/global/article/GALE%7CA389565345/00339c
672aa2dbc1dc495cc573ef0ff7?u=usocal_main
Stepler, R. (2016). Hispanic, Black parents see college degree as key for children’s success.
Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.. Retrieved from
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/24/hispanic-black-parents-see-college-
degree-as-key-for-childrens-success/
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 104
Strayhorn, T., Lo, M., Travers, C., & Tillman-Kelly, D. (2015). Assessing the relationship
between well-being, sense of belonging, and confidence in the transition to college for
Black male collegians. Spectrum: A Journal on Black Men, 4(1), 127-138.
Tinberg, H. (2012). The rhetoric of remediation: Negotiating entitlement and access to higher
education. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 39(3), 317-319.
Tovar, E. (2015). The role of faculty, counselors, and support programs on Latino/a community
college students’ success and intent to persist. Community College Review, 43(1), 46–71.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114553788
Vaccaro, A., & Newman, B. (2016). Development of a sense of belonging for privileged and
minoritized students: An emergent model. Journal of College Student Development,
57(8), 925–942. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2016.0091
The White House Office of the Press Secretary (2010, July 29). The importance of education
reform. [Video file] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCHMyFU6a
EU&t=926s.
Wilson, M. E. (Ed.). (2011). College student development theory (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson
Learning Solutions.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 105
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol
1. How do you think your work impacts the underrepresented student experience? (K1)
2. How do you think you might particularly influence underrepresented student retention?
(K1)
3. What kinds of challenges or issues do students commonly encounter in your
department/division? (K2)
4. How do you respond to those student concerns or challenges? (K2)
a. Do you refer them to other departments or resources? (K2)
b. Which ones? (K2)
c. How do you refer students? (K2)
5. What do you feel your role and your department’s role is in supporting underrepresented
student retention? (M1)
6. How confident do you feel in referring students to appropriate resources to help them
with their concerns or challenges? (M2)
a. What things influence your confidence? (M2)
7. What’s your general impression of the college’s approach to retaining underrepresented
students? (O1)
8. What kinds of things would help the college better support the retention of
underrepresented students? (O1)
a. How do you feel other departments approach support for underrepresented
students? (O1)
9. What training or information have you received about the retention of underrepresented
students, including strategies to support them? (O2)
a. How helpful has that training been? (O2)
10. What kind of training do you feel you would be helpful to support underrepresented
student retention? (O2)

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 106
APPENDIX B
Email sent to unfamiliar colleagues

SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PARTICIPATION: Dissertation Research

Hello [first name],
I hope this message finds you well! We may or may not have met already, but I work I Student
Affairs as the Assistant Dean of Students for Diversity & Inclusion. I am reaching out with a
request of you based on your position here at WCAD. I have been engaged in graduate study at
the University of Southern California in pursuit of a Doctor of Education (Ed.D) in
Organizational Change and Leadership (OCL). The OCL program is structured in a way that
engages students in the study of organizations that they are already affiliated with, and as such, I
have chosen WCAD as my study site. That’s why I’m writing to you!

It is my sincere hope that you will consider being a part of my research by sitting for an
interview. My dissertation, entitled, Factors Impacting Retention Rates Amongst
Underrepresented Students: An Evaluation Study, focuses on staff as institutional stakeholders
who have the ability to impact underrepresented student retention through their formal and
informal work. The interviews, along with other institutional survey data, will be analyzed for
patterns that can help answer the following research questions:
1. To what extent are stakeholders meeting the goal of developing advising and supporting
competencies in effort to increase underrepresented student retention?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
If you are available in the coming weeks and interested in supporting my research, please reply
to this message so we can schedule a time to meet. The interview itself will require
approximately 75-minutes of your time (60-minutes for the interview and 15-minutes for any
preliminary or follow-up questions or concerns). I have attached an Information Sheet which
provides basic answers you may have about your participation in the study, but please do not
hesitate to connect with me via email or phone with any additional questions or concerns.

Thank you for your consideration!

Best,
~Nicole

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 107
APPENDIX C
Email sent to familiar colleagues

SUBJECT: PLEASE READ: Nicole’s Dissertation Research

Hello [first name],
I hope this message finds you well! As you may already know, I have been engaged in graduate
study at the University of Southern California in pursuit of a Doctor of Education (Ed.D) in
Organizational Change and Leadership (OCL). The OCL program is structured in a way that
engages students in the study of organizations that they are already affiliated with, and as such, I
have chosen WCAD as my study site. That’s why I’m writing to you!

It is my sincere hope that you will consider being a part of my research by sitting for an
interview. My dissertation, entitled, Factors Impacting Retention Rates Amongst
Underrepresented Students: An Evaluation Study, focuses on staff as institutional stakeholders
who have the ability to impact underrepresented student retention through their formal and
informal work. The interviews, along with other institutional survey data, will be analyzed for
patterns that can help answer the following research questions:
1. To what extent are stakeholders meeting the goal of developing advising and supporting
competencies in effort to increase underrepresented student retention?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving
the organizational goal?
3. What are the recommendations for organizational practice in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational resources?
If you are available in the coming weeks and interested in supporting my research, please reply
to this message so we can schedule a time to meet. The interview itself will require
approximately 75-minutes of your time (60-minutes for the interview and 15-minutes for any
preliminary or follow-up questions or concerns). I have attached an Information Sheet which
provides basic answers you may have about your participation in the study, but please do not
hesitate to connect with me via email or phone with any additional questions or concerns.

Thank you for your consideration!

Best,
~Nicole

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 108
APPENDIX D
Information Sheet included as email attachment

University of Southern California
Information Sheet for Research

Factors Impacting Retention Rates Amongst Underrepresented Students:
An Evaluation Study

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Mrs. Jaclyn Nicole Whitner at the
University of Southern California as part of the dissertation requirement for completion of a Doctor of
Education (Ed.D) degree. Please read through this form and ask any questions you might have before
deciding whether or not you want to participate.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which West Coast Art and Design is meeting its
goal of increasing the percentage of underrepresented students amongst the student body. This goal is
filtered through the lens of staff as the primary stakeholder group. The analysis will focus on knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goals.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 60-minute audio-recorded
interview. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to. Please note that the data collected
is not tied to performance management processes associated with the organization. Information provided
is kept confidential and utilized solely by the researcher for the purposes of the study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential. At the
completion of the study, direct identifiers will be destroyed, and it is not anticipated that the coded (de-
identified) data will be used in other studies.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Mrs. Jaclyn Nicole
Whitner, by phone at 510.594.3720 or via email at jwhitner@usc.edu.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the research
in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of
the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South
Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 109
APPENDIX E
Survey
Please indicate how much you agree with the statements below by ranking your response on a
scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the lowest, indicating that you strongly disagree, and 5 being the
highest, indicating that strongly agree.
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
I felt this training was a good use of my time. 1 2 3 4 5
I found myself engaged by this training. 1 2 3 4 5
I learned how to apply concepts in this training
to my work specifically.
1 2 3 4 5
I learned something during this training that I
can apply immediately to my work.
1 2 3 4 5
This training addressed some of my concerns
about underrepresented student retention at
WCAD.
1 2 3 4 5
I believe that my work can directly impact
underrepresented student retention at WCAD.
1 2 3 4 5
I have learned something new about how to
help address retention of underrepresented
students at WCAD.
1 2 3 4 5
I feel it is important to incorporate some of the
things I’ve learned in the training into my work.
1 2 3 4 5
I feel confident in my ability to apply some of
the things I’ve learned.
1 2 3 4 5
Which concepts in the training were least relevant to your work?

Which concepts in the training did you find most helpful?
UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 110
APPENDIX F
Manager Rubric
Manager Rubric
Rating Scale (use of target behaviors)
1 = Effective 2= Moderately effective 3= Ineffective
Target Behavior Rating Manager Comments
1) Staff will offer students referrals to
campus resources that appropriately
match their concerns

2) Staff will reflect on how their work
impacts underrepresented student
retention

3) Staff will document their interactions
supporting underrepresented students

Summary:
Action Steps/Follow-up Plan:

UNDERREPRESENTED STUDENT RETENTION 111
APPENDIX G
Survey
Strongly
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
The person I spoke to helped me resolve my
concerns or directed me to someone who did.
1 2 3 4 5
The person I spoke to accurately identified my
concerns.
1 2 3 4 5
I learned something that I did not previously
know through working with this person.
1 2 3 4 5
I felt like the person I spoke to cared about my
ability to solve my concern.
1 2 3 4 5
I felt like the person I spoke to was
knowledgeable about resources that might help
me.
1 2 3 4 5
I would feel confident recommending this
person to my peers with similar concerns.
1 2 3 4 5

Additional comments:

Abstract (if available)

Abstract As it pertains to the American education system, equal has proven not to be synonymous with equitable. Equal works under the premise that everyone starts in the same position, thereby making it fair to offer everyone the exact same resources and opportunities for success. Education, in this sense, is supposed to be the great equalizer. By this theory of equality, smart and talented individuals should be able to work their way to success by earning a college degree, regardless of their background. In a 2010 speech to the National Urban League, former President Barack Obama used the descriptor “prerequisite to prosperity” to describe the role of education, noting that the ongoing achievement gap for underrepresented students dominoes into gaps in financial security and wealth. In today’s globalized economy, inroads to education mean more than just knowledge attainment for those who are able to engage in it directly and, subsequently, to the communities and industries they contribute to. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which a small private art and design college is meeting its goal of increasing the percentages of underrepresented students amongst the student body. This goal is filtered through the lens of staff as the primary stakeholder group. The analysis focuses on knowledge, motivation and organizational influences related to achieving the organizational goals. While a complete performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes the primary stakeholder group in this analysis is the staff.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

First-generation college students and persistence to a degree: an evaluation study

PDF

Increasing organizational capacity at a small college to deploy revenue diversification strategies: an evaluation study

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Going through it all: an evaluation of medical leave policy impact on persistence rates for students with disabilities

PDF

The Bridge Program and underrepresented Latino students: an evaluation study

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study

PDF

Critical factors impacting the exodus from teaching ranks: an evaluative study of an independent Christian school

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

Civic learning program policy compliance by a state department of higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Gender beyond the binary: transgender student success and the role of faculty

PDF

When parents become students: An examination of experiences, needs, and opportunities which contribute to student parent engagement in community college

PDF

Advising strategies to support high graduation rates of transfer students

PDF

Evaluation of thesis completion in a graduate blended learning program

PDF

The issue of remediation as it relates to high attrition rates among Latino students in higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Increasing student persistence at a community college from an administration perspective

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

Customer satisfaction with information technology service quality in higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

The mentorship of instructors and its impact on computer science interest among middle school girls: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Whitner, Jaclyn Nicole (author)

Core Title Factors impacting retention rates amongst underrepresented students: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 09/24/2018

Defense Date 08/20/2018

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

Tag Arts,College,educational equity,first-generation,Higher education,OAI-PMH Harvest,persistence,retention,student affairs,underrepresented students

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Española, Mirasol (committee member), Tambascia, Tracy Poon (committee member)

Creator Email jwhitner@usc.edu,whitner.nicole@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-73005

Unique identifier UC11671423

Identifier etd-WhitnerJac-6779.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-73005 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-WhitnerJac-6779.pdf

Dmrecord 73005

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Whitner, Jaclyn Nicole

Type texts

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

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

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA