Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Honorary mention: the untold stories of minoritized community college honors students
(USC Thesis Other)
Honorary mention: the untold stories of minoritized community college honors students
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running Head: HONORARY MENTION 1
HONORARY MENTION: THE UNTOLD STORIES OF MINORITIZED COMMUNITY
COLLEGE HONORS STUDENTS
by
Brandon A. N. Roberson
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
May 2020
Copyright 2020 Brandon A. N. Roberson
HONORARY MENTION 2
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my daughter Nolan and my son Wren. Thanks for letting
daddy miss Saturday activities, Friday movie nights, and the occasional bedtime story for time to
write. I hope that the knowledge created from this study will ease the path to you realizing your
dreams and aspirations and makes school a better vehicle for those endeavors. Daddy loves you
so much.
HONORARY MENTION 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First, I give all honor and glory to God, who is the head of my life. The ability to even
endeavor in this process is a testament to the unmerited favor of my lord and savior Jesus Christ.
I thank God for the talents he has bestowed upon me. He chose to guide the work of my hand
and the aspirations of my heart to build his kingdom and express his glory as an educator,
mentor, and now a scholar.
To my wife Jahmeilah, I share this work with you as my partner and my rock. There is
absolutely no way that I could have thought to take on the endeavor of getting my doctorate
without your support, encouragement, and love. Thank you for your faithfulness and sacrifice
throughout this process. There is no doubt that you are the real MVP on our team. I love you for
proving that over and over.
To Billy and Sheral Roberson (aka Mom and Dad), thank you for nurturing my curiosity
and desire to learn as a child. Your early investment in me made me eager to dissect the world
around me and allowed me the possibility to reach this academic achievement. You taught me to
never be ashamed of my identity and to strive for greatness with grace and humility. I am
forever grateful for your unconditional love and encouragement. Carlos and Teresa, thank you
for encouraging me to keep pushing throughout this process. It was incredibly helpful when you
would take the kids to the park to give Jahmeilah a break and allow me to write at the coffee
shop.
To my friends, I appreciate your support over the last few years. I thank my pastor and
church family for keeping me in prayer. I am especially grateful for “The Twelve” (aka table
twelve, aka 12welve, aka “you know who you are”) for the unique way you all have to keep me
humble while looking after me like a little brother. For the record, you all are officially required
HONORARY MENTION 4
to refer to me as the doctor. Tina, thanks for writing me a recommendation for the program and
for listening to me talk through my research regularly, even though it wasn’t interesting to you.
To Kim Middleton, thanks for pushing me to seek out my degree and making it possible for me
to leave work and attend classes. It was a blessing for me to have experienced your leadership,
and I appreciate your investment in my growth and potential.
I am incredibly lucky to have been under the guidance and support of my doctoral
committee. Dr. Tambascia, it’s tough to put into words how much I appreciate your ability to
make the impossible seem real. Thanks for believing in the vision for my study and for
effectively motivating me to drive the work forward. Dr. Corwin, thanks for your sound research
expertise and encouragement. You could have easily and justifiably turned me down when I
came to you; instead, you invested in me and had an undeniably valuable impact on this study.
Dr. Breland, I can’t imagine how you were able to fit me into your schedule, but I am thankful
that you did. Your passion for community college students is palpable, and your experience in
the field was the critical lens I needed to support this work.
Lastly, thank you to my Thursday night higher ed cohort. From the first semester to now,
you all have helped to keep me on track. From navigating deadlines to last-minute Starbucks
runs, we had each other covered. Thank you for letting me ask all the questions in Inquiry 1 & 2
(shout out to Dr. Hinga!). Thank you for entertaining my hypotheticals and debates even when it
was time for a break (sorry, not sorry). Thank you for being thought partners and holding me
accountable (yeah, that’s you Queena, Dom, Monida, Branden, Vanessa, Wilmon, Eric, Steve,
Jason, Sally, Soraira, Will, and especially Danielle!). We made it and long live the group chat!
HONORARY MENTION 5
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 7
List of Figures 8
Abstract 9
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 10
The Role of Community Colleges 11
Honors Programs 12
Statement of the Problem 13
Purpose of the Study 14
Significance of the Study 15
Limitations 16
Delimitations 17
Assumptions 17
Definitions 17
Conclusion 19
Chapter Two: Literature Review 20
American Community Colleges 20
History of Community Colleges 21
Growth of Community Colleges 22
Community Colleges in the Twenty-First Century 24
Collegiate Honors Education 26
History of Honors Programs 26
Honors Students 28
Community College Honors Programs 29
Benefits of Community College Honors Programs 30
Transfer Student Experiences 34
Minoritized Transfer Student Experiences 34
The Role of Social Capital 36
Institutional Agents 38
Social and Transfer Capital in Post-Secondary Research 40
Conclusion 42
Chapter Three: Methodology 43
Site Selection 44
Population and Sample 45
Instrumentation 46
Screening Survey 46
Interviews 47
Focus Groups 48
Data Collection 50
Data Analysis 53
Validity Error! Bookmark not defined.
Role of the Researcher 54
Conclusion 55
HONORARY MENTION 6
Chapter Four: Findings 56
Participants 56
Faculty Participant 57
Survey Participants 57
Interview Participants 59
Participant Profiles 60
Emergent Themes 66
Authentic Faculty and Student Interpersonal Relationships 66
Manufactured Closure and Community 71
A Clear North Star 75
Conclusion 77
Chapter Five: Discussion 78
Discussion of Findings 78
Research Question One 79
Research Question Two 80
Recommendations 83
Develop Small Learning Communities 83
Increase Contact and Engagement With Non-Instructional Institutional Agents 84
Diversify Institutional Agents and Faculty 85
Implications 86
Future Research 87
Conclusion 87
References 89
Appendix A: Recruitment E-mail 99
Appendix B: Screening Survey Questions 100
Appendix C: Information Sheet 102
Appendix D: Interview Protocol 104
Appendix E: Focus Group Protocol 109
Appendix F: Interview Protocol (Honors Director) 112
HONORARY MENTION 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Six Key Forms of Institutional Support 40
Table 2: Participant Demographics 59
Table 3: Survey Response Codes 70
HONORARY MENTION 8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Honors to transfer model. 42
Figure 2: Total semesters in the honors program. 58
Figure 3: Age range of survey participants. 58
Figure 4: Gender identity of survey participants. 58
Figure 5: Racial/ethnic identity of participants. 59
HONORARY MENTION 9
ABSTRACT
Within the community college system, honors programs have found success in supporting
transfer and degree achievement. This qualitative study explored the experiences of current
minoritized community college students participating in the school’s honors program. Using
social capital theory as a theoretical frame, the study used interviews and a focus group to
investigate how institutional agents supported the transfer and degree attainment endeavors of
minoritized students in the honors program. The study found that the honors program offered
access to valuable resources and information that helped students thrive at the college.
Additionally, the program design created a community with shared norms conducive to academic
achievement that allowed for frequent authentic engagement with faculty and like-minded peers
distinct from the experiences of the broader college. Lastly, participants highlighted how they
operationalized community cultural wealth. The study offers recommendations to extend the
benefits described by participants to the broader population of minoritized community college
students.
Keywords: Community College, Honors Program, Minoritized Students, Institutional
Agents
HONORARY MENTION 10
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Despite decades of increasing enrollment in the nation’s post-secondary institutions, there
continues to be a debate on whether higher education is a civil right and how to facilitate the
attainment of higher education in a fully democratic society. One readily apparent phenomenon
is the impact higher education has on the realization of economic advancement and social
mobility. On average, individuals who hold a bachelor’s degree or higher earn higher salaries
and have access to a broader range of high-wage, high-skill workforce opportunities (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 2017). The median annual earnings of full-time workers aged 25 to
34 with a bachelor’s degree or higher is $54,800, while the median annual earnings for the same
group drops to $31,800 for individuals who earned only a high school diploma (U.S. Department
of Commerce, 2017). However, many barriers to access prevent individuals from attending
bachelor’s degree-granting institutions. Access barriers in post-secondary education are
especially pronounced for minoritized students in the United States (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009;
Crisp & Nuñez, 2014; Freeman, 2017; Jenkins & Fink, 2016; Pérez & Ceja, 2010).
Minoritized students are underrepresented in post-secondary educational enrollment and
degree attainment. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in fall 2016 Black
and Hispanic students represented 14% and 19%, respectively, of the total undergraduate
population, while White students represented 56% (McFarland et al., 2017). Furthermore, Black
and Hispanic students only represented 11% and 13% of all bachelor’s degrees awarded from
2015 to 2016 (Ginder, Kelly-Reid, & Mann, 2017). These data show post-secondary access and
achievement gaps affecting minoritized students, which have resulted in increased attention by
policymakers, practitioners, and researchers seeking ways to increase degree attainment for these
students (Perna & Leigh, 2018). Much of this effort centers on the community colleges.
HONORARY MENTION 11
The Role of Community Colleges
Since their inception in 1901, community colleges have been a central part of the
expansion of post-secondary education in the United States. Community colleges are open-
access and serve their local communities (Brint & Karabel, 1989; Drury, 2003). These two-year
public institutions have helped democratize post-secondary education by providing accessible
education options for a wide range of individuals, including those who are adult learners, low-
income, or who work full time (Boswell & Wilson, 2004; Brint & Karabel, 1989). Given the
intersection of poverty and minoritized individuals in the United States, it follows that many
minoritized individuals find their path to degree attainment through community colleges (Bates,
Siqueiro, & Dow, 2019).
The California community colleges, which form one of the largest community college
systems, provide an opportunity to observe phenomena for minoritized student degree
attainment. Data collected through the U.S. census showed that approximately 6% of the 18- to
24-year-old population in California was Black, while 62% of Black first-time freshmen in
California enroll in one of its 114 community colleges (Bates et al., 2019). Similarly, Latinx
students represent the largest population in California’s public post-secondary institutions, but
the vast majority of them enroll in community colleges (Bates, Bell, & Siqueiros, 2018). The
concentration of minoritized populations in the community colleges present an opportunity for
the educational advancement of this population. To fully understand how community colleges
can increase their impact on minoritized students’ degree attainment, more research is needed to
understand their experiences in community colleges that increase the likelihood of their degree
completion.
HONORARY MENTION 12
Honors Programs
Historically, higher education honors programs have been meant to serve the unique
learning needs of the most talented and high-achieving students. These programs usually have
smaller class sizes, individualized learning opportunities, research, and increased interaction with
faculty (Berger, 2007; Harkins & Baker, 2015; Outcalt, 1999). In the 4-year college setting,
many of these programs are highly selective and require high standardized test scores and GPAs
to participate. However, in the community colleges, honors programs function differently from
those at their 4-year counterparts. While honors programs at the community college vary widely
across institutions, most have similar requirements for participation. Typically, community
college honors programs require students to maintain a GPA above transfer eligibility,
participate in a designated number of honors courses, and participate in mandatory academic
advisement. Community college honors students gain access to transfer programs and
articulation agreements that increase the likelihood of their transition to selective colleges and
universities (Rosenow, Morrison-Graham, & Ozolins, 2016; Trucker, 2014). While there is some
broader research on community college honors programs, the literature on their specific impact
on minoritized students is limited (Korah, Slate, Moore, & Lunenburg, 2019).
Several scholars have studied the experiences of high-achieving minoritized students
(Carrasquillo, 2013; Harper, 2004; Strayhorn, 2009). However, these studies have focused on
student experiences at predominantly White 4-year institutions. Furthermore, the existing body
of research on honors and high-achieving community college students does not center the
experiences of racially minoritized students (Carrasquillo, 2013). The effect of honors program
experiences, pedagogical practices, and institutional supports on minoritized students’
educational achievement is understudied.
HONORARY MENTION 13
Statement of the Problem
As non-selective, open-access, and affordable post-secondary institutions, California
community colleges enroll the vast majority of minoritized students in the state, yet there is a
significant disparity in educational outcomes between White and minoritized students. A report
by the Campaign for College Opportunity stated the 6-year completion rate for Black students
was 37% at the community college, while the completion rate for White community college
students was 54% (Bates et al., 2019). Completion rate measures the number of students who
earned a degree, certificate, or transferred to a 4-year university. The report also noted that the
transfer rate for Black students after six years was 35%, while the transfer rate for White students
was 45% (Bates et al., 2019). The circumstances are similar for California’s largest minoritized
student population. Latinx students had the lowest proportion of college degree earners at 12%,
with 72% of Latinx college students starting their post-secondary education at a California
community college (Bates et al., 2018).
The literature on the experiences of minoritized community college students discusses the
barriers these students face (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009-; Castro & Cortez, 2017; Crisp & Nuñez,
2014; Kisker, Cohen, & Wagoner, 2010; Lee, 2001; Woods & Williams, 2013). Bensimon and
Dowd (2009) found a transfer choice gap amongst minoritized community college students in
terms of selective universities, despite meeting the qualifications to attend, and attributed this
phenomenon to a lack of access to transfer agents. Woods and Williams (2013) noted that, for
Black males, student success problems are additive and increase over time. This amplifies the
need to understand how community college supports facilitate expedient degree completion and
transfer for minoritized students while providing access to social capital for sustained success
beyond the community college. Honors education in the community college provides a rich
HONORARY MENTION 14
academic experience for students; however, little is known about the impact of these programs
specific to minoritized student’s ability to thrive and reach their educational goals. Honors
education has been minimally studied, and existing data show promising results related to active
and collaborative learning, student effort, academic challenge, student-faculty interaction, and
support for learners (Korah et al., 2019). Still, research is needed on the impact of honors
programs in minoritized students’ educational outcomes.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of minoritized community
college honors students and to understand how institutional practices in honors programs support
the acquisition of social capital to support their transfer to 4-year universities. Findings may
contribute to the scaling of practices in honors program strategies to the broader population of
minoritized students in the community college. Given the disparity in degree attainment and
transfer of Black and Latinx students in California, this study examined rich data on the
experiences of minoritized honors students to understand how these experiences might mitigate
existing barriers to transfer and degree completion.
The study examined data through the lens of social capital theory and the role of
institutional agents. The data from individual interviews and focus group interviews offer insight
into how honors programs provide access to funds of knowledge and institutional agents within
the community college. Furthermore, the study sought to understand how the acquisition of
social capital by minoritized honors students, contributes to greater access to 4-year colleges and
universities.
HONORARY MENTION 15
Research Questions
1. What are the experiences of minoritized students enrolled in community college honors
programs?
2. How do community college honors programs prepare high-achieving minoritized
students to transfer to 4-year institutions?
Significance of the Study
As the demand for increased community college outcomes rises, senior-level
administrators and policymakers need access to data that informs the allocation of institutional
resources. This study sought rich data on the experiences of students in honors programs at the
community college and to fill the gap in research on this population. The data could inform the
design of community college honors programs throughout the state while identifying effective
practices for supporting degree completion and transfer readiness of minoritized students.
This study may also benefit higher education scholars by adding to the limited body of
literature on honors education in the community college. This study advances the literature by
understanding the experiences of high-achieving minoritized community college students who
are understudied in post-secondary research. While some research has highlighted the
engagement of honors students in the community college when compared to their peers, little is
known about the distinct experiences of minoritized students in honors programs (Korah et al.,
2019). This study provides descriptive data that could contribute to understanding how
minoritized students access and engage institutional resources to achieve positive educational
outcomes.
HONORARY MENTION 16
Limitations
This study was limited by its small sample of minoritized students and a faculty member
in a community college honors program at a single institution. While honors programs may have
similar characteristics across post-secondary institutions, the findings may not be generalizable
to beyond the site studied. The study took place at a well-established formal honors program.
For example, the honors program at VVC, has a curated list on honors courses each year,
dedicated honors classes with faculty that regularly engage with the program, and students must
receive a formal recommendation to join and earn a 3.25 GPA to continue to participate in the
program. There are formal articulation agreements with local colleges and universities exclusive
to honors program graduates, dedicated staff, and a formal lounge for study and collaboration.
The honors program at VVC is well resourced compared to other less formal honors programs at
community colleges that rely on an independent study model to earn honors credit in any course
and lack the dedicated resources present at VVC. Thus, the findings related to honors programs
should not be overly generalized to all community college honors programs. Furthermore, this
study depended on participants’ sharing their experiences and narratives related to honors
program participation. The participants’ recollections and willingness to share with the
researcher may have limited the data collection.
The study’s success relied on participants from a single honors program. The potential
for intersecting relationships may have presented challenges during focus groups. Participants
may have been unwilling to share challenging or controversial experiences that involve peers in
the focus group. Additionally, the study did not include students who were not participants in
the honors program. For this reason, the researcher could not conduct comparative analysis with
minoritized students outside of the program.
HONORARY MENTION 17
Another limitation of this study could involve researcher bias. As a Black male college
administrator who supports learning and student development, the researcher may have
preconceived notions of student experiences in honors programs. The researcher used reflexivity
to assess any potential bias and prevent his opinions from impacting the study (Creswell &
Miller, 2000).
Delimitations
This study used the setting of a formal honors program to allow for the analysis of
common experiences for high-achieving minoritized students. Since participants opted into the
program, the likelihood of a distinct experience was higher than that of individually identified
high-performing minoritized students given the guidelines for program eligibility. For this
reason, the experiences of students may be comparable to other community colleges with
similarly designed honors programs in large metropolitan areas of California.
Assumptions
The researcher assumed participants could accurately speak to their experiences as
academically high-achieving students. The researcher also assumed participants adhered to the
guidelines and expectation for honors program participation at the site. Lastly, the researcher
assumed there was a correlation between minoritized identity in the community college and
access to institutional resources that support the achievement of educational outcomes.
Definitions
Community colleges: Post-secondary educational institutions. They are 2-year colleges
regionally accredited to award certificates, associate of arts and associate of science degrees.
They can be public, private, non-profit, or for-profit institutions. In this study, the term
“community college” refers to public 2-year community colleges.
HONORARY MENTION 18
Honors education: Refers to formal programs designed to create a distinctive
educational experience for a select group of students. The National Collegiate Honors Council
(2019) described honors education by “in-class and extracurricular activities that are measurably
broader, deeper, or more complex than comparable learning experiences typically found at
institutions of higher education” (p.1) Honors education should not be confused with honors
societies designated by Greek letters or graduate honors (i.e., Magna Cum laude). This study
uses this term to refer to formal programs in post-secondary institutions.
Open-access institutions: refers to institutions with few to no selective conditions for
admission or enrollment. While these institutions may have a financial cost to attend, they
typically do not require standardized testing or GPA minimums for enrollment.
Minoritized student: This term is used intentionally rather the term “minority student”
given that students are not born minorities. Instead, the term “minoritized” signifies the ways
underrepresentation and subordination are manifested in U.S. social institutions (Harper, 2012).
This study uses this term to generally refer to racially minoritized students, namely Black and
Latinx students.
Transfer: The process by which a student changes their enrollment from one institution
to another. While students can transfer between different types of institutions for a variety of
reasons, this study used this term to refer to vertical transfer from a community college to a post-
secondary institution which grants bachelor’s degrees.
Community College Honors Programs: The most basic community college honors
program allows students to earn honors credit for a course or set of courses in the college
category to be designated as an honors graduate. However, honors programs can also be highly
structured and formal with articulation agreements, dedicated faculty and staff, GPA
HONORARY MENTION 19
requirements for participation, and dedicated space. This study refers to the more formal
application of honors programs.
Conclusion
This chapter detailed the existing problem of disparity in transfer and degree attainment
between minoritized students in the community college and their White peers. The purpose of
the study was presented along with the significant contribution honors education research would
offer the literature. Key terms were defined to avoid ambiguity and to provide an operational
understanding of commonly used terms throughout the study.
This dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter Two will explore relevant
literature and expound on existing research to provide a foundational understanding of related
topics and conceptual framing for this study. The literature review first describes the history of
community colleges and their unique role in higher education. Research related to the complex
missions of the community colleges is presented and followed by the history of honors education
in American post-secondary education. Lastly, the literature on transfer student experiences is
offered before outlining how research on social capital theory, the role of institutional agents,
and transfer capital framed this study.
Chapter Three will outline the methods used to facilitate this study. Chapter Four presents
the data collected and the results of the study. Chapter Five discusses the results, using the
literature as a lens for understanding the data collected. The researcher will present conclusions
and implications of the study.
HONORARY MENTION 20
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
American higher education offers students opportunities to study in a variety of settings
ranging from the highly selective research and liberal arts institutions to the open-access local
community college. The wide range of institutional characteristics in post-secondary education
allows schools to serve the unique needs of their stakeholders. This study explored the
experiences of minoritized students in community college honors programs. This chapter will
present the relevant research foundational to the present study. First, literature related to the
origin of community colleges is presented to provide context and understanding of the unique
role they play in post-secondary education and complex missions they fulfill for their
stakeholders. This chapter goes on to present research on the origin of honors education and its
application to the open-access model of the community colleges. Research on the benefits of
honors education on the achievement of educational outcomes and transfer to a 4-year campus is
presented. Lastly, research on social capital theory, the roles of institutional agents, and transfer
capital are presented to frame the study.
American Community Colleges
The community college system in the United States represents a significant proportion of
the post-secondary educational system. With 1,103 institutions enrolling 12.1 million students,
community colleges represent nearly half of the undergraduate population in the United States
(American Association of Community Colleges, 2019). Once known as junior colleges,
community colleges serve a wide range of educational needs (Bailey & Morest, 2004; Dougherty
& Townsend, 2006). Community college offerings include occupational education, collegiate
and transfer education, remedial education, and adult and community education (Dougherty &
Townsend, 2006). Similar to other post-secondary institutions, community college students
HONORARY MENTION 21
enroll both part time and full time, though the majority of students enroll part time (American
Association of Community Colleges, 2019).
Furthermore, community colleges serve a broad range of racial and socioeconomic
demographics, many of whom are historically minoritized groups. The American Association of
Community Colleges (2019) reported that, in fall 2017, community colleges enrolled 56% of all
Native American undergraduates, 52% of all Hispanic undergraduates, and 43% of all Black
undergraduates while enrolling 41% of the total undergraduate population. The community
colleges are serving an increasingly diverse population of students with a range of needs and
educational intentions. These data the community colleges are a gateway to college for a large
number of low-income, first-generation, and minoritized students.
History of Community Colleges
To understand community colleges in the United States, it is important to outline the
origin and expansion of community colleges. The Morrill Act of 1862 and 1890 led to the
creation of community colleges, known then as junior colleges. The Morrill Act of 1890, also
known as the Land Grant Act, allowed for the expansion of minority access to college by
withholding federal funds from states that denied admission based on race (Drury, 2003). With
the passage of the Morrill Act of 1890 came the expansion of Land Grant colleges, particularly
HBCUs in the south, and, later, the establishment of independent public junior colleges. Joliet
Junior College was established in 1901 by J. Stanley Brown and William Rainey Harper as an
experimental program. The college was founded to offer post-high-school classes to students
who wanted to remain in the local community but continue their educational pursuits (Joliet
Junior College, 2019). The courses at Joliet during that time were designed to parallel the first
two years of college or university curriculum and were offered to students tuition free (Joliet
HONORARY MENTION 22
Junior College, 2019). Though Joliet was the first independently established public junior
college, Harper had begun to experiment with the concept of junior colleges during his tenure as
the president of the University of Chicago (Drury, 2003). In 1892, Harper divided the University
of Chicago into a junior and senior college and introduced the associate degree for junior college
graduates (Drury, 2003). Harper’s efforts were in line with the trend by university presidents to
shift universities to be research focused rather than teaching focused, particularly in upper
division and graduate studies (Drury, 2003). Harper and other university presidents suggested
that the first two years of college should be an extension of high school (Cohen & Brawer, 1996;
Drury, 2003). This vision was realized in the founding of Joliet Junior College.
Growth of Community Colleges
Over the 118 year history of community colleges, the scope of their role in post-
secondary education has shifted and expanded. The growth of community colleges over time
was driven by domestic and economic forces such as the push for universal education, the GI
Bill, the Civil Rights Movement, and a growing economy with workforce training needs (Coley,
2000). As the need for post-secondary education increased, community colleges played an
important role in meeting the demand.
Early growth. The early growth of junior colleges in America was slow, particularly that
of public ones. The number of public junior colleges grew from 3 to 14 between 1910 and 1914
(Drury, 2003). Much of this growth was driven by university officials to shift universities
toward research and away from teaching (Cohen & Brawer, 1996; Drury, 2003). During this
time, university administrators in California enacted various laws that eventually established
funding for independent regions for junior colleges. These regions were given boards, budgets,
and policies (Drury, 2003). The nation’s expanding industries and need for a trained workforce,
HONORARY MENTION 23
combined with the view of education as an avenue for social mobility, contributed to the growth
of 2-year colleges (Cohen & Brawer, 1996). During this time, the majority of course offerings
were liberal arts focused and courses were transferrable to the university. Though some
vocational courses were offered, the main focus in the early years of 2-year colleges was college
preparation (Drury, 2003).
Influence of the American Association of Junior Colleges. The American Association
of Junior Colleges (AAJC) was established in 1920. At the time, its members held various
perspectives on the role of junior colleges, with some favoring transfer programs and others
vocational education (Drury, 2003). The junior colleges were also struggling to justify their
existence solely as institutions for university preparation (Brint & Karabel, 1989). The early
leaders of the AAJC were successful in promoting the development of vocational education
programs (Drury, 2003) that would further distinguish community colleges from the university.
The establishment of the Junior College Journal in 1930 allowed for further promotion of
vocational education programs (Brint & Karabel, 1989; Drury, 2003). With vocational programs
came intelligence testing and guidance counseling to determine the placement of students into
vocational curricula or transfer curricula. Over time, members of the AAJC developed
consensus over the concept of a two-track curriculum, which would be a critical characteristic in
fueling the future growth of 2-year colleges in America.
The rapid expansion of two-year colleges. There were several instances of rapid
growth throughout the history of the community colleges, both in enrollment and the number of
institutions. The first era of rapid growth occurred during the Great Depression when junior
college enrollment grew from 56,000 to 150,000 (Brint & Karabel, 1989). Junior colleges had
established themselves as avenues for social and economic mobility, reflected in the growth in
HONORARY MENTION 24
enrollment during a time of historic economic struggle (Drury, 2003). The second era of major
growth in the junior colleges occurred in 1944 after World War II, when Congress passed the GI
Bill, and 2.2 million veterans attended college (Drury, 2003). The 1960s and 1970s marked the
largest growth of the community colleges due to the Baby Boom generation. By 1980,
enrollment in community colleges went from 1.6 million students to 4.5 million students, with
community colleges being predominantly vocational (Drury, 2003). By the 1980s, community
colleges were focused on specialized and vocational training to serve the needs of their local
communities. Community colleges were not only distinct from universities, but they developed
a niche role in post-secondary education that often competed with 4-year colleges and
universities (Brint & Karabel, 1989).
Community Colleges in the Twenty-First Century
Complex missions. With the growth of community colleges came the growth and
complexity of their missions (Bailey & Morest, 2004; Coley, 2000; Dougherty & Townsend,
2006). The literature presents debate in terms of a singular mission for the community colleges.
This is largely due to the different functions community colleges serve for their communities, the
ties they have to local industry, the stakeholders they serve, and the political pressures that
influence them (Dougherty & Townsend, 2006). Bailey and Morest (2004) used organizational
theory and resource dependency theory to study the comprehensive nature of community college
missions. They defined community college missions as core, vertical, and horizontal. In this
representation, the core “is made up of degree-granting programs that, either lead to an academic
associate degree, transfer to a four-year college or university, or a terminal occupational degree
or certificate” (Bailey & Morest, 2004, p. 6). The vertical and horizontal are expansions of the
mission, with vertical representing programs that contribute to the academic and vocational
HONORARY MENTION 25
outcomes of the core (i.e., dual enrollment/k 12 programs, honors programs, applied
baccalaureate degrees). In contrast, horizontal mission expansions diversify the community
colleges market niche and fulfill community colleges call to meet the needs of the community
(Bailey & Morest, 2004; Vaughan, 2006). The comprehensive nature of community college
missions is the result of the dual responsibility they hold as accessible post-secondary institutions
and resource hubs to their local communities.
Characteristics of open-access. The open-access design of community colleges had a
significant impact on the democratization of post-secondary education and is evident in the
characteristics of community college students. Students at the community college tend to be
older and more racially diverse than those enrolled in 4-year institutions (Coley, 2000;
Dougherty & Townsend, 2006). However, diversity in community colleges also means potential
risk factors that could affect persistence (Coley, 2000; Dowd, 2007). The National Center for
Education Statistics identified seven educational risk factors for persistence and graduation of
students, and community colleges have higher concentrations of students who may be at risk:
delayed entry into college, part-time enrollment, full-time employment while enrolled, having
dependents, financial independence, being a single parent, and not having a high school diploma
(Choy, 2002; Coley, 2000).
The concentration of these barriers presents challenges to student outcomes and has
resulted in criticism of the community colleges (Coley, 2000; Dougherty & Townsend, 2006;
Dowd, 2007). Coley (2000) noted the consistently lower cost of education at community
colleges, combined with minimal enrollment requirements, has contributed to the appeal of
community colleges for minoritized and low-income students. Dowd (2007) emphasized the role
of community colleges as a gateway in a stratified educational system and their appeal to the
HONORARY MENTION 26
universalistic ideals of education. As either a gateway or access point for post-secondary
education, community colleges provide the prospect for social mobility and have taken on
students with a vast array of needs, while 4-year institutions have become increasingly selective
(Dougherty & Townsend, 2006; Dowd, 2007). More recently, community colleges have
experienced political pressures and calls to focus on the achievement and outcomes. With the
transfer and vocational functions of the community college at the forefront, research is needed to
identify ways to attain equitable outcomes for their students (Dowd, 2007).
Collegiate Honors Education
History of Honors Programs
Honors education programs originated in 1830 from Oxford and Cambridge universities,
with their creation of separate pass and honors degrees. An honors degree requires a more
substantial program of study than what is pursued by the average student (Guzy, 2003). Harvard
adopted a version of Oxford University’s program during a time of curricular innovation in
American higher education (Guzy, 2003). Other universities, like Wesleyan and University of
Michigan, followed suit and began offering honors designation to students at graduation. The
honors designation was characterized by the completion of a thesis, an approved arrangement of
courses, and a more flexible, individualized academic program (Rinehart, 1978).
Early honors education. The expansion of honors education is largely attributed to
efforts by Frank Aydelotte and Joseph Cohen (Rinehart, 1978). Aydelotte, former president of
Swarthmore College, wrote the first comprehensive report on honors programs in 1925, which
was called Honors Courses in American Colleges and Universities. This report was based on
data collected from an extensive catalog of existing honors programs in the United States (Guzy,
2003; Rinehart, 1978). In 1944, he wrote the first book dedicated to honors programs called
HONORARY MENTION 27
Breaking the Academic Lock-step: The Development of Honors Work in American Colleges and
Universities. This book offered an in-depth review of existing undergraduate honors programs at
the time, and a foundational justification for honors education that still resonates with current
honors scholars (Guzy, 2003). Aydelotte (1944) wrote the following justification:
The most persistent objection to this breaking of the academic lockstep, to giving abler
students harder work, is our academic interpretation or misinterpretation of the idea of
democracy. If all men are born free and equal, why should some be given a better
education than others? The word “better” begs the question. The best education for any
individual is that which will develop his powers to the utmost and best fit him to realize
his own ideal of the good life. (p. 128)
Growth of honors programs. The second major influence of modern-day honors
education was Joseph Cohen. As a pioneering researcher, he supported the broadening and
programmatic development of honors education (Guzy, 2003; Rinehart, 1978). Cohen was
successful in the proliferation of honors programs into the large public university domain by
creating the honors council at the University of Colorado in 1928. The program was
programmatically unique as it included first-year student and sophomore courses, budgeted
provisions for an honors library and program newsletter, and had an honors director (Guzy,
2003). The program at the University of Colorado was one of a few honors programs to continue
to function during World War II. Post WWII, Cohen built on the work of Aydelotte by writing
The Superior Student in American Higher Education in 1966 (Rinehart, 1978). Throughout this
time, Cohen contributed to the arguments validating the role of honors programs in institutions
challenged by shrinking budgets, growing enrollments. Furthermore, the 1960s saw open
admissions policies and increased pressure for academic improvement to compete with
HONORARY MENTION 28
international performance, most notably scientific advancement resulting from the United States
and Soviet Union space race (Guzy, 2003).
The National Collegiate Honors Council. To support the validation of honors
programs and their role in the university, Cohen helped found the Inter-University Committee on
the Superior Student (ICSS). The ICSS became the first organized professional forum for honors
educators and supported the honors movement across the nation. The ICSS disbanded and was
replaced by the National Collegiate Honors Council (NCHC) in 1966 (Guzy, 2003). The NCHC
serves as the major professional forum for honors education, providing a professional network
for honors administrators, educators, and students from two-year, 4-year, and graduate degree-
granting universities. Today the NCHC has nearly 900 member institutions and several hundred
individual members, impacting over 330,000 honors students (NCHC, 2019).
Honors Students
While there are commonalities in honors education and curriculum in higher education,
there is little consensus in the defining characteristics of the honors student. Rather, there is a
prevailing ideology associated with honors students as high ability, the best and brightest, and
superior (Achterberg, 2005; Shushok, 2002). However, few characteristics can be standardized
and empirically measured beyond a single institution (Achterberg, 2005). The term “honors
student” should be utilized generically and considered relative to an institution or in relation to
other students (Stoller, 2004). Given that honors students are selected, scholars have attempted
to define honors characteristics by utilizing the most common selection criteria, namely GPA and
Standardized test scores (ACT or SAT; Achterberg, 2005). Still, these measures vary across
institutions and do not provide a definitive description of an honors student.
HONORARY MENTION 29
Scholars have also studied the academic characteristics of honors students by comparing
them with their non-honors peers (Long & Lange, 2002; Shushok, 2002). Long and Lange’s
(2002) study of 360 undergraduate students asserted a strong academic focus of 142 honors
students when compared to their 214 non-honors peers. The study noted that honors students in
the study were more likely to prepare for class, ask questions in class, rewrite a paper, or discuss
academics with a faculty member outside of class. While this study provides some additional
characteristics to consider related to honors students, like other studies, it examines honors
students in the context of a 4-year university (Long & Lange, 2002; Shushok, 2002; Stoller,
2004). More empirical research is needed to understand the characteristics of honors students at
community colleges. Still, Achterberg (2005) offers a broad assertion of the honors student that
may, in part pertain to the community college honors student:
Nonetheless, an honors student should be a highly motivated, academically talented,
intrinsically-inspired, advanced, and curious student who has broad interests, a passion
for learning, and excitement about ideas. The student should also be sufficiently different
or unique from the institutional norm as to need, indeed require, a different, more
challenging curriculum and other learning opportunities to satisfy his or her drive to
learn, know, and do. (p. 81)
Empirical research is needed to understand the definitive characteristics of honors students in the
community college and how their honors experience uniquely impacts their academic outcomes.
Community College Honors Programs
Fully understanding honors programs and their role in the community college first
requires addressing the relationship honors education has with the core functions of access in the
community college. Much of the research related to honors education and its impact on success
HONORARY MENTION 30
in the community colleges first acknowledge how honors programs have been historically
challenged in the community college space (Engelen-Eigles & Milner, 2014; Kisker & Outcalt,
2005; Outcalt, 1999; Toso, 2018; Treat & Barnard, 2012). Opposition to the implementation of
honors programs at community colleges across the nation is the result of competition for limited
institutional resources. Additionally, there is a pervasive view of honors programs as elitist and
exclusive in the students they serve (Engelen-Eigles & Milner, 2014; Outcalt, 1999; Rosenow et
al., 2016; Trucker, 2014).
Benefits of Community College Honors Programs
There is evidence in the literature of the benefits of honors programs (Berger, 2007;
Corcoran, 2015; Harkins & Baker, 2015; Rosenow et al., 2016; Toso, 2018; Trucker, 2014).
These benefits are most prominent when looking at the goals of transfer education and degree
attainment in community colleges. With the shifting focus in higher education on degree
attainment in the United States, it is critical to understand the community college’s role in this
space (The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 2009). Furthermore, research suggests
that expansion of honors programs in the community college could have a significant and
increased impact on the graduation and transfer success for community college students of
various demographics and abilities (Toso, 2018; Trucker, 2014).
Traditionally, honors programs have been structured to provide curated experiences for
academically well-prepared students. In the K-12 context, honors programs are meant to prepare
students for the academic challenges they will face in their post-secondary studies. University
level honors programs may offer opportunities for undergraduate research in preparation for
scholarship at the graduate level (Berger, 2007; Corcoran, 2015; Pressler, 2009; Rosenow et al.,
2016). Likewise, community college honors programs provide access to curriculum intended to
HONORARY MENTION 31
engage deeper critical thought and prepare students for future endeavors in academia at the
baccalaureate and graduate level (Berger, 2007; Corcoran, 2015; Harkins & Baker, 2015). The
NCHC (2019) characterized honors education as “in-class and extracurricular activities that are
measurably broader, deeper, or more complex than comparable learning experiences” (p.1).
Further, the NCHC described honors education as distinctly learner-directed in its philosophy,
adaptable to an institution’s culture and mission, and characterized by a close community of
students and faculty. Scholars have emphasized the similarities between honors students and
their non-honors peers in the community college, which contradicts the typical elitist narrative
associated with honors education (Toso, 2018; Trucker, 2014).
From developmental courses to the honors program. The research focused on
community college honors programs has noted the significant opportunities for honors education
to be a vehicle for underrepresented students, particularly in supporting transfer to and
graduation from the university (Harkins & Baker, 2015; Outcalt, 1999; Rosenow et al., 2016;
Trucker, 2014). Due to the increasing population of students requiring developmental
coursework, researchers have challenged the notion that students who attend the community
college are either unwilling or unable to succeed in the honors curriculum, (Corcoran, 2015;
Rosenow et al., 2016; Trucker, 2014). Trucker (2014) studied a population of students who
participated in the honors program and began their studies in developmental coursework at the
community college. The author noted the institutional practices that increase the visibility and
accessibility of community college honors programs. Trucker suggested that community
colleges should embrace less traditional ways, particularly faculty recommendations, for students
to apply and participate in honors programs to encourage the participation of students who might
thrive in honors curriculum. The author found faculty recommendations to be a major indicator
HONORARY MENTION 32
in a student’s ultimate decision to participate in honors (Trucker, 2014). Allowing multiple ways
for students to experience honors education at the community college contributes to a more
diverse population in honors programs and extends their benefit on transfer and graduation to a
broader range of students (Corcoran, 2015; Harkins & Baker, 2015; Rosenow et al., 2016; Toso,
2018; Trucker, 2014)
Faculty interaction. Many studies have outlined the benefits of honors education at the
community college (Berger, 2007; Harkins & Baker, 2015; Rosenow et al., 2016; Toso, 2018;
Treat & Barnard, 2012; Trucker, 2014). Berger (2007) outlined the role that faculty and honors
programs play in the development of honors students. The author noted faculty in honors
programs help students move toward a culture of professional academic discourse and develop
nuanced positions as part of intellectual debate. Similarly, Rosenow et al. (2016) described the
increased rigor and intellectual engagement that characterizes honors seminars. Both of these
studies also found a small learning community allows students to engage with the faculty as
thought partners and facilitators in the learning process (Berger, 2007; Rosenow et al., 2016).
Kisker and Outcalt (2005) studied the characteristics of faculty who taught developmental and
honors courses at the community college. They identified a clear typology for faculty teaching
honors courses, finding that they were closely aligned with the curricular and disciplinary
practices of 4-year university faculty and engaged in traditional scholarly and research activities
more frequently than their non-honors peers. The strong alignment between honors faculty
practices and their 4-year faculty counterparts may account for increase success for honors
program students.
Peers and support. Beyond the support of strong faculty and an enriched curriculum,
multiple studies noted the role of peers and increased institutional supports in honors students’
HONORARY MENTION 33
success at the community college (Corcoran, 2015; Outcalt, 1999; Pressler, 2009; Toso, 2018)
Trucker (2014) found that, in addition to faculty, students’ peers in the honors program served as
travel guides in their academic journey. These travel guides were especially effective in the
recruitment of students for honors programs, as they provide access to information for students
weary of college employees. Furthermore, researchers noted that increased access to
institutional resources supports transfer and graduation success (Outcalt, 1999; Rosenow et al.,
2016; Toso, 2018; Trucker, 2014). Many honors programs offer the benefit of priority transfer
articulation agreements that offer special consideration when applying to universities for honors
program participant (Outcalt, 1999; Rosenow et al., 2016; Trucker, 2014). Thus, students in
community college honors programs are graduating and transferring sooner and with fewer units
than their non-honors peers, and they are prepared for rigorous academic discourse in 4-year
university settings (Toso, 2018).
While honors programs at the community college are intended to serve all the students,
researchers have uncovered unfavorable trends on access and participation among
underrepresented minority populations (Outcalt, 1999; Trucker, 2014). While research on
student demographics related to community college honors programs is limited, there is a
negative correlation between African American student enrollment and honors program offerings
and participation (Outcalt, 1999). Institutions that have a high population of African American
students offer more remedial coursework and fewer honors programs. The same study found
that, as the population of Latino students increased, so did the offering of honors education.
Still, research on subgroup success and participation factors in community college honors
programs is lacking in the literature. Researchers have suggested further study of the impact of
honors program participation on subsets of honors program participants, particularly racially
HONORARY MENTION 34
underrepresented, first-generation, and Pell Grant recipients which represent predominant
populations at the community college.
Transfer Student Experiences
Community college plays a significant role in the democratization of post-secondary
education, particularly as a pathway from high school to the baccalaureate degree for over 40%
of the American undergraduate population. As it is an open-access, local, and low-cost college
option, many students choose a community college based on convenience and access (Kisker et
al., 2010; Lee, 2001; Monaghan & Attewell, 2015). Nearly 80% of first-time college students
who begin their studies at a community college intend to earn a bachelor’s degree (Bensimon &
Dowd, 2009; Crisp & Nuñez, 2014; Woods & Williams, 2013). Despite students’ aspirations,
research on transfer student outcomes has highlighted the disparity in degree attainment between
students who begin their studies at a community college and students who enroll in a 4-year
university after high school (Kisker et al., 2010; Lee, 2001; Wilson, 2014; Woods & Williams,
2013).
Minoritized Transfer Student Experiences
Within the literature on community college transfer students, there is an abundance of
research on the experiences of underrepresented minority students related to access and
persistence for both racially and socioeconomically underrepresented students (Bensimon &
Dowd, 2009; Castro & Cortez, 2017; Crisp & Nuñez, 2014; Lee, 2001; Pérez & Ceja, 2010;
Wilson, 2014; Woods & Williams, 2013). Additionally, scholars have studied phenomena
related to institutional choice, sense of belonging at the university, and degree attainment of
community college transfer students, with a particular interest in the experiences of Black and
Latinx students (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009; Castro & Cortez, 2017; Wilson, 2014). This research
HONORARY MENTION 35
found persistent and unique barriers that affect minoritized students’ ability to transfer, and these
barriers have an impact on the types of institutions they choose. Bensimon and Dowd (2009)
described this phenomenon as the “transfer choice gap.” The authors sought to understand
Latinx student’s aversion to research and highly selective universities, even when meeting the
qualifications for acceptance and found that students’ engagement with institutional resources
was often characterized as serendipitous; students, instead, used peer and family as sources of
information (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009). Scholars encourage prominent and accessible ways for
students to access institution resources that will guide student’s transfer aspirations (Bensimon &
Dowd, 2009; Lee, 2001; Pérez & Ceja, 2010). Additionally, research has underscored the role of
institutional professionals as funds of knowledge for minoritized students (Bensimon & Dowd,
2009; Pérez & Ceja, 2010).
Regarding the unique experiences and significant barriers minoritized students face in
their ability to transfer, scholars have offered ways to support the persistence of minoritized
students (Pérez & Ceja, 2010; Woods & Williams, 2013). Notably, Woods and Williams (2013)
examined predictive factors for persistence among Black males attending the community college.
Their qualitative study examined data from a national sample and found environmental factors to
be the most significant predictor of persistence for these students. Furthermore, the study
suggested the role institutions play in counteracting the environmental “pull factors” that may
prevent the persistence of Black males at the community college (Woods & Williams, 2013).
Other studies have highlighted institutional ways to counteract environmental pull factors
impacting similar minoritized groups (Castro & Cortez, 2017; Townsend & Wilson, 2007;
Wilson, 2014). Pérez and Ceja (2010) offered institutional efforts supporting Latinx student
persistence and transfer such as policies and financial supports that promote continuous
HONORARY MENTION 36
enrollment, full-time status, and reduced work hours, further acknowledging the detrimental
impact of environmental pull factors on minoritized students.
Also, scholars have noted how facilitation and development of faculty relationships for
minoritized students benefit their transfer outcomes and successful transition to the university
(Bensimon & Dowd, 2009; Crisp & Nuñez, 2014; Pérez & Ceja, 2010; Wilson, 2014; Woods &
Williams, 2013). In particular, research has noted that colleges and universities need to design
more intentionality when supporting transfer students as a unique population of students (Pérez
& Ceja, 2010). Ultimately, the literature supports structured and targeted efforts designed to
encourage meaningful minoritized students’ engagement in the academic and social
environments (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009; Pérez & Ceja, 2010; Townsend & Wilson, 2007;
Wilson, 2014; Woods & Williams, 2013). It is important that meaningful transfer support begin
the community colleges and continue at destination universities to increase underrepresented
minority transfer student outcomes.
The Role of Social Capital
Social capital can be broadly understood as an intangible form of capital that affords
access to privileged channels of information and resources through social relationships and
networks (Smith, 2007). Social capital theory is used widely by social scientists to understand
the impact of social relationships and networks on social mobility (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman,
1988; Yosso, 2005). Much of the literature on social capital is framed on the work of the French
sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. Bourdieu (1986) argued that there are similarities between the laws
governing economic capital and social capital and that social capital is cumulative, can produce
benefits in the social world, can be converted into tangible resources or other forms of capital,
and can be reproduced identically or in expanded form (Stanton-Salazar, 1997). Foundational to
HONORARY MENTION 37
Bourdieu’s work was the understanding that social capital and other types of capital function to
create social reproduction (Bourdieu, 1977; Rogošić & Baranović, 2016). Plainly stated, social
capital preserved existing social status and closed social structures. This study focused on the
assertion that social capital, in the form of social relationships or a network of relationships, can
be converted into more tangible social resources and opportunities (Pierre Bourdieu, 1986;
Moschetti & Hudley, 2015; Rogošić & Baranović, 2016; Stanton-Salazar, 1997; Yosso, 2005)
Other scholars have taken different approaches to the analysis and study of social capital
(Coleman, 1988; Rogošić & Baranović, 2016; Yosso, 2005). Coleman (1988) studied social
capital in the context of education. He argued that social capital supported the creation of human
capital, which supported intergenerational social mobility. Critical in the understanding of
Coleman’s interpretation of social capital is the role of social relationships and a characteristic
described as “closure” (Coleman, 1988; Smith, 2007). Closure is the network of social
relationships that governs the norms and sanctions unapproved activity within the given network,
and “closure of the social structure is important not only for the existence of effective norms but
also for another form of social capital: the trustworthiness of social structures that allows the
proliferation of obligations and expectation[s]” (Coleman, 1988, p. 107).
Additionally, Coleman (1988) noted that information channels, inherent in social
relationships, are particularly important forms of social capital, since information provides a
basis for action. Social relationships provide additional and less costly access to potentially
valuable information to guide an individual’s actions (Smith, 2007). This study drew from
Coleman’s work to analyze how community college honors programs cultivate social
relationships with closure while providing participants with access to information channels that
guide action toward transfer and academic outcomes.
HONORARY MENTION 38
While the work of Bourdieu and Coleman are widely considered foundational to social
capital, scholars have critiqued their work for being deficit-focused and limited in their
understanding of cultural capital, especially concerning minoritized populations (Rogošić &
Baranović, 2016; Yosso, 2005). Yosso (2005) argued that “a traditional view of cultural capital
is narrowly defined by White, middle-class values, and is more limited than wealth” (p. 10).
Instead, Yosso broadened the definition of cultural capital to an understanding of community
cultural wealth that highlights the array of knowledge, skills, abilities, and contacts possessed
and utilized by communities of color that are invaluable in their community context and
undervalued by dominant and privileged groups. Yosso offered the following five additional
forms of capital in addition to social capital all contributing to community cultural wealth:
aspirational capital, linguistic capital, familial capital, navigational capital, and resistance capital.
This study sought to understand the impact of aspirational capital, familial capital, and
navigational capital on the experiences of minoritized students in community college honors
programs. Particularly, the study examined whether students experience dissonance or conflict
when or if acquiring social capital derived from their honors program experiences.
Institutional Agents
It is important to understand how social capital is transmitted in an educational context.
Using a network analytical approach, Stanton-Salazar (1997) evaluated the role of social capital,
as defined by Bourdieu (1977, 1986) and Coleman (1988), and institutional support to uncover
the institutional and ideological societal forces that problematize access to institutional privileges
and resources for minoritized youth. Critical in this research is the educational setting’s
institutional agents: “individuals who have the capacity and commitment to transmit directly or
negotiate the transmission of, institutional resources and opportunities” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997,
HONORARY MENTION 39
p. 6). The author emphasized the critical understanding that low-status students acquisition of
social capital is highly dependent on institutional supports offered by institutional agents in
mainstream educational institutions rife with exclusionary practices that problematize the social
development of low-status youth and “engineer their failure in school” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997,
p. 8). Different from that of other educational sociologists, this research offered a framework
focused on low-status or minoritized students access to tangible institutional resources and
opportunities while also seeking to understand how students overcome “exclusionary forces” and
“accumulate valuable, highly productive social capital” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997, p. 10).
The framework provided by Stanton-Salazar (1997) asserted six key forms of
institutional support that institutional agents need to provide for low-status students. Essentially,
Stanton-Salazar called for institutional agents to act in the capacity of role models that connect
students to resources and opportunities, provide moral and emotional support, and evaluative
feedback, all while supporting student’s socialization into the institution through the provision of
various funds of knowledge. Stanton-Salazar’s definition of institutional support guided this
study in understanding the institutional support minoritized students are experiencing through
their engagement with institutional agents associated with the community college honors
program. (See Table 1)
HONORARY MENTION 40
Table 1
Six Key Forms of Institutional Support
Six key forms of institutional support
1) Provision of various funds of knowledge Provide various funds of knowledge associated
with ascension within the educational system
including implicit and explicit socialization into
institutional discourses
2) Bridging Acting as a human bridge to gatekeepers, social
networks, and opportunities for exploring various
mainstream institutions
3) Advocacy Advocating and providing personalized
intervention
4) Role modeling Serving as a model to contextualize the use of
institutional funds of knowledge
5) Emotional and Moral Support The provision of thoughtful and genuine
emotional and moral support
6) Evaluative feedback, guidance, and advice Regular, personalized, and soundly based
evaluative feedback, guidance, and advice
incorporating the thoughtful provision of
institutional funds of knowledge
Source: Adapted from Stanton-Salazar, R. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding
the socialization of racial minority children and youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67,
1–40.
Social and Transfer Capital in Post-Secondary Research
Previous research has used social capital to understand phenomena related to student
success (Moschetti & Hudley, 2015; Museus & Neville, 2012; Nora, 2004; Palmer & Gasman,
2008; Sandoval-Lucero, Maes, & Klingsmith, 2014; Smith, 2007). The body of research has
attempted to understand the impact of social capital on academic success, college choice, and
community college transfer (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009; Moschetti & Hudley, 2015; Moser, 2013;
Nora, 2004; Palmer & Gasman, 2008; Sandoval-Lucero et al., 2014). Additionally, scholars
have used social capital theory to understand the unique post-secondary experiences of
minoritized populations (Sandoval-Lucero et al., 2014). Moser (2013) and Laanan, Starobin, and
Eggleston (2010) adapted seminal research on social capital to explore factors that facilitate
successful transfer from the community college to 4-year universities. Laanan et al. (2010) first
HONORARY MENTION 41
defined transfer capital as the process by which community college students acquire knowledge
and skills necessary to navigate the transfer process (Laanan et al., 2010). This study adds to the
existing literature by connecting the concepts of transfer capital, social capital, and community
cultural wealth in the context of minoritized students at the programmatic level in the community
college. Figure 1 offers a conceptual model on the role of community college honors programs
in the provision of social and transfer capital to impact transfer success. In this figure the Gray
space represents the interactions of the honors program, and their influence on student transfer
outcomes over time. Importantly, this figure visually shows an early interaction with community
cultural wealth. It should be noted that the figure is not crediting the honors program for
provisioning community cultural wealth, rather it suggests institutional agents in the honors
program form authentic relationships and leverage the forms of capital outlined by Yosso (2005),
that students possess, helping students activate and operationalize them. By performing Stanton-
Salazar’s (1997) key forms of institutional support, represented by the circles in figure 1,
institutional agents in the honors program alter a student’s trajectory to transfer. The researcher
created figure 1 to represent the various elements of social capital theory that will be cross
analyzed in this study.
HONORARY MENTION 42
Figure 1. Honors to transfer model.
Conclusion
This chapter presented the literature related to the study and outlined a theoretical frame
for interpreting the data. The next chapter will provide a detailed account of the methodology
used for the study. Details on site selection, sampling, and data collection will be presented.
HONORARY MENTION 43
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Historically, the community colleges have played a central role in post-secondary access,
particularly with regard to minoritized populations. By providing both vocational and career
technical education along with a pathway to baccalaureate and graduate level work via transfer,
community colleges have created educational opportunity for the masses. With increasing
emphasis on the development of a college-educated workforce in the United States, community
colleges will play an equally central role in the equitable access to college, particularly in their
ability to transfer minoritized students to selective colleges and universities.
Research on the experiences of community college students has highlighted how
minoritized students are overrepresented in community colleges, are more likely to be placed in
remedial classes, and struggle to transfer (Castro & Cortez, 2017; Crisp & Nuñez, 2014; Kisker
et al., 2010; Monaghan & Attewell, 2015). Few studies have explored the experiences of high-
achieving minoritized community college students (Jones, 2018; Hoxby & Turner, 2013).
Additionally, community college honors research has outlined the benefits honors education
offers students in their preparation for the university (Berger, 2007; Corcoran, 2015) while
simultaneously acknowledging the lack of participation of minoritized students in honors
programs (Engelen-Eigles & Milner, 2014; Kisker & Outcalt, 2005; Treat & Barnard, 2012).
This study sought to address the gap in the literature by understanding the experiences of
minoritized students participating in honors programs at the community college. Further, this
study explored how honors programs prepare high-achieving minoritized community college
students for transfer to selective colleges and universities. Two research questions guided this
study:
HONORARY MENTION 44
1. How do high-achieving, minoritized students characterize their experiences in
community college honors programs?
2. How do community college honors programs prepare high-achieving minoritized students to
transfer to selective post-secondary institutions?
Site Selection
The study was conducted at a community college in a large metropolitan area in
California. The site for this study was Viking Valley College (VVC). A pseudonym was used to
maintain confidentiality and anonymity of the site. VVC is the only community college in its
district and serves a diverse working-class population in the surrounding neighborhood and
enrolls over 24,000 students annually, with the largest populations being from racially
minoritized groups. VVC was a good site for this study due to the size of its honors program,
which includes approximately 450 active participants. VVC also has a strong reputation in its
community, which is evidenced by long-standing partnerships with the local K–12 district and
the local state college. Furthermore, the mission of the school explicitly states a commitment to
academic excellence and workforce development with the provision of equitable student learning
and achievement.
The honors program at VVC is well-established and has defined parameters for
participation. Students participating in the honors programs at VVC must maintain several
program requirements, including maintaining a 3.25 GPA, enrolling in at least one honors
designated course each semester, and meeting with the honors counselor at least once a semester.
Honors students must complete a formal application process that includes a faculty
recommendation. The demographics of the program mirror that of the college, with
approximately 50% of honors students identifying as Hispanic, 20% White, 10% Asian
HONORARY MENTION 45
American, and 10% Black. Honors class sizes range from 13 to 24 students and provide
increased access to faculty. Approximately 100 honors students transfer to a college or university
each year, and the average time to transfer for honors students is just over 2.5 years.
VVC has established transfer agreements with multiple local state colleges and
universities that provide priority consideration for honors transfer students. Additionally, VVC is
part of a statewide consortium of honors programs with access to a broader set of agreements
with private and out-of-state colleges and universities. VVC offers access to a large sample of
minoritized honors students.
Population and Sample
The population for this study was community college students who identified as Black or
Latinx and who participate in the school’s honors program. The sample consisted of 15
participants. Of that group, 13 participants were interviewed individually and three took part in a
focus group interview. In addition to the student participants the researcher conducted an
interview with the honors coordinator, a faculty member, to triangulate the data and further
understand the honors program design. The criteria used to select the student participant sample
was as follows: (a) identify as Black or Latinx, (b) enrolled at VVC, and (c) currently or
previously participated in the college’s formal honors program. In addition to the demographics
of the sample, the following criteria were considered in the selection of participants: (a)
willingness to share personal experiences, (b) availability, and (c) consent to be audio recorded.
Individuals who were interested and willing in participating in the study first completed a
screening survey, which served to collect demographic data used for purposeful sampling and to
ensure they met the criteria for selection. Additionally, the screening survey asked the interested
individuals for their preference in terms of participating in an individual interview or focus
HONORARY MENTION 46
group. Interested individuals who met the sample criteria were classified as potential
participants. The list of potential participants was further refined to maximize the diversity of
the sample as well as balance enrollment status (i.e., full-time or part-time) and gender
representation. Potential participants were contacted to schedule interviews or focus groups.
Individuals not meeting the criteria were not be contacted for further participation.
The goal of this study was to collect information-rich data on the experience and
preparation of students in a particular subset of the community college. To achieve this goal, the
researcher utilized purposeful sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Purposeful sampling
allowed for a non-randomized approach to select participants who offered data directly related to
the research questions. The research questions were designed to understand the experiences of a
specific demographic. Thus, it was necessary to use a non-random and criterion-based sampling
approach (Johnson & Christensen, 2008; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Instrumentation
This study sought to understand the experiences of minoritized students in a community
college honors program and to understand if those experiences prepare them to transfer to
selective colleges and universities. To do this, the study used instrumentation that supported the
collection of descriptive narratives provided by the study’s participants. Qualitative research
methods allowed the participants to expound upon their experiences related to their interest in,
the choice to participate, and experiences in the honors program. Since qualitative research
studies seek to understand how people interpret experiences and the meaning they attribute to the
experiences they encounter, this method was the most appropriate for understanding participants’
experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Screening Survey
HONORARY MENTION 47
The study began with a screening survey to support the recruitment and selection of
participants. The survey was sent digitally to all active honors students at VVC. The survey
contained demographic questions related to the participant’s age, gender, racial identity,
enrollment status, transfer intentions, and contact information, and two open-ended questions
related to honors program experiences. Data from two open-response questions in the screening
survey allowed participants to reflect on why they participated in the honors program at VVC
and what they found most valuable about the program. The researcher used open-ended
questions to triangulate the themes that arose from the participant interviews. The pre-screening
survey was created using the online survey tool Qualtrics. The initial request to participate was
distributed on behalf of the researcher via email by the honors program coordinator at VVC.
Interviews
The primary tool for collecting data was individual interviews. The researcher framed
questions that helped guide the conversation but allowed for authentic responses and reflection
from interviewees. The researcher began by developing a protocol to align each potential
interview question with the research questions. Secondly, the questions were developed to allow
sufficient exploration of the data provided through the lens’ of social capital theory, transfer
capital, and the role of institutional agents. Using this method, the researcher pulled a wealth of
information from each participant and identified themes that pointed to deeper meaning, which
developed a better understanding of how the honors programs college affected them. The
interviews were semi-structured and conversational, allowing for open-ended and authentic
responses (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). This method was essential to address the study’s research
questions and for the subsequent analysis. Open-ended questions allowed ample opportunity for
participants to provide thorough descriptions of their experiences, which were later coded into
HONORARY MENTION 48
themes for further analysis. This inductive process necessitated the use of qualitative methods
and allowed for the data to produce new concepts, hypotheses, and theories (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The interview questions were pre-composed and submitted to the dissertation chair for
review. Questions in the interview protocol provided opportunities for participants to describe
the ways the honors program at VVC affected their progress towards transfer, describe the
influence of institutional agents on their academic outcomes, and reflect on their decision and
justification for participating in the honors program. After interview questions were created and
reviewed by the dissertation chair, they were tested with two non-participants.
Focus Groups
Focus groups are socially constructed and produce rich information that cannot be
obtained through individual interviews as a result of the listening and interpretation of other
group member responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, in addition to the 13 semi-
structured interviews, a focus group was conducted with a select group of participants. This
group included one participant who also participated in an individual interview. Data collected
in the focus groups were used to triangulate the themes and data derived from individual
interviews. The focus group, in conjunction with individual interviews, helped to further
substantiate the findings of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The focus group questions were developed to include a variety of question types while
being flexible enough to allow for a casual and conversational environment amongst participants.
The focus group protocol included questions that explore the access and utilization of
institutional agents and other resources provided by the honors program. Additionally, questions
explored the motivations and intentions that participants had when choosing to participate in the
HONORARY MENTION 49
honors program. Lastly, questions explored the impact of the honors program on participant’s
academic outcomes.
HONORARY MENTION 50
Data Collection
Upon formal receipt of approval of the study by the USC Institutional Review Board, the
researcher contacted the coordinator of the honors program at VVC to enlist their participation in
sending the screening survey to students participating in the honors programs. Beyond the
criterion-based questions, the pre-screening survey included a brief description of the nature of
the study. As the screening surveys were completed, the researcher sorted the potential
participants from those not meeting the study criteria. The researcher then contacted potential
participants via email to schedule interviews. Interviews were only scheduled for participants
who consented to the recording and who were available during the window of time that
interviews were conducted. All interviews were conducted in a space that was convenient, and
accessible to both the researcher and participant and that maintained the participant’s privacy.
Six participants (Alexis, Isaac, Karen, Lulu, Jenifer, and Xander) were unable to meet in-person
and were interviewed virtually using Zoom conference call software. All Participants who
completed the interview received a $25 gift card to Amazon or Target within 24 hours of the
completion of the interview.
Each interview began with a brief introduction by the researcher. Participants were
thanked for their willingness to be interviewed and share their experiences. The researcher then
read a statement from an information sheet that gave a brief description of the purpose of the
study and the role of the researcher and the participant in the interview. Each participant was
reminded that their participation was voluntary, and they could end the interview at any time or
choose not to respond to any question in the interview if they were unwilling or uncomfortable
doing so. The researcher then emphasized the confidentiality of the interview and reminded the
participants that their identity would be kept anonymous through the use of a pseudonym. The
HONORARY MENTION 51
researcher then asked the participant to choose a pseudonym they wished to represent their
interview data. The researcher then explained how the pseudonym and data security measures
helped to maintain the anonymity of their identity. The researcher emphasized that the interview
was being recorded, the data transcribed, validated as needed by the participant, and then deleted.
The participants were asked if they had any questions regarding the confidentiality of their
interview and asked to consent verbally.
The target length of each interview was between 45 minutes and an hour, and the
researcher did their best to ensure that no interview went beyond 70 minutes. To ensure clarity
of the questions and accuracy of the responses, the researcher encouraged all participants to ask
clarifying questions should they not understand the question asked. Additionally, the researcher
asked clarifying questions to allow the participant to expound upon their experiences as needed.
To maintain a conversational atmosphere, the researcher relied on the recording and did not take
notes. Rather, the researcher stayed consistently and fully engaged with the participants as they
shared their experiences. The researcher submitted the recordings for professional transcription
shortly after the close of the interviews to allow for minimal time between the interview and
validation by the participant.
In addition to these 15 interviews with students, the honors program coordinator at VVC
was also interviewed. The honors program coordinator was asked to reflect on the programmatic
aspects of the honors program. This included the role and purpose of the honors program to the
college, the expectations of faculty and staff involved in the program, curriculum design, and the
successes and challenges of the honors program.
Focus groups were conducted similarly to the interviews. The researcher gave a brief
introduction to the purpose of the study. After thanking each of the participants for their
HONORARY MENTION 52
presence and willingness to participate, the researcher asked each of them to write the
pseudonym they wished to be known as during the focus group. The researcher explained how
the confidentiality of each participant would be maintained both in the recording of the interview
and in the transcription of their responses. All participants were reminded that their participation
was voluntary, and they could choose not to answer any question or end their participation at any
time. The researcher asked each of the participants to consent to participate verbally before
commencing the focus group.
The target time frame for each focus group was between one and two hours. The
researcher relied on the recording to capture the conversation while remaining fully engaged
with the group discussion. To maximize the authenticity of the group’s response, the researcher
asked a question one time and only repeated the question if asked by the group. The researcher
used follow-up questions and asked focus group members to expound on their responses to
ensure thorough answers throughout the focus group.
The researcher used a variety of questioning strategies and types. Question types
included experience and behavior, feelings, opinion and values, and knowledge questions
(Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). All questions asked were intended to allow participants opportunity
to expound upon their experiences in the honors program and how the program was preparing
them for their unique educational endeavors. The researcher strategically used different question
types to scaffold the focus group, allowing for questions that required deeper or critical thinking
to be asked once participants exhibited comfort with the dialogue. The researcher dressed in
casual attire to increase the comfort of the participants and to allow for a casual and
conversational environment. The researcher arrived early to arrange the chairs circularly and
ensure that the room allowed for the private conversation.
HONORARY MENTION 53
Data Analysis
To manage a potentially large amount of data, the researcher conducted the collection and
analysis of data simultaneously. To accomplish this, the researcher completed a brief reflection
at the close of each interview. In each of the reflections the researcher would review the data
and note common themes as well as the emotions and feelings he had with the data. Then the
researcher would reflect on the impetus of the emotions the data elicited. This process allowed
for active acknowledgment of potential bias and set it aside or bracketing the data. These short
reflections also served as memos allowing the researcher to relate the data to larger theoretical,
methodological, or substantive issues raised in the interview (Bogdan & Biklen, 1997). The
researcher used open coding to keep track of salient and summative themes in the collected data
that addressed the research questions of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The researcher employed phenomenological analysis in the interpretation of data. In
particular, he explored his personal prejudices, viewpoints, and assumptions related to the
experiences of minoritized community college honors students, a process referred to as epoche
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher then engaged in bracketing, which is to temporarily
set aside assumptions. After accounting for potential bias, the researcher used horizontalization,
holding all initial collection of data as equal value, and then organized that data into clusters and
themes for descriptive analysis (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Moustakas, 1994).
Trustworthiness
The researcher employed several strategies, including triangulation, member checking,
and reflexivity, to increase the credibility of the study’s findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
study used multiple data collection methods (i.e., individual interviews and focus group
interviews) to prevent any concern that the findings were artifacts of any single method or source
HONORARY MENTION 54
(Patton, 2015). This strategy ensured the overall trustworthiness of the findings. The
transferability of this study is challenging given the wide variance in honors program
characteristics in community colleges. For example, some community college honors programs
utilize projects or additional course requirements to earn honors course credit. In these programs
there may be little social engagement amongst fellow honors students and perhaps no formal
designation of honors physical space or faculty. To mitigate this challenge, the researcher chose
a site with a well-established honors program that implements a number of common honors
program characteristics such as application and earned entry, curated classes, dedicated faculty,
and space. The findings of this study should be aligned to similarly structured programs.
Throughout the data collection phase, the researcher analyzed the impact of these program
factors and the impact of participant experience.
Member checking allowed the researcher to confirm that the interpretation of the
participants’ interviews were authentically reflected in the data and the findings. This strategy
also allowed for clarification and validation of emerging themes presented in the data (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Further, the researcher openly stated their biases, dispositions, and assumptions
related to the research so that any interpretation of the findings could be made with a full
understanding of how their experiences, worldview, and perceptual lens may have influenced the
conclusions reached in the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Role of the Researcher
The researcher brings with them over a decade’s worth of experience in secondary and
higher education. The majority of his experience comes from working with minoritized students
as a classroom teacher, college access professional, and college student services professional.
Currently, the researcher supports the persistence and retention of students at a historically
HONORARY MENTION 55
female, small liberal arts, private Hispanic-serving institution. As a classroom educator, the
researcher spent years promoting the importance of a college degree to their students, the
majority of whom were students of color. The researcher has no formal experience working in a
community college system. As a Black male who attended and graduated from a 4-year
university without attending a community college, the researcher acknowledges that their
experience as a person of color could be uniquely different from that of this study’s participants.
As the primary collector and interpreter of data, the researcher used bracketing to suspend any
potential biases that could influence the findings.
Conclusion
This chapter provided a detailed account of the methodology for this study. The research
questions were provided along with details on the site, sampling, and data collection. The role of
the researcher was described to acknowledge potential bias that might influence the findings of
the study. Chapter Four will present the data collection following the methodology outlined
here.
HONORARY MENTION 56
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
This chapter includes findings collected from interviews and a focus group with
minoritized students participating in the honors program at VVC. Additional data from the
participant screening survey and an interview with the honors program administrator are also
reported.
The chapter opens with a review of the purpose and research questions that guided the
study, followed by a review of the methodology and a brief narrative of the participants. The
chapter is organized by the emergent themes that specifically address the research questions and
concludes with a summary of the findings. Two research questions guided this study:
1. What are the experiences of minoritized students enrolled in community college honors
programs?
2. How do community college honors programs prepare high-achieving minoritized
students to transfer to 4-year institutions?
Participants
Fifteen participants participated in interviews only, two participants participated only in a
focus group, and one participant completed both a focus group and individual interview. All 15
interview and focus group participants were current students at VVC and participated in the
honors program for at least one semester. In addition to these 15 interviews with students, the
honors program coordinator at VVC was also interviewed.
The interview transcripts of the 15 minoritized VVC honors program participants were
analyzed and assigned codes that captured their authentic experiences. Each code was given a
textual description. The codes related to the six key forms of institutional support for
institutional agents asserted by Stanton-Salazar (1997). This study used the six forms of
HONORARY MENTION 57
institutional support by institutional agents as a theoretical frame to understand the ways the
honors program at VVC supports the acquisition of social capital for minoritized students and
prepares them for transfer to a 4-year degree program. These institutional supports are provision
of various funds of knowledge, bridging, advocacy, role modeling, emotional and moral support,
and evaluative feedback, guidance, and advice.
Faculty Participant
The researcher completed an individual interview with the honors program coordinator.
John, a pseudonym, holds a dual role at VVC as the honors program coordinator and faculty in
the English department. At the time of this study, he had been at VVC for over a decade and
worked with the honors program for nearly the entire time. In addition to being responsible for
the recruitment and success monitoring of honors students, he also regularly taught classes for
honors and non-honors courses in the English department. He organized an honors orientation
each semester and served as a conduit for valuable information and resources between honors
students and college stakeholders.
Survey Participants
John sent a screening survey to all students participating in the honors program at VVC.
The following two open-ended questions were completed by 66 survey respondents: (a) Why did
you choose to participate in the honors program at VVC? (b) What has been the most valuable
resource to you in the honors program, and why? The sample of survey respondents was
generally representative of the honors program demographics at VVC. Figures 2 through 5
below show the demographic characteristics of the survey respondents.
HONORARY MENTION 58
Figure 2. Total semesters in the honors program.
Figure 3. Age range of survey participants.
Figure 4. Gender identity of survey participants.
Five or more
Semesters, 2, 3%
Four Semesters, 8,
12%
One
Semester,
30, 46%
Three Semesters, 14,
21%
Two Semesters,
12, 18%
Five or more Semesters
Four Semesters
One Semester
Three Semesters
Two Semesters
25 years or older, 18,
27%
under 25 years old,
48, 73%
25 years or older
under 25 years old
Female, 42, 64%
Gender Variant/Non-
Conforming, 3, 5%
Male, 20, 30%
Other not listed, 1,
1%
Female
Gender Variant/Non-Conforming
Male
Other not listed
HONORARY MENTION 59
Figure 5. Racial/ethnic identity of participants.
Interview Participants
All interview participants were selected from the 66 screening survey participants. The
researcher selected participants who identified with racially minoritized groups to participate in
either a focus group or individual interview. The researcher selected participants who had
completed one semester at the college and were participants in the honors program at VVC.
Table 2 provides the demographic breakdown of the 15 interview and focus group participants.
Table 2
Participant Demographics
Name
Gender
Identity
Race/Ethnic
Background
Age
Interview
Type
Semesters
in Honors
Enrollment
Status
Expected
Transfer
Year
ADAM
Gender
Variant/Non-
Conforming
Asian
under
25
Individual 4 PT 2021
ALEXIS Female
Black/African
American
under
25
Individual 1 FT 2022
DANIEL Male
Hispanic or
Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Individual 1 FT 2021
DEE Female
Hispanic or
Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Focus
Group
2 FT 2020
Asian, 13, 20%
Black/African
American, 5, 7%
Hispanic or Latinx
or Spanish Origin,
25, 38%
Multi Racial, 7, 11%
White, 16, 24%
Asian
Black/African American
Hispanic or Latinx or Spanish
Origin
HONORARY MENTION 60
Table 2, continued
Name
Gender
Identity
Race/Ethnic
Background
Age
Interview
Type
Semesters in
Honors
Enrollment
Status
Expected
Transfer
Year
ISAAC Male
Hispanic or Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Individual & Focus
Group
2 FT 2021
JENIFER Female Asian
under
25
Individual 1 FT 2021
JR Male
Hispanic or Latinx or
Spanish Origin
25 or
older
Individual 2 FT 2021
KAREN Female
Hispanic or Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Individual 1 FT 2020
LULU Female
Hispanic or Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Individual 3 FT 2020
MACY Female
Black/African
American
under
25
Individual 1 FT 2020
MARINO Male
Hispanic or Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Individual 3 FT 2021
SELENA Female
Hispanic or Latinx or
Spanish Origin
under
25
Focus Group 1 FT 2021
SHAWN Male
Black/African
American
25 or
older
Individual 3 FT 2020
SHERRY Female
Black/African
American
25 or
older
Individual 1 FT 2022
XANDER Male
Black/African
American
under
25
Individual 1 PT 2021
Participant Profiles
Adam had always held themself to high academic expectations. They noted that grades
below a B were not acceptable. Despite being accepted to a number of universities, Adam found
the financial benefits of attending the community college more comfortable. At the time of this
study, Adam attended VVC part-time and was studying film, despite the challenges this
presented with family. To appease the wishes of their family, Adam chose to work part time in a
job related to health care.
Alexis described herself as a high-achieving student who challenged herself with honors
and AP classes. During her years in high school, she earned high grades and had plans to attend
HONORARY MENTION 61
San Jose State to study nursing. However, a month before classes started, after making her
deposit and registering for classes, she realized her family could not meet the financial
obligations of her going away to school. Instead, she enrolled at VVC to begin her studies and
transfer after earning an associate degree. She found a place in the honors program at the college
in her first year and enjoyed the rigor of the courses she was taking.
Daniel knew early on that the community college route was a good fit for him. As a
middle school student, he recalled going to help his mother clean houses situated on hills and
helping his father lay tile on jobs around town. His parents immigrated from Mexico to build a
life where he could make a living by picking up a pencil rather than a shovel or a hoe. The hard
work of Daniel’s parents instilled in him a strong will to succeed academically, so much so that
he began taking classes at the local community college his junior and senior year of high school
while playing soccer and participating in extracurriculars at a charter school. For Daniel, the
challenge of college was less academic and more due to navigating the system and the cost.
Daniel was taking classes to prepare him for a future career as a physical therapist. This
included working toward a personal trainer certification. He was afforded the opportunity to
educate and train faculty and staff at VVC, helping them avoid the dangers of sedentary life.
Dee ’s high school record was a downward trend as her grades steadily declined year to
year. Her academic struggles were compounded by not feeling supported by her teachers and by
social challenges with her peers. In her senior year, she became increasingly motivated to attend
college. Her passion for politics and activism had her considering CSU San Francisco; however,
the financial realities of college attendance changed her plans. While VVC was financially
accessible, she described her early frustrations with having to play catch-up from poor academic
preparation in middle and high school.
HONORARY MENTION 62
Isaac always expected that he would attend college. As a child of two Honduran
immigrant parents who sacrificed completion of their own college degrees to care for him, there
was constant pressure to excel academically and honor that sacrifice. Until the end of middle
school, Isaac thrived academically, but his first two years of high school came with significant
challenges in math and English. Though he turned things around academically in his last two
years of high school, the struggles of ninth and tenth grade would ultimately limit his college
choices upon graduation. Still, Isaac was determined to persist towards earning a college degree.
As a student in the honors program at VVC he was taking classes to prepare him for his ultimate
goal of attending medical school and becoming a cardiologist. He also obtained a board of
governors waiver, which paid for his classes at VVC. While his choice to attend VVC was
initially disappointing, he found the cost savings and close proximity to home helpful as he
completed his general education courses before transferring.
Jenifer started high school enrolled in one of the schools’ selective honors programs,
participated in a number of school service clubs, and participated in the arts. However she did
not consider herself a high-achieving student. She attempted honors classes, but her grades
suffered, and she eventually switched out of her school’s honors academy. At the time, she
attributed her failures to not being equipped with the resources of her peers and feeling different
as one of the only Cambodian students in her classes. What she did not know at the time was
that she also had ADHD, which was seriously inhibiting her ability to thrive academically. She
attributed much of her success to the support she received from a local college access program
that would assist her financially when she transferred.
JR wanted to do well, but high school was a tumultuous time that lacked the stability he
needed to thrive academically. Financial challenges and inconsistent living arrangements made
HONORARY MENTION 63
prioritizing school difficult. Early in his educational endeavors, he believed that college was for
folks with money or who were really smart, so he did his best to be the latter. Upon graduating
from high school, he enrolled in classes while working, but quickly left classes behind to earn
money. After an 8-year hiatus from school and frustration in the workforce, he enrolled full time
at VVC.
Karen was determined at an early age to be the first in her family to attend and graduate
from college. After working hard in high school, her 3.5 GPA earned her acceptance into a small
liberal arts college. However, her time there was short-lived due to financial hardship. Even
after financial aid, her family was responsible for over $3,000 a month for tuition and room and
board costs. After her first year, the financial burden was not tenable and she transferred to VVC
to complete general education classes. The experience opened her to new ideas regarding her
educational goal, and she hoped to transfer to UCLA when she finished her courses at VVC.
Lulu described herself as a student just trying to get through her classes. She came to the
United States at age seven and saw education as an opportunity for a better life. She was
studying journalism at VVC with a Dream scholarship that would allow her additional financial
resources when she decided to transfer. She stated attending the community college had been
empowering for her as a Latina:
I just feel it’s kind of empowering when you see so many people with the same
background or similar backgrounds as you, when it comes to ethnicity, trying to get their
higher education and educating themselves and transferring, and you see your friends
transferring.
Macy remembers her eighth grade year when her brother was accepted into his dream
school, USC, as the moment she realized that she wanted to go to college. She toured the school
HONORARY MENTION 64
and remembered being proud of her brother and excited to work towards the same goal.
However, high school would prove to be a tumultuous time for her. Having attended four
different schools in two years, Macy describes herself as a high school troublemaker. Frustrated
with her high school experience, she opted to take the California High School Proficiency Exam
and exit high school early. Still motivated to pursue her college degree, she enrolled in classes at
the community college:
I realized how enriching education could be for someone. And I wanted that for myself.
And even now, I imagine myself being a teacher and being in an academic environment
for the rest of my life just because I feel school is so special.
Marino had been focused on college from an early age. His parents did whatever was in
their power to put him into educational environments that would support him academically, even
if that meant attending school in a different city and district. In high school, he took 12
Advanced Placement classes but only passed one of the exams. Still, Marino was apprehensive
about attending any college beyond the community college level due to a legacy of family failure
in college. He stated,
I felt that, if I started from the bottom and just worked myself up, I would be able to keep
going because I would have experience of it because coming straight out of high school, a
school like USC, it’s major. I never heard anyone in my family get past community
college.
Selena was accustomed to honors coursework since high school. In addition to
challenging herself with honors and AP courses, she was actively involved in her school’s
National Honor Society. She began her college planning in eighth grade at the encouragement of
her middle school teachers with aspirations of being the first in her family to graduate from
HONORARY MENTION 65
college. After working hard to get accepted into many universities, her ultimate decision was
made due to the cost of college. Realizing she ultimately wanted to attend graduate school, she
made a conscious decision to attend VVC to minimize undergraduate debt and make post-
graduate education a reality.
Shawn overcame compounding challenges to get to the honors program at VVC.
Though attending college was discussed as the obvious next step for him in high school, the path
to college would become increasingly unclear. After switching from private to public school, he
experienced culture shock that made him increasingly under-motivated. Until his senior year in
high school, football was his driving force. When his opportunities to play football after high
school ended, he dropped out of school, earned a GED, and pursued community college.
Shawn’s parents were unable and, at times, unwilling to help him finance his education, which
led him to move from job to job trying to find ways to pay for college. At one point, he was
living out of his car. Coincidentally, being homeless allowed him to be eligible for financial aid
as an independent student and enroll as a full-time student. His journey back to the classroom
continued to be a driving source of motivation. He said,
It kind of triggered this mindset in me that, I have to go get it, get it for myself. I have to
be above everybody else, and so I get it kind of triggered this insatiable drive, just have
got to be the best, because nobody’s going to look out for me, otherwise.
Sherry described her first three years of high school as a time when she was highly
involved, participating in multiple competitive sports. However, her senior year brought much
instability. By the end of her senior year, she had attended five different schools. She attributed
this instability to her family’s financial and housing insecurity. When she graduated, she was
accepted into three different universities, but she entered the workforce. After her mother’s
HONORARY MENTION 66
death, she returned to school to fulfill a promise she made to finish her education. She is now an
English major at VVC and hopes to pursue writing and her passion for Japanese after she
transfers.
Xander was thriving academically until his junior year of high school. He enjoyed
school and was challenging himself to take honors and AP classes. However, by his junior year,
he had become chronically ill and was unable to physically attend school. To continue his
education, he began to home school. Xander was determined, at times taking on more work than
he should have given his health. He would, in turn, graduate earlier than his peers and begin
taking classes at the community college to continue his care and be close to his family support
system.
Emergent Themes
After analysis of the interview and survey data, four major themes emerged that address
the research questions: (a) authentic faculty/student interpersonal relationships, (b) consistently
high expectations from peers, (c) manufactured closure and community, and (d) a clear north
star. This section will provide a description of each theme and provide references from the data.
Authentic Faculty and Student Interpersonal Relationships
One of the most salient and recurring themes from the data was the role of the honors
faculty members and their interactions with honors students. In the survey responses, when
asked about the most valuable resource in the program, honors faculty were the most referenced
response. Survey participants and interview participants alike noted the investment by faculty in
their personal and academic wellbeing. Survey Participant 5 mentioned,
The most valuable resource of the honors program so far is the use of my professor’s
office hours. This is helpful because it gives me one-on-one information regarding my
HONORARY MENTION 67
classes and any questions I may have from previous lectures. It also allows me to have a
bond with my professor, which I feel is helpful in succeeding in college.
Survey Participant 17 added, “The level of commitment from the instructors. They realize that
the class is engaged, and I believe it encourages them to keep challenging us as students.”
Participants described their honors faculty as proactive and personally invested in their
academic and long-term career aspirations. In doing so, faculty exhibited many of the roles of
institutional agents described by Stanton-Salazar (1997). By sharing various funds of knowledge
with students, they helped bridge them to future professional and academic opportunities that, in
turn, increase their access to resources. For example, Adam stated,
They help us with career development and resources. The other day, I was talking about
anthropology, and I thought like, “Oh, maybe I can minor in that,” and I went to my
honors anthropology professor, and he’s excitedly like, “Yes, let’s talk about it. I got
you,” and then he pulled up tabs on his computer, and he’s like, “Okay. Let me talk about
this. What are you looking for?
Similarly, Dee mentioned,
At the beginning of my honors orientation, John told us about the President’s
Ambassadors here on campus. I applied, interviewed, got it, and through that, I’m
getting connected to a lot of people that are trustees. I talked to them their like, oh, work
for this company, we have scholarships. And then a lot of them also know people
offering internships. Through there, I learned that there’s a community college internship
for NASA. So, I’m applying for that right now.
Lastly, Shawn said,
We ended up having a conversation. He was one of the honors teachers. I wasn’t in his
HONORARY MENTION 68
honors class at the time, but he brought out a guy from UCLA who was starting this
research program to get community college students involved with research and get them
to consider applying for Ph.D. programs. I applied for the program, interview, and I get
accepted for the program.
John described the role of the honors faculty as a critical element to the honors program’s
ability to support student transfer. With about 50% of VVC’s annual transfers to the UC coming
from the honors program, John attributed much of that success to the dedication of the honors
faculty. John said,
Honors students are much more demanding than a regular student population. They will
challenge you, and they will ask questions, they’ll stay after class, they’ll come to office
hours, all that kind of stuff. And so it’s great. I mean, that’s what we want students to do.
But the people who teach in the honors program have to be a special kind of faculty in
order to be willing to do that. But the students will develop those relationships with those
instructors, and that’s the strength of the program.
In each of these references, the commitment of the faculty was evident in their
willingness and eagerness to engage with the student. The resulting impact of the engagement
was a mutual investment in what could otherwise be a transactional relationship between the
faculty and the student.
Consistently High Expectations From Peers
Participants consistently referenced an expectation of being challenged by their honors
classes. Many cited seeking challenge or a rich learning environment as a reason for
participating in the program. Table 3 shows the frequency of coded responses of survey
participants. However, participants often noted that, while their courses were challenging, this
HONORARY MENTION 69
challenge had less to do with the actual coursework and more to do with the expectations that
result from a discussion-based curriculum and peer expectations. Daniel mentioned,
So, in my non-honors classes, I was more so casual, I would say. Maybe like making
friends, talking outside of the coursework, just basic casual conversations well as in the
honors classes, you’re more so just focused on the work. There’s no time for casual talk.
You’re there to work.
Alexis stated,
A lot of my classmates like to interact and talk and basically help each other in the
program. In my regular classes, it’s like everyone’s there for themselves if that makes
sense. It’s like everyone is their own individual person; no one is helping each […] Yeah
[in honors], it’s more involvement like the students they like to interact with each other
and working in groups, we work in groups a lot.
Isaac observed, “So, in the honor classes, it’s more professional because everybody is there to
exceed rather than just there for a good time or just because they have to be there.” Macy
highlighted the friendships she made in the program:
I’ve made quite a few friends in the honors program. I’ve maybe made one friend, an
actual friend outside of the honors program. But I think because the class sizes are a lot
smaller and like I said, we’re having a lot of class discussions that are just more
enriching, more challenging. I think naturally, we’re just more inclined to be friendlier
with each other, to reach out to each other and collaborate. So I think that’s how a lot of
my friendships have formed.
HONORARY MENTION 70
Table 3
Survey Response Codes
Q1 Response Codes # of coded References
What has been the most
valuable resource in the
honors program?
Articulation Agreements 4
Honors Classes/Curriculum 13
Honors Counselors 5
Honors Faculty 18
Honors Peers 8
Designated Honors space 14
Information Shared 8
Priority Registration 3
Honors Coordinator/staff 7
Q2 Response Codes # of coded References
Why did you choose
to participate in the
honors program?
Access to Resources 2
Transfer Advantages 29
Challenge 23
Peer/Social Interactions 17
Recommendation 3
Rich Learning Environment 20
Scholarships 1
John also noted the impact of what he described as peer pressure and its impact on
students in the honors program:
So many times, once a student starts in the honors, they are taking classes, and then they
join the honors program, a lot of times they’ll come in and thank me and say, “Oh, so
glad I’m here.” But a lot of what they’re saying is, now I’m around other people who are
also stepping up. And that makes a huge difference than being in a class where the
majority of the class is just kind of sitting back and letting things happen. In a lot of
ways, they’re not necessarily going to tolerate someone who’s just sitting back. So,
there’s that peer pressure. I’d say it’s a positive peer pressure of let’s push each other
forward.
HONORARY MENTION 71
Manufactured Closure and Community
Data consistently pointed to the existence of a community collectively understood by the
honors program. Multiple aspects of the honors program design establish what Coleman (1988)
described as closure amongst those that belong in the honors program. Coleman (1988)
explained that norms arise as attempts to limit negative external effects or encourage positive
ones, however the creation of effective norms is dependent on the condition of closure in the
social structure. Closure is thus a phenomenon in a social structure that ensures the efficacy of
norms to encourage desired behaviors through sanctions and rewards by in-group members. The
program design leverages physical space, small classes, and earned access to solidify a social
network across students from very different backgrounds and experiences. The resulting closure
helps to mitigate access to resources available and exclusive to those in the honors program,
including information, committed faculty, and like-minded peers.
Closure through physical space. The honors space or lounge was repeatedly referenced
by participants as a hub of support. Participants referenced getting access to free printing,
upcoming college events, clubs and organizations, and peer support in the hub. Additionally, it
was a designated space to engage with like-minded peers. Survey Participant 13 wrote,
The most valuable resource to me in the honors program has been the honors study area
and library because it has provided me with a space to focus on my studies and
collaborate with other honors students on my schoolwork. I have a very hectic schedule
this semester, so it has been helpful to have a stable workspace available to me at all
times.
Survey Participant 15 added,
HONORARY MENTION 72
I am able to access computers easier compared to waiting for a computer in the main
library area, including free printing. It also provides an area for me and my peers to study
together, which has helped bonding feel easier and comfortable. Lastly, it is easy to
access honors staff if I have any questions and/or concerns.
Elements of how the honors lounge supports closure in the honors program were most
vivid in Shawn’s description of his interaction with the honors lounge, particularly in how he
perceived his acceptance in the space when he first accessed it:
I remember when I first started coming into the honors lounge, there’s a pretty regular
group of people here just kind of chilling and working on stuff, hanging out, talking and
coming into the space. You kind of get this feeling that they’re kind of the core group of
the honors program and that anybody else is just kind of like a fringe element.
Closure through earned access. The honors requirements served as a commitment and
guard rails for the student rather than an actual barrier to entry. Those guard rails served as a
commitment to engage in the norms of all others in the network. This is a necessary aspect of
closure, especially when that closure allows for the sharing of resources or capital amongst the
group (Coleman, 1988). John described the honors application as an opportunity for students to
demonstrate their willingness to be challenged:
They have to fill out an application. And so just filling out an application, it takes a
certain amount of initiative to find that and to do that and to turn that in. We also ask
them to get a recommender, some instructor, that they actually have to talk to, and take a
huge risk to say, “I’d really like to join the honors program, do you think I’m good
enough to do that?” And that’s a terribly difficult question to ask. But a student who is
able to do that, to take that kind of initiative is well on their way to being the sort of
HONORARY MENTION 73
student we want. It’s someone who is willing to challenge themselves, someone who’s
willing to put themselves in a difficult situation, someone who is willing to do the work
that’s assigned, someone who’s willing to come into an office hour after class and
continue a conversation. Not all our students are there. But that’s the kind of student we’d
like to foster.
Dee noted this phenomenon when she described her peers’ perception of her honors courses.
She reflected on a semester when she took three honors courses in one semester:
Everyone’s like, Oh wow, really you’re taking honors classes? That must be hard. In my
head I’m like, no, it’s really not. It’s labeled as honors, smaller class size, and then
maybe, here’s the challenge problem, and that’s the extra thing, and that’s it. But you’re
learning the same thing[…]the challenge problem and do a little presentation on the
chapter, and that’s it. It was barely anything to add to the class.
Daniel noted that the requirements of the honors program seem purposeful given the intended
goal of the program and its participants, while Isaac described the hype of honors:
I think it’s the way things are run and the expectations — the requirements of keeping
above the 3.25 GPA. I think the requirements are there for a reason. That’s what colleges
expect are or are needed in order to transfer.
Isaac highlighted social recognition:
I mean, this is probably going to sound bad, but it’s also the hype of being in the honors
class. When you tell people, I’m taking honors this or I’m taking honors that everybody
is like, Oh, he’s really smart, and I’m like, yeah, that’s right. Personally, is there a
difference between how hard the material is in an honors class compared to a regular
class? I don’t think there’s much difference. Maybe you go a little bit faster, maybe just
HONORARY MENTION 74
learn a few more topics, but in general, I feel a regular student could probably pass an
honors class if they wanted to.
Closure through small classes. While the smaller classroom size in the honors program
was conducive to the discussion-based curricular design, it also had a notable impact on building
community and strengthening the social network shared by the faculty and students. A limited
offering of courses with limited seats increases opportunities for peer and faculty engagement,
and students develop stronger relationships amongst each other and with faculty, resulting in
extended relationships beyond a single course or semester. Students have increased engagement
in a single small class, and they have more opportunities to interact with the same faculty and
students in subsequent semesters, which increases the opportunities for resource sharing and
social capital exchange. Highlighting this point, Survey Participant 26 noted,
The most valuable resource is the relationship between professors and students. Because
honors classes are smaller than average classes, professors are able to be more engaged
and get to know their students on a personal level. Students are also able to fully share
knowledge and experiences with one another.
Survey Participant 10 stated,
The smaller class sizes have been useful because it lets us engage with the teacher better
and gives us an overall better-quality learning since our peers are all there to be
challenged, but also there to learn and have fun doing it.
Lastly, Survey Participant 14 wrote,
An asset that the honors program has which the class size. Being in a class size that is no
larger than 30 students is extremely important as I am able to clearly to express my
thoughts and ideas as I am not intimidated by a large class size. Having a small size
HONORARY MENTION 75
makes it easier to build relationships with the people around you and have great class
discussions.
A Clear North Star
While this theme is a bit nuanced, it was a salient phenomenon in the data. When
participants described their decision to enroll at VVC, and subsequently in the honors program,
most described a significant life experience that served as an academic reckoning or motivator.
Participants described, in great detail, depictions of poverty, experiences of housing insecurity,
frustration with missed opportunities, and aspirations of honoring the hard work of immigrant
parents. In each of these cases, there was a manifestation of grit and resilience. Notably, only
three of the participants described themselves as high-achieving students before participating in
the honors program. However, participants articulated their current direction and how the honors
program assisted them in their journey, depicting their unique life experience as their turning
point. For example, Macy said,
Well, at the time that I was working full time as a barista. So, during that fall semester
before I had enrolled here, like I mentioned, my uncle was really sick, and he passed
away shortly after. And I also lost a childhood friend of mine to gun violence, to gang
violence. I wasn’t doing anything during that time, except going to work and coming
home and going to sleep and then waking up, going to work. And I just decided that
something needed to change. I can’t live that for the rest of my life, and it’s just not
sustainable, and it’s not healthy. I just decided that something needed to change, and I
had to really work on myself and really figure out what it is that I wanted in my life.
Isaac mentioned his parents:
They’re pretty hardworking. I see how they are, and I just want to put in as much effort
HONORARY MENTION 76
as they do. So, I definitely think that’s something that helps me out with my education
because I can’t really give up and I can’t afford to give up because people of color in this
country, we have to work twice as hard.
JR discussed a turning point:
Last year, I was involved in a DUI, totally my fault. I was living in Palm Springs at the
time and got stranded here, but I did have family that lived here, and I moved in with
them. It was either get a job or try to figure out how to go to school so I can make more
money. I didn’t go to school right after high school, but I wish I would’ve. Life
experiences that I had to go through as a young adult have helped me with my
explanations with certain topics in class. Instead of having to research a perspective on
materials, I have a life perspective on materials.
Sherry discussed her late mother’s influence:
So, she passed in 2013. I came back. I started taking Japanese maybe like in 2017, so
maybe three, four years roughly after. Because I still was working, and I know she
wanted us to go back to college, but I was still on the fence. And I didn’t really know for
sure that’s still what I wanted to do, but then I felt the urge to come back because I felt
like if I kept working and that was the only thing I was going to keep doing, just keep
working basically like a dead-end job.
Despite experiences that provided justification for not being enrolled in school and
seeking other opportunities, the experiences participants described informed and undergirded a
purpose that would not have otherwise been realized without their life experience. Thus, the
honors program serves as an avenue of hope that removes barriers and allows them to traverse a
trajectory to their goals.
HONORARY MENTION 77
Conclusion
In conclusion, interviews with 15 participants provided a wealth of insights into the
experiences of minoritized community college honors students. The data provided evidence of
the honors program fostering a sense of closure and how that closure is experienced by
participants. Additionally, four themes emerged from the data addressing the two research
questions. The next chapter will discuss the implications of the findings as well as
considerations for future research.
HONORARY MENTION 78
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
This study and its findings address a gap in the literature on the experiences of
minoritized honors students in community college. Specifically, this study sought to understand
the role of the honors program at VVC on expediting transfer to 4-year universities for
minoritized students. By understanding the salient experiences of minoritized students in the
community college, its largest population of students, and excavating success strategies that
could be potentially scaled throughout the community college system. The findings could be
used to support the development of honors programs at other community colleges, or to redesign
existing programs, struggling to support or retain minoritized students.
Findings from student interviews showed strong alignment with work by Stanton-Salazar
(1997) and Yosso (2005) related to social capital. The study offers evidence of how participation
in the honors program at VVC provides access to institutional agents equipped to leverage the
shared cultural wealth of minoritized students and provide access to social capital that helps them
navigate the community college. This chapter will revisit the issues raised in Chapter One while
discussing the implications for practice and recommendations for future research. The research
questions will also be addressed, with institutional agents and social capital theory serving as a
framework for analysis.
Discussion of Findings
This section will examine the findings of the study in context of the two research
questions. This section will also connect the findings of the study to relevant published
literature.
HONORARY MENTION 79
Research Question One
Participants described their experiences in the honors program at VVC in two ways.
First, participants contrasted their current experiences with prior academic experiences.
Secondly, participants compared their experiences in honors courses to non-honors courses.
Interview data offer evidence of valuable relationships, interactions, and experiences for
participants, as they described their classrooms as discussion-rich environments where they were
expected to contribute to critical dialogue on a range of academic topics. By contrast,
participants noted that, in many of their non-honors classes, the expectations were far more
transactional and rudimentary. Specifically, they noted that the faculty in those classes were
focused on delivering the content, students seemed unmotivated to engage academically, and
their presence came from obligation rather than an interest in learning. Participants described
these environmental factors as a threat to their ability to develop authentic relationships with
faculty as they feared being stereotyped as uninterested or apathetic to learning. However, their
identity as honors students helped to counter that threat, as they now had an institutional
validation. As honors students, they were formalizing a commitment to being held accountable,
being challenged, and wanting more ambitious collegiate outcomes. It must be noted that
participating in the honors program was not a proclamation by students that they were elite or
high-achieving. Rather, they were willing to put in the effort to achieve their goals and wanted
an environment that was the path of least resistance to that end.
It would be a misrepresentation to claim that the honors program at VVC made the
participants in the study high-achieving; however the honors program created a community that
helped participants access their academic potential. In this community, their identity as scholars
was validated. they were surrounded by like-minded students with similar ambitions, and
HONORARY MENTION 80
developed authentic interpersonal relationships with members of the community, including
institutional agents. Thus, the honors program serves as an information and resource-rich
network that helped participants navigate VVC and future collegiate institutions.
Research Question Two
The results highlighted three important ways the honors program at VVC prepared
participants for transfer. To address this research question, this section will discuss the findings
while re-engaging the literature on social capital theory (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988),
community cultural wealth (Yosso, 2005), and the role of institutional agents (Stanton-Salazar,
1997).
Realization of community cultural wealth. For the majority of participants, there was a
significant life event that served as a renewed motivation for academic achievement: a clear
north star. Yosso (2005) described six types of capital that communities of color use to nurture
their community cultural wealth. Participants described instances in which these forms of capital
were realized and subsequently used to motivate future academic endeavors. Yosso likened
aspirational capital to resilience that allows individuals to dream of goals and outcomes beyond
their present circumstances, even when they lack the means to achieve that goal. Aspirational
capital was particularly salient for participants who were older and returning to school after a
hiatus. For example, interview participant JR had grown frustrated by the limitations of his job
prospects and, after being cited for driving under the influence, decided to access his aspirational
capital.
Shawn described his challenges related to being homeless and getting the financial
resources to continue pursuing his education. Through this experience, he had to overcome
oppressive views on his circumstances, many of which he perceived as the result of racial bias
HONORARY MENTION 81
and stereotypes. Shawn described how his experience “triggered [an] insatiable drive, to be the
best, because nobody’s going to look out for [him], otherwise.” This is an indicator of his
realizing his aspirational and resistance capital.
In both examples, it is not the existence of any one form of capital but, rather, the
realization and ability to operationalize that capital that motivated academic success. The drive
Shawn described served as a motivation to find opportunities to resist forces in the system that
had been oppressing his ability to thrive. The decision to participate in the honors program was a
logical step in advancing towards a clear north star.
Institutional agents as way-finders. While community cultural wealth was central to the
findings, the role of institutional agents associated with the honors program was equally
important. Participants offered examples of ways that honors faculty and staff have provisioned
resources, bridged them to opportunities for future academic or career opportunities, advocated
on their behalf, and provided emotional and moral support. Each of these describes a role
Stanton-Salazar (1997) described as a critical function for an institutional agent. These faculty
and staff serve as way-finders for students, helping them navigate the institutional challenges and
illuminating opportunities to enhance academic experiences. For example, interview participant
Sarah learned about the president’s scholars program by asking a faculty member about a picture
on a wall in the honors lounge. That question provided the opportunity for a scholarship.
Without the influence of institutional agents in the honors program, it is possible that participants
may have been successful by other means. However, the findings indicate their participation in
the honor program at VVC provided access to information and resources from honors faculty and
staff who supported efficient navigation of the transfer process.
HONORARY MENTION 82
Gateway or gatekeeper. The honors program at VVC is a closed community with
access to relevant resources for members of the community. Honors programs in other contexts,
employ measurements related to talent or proven academic achievement. While the program at
VVC utilizes a GPA requirement, it also uses the recommendation of those within the college to
recruit students. Interviewees received the support of someone in the college, but program
requirements could potentially deter others who have not found an advocate at the college to
recognize their academic potential. Furthermore, minoritized students may find it particularly
challenging given the stereotype threat they face. For example, Shawn described a meeting he
had with his new counselor during which he was openly discouraged from considering USC as a
transfer option before the counselor had reviewed his academic history or transcript,
emphasizing that “you had to be really special” to get into USC and encouraging him to instead
consider the local Cal State.
Though the findings showed that earned entry supported the social structure and norms
that benefitted participants, they are exclusive to these participants. Importantly, the
requirements for participation in the honors program align with the conditions for being a
competitive transfer applicant. However, there is a risk of students not being able to access the
program’s benefits due to the gatekeeper function that institutional agents often play. Stanton-
Salazar (1997) suggested that “the power of institutional agents comes from their ability to
situate youth within resource-rich social networks by actively manipulating the social and
institutional forces that determine who shall make it and who shall not” (p. 11). When
determining the qualifiers for participation in the program, special care should be given to
inclusive factors that allow for minoritized populations.
HONORARY MENTION 83
Recommendations
This section offers recommendations for community college administrators, faculty, and
staff on adapting or further developing academic benefits of the honors program like those found
at VVC. Additionally, this section will offer recommendations for scaling the benefits of the
honors program to other minoritized students in the community college.
Develop Small Learning Communities
One of the challenges in community colleges is the size of the student population. VVC
regularly has an enrollment of nearly 25,000 students. Students enroll either full or part time and
are seeking a number of different outcomes. However, participants in this study felt a part of a
much smaller community of students who sought academic outcomes similar to their own. The
honors program provided a sense of community, dedicated resources, space, and readily
available personnel. Thus, the honors program effectively shrunk the college for these students
and provided the resources to achieve their goals of transferring to a university.
It follows that community colleges should consider other ways to develop more small
learning communities that have the same effect of shrinking the college for students. This is
especially important for students in the community college seeking outcomes other than transfer,
such as students enrolled in distance learning, in vocational programs, or seeking career-
enhancing certifications. Learning communities in such spaces could provide access to resources
shared in social networks beyond the faculty, such as information and support amongst peers and
institutional agents (Corcoran, 2015; Toso, 2018). Additionally, when considering the creation
of various small learning communities, administrators should give particular attention to the
specific resources needed by that community to ensure relevance and alignment with desired
outcomes given that community colleges serve populations seeking a number of outcomes
HONORARY MENTION 84
(Bailey & Morest, 2004; Vaughan, 2006). It is essential that membership in these learning
communities be voluntary, reflect the demographics of the school, and be small relative to the
size of the college.
Increase Contact and Engagement With Non-Instructional Institutional Agents
The authentic and interpersonal relationships described by the interview participants were
far more feasible for the faculty and students in the honors program, given the small class sizes
and frequency of engagement. Participants’ described their engagement with honors faculty like
the kind of interactions students have with the counseling or advising offices in the college.
However, participants did not describe their counselor experiences with the same affinity as they
did those with their honors faculty. For an institutional agent to be effective, especially with
minoritized students, they need adequate time to develop authentic and interpersonal
relationships with students.
Administrators in the community college should consider ways to increase the contact
time that counseling faculty have with students. Much of the support that participants received
from the faculty reflect the core functions of the counseling staff. Participants consistently
described their interactions with counselors as transactional meetings to fill out an educational
plan, with insufficient time to explore uncertainties, learn about strengths and areas of interest, or
establish trust through ongoing interaction. Museus and Neville (2012) found that one of the
most productive ways institutional agents can develop trust with students of color is to engage in
holistic support. Specifically, the study’s participants described how institutional agents
transcended their professional roles and provide guidance and support beyond curricular topics.
This description is consistent with the relationship participants had with honors faculty. As the
holders of expertise in guidance and student development, community colleges may need to
HONORARY MENTION 85
reinvest in counseling support or rethink systems to leverage the expertise of community college
counselors. Perhaps considering a case management model where non-instructional community
college staff can provide frequent and ongoing support to a dedicated caseload of students in a
small learning community. Regardless of the particular strategy, administrators should remove
barriers for preventing counselors from acting as effective institutional agents for students of
color.
Diversify Institutional Agents and Faculty
A finding in this study was the efficacy of social capital in supporting participants’
success in the honors program. The participants gained access to capital from a social network
and exposure to effective institutional agents. However, the program relied on professor
recommendation to give students access to the network. Additionally, participants, particularly
Black and Latino male students described having to overcome stereotypical assumptions about
their academic potential. There is a body of work that explores the value of cultural validation
for students of color (Cole & Barber, 2003; Guifrida, 2005; Hernandez, 2000; Museus & Quaye,
2009; Smith, 2007; Watson et al., 2002). However, Museus and Neville (2012) found a
phenomenon of sharing a common experience allowed for institutional agents to form stronger
bonds with students of color. Further, the authors noted that this phenomenon was more likely to
occur when an institutional agent was also a person of color. While the honors faculty members
at VVC are predominately White, the program was able to manufacture trust and closure in the
creation of a social network with closure. If the methods employed by VVC are not possible, but
a college still seeks to ensure the efficacy of institutional agents, taking strategic steps to make
the faculty and other institutional agents representative of the school’s demographics may yield
similar results.
HONORARY MENTION 86
Implications
The findings may be used to support the development of new honors programs or the
redesign of existing honors programs seeking improved outcomes for minoritized students.
Additionally, the findings can be used to inform institutional strategies that improve the transfer
outcomes of minoritized community college students. The experiences of this study’s
participants can be used to support the allocation of institutional resources to implement the
strategies employed by the VVC honors program. These strategies include small class sizes, a
dedicated honors space, and dedicated personnel to support the honors program. The study
highlights the tole of authentic interpersonal relationships between institutional agents and
minoritized students in the community college, particularly in how these relationships help
minoritized students efficiently navigate the transfer process in pursuit of their academic goals. It
follows that other similarly structured learning communities could achieve these outcomes by
implementing the strategies outlined here.
Beyond the programmatic design that served participants in the program at VVC well, it
is important to emphasize that need for increased investment in minoritized populations of
varying needs at the community college. Programs as structured as the honors program at VVC
will undoubtedly require allocation physical and financial resources, but the needs for
professional development for counselors and administrators to better understand the needs of
high-achieving minoritized students at the community college should not be overlooked.
Administrators should support research efforts that lead to practical applications for benefitting
minoritized students. Perhaps establishing programs that provide similar opportunities to
leverage social networks with closure and provide increased access to institutional agents able to
HONORARY MENTION 87
cultivate authentic relationships and activate various forms of social capital for minoritized
students.
Future Research
The limited body of research on community college honors programs, particularly their
impact on honors and minoritized students, suggests a need for continued focus on this topic.
This study captured the experiences of students in an honors program that was generally
representative of the demographics of its institution. Future research might seek to understand
the experiences of honors students in programs that lack diversity. Additionally, the honors
program in this study was well-established, highly formalized, and well-resourced. Honors
programs in other community colleges vary in their design and allocation of resources. Thus,
future studies should seek to understand the impact of programmatic design on the experiences
of minoritized students. Doing so could help to disparage the idea that honors student success is
inherently due to student ability rather than curricular and programmatic factors that support
academic success. Future research might also interrogate whether there are disparate outcomes
and experiences between minoritized and White community college honors students.
The findings suggested that the honors program at VVC acted as a small community of
learners. Future research might employ a comparative analysis of non-honors programs like
TRIO, Puente, and Umoja. A comparative analysis could offer meaningful information on high-
impact practices or salient trends for supporting the success and transfer of minoritized students
in the community college.
Conclusion
To improve degree attainment among minoritized students, it is essential that support
strategies be targeted and relevant to the population in need. The concentration of minoritized
HONORARY MENTION 88
students in the community colleges points to the need to better understand their experiences in
that setting, particularly the strategies that support their degree attainment. Considering that 62%
of California’s Black first-time freshmen attend a community college, yet only 35% transfer after
six years, there is urgent need to uncover the strategies that work for minoritized students.
This study highlights strategies that have supported minoritized students in a specific
context yet could be adapted and potentially scaled to improve the outcomes of minoritized
students throughout the college. The study helped to define the roles of institutional agents in
the honors program, highlighted the role of a peer network in resource sharing, and illuminated
the characteristics that drive student success. The honors program helped participants thrive in a
large, challenging, and bureaucratic system by manufacturing a right-sized resource-rich shared
network of support.
HONORARY MENTION 89
REFERENCES
Achterberg, C. (2005). “What is an honors student?” Journal of the National Collegiate Honors
Council, 6(1), 75–83. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchcjournal/170
American Association of Community Colleges. (2019). AACC fast facts. Retrieved from
https://www.aacc.nche.edu/research-trends/fast-facts/
Aydelotte, F. (1944). Breaking the academic lock step: The development of honors work in
American colleges and universities. New York, Harper.
Bailey, T. R., & Morest, V. S. (2004). The organizational efficiency of multiple missions for
community colleges. New York, NY: Community College Research Center.
Bates, A. K., Bell, A., & Siqueiros, M. (2018). State of higher education for Latinx in California.
Retrieved from https://collegecampaign.org/portfolio/state-higher-education-latinx-
california/
Bates, A. K., Siqueiro, M., & Dow, A. (2019). State of higher education for Black Californians.
Retrieved from https://collegecampaign.org/portfolio/state-higher-education-black-
californians/
Bensimon, E. M., & Dowd, A. (2009). Dimensions of the transfer choice gap: Experiences of
Latina and Latino students who navigated transfer pathways. Harvard Educational
Review, 79(4), 632–659. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.79.4.05w66u23662k1444
Berger, J. (2007). Honors as a transformative experience : The role of liberal arts honors
programs in community colleges. Journal of College Admission, (194), 28–32.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
HONORARY MENTION 90
Boswell, K., & Wilson, C. D. (2004). Keeping America ’s promise: A report on the future of the
community college. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the United States.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In J. Karabel & A. H. Halsey
(Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487–511). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and
research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Brint, S., & Karabel, J. (1989). The diverted dream: Community colleges and the promise of
educational opportunity in America, 1900-1985. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Carrasquillo, C. A. (2013). Their own words: High-achieving, low-income community college
students talk about supports and obstacles to their success (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3567694)
Castro, E. L., & Cortez, E. (2017). Exploring the lived experiences and intersectionalities of
Mexican community college transfer students: Qualitative insights toward expanding a
transfer receptive culture. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41(2),
77–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2016.1158672
Choy, S. (2002). Nontraditional undergraduates. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1996). The American Community College. The Jossey-Bass
Higher and Adult Education Series.
Cole, S., & Barber, E. (2003). Increasing faculty diversity: The occupational choices of high-
achieving minority students. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
HONORARY MENTION 91
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of
Sociology, 94, S95–S120. Retrieved from https://about.jstor.org/terms
https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
Coley, R. J. (2000). The community college turns 100: A look at its students, programs, and
prospects. Retrieved from www.ets.orgiresearchipic.
Corcoran, J. (2015). Seeking and learning. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council,
16(2), 51–53.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into
practice, 39(3), 124-130.
Crisp, G., & Nuñez, A.-M. (2014). Understanding the racial transfer gap: Modeling
underrepresented minority and nonminority students’ pathways from two-to four-year
institutions. The Review of Higher Education, 37(3), 291–320.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2014.0017
Dougherty, K., & Townsend, B. (2006). Community college missions: A theoretical and
historical perspective. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2006(136), 5–13.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.254
Dowd, A. C. (2005). Data don ’t drive: Building a practitioner-driven culture of inquiry to assess
community college performance. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education.
Dowd, A. C. (2007). Community colleges as gateway and gatekeeper: Moving beyond the access
“saga” toward outcome equity. Harvard Educational Review, 77(4), 407–419.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.77.4.1233g31741157227
Drury, R. L. (2003). Community colleges in America: A historical perspective. Inquiry, 8(1), 1–
6.
HONORARY MENTION 92
Engelen-Eigles, D., & Milner, J. (2014). Why Honors Is a Hard Sell in the Community College.
Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 15(2), 93–102.
Freeman, E. (2017). Diversion or democratization: Do rural, Hispanic, community college
students show signs of academic undermatch?, 16(1), 77–97.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192716628604
Ginder, S. A., Kelly-Reid, J. E., & Mann, F. B. (2017). Enrollment and employees in
postsecondary institutions, Fall 2016; and financial statistics and academic libraries,
fiscal year 2016. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Guifrida, D. (2005). Othermothering as a framework for under? standing African American
students’ definitions of student? centered faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 76, 701-
23.
Guzy, A. (2003). Honors composition: Historical perspectives and contemporary practices.
Lincoln, NE: National Collegiate Honors Council.
Harkins, D. R., & Baker, K. (2015). An integrated learning experience. Journal of the National
Collegiate Honors Council, 16(2), 105–107.
Harper, S. R. (2004). The measure of a man: Conceptualizations of masculinity among high-
achieving African American male college students. Berkeley Journal of sociology, 89-
107.
Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist
institutional norms. The Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 9-29. Hernandez, J. C.
(2000). Understanding the retention of Latino college students. Journal of College
Student Development, 41, 575-584.
HONORARY MENTION 93
Hoxby, C., & Turner, S. (2013). Expanding college opportunities for high-achieving, low income
students. Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper, 12, 014.
Jenkins, D., & Fink, J. (2016). Tracking transfer: New measures of institutional and state
effectiveness in helping community college students attain bachelor ’s degrees. New
York, NY: Community College Research Center.
Joliet Junior College. (2019). History of Joliet Junior College. Retrieved from
https://www.jjc.edu/about-jjc/history
Jones, G. S. (2018). Black Males in Programs for High Achievers at a Community College:
Exploring the Qualitative Nature of Academic Success.
Kisker, C. B., Cohen, A. M., & Wagoner, R. L. (2010). Reforming transfer and articulation in
California: Four statewide solutions for creating a more successful and seamless transfer
path to the baccalaureate. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Community
Colleges
Kisker, C. B., & Outcalt, C. L. (2005). Community College honors and developmental faculty:
Characteristics, Practices, and implications for access and educational equity. Community
College Review, 33(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/009155210503300201
Korah, A., Slate, J. R., Moore, G. W., & Lunenburg, F. C. (2019). Differences in college
engagement benchmark scores as a function of honors course enrollment for community
college students: A nationwide study. Education Research International, 2019, 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5243639
Laanan, F. S., Starobin, S. S., & Eggleston, L. E. (2010). Adjustment of community college
students at a four-year university: Role and relevance of transfer student capital for
HONORARY MENTION 94
student retention. Journal of College Student Retention, 12(2), 175–209.
https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.12.2.d
Lee, W. Y. (2001).Toward a more perfect union: Reflecting on trends and issues for enhancing
the academic performance of minority transfer students. New Directions for Community
Colleges, 2001(114), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.19
Long, E. C. J., & Lange, S. (2002). An exploratory study: A comparison of honors and non-
honors students. The National Honors Report, 23(1), 20–30.
McFarland, J., Hussar, B., De Brey, C., Snyder, T., Wang, X., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., ... &
Bullock Mann, F. (2017). The Condition of Education 2017. NCES 2017-144. National
Center for Education Statistics.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation.
Monaghan, D. B., & Attewell, P. (2015). The community college route to the bachelor’s Degree.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(1), 70–91.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373714521865
Moschetti, R. V., & Hudley, C. (2015). Social capital and academic motivation among first-
generation community college students. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 39(3), 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2013.819304
Moser, K. (2013). Exploring the impact of transfer capital on community college transfer
students. Journal of the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition, 25(2), 53–75.
Museus, S. D., & Neville, K. M. (2012). Delineating the ways that key institutional agents
provide racial minority students with access to social capital in college. Journal of
College Student Development, 53(3), 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2012.0042
HONORARY MENTION 95
Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Toward an intercultural perspective of racial and ethnic
minority college student persistence. The Review of Higher Education, 33, 67-94.
National Collegiate Honors Council. (2019). What is honors? Retrieved from
https://www.nchchonors.org/about-nchc
Nora, A. (2004). The role of habitus and cultural capital in choosing a college, transitioning from
high school to higher education, and persisting in college among minority and
nonminority students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3(2), 180–208.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192704263189
Outcalt, C. (1999). Community college honors programs: An overview. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED427798.pdf
Palmer, R., & Gasman, M. (2008). “It takes a village to raise a child”: The role of social capital
in promoting academic success for African American Men at a Black college. Journal of
College Student Development, 49(1), 52–70. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2008.0002
Pérez, P. A., & Ceja, M. (2010). Building a Latina/o student transfer culture: Best practices and
outcomes in transfer to universities. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 9(1), 6–21.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192709350073
Perna, L. W., & Leigh, E. W. (2018). Understanding the promise: A typology of state and local
college promise programs. Educational Researcher, 47(3), 155–180.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17742653
Pressler, C. (2009). The two-year college honors program and the forbidden topics of class and
cultural capital. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 10(1). Retrieved
from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nchcjournal/255
HONORARY MENTION 96
Rinehart, T. (1978). The role of curricular and instructional innovation in the past, present, and
future of honors programs in American higher education (Doctoral dissertation).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 7820350)
Rogošić, S., & Baranović, B. (2016). Social capital and educational achievements: Coleman vs.
Bourdieu. CEPS Journal, 6(2), 81–100.
Rosenow, C., Morrison-Graham, K., & Ozolins, E. (2016). Varying Formats for Two-Year-
College Honors Seminars. Honors in Practice, 12, 95–107. Retrieved from https://files-
eric-ed-gov.libproxy1.usc.edu/fulltext/EJ1104241.pdf
Sandoval-Lucero, E., Maes, J., & Klingsmith, L. (2014). African American and Latina(o)
community college students’ social capital and student success. College Student Journal,
48(3), 522–533.
Shushok, F. (2002). Educating the best and the brightest: Collegiate honors programs and the
intellectual, social, and psychological development of students. College Park: University
of Maryland.
Smith, B. (2007). Accessing social capital through the academic mentoring process. Equity &
Excellence in Education, 40(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680601088465
Stanton-Salazar, R. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of
racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1–41.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.1.140676g74018u73k
Stoller, R. (2004). Honors selection processes: A typology and some reflections. Journal of the
National Collegiate Honors Council, 5(1), 79.
HONORARY MENTION 97
Strayhorn, T. L. (2009). The burden of proof: A quantitative study of high-achieving Black
collegians. Journal of African American Studies, 13(4), 375–387.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-008-9059-0
Toso, A. (2018). Community college honors programs: Measuring the effectiveness of
completion and transfer of the high achieving student to the four-year institution
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database.
(UMI No. 10974861)
Townsend, B. K., & Wilson, K. (2007). “A Hand hold for a little bit”: Factors facilitating the
success of community college transfer students to a large research university. Journal of
College Student Development, 47(4), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2006.0052
Treat, T., & Barnard, T. C. (2012). Seeking legitimacy: The community college mission and the
honors college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(9), 695–712.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920903178979
Trucker, J. (2014). Honors and the completion agenda: Identifying and Duplicating student
success. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 15(2), 69–92. Retrieved
from https://files-eric-ed-gov.libproxy1.usc.edu/fulltext/EJ1081536.pdf
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2009). Remarks by the president on the
American Graduation Initiative in Warren, MI. Retrieved from
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-american-
graduation-initiative-warren-mi
U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Current Population Survey (CPS), “Annual
Social and Economic Supplement,” 2017. See Digest of Education Statistics 2017, table
502.30
HONORARY MENTION 98
Watson, L. W., Terrell, M. C., Wright, D. J., Bonner II, F. A., Cuyjet, M. J., Gold, J. A., et al.
(2002). How minority students experience college: Implications for planning and policy.
Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Wilson, D. (2014). Follow me to the baccalaureate: Reflections and advice from African
American community college transfer student journeys. Community College Enterprise,
20(2), 72–84.
Woods, J. L., & Williams, R. C. (2013). Persistence factors for Black males in the community
college: An examination of background, academic, social, and environmental variables.
Spectrum: A Journal on Black Men, 1(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.2979/spectrum.1.2.1
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006
HONORARY MENTION 99
APPENDIX A
Recruitment E-mail
Dear Honors Student,
My name is Brandon Roberson, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education
at the University of Southern California. As part of my dissertation, I am conducting a study that
explores the experiences of students participating in community college honors programs. The
study will include individual interviews and focus groups. This email invites you to participate in
the study.
If you are interested in participating in the study, please follow the link below (see survey link)
to complete a brief 2-3 minute survey. This survey will help me determine if you qualify to
participate. If you meet the participant criteria, I may contact you to participate in either an
individual interview or in the focus group. The interview will be approximately 45-60 minutes in
length, and the focus group will be approximately 60 minutes long. Both will be audiotaped, but
all voice recordings will be deleted after being transcribed.
Participation in this study is completely voluntary, and your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study.
If you are selected to participate in the study, you will be compensated with a $15 Amazon or
Target gift card that will be presented to you after the interview or focus group.
Survey Link: (Insert Survey link here)
If you have any questions, please contact me at Broberso@usc.edu or (619) 995-3628
Thank you for your consideration,
Brandon Roberson
Doctoral Candidate
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
HONORARY MENTION 100
APPENDIX B
Screening Survey Questions
Directions: Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability. All responses will
remain confidential.
1. Are you currently enrolled at Long Beach City College?
a. Yes
b. No
2. Are you currently participating in the honors program or have you completed the honors
program at Long Beach City College?
a. Yes
b. No
3. How many semesters have you participated in the honors program at Long Beach City
College?
a. One semester
b. Two semesters
c. Three Semesters
d. Four Semesters
e. Five or more Semesters
4. Do you intend to transfer to a four-year college or university?
a. Yes
b. No
5. What year do you intend to transfer?
a. 2018
b. 2019
c. 2020
d. 2021
e. 2022
f. 2023
g. 2024
h. 2025 or later
i. I don’t intend to transfer
6. What is your current Enrollment Status
a. Full-time
b. Part-time
7. Gender
a. Female
HONORARY MENTION 101
b. Male
c. Other
8. Racial/Ethnic Background
a. African American
b. Latinx
c. White
d. Asian American
e. Native American
f. Other:
9. Age Range
a. Below the age of 25
b. 25 or older
10. Would you be interested in participating in a 45-60 minute interview that seeks to
understand the experiences of online students with support services?
a. Yes; please provide your email address here:
b. No
11. Interview preference
a. Individual Interview
b. Group Interview (with 4-6 other participants)
12. Please indicate the best time for the interview
a. Morning
b. Afternoon
c. Evening
13. Why did you choose to participate in the honors program?
14. What has been the most valuable resource to you in the Honors program? Why?
Thank you for completing this survey. If you are selected to participate in the study, you will be
contacted through email to schedule an appointment.
HONORARY MENTION 102
APPENDIX C
Information Sheet
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4033
Untitled: Supporting Minoritized Community College Honors Students
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Brandon Roberson under the
supervision of Dr. Tracy Tambascia at the University of Southern California. Research studies
include only people who voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about
this study. Please read through this form and ask any questions that may arise.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This research study aims to understand the experiences of minoritized community college honors
students, particularly whether or not honors programs support the transfer success of minoritized
community college honors students. Additionally, this study seeks to understand how institutional
practices in honors programs support the acquisition of social capital to support transfer to four-year
universities. This study seeks to capture the perspectives of minoritized students regarding their
honors program experience and understand its impact, if any, on achieving their academic
outcomes. This information may help to identify effective strategies that can be applied broadly to
honors programs at other institutions and perhaps non-honors academic programs that serve
minoritized students.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to complete a 2-3 minute survey and a 45-
60 minute audio-recorded in-person interview or focus group. If you don’t want to be taped, you
cannot participate in this study. You are free to stop the interview at any time or decide not to
answer any question you do not feel comfortable answering.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will receive a $15 Amazon or Target gift card for participating in the study. The gift card will
be given to you at the conclusion of the interview.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential.
Participant responses will be coded with a false name (pseudonym) and maintained separately in
a password protected computer. The audio recordings will be destroyed once they have been
transcribed, and the interview transcriptions will be shredded once the study is completed.
INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
HONORARY MENTION 103
FOCUS GROUPS: Due to the nature of focus groups, your confidentiality cannot be guaranteed.
However, in order to maintain the confidentiality of the group, you are asked not to discuss the
content of the group with anyone not in the group, or to discuss who participated in the focus
group.
The members of the research team, the funding agency, 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.
When the results of the research are published, or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the following
Brandon Roberson via email broberso@usc.edu or phone at (619) 995-3628 or Faculty Advisor
Dr. Tracy Tambascia at tpoon@rossier.usc.edu or (213) 740-9747.
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.
HONORARY MENTION 104
APPENDIX D
Interview Protocol
Introduction:
Before we begin, I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with and allowing me the opportunity to
learn from you.
Explanation of Purpose:
The purpose of this interview is to learn about your experience in the Honors program here at the
college. Particularly, I hope to learn about the factors that influenced your decision to participate in the
honors program, your experiences in classes with your honors peers, faculty, support staff, and how you
feel the program is preparing you for future academic endeavors.
Explanation of Confidentiality:
I would like to include what I learn from this interview as part of a larger study I am conducting. I am
interviewing you and other students to learn about their experiences as well. I will be sharing what I have
learned from these interviews; however, your identity will be kept confidential anytime I share data from
this study. All of your data will be linked to a pseudonym (fake name) of your choosing. What would you
like to be called?
Request to Record:
In order to make this interview as interactive as possible, will you allow me to record our conversation? I
will use the recording to write down what we have discussed in the interview later, and then I will delete
the recording.
Freedom not to answer:
If there are any questions you do not want to answer or if you would like to end the interview at any time,
please feel free to stop me and let me know. Your participation is voluntary.
Timeframe for Interview and other logistics
The interview will take about an hour. Does that timeframe work for you?
Is this space comfortable for you? Would you like water or a beverage before we begin?
Ok, if you have any questions or need me to clarify any of the questions stop me at any time. Let ’s begin
the interview.
Interview
I would like to start by asking some question to learn a bit about you.
1. How would you describe your high school experience?
a. Did you participate in honors and AP classes in high school?
b. Were you a highly involved student? What types of activities did you participate in?
c. Probes: Were you a high-achieving student? Were you socially motivated? Were you in
any formal leadership positions?
2. When did you first realize you wanted to go to college?
3. Why did you want to go to college?
4. Why did you choose to attend community college?
5. Are you enrolled as a full-time or part-time student?
a. How did you make the choice to be full-time/part-time?
HONORARY MENTION 105
6. What racial or ethnic identity do you most closely identify with?
a. Has this identity influenced you education experience in any way? If so, how?
b. Has your identity impacted your experience here at the community college? How so?
c. Has your identity impacted your experiences in the honors program here? If so, How?
7. Tell me about the classes you ’re taking.
a. What are you learning in your classes?
b. Are you enjoying your experiences?
c. Have you been challenged in your classes? If so, how?
8. Are you currently employed? If so, how many hours per week are you working?
a. How do you balance work, school, and other responsibilities?
I would like to shift to learn more about your Honors Program experience.
9. How did you learn about the honors program at the college?
10. Why did you decide to participate in the honors program?
11. What were your expectations for being in the honors program at the school? Have these
expectations been met?
12. How do your honors program classes differ from your non-honors classes?
13. Have the peer interaction in your honors program been different than in your non-honors
classes? If so, how?
14. What aspects of the honors program do you believe will help you prepare to transfer?
a. How do you know?
15. Have any of your academic goals changed as a result of your participation in the honors program?
b. What triggered the change?
I would like to ask some questions about other supports you received related to the honors program?
16. Outside of your faculty have there been any people at the college that have provided guidance
and advice in the honors program?
a. What does the support from these people look like?
b. Has the support from these people been helpful to you academically? How so?
c. Has the support from these people been helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career development? How so?
17. How have honors faculty at the college provided guidance and advice to you in the honors
program?
a. What does the support from faculty look like?
b. Have they supported you academically? How so?
c. Has the support from faculty been helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career development? How so?
18. Can you give an example of how someone from the honors program informed you of an
opportunity or a resource that you didn ’t know existed?
HONORARY MENTION 106
Ok, now I would like to know more about what you were looking for in a four year college and the
transfer process?
19. When the time comes to transfer to a four year college, how will you prepare?
20. Is there a resource in the honors program that you intend to access to help with the transfer
process?
a. Are there any people in the honors program that you will need support from?
b. What will you need from these people?
c. How do you know these people will be helpful in the transfer process?
21. What are you looking for in the school that you transfer to?
22. Why do those characteristics in a school matter to you?
23. Has the honors program here influenced the choice in where to transfer? How so?
24. Has the honors program here made you feel prepared for transfer to the four-year college? How
so?
25. What outcomes did the honors program help you achieve?
26. Did the honors program fail you in any way? How so?
27. Imagine if a younger version of yourself was asking if they should participate in the Honors
program here, what would your answer be to them?
Research Question
RQ 1: What are the
experiences of minoritized
students enrolled in
community college honors
programs?
RQ2: How do community
college honors programs
prepare high-achieving
minoritized students to
transfer to four-year
institutions?
Interview Question Type of Question (e.g.,
Devil ’s advocate,
opinion, etc.) Experience
and Behavior
RQ 1:
1. How would you characterize yourself as a high
school student?
a. Probes: Were you a high-achieving student?
Were you socially motivated? Were you in any
formal leadership positions?
RQ 1 2. When did you first realize you wanted to go to
college?
Background
RQ1 3. Why did you want to go to college?
Background
RQ1 4. Why did you choose to attend community college? Background
RQ1 5. Are you enrolled as a full-time or part-time
student?
a. How did you make the choice to be full-
time/part-time?
Experience
RQ1 6. What racial or ethnic identity do you most closely
identify with?
Experience
HONORARY MENTION 107
a. Has this identity influenced you education
experience in any way? If so, how?
b. Has your identity impacted your experience
here at the community college? How so?
c. Has your identity impacted your experiences in
the honors program here? If so, How?
RQ1 7. Tell me about the classes you ’re taking.
a. What are you learning in your classes?
b. Are you enjoying your experiences?
Experience
RQ1 8. Have you been challenged in your classes? If so,
how?
Experience
RQ1 9. How did you learn about the honors program at
the college?
Background/Experience
RQ1 10. Why did you decide to participate in the honors
program?
Background/Experience
RQ1 11. What were your expectations for being in the
honors program at the school? Have these
expectations been met?
Experience
RQ1 12. How do your honors program classes differ from
your non-honors classes?
Experience
RQ1 13. Have the peer interactions in your honors program
been different than in your non-honors classes? If
so, how?
Experience
RQ1 14. What aspects of the honors program do you
believe will help you prepare to transfer?
a. How do you know?
Knowledge/Experience
RQ1 15. Have any of your academic goals changed as a
result of your participation in the honors
program?
a. What triggered the change?
Background/Experience
RQ1 16. Outside of your faculty have there been any
people at the college that have provided guidance
and advice in the honors program?
a. What does the support from these
people look like?
b. Has the support from these people been
helpful to you academically? How so?
c. Has the support from these people been
helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career
development? How so?
Experience
HONORARY MENTION 108
RQ1 17. How have honors faculty at the college provided
guidance and advice to you in the honors
program?
a. What does the support from faculty look
like?
b. Have they supported you academically?
How so?
c. Has the support from faculty been
helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career
development? How so?
Experience
RQ 2 18. Can you give an example of how someone from
the honors program informed you of an
opportunity or a resource that you didn ’t know
existed?
Knowledge/Experience
RQ 2 19. When the time comes to transfer to a four year
college, how will you prepare?
knowledge
RQ 2 20. Is there a resource in the honors program that you
intend to access to help with the transfer process?
a. Are there any people in the honors
program that you will need support
from?
b. What will you need from these people?
c. How do you know these people will be
helpful in the transfer process?
Behavior/Knowledge
RQ 2 21. What are you looking for in the school that you
transfer to?
Background/knowledge
RQ 2 22. Why do those characteristics in a school matter to
you?
opinion
RQ 2 23. Has the honors program here influenced the
choice in where to transfer? How so?
24. Has the honors program here made you feel
prepared for transfer to the four-year college?
How so?
Experience
RQ 2 25. What outcomes did the honors program help you
achieve?
experience
RQ 2 26. Did the honors program fail you in any way? How
so?
Experience
RQ 2 27. Imagine if a younger version of yourself was asking
if they should participate in the Honors program
here, what would your answer be to them?
Hypothetical
HONORARY MENTION 109
APPENDIX E
Focus Group Protocol
Introduction:
Before we begin, I want to thank you each of you for taking the time to meet and allowing me the
opportunity to learn from your experience here.
Explanation of Purpose:
The purpose of this focus group is to learn about your experience in the Honors program here at the
college. Particularly, I hope to learn about the factors that influenced your decision to participate in the
honors program, your experiences in classes with your honors peers, faculty, support staff, and how you
feel the program is preparing you for future academic endeavors.
Explanation of Confidentiality:
I would like to include what I learn from this focus as part of a larger study I am conducting. I will be
sharing what I learn from various interviews and this focus group; however, your identity will be kept
confidential anytime I share data from this study. All of your data will be linked to a pseudonym (fake
name) of your choosing. What would you each like to be called?
Request to Record:
In order to make this group as interactive as possible, will you all allow me to record our conversation? I
will use the recording to write down what we have discussed in the interview later, and then I will delete
the recording.
Freedom not to answer:
If there are any questions you do not want to answer or if you would like to terminate your participation
at any time, please feel free to stop me and let me know. Your participation is voluntary.
Timeframe for Interview and other logistics
The focus group will take about an hour. Does that timeframe work for everyone?
Is this space comfortable? Would anyone like water or a beverage before we begin?
Ok, if you have any questions or need me to clarify any of the questions stop me at any time. Let ’s begin.
Focus group questions
I would like to start by asking some question to learn a bit about you.
1. How would you describe your high school experience?
2. Why did you want to go to college?
3. Why did you choose to attend community college?
4. What racial or ethnic identity do you most closely identify with?
a. Has this identity influenced your education experience in any way? If so, how?
b. Has your identity impacted your experience here at the community college? How so?
c. Has your identity impacted your experiences in the honors program here? If so, How?
I would like to shift to learn more about your Honors Program experience.
5. How did you learn about the honors program at the college?
6. Why did you decide to participate in the honors program?
7. What were your expectations for being in the honors program at the school? Have these
expectations been met?
HONORARY MENTION 110
8. What aspects of the honors program do you believe will help you prepare to transfer?
c. How do you know?
I would like to ask some questions about other supports you received related to the honors program?
9. Outside of your faculty have there been any people at the college that have provided guidance
and advice in the honors program?
a. What does the support from these people look like?
b. Has the support from these people been helpful to you academically? How so?
c. Has the support from these people been helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career development? How so?
10. How have honors faculty at the college provided guidance and advice to you in the honors
program?
a. What does the support from faculty look like?
b. Have they supported you academically? How so?
c. Has the support from faculty been helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career development? How so?
11. Can you give an example of how someone from the honors program informed you of an
opportunity or a resource that you didn ’t know existed?
Ok, now I would like to know more about what you were looking for in a four year college and the
transfer process?
12. When the time comes to transfer to a four year college, how will you prepare?
13. Is there a resource in the honors program that you intend to access to help with the transfer
process?
a. Are there any people in the honors program that you will need support from?
b. What will you need from these people?
c. How do you know these people will be helpful in the transfer process?
14. What are you looking for in the school that you transfer to?
15. Has the honors program here influenced the choice in where to transfer? How so?
16. Has the honors program here made you feel prepared for transfer to the four-year college? How
so?
17. Did the honors program fail you in any way? How so?
18. Imagine if a younger version of yourself was asking if they should participate in the Honors
program here, what would your answer be to them?
Research Question
RQ 1: What are the
experiences of minoritized
students enrolled in
community college honors
programs?
Interview Question Type of Question (e.g.,
Devil ’s advocate,
opinion, etc.) Experience
and Behavior
HONORARY MENTION 111
RQ2: How do community
college honors programs
prepare high-achieving
minoritized students to
transfer to four-year
institutions?
RQ 1:
1. How would you describe your high school
experience?
RQ1 2. Why did you want to go to college?
Background
RQ1 3. Why did you choose to attend community college? Background
RQ1 Experience
RQ1 4. What racial or ethnic identity do you most closely
identify with?
a. Has this identity influenced your education
experience in any way? If so, how?
b. Has your identity impacted your experience
here at the community college? How so?
c. Has your identity impacted your experiences in
the honors program here? If so, How?
Experience
RQ1 5. How did you learn about the honors program at
the college?
Background/Experience
RQ1 6. Why did you decide to participate in the honors
program?
Background/Experience
RQ1 7. What were your expectations for being in the
honors program at the school? Have these
expectations been met?
Experience
RQ1 8. What aspects of the honors program do you
believe will help you prepare to transfer?
a. How do you know?
Knowledge/Experience
RQ1 9. Outside of your faculty have there been any
people at the college that have provided guidance
and advice in the honors program?
a. What does the support from these
people look like?
b. Has the support from these people been
helpful to you academically? How so?
c. Has the support from these people been
helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career
development? How so?
Experience
RQ1 10. How have honors faculty at the college provided
guidance and advice to you in the honors
program?
a. What does the support from faculty look
like?
Experience
HONORARY MENTION 112
b. Have they supported you academically?
How so?
c. Has the support from faculty been
helpful to you socially? How so?
d. Have they supported your career
development? How so?
RQ 2 11. Can you give an example of how someone from
the honors program informed you of an
opportunity or a resource that you didn ’t know
existed?
Knowledge/Experience
RQ 2 12. When the time comes to transfer to a four year
college, how will you prepare?
knowledge
RQ 2 13. Is there a resource in the honors program that you
intend to access to help with the transfer process?
a. Are there any people in the honors
program that you will need support
from?
b. What will you need from these people?
c. How do you know these people will be
helpful in the transfer process?
Behavior/Knowledge
RQ 2 14. What are you looking for in the school that you
transfer to?
Background/knowledge
RQ 2 15. Has the honors program here influenced the
choice in where to transfer? How so?
Has the honors program here made you feel
prepared for transfer to the four-year college?
How so?
Experience
RQ 2 16. What outcomes did the honors program help you
achieve?
experience
RQ 2 17. Did the honors program fail you in any way? How
so?
Experience
RQ 2 18. Imagine if a younger version of yourself was asking
if they should participate in the Honors program
here, what would your answer be to them?
Hypothetical
APPENDIX F
Interview Protocol (Honors Director)
Introduction:
Before we begin, I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with and allowing me the opportunity to
learn from you.
HONORARY MENTION 113
Explanation of Purpose:
The purpose of this interview is to learn about your experience leading the Honors program here at the
college. Particularly, I hope to learn about the ongoing development and design of the honors program.
Explanation of Confidentiality:
I would like to include what I learn from this interview as part of a larger study I am conducting. I am
interviewing you and other students to learn about their experiences as well. I will be sharing what I have
learned from these interviews; however, your identity will be kept confidential anytime I share data from
this study. All of your data will be linked to a pseudonym (fake name) of your choosing. What would you
like to be called?
Request to Record:
In order to make this interview as interactive as possible, will you allow me to record our conversation? I
will use the recording to write down what we have discussed in the interview later, and then I will delete
the recording.
Freedom not to answer:
If there are any questions you do not want to answer or if you would like to end the interview at any time,
please feel free to stop me and let me know. Your participation is voluntary.
Timeframe for Interview and other logistics
The interview will take about an hour. Does that timeframe work for you?
Is this space comfortable for you? Would you like water or a beverage before we begin?
Ok, if you have any questions or need me to clarify any of the questions stop me at any time. Let ’s begin
the interview.
1. What are the main objectives of the honors program?
2. How is the program designed to meet the intended outcomes?
3. What impact do the honors faculty have in the success of the program?
4. Who else in the program is critical in the success of the students?
5. Why is the honors program important for the college?
I would like to ask a little about the students.
6. How would you describe an honors student?
7. When recruiting Honors students, what are you looking for?
8. How do students grow during their time in the honors program? What about the program has the
most significant impact on this growth?
9. How does the honors program acknowledge the identities of the students?
10. What challenges do most students in the honors program experience?
11. Are there any demographics in the honors program that struggle?
a. What are those demographics?
b. How do they struggle?
12. What makes honors faculty different than non-honors faculty?
13. If you could reimagine the perfect honors program for the college, what would it look like, who would
it serve, and what students gain from it?
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Within the community college system, honors programs have found success in supporting transfer and degree achievement. This qualitative study explored the experiences of current minoritized community college students participating in the school’s honors program. Using social capital theory as a theoretical frame, the study used interviews and a focus group to investigate how institutional agents supported the transfer and degree attainment endeavors of minoritized students in the honors program. The study found that the honors program offered access to valuable resources and information that helped students thrive at the college. Additionally, the program design created a community with shared norms conducive to academic achievement that allowed for frequent authentic engagement with faculty and like-minded peers distinct from the experiences of the broader college. Lastly, participants highlighted how they operationalized community cultural wealth. The study offers recommendations to extend the benefits described by participants to the broader population of minoritized community college students.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
African-American/Black students’ experience and achievement in asynchronous online learning environments at a community college
PDF
Transfer first-generation college students: the role of academic advisors in degree completion
PDF
An after thought: support services for distance learners at a post-secondary institution
PDF
Latino male community college students' persistence to transfer
PDF
Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study
PDF
A fine balance: enrollment & support of international and historically minoritized students in community colleges
PDF
Assessing the impact of the Puente Project on Latino males in California community colleges
PDF
College readiness: terms and conditions may apply
PDF
The academic integration and retention of Latino community college transfer students at a highly selective private four-year institution
PDF
Federal loan borrowing in community colleges: examining the decision making processes of non‐traditional community college students
PDF
""Having the right info"": College readiness as college knowledge among minoritized students in an urban education setting
PDF
College academic readiness and English placement
PDF
When parents become students: An examination of experiences, needs, and opportunities which contribute to student parent engagement in community college
PDF
And still we rise: examining the strengths of first-generation college students
PDF
STEM identity development: examining the experiences of transfer students
PDF
Serving those who have served: the role of university career services in student veteran degree completion
PDF
(Re)Imagining STEM instruction: an examination of culturally relevant andragogical practices to eradicate STEM inequities among racially minoritized students in community colleges
PDF
Latino/a college student-athletes: Influences on recruitment, enrollment and degree completion
PDF
Factors affecting the success of older community college students
PDF
Oppression of remedial reading community college students and their academic success rates: student perspectives of the unquantified challenges faced
Asset Metadata
Creator
Roberson, Brandon Allen Nathaniel
(author)
Core Title
Honorary mention: the untold stories of minoritized community college honors students
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
05/26/2020
Defense Date
03/24/2020
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
, institutional agents,community college,honors program,minoritized students,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Tambascia, Tracy (
committee chair
), Breland, Byron (
committee member
), Corwin, Zoe (
committee member
)
Creator Email
Broberso@usc.edu,roberson.brandon@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-313755
Unique identifier
UC11663647
Identifier
etd-RobersonBr-8553.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-313755 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-RobersonBr-8553.pdf
Dmrecord
313755
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Roberson, Brandon Allen Nathaniel
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
Tags
, institutional agents
community college
honors program
minoritized students