University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Dream deferred? Understanding the effects of educational debt on marginalized college professionals

(USC Thesis Other)

Dream deferred? Understanding the effects of educational debt on marginalized college professionals

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Dream Deferred?: Understanding the Effects of Educational Debt on Marginalized College
Professionals
by
Monique Patrice Bates

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2021

© Copyright by Monique Patrice Bates 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Monique Patrice Bates certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Darline Robles
Lawrence Picus
Eric Canny, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021
iv

Abstract
Research and statistics have documented the disproportionately negative effects of educational
debt on racial minorities. Research has not, however, explored the effects of educational debt on
racially marginalized individuals working in the field of higher education itself. This study
investigated the negative effects of educational debt on racially marginalized higher education
professionals using gap analysis. The study used literature to define the assumed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences assessed. Quantitative and qualitative survey data from
753 participants as well as a qualitative documents and artifacts review yielded results validating
knowledge, motivation, and organizational performance gaps. The study found racially
marginalized higher education employees lacked educational financing system knowledge and
self-efficacy related to student loan repayment. Additionally, the study found higher education
provided inadequate employee resources and services to encourage student loan debt elimination,
resulting in employee distrust and repayment difficulties. The study offers solution
recommendations as well as a logic model evaluation and implementation plan.

v

Dedication
To Zion and Noah, my greatest prayer is that you will have more, accomplish more, and be more
than anything I could ever dream for you. I completed this journey, in part, to model for you both
that the divinely-given determination, perseverance, and strength that has carried our family for
generations never fails.
To everyone I have loved that has passed on, I remain acutely aware of and thankful for your
comfort, guidance, and protection.
To Grandma Anna, Granny, Grandma Laura, and Kennedy, I feel your strength, love, prayers,
and protection daily.
To my father, John L. Bates, were it not for your work ethic, devotion, loyalty, and
encouragement, I would not have accomplished this milestone. I hope I made you as proud of me
as I will always be of you. Thank you for believing in me. Thank you for walking with me on
this journey. Thank you for never giving up on me. Most of all, thank you for your unconditional
love. You are still and always will be my Superman!

vi

Acknowledgements
To my committee, I am forever grateful for your time, effort, understanding, guidance,
and support. Dr. Canny, your calming, reassuring yet challenging nature and brilliance are what I
aspire to pay forward as an educator to my future students.
To my mother, I am thankful for everything you have done and sacrificed over the years
to make this possible. I hope I have made you proud. I love you!
To Ericka and Peaches, I could not have asked for more loving and supportive sisters. I
love you both tremendously!
To the entire Bates, Barley, Delaney, and McKensie families, I am grateful for each of
you, past and present. Our ancestors never dreamed of this moment, and I pray I utilize this
accomplishment and experience in a way that honors their life and legacies.
To my friends, especially the CNUsuals, ShuVaughn, and Will, I cannot thank you
enough for the encouragement and support you provided. Most of all, I thank you for the laughs,
believing in me, understanding when I was not available, checking on me whenever I
disappeared for too long, and for accepting me as I am. I love you all!
To Dana, towards the end and when I needed it most, I reached out, and you were there
as an accountability partner. You have no idea how much it meant and helped. Thank you!
To the OCL program and Cohort 12, especially Rhonda and the small circle of “my
people,” I am so grateful to have been able to learn with and from each of you. Long live the
#COVIDCohort!
To Jesus Christ, thank you for being “the God who sees me” as You were in Genesis
16:13 and still am to me each day.
Monique P. Bates https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1471-8617

vii

Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Field Context and Mission ...................................................................................................1
Field Goal.............................................................................................................................3
Related Literature.................................................................................................................4
Field Performance Status .....................................................................................................6
Importance of Addressing the Problem ...............................................................................7
Stakeholder Groups ..............................................................................................................8
Stakeholder Group for Study ...............................................................................................8
Theoretical and Methodical Framework ..............................................................................9
Definitions..........................................................................................................................10
Purpose of the Project and Primary Research Questions .....................................................9
Organization of the Study ..................................................................................................10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 13
Educational Financing Historical Context .........................................................................13
Negative Effects of Educational Debt on Racially Marginalized Populations ..................16
Institutional and Governmental Influences on Educational Debt ......................................23
Clark and Estes’s Theoretical Framework .........................................................................30
viii

Conclusion .........................................................................................................................41
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 42
Participating Stakeholders .................................................................................................42
Data Collection and Instrumentation .................................................................................44
Data Analysis .....................................................................................................................46
Credibility and Trustworthiness .........................................................................................47
Validity and Reliability ......................................................................................................48
Ethics..................................................................................................................................49
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................51
Chapter Four: Results ................................................................................................................... 53
Participating Stakeholders .................................................................................................54
Results ................................................................................................................................61
Synthesis ..........................................................................................................................105
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................ 107
Organizational Context and Mission ...............................................................................107
Organizational Performance Goal ....................................................................................108
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................108
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study ..................................................................109
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..............................................................................109
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ..........................................110
Evaluation and Implementation Plan ...............................................................................116
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach ....................................................................117
Limitations and Delimitations ..........................................................................................118
ix

Future Research ...............................................................................................................120
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................121
References ................................................................................................................................... 122
Appendix A: Survey ................................................................................................................... 140

x

List of Tables
Table 1: Knowledge Influences Summary 32
Table 2: Motivation Influences Summary 35
Table 3: Organizational Influences Summary 39
Table 4: Race 55
Table 5: Gender 55
Table 6: Marital Status 56
Table 7: Age 56
Table 8: U.S. Regions 57
Table 9: Education: Degree, Completion, and Enrollment 58
Table 10: Employment: Employer and Position 58
Table 11: Salary 59
Table 12: Student Loan Debt Demographics 60
Table 13: Assumed Knowledge Influences 63
Table 14: Student Loan Repayment Tenet Knowledge Question One Responses 64
Table 15: Student Loan Repayment Tenet Knowledge Question Two Responses 64
Table 16: Racial Comparison of Student Loan Repayment Knowledge Perceptions 66
Table 17: Knowledge of Student Loan Debt Elimination Life Benefits 1
Table 18: Reported Knowledge of Debt Elimination Benefits to Social Relationships 70
Table 19: Reported Knowledge of Debt Elimination Benefits to Career 71
Table 20: Repayment Type Knowledge 72
Table 21: Validated Knowledge Influences 75
Table 22: Assumed Motivation Influences 76
Table 23: Self-Efficacy ANOV A Analysis 77
Table 24: Self-Efficacy Racial Identity Comparison 78
xi

Table 25: Career Mobility Potential 79
Table 26: Enrollment Status Racial Identity Comparison 81
Table 27: Racial Comparison of Career Benefits of Educational Debt Elimination 82
Table 28: Utility Value Racial Comparison 83
Table 29: Utility Value of Wealth Attainment: Personal Finances 84
Table 30: Utility Value of Wealth Attainment: Income 84
Table 31: Validated Motivation Influences 86
Table 32: Assumed Organizational Influences 89
Table 33: Salary Earning by Racial Identity Comparison 91
Table 34: Validated Organizational Influences 95
Table 35: Degree and Salary Relationships 98
Table 36: Knowledge Recommendations 110
Table 37: Validated Motivation Influences 112
Table 38: Organizational Recommendations 114

xii

List of Figures
Figure 1: Knowledge Perceptions of Student Loan Repayment Methods 65
Figure 2: Knowledge of Repayment Options by Race 73
Figure 3: Current Enrollment Status 80
Figure 4: Student Loan Debt Holdings Racial Comparison 90
Figure 5: Employee Salaries 91
Figure 6: Employee Median Salary Earning by Racial Identity 92
Figure 7: Student Loan Repayment and Debt Reduction Offerings 93
Figure 8: Degree Preferences for Hiring 98
Figure 9: Logic Model 116

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
This study addressed the problem of how racially marginalized working professionals,
specifically those in higher education, are uniquely and negatively affected by educational debt.
The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods defines marginalized populations as
groups limited from participating in social, economic, cultural, or political life based on race,
gender, financial status, or other factors (Given, 2008). Report data released by the National
Center for Education Statistics shows that marginalized populations are up to 50% more likely to
default on educational loans than their counterparts confirms the problem (Woo et al., 2017). The
evidence highlights that the burden of educational debt disproportionately affects students and
graduates from marginalized backgrounds, causing decreased postsecondary retention rates,
increased student loan debt totals, and higher than average post-graduate default rates (Addo et
al., 2016; Houle & Warner, 2017; Luna-Torres et al., 2018). This problem is important to address
because, while the average U.S. citizen borrows $30,000 in student loans (The Institute for
College Access & Success, 2019; U.S. Department of Education, 2018), racially marginalized
populations borrow as much as 50% more compared to their White peers (Woo et al., 2017).
Moreover, addressing the problem could lessen or eliminate longstanding economic access
inequities, bolster the overall economy, and ensure the benefits of a college education remain
relevant and accessible to all college students and graduates.
Field Context and Mission
The higher education field derived from ancient origins and expanded throughout the
centuries in breadth, quality, and scope of services. Philosophers and theologians began the
earliest forms of higher education by using lectures to share advanced ideas, theories, and
concepts (Fuller, 2014). More formalized models of education from England’s Oxford and
2

Cambridge Universities later extended throughout the world, including the United States of
America (Fuller, 2014). In the 1600s, the U.S. established the first two U.S. institutions of higher
education, Harvard and William and Mary Universities, leading to the creation of thousands of
more institutions over the next 400 years, including various specialized institutions in research,
Liberal Arts, and agricultural (Best & Best, 2014; Fuller, 2014). As national laws regarding
equality, equity, and access expanded, the U.S. erected many other colleges for women and
racial minorities (Best & Best, 2014; Fuller, 2014). In the years to follow, hundreds of additional
colleges, institutes, and universities were built throughout the country, expanding upon the
original European model (Best & Best, 2014; Fuller, 2014). In 1947, President Harry Truman
formed the Commission on Education and further extended higher education by requiring the
creation of the nation’s junior and community colleges (Fuller, 2014). Later, technological
advances and the internet spread throughout the nation led to the creation of distance-learning
colleges of varying types (Fuller, 2014). Since being established in the 1600s, colleges and
universities throughout the U.S. have provided an array of educational opportunities and
experiences.
While each college’s mission varies, higher education maintains a unified goal to provide
degree-seeking students with socially transformative academic opportunities through
professionally facilitated academic and extracurricular experiences (Hendrickson & Ikenberry,
2013). Current colleges and universities aim to provide advanced knowledge and skills to 16.8
million students (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a) through curriculum and service
offerings (Hendrickson & Ikenberry, 2013). In 2019, more than 7,000 postsecondary institutions
offered a plethora of study areas and extracurricular activities to a diverse student population of
3

White (57%), African American (14%), Asian (7%), Hispanic (18%), and Native American (1%)
students (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a).
Most U.S. colleges and universities utilize various bureaucratic and political
accountability and accreditation models to sustain and substantiate the quality of education
rendered. To achieve the mission of conferring degrees and certifications to students, higher
education institutions hire four million professionals to provide instruction, extracurricular
activities, and supplementary services (Hendrickson & Ikenberry, 2013; National Center for
Education Statistics, 2019a). Using this structure, higher education plans to award 4,001,000
degrees in 2020 alone (Hendrickson & Ikenberry, 2013; National Center for Education Statistics,
2020). With more than $65 billion in federal and state funding annually, colleges and universities
also maintain appropriate academic and safety standards to maintain an environment conducive
to education and learning (The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2015).
Field Goal
While colleges and universities employ racial minorities, these institutions have struggled
to address increased educational debt totals, even among employees. The field has struggled to
recruit, hire, and retain employees from racially marginalized backgrounds in a manner that
aligns with minority degree or debt acquisition rates (Green & Ciez‐Volz, 2010; Vega et al.,
2010). Complaints related to organizational culture, equity, and career mobility have remained
constant for higher education (Naylor et al., 2015). Higher education would need many changes
to demonstrate a commitment to equity and address the problems educational debt creates for
racial minority professionals (American College Professionals Association, 2019; Green & Ciez‐
Volz, 2010). Namely, faculty and staff minority hiring, recruitment, and retention efforts would
4

need to align with the current student population and student debt consumed by persons of color
(Green & Ciez‐Volz, 2010; Vega et al., 2010).
Further, higher education would need to reduce wage gaps prevalent in the field to offset
the effects of educational debt on racially marginalized populations (Green & Ciez‐Volz, 2010;
National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a). Necessary increases in racial minority faculty
and staff hiring should also occur. Racial minority employee staffing should equal the nation’s
current racial minority student population (40%); however, the national statistics show colleges
and universities currently lag behind minority student enrollment rates, with minority employees
making up less than 11% of national college faculty for some racial minority groups (Gould,
2019; National Center for Education Statistics, 2019b). Employee wage and salary increases that
address the rising cost of education must also occur (Gould, 2019; National Center for Education
Statistics, 2019b). Overall, higher education institutions need to make the necessary changes to
decrease or eliminate educational debt among racial minority employees over the next 10 years.
Related Literature
Though well-researched and documented since the 1980s, student loan debt totals and
their problematic effects on students, graduates, and their families continue to climb (Best &
Best, 2014; Fuller, 2014). Subsequently, legislation to address the rising totals remains stalled to
address the concerns (Best & Best, 2014; Fuller, 2014).
Bodies of research have consistently reported that even minimal amounts of educational
debt can result in a host of negative consequences for students and graduates (Jackson &
Reynolds, 2013). Research correlates as little as $1,000 of educational debt to negative outcomes
on mental health, family planning, and homeownership (Bozick & Estacion, 2014; Robb et al.,
5

2019; Tran et al., 2018). With educational debt, however, race further exacerbates the negative
outcomes of personal, degree, career, and wealth attainment.
The research has highlighted explicitly that racial minorities assume a disproportionate
burden related to educational debt (Addo et al., 2016; Houle, 2014a). Educational debt not only
contributes to racial minorities enrolling in college 10% to 15% less often than peers but also
influences racial minorities graduation rates that lag behind White students by as much as 30%
(National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2018; U.S. Department of Education, 2016).
Further, upon graduation, racial minorities buy homes, attain careers, earn advanced degrees, and
accumulate wealth at a slower pace than White graduates (Belasco et al., 2014; Houle & Warner,
2017; Sinha, 2019). Research links issues such as college persistence, widening of racial and
gender wage gaps, delays in social and life transitions, and financial instability concerns to
student loan debt (Luna-Torres et al., 2018; Mendoza et al., 2009). College persistence, for
instance, lessens approximately 12% for racial minorities with educational debt while only
resulting in no significant decrease for White students (McKinney & Burridge, 2015; U.S.
Department of Education, 2016, 2018). Moreover, the wage gap of 20% worsens with the
inclusion of educational debt among graduates (Altonji et al., 2016; Economic Policy Institute,
2019; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019). Career and income opportunities vary considerably
for racial minorities, however, and contribute to the overall effects of student loan experience.
Research related to the negative effects of educational debt has focused mostly on costly
professional degrees such as medicine and law, where graduates yield average salaries of
$100,000 (Nashleanas et al., 2014; Phillips et al., 2014; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019).
Little to no research examines the effects of educational debt on individuals pursuing careers in
education, specifically in higher education where salaries average just $57,000 (U.S. Bureau for
6

Labor Statistics, 2019). As of May 2020, varied literature searches for the keywords “minority,”
“race,” “college,” “university,” “employees,” “staff,” “student loan,” and “debt” in ERIC
ProQuest, PSYCInfo, EBSCO Business Source Complete, and Google Scholar yield no related
research.
Field Performance Status
Higher education salary and employment data released in 2019 highlighted areas of
challenge in racial minority hiring that affect employee’s ability to mitigate the effects of
educational debt. Since the early 2000s, the cost of education has nearly doubled and continues
to increase (McMahon, 2009). During that time, racial minorities have met financing challenges,
accepted associated debt, and earned more higher education-related degrees; however, hiring
rates do not align with such increases (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019b). National
Center for Education Statistics (2019a) report data revealed several hiring discrepancies that
contribute to the problem. According to report data, while 13% of all college students are
African American and 20% are Hispanic, yet only 6% of faculty represent each of those racial
groups. Of student services staff members, only 13% are African American and 9% Latinx, still
less than the college students enrolled (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a, 2019b).
College athletics follow the same trend. In college football, for example, more than 60%
of all players are African American or Latinx; however, only 10% of all college football coaches
derive from racially marginalized backgrounds (Lapchick, 2019). Upper administrative
disparities are even more significant, as only 17% of all college presidents are persons of color
(American Council on Education, 2017). If colleges and universities do not hire at rates that
align with enrollment or pay at rates, then they do not provide adequate opportunities for those
from racially marginalized backgrounds to address the adverse effects of educational debt
7

created by higher education. Minority pay gap trends in higher education further exacerbate the
problem.
Disparities in institutional pay also contribute to the problem of educational debt
negatively affecting racial minorities. Employee wage data suggests that, in the U.S., racial
minorities earn 30% less annually when compared to Whites regardless of the position or
industry (Economic Policy Institute, 2019). The field of higher education performs similarly.
Statistics show that, of university faculty and staff, more than 70% of employees from racially
marginalized backgrounds earn in the bottom two-thirds of the average salary range respective to
their given positions (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). In contrast, the opposite
occurs for White employees (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Such disparities
highlight a need for change.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of how educational debt negatively affects racial minorities in higher
education is important to address due to the problem’s effect on a significant subset of the
population and the nation as a whole. The nation’s educational debt totals will likely climb with
each passing year if not addressed. As U.S. households today hold more than $30,000 in
educational debt, future increases in educational debt totals yield worry among students,
families, and economists (Best & Best, 2014). Those connected to and studying the problem of
educational debt suspect additional increases in debt totals could lead to a significant national
economic downturn (Best & Best, 2014). To avoid this outcome, lawmakers, and their
constituents throughout the country, have called for educational funding, loan, and repayment
reform (Best & Best, 2014; Elliott & Lewis, 2014). Specifically, data suggests that racial
minorities serve as the most consistently growing subpopulations of college attendees (Best &
8

Best, 2014; Cramer & Shanks, 2014). As such, if not addressed, racial minorities will
disproportionately bear the brunt of the student loan crisis.
Stakeholder Groups
Key stakeholder groups that could help achieve the organizational goal of decreasing
educational debt among racial minority employees by at least 50% over the next 10 years include
university faculty and staff educational debt holders, university administrators, and federal
policymakers. University faculty and staff educational debt holders could provide specific
feedback and data regarding how educational debt and organizational influences affect
employees. University administrators serve as organizational decision-makers who can either
hinder or help employees address organizational needs related to the problem, such as
developing promotional and pay structures that consider educational attainment and the
subsequent debt that may be associated. As both higher education institutions and employees
must comply with federal policy, federal policymakers also influence goal completion by
creating and managing how higher education is financed.
Stakeholder Group for Study
While all stakeholders serve a role in addressing the problem, university faculty and staff
serve as the focus group for this study. Regardless of additional stakeholder buy-in or systemic
changes, university employees remain connected to and affected by educational debt as faculty
and staff serve as direct educational financing consumers. Understanding how college and
university faculty and staff navigate the educational financing and repayment system is necessary
to address the problem. Further, assessing and understanding the extent to which university
faculty and staff are affected by educational debt and motivated to lessen the influence of
educational debt in their lives will highlight performance strengths and gaps as well as pinpoint
9

areas for additional study. Examining the strategies faculty and staff use or need to manage
educational debt will also provide insights into potential solutions. As such, university faculty
and staff will act as the study’s primary stakeholder group.
Theoretical and Methodical Framework
This research will utilize Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis theoretical framework to
examine the problem of educational debt’s negative effects on higher education professionals.
The gap analysis model assesses differences in organizational, or systemic, desired and actual
performance outcomes. The gap analysis framework first encourages the development of desired
performance outcomes or goals. The framework identifies current performance and compares it
to the desired outcome standard, highlighting the nature and breadth of performance deficits. An
analysis of organizational stakeholders’ knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
occurs to determine the cause, potential solutions, and needed resources to enhance performance
and meet the desired outcomes. Finally, Creswell and Creswell’s (2018) experimental approach
will serve as the study’s methodological approach.
Purpose of the Project and Primary Research Questions
The purpose of the project was to evaluate higher education’s effectiveness in mitigating
the adverse effects of educational debt on employees from racially marginalized backgrounds.
The knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors and influences related to achieving the
organizational goal were analyzed. Faculty and staff educational debt holders were the study’s
key stakeholders. The study’s guiding research questions were as follows:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation of racial minority higher education professionals
to reduce the negative effect of educational debt?
10

2. To what extent are colleges and universities’ resources, structures, and processes
effective in reducing the negative effects of educational debt on racial minority higher
education professionals?
3. What is the organizational interaction with minority higher education professionals’
motivation and knowledge to reduce the negative effects of educational debt?
Definitions
The current research utilizes several key terms. Relevant definitions are as follows:
African American is U.S. citizens with African ancestry (Van Patten, 2009).
Boomeranging refers to Cohabitating with one’s parent or guardian after earning a
college degree (Houle & Warner, 2017).
Career Mobility refers to the navigation of and movement through one’s job hiring, pay,
and promotional structures (Vardi, 1980).
Consumer Protections are laws, entities, or recourses intended to aid market consumers
from encountering, being susceptible to, or experiencing hardships from discriminating,
deceptive, fraudulent, or unfair business practices (Federal Trades Commission, 2013).
Default refers to delinquency of at least 270 days in paying student loans as outlined in
the original promissory note (U.S. Department of Education, 2020d).
Educational Debt is all repayable funds obtained by a student via a government-
sponsored or private lender in pursuit of education (Best & Best, 2014).
EDE is an acronym for educational debt effects.
Educational Financing System (EFS) refers to all of the institutions, entities, and
associated regulations related to the dissemination of educational financing funds (U.S.
Department of Education, 2020b).
11

Financial Aid is all forms of accessible educational financing offered through colleges,
universities, government, and private entities to students to fund or offset costs associated with
pursuing or obtaining higher education (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a).
Financial Wellness is a state of being financially happy, healthy, and free of worry (Joo,
2008; Zimmerman, 1995).
Higher Education Professionals (HEPs) are Those employed as administrators, faculty,
or staff by a two-year or four-year college or university.
Higher Education is the field of employment or branch of education that focuses on the
schooling of post-grade school students, including community college, undergraduate,
professional certification programs, and graduate programs (Cornell Law School, 2011).
Latinx refers to U.S. citizens with Latin American ancestry (Fernandez-Morera, 2010).
Life Transitions are Culturally pivotal life events that assert one’s independence in
society (Addo, 2014).
Marginalized Populations are groups limited from participation in social, economic,
cultural, or political life based on race, gender, financial status, or other factors (Given, 2008).
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth is an ongoing longitudinal research project
sponsored by the United State Department of Labor Statistics that collects data about the lives of
a given, U.S.-born youth sample (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020).
Personal Wellness is a state of being personally, emotionally, and physically healthy,
happy, and free from worry (Zimmerman, 1995).
RMHEPs is an acronym for the phrase “racially marginalized higher education
professionals.”
12

Wealth refers to appreciating assets acquired by a given party or family (Hiltonsmith,
2013; Zhan & Sinha, 2019).
Organization of the Study
Five chapters compose the study. Chapter One offers an introduction into how
educational debt negatively affects those from marginalized backgrounds working in higher
education, in addition to presenting the study’s gap analysis theoretical framework. Chapter Two
provides an extensive literature review regarding how educational debt negatively affects those
from marginalized backgrounds. Chapter Two will address the historical context, debt
acquisition, career, degree attainment, wealth, personal and financial wellness, and life
transitions. Chapter Three identifies the assumed influences contributing to the institutional
challenge and describes the study’s methodology. Chapter Four outlines the study’s data, data
analysis, and results. Chapter Five presents plausible solutions to improving or eliminating
educational debt’s negative effects on marginalized populations working in higher education.
Empirical evidence obtained through the literature and study findings will support the
recommended solutions. Solution implementation and evaluative planning will also be
delineated.

13

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The literature review examines educational debt’s negative effects on racial minority
students and professionals. The review first provides historical context followed by an appraisal
of current research. The effects of educational debt on racial minorities discussed include
educational and wealth attainment, financial and personal wellness, and life transition
opportunities. The review then explores the organizational influences on educational debt’s
negative effects on racial minorities, including college choice, career mobility, consumer
experiences, and financial socialization. The review closes by examining the gap analysis
theoretical framework (Clark & Estes, 2008). The review explains and applies the concepts of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences, as defined by Clark and Estes, to the
current study.
Educational Financing Historical Context
To access a U.S. college education, students need to address the financial costs associated
and identify effective means to cover tuition, books, fees, and housing. Student loans, currently
being utilized by nearly 70% of U.S. college students, account for the majority of educational
financing and, as such, also account for almost 30% of the nation’s overall debt (The Institute for
College Access & Success, 2019; U.S. Department of Education, 2018). Overall, the EFS now
services and affects 40% of U.S. homes and, while providing access to education, also
contributes to consumer debt and repayment difficulties (Fuller, 2014; The Institute for College
Access & Success, 2019; U.S. Department of Education, 2018). People from racially
marginalized backgrounds, however, disproportionately experience educational debt’s negative
influences.

14

Early Educational Financing Policies and Sources
The U.S. EFS began as a philanthropic movement intended to support males from low
socioeconomic statuses in earning college degrees and remained as such for more nearly 200
years. The Great Depression, however, brought in societal and economic shifts that changed the
landscape of higher education and educational financing access. To address the changed
economic landscape, the U.S. EFS evolved from a philanthropic effort to one of repayment,
profit, and interest. After the Great Depression and the Civil Rights Movement, the need, scope,
and access to student loans expanded to meet student demands (U.S. Department of Justice,
2016b; U.S. Department of Treasury, 2019). The increase in student loan disbursements resulted
in larger loan amounts to students from low-income backgrounds and providing educational
financing options for middle- and upper-class students as well (U. S. Congress, 1978a). Options
like the G.I. Bill, passed in 1944, also offered merit-based tuition funding to war veterans (U.S.
Department of Justice, 2020); however, for students without military experience, the need for
more student funding remained.
Current Educational Financing Policies, Sources, and Utilization
In the mid-1950s, colleges began to develop need-based financial aid award formulas to
determine student needs and award scholarships, grants, and fellowship opportunities (Fuller,
2014). Loan options continued to expand while non-interest bearing remained stagnant. The
Perkins Loan Program, created in 1958, capped loan amounts, created a 10-year repayment
period restriction, and offered various repayment methods (i.e., standard, graduated; U.S. House
of Representatives, n.d.). The passing of the Higher Education Act (HEA) in 1965, and its
subsequent reauthorization in 1968, authorized the Guaranteed Student Loan Program that
offered increased annual loan borrowing amounts for low- and middle-income students with a
15

10-year, standard repayment option while also giving lenders greater autonomy over borrowing
amounts (U.S. Congress, 2008; U.S. Department of Education, 2006). The U.S. government then
enacted Section 439A of the Education Amendment Act 1976 that disallowed the discharge of
student loans in bankruptcy for the first five years of loan repayment without a proven, undue
hardship, making it increasingly more difficult for overwhelmed debtors to get rid of excessive
educational debt (U.S. Congress, 1978a). At the same time, the expansion of loan options
increased college access to students of all backgrounds and shifted the perception of college from
a benevolent option available to a select few to a personal investment opportunity requiring
students to accept personal or familial debt, along with its challenges and limitations.
Numerous changes to the structure, distribution, and regulation of the U.S. EFS in the late
1900s and early 2000s resulted in increased access to student loans, related debt, and repayment
methods. Since the 1970s, U.S. educational financing has progressed into an elaborate funding
system where the federal and state governments align with lenders and institutions to authorize,
distribute, and collect payment on student loans with few available alternatives (Best & Best,
2014; Fuller, 2014). Nearly a dozen federal acts and reauthorizations between 1972 and 2005,
such as the HEA, Omnibus Reconciliation Action, and Student Loan Marketing Association
Reorganization Act, have continued to increase student loan borrowing amounts, types of loans,
and repayment options (U.S. Congress, 1978b, 1986; U.S. Department of Education, 2006).
The HEA reauthorization of 1976 incentivized states to establish guaranty agencies for
private lenders to insure federal student loans (U.S. Department of Education, 2006). The 1980
HEA reauthorization established the Parent Loans for Undergraduate Students (PLUS) Program,
allowing families to also borrow interest-laden loans to cover students’ education costs (U.S.
Department of Education, 2006). The HEA 1992 reauthorization and the Student Loan Reform
16

Act of 1993 created the Direct Loan, Stafford Loan, and Federal Family Education Loan and the
income-contingent, extended, and graduated repayment methods (U.S. Congress, 1993; U.S.
Department of Education, 2006). The Higher Education Reconciliation Act of 2005 allowed
graduate and professional students to borrow PLUS loans (U.S. Department of Education, 2006).
Shortly thereafter, Sallie Mae, a government-sponsored entity that had largely managed student
loans, applied to relinquish its government affiliations to act as a private lending and repayment
entity (U.S. Department of Treasury, 2006). The changes in student lending practices resulted in
exponential student debt growth accounting for an increase from $516 billion in 2007 to more
than $1.5 trillion in 2020 alone (U.S. Department of Education, 2020). With such substantial
increases in educational loan consumption, evolutions in educational loan repayment options
have further complicated an already challenging system. Educational debt now serves as a
ubiquitous consequence to educational attainment, especially to individuals from marginalized
backgrounds.
Negative Effects of Educational Debt on Racially Marginalized Populations
As the EFS has evolved into a loan-primary funding system, so have the negative
consequences for racially marginalized populations who have amassed millions of dollars in debt
pursuing college degrees. As the second leading form of consumer debt and the largest form of
unsecured consumer debt nationally, these populations hold as much as 85% more student loan
debt than their peers (Houle & Addo, 2019). Moreover, racially marginalized students have
disproportionately experienced the consequences of educational debt in the way of attainment,
wellness, and life navigation hindrances (Addo, 2014; Luna-Torres et al., 2018; Walsemann et
al., 2015). Black and Latinx males, for instance, married as much as 8% less often than Whites
for every 1% of additional educational debt, correlating this debt with racial minorities’
17

maintaining lasting romantic relationships and associated family planning goals (Addo et al.,
2018). Earning a college degree proves challenging for these individuals, as gaining access to the
nation’s colleges and universities requires funding predominantly derived from private,
subsidized, and unsubsidized student loans.
Educational Attainment Effects
Students from racially marginalized backgrounds often take on educational debt to earn a
college degree but face unanticipated challenges that delay or hinder them from achieving the
academic goal. The disproportionate effects of educational debt incurred by these populations
contribute to low admissions, high college dropout, and poor retention rates that exceed that of
their White peers (Belasco et al., 2014; Kim & Otts, 2010; McKinney & Burridge, 2015). To
determine how student loans and educational debt affected students’ college experiences, Luna-
Torres et al. (2018) analyzed data from 5,878 community college students. The researchers found
White student loan recipients received a college degree or transferred to a four-year institution
more often than students representing racially marginalized populations with similar student loan
debt totals. As individuals view community college as a more cost-effective option, educational
debt effects at the community college level suggest even greater negative effects possible at four-
year institutions.
Research has found that as the cost of education increases, educational attainment rates
decline for racially marginalized students. Dwyer et al. (2012) further explored the effects of
educational debt on these students’ attainment by evaluating 6,748 responses to the National
Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY 97). The authors found African American and
Hispanic males had the lowest graduation rates and highest educational debt totals of all college-
goers (Dwyer et al., 2012). For students pursuing terminal degrees, often required to obtain
18

faculty or upper administrative positions in higher education, Kim and Otts (2010) found similar
results. A study of 21,683 responses to the Survey of Earned Doctorates from NSF and the
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System revealed African Americans acquired
significantly more educational debt, earned terminal degrees less often, and required more time
to complete degrees than peers (Kim & Otts, 2010). Further, the authors found Latinx also
experienced higher educational debt totals and slower degree conferral rates than White students
(Kim & Otts, 2010). Ultimately, the educational attainment challenges created by educational
debt decrease the chances that racially marginalized student populations will earn degrees at
every level.
Due to educational debt, racial minority students may even avoid higher education
altogether. Belasco et al. (2014) found this population tended to avoid educational debt even at
the expense of not earning a college degree. The study assessed student loan acceptance attitudes
among 6,000 participants and showed Latinx and African American adults not currently enrolled
40% more likely to avoid educational debt in pursuit of graduate degrees than college than White
students (Belasco et al., 2014). These results not only mirror statistics on racial minorities’ taking
on more debt than their peers, but they also document the exacerbated debt effects that racial
minorities experience when compared to their White counterparts (Belasco et al., 2014). As a
result of the difficulties in educational achievement created by educational debt for marginalized
populations, subsequent career attainment struggles emerge, intensifying the problem further.
Career Attainment Effects
Individuals from racially marginalized backgrounds who earn college degrees by taking
on educational debt encounter additional challenges when attempting to enter and navigate the
working world. The cost of education and subsequent educational debt leads to lower career
19

aspirations despite ability levels and academic prowess (Eitel & Martin, 2009; Gansememer-
Topf et al., 2017; Nashleanas et al., 2014; Rothstein & Rouse, 2011). A mixed-methods study of
204 first-generation, female, mostly African American and Latinas, college students conducted
by Eitel and Martin (2009) highlighted these results. The study’s findings revealed individuals
from racially marginalized backgrounds desiring careers as doctors, lawyers, college
administrators, or financial analysts relegated themselves to becoming nurses, paralegals, college
staff workers, or bankers (Eitel & Martin, 2009). According to the research, students reduced
career aspirations due to perceiving educational debt as excessive, unaffordable, and unavoidable
(Eitel & Martin, 2009). By reducing career aspirations, educational debt hinders career
advancement opportunities for racial minorities before the minority workers even enter the
working world.
When entering the working world, the effects of educational debt continue to influence
the decision making of racial minority graduates and new professionals. Rothstein and Rouse
(2011) found additional career effects in their study of 8,641 students from “highly selective
universities” with no loan policies. The research found graduates with the highest debt totals,
commonly racial minorities, tended to seek jobs with higher initial earnings and lower career
mobility prospects (Rothstein & Rouse, 2011). Through a quantitative study of 156 final-year
students at the University of Iowa College of Dentistry from 2007 through 2010, Nashleanas et
al. (2014) also found potentially damaging career mobility results for professionals with
excessive educational debt. The study found graduates with educational debt totals of $100,000
or more planned to enter private practice immediately after graduation more often than peers
with less debt. Graduates with less debt tended to pursue additional training or specialties after
graduation, increasing their access to more lucrative, long-term income opportunities
20

(Nashleanas et al., 2014). This research suggests racial minorities may value current financial
stability over longer-term income and wealth attainment. With limited career opportunities and
outcomes, financial wellness and growth also prove evasive for debt holders from marginalized
backgrounds.
Wealth Attainment and Financial Wellness Effects
Educational debt continues to restrict and limit the financial lives of racially marginalized
populations by preventing them from building wealth as well as financial independence and
wellness. Educational debt creates financial and social constraints as well as attainment doubts
that prevent workers from accumulating appreciating assets or developing effective financial
management strategies that could provide greater economic security (Houle, 2014; Houle &
Berger, 2015; Zhan & Sinha, 2019). Houle and Berger’s (2015) analysis of NLSY 97 responses
showcased negative asset and wealth attainment effects. The researchers found a negative
association between homeownership and educational debt holders, regardless of the educational
debt amount, for racial minority participants (Houle & Berger, 2015). The research found no
association among non-debt holders, a largely White, male subgroup (Houle & Berger, 2015).
Additional research by Myers et al. (2019) suggests these real estate purchasing difficulties may
extend well into the next decade. The simulated analysis of homeownership trends and changes
among 25- to 44-year-old participants using Panel Study of Income Dynamics data identified an
expected decline in homeownership rates among racial minority graduates due to educational
attainment costs well into the year 2035 and beyond. Educational debt affects not only real estate
purchases but also all forms of wealth and financial stability.
Racial minorities experience challenges establishing and preparing for their financial
futures because of the financial strain educational debt creates. Zhan and Sinha (2019) found
21

racial minority, unmarried females least likely to possess various forms of wealth (i.e., retirement
funds, savings accounts) among graduates with educational debt when the researchers analyzed
2015 National Financial Capacity study data. Elliot and Nam (2013) also found a negative
relationship between wealth attainment and student loan debt. When studying data from 3,857
participants who responded to the Survey of Consumer Finances, the authors found workers with
a net worth of $128,828 in 2005 experienced a loss of 54% of net worth four years later
compared to workers with similar net worth levels but no student loan debt (Elliot & Nam,
2013). The financial limitations and difficulties created by educational debt may also act as a
stressor, resulting in physical and emotional consequences that further affect one’s ability to
navigate life effectively.
Personal Wellness Effects
Consumers from racially marginalized backgrounds also encounter personal functioning
and general wellness challenges resulting from student loan debt. Physical ailments, mental
health challenges, and daily functioning difficulties emerge as educational debt creates excessive
stress, anxiety, and emotional concerns (Destin & Svoboda, 2018; Hwang et al., 2012;
Richardson et al., 2013; Walsemann et al., 2015). Walsemann et al. (2015) investigated the
personal wellness effects of educational debt on young adults when analyzing 4,643 participant
responses of the NLSY 97. The study found inverse associations with educational debt and
positive psychological functioning among low-income debt holders, mostly individuals from
marginalized backgrounds (Walsemann et al., 2015). In 2018, Destin et al. also found racial
minority groups with student loan debt and salient student loan debt reminders experienced
decreased cognitive functioning and academic performance when the researchers evaluated
3,924 responses to the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen. The research found increased
22

mental resiliency in students who did not have to focus on financial success. Destin et al.’s
research revealed students who did have to focus on financial success also did not experience
cognitive ability reductions when thinking about negative experiences. Destin et al.’s research
supported earlier findings that revealed African American educational debt holders reported
sleeping less than White debt holders or non-debt holders even when accounting for occupation,
marital status, net worth, health, and a host of other potential factors (Walsemann et al., 2016).
By impeding marginalized groups’ ability to obtain or maintain high levels of personal wellness,
educational debt’s influence inhibits social advancement and transition.
Life Transitions Effects
Unlike their White counterparts, students and graduates from racially marginalized
backgrounds disproportionately experience life transition difficulties due to educational debt and,
instead, delay or forego such rites of passage. Due to educational debt, these populations
encounter additional challenges to independent living, marriage, and family planning (Addo et
al., 2018; Gicheva, 2016; Houle & Berger, 2015; Houle & Warner, 2017; Min & Taylor, 2018;
Myers et al., 2019). Houle and Warner (2017) examined the likelihood of young adults residing
with parents or guardians after graduation. The study utilized an 8,984-participant sample from
the NLSY 97 and found African American males at greatest risk of “boomeranging,” or
cohabitating with parents or guardians post-graduation. Further, the research noted strong
correlations between boomeranging, educational debt, lack of degree completion, and low
socioeconomic status (Houle & Warner, 2017). Myers et al. (2019) also found links to delayed
independent living and educational debt among racial minorities. The researchers analyzed data
from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics and determined non-Hispanic Whites purchased
homes more often than racial minority peers despite any associated educational attainment,
23

wealth, or debt amounts (Myers et al., 2019). By creating doubt and negative expectations about
one’s ability to manage financial responsibilities independently, educational debt prevents the
construction of a life of choice.
The effects of educational debt permeate the lives of racial minorities so much so that
researchers have even found correlations to family planning and family expansion. When
analyzing NLSY 97 data to determine life transition effects on racial minority debt holders, Min
and Taylor (2018) discovered Latinx females experienced a lowered probability of giving birth
when they held educational debt, regardless of marital status, unlike their White counterparts
who experience lowered probability of childbirth only when indebted and married. Similarly, in
2014, Bozick and Estacion utilized a sample population of 9,410 bachelor’s degree recipients
from the 1993 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study to identify a reduction in first
marriage correlating to female bachelor’s degree recipients. The correlation increased by 2% for
every $1,000 increase in student loan debt incurred. The study found more prominent results
among racial minority females. As educational debt discourages life transitions among
marginalized groups, system factors within colleges, universities, and government funding
systems exacerbate the debt’s negative effects by supporting educational, career, and social
navigation barriers.
Institutional and Governmental Influences on Educational Debt
Educational financing government entities and individual higher education institutions
contribute to the problem of negative educational debt effects on racial minorities through
structures, practices, and policies that exacerbate these effects. Organizational influences, such as
accreditation limitations, inconsistent pay and promotion structures, and the lack of ongoing
financial literacy also prevent full access to or benefits from earning a college degree. The
24

institutional and organizational structures that influence educational debt also contribute to how
these populations approach, accept, manage, and make decisions regarding taking on educational
debt.
College Choice and Costs
The rising cost of a college degree has created barriers to a quality education for racial
minorities working in higher education to help offset household educational debt. Institutional
and degree prestige serve as social, professional, and economic capital for students and
professionals entering this field. As such, college-goers from racially marginalized backgrounds
pursuing careers in higher education need to weigh college choice against the cost of college
attendance should they wish to improve their overall career mobility outlooks. Stevenson (2016)
found challenges to college choice among racial minorities by analyzing longitudinal data from
the Educational Longitudinal Survey (ELS) 2002. The research found the current financial aid
system most often expected African American and Latinx students from moderate-income
households to fund their own college experience. The research highlighted this expectation
exacerbates economic disparity, unfairly places a significant financial strain, and limits college
choice options (Stevenson, 2016). Students who earn professional degrees from top-ranked
programs, for instance, earn salaries that more than double that of the average bachelor’s degree
recipient (Stevenson, 2016). Due to these college choice limitations, racial minority students do
not gain access to the economic capital gained from institutional prestige. They then encounter
similar negative systemic educational debt influences at the individual college level as well.
During admissions processes, colleges and universities limit college choice options by
failing to acknowledge the challenges caused by educational debt or presenting viable solutions.
Rios et al. (2019) found additional college choice and cost reduction concerns for racially
25

marginalized individuals pursuing degrees by analyzing 120 graduate schools’ programs
recruitment webpages using the NCME and American Psychological Association list of
measurement program. The analysis found these programs often fail to highlight key factors in
their recruitment techniques, like flexible attendance opportunities, debt-free college financing
options, or anti-discrimination statements that attract students from racially marginalized
backgrounds (Rios et al., 2019). When higher education institutions fail to acknowledge
educational debt’s influences, students from racially marginalized backgrounds tend to overlook
or discount more prestigious institutions that could yield greater career capital in fields like
higher education.
Choosing institutions that do not align with professional goals to avoid debt can take
severe tolls professionally and financially. Glocker and Storck’s (2014) findings from an analysis
of 75 fields of education highlighted the costs of “undermatching.” Using German Micro Census
data, the study found graduates yield a higher return on investment when earning degrees from
an institution specializing in the field they wish to pursue rather than obtaining a degree from
arbitrary or more cost-effective institutions, a technique commonly employed by racially
marginalized groups (Glocker & Storck, 2014). Similarly, Monaghan and Jang (2017) assessed
the heightened risk of low income and unemployment after graduation in various fields using
data from the Baccalaureate & Beyond 1993–2003 and Beginning Postsecondary Students
Longitudinal Study 2004–2009. The study found one’s college major has a significant effect on
anticipated income or unemployment (Monaghan & Jang, 2017). The research found African
American and Latinx graduates, for instance, less likely to select “risky” college majors that
require graduate school, like education or social services fields, to yield increased initial pay
(Monaghan & Jang, 2017). Unable to utilize institutional capacity, minority HEPs set themselves
26

up for additional career struggles and difficulties navigating the field’s hiring and promotional
structures.
Career Mobility and Pay
For racially marginalized populations, there are no higher education salary and promotion
structures that align with the nation’s rising educational debt totals. As these individuals navigate
the professional world of higher education, they often face limited pay options, uncertain job
security, and restricted benefits that do little to offset the financial burden of educational debt
(Choi, 2014; Nashleanas et al., 2014; Rothstein & Rouse, 2011). Statistics related to pay in
higher education confirm that, regardless of debt totals, these populations receive substantially
lower salaries than their White peers (National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Statistics
show that White employees made up 72% of all higher education employees earning $100,000
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). African Americans accounted for less than 5%
of this group, while Asian and Latinx employees accounted for 4% and 3%, respectively
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2009). Additionally, research on national reporting
data, documents, and media articles related to eight U.S. Ivy League institutions found racial
minority underrepresentation among academic faculty and administrators that did not represent
the student population (Gasman et al., 2015). Lowered career aspirations and degree attainment
due to educational debt contribute to racial minorities’ institutional underrepresentation.
Racial minority HEPs fortunate enough to persevere and establish careers enter the world
of academia only to experience additional challenges that hinder career mobility. Qualitative
research conducted by Boyd et al. (2010) found faculty of color reported difficulties navigating
the field due to ongoing marginalization and alienation from White faculty and administrators
that make it more difficult to maneuver through the ranks and assume positions of professional
27

power. While working to navigate professional spaces in higher education, graduates from
racially marginalized backgrounds need to understand and navigate the student loan repayment
system to avoid default or financial distress.
Student Loan Repayment Practices, Access, and Applications
The many forms of and regulations surrounding student loan repayment also contribute to
issues, consequences, and confusion due to the potential financial penalties of not utilizing the
best personal repayment option. Complexities surrounding student loan repayment options
further contribute to racial minority HEPs’ student loan knowledge deficits and greater difficulty
navigating the EFS (Chapman & Dearden, 2017; Jackson & Reynolds, 2013; Seamster &
Charron-Chénier, 2017). In a general examination of educational debt effects on racial
minorities, Seamster and Charron-Chénier (2017) analyzed data from the Survey of Consumer
Finances and found concerning outcomes. The research found African Americans experience
higher educational debt totals than peers even when accounting for educational attainment. The
researchers suggested lenders may offer needed services and repayment options to African
American households using exploitative terms that limit benefit. For racial minority HEPs, the
student loan industry’s predatory lending practices then lead to repayment complications.
Student loan repayment disparities unduly affect racial minority HEPs, leading to loan
defaults and financial penalties. Chapman and Dearden (2017) explored the effects of student
loan repayment on racial minorities when calculating economic repayment burdens using 205
CPS data. The findings revealed the proportion of a debtor’s income required to repay Stafford
loans placed too much strain on their consumption and standard of living (Chapman & Dearden,
2017). This increases the chance of loan default. In 2013, by further analyzing the 1995-1996
Beginning Postsecondary Student study data from more than 10,000 students, Jackson and
28

Reynolds also cited student loan repayment concerns. The research revealed students
representing racially marginalized populations relied on student loans 20% more and defaulted
on student loans up to 33% more often than Whites. There are also few resources or options to
lessen the effects of defaulting on student loans.
Consumer Protections
Unlike many forms of secured debt, educational debt stands as an unsecured debt in the
U.S., barred from consumer protection programs, laws, and supports that could help working
HEPs overcome this debt’s negative effects. With few recourses to combat potential financial
abuses or credit reporting errors and even fewer means to discharge this debt, individuals from
racially marginalized backgrounds face additional systemic barriers when overwhelmed by
educational debt effects (Best & Best, 2014; Hancock, 2009; Iuliano, 2012; McMahon, 2009).
Further, significant complexities surround bankruptcy law and bankruptcy discharge that create
literacy challenges, even for individuals with law degrees (Best & Best, 2014; Hancock, 2009).
In a review of 100 cases related to how the court interprets hardship related to student loan debt,
Hancock (2009) found an increase in cases related to bankruptcy and discharge requests of
student loans; however, the courts have granted less than half (47%) of all such discharge
requests. According to Hancock’s findings, this places an undue burden on groups that have no
other recourse to reduce the negative effects of educational debt (Hancock, 2009). Iuliano
conducted similar research in 2012, evaluating 217 legal proceedings involving debtors pursuing
a student loan discharge in the Public Access to Court Electronic Records database. Of the
dataset examined, where most of the filers derived from racially marginalized backgrounds, only
0.1% attempted to discharge educational debts even though many of them met the criteria to
request this cancellation (i.e., higher rates of medical hardship, lessened likelihood of being
29

employed, and had lower annual incomes). The lack of consumer protections presents concerns,
as many students often have little knowledge regarding educational debt regulations and the
associated consequences.
Financial Literacy and Socialization
The lack of institutional, organizational, and systemic financing literacy and financial
socialization at the collegiate level further contributes to the problem of educational debt
negatively affecting racial minority students and graduates. Inconsistent or nonexistent financial
literacy programs for college students and graduates place borrowers at a disadvantage by not
allowing them to fully understand the potential negative effects of student loan debt before,
during, and after incurring debt (Fan & Chatterjee, 2019; Goetz et al., 2011; Ohio State
University, 2017). Fan and Chatterjee’s 2019 study of financial socialization and education
assessed 2015 Financial Capability Study data and found individuals who received financial
education in an academic or professional setting less likely to make late student loan payments or
worry about their student loan debt than peers who did not. The research results indicated a 10%
increased likelihood for late payments by student loan recipients with limited-or-no financial
literacy education when compared to the control group. This suggests that a lack of financial
literacy contributes to educational debt hardships.
Research also suggests that any financial literacy modality yields student loan debt
improvements among racial minority populations. Additional research by Goetz et al. (2011)
expanded upon the previous research by surveying 509 undergraduate students regarding
perceptions and attitudes related to an on-campus financial counseling center, online financial
management resources, and in-person educational workshops. The study found associations
between having higher educational debt, being African American, and believing that finances
30

could affect the chances of degree conferral with web-based financial literacy delivery
perceptions and effectiveness ratings (Goetz et al., 2011). Ohio State University researchers
(2017) also investigated the effects of financial socialization and literacy by analyzing 28,539
survey responses from 90 two- and four-year public and private college and university campuses.
The study found 15% of respondents participated in a recurring personal finance course or
workshop while in high school compared to only 10.3% of respondents who participated while in
college. The lack of student loan financial literacy helps to ensure students, graduates, and
professionals from racially marginalized populations encounter far more negative consequences
to student loan debt than their counterparts. Undoubtedly, researchers should explore the
phenomenon further and identify viable solutions to decrease educational debt’s negative effects,
especially for racial minority professionals who support the higher education field itself.
Clark and Estes’s Theoretical Framework
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis theoretical framework serves as a research-
supported method to identify, analyze, implement, and reanalyze organizational or systems
performance deficits. The gap analysis model first encourages researchers to develop a set of
desired performance outcomes or goals for the given organization or system (Clark & Estes,
2008). After delineating goals, the model compares the organization’s or system’s current
performance against its desired outcome standard, highlighting the nature and breadth of any
performance deficits or gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). An analysis of key organizational
stakeholders' knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences then occurs to determine the
strengths and weaknesses yielding the current outcomes (Clark & Estes, 2008). The researcher
then addresses areas of weakness or challenge, causes, potential solutions, and needed resources
to enhance performance and meet the desired outcomes (Clark & Estes, 2008). The gap analysis
31

concludes by identifying potential solutions that eliminate or offset the causes of performance
gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Clark and Estes’s (2008) model asserts knowledge or skills, motivation, or organizational
influences or barriers cause performance gaps. Knowledge, either factual, conceptual,
procedural, or metacognitive, provides the information and skills needed to achieve a given task
or goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Motivation encourages the attainment of
knowledge necessary to achieve organizational or systemic goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Motivation, a result of either choice, persistence, or mental effort, activates, deactivates,
maintains, or aborts action towards a learning task (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011). Finally,
Clark and Estes’s model encourages the exploration of organizational factors, such as training
materials, policies, and culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). The organization undergoes a thorough
analysis to address performance deficits properly.
Knowledge
Determining the knowledge necessary to address the negative effects of educational debt
on racial minorities in higher education requires an exploration of the factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive knowledge presentations. Factual knowledge includes basic,
concrete information related to a given task (Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual knowledge
references how factual or declarative knowledge interrelate (Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural
knowledge involves task completion information (Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011). Finally,
theorists refer to the individualized, internal processes necessary to obtain and retain knowledge
as metacognition (Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011).
The types of knowledge needed to address the negative influences of educational debt on
racial minorities in higher education include understanding the educational debt system, how to
32

identify and utilize options to eliminate this debt, and the benefits of freedom from this debt.
Table 1 delineates the literature-derived knowledge types and influences.

Table 1
Knowledge Influences Summary
Field Mission
To provide degree-seeking students with socially transformative academic opportunities
through professionally facilitated academic and extracurricular experiences
Field Assessment Goal
By 2030, educational debt totals for racial minority higher education professionals will be
eliminated.
Stakeholder Goal
By the conclusion of 2025, racial minorities professionals working in higher education
demonstrate an increased self-efficacy in educational debt elimination.
Knowledge Influences Knowledge Type
Employees need to understand the general tenets of educational
financing.
Factual
Employees need to be able to conceptually identify the benefits of
eliminating educational debt.
Conceptual
Employees need to know how to eliminate educational debt. Procedural

33

Employees Need to Understand the General Tenets of Educational Financing
To achieve the goal of reducing the effects on racially marginalized populations, HEPs
need to understand the general concepts, structure, and facts related to educational debt (Clark &
Estes, 2008). The lack of factual knowledge of the EFS, its terminology, and purpose contributes
to increased student loan default among college graduates (Fan & Chatterjee, 2019; Hancock,
2009; Montalto et al., 2019). Research suggests many student loan holders make decisions
regarding educational debt without having a basic understanding of the associated terms,
conditions, or processes (Luna-Torres et al., 2018). This leaves vulnerable groups at a significant
disadvantage and susceptible to financial harm.
Employees Ability to Conceptually Identify the Benefits of Eliminating Educational Debt
As racial minority HEPs view educational debt as a requirement to achieving college
degrees, they accept educational debt and its consequences (Luna-Torres et al., 2018). Assuming
the unlikelihood of a debt-free life and earning lower wages than their peers, these individuals
resigned themselves to lowered life access expectations (Berg & Tollefson, 2014; Boatman &
Evans, 2017). Racial minority HEP perceptions about achieving a life free of educational debt
can change by imparting knowledge about how lack of this debt can improve social, economic,
and personal health (Fan & Chatterjee, 2019). If racial minority HEPs acquired the conceptual
knowledge related to educational debt, as well as the economic, social, professional, and
personal capital gains possible through debt eliminations, they could approach educational debt
differently and mitigate its negative effects.
Employees Need to Know How to Eliminate Educational Debt
Attainability plays an integral role in eliminating educational debt (Boatman & Evans,
2017; Rose, 2016). Racial minority HEPs need to understand the steps, processes, services, and
34

policies to live a life free of educational debt and reap its benefits. Increasing procedural
knowledge can improving educational debt freedom rates among this population to better ensure
they experience its many benefits. Evidence suggests financial management education and
socialization decreases student loan default rates and improves overall wealth attainment (Fan &
Chatterjee, 2019; Houle & Berger, 2015). Increasing the procedural knowledge necessary to
eliminate educational debt will help offset common pay inequities between White HEPs and
those from racially marginalized backgrounds (Zhang, 2008).
Motivation
Stakeholder motivation related to achieving the goal of reducing or eliminating the
negative effects of educational debt on racial minorities in higher education includes active
choice, persistence, and mental effort. Clark and Estes (2008) define active choice as the
stakeholder’s decision to pursue a given task or goal. The model defines persistence as the aspect
of motivation involving the stakeholder’s choice and determination to ensure a task’s full
completion (Clark & Estes, 2008). Mental effort involves a stakeholder’s investment of personal
energy in completing a given task. Beliefs and interests are the primary focus of the current
research.
One’s beliefs about accomplishing a given task or goal influence one’s motivation to
achieve the goal (Bandura, 1991, 2001). Bandura coined this concept as self-efficacy as outlined
in social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1991, 2001). Expectancy-value theory suggests interest
drives motivation by associating value and meaning to the task (Eccles, 2006). This work
focused on the motivational factors that influence HEPs from racially marginalized backgrounds
to eliminate educational debt. Table 2 outlines the motivational influences reviewed hereafter.
35

Table 2
Motivation Influences Summary
Field Mission
To provide degree-seeking students with socially transformative academic opportunities
through professionally facilitated academic and extracurricular experiences
Field Assessment Goal
By 2030, educational debt totals for racial minority higher education professionals will be
eliminated.
Stakeholder Goal
By the conclusion of 2025, racial minorities professionals working in higher education
demonstrate an increased self-efficacy in educational debt elimination.
Motivation Influences Motivation Type
Employees need to believe they can eliminate educational debt. Self-efficacy
Employees need to believe they can improve career mobility. Self-efficacy
Employees need to believe educational debt elimination is linked to
attaining improved career mobility.
Attainment value
Employees need to relate educational debt elimination to obtaining
wealth.
Utility value

Employees Need to Believe They Can Eliminate Educational Debt
Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2001) describes learning as a contextual process
achieved through observing others which shapes one’s own motivation to achieve given tasks.
Based on the observed successes or failures of others, individuals develop internal narratives that
direct their actions, reactions, and beliefs about accomplishing similar tasks and goals (Bandura,
1991a, 2001). Four sources shape one’s self-efficacy: mastery experience, vicarious experience,
social persuasions, and emotional and physiological states (Bandura, 1991a, 2001). An
individual acquires mastery experience after achieving success despite adversity (Bandura,
1991a, 2001). Observing others provides individuals with influential vicarious experiences
(Bandura, 1991a, 2001). Social persuasions offer external praise or discouragement from a
36

trusted source (Bandura, 1991a, 2001). Emotional and physiological states, commonly referred
to as reactive states, occur after completing a task (Bandura, 1991a, 2001). The most long-lasting
self-efficacious effects occur through mastery and the least lasting through social persuasions
(Bandura, 1991a, 2001). With a substantial effect on one’s task completion, self-efficacy creates
and sustains intrinsic motivation.
Employees Need to Believe They Can Improve Career Mobility
Racial minority HEPs need to believe in the attainability of educational debt elimination
and its contribution to improved career mobility. Self-efficacy influences the elimination of
personal student loan debt. Working professionals’ beliefs about their ability to pay or eliminate
this debt lead to career choices that improve long-term income opportunities and, consequently,
increased wealth attainment (Eitel & Martin, 2009; Gansememer-Topf et al., 2017; Nashleanas et
al., 2014; Rothstein & Rouse, 2011). Further, racial minority HEPs who believe in their ability to
influence educational debt freedom experience critical life transitions more quickly and have
lower student debt totals (Addo et al., 2018; Gicheva, 2016; Houle & Berger, 2015; Houle &
Warner, 2017; Min & Taylor, 2018; Myers et al., 2019). Table 2 describes self-efficacious
factors that will help HEPs from racially marginalized backgrounds to eliminate educational debt
by 2025.
Expectancy-Value Theory, Educational Debt, and Career Mobility
Employees need to relate educational debt elimination to obtaining improved career
mobility. Expectancy-value theory, adapted by Eccles (2006), asserts motivation allows
individuals to choose specific behaviors due to internal expectations regarding the anticipated
result. The desirability of the assumed outcome and the value placed on task completion, or the
lack thereof, determines one’s motivation to act (Eccles, 2006). Four salient expectancy-value
37

concepts drive the theory: intrinsic, attainment, utility, and cost (Eccles, 2006). Intrinsic value
results when an individual assigns personal enjoyment and meaning to a given task (Eccles,
2006). Eccles defines attainment value as the importance individuals place on a task’s
completion in relation to the individual’s personal identity (Eccles, 2006). Similarly, utility value
relates to if or how much the individual perceives the task as useful. Cost, the energy or effort
expended to achieve the given task, includes physical or mental efforts (Eccles, 2006). The
current study used attainment and utility value as primary areas of focus.
Employees Need to Relate Educational Debt Elimination to Wealth and Career Mobility
Employees need to relate educational debt elimination to attaining improved career
mobility and wealth. They could eliminate educational debt more often if doing so aligned with
their personal values and sense of self (Eccles, 2006). Research shows attainment value
influences a worker’s career, family planning, and financial choices (Addo et al., 2018; Fan &
Chatterjee, 2019; Luna-Torres et al., 2018; Nashleanas et al., 2014). If there is incongruence
between their core values and the given task, workers may divert efforts away from obtaining
graduate degrees, owning homes, and pursuing cost-prohibitive careers (Addo et al., 2018; Fan
& Chatterjee, 2019; Luna-Torres et al., 2018; McKinney & Burridge, 2015; Nashleanas et al.,
2014). If racial minorities working in higher education do not believe eliminating educational
debt holds personal, economic, or career value, they will avoid the task (Luna-Torres et al.,
2018). Therefore, programs and services targeted to help eliminate educational debt should focus
on the values and benefits most central to the subpopulation. Table 2 describes the expectancy-
and values-related motivational influences will help eliminate educational debt by 2025 for HEPs
from racially marginalized backgrounds.

38

Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes (2008) assert that organizations need to have effective work processes
and adequate resources to obtain and maintain success. Therefore, when organizational deficits
arise, organizational evaluations prove necessary to determine if organizational barriers exist or
contribute to the performance problem (Clark & Estes, 2008). Organizational cultures, or the
way organizations function and believe, often contribute to organizational achievement or
performance deficits (Clark & Estes, 2008). Environments, individual workers, and groups
interact to shape an organization’s culture, a set of organization’s goals, beliefs, and processes
held throughout the organization (Bolman & Deal, 2017; Clark & Estes, 2008). The culture acts
as a powerful, yet often difficult to identify, performance influencer (Bolman & Deal, 2017;
Clark & Estes, 2008). An organization’s cultural models, the covert beliefs, values, and attitudes
that shape an organization or system, serve to support resistance or acceptance of change
processes (Bolman & Deal, 2017; Clark & Estes, 2008). Similarly, the more overt manifestations
of the organization’s mission, beliefs, and values, can identify lacking organizational or system
strategies or mission incongruence that may also contribute to performance deficits (Rueda,
2011). An organization presents its settings through its observable, concrete manifestations, such
as its manuals, websites, and written policies. After identifying organizational contributors, the
culture shifts through organizational alignment and leadership towards effective, substantive
change (Shein, 2017). Table 3 provides a summary of the organizational influences.

39

Table 3
Organizational Influences Summary
Field Mission
To provide degree-seeking students with socially transformative academic opportunities
through professionally facilitated academic and extracurricular experiences
Field Assessment Goal
By 2030, educational debt totals for racial minority higher education professionals will be
eliminated.
Stakeholder Goal
By the conclusion of 2025, racial minorities professionals working in higher education
demonstrate an increased self-efficacy in educational debt elimination.
Organizational Influences Influence Type
The field of higher education needs to be racially inclusive in a manner
that supports personal and financial wellness.
Cultural model
The field of higher education needs resources to support financial
literacy, socialization, and modeling.
Cultural setting

A Culture of Institutional Racial Inclusivity That Supports Personal and Financial Wellness
A lack of equity in the higher education field prevents racial minority HEPs from
eliminating educational debt. Higher education employment statistics show an
underrepresentation of racial minority faculty and non-academic staff positions (American
Council on Education, 2017; Lapchick, 2019; National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a,
2019b). Research also shows these employees have and continue to experience lower wages,
graduation rates, and increased educational debt among all employers (McKinney & Burridge,
2015). Historically and statistically, racial minorities also encounter social, professional, and
financial penalties their peers do not.
The lack of racial inclusivity in higher education aligns with critical race theory (CRT)
concepts that attribute representation disparities to systemic oppression (Tate, 1997). According
to CRT, individuals in power develop organizational systems and cultures steeped in systemic
40

racism and discrimination, intended to discourage or disable success for racially marginalized
populations. Systemic racism then permeates organizations and systems, like higher education
institutions, and enables oppression despite individuals’ efforts to that navigate the system (Tate,
1997). As such, institutions need to develop equitable and inclusive cultures and environments
that support employee professional success and fiscal management that could offset or eliminate
educational debt’s negative effects on racial minority HEBs.
Financial Literacy, Socialization, and Modeling Resources
Social cognitive theory values modeling, or peer observations, as vital tenets (Bandura,
1991a, 2001). According to Bandura (2006), modeling affects behavior and learning. Research in
educational debt with minority groups confirms the impact of financial management modeling as
an effective method to decrease educational debt and default rates (Fan & Chatterjee, 2019).
Studies also indicate self-efficacy in individuals exposed to financial socialization have increased
self-efficacy related to student loan repayment (Fan & Chatterjee, 2019). However, much of the
research notes these modeling opportunities occur in the home or the grade school setting, not in
the higher education classroom or employment settings (Fan & Chatterjee, 2019). As financial
education serves as a critical factor in educational debt and default avoidance, the elimination of
educational debt by racial minority HEPs hinges, in part, on the proper organizational allocation
of resources to provide needed financial literacy training, socialization, and modeling (Shein,
2017). Therefore, institutions need to establish and maintain mentoring or modeling
opportunities related to financial management and debt recovery. Table 3 outlines the
organizational influences that will contribute to eliminating educational debt by 2025 for HEPs
from racially marginalized backgrounds.

41

Conclusion
The purpose of the project was to evaluate the field of higher education’s effectiveness in
lessening the negative effects of educational debt on employees from racially marginalized
backgrounds. This chapter presented a review of the related literature to provide insights into the
known and potential negative effects of this debt on racial minority HEPs: educational
attainment, wealth attainment, career mobility, personal wellness, delayed life transitions,
institutional and legal restrictions, and poor financial literacy and socialization. The chapter also
provided a theoretical framework review. The section concluded by outlining the assumed
knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that could enable racial minority HEPs
to eliminate educational debt and, subsequently, its negative effects. Chapter Three will discuss
the research project’s methodology.

42

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study addressed the problem of how racially marginalized professionals working in
higher education are uniquely and negatively affected by educational debt. This chapter will
review the study’s mixed-methods research design, data collection, and analysis techniques. This
chapter will identify and justify the study’s participant group and the related sampling criteria.
The chapter will then outline the study’s quantitative and qualitative data collection, analysis,
instruments, and approaches. The chapter will review the study’s data analysis plan, including an
examination of the study’s reliability, validity, and ethical considerations. Finally, the chapter
will delineate the study’s limitations and delimitations. The research design, data collection, and
analysis served to answer the following research questions:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation of racial minority higher education professionals
to reduce the negative effect of educational debt?
2. To what extent are colleges and universities’ resources, structures, and processes
effective in reducing educational debt’s negative effects on racial minority higher
education professionals?
3. What is the organizational interaction with minority higher education professionals’
motivation and knowledge to reduce the negative effects of educational debt?
Participating Stakeholders
The study’s participants were full- and part-time higher education faculty, staff, and
administrators. Participant characteristics include working professionals currently employed by a
United States community college, technical college, college, or university. Eligible participants
held educational debt regardless of repayment status (i.e., in repayment, forbearance, or default).
The study excluded contract employees who receive a salary and benefits outside of the direct
43

control of the institutions wherein they serve. The sample includes a robust representative
subsample of higher education employees from racially marginalized backgrounds to align with
the research questions.
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Employed by a Postsecondary Institution
The study’s participants were employed by a two- or four-year higher education
institution during the data collection window. The study utilized active HEPs, as those seeking
employment in the field or no longer working in the field would have a different set of influences
and experiences related to educational debt. For instance, retired HEPs would likely have
different expectations than those still actively earning wages that contribute to their student loan
repayment. Collecting data from all willing participants also allowed natural variances in
participant race, the study’s independent variable. The study did not use race as a criterion for
participation, as having participants from all racial groups allowed for comparative analysis.
Finally, the primary research topic centered on HEPs as the population of interest.
Possessing Current Educational Debt
The study’s participants also included those with some amount of current educational
debt. As the study examined the influence of educational debt on racial minority HEPs, the study
could only assess data from participants possessing student loan debt. Further, the study’s
conceptual framework focuses on the knowledge and motivation of racial minority HEPs to
reduce or eliminate educational debt. Without holding such debt, the likelihood of possessing
knowledge regarding student loan debt decreases, and the motivation is nullified.

44

Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The study utilized a convenience sampling approach with supplemental snowballing
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Participants were members of higher
education-related social media groups, forums, or email distribution lists. They voluntarily
participated and completed the survey. Social media forums were Facebook and higher education
professional development forums. Email distribution lists included college professional
networking listservs offered by national and regional higher education professional
organizations. Study participation recruitment occurred over four weeks through open, online
forum requests. The survey’s last item encouraged respondents to share the survey with other
HEPs who met the study’s criteria (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A target sample size of 377 was
desired to provide a statistically sound margin of error (5%) and confidence level (95%)
representative of the total population (Raosoft, Inc., 2004). To address the research questions, the
study’s sample population consisted of higher education employees from diverse racially
marginalized backgrounds. The study disseminated the survey at the beginning of data collection
due to its single-stage design.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The study utilized a convergent mixed-methods approach, collecting both quantitative
and qualitative data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The study utilized a survey to collect
quantitative data. The quantitative data provided insight into trends, attitudes, and beliefs that
drive the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences contributing to racial minorities
experiencing disproportionately negative educational debt effects. The study analyzed
organizational artifacts and documents for its qualitative data. The qualitative data highlighted
organizational patterns and culture components that influence educational debt holders and the
45

EFS itself. By utilizing this approach, the study’s results better address and explain incongruent
outcomes from quantitative and qualitative data.
Survey
The study utilized an online survey instrument using Qualtrics software. The online
format allowed for completion via any electronic device with web browser access. Prior to any
survey data entry sections, the survey included informed consent information. The survey
allowed all participants to discontinue participation at any time. The survey’s demographic
questions were modeled after Rosenberg’s (2017) and Robinson and Firth Leonard’s (2019)
questionnaire samples. The survey’s demographic questions served to identify and confirm
common issues of marginalization (i.e., race, gender, socioeconomic status) as well as
employment, organization, and educational debt status. To address motivation, the survey
included items related to self-efficacy, expectancy, and attainment adapted from Pintrich’s
(1991) questionnaire samples. The survey also utilized Robinson and Firth Leonard’s (2019)
questionnaire item samples to collect knowledge-based survey items. Finally, the survey utilized
a student loan debt-adapted version of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (2017)
Financial Wellness Survey to assess student loan debt effects. The survey consisted of 75 items:
four open-ended and 71 closed-ended items.
Documents and Artifacts
The research analyzed the primary federal government college student aid website
(studentaid.gov), a higher education job website (higheredjob.com), and two primary higher
professional organization websites (naspa.org and myacpa.org; ACPA College Student
Educators International, 2020; HigherEdJobs, 2020; NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in
Higher Education, 2020; U.S. Department of Education, 2020a). The study explored the websites
46

for resources, articles, and help tools related to student loan debt reduction, career advancement
options, and racial minority-specific debt information and strategies. The document data
provided insights into the accessibility to and clarity of organizational debt reduction and
eradication information as well as career-specific student loan debt reduction options and
benefits. Further, the websites present organizational culture data for the United States’ EFS as
well as for the higher education field related to racial minorities and student loan debt. As core,
public websites related to financial aid and professionalism in higher education, the material and
information on the sites provided data in its naturally occurring form (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The websites all contained data that served as potential factual, conceptual, and procedural
knowledge sources for racial minority HEPs (Krathwohl, 2002; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Further, materials provided through the websites could alter the value and expectancy placed on
debt elimination (Krathwohl, 2002; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Collecting the aforementioned
information helped to address the research questions while providing insights into the types of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational hindrances or aids that contribute to the effects of
educational debt on racial minority HEPs.
Data Analysis
The study utilized Qualtrics and SPSS software to conduct quantitative descriptive
statistical analyses. Similarly, the study utilized ATLAS.ti to conduct qualitative analyses.
Qualitative analysis began with analytic memos followed by documented thoughts, concerns,
and initial conclusions in relation to the conceptual framework and research questions. A second
phase of empirical and a prior coding also occurred. The third qualitative analysis phase
consisted of theoretical coding to identify emerging themes and patterns. Finally, the study
47

analyzed documents and artifacts for evidence of knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to the theoretical framework.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The study established credibility and trustworthiness through identifying and minimizing
researcher bias and reactivity (Maxwell, 2013). Maxwell defined research bias as the ways in
which the researcher’s ideologies, beliefs, and experiences affect research results. Maxwell
defined reactivity as the researcher’s influence or effect on the research setting. As the
qualitative components of the study involved only document analysis and open-ended survey
questions, I had little influence on the research setting. However, I worked to minimize bias
using three of Maxwell’s validity tests: triangulation, reflexivity, and searching for discrepant
evidence and negative cases (Maxwell, 2013). For triangulation, the study gathered data from
participants employed in a variety of settings to ensure the data did not reflect the experiences of
a single group or subpopulation. Additionally, for the organizational influences, I collected
quantitative and qualitative data for further triangulation. As such, the study’s data did not only
corroborate stakeholder findings among an array of participants but also through a variety of
means to reduce the effects or likelihood of researcher bias.
Throughout the research, I also utilized reflexivity, a metacognitive approach, to maintain
awareness of potential bias (Maxwell, 2013). I placed emphasized reflexivity during qualitative
data collection and analysis to increase my awareness of potential bias (Maxwell, 2013). I
documented and discussed significant issues of bias noted through reflexivity in the study’s
findings. Finally, as encouraged by Maxwell (2013) to increase a study’s credibility and
trustworthiness, I also sought, identified, and discussed alternative outcomes and reasoning with
colleagues and in the study’s results.
48

Validity and Reliability
The study utilized best practices to maintain sound research validity and reliability.
According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), three types of validity, content, concurrent, and
construct, exist. Content validity confirms if the researcher accurately evaluated the study’s
intended measure. Concurrent validity, sometimes referred to as predictive validity, addresses if
the study’s results correlate. Construct validity tells if the data collection instruments properly
measure the study’s defined concepts. Reliability addresses the research results’ consistency or
repeatability over time. Empirically sound studies must address common threats to both validity
and reliability to provide generalizable and consistent research results.
The study’s procedures eliminated several common validity threats. Though modified,
the study utilized empirically validated quantitative survey items to enhance its validity
(Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 2017; Pintrich, 1991; Robinson & Firth Leonard, 2019).
Appendix A provides a copy of the study’s survey items. Additionally, the study eliminated
potential validity threats of history, regression, testing, instrumentation, and maturation due to its
single-stage quantitative design (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
study also rejected potential selection validity as the social media groups or forums used in the
convenience sampling remained unrelated to student loan acquisition or repayment (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As an additional result of the study’s convenience
sampling approach, the study did not encounter compensatory rivalry. The sampling criteria also
required a predisposition to student loan debt, the study’s control variable, so participants could
not assume any study-related benefits or penalties (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The study addressed its primary threat to external validity, the interaction of
selection and treatment, by ensuring I properly analyzed the effects of selection when
49

interpreting the research results (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Mortality, or participant drop out, was the study’s primary threat to validity; however,
incomplete survey items were removed from the final research analysis (Creswell & Creswell,
2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The study’s design addressed its primary threats to reliability. Due to the study’s
convenience sampling approach, potential sampling bias would inherently impact its reliability
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I discussed the potential influence of the sampling method on the
study’s overall reliability when interpreting the study’s results. Similar to the benefits of utilizing
empirically validated survey items to enhance the study’s validity, the same occurs for the
study’s reliability. The study reassessed the modified items’ reliability during data analysis to
ensure research consistency. Finally, the study transparently presented specific reliability data. I
addressed reliability discrepancies or insufficiencies in the study’s results and interpreted the
findings accordingly.
Ethics
The study adhered to ethical research practices. First, the study strictly adhered to its
approving body’s research guidelines (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; University of Southern
California, 2020). The University of Southern California’s (USC) Institutional Research Board
(IRB)’s ethical guidelines include The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and guidelines for
Human Subjects Research, the Report of the National Commission for the Protection of Human
Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, and The Nuremberg Code (University of
Southern California, 2020). USC’s IRB also prohibits the collection of data prior to research
approval. The current study’s researcher acted with integrity by adhering to all of USC’s IRB
expectations.
50

In compliance with the aforementioned guidelines, the study granted all participants
ethical rights to informed consent, voluntary participation, and data security (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). The study also provided all participants with informed consent. The
independent, electronic dissemination of the survey ensured voluntary participation and offered
participants the ability to withdraw from the study at any time. I secured all data under password-
protected electronic storage accounts. Qualtrics, the modality utilized to collect the survey
inputs, housed the initial data. During analysis, I transferred and stored the raw analysis into an
encrypted Google Drive file. As a cloud-based, password-protected service managed through
USC, both Qualtrics and Google Drive helped to reduce the risk of data loss or security breaches.
As a racial minority HEP holding and actively utilizing educational debt to fund even this
study, I identify as a member of the target population. I remain personally impacted by
educational debt daily, both personally and professionally. I accounted for natural assumptions
and biases that educational debt would influence the participants’ lives and professional
trajectories in a similar fashion to my own. As such, it was essential to analyze and interpret the
study’s data accurately and without personal bias or interpretations that slanted towards my own
thoughts, ideologies, and beliefs. To mitigate potential bias, I consulted with professional
colleagues and the dissertation committee, allowing each to review, critique, and challenge the
study’s findings.
Since I also serve as a mid-level supervisor at a public higher education institution in
Central Virginia, I took care to eliminate undue pressure to participate in the research for those
who work directly under my supervision. The use of social media forums or group posts to
distribute the survey helped mitigate this potential conflict. The survey’s anonymous data
collection method meant I could not track participants or confirm participation. The anonymous
51

survey collection approach also prevented the coercion of subordinates into participation. I also
acted in accordance with Creswell and Creswell’s (2018) and Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016)
ethical reference lists. Finally, I also relied on the dissertation chair as an ethical advisor.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations influence the study and its results. Ross and Bibler Zaidi (2019) define
research limitations as factors beyond the researcher’s control. As the study utilized a mixed-
methods approach, limitations had a reduced effect on the study and its results (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). Nonetheless, the limitations for the current study remain and include participant
solicitation forums, sample size of any given racial minority group, respondent honesty, and
government student loan repayment suspension. As I solicited participants through social media
webpages and groups, the research could ensure that all higher education employees learned of
the study or had equal representation in the study’s sample. Similarly, the candidate pool derived
from voluntary participants of various higher education social media groups. Therefore, the study
could not control for the racial makeup of the sample size to ensure it accurately depicted the
total population of HEPs. The convenience sampling technique allowed for over- or
underrepresentation of any racial group. As is common in research, participants may have also
responded to the survey items in a manner they believed the study desired instead of honestly
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Finally, as of March 2020, the United States government
suspended all government-managed student loan payments until October 2020 (U.S. Department
of Education, 2020b). This suspension overlapped with the data collection window for the
current study and could thereby have influenced the participants’ attitudes and beliefs about
student loans. I accounted for the aforementioned limitations when analyzing data and presenting
results.
52

Matters the study can control, referred to as delimitations, equally influenced the study.
Delimitations include my personal identity and investment in the study’s subject matter, the
conceptual framework and study approach, the breadth of data analyzed for the qualitative
components of the study, and the sampling method utilized. I selected the theoretical lenses and
conceptual frameworks for the study to garner robust data; however, both influence the data and
the ultimate interpretation of the study’s results. Further, I selected the topic of educational debt
influencing racial minorities due to personal interest. As a result, I took additional care not to
allow personal interest to influence the interpretation of the study’s results. Due to time
constraints related to my degree program requirements, I analyzed the contents of only four
websites for their qualitative components. I acknowledge that other websites may also have
information relative to the study’s primary topic. Finally, the study’s research design relied on
convenience sampling due to time constraints and access to the total population. The sampling
approach presents a threat to the study’s reliability that a true random sample would not
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The study's delimitations undoubtedly constrain it; however, the
results still contribute to the body of literature on the subject matter.

53

Chapter Four: Results
This study evaluated the effects of educational debt on racially marginalized higher
education employees working in the United States and the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences affecting the field of study. The study’s research questions were
1. What are the knowledge and motivation of racial minority higher education professionals
to reduce the negative effect of educational debt?
2. To what extent are colleges and universities’ resources, structures, and processes
effective in reducing the negative effects of educational debt on racial minority higher
education professionals?
3. What is the organizational interaction with minority higher education professionals’
motivation and knowledge to reduce the negative effects of educational debt?
As reviewed in Chapter Three, the study utilized a mixed-methods approach (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). The study administered one survey containing quantitative and qualitative
questions. The study also collected and analyzed organizational documents and artifacts. The
qualitative and quantitative data combined to provide insights and identify gaps that prevent
racially marginalized higher education employees from eliminating educational debt and its
negative effects.
The current chapter will provide a detailed study review and discussion. The chapter will
first describe the study’s participants before defining the study’s dissemination and
administration, followed by the data analysis. Chapter Four then presents results and thematic
analysis before providing the chapter’s synthesis.

54

Participating Stakeholders
As the study intended to solicit feedback from a racially and professionally diverse set of
United States higher education employees, the respondents needed to identify as currently
employed either full-time or part-time by a United States higher education institution. The study
recruited participants via higher education-focused social media groups and professional
development listservs accessible via the public domain. The study distributed the survey link to
five Facebook groups via posts soliciting for voluntary survey completion. The Facebook groups
included one general and one African American/Black Student Affairs group, one racial
minority-focused doctoral group, one general dissertation group, and one Tidewater, Virginia,
university-specific diversity group. At my request, two higher education professional
development listserv administrators also disseminated the survey. The two listserv groups were
the Virginia Association of College and University Housing Officers (VACUHO) and the
Collegiate Women’s Network (CWN). Due to the manner of recruitment, the precise number of
solicited participants remains unknown.
Participant Demographics
This study had 753 participants. As seen in Table 4, the participants identified
exclusively as either Black/African American/African (41.89%), White (41.30%),
Hispanic/Latinx (6.78%), Asian (1.62%), and Native American (0.29%). As presented in Table
5, participants identifying as female made up the majority of the respondents (79%). Also, 48.5%
of respondents were never married, and 43.3% were married. Table 6 provides the marital status
sample composition.

55

Table 4
Race
Race n %
African American/Black 284 41.89%
White 280 41.30%
Multiracial 50 7.37%
Hispanic/Latinx 46 6.78%
Asian 11 1.62%
Other 5 0.74%
Native American 2 0.29%
Prefer not to answer 1 0.15%
Pacific Islander 0 0.00%

Table 5
Gender
Gender n %
Female 545 79.10%
Male 129 18.80%
Nonbinary 10 1.45%
Other 3 0.44%
Prefer not to answer 2 0.29%

56

Table 6
Marital Status
Status n %
Married 298 43.31%
Widowed 2 0.29%
Divorced 37 5.38%
Separated 10 1.45%
Never married 334 48.55%
Prefer not to say 7 1.02%

Most respondents were aged 25 to 34 (49.64%) or 35 to 44 (32.90%). Table 7 presents
the age distribution. Participants represented all four U.S. Census Bureau regions as follows:
South (50%), Northeast (18.8%), Midwest (17.9%), and West (17.3%) (U.S. Census Bureau,
2015). Table 8 illustrates the sample population’s regional composition.

Table 7
Age
Age group n %
25 - 34 341 49.60%
35 - 44 226 32.90%
45 - 54 82 11.90%
18 - 24 20 2.90%
55 - 64 16 2.30%

57

Table 8
U.S. Regions
Region n %
South 343 50.0%
Northeast 129 18.8%
Midwest 123 17.9%
West 91 13.3%

The highest degrees the participants earned were master’s (74.9%), doctorates (18.2%),
bachelor’s (5.4%), professional (1.2%), and associates (0.3%). In terms of how long ago they
earned these degrees: 44.17% graduated within the last four years, and 26.53% between 5 and 8
years ago. Table 9 describes participant education distribution.
The respondents were mostly employed in administrative positions (85.5%), with
executive (8.1%) and faculty (8.1%) positions, both yielding less than 10% of the total. The
participants’ employers were public (42%), private (17%), and vocational/technical education
(1%) institutions from both 4-year (32%) and 2-year (8%) institutions (see Table 10).

58

Table 9
Education: Degree, Completion, and Enrollment
Demographic Category n %
Higher degree completed Masters 515 74.90%

Doctoral 125 18.20%

Bachelors 37 5.40%

Professional 8 1.20%

Associates 2 0.30%

Some college/No degree 1 0.10%
Years since degree completion 0 - 4 years 303 44.17%

5 - 8 years 182 26.53%

9 - 12 years 119 17.35%

13 - 16 years 34 4.96%

17 - 20 years 27 3.94%
21 - 24 years 11 1.60%

25 - 28 years 5 0.73%

29 - 32 years 4 0.58%

33 - 36 years 1 0.15%
Current enrollment status None/Not currently enrolled 501 73.25%

Bachelors 4 0.58%

Masters 32 4.68%

Professional 10 1.46%

Doctoral 137 20.03%

Table 10
Employment: Employer and Position
Demographic Category n %
Employer type
Public 445 70.60%

Private 185 29.40%

Vocational/Technical education 8 1.50%

4-Year Institution 339 78.50%

2-Year Institution 85 19.70%
Position Administrative 562 85.50%

Executive 53 8.10%

Faculty 42 6.40%
59

Table 11
Salary
Demographic Category n %
Salary Less than $10,000 5 0.70%

$10,000 - $19,999 6 0.90%

$20,000 - $29,999 14 2.00%

$30,000 - $39,999 75 10.90%

$40,000 - $49,999 153 22.30%

$50,000 - $59,999 144 21.00%

$60,000 - $69,999 87 12.70%

$70,000 - $79,999 66 9.60%

$80,000 - $89,999 42 6.10%

$90,000 - $99,999 29 4.20%

$100,000 - $149,999 52 7.60%

More than $150,000 13 1.90%

More than half of the respondents, 57.8%, reported incomes of less than $60,000. The
remaining respondents earn more than $60,000. Table 11 provides the employment
demographics.
Finally, the participants reported a range of educational debt totals with four categories
yielding the most responses: Less than $20,000 (28%), $20,000 - $39,999 (15%), $40,000 -
$59,999 (13%), and $60,000 - $79,999 (11%). The participants largely held government-funded
loans (70.0%) and had not defaulted on repayment (82.5%). Table 12 provides a summary of
student loan debt amounts.

60

Table 12
Student Loan Debt Demographics
Demographic Category n %
Loan types Public 527 70.0%

Private 154 20.5%

Personal loans 24 3.2%
Repayment status No/Never defaulted 495 82.5%

Previous default
(no longer in default or rehabilitation) 71 11.8%

Current default (in rehabilitation) 19 3.2%

Currently in default (not in rehabilitation) 15 2.5%
Loan amount
Less than $20,000 168 27.8%

$20,000 - $39,999 90 14.9%

$40,000 - $59,999 80 13.2%

$60,000 - $79,999 68 11.2%

$80,000 - $99,999 50 8.3%

$100,000 - $119,999 36 6.0%

$120,000 - $139,999 35 5.8%

$140,000 - $159,999 17 2.8%

$160,000 - $179,999 17 2.8%

$180,000 - $199,999 14 2.3%
$200,000 or more 30 5.0%

Survey Administration
As previously stated, the study utilized a mixed-methods approach. On Day 1, tI
simultaneously distributed the survey via Facebook to higher education-focused groups and sent
distribution requests to both VACUHO and CWN. All Facebook groups posted the request for
study participation on Day 1. VACUHO and CWN both disseminated the study participation
request to listserv members on Day 3. The survey collected responses for 17 days with an
average participant response time of 23 minutes. Finally, on Day 7, I downloaded all publicly
61

accessible data from the professional development and federal financial aid websites to serve for
the documents and artifacts review analysis.
Data Analysis
The study administered the survey electronically using Qualtrics. Qualtrics allowed for
completion via any internet-compatible device. The first page of the survey included the
informed consent information and reiterated voluntary participation. As the study utilized United
States financial aid and higher education professional development webpages as documents and
artifacts, Idownloaded the data accessible on the day of retrieval. Appendix A provides a copy of
the survey. Appendix B offers the item tracing matrix.
Due to the voluntary nature of the study, the survey did not yield a 100% completion rate,
resulting in some missing data. The study categorized and eliminated missing data and provided
associated samples for each item analyzed. For ordinal data, I created frequency and percentage
distributions with appropriate univariate analysis. Interval data generated mean, median, mode,
range, and standard deviation data. For the quantitative data, I completed statistical data analysis
using Qualtrics and SPSS analysis software, utilizing a 25% quantitative threshold with
supporting qualitative results to validate or invalidate the assumed influences. I utilized
ATLAS.ti to analyze and code the documents, artifacts, and open-ended question responses.
Further, I utilized ATLAS.ti to create and house the study’s qualitative data codebook.
Results
The literature review in Chapter Two reviewed the history and documented effects of
educational debt on individuals from racially marginalized populations before outlining the
knowledge, motivation, and organization factors that affect racially marginalized HEPs’ ability
to reduce the effects of educational debt using Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model. The
62

study’s assumed knowledge influences were factual, conceptual, and procedural knowledge. The
motivational influences involve self-efficacy as well as attainment and utility values related to
reducing the effects of educational debt. The need for racial inclusivity in a manner that supports
personal and financial wellness, as well as the need for financial literacy, socialization, and
modeling, served as organizational influences. This chapter will discuss the study’s quantitative
and quantitative results and findings related to the assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences.
The analysis revealed three primary themes: employee educational debt reduction
perceptions and strategies, educational debt reduction resources, and organizational influence on
employee educational debt. The first addresses how respondents’ knowledge and motivational
gaps contributed to educational debt acquisition, management, reduction, and elimination. The
second explores the accessibility, utilization, and effectiveness of student loan debt reduction
resources offered by higher education and the EFS as observed through the document review and
survey responses. Finally, the third will address how higher education systems affect employee
educational debt acquisition and repayment as well as how employees navigate employment and
repayment systems with regard to their educational debt.
Knowledge Results
As presented in Table 13, the study focused on compulsory knowledge to reduce or
eliminate the effects of educational debt. The survey items assessed whether HEPs and
RMHEPs understood the general tenets of the educational financing system, how to eliminate
educational debt, and the benefits of student loan debt elimination. The results help address the
research questions one and three by identifying the knowledge of HEPs and the how such
knowledge interacts with organizational factors to reduce the negative effect of educational debt.
63

Table 13
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Influence category Assumed influence
Factual Employees need to understand the general tenets of educational
financing.
Conceptual Employees need to be able to conceptually identify the benefits
of eliminating educational debt.
Procedural Employees need to know how to eliminate educational debt.

Employees Need to Understand the General Tenets of Educational Financing
Despite inconsistencies in the quantitative findings, the responses validate a knowledge
gap. Survey data highlighted a lack of knowledge regarding educational financing among
respondents. The data reflected 74% of respondents from racially marginalized backgrounds
could not accurately identify student loan repayment interest accrual as daily (U.S. Department
of Education, 2020e) when asked a timeframe accrual rate question. Table 14 records the survey
responses to the interest accrual question. Similarly, 58.4% of respondents from racially
marginalized backgrounds responded incorrectly when asked to identify one true statement from
the four presented regarding student loan repayment. Table 15 shows the knowledge responses.
A Chi-Squared test, however, found no statistically significant difference between the responses
of racial minority and White respondents for knowledge question one (χ
2
(12, N = 571) = 7.11, p
< .85) or knowledge question two (χ
2
(16, N = 571) = 10.8, p < .82).

64

Table 14
Student Loan Repayment Tenet Knowledge Question One Responses
Responses to “Public student loans acquire interest at what rate?”
Response options Asian Black/
African
American
White Hispanic/
Latinx
Native
American
Overall
Response
Rate
Daily
(correct answer)
30.8% 26.5% 29.3% 25.6% 0.0% 27.4%
Weekly 0.0% 1.5% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8%
Bi-weekly 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%
Monthly 53.8% 50.7% 54.5% 65.1% 100.0% 53.6%
Annually 15.4% 21.3%* 14.0% 9.3% 0.0% 17.4%

* = p≤.05

Table 15
Student Loan Repayment Tenet Knowledge Question Two Responses
Responses to “Which of the following is true about student loan repayment?”
Response
options
Asian Black/
African
American
White Hispanic/
Latinx
Native
American
Overall
Response
Rate
Payment options cannot
be modified once selected.
0.00
%
7.49%
8.30
%
9.76% 0.00% 7.7%
Standard payments are set
to fixed amounts that
ensure the loans are paid
off within 10 years.
(Correct Answer)
46.15
%
41.20%
42.74
%
43.90% 100.00% 42.1%
For those with multiple
student loans, loan
consolidation is not an
option.
0.00
%
2.62%
5.39
%
2.44% 0.00% 3.7%
There are 17 income-
relative student loan
payment plan options.
53.85
%
48.69%
43.57
%
43.90% 0.00% 46.5%

65

Respondents’ knowledge perceptions, however, countered the knowledge question
results. The data showed more than 30% of all HEPs reported feeling knowledgeable of at least
three student loan repayment options: 38.8% for Income-Based Repayment (IBR), 37.2% for
Public Student Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), and 27.2 % for the Standard Repayment (see Figure
1). HEPs from racially marginalized backgrounds reported statistically higher education debt
repayment knowledge perceptions for seven of the 12 repayment options presented (X
2
(4, n =
684) = 24.6, p < 0.0000601)). White HEPs, however, reported statistically lower knowledge
perceptions for the same seven repayment options (see Table 16).

Figure 1
Knowledge Perceptions of Student Loan Repayment Methods

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Income-Based Repayment
Public Service Loan Forgiveness
Standard Repayment
Student Loan Consolidation
None
Revised Pay As You Go (REPAYE)
Tuition Reimbursement
Graduated Repayment
Income-Contingent Repayment
Extended Repayment
Income-Sensitive Repayment
Other
Percentage of Participants Who Reported Having Knowledge
(n=595)
Repayment Options
66

Table 16
Racial Comparison of Student Loan Repayment Knowledge Perceptions
Repayment Type (n = 595) White RMHEPs
Income-based repayment 14.6% 27.8%
PSLF 15.4% 25.3%
Standard repayment 13.7% 16.1%
Student loan consolidation 7.2% 13.9%
REPAYE 5.3% 11.4%
I do not feel knowledgeable about any student loan repayment
methods. 9.7% 9.3%
Tuition reimbursement 2.8% 8.7%
Income-contingent repayment 2.4% 7.1%
Graduated repayment 5.0% 6.4%
Extended repayment 2.7% 4.0%
Income-sensitive repayment 0.7% 2.5%
Other 0.0% 0.4%

As outlined in Table 16, all other educational debt reduction methods yielded less than
20% of respondents confirming knowledge. Moreover, the survey revealed 10% of White HEPs
and 9% of all RMHEPs affirmatively acknowledged the statement “I do not feel knowledgeable
about any student loan repayment methods,” showing a complete lack of student loan repayment
knowledge.
Qualitative data further pointed to knowledge deficits related to general student loan
repayment options, specifically PSLF. HEPs reported difficulty navigating the student loan debt
repayment system due to difficulty understanding the EFS. When referencing personal
knowledge of student loan repayment, one RMHEP participant shared, “The lay [sic] repayment
process is very confusing and it should be a workshop for each new professionals in SA [student
affairs]. It would be so helpful.” Such responses repeated in the qualitative data collection even
though the study observed simplified explanations of various repayment methods coupled with
67

repayment tools and stimulators during the financial aid website documents review.
Additionally, RMHEPs explicitly cited misunderstanding the PSLF program. An HEP
identifying as African American shared the need for a “Clearer understanding of the Public
Service Loan Forgiveness Program” when asked the question, “What concerns, advice, or
recommended resources do you have regarding your student loan debt as a higher education
professional?” These types of responses again corroborate the knowledge gap’s existence.
Employees Need to be Able to Conceptually Identify the Benefits of Eliminating Educational
Debt
These data and responses validate the presence of a knowledge gap. The data reflected
varied knowledge regarding the quality of life benefits to eliminating educational debt among
racially marginalized HEPs. The data 70% or more of all respondents from racially marginalized
backgrounds identified showed knowledge of life benefits for the areas of family planning,
housing, income, mental health, and personal finance benefiting from student loan debt
elimination. Conversely, 15% or more of the respondents from racially marginalized
backgrounds identified either rare or no benefits for the areas of personal morals or ethics,
physical health, romantic relationships, and social relationships for eliminating educational debt.
Table 17 delineates the student loan debt elimination benefits responses.

Table 17
Knowledge of Student Loan Debt Elimination Life Benefits
Life area Responses (n= 323)

Most beneficial Beneficial Neutral benefit Rarely beneficial Not at all beneficial

RMHEP All RMHEP All RMHEP All RMHEP All RMHEP All
Career
30.7 26.8 31.6 35.2 26.0 26.7 4.3 4.1 7.4 7.2
Education
35.0 31.7 31.0 32.9 23.2 25.6 3.1 3.8 7.7 6.1
Family
planning
70.3 67.6 15.2 16.5 8.4 8.2 2.2 2.1 4.0 5.5
Housing
77.0 74.7 16.1 19.0 4.7 3.6 0.6 0.5 1.6 2.2
Income
79.2 74.9 13.7 18.3 5.6 4.8 0.0 0.4 1.6 1.6
Mental health
59.3 59.0 25.8 27.2 10.2 10.0 1.9 1.8 2.8 2.0
Personal
finances
80.9 77.2 15.7 19.1 1.6 2.2 0.6 0.5 1.3 1.1
Personal
morals/Ethics
33.7 30.6 24.5 25.4 24.8 29.2 6.5 5.9 10.5 8.8
Physical
health
31.5 27.2 25.5 28.5 25.2 28.0 8.1 7.9 9.7 8.6
Romantic
relationships
33.0 29.0 24.6 28.5 23.7 26.0 8.1 7.0 10.6 9.5
Social
relationships
25.2 21.7 29.6 31.2 24.6 28.7 8.4 7.3 12.1 11.1
Transportation
33.3 30.6 33.0 37.3 20.6 19.5 4.7 5.2 8.4 7.3
Other areas of
life
29.4 29.2 40.6 40.5 20.6 22.5 2.8 2.0 6.6 5.8

69
70

A Chi-Squared test revealed a statistically significant relationship between the benefits
knowledge and race, specifically with respect to social relationships (X
2
(16, n = 553) = 31.9,
p < .01)) and career (X
2
(16, n = 554) = 27, p < .0413)). Latinx participants strongly identified the
benefits to social relationships more than any other racial group. White HEPs reported higher
knowledge of career benefits. Tables 18 and 19 report the social relationships and career benefits
knowledge data, respectively.

Table 18
Reported Knowledge of Debt Elimination Benefits to Social Relationships
Race Responses by Percentages (n=553)

Most beneficial Beneficial
Neutral
benefit
Rarely
beneficial
Not at all
beneficial
Asian 23.1 38.5 23.1 0.0 15.4
Black/AA 22.6 29.3* 24.4* 9.8 * 13.9
White 16.8* 33.6* 34.1 * 5.6 9.9
Hispanic/Latinx 43.9*** 26.8 26.8 2.4* 0.0 *
Native American 0.0 100 0.0 0.0 0.0

* = p≤.05
*** = Much p≤.05

71

Table 19
Reported Knowledge of Debt Elimination Benefits to Career
Race Responses by Percentages (n = 559)

Most
beneficial Beneficial
Neutral
benefit
Rarely
beneficial
Not at all
beneficial
Asian 15.4% 38.5% 30.8% 0.0% 15.4%
Black/AA 30.2% 31.3% 26.9% 4.1% 7.5%
White
21.6%* 39.8%* 27.7% 3.9% 6.9%
Hispanic/Latinx 39.0% 31.7% 19.5% 7.3% 2.4%
Native American 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

* = p≤.05

The qualitative data also pointed to inconsistent knowledge of educational debt
elimination benefits to personal, professional, and financial life. HEPs acknowledged student
loan debt helping or hindering life goals. With regard to conceptualizing the benefits, one HEP
said, “I am praying that progressive government leadership will leave to student debt elimination
so I can buy a house, adopt children, and lessen my anxieties about my financial situation.”
Another identified potential career and financial benefits when they stated,
I am concerned that as a first generation college student that I will never be able to
understand loans not just educational loans and because of this lack of knowledge will
hinder me and areas of housing and potential entrepreneurship opportunities.
RMHEPs associated educational debt elimination with general financial wellness and identified
its benefits; however, some expressed indifference towards potential debt elimination benefits. A
RMHEP who identified as African American wrote, “I do not allow for my student loan debt to
control my ability to live.” The respondent’s message emphasized the knowledge gap.

72

Employees Need to Know How to Eliminate Educational Debt
The study’s data substantiates the assumed influence and confirms the existence of a
knowledge gap. The survey responses showcase deficits in knowledge of educational debt
elimination methods among racially marginalized HEPs. Less than 40% of all HEPs surveyed
reported having knowledge of any of the referenced student loan repayment methods. Table 20
summarizes the overall knowledge of repayment options noted.

Table 20
Repayment Type Knowledge
Repayment Type (n = 753) %
Income-based repayment 38.8%
PSLF 37.2%
Standard repayment 27.2%
Student loan consolidation 19.1%
I do not feel knowledgeable about any student loan repayment methods. 17.4%
REPAYE 15.3%
Tuition reimbursement 10.4%
Graduated repayment 10.4%
Income-contingent repayment 8.8%
Extended repayment 6.0%
Income-sensitive repayment 3.1%
Other 0.4%

73

Figure 2
Knowledge of Repayment Options by Race

Moreover, most of the student loan repayment methods yielded between 7% and 20%
knowledge confirmation. Less than 25% of racially marginalized respondents reported being
knowledgeable of 10 out of 12 options presented. Figure 2 provides a comparison of repayment
options knowledge by race.
Qualitative responses regarding how to eliminate educational debt commonly cited the
utilization of educational financing resources as well as financial savvy. When providing advice
on how to decrease educational debt, multiple RMHEPs encouraged employees to utilize
income-contingent repayment options and the PSLF program. Like many other participants, one
RMHEP encouraged networking and debt acquisition prevention methods when saying,
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Income-Based Repayment
PSLF
Standard Repayment
Student Loan Consolidation
REPAYE
None
Tuition Reimbursement
Income-Contingent Repayment
Graduated Repayment
Extended Repayment
Income-Sensitive Repayment
Other
n=595
White
RMHEPs
74

I’d recommend new professionals in higher education meet with their HR representative
to learn more about potential benefits such as tuition reimbursement, learn how to qualify
for PSLF, and speak with other professionals on how to manage student loan debt while
working full-time in higher education.
Other RMHEPs encouraged cost-cutting and the use of independent financial planning services.
When sharing debt reduction strategies, a RMHEP who identified as an African American
female wrote,
My husband and I decided to hire a financial advisor to assist us in paying off our student
loans. We consolidated our loans at a lower rate and should pay them off in 5 years. . .
It’s been difficult and has resulted in feelings of anxiety and stress, but as we have been
working with our advisor on a written budget, things have gotten better. We pay $60 a
month for this advise [sic] and it’s been worth it.
While the qualitative data suggests some understanding of how to eliminate educational debt, the
quantitative data suggests few HEPs know about or understand educational debt elimination
programs or techniques.
Educational Debt Reduction Strategy Knowledge
As summarized in Table 21, the study confirmed gaps in all three assumed knowledge
influences. The factual, conceptual, and procedural knowledge on reducing educational debt’s
negative effects helps RMHEPs understand how to reduce or eliminate educational debt. They
must understand the general tenets of educational financing while identifying effective ways to
reduce this debt. The knowledge deficits are incongruent with educational debt reduction and
elimination. The data revealed an inability of 76% of RMHEPs to identify core student loan
repayment procedures and of 60% to report having knowledge of repayment methods.
75

Table 21
Validated Knowledge Influences
Influence category Validated influence Identified Theme
Factual Employees need to understand the
general tenets of educational
financing.
Student loan debt education and
literacy
Conceptual Employees need to be able to
conceptually identify the benefits
of eliminating educational debt.

Procedural Employees need to know how to
eliminate educational debt.
Student loan elimination
strategy resources

The qualitative findings supported this finding as participants expressed lacking
knowledge or understanding of the EFS and needing additional knowledge to identify effective
repayment strategies. One RMHEP described their lack of knowledge as a direct hindrance to
achieving educational elimination when they said,
My only advice that I didn’t know as a first-gen student, is the importance of pursuing as
many scholarships as possible to cover tuition. I will do everything I can to ensure my
son understands and pursues this option so he does not have to take out a single loan!
These findings suggested student loan borrowers from racially marginalized
backgrounds tend to navigate the educational debt system poorly due to confusion regarding
educational financing practices.
Knowledge Results Summary
The results revealed HEPs lack the knowledge necessary to eliminate educational debt
and its negative effects. According to the study’s data, HEPs cannot effectively identify student
loan repayment knowledge, benefits, or strategy. The data suggested a need for financial literacy
education in higher education’s curriculum as well as a need for access to financial planning
76

experts. Knowledge alone remains insufficient in resolving the negative student loan outcomes
RMHEPs experience, however. The motivation to eliminate educational debt must also propel
RMHEPs towards change and effective student loan debt reduction.
Motivation Results
Knowledge needs to couple with motivation to be effective. Individuals with debt
reduction self-efficacy experience low student loan default rates and improved career mobility
(Boyd et al., 2010). Further, research also suggests employees who view debt elimination as
personally valuable and useful pursue more opportunities for professional advancement and
improve personal wealth attainment (Nashleanas et al., 2014). Such factors encourage employees
to eliminate educational debt and offset its associated effects (see Table 22).

Table 22
Assumed Motivation Influences
Influence category Assumed influence
Self-efficacy Employees need to believe they can eliminate
educational debt.
Attainment value Employees need to believe educational debt
elimination is linked to attaining improved career
mobility.
Utility value Employees need to relate educational debt
elimination to obtaining wealth.

77

Employees Need to Believe They Can Eliminate Educational Debt
The validated the assumed influence and highlighted a motivational deficit. The study
utilized an ANOVA test to assess the relationship between racial identity and student loan debt
elimination self-efficacy. Study data revealed a statistically significant correlation between the
two variables (F(6, 555) = 4.706, p < 0.000154). Table 23 shows the ANOVA results. As
reflected in Table 24, survey results showed RMHEPs presented in a less self-efficacious manner
than their White counterparts regarding reducing or eliminating educational debt.
Specifically, 41% of African American and 31.7% of Latinx participants reported the
statement “I believe I will eliminate my student debt” described them Not Well At All while 27%
of White participants responded this way. Additional statements such as “I expect to be
successful in eliminating my student loan debt” and “If I try hard enough, I will eliminate my
student loan debt” reflected similar results with 34.2% and 22.4% of African American and
31.7% and 22% of Latinx respondents responding Not Well At All, while 22.4% and 16%% of
White respondents shared the same response, respectively.

Table 23
Self-Efficacy ANOVA Analysis
SS df MS F Sig.
Between Groups 17.303 6 2.884 4.706 .000
Within Groups 340.096 555 .613
Total 357.399 561

78

Table 24
Self-Efficacy Racial Identity Comparison
Group
Average self-
efficacy score
Median N n CI SD
Asian 3.18 3.0 41 13 2.62 to 3.73 0.92
Black/African
American
2.40 2.2 631 263 2.28 to 2.51 0.96
White 2.88 2.8 674 234 2.75 to 3.01 1.02
Hispanic/Latinx 2.48 2.3 102 41 2.19 to 2.78 0.94
Native American 4.10 4.1 4 1 4.10 to 4.10 N/A

Low self-efficacy related to educational debt elimination among RMHEPs also presented
in the qualitative findings. Statements like “Carrying around so much student loan debt makes
me feel trapped, hopeless and unable to ever get the opportunity to live the life I desire,” “I have
come to grips that I don’t think I will ever pay them off, and “The debt is like a noose” were
repeated by African American and Latinx respondents alike. With respondents expressing poor
self-efficacy, the study continued exploring how the effects of educational debt may also
influence RMHEPs’ professional careers.
Employees Need to Believe They Can Improve Career Mobility
The data invalidated this assumed influence. Respondents consistently expressed the
belief in the chance of receiving a job promotion regardless of educational debt totals, position,
or institution type. Just under half of the respondents, 46.5%, shared either an Extremely Likely
or Moderately Likely chance of earning a job promotion with their current college degree. Table
25 presents the responses on promotion potential. Related to promotion potential, few employees
79

reported pursuing additional degrees as only 26% reported current enrollment in a degree-
seeking program. Figure 3 presents current enrollment data.

Table 25
Career Mobility Potential
Response n %
Extremely likely 136 20.7%
Moderately likely 169 25.8%
Slightly likely 126 19.2%
Neither likely nor unlikely 89 13.6%
Slightly unlikely 33 5.0%
Moderately unlikely 42 6.4%
Extremely unlikely 61 9.3%

80

Figure 3
Current Enrollment Status

An analysis of the qualitative data revealed multiple references to RMHEPs planning to
pursue or having received job promotions. Like several others, when discussing future career
plans in higher education, one RMHEP explained, “I must have another degree to be considered
for the direction of my career I am heading towards.” Such commentary suggests RMHEPs
recognize career advancement as an accessible goal. Additionally, the professional development
websites referenced in the document review showed organizations encouraging RMHEPs to
explore career advancement opportunities.
RMHEPs reported higher enrollment in degree-seeking programs, but the study found no
statistically significant differences (X
2
(16, n = 678) = 12.7, p < .696)). Specifically, there was no
statistically significant evidence of correlations between racial identity and potential for
improved career mobility (X
2
(8, n = 683) = 6.99, p < .538)). Table 26 presents current
enrollment data.
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Not Enrolled Bachelors Masters Professional Doctoral
Percentage
Enrolled
Degree Type
81

Table 26
Enrollment Status Racial Identity Comparison
Degree type White HEPs RMHEP
None 77.6%* 69.6%*
Bachelors 0.3% 0.8%
Masters 3.5% 5.7%
Professional 1.4% 1.6%
Doctoral 17.1% 22.3%

* = p≤.05

Employees Need to Believe Educational Debt Elimination is Linked to Attaining Improved
Career Mobility
The data suggested this motivational performance gap also does not exist. For this
influence, study results varied. All study respondents associated career benefits with educational
debt elimination. The results revealed 62% identified educational debt elimination as either Most
Beneficial or Beneficial to their career (see Table 27). Further, the study found a statistically
significant relationship between the influence of educational debt elimination on perceived
career mobility and race (X
2
(4, n = 548) = 11.5, p < .0215)).

82

Table 27
Racial Comparison of Career Benefits of Educational Debt Elimination
Race Responses (n = 559)

Most beneficial Beneficial
Neutrally
beneficial
Rarely
beneficial
Not at all
beneficial
Asian 1.3 2.6 2.7 0.0 5.0
Black/AA 54.4 43.3 48.6 47.8 50.0
White 33.6 * 47.4 * 43.2 39.1 40.0
Hispanic/Latinx 10.7 6.7 5.4 13.0 2.5
Native
American 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5

* = p≤.05

Respondents from racially marginalized backgrounds noted educational debt as Most
Influential to career at a statistically significant level, while their White counterparts responded
in the opposite manner. Multiple HEP responses identified the influence of educational debt on
one’s career advancement. One HEPs shared,
I want to pursue my PhD in educational leadership but am concerned about applying for
more loans so I can afford to do so. I received a hefty pay increase when I received my
master's [sic] degree and subsequently a new job that has made life much more
financially comfortable. I anticipate the same may happen if I receive a PhD and am able
to find a new job. Is it worth the extra work and loans?
Again, the quantitative and qualitative data suggested despite the career conflicts imposed by
educational debt, HEPs continue view career advancement as a worthwhile pursuit.
Employees Need to Relate Educational Debt Elimination to Obtaining Wealth
The qualitative and quantitative results invalidated the assumed influence that this
motivational gap exists and suggested HEPs already associate educational debt elimination with
83

wealth attainment. Overall, the utility value of educational debt elimination presented higher in
Latinx HEPs than other racial minority groups as all Latinx respondents identified various life
areas as influential to their educational debt elimination efforts (F(6, 555) = 4.706,
p < 0.000154). Table 28 presents the comparison.

Table 28
Utility Value Racial Comparison
Race Average Median Sum SS CI SD
Asian 4.19 4.5 55 13 3.49 to 4.90 1.16
Black/AA 4.51 5.0 1190 264 4.41 to 4.60 0.78
White 4.50 4.5 1014 225 4.42 to 4.59 0.64
Hispanic/Latinx 4.73 5.0 194 41 4.61 to 4.85 0.37
Native American 3.00 3.0 3 1 3.00 to 3.00 N/A

84

Table 29
Utility Value of Wealth Attainment: Personal Finances
Response options Race (n = 549)

Asian Black/AA White Hispanic/Latinx
Native
American
Most influential 46.2 64.4 56.9 68.3 0.0
Influential 30.8 28.0 33.3 29.3 100.0
Neutral influence 7.7 3.8 7.6 2.4 0.0
Rarely influential 7.7* 1.1 0.9 0.0 0.0
Not influential at all 7.7 2.7 1.3 0.0 0.0

* = p≤.05

Table 30
Utility Value of Wealth Attainment: Income
Response options Race (n = 549)

Asian Black/AA White Hispanic/Latinx Native
American
Most influential 69.2 70.8 64.9 80.5 0.0
Influential 15.4 19.3 * 29.8 * 19.5 0.0
Neutral influence 7.7 4.9 4.0 0.0 0.0
Rarely influential 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 100.0
Not influential at all 7.7 4.9 ** 0.9 * 0.0 0.0

* = p≤.05
** = p≤.01

85

Other racial groups also had high utility value composite scores, but all other RMHEPs
reported fewer Most Influential or Influential scores than White HEPs (90.7%): 88.6% of African
Americans and 76.9% of Asians (see Table 29). When relating specific wealth utility value
associated with educational debt elimination, respondents associated educational debt
elimination with wealth acquisition. They identified both Income and Personal Finance as Most
Influential or Influential and also Most Beneficial or Beneficial (see Table 30).
While the relationship to Personal Finance and race (X
2
(16, n = 544) = 19.0, p < .0268))
did not yield a statistically significant relationship, the study did find a statistically significant
relationship between educational debt elimination, income, and race (X
2
(16, n = 544) = 291,
p < 0.00001)).
RMHEPs cited educational debt elimination with improved wealth acquisition by way of
retirement, income, and real estate acquisition. One directly associated educational debt
elimination with her potential to retire. She said, “I have 10 years until I am eligible for
retirement. I fear I will not pay off my student loan debt within that timeframe which will require
me to work longer.” Another, who identified as an African American female, also associated
educational debt with future income and homeownership potential when saying, “I have 200k in
student loans, and I make $42k a year as an academic advisor. I can’t get married, have a baby,
own a house, or save because of my student loan debt. It’s depressing as hell.” These sentiments
illustrate the effect of student loan debt on HEP motivation.
Factors Influencing Employee ’s Motivation to Reduce Educational Debt
RMHEPs need motivational influences to reduce the negative effects of educational debt.
They need high levels of self-efficacy as well as positive attainment and utility value associations
to educational debt reduction. They need to believe they can attain educational debt elimination
86

and associate debt elimination with improved career mobility. They also need to believe the
educational debt elimination contributes to personal wealth attainment. The data suggested while
RMHEPs positively associated educational debt elimination with career advancement and wealth
attainment by more than 85% each, they struggled to believe in their ability to eliminate this debt
to attain the career and wealth benefits (see Table 31).

Table 31
Validated Motivation Influences
Influence category Validated influence Identified Theme
Self-efficacy Employees need to believe they
can eliminate educational
debt.
Student loan debt intervention and
prevention needs

87

Qualitative entries confirmed both high levels of attainment and utility value as
participants shared an interest in prioritizing educational debt reduction due to its value with
statements such as “Figure out how much you can afford to pay down your loans first and base
most other expenses around that.” Self-efficacy did not yield the same results. When asked how
well statements such as “I expect to be successful in eliminating student loan debt,” for instance,
only 23.8% of African American and 31.7% of Latinx participants reported the statement
described them Extremely Well or Very Well. Moreover, comments like that of one RMHEP
reinforced the quantitative findings:
For most, this debt cannot only be discouraging but also quite jarring, overwhelming and
illuminate the many reasons for an individual to realistically have/make plans to paying
off their own student loans. It is a sad discovery. One is often promised the World after
they graduate college, however in the end, they are met with (and almost forced to)
having to face the harsh terms of financial student loan debt and accept the notion that
this may be their new reality. But for how long? For me, it will be a lifetime. To be frank,
I’ll most likely will pass away before paying off all of my government student loans.
Attainment and utility value contribute to RMHEPs reducing or eliminating educational debt’s
negative effects as the value placed motivates or hinders RMHEPs to engage in debt elimination
practices. Individuals who believe in the possibility of student loan debt reduction experience
fewer negative effects and pursue additional professional development opportunities that
increase long-term income and wealth attainment. These findings suggest a need for additional
investigation and modification to the current student loan borrowing system in order to improve
repayment and debt elimination.

88

Motivation Results Summary
The study found self-efficacy deficits contributed to RMHEPs’ difficulty eliminating
educational debt more than a lack of utility or attainment value. While HEPs value student loan
debt elimination, RMHEPs simply do not believe in their ability to successful achieve student
loan debt elimination. These findings suggest higher education needs to provide intervention
programs to help those who already have student loan debt and also expand its current student
loan debt prevention programs so RMHEPs do not acquire additional debt when pursuing
additional degrees needed to effectively navigate higher education employee structures.
Organizational Results
Knowledge and motivation need to work in tandem with the organizational structures and
models in order for employees to fully achieve professional goals and objectives. The current
study explored the organizational barriers that hinder RMHEPs from reducing or eliminating
educational debt’s negative effects. Organizations lacking in racial inclusivity contribute to
decreased professional growth, professional networking as well as personal and financial
wellness as a result of lacking financial literacy, socialization, mentoring, and modeling (Fan &
Chatterjee, 2019; Montalto et al., 2019). These organizational factors not only aid in the creation
of educational debt but also influence its elimination among employees. Table 32 provides a
summary of the assumed organizational influences.

89

Table 32
Assumed Organizational Influences
Influence category Assumed influence
Cultural model The field of higher education needs to be racially
inclusive in a manner that supports personal and
financial wellness.
Cultural setting The field of higher education needs resources to support
financial literacy, socialization, and modeling.

The Field of Higher Education needs to be Racially Inclusive in a Manner That Supports
Personal and Financial Wellness
Organizational equity data reflected racial inclusivity disparities validating the existence
of this performance gap. Survey data showed despite portions of the RMHEPs sampled having
higher salaries, employees from racially marginalized backgrounds tended to hold $80,000 or
more in student loan debt. White employees, however, tended to possess far less student debt -
$79,999 or less - creating racially inequitable income-to-debt ratios and overall financial
wellness. Despite observations from higher education’s professional development websites
expressing value for diversity, equity, and inclusion from all observed professional development
websites, the quantitative results revealed a statistically significant relationship between race and
educational debt totals where HEPs from racially marginalized backgrounds held more
educational debt than their peers (X
2
(8, n = 600) = 48.3, p < 0.00001)). Figure 4 illustrates the
student loan debt racial comparison.

90

Figure 4
Student Loan Debt Holdings Racial Comparison

For salary, 57% of all respondents earned less than $60,000 per year, less than the U.S.
median salary of $68,703 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). Additionally, less than 10% of
respondents earned $100,000 or more. As seen in Table 33, the study identified a statistically
significant relationship between race and salary (X
2
(4, n = 680) = 11.7, p < 0.0201)).

56%
42%
46%
54%
34%
14%
31%
24%
24%
27%
43%
52%
53%
46%
66%
83%
69%
71%
76%
100%
73%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
$0 - $19,999
$20,000 - $39,999
$40,000 - $59,999
$60,000 - $79,999
$80,000 - $99,999
$100,000 - $119,999
$120,000 - $139,999
$140,000 - $159,999
$160,000 - $179,999
$180,000 - $199,999
$200,000 or More
% of Respondents Who Indicated Possessing the Given Debt Amount
Student Loan Debt
Majority
RMHEP
91

Figure 5
Employee Salaries

Table 33
Median Salary Earnings Status by Racial Identity Comparison
Race At or Below Median Above Median
Asian 76.5%* 23.5%*
Black/African American 66.2%** 33.8%**
White 76.5% 23.5%
Hispanic/Latinx 63.8% 36.2%
Native American 0.0% 100.0%

* = p≤.05
*** = p≤.001

0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
At or Below Median Above Median
Percentage of Employees
Salary Median Comparison
92

The study found no statistically significant relationship between race and position title.
The student utilized the salary, and educational debt total confirmed performance gap data to
examine how institutions of higher education support HEPs in managing their low salary against
their high student loan debt totals. The results showed 53.7% of African American HEPs earn
above the U.S. median salary while 35.2% of White and 8.5% of Latinx HEPs earned above the
median (see Figure 6).

Figure 6
Employee Median Salary Earning by Racial Identity

0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Asian Black/AA Caucasian Hispanic/Latinx Native American
% of Employes
Above Median At or Below Median
93

The Field of Higher Education Needs Resources to Support Financial Literacy, Socialization,
and Modeling
These results validated the need for financial literacy, socialization, and modeling as an
assumed influence and confirmed the presence of an organizational performance gap. The
responses to the survey indicated higher education performs poorly in offering employee
educational debt reduction and elimination resources. The most commonly offered student loan
debt support resources were Tuition Assistance (26.4%), Free Tuition (15.5%), Tuition
Reimbursements (10.7%), and Student Loan Forgiveness (4.4%). As illustrated in Figure 7,
White participants reported fewer offerings in all categories: Tuition Assistance (15.8%), Free
Tuition (13.4%), Tuition Reimbursements (7.3%), and Student Loan Forgiveness (2.6%).

Figure 7
Student Loan Repayment and Debt Reduction Offerings

94

Overall, for resources that prevent student loan debt acquisition, 39.6% of participants
indicated their employer offered Tuition Assistance, 26.6% indicated Free Tuition, and 17%
indicated Tuition Reimbursement for 97% tuition support offered. Assistance decreased
significantly, however, after employees took student loans, with only 6.8% of respondents
identifying student loan forgiveness and 0% offering student loan repayment contributions as
employer-offered resources. The results also highlighted the rarity of financial literacy offerings
from higher education institutions, as less than 1% of all respondents reported their institution
offered student loan education resources.
Employees also discussed higher education’s lack of financial literacy resources.
RMHEPs and White HEPs both highlighted the need for increased financial literacy related to
student loan reduction before, during, and after educational debt acquisition. One RMHEP
articulated the effectiveness of financial literacy education and networking when he wrote,
One of the most vital moments of my career was attending a NASPA conference where a
colleague of mine facilitied [sic] a workshop on financial management and not only
named the advice I had been given before but also provided practical tools. Developing
conference track language that is geared to personal development with presentations,
workshops and roundtables on these type of discussions is valuable. It needs to happen
more often. And honestly what was the most valuable about this session, my colleague
was a Black man.
Such qualitative data suggests RMHEPs desire and benefit from financial literacy education and
financial socialization through higher education’s professional development and employee
benefits programs.

95

Table 34
Validated Organizational Influences
Influence category Validated influence Identified themes
Cultural model The field of higher education needs
to be racially inclusive in a
manner that supports personal
and financial wellness.
Debt reduction resources use and
effectiveness

Organizational influences on
employee educational debt
acquisition and elimination
Cultural setting The field of higher education needs
resources to support financial
literacy, socialization, and
modeling.
Financial wellness and literacy

Employees distrust in debt
elimination resources and
supports

Educational Debt Reduction Resources Use and Effectiveness
Like the assumed knowledge and motivational factors, the study assumed higher
education’s organizational culture also contributed to educational debt’s negative effects on
RMHEPs. The study validated higher education’s cultural models and cultural settings
influenced the RMHEPs’ negative educational debt experiences (see Table 34).
The educational debt reduction resources serve as a vital organizational cultural model
affected by the attitudes, beliefs, and values the EFS and institutions of higher education apply to
them. The available educational debt elimination resources and their applicable cultural settings
combine to either hinder or support RMHEPs’ ability to reduce the negative effects of
educational debt.
Education Use of Educational Debt Repayment Resources. A lack of student loan
repayment and elimination resources permeated quantitative and qualitative data. Higher
education’s offering of student loan repayment options highlighted a limited number of offerings
96

that varied in availability. RMHEP respondents reported less than 30% of employers offered
student loan debt elimination services, such as tuition reimbursement. Though the document
review found the prominent promotion of eight different educational debt repayment options and
one student loan debt elimination option applicable to HEPs, options to prevent the acquisition of
debt via non-loan related means such as scholarships, internships, and assistantships proved less
prominent. Participants reported looking to the colleges, universities, the EFS, and government
officials to increase student loan elimination options supports. One Latinx respondent echoed
comments provided by multiple RMHEPs by writing,
I don’t believe I should strive to pay them off. I’m still waiting for true leadership to wipe
them away. Until then, I will pay the minimum required because I don’t believe we
should have been forced into this debt in the first place.
Increasing educational debt elimination options will contribute to RMHEPs encountering less
debt and benefiting more fully from their education and careers as opposed to experiencing its
penalties.
Effectiveness of Available Educational Debt Elimination Resources. In addition to the
availability of educational debt reduction options, HEPs find the available offerings ineffective.
When assessed, HEPs identified the available educational debt repayment methods as Most
Helpful at a rate of no more than 23%. Further, none of the websites analyzed addressed or
provided data regarding the effectiveness of any educational debt elimination options to assist
HEPs in selecting the most effective debt elimination options. One African American participant
expressed concern regarding the effectiveness of educational debt elimination options by sharing,
More institutions should offer tuition remission or reimbursement to all of its employees,
and at a wider selection of institutions. The ability to only take classes at the institution
97

one works at cane be difficult, especially when only able to take one class at a time it
makes it difficult to finish their degree within a reasonable timeline.
A lack of effective and clear financial literacy resources related to student loan debt contribute to
debt elimination issues. As such, loosening current educational debt elimination restrictions and
increasing consumer protections would prove beneficial.
Organizational Influences on Employee Educational Debt Acquisition and Elimination
As RMHEPs support their field while navigating the field’s EFS, an interplay between
their understanding and personal investment and systemic factors further exacerbates educational
debt’s effects. Factors include hiring and pay practices, return on investment, employee financial
wellness, lack of financial literacy, and employee distrust. These factors address the research
question regarding organizational interaction with minority HEPs’ motivation and knowledge by
exploring the cyclical nature of educational debt for both RMHEPs and their employers.
Hiring Requirements. Higher education’s hiring practices contribute to RMHEPs’
accumulation of and inability to eliminate educational debt. Data showed higher education
institutions most often required a minimum master’s degree (49.2%) but overwhelming preferred
a Masters (71%) or terminal (19.9%) degree (see Table 35).

98

Table 35
Degree and Salary Relationships
Employee Degree Type and Salary Comparison (n=680)

At or below median Above median
Some college 0.0% 0.5%
Associates 0.4% 0.0%
Bachelors 6.6%* 2.5%*
Masters 85.7%*** 49.0%***
Professional 0.6%* 2.5%*
Doctoral 6.6%*** 45.5%***

* = p≤.05
*** = p≤.001

Figure 8
Degree Preferences for Hiring

0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Some College Associates Bachelors Masters Professional Doctoral
Percentage of Preference
Degree Type (n=655)
99

To be considered for a promotion, 20.7% of respondents reported a Slightly Unlikely to
Extremely Unlikely chance with their current degree regardless of degree type, race, or amount of
educational debt. Figure 8 shows individuals with Masters degrees most commonly hold between
$60,000 and $79,999 of educational debt (12.8%) and 28.5% of all master’s degree holders
possessing more than $80,000 in educational debt.
Not surprisingly, terminal degree holders possess even more debt, with 50% having more
than $80,000 in student loan debt, of whom 13.8% hold $200,000 or more of educational debt.
Respondents corroborated the survey findings with statements such as on by an RMHEP that
read,
In order to move forward in a higher education career, a terminal degree is still a basic
necessity so there is pressure to pursue it, even if there is an expense of a loan added to
your debt.
Another RMHEP echoed concerns of higher education’s unspoken requirement to incur
additional debt to achieve career promotion by saying, “I am concerned I was encouraged to
complete my Master Degree because it was seen as the only way to secure a job in higher
education” Requiring advanced degrees encourages the acquisition of additional debt and create
subsequent income disparity risks. Employers need to shield workers from potential job
insecurity concerns by explicitly addressing factors to increase employee longevity.
Salary. While higher education’s hiring practices require advanced degrees and
associated educational debt, HEP pay presents additional challenges contributing to educational
debt’s negative effects. Most notably, 70.6% of all respondents earn at or below median salary;
28.8% possess more than $80,000 of educational debt. For those earning above the U.S. median
salary, 43.2% possess student loan debt totaling more than $80,000. The study did not note lower
100

wages when comparing RMHEPs to White HEPs. Commentary from RMHEPs on low salaries
or wages disproportionate to educational hiring requirements reverberated throughout the
qualitative data. Statements such as, “Higher education feels like you need more education, but
the pay is low…Need to take out loans to earn education required, but do not have potential to
earn much.” Another African American participant said of low wages compared to the
educational debt accumulation expectations,
They tell us to go get degrees. But when we obtain them, we get paid little to no money. I
have two masters degrees and was pushed and encouraged to obtain another masters
degree so I could “advance my career” only to make 15.73, that’s not normal to me. It
sucks to acquire all these loans and not even be able to live comfortably. What exactly is
the point because of this I am actually looking to leave higher ed.
The salary discrepancies suggest a need to adjust salaries to better align with professional degree
requirements and associated debt.
Return on Investment. After earning degrees and pursuing careers, higher education
offers RMHEPs uncertain yields on any educational debt, creating challenges in meeting EFS’s
expectation of student loan repayment. When referencing the return on investment, one RMHEP
shared:
As a marginalized higher education professional, I have chosen a career that I realize may
not yield the financial returns other May [sic] but I find it rewarding to have the
opportunity to prevent my students from repeating my mistakes.
Another African American HEP wrote,
101

I work at a university. Have two degrees from this university. In order for me to continue
to advance, I will have to continue my education = increase debt. This increased debt
doesn’t balance out with what I will make.
As observed during the document review, higher education’s professional development
websites encourage racially marginalized professionals to pursue careers in higher education “at
all levels;” however, the professional development websites did not elaborate on the to-be-
anticipated financial benefits. Moreover, the acquisition of degrees in pursuit of career mobility
by RMHEPs seemingly supersedes professional experience while offering no guarantee on
additional professional or financial benefits. An African American HEP explained:
I often think that we are forced to continue education for the sake of having a degree and
being competitive for the positions that we are applying for, even if we have the
knowledge, background, and experience that would’ve made us successful. Our income
for this trade off isn’t nearly what it should be, yet we are called to do an immense
amount of work within our roles.
Student debt contributes to poor yields on the financial investment of education by undercutting
and offsetting employee wages and disposable income. Needed student loan repayment policy
changes would better account for the negative career and income influences educational debt
creates.
Financial Literacy and Socialization. As higher education encourages educational debt
acquisition, employees seek to learn effective repayment, debt elimination, and financial
management strategies. Unfortunately, higher education provides few, if any, financial literacy
resources. Less than 1% of both RMHEPs (0.3%) and White (0.7%) surveyed reported their
employer offering some form of student loan repayment education. Further, financial literacy
102

resources often prove confusing. RMHEPs reported misunderstanding the nuance of student loan
repayment resulting in repayment missteps, the need for additional knowledge, or general apathy
towards repayment. One African American participant shared an account of using available
financial literacy information and still encountering challenges when they said,
I thought I was in the right public servant program when it was first announced. As I got
to the end of my 10 years, I was informed I should’ve enrolled in a plan, which wasn’t
made clear in the beginning . . .it was frustrating to find out that my public service did not
count in this instance.
Higher education does not integrate financial socialization into its professional culture.
The professional development websites observed failed to reference or encourage financial
planning, offer financial advising supports, or provide educational debt elimination mentoring.
Qualitative responses further highlighted higher education’s inability to encourage financial
socialization as multiple participants cited outside sources, such as student loan debt elimination-
focused social media groups and personal networking as financial socialization resources. An
African American participant shared, “What was helpful for me is making friends with financial
aid professional in higher education. Someone I could ask the questions too . . . there should be a
hotline just so you can ask questions . . . not tied to a servicer or school.” Financial literacy
improves employees’ ability to allocate and manage financial resources increasing employees’
likelihood of meeting their financial requirements as well as overall wellness. Additionally,
financial socialization correlates positively with on-time student loan repayment and reduced
student loan repayment worries. Employers need to offer ongoing financial literacy to improve
employees’ financial wellness and provide securities against financial crises in addition to
financial socialization.
103

Employee Financial Wellness. The effects of student loan debt and limited elimination
options extend beyond the EFS’ original purpose of educational accessibility and, for RMHEPs,
influences nearly every facet of life. Once in repayment, the student loan debt alters access to
financial, career, familial, and personal goals. The document review revealed messaging to
encourage RMHEPs to pursue additional degrees and training through the use of student loans
and adjusted repayment options. HEPs, however, cited overwhelming negative financial wellness
implications of possessing student loan debt. Participants reported statements like “I feel
concerned that the money I have or will save won’t last” described them Moderately to
Extremely well at a rate of 66.4%. Furthermore, survey data found those with below-average
student loan debt reported 15% higher financial wellness scores than those with median or
extreme educational debt. The educational financing and professional development websites
reviewed did not address educational debt potentially hindering RMHEPs from achieving
financial wellness. Multiple participants, however, pointed specifically to financial wellness
conflicts created by higher education’s EFS. One RMHEP stated:
I think it is horrifically sad that I can’t advance in my career without attaining a higher
degree . . . It’s a vicious cycle. I work in higher education, yet I can’t feasibly access it
without facing personal impoverishment.
Positive financial wellness among student loan borrowers contributes to an increased likelihood
of overall debt management. Higher education needs to intentionally research, develop, and
implement financial capability supports and increase debt relief options for employees.
Employees Distrust Debt Elimination Resources and Supports. While the field of
higher education and educational financing agencies attempt to provide debt reduction supports,
services, and education, RMHEPs distrust the reliability, usefulness, and intent behind such
104

practices. Qualitative responses repeatedly suggested employees do not trust the EFS or higher
education’s efforts to combat educational debt. Instead, employees tend to believe the EFS has a
predatory intent. One RMHEP responded,
I can’t change that I didn’t understand what was happening when I decided to take out
these loans or that I didn’t feel like I had other options. It isn’t my fault. I know that so I
don’t let guilt getting to me. I know this system is rigged- they won’t get my sanity.
When responding to open-ended questions about student loan debt, multiple participants
referenced the need to question the student loan terms and the instability of repayment methods.
RMHEPs worried the EFS would renege on student loan debt elimination offerings. When
discussing PSLF, one RMHEP shared uncertainty when they said,
I am just holding out hope that the loan forgiveness programs will not be undercut or
eliminated before I reach my goal. It feels very far off, but it was the only reason I felt
comfortable assuming the amount of loan debt I did. If that falls through [sic] I’ll be
stuck with this massive debt forever. Even if the incoming administration offers the
higher amount of $50K in forgiveness that has been tossed around in the news, that only
gets me less than a third of the way to eliminating that balance. I think the “120 payments
until forgiveness” route is my only reasonable escape.
Stakeholder distrust works counter to EFS’ intended goals to provide access to education and
provide reasonable means of repayment. To reduce educational debt’s negative effects on
RMHEPs, higher education needs to engage in transparent, intentional employee
communications. Additional, higher education should take a receptive approach to consumer
feedback in order to address the current distrust and the other knowledge, motivation, and
organizational performance gaps discussed.
105

Organizational Results Summary
The study revealed student loan debt elimination struggles relate not only to employee
knowledge and motivation but also to organizational factors. Data suggested poor utilization of
the few student loan debt reduction and elimination offerings available by higher education
institutions contribute to the problem. Further, a lack of trust in the stability and reliability of
student loan debt organizational resources further hinders utilization and motivation. Higher
education needs to address this interplay of knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors by
improving its financial wellness and literacy programs and expanding its debt relief options in a
manner that protects the consumer and instills trust.
Synthesis
The study revealed a distinctive relationship between RMHEPs and negative financial
wellness and career effects. Although the RMHEPs understood the benefits of educational debt
elimination, they experienced difficulty acquiring the factual, conceptual, and procedural
knowledge necessary to successfully navigate the higher education field and the EFS.
Additionally, RMHEPs faced educational debt elimination with lower self-efficacy than their
White peer, lacking confidence in their ability to rid themselves of educational debt.
Organizational factors within higher education and its EFS also contribute to the problem of
RMHEPs experiencing negative effects of educational debt as higher education lacks needed
inclusivity and debt reduction resources.
The results and findings address the study’s research questions by analyzing the
knowledge, motivation, and organization factors contributing to RMHEPs’ educational debt
elimination decisions. Further, the findings explore the interaction between employees’
knowledge and motivational deficits, the field of higher education’s performance gaps, and the
106

EFS’s performance gaps. Chapter Five will recommend ways to address each of the study’s
findings.

107

Chapter Five: Discussion
The study utilized Clark and Estes’s (2008) framework to examine the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences that contribute to or eliminate educational debt’s
negative effects on college employees from racially marginalized backgrounds. The influences
potentially contribute to HEPs understanding how to effectively navigate their professional and
financial lives in a way that encourages educational debt elimination and the harmful student
loan possession effects. As outlined in Chapter Four, the study confirmed knowledge,
motivation, and organizational performance gaps related to higher education’s student loan
repayment system and HEPs’ financial decisions as well as their educational and career
aspirations. The data suggested a need to address the validated influence gaps and improve
overall employee knowledge and motivation as well as higher education’s organizational
performance.
Chapter Five provides recommendations to address the problem of practice using a logic
model approach (Kellogg Foundation, 2004; MacDonald, 2018). If implemented, HEP
educational debt totals decrease alongside the negative personal, educational, professional, and
economic effects. The chapter will present knowledge, motivation, and organization
recommendations. The chapter concludes by offering an evaluation and implementation plan
before discussing limitations, delimitations, and future research.
Organizational Context and Mission
Throughout the United States, colleges and universities expand upon students’ primary
school and professional knowledge by offering educationally conducive opportunities,
experiences, and environments. Using largely bureaucratic and political accountability models to
substantiate its services, colleges and universities aim to provide advanced knowledge and skills
108

to 16.8 million students using its $65 billion budget (Hendrickson & Ikenberry, 2013; National
Center for Education Statistics, 2019a). Each college or university works in tandem with
applicable local, state, and federal government agencies to support and sustain its accessibility,
utilization, and goals. More than four million employees then facilitate higher education’s
mission and achieve its performance goals (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a).
Overall, higher education aims to offer degree-seeking students socially transformative academic
opportunities through professionally facilitated curricular and extracurricular experiences
(Hendrickson & Ikenberry, 2013). Higher education measures its success by its institution and
field performance.
Organizational Performance Goal
Colleges and universities employ racial minorities; however, these institutions have not
addressed the ever-growing student loan debt among employees. The field does not employ
faculty, staff, or administrators from racially marginalized backgrounds in a manner that aligns
with minority degree or debt acquisition rates American College Professionals Association,
2019). Similarly, the field does not address the negative effects educational debt creates for racial
minority professionals (Green & Ciez‐Volz, 2010). In short, higher education needs to decrease
educational debt among racial minority employees by at least 50% over the next 10 years to
fulfill its mission.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
University faculty, staff, and administrators, as well as federal policymakers, were the
stakeholder groups for this problem of practice. University faculty and staff educational debt
holders directly take on educational debt while later navigating the EFS’s repayment services.
Institutional decision-makers, the university administrations, contribute to employees’ ability to
109

effectively navigate higher education’s professional and student loan financing system by
developing and implementing effective pay, hiring, promotion, and benefits structures directly
related to HEPs’ income and financial wellness. Finally, federal policymakers act as a
stakeholder group through their creation, management, and enforcement of laws, policies, and
agencies related to student loan debt. University employees served as the stakeholder group of
study.
Goal of the Stakeholder Group for the Study
HEPs need to improve knowledge and motivation to effectively navigate both higher
education’s student loan repayment and professional systems. HEPs need to understand EFS’s
general tenets, including how to eliminate educational debt efficiently. As the stakeholder group
of study, HEPs need to make the necessary changes to eliminate educational debt within the next
10 years.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The study evaluated the higher education field’s effectiveness in addressing and helping
employees from racially marginalized backgrounds avoid educational debt’s negative effects.
The study’s guiding research questions were as follows:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation of racial minority higher education professionals
to reduce the negative effect of educational debt?
2. To what extent are colleges and universities’ resources, structures, and processes effective
in reducing the negative effects of educational debt on racial minority higher education
professionals?
3. What is the organizational interaction with minority higher education professionals’
motivation and knowledge to reduce the negative effects of educational debt?
110

Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
As reviewed in Chapter Two, Krathwohl (2002) discussed factual, conceptual, and
procedural knowledge types. The study validated all three types of knowledge influences as
RMHEPs could not identify obligatory EF or student repayment information. Additionally,
RMHEPs could not discern the relationship between EFS and the overarching EFS structure.
Stakeholders require all three forms of knowledge to achieve performance goals (Krathwohl,
2002; Mayer, 2011). Table 36 outlines the recommendations to improve stakeholder
performance and the supporting theoretical principles.

Table 36
Knowledge Recommendations
Influence
category
Validated knowledge
influence
Addressed
Themes
Recommendation
Factual Employees need to
understand the
general tenets of
educational
financing.
Student loan debt
education and
literacy
Provide direct, onsite financial
wellness services through
institutional Human Resources
services that provide biannual
student loan repayment
progress reports, student loan
debt prevention for those
interested in acquiring
additional degrees, and related
financial advising (Despard et
al., 2020)
Conceptual Employees need to be
able to conceptually
identify the benefits
of eliminating
educational debt.
Provide employees with a
customized annual newsletter
outlining the benefits of
student loan debt elimination
Procedural Employees need to
know how to
eliminate
educational debt.
Student loan
elimination
strategy
resources
Provide employees with a
customized annual newsletter
reviewing all available student
loan debt elimination options
111

The recommendation related to knowledge pertains to strategies. To increase interest in
student loan debt reduction and elimination, the employees will need to understand the EFS, the
benefits of debt reduction, and how to eliminate student loan debt. Individuals from racially
marginalized populations tend to have more negative student loan debt experiences, in part, due
to a poor understanding of how to navigate the student loan repayment and discharge system
(Hancock, 2009; Iuliano, 2011). Mountain et al. (2021) suggested intentional financial wellness
program opportunities can improve employee financial stressors related to student loan debt and
improve overall financial literacy. To address the employee knowledge deficits, higher education
employers should create financial wellness services staffed by financial advising specialists as a
human resources service. The financial wellness services should focus on reducing student loan
debt, money management, aid in student loan debt prevention plans for employees pursuing
additional degrees, and generalized financial counseling. Services should include providing
biannual student loan repayment progress reports, advanced education financing planning, and
supplemental financial advising. Increasing employee knowledge in this way will lead to
decreased student loan debt amounts and RMHEP interest in pursuing student loan debt freedom.
Motivation Recommendations
According to Mayer (2011), motivation activates knowledge by providing the desire to
apply the knowledge. Active choice, persistence, and mental effort couple with individuals’
interests, beliefs, goals, attributions, and partnerships to propel them towards their goals (Mayer,
2011). The current study found RMHEPs lacked the needed motivation to eliminate educational
debt as RMHEPs did not believe in their ability to complete student loan debt elimination. Table
37 delineates the study’s validated motivation influence and associated recommendation.
112

Table 37
Validated Motivation Influences
Influence
category
Assumed motivation
influence
Addressed
Themes
Recommendation
Self-efficacy Employees need to believe
they can eliminate
educational debt.
Student loan debt
intervention and
prevention needs
Establish student loan debt
prevention and
intervention programs
for employees to prevent
accumulating of
additional debt while
pursuing other degrees
(Shim et al., 2019)

Offer racial minority
student loan repayment
mentoring professional
development
opportunities (Shim et
al., 2019)

The motivation recommendation pertains to self-efficacy development. RMHEPs have
lower self-efficacy related to educational debt elimination and, as a result, experience more
negative student loan effects. Bandura (1991) found individuals with higher self-efficacy
demonstrate increased persistence when faced with performance tasks. Based on available
research as well as the findings from this study, the higher education field should establish
student loan financial advising intervention programs for employees who already have student
loan debt. Additionally, higher education should expand options, like free part-time enrollment,
for its employees to prevent additional student loan debt and increase advanced degree
attainment. Offer student loan repayment mentoring opportunities would also increase RMHEP
self-efficacy (Shim et al., 2019). These resources will increase mastery and provide modeling,
113

two factors that improve self-efficacy (Usher & Pajares, 2007). The services would also increase
staffing and campus financial planning resources.
Organizational Recommendations
Organizations work to meet or exceed performance goals and use the organizational
culture to do so. Cultural models and settings guide how organizations approach tasks and
operate (Clark & Estes, 2008). Further, organizational culture influences how people navigate a
given system as the organizations have both overt and covert manifestations that help or hinder
individual access to the organization’s services (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). In this way,
even if stakeholders possess the knowledge and motivation to achieve a task, organizational
culture may help or impede progress, whether directly or passively (Clark & Estes, 2008). The
current study found higher education’s cultural models and settings contribute to RMHEPs
having more student loan debt than they can repay. Table 38 presents the validated
organizational influences and recommendations.

114

Table 38
Organizational Recommendations
Influence
category
Validated organizational
influence
Addressed
Themes
Recommendations
Cultural
models
The field of higher
education needs to be
racially inclusive in a
manner that supports
personal and financial
wellness.
Hiring, salary, and
financial
wellness
Establish and maintain
salary standards that
account for assumed
student loan debt (Eagan
& Garvey, 2015)

Prevent student loan
interest accrual for
RMHEPs (Alonzi et al.,
2015)

Provide guaranteed paths
to student loan
forgiveness (Johnston &
Roten, 2015)
Cultural
settings
The field of higher
education needs
resources to support
financial literacy,
socialization, and
modeling.
Employee distrust
in debt
elimination
options
Expand consumer
protections to allow for
increased debt discharge
options for low-income
individuals (Hancock,
2009).

Hiring, Salary, and Financial Wellness
RMHEPs experience inequitable work environments lacking in diversity. The lack of
racial inclusivity negatively affects RMHEPs’ career mobility and income (Eddy, 2010).
Research also suggests more diverse working environments improve engagement and career
success (Boyd et al., 2010). To address the lack of racial inclusivity in hiring and pay practices,
higher education institutions should create salary standards that account for the employees’
practice specialty’s average student loan debt total and degree requirements. The student loan
repayment system should also modify interest accrual for HEPs to ensure the loans do not incur
115

interest or repayment amount absorb any accrued interest. By making these changes, higher
education would ensure the staff wages align with the amount of student loan debt employees
have and the amounts paid towards student loans result in monthly decreases to their loan debt
totals. Should higher education implement these recommendations, the field would improve
HEPs’ ability to repay student loans, improving overall financial wellness.
Distrust
In addition to the lack of diversity in the workplace, higher education facilitates the
student loan repayment system in a manner that fails to offer needed consumer protections,
breeding distrust and uncertainty. Hancock (2009) found flaws in the EFS system that
disadvantaged the student loan borrower and disproportionately affected racial minority
borrowers. Additionally, Fakunmoju and Kersting (2016) found uncertainty about student loan
debt support programs, like PSLF, negatively associated with professional outcomes and
retention. To address these concerns, the study offers as a final recommendation that higher
education provide guaranteed student loan forgiveness options and expand consumer protections
allowing for partial or full discharge of student loans. Making this change would improve
employee-organization trust and motivate employees to pursue viable repayment options.

116

Figure 9
Logic Model

Evaluation and Implementation Plan
The logic model serves as the study’s evaluation and implementation framework. The
logic model outlines the resources, activities, outputs, outcomes, and impact of the
recommendations (Kellogg Foundation, 2004; MacDonald, 2018). The model’s resources outline
the items needed to achieve the given activities. The Kellogg Foundation defines activities as the
117

services or programs that directly address the problem and outcomes measure the activities’
success. Outcomes include accomplishments that derive from the activities. Finally, impact
describes the long-term change resulting from the activities. Figure 9 provides the study’s logic
model.
The recommendations require the following resources: funding, racial minority mentors,
financial advisors, student loan repayment procedures, a professional development committee,
and a Department of Education student loan elimination commission. These resources will aid in
facilitating activities needed to modify the student loan repayment system and market the
enhanced student loan repayment options. The resources will also provide financial wellness
professional development and mentoring and ongoing activity funding. Multiple programmatic
and economic measures will serve as outputs. Most of the plan’s outputs center around HEP
enrollment in the proposed programs as well as student loan debt data and salary data. In the
short term, employees will experience life and career improvements, including improved job
satisfaction, financial wellness, and access to career and educational advancement. The field of
higher education will also experience increased employee retention and performance. Broader
and longer-term outcomes that will result from the implementation of the recommended changes
include an improved national economic outlook as well as improved perceptions of the student
loan repayment system. The racial wage gap would also decrease as racial diversity in higher
education increased (Li & Koedel, 2017). Ultimately, the changes and the evaluative approach
will result in decreased financial oppression of racial minorities.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
Utilizing Clark and Estes’s (2008) framework alongside the logic model evaluation
approach holistically addresses the performance problem and offers an evaluation plan backed by
118

the study’s empirical findings (Kellogg Foundation, 2004; MacDonald, 2018). Even so, flaws to
this approach exist. Both the problem-solving model and the evaluation approach fail to address
historical racial equity factors adequately. Clark and Estes’s gap analysis model does not utilize
or integrate diversity, equity, and inclusion into its assessment of the knowledge, motivation, or
organizational influence evaluation and solution development practices. The knowledge and
motivational theories utilized also do not address issues of how race may uniquely affect such
factors (Fan, 2019). Similarly, the logic model oversimplifies the ease of change implementation
without regard to CRT (Tate, 1997). Changes to knowledge, motivation, and organizational
changes should consider individual and group cultural contexts and practices. Finally, no one
approach ensures success. Therefore, this study recognizes the provided recommendations and
evaluation plan offer only guidance towards addressing the problem.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations and delimitations for the study include data collection, access, external
validity, and researcher bias. The study utilized a convenience sampling approach by soliciting
survey responses from publicly accessible social media groups devoted to higher education-
related topics or specialized identities. Due to accessibility, the study also opted to solicit
participation from Student Affairs-focused groups. Doing so resulted in the overwhelming
majority of respondents serving in administrative (n = 562) roles compared to executive (n = 53)
or faculty (n = 42) roles. Further, the sample disproportionately represented African American
participants (n = 319, or 46.6%). Thus, the current findings and recommendations may prove
inapplicable to such racial minority groups. Specifically, Asian (n = 17, or 2.5%), Native
American (n = 2, or 0.3%), and Pacific Islanders (n = 0) made up such a small portion of the
sample that the findings of this study may not accurately reflect the true educational debt and
119

professional experiences of those underrepresented subpopulations. Future survey distribution
should obtain a more representative sample to better assess the problem of practice.
Similarly, the qualitative data collection process limited the reviewed professional
development websites to two and educational financing websites to one. The available employee
educational financing resources expand beyond those assessed. The study did not access
generalized resources related to retirement, financial advising, or specialized training commonly
accessible to HEPs. Additional research should evaluate the effects of the aforementioned
resources to fully measure the available educational debt resource offerings.
The student also recognizes the external validity concerns created by collecting data
during the 2021 portion of the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 resulted in unexpected financial
hardships and federal legislation that provided temporary student loan debt relief (U.S. Congress,
2020; The White House, 2021). As individuals did not have to repay federal student loans during
the COVID-19 pandemic, respondent beliefs, experiences, and interests in student loan
repayment may have differed from normal repayment periods.
As a delimitation, the interval data framing of the survey allowed for completion from
those who did not have debt. Though the survey specifically solicited completion from only debt
holders, the survey did not disqualify or prevent completion by those holding no current
educational debt. Survey item 19 presented a debt range of $0 - $1,999 and could have
inaccurately considered those with no student loan debt. This occurred in at least one case, as a
response stated, “I owe $0. You question about the amount owed has a range of $0-$1999
dollars. This inaccurately put me in the category with people who owe money.” As such,
individuals with no debt may present in and potentially skew the findings. Future research should
provide a true I do not possess any student loan debt option to obtain more consistent results.
120

Finally, I identify as a member of the study’s target population. I utilized recommended
practices to limit bias in interpreting the study’s findings; however, total elimination of bias
remains unattainable (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Due to these limitations and delimitations, the
study does not provide a fully comprehensive analysis of RMHEPs’ student loan experiences. I
encourage additional research to expand the current findings and identify viable, sustainable
solutions.
Future Research
Additional research should target specific racial minority groups as well as explore
gender, position, and organizational unit differences. The current study had a disproportionate
number of African American and female participants. As referenced in Chapter Two, research
suggests some racial minorities and gender identity groups may have different educational debt
experiences (Addo et al., 2016; Houle, 2014a). As such, future research should investigate the
specific experiences of each racial and gender identity subgroup to better understand educational
debt’s effects and recommend appropriate reform. Similarly, differences in faculty, staff, and
administrator experiences and pay may influence RMHEP student loan debt and career
experiences. The current study had a small faculty and administrator response rate. Most of the
respondents also reported serving in student affairs positions. Additional exploration into the
various subcategories of RMHEP professional populations will serve to expand understanding
and provide focused support to address the problems caused by student loan debt.
Future researchers should also study the problem after the conclusion of the COVID-19
pandemic. As previously mentioned, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented
economic hardship and a subsequent suspension of federal student loan repayments. The
economic uncertainty brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to
121

differences in RMHEPs’ experiences with and perceptions of educational debt and professional
outcomes. Post-pandemic research could yield different findings.
Conclusion
The study evaluated how HEPs from racially marginalized backgrounds experience and
navigate the U.S. EFS as well as its effect on their careers. Using Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis framework, the study found racial minorities struggle to understand or navigate the
complex student loan repayment system resulting in personal, professional, and socioeconomic
challenges. The study recommended changes in financial socialization, hiring, salary, and
student loan reform to address the identified performance gaps. The study stands to guide higher
education professional development and employment practices as well as political policy reform.
The study’s results punctuate the need for student loan reform as a pressing matter of
urgency. Employees from racially marginalized backgrounds sustain higher education daily, yet
they remain financially oppressed by that system. RMHEPs cannot continue to support a lender-
protected system that offers debilitating debt and virtually no options for financial freedom when
employees simply wish to help higher education in fulfilling its mission. Instead of higher
education using RMHEPs’ talents and expertise to enhance learning, it uses their desire for
education as a vehicle to facilitate systemic racism. If higher education desires to fulfill its
mission of expanding access to career, social, and economic opportunity, the field must first
acknowledge and address the undue burden student loans create. With the pervasive influence
educational debt has on RMHEPs’ lives, simply offering solutions remains insufficient. Higher
education needs to address this chronic issue in a manner that recognizes racially marginalized
populations have taken or more than their fair share of the student loan debt burden.

122

References
ACPA College Student Educators International. (2020). ACPA. https://www.myacpa.org/
Addo, F., Houle, J., & Sassler, S. (2018). The changing nature of the association between student
loan debt and marital behavior in young adulthood. Journal of Family and Economic
Issues, 40(1), 86–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-018-9591-6
Addo, F. R. (2014). Debt, cohabitation, and marriage in young adulthood. Demography, 51(5),
1677–1701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-014-0333-6
Addo, F. R., Houle, J. N., & Simon, D. (2016). Young, black, and (still) in the red: Parental
wealth, race, and student loan debt. Race and Social Problems, 8(1), 64–76.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-016-9162-0
Alonzi, L., Irons, R., & Razaki, K. (2015). A demand and supply analysis of the confluence of
student loan stakeholder interests. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 13(1), 49.
https://doi.org/10.19030/jber.v13i1.9079
Altonji, J., Arcidiacono, P., & Maurel, A. (2016). The analysis of field choice in college and
graduate school. In E. A. Hanushek, S. Machin, & L. Woessmann. Handbook of the
economics of education (Vol. 5, pp. 305–396). Elsevier B.V.,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63459-7.00007-5
American College Professionals Association. (2019). Equity and inclusion statement.
https://www.myacpa.org/equity-and-inclusion-statement
American Council on Education. (2017). Minority presidents’ profile - American college
president study. https://www.aceacps.org/minority-presidents/
123

Archuleta, K., Dale, A., & Spann, S. (2013). College Students and Financial Distress: Exploring
Debt, Financial Satisfaction, and Financial Anxiety. Financial Counseling and Planning,
24(2), 50–63.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-
5978(91)90022-L
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A. (2007). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. C. Urdan
(Authors), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-337). Information Age Publishing.
Belasco, A. S., Trivette, M. J., & Webber, K. L. (2014). Advanced degrees of debt: Analyzing
the patterns and determinants of graduate student borrowing. The Review of Higher
Education, 37(4), 469–497. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2014.0030
Berg, G., & Tollefson, K. (2014). Latina/o student perceptions of post-baccalaureate education:
Identifying challenges to increased participation. Journal of Latinos and Education,
13(4), 296–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2014.887470
Best, J., & Best, E. (2014). The Student Loan Mess. University of California Press.
https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520958449
Boatman, A., & Evans, B. J. (2017). How financial literacy, federal aid knowledge, and credit
market experience predict loan aversion for education. The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 671(1), 49–68.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217695779
124

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2017). Reframing organizations artistry, choice and leadership (6th ed.).
Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119281856
Boyd, T., Cintron, R., & Alexander-Snow, M. (2010). The experience of being a junior minority
female faculty member (EJ903575). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ903575
Bozick, R., & Estacion, A. (2014). Do student loans delay marriage? Debt repayment and family
formation in young adulthood. Demographic Research, 30, 1865–1891.
https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2014.30.69
Chapman, B., & Dearden, L. (2017). Conceptual and empirical issues for alternative student loan
designs: The significance of loan repayment burdens for the united states. The Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 671(1), 249–268.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217703969
Choi, Y. (2014). Debt and college students’ life transitions: The effects of educational debt on
career choice in America. Journal of Student Financial Aid, 44(1), 1–18.
Clark, R., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Pub Inc.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. (2017). Measuring financial well-being: A guide to using
the CFPB financial well-being scale. https://www.consumerfinance.gov/data-
research/research-reports/financial-well-being-scale/
Cornell Law School. (2011). 20 U.S. code § 1001 - General Definition of Institution of Higher
Education. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1001
Cramer, R., & Shanks, T. (2014). The assets perspective : the rise of asset building and its
impact on social policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
125

Despard, M., Frank-Miller, E., Fox-Dichter, S., Germain, G., & Conan, M. (2020). Employee
financial wellness programs: Opportunities to promote financial inclusion? Journal of
Community Practice, 28(3), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2020.1796878
Destin, M., & Svoboda, R. (2018). Costs on the mind: The influence of the financial burden of
college on academic performance and cognitive functioning. Research in Higher
Education, 59(3), 302–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9469-8
Dwyer, R. E., McCloud, L., & Hodson, R. (2012). Debt and graduation from American
universities. Social Forces, 90(4), 1133–1155. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sos072
Eagan, M., & Garvey, J. (2015). Stressing Out: Connecting Race, Gender, and Stress with
Faculty Productivity. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(6), 923–954.
https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2015.0034
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. http://www.education.com/reference/
article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Economic Policy Institute. (2019). Wages 2018. https://www.epi.org/publication/state-of-
american-wages-2018/
Eddy, P. (2010). New faculty issues: Fitting in and figuring it out. New Directions for
Community Colleges, 2010(152), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.423
Eitel, S. J., & Martin, J. (2009). First-generation female college students’ financial literacy: Real
and perceived barriers to degree completion. College Student Journal, 43(2), 616–631.
Elliott, W., & Lewis, M. (2013). Student loans are widening the wealth gap: Time to focus on
equity. Assets and Education Initiative (AEDI).
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260780939_STUDENT_LOANS_ARE_WIDE
NING_THE_WEALTH_GAP_TIME_TO_FOCUS_ON_EQUITY
126

Elliot, W., & Nam, I. (2013, September/October). Is student debt jeopardizing the short-term
financial health of U.S. households? Review - Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 95,
405–424. https://doi.org/10.20955/r.95.405-424
Fakunmoju, S., & Kersting, R. (2016). Perceived effects of student loan forgiveness on
Turnover intention among social workers in Massachusetts. Social Work (New York),
61(4), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/sww051
Fan, D. (2019). Why diversity, equity, and inclusion struggle in corporate America [Editorial].
Profiles in Diversity Journal. https://diversityjournal.com/19148-why-diversity-equity-
and-inclusion-struggle-in-corporate-america/
Fan, L., & Chatterjee, S. (2019). Financial socialization, financial education, and student loan
debt. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 40(1), 74–85.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-018-9589-0
Federal Trades Commission. (2013). Bureau of consumer protection. https://www.ftc.gov/about-
ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection
Fernandez-Morera, D. (2010). Ask a scholar: What is the true definition of Latino? National
Association of Scholars. https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/ask_a_scholar_what_is_
the_true_definition_of_latino
Fuller, M. (2014). A history of financial aid to students. Journal of Student Financial Aid, 44(1),
42–67.
Gansememer-Topf, A. M., Downey, J., & Genschel, U. (2017). Definitions matter: Investigating
and comparing different operationalizations of academic undermatching. Research &
Practice in Assessment, 12, 28–40.
127

Gasman, M., Abiola, U., & Travers, C. (2015). Diversity and senior leadership at elite
institutions of higher education. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 8(1), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038872
Gicheva, D. (2016). Student loans or marriage? A look at the highly educated. Economics of
Education Review, 53, 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.04.006
Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Sage
Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909
Glocker, D., & Storck, J. (2014). Risks and returns to educational fields: A financial asset
approach to vocational and academic education. Economics of Education Review,
42(October), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.06.004
Goetz, B. J., Nielsen, R., Chatterjee, S., & Mimura, Y. (2011). College-based personal finance
education: Student interest in three delivery methods. Financial Counseling and
Planning, 22(1), 27. https://search.proquest.com/docview/881292075
Gould, E. (2019). State of working America wages 2018: Wage inequality marches on---and is
even threatening data reliability. In Policy File. Economic Policy Institute.
Gramm, C. L., & Schnell, J. F. (2013). Does Employment Security Influence Organizational
Hiring Success? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(3).
Green, D. W., & Ciez‐Volz, K. (2010). Now hiring: The faculty of the future. New Directions for
Community Colleges, 2010(152), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.430
Hancock, K. E. (2009). A certainty of hopelessness: Debt, depression, and the discharge of
student loans under the bankruptcy code. Law and Psychology Review, 33, 151–166.
128

Hendrickson, R., & Ikenberry, S. (2013). Academic leadership and governance of higher
education : A guide for trustees, leaders, and aspiring leaders of two- and four-year
institutions (First edition.). Stylus.
HigherEdJobs. (2020). HigherEdJobs. https://www.higheredjobs.com/Default.cfm
Hiltonsmith, R. (2013). At what cost? How student debt reduces lifetime wealth. Demos.,
http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/AtWhatCostFinal_Demos.pdf
Houle, J., & Addo, F. (2019). Racial disparities in student debt and the reproduction of the
fragile black middle class. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 5(4),
562–577. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649218790989
Houle, J., & Berger, L. (2015). Is student loan debt discouraging homeownership among young
adults? The Social Service Review, 89(4), 589–621. https://doi.org/10.1086/684587
Houle, J. N. (2014a). A generation indebted: Young adult debt across three cohorts. Social
Problems, 61(3), 448–465. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2014.12110
Houle, J. N. (2014b). Disparities in debt: Parents’ socioeconomic resources and young adult
student loan debt. Sociology of Education, 87(1), 53–69.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040713512213
Houle, J. N., & Warner, C. (2017). Into the red and back to the nest? student debt, college
completion, and returning to the parental home among young adults. Sociology of
Education, 90(1), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040716685873
Hwang, J. S., Beebe, K., Benevenia, J., Karanfilian, B., & Berberian, W. S. (2012). Financial
debt of orthopedic residents. Orthopedics, 35(4), e549–e554.
https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20120327-27
129

The Institute for College Access & Success. (2019). Quick facts about student debt.
http://bit.ly/1lxjskr
Iuliano, J. (2011). An empirical assessment of student loan discharges and the bankruptcy undue
hardship standard. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1894445
Jackson, B. A., & Reynolds, J. R. (2013). The price of opportunity: Race, student loan debt, and
college achievement. Sociological Inquiry, 83(3), 335–368.
https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12012
Johnston, J., & Roten, I. (2015). Income-Based Repayment and Loan Forgiveness: Implications
on Student Loan Debt. Journal of Financial Planning, 28(4), 24.
Joo, S. (2008). Personal financial wellness. In J. J. Xiao (Ed.), Handbook of consumer finance
research (pp. 21–33). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75734-6_2
Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and
Action: Logic model development guide. https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/
LogicModel.pdf
Kim, D., & Otts, C. (2010). The effect of loans on time to doctorate degree: Differences by
race/ethnicity, field of study, and institutional characteristics. The Journal of Higher
Education, 81(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2010.11778968
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Lapchick, R. (2019). 2016 racial and gender report card: College sport. The Institute for
Diversity and Ethics in Sport. https://statistical.proquest.com/statisticalinsight/result/
pqpresultpage.previewtitle?docType=PQSI&titleUri=/content/2018/U6327-1.xml
130

Li, D., & Koedel, C. (2017). Representation and salary gaps by race-ethnicity and gender at
selective public universities. Educational Researcher, 46(7), 343-354.
http://dx.doi.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.3102/0013189X17726535
Luna-Torres, M., McKinney, L., Horn, C., & Jones, S. (2018). Understanding loan use and debt
burden among low-income and minority students at a large urban community college.
Journal of Student Financial Aid, 48(1), 2–28.
MacDonald, G. (2018). Checklist of key considerations for development of program logic
models. https://wmich.edu/evaluation/checklists
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE
Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson Education.
McKenzie-Mohr, D., & Schultz, P. (2014). Choosing effective behavior change tools. Social
Marketing Quarterly, 20(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524500413519257
McKinney, L., & Burridge, A. (2015). Helping or hindering? The effects of loans on community
college student persistence. Research in Higher Education, 56(4), 299–324.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-014-9349-4
McMahon, W. (2009). Higher learning, greater good: The private and social benefits of higher
education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Mendoza, P., Mendez, J. P., & Malcolm, Z. (2009). Financial aid and persistence in community
college: Assessing the effectiveness of federal and state financial aid programs in
Oklahoma. Community College Review, 37(2), 112–135.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552109348045
131

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Min, S., & Taylor, M. (2018). Racial and ethnic variation in the relationship between student
loan debt and the transition to first birth. Demography, 55(1), 165–188.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0643-6
Monaghan, D., & Jang, S. H. (2017). Major payoffs. Sociological Perspectives, 60(4), 722–746.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121416688445
Montalto, C. P., Phillips, E. L., McDaniel, A., & Baker, A. R. (2019). College Student Financial
Wellness: Student Loans and Beyond. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 40(1), 3–
21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-018-9593-4
Mountain, T., Kim, N., Serido, J., & Shim, S. (2021). Does Type of Financial Learning Matter
for Young Adults’ Objective Financial Knowledge and Financial Behaviors? A
Longitudinal and Mediation Analysis. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 42(1),
113–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-020-09689-6
Myers, D., Painter, G., Zissimopoulos, J., Lee, H., & Thunell, J. (2019). Simulating the change in
young adult homeownership through 2035: Effects of growing diversity and rising
educational attainment. Housing Policy Debate, 29(1), 126–142.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2018.1452045
Nashleanas, B. M., McKernan, S. C., Kuthy, R. A., & Qian, F. (2014). Career influences among
final year dental students who plan to enter private practice. BMC Oral Health, 14(1), 18.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-18
NASPA Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education. (2020). NASPA.
https://www.naspa.org/
132

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Table 315.60 full-time and part-time faculty and
instructional staff in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by race/ethnicity, sex,
and selected characteristics: Fall 2003. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/
dt15_315.60.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019a). Glossary. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/
glossary.asp#fulltime
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019b). Race/ethnicity of college faculty.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=61
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019c). Race/ethnicity of college faculty.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=61
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019d). Undergraduate enrollment.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cha.asp#info
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Fast facts: Back to school statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372#College_attainment
National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. (2018). National Student Clearinghouse
Research Center. https://nscresearchcenter.org/
Naylor, L. A., Wyatt-Nichol, H., & Brown, S. L. (2015). Inequality: Underrepresentation of
African American males in U. S. higher education. Journal of Public Affairs Education,
21(4), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2015.12002218
Ohio State University. (2017). Study on collegiate financial wellness (SCFW): National
descriptive report. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. https://cfw.osu.edu.
133

Parcia, R. O., & Estimo, E. T. (2017). Employees’ financial literacy, behavior, stress, and
wellness. Journal of Human Resource Management, 5(5), 78.
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jhrm.20170505.12
The Pew Charitable Trusts. (2015). Federal and state funding of higher education.
http://pew.org/1G94lXI
Phillips, J. P., Petterson, S. M., Bazemore, A. W., & Phillips, R. L. (2014). A retrospective
analysis of the relationship between medical student debt and primary care practice in the
united states. Annals of Family Medicine, 12(6), 542–549.
https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1697
Pintrich, P. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire
(MSLQ). University of Michigan.
Raosoft, Inc. (2004). Sample size calculator. http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html
Richardson, T., Elliott, P., & Roberts, R. (2013). The relationship between personal unsecured
debt and mental and physical health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical
Psychology Review, 33(8), 1148–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.08.009
Rios, J. A., Randall, J., & Donnelly, M. (2019). An analysis of college choice information
provided on graduate program websites: Implications for improving applicant diversity in
educational measurement. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 38(4), 67–77.
https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12284
Robb, C., Schreiber, S., & Heckman, S. (2019). The Role of Federal and Private Student Loans
in Homeownership Decisions. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 54(1), 43–69.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12248
Robinson, S. B., & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
134

Rose, D. (2017). Keys that jingle and fold: Federal student aid and the expansion of
educational opportunity for black women. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 38(3),
363–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2016.1219592
Rosenberg, S. (2017). Respectful collection of demographic data. Medium.
https://medium.com/@anna.sarai.rosenberg/respectful-collection-of-demographic-data-
56de9fcb80e2
Ross, P., & Bibler Zaidi, N. (2019). Limited by our limitations. Perspectives on Medical
Education, 8(4), 261–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-00530-x
Rothstein, J., & Rouse, C. (2011). Constrained after college: Student loans and early-career
occupational choices. Journal of Public Economics, 95(1/2), 149–163.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.09.015
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
Seamster, L., & Charron-Chénier, R. (2017). Predatory inclusion and education debt: Rethinking
the racial wealth gap. Social Currents, 4(3), 199–207.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2329496516686620
Shim, S., Serido, J., & Lee, S. (2019). Problem‐Solving Orientations, Financial Self‐Efficacy,
and Student‐Loan Repayment Stress. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 53(3), 1273–
1296. https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12228
Sinha, G. (2019). Wealth Building among Young adults with student loan debt: What factors
make a difference? Social Development Issues, 41(2), 33–48.
Smith, K. (2016). The income-based repayment plans and for-profit education: How does this
combination affect the question to include student loans in bankruptcy? Georgia State
University Law Review, 32(3), 603.
135

Stevenson, A. (2016). The returns to quality in graduate education. Education Economics,
24(5/6), 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2016.1150418
Tate, W. F., IV. (1997). Chapter 4: Critical Race Theory and Education: History, Theory, and
Implications. Review of Research in Education, 22(1), 195–247.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X022001195
Tran, A., Mintert, J., Llamas, J., & Lam, C. (2018). At what costs? Student loan debt, debt stress,
and racially/ethnically diverse college students’ perceived health. Cultural Diversity &
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 24(4), 459–469. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000207
University of Southern California. (2020). International research. https://oprs.usc.edu/irb-
review/international-research/
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). May 2019 national occupational employment and wage
estimates. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000Top of FormBottom of
Form
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2020). National longitudinal survey of youth 1997 cohort.
https://www.nlsinfo.org/content/cohorts/nlsy97
U. S. Census Bureau. (2015). Median household income: 2015-2019.
https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf
U. S. Census Bureau. (2020). Census regions and divisions of the United States.
https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/acs-median-household-income-
2015-2019.html
U. S. Congress. (1978a). H.R. 11274 Middle Income Student Assistance Act.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/95th-congress/house-bill/11274
136

U. S. Congress. (1978b). H.R.15 - Education Amendments. https://www.congress.gov/bill/95th-
congress/house-bill/15
Congress of the, U. S. (1978). H.R.15 - Education Amendments.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/95th-congress/house-bill/15
U. S. Congress. (2008). H.R.5715 - Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 2008.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/110th-congress/house-bill/5715
U. S. Congress. (2020). S.3548 - CARES Act. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-
congress/senate-bill/3548/text
U.S. Department of Education. (2006). 1998 amendments to higher education act of 1965.
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/hea98/index.html
U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic
groups 2016. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016007.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. (2018). Federal student loan portfolio.
https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/about/data-center/student/portfolio
U.S. Department of Education. (2020a). CARES Act: Higher education emergency relief fund.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/caresact.html
U.S. Department of Education. (2020b). Federal student aid. https://studentaid.gov/
U.S. Department of Education. (2020c). Federal student loan portfolio.
https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/about/data-center/student/portfolio
U.S. Department of Education. (2020d). Glossary.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/ell/glossary.html
137

U.S. Department of Education. (2020e). Understand how interest is calculated and what fees are
associated with your federal student loan. https://studentaid.gov/understand-
aid/types/loans/interest-rates
U.S. Department of Justice. (2016a). The servicemembers civil relief act (SCRA).
https://www.justice.gov/servicemembers/servicemembers-civil-relief-act-scra
U.S. Department of Justice. (2016b). Title VI of the civil rights act of 1964.
https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/titlevi
U.S. Department of Treasury. (2016). Federal financial assistance and civil rights.
https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/careers/federal-financial-assistance-civil-rights.html.
U.S. Department of Treasury. (2006). Lessons learned from the privatization of Sallie Mae.
https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-
structure/offices/Documents/SallieMaePrivatizationReport.pdf
U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs. (2013). Education and training: History and timeline.
https://www.benefits.va.gov/gibill/history.asp
U.S. House of Representatives. (n.d.). National Defense Education Act.
https://history.house.gov/Records-and-Research/Listing/lfp_006/
Usher, E., & Pajares, F. (2007). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning: A validation study.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(3), 443–463.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164407308475
Van Patten, J. (2009). Higher education, history of. In E. F. Provenzo, & A. B. Provenzo
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of the social and cultural foundations of education (pp. 395-399).
SAGE Publications, Inc., https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781412963992.n186
138

Vardi, Y. (1980). Organizational career mobility: An integrative model. Academy of
Management Review, 5(3), 341–355. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1980.4288838
Vega, W., Yglesias, K., & Murray, J. P. (2010). Recruiting and mentoring minority faculty
members. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2010(152), 49–55.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.427
Walsemann, K. M., Ailshire, J. A., & Gee, G. C. (2016). Student loans and racial disparities in
self-reported sleep duration: Evidence from a nationally representative sample of US
young adults. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 70(1), 42–48.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2015-205583
Walsemann, K. M., Gee, G. C., & Gentile, D. (2015). Sick of our loans: Student borrowing and
the mental health of young adults in the united states. Social Science & Medicine, 124,
85–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.11.027
Weidner, J. (2016). Does student debt reduce earnings? Princeton University.
The White House. (2021). Pausing federal student loan payments. https://www.whitehouse.gov/
briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/01/20/pausing-federal-student-loan-payments/
Woo, J. H., Bentz, A. H., Lew, S., Velez, E. D., & Smith, N. (2017). Repayment of student loans
as of 2015 among 1995-96 and 2003-04 first-time beginning students: First look (NCES
2018-410). National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
Zhan, M., & Sinha, G. R. (2019). Wealth building among young adults with student loan debt:
What factors make a difference? Social Development Issues: Alternative Approaches to
Global Human Needs, 41(2), 33-48. https://search.proquest.com/docview/2295424541
Zhang, L. (2008). Gender and racial gaps in earnings among recent college graduates. Review of
Higher Education, 32(1), 51–72. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0035
139

Zimmerman, S. L. (1995). Understanding family policy: Theories and applications (2nd ed.).
Sage.

140

Appendix A: Survey

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

Appendix B: Survey Items Variable Tracing Matrix
Table Legend
D Demographics
K:F Knowledge: Factual
K:C Knowledge: Conceptual
K:P Knowledge: Procedural
M:SE Motivation: Self-efficacy
M:AV Motivation: Attainment value
M:UV Motivation: Utility value
O:CM Organizational: Cultural model
O:CS Organizational: Cultural setting
FW Financial wellness
N/A Not applicable

Item D K:F K:C K: P M:SE M: AV M:UV O:CM O:CS FW N/A
1 ●

2 ●

3 ●

4 ●

5 ●

6 ●

7 ●

8 ●

9 ●

10 ●

11 ●

12 ●

13 ●

14 ●

150

Item D K:F K:C K: P M:SE M: AV M:UV O:CM O:CS FW N/A
15

● ●

16

● ●

17

● ●

18

●

19 ●

● ●

20 ●

● ●

21 ●

● ●

22 ●

● ●

● ●

23

●

24

●

25

●

26

●
26a

●

26b

●

26c

●

26d

●

26e

●

26f

●

27

●
27a

●

27b

●

27c

●

27d

●

27e

●

28

●
28a

●

28b

●

28c

●

28d

●

28e

●

28f

●

28g

●

28h

●

28i

●

28j

●

29

●
29a

●

29b

●

151

Item D K:F K:C K: P M:SE M: AV M:UV O:CM O:CS FW N/A
29c

●

29d

●

29e

●

29f

●

29g

●

29h

●

29i

●

29j

●

29k

●

29l

●

29m

●

30

●
30a

●

30b

●

30c

●

30d

●

30e

●

30f

●

30g

●

30h

●

30i

●

30j

●

30k

●

30l

●

30m

●

31 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Women of color senior leaders: pathways to increasing representation in higher education

PDF

Examining teachers’ perceptions of diversity, equity, and inclusion professional development

PDF

Impact of mindfulness on early education teacher well-being: an evaluation study

PDF

Quality literacy instruction in juvenile court schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Increasing the effectiveness of African-American male mentorship

PDF

Cultivating culturally competent educators

PDF

Equity and access: the under-identification of African American students in gifted programs

PDF

Student loan debt and the impacts on first-generation student success

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

Decreasing racial disproportionalities within exclusionary discipline at the middle school level

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

Examining the pandemic’s impact on remote worker wellness in community colleges: organizational lessons and strategies

PDF

The attrition and lack of medical follow-up of patients in research in a primary care setting: a gap analysis

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

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

PDF

Addressing the challenges of employee retention: a qualitative analysis of job satisfaction and perceptions of advancement by marginalized women in the insurance industry

PDF

The impact of culturally responsive teaching on the suspension rate of African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

The underrepresentation of Latinas as K−12 school district superintendents: an evaluation study

PDF

Provisional admission in higher education: a case study in retention, persistence, and matriculation in academia

PDF

Equity-focused school boards: supporting K-12 suburban districts

Asset Metadata

Creator Bates, Monique Patrice (author)

Core Title Dream deferred? Understanding the effects of educational debt on marginalized college professionals

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 05/03/2021

Defense Date 04/14/2021

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

Tag African American,Asian,college,Debt,disparity,diversity,educational debt,equity,federal loan,Higher education,Hispanic,inclusion,job satisfaction,Latino,Latinx,loan debt,marginalized,minority,OAI-PMH Harvest,pay,professional development,professionals,Race,racial,student loans,University

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Canny, Eric (committee chair), Picus, Laurence (committee member), Robles, Darline (committee member)

Creator Email moniquebates@yahoo.com,mpbates@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-458778

Unique identifier UC11668237

Identifier etd-BatesMoniq-9586.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-458778 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BatesMoniq-9586.pdf

Dmrecord 458778

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Bates, Monique Patrice

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