Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness in Addressing the Retention of African

American Male Students at a Historically Black College

by

Howard G. Wright

A Thesis

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree Education Specialist

in the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Leadership

in the School of Graduate Studies

Alabama A & M University

Normal, Alabama 35762

May 2005

1

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL

Submitted by HOWARD G. WRIGHT in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of EDUCATION SPECIALIST with a concentration in HIGHER

EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION.

Accepted on behalf of the Faculty of the Graduate School by the Thesis

Committee:

____________________________

____________________________

____________________________

____________________________ Major Advisor

__________________________ Dean School of Graduate Studies

___________________________ Date

2

Copyright by

HOWARD G. WRIGHT

2005

3

This thesis is dedicated to my grandmother Vashti James who made the

commitment to change the fortunes of her second generation through education. It is

through her vision that a new generation of college educated professionals have risen

above the status quo set for children of an agrain society.

4

Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness in Addressing the Retention of African

American Male Students at Alabama A & M University

Wright, Howard, G., Ed.S. Alabama A & M University, 2004, 155 pp.

Thesis Advisor: Dr Phillip L. Redrick

The study examined faculty perceptions regarding the retention of African

American male students at Alabama A & M University. Using a 38-item questionnaire,

106 faculty members participated in a campus-wide survey in the fall semester of the

2004 Academic Year. The instrument examined faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of

institutional policy, the effectiveness of institutional support, the effect of workload on

the perceptions to institutional effectiveness, knowledge of institutional retention

programs for African American Males, and faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the

retention program based on to race, gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and

academic advising. Faculty in general was neutral on the effectiveness of institutional

policy, and support, revealed marginal knowledge of the mechanism of institutional

programs for African American male students. Their perceptions were consistent

irrespective of gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and academic advisement.

Based on the data revealed, it is recommended that (1) the study is replicated at a private

Historically Black College or University, (2) the study be replicated at a predominately

White institution, (3) a study be conducted of African American males’ perception of

institutional program targeting their retention, and (4) a comparative analysis between the

retention results and the allocation of resources.

KEYWORDS: retention, faculty, institutional effectiveness, African American male students, Historically Black Colleges and Universities

5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL ii

ABSTRACTS AND KEYWORDS v

LIST OF TABLES viii

LIST OF FIGURES xiii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT xiv

CHAPTER

1. INTRODUCTION 1Background and significance 6Statement of the problem 10Purpose of the study 10Research questions 11Need for the study 12Limitations of the study 12Definition of terms 13

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 15

3. METHODOLOGY Introduction 37Population 37Sampling method 39Research Instrument 39

Research Procedures and Design 42Reliability and Validity 45Statistical Method 46

4. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 47Introduction 47Profile of Participants 47

Research Question One 51Research Question Two 59Research Question Three 65

6

Research Question Four 69Research Question Five 77

5. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, 83AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Discussions 83 Conclusion 88

Implications 88 Recommandations 90

APPENDICES A. Letter of Request Provost/Vice President 91

B. Letter of Request Vice President Oakwood College 93C. Letter to Request Oakwood College Faculty 95D. Letter of Request to Deans 96E. Letter of Request to Faculty Members 97F. Follow-Up Letter to Faculty Members 98 G. Research Instrument 99H. Variable Description 97I. Summary of Cross Tab and Chi Square 108J. Frequency Table for Questionnaires 137

REFERENCES 149 VITA

7

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. 1992-1997 cohorts graduation rates for African American 8 males/females at Alabama A & M University.

2. Full time faculty by race and gender 38

3. Faculty by schools and department 38

4. Relationship between research questions and 41 questionnaire items

5. Date collection summary 45 6. Age and gender 48

7. Tenure status 48

8. Years of teaching 49

9. Academic rank of respondents 49

10. Courses taught 50

11. Number of undergraduate African American male 50 students advised per academic year

12. School affiliation 51

8

13. Retention policy clearly communicated and understood 53

14. Retention program aligned with policy and mission 54

15. Retention policy encourage interaction between faculty and 55 African American male students outside the classroom

16. Program encourage faculty and staff to work collaboratively 56 to increase African American male students.

Page Table

17. Retention policy is aligned with the goals 57

18. Retention policy addresses the academic, 58 social, cultural environment essential for African American male retention

19. Retention policy addresses social and 59 economic background of African American male students

20. The program include provision for addressing the needs of African American male students 61

21. The institution allocates financial resources 62 to African American male students support

22. Freshman/new student orientation includes segments that addresses the need of African American male students 63

9

23. Retention program encourages parental involvement 64 with African American male students

24. The institution recognizes and rewards 65 efforts of faculty to improve the retention of African American male students

25. Number of credit hours taught per semester 66

26. Time spent on committee work 67

27. Percentage of time spent interacting with African 68 American male students outside of classroom

28. Number of publications the past two years 69

29. The relationship between perceived work-loads 70 and

institutional effectiveness

30. Training for faculty to address the problems and 71 concerns of African American male students

31. I am cognizant of the collegiate problems 72 of African American male students

Table Page

32. I am provided with an early alert on African American male 73 students who are having academic, social and other difficulties

33. I am provided with information regarding individual and 74 institutional services to assist African American male students

10

34. Institution tracking system allows for identification and monitoring 75 of African American male students progress

35. I am able to make contact with African American male students 76 through telephone calls

36. I am able to make contact with African American male students 77 through emails

37. Number of undergraduate students advised per academic year 78

38. Office hours spent advising African American male students per week 79

39. I use my advisement time to help African American male students 80

with personal and career goals

40. I provide African American Male students with information 81

that helps them make decisions concerning their major

41. I frequently refer African American 82 male advisees to counselors and tutors

42. I meet informally with students African American 82

43. Retention policy is clearly communicated and understood 109

44. Retention policy is aligned with policy and mission 110

45. Retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside the classroom 111

46. Program encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male student retention 112

11

47. Retention policy is aligned with the goals of 113 African American male students

Table Page

48. Relationship between retention policy and academic, social 114 and cultural environment

49. Relationship between retention policy and social and economic 115 background of African American male students

50. Retention policy includes provision for addressing 116 the needs of African American male students

51. Relationship between retention policy, financial resource 117

allocation

52. Relationship between retention policy and the inclusion of 118 segments for African American male freshman/new student at orientation

53. Relationship between retention policy and 119 parental involvement with African American male students

54. Relationship between retention policy rewarding 120and recognizing faculty efforts to improve the

retention of African American male students

55. Institution provides training for faculty to address the 121 problems and concerns of African American male students

56. Cognizant of the problems of African American male student 122

12

57. Provision with early alert on African American male students 123 who are having social and academic difficulties

58. Information is provided on services and individuals to assist African 124 American male students

59. The institution’s tracking system allows for monitoring 125

African American male students progress

60. I am able to make contact with African American male students 126 through telephone calls and selected variables

Table Page 61. Making contact with African American male students 127 through emails

62. Number of African American male undergraduate 128 students advised per academic year

63. Office hours spent advising African American male students 129

64. Using advisement time to help African American male 130

students with their personal and career goals

65. Providing African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their majors 131

66. Referring African American male students advisees to tutors 132 67. Meeting informally with African American male students I advise 133

68. Collapsing Values 134

13

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Model of institutional departure 16

2. Model of undergraduate socialization 17

3. Weidman’s model of undergraduate socialization 18

14

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I must thank the faculty of Alabama A & M University and Oakwood College for

participating in the project and for the insight and knowledge shared on the project.

Special thanks to Dr. Phillip L Redrick, my thesis and academic advisor, for not only

providing guidance throughout the thesis experience, but for exposing me to the

intricacies of higher education administration.

I must also extend my gratitude to the other members of my committee, Dr.

Victoria W. Husley, Dr. James H. Stewart and Dr. D. Derrick Davis for the valuable

insights and continuous encouragement. Special thanks also must be extended to Dr.

William B. Gile and other members of the faculty of Curriculum, Teaching and

Educational Leadership for sharing their thoughts and experiences about education

administration.

15

Thanks must also be extended to the staff of Institutional Research notably, Dr.

Subodh Shrama for his assistance, and Dr Leatha Bennett from the Office of Retention

and Support for her encouragement and support.

My heart goes out to my family, grandmother Vashti James who instilled the

importance of a proper education. Also to Orlethia for enduring my countless hours from

home, for understanding my aspirations and endeavors and supporting them. To my

children Andrea, Rojae and Georgiana for giving daddy time to work undisturbed.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The issue of student retention is relevant to every institution of higher learning,

Black or predominantly White. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs),

however, because of their unique mission in providing educational opportunities to all

students of African descent, have opted to attract and enroll a wide range of students from

various socio-economic and academic backgrounds, many of whom would not have met

the criteria for acceptance at predominately white institutions (Wilson, 2000).

Historically Black Colleges and Universities are becoming an increasing option

for many Black students. These institutions constitute only three percent of American

16

higher education; they educate 24 percent of all African American students enrolled in

four-year colleges, and award 24 percent of all baccalaureate degrees earned nationally.

In terms of gender, however, the percentage of male students at HBCUs has decreased in

recent years from a high of 47 percent in 1976 to approximately 40 percent in 1999-2000,

while the percentage of Black women has risen significantly to over 60 percent for the

same period (Wenglinsky, 1999).

African American males face several problems and hardships which affect every

aspect of their lives (Noguera, 1997). The national high school dropout rate in 1998 for

African Americans ages 18-21 was 19 percent and 14.3 percent for ages 22-24, with a

third of the states reporting dropout rates of higher percentages. Of the 1.7 million

African Americans males between the ages of 18-24 that completed high school,

approximately 36 percent entered college, compared to 46 percent for their White

counterparts (United States Department of Commerce, 1997).

The National Collegiate Athletics Association (2003) graduation report for

Division 1 HBCUs reported that the four-year graduation rate class average for African

American males was 29 percent, showing variations of a high of 42 percent at Hampton

University to a low of nine percent at Texas Southern University. More students,

however, are completing their degrees in five to six years rather than the traditional four

years. This is a completion rate of 34 percent compared to 43 percent for their White

counterparts (United States Department Commerce, 1997).

According to Davis (1999), the effects of racism, stereotyping, the

disproportionate placing of African American males in special education, under

achievement in reading and mathematics, low teacher expectations, negative peer

17

pressure, anti-schooling attitudes, drugs, gangs, the criminal justice system and the lack

of positive Black male influence in the home and schools have created enormous strain

on the psyche of Black male students. Many of these issues become unresolved in high

school and migrate with the student into the college experience, creating problems in

adjusting to the pressures and expectations of college life. Furr and Elling’s (2002)

research conclude that African American males come to college under- prepared for the

experience. They wrestle with adjustment expectations, as well as behavior and

responsibility issues. The result is fewer African American males earning their degrees

and completing their programs.

Wilson (2000) stated that African American males are not choosing to pursue

higher education at rates comparable to females. He further suggested stated that the

decline is due to the inclination to entering the military, entering employment after high

school, a relatively high incident of incarceration, and displays a lack of familiarity with

the college environment. He concludes that colleges are aware of the problems that

contribute to the decline in male enrollment but cannot create gender specific programs

due to court challenges to race and gender specific issues.Enrollment in college after high

school is the expected transition for most students as a means to improve their social,

economic and occupational standing; an investment, which usually pays off in the future.

For all demographic groups, workers who have completed at least their baccalaureate

degree are expected to earn over their lifetime in excess of over $1.0 million more than

those with a high school diploma (College Board, 2003).

Graduation from college, therefore, has financial implications over an individual’s

lifetime. This creates long-term economic problems that have social and political

18

consequences for society as it alters the productive future and social dynamics of the

Black family (Davis, 1999). Poor retention rates also have other effects. It has negative

implications for the students who drop out, the institution’s reputation is compromised

and revenues, which could be generated for academic, and student services, are lost

(Tinto, 1993).

Many administrators at HBCUs over the years have not had retention as an

institutional priority because their focus was on increased enrollment so as to reflect

increases in state budgetary allocations (Hurd, 2000). They have recognized that in order

to improve retention rates on their campuses it will take a collective responsibility to

nurture the psyche of the African American male by creating better college experiences

that address their needs (Davis, 1999).

Having acknowledged that retention is a serious institutional issue, efforts have

being undertaken to establish retention projects at most Historically Black Colleges and

Universities by making retention a part of their institutional mission. They have

established institutional strategies such as academic support services, remediation,

counseling and retention centers. These programs are aimed at developing academic

skills through remediation, social skills development and providing financial assistance

(Chenoweth, 1999).

While there are improvements in the freshman cohorts at most institutions, the

majority still struggle with retention of Black males with rather discouraging completion

rates (Chenoweth, 1999). According to Nittie et al (1994) the “fade out effect” has

trapped many institutions in which students at risk are asked to participate in programs in

which they have made significant improvements only to have these gains negated when

19

they move out of the programs.

Successful teachers of African American males have commonly helped students

develop an attachment for learning by dealing with student concerns, and have gained

their students respect. It is in developing personal alliances and relationships with their

students that they establish behavioral and academic standards. In the process they have

developed these students socially and emotionally by teaching self-confidence, attitude

development, leadership skills and responsibility for self and others. These teachers not

only have the required pedagogical skills to teach these students but also posses character

building traits which are necessary for these student’s survival (Davis, 1999). Foster and

Reele (2000, p. 12) state that “it is the style of teaching which requires an authoritative

parenting style which integrates acceptance, involvement, firm control and respect”.

A positive and nurturing environment is therefore significant for the Black male

retention, development and satisfaction with college. For faculty to truly change toward

a student centered professional retention mentality, educational planners have to place

high value on programs that improve retention and give staff the time and reward to

invest the effort to maximize the outcomes (Cuseo, 2003). According to Lidholm (2002),

“program mangers have to also take into consideration the compatibility between the

characteristics of faculty and the attributes of their work environment. A sense of fit

between faculty and their institution is important, because faculty perceptions and

behavior are known to affect their work environment” (p. 224).

According to Lee, Letiz, Noel, and Saluri (1985) a major source of resistance to

changing retention programs on campuses is faculty misconception of retention efforts.

They further postulate that “faculty is a critical part of any retention program but their

20

efforts should not be assumed, as they are subjected to a wide variety of pulls, which

involve investment of their time. They will select what they want to be involved with, to

what extent, and will give priority to those tasks that carry the greatest weight in the

reward system” (p. 399).

The needs of a diversified African American male student population are

constantly shifting with students of different age groups, socioeconomic backgrounds and

preparation levels. They bring to college different variables that affect their college

experiences, which have to be addressed collectively or individually for them to graduate

(Pascarella, 1985). For African American males, their plight is of serious concern which

will require evaluation of strategies employed and solutions found to ensure that the

majority of African American male students graduate in five to six years.

The problem of retention therefore, is a complex issue and requires intervention

from all facets of the college to make it a success. Faculty and program managers have to

work together on the same strategic plan, having a common understanding of the

dynamics of at risk students (Chenoweth, 1999).

Background and Significance

Alabama A & M University (AAMU) was organized through the effort of an ex

slave in 1875 and became a land-grant college with the passing of the Morrill Act of

1890. Alabama A & M University is located in Huntsville, a city of 186, 0000 residents,

with an enrollment of over 6,000 students during the 2003-2004 school year. It defines

itself as a center of knowledge through teaching and research, and provides baccalaureate

and graduate degrees, including Ph.D. degrees. It also provides vocational training and

public service in the form of agricultural extension as part of its land granting mandate

21

(Alabama A & M University, 2001).

The admission process is designed to accommodate students with different

educational backgrounds. As part of its mission, the institution;

1. Commits itself to the provision of a comprehensive program designed to meet the

challenges of the larger community and for providing programs necessary to adequately

address the major needs and problems of capable students who have experienced limited

access to education;

2. provides excellence in education and a scholarly environment in which inquiry and

discriminating minds may flourish; and

3. provides programs to adequately address the major needs and problems of capable

students who have had limited access to education.

The objective of each student entering the university is to graduate in a four-year

time-frame. The university is cognizant of its role in helping students to graduate within

this time frame, and the university examined the various factors contributing to them not

meeting those objectives. In recognition of its role in assisting the various cohorts in

graduating as scheduled , a study was conducted by Alabama A & M University in 1986-

87 to examine the factors that contributed to student attrition.

A report, Increasing Student Success: A Campus Wide Retention Plan, (Alabama

A& M University, 1988) was developed by a task force on student retention. From this

report a strategic academic plan was developed. The model had four areas of attention

which included the following components: (a) academic advisement center to address

academic, social and psychological needs, (b) tutorial and referral service, (c) key

advisors (school level), and (e) major /academic advisors.

22

During the early nineties, data from the Office of Counseling and Student

Development indicated that the greatest attrition rate was occurring in the freshman to

junior years. To correct the situation, the university revised and improved its freshman

seminar and new student orientation program to reflect the skills necessary for college

survival. It also improved its learning community experience by instituting mandatory

campus residence for all freshmen living outside the city of Huntsville. The living

facilities were also upgraded to make them more students friendly and equipped with

study halls and computer labs.

The institution also expanded University College, the entry unit for all freshmen

and first-time students, to provide advisement and counseling, and for transfer students

with 31 or fewer semester hours. An adjustment was made to the curriculum to improve

and increase developmental programs, and academic services were developed to offer

specific services during orientation of new students. These initiatives contributed to a

75% return rate of the fall 2000 cohort for the second year, the third best result for four-

year colleges in the state of Alabama (Alabama Commission on Higher Education, 2001).

The six-year graduation rates of the respective cohorts (Table 1) between 1992

and 1996 indicated that less than a third of all African American males who were enrolled

at the institution were graduating in six years.

======================================================Table 1.1992-1997 Cohorts graduation rates for African American males/females Alabama A&M University after 6 Years

Year % males % females

1992 27.8 44.27

1993 27.34. 42.17

23

1994 32.33 38.4

1995 29.44 50.69

1996 31.88 44.89

Source: Alabama Commission on Higher Education: Completion and Retention Rates Report, 2001.

In realizing that the services of University College could not carry out the

objectives required to meet the retention needs of all cohorts, the Office of Retention and

Academic Support (RAS) was created in 2001 with the mandate to coordinate and

implement programs and services to assist undergraduate students successfully complete

their degree.

The mission of RAS is to be instrumental in developing, coordinating and

implementing programs and services to assist students with successful degree

completion. It also designed programs to assist students in reducing acclimatization,

stress, and make connections with peer and faculty so as to improve their chances for

graduating. RAS was designated to work with all academic departments, student services

and all academic support units to help students reduce the obstacles that prevented them

from completing their degrees and foster interaction among students, faculty and staff.

Tinto (1987) and Braunstien and McGrath (1997) emphasized that nearly 85% of

student departures are voluntary and occur even though most students maintain adequate

levels of academic performance. Administrative personnel, faculty members and staff

therefore, must develop an understanding of students who withdraw and the reasons why

they do. Programs that are designed must have inputs from administration, academic

staff, alumni, and student services. They have to work together and be on the same

strategic plan, having a common understanding of the issues and concerns of students at

24

risk.

It is imperative that the perceptions and the experiences of individuals be

examined so that decisions made are guided by research (Levin & Levin 1992). Levin

and Levin et.al further stated that in order to improve retention rates for at-risk minority

students, program developers will benefit from consultation or collaboration with

researchers and faculty in the areas of student life and curriculum development.

Braunstien (1997) indicated that if this does not occur the institution will have several

departments with an abundance of retention programs with different budget systems and

responsibilities offering relevant, but non- coordinated and segmented services.

Changes in academic and essential program objectives are usually based more

frequently on the planner’s assumptions, personal convictions and perceptions

(Braunstien, McGrath, 1997). Administrators, therefore, must pay attention to the

compatibility between the characteristics of faculty and the factors that affect their work

environment (Lidholm, 2002). Faculty have to be challenged to be not only facilitators of

learning but also be able to accommodate the problems and experiences of African

American males and lend their support in enhancing their collegiate experiences

(Spradley, 2001). The perceptions of faculty regarding program design and

implementation becomes critical in successful planning, executing and evaluating any

initiative to improve retention. If faculty perceives that there is no fit between them, their

institution, and work environment, then their participation in programs will be affected

(Braunstien, McGrath, 1997).

Statement of the Problem

25

The primary issue investigated in this study is: What are faculty perceptions

regarding the institution’s retention program for African American male students as

related to race, gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and academic advising?

The Purpose of the Study

Several studies have been conducted on the retention of African American

students at Predominately White Colleges and Universities (PWCUs) and at HBCUs, but

little research as been conducted on the perceptions of faculty regarding their perception

of institutional initiatives that affect the retention of male African American students.

According to Hickenson (2002) limited research has also been conducted with respect to

gender and race at HBCU.

The purpose of the study is to contribute to the body of research on student

retention by investigating faculty perceptions regarding a historically black institution’s

retention program for African American male students as related to race, gender, age,

years of teaching, academic rank, and academic advising.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided this study:

1. What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional

policies for increasing the retention of African American male students?

2. What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional

support for increasing the retention of African American male students?

3. How do workload influences faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of

the institution’s retention program affecting African American male

26

students?

4. What knowledge do faculty members possess regarding the institution’s

retention program?

5. How do faculty perceptions differ on the effectiveness of the

institution’s retention program with respect to race, gender, age, years of

teaching, academic rank, and academic advising?

The Need for the Study

The study will be useful to the entire university community and specifically to:

1. The Board of Trustees – The study will provide information, that will assist the board

in formulating and amending institutional policies regarding student retention.

2. The President – It will provide the President with information regarding faculty

perceptions of student retention and how institutional retention policies are implemented.

2. The Provost/ Vice President of Academic Affairs and The Vice President for Students

Affairs – It will provide these senior administrators with information regarding faculty

perceptions of retention programs that can be used as a benchmark to determine

acceptable faculty engagement.

3. Dean of University College/ Office of Retention and Support – It will provide

information from the faculty’s perspectives on the effectiveness of the institution’s

retention program for African American male students.

4. Deans and Department Chairs – The information will be useful to these academic

leaders to serve as a tool for improving faculty participation in retention initiatives.

5. Faculty- To make faculty aware of their role and expectations by students, and the

institution in fulfilling the retention mandate.

27

Limitations of the Study

1. The sample was limited to full-time faculty (9-12 months) employed by the

university during the 2003-2004 academic year.

2. The study was limited to one Historically Black Public University.

3. The variables associated with retention in this study were limited only to faculty

perceptions, and do not take into consideration other factors such as students’

socioeconomic background, college satisfaction, financial aid, and first generation

college entrants.

Definition of Terms

1. Institutional Policy. Clear and explainable university policy that is central to the

institution and approved by the board of trustees.

2. Institutional support. Allocation of funds, personnel, facilities, technology, and other

essential resources.

3. Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Institutions established before 1960 with

the primary intention of educating African Americans.

4. Retention – The flow of students through the university within a 1-6 year time period

and is reflected in the way students enroll, complete their degree

requirements or drop out.

5. Faculty Workload. Time spent in teaching, research, service and professional

28

activities.

6. Full- time faculty. Individuals employed by the university on a 9-12 month contract,

who teach a minimum of 6- 9 hours credit hours per semester as

graduate faculty, and 9-15 credit hours per semester as

undergraduate faculty

(American Association of University Professors, 2003).

7. Research and professional activity. Scholarly endeavors beyond those required for

effective teaching; the results intended for publication, dissemination for

evaluation or criticism by peers in books, scholarly journals or

professional meetings (American Association of University

Professors, 2003).

8. Years of Teaching. Number of years spent participating in classroom teaching,

directed studies, and supervised field work, grading, advising, and

directing thesis or dissertation, serving or graduate or thesis

committees at the institution sampled.

9. Frequency of Contact. Interaction with students in and out of the classroom.

Organization of the study

The remainder of the research report presents the chapters beginning with the

review of the literature in Chapter two. The literature review is divided into (1)

theoretical perspective, (2) impact of institutional policy on retention, (3) impact of

faculty support, (4) impact of gender, (5) impact of workload, and (6) impact of years of

teaching. In chapter three the research methodology is presented while chapter four

provides the presentation and analysis of the data. Chapter five presents the findings,

29

conclusions, recommendations and recommendation.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Perspective

To understand the factors that are expected in a successful retention program there

has to be an examination of how the students’ environment in and out of the institution

affects their persistence. Austin’s (1985) theory of involvement concludes that for

students to be successful they must be involved with their environment and exploit the

opportunities available.

30

Tinto’s (1987) theory of institutional departure depicts the impact of student

environment on persistence (see Figure 1.). Tinto stipulated that students enter college for

various reasons including personal, family, academic characteristics, college disposition

and goals. These have to be modified and reformulated through longitudinal interactions

with individuals and structures in both the academic and social system of the institution.

Satisfying encounters will lead to greater integration by the student and enhances the

student retention chances. Negative interactions, on the other hand, will distance the

student and create marginality and withdrawal (Tinto, 1987).

Fig 1. Model of Institutional Departure===============================================================

31

Source: Tinto, 1987, Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student

attrition. (p.114) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto (2002) stated that persistence by students is related to the level of

integration of the student within an institution and the feelings they experience as they try

to fit into the community. Students, he concludes, must feel that their goals are aligned

with the institution’s goals and must have sufficient interaction to feel that their goals and

values are the same as the organization’s.

Pascarella’s general model for assessing changes ( see Figure 2) also emphasizes

environmental variables effect on retention. He stated that college background, pre-

college traits, the structural and organizational characteristics of the institution, the

college or university environment influences student interaction and socialization. He

concludes that student retention is determined by the quality of the student effort to

socialize and interact with socialization agents such as peers, faculty, and the effort in

learning and developing.

32

Fig 2. Model of Undergraduate Socialization===============================================================

===============================================================Source: From Pascarella, E. (1985). College environmental influences on learning and

cognitive development: A critical review and synthesis. (p.50) New York: Agathon

The Weidman model of undergraduate socialization, takes into consideration

socialization and psychological influences on a student’s effort to change their behaviors

(see Figure 3). Student behavior within a college structure and the organizational setting

can be influenced by groups out of the college environment such as parental socialization,

church, other community organizations, peers and employers. When they become

exposed to the college normative and socialization experience they have to make a

decision to maintain or change their aspirations or values that they had on entering

college. The encounters with peers and faculty will help the student decide on career,

lifestyle preferences, values and aspirations.

33

Fig 3. Weidman Model of Undergraduate Socialization===============================================================

===============================================================Source: Weidman, J. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J

Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol.5). New York: Agathon.

Molnar (1996) stated that social and psychological outcomes are important

contributions to predicting retention but his analysis concludes that the only variables

associated with social integration that encourage persistence were those that support

academic involvement, credit hours attempted, prior expectation of graduation, and

participation in orientation course.

Bean (1980), in his model of attrition, also supports the notion that environment

shapes students behaviors and attitudes. He postulates that different types of students in

the same institution differ in their types of economic and social experiences. Social and

academic integration in the institution affect student persistence at different times during

34

the college experience. The intentions and approaches are shaped by attitudes and

experiences, intentions, background, environment and behavioral outcomes. These

factors, he concludes, affect students intentions to leave the university.

According to Diola (1996) the typical construct of these models includes parental

approval, financial attitudes, and opportunity to transfer, courses, encouragement from

friends, institutional quality fit, academic integration, social integration, institutional

commitment, goal commitment and interest to persist. The research concludes that

academic and social integration are considered as longitudinal outcomes, and their

measurements focus on events or outcomes that take place within the college experience.

If college experiences are critical in examining retention status, efforts of

Historically Black Colleges and Universities and open admission colleges to identify

those who are likely to withdraw prior to, or shortly after enrollment is not the correct

procedure. Diola (1996) concludes that the focus should be on students early in their

college experience, the student/college match, culture, and the initial experiences of the

students, academic advising, and support services.

Impact of Institutional Policy and Support

In a comprehensive model on black student retention Credle and Dean (1991)

stated that colleges must examine their philosophy and mission, asses the institution’s

ability to work with black students and assesses black students’ academic and social

readiness. They conclude that when the students enter college, the advisor, staff and

faculty must establish rapport with them, help them work within the organizational

35

structure, assist with career and the world of work, and adopt services to support these

endeavors.

According to Cuseo (2003) academic advisors are in an ideal position to connect

with students rather than academic support personnel. Johnson (1997) stated that it is the

people who come face to face with students on a regular basis who provide the positive

growth experiences for students that enable them to identify their goals and talents and

learn how to use them. Tinto (1987) stated that academic advising is the only structured

activity on campuses in which students have the opportunity to have one to one

interaction with a concerned representative of the institution. Academic advising

therefore is one of the major social and academic domains of the college experience that

decide if students leave or stay. Johnson (1997) also stated that advising is not an isolated

process, as retention efforts must be focused on all components of the campus and the

university. He postulates that colleges and universities must build an effective and strong

connection between advising programs and various components on campus. Wyckoff

(1999) in his research concludes that one of the key factors that contribute to poor

advising is lack of consensus about the role and function of the advisors.

Milem (1996) stated that involvement influences students’ perception of

institutional support. His findings suggest that early involvement of the student with

faculty have positive effect on student persistence therefore, students must not only be

encouraged to be actively engage with their peers but also with their professors. Mohr,

Fiche, and Sedlacek (1998) in a study of non- returning seniors concluded that the

retention of seniors is best predicted by dissatisfaction with academic guidance,

dissatisfaction with access to school information, dissatisfaction with quality of

36

education, and the feeling of institutional alienation. This is further supported by Furr and

Elling (2002) who found a negative relationship between not knowing about campus

programs, interest in the university, and retention.

Furr further postulated that the university should collect information prior to the

student entering college and after the student begins so that they can have information

from the students concerning social integration, involvement in and out of class

experiences, program activities, financial needs, and intentions to work through

structured climate surveys. He stated that if faculty members are aware of this

information they can develop profiles to help students monitor and balance their various

activities, interact on the student’s behalf with financial aid, provide information for

counselors, residential hall advisors and other faculty members before the student’s

problems become insurmountable.

Shwitzer (1993) stated that persistence through graduation was related positively

to voluntarily seeking help. In his study he stated that as voluntary use of counseling

increased, the academic performance of second year at risk students who participated in

brief mandatory counseling improved dramatically. According to Boyd (1987) many

students who are at risk however, fail to avail themselves of the resources provided for

them by their universities. He stated that in the interest of academic retention, colleges

and universities must take a proactive stance by contacting students at risks to offer them

specific services.

Friedlander (1980) stated that at-risk students are less likely than low- risk

students to seek assistance from academic related programs, become involved in college

activities or report that college is helping them to make academic progress. Requiring

37

these students to participate in remedial programs generates it own problems as these

students become isolated from the general student population. Visibly distinguishing

these students creates a sense of inferiority and separateness. He postulates that program

staff and faculty should go after these students to increase the likelihood of the students

making use of campus resources. High-risk students he concludes should be worked with

closely to develop their confidence, skills, and interest in learning.

One of the key reasons for students at-risk not seeking assistance is the

communication apprehension that exits. According to McCroskey (1989) communication

apprehension is conceptualized as a casual agent in student success. He stated that this is

implicated in both academic and interpersonal success. From his study the results

indicated that students with communication apprehension were more likely to drop out

and attain lower grade point averages compared to students with low communication

apprehension. The impact is strongest in the first two years of school. Hawken (1991)

further confirmed that the social confirmation dimensions of communication competence

differentiate persisters and non persisters up to four years in college. Cuseo (2003)

suggested that the institution should deliver academic support intrusively by initiating

contact with students and aggressively bringing the support services to them, rather than

hoping the students will take advantage of them in their own time.

Tinto (1975) stated that out-of-class contact with students has a powerful effect

on the persistence of students who are “withdrawal prone”. Tinto (1997), in his study of

high-risk students, found that every student who persisted had cited someone on the

faculty who has made contact with them outside of the classroom. This becomes more

apparent when it is embedded into the institutional mission.

38

The perception of the extent that a program shares in the institutional mission is

an important component to faculty participation in any program. Faculty who buy into

institutional mission report greater satisfaction than those who consider the mission

irrelevant (Padilla, 2000). Thomas, Giles and Green (1994), on the other hand, stated that

faculty should be convinced that retention is important and the problems associated with

student retention are a part of the college life. According to Thomas, Giles and Green

retention effort, should be organized for faculty and students to understand how to

receive and take advantage of the available assistance.

According to Saluri, Levitz, Noel and associates (1985) “there are at least five

factors that determine the success in organizing a campus effort to confront the issue of

retention. They are (a) institutional climate, (b) definitive objectives, (c) well conceived

strategy for achieving these objectives, (d) involvement of key faculty members and

administrators, and (e) specific and realistic recommendations” (p.432).

According to Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) institutional climate can influence

faculty members if there activities have some reward. They stated that faculty cannot be

expected to have an involvement in out-of-class student activities if they are recruited for

research and whose research brings them more prominence than involvement with under

graduate students. Faculty recruitment and reward, therefore, should focus on reflecting

the seriousness of the institution to retention.

The Impact of Faculty Support

39

Bandura’s (1997) theory of self-efficacy postulates that problems are affected by

environmental and prior experiences. Individuals who are motivated to pursue a course of

action and the way they support environmental initiatives are affected by self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy and outcome expectations are beliefs about whether the outcome is worth

pursuing. Expectations of a person’s efficacy determine whether behavior will be

imitated, how much effort will be expended and how long the effort will be sustained in

the presence of obstacles.

Commitment of faculty, as well as the institution, is central to higher education’s

program success. Armon (1995) stated that faculty want to help their institutions, and

administrations should communicate with them openly, honestly, and frequently in face-

to-face dialogues centered on their mission. Armon (1995) further found that

commitment to an organization by faculty does not change due to faculty age, gender,

length of employment, teaching load, marital status, tenure status and highest educational

degree achieved. Organizational commitment, he postulates, correlated positively with

perceptions of openness of communication system, professional growth opportunities,

socialization opportunities, pay satisfaction and personal agreement with collegiate

mission.

A study conducted by Sydow and Sandel (1998) to determine the reasons behind

the high rate of student attrition indicated that student faculty interaction had a stronger

relationship to student satisfaction then any other variable. They reported that academic

advisors gave their advisees encouragement and support, helped them define their goals,

sent notes, made phone calls, visited advisee, discussed dropping out, emphasized class

attendance, and referred advisees to counselors and tutors.

40

This is further supported by Carerra, Nora and Castaneda (1993) who suggested

three issues that have significant impact on students thought of leaving the university,

faculty members who have been psychologically supportive of the student’s needs,

faculty who return phone calls and emails in a timely fashion, and faculty members who

are approachable. The research also contends that faculty who help students gain

competency and self-worth, and who want students to succeed have implemented more

meaningful strategies for effective intervention. From the student perspective,

undergraduates value faculty who function very effectively as mentors and counselors,

are accessible and available, are knowledgeable and helpful, are personable and helpful,

and act as a humanizing agent.

Henderson (2002) found that the majority of students at a historically black

college felt it is most important to have someone who cares about their future and has a

vested interest in their education. Race, the research revealed, had nothing to do with the

quality of the individual. Lee (1999) also said that the race of the faculty members was

not important in facilitating minority-mentoring relationship but it was the quality of the

interaction that was important. Lee further postulates that students expected a faculty

advisor to help them gain insight of the dominant culture, to help them succeed both in

attaining their degree and securing employment in their career field. According to Lee,

Noel, Letiz and Saluri (1985) “ among the characteristics of those persons with the

greatest potential to retention projects seem to be those with (1) knowledge of students

concern and behavior, (2) clout and credibility within the institution decision mechanism,

and (3) time to attend regularly scheduled meeting” (p.42).

41

Many faculty members may not be aware of the impact of these factors on

retention. Braunstein & McGrath (1997) stated that there should be informal discussions

as well as formal opportunities to discuss and propose ways by which the issue of

retention should be addressed. As part of that dialogue he postulates that the focus

should be on both the functional and substantive reality of institutional life so that

stakeholders are less disengaged and have greater participation. He suggested that those

responsible for retention share the predictors of retention with members of the

community so that they can be sensitized to needs of the students. It is then that room can

be allowed for the design that is conducive and adaptive to the academic environment.

For faculty to truly change towards a student-centered professional advising

mentality, educational administrators have to place a high value on academic advisement

as a professional responsibility. Lowe (2000) said that in comparing student satisfaction

with academic advising the frequency and contact with faculty greatly predicts student

satisfaction. He also indicated that academic advising varies greatly across colleges,

between student groups, and there was a difference in the perception of advising based on

the student status. In order to bring about a more effective advising system, Lowe (2000)

recommends that advising be recognized as a high priority activity, advisors be trained,

advising responsibilities be defined, materials be improved and become more widely

available, there must be accountability, evaluations be conducted and reward measures be

instituted.

Research has shown that faculty influence affects retention of students more than

any other group and is a good predictor of student retention. Faculty transforms many

students from deprived backgrounds into competent confident black professionals.

42

Students who interact with faculty frequently report significant increases in educational

satisfaction and consider the caring attitudes as the most important factor contributing to

their degree completion than any other variable (Tinto, 1975; Austin, 1977). Out- of-

class contacts with students have a perennial impact on students who are “withdrawal

prone”. Frequent faculty contact in and out of the classroom, whether it is in the form of

advising, mentoring and counseling, requires time and commitment for it to be successful

(Astin, 1985). The present system as it exists does not allow faculty to contribute

effectively to their professional endeavors, meet their academic responsibilities and serve

the needs of male students (AAUP, 2003).

For faculty to invest time and effort in addition to teaching, research and

publishing it will be reasonable to expect some form of compromise. According to Boyer

(1991), faculty research and scholarship should be more broadly defined to include the

advising and retention process, and it should be apart of the tenure process. He further

stated that for institutions to make high quality advisement a reality, advisors need to be

aware of the position and commitment of the institution towards advising, be given the

time to do it, know that the time will be counted to their promotion and tenure, maintain

advisee ratios that are small enough to deliver personal advising, provide strong incentive

for students to meet their advisors, identify effective advisors and position students who

are at risk in their major area so they are declared to the advisor during their first

semester.

Berger (1996) indicated that various forms of involvement did influence students'

perceptions of institutional support and peer support. In turn, these perceptions of support

appear to have an effect on students' levels of institutional commitment. Of greater

43

significance, he reported, was early involvement with faculty, which tended to have a

positive role in molding student persistence.

Faculty, know that the demands of tenure and promotion are vested in scholastic

achievement. Faculty members would like to be considered as scholars and not just

teachers. They believe that research and teaching are complementary and not competing

activities. While administrators reiterate that teaching is priority they expect faculty to be

involved in research and service actives along with their standard teaching load

(Sharobeam & Howard, 2000).

Historically Black Colleges and Universities do not function under the publish or

perish philosophy. Administrators under pressure from public policies, legislation and

cost constraints have increased teaching loads for faculty, which have decreased the

quality of their research and give less time to scholarly activities. An increase in student

to faculty ratio decreases the educational quality which underscores retention initiatives

(Massy and Zemesky 1994). Studies by Wagner (1994) found that faculty promotion and

tenure decisions are marginally affected by excellence in teaching and are mainly based

on faculty research activities. Research is not only essential for promotion and tenure but

also for career and professional development.

The changing demands of students, the demand to carry out productive research

and invest in the service components can create tension and resentments in addressing

program objectives associated with the African American males. For a faculty member at

a historically black college, a conflict can arise between racial uplift goals of working to

improve and advance the condition of one's race, promotion and tenure obligations.

Faculty can have societal and community impacts through their research but faculty have

44

to make decisions every day between obligations that are focused on individual

accomplishments, such as publishing a research article, and obligations to race-related

service activities (Townsend, 2003).   

The overrepresentation of minority faculty in service involvements has a few

interesting twists. As long as faculty is not supporting community service initiatives, then

community service initiatives will be marginalized (O’Meara, 2002). Furthermore,

according to Ascher (1991), as long as service is marginalized and under rewarded in the

academic work hierarchy, faculty who are extensively involved in service and who are

not tenured will risk the ultimate, which is marginalization and denial of tenure for failure

to engage in the activities that are rewarded through promotion. Omera (2002) support

this further by stating that the dilemma presents a challenge for scholars interested in

service roles and campuses interested in creating a service culture. Faculty support for

programs, he conclude will depend on their perception to programs that require constant

interaction between faculty and students and which infringes on time for activities

affecting their tenure.

The Impact of Gender

Bonner (1995), in examining the perceptions of African-American male and

female faculty and administrators in areas such as promotion, tenure, institutional

climate, and professional life, indicated significant differences by gender in response to

items assessing the subjects' perceptions of promotion, tenure, institutional climate, and

professional life. Female subjects reported lower satisfaction with their professional lives,

reported a greater sense of isolation on campus, and reported differential and more

negative treatment by colleagues. Bonner (1995) stated that women faculty is reporting

45

greater pressure, more so than their male counterparts, as they have had to juggle family

and academic responsibilities. Buck (2003) also stated that women faculty, because of

their traditional role, are expected to provide more service to their students, the

department, and institution in greater measures than their male colleagues.

Bonner (2001), in a study on gender issue at Historically Black Colleges revealed

that black women continue to experience a pattern of location at the bottom of the

employment, rank, and tenure ladder. Moreover, they indicate that in relation to barriers

to promotion, exclusion from the curricula, a chilly climate in the workplace and

classroom, and sexual harassment. Black women face the same obstacles at HBCUs as

they do at predominantly white institutions, because most of these institutions lag behind

in addressing gender issues. Black women on faculty are also faced with the issues

relating to managing career and family, attaining tenure, overcoming external barriers,

and establishing support systems (Bonner, 2001). Dey (2002) reported that tenure status,

race, gender and household/childcare roles all produced significant level of stress for

white and black women faculty but non-white women report higher rates of stress related

to subtle racism.

Racial uplift is a concern for students as well as faculty. Involvement with

external racial communities through service is an important mechanism for faculty and

students to contribute to their racial community (Harris, 1995). Depending, therefore, on

supportive network that exits and the development culture that encourages participation

by faculty in most critical retention discussions, female faculty perception and

participation will be affected. If there is no focus on institutional climate, support systems

and networks, role ambiguity and role overload, the connections between racism and

46

sexism, along with other systemic barriers facing black women faculty in the academy,

then women participation in retention program will be affected (Bonner, 2001).

According to Allen (1998), there is a gender gap in public doctoral institutions.

Men and women give different priorities to their work responsibilities. Males in general,

he postulates, spend more time on research than teaching and publish more frequently

than their female counterparts. They work more hours irrespective of their ethnicity.

Female faculty, on the other hand, devote more time to teaching and spends less time on

research and publish less.

Impact of Work Load

Jane Buck (2003), in her presentation to an AAUP conference underscores the

plight of faculty at Historically Black Colleges by stating “the problems of individual

faculty members of HBCUs are of great concern. Faculty members of HBCUs complain

of crushing teaching loads coupled with accelerating demands for research productivity,

lack of effective participation in governance, pathetically low salaries, increasingly

difficult time criteria for promotion and tenure.” (p.4)

The AAUP (2004) guidelines states that “only in extraordinary circumstances will

tenure track, probationary faculty be called to teach more than 9 credit hours per

semester.” (p.3). Annual criteria for such faculty are 60% teaching, 30% research and

10% service. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (1999), full-time

faculty members work about fifty-five hours a week, and part-time faculty work nearly

forty. With a further decrease in most state appropriation for higher education, faculty at

Historically Black Colleges and Universities are teaching more courses, have larger

undergraduate classes and are working 48-60 hours per week (AAUP, 2003).

47

Faculty role and workload are usually shaped by academic culture include values

and incentives that tend to be in large part disciplined related and institutionally driven

(Amey, 1995). Workload is critical in creating work situations that allow faculty to meet

criteria for promotion and tenure. Workload imbalances or inequities, also, can lead to

significant morale problems within the faculty unit. Dissatisfaction with workload

allocation and possible inequities among faculty creates faculty dissatisfaction and

problems with cooperation. For these reasons programs should ensure that workload

policies cover all faculty roles, and are clearly stated and fair to all faculties. Equally

important is a faculty based mechanism to monitor the implementation of these policies

and one that pays special attention to differences based on race, gender, and rank

(Seaberg, 1998).

Four work environmental factors mostly connected with stress are exhaustion,

alienation, low self-esteem, and depression. These occur most often where there are high

teaching loads, low institutional support including pay and satisfaction, low participation

institutional governance and loss of satisfaction with academic life (Wills, 2000). The

workload of faculty requires great time management in balancing professional lives, work

environment and situations occurring on the job itself. Faculty who try to get more done

in less time frequently experience academic “burn out”, frustration and work related

stress (Plane & Jacob 2000).

Plane and Jacob (2000) also maintained that time management is generally seen

as effective when individuals can control their work. If there is no great organizational

effectiveness and faculty are not able to manage academic stress and work related

pressure they will “burnt out”. When faculty workload is tremendous and stress is not

48

managed the result is lessened job satisfaction, depression and family difficulties. Plane

and Jacobs (2000) conclude that if faculty believes they have control of good and bad

outcomes in their lives they will be better able to cope with the stress related to academic

workload.

Impact of Years of Teaching

According to Knight (2002), attempts to improve teaching are often focused on

beginning teachers but there are indications that older teachers are losing teaching service

vitality. Knight contend that “ faculty exhibit a general displacement energy in the

second half of their careers and have a tendency to exhibit withdrawal from work, exhibit

less activism and zealousness about the pursuit of service excellence.” (p. 76). Knight

(2002) further stated that attempts to improve teaching are often focused on younger

faculty who tend to be more active due to tenure and promotion obligations but older

faculty is losing teaching service vitality. Most still do teach but they face new

challenges, new teaching mandates, a more diverse student body and new policies but

tend not to engage in instructional, developmental and professional activities.

According to Rosa (2003), faculty becomes polarized as the privileged elite of

older tenure males who teach graduate students and have time available for research.

According to the National Education Association (1995, 2001) recently hired full- time

faculty (five years or less) are less likely to have tenure or be on tenure tract than is the

case of full- time faculty members. The study concluded that tenured faculty members

publish more, teach more classes, serve on more committees, have more contact with

students, and receive higher salaries than those who are on tenure tract.

49

Lindholm (2002), in a study on understanding faculty work experience and its

relationship, looked at faculty members assessment of fit, intellectual stimulation

social/economic and structural support based on gender, career stage and departmental

affiliation concludes that the importance of university based associations tend to decline

as faculty become established in their careers. This, he stated, can create conflicting

dimensions for faculty work and individuals as institutional characteristics operate

together to affect organizational community.

Summary of Literature Review

African American male student retention is affected by social and psychological

experiences associated with their environment before and after they entered college. They

have different experiences and expectations upon entering college that must be molded

and guided within the college environment so that career and graduation expectation are

achieved. For this to occur social programs have to be designed to help at risk African

American male students with academic and social integration.

The cornerstone for its success is faculty student socializing and interaction in or

out of the classroom. Faculty role in retention program success reflects the variety of

roles they play, whether it is advisor, mentor or teacher. Their interaction and reaction to

African American male students can determine their persistence to graduation.

The literature cited showed that:

1. Faculty participation in retention programs is impacted by clearly

defined institutional policies, goals and resources.

50

2. The success of retention initiatives for African American male students

will be impacted by the frequency of informal or formal interaction with

faculty in and out of the classroom. The level of support will be

determined, if it is consistent with faculty personal and professional

goals.

3. Faculty, irrespective of gender, face the same professional issues

throughout their careers, however women faculty because of their

traditional roles are expected to provide more service to students than

their males colleagues. They also have additional issues relating to

family and career, which can create overload and role ambiguity. This

can affect their participation in retention programs.

4. High teaching loads at Historically Black Colleges and Universities can

create dissatisfaction and faculty cooperation. Workload must seem fair

and equitable and faculty must be able to balance both their professional

lives and participate in activities such as retention.

5. Recently hired faculty in trying to establish their careers are more active

and vibrant and show a willingness to accommodate a more diverse

student body. More establish faculty members on the other hand are

more involved in research, teach graduate students and involved with

policy issues. An environment thus has to created for both groups to

work together in their different dimensions to improve African

American male student retention.

51

The literature cited postulates that there are connections between faculty

participation in intrusive programs based on their ability and willingness to manage and

balance academic and social responsibilities. Research also show that the level of

institutional commitment, tenure, faculty workload, gender of the faculty and years of

teaching, are embedded in the visages of academic life, and do affect participation.

Faculty perceptions are based on interrelated variables molded into their academic

experiences and campus environment.

Chapter 3

Methodology

52

Introduction

The purpose of the study is to contribute to the body of research on student

retention by investigating faculty perceptions regarding a Historically Black University’s

institutional retention program for African American male students as related to race,

gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank and academic advising.

This chapter presents information regarding (a) the population, (b) data collection, (c)

research instrument, (d) research procedures and design, and (e) data analysis.

Population

Permission to complete the study was received from the Provost and Vice

President for Academic affairs (see Appendix A). A request was made to Institutional

Research and Planning for a list of the full time academic faculty for the 2003-2004

school year. The population for this study consisted of 250 full-time faculty at Alabama

A & M University.

As shown in Table 2 the racial profile was 50.3% Black non-Hispanic, 28.8%

White non-Hispanics, 13% Asian Pacific Islander, and 7.2% Non Resident alien. The

population also consisted of 187 or (65.1%) male faculty and 108 or (36 %) female

faculty.

Table 2. Headcount of full-time faculty by race and gender, 2003-2004===============================================================Gender Black-Non White Non Asian Pacific American Non Resident

Hispanic Hispanic Islander Indian Alien

53

_______________________________________________________________________Female 36.6% 35.7% 23.7% 0 4.8%Male 63.3% 64.3% 76.3% 1 95.2%Race as 50.3% 28.8% 13% 0.03% 7.2%A % ofTotal___________________________________________________________________N = 295

Table 3 shows the full-time faculty from schools and departments across the

institution. The School of Arts and Science comprise of 100 faculty, Agriculture and

Environmental Sciences has 60, Business with 28, Education 60, and Engineering and

Technology 47.

Table 3. Faculty members by schools and departments===============================================================

Full Time-FacultyAgriculture and Environmental Sciences 60

Agri-Business 9Community Planning and Urban Studies 6Family and Consumer Science 11Food and Animal Science 8

Plant and Soil Science 26 Arts and Sciences 100

Behavioral Sciences 11 English and Foreign Languages 35

Mathematics 14Chemistry 9

Biology 11 Physics 14 Social Work 6Business 28

Accounting 6Economic and Fiancé 11Management and Marketing 11

Education 60 Communicative Sciences and Disorders 6

Table 3. (continued)================================================================ Full Time-Faculty

54

Elementary and Early Childhood 9 Arts and Music 13

Physical Education 8 Psychology and Counseling 8 Curriculum, Teaching and Educational Leadership 16Engineering and Technology 47 Civil Engineering 6 Computer Science 12

Electrical Engineering 7Industrial Technology 14Mechanical Engineering 8

Total 295

Sampling Method

A copy of the faculty listing for 2004 was requested from The Office of Planning

and Institutional Research. Two lists were generated, the first presented faculty by gender

and race while the second listed faculty by schools and departments. The lists were

checked against the faculty database at aamu.edu, the official Web site of the institution

and the campus directory for 2003-2004.

Research Instrument

According to Lee (1997) surveys are useful in determining the actual

values of the variables studied and the relationship between them. They can be pretested,

used to determine appropriate response rate, evaluate non-response biases assessment of

whether any real relationships exits, and are appropriate to be used with other forms.

A questionnaire was developed specifically for this study. The developmental

process of the instrument involved:

55

(a) Identifying the intended population;

(b) identifying and clarifying the research objectives using issues addressed in

the literature review;

(c) designing and selecting appropriate research questions; and

(d) considering the relationship between questions on the instrument and the

research objectives.

The survey was designed to address and to seek information on faculty

perceptions regarding the institution’s retention program for African American male

students. The questionnaire was designed in six sections to address specific research

questions. A numeric Likert-like scale was used to measure participants’ responses of the

questionnaire items. Participants responded to a series of statements indicating whether

they strongly agree (SA), agree (A), disagree (D), neutral (N), or strongly disagree (SD).

Each item was associated with a value point and individual scores ranging from 1 for

strongly agree (SA) to 5 for strongly disagree (SD). The usable questionnaires were

numbered, coded, with value labels for preparation for computer analysis (Appendix H).

The relationship between the research questions and items in the questionnaire is shown

in Table 4.

Table 4. Relationship between research questions and items in questionnaire

Research Questions Related Items on Questionnaire

56

1. What are faculty perceptions regarding Institutional Policy 14-20the effectiveness of institutional policies for increasing the retention of African American male students?

2. What are faculty perceptions regarding Institutional Support 21-25 the effectiveness of institutional support for increasing the retention of African American male students?

3.How does faculty workload influence Workload 10-13 & 14-15? their perceptions of the effectivenessof the institution’s retention program Affecting African American male students?

4. What knowledge do faculty possess regarding the institution’s retention program?

Knowledge 26-31

5. How do faculty perceptions differ on the Race 6 effectiveness of the institutions retention Gender 7program affecting African American males Age 8with respect to race, gender, age, years Years of teaching 9of teaching, academic rank and academic Academic Rank 3 advising? Academic Advising 33-38

The instrument contained 38 questions and was divided into the following six

sections:

1. General faculty and demographic information,

2. faculty workload,

3. faculty perceptions of institutional policy towards retention of African

American males students,

4. faculty perceptions of the institution’s support towards the retention of

African American males students,

57

5. faculty perceptions about their knowledge of the institution’s retention

program and

6. academic advisement.

Procedure and Design

The subjects participated in the study during the spring semester of the 2003-

2004 academic year. A week before the survey instrument was distributed, a letter was

sent to the respective school deans explaining the purpose of the study. They were asked

to help in informing department chairs in their schools regarding the purpose of the study.

The Deans and Chairpersons were also to ensure that faculty members received,

completed, and returned the survey instrument. (See Appendix D).

The researcher delivered the survey instrument to each department and given to

the secretary or chair for distribution to the faculty in that department

Each survey package contained:

(a) a cover letter to faculty members (Appendix F),

(b) the questionnaire (see Appendix G),

(c) a return envelope addressed to the researcher. Each envelope contained a number

from 1-295.

A record sheet was developed and use to record the department name, range of surveys

distributed, number of surveys distributed, and the number of instruments returned.

The following steps were employed to collect the completed questionnaire:

58

1. In early April contact was made with the secretaries of the respective departments

soliciting their assistance in distributing the questionnaire to faculty members in

their department. The faculty list for the department was verified with each

secretary. A copy of the questionnaire along with the cover letter and an attached

numbered return envelope was distributed to each department. The numbers were

distributed in sequence based on the number of faculty in the department. The

secretaries were given a folder to place all returned, sealed responses.

2. The secretaries placed the questionnaire in the mailbox of the respective faculty

members in their department.

3. Faculty members were given six days to complete the questionnaire and return it

in a sealed envelope to the department office.

4. In mid April, the investigator made the first pickup from the secretaries in all the

departments. Data were entered on the record sheet as to how many envelopes

were picked up. No records were made of the names of the faculty members who

did not return the survey so as to maintain confidentiality and anonymity. The

secretaries’ assistance was solicited to remind faculty members to complete the

questionnaire.

5. During the third week of April, 280 phone calls were made to faculty by the

investigator encouraging their participation in the study. Another pickup was

made six days after the follow-up phone calls.

6. At the end of April, 270 letters (Appendix F) were mailed to faculty members as a

reminder to complete the questionnaire. A second pickup was made in early May.

59

7. During the first week in May 250 phone calls were made thanking faculty

members for their participation in the survey and encouraged those who had not

responded to complete the instrument and return it to their department secretary.

The final pickup was made in mid May.

Data Collection

One hundred and seventeen questionnaires or 39.7 percent were returned. Nine of

the questionnaires were discarded. Of the nine unusable responses five were returned

unanswered, and four were from individuals who no longer held full-time faculty

positions. Four surveys were returned through the mail and the investigator collected one

hundred and thirteen from the respective departments. Table 5 highlights the summation

of the data collection from the respective schools and departments

Questionnaires distributed

Number returned

Percent returned

Agriculture and Environmental Sciences 60 23 38.3

60

Agri-Business 9 2 22.2

Community Planning and Urban Studies 6 2 33.3

Family and Consumer Sciences 11 4 36.4

Food and Animal Science 8 3 37.5

Plant and Soil Science 26 12 46.2Arts and Sciences 100 35 35.0

Behavioral Sciences 11 4 36.4

English and Foreign Languages 35 11 31.4

Mathematics 14 4 28.6

Chemistry 9 3 33.3

Biology 11 3 27.3

Physics 16 4 25.0

Social Work 6 6 100.0

Business 28 13 46.4Accounting 8 3 37.5

Economics and Finance 9 5 55.6

Management and Marketing 11 5 45.5

Education 60 32 53.3 Communicative Sciences and Disorders 6 3 50.0

Early Childhood Elementary Education 9 2 22.2

Fine Arts and Music 13 4 32.5

Physical Education 8 5 62.5

Psychology and Counseling 8 3 37.5 Curriculum Teaching and Educational Leadership 16 9 56.25

Engineering 47 14 29.8 Civil Engineering 6 3 50.0

Computer Science 12 5 0.0

Electrical Engineering 7 0 0.0

Industrial Technology 14 0 0.0

Mechanical Engineering 8 3 37.5

Total 295 117 39.7 Table 5. Faculty Data Collection Summary

_______________________________________________________________________

Reliability and Validity

The instrument was field tested at a Historically Black four-year private college.

A letter was sent to the Provost/Vice-President for Academic Affairs at the institution

61

requesting permission to conduct a field test of the instrument (Appendix B). After verbal

permission was granted, a cover letter was provided to the field test subjects explaining

the purpose of the study (Appendix C). The instruments and numbered envelopes were

hand delivered to the offices of each department. The secretary of the departments placed

the instruments in respective faculty mailboxes. Seventy instruments were distributed.

The investigator returned to the field test site seven days after the initial distribution to

collect the instruments. A second visit was made four (4) days later to collect any

remaining completed instruments. Faculty members and the investigator had informal

discussions relating to the instrument and suggestions were made to clarify a few

questions. Twenty of the instruments or thirty-five percent were returned. The returned

instruments were evaluated and minor adjustments made where necessary.

Statistical Methods

The responses from the survey were coded and analyzed using the Statistical

Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 10.0. Descriptive statistics were used to

analyze and compare the variables relating to the demographic profile of the respondents.

The frequency table was generated and cross-tabulated to compare the responses within

the variables. Chi-Square was used to determine the significance among the variables:

gender, race, age, years of teaching, academic rank, and tenure status.

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION AND ANAYSIS OF DATA

62

Introduction

Chapter four consists of presentation of the data. The results of the study are

presented in two sections. The first section presents descriptive analysis of the

participants. The second section presents data on the responses to individual research

questions relating to faculty perceptions regarding the institution’s retention program for

African American male students as related to race, gender, age, years of teaching,

academic rank and academic advising.

Part One

Profile of Respondents

The data were collected from 106 subjects. Sixty-nine or 65.1 % of the

respondents were males and 37 or 34.9 % were females (Table 6). Table 6 also shows the

age of the respondents in relationship to gender. A little less than half of the respondents,

both male and female were between the ages of 51-60 years old, 40.6% and 43.2 %

respectively. This is followed by the age range 41-50, with 26.1% for males versus 21.1%

females.

Table 6. Respondents age and gender. N=106===========================================================Age Range Male Percentage Female Percentage Total

20-30 1 1.4 2 5.4 3

63

31-40 8 11.6 4 10.8 12

41-50 18 26.1 8 21.7 26

51-60 28 40.6 16 43.2 44

61-70 14 20.3 7 18.9 21

Total 69 100 37 100 106

___________________________________________________________________

Table 7, on the other hand show 44 or 41.5 % of the respondents hold tenure, 27

or 25.5 % are non-tenured, and 35 or 33% hold a tenure track position.

Table 7. Tenure status. N=106=============================================================Tenure Status Frequency Percent

Tenure 44 41.5

Non- Tenure 27 25.5

Tenure Track 35 33

Total 106 100

____________________________________________________________________

Thirty-seven or 34.9% of the respondents have taught at the institution between

1 -5 years. Cumulatively, 65.1 percent of the faculty has taught at the institution between

1 - 15 years (Table 8).

Table 8. Years of teaching at the institution. N=106 ===================================================

Years Range Frequency Percentage

64

1-5 37 34.9

6-10 20 18.9

11-15 12 11.3

16-20 10 9.4

21-25 13 12.3

26 or more 14 13.2

Total 106 100

Eight or 7.5% of the respondents instructors. A little less than half of the

respondents were assistant professors, 50 or 47.2%, 28 or 26.4% are associate professors,

and 20 or 18.9% were professors (Table 9).

Table 9. Academic rank of respondents. N= 106 ======================================================Rank Frequency Percentage

Instructor 8 7.5

Assistant Professor 50 47.2

Associate Professor 28 26.4

Professor 20 18.9

Total 106 100

Table 10 shows that 21 or 19.8% of the respondents teach undergraduate courses

only, 24 or 22.6% teach graduate courses, and 61 or 57.5% teach graduate and

undergraduate courses.

Table 10. Courses taught. N = 104 =========================================================Course Taught Frequency Percent

Undergraduate Only 21 19.8

Graduate Only 24 22.6

Graduate & Undergraduate 61 57.5

65

Totals 106 100

As shown in Table 11, 66 or 62.3% advise 1-10 undergraduate male African

American males students per academic year, eight or 7.5% advise 21-30, seven or 6.6%

advice both 31-40 and 41-50 respectively while five or 4.7 % advise 51 and over.

Table 11. Number of undergraduate African American male undergraduate students advised per academic year. N=106

===========================================================Number Frequency Percent

1-10 66 62.3

21-30 8 7.5

31-40 7 6.6

41-50 7 6.6

51 & over 5 4.7

Missing 3 2.8

Total 106 100

Table 12 shows that 23 or 21.7 % of the respondents are affiliated with the School

of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, 33 or 31.1% with the School of Arts and

Sciences, nine (9) or 8.5% with the School of Business, 27 or 25.5% with the School of

Education and 14 or 13.2 % with the School of Engineering and Technology.

Table.12 School affiliation. N=106===========================================================School Frequency Percent

Agriculture and Environnemental Sciences

23 21.7

Arts & Sciences 33 31.1

Business 9 8.5

66

Education 27 25.5Engineering & Technology 14 13.2

Total 106 100

Part Two

In part two of the Chapter four the data is presented in the form of descriptive

statistics. Five research questions are discussed and presented in the form of frequency

tables and cross-tabs. The level of significance of the responses are determined by the use

of Chi-square at less than or equal to 0.05 probability. The responses from the survey

showing the frequency are displayed in Appendix J while the cross-tab and Chi-square

results are displayed in Tables 43-66 in Appendix H.

Research Question One

What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional policies

for increasing the retention for African American male students?

Seven questions were asked to solicit faculty responses. Faculty was asked to respond to

the following statements:

1. The institution’s retention policy is clearly communicated and understood.

2. The institution’s retention policy is aligned with its policy and mission.

3. The retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American

male students outside of the classroom.

4. The institution’s retention program encourages faculty and staff to work

collaboratively to increase retention of African American male students.

5. The institution’s retention policy is aligned with the values and goals of African

67

American male students.

6. The institution’s retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural environment

essential for African American male retention.

7. The institution’s retention policy addresses the social and economic background of

African American male students.

To measure the response to each item, a Likert scale was used. Participants were

asked to respond to the items by circling 1- strongly disagree, 2- disagree, 3- neutral

4- agree, 5- strongly disagree. Separate tables are developed for both the responses and

the summary of the Chi-Square results for the different variables. Cross tabulation and

Chi-Square analysis between the variables race, gender, age, years of teaching and

academic rank can be observed in the Appendix I.

In response to the item, the institution’s retention policy is clearly communicated

and understood, Table 13 shows that 12.6% strongly disagreed, 19.8 % disagreed, 30.2%

were neutral, 29.2% agreeing, and 9.5% strongly agreeing. Cumulatively (agreeing,

neutral, and disagreeing), there is a fairly even distribution of the responses (32.4%,

30.2% and 37.7% respectively), but there is a slight inclination to support the statement.

This indicates that, in general there is not an overwhelming support of this statement by

the respondents. Chi-square analysis shows no statistically significant relationship

between faculty perceptions of the clarity in the communication and understanding of the

retention policy irrespective of race (x2 = 26.5, p = 0.051), gender

(x2 = 2.1, p = 0.712), age ( x2 = 21.1, p = 0.739), years of teaching (x2 = 24.2, p = 0.232),

and academic rank (x2 = 20.1, p = 0.06). See Appendix I Table 43.

68

Table13. The Retention policy is Clearly Communicated and Understood. N=106

=========================================================Response Frequency Percent

69

Strongly disagree

70

Disagree 21 19.8

Neutral 32 30.2

Agree 31 29.2

Strongly agree 9 8.5

Total 106 100.0

_________________________________________________________________

The results relating to the question, the retention program is aligned with its

policy and mission is shown in Table 14. The results showed that 4.7% of the respondents

strongly disagreed, 18.9% disagreed, 32.1 % were neutral, 36.8% agreed and 7.5 %

strongly agreed. Cumulatively, there was positive support to the statement by 44.3 % of

the respondents. The results indicate, that most of the respondents have a positive

perception to the alignment of the retention program with the institution’s mission and

policy. Table 44 (Appendix I) shows no statistically significant relationship between the

respondents perception irrespective of race (x2 = 22.1, p = 0.141), gender (x2 = 6.7, p =

0.153), age (x2 =14.4, p = 0.569), years of teaching (x2 =18.8, p = 0.533), and academic

rank (x2 = 11.1, p = 0.521).

Table 14. The Retention program is aligned with its policy and mission. N=106

========================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7

Disagree 20 18.9

Neutral 34 32.1

Agree 39 36.8

Strongly agree 8 7.5

71

Total 106 100.0

__________________________________________________________________

In response to the item regarding whether the institution’s retention policy

encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside the

classroom, Table 15 summarizes the responses. Less than half or 41.5% of the

respondents were neutral, while a quarter or 25.5 % agreed, 7.5 % strongly agreed 19.8 %

disagreed and 5.7% strongly disagreed. The results indicate that a large percentage of the

respondents were not able to take a definitive stance on this issue. Chi-square analysis

(Table 45, Appendix I) indicates no significant statistical relationship between faculty

perceptions on this issue irrespective of race (x2 = 20.9, p = 0.182), gender (x2 =4,

p = 0.405), age (x2 =18.9, p = 0.274), years of teaching (x2 = 18.4, p = 0.559), and

academic rank (x2 = 9.1, p = 0.695).

Table 15. Retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside the classroom N=106

========================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 6 5.7

Disagree 21 19.8

Neutral 44 41.5

Agree 27 25.5

72

Strongly agree 8 7.5

Total 106 100.0

In response to the statement the institutions program encourages faculty and staff

to work collaboratively to increase the retention of African American male students, 34%

were neutral, 31% agree and 9.4% strongly agreed, in contrast 19.8 % disagree and 4.7%

of the respondents strongly disagree (see Table 16). This indicates that more than a third

of the respondents did not take a position on the issue, however, more than 40%

respondents agreed with the statement.

As indicated in Table 46 (Appendix I), Chi-square analysis indicates no

statistically significant relationship between the respondents perception of the retention

program encouraging faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase the retention of

African American male students and the variables gender (x2 = 1.6, p = 0.807), age (x2 =

21.8, p = 0.807), years of teaching (x2 = 26.2, p = 0.161), and academic rank (x2 =15.6, p

= 209). Chi-square test also revealed race to be significant, x2 = 30.3, p < 0.016. Test of

independence for the respondents based on the association with race, however, was not

significant, x2= 1.5, p = 0.220. See Table 68.1 Appendix I.

Table16. Program encourages faculty & staff to work collaboratively to increase the retention of African American male students. N=106=============================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7

Disagree 21 19.8

Neutral 36 34.0

Agree 33 31.1

Strongly agree 10 9.4

Total 105 99.1

73

Missing 1 .9

Total 106 100.0

The result from the statement, the retention policy is aligned with the goals of

African American male students showed less than half of the respondents or 44.3 %

remained neutral, less than a quarter or 24.5 % agreed and 4.7 % strongly agree. In

contrast 7.9 % disagree with the statement, while the remaining 5.7% strongly disagreed

(Table 17). The result indicates, that most of the respondents were not able to take a

position on the issue. As illustrated in Table 47 (Appendix I) Chi-square analyses showed

no statically significant relationship between the alignment of the institution’s policy and

goal with the retention of African American male student and the variables race (x2 =

11.4, p = 0.495), gender (x2 = 4.6, p = 0.336), age (x2 = 12.2, p = 0.729), years of teaching

(x2= 18.7, p = 0.544), and academic rank (x2 =16.4, p = 0.173).

Table 17. Retention policy is aligned with the goals of African American male students.

N=106============================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 6 5.7

Disagree 19 7.9

Neutral 47 44.3

Agree 26 24.5

Strongly agree 5 4.7

74

Total 103 97.2

Missing 3 2.8

Total 106 100.0

The results to the item, the retention policy addresses the academic, social, and

cultural environment essential for African American male student retention showed less

than a half or 46.2 % of the respondent remained neutral, a quarter or 25.5% agreed and

5.7% strongly agreed. Table 18 further shows that 17% disagreed and 3.8% strongly

disagreed with the statement. The Chi-square analysis showed no statistically significant

relationship between the policy addressing the academic, social, and cultural environment

irrespective of race (x2= 24.3, p = 0.083), gender (x2= 7.0, p = 0.136), age (x2= 15.1, p =

0.521), years of teaching (x2= 17.5, p = 0.620), and academic rank (x2= 12.4, p = 0.410).

See Table 48 (Appendix I).

Table 18. Retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural and environment essential for African American male retention. N=106

==========================================================Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 4 3.8

Disagree 18 17.0

Neutral 49 46.2

Agree 27 25.5

Strongly agree 6 5.7

75

Total 104 98.1

Missing 2 1.9

The item, the retention policy addresses social and economic background of

African American male students completes the questions for research question one. The

responses to items shown in Table 19 indicate that less than half or 46.2% of the

respondents were neutral, a fifth or 21.7 % agreed and 5.7% strongly agree. In contrast,

less than a fifth or 19.8% disagree and 3.8% strongly disagree with the statement. As

indicated in Table 49 Appendix I, the Chi-square results showed no statistically

significant relationship between the respondents perception relating to the retention

policy addressing he socio-economic background of African American male students

irrespective of race (x2 = 21, p = 0.180), gender (x2 = 3.1, p = 0.550), age (x2 = 19.5,

0.245), years of teaching (x2= 21.6, p = 0.360), and academic rank (x2= 22.1, p = 0.140).

Table 19. Retention policy addresses social and economic background of African American male students. N=106

============================================================ Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 4 3.8Disagree 21 19.8Neutral 49 46.2Agree 23 21.7Strongly agree 6 5.7Total 103 97.2Missing 3 2.8

76

Total 106 100

Research Question Two

What are faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional support

for increasing the retention of African American male students?

Five questions were placed on the survey instrument to solicit responses from

faculty. Faculty members responded to the following questions:

1. The institution’s retention program includes specific provisions for addressing the

needs of African American male students.

2. The institution allocates financial resources to support the retention of African

American male students.

3. The institution’s freshman/new student orientation program includes a segment that

addresses the needs of African American male students.

4. The institution’s retention program encourages parental involvement with African

American male students.

5. The institution rewards and recognizes efforts by the faculty to improve the retention

of African American male students.

The results showed that in general, most of the respondents were neutral with the

responses varying from a low of 35.5% to a high of 52.8 %. Exception to the

generalization is faculty negative perceptions of institutional effort to reward and

recognize retention efforts for African American male students. Tables 50-54 (Appendix

I) show the Chi-square results for the variables race, gender, age, years of teaching and

academic rank.

77

Table 20 shows the responses to the item, the institutional program includes

provisions for addressing the needs of African American male students. Less than half of

the respondents or 46.2% had a neutral response. Further analysis showed that less than a

third or 28.3 % of the respondents agreed with the statement compared to 17 % that

disagreed. Table 50 (Appendix I) showed significant statistical relationship between

institutional provisions for African American male student retention and the variable race

(x2= 30.3, p < 0.016). No significant statistical relationship, however, exits between the

variables gender (x2 = 11.2, p = 0.052), age (x2 = 24.4, p = 0.079), years of teaching (x2 =

27.2, p = 0.335), and academic rank (x2= 13.5, p = 0.129). Test of independence for the

respondents based on the association with race, however, was significant (x2 = 8.97, p

= .003). See Table 69.2 (Appendix I). The results indicate that whites were more likely to

agree that the retention program includes provision for addressing the needs of African

American male students

Table 20. Program includes provision for addressing the needs of African American males. N=106

============================================================ Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 3 2.8

Disagree 18 17.0

Neutral 49 46.2

Agree 30 28.3

Strongly agree 3 2.8

78

Total 103 97.2

Missing 3 2.8

Total 106 100

The response to the item, the institution allocates financial resources to support

African American male students, more than half or 52.8% of the respondents were

neutral. Table 21 further shows that a quarter or 25% agree with the statement, 15.1%

disagreed, and 3.8% strongly disagreed. Chi-square test showed no significant statistical

relationship between the variables race (x2 = 15.2, p = 0.513), gender (x2 = 9.3, p = 0.055),

age (x2 = 12.9, p = 0.683), years of teaching (x2 = 24.8, p = 0.208), academic rank (x2 =

15.3, p = 0.224) and the allocation of financial resources for African American male

student retention (Table 51, Appendix I).

Table 21. The institution allocates financial resources to support African American male students. N=106 ============================================================= Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 4 3.8

Disagree 16 15.1

Neutral 56 52.8

Agree 27 25.5

79

Strongly agree 1 .9

Total 104 98.1

Missing 2 1.9

Total 106 100

Table 22 shows a neutral perception to with the statement; freshman/new student

orientation includes segments that address the need of African American male student. A

little less than half or 48.1 % of the respondents are neutral, 31.1% agreed, 13.2 %

disagreed and 4.7% strongly disagreed. Chi-square analysis indicates no statistically

significant relationship between the inclusion of segments in new student orientation to

address retention and the variables race (x2 = 19.6, p = 0.236), gender

(x2 = 6.9, p = 0.141), age ( x2 = 11.4, p = 0.782), years of teaching (x2 = 30.5, p = 0.061),

and academic rank ( x2= 8.03, p = 0.782). See Table 52 Appendix I.

Table 22. Freshman/New student orientation includes segments that address the need of African American male students.

N=106=============================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7

Disagree 14 13.2

Neutral 51 48.1

80

Agree 33 31.1

Strongly agree 2 1.9

Total 105 99.1

Missing 1 .9

Total 106 100.0

Table 23 shows the response to the statement, the institution retention program

encourages parental involvement with African American male students. More than half or

55.7% of the respondents were neutral in contrast, 19.8% agreed, 15.1% disagreed, and

5.7 % strongly disagreed. As shown in Table 53 (Appendix I) there was no statistically

relationship between the retention program encouraging parental involvement and the

variables race (x2 = 14.1, p = 0.589), gender (x2 = 13.0, p = 0.051), age (x2 = 8.2, p =

0.942), years of teaching (x2 = 17.2, p = 0.062), and academic rank (x2 = 11.7, p = 0.467).

Table 23. Retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male students. N=106

=========================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 6 5.7

Disagree 16 15.1

Neutral 59 55.7

81

Agree 21 19.8

Strongly agree 1 .9

Total 103 97.2

Missing 3 2.8

Total 106 100.0

Faculty was asked to respond to the item, the institution recognizes and rewards

efforts by faculty to improve the retention of African American male students. The results

showed that 35.8% of the respondents are neutral, while cumulatively, 48.1.1% disagreed

with the statement (see Table 24). The results indicate that a little less than half the

respondent did not perceive the institution recognizing or supporting their efforts to

improve the retention of African American male students. As illustrated in Table 54

(Appendix I), there is an association between genders (x2 = 10.1, p < 0.04), and faculty

perception of the institution recognizing and rewarding faculty efforts to improve the

retention of African American male students.

Test of independence for the respondents based on the association with gender,

was also significant, (x2 = 7.25, p < 0.007) indicating that females are more likely to

disagree that the institution recognizes and reward retention efforts. See Table 68.3,

(Appendix I). Chi-square result also showed no statistically significant relationship

irrespective of race (x2 =15.6, p = 0.484), age (x2 =18.1, p = 0.32), years of teaching (x2 =

30.5, p = 0.061), and academic rank (x2 = 8.03, p = 0.782). See Table 54, Appendix I.

Table 24. The institution recognizes and rewards faculty efforts to improve the retention of African American male students. N=106

===========================================================

82

Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 21 19.8

Disagree 30 28.3

Neutral 38 35.8

Agree 16 15.1

Strongly agree 1 0.9

Total 106 100.0

Question Three

How does faculty workload influence their perceptions of the effectiveness of the

institution’s retention program affecting African American male students?

Five questions relating to workload were asked to measure faculty response. Participants

were asked to place a circle around each response that they deemed most appropriate. The

following questions were asked of the respondents to ascertain their perceptions:

1. How many credit hours do you teach each semester?

2. What percentage of your time is spent on institutional committee work during the

academic year?

3. What percentage of your time do you spend each academic year interacting with

African American male students outside the classroom?

4. State the number of publication you completed over the past year.

The results from the questionnaire indicate that the respondents teach mainly 3-12

credit hours per semester, spends 1-15% of their time on committee work, use less than

16% of their time interacting with African American male students outside of the

classroom, and have published less than two items for the past two years. To determine

how workload influences faculty perception Chi-square analysis was done with questions

83

related to workload and institutional effectiveness (policy and institutional support). See

Appendix G. The results showed no significant statistical difference between workload

and the respondents perception of institutional effectiveness, indicating that faculty

workload did not impact their perceptions

In response to the question, how many credit hours do you typically teach each

semester, the respondents were given the choices: 3-6 credit hours, 1-5 credit hours, 13 -

15 credit hours, 16-19 credit hours, and Other. The results, shown in Table 25 shows that

58.5% of the respondents teach 7-12 credit hours, 20.8% teach 13-15 hours and 17%

teach 3-6 hours. This indicates that a large percentage of the respondents teach 7-12 hours

per semester. Chi-Square results in general showed no statistically significant

relationships between hours teach per semester and the perception of institutional

effectiveness. See Table 29, page 79.

Table 25. Numbers of credit hours taught per semester. N=106 ========================================================= Response Frequency Percent

3-6 18 17.0

7-12 62 58.5

13-15 22 20.8

16-19 2 1.9

Other 2 1.9

In response to the question, what percentage of your time is spent on institutional

committee work during the academic year. As shown in Table 26, 38.7% of the

respondents spend 10-15% of their time, 19.8 % spend 1-5, 14.2% spend 16-20 and 8.5%

84

spend 21% or more. Chi square analysis in general showed no significant statistically

relationship between time spent doing committee work and the indicators associated with

the perception of institutional effectiveness (Table 29, page 69).

Table 26. Time spent on committee work. N=106=========================================================Response Frequency Percent

1-5 % 21 19.8

6-9% 20 18.9

10-15% 41 38.7

16-20% 15 14.2

21% & more 9 8.5

Faculty members were asked to respond to the question, what percentage of your

time is spent interacting with African American males outside of the classroom. As

illustrated in Table 27, the result showed 25.5 % of the respondents spent 16% or more of

their time interaction with African American male students outside of the classroom. The

results also showed that 23.6% spent 5-8%, 19.8% spent 1-4%, 19.8. %, spent 9-12%

and 11.3% spent 13-16% of their time interaction with African American male students

outside of the classroom. Chi-square analysis revealed no significant statistical

relationship between the times spent interacting with African American males outside the

classroom and the respondents’ perception of the factors associated with institutional

effectiveness (Table 29, page 69).

Table 27. Percentage of time spent interacting with African American male students outside of classroom. N=106

============================================================

85

Response Frequency Percent

1-4% 21 19.8

5-8% 25 23.6

9-12% 21 19.8

13-16% 12 11.3

16% & over 27 25.5

Total 106 100.0

___________________________________________________________________

In response to the item addressing publishing, 41.5% published 0 articles, 24.3

published 1, 13.2% published 2, 12.3 % published 4 and over and 8.5% publish 3 articles

in the past two years. Chi-square results show no significant statistical relationship

between the number of articles published and the variables associated with institutional

effectiveness (Table 29, page 69).

Table 28. Number of Publication the Past Two Years N=106==========================================================Response Frequency Percent

0 44 41.51 26 24.5

2 14 13.2

3 9 8.5

4 & over 13 12.3Total 106 100.0

86

Table 29 The relationship between perceived workload and institutional effectiveness. N=106==================================================================================

Credit Hours Per Time Spent on Interaction Time Publication the

Per Semester Committee WorkOutside Classroom Past 2 Years

Chi square Chi Square Chi square Chi Square

Value Asymp Sig Value

Asymp Sig Value

Asymp Sig Value Asymp sig

Retention Policy Communicated and Understood

11.7 0.926 * 17.538 0.352* 15.791 0.468* 14.411 0.568*Program Aligned with Missionand Policy

17.061 0.649* 17.74 0.339* 15.149 0.514* 7.704 0.103*

Interaction Outside of Classroom

18.709 0.541* 18.846 0.227* 19.638 0.237* 19.406 0.248*

Faculty and Staff Collaboration

15.149 0.768* 20.41 0.202* 23.297 0.106* 21.422 0.372*

Goals Aligned with Goals of AAMS

15.922 0.731* 13.948 0.603* 27.005 0.041** 4.818 0.964*

Academic Social, Cultural Environment 29.05 0.087* 13.957 0.602* 20.258 0.209* 17.91 0.951*Social and Economic Background 14.07 0.827* 18.872 0.275* 20.051 0.455* 16.794 0.399*Provision for Addressing the Needs of AAMS

18.485 0.555* 18.31 0.567* 20.051 0.455* 22.372 0.132*

Allocation of Financial Resources

17.866 0.848* 11.146 0.8* 10.3 0.85* 17.344 0.364*

Orientation Addresses the Needs of AAMS

16.866 0.662* 13.799 0.614* 16.828 0.397* 19.906 0.225*

Encourages Parental Involvement

16.256 0.435* 26.67 0.45* 9.55 0.889* 8.931 0.984*

Rewards and Recognizes faculty

19.866 0.226* 13.897 0.606* 12.237 0.727* 11.67 0.766*

** P < .05 * Not significant AAMS = African American male student

87

Question Four

What knowledge does faculty possess about the institution’s retention program?

Seven items were placed on the questionnaire to measure faculty perceptions. Faculty

was asked to respond to the following statements:

1. The institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of

African American male students.

2. I am cognizant of the collegiate problems of African American male students at this

institution.

3. I am provided with an early academic alert on African American male students who are

having academic, social and other difficulties.

4. I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to

assists African American male students.

5. The institution’s academic tracking system allows for the identification and

monitoring of African American male students progress.

6. I am able to make personal contact with African American male students with

telephone calls.

7. I am able to make contact with African American male students through emails.

There was an inclination to disagree with statements relating to training,

monitoring of African American student progress, and the provision of an early alert

system on African American male issues. In contrast, there were positives responses to

statements relating to the problems of African American males students and the ability to

make contact through telephone call and emails. With an overall statistical mean of 2.96

88

on the scale of 1- 5 there is an inclination to marginally agree with the statement.

In responding to the statement, the institution provides training for faculty to

address the problems and concerns of African American male students; Table 30 shows

that respondents generally tend to disagree with the statement. The result showed that

23.6% strongly disagree, 34.9% disagree, 24.5% were neutral and 16% agreed with the

statement. Chi-square analysis indicates no statistically significant relationship between

the provision of training and the variables race (x2 = 14.4, p = 0.568, gender (x2 = 7.7,

p = 0.103), age ( x2 = 19.4, p = 0.248), years of teaching ( x2 = 21.4, p = 0.372) and

academic rank (x2 = 4.8, p = 0.964). See Table 55, Appendix I.

Table 30. Response to training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American Male students. N=106

=========================================================== Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 25 23.6

Disagree 37 34.9

Neutral 26 24.5

Agree 17 16.0

Strongly agree 1 .9

Total 106 100.0

In response to the question, I am cognizant the problems of African American

males students at this institution, more than a third or 33.4% of the respondents agree

with the statement, 17% strongly disagreed, 25.5 % were neutral, 18.9% disagreed and

2.8% strongly disagreed (Table 31). The results indicate that a little more than half of the

respondents are aware of the problems of African American male students. Chi-square

test showed no statistically significant relationship irrespective race (x2 = 20.4,

89

p = 0.203), age ( x2 = 5.03, p = 0.973), years of teaching (x2 = 14.8, p = 0.594), and

academic rank (x2 = 18.8, p = 0.251). See Table 56, Appendix I.

Table 31. Response to I am cognizant of the collegiate problems of African American male students.

N=106============================================================= Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 3 2.8

Disagree 20 18.9

Neutral 27 25.5

Agree 37 34.9

Strongly agree 18 17.0

Total 105 99.1

Missing 1 .9

Total 106 100.0

In response to the statement, I am provided with an early alert on African

Americans males who are having academic, social and other difficulties; the respondents

in general, disagreed with the statement. The table shows that 33% disagreed, 27.4%

strongly disagreed, 12.7% remained neutral, 15.1% agreed, and 2.8% strongly disagreed

(Table 32). Chi-square analysis showed no significant statistical relationship between the

provision of early alert systems and the variables race (x2 = 23.6, p = 0.099), age (x2 =

7.9, p = 0.094), and academic rank (x2 = 14.4, p = .0278). See Table 57 Appendix I.

There were, however, significant relationship between years of teaching (x2 = 34.0,

p < .0026) and the perception to the provision of an early alert system for African

American males who are have social and academic difficulties. Test of independence for

the respondents based on the association with years of teaching was not significant (x2 =

90

1.177, p = .278). See Table 69.4, Appendix I.

Table 32. I am provided with an early alert on African American male students who are having academic, social and other difficulties.

============================================================= Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 29 27.4

Disagree 35 33.0

Neutral 23 21.7

Agree 16 15.1

Strongly agree 3 2.8

Total 106 100.0

Table 33 shows the response to I am provided with information regarding

individual and institutional services to assists African American male students. A little

less than half of respondents did not support the statement: 19.8% strongly disagreed,

24.5 % disagreed, 33% were neutral, 17.9 % disagreed, and 4.7 % strongly disagreed.

More than 44.3% of the respondents do not agree with the statement. Chi-square test

showed that except for the variable age (x2 = 27.5, p < 0.036) there is no statistically

significant relationship between the provision of information and the variables race

(x2 = 23.1, p = 0.111), gender (x2 = 7, p = 0.138), years of teaching (x2 = 24, p = 0.241),

and academic rank (x2 = 8.7, p = 0.728). See Table 58, Appendix I.

91

Table 33. I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to assist African American male students.===============================================================Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 21 19.8

Disagree 26 24.5

Neutral 35 33.0

Agree 19 17.9

Strongly agree 5 4.7

Total 106 100.0

Table 34 shows the response to the institution’s tracking system allows for

identification and monitoring of African American male student’s progress. Over a third

or 38.7% of the respondents remained neutral, 22.6 % agree, 20.8% disagree, 10.4%

strongly disagree and 7.5% strongly agree. Cumulatively, there is an even distribution

between those who agree, are neutral and disagreeing. Results from the Chi-square test

showed no significant statistical relationship between the respondents perception of the

institutions’ tracking system allowing for the identification and monitoring of African

American male students progress irrespective of race (x2 =18.7, p = 0.286), gender

(x2 = 2.7, p = 0.938), age (x2 = 8.3, p = 0.938), years of teaching (x2 = 21.6, p = 0.36), and

academic rank (x2 = 6.4, p = 0.896). See Table 59, Appendix I.

Table 34. Institution tracking system allows for identification and monitoring African American male student’s progress.

==============================================================

92

Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 11 10.4

Disagree 22 20.8

Neutral 41 38.7

Agree 24 22.6

Strongly agree 8 7.5

Table 35 shows cumulatively, a little more than 50% of the faculty members

survey agreed that they were able to make contact with African American male students

through telephone calls. Table 35 shows that 40.7% agreed, 17.9 % strongly agreed,

19.8% was neutral 17% disagreed and 4.7% strongly disagreed. Chi-square analysis

showed no significant statistical relationship between the ability to respond to making

contact with African American males through telephone irrespective of gender (x2 = 4.1,

p = 0.394), age (x2 = 13.6, p = 0.625), years of teaching (x2 = 7.7, p = 0.790), and

academic rank (x2 = 12, p = 0.809). Race, however, was significant (x2 = 35.3, p < 0.004).

See Table 60 Appendix I. Test of independence for the respondents based on the

association with race, showed no significant statistical difference (x2 = 1.987, p = 0.159).

See Table 68.5, Appendix I.

Table 35. The ability to make contact with African American Male Students through telephone calls.

==========================================================

93

Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7

Disagree 18 17.0

Neutral 21 19.8

Agree 43 40.6

Strongly agree 19 17.9

Total 106 100.0

In responding to the statement, I am able to make contact with African American

males through email, more than half of the respondents support the statement 38.7%

agreed, 17% strongly agreed, 17.9% disagreed and 4.97 strongly disagreed (Table 36).

The Chi-square test for the responses showed no significant statistical relationship

between the variables gender (x2 =1.7, p = 0.775), age (x2 = 12.6, p = 0.699), years of

teaching (x2 = 16.6, p = 0.676), academic rank (x2 = 8.1, p = 0.775) and the ability to

communicate with African American male students (Tables 61 Appendix I). There was a

significant difference based on race (x2 = 28.6, p < 0.027). Test of independence for the

respondents based on the association with race, however, showed no significant statistical

difference (x2 = 0.77, p = .781). See Table 68.6, Appendix I.

Table 36. The ability to make contact with African American male students through

emails============================================================

94

Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7

Disagree 19 17.9

Neutral 23 21.7

Agree 41 38.7

Strongly agree 18 17.0

Total 106 100.0

Question Five

How does faculty perceptions differ on the effectiveness of institution’s retention

program for African American male students with respect to race, gender, age, years of

teaching, academic rank and academic advisement?

Seven items were placed on the questionnaire to measure faculty perceptions relating to

academic advising. Faculty was asked to respond to the following statements:

1. How much of your office hours are spent advising African American males

students per week?

2. I use my advisement time to help African American male students with their

personal and career goals.

3. I provide African American students with information that helps them make

decisions concerning their majors.

4. I frequently refer African American male advisees to counselors and tutors.

5. I meet informally with African American male students I advise.

The results indicate that the respondents advise 1-10 African American male

students per year, and spend 1-10 hours per week advising them. They tend to use their

advisement time helping African American students with personal and career goals and

95

providing them with information to assists them in making decisions about their majors.

They frequently refer them to counselors and tutors and frequently meet informally with

African American male students.

Table 37 shows that 62% of the respondents advise 1-10 African American

students per academic year. The Chi-square result showed no statistical significant

relationship between the number of undergraduate students advised and the variables race

(x2 = 25.3, p = 0.064), gender (x2 =2.0, p = 0.735), age (x2 = 18, p = 0.324) and years of

teaching (x2 = 19.6, p = 0.483), academic rank (x2 = 10.5, p = 0.571). See Table 62,

Appendix I.

Table 37. The number of undergraduate students advised per academic year.======================================================== Response Frequency Percent

1-10 66 62.3

21-30 8 7.5

31-40 7 6.6

41-50 7 6.6

51 & over 5 4.7

Total 106 100.0

In response to the question, how much of your office time is spent advising

African American male students per week. Participants were asked to select from items 1-

5 hours, 6-10 hours, 11-15 hours, and 16 hours and over by circling one of four choices.

Table 38 shows that more than half of the respondents or 57.5% spend 1-6 hours, 22.6%

spend 6-10 hours per week, 6.6% spend 11-15 hours per week and 10.4% spend 16 hours

per week. As shown in Table 63, Appendix I, Chi-square analysis indicate no statistical

significant relationship between the number of students advices and the variables race (x2

96

= 7.5, p = 0.821), gender (x2 = 5.9, p = 0.899), age (x2 = 14.2,

p = 0.283), years of teaching (x2 = 23.4, p = 0.741), and academic rank (x2 = 14.4,

p = 0.85).

Table 38. Office hours spent advising African American students per academic year.============================================================ Response Frequency Percent

1-5 61 57.5

6-10 24 22.6

11-15 7 6.6

16 & over 11 10.4

Total 103 97.2

Missing 3 2.8

Total 106 100.0

On the statement, I use my advisement time to help African American male

students with personal and career goals, more than three quarter of the respondents

support the statement. As shown in Table 39, 51.9% agreed with the statement, 19.8%

strongly agreed, 12.4 disagreed, and 4.8 % strongly disagreed. Chi-square analysis

showed no significant statistical relationship between advisement time and the variables

race (x2 = 9, p = 0.355), gender (x2 = 2.1, p = 0.799), age (x2 = 27.7, p = 0.369), years of

teaching (x2 = 24, p = 0.866), and academic rank (x2 = 12.5, p = 0.315). See Table 64,

Appendix I.

Table 39. The use of advisement time helps African American male students with personal and career goals.

==========================================================

97

Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7

Disagree 13 12.3

Neutral 11 10.4

Agree 55 51.9

Strongly agree 21 19.8

Total 105 99.1

Missing 1 .9

Total 106 100.0

Table 40 shows the result of the response I provide African American male

student with information that helps them make decision about their majors. The results

showed that 47.7% of the respondents agreed with the statement, 33.3% strongly agreed,

8.6 disagreed, 3.8 strongly disagreed and 6.7 remained neutral. This indicates that more

of the respondents agreed with the statement. Chi- square test showed no significant

statistical relationship between the provision of information and the variables race (x2 =

8.9, p = 0.914), gender (x2 = 2.1, p = 0.709), years of teaching (x2 = 24, p = 0.705), and

academic rank (x2 = 12.5, p = 0.404). See Table 65, Appendix I. There was, however, a

significant relationship between age (x2 = 27.7, p < 0.035) and the provision of

information to help African American male students make decisions about their major.

Test of independence for the respondents based on the association with age, showed no

significant statistical difference (x2 = 0.344, p = 0.558) among the respondents. See Table

68.6, Appendix I.

Table 40. Response to I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their major.

==============================================================

98

Response Frequency PercentStrongly disagree 4 3.8Disagree 9 8.5

Neutral 7 6.6

Agree 50 47.2

Strongly agree 35 33.0

Total 105 99.1

Missing 1 0.9

Total 106 100.0

More than half the respondents had a positive perception towards the statement, I

frequently refer African American male advisees to counselors and tutors. The result

showed that 35.6% agreed and 18.3% strongly agreed, more than a quarter of the 25% of

the respondents were neutral, 16.3% disagreed and 4.8% strongly disagreed (Table 41).

Chi-square test revealed no significant statistical relationships between the provision of

information to make decision and the variables race (x2 = 17.4 p = 0.36), gender (x2 = 4.7,

p = 0.315), age (x2 = 23.7, p = 0.095), years of teaching (x2 = 14.6, p = 0.799), and

academic advising (x2 = 17.7, p = 0.124). See Table 66 Appendix I.

Table 41. Response to I frequently refer African American male advisees to counselors and tutors.

===============================================================

99

Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7Disagree 17 16.0

Neutral 26 24.5

Agree 37 34.9

Strongly agree 19 17.9

Total 104 98.1

The final statement, I meet informally with African American students I advise,

showed more than half of the respondents agreeing with the statement (41.9% agreed and

23.8 strongly agreed). Tables 42 showed also that 11.4% of the respondents strongly

disagreed, 10.5 disagreed and 12.4% remained neutral. Chi-square results show no

significant statistical relationship between the informal meeting of African American

male students and the variables race (x2 = 17.4, p = 0.36), gender, (x2 = 4.7, p = 0.315),

age (x2 = 23.7, p = 0.095), years of teaching (x2 = 14.6, p = 0.799), and academic

advising (x2 = 17.7, p = 0.124). See Table 67, Appendix I.

Table 42.Response to I meet informally with African American students I advise.========================================================= Response Frequency Percent

Strongly disagree 12 11.3

Disagree 11 10.4

Neutral 13 12.3

Agree 44 41.5

Strongly agree 25 23.6

Total 105 99.1

CHAPTER 5

100

DISCUSSIONS, IMPLICATIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS

Discussions

The discussions of the findings are based on the data generated

Research Question One

Faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of institutional policy for increasing the

retention of African American male students were in general, neutral. The respondents in

general perceived that the retention policy is in alignment with the institution mission and

policy, but there is no indication that it is clearly communicated and understood. This is

indicating a difference between what is outlined in the institution mission and how it is

communicated and interpreted as part of the overall retention strategy by faculty

members. Padilla (2000) suggested that faculty who buy into the institution mission

show a higher level of program satisfaction than those who consider the mission

irrelevant.

Policy issues relating to the retention of African American males were neutral for

a little less than 50% of the respondents. In general, faculty did not take a position as to

the alignment of the institution’s policy with the goals of African American students, the

policy addressing the environmental problems African American male students

experience prior to coming to the institution, the addressing of the academic and social

environment necessary for their retention once they are in college and the policy issues

relating to the encouragement of interaction between faculty and African American male

students outside of the classroom.

101

Faculty, also in general, did not take a position as to the effectiveness of the

institution policy for the retention of African American males students is contrary to what

research has indicated as the foundation for a successful retention program. Thomas,

Giles and Green (1994) suggested that faculty should be convinced that retention is

important and should be organized for faculty to understand how to take advantage of the

available assistance.

Research Question Two

Faculty perceptions regarding the effectiveness of institutional support for

increasing the retention of African American male college students is generally neutral.

A little less than 50% of the respondents were neutral to statements regarding the

retention program including provisions for addressing the needs of African American

male students. There were differences based on race, with whites faculty members more

likely agreeing with the statement. Faculty did not take a position as to the allocation of

resources to support African American male student retention, the orientation program

addressing the needs of African American male students, and the encouragement of

parents in the retention program for African American males.

Faculty did not agree with the institution’s effort in offering rewards and

recognition for efforts in improving the retention of African American male students

(Table 24), with female faculty members disagreeing more. According to Bonner (2001),

depending on the supportive network that exits and the development culture that

encourages participation by faculty in most critical retention discussions, female faculty

perception and participation will be affected. This does not serve as positive motivation

102

for faculty to go beyond professional service expectations to assist students with

difficulties (Pascarella and Ternezini1991).

The most surprising finding concerned faculty perception to the institution’s

allocation of resources to support African American male retention efforts. More than

half the respondents, irrespective of variables investigated, did not take a position on the

issue. This is contrary to Saluri, Levitz, Noel and associates (1985) who suggest that

factors, which determine the success in organizing a campus effort to confront the issue

of retention, must include definitive resources, and a well conceived strategy for

achieving the retention objectives.

Research Question Three

The findings show that faculty in general teach 3-12 credit hours per semester,

spends 16% or more of their time on committee work, and produce no publications for

the past two years (Tables 25-27). The findings indicate that in general, the faculty

workload is within the teaching guidelines of American Association of University

Professors (60%), is drastically below the research guidelines of (30%), but slightly

above the time spent on service (10%) (AAUP, 2003). With a little more than half of the

respondents teaching graduate and undergraduate classes and having less than 10 African

American male undergraduate advisee per year, the level of committee involvement

(thesis and administrative) is expected to be high.

Chi-square analysis between issues related to institutional effectiveness, (policy

and support) and workload shows no significant statistical relationship. This indicates, a

103

general consistency in faculty perception of institutional effectiveness irrespective of

workload

Research Question Four

Faculty knowledge of the institution’s retention program is marginally positive. In

general the results shows that the respondents are cognizant of the problem of African

American males, and are able to make contact through telephone calls and emails (Tables

35 & 36). According to Sydow and Sandal (1998) this is a key determinate in student

satisfaction and retention. In contrast, there are negative perceptions of the institution

providing training on issues affecting African American students’ retention, the tracking

and monitoring of African American students progress, and the provision of information

on services and individuals to assist African American male students retention (Tables 33

to 34). There was, however, an even distribution of responses toward the provision of an

early alerts system to track African American males who are having academic, social and

other problems (Table 32). The results suggest that faculty believe that they are not

trained to handle the various issues associated with African American male retention and

are not very knowledgeable of the services and personnel involved. They also have mixed

feelings regarding the tracking system in place to identify and monitor the progress of

African American male students (Table 34). This is contrary to Noel, et al (1985) who

suggests that persons who have greatest influence in retention projects are those with

knowledge of and the concerns of student behavior.

104

Research Question Five

Chi-square analysis of the questions related to academic advisement indicates that

the respondents had a positive perception toward academic advisement. The data shows

that faculty advises 1-10 African American male students per year and spends 1-10 hours

per week advising them. They tend to use advisement time helping African American

students with personal and career goals and provide them with information that helps

them make decisions about their majors. They frequently refer them to counselors and

tutors and frequently meet informally with the African American male students they

advise.

Perceptions of the effectiveness of the retention of African American male

students indicate that in general, no significance statistical differences exits between

faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the institutions retention program affecting

African American males and the variables race, age, years of teaching and academic

advising. There were exceptions: female faculty members disagreeing more with the

rewards and recognition offered for efforts to improve the retention of African American

male students and white faculty members more likely agreeing with the statement

regarding the retention program including provision for addressing the needs of African

American male students

The positive statistical significance for the variables can be interrupted to mean

that in general, faculty are consistent in the perceptions of the program for the retention

of African American males irrespective of, gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank

or academic advisement relationship.

105

Conclusions

The findings related to faculty perceptions regarding the institution’s retention

programs have generated the following conclusions:

1. Faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the institutional policy for increasing the

retention of African American male students are not definitive.

2. Faculty members did not show an awareness of the effectiveness of institutional

support for increasing the retention of African American male students.

3. Respondents workload do not affect their perceptions of the effectiveness of

institution retention program for African American male students.

4. In general, faculty has a marginal knowledge of the mechanism involving the

institution’s retention program.

5. Faculty members are, in general, consistent in their perceptions of the effectiveness of

the program for the retention of African American male students irrespective of faculty,

gender, age, years of teaching, academic rank or academic advisement relationship.

Implications

The analysis of the data provided the basis from which the following implications can be drawn:

1. Faculty, though aware of the institution’s policy on the retention of African

American males, lack a comprehensive understanding of the strategies that have

been pursued by the institution to combat the external and internal issues faced by

this group of students. The required contribution by faculty to support retention

initiatives needs to be clearly defined at the institutional level.

106

2. The allocation of resources at both program and personnel levels to support the

retention of African American male students has not been fully understood by

faculty. Faculty members have a negative feeling toward the institutional

motivational support for their efforts to improve the retention effort of African

American male students.

3. Faculty members are knowledgeable of the problems of African American male

students and are able to make contact with them. They, however, lack an

understanding of infrastructure, which tracks and monitors African American

students with difficulties. The provision of training and more information on the

issues relating to the retention of African American males could increase their

involvement.

4. Workload changes did not affect faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the

policy and support of the institution towards the retention of African American

male students. Having a faculty-base retention program that is clearly stated,

equitable and monitored could impact the decision of faculty members to get

involved in the retention effort.

5. Faculty perceptions on institutional retention efforts of African American male

students are consistent irrespective of race, sex, gender, years of teaching and

academic rank. Fostering an environment that embody a culture of retention will

create an institutional effort that will foster and focus faculty involvement

irrespective of their background.

107

Recommendations

In reviewing the literature, no studies were found that looked at faculty perceptions

of institutional program for African American male students. Based on the investigator’s

interpretation of the data, further research needs to be conducted on the topic. The

following recommendations are offered:

1. The study should be replicated at a Private Historically Black College and

University to determine if differences in perceptions exit.

2. The study should be conducted at a Predominantly White University to determine

if there are differences in perceptions.

3. A study should be conducted with college administers and staff to determine their

perceptions.

4. A study should be conducted with African American male students to determine

their perceptions of efforts regarding institutional retention programs to address

issues they face through their college experience.

5. Studies should be conducted on the role of mentoring vs. academic advising as the

method of contact between African American male students and faculty.

6. A comparative analysis should be conducted of the results of the retention

programs based on the resources allocated by the institution.

108

Appendix A

Letter of Request to the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs at Alabama A & M University

4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816

February 16, 2004.

Dr. Virginia CaplesProvost/Vice President Academic AffairsAlabama A & M University4900 Meridian StreetHuntsville, AL 35762.

Dear Dr Caples:

Public Historically Black Colleges and Universities because of their unique mission in providing opportunities for all students through their semi open door policy attracts students from lower socio economic backgrounds, who have poor pre-college preparation and lack functional skills necessary for the collegiate experience. This creates serious challenges for many African American male students who must also grapple with the vintages of racism and stereotyping and develop alliances and relationships that will contribute to the successful completion of their degrees.

Many institutions have initiated orientation and remediation programs to improve the likelihood of successes for cohorts beyond the freshman year. While there may not be a program per se for African American males, results from retention initiatives, however, have not shown significant improvement in retention rates for African American males on most campuses. According to research by Tinto, Pascarella, Terenzini and others it will take a collective effort by most institutions to reverse that trend. Faculty, they conclude because of the frequency of their contact with African American male students have the greatest influence in changing the fortunes of any campus retention initiative to assist this group.

Faculty, however, is faced with their professional and personal responsibilities, which require time and commitment. They are also challenged with the changing dynamics of the student population, political and financial constraints that require more of their time and effort. They tend to dedicate more time and effort into activities that they find most rewarding. The success of any retention program therefore hangs on their perceptions of its overall success, the commitment of the institution in making it successful, and their overall participation.

109

It is along this background that I have proposed a study to investigate the extent to which faculty perceptions of a institution’s retention program contributing to the success or interruption of the African American male experience. The research questions will address faculty perceptions regarding, the effectiveness of institutional policy, institutional support, faculty workload, knowledge of institution retention program, the effectiveness of the institution retention program in relationship to faculty race, age, years of teaching, tenure status, and teaching load.

I am therefore requesting your permission to conduct a survey among the faculty at Alabama A&M University for this project. The information gained will be confidential and the source of the information will not be divulged unless given permission to do so. The information gained will be made available to the university, which I hope will assist in improving the retention of our African American male students.

I will be willing to discuss this further with you if necessary. I can be contacted at (256) 430-1854 or Joetex29@Hotmail.com .

Thank you in advance for your kind assistance.

Sincerely,

Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate Higher Education Administration Alabama A&M University

110

Appendix B

Letter of Request to Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs Oakwood College

4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816

February 16, 2004.

Provost /Vice President Academic AffairsOakwood College,7000 Adventist BlvdHuntsville, Al 35896.

Dear Sir:

Public Historically Black Colleges and Universities because of their unique mission in providing opportunities for all students through their semi open door policy attracts students from lower socio economic backgrounds, who have poor pre-college preparation and lack functional skills necessary for the collegiate experience. This creates serious challenges for many African American male students who must also grapple with the vintages of racism and stereotyping and develop alliances and relationships that will contribute to the successful completion of their degrees.

Many institutions have initiated orientation and remediation programs to improve the likelihood of successes for cohorts beyond the freshman year. The results however, have not shown significant improvement in retention rates for African American males on most campuses. According to research by Tinto, Pascarella, Terenzini and others it will take a collective effort by most institutions to reverse that trend. Faculty they conclude because of the frequency of their contact with African American male students have the greatest influence in changing the fortunes of any campus retention initiative to assist this group.

Faculty however is faced with their professional and personal responsibilities, which require time and commitment. They are also challenged with the changing dynamics of the student population, political and financial constraints which require more of their time and effort. They however, will only dedicate more time and effort into activities that they find most rewarding. The success of any retention programs therefore hangs on their perception of its overall success and the commitment of the institution in making it successful and their overall participation.

It is along this background that I have propose a study to investigate the extent of faculty perception of a institution’s retention program contributing to the success or interruption of the African American male experience. The research questions will address faculty

111

perception regarding, the effectiveness of institutional policy, institutional support, faculty workload, knowledge of institution retention program, the effectiveness of the institution retention program in relationship to faculty race, age, years of teaching, tenure status, and teaching load. The population will be the faculty of a Public Historically Black College and University.

Testing the validity and reliability of an instrument is very important in the research process, therefore I am requesting your permission to have thirty faculty members at your institution assist in this endeavor. The process will be confidential will and entail replying to thirty-four questions. Faculty will also be asked to comment on whether the items on the questionnaire are clear and to offer any other comment they deemed necessary.

I will be willing to discuss this further with you if necessary. I can be contacted at (256) 430-1854 or Joetex29@Hotmail.com .

Thank you in advance for your kind assistance

Sincerely,

Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate Higher Education Administration

112

Appendix C

Letter of Request to Oakwood College Faculty

4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816

March 29, 2004.

FacultyOakwood College7000 Adventist BlvdHuntsville, Al 35896.

Dear Faculty:

I am in the process of conducting a study on faculty perceptions regarding Alabama A & M University’s retention program for African American male students.

I have requested permission from the Provost/ Vice President for Academic Affairs at Oakwood in soliciting your kind assistance in conducting a pilot test of the instrument. This exercise will assists in determining the reliability and validity of the instrument. I would appreciate your cooperation in completing the attached questionnaire. Please place the completed questionnaire in the envelope provided and return it to the office of Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs for pickup by 4.p.m on Friday April 2, 2004. Your response will be treated in confidence.

I appreciate any comments or suggestions you may have in strengthening the instrument. Please feel free to write on the questionnaire.

I look forward in receiving your responses by April 2nd. Thank you for your kind assistance in this endeavor.

Sincerely,Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate

Appendix D

113

Letter of Request to the DeansAlabama A & M University

4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816

March 31, 2004.

Dear Dean:

This letter is to inform you of a research project, I am conducting involving the entire-full time faculty at Alabama A & M University. My research addresses faculty perceptions regarding the retention program for African American male college students. I have received permission from the Provost/ Vice president of Academic Affairs to conduct the study. I am requesting your assistance in informing your department chairs of the intended project.

The study will include the distributing and picking up the survey instrument at respective department offices. I would like to begin issuing the survey instruments on April 5, 2004 and begin picking them up five days after. If the return rate is not acceptable I will extend the pickup time and issue a follow- up letter.

The names of the faculty members will not be requested on the instrument as to ensure confidentiality. A summary of the results will be shared with senior university officials and the respective schools deans.

I will be willing to discuss any questions you may have. You may contact me by phone at (256) 430-1854 or by email at Joetex29@hotmail.com.

Sincerely,

Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate Higher Education Administration

Appendix E

114

Letter to Alabama A & M University Faculty Members

4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816

March 31, 2004

Dear Faculty Member:

I will be embarking on a research project involving the entire full-time faculty at Alabama A & M University. The project will address faculty perceptions regarding the University’s retention program for African American male college students. The Provost/ Vice president of Academic Affairs has given permission me to conduct the study and your Dean has been briefed on the project.

Alabama A & M University has initiated orientation and remediation programs to improve the likelihood of success for incoming freshmen. Results from other retention initiatives have not, however, shown significant improvements in the six year graduation rates for African American males, which range from 22.68 percent in 1992 to 31.88 in 1997. This is not unique to Alabama A & M University. Other Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) are faced with the same dilemma.

Researchers have paid little attention to retention efforts to assists African American male college students, and faculty perceptions of the retention programs at HBCUs. Research has indicated that faculty is faced with professional and personal responsibilities which require time and commitment, and is challenged with the changing dynamics of the student population. This requires more of their time and effort but they can only dedicate more time and effort into activities that are most rewarding.

I have developed a questionnaire, which contains items, which will indicate your perception of the institution’s retention program for addressing African American male students. The questionnaire will be distributed to you and your colleagues by April 6 through your department. Upon completion, please deliver your completed and sealed questionnaire to the secretary in your department for pickup on April 12, 2004. This is a voluntary exercise, but it is important that a high level of response is ascertained; therefore, your response will be important. Thank you for your kind assistance.

Sincerely,

Howard Wright

Appendix F

115

Follow Up Letter to Faculty Alabama A & M University

4431 D Torrance DrHuntsville, AL 35816

April 25, 2004

Dear Faculty Member:

A questionnaire was distributed to you and your colleagues that focused on faculty perceptions of the effectiveness of the Alabama A & M University retention program for African American male students. I know this is a very busy time of the year for you with the end of the semester approaching. Indications from your colleagues who have completed the survey, suggest that it will take approximately five minutes to have it done.

Although participation is voluntary, the completion of each questionnaire is important, as a small amount of non- responses will affect the study. Your single response is extremely important to the success of the study. If you have not completed the questionnaire as yet, please do so and return it to the secretary in your respective department. By doing this, you will assist in contributing to the knowledge about the effectiveness of programs addressing African American male retention at a Historically Black College.

Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,

Howard WrightEducation Specialist Candidate

Appendix G

116

Research InstrumentQuestionnaire

Faculty Perceptions of the Effectiveness of the Program for Addressing the Retention of African American Male Students at Alabama A&M University

Background and Demographic Information

1. Do you hold a full-time faculty appointment? (1) Yes (2) No

2. What is your current tenure status?

(1) Tenured (2) Non- tenured (3) Tenure track 3. What is your current academic rank? (1) Instructor (2) Assistant Professor (3) Associate Professor (4) Professor 4. What level of courses do you teach?

(1) Undergraduate only (2) Graduate only (3) Graduate and Undergraduate

5. Which school is you affiliated?

(1) Agriculture & Environmental Sciences (2) Arts & Sciences (3) Business (4) Education (5) Engineering & Technology

6. Racial identification (1) White non Hispanic (2) Black Non-Hispanic (3) Asian/Pacific Islander (4) Non Resident Alien (5) Hispanic (6) Native American

(7) Other________________ (please specify)

7. Gender (1) Male (2) Female

8. What is your age range?

117

(1) 20-30 (2) 31-40 (3) 41-50 (4) 51-60 (5) 61-70 (6) 71 & over

9. How many years have you been teaching at this institution?

(1) 1-5 (2) 6-10 (3) 11-15 (4)16-20 (5)21-25 (6) 26 or more

Workload

10. How many credit hours do you typically teach per semester?

(1) 3-6 (2) 7-12 (3) 13-15 (4) 16-19 (5) Other __________ (please specify)

11. What percentage of your time is spent on institutional committee work during the academic year?

(1) 1- 5% (2) 6-9% (3) 10-15% (4) 16-20% (5) 21% or more

12. What percentage of your time do you spend each academic year interacting with African American male students outside of the classroom?

(1) 1-4 % (2) 5-8% (3) 9-12% (4) 13-16% (5) 16 % or more

13. Please state the number of publications you completed over the past two years?

(1)0 (2) 1 (3) 2 (4) 3 (5) 4 & over

Institutional policy

Indicate your response by circling one Strongly Disagree -1Choice for each item Disagree - 2

Neutral - 3 Agree - 4

Strongly Agree -5

14. The institution’s retention 1 2 3 4 5 policy is clearly communicated and understood. 15. The institution’s retention 1 2 3 4 5program is aligned with its policy and mission.

16. The institution retention policy 1 2 3 4 5encourages interaction between faculty

118

and African American male student outside the classroom.

17. The institution’s retention program 1 2 3 4 5 encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase retention of African American male students.

18. The institution’s retention policy is 1 2 3 4 5 aligned with the goals of African American male students.

19. The institution’s retention policy 1 2 3 4 5 addresses the academic, social and cultural environment essential for African American male student retention. 20. The institution’s retention policy 1 2 3 4 5 addresses the social and economic background of African American male students. Institutional support

21. The institution’s retention program 1 2 3 4 5 includes specific provisions for addressing the needs of African American male students.

22. The institution allocates financial 1 2 3 4 5 resources to support the retention of African American male students. 23. The institution’s freshman/new 1 2 3 4 5student orientation program includes segments that address the needs ofAfrican American male students.

24. The institution’s retention program 1 2 3 4 5encourages parental involvement with African American male students. 25. The institution rewards and recognizes 1 2 3 4 5efforts by the faculty to improve the retention of African American male students.

119

Knowledge

26. The institution provides training 1 2 3 4 5 for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American male students.

27. I am cognizant of the 1 2 3 4 5collegiate problems of African American male students at this institution.

28. I am provided early academic alert 1 2 3 4 5on African American male students who are having academic social and otherdifficulties.

29. I am provided with information regarding 1 2 3 4 5 individual and institutional services to assist African American male students. 30. The institution’s academic tracking 1 2 3 4 5system allows for the identification and monitoring of African American male students’ progress.

31. I am able to make contact 1 2 3 4 5 with African American male students through telephone calls.

32. I am able to make contact 1 2 3 4 5 with African American male students through emails.

Academic Advisement

33. Please indicate the number of African American male undergraduate students you advise for the academic year? (Circle One).

1. 10-20 2. 21-30 3. 31-40 4. 41-50 5. 51 and over

120

34. How much of your office hours are spent advising African American students? (Circle One).

1. 0 2. 1-5 3. 6-10 4. 11-15 5. 16 and over

35. I use my advisement time to 1 2 3 4 5help African American male students with their personal and career goals.

36. I provide African American students 1 2 3 4 5 with information that helps them make decisions concerning their major.

37. I frequently refer African American 1 2 3 4 5male advisees to counselors and tutors.

38. I meet informally with African American male students I advise. 1 2 3 4 5

121

Appendix H

Variable Description

Variable Label Response Choice Value code

Full time faculty appointment yes no

12

Current tenure status tenurenon – tenuretenure track

123

Academic rank InstructorAssistant ProfessorAssociate ProfessorProfessor

1234

Course teach undergraduate onlygraduate onlygraduate & undergraduate

123

School affiliation Agriculture & Environmental SciencesArts and SciencesBusinessEducationEngineering & Technology

1

2345

Racial identification HispanicBlack –non HispanicAsian/ Pacific IslanderNon Resident AlienHispanicNative AmericanOther

1234567

Gender malefemale

12

Age range 20-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071 & over

123456

Years of teaching 1-56-1011-1516-2021-2526 or more

123456

122

Variable Label Response Choice Value code

Percentage of time spent on committee 1-56-910-1516-2016 or more

12345

Percentage of time spent interacting with African American male students outside classroom

1-45-89-1213-1616 or more

12345

Number of publication the past two years 01234 & over

12345

Retention policy clearly communicated strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

Retention program aligned with mission & policy strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

Retention policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students outside of classroom

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

Institution allocates financial resources to support with African American male students

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly disagree

12345

123

Variable Label Value label Value code

Retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male students

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

Institution rewards and recognizes faculty efforts to improve the retention of African American male students

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

Institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concern of African American male students

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I am cognizant of the problems of African American male students at this institution

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I am provided with early alert on African American male students who are having academic, social, and other difficulties

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to assist with African American male students

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

Institutional tracking system allows for identification and monitoring of African American male students progress

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I am able to make contact with African American male students through telephone calls

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

124

Variable Label Value label Value code

Number of undergraduate students advice per academic year

10-2021-3031-4041-5051 & over

12345

Office hours spent advising African American male students per week

1-56-1011-1516 & over

1234

I use my advisement time to help African American male students with personal and career goals

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decision concerning their major

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I frequently refer African American male students advisees to counselors and tutors

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

I frequently met informally with African American male students I advise

strongly disagreedisagreeneutralagreestrongly agree

12345

125

APPENDIX I(TABLES 43-68.7)

SUMMARY OF CROSS TAB AND CHI-SQUARE

126

Table 43. The retention policy is clearly communicated and understood. ===============================================================

Variables X2 Asymp sig (2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 26.5 0.051 *White- Non-Hispanic 3.8 8.5 8.5 9.4 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 8.5 8.05 14.2 9.4 5.7 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 2.8 6.6 12.3 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 7.5 0.9 .09Other 0 0 0.9 0 8.5 1.9Total 12.3 19.8 30.2 29.2 48.5 100

Gender 2.1 0.712 *Male 7.5 15.1 17.9 19.8 4.7 65.1Female 4.7 4.7 12.3 9.4 3.8 34.9Total 12.3 19.8 30.2 29.2 26 5.8

Age 12.1 0.739 *20-30 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 2.831-40 1.9 2.8 3.8 1.9 0.9 11.341-50 0 5.7 6.6 9.4 2.8 24.551-60 6.6 8.5 13.2 9.4 3.8 41.561-70 2.8 1.9 5.7 8.5 0.9 19.8.Total 12.3 19.8 30.2 29.2 8.5 100

Years of Teaching 24.2 0.232 *1 to 5 6.6 4.7 10.4 11.3 1.9 34.96 to 10 0 5.7 3.8 7.5 1.9 18.911 to 15 0 2.8 4.7 2.8 0.9 11.316 to20 0.9 3.8 0.9 1.9 1.9 9.421 to25 0.9 2.8 3.8 3.8 0.9 12.326 or more 3.8 0 6.6 1.9 0.9 13.2Total 12.3 19.3 30.2 29.2 8.5 100Academic Rank 20.1 0.06 *Instructor 0 0.9 1.9 4.7 0 7.5Assistant Professor 5.7 11.3 11.3 11.3 7.5 47.2Associate Professor 3.8 5.7 6.6 10.4 0 26.4Professor 2.8 1.9 10.4 2.8 0.9 18.9Total 12.8 19.8 30.2 29.2 8.5 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

127

Table 44. Retention program is aligned with policy and mission===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 22.1 0.141*White- Non-Hispanic 0.9 7.5 8.5 13.2 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 8.5 16 15.1 5.7 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 0.9 7.5 8.5 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0 0.9 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 100

GenderMale 1.9 11.3 20.8 28.3 2.8 65.1 6.7 0.153 *Female 2.8 7.5 11.3 8.5 4.7 34.9Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 100

Age20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.8 14.4 0.569 *31-40 0 2.8 2.8 3.8 1.9 11.341-50 0 4.7 6.6 11.3 1.9 24.551-60 2.8 9.4 14.1 11.3 2.8 41.561-70 1.9 0.9 5.7 10.4 0.9 19.8Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 100

Years of Teaching1 to 5 0.9 1.9 0.9 2.8 0.9 7.5 11.1 0.521 *6 to 10 1.9 9.4 17 13.2 5.7 47.211 to 15 0 3.8 9.4 10.4 0.9 26.416 to20 0 3.8 4.7 10.4 0 18.921 to25 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5 10026 or moreTotal

0.9 6.6 11.3 14.2 1.9 18.8 0.533 *Academic Rank 0 4.7 6.6 6.6 0.9Instructor 0.9 1.9 3.8 2.8 1.9Assistant Professor 0.9 1.9 2.8 1.9 1.9Associate Professor 0.9 2.8 5.7 1.9 0.9Professor 0.9 0.9 1.9 9.4 0Total 4.7 18.9 32.1 36.8 7.5

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

128

Table 45. The Policy encourages interaction between faculty and AfricanAmerican male students outside of the classroom

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 20.9 0.182 *

White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 7.5 13.2 5.7 1.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 7.5 22.6 14.2 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific Islander 0 3.8 5.7 4.7 3.8 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 0.9 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Gender 4.0 0.405 *Male 1.9 13.2 28.3 17.9 3.8 65.1Female 3.8 6.6 13.2 7.5 3.8 34.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Age 18.9 0.274 *20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.831-40 0 0.9 8.5 0.9 0.9 11.341-50 0 3.8 9.4 10.4 0.9 24.551-60 2.8 9.4 16 8.5 4.7 41.561-70 2.8 4.7 5.7 5.7 0.9 19.8Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Years of Teaching 18.4 0.559 *1 to 5 0.9 5.7 14.2 10.4 11.3 1.96 to 10 0.9 5.7 6.6 4.7 7.5 1.911 to 15 0 1.9 4.7 3.8 2.8 0.916 to20 0 1.9 5.7 0.9 1.9 1.921 to25 2.8 3.8 2.8 2.8 3.8 0.926 or more 0.9 0.9 0.9 2.8 1.9 0.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 29.2 8.5Academic Rank 9.1 0.695 *Instructor 0 1.9 1.9 3.8 0 5Assistant Professor 3.8 7.5 20.8 11.3 3.8 47.2Associate Professor 1.9 5.7 8.5 7.5 2.8 26.4Professor 0 4.7 10.4 2.89 18.9 26.4Total 5.7 19.9 41.5 25.1 7.5 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

129

Table 46. The program encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male retention.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 30.4 0.016 **White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 7.5 13.2 5.7 1.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 7.5 22.6 14.2 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 3.8 5.7 4.7 3.8 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 0.9 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Gender 1.6 0.807 *Male 1.9 13.2 28.3 17.9 3.8 65.1Female 3.8 6.6 13.2 7.5 3.8 34.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Age 21.8 0.149 *20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.831-40 0 0.9 8.5 0.9 0.9 11.341-50 0 3.8 9.4 10.4 0.9 24.551-60 2.8 9.4 16 8.5 4.7 41.561-70 2.8 4.7 5.7 5.7 0.9 19.8Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Years of Teaching 26.2 0.161 *1 to 5 0.9 5.7 14.2 10.4 3.8 34.96 to 10 0.9 5.7 6.6 4.7 0.9 18.911 to 15 0 1.9 4.7 3.8 0.9 11.316 to20 0 1.9 5.7 0.9 0.9 9.421 to25 2.8 3.8 2.8 2.8 0.9 12.326 or more 0.9 0.9 0.9 2.8 0.9 0.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

Academic Rank 15.6 0.209 *Instructor 0 1.9 1.9 3.8 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 3.8 7.5 20.8 11.3 5.7 47.2Associate Professor 1.9 5.7 8.5 7.5 0.9 26.4Professor 0 4.7 10.4 2.8 0 18.9Total 5.7 19.8 41.5 25.5 7.5 100

_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

130

Table 47. The retention policy is aligned with the goals of African American male students.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 11.4 0.495 *White- Non-Hispanic 1 6.8 11.7 8.7 1 29.1Black-Non Hispanic 4.9 8.7 24.3 10.7 1.9 50.2Asian-Pacific Islander 0 1 9.7 4.9 1.9 17.5Non-Resident 0 1 0 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 1 0 1.9Total 0 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100

Gender 2.9 13.6 29.1 14.6 4.9 65 4.6 0.336 *Male 2.9 4.9 16.5 10.7 0 35Female 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100Total

Age 12.2 0.729 *20-30 1 0 1 1 0 2.931-40 1 1 6.8 1.9 1 11.741-50 0 3.9 9.7 7.8 1.9 23.351-60 1.9 9.7 18.4 11.7 1 42.761-70 1.9 3.9 9.7 2.9 1 19.4Total 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100

Years of Teaching 18.7 0.544 *1 to 5 1.9 4.9 16.5 9.7 1.9 356 to 10 1.9 5.8 5.8 4.9 1 19.411 to 15 0 2.9 5.8 1 1 10.716 to20 0 1 4.9 3.9 0 9.721 to25 1.9 3.9 5.8 1 0 12.626 or more 0 0 6.8 4.9 1 12.6Total 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100

Academic Rank 16.4 0.173 *Instructor 0 0 3.9 2.9 1 7.8Assistant Professor 4.9 8.7 15.5 15.5 2.9 47.6Associate Professor 1 6.8 15.5 1.9 1 26.2Professor 0 2.9 10.7 4.9 0 18.4Total 5.8 18.4 45.6 25.2 4.9 100

_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

131

Table 48. The retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural, environment essential for African American male student retention.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 24.3 0.083 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 16.3 8.7 1 29.8Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 6.7 26 10.6 2.9 50Asian-Pacific Islander 0 4.8 4.8 6.7 1 17.3Non-Resident 0 1 0 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 0 1 1.9Total 3.8 17.8 47.1 26 5.8 100

Gender 7.0 0.136 *Male 1 9.6 28.8 21.2 3.8 64.4Female 2.9 7.7 18.3 4.8 1.9 35.6Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100

Age 15.1 0.521*20-30 0 0 1.9 1 0 2.931-40 1 1 5.8 3.8 0 11.541-50 0 2.9 9.6 10.6 1.9 2551-60 1 10.6 22.1 5.8 1.9 2561-70 1.9 2.9 7.7 4.8 1 18.3Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100

Years of Teaching 17.5 0.620 *1 to 5 1.9 5.8 14.4 10.6 2.9 35.66 to 10 0 4.8 8.7 3.8 1.9 19.211 to 15 0 1.9 5.8 3.8 0 11.516 to20 0 1.9 4.8 1.9 1 9.621 to25 1.9 2.9 4.8 1.9 0 11.526 or more 0 0 0 3.8 0 12.5Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100

Academic Rank 12.4 0.410 *Instructor 0 1 4.8 1.9 0 7.7Assistant Professor 2.9 6.7 19.2 14.4 4.8 48.1Associate Professor 1 7.7 10.6 6.7 1 26.9Professor 0 1.9 12.5 2.9 0 17.3Total 3.8 17.3 47.1 26 5.8 100

_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

132

Table 49. The relationship between retention policy addresses social and economic background of African American male students===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 21.0 0.180*White- Non-Hispanic 0 7.8 12.6 9.7 0 30.1Black-Non Hispanic 3.9 9.7 25.2 7.8 2.9 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 1.9 8.7 4.9 1.9 17.5Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 0 1 1.9Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100

Gender 3.1 0.550*Male 1 13.6 30.1 15.5 3.9 64.1Female 2.9 6.8 17.5 6.8 1.9 35.9Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100

Age 19.5 0.245*20-30 0 0 2.9 0 0 2.931-40 1 1 5.8 1 1.9 10.741-50 0 3.9 9.7 10.7 1 25.251-60 1 10.7 21.4 7.8 1.9 42.761-70 1.9 4.9 7.8 2.9 1 18.4Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100

Years of Teaching 21.6 0.360*1 to 5 1.9 5.8 18.4 6.8 1.9 356 to 10 0 4.9 7.8 4.9 1.9 19.411 to 15 0 1.9 7.8 1.9 0 11.716 to20 0 1 3.9 2.9 1.9 9.721 to25 1.9 4.9 2.9 1.9 0 11.726 or more 0 1.9 6.8 3.9 0 12.6Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100

Academic Rank 22.1 0.140*Instructor 0 1 5.8 1 0 7.8Assistant Professor 2.9 6.8 20.4 12.6 4.9 47.6Associate Professor 1 8.7 12.6 3.9 1 27.2Professor 0 3.9 8.7 4.9 0 17.5Total 3.9 20.4 47.6 22.3 5.8 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

133

Table 50. The retention policy address includes provision for addressing the needs of African American male students. ===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 30.3 0.016 **White- Non-Hispanic 0 1.9 16.5 11.7 0 30.1Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 11.7 25.2 8.7 1 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 1.9 4.9 8.7 1.9 17.4Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1.9 0 0 0 1.9Total 2.9 17.5 46.9 29.1 2.9 100

Gender 11.2 0.52 *Male 1 14.6 24.3 23.3 21.9 65Female 1.9 2.9 23.3 5.8 1 35Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100

Age 24.4 0.079 *20-30 0 0 2.9 0 0 2.931-40 0 1 7.8 2.9 0 11.741-50 0 1.9 6.8 12.6 1.9 13.351-60 1.9 11.7 21.4 6.8 0 41.761-70 1 2.9 8.7 6.8 1 20.4Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100

Years of Teaching 27.2 0.335 *1 to 5 1 4.9 20.4 8.7 0 356 to 10 0 3.9 5.8 7.8 1 18.411 to 15 0 1 7.8 1.9 1 11.716 to20 0 2.9 4.9 1 0 8.721 to25 1.9 2.9 4.9 1.9 1 12.626 or more 0 1.9 3.9 7.8 0 13.6Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100

Academic Rank 13.5 0.129 *Instructor 0 1 2.9 3.9 0 7.8Assistant Professor 2.9 5.8 22.3 14.6 1 46.6Associate Professor 0 8.7 9.7 6.8 1 26.2Professor 0 1.9 12.6 3.9 1 19.4Total 2.9 17.5 47.6 29.1 2.9 100

_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

134

Table 51. The institution allocates financial resources to support the retention of African American male students.

=============================================================== Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 15.2 0.513 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 13.5 13.5 0 30.8Black-Non Hispanic 3.8 8.7 26.9 8.7 1 48.1Asian-Pacific Islander 0 1.9 11.5 3.8 0 17.2Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 1 0 0 2Total 3.8 15.4 53.9 26 1 100

Gender 9.3 0.055 *Male 1.9 12.5 28.8 21.2 1 65.4Female 1.9 2.9 25 4.8 0 34.6Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100

Age 12.9 0.683 *20-30 0 0 2.9 0 0 2.931-40 0 1.9 5.8 3.8 0 11.541-50 0 1.9 13.5 7.7 1 2451-60 2.9 9.6 19.2 9.6 0 41.361-70 1 1.9 12.5 4.8 0 20.2Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100

Years of Teaching 24.8 0.208 *1 to 5 1.9 4.8 20.2 8.7 0 35.66 to 10 0 2.9 6.7 7.7 1 18.311 to 15 0 0 8.7 2.9 0 11.516 to20 0 3.8 2.9 1.9 0 8.721 to25 1.9 1.9 7.7 1 0 12.526 or more 0 1.9 7.7 3.8 0 13.5Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100

Academic Rank 15.3 0.224 *Instructor 0 1 4.8 1.9 0 7.77Assistant Professor 2.9 5.8 25 13.5 0 47.1Associate Professor 1 5.8 8.7 9.6 1 26Professor 0 2.9 15.4 1 0 19.2Total 3.8 15.4 53.8 26 1 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

135

Table 52. The freshman/new student orientation includes segment that addressesthe needs of African American male students.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 19.6 0.236 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 12.4 12.4 1.9 30.5Black-Non Hispanic 4.8 7.6 26.7 10.5 0 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 1 7.6 8.6 0 17.1Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 1 0 0 1.9Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100

Gender 6.9 0.141 *Male 2.9 11.4 26.7 23.8 1 65.7Female 1.9 1.9 21.9 7.6 1 34.3Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100

Age 11.4 0.782 *20-30 0 1 1.9 0 0 2.931-40 1 1.9 6.7 1.9 0 11.441-50 0 2.9 9.5 11.4 1 24.851-60 1.9 6.7 19 12.4 1 4161-70 41.9 1 11.4 5.7 0 20Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100

Years of Teaching 30.5 0.061 *1 to 5 2.9 4.8 19 7.6 1 35.26 to 10 0 3.8 8.6 6.7 0 1911 to 15 0 1 7.6 2.9 0 11.416 to20 0 2.9 3.8 1 1 8.621 to25 1.9 0 6.7 3.8 0 12.426 or more 0 1 2.9 9.5 0 13.3Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100

Academic Rank 8.03 0.782* Instructor 0 1 4.8 1.9 0 7.6Assistant Professor 3.8 7.6 19 15.2 1.9 47.6Associate Professor 1 1.9 13.3 9.5 0 25.7Professor 0 2.9 11.4 4.8 0 19Total 4.8 13.3 48.6 31.4 1.9 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

136

Table 53. The retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male students.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 14.1 0.589 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 5.8 18.4 5.8 1 31.1Black-Non Hispanic 5.8 5.8 28.2 8.7 0 48.5Asian-Pacific Islander 0 2.9 9.7 4.9 0 17.5Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1Other 0 1 0 1 0 1.9Total 5.8 15.5 57.7 20.4 1 100

Gender 2.9 13.6 31.1 15.5 0 64 13.0 0.051 **Male 2.9 1.9 26.2 2.9 1 35Female 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1Total

Age 0 1 1.9 0 0 2.9 8.2 0.942*20-30 0 1 8.7 1.9 0 11.731-40 1 2.9 14.6 5.8 0 24.341-50 3.9 6.8 23.3 6.8 1 41.751-60 1 3.9 8.7 5.8 0 19.461-70 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1 100Total

Years of Teaching 17.5 0.620 *1 to 5 1 5.8 21.4 6.8 0 356 to 10 1.9 2.9 9.7 3.9 0 18.411 to 15 0 1.9 6.8 2.9 0 11.716 to20 1 1 3.9 1.9 1 8.721 to25 1.9 1 7.8 1.9 0 12.626 or more 0 2.9 7.8 2.9 0 13.6Total 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1 100

Academic Rank 11.7 0.467 *Instructor 0 1 3.9 2.9 0 7.8Assistant Professor 4.9 4.9 27.2 9.7 1 47.6Associate Professor 1 4.9 12.6 6.8 0 25.2Professor 0 4.9 13.6 1 0 19.4Total 5.8 15.5 57.3 20.4 1 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

137

Table 54. The institution rewards and recognizes efforts by the faculty to improve the retention of African American males.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 15.6 0.484 *White- Non-Hispanic 5.7 12.3 7.5 4.7 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 11.3 11.3 19.8 6.6 0 49.1Asian-Pacific 1.9 3.8 7.5 3.8 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0.9 0.9 0 0 1.9Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100

Gender 10.1 0.04 **Male 14.2 14.2 21.7 14.2 0.9 65.1Female 5.7 14.2 14.2 0.9 0 35.9Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100

Age 18.1 0.32 *20-30 0 0 1.9 0.9 0 2.831-40 0.9 5.7 2.8 0.9 0.9 11.341-50 3.8 7.5 9.4 3.8 0 24.551-60 11.3 11.3 14.2 4.7 0 41.561-70 3.8 3.8 7.5 4.7 0 19.8Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100

Years of Teaching 19.6 0.483 *1 to 5 4.7 12.3 11.3 5.7 0.9 34.96 to 10 6.6 0.9 6.6 4.7 0 18.911 to 15 0.9 2.8 5.7 1.9 0 11.316 to20 0.9 4.7 2.8 0.9 0 9.421 to25 2.8 4.7 2.8 1.9 0 12.326 or more 3.8 2.8 6.6 0 0 13.2Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100

Academic Rank 7.7 0.808 *Instructor 0.9 3.8 1.9 0.9 0 7.5Assistant Professor 11.3 10.4 15.1 9.4 0.9 47.2Associate Professor 3.8 7.5 11.3 3.8 0 26.4Professor 3.8 6.6 7.5 0.9 0 18.9Total 19.8 28.3 35.8 15.1 0.9 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

138

Table 55. The institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American male students

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 14.4 0.568 *White- Non-Hispanic 6.6 13.2 6.6 3.8 0 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 12.3 17 13.2 5.7 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 2.8 3.8 4.7 6.6 0 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0.9 0.9 0 0 1.9Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100

Gender 7.7 0.103 *Male 14.2 23.6 13.2 14.2 0 65.1Female 9.4 11.3 11.3 1.9 0.9 34.9Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100

Age 19.4 0.248 *20-30 0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 2.831-40 1.9 4.7 1.9 1.9 0.9 11.341-50 4.7 11.3 5.7 2.8 0 24.551-60 13.2 12.3 12.3 3.8 0 41.561-70 3.8 5.7 3.8 6.6 0 19.8Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100

Years of Teaching 21.4 0.372 *1 to 5 10.4 9.4 9.4 5.7 0 34.96 to 10 2.8 8.5 4.7 1.9 0.9 18.911 to 15 1.9 3.8 1.9 3.8 0 11.316 to20 2.8 4.7 1.9 0 0 9.421 to25 5.7 1.9 2.8 1.9 0 12.326 or more 0 6.6 3.8 2.8 0 13.2Total 23.6 34.9 24.5 16 0.9 100

Academic Rank 4.8 0.964 *Instructor 1.9 2.8 0.9 1.9 0 7.5Assistant Professor 13.2 16 10.4 6.6 0.9 47.2Associate Professor 5.7 10.4 6.6 3.8 0 26.4Professor 2.8 5.7 6.6 3.8 0 18.9Total 23.6 34.9 34.5 24.5 0.9 100

_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

139

Table 56. I am cognizant of the problems of African American male students.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 20.4 0.203*White- Non-Hispanic 0 3.8 6.7 14.3 4.8 29.5Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 12.4 9.5 15.2 9.5 49.5Asian-Pacific 0 2.9 8.6 5.7 1 18.1Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1 1Other 0 0 1 0 1 1.9Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100

Gender 5.03 0.973*Male 1.9 13.3 17.1 21.9 10.5 64.8Female 1 5.7 8.6 13.3 6.7 35.2Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100

Age 11.6 0.772*20-30 0 1 1 1 0 2.931-40 0 2.9 4.8 3.8 0 11.441-50 1 3.8 3.8 9.5 6.7 24.851-60 1.9 5.7 11.4 14.3 8.6 41.961-70 0 5.7 4.8 6.7 1.9 19Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100

Years of Teaching 14.8 0.594*1 to 5 0 6.7 11.4 13.3 3.8 35.26 to 10 1.9 2.9 3.8 6.7 3.8 1911 to 15 0 3.8 2.9 2.9 1.9 11.416 to20 0 2.9 1.9 1.9 2.9 9.521 to25 0 1 3.8 6.7 1 12.426 or more 1 1.9 1.9 3.8 3.8 12.4Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100

Academic Rank 18.8 0.251*Instructor 0 1 1 4.8 1 7.6Assistant Professor 2.9 4.8 12.4 19 8.6 47.6Associate Professor 0 9.5 5.7 6.7 4.8 26.7Professor 0 3.8 6.7 4.8 2.9 18.1Total 2.9 19 25.7 35.2 17.1 100

_______________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

140

Table 57. I am provided with early alert on African American male students who are having social and academic difficulties

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 23.6 0.099*White- Non-Hispanic 9.4 12.3 3.8 2.8 1.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 15.1 15.1 14.2 4.7 0 49.1Asian-Pacific 0.9 5.7 3.8 6.6 0.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0.9 0 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100

Gender 7.9 0.094*Male 13.2 23.6 13.2 13.2 1.9 65.1Female 14.2 9.4 8.5 1.9 0.9 34.9Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100

Age 22.5 0.128 *20-30 0 1.9 0.9 0 0 2.831-40 5.7 1.9 2.8 0.9 0 11.341-50 6.6 4.7 6.6 5.7 0.9 24.551-60 12.3 17 9.4 2.8 0 41.561-70 2.8 7.5 1.9 5.7 1.9 19.8Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100

Years of Teaching1 to 5 14.2 7.5 9.4 3.8 0 34.9 34.0 0.026**6 to 10

5.7 6.62.8

3.8 0 18.911 to 15 0.9 4.7 0.9 2.8 1.9 11.316 to20 0.9 6.6 1.9 0 0 9.421 to25 3.8 5.7 1.9 0.9 0 12.326 or more 1.9 1.9 4.7 3.8 0.9 13.2Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100

Academic Rank 14.4 0.278 *Instructor 0.9 2.8 0.9 1.9 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 18.9 12.3 11.3 4.7 0 47.2Associate Professor 4.7 9.4 5.7 5.7 0.9 26.4Professor 2.8 8.5 3.8 2.8 0.9 18.9Total 27.4 33 21.7 15.1 2.8 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05

141

* Not significantTable 58. Information on services and individuals for African American male students.===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 23.1 0.111 *White- Non-Hispanic 7.5 7.5 8.5 5.7 0.9 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 8.5 13.2 19.8 6.6 0.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 1.9 3.8 4.7 5.7 1.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0.9 0 0 0 0.9 1.9Total 19.8 24.5 24.5 17.9 4.7 100

Gender 7.0 0.138 *Male 9.4 17 19.8 15.1 3.8 65.1Female 10.4 7.5 13.2 2.8 0.9 34.9Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7

Age 27.5 0.036 **20-30 0 1.9 0 0.9 0 2.831-40 0.9 6.6 2.8 0.9 0 11.341-50 2.8 4.7 7.5 7.5 1.9 24.551-60 14.2 6.6 16 3.8 0.9 41.561-70 1.9 4.7 6.6 4.7 1.9 19.8Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7 100

Years of Teaching 24.0 0.241 *1 to 5 9.4 10.4 8.5 6.6 0 34.96 to 10 4.7 2.8 5.7 3.8 1.9 18.911 to 15 0 2.8 4.7 1.9 1.9 11.316 to20 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.8 0.9 9.421 to25 2.8 2.8 3.8 2.8 0 12.326 or more 0.9 3.8 8.5 0 0 13.2Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7 100

Academic Rank 8.7 0.728 *Instructor 0 2.8 1.9 1.9 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 12.3 12.3 12.3 8.5 1.9 47.2Associate Professor 4.7 5.7 9.4 5.7 0.9 26.4Professor 2.8 3.8 9.4 1.9 0.9 18.9Total 19.8 24.5 33 17.9 4.7 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

142

Table 59. The institution’s tracking system allows for monitoring African American male students progress

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 18.7 0.286 *White- Non-Hispanic 0 8.5 11.3 7.5 2.8 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 7.5 10.4 20.8 8.5 1.9 49.1Asian-Pacific 1.9 1.9 6.6 4.7 2.8 17.9Non-Resident 0 0 0 0.9 0 0.9Other 0.9 0 0 0.9 0 1.9Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100

Gender 2.7 0.609 *Male 4.7 14.2 24.5 16 5.7 65.1Female 5.7 6.6 14.2 6.6 1.9 34.9Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100

Age 8.3 0.938 *20-30 0.9 0.9 0.9 0 0 2.831-40 1.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 0.9 24.541-50 1.9 4.7 9.4 6.6 1.9 24.551-60 3.8 10.4 17.9 6.6 2.8 41.561-70 1.9 1.9 7.5 6.6 1.9 19.8Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100

Years of Teaching 21.6 0.36 *1 to 5

2.8 2.817

8.5 2.8 34.96 to 10 3.8 5.7 5.7 3.8 0 18.911 to 15 0 3.8 3.8 1.9 1.9 11.316 to20 1.9 3.8 1.9 0.9 0.9 9.421 to25 1.9 2.8 4.7 2.8 0 12.326 or more 0 0.9 5.7 4.7 1.9 13.2Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100

Academic Rank 6.4 0.896 *Instructor 0 1.9 2.8 1.9 0.9 7.5Assistant Professor 6.6 9.4 17 11.3 2.8 47.2Associate Professor 3.8 3.8 11.3 5.7 1.9 26.4Professor 0 5.7 7.5 3.8 1.9 18.9Total 10.4 20.8 38.7 22.6 7.5 100

________________________________________________________________________

143

** P < .05* Not significantTable 60. I am able to make contact with African American male students through

telephone calls.===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 35.3 0.004 **White- Non-Hispanic 0.9 3.8 3.8 14.2 7.5 30.1Black-Non Hispanic 2.8 8.5 14.2 16 7.5 49Asian-Pacific 0 4.7 0.9 10.4 1.9 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0 0.9 0 0.9 1.8Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100

Gender 4.1 0.394*Male 1.9 13.2 11.3 28.3 10.4 65.1Female 2.8 3.8 8.5 12.3 7.5 34.9Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100

Age 13.6 0.625 *20-30 0 0.9 1.9 0 0 2.831-40 0 0.9 1.9 6.6 1.9 11.341-50 0 4.7 2.8 12.3 4.7 24.551-60 3.8 7.5 8.5 15.1 6.6 41.561-70 0.9 2.8 4.7 6.6 4.7 19.8Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100

Years of Teaching1 to 5 2.8 3.8 6.6 16 5.7 34.9 7.7 0.790 *6 to 10 0.9 2.8 6.6 6.6 1.9 18.911 to 15 0 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 11.316 to20 0 1.9 0 4.7 2.8 9.421 to25 0.9 3.8 2.8 3.8 0.9 12.326 or more 0 1.9 0.9 6.6 3.8 13.2Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100

Academic Rank 12.0 0.809 *Instructor 0 1.9 0.9 2.8 1.9 7.5Assistant Professor 3.8 5.7 7.5 20.8 9.4 47.5Associate Professor 0 4.7 7.5 9.4 4.7 26.4Professor 0.9 4.7 3.8 7.5 1.9 18.9Total 4.7 17 19.8 40.6 17.9 100

________________________________________________________________________

144

** P < .05* Not significantTable 61. I am able to make contact with African American male students

through emails===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 28.6 0.027**White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 5.7 3.8 11.3 7.5 30.2Black-Non Hispanic 1.9 9.4 12.3 19.8 5.7 49.1Asian-Pacific 0 2.8 4.7 7.5 2.8 17.9Non-Resident 0.9 0 0 0 0 0.9Other 0 0 0.9 0 0.9 1.9Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100

Gender 1.7 0.775*Male 1.9 12.3 14.2 26.4 10.4 65.1Female 2.8 5.7 7.5 12.3 6.6 34.9Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100

Age 12.6 0.699*20-30 0 0.9 0.9 0 0.9 2.831-40 0 1.9 1.9 5.7 1.9 11.341-50 0 5.7 4.7 8.5 5.7 24.551-60 3.8 4.7 10.4 18.9 3.8 41.561-70 0.9 4.7 3.8 5.7 4.7 19.8Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100

Years of Teaching 16.6 0.676*1 to 5 1.9 5.7 6.6 14.2 6.6 34.96 to 10

0.9 2.83.8

8.5 2.8 18.911 to 15 0 3.8 2.8 1.9 2.8 11.316 to20 0 1.9 0.9 4.7 1.9 9.421 to25 0 3.8 3.8 4.7 0 12.326 or more 1.9 0 3.8 4.7 2.8 13.2Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100

Academic Rank 8.1 0.775*Instructor 0 0.9 1.9 2.8 1.9 7.5Assistant Professor 1.9 8.5 6.6 20.8 9.4 47.2Associate Professor 0.9 5.7 8.5 9.4 1.9 26.4Professor 1.9 2.8 4.7 5.7 3.8 18.9Total 4.7 17.9 21.7 38.7 17 100

145

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

146

Table 62. The number of African American male undergraduate students advise per academic year.

===================================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race 1-10 21-30 31-40 41-50 51&Over

Total

White- Non-Hispanic 16.1 4.3 2.2 3.2 2.2 28 25.3 0.064*Black-Non Hispanic 39.8 2.2 3.2 2.2 2.2 49.5Asian-Pacific 12.9 2.2 2.2 2.2 0 19.4Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1Other 2.2 0 0 0 0 2.2Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100

Gender 2.0 0.735*Male 47.3 6.5 5.4 5.4 2.2 66.7Female 23.7 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 33.3Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100

Age 18.0 0.324*20-30 2.2 0 1.1 0 0 3.231-40 10.8 0 0 0 0 10.841-50 15.1 2.2 1.1 3.2 0 21.551-60 32.3 3.2 2.2 1.1 3.2 41.961-70 10.8 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.2 22.6Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100

Years of Teaching 19.6 0.483*1 to 5 26.9 1.1 2.2 3.2 2.2 35.56 to 10 15.1 0 2.2 2.2 0 19.411 to 15 5.4 3.2 1.1 0 0 9.716 to20 6.5 1.1 1.1 0 1.1 9.721 to25 7.5 2.2 1.1 1.1 0 11.826 or more 9.7 1.1 0 1.1 2.2 14Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100

Academic Rank 10.5 0.571*Instructor 3.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 0 6.5Assistant Professor 36.6 3.2 4.3 3.2 1.1 48.4Associate Professor 18.3 3.2 2.2 2.2 1.1 26.9Professor 12.9 1.1 0 1.1 3.2 18.3Total 71 8.6 7.5 7.5 5.4 100

____________________________________________________________________________** P < .05 * Not significant

147

Table 63. Office hours spent advising African American male students=================================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race 1-5 6-10 11-15 16& Over Total

White- Non-Hispanic 18.4 5.8 1.9 3.9 30.1 7.5 0.821 *Black-Non Hispanic 29.1 9.7 4.9 4.9 48.5  Asian-Pacific 10.7 5.8 0 1.9 18.4  Non-Resident 0 1 0 0 1  Other 1 1 0 0 1.9  Total 59.2 23.3 6.8 10.7 100  

 Gender 5.9 0.899*Male 37.9 16.5 3.9 6.8 65Female 21.4 6.8 2.9 3.9 35  Total 21.4 6.8 2.9 3.9 35  

 Age 14.2 0.283 *20-30 2.9 0 0 0 2.931-40 6.8 1.9 1.9 1 11.7  41-50 14.6 6.8 1.9 0 23.3  51-60 26.2 6.8 2.9 5.8 41.7  61-70 8.7 7.8 0 3.9 20.4  Total 59.2 23.3 6.8 10.7 100  

 Years of Teaching 23.4  0.741*1 to 5 25.2 3.9 2.9 2.9 356 to 10 9.7 5.8 1 1.9 18.4  11 to 15 6.8 1.9 1 1 10.7  16 to20 2.9 2.9 1 2.9 9.7  21 to25 6.8 3.9 0 1.9 12.6  26 or more 7.8 4.9 1 0 13.6  Total 49.2 23.3 6.8 10.7 100  

 Academic Rank 14.4 0.85*Instructor 3.9 2.9 0 0 6.8  Assistant Professor 29.1 8.7 2.9 5.8 46.6  Associate Professor 15.5 5.8 1.9 3.9 27.2  Professor 10.7 5.8 1.9 1 19.4  Total

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

148

Table 64. I use my advisement time to help African American male students with their personal and career goals.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 9.0 0.355*White- Non-Hispanic 1 0 2.9 21 4.8 28.5Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 8.6 6.7 20 11.4 49.5Asian-Pacific 1 2.9 1 10.5 2.9 18.1Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1 1Other 0 1 0 1 0 1.9Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100

Gender 2.1 0.799*Male 2.9 8.6 5.7 36.2 11.4 64.8Female 1.9 3.8 4.8 16.2 8.6 35.2Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 35.5 100

Age 27.7 0.369*20-30 1 1 1 0 0 2.931-40 1 1.9 0 6.7 1.9 11.441-50 1 3.8 1.9 14.3 2.9 23.851-60 1 3.8 6.7 20 10.5 41.961-70 1 1.9 1 11.4 4.8 20Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100

Years of Teaching 24 0.866*1 to 5 1.9 3.8 1.9 17.1 9.5 34.36 to 10 1 2.9 2.9 9.5 2.9 1911 to 15 1 1.9 2.9 4.8 1 11.416 to20 0 1.9 1.9 3.8 1.9 9.521 to25 1 1 1 7.6 1.9 12.426 or more 0 1 0 9.5 2.9 13.3Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100

Academic Rank 12.5 0.315*Instructor 0 0 1 6.7 0 7.6Assistant Professor 3.8 8.6 2.9 20 11.4 46.7Associate Professor 1 1.9 4.8 15.2 3.8 26.7Professor 0 1.9 1.9 10.5 4.8 19Total 4.8 12.4 10.5 52.4 20 100

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

149

Table 65. I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their majors.

===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 8.9 0.914*White- Non-Hispanic 1 1.9 1 18.1 7.6 29.5  Black-Non Hispanic 2.9 4.8 4.8 21.9 15.2 49.5  Asian-Pacific 0 1.9 1 6.7 8.6 18.1  Non-Resident 0 0 0 0 1 1  Other 0 0 0 1 1 1.9  Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100  

 Gender 2.1 0.709*Male 2.9 4.8 4.8 33.3 19 64.8Female 1 3.8 1.9 14.3 14.3 35.2  Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100  

 Age 27.7 0.035**20-30 1 1 0 0 1 2.9  31-40 1.9 1 1 4.8 2.9 11.4  41-50 1 0 1 11.4 10.5 23.8  51-60 0 3.8 1.9 24.8 11.4 41.9  61-70 0 2.9 2.9 6.7 7.6 20  Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 100 33.3 100  

 Years of Teaching 24.0  0.705*1 to 5 1.9 2.9 2.9 15.2 11.4 34.3  6 to 10 1 1 0 8.6 8.6 19  11 to 15 1 2.9 1 2.9 3.8 11.4  16 to20 0 0 0 5.7 3.8 9.5  21 to25 0 1 1 7.6 2.9 12.4  26 or more 0 1 1.9 7.6 2.9 13.3  Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100  

 Academic Rank 12.5 0.404*Instructor 0 1 0 2.9 3.8 7.6Assistant Professor 3.8 3.8 1 21 17.1 46.7  Associate Professor 0 1.9 3.8 12.4 8.6 26.7  Professor 0 1.9 1.9 11.4 3.8 19  Total 3.8 8.6 6.7 47.6 33.3 100  

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

150

Table 66. I frequently refer African American male student advisees to tutors===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 17.4 0.36*White- Non-Hispanic 2.9 4.8 6.7 11.5 3.8 29.8  Black-Non Hispanic 1.9 10.6 9.6 16.3 10.6 49  Asian-Pacific 0 0 7.7 7.7 2.9 18.3  Non-Resident 0 0 1 0 0 1  Other 0 1 0 0 1 1.9  Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100  

 Gender 4.7 0.315*Male 2.9 9.6 16.3 26.9 8.7 64.4  Female 1.9 6.7 8.7 8.7 9.6 35.6  Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100  

 Age 23.7 0.095*20-30 0 1 1.9 0 0 2.931-40 1.9 1.9 3.8 2.9 0 10.6  41-50 1.9 1.9 5.8 11.5 2.9 24  51-60 1 6.7 15 15.4 7.7 42.3  61-70 0 4.8 1.9 5.8 7.7 20.2  Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100  

 Years of Teaching 14.6 0.799*1 to 5 3.8 5.8 9.6 9.6 4.8 33.76 to 10 1 2.9 5.8 5.8 3.8 19.2  11 to 15

0 2.92.9

4.8 1 11.5  16 to20 0 1.9 1.9 2.9 2.9 9.6  21 to25 0 2.9 1.9 4.8 2.9 12.5  26 or more 0 0 2.9 7.7 2.9 13.5  Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 18.3  

 Academic Rank 17.7 0.124*Instructor 0 0 1 5.8 1 7.7Assistant Professor 4.8 7.7 12.5 12.5 8.7 46.2  Associate Professor 0 6.7 7.7 6.7 5.8 26.9  Professor 0 1.9 3.8 10.6 2.9 19.2  Total 4.8 16.3 25 35.6 18.3 100  

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

151

Table 67. I meet formally with African American male students I advise.===============================================================Variables X2 Asymp sig

(2 sided)

Race SD D N A SA Total 20.43 0.201White- Non-Hispanic 1.9 1.9 1 17.1 7.6 29.5Black-Non Hispanic 6.7 7.6 7.6 17.1 10.5 49.5    Asian-Pacific 1.9 1 2.9 7.6 4.8 18.1    Non-Resident 1 0 0 0 0 1    Other 0 0 1 0 1 1.9    Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100    

   Gender  7.28  0.121Male 5.7 9.5 5.7 29.5 14.3 64.8Female 5.7 1 6.7 12.4 9.5 35.2    Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100    

   Age  17.2  0.37620-30 0 1 1 0 1 2.931-40 1.9 0 2.9 4.8 1.9 11.4    41-50 1 4.8 1.9 8.6 7.6 23.8    51-60 6.7 3.8 5.7 19 6.7 41.9    61-70 1.9 1 1 9.5 6.7 20    Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100    

   Years of Teaching  16.9  0.656 1 to 5 3.8 2.9 4.8 12.4 10.5 34.3   6 to 10 2.9 1.9 2.9 4.7 5.7 19    11 to 15 1 2.9 1.9 3.8 1.9 11.4    16 to20 1 0 1 4.8 2.9 9.5    21 to25 11.9 1.9 1.9 4.8 1.9 12.4    26 or more 1 1 0 10.5 1 13.3    Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100    

   Academic Rank  9.19  0.686Instructor 0 1 1 4.8 1 7.6Assistant Professor 7.6 4.8 5.7 16.2 12.4 46.7    Associate Professor 1 1.9 4.8 11.4 7.6 26.7  Professor 2.9 2.9 1 9.5 2.9 19  Total 11.4 10.5 12.4 41.9 23.8 100  

________________________________________________________________________** P < .05* Not significant

152

Table 68. Collapsing Values

68.1.The program encourages faculty and staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male retention

Race White Black X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 11 20 1.5 0.22

Disagree 12 12

68.2.The retention policy includes provision for addressing the needs of African American male students

Race White Black X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 13 10 1.0 0.003**

Disagree 2 16

68.3.The institution rewards and recognizes efforts by faculty to improve the retention of American males

Gender Male Female X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 16 1 7.25 0.007**

Disagree 30 17

Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 44 35 4.6 0.031**

Disagree 11 20

Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 34 27.5 3.0 0.80*

Disagree 21 27.5

Gender Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 17 34 17 0.001**

Disagree 51 34153

68.4. I am provide with early alert on African American male students who are having social and academic difficulties

Years of Teaching

1-10 10 > X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 8 11 1.17 0.278*

Disagree 36 28

Years of Teaching

Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 19 41.5 24.4 0.001 **

Disagree 64 41.55

68.5. I am able make contact with African American male students through telephone calls

Race Black White X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 20 13 1.987 0.159*

Disagree 26 23

Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 23 42.5 17.89 0.001 **

Disagree 52 42.5

68.6. I am able to make contact with African American male students through emails

Race Black White X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 13 8 .077 0.781*

Disagree 28 20

Race Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 59 41.5 14.76 0.001 **

Disagree 24 41.5

154

68.7. I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decisions concerning their majors

Age 20-50 Over 50 X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 32 53 034. 0.558 *

Disagree 6 7

Age Observe Expected X2 Asymp sig (2 sided

Agree 85 49 52.9 0.001**

Disagree 13 49.0

155

APPENDIX J

Frequency Table for Responses

N = 106

1. Do you hold a full time faculty appointment?=============================================================== Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Yes 106 100.0 100.0 100.0_______________________________________________________________________

2. Current tenure status=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Tenured 44 41.5 41.5 41.5Non-tenured 27 25.5 25.5 67.0Tenured track 35 33.0 33.0 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

3. Academic rank=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Instructor 8 7.5 7.5 7.5Assistant Professor 50 47.2 47.2 54.7Associate Professor 28 26.4 26.4 81.1Professor 20 18.9 18.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

4. Courses taught=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Undergraduate Only 21 19.8 19.8 19.8Graduate only 24 22.6 22.6 42.5Graduate and undergraduate

61 57.5 57.5 100.0

Total 106 100.0 100.0

156

5. School facilitation=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Agriculture. & Environmental sciences

23 21.7 21.7 21.7

Arts & Sciences 33 31.1 31.1 52.8Business 9 8.5 8.5 61.3Education 27 25.5 25.5 86.8Engineering and Technology

14 13.2 13.2 100.0

Total 106 100.0 100.0

6. Racial identifications

Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentWhite Non Hispanic 32 30.2 30.2 30.2Black Non Hispanic 52 49.1 49.1 79.2Asian Pacific Islander 19 17.9 17.9 97.2Non Résident Alien 1 .9 .9 98.1Other 2 1.9 1.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

7. Gender===================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Male 69 65.1 65.1 65.1Female 37 34.9 34.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

8. Age range============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

20-30 3 2.8 2.8 2.831-40 12 11.3 11.3 14.241-50 26 24.5 24.5 38.751-60 44 41.5 41.5 80.261-70 21 19.8 19.8 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

157

9. Years teaching at institution===============================================================Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

1-5 37 34.9 34.9 34.96-10 20 18.9 18.9 53.811-15 12 11.3 11.3 65.116-20 10 9.4 9.4 74.521-25 13 12.3 12.3 86.826 or more 14 13.2 13.2 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

10. Credit hours teach per semester============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

3-6 18 17.0 17.0 17.07-12 62 58.5 58.5 75.513-15 22 20.8 20.8 96.216-19 2 1.9 1.9 98.1Other 2 1.9 1.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

11. Percentage of time spent on committee work=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

1-5 % 21 19.8 19.8 19.86-9% 20 18.9 18.9 38.710-15% 41 38.7 38.7 77.416-20% 15 14.2 14.2 91.521% & more 9 8.5 8.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

158

12. Percentage of time interacting with African American male students outside of classroom=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

1-4% 21 19.8 19.8 19.85-8% 25 23.6 23.6 43.49-12% 21 19.8 19.8 63.213-16% 12 11.3 11.3 74.516% & over 27 25.5 25.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

13. Number of publication the past two years==============================================================Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

0 44 41.5 41.5 41.51 26 24.5 24.5 66.02 14 13.2 13.2 79.23 9 8.5 8.5 87.74 & over 13 12.3 12.3 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

14. Retention policy is clearly is clearly communicated and understood============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid

PercentCumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 13 12.6 12.3 12.3Disagree 21 19.8 19.8 32.1Neutral 32 30.2 30.2 62.3Agree 31 29.2 29.2 91.5Strongly agree 9 8.5 85 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

159

14. Retention program is aligned with its policy and mission========================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

PercentStrongly disagree 5 4.7 4.7 4.7Disagree 20 18.9 18.9 23.6Neutral 34 32.1 32.1 55.7Agree 39 36.8 36.8 92.5Strongly agree 8 7.5 7.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

16. Policy encourages interaction between faculty and African American male students ============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

PercentStrongly disagree 6 5.7 5.7 5.7Disagree 21 19.8 19.8 25.5Neutral 44 41.5 41.5 67.0Agree 27 25.5 25.5 92.5Strongly agree 8 7.5 7.5 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

17. Program encourages faculty & staff to work collaboratively to increase African American male student retention============================================================= Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree

5 4.7 4.8 4.8

Disagree 21 19.8 20.0 24.8Neutral 36 34.0 34.3 59.0Agree 33 31.1 31.4 90.5Strongly agree

10 9.4 9.5 100.0

Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0

160

18. Retention policy is aligned with the goals of African American male students============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 6 5.7 5.8 5.8Disagree 19 17.9 18.4 24.3Neutral 47 44.3 45.6 69.9Agree 26 24.5 25.2 95.1Strongly agree 5 4.7 4.9 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0

19. Retention policy addresses the academic, social, cultural environment essential for African American male students retention=============================================================== Variance Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Variable 4 3.8 3.8 3.8Strongly disagree 18 17.0 17.3 21.2Disagree 49 46.2 47.1 68.3Neutral 27 25.5 26.0 94.2Agree 6 5.7 5.8 100.0Strongly agree 104 98.1 100.0 Missing 2 1.9 Total 106 100.0

20. Retention policy addresses social & economic background of African American male students=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 4 3.8 3.9 3.9Disagree 21 19.8 20.4 24.3Neutral 49 46.2 47.6 71.8Agree 23 21.7 22.3 94.2Strongly agree 6 5.7 5.8 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0

161

21. Program includes provision for addressing the needs of African American male students============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 3 2.8 2.9 2.9Disagree 18 17.0 17.5 20.4Neutral 49 46.2 47.6 68.0Agree 30 28.3 29.1 97.1Strongly agree 3 2.8 2.9 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0

22. Institution allocates financial resources to support African American male students=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 4 3.8 3.8 3.8Disagree 16 15.1 15.4 19.2Neutral 56 52.8 53.8 73.1Agree 27 25.5 26.0 99.0Strongly agree 1 .9 1.0 100.0Total 104 98.1 100.0 Missing 2 1.9 Total 106 100.0

23. Freshman/new student orientation includes segments that addresses the need of African American male student ============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 5 4.7 4.8 4.8Disagree 14 13.2 13.3 18.1Neutral 51 48.1 48.6 66.7Agree 33 31.1 31.4 98.1Strongly agree 2 1.9 1.9 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0

162

24. Retention program encourages parental involvement with African American male ============================================================= Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 6 5.7 5.8 5.8Disagree 16 15.1 15.5 21.4Neutral 59 55.7 57.3 78.6Agree 21 19.8 20.4 99.0Strongly agree 1 .9 1.0 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 Total 106 100.0

25. Institution rewards and recognizes faculty efforts to improve the retention of African American male students=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 21 19.8 19.8 19.8Disagree 30 28.3 28.3 48.1Neutral 38 35.8 35.8 84.0Agree 16 15.1 15.1 99.1Strongly agree 1 .9 .9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

26. Institution provides training for faculty to address the problems and concerns of African American male students============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 25 23.6 23.6 23.6Disagree 37 34.9 34.9 58.5Neutral 26 24.5 24.5 83.0Agree 17 16.0 16.0 99.1Strongly agree 1 .9 .9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

163

27. I am cognizant of the problems of African American male students at this institution=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 3 2.8 2.9 2.9Disagree 20 18.9 19.0 21.9Neutral 27 25.5 25.7 47.6Agree 37 34.9 35.2 82.9Strongly agree 18 17.0 17.1 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0

28. I am provided with early alert on African American male student who are having academic, social and other difficulties============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 29 27.4 27.4 27.4Disagree 35 33.0 33.0 60.4Neutral 23 21.7 21.7 82.1Agree 16 15.1 15.1 97.2Strongly agree 3 2.8 2.8 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

29. I am provided with information regarding individual and institutional services to assist African American male students============================================================ Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 21 19.8 19.8 19.8Disagree 26 24.5 24.5 44.3Neutral 35 33.0 33.0 77.4Agree 19 17.9 17.9 95.3Strongly agree 5 4.7 4.7 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

164

30. Institution tracking system allows for identification and monitoring African American male students progress=========================================================

31. I am able to make contact with African American male students through telephone calls========================================================= Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7 4.7 4.7Disagree 18 17.0 17.0 21.7Neutral 21 19.8 19.8 41.5Agree 43 40.6 40.6 82.1Strongly agree 19 17.9 17.9 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

32. I am able to make contact with AAMS through emails=========================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 5 4.7 4.7 4.7Disagree 19 17.9 17.9 22.6Neutral 23 21.7 21.7 44.3Agree 41 38.7 38.7 83.0Strongly agree 18 17.0 17.0 100.0Total 106 100.0 100.0

Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Variable 11 10.4 10.4 10.4Strongly disagree 22 20.8 20.8 31.1Disagree 41 38.7 38.7 69.8Neutral 24 22.6 22.6 92.5Agree 8 7.5 7.5 100.0Strongly agree 106 100.0 100.0 Total

165

33. Number of undergraduate students advised per academic year

Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent1-10 66 62.3 71.0 71.021-30 8 7.5 8.6 79.631-40 7 6.6 7.5 87.141-50 7 6.6 7.5 94.651 & over 5 4.7 5.4 100.0Total 93 87.7 100.0 Missing 13 12.3 106 100.0

34. Office hours spent advising African American male students per week=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

1-5 61 57.5 59.2 59.26-10 24 22.6 23.3 82.511-15 7 6.6 6.8 89.316 & over 11 10.4 10.7 100.0Total 103 97.2 100.0 Missing 3 2.8 106 100.0

35. I use my advisement time to help African American male students with personal and career goals=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7 4.8 4.8Disagree 13 12.3 12.4 17.1Neutral 11 10.4 10.5 27.6Agree 55 51.9 52.4 80.0Strongly agree 21 19.8 20.0 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9

106 100.0

166

36. I provide African American male students with information that helps them make decision concerning their major=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 4 3.8 3.8 3.8Disagree 9 8.5 8.6 12.4Neutral 7 6.6 6.7 19.0Agree 50 47.2 47.6 66.7Strongly agree 35 33.0 33.3 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0

37. I frequently refer African American male students advisees to counselors and tutors=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Strongly disagree 5 4.7 4.8 4.8Disagree 17 16.0 16.3 21.2Neutral 26 24.5 25.0 46.2Agree 37 34.9 35.6 81.7Strongly agree 19 17.9 18.3 100.0Total 104 98.1 100.0 Missing 2 1.9 Total 106 100.0

38. I meet informally with African American male students I advise=============================================================== Variable Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative PercentStrongly disagree 12 11.3 11.4 11.4Disagree 11 10.4 10.5 21.9Neutral 13 12.3 12.4 34.3Agree 44 41.5 41.9 76.2Strongly agree 25 23.6 23.8 100.0Total 105 99.1 100.0 Missing 1 .9 Total 106 100.0

167

REFERENCES

Alabama A&M University. (2001). Message from the president. Retrieved January 12, 2004 from Alabama A & M University Web site:http://www.aamu.edu/.

Alabama A&M University. (1988). Strategic academic planning phase 1. Huntsville, Alabama: Alabama A & M University.

Alabama Commission on Higher Education. (2001). Completion and Retention Rates Report. Retrieved November 24, 2004 from http://www.ache.state.al.us/03Abstract/Index.htm.

Allen,W.R.(1988). Improving black students, access and achievement in higher education research. The Review of Higher Education, 11, 403-416.

Amey, M. J. (1999). Faculty culture and college life: Reshaping incentives towards student outcomes. New Directions for Higher Education. San Francisco:

Jossey Bass.

Armon, M. (1995). Factors that influence faculty organizational commitment in highereducation. (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University 1995). Dissertation Abstract International 56 (03), 834.

Ascher, C. (1991). School programs for African American males. (Eric Digest no.72). Eric Clearing House on Urban Education: New York. ( Eric Document Service No. ED3334340).

Astin, A.W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years: Effects of College on beliefs, attitudes and knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Astin, A.W. (1985). Assessment for excellence: A critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

American Association of University Professors. (2000). Statement on faculty workload with interactive comments. Retrieved on November 23, 2003, from http://aaup.org/statments/reddook/rbworl.html.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, Freeman.

Bean, J.P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a casual model of students attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12, 2.

168

Bean, J .P. (1981). The synthesis of a theoretical model of student attrition. Paper presented at the 1981 meeting of the American educational Research Association. Los Angeles, California.

Berger M.J. (1996). A modified model of college student persistence: Exploring the relationship between Astin’s theory of involvement and Tinto’s departure

theory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. Seattle, Washington.

Bonner, F.B., Thomas, V.G. (2001). New continuing challenges and opportunities for Black women in the academy. Journal of Negro Education, 70(3),

125-126.

Bonner, F.B. (2001). Addressing gender in the historically black college and university community: A challenge and call to action. Journal of Negro Education,

70(3), 176-192.

Boyer, E. L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper & Row.

Boyer, E.L. (1991). NJ: Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Braunstien, A., McGrath, M. (1997). The retention of freshmen students: An examination of the assumptions, beliefs and perceptions held by college administrators and faculty. College Student Journal, 31(2), 188-201.

Buck, J. (2003). The state of African American Professoriate: Challenges and responsibilities. Paper presented at the 2003

meeting of the American Association of University Professors. Mahwah, New Jersey

Dey, E.L. (2002). Job satisfaction in teaching: An examination of personnel and environmental influences on faculty, October 2002. (ERIC Document Service No.ED474038)

Cabrera, A. F., & Nora, A. (1992). The convergence between two theories of college persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 123-137.

Chenoweth, K. (1999). HBCUS tackle the knotty problem of retention. Black Issues in Higher Education, 15(26), 38-42.

College Board. (2003). Trends in college pricing. Retrieved on November 5, 2003, from http://www.collegeboard.com/press/cost/cost03/trends.html.

169

Corbin, S.K. (1998). Role perception and job satisfaction for community college faculty. (Doctoral dissertation, Catholic University of America, 1998). Dissertation

Abstracts International Section, 59(4) 1050.

Credle, J.O., Dean, J. (1991). Comprehensive model for enhancing black student retention in higher education. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 19(4), 24-39.

Cusoe, J. (2003). Academic advisement and student retention: Empirical connections and systematic intervention. Retrieved April 17, 2003, from http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/listserve/remarks/cuseoretention.pdf.

Davis, J.E, & Polite, V.C. (Eds). (1999). What does gender have to do with the experiences of the African American males in school and Society, African American males in school land Society: Practices and Policies for effective education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Diola, B., & Kelly E. (1996). The Dynamics of student retention: A review and a prescription. Journal of Higher Education, 14(3), 22-35.

Foster, M., & Peele, T.P. (1999). Teaching black males: Lessons for the experts. In Davis, J.E, & Polite, V.C, (Ed.s). (1999). What does gender have to do with the experiences of the African American males in school and Society, African American males in school land Society: Practices and Policies for effective education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Furr, S.R.,& Elling, T.W. (2002). African American students in predominantly white universities: Factors associated with retention. College Student Journal, 36(2), 188-203.

Friedler, J. (1980). Are colleges support programs and services reaching high risk students. Journal of College Students Retention, 21(1), 23-28.

Gohn, L., Swartz, J., & Donnelly, S. (2000). A case of second year persistence. Journal of College Student retention: Research Theory and Practice, 2(4), 188-190.

Harris, S.M. (1995). Psychological development and the black male masculinity: Implications for counseling economically disadvantage male adolescents. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 279-285.

170

Hawken, L., Duran, R., & Kelly, L. (1991). The relationship of interpersonal communication variables to academic success and persistence in college. Communication Quarterly, 39(4), 297-309.

Henderson, W.E., Henderson, D. Hudson, J. (2002). The retention of entering and returning freshmen at Florida A & M University’s school of general studies. Education, 123(1), 210-214.

Henry, A. (1998). Faculty workload and productivity; A gender comparison. NationalAssociation 1998 Almanac of Higher Education. Retrieved November 2, 2003, from http://www.N.C.A.A.org/he/healma98/workload.pbf.

Hickson, M.E. (2002). What role does the race of the professors have on the retention of students attending historically black colleges and universities. Education, 123 (1), 186-192.

Johnson, J.C. (1997). Commuter college students: What factors, determine who drop out

of college. College Students Journal, 3(1), 323-332. Knight, T.W. (2002). What matters in the university: Graduation of community college

transfer students,. (ERIC Document Production Service No. ED477828)

Lau, R.S. (1996). Evaluating faculty workload. An application of process control chart. Journal of Education for Business 72(2), 94-107.

Lee, W.Y. (1999). Striving toward effective retention: The effect of race on the mentoring of African American student. Peabody Journal of Education, 74(2), 17-27.

Levin, M. & Levin, J. (1991). An initial explanation of academic retention programs for at risk college minority students. Journal of College Development, July 1999, 32, 323-334.

Lidholm, J.A. (2002). Establishing a sense of “space” within academic environment: faculty constructors of institutional fit and the resulting implications for professional vitality.(Doctoral dissertation University of California, 2002) Dissertation Abstracts International, 26(12), 4088.

Lowe, A. & Michael, T. (2000). Academic advising: Views of the givers and takers.Journal of College Student Retention: Research Theory and Practice, 2(2), 150-170.

National Education Association. (1995).Research Center Update, 1, (3). RetrievedNovember 10, 2003 fromhttp://www.nea.org/he/heupdate/vol17no3.pdf.

171

National Education Association. (2001).Research Center Update, 7, (3). Retrieved November 10,2003 from http://www.nea.org/he/heupdate/vol17no3.pdf.

N.C.A.A (2003). Graduation report for NCAA division one schools. Retrieved

Novenber 10, 2003, from http://www.ncaa.org.org/graduationrates/2003/dr/index:html.

Nettie, L., McDill, E., & McPartland, J. (1994). Education reforms and students at risk: A review of the current state of the art. Education Review, 34(4), 145-162.

Newsted, P. R., Chin,W., Ngwenyama, O., and Lee, A. (1997, December). Resolved: surveys have outlived their usefulness in IS research. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems, Cleveland, OH.

Noel, L., Levitz, R., Saluri, D. (1985). Increasing student retention. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

Norguera, P.A. (1997). Responding to crisis confronting black youth: Providing support without further marginalization. Motion Magazine, 6, 18-26.

McCroskey, J.C., Butterfield, S., & Payne, S.K. (1989). The impact of communication apprehension on college student retention and success. Communication Quarterly,

37(2), 100-108.

Milen, J., Berger, J. (1996). A modified model of college persistence. Exploring the relationship between Astin’s theory of involvement and Tinto’s theory of departure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher education. New Orleans, LA.

Molnar, D. (1996). The impact of institutional effectiveness on student retention. Annual forum paper. (Report No 397721). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service

No. ED 307-721.

McDaniel, C., & Graham S.W. (2001). Student retention at a Historically Black College College student Journal, 35(1), 15-21.

Mohr, J., Fiche, K., Sedlacek, W. (1998). So close yet so far: Predicting attrition in college seniors. Journal of College Development, 39(4), 343-354.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2001) Selected statistics on degree granting Historically Black Colleges 1999- 2000. Digest of Educational Statistics. Retrieved December 21, 2003, from http://www.neces.ed.gov/pub2002/digest2001.

172

O’Mera, T.L. (2002). Faculty Socialization: Lessons learned from urban black colleges. Urban Education, 3(6), 5, 630-647.

Padilla, R.V. (2000). College retention: Focus on success. Journal of College Retention: Research Theory and Practice,1(2), 124-135.

Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How collage affects students. Finding and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

(RAS). (2001). Office of Retention and Academic Support Publication. Huntsville, Alabama A & M University.

Pascarella, E. (1985). College environment influences on learning and cognitive development: A critical review and synthesis. In J. Smart (ed). Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, V5, New York: Agathon.

Rosa, M.L. (2003). Campus climate at Cal Poly Poma: Perceptions of students, faculty, staff and administrators. Academic Resources, Institutional Research and Planning. Cal Poly Poma University.

Plane, R.K., & Jacob, W.L. (2000). Intensification, Extension and complexity of teachers workload. Journal of Sociology and Education, 21(1), 43-59.

Seaberg, J. (1998). Faculty report of workload: The result of national survey. Journal of Social Work Education, 34(1), 7-22.

Schreiner, L. A. (1988). Increasing retention on a college campus through at risk student

identification and faculty student contact (Report No CGO21081). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association.

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 298400).

Sharobean, M.H.,& Howard, K. (2000). Teaching demands versus research productivity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(7), 436-441.

Shwitzer, A.M. (1993). Implementing and utilization of per counselors for minority freshmen at a predominately white university. Journal of Freshman Experience, 10 (1), 31-50.

Spradley, P.A. (1996). A multivariate analysis of the persistence of adult African American males from a baccalaureate degree program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, Teachers College.

Sydow, D.L., Sandel, R.H. (1998). Making retention an institutional priority. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 22 (7), 635-644.

173

Thompson, D. (1978). Black faculty and students. Black colleges in America, challenge, development, survival. New York: Columbia University.

Thomas, S., Giles, M. G. (1994). Assessment and retention of blacks students in higher education. Journal of Negro Education, 63(2), 164-178.

Tinto, V. (1987). Increasing student retention. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from Higher Education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.

Tinto, V. (1998). Classroom as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177.

Tinto, V. (2002). Taking student retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. Paper presented at the 2002 meeting of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admission Officers. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Towsend, B.(2003). Tenure in the sacred grove: Issues and strategies for women and minority faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 74, 712-716.

U.S.Department of Commerce. ( 1997). Percent of high school students enrolled in college, by age and race-ethnicity . Bureau of Census population surveys. Retrived on October 20, 2005, from http://www.bls.census.gov/cps/pub/hsgec_1095.htm

Wenglinsky, H. (1999). Historical Black Colleges and Universities: Their aspirations and accomplishment. Educational Testing Service. Retrieved on November 5, 2003, from Web site http://www.ets.org/.

Weidman, J.C. (1989) Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol 5. New York: Agathon.

Wilson, M. (2000). Reversing the plight of African American male college students. Black Issues in Higher Education, 17(18), 175-176.

Winston, R.B. (1994). Developmental academic advising reconsidered: Chimera or unrealized potential? NACADA Journal, 14(2), 112-116.

Wyckoff, S.C. (1999). The academic advising process in higher education: History, research and improvement. Recruitment and Retention in Higher Education, 13(1), 1-3.

174

VITA

Howard Wright was born in Hanover, Jamaica on April 21, 1968. He obtained an

associate of science degree in agricultural sciences in 1988 from the College of

Agriculture, Port Antonio, Jamaica. He worked as a teacher of agricultural science and

biology at his alma mater, Happy Grove High School between 1988 and 1989 before

being employed as a project officer with the Jamaica/ Netherlands Rural Development

Project in 1991. He entered Florida A & M University in 1991 and competed his

bachelors of science degree in agri-business in 1993. He returned to Jamaica and worked

with Eastern Banana Estates as a technical services manager. He entered Alabama A &

M University to pursue a masters degree in business administration with emphasis in

human resource management. He graduated in 1997 and was employed as the agricultural

business manager at Appleton Estates in St Elizabeth, Jamaica specializing in cost

analysis and resource development. He is currently a technical trainer at West

Corporation in Huntsville, Alabama.

175