rerichards.weebly.com · web viewwhen it comes to college preparatory program data, there are...

Running head: 8TH GRADE MAJORS FAIR 1

8th Grade Majors Fair: Passport to Your Future

Jacob Arzaga, Sarina Coutin, Brittney Saldana, Rhea Richards

Azusa Pacific University

8TH GRADE MAJORS FAIR 2

Abstract

Keywords: college preparation program, middle-school students, college major awareness


8th Grade Majors Fair: Passport to Your Future

The current study aims to increase knowledge on college preparation outreach programs

which influence middle-school students. The program related to this study is unique, in that it

focuses on middle school students and the duration of the program only lasts one day. In order

to generate the proper assessment methods for this program evaluation, the researchers have

gathered information about related elements of other college preparation programs. The

researchers investigated factors related to college enrollment and ideologies for the student

population who attended this program.

Literature Review

In regards to college preparation programs, Swail (2000) states, “early intervention

programs generally focus on helping educationally or economically disadvantaged students

aspire to and prepare for higher education…the three most targeted student populations include

low-income, minority, and first-generation students…” (p. 95). Pre-collegiate outreach programs

aim to assist students by giving them the social capital necessary to achieve college enrollment

(Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Perna, 2002). Swail (2000) identifies that “the basic problem lies in the fact

that none of these programs are broad enough to provide services to all needy students” (p. 90).

Hamrick and Stage (2004) declare that the common goal in college predisposition

programs aim to serve minority, high-school, low-income students who do not have access to all

the resources they need to prepare for and learn about college. The current study will service

students with similar demographics. Similarly, reputable year-round programs like Upward

Bound and GEAR UP (Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs)

target first-generation, minority, low-income students (Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Swail, 2000).


Most scholars would agree that outreach programs working with K-12 students are

attributable to the emergence of Upward Bound as part of the Economic Opportunity Act of

1964 (Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Fields, 2001; Swail, 2000). GEAR UP launched in 1999 as a

partnership between low-performing high poverty middle schools, universities, businesses and

community agencies. The goal of GEAR UP is to provide every child in secondary school

systems with exposure to a pre-college curriculum (Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Fields, 2001; Swail,

2000).

Similar to existing blended college preparatory programs like AVID (Advancement Via

Individual Determination), the Puente Project and MESA (Mathematics, Engineering, and

Science Achievement), GEAR UP provides professional development for teachers. In addition,

GEAR UP provides information dissemination and college advising as an attempt to equalize the

pre-college preparation experience. GEAR UP and Upward Bound addresses the financial aid

barrier to college and aim to eliminate this hardship for its participants (Gullatt & Jan, 2003;

Fields, 2001; Swail, 2000). GEAR UP does not monitor participant’s college retention and

completion.

Upward Bound primarily prepares small high school student groups on college campuses

for higher education through a structured program. Studies conducted on Upward Bound found

its participants are four times more likely to earn an undergraduate degree than those with similar

backgrounds not in TRIO (Fields, 2001). TRIO refers to the three programs (Talent Search,

Upward Bound and Student Support Services) originally funded by Congress under Title IV of

the Higher Education Act of 1965 (Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Swail, 2000; www.trioprograms.org).

Talent Search is another college preparatory program that focuses on information about college

and aims to raise college awareness for students in grades 6-12 (Gullatt & Jan, 2003). While a


lot of knowledge has been gained about these existing and popular (in that they reach a large

amount of students) state funded college preparatory outreach programs that service “needy”

students. The current study is unique, in that it focuses on middle school students, is not state

funded, and the duration of the program only lasts one day, allowing for new knowledge to be

gained on the structural elements of this program that do or do not work.

When it comes to college preparatory program data, there are mixed findings on the

influence of family members and the impact of their support. Hamrick and Stage (2004) factor

in family influence because it largely has to do with students not being able to afford college

prep, having social capitol, and maintaining awareness on college enrollment (pp. 162-165).

Researchers suggest that family influence highly impacts a child’s aspirations to attend college

(Dempsey & Sandler, 1997; Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Perna, 2002; Perna, 2005). Due to this

uncertainty, the current study will look into family interaction via post-event survey.

Furthermore, there are mixed results when it comes to the influence mentoring has on

these students. For example, “McDonough’s (1997) work also suggests that these students, even

if they have access to school-based mentors, may be less likely to focus on college choice than

on more immediate school or family concerns” (as cited in Hamrick & Stage, 2004, p.162).

Hossler (2005) also notes that mentoring may not be critical for student success. While

mentoring is a trend for college preparatory programs, for the current study it is not a measurable

variable. The researchers are interested in seeing if there is still an impact on students even when

mentorship is not included in the program because the scope of this program does not require

students to participate all year long (like GEAR UP and Upward Bound).

Interestingly enough, scholars agree that “Latinos are the largest and fastest-growing U.S.

racial/ethnic population, but their college enrollment and graduation rates are one of the lowest”


(as cited in Nunez & Kim, 2012, p. 237; Perna, 2000; Sciarra & Whitson, 2007). Moreover,

scholars have considered why enrollment into college for Latinos is not where it should be and

found various answers ranging from college preparation, curriculum, finances, social capital,

etc… (Arbona & Nora, 2007; Castillo, Lopez-Arenas, & Saldivar, 2010; Hossler, 2005; Mangan,

2011; Perna, 2000). While many outreach programs touch on financial aid and affording college,

the current study does not aim to factor in financial concerns and perceptions because this is

beyond the scope of the program. Interestingly, it is also due to the fact that findings suggest that

early exposure to college or university campuses help student’s college enrollment and this is the

variable that the researchers are more interested in assessing (Swail, 2000).

Perna (2006) and Perna and Thomas (2008) in aiming to learn more about college access

for Latinos identified four factors which affect college enrollment (as cited in Nunez & Kim,

2012, p. 238). The factors discovered to impact college access are: “(a) individual student, (b)

family, (c) school, and (d) broader social, economic and political conditions” (Nunez & Kim,

2012, p. 238). Among these contexts, Perna and Thomas (2008) emphasize students, the schools

[K–12 or higher education] they attend, and broader sociopolitical contexts [like state or federal

policy environments] as “three particularly critical units of analysis” (as cited in Nunez & Kim,

2012, p. 238).

Nunez and Kim (2012) claim “ most of the significant predictors of college enrollment

for Latino high school students were at the individual level, rather than at the school or state

level. This finding is consistent with other research suggesting individual, rather than school

factors, being the primary predictors of college enrollment choices” (pp. 249-250). As a result,

the researchers are interested in seeing the impact the 8th Grade Majors Fair will have on students

from a school district composed of approximately 90% Latino students. The researchers propose


this program will have more of an impact because it allows for students to get engaged, thus

fostering interest in learning more about college outside of the classroom. Additionally, the

current study will look at a program that is at no cost to the “needy” participant and does not

alter curriculum while factoring in community involvement.

Impact evaluations are scarce in college preparatory outreach programs for multiple

reasons, mainly because tracking students once they get to college can be very difficult (Gullatt

& Jan, 2003). While in the past researchers called for more data because programs struggled

with gathering more data on year-long programs that influence high-school students, few have

called for data on one-day interventions that influence middle-school students. Eighth graders

were chosen because scholars have stressed that programs needed to target middle school years

and earlier (Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Perna, 2002; Swail, 2000). The researchers have developed the

evaluation of the 8th Grade Majors Fair while considering all of these elements of research on

college preparation outreach programs because this program could possibly support or deny the

claim that programs need to target middle-school students to have an impact.

The 8th Grade Majors Fair combines two of three common types of pre-collegiate

academic development programming. One is informational outreach, which primarily offers

information dissemination and advising but has little or no academic intervention. Given that the

8th Grade Majors Fair is only one day the focus is on information dissemination and does not

factor in advising. Second, is the career-based outreach, which provides academic, motivational

and informational interventions designed around the students’ career aspirations and intends to

link those aspirations with college majors” (Gullatt & Jan, 2003, p.16). Furthermore, the 8th

Grade Majors Fair also integrates this approach by focusing on connecting the students’

interested career with a college major.


The researchers are interested in assessing the 8th Grade Majors Fair to see if it

encourages 8th grade students who participate in the fair to pursue higher education. Also, the

researchers are interested in evaluating the 8th Grade Majors Fair to determine if it increases

student awareness in regards to the admissions process for colleges and universities.

Method

The Center for Academic Service Learning and Research coordinates the 8th Grade

Majors Fair: Passport to your Future. The 8th Grade Majors Fair is a college preparatory program

for a school district in southern California. The researchers assessed the 8th Grade Majors Fair to

see its relationship on the motivation of 8th grade students to pursue higher education. In

addition, the researchers evaluated the 8th Grade Majors Fair to determine if it increased student

awareness in regards to the admissions process for colleges and universities.

Participants

The researchers chose all 749 8th grade students in the school district to survey. It is

inferred that all students sampled were between the ages of 12 and 14, since all students

surveyed were in the 8th grade. In order to protect the anonymity of the students the researchers

were unable to collect demographic information, including: age, race/ethnicity, first generation

status, English language learner, socioeconomic status, and gender. This limitation was

overcome by researching the schools’ demographic information. The middle schools in the

school district are 92% Latino and 52% male (Azusa Unified School District, 2013). The

researchers chose this population because “Latinos are the largest and fastest-growing U.S.

racial/ethnic population, but their college enrollment and graduation rates are one of the lowest”

(Nunez & Kim, 2012, p. 237). Eighth graders were chosen for this study because scholars have


stressed the importance of college preparatory programs targeting middle school years and

earlier (Gullatt & Jan, 2003; Perna, 2002; Swail, 2000).

The researchers were also able to collect qualitative data from upper level administrators

in the school district, 8th grade students participating in the program, and higher education

representatives who supported the programs in the school district. According to Oakes,

Mendoza and Silver (2006) “a school’s structural characteristics, curriculum, and the extent to

which is has a ‘college going’ school culture are key factors that affect students’ college

enrollment (as cited in Nunez & Kim, 2012, p. 240); for this reason, we selected the

administrators in the school district to see if the schools had an impact on the students

willingness to attend higher education.

Instruments

The researchers used multiple instruments to collect data. The main instrument tool used

was a locally developed pre and post survey, which was distributed to the 8th grade students in

their classrooms. Six upper-level administrators participated in a videotaped interview that

consisted of five interview questions. Finally, the researchers conducted a document review

including survey data from the first initial 8th Grade Majors Fair and proposed learning outcome

for the program.

The pre-evaluation survey consisted of ten questions. These questions pertained to the

students’ interest and knowledge of higher education. Students’ interest in higher education was

determined using a four point Lickert scale that had the following options: strongly disagree,

disagree, agree, and strongly agree. The researchers were interested in the students’ previous

exposure to higher education, which was determined through a multiple choice question asking

“who had previously talked to the students about higher education,” as well as an open ended


question “where else have you learned about college.” The survey also asks if the students were

in C.H.A.M.P. (College Headed and Mighty Proud), a college preparatory program that the

Center for Academic Service Learning and Research offers to half the 4th grade students in the

school district. The questions “I have ideas about what I want to be when I grow up” and I have

an idea about which major(s) I want to study in college,” were asked to assess whether or not the

students had a general idea of what they wanted to study in college before participating in the

fair.

The post-evaluation survey consisted of a total of twelve questions. The questions

focused on the students’ interest and knowledge of college. A four point Lickert scale with the

options strongly disagree, disagree, agree, and strongly agree was used to assess students’

interest in higher education. The post evaluation questions included: “I am now curious to learn

more about at least one college major,” “I now want to participate in extracurricular activities in

college,” and “learning about new majors made me think about my future.” These questions

were used to measure if students’ had a higher interest in college after attending the fair. Other

questions including: “I enjoyed the majors fair,” “I was excited about attending the majors fair,”

and “my top three favorite majors were,” were used in the survey for planning purposes for next

years fair. In both the pre and post surveys, the word college was used instead of higher

education to alleviate confusion for the students. The only questions repeated on both the pre

and post evaluation survey was if the student planned on attending college.

Qualitative data was gathered from open ended questions, observations, interview

questions and document review to assess the perceived implications of the 8th Grade Majors Fair

on the school district and the students. Individuals were asked questions such as “did you find a

favorite major,” “what do you think this means to the students involved,” and “do you see a


benefit from the three school collaboration.” Researchers used observation during the event to

track student and teacher engagement and observe limitations of program.

Procedures

The researchers utilized a quantitative evaluation of the fair using the pre and post

surveys. The researchers used qualitative methods of open ended questions, observations,

interviews and document review. The researchers also gathered demographic information from

the school district website to assess the different characteristics of the students who would be

participating in the program.

First the researchers ran a multiple regression to see whether family, friends, teachers,

counselors, mentors, or other individuals talking to students about higher education increased the

student’s likelihood of wanting to attend a higher education institution. The researchers then ran

another multiple regression to see the impact of visiting a college campus, having ideas about

what the student wanted to be when they grew up, the student knowing which majors they

wanted to study in college, and if the student participated in C.H.A.M.P. to see the variance these

factors played in the students interest in attending higher education. A One-Way Anova was

used to determine if the middle school the students attended had an impact on the student’s

interest in attending higher education, and also to note the differences among the factors which

indicated a student’s increased likelihood of attending an institution of higher education. The

researchers ran a Pearson Correlation to see if students enjoyment of the fair increased the

students interest in thinking about their future, wanting to learn about more majors, wanting to

participate in extracurricular activities in higher education, knowing how to get into a higher

education institution, and if the students shared the information with their parents when they got

home.


Due to the dual nature of the program being an Educational Opportunity Program and a

Service Learning Program, the researchers used both to assess if the program was meeting the

Council for the Advancement of Standards(CAS) in higher education requirements. The CAS

was used because, as a university sanctioned program, it is important that funding be utilized in

the most beneficial way for students. The CAS assists the researchers in determining the

effectiveness of the program. According to the text, Council for the Advancement of Standards

in Higher Education (2012), the main goal of Service-Learning Programs “is to engage students

in experiences that address human and community needs together with structured opportunities

for reflection intentionally designed to promote student learning and development” (p. 303), and

the primary goal of TRIO and Other Educational Opportunity Programs “is to encourage and

assist people who are traditionally under-represented in post-secondary education because of

income, family educational background, disability, or other relevant federal, state, provincial or

institutional criteria, in the preparation for, entry to, and completion of a post-secondary

education” (p. 331). The interviews, open ended questions, and observations will be used to

assess if the 8th Grade Majors Fair is meeting the mission of both service-learning and

educational opportunity programs. Some learning outcomes for both the Educational

Opportunity Programs and Service-Learning are personal and educational goals, career choices,

intellectual growth, enhanced self-esteem, and leadership development these learning outcomes

will be assessed using the pre and post survey, document review, observations, and the interview

questions. Another CAS standard for both areas is Equity and Access, which ensures that

programs are equally available to all students; this standard is met through the distribution of the

program being available to each 8th grade student in the school district. The 8th Grade Majors

Fair also meets the Campus and External relations CAS standard, which can be assessed through

School Gender EthnicityFree Reduced

Lunch Program

Student/Teacher Ratio

School A 53% Male 92% Hispanic 73% 23 to 1

School B 53% Male 91% Hispanic 72% 23 to 1

School C 50% Male 92% Hispanic 72% 25 to 1

Table 1: Middle School Participant Demographics (Azusa Unified School District, 2013)


interviews and document review, as well as the continuation of the program since the program is

a collaborative effort with three higher education institutions, the school district, and many

internal offices and faculty members. A final CAS standard reached through the 8th Grade

Majors Fair is Human Resources, which is assessed through the specific job requirement of the

Special Events Coordinator who is implementing the fair.

Results

The researchers surveyed all 748 8th grade students in a Southern California school

district. From the 748 students, 657 responded to the pre-evaluations (88% response rate) and

637 responded to the post-evaluations (85% response rate). The school district the researchers

surveyed had three middle schools. For confidentiality purposes, the three middle schools will be

referred to as School A, School B, and School C in this research. The researchers were unable to

collect demographic

information, but did

collect the demographic

information from the

district website. For

school demographics including gender, ethnicity, number of students on free/reduced lunch

program and the student/teacher ration see table 1. Due to the lack of demographic no tests were

able to be run to discern impact of demographics.

Pre-Collegiate Influences

Nunez and Kim (2012) claim “most of the significant predictors of college enrollment for

Latino high school students were at the individual level, rather than at the school or state level.

This finding is consistent with other research suggesting individual, rather than school factors,


being the primary predictors of college enrollment choices” (pp. 249-250). Consistent with this

finding, using a hierarchical regression, the researchers found a significant difference in variance

with individuals who talked to students about higher education, ideas about what the students

wanted to be when they grew up, ideas about what the students wanted to study in college, and

C.H.A.M.P. impacting the student’s intent on attending an institution of higher education. The

variables contributed 17% of the variance to the students’ plans of attending higher education.

The researchers found that family, teachers, and mentors talking to the student about higher

education showed significant variance with a total variance of 8%. Family (b=.23, p<.001),

teachers (b=.12, p<.05), mentors (b=.12, p<.05). The remaining variables ideas about what the

students wanted to be when they grew up (b=.2, p<.001), ideas about what the students wanted to

study in college (b=.14, p<.05), and C.H.A.M.P. (b=.02, p>.05) contributing 9% to the total

variance.

Using a One-Way Anova, a statistically significant difference was found among the

schools with the independent variables of friends talking to the students about college, teachers

talking to the students about college, counselors talking to the students about college, the number

of students who visited a college campuses, students knowing what they wanted to do when they

grew up, and number of students who were a part of C.H.A.M.P. Using a Scheffe Post Hoc test,

a significant difference was found between School B and School A, such that friends

(F(2,654)=3.51, p<.05) and teachers (F(2,654)=5.06, p<.05) talked to the students more

frequently and more students had visited a college campus (F(2,654)=8.95, p<.001) at School B

than School A. However, School A had more counselors talk to students about college than

School B (F(2,654)=3.49, p<.05). School B also had more students in C.H.A.M.P. than both


School A and School C (F(2,643)=36.14, p<.001). Finally, School C had more students who

knew what they wanted to be when they grew up than School A (F(2,647)=4.38, p<.05).

Program Effectiveness

A Pearson Correlation showed a significant relationship between the attendance of the 8th

grade majors fair and other factors involving interest in higher education. A positive correlation

was found between enjoyment of the majors fair and other indicators of interest in higher

education. Enjoyment of the majors fair had a moderate positive correlation with the student

thinking about their future more (r(635)=.35, p<.001), the students are now curious to learn

about at least one more major (r(635)=.34, p<.001), the students knowing more about how to get

into college (r(634)=.35, p<.001), and the students sharing what they learned when they got

home (r(634)=.35, p<.001). Enjoyment of the majors fair also showed a weak positive

correlation with students wanting to participate in extracurricular activities in higher education

(r(634)=.28, p<.001). Two strong positive correlations were found between learning new majors


making the students think about their future and the students curiosity to learn about another

major (r(634)=.45, p<.001) and the students knowing more about how to get into college

(r(633)=.42, p<.001). For further correlations related to variables in the majors fair, refer to

Table 2.

Counsel for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education Standards (CAS)

Through qualitative methods of observation, interviews, open-ended questions, and

document review, the researchers assessed completion of the CAS goals of Service Learning

Programs and Trio and other Educational Opportunity Programs. Both the mission of Service

Learning Programs and Trio and other Educational Opportunity Programs were met through the

deliverance of the 8th Grade Majors Fair. One upper level district administrator commented on

the effectiveness of the fair stating “the fair turned out great. This is such a benefit to the

students. I wish there had been something like this when I was in school.” Student comments

including “they should have this major fair every year,” “I really enjoyed it. I hope that you

continue to do this,” “it was a great learning experience,” and “you guys did an amazing job and

I am definitely starting to think about college” were written down on our post-evaluation

surveys. Learning outcomes for both the Educational Opportunity Programs and Service

Learning were also assessed through post-evaluation comments. Some of the student responses

affirming success of the 8th Grade Majors Fair included “I liked learning new things that I can

study,” “we were talked to by experienced students,” and “it got me motivated to go to college.”

The career choices learning outcome was evaluated through the correlation previously mentioned

above. Equity and Access were met by the inclusion of all 8th grade students in the district who

obtained parental consent attending the Majors Fair. Campus and External Relations was

observed by the researchers through the collaborative efforts of the three higher education


institutions to create the majors fair for the school district to benefit the students. The Human

Resources CAS standard was met by the special events coordinator whose main priority was

executing the fair.

Appendix A


Pre-evaluation

1. I plan on going to college.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. These people have talked to me about college: (Circle all that apply)

a) Family b) Friends c) Teachers d) Counselors e) Mentors f) Other: __________________

3. Where else have you learned about college?

______________________________________________________________________________

4. Have you visited a college campus?

a) Yes b) No

If yes, which college(s): _________________________________________________________

6. I have ideas about what I want to be when I grow up.


7. I have an idea about which major(s) I want to study in college.


8. Were you in C.H.A.M.P.?

a) Yesb) No

If you answered yes to question #8, please answer the following:

9. Which school did you attend while participating in C.H.A.M.P.?

______________________________________________________________________________

10. What part of C.H.A.M.P. helped you the most to think about college?

Appendix BPost-Evaluation


1. I was excited about attending the Majors Fair.


2. I enjoyed the Majors Fair.


3. Learning about new majors made me think about my future.


4. I am now curious to learn more about at least one college major.


5. I now want to participate in extracurricular activities (ex. music, sports, clubs) in college.


6. Because of the Majors Fair, I know more about how to get into college.


7. I shared what I learned at the Majors Fair when I got home.


8. Do you plan on going to college?

a. Yesb. No

9. What did you like most about the majors fair?

10. What majors do you wish had been at the fair?

11. Do you have any comments or suggestions?

12. Please circle your top 3 favorite majors:


Thank you for participating in our survey!

References

Health and Wellness Plant and Animal ScienceNursing Biology

Food and Nutrition Plant Science

Cosmetology Animal Science

Humanities and Education Technology and Design History Recording Arts

Communications Theater, Film, and Television

Biblical Studies Emerging Theater Technologies

Spanish Computer Information Systems

Liberal Studies Apparel Merchandising and Management

English Art and Design

Professional Studies Science and Human Behavior Emergency Medical Training Army ROTC

Administration of Justice Physics

Automotive Technology Social Work

Hospitality


Arbona, C., & Nora, A. (2007). The influence of academic and environmental factors on

Hispanic college degree attainment. The Review of Higher Education, 30(3), 247–270.

Azusa unified school district. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.education.com/schoolfinder/

us/california/district/azusa-unified-school-district/

Castillo, L. G., Lopez-Arenas, A., & Saldivar, I. M. (2010). The influence of acculturation and

enculturation on Mexican American high school students' decision to apply to college.

Journal of Multicultural Counseling & Development, 38(2), 88-98.

Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (2009). CAS professional

standards for higher education (7th ed.). Washington, DC.

Dempsey, K.V. and H. Sandier (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s

education? Review of Educational Research, 6(1), 31-55.

Fields, C.D (2001). Can TRIO and GEAR UP continue to co-exist? Black Issues in Higher

Education, 8(21), 26-31.

Gullatt, Y., & Jan, W. (2003). How do pre-collegiate academic outreach programs impact

college-going among underrepresented students? Pathways to College Network.

Retrieved February 25, 2013, from http://www.pathwaystocollege.net

Hamrick, F., & Stage, F. (2004). College predisposition at high-minority enrollment, low-income

schools. The review of Higher Education, 27(2), 151-168.

Hossler, D. (2005). Preparing for college: Nine elements of effective outreach (review). The

Journal of Higher Education, 77(3), 553-557.

Mangan, K. (2011). Educators start early to create a college-going culture among Hispanics in

Texas. Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(6), B4-B7.


Nunez, A., & Kim, D. (2012). Building a multicontextual model of Latino college enrollment:

Student, school, and state-level effects. The review of Higher Education, 35(2), 237-263.

Perna, L. W. (2000). Differences in the decision to attend college among African Americans,

Hispanics, and Whites. Journal of Higher Education, 71(2), 117–141.

Perna. L.W. (2002). Pre-college outreach programs: characteristics of programs serving

historically underrepresented groups of students. Journal of College Student

Development, 43(1).

Perna, L. W. (2006). Studying college access and choice: A proposed conceptual model. In J.

Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 21, pp. 99–1157).

Cambridge, MA: Springer.

Perna, L., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., Bell, A., Thomas, S. L., & Li, C. (2008). A typology of federal

and state programs designed to promote college enrollment. The Journal of Higher

Education, 79(3), 243–267.

Perna, L. W., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., Thomas, S. L., Bell, A., Anderson, R., & Li, C. (2008). The

role of college counseling in shaping opportunity: Variations across high schools. Review

of Higher Education, 31(2), 131–159.

Perna, L. W., & Titus, M. A. (2005). The relationship between parental involvement as social

capital and college enrollment: An examination of racial/ethnic group differences.

Journal of Higher Education, 76(5), 486–518.

Sciarra, D. T., & Whitson, M. L. (2007). Predictive factors in postsecondary educational

attainment among Latinos. Professional School Counseling, 10(3), 307-316.

Swail, W. (2000). Preparing America's disadvantaged for college. New Directions for

Institutional Research, 107, 85-100.


Trio Website (www.trioprograms.org).

rerichards.weebly.com · web viewwhen it comes to college preparatory program data, there are...

Documents