Social Networks, Social Identities, and Mindset of At-Risk College Students
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology Psychology, Department of 8-1-2009 Social Networks, Social Identities, and Mindset of At-Risk College Students Troy A. Romero University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss Part of the Psychiatry and Psychology Commons Romero, Troy A., "Social Networks, Social Identities, and Mindset of At-Risk College Students" (2009). Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology. 11. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. SOCIAL NETWORKS, SOCIAL IDENTITIES, AND MINDSET OF AT-RISK COLLEGE STUDENTS by Troy Angelo Romero A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Psychology Under the Supervision of Professor Wayne Harrison Lincoln, Nebraska August, 2009 SOCIAL NETWORKS, SOCIAL IDENTITIES, AND MINDSET OF AT-RISK COLLEGE STUDENTS Troy Angelo Romero, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2009 Adviser: Wayne Harrison Success in higher education is typically measured by retention and graduation, and traditionally the students who are least likely to succeed are at-risk students. At-risk students are characterized by one or more of the following: being from underrepresented ethnicities and cultures, having low socioeconomic status, being educated in poorly funded primary and secondary education systems, being first-generation college students, or being otherwise marginalized in society. This study was designed to test how at-risk students differ from other students in terms of the size of their academic social networks, the strength of their academic identities, and their mindset, and to what extent these differences influenced their success in higher education. Data from 87 students, comprised of two intact groups used as proxies for at-risk and advantaged students, were used to test ten hypotheses. Analyses were completed on participants’ demographic data and individual scores from two questionnaires, which included measures specifically created for this study, modified items from Lee’s (1998), Turner’s (1987), White and Burke’s (1987), and Stryker and Statham’s (1985) studies, and modified measures from Grant and Dweck’s (2003) and Astin’s (1993) studies. At-risk students had smaller academic social networks and stronger ethnic identities than advantaged students. All participants had stronger academic identities than the other identities measured (i.e., ethnic, SES, and gender). There were no group differences in mindset. Neither academic social network, academic identity, nor mindset affected academic performance based on data collected after the first semester in college. Generalizing the results of this study may be difficult because the academic identity of at-risk students was significantly stronger than expected, and the long-term time frame of one semester may have been too short to demonstrate overall effects on performance. iv Acknowledgements I would like the thank my advisor, Dr. Harrison, and the members of my committee, Dr. Jerry Cederblom, Dr. Carey Ryan, and Dr. James Thomas for their insightful and constructive evaluation of my work throughout the development of the dissertation. I would like to also recognize the Goodrich Scholarship Program. My motivation and inspiration was constantly refueled by my interaction with the Goodrich Scholars, and the unending encouragement and support from the faculty and staff provided me with the energy I needed to see this project through. Lastly, I would like to extend a special recognition to my family and friends. The time I dedicated to my dissertation was time I could not spend with you all. Thank you for understanding my sacrifice. My achievement is a result of and a testament to your love and support. v Table of Contents Chapter List of Tables …………………………………………………………… viii List of Figures …………………………………………………………… x List of Appendices …………………………………………………………… xi I. Introduction …………………………………………………………… 1 II. Academic Social Network …………………………………………… 7 A. Academic Social Network and Success …………………………… 7 B. At-risk Students and Limited Academic Social Networks …… 8 C. First-Generation Students …………………………………… 9 D. Effect on Success ……….…………………………………… 11 E. Low-SES Students ……….…………………………………… 13 F. Adding to Extant Networks .…………………………………… 17 III. Academic Identity …………………………………………………… 20 A. Identity Through Categorization …………………………… 21 1. Social Identity Theory …………………………………… 21 2. Self-Categorization Theory (SCT) …………………………… 22 B. Identity Through Social Network …………………………… 24 1. Identity Theory …………………………………………… 24 2. Identity Control Theory (ICT) …………………………… 26 C. Academic Identity and At-Risk Students …………………… 28 1. Academic Identity and SCT …………………………………… 29 vi 2. Academic Identity and ICT …………………………………… 35 IV. Entity versus Incremental Theory …………………………………… 43 A. Entity and Incremental Implicit Theories …………………… 44 B. Implicit Theories and Achievement Motivation …………… 46 C. Notable Differences Between Entity and Incremental Theorists ... 58 D. At-risk Students and Mindset …………………………………… 62 V. Long-Term Effects …………………………………………………… 67 A. Interaction Effects …………………………………………… 67 VI. Method …………………………………………………………………… 71 A. Participants …………………………………………………… 71 B. Procedure …………………………………………………… 73 C. Measures …………………………………………………… 74 VII. Results …………………………………………………………………… 80 A. Demographic Data …………………………………………… 80 B. Academic Social Network …………………………………… 82 C. Academic Identity …………………………………………… 85 D. Mindset ...……...…………………………………………… 106 E. Long-Term Effects …………………………………………… 110 F. Statistically Demographically Indexed At-Risk and Advantaged … 115 G. Differences in Results for Demographically Indexed Groups ……. 117 VIII. Discussion …………………………………………………………… 125 A. Results Summary and Discussion …………………………… 128 vii B. General Discussion …………………………………………… 137 C. Limitations …………………………………………………… 138 D. Conclusion …………………………………………………… 140 E. Future Directions …………………………………………… 142 References …………………………………………………………… 144 viii List of Tables Table Page 1: Achievement Goals and Achievement Behavior ……………….…… 51 2: Frequency and Mean of SES Variables: Parents’ Income and Parents’ Education ……………….…… 83 3: Means and Standard Deviations for Category Membership and Comparative Fit Measures ……………….…… 88 4: Multivariate and Univariate t-tests of Category Membership on Comparative Fit Measures ……………….…… 89 5: Means and Standard Deviations for Category Membership and Depersonalization Measures ……………….…… 92 6: Multivariate and Univariate t-tests of Category Membership on Depersonalization Measures ……………….…… 93 7: Correlation Coefficients for Relations Among the Depersonalization Measures ……………………………….…… 95 8: Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Depersonalization Measures for Group and Accessibility ……………………….…… 96 9: Multivariate and Univariate Analyses of Variance for Depersonalization Measures for Group and Accessibility ……….…… 97 10: Correlation Coefficients for Relations Among the Salience Measures … 103 11: Means Scores and Standard Deviations for Salience Measures for Group Membership ……………….……………….…… 104 ix 12: Correlation Coefficients for Relations Among the Commitment Measures ……………………………………….…… 107 13: Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Commitment Measures for Group Membership ……………....……………….…… 108 14: Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations for Fall Semester GPA and the Predictors for Hypothesis 8 ……….…… 112 15: Regression Analysis Summary for Mindset, Academic Identity, and Academic Social Network Predicting Fall Semester GPA .…… 113 16: Regression Analysis Summary for Mindset, Academic Identity, and Academic Social Network Predicting SCE ……………….…… 114 17: Frequency and Mean of Age, Ethnicity, Parents’ Income and Parents’ Education for the Demographically Indexed Groups .…… 118 18: Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Salience Measures for Demographically Indexed Group Membership ……………….…… 120 19: Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Commitment Measures for Demographically Indexed Group Membership ……………….…… 123 x List of Figures Figure Page 1: Group Means for Identity Salience – Intact Groups …………… 105 2: Group Means for Identity Commitment – Intact Groups ….………… 109 3: Group Means for Identity Salience – Demographically Indexed …… 121 4: Group Means for Identity Commitment – Demographically Indexed … 124 xi List of Appendices Appendix Page A: Demographics ……………….…………………………………… 160 B: Social Networks ………………………………………….………… 161 C: Comparative Fit, Exploratory, and Depersonalization .…………… 162 D: Identity Salience ……………………………………………….…… 163 E: Commitment ……………………………….…………………… 164 F: Mindset ……………………………….…………………… 165 G: Satisfaction with College Environment ……….…………………… 166 H: Interaction of Social Network and Mindset .…………………… 167 I: List of Hypotheses ……………………….…………………… 168 1 Chapter I Introduction In 1923, P. W. Horn addressed a growing discussion among colleges in the United States that suggested colleges should only accept the top 10% of high school graduates.