:—

. r99 .

a..." 1.
.5113; Lyn-“fit; . .i
"3%... . ... . J “Wu.

. ‘ 1! .
. . $2.. sf.“ ,.
. . .3 .m

an...

a
I.
.1:

.

a}.

If I
.3

at; 3: 2.:

15.

. Lil...
.

saawfié

1.. u

‘ Iv...

'

.9?
........a.r.,..u..Ms .
4.1. .e
i .
,. . V .5.

iii?

v1.1...»
u ‘afisirs:
3..., Iflae 1}.

wt v
3:! l“
v).

i 131.,
\JFA. !. ’1

 

LIB
‘ ‘7 C I Michigmte
University

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

EDUCATIONAL EXPECTATIONS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS
FROM MEXICAN AMERICAN MIGRANT FARMWORKEFI
FAMILIES

presented by
Wilma Novalés Wibert

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Doctoral degree in Family and Child Ecology

 

 

Major Professor’s Signature
// I/ {7%

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:IClRC/DateDue.indd-p.1

EDUCATIONAL EXPECTATIONS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS FROM MEXICAN
AMERICAN MIGRANT FARMWORKER FAMILIES

BY

Wilma Novalés Wibert

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Family and Child Ecology

2006

ABSTRACT

EDUCATIONAL EXPECTATIONS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS FROM MEXICAN
AMERICAN MIGRANT FARMWORKER FAMILIES

BY

Wilma Novalés Wibert

The goal of this study was to identify factors that
promote and deter the academic achievement of students who
come from Mexican American migrant farmworker families.
Specifically, this study looked at the likelihood of
theoretically based variables predicting academic success.
Dependent variables included in the study were academic
achievement and educational expectations. The independent
variables were family income, familism, mobility, gender
and parent's educational attainment. A convenience sample
of 147 (n=147) college students from Mexican American
migrant farmworker families were recruited to answer a 93
item survey questionnaire.

Results indicate that academic achievement is
positively associated with familism (r=.20, p:.Ol), family
income(r=.l6, p5.03), and educational expectations (F=7.49,

p5.00l). The traditional nature of this community is seen

in further analysis resulting in mother’s educational
attainment having a significant and positive association
with their educational expectations for their daughters
(r=.25, p5.02) but not their sons (r=.08, p5.26); and
father’s level of educational attainment being
significantly and positively associated with their
educational expectations for their sons (r=.21, p:.04) but
not their daughters (r=.Ol, p:.48). Findings also revealed
University academic achievement is significantly and
negatively associated with prior educational mobility
(during K—12) in migrant farmworker college student
populations (r=—.23, p:.002).

Results were indicative of the resiliency of the
migrant community. Factors found to promote academic
achievement included familism, parent’s educational
attainment, parent's educational expectations and student’s
educational expectations. Factors found to deter academic
achievement included annual mobility and family income.
Essentially, migrant parents want more for their children
and as a result have high educational expectations of them.
The values, beliefs and norms established through their
Latino culture and exemplified by their level of familism

provide balance for other life challenges.

Copyright by
Wilma Novalés Wibert

2006

This dissertation is dedicated to my father, the late
Pedro Emilio Novalés, the man who taught me integrity,
honesty, and tenacity by example. The dignity with which
you managed the last year of your life was an incredible
gift to our family. Although you missed my graduation by
four months, I know you are looking down on me and smiling.
I could not have done this without you! Papi, I love you

more!

AC KNOWLEDGEMENT S

First and foremost I give thanks to our Heavenly
Father, from whom all blessings flow! This has been a
journey that I did not take alone and I'd like to
acknowledge a few of the people who came along on this
bumpy ride! First, I have to thank my husband (Tom) for
being patient and supportive during this long process. You
never gave up on me even when I did, I love you for all you
do and all you are; to my children (Emily, Peter and Ben)
for making me feel as if my being a “word doctor" was
important to them; to my sisters (Noemi and Elizabeth) who
provided me with support and encouragement throughout my
education; to my parents without whom I would not be here
but especially to my step—father, the late Juan Mendoza
Vasquez, who inspired my love of the migrant community and
my step—mother Silvia, for taking such great care of my
father in his last year of life and helping me realize that
my work needed to get finished, no matter what else was
going on; and finally to my sister—in—law (Dr. Lori Post,
PhD) who was always willing to help, you gave me the
confidence I needed to stand on my own. THANK YOU to my

entire family (both Novales and Wibert).

As important as my family was in keeping me going
throughout my education, I would be remiss to not
acknowledge my committee members who truly guided me
through my journey this last year. First, I’d like to
thank my chair, Dr. Harriette Pipes MCAdoo, you have been a
true mentor to me and I appreciate your time and
encouragement, you never doubted my abilities; Dr. Carl S.
Taylor, who convinced me to go to graduate school in the
first place, thank you for seeing in me what I could not
yet see; Dr. David Imig, I thank you for always challenging
me to look beneath the surface. My work is better because
of you; Dr. LeAnn Silvey, the ultimate editor! Thank you
for your meticulous fine tuning of this dissertation; and
finally, Dr. Rneben Parra-Cordone, you stepped in when Dr.
Israel Cuellar was not able to stay on and offered me your
unconditional support and encouragement. You were a big
part of the reason why I returned to finish my work and I
thank you. Abrazos!

Lastly, I'd like to thank all the MSU CAMP students
and staff who made me feel a welcomed member of their
community. You have inspired me and taught me a great deal
about myself and about life. Without you there wouldn’t be
a dissertation, so it goes without saying that you will

always be special to me and my family. Muchisimas Gracias!

vfi

PREFACE

Although I have been in the doctoral program at
Michigan State University for six years, this project has
been in the making for many more years. The present
dissertation topic grew out of my respect and admiration
for the man who raised me, my step-father. As a Mexican
American migrant farmworker he faced many hardships,
including; language barriers, marginalization, poverty,
racism, mobility, limited educational opportunities and
meager housing options.

Providing for basic needs was his family’s focus
growing up, but honoring your parents and family was their
motto. Family extended to include aunts, uncles, cousins,
grandparents and great—grandparents. Every member of your
family took pride in your accomplishments and was shamed by
your misdeeds. The family motto my step—father brought to
our family was the same; he made sure we were all raised to
be “bien educado" or well educated. Education in this
sense not only meant formal schooling, but more
importantly, it meant the way in which you carried yourself
in public; respectful, polite, showing pride in family and

ethnicity, as well as faithful to our religious beliefs.

viii

As a migrant farmworker growing up in a Texas border
town in the 1930's, my step-father grew accustomed to
unfair treatment. For example, growers would pay his
family less than they earned, housing developments would
not rent to Mexicans and schools completely overlooked
migrant students. As a result, their options were not
just limited by the language barrier and poverty but by the
marginalization they experienced in their own community
which discriminated against seasonal workers. Still, his
family made a point of pushing their children to learn all
they could wherever they could. Reading and writing were
first introduced to him by his mono-lingual Spanish
speaking father, who had no formal schooling but had also
been taught by his father phonetically. Learning to read
in English was the motive for sending him to a public
school in Texas. As the oldest male in the family, the
most important reason for learning to read and write in
English was so he would not be taken advantage of by the
growers he worked for in the fields and he could protect
his family from the same.

In time he learned to read and write in English,
becoming the family interpreter and translator. As he
continued in school his parents could only offer him

encouragement but they were not able to help him with his

ix

homework. As a result, he learned to internalize the
responsibility of his formal education while knowing that
his family was proud of his accomplishments. Eventually,
he settled out of migrant work for a factory job at General
Motors and went on to a community college and earned an
associates degree necessary to gain a promotion. Although
my mother had finished high school and my step—father had
earned an associates degree, they still viewed the
University as a luxury. Consequently, when it was my turn
to graduate from high school I had to rely on peers and
guidance counselors for college preparation, selection,
application and financial aid information.

Growing up, as the youngest of five and female, I was
taught that an education is only as good as the job or
husband it can help you obtain. The advice I received when
I first left for college had less to do with formal
education and more to do with their expectations of my
unsupervised behavior; remembering who I was and where I
came from. After earning a Masters degree in Family
Studies, my parents asked me what I would be, meaning my
job title. They really wanted to be able to tell their
friends about their daughter the doctor, lawyer, teacher or
anything with a title. My parents were proud of me and my

academic achievements and although they encouraged me to be

successful at whatever I chose to do, they were not able to
offer the practical support I needed to successfully
maneuver through the higher education process.
Inadvertently, the foundation for the present

research topic began to take shape in my formative years as
I began to integrate my family history with my educational
expectations. Ultimately, the path for my research became
clear to me when I began working with Mexican American
college students from migrant farmworker families as a
graduate assistant. The work I did with students from the
Michigan State University College Assistance Migrant
Program included recruitment in addition to student
services. Quite purposefully, we set out to provide them
with the social capital they needed to be successful
students by attempting to create a family environment that
would bind the annual groups into a family and all the
groups into a community. The process of helping them bond
gave me an opportunity to reflect on my family history and
how prevalent the values and norms still were in my daily
life.

It was an honor to work with this group of students;
as I write this introduction I can’t help but feel a great
sense of pride in the students I have had the privilege of

working for. Their journey from the fields to graduation

xi

was challenging and most set out on their voyage without a
map. The courage and dedication with which they pursue
their academic goals is inspiring. In the end, I hope this
research will be an accurate reflection of the many assets

this community brings with them to the University.

xfi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables.
List of Figures.
Chapter 1: Introduction.

Statement of the Problem.
Purpose of the Study.
Research Questions.
Research Hypotheses.

Chapter 2: Review of the Literature.

Theoretical Framework.

Family Systems Theory.

Theory of Social Capital

Parent’s Educational Attainment.
Family Income.

Familism.

Mobility . .
Student’s Educational Expectations
Parent’ 5 Educational Expectations.
Gender Differences.

Predominantly White University Culture

Summary.

Chapter 3: Methods.

Operational and Conceptual Definitions.

Research Design. .

Description of MSU CAMP
Recruitment.

Sample.

Data Sources.

Sample Descriptives .
Reliability and Validity of Scale.
Statistical Techniques.

Chapter 4: Results.

Hypothesis One

)tiii

XV

xvi

CD\I\IO\

.10

13
13
18
26
3O
34
4O
44
45
48
49
53

55

55
61
62
66
67
68
69
72
75

79

79

Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Hypothesis
Summary.

Two.

Three.

Four.

Five. . . . . . . . .
Six.

Chapter 5: Conclusions.

Discussion.

Limitations. . .
Sampling Biases. . . . . . .

Recommendations for Future Research.

Conclusions.

Appendices.

Appendix A: UCRIHS Approval.
Appendix B: Consent Forms. .

Appendix C:

References.

Survey Instrument.

mw

80
83
84
86
88
89

91

91

.104
.104
.106
.106

.110
.111
.113
.117

.135

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

LIST OF TABLES

Sample Characteristics

Parent’s Educational Attainment.

Inclusion of Familism Items .
Test for Multi—Collinearity
Correlations for H2

Mean (Expectations and GPA)

Educational Expectations.

XV

70

71

73

75

82

85

87

Figure 1:

LIST OF FIGURES

Theoretical Model

xvi

24

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The Latino population has been growing steadily for
the past few decades. Based on indicators of population
growth, this trend is going to continue. According to the
Current Population Survey (2000) Latinos make up 12 percent
of the population with 32.8 million Latinos living in the
United States; making Latinos the largest minority group
within the United States today. Mexican Americans make up
66 percent of the overall Latino population and 36 percent
of Mexican Americans are under the age of 18 (Current
Population Survey, 2000). The increase in the Latino
population raises social and economic concerns for the
United States because Latino school aged children are the
fastest growing group in the United States (U.S. Census
Bureau, 1999).

Recently, it has been reported that more than a
quarter (27.3 percent) of Latinos over age 25 hold less
than a ninth grade education (Yzaguirre, 2001). In 1992,

the estimated drop out rate for Mexican Americans was 35.3

percent versus 8.9 percent for non—Latino Whites (U.S.
Census Bureau, 1999). Consequently, Latinos in general are
underrepresented in postsecondary institutions today
(Carter & Wilson, 1996). Some scholars have argued that
the school failure of Latino students stemmed from their
family and community’s lack of educational values (Bernal,
Saenz & Knight, 1991). Others have suggested that a
cultural mismatch between student and school may result in
alienation or drop out from school (Trusty, 1996).
Although the current educational picture of this
community is bleak, the opportunity to attend and the
number of Latino students enrolled at four year
universities in the United States are slowly increasing
(Gilroy, 2005). Unfortunately, Latino students are still
at a greater risk for drop out than their non-Latino peers
and the number of Latinos actually earning a bachelor's
degree is still very low (Fry, 2002). According to the
U.S. Census Bureau, only 11 percent of Latino adults have
earned a bachelor’s degree compared to 30 percent of
European Americans, and the number of Mexican origin
Latinos with a bachelor’s degree is about seven percent
(2004). Latino students in postsecondary education face
many challenges that diminish their chances of completing

their educational goals. As an indicator of socioeconomic

status, education is one of the best challenges to address
when looking at ways to change the economic future of any
community.

Mexican American migrant farmworker families are a
unique segment of the Latino and. more specifically the
Mexican American population. They face all the same
struggles that Mexican Americans face; population growth,
low educational attainment, and poverty with the additional
stresses of educational disruption and community
marginalization due to the nature of their work. According
to recent publications there are 1.6 million migrant and
seasonal farmworkers (Lacar, 2001) with anywhere from
400,000 (Mehta, Gabbard, Barrat, Lewis, Carroll, & Mines,
2000) to 819,000 (Gibson, 2003) children currently working
in the United States. According to the Michigan Family
Independence Agency, Michigan is the forth largest user of
migrant labor with approximately 40,000 workers returning
annually (Gold, 2004).

Based on findings from the National Agricultural
Workers Survey' of 1997—1998 (NAWS), Mehta. et al. (2000)
found the majority of U.S. farmworkers (56 percent) had to
travel in order to secure employment. It has been reported
that seventy percent of Michigan migrant farmworkers

originate from Texas, twenty-five percent from Florida and

the rest from other states (Gold, 2004). The majority (95%)
of Michigan migrants today are of Mexican origin (Gold,
2004). This population follows a particular migrant stream
as they travel to Michigan (i.e., the receiving state) from
Texas (i.e., the sending state) annually. The laborers
travel from one state to another following the work until
they reach Michigan via “Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri,
Illinois, and Indiana” (Roeder & Millard, 2000, p. 2),
arriving' before; the end (M5 the school year and leaving
after the beginning of the school year. Regrettably,
mobility has also been found to have a negative effect on
school performance (Boisloly, Duncan, and Hofferth, 1995;
Haveman, Wolfe, & Spaulding, 1991). In Michigan, it has
been reported that adult migrant farmworkers have on
average, a sixth grade education and their children average
a ninth grade education (Gold, 2004).

In order to fully understand the Mexican American
migrant farmworker population being studied, it was
important that a working definition be established. To
that end, Migrants as defined by U.S. Department of
Education (1994) guidelines are “ migratory workers or the
children of migratory workers who move for the purposes of
obtaining seasonal or temporary work in agriculture .”

Mehta et a1. (2000), defined shuttle migrants as

4

farmworkers, “ moving between two or more jobs clustered at
a location far from their home base” (p. 21). The United
States Department of Agriculture (1988) defines migrant
workers as anyone earning more than 50 percent of their
annual income performing agricultural work, that takes them
away from their home (or cross a county line) in order to
participate in agricultural employment. Although accurate,
these definitions did not touch upon the true uniqueness of
this group. Looking for specific cultural characteristics
within the migrant community, Hinz (1987) found that,
“mMigrant workers have a strong sense of family

loyalty; respect for elderly persons; politeness .

They have pride for who they are and their heritage;

maintain faith with the family and their religion they

feel that diplomacy and tactfulness are very important

in communicating with others” (p. 13).

Sensitive to the cultural characterization by Hinz
(1987), this study defined migrant farmworkers by their
work status; as migratory workers (and their children) who
moved between job sites causing them to live part of the
year away from their home base, fully intending on adding

to this definition upon completion of this research.

Statement of the Problem

The academic achievement of Latino students has been a
topic of interest to researchers for decades. Although
the number of students entering college from Latino
families has increased, the number of students earning
degrees continues to fall behind other minority groups in
America. Literature on Mexican American migrant
farmworkers was more limited but showed that students from
this population had added disadvantages when it came to
education as they continued to struggle with high rates of
school drop out, high rates of poverty and low rates of
university enrollment. Currently, 85 percent of migrant
farmworker adults have not completed high school (Mehta et
al., 2000). In fact, the drop out rate for children from
Mexican American migrant farmworker families is higher than
any other ethnic group, at twice the national average
(Mehta et al., 2000). Current public policy is attempting
to address the postsecondary educational recruitment of
students from migrant farmworker families. Yet, their
persistence and completion has not adequately been

addressed at the public policy level.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that
promote and deter the academic achievement of students at
Michigan State University who come from Mexican American
migrant farmworker families. Specifically, this study
looked at the likelihood of theoretically based variables
predicting academic success.

By examining the issues of academic achievement and
educational expectations of migrant farmworker college
students, the present study was intended to generate
discussion toward plausible solutions. Besides making a
basic contribution to the existing literature on Mexican
American migrant farmworker families, the researcher hoped
to impact future public policy on the need to foster
postsecondary educational persistence among students who

are the most economically and academically at risk.

Research Questions

To that end, there were six main research questions

that guided the current study;

1” What impact does social capital have on postsecondary
academic achievement?

2L What impact does human capital have on postsecondary
academic achievement?

3.What impact does frequency of moves or mobility have on
postsecondary academic achievement?

l4.What affect does a student’s educational expectation have
on their academic achievement?

5.Are student’s educational expectations influenced by
their perception of their parent’s educational
expectations of them?

6.Does gender have an impact on educational expectations?

Research Hypotheses

Theoretical testing began with selection of variables
followed with development of hypotheses for testing. As a
result the following hypotheses were posited;

H1: Social capital, which includes family income and

familism is positively associated with academic

achievement.

H2: Human capital, which includes parents educational

attainment is positively associated with academic
achievement.

H3: Mobility is negatively associated with academic
achievement.

H4: Respondent’s educational expectations are
positively associated with academic achievement.

H5: Parent’s educational expectations are positively
associated with respondent’s educational
expectation.

H6: Gender is differentially associated with

academic achievement.

Through a theoretically informed lens, this study set
out to look at the factors related to the educational
achievement of Mexican American migrant farmworker students
admitted to a Midwestern university. Chapter two provides
the theoretical underpinnings of this study; chapter three
will review hypotheses testing; chapter four will provide
results of theory and hypotheses tests; concluding with

chapter five’s discussion of results.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The majority of migrant farmworkers in the United
States today are from Mexican families (Mehta et al.,
2000). Nationally, 77 percent of migrant farmworkers in
America are first generation Americans originating from
Mexico (Mehta et al., 2000). In fact, 95 percent of all
migrant farmworkers currently working the fields of
Michigan are of Mexican descent (Gold, 2004), most
following the Texas to Michigan migrant stream (Roeder &
Millard, 2000). As a result, the first language of 75
percent of children from migrant farmworker families is not
English but Spanish (Leon, 1996).

The drop out rate for children from Mexican American
migrant farmworker families has been reported to be higher
than any other ethnic group at twice the national average
(Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; CSCE,
1993) and well over 85 percent of migrant farmworkers in
America have not completed high school (Mehta et a1, 2000).
According to Mehta et al. (2000), an overwhelming number of

migrant farmworkers in the United States today, 38 percent,

10

are functionally illiterate. Historically, migrant
farmworkers in America have been described as the poorest
of the poor (Guerra, 1979).

Today, current research has found that this population
is still experiencing poverty at alarming rates. In fact,
according to a report by the United States Department of
Labor, 75 percent of all migrant farmworkers are earning
less than $10,000 annually (Mehta et al., 2000), and some
report it closer to $7,500 for a family of four (Gold,
2004). “Although wage rates for farmworkers have gone up
over the last decade, when adjusted for inflation we find
that farmworkers' real wages have decreased five percent in
that time” (National Center for Farmworker Health, Inc.,
2006). As a result, an estimated 60 percent of migrant
farmworkers are living below the poverty line (Lacar, 2001)
and 73 percent of their children 14 years and younger are
living in poverty (Gabbard, Mines, & Boccalandro, 1994).

Ironically, according to Gold (2004), Michigan’s cash
receipts from farm production totaled approximately $3.4
billion in 2002. Furthermore, in the past researchers have
estimated the average amount of food one farmworker
produces at approximately 107,000 pounds annually (Rochin,
Santiago, and Dickey, 1989). This same farmworker is

estimated to create more than five non—farm jobs to the

11

people who process, move, and sell the crops as well as
manufacture items needed by growers (U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1988). Yet this same farmworker and their
family are living below the poverty line barely able to
feed their own children.

With few exceptions, socioeconomic status has been
positively associated with academic achievement in the
literature. While level of educational attainment of
parents has been linked to high educational expectations
for and by their children; and high academic expectations
has been positively associated with academic achievement.
Unfortunately, this is not the cycle in which the migrant
community participates; rather, the migrant community has
been trapped in a cycle of poverty for over a century
perpetuated by low educational attainment. The current
study addressed issues related to this cycle through an
ecologically informed process.

The current chapter provides research findings that
related to the likelihood of a family's capital and
educational expectations predicting academic achievement.
Due to the dearth of literature concerning the migrant
community, studies on other populations as well as older
studies have been employed. The lack of literature in

this area is the void this study will fill.

12

Theoretical Framework

Family Systems Theory

Previous studies have looked at the phenomenon of
educational expectations through a purely sociological
perspective (Cheng and Starks, 2002; Kao and Tienda, 1998).
Although studies on immigrant students and their
educational expectations and academic achievement were
available, there was no research study found specifically
targeting the Mexican American migrant farmworker college
student’s educational expectations. The current study set
out to fill that void by looking at this topic with an
ethnically and culturally informed ecological perspective.
Therefore, this research was conducted and analyzed within
the Family Systems Theory while incorporating the theory of
Social Capital in an effort to respect the cultural
diversity of the Mexican American migrant farmworker
population.

Family Systems Theory originated from the General
Systems Theory, due to the fact that families essentially
had the same basic needs as other systems. For example,

families need to thrive in order to continue, they need to

13

work interdependently, they must establish clear boundaries
for decision—making, they require feedback for change, and
they can adapt as a result of that feedback. When change
occurs within any level of the system it impacts the other
parts of the system.

Bronfenbrenner (1979; 1989) created a Family Systems
Model that described the structure of the ecological
environment where human development happens. There are five
levels of the life span or developmental environments as
defined by Bronfenbrenner. The microsystem, mesosystem,
exosystem, and macrosystem, were conceptualized as
concentric rings, each fitting into the next serving as a
filter for the individual to experience the world over time
(chronosystem) often compared to a set of Russian dolls
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979).

At the very innermost level, the microsystem, where
development takes place you find the individual college
student. The mesosystem is where interaction within the
system occurs; for example, interaction between parents and
schools which is highly dependent on parent’s own level of
education. The next level is called the exosystem, and is
where interaction between systems takes place that have an
impact on the individual; for example, a parent’s work site

and subsequent level of family income. The fourth level

14

Bronfenbrenner called the macrosystem; this is the outer
most level and includes the larger society, which impacts
the entire system; for example, the cultural norm of
familism where the student’s entire life is deeply rooted.
The final level is the chronosystem, which allows for the
gauging of change and continuity within and between systems
over time; for example, over the four years of college.

As one looks at Mexican American migrant farmworker
families through the lens of the Family Systems Framework
you are able to see patterns of interactions within the
family as well as the patterns of interactions between
systems in which the family is embedded. The Mexican
American migrant farmworker family is interdependent;
meaning each member of the family is dependent on the other
for the family’s allocation of resources. Their strong and
cohesive work ethic, which is passed down through
generations, is essential to the success and subsequent
survival of the overall family system.

The Mexican American migrant farmworker family, like
other families, needs to thrive in order to continue, which
may lead parents to encourage higher education or promote
their student's plans to go into the work force immediately
after high school. According to McAdoo, “Whenever a family

member moves beyond the family into another setting, a

15

linkage is formed. Parents are members of the larger
society and subgroups that have parenting values that they
would like to pass down through the generations ” (1993, p.
298).

The family network has its boundaries in that ties
among family members do not extend to outsiders, the family
demand for traditional values may stifle individual
actions, and the likelihood exists for negative pressure to
be placed on a member (Portes, 1998; Portes & Landolt,
1996). The family network or system is the foundation for
learning. The family environment is critical to this

\\

learning process and is mmade up of rituals, beliefs, and
values of the family” (McAdoo, 1993, p. 299). Mexican
American parents, like other parents, want what is best for
their children. This includes the belief that maintaining
family rituals, beliefs, values, and cultural norms is
essential to their children’s well being.

The strengths related with utilizing this theoretical
framework were numerous and included; the family as the
unit of analysis allowing patterns of interaction within
systems and not just at the individual level to be
illuminated; the ability to look at interactions between

systems; and finally, the Family Systems Theory allowed for

internal cultural value to be maintained. Based on the

16

Family Systems theory, the researcher would expect the
independent variables (i.e. family income, familism, parent
educational attainment, mobility, parent educational
expectations, and gender) to influence the dependent
variables (i.e. academic achievement and respondent’s
educational expectation) at different levels based on the
system they represent. For example, variables resulting in
the exosystem (e.g. family income) will be filtered through
the mesosystem (e.g. parent’s educational attainment)
before impacting the individual development.

The foundation for identifying the variables for study
was based on the Family Systems Theory and the existing
literature on migrant farmworkers. In order to
systematically select and study specific variables related
to this topic the theory of social capital was incorporated

into this research.

17

Theory of Social Capital

The Family Systems Theory provided the lens with which
to View the migrant farmworker family. The theory of
Social Capital provided this study with an organized way to
look at the systems Bronfenbrenner established in his model
and select variables from the literature employing a
logical approach. Social capital was not a new concept,
but it has come into distinction in the last few decades
due to the works of Jane Jacobs (1961), Pierre Bourdieu
(1983), James C. Coleman (1988) and Robert D. Putnam
(2000).

According to sociologist James Coleman, social capital
refers to the value and strength of relationships between
members within a family system or community. Coleman
(1988) noted, “The social capital of the family is the
relation between children and parents (and, when families
include other members, relationships with them as well)”
(p. 384). The child's well being is the emphasis of social
capital and the ability of the family to put forth effort
toward that objective is essential. Providing a positive

environment for children to develop and achieve through a

18

strong sense of community, shared values and trust is the
goal.

Coleman (1988) described the relationship aspect as
expectations and obligations (e.g. macrosystem; mobility
and familism) between people within a unit; the social set
of connections accommodates the transfer between people in
a community (e.g. exosystem; family income); and the norms
piece incorporates the enforcement of a certain set of
activities within those relationships (e.g. mesosystem;
educational attainment).

Social capital has been utilized in studies associated
with school aged children and their families in the past.
Coleman (1988) and Pribesh and Downey (1999) looked at the
number of residential and school moves a child experiences
and its association with school expectations and
performance utilizing the theory of social capital and came
up with similar results. Data from the National
Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS) of 1988 and its 1992
follow up were used by Pribesh and Downey (1999) and the
national High School and Beyond (HSB) survey data was used
by Coleman (1988). The NELS data were collected by the
National Center for Education Statistics and “included
information from students, parents, teachers and principals

from over 24,000 eighth graders” (Pribesh et al., 1999 p.

19

5). Pribesh and Downey’s study focused on the impact of
social capital on residential moves and educational
performance and found that students who move experience a
drop in social capital and in school performance.

There are different forms of capital that impact an
individual. Social capital is the result of the buildup of
social debts and the belief they will be repaid (i.e.,
exosystem/family income), it stems from feelings of unity
that grow among people living in comparable situations
(i.e., macrosystem; familism and mobility), with comparable
experiences (i.e., mesosystem/educational attainment), and
it comes from their aspirations to be integrated into
larger groups (i.e., microsystem/educational expectations
and achievement) (Portes, 1998).

Human capital referred to the individual's
credentials, training, educational achievement and
certifications. According to Becker and Tomes’ (1986)
human capital model, parents were seen as investing in
their children, constrained by family resources including
parents' education and time. The current study used the
variable of parent’s educational attainment to represent
human capital (mesosystem).

The resources embedded in a social structure are

significant because they serve as a social reference for

20

members of a network, strengthen group characteristics,
influence decision making, and assist in the diffusion of
information (Lin, 2001). Because of the low levels of
social and human capital that the migrant community has
experienced, social capital, human capital and the
resulting network ties are of greater importance. In an
effort to compensate for low levels of social and human
capital, the migrant community becomes enmeshed in a
complex social network. The spatial concentration of
migrants within camps and outside mainstream communities
leads to an increased reliance on people of similar origin.
The reciprocity implied in the exchange of social capital
and the reliance on family and community members for
survival allows migrant networks to support its members
(Coleman, 1988; Portes, 1995; Rogers & Henning, 1999).
According to Coleman (1988) if parent’s human capital
(i.e. mesosystem/parents education and time), was not
balanced by social capital embodied in family associations
(i.e. macrosystem/familism and exosystem/family income),
the amount of human capital (i.e., parent education) those
parents possessed would be immaterial to their child's
educational development (i.e., microsystem/educational
expectations and achievement). In utilizing this View in

the current study, Mexican American migrant farmworker

21

parents’ educational attainment was expected to be lower
than the average population. Yet the level of familism, or
sense of family obligation and interdependence was expected
to be higher ultimately creating the balance Coleman
mentioned.

Essentially, social capital consists of the
interaction within a family and between families in a
community paying particular attention to the shared values,
trust, and the mutual understanding that connect people to
each other and a common goal (Pribesh & Downey, 1999).
Social capital, like family systems, allowed for closer
study of those connections both between and within systems
but social capital offers the ability to look at the
resulting trustworthiness and standard of reciprocity
established by those connections. The ideas established by
Coleman (1988) on social capital fit well with
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) theory of family systems and were
why these two theories, in conjunction, provided the lens
by which this study was scrutinized.

The literature reflects a positive relationship
between family income and academic achievement; and
respondents’ educational expectation and academic
achievement. The literature also reflects a negative

relationship between mobility and academic achievement;

22

between parents’ educational attainment and academic
achievement; and between familism and academic achievement.
As Figure 1 shows, the relationship between student's
or respondents educational expectations (Res. Ed. Exp) and
their perception of their parent’s educational expectations
for them (Par. Ed. Exp.) form four quadrants. ‘Quadrant I’
is where there is a positive relationship between
expectations, meaning as the parents educational
expectations increase so do their student’s expectations
and subsequently their student’s academic achievement is
expected to increase. ‘Quadrant II’ and ‘Quadrant IV' are
where there is a negative relationship between parent and
student expectations, meaning as the parents educational
expectations decrease or increase their student's
expectations will increase or decrease, respectively. These
quadrant areas are where student’s academic achievement is
expected to be medium. ‘Quadrant III’ is where there is a
positive relationship between expectations, meaning as the
parents educational expectations decrease so do their
student’s expectations and subsequently their student's
academic achievement is expected to be low. The high,
medium and low academic achievement designation will result

from natural breaks in the data analysis.

23

These four quadrants depict the impact on GPA caused
by mediating variables (i.e., Capital) which impact
expectations. The control variable (e.g. gender); the
social capital variables (e.g. family income and familism);
and the human capital variable (e.g. parent’s educational
attainment) all impact the microsystem from outside. The
mesosystem (i.e., parent’s educational attainment),
exosystem (i.e., family income), and macrosystem (i.e.,
familism and mobility) are concentric rings which will
serve as a filter to protect the individual during

development (see Figure 1).

24

Figure 1: Theoretical Model

 

 

 

 

+/-Capital _

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+/-Capital
+ Res. Ed. Exp.
+Par. H 1] -Par. Ed.
Ed. Exp [V -1" Exp
+/-Capital I; \
+/-Capital
-Res. Ed. Exp.
Microsystem
Macrosvstem
L
I
Chronosystem

 

 

 

Quadrants (Dependent Variable) :
I: High GPA

II 5 IV: Medium GPA

III: Low GPA

25

 

Parents Educational Attainment

A well documented limitation to higher education was
parent’s educational background. Parent’s educational
history was found to be a significant predictor to
educational persistence and graduation in the literature
time and again (Spady, 1970; Featherman & Hauser, 1978;
Haveman, Wolfe & Spaulding, 1991; Terenzini, Springer,
Yaeger, Pascarella & Nora, 1996; Cheng & Starks, 2002).
According to Haveman, Wolfe and Spaulding (1991) a student
whose father has at least some college education has a 14
percent greater probability of graduating from high school
and a student whose mother has a college degree is
virtually certain to graduate from high school. Thus, the
idea that parents with more education provide a home
environment conducive to the educational success of their
children has been strengthened by the literature.

According to Buchmann and Dalton (2002), higher human
(i.e., parent education and time) and physical capital
(i.e., family income) can increase a student’s educational
expectations. With overall low parental educational
attainment, the migrant population is in a unique position

to add differing perspectives to the topic at hand.

26

Velazquez (1993) studied migrant farmworker adults and
found that they described a common perception of negative
schooling experiences. The constant moving and the
pressures to conform and to meet expectations proved to be
a heavy burden to them. The schools, according to the
parents in Velazquez’s study, made no efforts to help them
adjust. Many had to repeat grades and were left behind by
peers. For the most part, the main theme these migrant
parents reported remembering in this study was the pain,
rejection, and isolation of school (Velasquez, 1993).

Apicella (1985) studied perceptions of why migrant
students drop out and what can be done to encourage their
graduation and found that even though migrant students who
drop out consistently expressed a belief in the value of
learning, they distrusted schools as a means of improving
employability and quality of life. The distrust of schools
and its value was learned through negative experiences in
the migrant farmworker family and community. In order for
migrant farmworker children to aspire and pursue higher
educational goals, the migrant farmworker community must
see tangible change in the current potential of education
on their children’s future employability. Educational
reform must not exclude migrants in its plan for a new

educational foundation.

27

Research by Duron (1995) found that the most important
factors contributing to migrant student’s decisions to
participate in postsecondary education were: 1) access to
quality high school and college counseling that offers an
array of options; 2) personal factors, including the
individual's incentive and beliefs about self efficacy; 3)
financial factors including access to scholarships, loans,
and work or work-study programs; and 4) ongoing support
from family and educational personnel (Duron, 1995). The
Duron (1995) study was important in trying to pinpoint the
reasons why migrant students decide not to pursue
postsecondary educations.

As first generation college students whose parents
have not participated in postsecondary education, migrant
students face all the same struggles that traditional
students face as they enter a new phase in their
educational lives with the additional stress of navigating
through territory previously uncharted by their family.
York-Anderson and Bowman (1991) studied the college
knowledge of first and second generation college students
and found that first-generation students were at a
disadvantage when compared to traditional students in their
basic knowledge of college, their personal dedication to

higher education, the level of family support they receive,

28

and at a greater risk in respect to persistence and degree
attainment.

Black, Paz and DeBlassie’s (1991) study on Latino
adolescents found Latino adolescents were more apt than
Anglo adolescents to adopt their parent’s commitment to
occupational preference and standard of living. Buchmann
and Dalton (2002), found higher parental education and
socioeconomic status can increase student’s educational
expectations. First-generation college students coming
from migrant farmworker families face all the same
struggles as their non-migrant counterparts with the added
disadvantages of cultural and social barriers experienced.

Migrant farmworker families are different in many
respects to other families. Suffering poverty, mobility,
language barriers and discrimination issues, the norm for
parents in this community has been low educational
attainment. Reportedly, an overwhelming majority of adult
migrant farmworkers have low educational accomplishments,
with well over 85 percent not finishing high school (Mehta
et al., 2000). Although income was a contributing factor
to low educational attainment, the literature also points
to other factors that may impact educational expectations
and limit or enhance the educational outcomes of college

students, including mobility, familism and gender.

29

Family Income

The socioeconomic status of the Mexican American
migrant farmworker community today presents one of the
major educational limitations faced by students coming from
this population. According to Mehta et a1. (2000), “More
than three-fifths of migrant farmworkers are poor, and this
number is increasing each year. Seventy-five percent of
all migrant farmworkers earn less than $10,000 annuallym
with ten percent of farmworkers earning below minimum wage”
(p.7). These numbers fall short of the poverty level for
an individual in the U.S. in 2002, which was $18,100 and is
shamefully lower than the median income of households in
the United States, $40,800 (U.S. Bureau of the Census,
1999).

Thompson and Wiggins (2002) reported that migrant
farmworkers have the lowest annual family incomes of any
United States wage and salary workers with a majority
living in poverty. Five percent of farmworkers
interviewed for the National Agricultural Workers Survey
1997—1998 were being provided health insurance from their
agricultural employers and only 21 percent were receiving
free housing (Mehta et al., 2000). Yet despite all their

economic anguish, few migrant farmworkers used social

30

services available to them. According to Mehta et a1.
(2000), only one percent of farmworker families received
Aid to Families with Dependent Children, public housing, or
general assistance with only ten percent receiving food
stamps or food vouchers through the Women, Infant, and
Children program. The very idea that migrant farmworker
families migrate to a new community, becoming parasites,
rather than contributing members is unfounded (Thompson &
Wiggins, 2002).

The State of Michigan employs an estimated 40,000-
45,000 migrant farmworkers annually (Rochin, Santiago, &
Dickey, 1989). There are an estimated 819,000 migrant
children nationwide (Gibson, 2003). The economic status of
this population will continue to degrade as inflation rises
and their wages remain stagnant. “In Florida, for example,
orange pickers are paid $.55 per box, and this piece rate
has remained unchanged for the past 25 years” (Davis, 1997,
p. 2). Due to the impact migrant labor has on the state of
Michigan’s economy, with cash receipts from farm production
totaling $3.4 billion in 2002 (Gold, 2004), this state
should be doing more to change the current economic
condition of this population.

With few exceptions, family income has been positively

associated with academic achievement, once again making

31

migrant farmworker students an at risk group for negative
educational outcomes. According to Buchmann and Dalton
(2002), higher socioeconomic status (SES) can increase
student’s educational expectations. Studies have found
that children from homes of high SES tend to be raised to
value self-direction and independence (Gandura, 1995) which
is conducive to the learning environment in the United
States public school system. Mexican origin parents tend
to value cooperation and respect rather than independence
and competition (Gandara, 1995), contrary to the learning
environment in the United States public school system.

A characteristic of Latino culture is a strong
identification with and attachment of individuals to their
families, which have been described as cohesive and
supportive (Sabogal, Marin, Otero-Sabogal, Marin, & Perez—
Stable, 1987). Today, economic pressures compel families to
remove older children from school in order for them to work
in the field full time. This practice enables the family
to earn more money than a traditional minimum wage job with
only one or two household members working. At the same
time, having the children with them decreases the need for
childcare expenses and allows families to stay together
throughout the day. Latino school aged children are the

fastest growing group in the United States (U.S. Census

32

 

Bureau, 1999). According to Rochin et a1. (1989), children
eight years or older can work in the fields, significantly
increasing family income if everyone in the family unit
works together. In fact, in the state of Michigan, the
family structure of migrant farmworkers tends to be young
families with extended family members included to increase
their earning potential (Rochin et al., 1989).

Overall, family income has been found to have a direct
relationship with educational persistence in the literature
when different economic groups are compared and Latino
parent's annual incomes have been found to be significantly
lower than non-Latino parents of school aged children
(Martinez, DeGarmo, & Eddy, 2004). Financial limitations
have been reported as a reason why Mexican American college
students drop out (Castillo & Hill, 2004). Castillo and
Hill (2004) also establish that one of the contributing
factors to higher levels of stress among Latino college
students is financial need and the demands of balancing
part time or full time jobs with their school
responsibilities. The transition to university life can be
derailed when a student is spending too many hours working
outside of academia. Trying to juggle work, school,

personal finances, concern over family finances, social and

33

personal lives can be overwhelming and detrimental to a

students educational goals and overall well being.

Familism

An additional characteristic linked to educational
expectations and attainment in the literature was family
generational status in the United States (Buriel & Cardoza,
1988; Kao & Tienda, 1995). In their study of immigrant
families, Kao et al. (1995), found that although Latino
children whose parents were foreign born did not have
higher grades, they did have higher college expectations.
Contrary to Kao et al. (1995), Hao and Bonstead-Bruns
(1998) found that students whose mother tongue was English
had higher educational expectations. Hao et al. (1998),
also reported that the higher the English proficiency of a
student whose first language is not English, the higher his
or her educational expectations.

Migrant farmworker families in America are 90 percent
foreign born with 95 percent of all foreign born migrants
originating in Mexico and spending on average ten years in
the United States (Mehta et al., 2000). Few significant

differences have been found between first generation and

34

 

third generation minorities in school outcomes (Matute—
Bianchi, 1991). This may be attributed to the fact that
the majority of minority children are no longer fluent in
their immigrant language by the third generation (Buriel &
Cardoza, 1988). Unlike other immigrants today, the first
language of 75 percent of Mexican American migrant
farmworker children is not English but Spanish (Leon,
1996). According to Schrauf (1999), the only factors
significantly associated with retention of the immigrant
language into the third generation were settlement in
geographically bounded ethnic communities and the practice
of native religious forms. Mexican American migrant
farmworker communities are just that, cohesive networks of
family and friends who migrate together in a social support
system. The migrant farmworker community maintains its
cultural values of family, language and religion for
generations.

According to Gordon (1994), acculturation refers to
the process whereby immigrants come to adopt the values and
behaviors of the host country. The acculturation process
has often been described as a long-term, fluid process
whereby an individual simultaneously moves along two
cultural dimensions. Individuals are constantly modifying

their old culture by integrating certain aspects of the new

35

culture in order to develop a sense of belonging. Gauvain
and Rogoff (1989) found that acculturated Latino students
were more likely to attend college and have parents who
have experienced higher levels of educational attainment.

Higher levels of acculturation in students have been
found to promote academic success at school. Kao and
Tienda (1995) found that limited English proficiency and
recent immigration can decrease the educational outcomes of
students to the point of dropping out. According to
Rueschenberg and Buriel (1989), as families of Mexican
descent acculturate, they become more involved with social
systems outside the family (i.e., social capital; e.g.
family income) while the fundamental family system remains
the same. If we look within the Mexican American migrant
farmworker family we find that a defining characteristic of
the Latino culture is a strong identification with and
attachment of individuals to their families, which have
been described as cohesive and supportive (Sabogal, Marin,
Otero-Sabogal, Marin, & Perez-Stable, 1987; Phinney, Ong, &
Madden, 2000). The cohesiveness and connectedness within
this family culture is referred to as Familism (i.e.,
social capital).

Cuéllar, Arnold, and Maldonado (1995) believe that

generational status is linked with Mexican American’s level

36

of acculturation. Although acculturation has been focused
on an assimilation agenda in the past, acculturation is not
one-dimensional. Specifically, Cuéllar et a1. (1995)
argues that in order to adapt to the new culture one does
not need to turn their back on their original culture. In
fact, Cuéllar et a1. (1995) spoke directly to the notion
that acculturation is not a cultural exchange; rather, it
is a multicultural construct without assimilation agendas.
While there is not similar research in the literature
on Mexican migrants, other literature informs this study
including research with high school students from Asian,
Latin American and European backgrounds. Several of these
studies have shown that the value of family obligation
(familism) is positively associated with students'
educational aspirations (Fuligni, Tseng, & Lam, 1999;
Tseng, 2004). Another study of an ethnically diverse
student population found an association between academic
persistence after high school and a strong sense of family
obligations (familism) for students with low to moderate
grades in high school (Fuligni & Pedersen, 2002). Building
on the Fuligni et a1. studies, this research looked at the
association between academic achievement after high school,
educational expectations and familism in a Mexican American

migrant student population.

37

I!

The idea of family interconnectedness has been
referred to as familism in the literature (Velenzula &
Dornbusch, 1994). Familism has been defined as containing
three dimensions that are operating consecutively in a
family system; structural, behavioral, and attitudinal
(Valenzuela & Dornbusch, 1994). The structural dimension
“marks the spatial and social boundaries within which
behaviors occur and attitudes acquire meaning” (Valenzuela
& Dornbusch, 1994, p. 18). The behavioral dimension refers
to the emotional connection to the family (Sabogal, Marin,
Otero-Sabogal, & Marin, 1987). The attitudinal dimension
refers to the tendency to put the family good ahead of your
own (Luna, deArdon, Lim, Cromwell, Phillips, & Russell,
1996).

The “attitudinal dimension has been defined as a
cultural value that involves an individual's strong
identification with and attachment to his or her nuclear
and extended families and strong feelings of loyalty,
reciprocity, and solidarity among members of the same
family” (Steidel & Contreras, 2003, pp.313-314) and it is
the level of familism chosen for this study. According to
Steidel et al. (2003) one of the most referred to
definitions of attitudinal familism comes from Burgess,

Locke, and Thomes (1963) and reads as follows;

38

“1) the feeling on the part of all members that
they belong pre—eminently to the family group and that
all other persons are outsiders; 2) complete
integration of individual activities for the
achievement of family objectives; 3) the assumption
that land, money and other material goods are family
property, involving the obligation to support
individual members and give them assistance when they
are in need; 4) willingness of all members to rally to
the support of a member if attacked by outsiders, and
5) concern for the perpetuation of the family...”

(pp.35-36).

According to familism, every member in a migrant
farmworker family is essential to the wellbeing of the
family unit, emotionally, economically and socially. As a
result, children grow up feeling a positive sense of
responsibility for their family’s welfare. Therefore when
it comes time to leave the family unit to attend college,
these students must first weigh the impact their absence
will have on their family against the potential of economic
success in the future resulting from higher education. At
the same time, these students and their parents must also

consider the community atmosphere to which the student is

moving. Educational expectations from parents pushing

39

I

college attendance may be more important for Latino
students who maintain and support their cultural values of
meeting the family demands and expectations (Markus &
Kitayama, 1991). A history of discrimination and
marginalization has made this community weary of sending
their most precious members, their children, out into a

predominantly white university culture alone.

Mobility

For purposes of this study, mobility refers to
frequency of moves. As stated earlier, Michigan migrant
farmworkers tend to be Mexican Americans (95%) who consider
their home state to be Texas (70%) during the winter and
migrate North via “Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois,
and Indiana” (Roeder & Millard, 2000, p. 2) during planting
and harvesting seasons (Gold, 2004). Educational disrupt
caused by mobility has been found to have a long lasting
impact on children. According to Haveman, Wolfe, and
Spaulding (1991) frequency of moves made at ages four to
seven, as well as at ages 12 to 15 had a significant and
negative impact on educational achievement at ages 19-24.

Building on Haveman, Wolfe, and Spaulding’s (1991)

40

research, this study looked at the association and possible
residual impact of frequency of mobility during childhood
and academic achievement at the university level.

The migrant farmworker population has been at a
disadvantage educationally due in part to the economic
hardship they face. Work schedules of parents interfere
with the educational calendar of most states, as some
children work and do not begin the school year until
October or November and leave before the year is over
(Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 1993).
The literature on mobility indicates that students with
high frequency of moves defined as six to eight moves from
K-12u‘grade experience academic achievement challenges
(Wood, Halfon, Scarlata, Newacheck, & Nessim, 1993;
Filippelli & Jason, 1992). According to Leon (1996);

“Migrant farmworkers move on an average six (6)
times per year in order to complete the different
variety of farm harvesting. This movement from one
state to another or from one city from another within

a state creates a tremendous educational hazard for

their children. Migrant children will arrive to a new

school, (be) tested on all subjects, and placed in a

room with new students in the middle of the school

year. In addition, many migrant students are placed

41

in a lower grade level because the school standards

and absenteeism policies are different from the school

they just came from. Many times curriculum

incompatibility and staff shortage creates a

compounding negative effect. Migrant students are

often placed in a room with a teacher aide or simply
left alone in the school hallways. Interrupted
schooling and lack of continuity in curriculum from
that interruption of studies are additional conditions
that raise the dropout rate for migrant students.

These conditions often hinder and decrease the

accumulation of credits they need to pass from one

grade to another” (Leon, 1996, p.6).

In addition, Parra-Cardona, Bulock, Imig, Villarruel,
and Gold (2006) found that “challenges associated with
Michigan's schools (included) shortage of bilingual staff
and teachers, children being assigned to ‘special
education’ classes, or being placed in a lower level grade
than in the previous state” (p. 370). Unfortunately, the
current school system in most states does not accommodate
the migrant farmworker calendar and in most instances the
receiving schools do not accept the grades from the
departing school, causing student’s education to be delayed

and disrupted.

42

 

The association between mobility and social capital
has been well documented. Coleman (1988) used educational
mobility as a close indicator of social capital. Pribesh
et al., (1999) stated, “From a social capital perspective,
moving interrupts social relations with persons in the
school, the neighborhood, the community, and, perhaps, the
family Simply put, moving negatively affects school
performance because within-family ties are stressed and
within—community ties with teachers, administrators, and
other community members are often lost” (p. 2). Boisloly,
Duncan, and Hofferth (1995) also noted the association of
less social capital with geographic mobility.

One of the defining characteristics of migrant farm
laborers is their willingness to travel for purposes of
work during the harvest season. Mobility between two or
more communities is an annual common practice. Students
tend to stay in their southern home state schools till
spring harvest when they will travel north with their
families to a Midwestern state to participate in the
agricultural industry. As they harvest one crop after
another, it is not uncommon for families to move several
times within a season until they leave again in late fall.

By late fall, students have begun classes in a northern

43

 

school, and have to transfer to a southern school mid
semester when their employment ends.

Mobility has been linked to the high rate of drop out
in this community, due to the fact that each school in the
U.S. has a different curriculum with different requirements
for graduation. As a result many times migrant student’s
credits do not transfer from one state to the other or the
students are forced to retake courses previously taken due
to moving before the end of the semester and not being able
to finish the course in their new school. Frustration can
quickly build within a community after years of being

overlooked and un-accommodated by the educational system.

Student’s Educational Expectations

Educational expectations held by students and their
parents have been found in the literature to impact
academic success. In the past, the literature concerning
student educational aspirations has used educational
expectations or college plans as the dependent variable of
interest (Sewell and Shah, 1967; Woefel and Haller, 1971;
Cheng & Starks, 2002). Some studies have attempted to

separate idealistic aspirations and realistic expectations,

44

but concluded that they are highly correlated and therefore
provide similar results (Marini, 1978; Spencer, 1976).

For decade’s research on educational expectations
found expectations to be relevant in predicting student’s
educational outcomes. Tinto (1975) indicated that being
committed to finishing a college degree was the most
important determinant of persistence in college after
taking a student’s high school academic history into
account. Arbona and Novy (1990) found that Mexican
American students who held greater educational expectations
achieved higher first—year college grades. Overall,
studies on children’s educational expectations have
concluded that Latinos in the United States have the lowest
educational expectations of all racial groups studied and
Asian American groups have the highest educational
expectations (Coleman, Hobson, McPartland, Mood, Weidfeld,
& York, 1966; Mickelson, 1990; Goyette & Xie, 1999; Cheng

and Starks, 2002).

Parent’s Educational Expectations

Recently, parent’s educational support has been found

to have an impact on their student’s educational outcomes

45

(Gandara, 1995; Gloria & Rodriguez, 2000; Cheng & Starks,
2002). Hao and Bonstead-Bruns (1998) looked at parent and
child differences in educational expectations and academic
achievement of immigrant and native students and found that
higher shared educational expectations boost achievement
and greater differences lower achievement. A good deal of
the literature on educational outcomes and parental
expectations and involvement revolve around pre-college
populations. Current research on parent’s educational
expectations for their children has begun to address the
differences among racial ethnic groups.

Within that existing research, educational
expectations of students held by their parents and
significant others have been found to differ by parental
education and race with less educated Latino parents coming
in last (Farkas, Grobe, Sheehan, & Shaun, 1990;
Horchschild, 1995; Kao, 1995; Cheng & Starks, 2002). A
qualitative study on educational and occupational
aspirations of Latino students and their parents found that
parent’s aspirations tended to transfer to their children
(Behnke, Piercy & Diversi, 2004). Although no studies were
found specifically addressing the educational expectations
for and by Mexican American migrant farmworker students, a

study of successful migrant students indicated that migrant

46

 

parents had encouraged their children to stay in school so
the children could have a better life (Salerno & Fink,
1992).

Parra-Cardona et a1. (2006) found that the migrant
farmworkers they interviewed had a different perception of
what ‘moving up in life’ meant from mainstream society.
Parents in their study reported that an indicator of
prevailing over the challenges associated with the migrant
lifestyle was the ability farm work afforded them to
achieve specific goals, like an education, while still
being able to provide for their families basic needs
(Parra—Cardona et al., 2006).

Cheng and Starks (2002) studied racial differences in
the effects of significant others on students’ educational
expectations and found that parents of color (Asian-
American, African American, and Latino) held higher
aspirations for their children than White parents while the
relative influence of White parents was greater than their
non-White counterparts. Building on Cheng and Starks’
(2002) findings, this study extended the assessment of
ethnic differences in the level of educational expectations
that parents have for their students to include the unique

community of Mexican American migrant farmworker families.

47

Gender Differences

Another factor that was found to have an impact on
educational expectations and persistence was gender.
Buchmann and Dalton’s (2002) study of the interpersonal
influences and educational expectations in twelve
countries, found gender impacted outcomes in a surprising
way. Contrary to studies in the 1970’s (Alexander and
Eckland, 1974; Marini, 1978), Buchmann and Dalton (2002)
found that females reported significantly higher
educational expectations than males in eight out of twelve
countries. Although Mexico was not one of the countries
studied they reported that in countries, like Mexico, that
continue to promote cultural traditions and distinct gender
roles, there was the opposite results with low labor force
participation among females and lower rates of educational
expectations (Buchmann & Dalton, 2002). The Mexican
American migrant farmworker community continues to promote
cultural traditions and distinct gender roles in the home
today, even when all family members work side by side in
the fields. Adding to Buchmann and Dalton’s study, this
research looked at the impact gender had on the educational
expectations of college students from Mexican American

migrant farmworker families.

48

 

Predominantly White University Culture

Although not one of the variables currently under
scrutiny, the predominantly white university culture has
been found to have an impact on the educational attainment
of minority populations and as a result bares
consideration. Currently, Michigan State University (MSU)
has a total of 45,166 students; 35,678 undergraduate and
9,488 graduate and professional students enrolled with 54
percent females and 46 percent males. The ethnic breakdown
of students at MSU is 83 percent Caucasian American, 7.9
percent African American, 5.3 percent Asian/Pacific
Islander, 3.0 percent Chicano/Other Hispanic, and 0.8
percent Native American (Michigan State University, 2006).

Nationally, full time faculty positions as well as
administrative positions in 1999, at the college level,
were lacking in Latino representation with only 2.9 percent
of faculty and three percent of administrators coming from
the Latino community (Castellanos & Jones, 2003).

Michigan State University (MSU) reports their Latino tenure
faculty at 2.9 percent; their Latino fixed term faculty at
3.2 percent; their continuing academic staff at 2.5
percent; and their Latino fixed term academic staff at 3.2

percent for an overall Latino presence of 2.9 percent in

49

2006 (Michigan State University Academic Human Resosurces,
2006). Consequently, Latino students at MSU are more
likely to see Latino representation in the lower levels of
academia rather than in tenure system faculty positions.
From day one, the predominantly White university model
accommodates individuals who academically meet standards
established as determinants for success in White student
populations, such as high grade point averages and
standardized test scores (Sedlacek, 1999). The Scholastic
Aptitude Test (SAT) and the American College Testing
Program (ACT) have been used to predict postsecondary grade
point average (GPA) but not as strongly as High School
Grade Point Average (HSGPA) (Duran, 1983). Latino
students who decide to attend a predominantly White
university are faced with an academic culture tailor-made
for the White, middle class male and often experience
situations contrary to their cultural values and beliefs

(Jones, Castellanos, & Cole, 2002).

Transition into the university culture is essential to
the student’s educational outcomes. Hurtado and Carter
(1997) looked at the effects of college transition on
Latino college students’ sense of belonging to the
university community and found that early transition

experiences were important predictors of future sense of

50

belonging to the university community. Many Latino
students develop bicultural coping mechanisms to maintain
their psychological equilibrium during transition (Suarez,
Fowers, Garwood, & Szapocznik, 1997) and students who were
not able to do so had an increased likelihood of academic

non-persistence (Gloria & Rodriguez, 2000).

A student’s perception of the university environment
has been found to have an impact on both their academic and
social lives (Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen,
1998; Cabrera & Padilla, 2004) and will directly affect
their sense of belonging. The predominantly White
university culture has an enormous impact on non-White
students today but can be especially burdensome to students
from migrant farmworker families. The idea that an
individual needs to feel a part of their community in order
to readily participate in it is important to this study.
Keep in mind, the majority of students from Mexican
American migrant farmworker families are leaving a
cohesive, supportive and interconnected family community,
to which they have strong ties.

Enhancing a student's sense of belonging to the
university community is essential to academic motivation,
participation, and achievement (Gonzalez & Padilla, 1997;

Goodenow & Grady, 1993; Osterman, 2000). Bollen and Hoyle

51

(1990), stated that a “ sense of belonging is fundamental
to a member's identification with a group and has numerous
consequences for behavior” (p. 484). According to a
report by Gibson (2003), “a sense of belonging may be
especially important for migrant students due to the status
differences that exist between them and members of the
dominant society, their high rate of absenteeism, and the
disconnect that they experience between home and school
culture” (p. 2).

Cabrera and Padilla’s (2004) qualitative research on
succeeding in the culture of college found that “Juan” a
student at Stanford, from a Mexican American migrant
farmworker family was able to transition into university
life via his living arrangements during his freshmen year;
the Chicano theme house provided him a place where he could
feel comfortable with other students who shared his culture
and who he could share his experiences with. Ultimately,
the theme house helped “Juan” ease into the transition
process.

Building on existing literature, this study looked at
students at a predominantly white university who
participated in a program specifically designed to provide
migrant students with a sense of belonging to the

university community. The Michigan State University

52

College Assistance Migrant Program (MSU CAMP) was
established to not only recruit high school graduates to
the university but also to increase educational persistence

through group programming.

Summary

Founded on the ecological and contextual theories of human
development this study explored the factors associated with
the academic achievement of Mexican American migrant
farmworker college students. The research concepts,
questions and hypotheses to be tested, are all grounded in
this theoretical framework. Variable selection followed
theoretically prescribed boundaries. Specifically,
variables were selected by first looking at
Bronfenbrenner’s model of development and finding specific
constructs related to the study population. Then, the
theory of social capital was utilized to generate
relationships between the variables chosen. Once that was
completed the research process continued in an effort to
explain the relationships presented.

Specifically, this study set out to shed light on the

relationship between parent’s educational expectations and

53

student’s educational expectation and the subsequent impact
on student’s academic achievement. The underlying logic
for conducting this study was if college students from
Mexican American migrant farmworker families believe that
they will attain high levels of education and that their
parent’s have high educational expectations of them, then
they will attain higher levels of academic achievement
reflected by their GPA.

The purpose of this literature review was to provide
context for and identify important previous work done on
this topic. The following chapters will provide an
overview of the methodological procedures undertaken for
hypotheses testing as well as subsequent results of
analyses, followed by conclusions and recommendations for

future research.

54

CHAPTER III

Methods

Conceptual and Operational Definitions

The main variable of study was academic achievement
and was conceptualized as the academic status of
respondents. This interval level data was operationalized
as the respondent’s actual grade point average (GPA)
accessed via university records ranging from 0.0 to 4.0.

Social capital was conceptualized as the basic
components required in order to provide an encouraging
environment for children to grow and accomplish through a
strong sense of community and common values. Operationally,
social capital was measured as the variables family income
and familism. Family income was measured using the survey
question; “what was your annual family income last year?”
Thies ordinal level data, family income, ranged from 1 to 5
(1: ‘1ess than $10,000’ and 5= ‘$40,000 or more’).

Familism was conceptualized as a strong sense of
family obligation and commitment. Operationally, this
ordinal level data was measured by Steidel and Contrera's

(2003) 18—item Attitudinal Familism composite scale. The

55

Attitudinal Familism composite scale was chosen because it
was intended for less acculturated Latinos and had been
found reliable (Cronbach’s alpha p§.83) and validated with
a Latino population. The scale will be tested for
reliability and validity with the current population prior
to analysis.

Familism consisted of the following 18 Likert-type

questions;

0 A person should live near his or her parents and
spend time with them on a regular basis.

0 Aging parents should live with their relatives.

0 querson should help his or her elderly parents in
times of need, for example help financially or share
a house.

0 Children should always help their parents with the
support of younger brothers and sisters, for
example, help them with homework, help the parents
take care of the children, and so forth.

0 A person should rely on his or her family if the
need arises.

.. A person should always support members of the

extended family, for example aunts, uncles, and in—

56

laws, if they are in need even if it is a big
sacrifice.

Parents and grandparents should be treated with
great respect regardless of their differences in
Views.

A person should often do activities with his or her
immediate and extended families, for example, eat
meals, play games, go somewhere together, or work on

things together.

The family should control the behavior of children

younger than 18.

A person should cherish time spent with his or her

relatives.

Children should help out around the house without

expecting an allowance.

Children younger than 18 should give almost all

their earnings to their parents.

A person should feel ashamed if something he or she

does dishonors the family name.

Children should live with their parents until they

get married.

A person should always be expected to defend his or

her family’s honor no matter what the cost.

57

 

 
 

 

o .Alperson should respect his or her older brothers
and sisters regardless of their differences in

views.

0 A person should be a good person for the sake of his

or her family.

0 Children should obey their parents without question

even if they believe they are wrong.

The ordinal level data, Familism, ranged from 1 to 10
(1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree). Although
ordinal level variables, Likert—type scales are very
commonly used with interval procedures, provided the scale
item has at least five or more categories. Most tests
require the assumption of normal distribution and the fewer
the number of points, the more likely the departure from
this assumption. As a ten point Likert—type scale,
familism will be treated as an interval level variable for
analysis.

Human capital was conceptualized as actions that bring
about changes in a person’s skill levels and capabilities
allowing them to act in new ways. Operationally, human
capital was measured as the variable parent’s educational
attainment. The ordinal level data, parent’s educational
attainment ranged from 1 to 12 (1= he/she had no formal

education to 12: he/she had a professional degree) and was

58

measured using the following survey questions; “what is the
highest level of education your mother completed?” And,
“what is the highest level of education your father
completed?”

Mobility was conceptualized as the respondent’s
frequency of moves. Operationally, this ordinal level data
ranged from 1 to 7 (1 = once a year and 7= more than six
times a year) and was measured using the following survey
question; “as well as you remember, about how many times
did you move annually growing up?”

Respondent’s educational expectation was
conceptualized as how far a person believed they would go
in terms of educational degrees. Operationally, this
ordinal level data ranged from 1 to 6 (1= GED/High school
diploma to 6: Professional degree) and was measured using
the following survey question; “as things stand now, how
far in school do you think you will get?”

Prior to analysis, this ordinal level data will be
recoded to low, medium, and high (low= GED/high school
diploma, trade school, some college/no degree; medium:
bachelor’s degree; high: master’s degree or professional
degree) based on natural breaks in the data. The question
will then become did the respondents expect to drop out of

college (i.e., low), to finish the degree program they were

59

currently in (i.e., medium), or do they expect to finish
the current degree program they are in and go on to
I graduate school (i.e., high).

Parent’s educational expectations were conceptualized
as how far a respondent’s mother and father expected them
to go in terms of educational degrees, based on
respondent’s perception. Operationally, the ordinal level
data ranged from 1 to 6 (1= GED/High school diploma to 6:
Professional degree) and was measured using the following
survey questions; “as things stand now, how far in school
does your mother think you will get?” And, “as things stand
now, how far in school does your father think you will
get?”

Respondent’s educational expectation and parent’s
educational expectations survey questions were based on the
items used by the National Educational Longitudinal Study
(NELS). Previous studies have calculated expectations as
years of education anticipated (Hao and Bonstead-Bruns,
1998; Morgan, 1996). The current study followed Cheng and
Starks' (2002) lead and treated educational expectations as
the level of credentials expected.

The last variable of study was gender and was
conceptualized as the respondent’s sex and operationally

the nominal level data was measured as the following survey

60

question; “what is your gender?” (dummy coded 0: male and

1: female).

Research Design

In order to carry out the objectives of this
explanatory research most effectively, a non-experimental
cross sectional study was conducted. Recruitment of
participants from the Michigan State University College
Assistance Migrant Program (MSU CAMP) consisted of
electronic contact, via email, with a sampling frame of
240. A response from potential participants was followed
by electronic or hard copy survey going to eligible
participants, based on their preference. Those found
eligible to participate met three main criteria for
inclusion:

1. Participants must be college students from migrant

farmworker families.

2. Participants must be current or past members of MSU
CAMP, as both could contribute valuable information
to this research study.

3. Participants must be of Mexican origin, due to the

fact that 95% of farmworkers that migrate to the

61

state of Michigan are of Mexican origin (Gold,
2004).

4. Participants must be willing to answer a 93 item
survey questionnaire, which should take
approximately 20 minutes.

Support for using a survey method was based on the
purpose of this study which was to generalize from a sample
to a population in order to make inferences about the
behavior of the population. The advantages of conducting a
cross-sectional survey study included those identified by
Babbie (2001); the low cost of conducting a survey study,
the rapid turn around time in data collection, and finally
the ability to identify attributes of the migrant
population at MSU from the small group of participants from

MSU CAMP.

Description of MSU CAMP

The Michigan State University College Assistance
Migrant Program (MSU CAMP) was established at Michigan
State University in the fall semester of 2000. Annually,
approximately 45 migrant farmworker students are recruited

by Michigan State University. The majority of these

62

students are bilingual, first generation Mexican-Americans
who spent part of every year growing up in Michigan; yet
they consider their home state Texas, where they lived the
rest of the year in towns near the Mexican border. The MSU
CAMP participants represent a unique segment of the
university population meritorious of investigation.

As unique as the students of MSU CAMP are, the program
itself is also unique based on the services it provides its
participants. The goal of MSU CAMP is to assist students
from migrant farmworker family backgrounds transition into
the University community. CAMP provides student support
and retention services as well as supplemental financial
assistance during the first year of study at Michigan State
University. Among other services, CAMP provides assistance
with completing all necessary admissions application
requirements (e.g. financial aid forms, ACT testing ),
assistance securing on-campus housing as a group,
assistance securing tutors, and monthly academic and
personal monitoring to ensure ease of transition into the
university community (MSU CAMP, 2001).

In order to participate in CAMP, qualified students
must have spent seventy—five days during the previous
twenty-four months (prior to admissions) in migrant and/or

seasonal farm work, or must have participated (or were

63

eligible to participate) in migrant programs or Employment
Training Administration, Department of Labor-Migrant and
Seasonal Farmworker Programs (MSU CAMP, 2001). As a result
of spending part of the year in Michigan as agricultural
laborers, migrant students are eligible for in state
tuition regardless of the state in which they graduated
high school.

The CAMP was established at Michigan State University
to recruit migrant farmworker students and assist them as
they transition through their first year at the University.
To that end, MSU CAMP has made it their mission to: provide
their student members a social network that resembles the
group they left behind at home. The rationale was that
migrant students would feel emotionally invested in MSU and
would cultivate a strong sense of belonging to the
University community. The motivation for creating such an
atmosphere was to foster a positive image with being a
member of Michigan State University and the CAMP.

Culturally relevant activities are planned and
supported by the MSU CAMP which promotes cultural diversity
within the university and pride within the program. An
alternative spring break experience, for academic credit,
as a group in Mexico is offered annually to current and

past participants. MSU CAMP also provides mentoring for

64

 

 

current program participants by previous program
participants and university faculty to encourage
persistence. Mentoring is also provided by the current
graduate assistants who are all previous MSU CAMP
participants and Michigan State University graduates,
currently enrolled in graduate programs. In addition,
academic enhancement programs specifically targeted to
migrant students are offered by the university to support
academic achievement.

The purpose of this program is to recreate an
accepting environment that offers University contextual
supports and diminishes University contextual stressors so
that students can thrive. The first semester is full of
one on one care and mentoring; the second semester is meant
to ready the students for independent student life. With
that being said, this convenience sample of MSU migrant
students may have introduced sampling biases; however,

important information still informs this study.

65

Recruitment

The single stage sampling procedure was best suited
for this study. Access to email addresses was available
via the MSU CAMP office listserv, allowing for the quick
and direct access via an electronic survey of the
population of interest. Aside from accessible via email
listserv, an electronic survey provided access to the
entire migrant student population on and off campus,
including previous program participants that may have left
the university.

The recruitment email was sent at two week intervals
until the deadline for collection ended with a total of
three recruitment cycles. Compensation for participants’
time was set at $10 per survey, again intended to increase
study participation.

The survey responses were entered into a statistical
program for analyses. Selection of individuals included
all eligible students who responded to the email. The email
went out to all current and previous CAMP participants at
the same time; everyone had the opportunity to participate.
The option to personally fill out the survey was given and

those students were directed where to go; this method

66

allowed students to receive their $10 compensation
immediately rather than via mail. The MSU CAMP students
also participated in recruitment via word of mouth to their
peers as $10 was adequate motivation for a college student
population.

The majority of the 147 respondents chose to
participate via hard copy as they wanted to receive their
cash compensation as soon as possible. All research data

was collected between May and December in 2005.

Sample

A convenience sample of Michigan State University
Mexican American migrant farmworker students were drawn for
this study. Participants were recruited from Michigan
State University's College Assistance Migrant Program (MSU
CAMP). Sample participants included current MSU CAMP
students as well as all previous MSU CAMP students with a
sampling frame of 240 respondents, netting a sample of 147

(n=147).

67

Data Sources

Two data sources were utilized for this study.

First, all information, including socio-demographic
information, was elicited by a structured 93 closed item
survey questionnaire. In constructing the survey
instrument, careful attention was paid to the specific
variables under study. Selection of items was determined
based on ability to capture the information required for
appropriate analysis of this topic. As a result, items
were selected based on their logical fit or face validity,
ability to test one dimension of the concept or
unidimensionality, specificity to study population, and
level of measurement.

Second, student records were released by participants
to include their actual Michigan State University
accumulative grade point averages. These records and
survey data had identifiers that allowed the two to be

linked for analysis purposes.

68

Sample Descriptives

In order to test the six hypotheses in question, a
sample of Mexican American migrant farmworker college
students was recruited. The sample consisted of Mexican
American respondents (n=147); with 73 males and 74 females.
The age of respondents ranged from 18 to 21. The respondents
were on average second year students at the university,
with a grade point average mean of 2.25 on a 0.0 to 4.0
scale, and all were current or previous MSU CAMP
participants. Participants’ family income averaged from
$10,000 to $25,000 and their family size ranged from a
total of two children to 14 with an average of 4.9 children
per family. Annual mobility ranged from once a year or
less to more than five times a year, averaging 1.8 moves

annually (see Table 1).

69

 

 

 

Table 1: Sample Characteristics

variables Min/Max .Mean Frequency
Female - 50% 74
.Male — 50% 73
Age 18/24yrs. l8-21yrs. -
Grade Level - Year Two —
GPA 0.0/3.86 2.25 -

Family Income

$10,000-$40,000

$10,000-$25,000

Family Size 2/14 4.9 -

Annual Mobility £1/>5 1.8 -

 

 

Note. n=147

The median educational attainment of fathers was

seventh grade or less and for mothers it was eighth grade

or less. Only 22 fathers (15 percent) and 32 mothers (21.8
percent) reportedly earned their high school diploma or
GED. Father’s were more likely than mothers to not have

any formal education. Mother’s were more likely to have a

college education than fathers. Overall, mothers had
higher levels of educational attainment than fathers (See

Table 2).

70

 

Table 2: Parent’s Educational Attainment

 

Level of
Education

MOther

(%) Frequency

Father
(%) Frequency

 

 

No Formal Education (10.2%) 15 (21.1%) 31
Kindergarten—3rd (10.2%) 15 (16.3%) 24
4th—6th grade (21.8%) 32 (18.4%) 27
7th-8th grade (21.8%) 32 (23.8%) 35
General Equivalency (14.3%) 21 (10.9%) 16
Diploma (GED)/

High School Graduate (7.5%) 11 (4.1%) 6
Some College (4.8%) 7 (3.4%) 5
Associates Degree (3.4%) 5

Bachelors Degree (4.8%) 7 (1.4%) 2
Masters Degree (1.4%) 2 (.7%)
n=147 (100%) 147 (100%)

 

71

Reliability and Validity of Scale

For this study, all 18 items of the familism scale
were tested (See Table 3). The reliability test generated
a Cronbach’s alpha of .85. In fact, this scale netted a
higher alpha for this population than Steidel’s (2003)
original study (Cronbach’s alpha p§.83), confirming that
this scale was reliable for use with the current
population. In the social sciences an alpha greater than
.70 is an acceptable threshold for scaling (Miller, 1991).

In addition to generating an overall alpha level of
.85, separate alphas were run for each scale item to
determine if deleting that item would increase the alpha
score. There was no significant benefit to the scale by
deleting any single item. Furthermore, as is evident in
Table 3, the overall alpha decreased when any single item
was deleted. Therefore, this study relied on the complete
familism scale which included all 18 responses (see Table

3).

72

Table 3:

Inclusion of Familism Items

 

 

Familism Cronbach’s
Items Alpha if Item

Deleted
Familism 1 .849
Familism 2 .851
Familism 3 .850
Familism 4 .841
Familism 5 .849
Familism 6 .841
Familism 7 .845
Familism 8 .841
Familism 9 .849
Familism 10 .847
Familism 11 .840
Familism 12 .843
Familism 13 .845
Familism 14 .850
Familism 15 .847
Familism 16 .838
Familism 17 .841
Familism 18 .838

 

 

Note:

scale questions.

Familism items order

(1-18)

73

corresponds to order of

Although Steidel and Contreras’ (2003) original study
specifically targeted Latino families, the majority of
Steidel’s sample came from Latino’s of Puerto Rican descent
(86.7%) while the current study sampled college students of
Mexican origin (n=147). Furthermore, Steidel and Contreras
addressed families rather than college students. As a
result of sampling differences, it is important to test the
validity of using this test with the current population.

The scale’s validity was also tested by correlating
all familism scores with a generational status variable.

As expected, correlational analysis netted a negative
relationship between variables (r=-.07) although not
significantly (p:.40), perhaps due to the small sample
size.

As explained in the literature review, parent’s
educational attainment, family income, and familism are
variables used to represent capital in this study. Given
the possibility of multi-collinearity between educational
attainment and family income, tests of collinearity were
conducted. All four variables netted a variance inflation
factor (VIF) less than two so all four variables were

actually retained in the model (See Table 4).

74

 

 

Table 4: Test for Multi-Collinearity

 

 

Variable VIF
Family Income 1.15
Familism 1.04
Father’s Educational Attainment 1.22
Mother’s Educational Attainment 1.24

 

 

 

Note: Variance Inflation Factor (VIF).

Statistical Techniques

In regard to all statistical analyses in this study, a
significance level of p5.05 will be used to accept or not
accept hypotheses.

Prior to testing hypothesis one: social capital, which
includes family income and familism, is positively
associated with academic achievement; preliminary
statistical work must be completed. First, the Familism
Attitudinal scale will be tested for reliability and
validity. In this manner, we will be sure the Attitudinal
Familism scale is appropriate for use with this population.

Once the scale is deemed acceptable for use with the

75

current population, data will be screened for outliers to
avoid misleading results followed by calculating
correlation coefficients. Pearson’s correlation will be
used to measure how the variables are related and the
strength of that relationship.

In testing hypothesis two: parent’s educational
attainment is positively associated with academic
achievement; data will be screened as in hypothesis one for
outliers before conducting correlational analysis (i.e.,
Pearson’s correlation) to measure how the variables are
related and the strength of that relationship.

In testing hypothesis three: mobility is negatively
associated with academic achievement; as in hypotheses one
and two, data will be screened for outliers followed by
Pearson’s r correlation to measure the relationship between
variables.

In testing hypothesis four: respondent’s educational
expectation is positively associated with academic
achievement; first the measure for variable respondent’s
educational expectation will be tested for reliability for
use with the current study population. Then, a frequency
table will be calculated so the variable, respondent’s
educational expectation can be recoded based on natural

breaks in the data to low, medium and high. Finally,

76

 

analysis will consist of post hoc tests comparing the mean
scores utilizing a one way analysis of variance (One-way
ANOVA).

In testing hypothesis five: parent’s educational
expectations are positively associated with respondent’s
educational expectation; non-parametric measures of
association for ordinal variables will be used (i.e.,
Kendall’s tau-b and Spearman Rho). Spearman Rho will allow
ranking of the data from smallest to largest with the
correlation coefficient being computed on the ranks rather
than the actual values. Kendall’s tau—b will also be used
to “normalize the number of concordant pairs minus the
number of discordant pairs for all distinct pairs of
observations by considering ties on each variable in a pair
separately but not ties on both variables in a pair” (p.
216) (Norusis, 2004).

In testing hypothesis six: gender is differentially
associated with respondent’s educational expectations;
nominal and ordinal level variables respectively, the Chi-
square test of independence will be utilized to detect a
significant association. Chi-square is based on the null
hypothesis; therefore the expectation is that no
relationship exists between the variables in question. A

comparison is made between expected distribution and actual

77

 

distribution of cases found to determine the independence
of variables followed by measures of association based on

results of Chi-square.

78

CHAPTER 4

Results

The current study examines educational expectations of
students, their correlates, and subsequent impact on
academic achievement. Migrant academic achievement is
being explored through an ecological and human development
lens. The following chapter provides the results netted
from the researcher’s interpretation of statistical

analyses.

Hypothesis One

Hypothesis One: Social capital, which includes family
income and.familism, is positively associated with academic
achievement.

Based on the measure of association test, Pearson’s r
correlation, academic achievement (GPA) was found to be
significantly and positively related to family income
(r=.16, p:.03) and familism (r=.20, p§.01). Controlling

for family income, every one unit increase in familism

79

resulted in a .01 increase to student’s grade point average
(p5.02). Controlling for familism, every one unit increase
in family income, resulted in a .16 increase to the
students GPA (p5.03). Therefore, both familism and family
income were positively correlated with students GPA. Thus,

there is sufficient support to accept hypothesis one.

Hypothesis Two

Hypothesis two: Human capital, which is represented.by
parent’s educational attainment, is positively associated
with academic achievement.

In the analysis of hypothesis two, initial
correlations revealed father’s educational attainment
(r=.01, p:.44) was not significantly related to academic
achievement. Mother’s educational attainment was also
found to not be significantly related to respondent’s
academic achievement (r=—1l. p§.lO). As these results were
contrary to the literature review, further analyses were
conducted to verify results. Correlations controlling for
gender supported earlier results in parent’s level of
educational attainment not having an impact on respondent’s

academic achievement (males and fathers r=.14, p5.12 and

80

mothers r=—.04, p:.39; females and father’s r=-.12, p5.16
and mothers r=-.11, p£.17). Finally, correlations were
conducted controlling for gender between parent’s
educational expectations and parent's level of educational
attainment. Pearson’s r correlations supported the
literature indicating that parent's educational background
impacted parents educational expectations, but in a
surprising way. Analysis resulted in mother’s educational
attainment being associated with their educational l
expectations for their daughters (r=.25, pg.02) but not for
their sons (r=.08, p£.26). Father’s level of educational
attainment was found to be significantly and positively
associated with their educational expectations of their
sons (r=.21, p5.04) but not their daughters (r=.01, p§.48).
As indicated in the results of hypotheses four and five,
parent’s educational expectations are significantly and
positively associated with respondent’s educational
expectations, and respondent’s educational expectations are
positively and significantly associated with their academic
achievement. Therefore, based on the overall analyses
conducted, there is sufficient support to accept hypothesis
two (See Table 5) that parent’s educational attainment is
positively associated with respondent’s academic

achievement.

81

 

Table 5: Correlations for H2

 

 

 

.MOther’s Father’s .MOther’s Father’s
Ed. Ed. Ed. Ed.
Attainment Expectations
ABles
GPA —.O35 .14 .25* .34**
MOther
Ed. Att. — .39** .08 -.03
Father
Ed. Att. .39** — .14 .21*
Females
GPA -.11 -.11 .05 .15
.MOther
Ed. Att. — .30** .25* .14
Father
Ed. Att. .30** - —.04 .01

‘

 

-:p5.05. **p§.01.

82

Hypothesis Three

Hypothesis three: Mobility is negatively associated with
academic achievement.

Analysis of hypothesis three began with a test for
association between the variables to determine
relationship. Testing mobility and academic achievement
rendered an expected result. Based on the test chosen,
Pearson’s r correlation, sufficient support was found to
accept the hypothesis that seasonal migration impacts
student’s academic achievement after the migrating ends
(r=-.23, pg .002). This relationship did not change when
controlling for gender. Further correlational analyses
netted a significant and negative association between
mobility and respondent’s educational expectations (r=-.18,
p§.02). Therefore, as mobility increases, respondent’s
educational expectations and academic achievement decrease.
Consequently, based on the overall analyses conducted,
there is sufficient support to accept hypothesis three that
mobility is significantly and negatively associated with

academic achievement.

83

 

Hypothesis Four

Hypothesis four: Respondent’ s educational expectations are
positively associated with academic achievement.

In the analysis of hypothesis four, first the measure
for the variable respondent’s educational expectation was
tested for reliability for use with the current study
population, netting a Cronbach’s alpha of .81. This tells
us that the National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS)
item used to measure respondent’s educational expectation
was an appropriate measure with this population. Then, a
frequency table was calculated so the variable,
respondent’s educational expectation could be recoded based
on natural breaks in the data to low, medium and high.
Finally, a one-way ANOVA test comparing the mean scores was
calculated and based on the F value (F=7.488, p<.001) we
find that the difference between the three groups is
greater than the difference within the three groups and
their academic achievement. In fact, the higher one’s
educational expectations, the higher ones GPA (see table
6).

Respondents with high educational expectations also
had higher grade point averages (GPA) than respondents with

low educational expectations (2.5, 1.4 respectively).

84

 

Therefore, there is sufficient support to accept hypothesis
four that there is a relationship between educational

expectations and academic achievement.

 

Table 6: Means (Expectations and GPA)

 

 

 

 

Educational Frequency .Mean GPA
Expectations (%)

Low (4.1%) 6 1.4
.Medium (45.6%) 67 2.1

High (50.3%) 74 2.5

n (100%) 147

 

 

85

Hypothesis Five

Hypothesis five: Parent’s educational expectations are
positively associated with respondent's educational
expectation.

To test hypothesis five, measures of association
appropriate for ordinal level data were used (i.e.,
Kendall’s tau-b and Spearman's Rho). Spearman Rho allowed
ranking of the data from smallest to largest with the
correlation coefficient being computed on the ranks rather
than the actual values. Kendall’s tau-b allowed ranking of
the values of each variable from smallest to largest with
the correlation coefficient being calculated on the ranks.
The results led to the conclusion that mother’s have higher
educational expectations for their children than father’s
with average expectations at just over a bachelors degree
(4.32) versus a bachelors degree (4.10), respectively.
Mother’s and Father’s educational expectations were highly
correlated at .85, while the correlation between students
and their mother’s and father’s educational expectations
were much less correlated at .33 and .35, respectively (See

Table 7).

86

 

Table 7: Educational Expectations

 

 

 

 

Student .Mother’s Father’s Average
Ed. Exp Ed. Exp Ed. Exp
Student
Ed. Exp 1.00 .33** .35** 4.67
Mother’s
Ed. Exp .33** 1.00 .85 4.32
Father’s
Ed. Exp .35** .85 1.00 4.10
*kps.01

Sufficient support was found to accept the fifth
hypothesis that parents’ educational expectations are
positively associated with respondent’s educational
expectations. Kendall’s tau-b (K=.33 for mothers and
fathers separately, p§.00) and Spearman Rho (S=.35 for
mothers and fathers separately, p§.00) each produced
significant positive relationships between respondent and
mother’s and respondents and father’s educational

expectations.

87

Hypothesis Six

Hypothesis six: Gender is differentially associated with
academic achievement.

In order to test the final hypothesis, the Chi-square
test of independence was used to detect a significant
association. Based on the expectation that no relationship
exists between the variables in question, a comparison was A
made between expected distribution and actual distribution
of cases found to determine the independence of variables
.followed by measures of association based on results of
(Chi-square. Analysis resulted in gender impacting
Inespondent's educational expectations significantly

differently (x2=57.10, p__<_.00), with males having higher
eeciucational expectations than females. The median for
rneafiles’ educational expectations was bachelor’s degree
vvlleereas it was only some college, no degree for females.
Tl”Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to accept
hhfpothesis six that there is a differential association

beBtween gender and educational expectations.

88

Summary

First, support was found to accept hypothesis one. As
found in previous studies, the current study was able to
render support for family income being positively related
to academic achievement. The level of family connectedness
and sense of family obligation, measured by the familism
scale, was also found to be positively associated with
academic achievement. Thus, hypothesis one was accepted.

Results support the acceptance of hypothesis two.
Supporting existing literature parent’s educational
attainment was found to impact academic achievement in the
current study population. Therefore, hypothesis two was
accepted. Sufficient support was found to accept
hypothesis three, as mobility during K-12 years did have a
significant and negative impact on respondent’s academic
achievement. Thus, hypothesis three was also accepted.

In addition, support was found to accept hypothesis
four as respondent’s educational expectation was found to
be positively associated with academic achievement.
Furthermore, support was found to accept hypothesis five as
parent’s educational expectations were found to be

positively related to respondent’s educational

89

expectations. Therefore, hypothesis five was also
accepted.

Moreover, support was found to accept the final
hypothesis as gender was found to have an impact on
respondent’s educational expectations with males having
higher educational expectations than females.
Consequently, all six hypotheses were supported in the

current study.

90

CHAPTER 5

Discussion

The literature on Mexican American migrant farmworker
college students is rather limited today and was the void
this study intended to fill. It is important to look at
the outcomes of the research through the theoretical lens
provided. As such, the current findings can inform future
public policy and practice on migrant education.

There was a dearth of literature on academic
achievement of college age samples in relation to migrant
students. The opportunity to study such a population is
limited, based on the number of migrants that actually
graduate from high school and go on to college.

Nationally, the Department of Education is addressing the
lack of migrant students in postsecondary education through
their High School Equivalency Program (HEP) and their
College Assistance Migrant Program (CAMP). Public policy
has yet to adequately address the persistence and
completion of this segment of the college population.

The Family Systems Theory provided the lens with which

to view the migrant farmworker family. The filtering of

91

life through systems established to protect the individual
under development by Bronfenbrenner’s model was appropriate
and extremely helpful to use in studying the migrant
community. The strengths related with utilizing this
theoretical framework were numerous and included; the
ability to View patterns of interaction within and between
systems and not just at the individual level and the
ability to maintain internal cultural value.

It was important to recognize the weaknesses of using
Bronfenbrenner’s model as well in order to gain the
greatest understanding of research findings. Fundamentally,
the greatest limitation in utilizing the Family Systems
theoretical framework was the boundaries inherent in family
networks. The family network has its restrictions in that
ties among family members do not extend to outsiders, the
family demand for traditional values may stifle individual
actions, and the likelihood exists for negative pressure to
be placed on a member (Portes, 1998; Portes & Landolt,
1996). As a result of these limitations a second
theoretical framework was also included to strengthen the
overall theoretical structure of this research.

The theory of Social Capital compensated for the afore
mentioned limitations of Family Systems Theory by providing

the necessary lens to view external social networks that

92

influence the internal development of the individual more
closely. Because of the low levels of capital that the
migrant community has experienced, social capital, human
capital, and the resulting network ties are of greater
importance. In an effort to compensate for low levels of
social and human capital, the migrant college community has
created a complex social network. The spatial
concentration of migrant students at MSU allows them to
continue their tradition of reliance on people of similar
origin. The reciprocity implied in the exchange of social
capital and the reliance on family and community members
for survival allows the MSU CAMP network to support its
members (Coleman, 1988; Portes, 1995; Rogers & Henning,
1999).

According to Coleman (1988) if parent’s human capital
(i.e., mesosystem/parents education and time), was not
balanced by social capital embodied in family associations
(i.e., macrosystem/familism and exosystem/family income),
the amount of human capital (i.e., mesosystem or parent
educational attainment) those parents possessed would be
immaterial to their child’s educational development (i.e.,
microsystem or educational expectations and achievement).
In utilizing this View in the current study, Mexican

American migrant farmworker parent’s educational attainment

93

was accurately expected to be lower than the average
American population. The level of familism or sense of
family obligation and interdependence was correctly
expected to be high ultimately creating the balance Coleman
mentioned.

Although the overall theoretical foundation of this ,
study was adequate in explaining the findings, social
capital was a bit problematic to use with families. It was A
difficult to fit family issues into a conventional
community based theory, yet the idea of social exchange and
reciprocity implicit in social capital was important to the
depiction of migrant farmworker families. The mobile
lifestyle of this community makes its’ within family
members unique in that they must depend on each other more
so than the average family. Within the larger migrant
community a shared sense of values and norms keeps members
reliant on each other for survival, not to mention the
threat and fear of discrimination.

Yet, there seems to be a need to enhance the current
theoretical framework to better represent the family unit
more as a family than a community. Imig (2006) proposes
replacing family social capital with family capital;
conceptualized “as a family—unit level attribute that

emerges as a function of collective activity around

94

household production” (unpublished). Thus, allowing for
human capital to be developed within an assortment of
family interactions rather than just a distinct
disconnected undertaking of a specific place and time. The
idea of family capital would change the ‘compartmentalized’
View of social capital and hold firm the non-
interchangeability of specific family components (Imig,
unpublished).

Based on the chosen theories, the researcher’s
expectations were confirmed. The independent variables
(i.e. family income, familism, parent educational
attainment, mobility, parent educational expectations, and
gender) were found to influence the dependent variables
(i.e. academic achievement and respondent’s educational
expectation) at different levels based on the system they
represent within and between internal systems as well as
external networks.

Support was found for existing research on the
positive relationship between family income and academic
achievement (Thompson et al., 2002; Mehta et al., 2000;
Buchmann et al., 2002; Castillo et al., 2004). Castillo
and Hill (2004) established that one of the contributing
factors to higher levels of stress among Latino college

students is financial need and the demands of balancing

95

 

part time or full time jobs with their school
responsibilities. Essentially, basic needs (i.e., capital)
must be met first, in order for the individual to freely
interact with systems outside of the microsystem.

The median annual family income reported by the study
sample was between $10,000 and $25,000 per family, which is
substantially less than the $40,800 median income for a
family of four in the U.S. today and less than the poverty
level which is based on a single individual (i.e., $18,100)
not a family of four or more (Census, 2000). As migrant
farmworkers continue to live below the poverty line, it is
essential to find ways of countering the effects of family
income on academic achievement. Financial limitations
continue to be reported as a reason why Mexican American
college students drop out (Castillo, and Hill, 2004).

As previously mentioned, social capital is the result
of the buildup of social debts and the belief they will be
repaid. College students from migrant homes come from a
tradition of reciprocity and recognize the interaction
between family members and the community as part of the
transaction. The current findings are meaningful and add
to the body of literature as they show the positive

relationship between family income and academic achievement

96

 

continue to hold up within the poverty stricken migrant
community.

Family structure or size of family has also been
linked to educational outcomes in the literature. The
average number of offspring per family for the study sample
was 4.9 children compared to the 2.1 children per family
norm in the U.S. today (U.S. Census Bureau, 1999) and 3.5
average size of Michigan migrant farmworker family’s (Gold,
2004). Family size can not be ignored, but rather must be a
consideration when we look at the financial well being of
this community.

Support was found for the positive association between
familism and academic achievement. Research on Latino
families in the past focused on level of acculturation to
mainstream society and/or generational status as the
dependent variable of interest concluding that the longer a
person is exposed to mainstream society the less
traditional they are. Traditional acculturation research
focused on the exchange of cultures toward mainstream the
longer one is exposed to that way of life. Familism
research allows for cultural stability to be maintained
within the individual, while the individual interacts with

new systems outside of their family boundaries.

97

Unlike acculturation and generational status, familism
reports on the level of family connectedness and sense of
obligation a respondent feels towards their family. Thus,
higher levels of familism will yield stronger traditional
values and sense of family obligation. As an intra-
subsystem within group measure, familism embodies social
capital. It stems from feelings of unity that grow among
people living in comparable situations. The current study
supports the findings of Fuligni & Pedersen (2002) who
found a positive association between academic persistence
after high school and a strong sense of family obligations
(familism) for students with low to moderate grades in high
school.

In the past, researchers have argued about the role a
Mexican American family plays in promoting higher education
for their children. In 1966, Heller reported that the
Mexican American family encouraged overdependence on the
family unit at the expense of the individual’s satisfactory
integration into U.S society. The idea that familism can
hinder an individual’s academic success has not been
supported by the current study. In fact, these findings
conclude that familism is a precursor of academic
achievement for students from migrant farmworker families,

not a hindrance.

98

Previous studies have supported the predictability of
the level of parent’s educational attainment on the
academic achievement, respondent’s educational
expectations, and subsequent graduation of their children
(Spady, 1970; Featherman & Hauser, 1978; Haveman, Wolfe &
Spaulding, 1991; Terenzini, Springer, Yaeger, Pascarella & f
Nora, 1996; Cheng & Starks, 2002). Although the current @-

population is unique to the U.S. it is not unique to other

 

migrant communities. Similar to the majority of migrant I
farmworker parents today, a majority of the parents in this
sample had not graduated from high school (Mehta et al.,
2000). As predicted by the literature review, there was
satisfactory support found for the association between
parent’s educational attainment and their child’s academic
achievement.

The fact that this study found an association between
parent's level of educational attainment and their
children’s academic achievement is extremely meaningful to
the migrant community. Mexican American migrant
farmworkers are the least educated ethnic minority in
America today. In order to realistically move forward in
breaking the cycle of poverty for this community public

policy needs to simultaneously address the lack of

99

appropriate educational opportunities for both the children
of migrant farmworkers as well as for adult farmworkers.

Adequate support was also found for Haveman, Wolfe,
and Spaulding (1991) who reported that frequency of moves
made within K-12 had a significant and negative impact on
educational achievement at ages 19‘24. The current
findings support the idea that students who move experience
a drop in social capital and in school performance. This
may be due to the fact that mobility is an educationally
negative experience. Migrants experience difficulties
adjusting to the different curriculums throughout the
country, finding themselves falling behind their non-
migrant peers as a direct result of mobility.

As previously mentioned, Pribesh et al., (1999)
stated, “From a social capital perspective, moving
interrupts social relations with persons in the school, the
neighborhood, the community, and, perhaps, the family.
mSimply put, moving negatively affects school performance
because within-family ties are stressed and within-
community ties with teachers, administrators, and other
community members are often lost” (p. 2). The reality is
that mobility has been linked to the high rate of drop out

in the migrant community.

109

Rather than blame the drop out rate on mobility, why
not look at the educational system in which the migrant
students find themselves. Each school district in the U.S.
has a different curriculum with different requirements for
graduation. As a result many times migrant student’s
credits do not transfer from one state to the other or the
students are forced to retake courses previously taken due
to moving before the end of the semester and not being able
to finish the course in their new school. Or worst yet,
students are required to take ‘special education’ courses
because other coursers are full or because their English
language skills aren’t up to standards and no bilingual
education is offered. Isn’t it likely that frustration has
built up within the migrant community after years of being
overlooked and un-accommodated by the educational system?
It would make more sense for policy makers to look closely
at creating a national curriculum ensuring all of America’s
children have access to the same level of education.

Support was found for Arbona and Novy (1990) who found
that Mexican American students who held greater educational
expectations achieved higher first year college grades.

The current findings indicate that the higher a student’s
educational expectation, the higher their academic

achievement. Thus, educational practices should be geared

101

 

toward the educational process of improving expectations to
positively impact educational outcomes.

Ample support was found for higher shared educational
expectations increasing academic achievement. The current
findings establish that migrant parents with high
expectations also had students with higher expectations.
Previous studies on Latino students found that parent’s
educational expectations tended to transfer to their
children (Blanke, Piercy & Diversi, 2004). Along with the
findings on the lack of influence migrant parent’s level of
educational attainment has on academic achievement, it is
important to inform migrant parents that regardless of
their educational history they can hold high educational
expectations for their child and offer encouragement to
increase their child’s level of educational expectations
and, therefore, impact their child’s academic achievement.

Buchmann and Dalton (2002) studied the impact of
gender on educational expectations in twelve countries and
found that females reported significantly lower educational
expectations than males in countries that continue to
promote cultural tradition and distinct gender roles. The
current findings support Buchmann and Dalton (2002), as
females were found to have lower educational expectations

than males. Current findings have already established that

102

 

higher educational expectations lead to higher academic
achievement in the study population, it is problematic that
females are reporting significantly lower educational
expectations than their male counterparts.

The ultimate goal of this dissertation was to identify
factors that could predict the academic success of students
from Mexican American migrant farmworker families at MSU.
To that end, a theoretical model was created depicting the
impact of mediating factors on student and parent’s
educational expectations and the subsequent impact on
student’s GPA based on their designated expectations
quadrant (i.e., quadrant I= high positively associated
parent and student expectations and subsequent high GPA;
quadrants II and IV: negatively associated parent and
student expectations and medium GPA; quadrant III= low
positively associated parent and student expectations and
low GPA. According to results students and parents
expectations were positively associated with each other and
with students subsequent GPA (see figure 1). Students who
fell into quadrant I subsequently had GPA’s that averaged
2.5; students who fell into quadrants II and IV had GPA’s
that averaged 2.1; and students who fell into quadrant 111

had GPA’s that averaged 1.4.

103

Limitations

Several limitations exist in the current study.
First, the sample was not random but rather a convenience
sample. Secondly, the use of cross sectional data only
provides a picture of academic achievement of this f
community at one point in time rather than a long term

view. This type of cross—sectional design excludes the

 

ability to draw conclusions about cause and effect
relationships between these characteristics. Third, the
current study used a self report survey which, depending on
the subject areas being questioned, may be prone to some
inaccuracy as a result of lack of information, less than
accurate recall, or possible discomfort with self-
disclosure. Furthermore, rather than asking respondents for
their perception of their parent’s educational expectations
for them, actually asking parents might have rendered

different findings.

Sampling Biases

Students who completed the survey may have similar

responses in that they have been exposed to university life

104

via the MSU CAMP filter and come from the same area of the
country as migrants to the state of Michigan. The MSU CAMP
provides students with a unique university community
experience that may have influenced the findings. Migrant
students from other universities or from other locales
might report different experiences and expectations in
regards to their educational achievement.

Students who did not complete the survey may have
significantly different responses than those that did.

The motivation to return the survey was $10. Students less
likely to be motivated by $10 may include those that
dropped out and have full time jobs and $10 did not pique
their interest; students who left MSU and no longer check
their student email accounts; students who left MSU feeling
bad about themselves and may have identified the survey
with the university; and students who did not want to take
the time necessary to fill out the survey. These biases
may impact results even though the investigator took
measures to prevent as many as possible.

Also, researcher bias may have played a role in
interpretation of data analyses. As a cultural insider,
the researcher may have inadvertently overlooked plausible
explanations for results, although the researcher attempted

not to do so.

105

 

Recommendations for Future Research

In order to continue filling the void in the
literature that continues to exist for this population
future research could focus on: longitudinal study;
students from other universities; students from home states
other than Texas; and students that migrate to states other fl“

than Michigan. Also, future studies should look at the

 

impact gender may play in parent’s educational expectations I
for their children as well as the direct impact family
income plays on educational expectations of students and

their parents.

Conclusions

The academic achievement of Latino students has been a
topic of interest to researchers for decades. Although
the number of students entering college from Latino
families has increased, the number of students earning
degrees continues to fall behind other minority groups in
America. Previous literature on Mexican American migrant
farmworkers showed that students from this population had

added disadvantages when it came to education as they

106

continued to struggle with high rates of school dropout,
high rates of poverty, and low rates of university
enrollment. Current public policy has more adequately
addressed the postsecondary educational recruitment of
students from migrant farmworker families but, their
persistence and completion has not effectively been tackled
at the public policy level.

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that
promoted and deterred the academic achievement of students
at Michigan State University who came from Mexican American
migrant farmworker families. Specifically, this study
looked at the likelihood of theoretically based variables
predicting academic success. Currently, 85 percent of
migrant farmworker adults have not completed high school
(Mehta et al., 2000). In fact, the drop out rate for
children from Mexican American migrant farmworker families
is higher than any other ethnic group, at twice the
national average (Mehta et al., 2000). By examining the
issues of educational expectations and academic achievement
of migrant farmworker college students, the present study
has provided a discourse towards plausible solutions.

The underlying logic for conducting this study was if
college students from Mexican American migrant farmworker

families believe that they will attain high levels of

107

education and that their parent’s have high educational
expectations of them, then they will attain higher levels
of academic achievement reflected by their GPA. The
current findings made a contribution to the existing
literature on Mexican American migrant farmworker families
by filling an existing void. These findings need to be
built upon by future researchers in an effort to impact
future public policy on the need to foster postsecondary
educational persistence among students who are the most
economically and academically at risk.

Overall, the current study shows that enhancing social
capital (e.g. family income and familism) will add to the
success of Mexican American college students from migrant
farmworker families. In addition, as mobility was found to
have a long term impact on the academic achievement of
migrant college students, it is time that educational
reform be discussed by policy makers who must not exclude
migrant children from their plan for a better American
educational system that will truly be equal regardless of
where you live.

In conclusion, the definitions currently available of
the Migrant community are either specific to their work
status or tend to be old fashioned and leaning toward

racists. Updating the definitions by adding

108

characteristics established by this study will help people
working with the migrant population to better understand
and respect this unique community. To that end, Migrant
workers have a strong appreciation for family and
community; they have a strong sense of family connectedness
and feel a positive sense of obligation and respect toward
their family members; they are very proud of where they
come from and extremely proud of their abilities to work
hard to meet their family’s needs; although they face many
challenges stemming from their occupation they see their
work as a way to spend time with family, to work hard
together, and to provide their children with more

opportunities than they themselves had.

109

 

APPENDICES

110

APPENDIX A

UCRIHS APPROVAL

 

111

MICHIGAN STATE

UNIVERSITY

 

April 29, 2005

To: Harriette Mcadoo

115 Human Ecology 1
Re: IRB#05—l93 Category: EXEMPT I-2

Approval Date: April 28. 2005 April 27.

Expiration Date: 2006

 

Title: EDUCATIONAL EXPECTATIONS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS FROM MEXICAN AMERICAN MIGRANT
FARMWORKER FAMILIES

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS) has completed their review of your project. I am
pleased to advise you that your project has been approved.

Thecommittee has foundthatyourresearchprojcctisappropriate indesign, protectstherightsandwelfare ofhuman subjects,
and meets the requirements of MSU‘s Federal Wide Assurance and the Federal Guidelines (45 CFR 46 and 21 CFR Part 50). The
protection of human subjects in research is a partnership between the [RB and the investigators. We look forward to working Willi
you as we both fulfill our responsibilities.

Renewals: UCRIHS approval is valid until the expiration date listed above. If you are continuing your project, you must submit
an Application for Renewal application at least one month before expiration. If the project is completed, please srbmitai
Applimtion for Permnellt (Joann.

Revisions: UCRIHS must review my changes in the project, prior to initiation of the change. Please submit an Application for
Revision to have your changes reviewed If changes are made at the time of renewal, please include an Application for Revision
with the renewal application.

 

Problems: If issues should arise during the conduct of the research, such as unanticipated problems, adverse events, or any
problem that may increase the risk to the human subjects, notify UCRIHS promptly. Forms are available to report these issues.

OFFICE OF
RESEARCH Please use the [RB number listed above on any forms submitted which relate to this project, or on any correspondence with
UCRIHS.
ETHICS AND
STANDARDS Good luck in your research. If we can be of further assistance, please contact us at 517-355-2180 or via email at
University Committee on UCRIHS msu.edu. Thank you for your cooperation,
Research Inching Sincerely,
Human Subjects
Michigan State University
20201151111) ,4
East Larsing. MI
48824
517/355-2I80
F AX: 517/432-4503 Peter Vasilenko, Ph.D.
Web: UCRIHS Chair

whumanresearchmsueh E-
Mail: uerihsfalmuiedu

c: Wilma Novales 1 1 2

616WiIdwoodDr
Fact] aneino All ART)?

APPENDIX B

CONSENT FORMS

 

113

Subject Consent to participate in a study of
The Educational Expectations of College Students from
Mexican American
Migant Farmworker Families

You are being asked to participate in a research study
conducted by me, Wilma Novales, a graduate student in the
Family and Child Ecology department at Michigan State
University (MSU). You were selected as a possible
participant in this study because you are or were an M.S.U
College Assistance Migrant Program student. The purpose of
this study is to gain a broader understanding of the
migrant student’s educational expectations and factors
related to educational success. If you volunteer to
participate in this research study, I would ask you to
agree to fill out the following survey, lasting
approximately 20 minutes. The survey will include questions
about your education and family life. I am also requesting
your consent to review your records at MSU CAMP
specifically looking at your MSU GPA, your family income
and your personal statements. This information will be
cross referenced with your survey answers to ensure
accuracy and the personal statements will add your voice to
this research.

Please understand that there are no physical, emotional,
social, legal, or other risks expected from participating
in this research study. The survey and the review of your
CAMP records are not expected to directly or indirectly
cause physical or emotional harm. Your decision to take
part in the study is VOLUNTARY, and you are under no
obligation to answer any question that makes you feel
uncomfortable. You are free to choose not to take part in
this study or to interrupt/terminate participation at any
time. Your decision whether or not to participate will in
no way affect your relationship to the M.S.U. CAMP program.

Any and all information that is obtained in connection with
this study that can be identified with you will remain
confidential and will be disclosed only with your
permission or as required by law. Everything learned about
you in this study will be confidential. Once the data has
all been collected it will be kept under lock and key
separate from the consent forms to ensure your anonymity.
If any portions of this study are published, you will not
be identified in any way. All data will be stored in a

114

secure data base on campus only accessible to the
researchers for three years and then destroyed.

If you have any questions or concerns about the research,
please feel free to contact me, Wilma Novales at (517) 337—
5690 or at novalesw@msu.edu you may also contact Dr.
Harriette McAdoo at 517/ 432-3321.

 

You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue
participation without penalty. You are not waiving any
legal claims or rights because of your participation in
this research study. If you have any questions regarding
your rights as a research subject, contact Peter Vasilenko,
Ph.D., Chair of the University Committee on Research
Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS), Michigan State
University, at (517) 355-2180, ucrihs@msu.edu, or write him
at UCRIHS, 202 Olds Hall, MSU, East Lansing, MI 48824.

 

Please sign electronically below to indicate you understand
all your rights as a research participant and agree to
participate in this study.

Please mark the box that says “I agree” if you agree to
participate in this study. Check “1 do NOT agree” if you do
not agree to participate in this study. Please write your
name in the space provided whether you agree or do not
agree to participate. If you agree, you will automatically
be taken to the survey once this and release form step is
completed.

Thank you for your time!

115

 

Educational Expectations of College Students from

Mexican American Migrant Farmworker

Thank you for agreeing to participate in my
dissertation research study. The purpose of this study is
to gain a broader understanding of the migrant student’s
educational expectations and factors related to their
educational success. The study will include a 93 item
survey consisting of questions the researcher finds
important to the understanding of this topic. In addition
to the survey, the researcher is requesting your permission
to access the following information from your MSU CAMP
records:

(1.) Your overall GPA;

(2.) Your family’s annual income last year; and

(3.) Your application personal statement.

All the data collected from your CAMP records will
only be seen by the researcher; it will be coded and
entered into a secure database with all identifying
information removed. The database will be housed at the
Julian Samora Research Institute and only the researcher
will have access to the information. The data will be
destroyed after three years. Your electronic signature
below will authorize MSU CAMP to release the above
mentioned information to me; this release will only be good
for three months (from your signature date) which is ample

time to collect all the required information.

Please mark the box that says “I agree” if you agree to
allow CAMP to release the requested information. Check “1
do NOT agree” if you do not agree to release the requested

CAMP information. You may proceed with the survey.

116

 

APPENDIX C

SURVEY INSTRUMENT

117

Please click one, and only one of the answers
provided, Thank you.

1.What is your gender?

0 Male
0 Female

2. How old are you?

17 or younger
18-19

20-21

22-23

24 or older

3.Which best describes you?

0 I am currently a MSU (CAMP) student
0 I was a HEP student and now am a CAMP student

0 I was a CAMP student at MSU but I transferred to
another University

0 I was a CAMP student at MSU but I left without
finishing my degree

0 I was a CAMP student at MSU and I graduated

4.What year is this for you at MSU?

First year
Second year
Third year

Fourth year

Fifth year

I Graduated from MSU

I left MSU without a degree

I transferred to another University

5.If you graduated from MSU, how many years did it take
you?

0 Three years
0 Four years
0 Five years

118

is

Six years
Seven years
I have not graduated yet

6.If you left MSU, when did you leave?

first year

second year

third year

fourth year

After I Graduated from MSU
I am currently at MSU

7. If you are still attending a University, as things
stand now, how many years do you believe it will take
you to complete your undergraduate degree?

8 . What

Three years

Four years

Five years

Six years

Seven or more years

I plan to transfer to another institution

I don’t expect to earn an undergraduate degree
I don’t know

is your marital status?

Single (never married)
Married

Separated

Divorced

Widowed

9.How many children do you have?

10.

None

One

Two

Three

More than three

What is your racial/ethnic group?

119

1

11.

12.

have?

13.
graduated from high school? (Do not include G.E.D.)

14.
their G.E.D?

African American

Asian American
Caucasian

Mexican American
Non-Mexican Hispanic
Caribbean (non-Hispanic)
Other

How many older brothers and sisters do you have?

One

Two

Three

Four

Five

Six

More than six

How many younger brothers and sisters do you

One

Two

Three

Four

Five

Six

More than six

How many of your brothers and sisters have

None

One

Two

Three

Four or more

How many of your brothers and sisters have earned

None
One

120

15.

Two
Three
Four or more

What is the highest level of education your

father completed?

16.
mother completed?

17.

He had no formal education

Elementary school (K-3mlgrade)

Middle School (4“‘-%Hh grade)

Junior High School (7“L4Hh grade)

High School (graduation)

G.E.D.

Some college (no degree completed)
Associates Degree (two year college degree
program)

Trade School

College Graduate (undergraduate degree-4 years)
Graduate Degree (Masters Level; MA, MS.)
Professional Degree (PhD., M.Dm)

What is the highest level of education your

She had no formal education

Elementary school (K-3rd grade)

Middle School (4th —6th grade)

Junior High School (7“hifh grade)

High School (graduation)

G.E.D.

Some college (no degree completed)
Associates Degree (two year college degree
program)

Trade School

College Graduate (undergraduate degree-4 years)
Graduate Degree (Masters Level; MA, MS.)
Professional Degree (PhD., M.Dm)

Check the generation that best applies to you.

1St generation = you were not born in the U.S.

2m‘generation = You were born in the US; either
one of your parents was born in another country

121

18.

3rd generation = you were born in the US, both
your parents were born in the US and your grand
parents were born in another country.
4u‘generation = you and your parents were born in
the US and one grandparent was born in another
country with the remainder of your grandparents

born in the US.

Su‘generation = you and your parents and all your
grandparents were born in the US.

Have you spent any of your pre-college education

in school outside the United States?

19.

Yes
No

What would you say best fits your family

situation growing up?

20.
attend for elementary school (K-3rd grades)?

21.
attend for middle/junior high school (4th-4Fh grades)?

lived in a single female headed household
lived in a single male headed household
lived with both mom and dad

lived with relatives (neither parent)
lived with at least one step—parent

None of the above

H H H H H

As well as you remember, how many schools did you

One

Two

Three

Four

Five or more

As well as you remember, how many schools did you

One

Two

Three

Four

Five or more

122

22. As well as you remember, how many schools did you
attend for high school (9“kdifih grades)?

0 One
0 Two
0 Three
0 Four
0 Five or more
23. As well as you remember, about how many times did

you move annually growing up?

Once a year
Twice a year

Three times a year

Four times a year

Five times a year
0 More than five times a year

24. What was your family annual income last year?

Less than $10,000

Between $10,000 and $20,000
Between $20,000 - $30,000
Between $30,000 and $40,000
$40,000 or more

25. How many family members contributed to your
family’s annual income last year?

0 One

0 Two

0 Three

0 Four

0 Five or more

26. Were you one of the family members that
contributed to your family’s annual income last year?

0 Yes
0 No
27. What was your overall grade point average in high
school?

123

28.

(GPA)

29.
think you will get?

30.

your

31.

your

MUOEIJID‘

What was your last overall grade point average
at Michigan State University?
scale)?

(Based on a 4.0

***/accessed through actual student records at

University

As things stand now, how far

GED/High school diploma
Trade School

Some college, no degree

A bachelor’s degree (4 years
A master’s degree (M.S.,
A professional degree

As things stand now, how far
MOTHER think you will get?

GED/High School diploma
Trade School

Some college, no degree

A bachelor’s degree (4 years
A master’s degree (M.S.,
A professional degree

As things stand now, how far
FATHER think you will get?

GED/High School diploma
Trade School
Some college, no degree

A bachelor’s degree (4 years
A master’s degree (M.S.,

A professional degree

124

in

of

M.Am)

(Ph.D., M.

in

of

M.Am)

(Ph.D., M.

in

of

M.Am)

(Ph.D., M.

school do YOU

school did/does

school did/does

college)

0., J.D.m)

32.

As things stand now,

FRIENDS think you will get?

GED/High School diploma
Trade School
Some college,
A bachelor’s degree
A master’s degree (M.S.,
A professional degree

no degree

M.Am)

um.pq M.D”

(4 years of college)

J.D.m

how far in school do your

Please indicate the extent to which you agree or

disagree

33.

with the following:

My mother thinks it is important for me to do

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

well at school.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
34. My father thinks it is important for me to do
well at school.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
35. A person should live near his or her parents and

spend time with them on a regular basis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

36. Aging parents should live with their relatives.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

125

 

 

37.

in times of need,

A person should help his or her elderly parents

share a house.

for example help financially or

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

38. Children should always help their parents with
the support of younger brothers and sisters, for
example, help them with homework, help the parents
take care of the children, and so forth.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

39. A person should rely on his or her family if the

need arises.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

40. A person should always support members of the
extended family, for example aunts, uncles, and in—
1aws, if they are in need even if it is a big
sacrifice.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

41. Parents and grandparents should be treated with
great respect regardless of their differences in
views.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

126

 

 

 

 

 

42.
her immediate and extended families,
meals, play games, go somewhere together,
things together.

A person should often do activities with his or
for example, eat
or work on

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

43. The family should control the behavior of
children younger than 18.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

44. A person should cherish time spent with his or
her relatives.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

45. Children should help out around the house without
expecting an allowance.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

46. Children younger than 18 should give almost all
their earnings to their parents.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

47. A person should feel ashamed if something he or
she does dishonors the family name.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

127

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

48. Children should live with their parents until
they get married.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

49. A person should always be expected to defend his
or her family’s honor no matter what the cost.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

50. A person should respect his or her older brothers
and sisters regardless of their differences in views.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 7’ 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

51. A person should be a good person for the sake of
his or her family.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

52. Children should obey their parents without
question even if they believe they are wrong.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
strongly disagree somewhat somewhat agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree

53. I speak Spanish
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
54. I speak English
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always

 

 

 

 

 

 

128

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

55. I enjoy speaking Spanish
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
56. I associate with Anglos
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
57. I enjoy Spanish language music
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
58. I enjoy listening to English language music
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
59. I enjoy Spanish language TV
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
60. I enjoy English language TV
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
61. I enjoy Spanish language movies
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always

 

 

 

 

 

 

129

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62. I enjoy English language movies
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
63. I enjoy reading books in Spanish
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
64. I enjoy reading books in English
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
65. I write letters in Spanish
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
66. I write letters in English
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
67. My thinking is done in the English language
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
68. My thinking is done in the Spanish language
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always

 

 

 

 

 

130

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

69. My contact with Mexico has been

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
70. My contact with the US has been
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
71. My father identifies or identified himself a
“Mexicano”
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
72. My mother identifies or identified herself as
“Mexicana”
'1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
73. My friends while I was growing up were of Mexican
origin Almost always
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
74. My friends while I was growing up were of Anglo
origin
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
75. My family cooks Mexican foods
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always

 

 

 

 

 

131

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

76. My friends now are of Anglo origin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
77. My friends now are of Mexican origin
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
78. I like to identify myself as an Anglo American
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
79. I like to identify myself as Mexican American
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
80. I like to identify myself as Mexican
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
81. I like to identify myself as American
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all Very Moderately Very often Almost
little always
82. My family really tries to help me.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree

 

 

 

 

 

132

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

83. I get emotional help and support from my family.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
84. I can talk about my problems with my family.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
85. My family is willing to help me make educational
decisions.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
86. My family supports my educational goals.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
87. My mom supports my educational goals.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
88. My dad supports my educational goals.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
89. My friends support my educational goals.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree

 

 

 

 

 

133

.1

 

I.

 

90.

I’ve experienced difficulties due to owing money.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
91. I’ve experienced difficulty paying for food.
1 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
92.

I’ve experienced difficulty paying for recreation
and entertainment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

l 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree

 

93.

I’ve experienced difficulty due to my family
experiencing money problems.

 

 

 

 

 

 

l 2 3 4
Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree

 

134

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES

135

REFERENCES

Alexander, K.L., & Eckland, B.K. (1974). Sex differences in
the educational attainment process. American
Sociological Review, 39:668—682.

Apicella, R. (1985). Perceptions of why migrant students
drop out of school and what can be done to encourage
them to graduate. Oneonta: State University of New
York at Oneonta.

 

Arbona, C. & Novy, D.M. (1990). Noncognitive dimensions as
predictors of college success among Black, Mexican
American, and White students. JOurnal of College
Student Development, 31:415-422.

Babbie, E. (2001). Survey research methods. (2m'ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Becker, G.S. & Tomes, N. (1986). “Human capital and the
rise and fall of families. JOurnal of Labor Economics,
Vol 4, pp. 1-49.

Behnke, A.O., Piercy, K.W., Diversi, M. (2004). Educational
and occupational aspirations of Latino youth and their
parents. Hispanic JOurnal of Behavioral Sciences, vol.
26 No.1, pp. 16-35.

Bernal, M.E., Saenz, D.S., & Knight, G.P. (1991). Ethnic
identity and adaptation of Mexican American youths in
school settings. Hispanic JOurnal of Behavioral
Sciences, 13:135—154.

Black, C., Paz, H., & DeBlassie, R. (1991). Counseling the
Hispanic male adolescent. Adolescence, 26:223-32.

Boisjoly, J., Duncan, G.J., & Hofferth, S. (1995). Access

to social capital. JOurnal of Family Issues, 16:609-
631.

Bollen, K.A., & Hoyle, R.H. (1990). Perceived cohesion: A

conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces,
69:479-504.

136

 

 

Bourdieu, P. (1983). Forms of capital. In: Richards, J. C.
(Ed). Handbook of theory and research for the
sociology of education, New York, Greenwood Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human
development: Experiments by nature and design.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R.
Vasta (Ed.) Annals of Child Development, 6:187-249.

Buchmann, C., & Dalton, B. (2002). Interpersonal influences
and educational aspirations in 12 countries: The
importance of Institutional context. Sociology of
Education, 75:99—122.

Burgess, E.W., Locke, H.J., & Thomes, M..M. (1963). The
familyv From institution to companionship (3”‘ed). New
York: American Book company.

Buriel, R., & Cardoza, D. (1988). Sociocultural correlates
of achievement among three generations of Mexican
American high school seniors. American Educational
Research JOurnal, 25:177—192.

Cabrera, N.L., & Padilla, A.M. (2004). Entering and
succeeding in the “culture of college”: The story of
two Mexican heritage students. Hispanic JOurnal of
Behavioral Sciences, 26(2):152—l70.

Carter, D. J., & Wilson, R. (1996). Minorities in Higher
Education. 1995—1996 Fourteenth Annual Status Report.
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education (ED
407 892).Census Bureau Facts for Features (2000).
Available on line: http://www.media@info.census.gov.

 

Castallanos, J., & Jones, L. (2003). (Eds). The majority
in the minority: Expanding the representation of
Latina/o faculty, administrators and students in
higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Castillo, L.G., & Hill, R.D. (2004). Predictors of
distress in Chicana college students. JOurnal of
.Multicultural Counseling and Development, 32:234-248.

Cheng, S. & Starks, B. (2002). Racial differences in the
effects of significant others on students’ educational

137

 

expectations. Sociology of Education, 75:306-327.

Coleman, J.S., Campbell, E.Q., Hobson, C.F., McPartland,
J.M., Mood, A.M., Weidfeld, F.D., & York, R.L.
(1966). Equality of educational opportunity.
washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Coleman, J. C. (1988). Social capital in the creation of
human capital. American JOurnal of Sociology, 94:
S95-S120.

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE)
(1993). .Migrant farmworkers in the United States.
Implementation of the Helsinki accords. Briefing of
the commission on security and cooperation in Europe
(July 20, 1992; October 9, 1992; February 19, 1993;
March 1, 1993, April 8, 1993). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 365 486).

Cuéllar, 1., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R., (1995).
Acculturation rating scale for Mexican Americans-II:
A revision of the original ARSMA scale. Hispanic
JOurnal of Behavioral Sciences, l7(3):275—304.

Current Population Survey (2000). U.S. Hispanic Population:
2000. U.S. Census Bureau available on line at:
http://www.census.gov.

 

Davis, S. (1997). Child labor in agriculture. ERIC Digest
' (Appalachia Educational Laboratories, Arlington, Va.).
Bulletin EDO-RC-96-10 (February).

Duron, S.B. (1995)..Migrant farmworker students: Decisions
involved in pmet-secondary participation and success.
Geneseo, NY: BOCES Geneseo Migrant Center (ED 383
506).

Duran, R.P. (1983). Hispanics’ education and background:
Predictors of college achievement. New York: Teachers
College Press.

Farkas, G., Grobe, R.P., Sheehan, D., & Shuan, Y. (1990).
Cultural resources and school success: Gender,
ethnicity, and poverty groups within an urban school
district. American Sociological Review, 55:127—42.

138

 

 

Featherman, D.L., & Hauser, R.M. (1978). Opportunity and
change. Academic Press.

Filippelli, L., & Jason, L. (1992). How life events affect
the academic adjustment and self-concept of transfer
children. JOurnal of Instructional Psychology, 19:61-
5.

Fry, R. (2002). Latinos in higher education: Many enroll,
too few graduate. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic
Center.

Fuligni, A., & Pedersen, S. (2002). Family obligation and
the transition to young adulthood. Developmental
Psychology, 38:856-868.

Fuligni, A., Tseng, V. & Lam, M. (1999). Attitudes toward
family obligations among American adolescents with

Asian, Latin American, and European backgrounds.
Child Development, 70:1030-1044.

Gabbard, S., Mines, R., & Boccalandro, B. (1994)..Migrant
farmworker: Pursuing security in an unstable labor
market. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy.

Gandara, P.C. (1995). Over the ivy walls: The educational
mobility of low-income Chicanos. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.

Gauvain, M., & Rogoff, B. (1989). Collaborative problem

solving and children’s planning skills. Developmental
Psychology, 25(1):139-151.

Gibson, M.A. (2003) Improving graduation outcomes for
migrant students. ERIC Digest, www.ael.org/eric.

 

Gilroy, M. (2005). American Council education issues annual
status report on minorities. The Hispanic Outlook in
Higher Education, 15(19):9-11.

Gloria, A.M., & Rodriguez, E.R. (2000). Counseling Latino
university students: Psychosocialcultural issues for
consideration. Journal of Counseling and

Development, 78(2):145-154.

Gold, L.J. (2004). The farmworker protection standards

139

revisited. Retrieved September 20, 2006 from Michigan
State University, Julian Samora Research Institute:
http//:www.jsri.msu.edu/RandS/research/irr/12abs.html.

Gonzalez, R., & Padilla, A.M. (1997). The academic
resilience of Mexican American high school students.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19(3), pp.
301-317.

Goodenow, C., & Grady, K.E. (1993). The relationship of
school belonging and friends’ values to academic
motivation among urban adolescent students. JOurnal of
Experimental Education, 62(1):60—71.

Gordon, K.A. (1994). Resilient African American high school
students’ self concept and motivational patterns:
Sources of Strength. Dissertation Abstracts
International, 94, No.03944.

Goyette, PL & Xie, in (1999). Educational expectations of
Asian American youths: Determinants and ethnic
differences. Sociology of Education, 72:22-36.

Hao, L., & Bonstead-Bruns, M. (1998). Parent child
differences in educational expectations and the
academic achievement of immigrant and Native students.
Sociology of Education, 71:175-98.

Haveman, R., Wolfe, B.L., & Spaulding, J. (1991). Childhood
events and circumstances influencing high school
completion. Demography, 28:133-158.

Heller, C. (1966). Mexican American YOuth: Youth forgotten
at the crossroads. New York: Random House.

Hinz, J. (1987). Poverty, prejudice, power, politics:
Migrants speak about their lives. Columbus, Ohio:
Avonelle.

Hochschild, J.L. (1995). Facing up to the American dream:
Race, class, and the soul of the nation. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.

Hurtado, 8., & Carter, D.F. (1997). Effects of college
transition and perceptions of the campus racial
climate on Latino college students’ sense of
belonging. Sociology of Education, 70:324—345.

140

Hurtado, S., Milem, J.F., Clayton-Pederson, A., & Allen, W.
(1996). Improving the climate for diversity in higher
education institutions (Final report to the Lilly
Endowment). Nashville, TN: Peabody Sollege, Vanderbilt
University.

Imig, D.R. (2006). (Personal Communication) From: Family
capital versus family social capital: Different
boundaries, different processes: unpublished. Michigan
State University.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American
cities. New York, Random Books.

Jones, L., Jaccard, James and Choi K. Wan (1996). LISREL
approaches to interaction effects in multiple
regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Jones, L., Castellanos, C., & Cole, D. (2002). Examining
the ethnic minority student experience at
predominantly White institutions: A case study.
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 1, pp. 19-39.

Kao, G., (1995). “Asian-Americans as model minorities? A
look at their academic performance.” American Journal
of Education 103: 121—59.

Kao, G., & Tienda, M. (1995). Optimism and achievement: The
educational performance of immigrant youth. Social
Science Quarterly, 76:1-19.

Kao, G., & Tienda, M. (1998). Educational aspirations of
minority youth. American JOurnal of Education,
106(3):349-384.

Lacar, M.S. (2001). The personal responsibility and work
opportunity reconciliation act of 1996: Implications
for Hispanic migrant farmworkers. Retrieved September
20, 2006, from
http:www.jsri.msu.edu/RandS/research/wps/Wp53.pdf.

Leon, E. (1996). Challenges and solutions for educating
migrant students. Working paper No. 28, Julian Samora

Research Institute, Michigan State University.

Lin, N. (2001). Building a network theory of social

141

capital. In N. Lin, K. Cook, & R.S.B. Hawthrone
(Eds.), Social capital: theory and research (pp. 3—
30). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Marini, M.M. (1978). Sex differences in the determination

of adolescent aspirations: A review of research. Sex
Roles, 4:723-753.

Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self:
Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Psychological Review, 98:224-253.

Martinez, C.R., DeGarmo, D.S., & Eddy, J.M. (2004).
Promoting academic success among Latino youths.
Hispanic JOurnal of Behavioral Sciences, 26:128-151.

Matute-Bianchi, M.E. (1991). “Situational ethnicity and
patterns of school performance among immigrant and
nonimmigrant Mexican-Descent students.” Pp.204-47 in
Aunority status and schooling: A comparative study of
immigrant and involuntary minorities, edited by
Margaret A. Gibson and John U. Ogbu. New York: Garland
Press.

McAdoo, H.P. (1993). The social cultural contexts of
ecological developmental family models. In Boss, P.G.,
Doherty, W.J., LaRossa, R., Schumm, W.R., & Steinmetz,
S.K. (Ed.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods:
A contextual approach, (pp. 298-302) Plenum Press: New
York.

Mehta,K., Gabbard, S.M., Barrat, V., Lewis, M., Carroll,

D., & Mines, R. (2000). Findings from the National
Agricultural workers Survey (NAWS) 1997-1998:A
demographic and employment profile of United States
farmworkers. Research Report No.8 (march). Office of
the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Program
Economics. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of Labor.

Michigan State University (2006)..MSU Facts at a glance.
Retrieved from Michigan State University on October
19, 2006 at MSU Web site:
http://newsroom.msu.edu/snav/184/page.htm.

Michigan State University, Academic Human Resources (2006).

Data report received on October 27, 2006 from “HUman
Resources department; 2006 October Frozen Tape”.

142

Mickelson, R.A. (1990). The attitude-achievement paradox
among black adolescents. Sociology of Education,
63:44-61.

Miller, D. (1991). Handbook of research design and social
measurement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Morgan, S.L. (1996). “Trends in Black White differences in
educational expectations: 1980-92.” Sociology of
Education, 69:308-19.

National Center for Farmworker Health, Inc. (2002)..Migrant
and seasonal farmworker demographic sheet. Retrieved
September 20, 2006 from NCFH Web site:
http://www.ncfh.org.

 

MSU CAMP (2001). Michigan State University’s College
Assistance.Migrant Program. Available on line:
http://www.msucamp;msu.edu.

 

Parra-Cardona, J.R., Bulock, L.A., Imig, D.R., Villarruel,
F.A., & Gold, S.J.(2006). “Trabajando Duro Todos Los
Dias”: Learning from the life experiences of Mexican-
origin migrant families. Family Relations,55, pp.
361-375.

Phinney, J., Ong, A., & Madden, T. (2000). Cultural values
and intergenerational value discrepancies in immigrant

and non-immigrant families. Child Development,
71:528—539.

Pribesh, S., & Downey, D.B. (1999). Why are residential and
school moves associated with poor school performance?
Demography, 36(4):521—534.

Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and
applications in modern society. Annual Review of
Sociology, 24, pp. 1-24.

Portes, A., & Landolt, P. (1996). Unsolved mysteries: The
Toqueville filesII. The American Prospect. Retrieved
September 20, 2006 from
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=
viewprint&articleld=4943.

 

 

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and
revival of American community. New York, Simon and

143

Schuster.

Rochin, R.I., Santiago, A.M., & Dickey, K.S. (1989).
.Migrant and Seasonal Workers in .Michigan’s
Agriculture: A Study of their Contribution,
Characteristics, Needs, and Services. JSRI Research
Report #1, The Julian Samora Research Institute,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Roeder, V.D., & Millard, A.V. (2000). Gender and employment
among Latino migrant farmworkers in Michigan.
Retrieved September 20, 2006 from Michigan State
University, Julian Samora Research Institute Web site:
http://www.jsri.msu.edu/RandS/research/wps/wp52abs.htm
l.

 

Rogers, A., & Henning, S. (1999). The international
migration pattern of the foreign born native born
populations in the United States: 1975—1980.
International Migration Review, 33, pp. 403-429.

Rueschenberg, E., & Buriel, R. (1989). Mexican American
family functioning and acculturation: A family systems
perspective. Hispanic JOurnal of behavioral Sciences,
11(3):232-244.

Sabogal, F., Marin, G., Otero-Sabogal, R., Marin, B.V., &
Perez-Stable, E.J. (1987). Hispanic familialism and
acculturation: What changes and what doesn’t?
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 9:397-412.

Salerno, A., & Fink, M. (1992). Heme/school partnerships:
.Migrant parent involvement report. Geneseo, NY.:BOCES
Geneseo Migrant Center. ERIC ED 345 915.

Schrauf, R.W. (1999). Mother tongue maintenance among North

American ethnic groups. Cross—Cultural Research,
33:175-92.

Sedlacek, W.E. (1999). Black students on white campuses:
Twenty years of research. JOurnal of College Student
Development, 40(5):538—550.

Sewell, W.H. & Shah, V.P. (1967). Socioeconomic status,

intelligence, and the attainment of higher education.
Sociology of Education, 40:1-23.

144

Spady, W.G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An
interdisciplinary review and synthesis. Interchange,
1(1):64-85.

Spencer, W.A. (1976). Interpersonal influence on
educational aspirations: A cross-cultural analysis.
Sociology of Education, 49:41-6.

Steidel, A. G. L., & Contreras, J. M. (2003). A new
familism scale for use with Latino populations.
Hdspanic JOurnal of Behavioral Sciences, 25:312—330.

Terenzini, P.T., Springer, L., Yaeger, P.M., Pascarella,
E.T., & Nora, A. (1996). First-generation college
students: Characteristics, experiences, and cognitive
development. Research in Higher Education, 37:1-22.

Thompson, C.D. Jr., & Wiggins, M.E. (2002). The Human Cost
Of Food: Farmworkers’ Lives, Labor and Advocacy.
University of Texas Press.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A
theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of
Educational Research, 45:89-125.

Trusty, J. (1996). Counseling for dropout prevention:
Applications from multicultural counseling. JOurnal of
MUlticultural Counseling and Development, 24:105—117.

U.S. Census Bureau (1999). As cited in Escuela, PBS Web
site. Available on line at:
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2002/escuela/migrant&#95;fea
tured01.html.

 

U.S. Census Bureau (2004). Education attainment in the
United States: 2003. Available on line at:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-550.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, (1988). Lansing: Michigan
Food and Fiber Facts (published annually).

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Statistics. (1994). Improving America’s Schools Act,
103-382 statute, Title I, part C, (Migrant Education)
Program Purpose, Section 1301-(4).

Valenzuela, A., & Dornbusch, S.M., (1994). Familism and

145

 

social capital in the academic achievement of mexican

origin and anglo adolescents. Social Science uarterly,
75(1):18—36.

Velazquez, L.C. (1993). Migrant adults’ perceptions of
schooling, learning, and education. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, College of Education,
University of Tennessee.

Woefel, J., & Haller, A.O. (1971). Significant others, the
self-reflexive act and the attitude formation process.
American Sociological Review, 40:521-531.

Wood, D., Halfon, N., Scarlata, D., Newacheck, P., &
Nessim, S. (1993). Impact of family relocation on
children’s growth, development, school function, and

behavior. JOurnal of the American Medical Association,
270:1334—1338.

Yzaguirre, P. (2001). Census shows disparity in education
of Latino children. Hispanic, 14(4):104.

York-Anderson, D.C., & Bowman, S.L. (1991). Assessing the
college knowledge of first—generation and second—
generation college students. JOurnal of College
Development, 32(2):116—122.

146

 

 

 

   

(111111