An Analysis of the Use of Continuous Quality Improvement in the Retention of

African American Males at Historically Black Colleges

and Universities

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate School

of

Tennessee State University

in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the degree of

Doctorate of Education

Graduate Research Series No.___________

Howard G. Wright

December 2008

ii

An Analysis of the Use of Continuous Quality Improvement in the Retention of

African American Males at Historically Black Colleges

and Universities

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate School

of

Tennessee State University

in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the degree of

Doctorate of Education

Howard G. Wright

December 2008

iii

Copyrighted © 2008

by

Howard Wright

All rights reserved

iv

To the Graduate School:

We are submitting a dissertation by Howard G. Wright entitled “An Analysis of

the Use of Continuous Quality Improvement in the Retention of African American Males

at Historically Black Colleges and Universities”. We recommend that it be accepted in

partial fulfillment of the degree, Doctorate of Education in Education Administration and

Supervision.

Denise Dunbar .

Chairperson

Christon Arthur . Committee Member

Janet Finch .

Committee Member

Mark Hunter . Committee Member

Accepted for the Graduate School: Alex Skewat . Dean of the Graduate School

v

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to the individuals who have assisted me in making

this dream possible. I am most grateful to my grandmother Vashti James for her

unwavering love throughout my early life and her commitment to ensuring that I value

the importance of education during my developmental years.

vi

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

I sincerely thank my committee members Dr. Denise Dunbar Chairman, Dr

Christon Arthur, Dr. Janet Finch, and Dr. Mark Hunter for their guidance throughout the

dissertation process. I thank Dr. Phillip Redrick, my former academic advisor at Alabama

A & M University, for directing my passion for higher education research to focus on the

plight of African American males in higher education. I am grateful to Dr. Leatha

Bennett, Mrs. Janet Jones, and my colleagues at The Office of Retention and Academic

Support at Alabama A & M University for their support and encouragement. I thank Dr.

Kathrynn Seidler Engberg for her commitment to edit the manuscript. I also thank my life

long friends of the Class of 88 (The Ratoons) of The College of Agriculture in Port

Antonio Jamaica for their continued encouragement. I am grateful to the friends I met as

an international student at Florida A & M University, who encouraged and supported me

even when I came very close to becoming a college dropout.

I thank my wife, Andrea, for her understanding, love, support, and encouragement

throughout the dissertation process. Without her, I would have not started this journey.

To my children, Andre, Rojae, and Georgiana, I thank you all for your patience and

support, and for the time you gave me to work undisturbed. Finally, I am eternally

grateful to God for taking me from a humble beginning and providing the resources and

drive to complete this journey.

vii

ABSTRACT HOWARD WRIGHT. An Analysis of the Use of Continuous Quality Improvement in the Retention of African American Male Students at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (under the direction of DR. DENISE DUNBAR.)

This study explores the use of Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) in the

retention of African American male students, at historically black colleges and

universities (HBCUs). Based on current literature, African American male students at

HBCUs are faced with academic and non-academic factors which affect their retention

and subsequent graduation. CQI is a management system available to Academic Support

Directors which promotes engaging leadership, establishing and defining the modes of

operation, and making data driven decisions.

The purpose of the study was to focus on the application of Continuous Quality

Improvement by Academic Support Directors when integrating retention strategies for

African American male students at two-year, four-year public, and four-year private

HBCUs. To complete this study, a quantitative web-based instrument was sent to 99

Academic Support directors at 99 HBCUs that serve male undergraduate populations.

The instrument consisted of 78 Likert-like scale and two open-ended questions. The

return rate was 55.4% (57).

The responses were analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and

T-test. The null hypothesis tested at a 0.05 level of significance. The results from the

hypotheses revealed no statistically significant differences between the various colleges

viii

and (a) retention policies and practices, (b) the years practicing CQI, (c) the benefits

achieved, (d) the obstacles faced, (e) the use of data in decision making, (f) the extent of

senior leadership support, and (g) the provision of leadership support for CQI. There

were also no statistically significant differences between the practice of CQI and the use

of data in decision making, as well as the perception of senior leadership support for CQI

and the time practicing CQI.

A summary of the open ended questions revealed that CQI was discussed and

implemented at the various HBCUs, but required a lot of time and departmental

cooperation. The findings indicate that CQI is practiced by Academic Support Directors

at HBCUs, and the issues faced in applying CQI to the retention management of African

American male students are similar among two-year, four-year public, and four- year

private HBCUs. It is recommended that further research be conducted (a) on the use of

CQI in African American male student retention at predominately white institutions, (b)

examine which CQI model has the most impact on African American male retention, (c)

the financial impact of CQI in retention management, (d) the success of non-

implementers of CQI, and (e) leadership support of CQI in African American male

student retention.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER Page

I. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………… 1

Statement of the Problem…………………………………………....7

Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………9

The Significance of the Study………………………………………10

Research Questions…………………………………………………10

Limitations of the Study…………………………………………….12

Assumptions of the Study………………………………………….. 12

Definition of Terms…………………………………………………13

II LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………...17

The Continuous Quality Management Philosophy………………….17

The Continuous Quality Organization………………………………19

The African American Male Student ……………………………….22

Drivers of Continuous Improvement in Higher Education..........…..27

Strategies for Student Retention………………………..…………..30

Data and Assessment………………………………………………..44

The Role of Institutional Management……………………………..46

Continuous Quality Improvement in Higher Education…………….48

Leadership in Continuous Quality Improvement……………………51

x

CHAPTER Page

Quality Improvement Methods Used in Higher Education………....54

Summary of the Literature…………………………………………. 62

III METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………65

Research Design…………………………………………………….65

Participants………………………………………………………….66

Research Instrument…………………………………………….......67

Data Collection Procedures…………………………………………70

Data Analysis……………………………………………………….71

Hypotheses………………………………………………………….72

IV ANALYSIS OF DATA…………………………………………………..74 Results of Research Questions…………………………………………...76 Results of Hypotheses Testing…………………………………………...85 V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS……….…..101 Summary of the Findings………………………………………………..102 Discussion of the Findings………………………………………………106 Conclusion………………………………………………………………111 Recommendations for Further Research…….………………………….113 REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………115

xi

APPENDICES A. First Letter of Solicitation…………………………………………..141 B. Second Letter of Solicitation………………………………………..144 C. Final Letter of Solicitation…………………………………………..146

. D. Permission to Use Survey ……………………………………….....148

E. Survey Instrument…………………………………………………..150

F. Panel of Experts…………………...………………………………...163

G. Institutional Review Board Application……………………………166

H. Open Ended Responses…………………………………………….168

I. Four Year Class Average 1999-2000 Cohort………………………...171

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Pages

1. Results of Cronbach’s Analysis………………………………………..69

2. Results of Response by College Size………………………………….75

3. Results of Colleges by Classification…………………………………75

4. The Effectiveness of Retention Program Meeting the needs of African American Male Students……………………….77 5. Results of CQI Methods Practiced by Retention Directors…..………79

6. Factors Driving the Support for CQI in Retention Management for African American Males……………………………80

7. Obstacles Faced in Implementing CQI in Retention Management………………………………………..82 8. Factors Driving Non Implementers from Supporting

CQI in Retention Management for African American Male Students…83

9. Benefits Derived from Implementing CQI in Retention Management for African American Male Students……….84

10. ANOVA Results of Significant Differences Between Program Policies and Practices for African American Male Students and the Various Colleges.…………………………. …...….85

11. ANOVA Results for Significant Differences Between Years

of Practice and the Various Colleges ………………………………... 87

12. ANOVA Results of Benefits Achieved from Implementing CQI in Retention of African American Males Among the Various Colleges …..……………………………………………………………88

xiii

Table Pages 13. ANOVA Results of the Differences in Obstacles Faced Implementing CQI and the Various College..……………….....90 14. T-test Comparing Practitioners and Non Practitioners

in the use of Data in Decision Making for African American Male Student Retention………………………………………………92

15. ANOVA Results for Differences in the Use of Data for Decision Making and the Various Colleges……………………….93

16. ANOVA Results for the Differences between the Extent of Senior Administrative Support and the Various Colleges….94

17. ANOVA Results for the Differences in the Perception

of Senior Leadership Support for CQI and the Time Practicing CQI…………………………………………………...96

18. ANOVA Results Comparing the Differences Between The Provision of Leadership in Campus Retention and The Various Colleges ………………………………………….……...98

19. ANOVA Results Comparing the Differences Between the Provision of Leadership in Campus Retention Initiatives and the Years Practicing CQI…………………………….99

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION There is a great demand for institutions to monitor students’ progress through

their college experience and apply strategies to improve their successful matriculation

(Dey & Hurtado, 2005). A student's decision to leave an institution is very complex and

involves several factors that must be managed effectively during the student's academic

career (Bean, 1980; Tinto, 1993; Nora & Cabrera, 1996). For African American males at

historically black colleges, the stakes are much higher, because more than two thirds

leave without obtaining a degree from the same institution (NCES, 2003). The African

American male student’s plight is a serious concern that requires evaluation of the

strategies used by the institutions and solutions found that will enable the majority of

African American male students to graduate within five to six years (Pascarella, 1985).

In a report on first time bachelor degree seeking students enrolled in 1996, who

graduated from the same HBCU institution by August 2002, the graduation rates for

black females by year four was 23%, in comparison to 14% for black males. In year five,

the graduation rates for black females was 38% in comparison to 28% for black males. In

year six the graduation rate was 44% compared to 34% respectively. Comparatively, the

six-year graduation rate for white males was 56% (NCES, 2003).

2

The retention rate for any group of students is a performance indicator that allows

institutions to demonstrate quality, satisfy the stakeholders’ need for improvement and

accountability, and enhances the institutional capability in making informed decisions on

policies, programs and personnel (Bogue, 1998). A low retention rate for any institution

is damaging. A low rate is an indication of the ineffectiveness of an institution in

managing the progress of its students to graduate within the time indicated. It has

negative implications for the students who drop out. The institution's reputation is

compromised, and revenues that could be generated for academic and student services are

lost (Leveille, 2006; Tinto, 1993). According to Swail et. al (2004), when an institution

loses a student it reduces its income over the years. The institution also loses revenue

from bookstores, residential halls, financial aid, campus restaurants, and potentially lost

alumni contributions (Swail et. al, 2004).

Mustiful (1995) found that for improvements to occur in retention, all areas of

the campus community including financial aid, faculty and peer support, campus activity

and mentors at the institution must work together to improve the student experience,

because individually they impact all students' persistence. Students who departed from

historically black colleges, however, spoke about the disorganization on the campuses,

financial aid issues, problems with bureaucratic red tape and poor customer service which

impacted their departure (Hurd, 2000).

Over the years many HBCU administrators failed to look at the financial and

social implications that retention has on their institutions (Hurd, 2000).This has created a

general public consensus that black males on campuses have difficulty becoming socially

3

integrated, but very little is done to better manage their academic careers to improve their

participation and degree completion (Davis, 1999; Cuyjet, 2006).

A report from the Consortium for Student Data Exchange (2004) found that

institutions lose 20 % of its students in the first year, 11 % in the second year and 9 % in

the third year. A similar study by the ACT (2005) on retention transitioning from

freshman to sophomore from 1983 to 2005 showed that the national rate for two-year

private colleges was 62%, in comparison to 52% for two-year public institutions. The

retention rate was 66.4% for public baccalaureate institutions, in comparison to 70% for

private baccalaureate institutions. For public doctoral institutions, the retention rate was

77%, compared to 82.1% for private doctoral institutions. Nationally for all institutions,

the retention rate was 68.2% (ACT, 2005).

Retention projects have been established at most historically black colleges and

universities by making retention a major part of their institutional mission. Many

HBCUs, with the support of federal and state agencies, have established institutional

strategies such as academic support services, remediation, counseling and retention

centers, career services, emergency loans and merit based scholarships, private and

corporate donations, along with Title IV initiatives such as Summer Bridge and Trio

programs. Each program plays a significant role in improving retention (Chenoweth,

1999; Jones-Giles, 2004). The programs are aimed at developing academic skills through

remediation, social skills development, and providing financial assistance (Chenoweth,

1999). The student reported benefits from these programs are improved grades, enhanced

sense of self-worth, as well as the ability to persevere in school (Marshall, 2005).

4

Efforts to address the general needs of black students do not specifically address

the needs of African American men within the campus structure. Academic support and

retention services should be designed to address the socio-economic problems faced by

black male students as they maneuver the obstacles they encounter on campuses (Cuyjet,

1997). According to Fortson (1997), many programs have not increased the retention

rates significantly, because they do not demonstrate their effectiveness in addressing the

factors that will increase the retention of African American male students. According to

Nittie et al. (1994), the fade out effect has trapped many institutions into a cycle in which

students participate in programs, but as they improve and move out of the programs, the

gains are lost.

The National Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities’ (NASULGC)

report (2001) on the future of state land grant universities found that the public was

growing frustrated with institutional unresponsiveness. Despite the resources available,

public institutions are perceived as unorganized, unable to improve their internal

problems efficiently and effectively. Boyd (2002) and Muraskin & Lee (2004) argued

that negative perceptions are fueled by increases in tuition, increases in student

indebtedness, demands for more financial aid, reductions of educational opportunity for

low income students, financial crises at the state and local government, allegations of

financial and academic wrong doing at institutions, students’ performance, reductions of

state appropriations to higher education, and finally poor management of tax dollars.

The demand for resources has created an ongoing national and regional discussion

by legislators, the public, higher education policy makers, and members of the African

5

American community, all of which call for accountability and a planned approach to

improve the retention of African American males in higher education. In support of these

discussions, The NASULAGC, (2001) report recommended that land grant institutions

become engaged in improving student experiences, change the campus culture and

organize themselves to respond to the needs of the current and future students.

According to Tinto (2000), institutions should consider more than the overall

graduation rates, but instead examine improvements in retention of the different student

populations (low income, traditional, first generation, non traditional) to see if their

persistence rates have increased with time. Davis (1999) concurred that improvements in

the current retention rates on campuses require a collective effort to nurture the African

American male from his junior year in high school to his senior year in college.

Monitoring a student from the time he/she is accepted by the institution provides the

institution with information to offer the necessary services to accommodate the student’s

needs. The solution also requires the contribution of individuals involved with students to

continuously improve the processes that will sustain the student throughout their

academic career (Cuyjet, 2006).

Prudent retention management requires leaders to become part of the solution.

Successful retention planning involves setting the stage for student retention, establishing

priorities, integrating retention goals with existing programs and services, evaluating

retention outcomes, preparing realistic timelines, along with recognizing and celebrating

student successes (Law, 1999).

6

Seymour (1993) argued that for an institution to solve any of its problems there

must be an understanding of the issues, then it must work continuously to improve the

processes that caused the problem. Regular assessment of the efficiency of institutional

activities creates a foundation that allows groups to respond to changing demands of the

students’ needs with a planned approach (Kaye & Anderson, 1999; Chamblis, 2003).

Regular assessment creates a culture of evidence that allows the institution to constantly

gain information about itself, use the information to continually improve its management

processes that will satisfy students’ needs (Leveille, 2006).

According to Dew (2006), continuous quality improvement models assist

institutions in examining their work systems and performance indicators. The models

engage leadership, define strategic and operational planning, create measures and

assessment, and evaluate work processes. Several CQI models have been used in higher

education to create operational improvements to non-academic departments. The most

notable are Baldrige Criteria for Education Excellence and Balance Scorecard (Rice &

Taylor, 2003), Benchmarking (Thalner, 2005), Quality Planning (Zhiming, 1999) and

Strategic Planning (Low, 1999).

Continuous Quality Improvement does not have to be an institutional initiative,

but non-academic departments such as retention can use it as an effective tool to make

small improvements (Chambliss, 2003). Institutions can also create receptive employees

to quality models (Fritz, 1999), and can use CQI as a launching pad for campus wide

quality initiatives (Dew & Nering, 2003).

7

Deming (1986) suggests that it is the responsibility of the manager in the quality

environment to eliminate obstacles that will prevent optimal performance, because

problems that occur are due to system failure rather than unmotivated employees. The

CQI process allows managers to focus on improving the college experience by

strengthening integration, student involvement and commitment, and utilizing a planned

approach to problem solving (Chamblis, 2003). Continuous Quality Improvement allows

departments to respond to the changing demands of student needs and services creating a

foundation to respond to the challenges faced in the educational environment (Chamblis,

2003).

Improvement in student services can only occur if there is an examination of all

the different processes involved in CQI and by bringing together all the various

stakeholders together. CQI creates cross-functional teams that manage key processes,

maximize operational effectiveness, and enhance customer satisfaction (Lewis & Smith,

1993; Burril & Ledolter, 1999). Continuous Quality Improvement emphasizes service,

implements teamwork, institutes divisions of management, solves problems based on

facts, utilizes statistical methods, and develops human capital (Lewis & Smith, 1994).

Statement of the Problem

While there are steady increases in the female population at HBCUs, the male

population continues to decline steadily. The number of African American men enrolled

at HBCUs continued to decline from 90,130 (40%) in 1995 to 85,628 in 2004, making up

(39%) of the HBCU population (United Negro College Fund [UNCF], 2006). The

National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) (2007) graduation report for the

8

1999-2000 cohorts showed graduation rates for African American men at a low of 9% at

the University District of Columbia, 13 % at Texas Southern University, and 14% at

Alabama State respectively. In contrast to a high of 60 % at Miles College, 55% at

Morehouse College, 52% at Fisk, and 46% at Elizabeth State University respectively

(Appendix H).

The current African American male students’ graduation rates reflect the high

levels of attrition for African American rates at HBCUs. In general, leadership by

academic support directors for retention initiatives is critical when developing an

integrated approach that will continuously improve the retention process, improve

departmental operational efficiencies, and ultimately improve the graduation rates for

African American males. Improving the current system requires improvements not only

in the individual units, but also departments that contribute to African American male

student retention (Seymour, 1997). The utilization of management initiatives such as CQI

by college directors helps non-academic departments such as student retention services,

to develop an integrated structured approach to continuously improve their systems

(Chamblis, 2004).

Despite the proliferation of several quality initiatives over the past two decades,

there is no published research on the use of continuous quality management models to

improve the factors that impact the retention of African American male students from

pre-college to graduation at HBCUs. The low graduation rates at HBCUs has created the

need to ask: To what extent are Continuous Quality Improvement methods used by

Academic Support Directors at historically black colleges and universities to address the

9

retention of African American undergraduate male students working? This study is

therefore designed to examine the extent to which Continuous Quality Improvement

methods are used by Academic Support Directors at HBCUs to address the retention of

African American male students.

The Purpose of the Study

The discussions relating to African American male student retention at

historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) are more relevant, because of the

uniqueness of their mission in providing educational opportunities for all students

(Wilson, 2000). According to Wilson (2000), HBCUs open enrollment policy attracts

students with academic deficiencies, low ACT scores and requires some level of

remediation to be academically successful. Once the institution accepts these students,

their retention becomes an important part of HBCUs accountability. Historically black

colleges and universities, like any other institution, must clearly monitor the progress of

enrolled students they enroll and make an effort to improve their college experience (Dey

& Hurtado, 2005).

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the extent of the use of

Continuous Quality Improvement among Academic Support Directors in integrating

retention strategies for African American male students at two-year HBCUs, four-year

public, and four-year private HBCUs. The study evaluated the level of awareness and

implementation of quality improvement practices among Academic Support Directors at

various HBCUs. The study sought to identify the impact of institutional policies and

practices on the retention of African American male students, as well as examining the

10

level of awareness and practice of continuous quality improvement practices among

academic support directors at HBCUs. The study also examined the perception of the

impact of Continuous Quality Improvement strategies on the retention management of

African American males and the role of leadership in the practice of CQI in retention

management.

The Significance the Study

Woodard, Mallory & De Luca (2001) concurred that institutions must examine

their characteristics, culture, academic best practices, student services, and how they

affect their ability to graduate their students. According to the College Board (1999),

college officials should promote the use of strategies for minority student issues, take the

lead in developing these strategies, and get members of the school community involved.

This study is important because it provides information on the continuous quality

framework used by two-year, private and four-year public HBCUs to improve the

African American male college student experience. The study is also significant because

it brings to the forefront effective management strategies utilized by HBCUs to improve

the factors that impact African American male students’ engagement and participation. It

is the intention of this research to fill the void for a study on Continuous Quality

Improvement practices among academic support directors in dealing with the issues faced

by African American males at both private and public historically black colleges.

Research Questions

Referring to the statement of the problem and the significance of the study the

following research questions form the basis of this study:

11

1. What percentage of HBCUs have a center designated for student retention?

2. What percentage of HBCUs have support services designed to target traditional

and non-traditional African American male student populations?

3. How effective are the current retention programs and policies in meeting the

needs of African American male students at historically black colleges and

universities (i.e. student preparedness, faculty, mentors and role models,

academic advising, financial aid, campus environment and services and

socialization and integration)?

4. To what extent are Academic Support Directors aware of and adopting quality

improvement models to their department?

5. What Continuous Quality Improvement models are used, if any, to manage

retention outcomes?

6. What factors are driving academic support directors to continuously improve

the retention of African American male students?

7. What obstacles are encountered by implementers in the application of CQI to

retention practices?

8. What factors contributed to non- implementers not pursuing CQI in retention

practices for African American males?

9. What benefits are gained from the application of Continuous Quality Methods?

12

Limitations of the Study

1. The study will be limited to Historically Black Colleges and Universities with

undergraduate male populations within the United States and U.S Virgin Islands.

2. The study will focus on the management of undergraduate African American

male students only, and will not include graduate level African American males.

3. The study will focus on Academic Support Directors at only historically black

colleges and universities, and not academic support directors at predominately

white institutions.

4. The study will not focus on the retention management of African American

females and other ethnic groups attending HBCUs.

5. The study focuses only on the perceptions of administrators who have

responsibility for academic support and retention at the institutions studied.

6. The study will limit Continuous Quality improvement Strategies to Baldridge

Criteria, Balance Scorecard, Strategic Planning, Process Management and

Benchmarking.

Assumptions of the Study

1. Academic support directors can make decisions relating to the continuous

quality management method used to fulfill the institution’s retention mandate.

2. Continuous quality management strategies that are used by predominately white

institutions are applicable to Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

3. The responses of the Academic Support Directors will be without bias, offering

an accurate description of their individual operations.

13

4. African American males entering HBCUs share similar institutional experiences

with other males at HBCUs that impact their retention.

5. All HBCUs retention rates for African American male students’ needs

improvement.

6. All HBCUs have a department or individual who is responsible for retention.

Definition of Terms

Academic Support Director: Individuals who are responsibility for the day to day.

operational management of the retention program at their respective institutions

African American males: Refers to black men enrolled at historically black colleges and

universities who reside in the United States and its territories.

Assessment: A statistical method of evaluating work functions and processes to provide

diagnostic information to policymakers.

At Risk Students: Students classified as at risk are first generation to attend college,

have low parental income, have low high school cumulative grade point average,

have low ACT scores, have poor high school preparation, have poor social skills,

have financial difficulties, and work more than 40 hours per week.

Attrition: The departure of students before degree completion.

Balance Scorecard: A management system that measures the business strategy

through measurable objectives (Reuben, 1999).

College Type: The classifications of institutions based on whether they are

private four year, public four year and two year institutions.

14

Continuous Quality Improvement: The identification of the customers’ needs and

expectations, compared against established market standards. It utilizes data

collection and analysis to continuously seek improvement in specific services and

process within the organization (Chambliss, 2003).

Customers: Individuals who use the organization products and services.

Drivers: Factors inside and outside of the institution that force institutions to improve

operational efficiencies.

Baldrige Criteria for Educational Excellence: This is the education excellence section of

the Baldrige Quality awards. It integrates a management system through

leadership, strategic planning, student relationship, stakeholders, market data, and

management analysis (Baldrige National Quality Program, 2006).

Benchmarking: The finding of the best practices of a peer organization and examining,

the factors that lead to the organization’s success, and adopting the factors that are

suitable in improving the organizational performance (Dew and Nearing, 2004).

Higher Education: Post secondary institution that confers certificates, diplomas, and

degrees, and includes two year, four-year public, and four year private colleges

and universities.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities: These institutions are “colleges or

universities that were established before 1964 with the primary mission of

educating the African American community and are accredited by a nationally

recognized accrediting agency or association determined by the Secretary of

Education to be a reliable authority as to the quality of training offered or is,

15

according to such an agency or association, making reasonable progress toward

accreditation." (Higher Education Act, 1965). There are currently 105 established

HBCUs in the United States and the U.S Virgin Island (USDE, 2002).

Institution: Four year or two year private and public college and universities of higher

education.

Intrusive Advising: Proactively seeking out students who are at-risk and providing the

necessary services that will improve the student’s chances of completing their

degree.

Persistence: The student remaining in the institution until the degree attainment.

Quality: Conducting the organization’s operational transaction within the agreed

requirements of the customer (Crosby, 1997).

Quality Improvement: The process by which changes occur in the institution through

transformation (Spandauer, 1992).

Quality management: The design of programs to fit the organization’s current plan

through understanding the processes, planning, designing implementation, and

evaluation of the processes (Burril & Ledolter, 1999).

Retention: The flow of students through the institution within a one to six year period;

and is reflected in the way the student complete their degree requirements or drop

out (Tinto, 1993).

Retention Program: A structured program within an institution designed to provide

services and programs to guide the student from admission to graduation.

16

Various HBCUs: Two year and four year private and public historically black colleges

and universities.

Strategic Planning: A formal process that strategically integrates and aligns the

organization’s short- term and long-term goals to support its mission and

management plans on a year-by year -basis (Thompson & Strickland, 1999).

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This section covers an overview of the use of Continuous Quality Improvement in

higher education and the issues that contribute to the retention of African American male

students. The review of the literature is divided into the following sections: the

Continuous Quality Management philosophy, the African American male student in

higher education, the drivers of continuous improvement in higher education, the

strategies for student retention, the data assessment, the continuous quality improvement

strategies in higher education, leadership and finally a summary of the literature.

The Continuous Quality Management Philosophy

Quality methods used in the corporate environment and higher education have

their genesis with Fredrick Taylor’s scientific method (Birnbaum, 2000). Taylor and his

associates postulated that in analyzing the work process and timing, the most efficient

method of completing a task could be determined (Hoy & Miskel, 2005). Taylor

proposed the establishment of work methods and design, the establishment of standards

for daily work, the training of workers, and centralized planning by management.

(Sheldrade, 1996). The advent of Taylorism created the self-directing team concept

allowing employees to become more skilled in the management process, taking on

18

functions that were only designated for management (Brocka and Brocka, 1992). In a

criticism of Taylor’s principle, Evans & Lindsay (2005) argued that it dramatically

improved production efficiencies and quality, but lacked system perspective and focus on

the customer.

Total Quality Management revolutionized management philosophy by placing

emphasis on customer satisfaction, utilizing statistical analysis, and emphasizing human

resource development in the management process (Deming, 1986). According to Evan &

Lindsay (2005), Deming’s philosophy emphasized the need for quality to be driven by

the managers, be based on the continual improvement of products from design to

manufacturing, and a reduction in uncertainty and variation.

To support his philosophy Deming (1986) outlined 14 points on operations in a

quality environment. They included: 1.goal specific improvements, 2. adoption of a new

management philosophy, 3. assessments and inspection, 4. reward for performance, 5.

continuous product improvement, 6. employee training, 7. leadership practices, 8. remove

fear by creating an atmosphere of trust and creativity, 9. encourage teamwork, 10.

management through statistical thinking, 11. process improvement, 12. removal of

barriers to quality improvement, 13. promote employee education, and 14. improve the

culture and climate of the organization.

Crosby’s (1979) 14 steps of quality and Juran’s (1989) 10 steps to quality also share

Deming’s (1986) approach to managing in a quality environment. Crosby (1979)

postulated that proposed improvements should be passed down the organization through

education and dialogue, quality must be done right the first time, and zero defects are the

19

only performance standards. Juran (1989), on the other hand, emphasized that quality

planning, control, and improvements can occur in an organization by designing quality

programs to fit the organization’s current plans.

In comparing the different quality philosophies of Deming (1986), Juran (1989)

and Crosby (1979), Evans and Lindsay (2005), concurred that they all focused on the

commitment of top management to the quality process, incremental continuous

improvement, customer service, teamwork, measurement for problem solving,

recognition and reward, and the problems associated with changing organizational culture

(Evans and Lindsay, 2005).

The Continuous Quality Organization

A continuous quality organization is an organization that creates a climate that

constantly reviews its operations to find areas for continuous improvement (Deming,

1986). It establishes measurable yardsticks which are driven by comparison with other

organizational costs, accountability, performance, and service (Seymour, 1993). A CQI

organization meets the customer’s requirements (Evans & Lindsay, 2005). The CQI

organization should conduct its transactions within the agreed framework by impacting

every area within the organization that contributes to improving the organization’s

reputation and ultimately its revenue intensity (Crosby, 1997). In a summary of quality

definition within higher education, Bogue (1998) argued that quality is a competitive

affair which allows institutions to maintain their competiveness. It should be established

in the organization’s goals and mission, and the result should add value to the

organization (Bogue, 1998).

20

Deming (1986) Plan- Do-Check-Act cycle (PCDA) suggests that incremental

continuous improvement within an organization occurs on a continuum. The process, the

customers, goals, assessment strategy, and the best solution to the problem define the

“planning” phase. The “do” phase consists of making incremental system changes,

followed by the “check” phase which examines the changes to determine if the solution

addresses the issue. The “Act” stage is the implementation of the plan on a larger basis.

Arveson’s (1998) critique of Deming’s PCDA model argued that it focuses on

continuous improvements at the production level, but businesses seek improvement at the

business or unit level to drive the production process. Burrill & Ledolter (1999) in

support of Deming (1986) stated that, “ A single improvement requires selecting the

problem to tackle, determining the cause of the problem, devising a system change to

remove the cause, gain approval to make the change, install and verify that the change is

effective” (p. 67). The micro-level process has its advantages; it improves services for

students and faculty, it improves program visibility, it is cost effective, and it creates

improvement in operational efficiencies in service areas (Dew & Nering, 2004).

To improve student achievement Spanbauer (1992) argued that quality improvement

process is the medium through which cultural change can be exercised in education by

changing how schools are managed. The quality improvement process should involve

students, staff, faulty and other school constituents with each recognizing the others

contribution. These contributions should be challenged through training and commitment

to change (Spanbauer, 1992).

21

Adams (2000) in examining strategies that are used to improve student services at

eight California Community Colleges found that student affairs directors agree that

student services must be improved to be competitive. The study found that leadership

must be committed to the goals and mission of the institution, and must develop

continuous improvement strategies based on students’ needs. The study also found that

improvement in student services requires continuous assessment, surveys, and

questionnaires about student satisfaction and must be given top priority in decisions

making. Adams concluded that these methods create a student-centered environment

where students will participate in services designed for their success.

Quality programs must constantly focus on process improvement with incremental

changes made to improve the process (Burrill & Ledolter, 1999). To understand the

process there must be an understanding of the needs and expectations of the customer.

The process must be examined to ensure that the customer’s needs are met. If

expectations are not met, the process must be redesigned to satisfy the customer’s needs.

The system must be continuously re-evaluated for weaknesses, and then strategies must

be made to correct the faults (Burrill & Ledolter, 1999). The program must be market

lead, focusing on adding value to the customer and must responsive to market forces and

be the basis for setting goals. It must be the foundation for problem solving, rewarding,

performance appraisal, incentive distribution, and resource allocation (Jiju & Preece

2002; Evans & Lindsay, 2000).

22

The African American Male Student in Higher Education

Many college bound African American students are from disadvantaged

backgrounds. They do not have parents who attended college, often lack positive

educational role models, from single parent homes, and are first generation college

students. African American students are more likely to be from lower income families,

have limited financial resources, have problems with finances and the financial aid

system, and feel isolated on campus (Seidman, 2005; Tinto, 1993). They are also less

prepared for college, are faced with more problems in college, and are negatively affected

by increases in college tuition than students of wealthier families (Muraskin, 2004).

According to Tinto (1993), students come from different social and economic

backgrounds, with different personalities, and pre-college preparation levels. Students’

behaviors are modified based on their longitudinal interaction within the college

environment. A negative or positive interaction will influence the student’s commitment

creating marginality or even withdrawal (Tinto, 1993). The student’s academic and social

integration is a psychological process, which is shaped through the student’s past

behaviors, coping abilities, and self-efficacy towards academics (Bean & Eaton, 1995).

According to Davis (1999), “African American males often struggle to socially

integrate in a community of peers who are supportive and is often confining. They

struggle to overcome academic hurdles, created by inadequate college preparation. They

struggle against a school environment that marginalizes their presence and academic

expectations… often their voices are not heard, misunderstood or simply ignored”

(p.135). Neal and McCray et al. (2003) found that African American boys are usually

23

misunderstood from as early as middle school, because teachers tend to perceive African

American culture styles as lower in achievement, higher in aggression, and more likely to

be in need of special education than those individuals who have normal behavior styles.

Davis (1999) elaborated that there is also the effect of racism, stereotyping,

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

pressure, anti-schooling attitudes, drugs, gangs, the legal systems, and the lack of positive

male influence has greatly influenced black male behavior and educational experience.

Bush & Bush (2005) reported that a review by the California Chancellors office

for community colleges found that African American males are the lowest performing

group in terms of degrees earned, retention rates, and average accumulative grade point

averages. Bush and Bush also reported that African American males are less likely to

meet with their instructors and less likely to participate in extracurricular activities than

any other groups of students.

Cuyjet (1997) found that African American males do not spend much time

reading students newspapers, do not get involved in clubs as much as female students,

and are not very active in student organizations. They often do not exhibit interest in

student organizations and are not highly involved in campus sanctioned activities (Cuyjet,

1997). Harper (2003) concurred that African American male students spent their out of

class time, “In residence hall rooms doing nothing, pursuing romantic endeavors with

women, exercising in the campus fitness center, playing video games, playing basketball

and other sports, trying to become rappers, showing off their material possessions,

partying, hanging out informally with other African American males at designated spots

24

on campus and studying in the library by themselves” (p.74). These needs affect their

college experiences, and have to be addressed collectively and individually for them to

graduate (Pascarella, 1985).

The lingering effects of past experiences are carried over into the college

experience creating behaviors on college campuses that are different from other

demographic groups (Cuyet, 1997). The extent to which the students become involved in

the institutional environment and exploit the opportunities available in the institutional

setting will enhance their persistence (Pascarella, 1985; Weidman 1989; Austin, 1985).

The African American male student population, however, is very diverse and has needs,

which shifts based on age group, socio-economic background and preparation levels

(Pascarella, 1985).

Labunski (2003) argued that educated students, regardless of their background,

must be cognizant of the requirements of their majors, should mix general education

classes with their major, gather information about the major, attend class, and become

involved in group discussions. They should work less than 15 hours per week, attend

class at all times especially before exams, and work on a career path which includes

internships. They must also build relationships with professors, find out and participate in

extracurricular activities, have adequate insurance, complain of sexual harassment when

it occurs and do not drop classes because of the fear of earning average grades.

The Traditional and Non-Traditional African American Student

Stokes (2005) reported that the college population is now made up of a diverse

group of students. The traditional undergraduate students, who are dependent, attend

25

school full-time, and work part-time, has changed dramatically over the past two decades

(NCES, 2002). The traditional age 18-22-year-old undergraduate students make up only

16% of higher education enrollment. Approximately 40 % of students are 25 years or

older and 40% of students studying part-time (NCES, 2002).

Non-traditional students on the other hand have the characteristics of delayed

enrollment, attend school part-time, are independent and work full-time while enrolled.

They have children, are single parents, and may not have received a high school diploma

(NCES, 2002). Traditional and non-traditional students do not exhibit similar retention

patterns at the bachelor’s degree level. However at the associate degree level, non-

traditional students are half as likely to achieve their degrees (NCES, 2002).

Students with non-traditional characteristics are more likely to leave without

obtaining a degree and are a greater risk of dropping out especially in their first year.

Male non-traditional students at an urban commuter college found that competing jobs,

classroom priorities, poor time management, and academic under-preparedness

contributed to the dropout decision (Gary, 2004). Non-traditional students’ energy is

more focused on their employment rather than on school (Conditions of Education

Report, 2002). Non traditional students also fear returning to academics. They struggle to

balance family and school, facing financial difficulties which cannot be remedied by the

financial aid process (Widoff, 2000).

Marshal (2006) found that there are barriers to participation for both traditional

and non-traditional students. Marshal found that traditional students utilize the retention

programs less. Factors contributing to students’ lack of using the services stem from

26

cultural beliefs regarding the stigma associated with seeking help, and excelling is seen as

“acting white”. The study also found institutional factors such as peer tutors lacking

diversity skills, ineffective marketing of services, and the negative connotation associated

with the word retention impacts program utilization. Non-traditional students face similar

issues, but as more mature students they overcome the obstacles.

Marshal (2006) concluded that in order to improve the use of retention services,

the program name and strategies should be changed to reflect the African American

culture. The use of the “Retention Program” is perceived negatively and should be

changed to “Academic Support Programs”. Peer tutors should undergo extensive training,

and universities should establish committees, which should include administrators,

faculty, and students to monitor, evaluate and make recommendations to improve the

Academic Support Program.

The adult-learner is another group of non-traditional students which is a very

diverse group. They are poorly understood, and require specially designed programs to

meet their needs. They need institutional planning and counseling to help map their

success, therefore, institutions need to understand their pattern of enrollment (Pusser et

al., 2007). According to Tinto (1993) adult male students returning to school face

difficulties such as feeling out of place. They are less willing to admit to academic

difficulties, and ask fewer questions when academic help arrives. They balance work and

have family responsibilities impacting their integration and assimilation into the school

community.

27

Spadley (2001) argued that the increase in the number of traditional age black

male students in higher education requires educators to design special programs to

address their needs (Spadley, 2001). Spadley recommended that administrators facilitate

peer intervention to enhance integration. Spadley also recommended that faculty need to

foster a learning environment that encourages participation and nurturing by designing

extracurricular activities that enhance learning and participation.

Drivers of Continuous Improvement in Retention

The survival of private four-year, public-four year, and two-year HBCUs will

depend on the institution’s ability to improve the management of its student services and

find new sources of revenue. Many HBCUs, however, are periodically plagued by

financial problems. They do not have large endowments and depend on student fees, state

appropriations, and philanthropy to survive (Jaynes & Williams, 1989). Losing a high

percentage of male students is a loss of potential revenue.

Reversing the negative male retention trend requires a structured approach that

must be managed for both short term and long term gains in graduation rate. The

competitive educational environment dictates that as service organizations, institutions

must make an effort to be service oriented, creating an image that will impact market

share, student selection, donation dollars, and research funding (Jurow, 2006). The

competition among higher education institutions requires all institutions (including

HBCUs) to become more adaptable and flexible to the changing market. This will attract

the best and brightest students (American Council of Education, 2004). Deming (1993)

suggested that within a competitive economy, customers have more choices than in the

28

past. With this flexibility they become more focused on organizations that meet their

expectations. Leville (2006) concurred that students understand market forces and seek

quality education at competitive pricing.

A United Negro College Fund (2004) study found that 50% of African American

graduating high school seniors and 50% of parents consider HBCUs as the college of

choice, with the percentage rising to 64% with parents with four-year degrees or higher.

Black high school students choose HBCUs based on “word- of- mouth” about HBCUs

from friends and family members. They were more interested in the availability of

extracurricular activities and the schools’ social reputation more than other ethnic groups

(Foley, 1996).

The brightest black students now have more choices and are recruited by the top

predominately white institutions even though historically black colleges and universities

are viable options (UNCF, 2004). Better-prepared students are attracted to institutions

with good academic reputations. If the HBCUs, however, do not improve their academic

reputation, they will not be able to attract the best students (Goenner & Snaith, 2004).

There are also federal concerns for HBCUs to improve their degree completion

rates (USDE, 2006). Federal intervention through the United States Department of

Education program for the promotion of educational excellence for all Americans has

established accountability expectations for HBCUs (USDE, 2006). With federal

assistance, there are demands for historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) to

become more accountable for performance indicators, such as retention (USDE, 2006).

29

Quality objectives established for HBCUs are monitored annually through the

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and measured against long-

term progress up to 2009. Some established targets are to increase persistence beyond

first year enrollment, increase graduation rates, increase in six year graduation

percentages, increase graduation rates for students in engineering, physical and biological

sciences, and improve the efficiency of institutional services to students. These indicators

allow families and students to rank colleges based on expert recommendations from the

Department of Education (NCES, 2002). This increase flow of information will allow

students and parents to make better educated choices when selecting a college (Miller,

2006).

In addition to the federal regulations, Cohen (1999) states that accreditation is

another force affecting institutional conduct. The Secretary of Education Commission on

Higher Education (2006) recommends that accreditation agencies be held accountable for

assuring performance issues, ensure performance questions are answered, and show

consistency and transparency. According to Schray (2006), accreditation agencies must

respond to the demands of the higher education environment, specifically due to the

growing demand for accountability, reduction in funding, rising costs, the increasing need

for efficiency, and expanding distance learning.

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS, 2002) issued a

position statement warning institutions that they will be held accountable for programs

and services irrespective of any reduction in funding. SACS in its manual, The Principles

of Accreditation: Foundation of Quality Enhancement, states that they, "Expect

30

institutions to dedicate themselves to enhancing the quality of their programs and services

within the context of their missions, resources, and capacities, be engaged in an ongoing

program of improvement and be able to demonstrate how well it fulfills its stated

mission...document quality and effectiveness in all its major aspects" (SACS, 2006).

Other accreditation agencies such as The Higher Learning Commission of the North

Central Association have asked institutions to implement the Academic Quality

Improvement Process (AQIP). This provides institutions with a quality improvement

approach to accreditation, utilizing self-assessment, strategic planning, and quality

methods (Dew, 2004).

Strategies for Student Retention

Many students’ decision to withdraw from an institution lies in the

communication and interactive networks established between student and university

personnel. If these networks are working successfully, they determine whether a student

leaves or graduates from the institution (Hermonowiz, 2004). Many at risk students fail to

utilize university provided resources. They fail to contact members of the institution

when experiencing difficulties (Boyer 1987; Cuseo, 2003).

In the interest of retention, colleges and universities must take a proactive stance

by contacting at-risk students, offering them specific services, and working closely with

the students to develop their confidence skills and interest in learning (Friedlander, 1980;

Boyer, 1987). Kuh and Associates (2005) argues that student success in an institution can

be increased by establishing performance standards for students, staff and faculty. Also,

institutions must assess and reformulate programs to meet students’ expectations. They

31

should develop early warning systems ensuring that first-year students are assigned

mentors, and have a sustainable advising program that promotes four-year completion.

The institution should reward faculty for performance, create activities that encourage a

climate in which all students will interact with their peers. Programs must address

students’ academic needs, help students cope with studying, and other non-academic

issues. Institutions must promote student relationships with faculty and administrative

staff (Kuh and Associates, 2005).

According to Lotowski et al. (2004) retention is best predicted by combining

social and economic factors, high school GPA and non-economic factors. The findings

from his research suggest that the best approach for designing retention programs is to

move beyond the traditional method of identifying at risk students by GPA alone. The

best strategy involves students with adequate GPAs, who fail to develop social skill and

self confidence.

Similar studies on the academic success of students at an HBCU in Maryland

conducted by Peters (2007) supports the ACT findings. Peters (2007) found that high

school GPA was a stronger in predicting academic success than Scholastic Aptitude Test

Score (SAT). The study found significant differences in graduation rates for students with

low SAT scores and the overall institutional graduation rates. There were also significant

differences between graduation rates, students with low high school GPA and overall

graduation rates. The study also found that females had higher graduation rates for the

cohort studied and students with low SAT scores can persist to graduation, if there is a

strategy of utilizing academic and non-academic intervention tools.

32

Levitz and Noel (2000) argued that the first step in identifying and managing

marginally involved students is to identify the student’s academic motivation, examine

their transition to the institutional environment, and examine the type of help the student

may need to succeed. The second step is to design individual student programs through

proper advising, with trained and knowledgeable advisors. The third step is to deliver a

program that is unique to the individual student’s needs.

Campus Support

Strauss (2004) in a study of the adaptation of students to their environment found

that the strongest impact on institutional commitment derives from student experiences.

The study suggested that it is the collective balance of students’ academic and social

experiences that exert heavy influence on their commitment to the institution and is more

important than all variables.

Positive experiences from post-college and pre-college variables prevent

freshmen from becoming involved in many negative psychosocial activities (DeBerad et

al., 2004). According to DeBerad et al. (2004), universities have to look at the

psychosocial predictors of freshmen academic achievement and retention. They must

examine psychological variables such as smoking, drinking, health, social support, and

maladaptive coping strategies, because they are related to retention. Colleges must be

proactive in identifying potential at-risk students during their freshman year and provide

the necessary corrective and intervention strategies (DeBerad et al., 2004).

In contrast, Alderman (2004) argues that student performance comes from effort

and ability, which is influenced by motivation, the expectations for future performance,

33

and subsequent actions taken by the student. Burton et al. (2006) argues that the student’s

success in school occurs when they make a deliberate effort to participate in the learning

process such as studying, doing homework, and completing work assignments. If the

students are experiencing difficulties, they must make an attempt to seek help (Burton et

al., 2006).

Persistence through graduation is related positively to voluntarily seeking help

(Shwitzer, 1993) As voluntary use of counseling increases, the academic performance of

second year at risk students who participated in brief mandatory counseling improved

dramatically (Shwitzer, 1993). Therefore, academic advising and support services at

HBCUs, should be implemented early in a student’s career. This will create the avenue

for students at risk to be identified early so that measures can be taken to enhance the

students’ academic and social integration (McDaniel & Graham, 2001).

In a study of how student services such as enrollment management, financial aid

service, residential life, extracurricular activities, counseling services and academic

support services impact freshmen at two private HBCU’s, Hutto & Fenwick (2002) found

a significant statistical relationship between the students’ perception of the quality of

services available to them and their retention. Hutto & Fenwick concluded that privately

funded institutions could correct their retention issues by coming to terms with the issues

with their services, and strengthen the quality of the student services they provide.

Programs with cognitive approaches such as mentoring, tutoring, academic

enrichment, group study sessions and increased communication enhances persistence

(Peters, 2005). Non-cognitive factors such as time management, advising, social support,

34

team building, and leadership skills also impact persistence. Leadership and character

development activities showed the best promise as a strategy for improving African

American male retention (Peters, 2005).

In Tinto’s (1993) reflection on the principles of effective retention, he argued that

successful retention programs should be committed to the students they serve. They must

be committed to becoming student centered and must engage staff, faculty and students to

ensure that the students become involved in the institution and have the skills necessary

to survive the academic vigor. Tinto (1993) states that the institution must commit itself

to develop support services and learning communities, so that the students can become

fully integrated into the fabric of institution.

This observation was supported by Mustiful (2005) in a study of African

American male persistence at four-year private and public HBCUs. Mistiful (2005) found

that African American males persist because of individuals such as parents and

grandparents who provided financial and emotional support. The study also found that

high school personnel and institutional factors such as financial aid, support faculty of

and peers, involvement in campus activities and mentors at the institution all contribute to

African American male persistence.

Flowers (2006) in a study on the effects of attending a two year versus a four year

institution on African American males’ academic and social integration during the first

year, found that African American males attending four year colleges are more likely to

report higher levels of academic and social integration than their two year counterparts.

35

Flowers (2006) concluded that two year institutions should make more effort to develop

strategies to improve African American males’ academic and social integration.

A nurturing college environment is a primary expectation of African American

students, and there must be a fit between the college environment and African American

students’ expectations (Key, 2003). Key also found that there must be a fit between the

student’s expectations and that of the institution when establishing a quality-nurturing

environment to improve graduation rates. Similar sentiments are shared by Tinto (2000)

who argued that students’ goals must be aligned with the institution, and there must

sufficient interaction for the student to feel that their goals are in unison with the

institution.

In an ACT study on what works in retention for four-year private colleges, by

Habley and McClanahan (2004) found that 64.1 % of the institution studied had an

individual who coordinated retention, 59.4% had retention improvement goals from first

to second year, and 38.7% had goals to improve retention to degree completion. The

respondents linked attrition to student characteristics mainly, inadequate financial

resources, lack of motivation, lack of coping skill, and lack of educational goals. The

retention programs that were found to have the greatest contribution to retention were

first year programs, academic advising, and learning support. The retention programs that

had the greatest impact were freshman seminars, advising with selected student groups

and internships respectively. Habley and McClanahan (2004) also found that private four

year institutions that have high retention and graduation rates practiced integrating

academic advising with first year programs, had an academic advising center, faculty

36

mentoring, summer bridge programs, honors programs, increased advising staff, learning

communities, had peer mentoring and writing labs, and had non credited extended writing

labs.

Campus Services

Jones-Giles (2004) in a study of retention at HBCUs found other factors that were

negatively associated with student retention at HBCUs. The factors included academic

boredom and uncertainty of what to study, transition and adjustment problems, unrealistic

expectations of college, lack of satisfactory academic advising, and competitive college

entrance scores. In addition, there were college retention programs, unexpected high

workload in freshman college courses, and academic under preparedness. Jones-Giles

(2004) also found that a lack of competitive high school backgrounds, parental

involvement, personal and emotional factors, financial problems and a lack of self-

confidence and self esteem impacts retention (Jones-Giles, 2004).

Advising, tutoring, mentoring, counseling, remedial courses, schedule adjustment

and financial aid respectively, are considered the most effective strategies for correcting

many of the issues faced by African American students (Harleston, 2004). A similar

study by Jones-Giles (2004) found that the most effective polices in improving retention

at HBCUs were screening potential dropouts for prevention and intervention, providing

academic counseling to potential dropouts, and implementing student and faculty

feedback to identify students who are likely to withdraw. Jones-Giles also found that

establishing policies at the departmental level to handle retention issues and using

37

information from exit interviews to identify factors that impact the student withdrawal

improves student retention.

Glen (2004) in an analysis of factors that contribute to Texas community colleges,

graduating black males found that institutions in the top quartile had specific strategies

for retention success. Glen found that the best strategies include freshman only advising,

offering credits for orientation courses, and tutorial programs, and monitoring at risk

groups with specific retention plans. The study also found that the strategies that had the

greatest impact on African American male retention were identifying at-risk students

from the time of enrollment, and monitoring their academic performance. According to

Tinto (2000), for institutional retention programs to impact the sophomore, junior and

senior years, a learning community approach must be utilized. This creates a program

that has continued success throughout the students' academic career.

Faculty

African American students persist due to experiences and interactions that occur

in the school environment (Latiker, 2003). Frequent daily interactions with students in

and out of the classroom impact the student’s decision to stay or leave school (Tinto,

1993; Chenoweth 1999). At risk students who persist cite someone on the faculty who

has made positive contact with them outside of the classroom (Tinto, 1997).

In a study by Schaeffer et al. (2003), both students and faculty were asked to rank

the 10 qualities of effective teachers. The qualities are: (1) approachability, (2) creativity

and interesting, (3) flexibility and open mindedness, (4) knowledgeable, (5) realistic

expectations, (6) fairness, and (7) respectful, were all traits identified as the top seven.

38

The major difference between teacher and students responses were that faculty placed

more emphasis on teaching techniques, while students placed more emphasis on the

student teacher relationship.

Students felt it was important to have someone who is engaged in their learning

experience, care about their future, and have a vested interest in their education,

irrespective of race (Henderson, Henderson & Hudson, 2002). Hickson (2002) in his

study at an HBCU found that students did not care about the race of the faculty member

as long as the following attributes are met: the faculty member cared about their future,

had an interest in their education, cared about their aspirations, and cared about their

goals outside of the classroom.

Thomas and Giles (1994) argued that faculty should be convinced that retention is

important and that the problems associated with student retention are a part of the

experience. Efforts must be organized to assists faculty and students in understanding

how to receive and take advantage of the available assistance (Thomas, & Gile, 1994).

Spardely (2001) argued that faculty must be challenged to be not only facilitators of

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

males. According to Padilla (2000), the perception of the extent that a program shares in

the institutional mission is an important component in faculty participation in any

program to succeed. Faculty who buy into the institutional mission reported greater

satisfaction than those who consider the mission irrelevant (Padilla, 2000).

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

faculty members if the activities have some rewards. Pascarella and Terenzini stated that

39

faculty cannot be expected to be involved in out-of-class student activities if they are

recruited for research and their research brings them more prominence than involvement

with undergraduate students (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Incentives should be offered

to faculty and staff to participate in the process, and programs developed with faculty

input. This creates a level of openness, so that views from various areas of institutional

life are heard (Tinto, 1993).

Academic Advising

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

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

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

growth experiences for students. They enable students to identify their strengths and learn

how to use them. Academic advising is the only structured activity on campuses where

students have the opportunity to have one-on-one interaction with a concerned

representative of the institution (Tinto, 1993). Thus, academic advising is one of the

major social and academic factors that determine whether a student leaves or stays (Tinto,

1993).

Wyckoff (1999) concurs that one of the key factors that contribute to poor

advising is lack of consensus about the role and function of the advisors. Johnson (1997)

stated that advising is not an isolated process; retention efforts must be focused on all

components of the university. Johnson (1997) postulates that colleges and universities

must build an effective and strong connection between advising programs and the various

components on campus. Credle and Dean (1991) concluded that when the students enter

40

college, the advisor, staff, and faculty must establish rapport with them, by helping them

work within the organizational structure, and assist with careers development.

Furr and Elling (2002) stated that faculty members must have information about

the student. If they know the student information, they can develop profiles to help

students monitor and balance their various activities. They can interact on the student’s

behalf with financial aid, provide information for counselors, residential hall advisors,

and other faculty members before the student’s problems become insurmountable.

Graunke and Woosley (2005), in a study examining how sophomore experiences

and attitudes affect their experiences, found that commitment to academic major and

faculty interactions were significant predators of grade point average. Graunke &

Woosley found that in order to improve sophomore academic performance, institutions

should focus on helping sophomores declare their majors early, design student activities

to promote involvement, which in turn will improve the student’s interactions with

faculty (Graunke & Woosley, 2005). Focusing advising and academic services along with

providing information early in the college experience will help enhance the student’s

academic and social integration (McCaha & Fitzpatrick, 2005).

When comparing student satisfaction with academic advising, Lowe (2000) found

that the frequency of contact with faculty greatly predicts students’ satisfaction. Lowe

indicated that academic advising varies greatly across colleges, between student groups,

and there are differences in the perception of advising based on the student status. In

order to bring about a more effective advising system, Lowe & Michael (2000)

recommends that advising should be recognized as a high priority activity, should be

41

intrusive, and advisors should be trained. Advising responsibilities must be defined,

materials must be improved and made more widely available. There must be

accountability, evaluations must be conducted and reward measures instituted.

Mentors and Role Models

Successful teachers of African American males have commonly helped students

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

their students respect (Ross, 1998). Ross (1998) found that African American males

graduate because of nurturing by a significant person, and by bonding to a person who

provides a strong sense of direction, guidance and responsibility. This person may be

someone from church, family, or the institution the student attends who is caring to the

student.

Mentoring is a valuable structured tool that is used to promote interaction between

African American men and faculty (LaVant, Tiggs, & Anderson, 1997). From their

observation of mentoring programs in higher education institutions throughout the

country, LaVant, Tiggs, & Anderson (1997) recommends that successful mentoring

programs for African American men should have a commitment of the institution’s

executive leadership to have a formal mentoring program. A university committee should

be established to identify African American males for mentorship upon admission.

Mentors who are passionate should be selected, and there must be coordination between

the mentoring program and enrollment management to identify potential participants.

Training should be provided for faculty, and the program must engage the university’s

external partners. There must be an ongoing unbiased analysis and evaluation of the

42

program. Recommendations from the evaluations must be implemented to improve the

programs’ effectiveness (LaVant, Tiggs & Anderson, 1997).

Financial Aid

Receiving assistance with financial aid increases the odds of departure by 89%

(Ishitani & Snider, 2004). Financial aid does have a positive effect on first-year and

fourth-year retention (Ishitani, 2006), but the attrition rate varies based on the amount,

timing and composition of the loan (Ishitani & DesJardins, 2003). The percentage of

money burrowed for higher education is highest for students who attend private

institutions while those students that attend two-year colleges are less likely to borrow.

More than 20% of those who borrow drop out and are faced with the life long financial

difficulties (Gladieux & Perna, 2005).

According to Mihok (2005), the composition of financial aid packages are related

to the persistence of first generation, low- income sophomore students. Low- income

students who receive need based loans at the beginning of their enrollment are not as

likely to persist as those who received aid in the latter years of college. Increasing the

funding or frontloading grants in earlier years increases the likelihood of students

persisting to the third, fourth, and fifth years. This is because most students tend to drop

out in the first two years due to the fear of debt accumulation (Mihok, 2005).

Allgood (2005) in a study of financial aid knowledge of students at HBCUs found

that students knew that they needed financial aid to persist. They had minimal knowledge

of the financial aid process and were late planners even though they completed the

application themselves. Allgood (2005) also found that the level of financial aid

43

knowledge increased based on residency. Out of state students had more knowledge of

the financial aid process than instate students, but they both had the same knowledge of

the process. Both instate and out of state students were most dissatisfied with the length

of the financial aid process, the office staff, and the quality of service received.

Important information must be provided to each student and their parents early in

the high school years (Sallie Mae Fund, 2004). Parents and students would like to receive

from teachers and counselors their financial aid information as early as junior high school

from teachers and counselors. The financial aid information is best targeted in venues

such as churches, civic areas, and libraries and should be placed in areas that are very

visible to parents and students. Every effort should be made to have the students

informed of the financial aid process as early as possible (Sallie Mae Fund, 2004).

Institutions, therefore, must focus on policies that better prepare students for

undergraduate and post-secondary education, and helping students understand the

financial options available. This can be achieved through early training, strengthening the

on campus financial aid system, and by providing resources such as on campus work

study and grants to at-risk students (Gladieux & Perna, 2005).

Data and Assessment

The students’ views on all aspects of their higher education experiences are

considered a part of quality monitoring at universities and are canvassed by institutions as

part of their marketing strategies (Hill, Laurie & MacGregor, 2003). Students perceive

the quality of faculty and the student support systems as determinants of quality in higher

education (Hill, Laurie & MacGregor, 2003). The organization that consistently measures

44

the opinion of its customers will have products and services that are needed by the

customer and will be able to provide numerical evidence to substantiate the quality of

their products (Holcomb, 1993; Czarnecki, 1999). Measurement and analysis of critical

performance data are important to performance management. Data is critical for

performance review, process improvement, and implementation of similar programs in

other departments or institutions. It is through data analysis that performance can be

tracked (Balding Criteria, 2006).

Kaye and Anderson (1999) reported that the elements of best practice in a

continuous improving business mechanism should be implemented to regularly examine

the level of satisfaction of the stakeholders by identifying and monitoring their needs.

Self-assessment will measure the current performance of the institution or department

against a business model that can be used as the basis for continuous improvement (Kaye

& Anderson, 1999).

Institutions should collect information prior to the student entering the university

and throughout their college experience. The institution should have information from the

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

experiences, program activities, financial needs, and intention to work through structured

climate surveys. The student assessment data should also include student satisfaction with

campus climate, instructional effectiveness, financial aid effectiveness, registration

effectiveness, campus safety and security, and academic advising effectiveness (Tinto,

1993; Low, 1999; Furr and Elling, 2002).

45

The data system must monitor the established parameters, focus on the goals and

provide diagnostic information to policymakers and the public (National Commission on

Accountability in Higher Education, 2005). Through focused self-assessment, the

institution can look at the areas of strengths and weaknesses. Institutions can examine the

areas for improvement, look at what they are doing great, and celebrate it while

improving on the areas of weaknesses. From this information a plan can be developed

among institutional leaders, staff, and faculty to improve the weak areas (Dew & Nering,

2004).

Siedman (2005) stated that colleges should amass information on potential at-risk

students before they enter and should use that database to create a profile on each student.

They should work with the students from high school to enrollment, determine the

students’ profile, examine the difficulties they may experience, and plan an intervention

strategy to match the students’ needs (Siedman, 2005). Early intervention and monitoring

of the student will ensure that the student is monitored and taught competent social and

academic skills for their college survival. This intervention should continue throughout

the students’ college career to affect the desired change (Siedman, 2005). According to

Tinto (1993), it is the responsibility of the institution to assist students who enroll and

monitor the students’ progress in the classroom throughout the student academic career.

Higher education generates an enormous amount of data through instruments and

surveys, but the system is weak and requires improvement in data utilization (National

Commission on Accountability in Higher Education, 2005). Edirisooriya (2002) argued

that institutions lose time and money, become inefficient, miscalculate priorities,

46

underutilize resources, and create archaic situation in handling students’ information. In

order to improve information flow in the short-term, institutions must put in place a plan

that integrates available data through technology, training, and an institutionalize reward

system (Edirisooriya, 2002). To improve performance and accountability a better data

system is needed to provide information on the experiences of students and faculty so that

better decisions can be made with regard to measurable goals.

The Role of Institutional Management in Continuous Quality Environment

The role of the manager is to provide the strategic vision and direction for the

organization’s future, and set clear definable objectives. The manager must create

strategies to meet the objectives, implement, evaluate, and make modifications to meet

business needs (Thompson & Strickland, 1999).

Kaye and Anderson (1998) in a study of senior managers who had responsible for

quality in business organizations found the following good practices for continuous

improvement in the business sector: the evidence of senior management leadership,

customer, and stakeholder focus. The study found that there must be a culture of

continuous improvement, constant dialogue, visible employee involvement, self-

assessment to improve performance and processes, constant feedback, and measurement.

The study also found that weak organizations did not identify critical success factors, did

not understand continuous improvement and quality, and did not integrate sufficiently

continuous improvement practices (Kaye and Anderson, 1998).

Kaye and Anderson (1998) recommend that senior managers learn how to

integrate improvement activities within the organization and drive the business process

47

by keeping the business focused on the stakeholder’s requirements. Managers should

create a culture of continuous improvement, focus on the processes, measure

performance, interpret the results, and use the results to drive business improvements

(Kaye & Anderson, 1999).

Imai (1986) concurred that managers are responsible for setting the mission and

goals of the organization, establish the structure to support the objectives, plan for

production, monitor the task, lead the efforts, and monitoring the results of managers’

attitudes. Managers’ support impacts the success of any quality program and are

responsible for the training and commitment of members in the organization to the

quality process (Imai, 1986).

Quality is the responsibility of top management who must continuously, improve

the process by asking questions related to the current state of the organization. They must

know what the projected growth is, what strategy must be used to get there, and have

established measurable yardsticks (Deming, 2000 & Seymour, 1996). The manager’s role

in a quality environment is not for process description, but to improve the process

educating the constituents about the process, creating a plan for improvement at the

various stages (Seymour, 1993). In transforming the organization, the manager must

understand all the component of the system, articulate his vision for transformation,

maintain interdepartmental dialogue to reduce conflict and resistance, garnish group

support, and maintain two-way communication with the constituent (Deming, 2000).

According to Deming (1993) businesses operate in a system that works

independently in achieving organizational goals. The components must work together to

48

accomplish the objectives, through communication among members of the system.

Deming believed that in any system there must be established goals. The goals must be

shared by all employees and must be effectively managed to ensure institutional success

(Lamberg, 1999). Deming (1986) further suggested that people work in the system, but it

is the manager’s responsibility to monitor and refine the system to facilitate continuous

improvement.

Seymour (1996) reiterates that quality principles can be applied to any system, but

the value will only occur in an environment that fosters continuous learning, is goal

orientated, and has a measurable processes for planning, execution, and evaluation

(Seymour, 1996). Changing the system, however can be political, but can have legitimacy

if the right people are assembled, and allowed access to data in making decisions (Dew &

Nehring, 2004). The data collection and analysis must be scientific, can be substantiated

by theory, must create an accurate description of the process, and be the basis from which

decisions are made (Dew & Nehring, 2004).

Continuous Quality Improvement in Higher Education

Rice and Taylor (2003) in a progress report on continuous improvement strategies

in higher education found that continuous improvement principles are applied with

success in higher education for process improvement, continuous improvement,

institutional effectiveness, student learning assessment, and preparation for accreditation.

This occurs through the use of Baldridge methodology, state quality award presentation,

balance score card, and quality base cost accounting. The respondents identified learning

49

assessment, institutional effectiveness, and accreditation as the most widely used, while

process improvement was the most pursued at the departmental level.

Rice and Taylor (2003) argued that by adopting continuous improvement

strategies, institutions significantly increased the quality of student services, employee

efficiency, and institutional performances. However, for success to occur, senior

administrators must support strategic campus plan, insists on cross departmental

integration, and a supportive campus culture (Paris, 2007). Negative factors such as

faulty and staff attitudes, lack of resources, protection of turf, complexity of the

university system and decentralization, can negate any improvement in institutional

efficiencies (Paris, 2007).

Birnbaum (1999) in a study of 469 colleges and universities, who have adopted

CQI methods, found that CQI use was low, and used only by approximately by 13% of

the institutions studied. Birnbaum (2000) argued that many of the quality improvement

practices adopted by higher education are fads that are not adopted by the entire

organization. According Birnbaum (2000), many of these fads are short lived and are part

of the growing management practices that are being sold to higher education by industry.

These fades Birnbaum argues appear to initiate changes, but they do not make

measurable changes and are difficult to assess.

In a study of directors in department of financial services, facilities management,

auxiliary services and higher education in Michigan, Thalner (2005) found that most had

attempted CQI and continued to use CQI. The study found that the primary methods

reported were CQI teams and benchmarking. The groups surveyed were driven to pursue

50

CQI due to demand from reduced budgetary allocations as well as, the need to improve

efficiencies, competitiveness and services. When using CQI, the respondents observed

improved service, quicker responses, improved efficiencies, increased financial returns,

and improved communication across departmental lines (Thalner, 2005).

Similar studies by Zhiming (1998) on effective practices of continuous

improvement in United States’ colleges and universities in mainly administrative areas,

found that commitment of top management, quality planning, teamwork, expanding CQI

to involve faculty and staff, are some of the best practices necessary for CQI success.

Other factors important for student success were: involvement of partners, a dedicated

quality staff, training for implementers, the use of flow chart and benchmarking, union

support, a reward and recognition system, established assessment standards, and good

communication to the constituency.

Zhiming (1998) provided the following “don’ts” of CQI based on the data and

field studies: for beginning implementers, they must not leave middle managers out of the

training; they must use world class benchmarking and they must not launch CQI

initiatives institution wide unless they are ready for it. He also emphasized that

experienced implementers should not leave the unions and academic areas out of the CQI

processes. Finally, the quality of student services and student’s satisfaction should be

emphasized instead of dollars saved.

Leadership in Continuous Quality Improvement

As HBCUs become more accountable to their external and internal stakeholders,

it becomes imperative for administrators to engage in studying their organizations, focus

51

on the institution’s culture, how the culture impacts the student groups they serve, and

implement the necessary actions for program success (Strauss & Volkwein, 2004).

Administrators must concentrate their efforts and policies on understanding and

improving the student’s experiences in order to strengthen each student integration,

involvement and commitment (Strauss and Volkwein, 2004).

Administrators can help students’ retention by allocating appropriate funding for

Academic Support Services, providing physical facilities, and managing the multicultural

environment (Lau, 2003). The president of the institution must lead the way, by playing a

major role in promoting the process, and by making the necessary changes in policies,

procedures and systems (Spandauer, 1992). It is through this change that the quality

improvement process will provide the vehicle to make the cultural changes necessary to

change the educational system (Spandauer, 1992).

In a study of the leadership at the University of Wisconsin- Stout after winning

the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in Education, Seanor (2004) found that

there are ten leadership guidelines for successful implementation. Seanor (2004) found

that a leader must; (1) develop a mission and vision that is widely understood and

believed by every organizational member, (2) develop a leadership process with

stakeholders, (3) find the means necessary to motivate and spark participation in the

leadership process, (4) have a visible passionate leader, (5) hire or develop inspiring

leaders, (6) develop effective methods for communication to the stakeholders, (7) make

data driven decision, (8) organize relationship building activities with leaders on a

52

consistent basis,(9) frequently recognize outstanding individuals; and (10) develop a long

term college-wide commitment to adopting the Baldrige process.

For administrators to develop a CQI policy they must be knowledgeable about the

CQI process and senior administrators must have an accurate perception of how viable

total quality management is at their institution (McMillian, 1999). McMillian (1999) in a

study of senior administrators perception of total quality management (TQM) found that

senior administrators have moderately to high knowledge of TQM, have moderately to

high knowledge of relevant issues related to higher education, but they had low

participation rates in TQM. McMillian (1998) also found that TQM participation rates

were highest at two-year community colleges, four-year public colleges, two-year

technical colleges, and four-year private colleges. McMillan (1999) concluded that

senior administrators must have an accurate perception of how viable total quality

management is at their institution. In order to do so, data must be presented on how the

institutional efficiency can be improved with TQM and how the total institutional system

must be connected to maximize its benefits. The ability to monitor and assess the process

within the institution determines the success of implementation. The end result will be

waste and cost reduction, top management support, improvement in the institutional

process, and streamlined operation (McMillan, 1998).

CQI in higher education depends on sustained leadership over time (Benson,

2000). Leadership affected CQI through changes in leadership, frustration with the CQI

process, a lack of support, waning support over time, not dealing with resistors in senior

administrative capacity, lack of trust, and poor communication. Benson found that not

53

dealing with resisters in senior administrative causes loss of support for CQI initiatives.

Benson (2000) also found that when an institution tries to address its management issues

without addressing resistors in upper leadership in the institution, CQI effectiveness is

diminished.

Klocinski (1999) in evaluating the success and failure in the implementation of

TQM management principles in the administration of selected institutions in higher

education discounted that higher education had similar reasons as corporations that

resulted in the success and failure of TQM. The findings revealed that successful

implementers had leadership support from the top managers who gave support and had a

vision which emphasized teamwork. Perceived unsuccessful implementers, on the other

hand, showed a lack of commitment from leadership, management, faculty and staff, and

had poor communication throughout the institution. The study also revealed that TQM

consumes a lot of time, has incremental results, and the implementation process is a

continuous.

The key to creating changes in a continuous environment is to create an

environment where members are comfortable with change (Freed, 1998). Freed found

that leadership is critical when creating a culture in which the members see the need for

change and its impact. Freed (1998) also found that institutions shifted their thinking and

culture to understand their systems, developed new systems, and improved existing

systems. These institutions understand the connection between the systems and the

people (Freed, 1998).

54

A similar study by Robinson (2005) who observed the effective model for

leadership in community colleges that are committed to continuous quality improvement

found a number of leadership traits and behaviors necessary for CQI implementation. The

traits were: CQI requires long term commitment (10-15 years), a committed president

that empowers and embraces two way communications, the development of cross

functional teams, a relationship oriented leadership, and shared leadership.

Quality Improvement Methods Used in Higher Education

Zhiming (1998) said that the success of CQI in higher education is dependent on

having quality models that are well developed and validated. Dew and Nearing (2004)

argued that an institution should compare itself to management systems such as the

Malcolm Baldbrige Quality Award for Education and the Academic Quality

Improvement (AQIP) project. This is necessary for establishing institutional efficiency

standards (Dew & Nearing, 2004).

Baldrige Criteria for Educational Excellence

According to the Baldrige National Quality Program (2006), the core values of the

Baldrige Criteria used in business is their adaptability to all organizations, including

education. The Baldrige Criteria transfers the business excellence concepts to excellence

in education. The education performance excellence goals criterion was designed to

improve organizational performance management. Baldrige Criteria integrates the

management system for education through: (a) leadership of the organization, (b)

embracing strategic planning and implementation, (c) maintaining relationships with

students, (b) stakeholder and market, (e) management of data and analysis, (f) faculty and

55

staff participation in designing and management. The results are then interpreted through

key organizational performance areas such as student learning, stakeholders’ outcome,

budgetary, financial and market outcomes, faculty and staff outcomes, organizational

effectiveness outcomes, and leadership and social responsibility outcomes (Baldrige

National Quality Program, 2006).

The principles of the Baldrige process can be applied to schools since it creates a

medium for departments to improve their operational processes (Arcaro, 1995). The

Baldrige Criteria are the ideal point for measurement of a program. They are specific in

focus and offer a better understanding of established goals and needs of the organization

(Czarneki, 1999). According to Dew (2006), institutions that win the Baldrige award

utilize surveys, longitudinal studies such as focus groups, and need assessment to

examine their results. As a result, leaders obtain data on faulty, students, and other

stakeholders, specifically on the impression of the institution. From this data they can

make decisions for continuous improvement. Arcaro (1995) argues that the Baldridge

assessment process establishes a culture that is student focused, increases cooperation,

efficiency and productivity, improves teamwork, improves outcomes for staff and

students, and recognizes stakeholder’s contribution.

Clark (1999) in a report on putting ISO 9000 and the Baldrige Quality Criteria to

work in public education reported that together both methods meet the requirements for

developing a high performance educational system. They allow the institutions to deliver

high standards to its students, provide measurable data for continuous quality, and

provide data for systematic reform. They also have a single methodology for appraisal

56

and improvement, and improve efficiency through bottom up planning and system

organization (Clark, 1999).

Similar findings were found in a report on the strategies used by states for meeting

high standards in education using the principle of Deming and Baldrige criteria by Barth

et al. (2000). Barth et al. (2000) stated that when these tools are applied to education it

creates performance improvement. These systems according to Barth et al. (2000) create

consistent and comprehensive gains in student achievement including, increase in

discipline issues, greater employee satisfaction, reduced administrative cost, and

increased support from parents and the community.

Winn (2003) in evaluating readiness factors that influence five higher education

institutions that use the Baldrige criteria as a continuous quality process, found that it

should not be the fist step for CQI. Its implementation depended on a well articulated

vision by the leader who gave it full attention, allocating necessary resources, and

becoming more proficient in the use of data for decision making. Winn concluded that

Baldrige is effective in long term strategic improvement. The method creates positive

institutional climate, but its future will depends on the action of the regional accreditation

boards (Winn, 2003).

The Baldrige Assessment encourages the studied institution to take action (Wallace,

2001). The assessment provides a road map for continuous improvement, by validating

key performance areas and opening avenues to find areas for improvement (Wallace,

2001). Faulkner (2002) concurred in a study on the use of Baldrige for accreditation in

community colleges that the Baldrige Criteria is a viable option for accreditation in

57

comparison to traditional methods. However, institutions had challenges meeting and

applying the criteria. Faulkner (2002) concluded that incorporating the Baldrige allows

the institution to gather and make data driven decisions, and be better aligned the plans

with research and accreditation.

Benchmarking

Benchmarking can be used in combination with the Baldrige criteria to identify areas

in the organization that need improvement (Dew & Nehring, 2005). Continuous

improvement through Benchmarking involves finding the best in the service profession,

studying what make them successful, and adopting the best practices suited for a

department. (American Society of Quality, 2006). It allows the organization managers to

understand performance gaps, measure and identify performance deficiencies, and

control the performance of the organization (Czarneki, 1999).

There are two major reasons for benchmarking; the first is assessment in which

the organization can compare its performance in specific areas to its competitors and the

second is innovation. Comparisons with other organizations create new ideas and insights

into developing programs and services that improves the institution (Doris, Kelly and

Trainer, 2004). According to Dew and Nehring (2004), Benchmarking provides academic

leaders with structured methods to examine and apply strategies used successfully in

other departments and colleges.

Before an organization considers Benchmarking, the instruction should ensure

that it is conducive for benchmarking, prepared for benchmarking efforts and be

knowlegable about how to use the information. (Burrill & Ledolter, 1999). It is

58

recommended that institutions follow the following steps: conduct an investigation,

document best practices for planning, determine performance gaps, project future

performance levels, communicate benchmarking findings, review performance goals,

develop an action plan, implement the plan, monitor the progress, and evaluate the

benchmarks (Camp, 1995; Burrill & Ledolter, 1999).

Mosier and Schwarmueller (2002) in examining Benchmarking in higher education

found that it is an effective model to improve services and programs in student affairs and

housing. Benchmarking discovers best practices, determines what practices are working

most efficiently, and creates an understanding of what practices are effective. The

students benefit by having a better education, because the systems and scenarios are

delivered more efficiently (Mosier & Schwarmueller, 2002).

Strategic Planning

Organizational planning is a continuous process that includes and anticipates

changes in instruction, hiring, staff and faculty development, changes in technology,

demographics, market trends, and the needs and expectations of the faculty and staff. It

examines opportunities for partnerships and the availability of resources to meet the

institution’s objectives (Baldrige, 2006). According to Rose and Kirk (2001), planning

should be viewed as a method of achieving institutional objectives. It examines the

internal and external factors that impact decisions, institutional policies and constraints,

and the identification and coordination of expertise. A clearly articulated vision and how

the decisions are related to other organizational goals is a benefit of strategic planning

(Rose and Kirk, 2001). The planning process allows the institution or department to make

59

decisions based on its current and projected needs, and communicate both the vision and

strategy to its constituents (Rowley & Herman, 1997).

According to Brown & Allen (2002), HBCUs must identify and prepare for

factors such as the demographic changes on the campuses, technology, and cost. These

factors, if not addressed, have financial implications when trying to provide quality

education to African American students. Brown & Allen (2002) argued that HBCU

administrators must adopt business strategies and make decisions utilizing strategic

planning, and financial management strategies to ensure the institution’s success.

Aloi (2005) in a study of best practices linking assessment and planning found

that the best practices for using data for strategic planning were having a focused

mission, maintaining a culture of continuous improvement, having individuals who have

planning and assessment knowledge, having planning as a part of management

operations and structure, as well as having performance expectations. Faculty, staff,

students and alumni should be included in the planning process, reports should be

published, data driven decisions should be made, and the results communicate to the

constituency. Aloi concluded that the best practice for an institution is to develop a

strategic planning process that utilizes data from assessments.

Welsh, Nunez & Petrosko (2006) found in a study examining the similarities and

differences in faculty and administrators’ perspective on strategic planning found that the

depth of implementation of strategic planning, the institutional decision making process

and the extent of state reforms are critical for faculty and administration support for

strategic planning activities. Cowhan (2005) stressed the importance of staff and faculty

60

participation by arguing that for the institution to effectively carry out its mission, the

faculty and staff must be provided with the opportunity to have early involvement in the

planning process, and participate in strategy formulation, and any future discussions. This

is important because it steers the institution in a clear direction, and focuses on the

constituencies’ demands.

Balance Scorecard The Balance Scorecard is an information-based tool that establishes strategic

objectives into performance measures (Reuben, 1999). It is a tool that translates strategies

into action through the development of performance goals measures. The Balance

Scorecard communicates these strategies to the university and departmental units (Niven,

2003). It has a set of performance measures that form the basis for management and

accountability. The established set of measures allows the institution to have specific

organizational and individual unit benchmarks (Doerful & Reuben, 2002).

Many corporate organizations have indicators that measure key elements in their

strategic direction. The scorecards provide numerical feedback to the institution about

how their services are perceived by the constituency. Scorecards provide the university

the opportunity to develop a report card that can be compared at the departmental levels,

administrative units, and across the institution (Dew and Nearing, 2004).

In a study by the Education Commission of the States on performance reporting

indicators used by 10 states, Ewell (1994) establishes the following indicators:

number of students enrolled by race and gender, student characteristics and ability levels,

number of student exiting the institution, student ethnicity, student retention by ethnicity,

61

degree completion, rates of persistence, graduation percentages, remediation, transfers

from two-year colleges and transfer to other colleges, faculty student ratio, choice of

programs, professional exams passed and job placement data. In education, the

indicators are available to the public and used internally and externally at the local as

well as the state level to monitor and allocate resources (Ewell, 1994).

The Balance Scorecard provides managers with information to drive their future

expectations in order to maintain their competitive advantage. It translates the

organization’s mission, measures performance against progress and expected growth,

enables the institution to tract the result, revise their strategy, and build a foundation for

future growth. It also creates a systematic approach to have feedback and enables an

organization to align itself and focus on implementing long term strategies (Kaplan &

Norton, 1996).

According to Kaplan and Norton (1996), critical business processes that can be

accomplished using the scorecard are clarifying and updating visions and strategies by

translating business unit objectives into strategic objectives, and communicating and

linking strategic objectives and measures via newsletters, bulleting boards, etc.

throughout the organization. Other proposed scorecards are planning, set targets and

aligning strategic objectives for measures three to five years out to transform the

organizational goals, enhancing feedback and learning, and improving the capability of

the organization.

62

Summary of the Literature Review

Continuous quality improvement entails a very systematic approach to solving

customers’ problems. It is measurable and market forces dictate its implementation.

Continuous Quality Improvement places emphasis on serving customers, solving their

problems, reorganizing and improving the process required for a quality service (Ralph &

Douglas, 1994). To meet and improve the quality process Deming (1986) promoted the

plan, do, check, and act cycle, which formed the foundation for continuously improving

the processes in higher education. The benefits obtained from using continuous quality

improvement processes are: better service to the customer, a culture of openness and

reward, reduction in waste, open communication and streamlined operations.

Student retention is shaped by dissatisfaction with the college experience and

institutions must confront the issue as part of their accountability (Tinto, 1993). African

American male students are a diverse and unique group facing unique socio-economic

problems, which must be addressed for their continued participation in the educational

process at historically black colleges. Their retention is shaped by academic and non-

academic factors such as student preparedness, student responsibility, mentors and role

models, the campus environment, campus services, socialization and integration, faculty

academic advising, and financial aid. These factors must be addressed in order to foster

the student’s academic and social integration within the institution from their freshman

year to graduation (Pascarella, 1985, Cuyjet, 1997; Harper, 2003; Lotowski.et al., 2004;

Jones-Giles, 2004 and DeBerad et al., 2004).

63

Prudent retention strategy is a process requiring an understanding of the causes

that result in student attrition backed by a management philosophy that integrates the

institution’s stakeholders. The foundation is based on understanding the needs of the

customers within the system, utilizing self-assessment and data analysis, designing

student focus programs, and implementing and evaluating the respective programs. The

process requires data to be collected from the student as soon as the institution accepts

them. This allows the institution to develop a profile on the student so that proactive

strategies can be implemented for students at risk (Deming, 1983; Key & Anderson,

1999; Dew & Nering 2004; Seidman, 2005 and Eririsooriya, 2002)

The retention process requires the president’s cabinet to lead the way, providing the

vision, funding, facilities, and creating a culture committed to change through quality

improvement. The literature suggests that it is the role of managers within the system to

improve the process, establish mission and objectives, articulate the vision, and

encourage dialogue across department lines. They are expected to reduce departmental

tension, institute training and development, continuously improve the process that is

causing the problem, monitor and evaluate the progress made. Success in a continuous

quality improvement environment requires sustained management oversight in

monitoring, assessing, and providing a shared vision based on teamwork (Imai 1986;

Seymour 1996; Zhiming 1998; Deming 2000; Rice & Taylor, 2003 and Thalner, 2005).

There is no indication from the literature of widespread use of Continuous Quality

Improvement models at historically black colleges and universities, but research did

indicate that they are becoming the foundation for developing quality programs at

64

departmental and institutional levels at several majority white institutions. Quality

improvement models that are developed, validated, adopted in higher education are the

Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award for Educational Excellence (Clarke 1999; Barthe et al.,

2000; Winn, 2003), Benchmarking (Mosier and Schwarmueller, 2002 and Dew &

Nehring, 2005), Balance Scorecard (Ewell, 1994) and Strategic Planning ( Rose & Kirk

2001; Brown & Allen, 2002; Aloi, 2005). These models are not without problems, but are

successful if they are backed by management commitment and prudent leadership

(Birnbaum, 1999; Benson, 2000; Seanor, 2004).

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the extent of the use of

Continuous Quality Improvement among Academic Support Directors in integrating

retention strategies for African American male students at two-year HBCUs, four-year

public, and four-year private HBCUs. This chapter will describe the research design,

participants, data collection procedures, hypotheses, and data analysis.

The study was quantitative in nature utilizing a descriptive research design.

According to Gay & Airasian (2003), quantitative research is descriptive and outcome

orientated. In addition, it can be duplicated. This study focuses on established theories

and hypotheses, is specific, explains cause and effect relationships among variables, is

unbiased, and objective. Survey research was used to gather information from academic

support directors at HBCUs. Gay & Airasian (2003) emphasized that understanding a

population’s perspective requires the use of a data collection method that is ideal. It

should involve a large population, and provide statistical data that can be analyzed and

interpreted.

66

Participants

The participants of the study were 99 academic support directors from 104

HBCUs representing the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, and the U.S Virgin

Islands for the 2007-2008 academic year. Six HBCUs were not selected to participate in

the study, because they were professional graduate schools or had all female student

populations. The participating institutions represent 49 private HBCUs 38 public four-

year and 11 public two-year HBCUs.

Purposive sampling method was used to select the participants in the study. The

participants were directors who had responsibilities for retention at the respective

HBCUs. According to Gay and Airasian (2003), purposive sampling is ideal, because it

allows the researcher to select the sample based on his knowledge of the population. It

also allows the researcher to personally choose and use all members of the available

population.

The email addresses and phone numbers of the academic support directors were

obtained through their respective institutions’ web page. Whenever the information could

not be ascertained from the institutions’ web page, calls were made to the institutions to

determine the name and title of the appropriate individual. After the name of the

respective Academic Support Directors was ascertained, the researcher called the

respective Vice President for Academic Affairs office to confirm the employment status

and position of the individuals.

67

Instrumentation

The research instrument was a survey developed by the researcher. A section of

Thalner’s (2005) study on the application of Continuous Quality Improvement in higher

education in Michigan was modified and utilized to address the continuous quality

improvement process. Permission was requested and granted by Thalner (2005) to use

her survey instrument (please see Appendix D).

The Survey Monkey software was used to develop the style and format of the

instrument. Email for each director was input into the Survey Monkey software. A cover

letter with the link to the instrument was mailed to each director. Each return instrument

was marked completed or not completed by the software, but was checked by the

researcher to ensure that completed surveys had accepted the terms and conditions.

A web-based format was used for the instrument. According to Schonlau, Fricker,

& Elliott (2002), web-based surveys have the benefit of reducing completion time, and

the overall survey costs. Web based surveys also correct names, addresses problems, and

can resubmit the survey to its intended recipients. According to Schuh, Upcraft and

Associates (2001), the advantages of web-based surveys are the data can be collected in a

user friendly manner, the return rate may be greater and timelier, data collection time is

reduced, anonymity can be managed, the response pool can be expanded, costs can be

reduced, and the instrument can be piloted more easily.

The Survey Monkey software was used to develop the style and format of the

instrument. The first page of the instrument was designed to include the statement of

confidentiality, the terms and conditions of the study, contact information and an option

68

to accept electronically the terms and conditions of the study. The rest of the instruments

were divided into four areas, namely demographic information, retention practices and

policies, the use of Continuous Quality Improvement and administrative support, along

with departmental leadership (see Appendix E). Within the demographic information,

there were two questions on institution classification (i.e. public four-year, private-four

year, and two-year) and the size of the institution. The second section provided

information relating to retention polices and practices. The third section adopted

questions from Thalner’s (2005) survey instrument. The questions investigated the use of

Continuous Quality Improvement in retention departments. The fourth section addressed

administrative support and departmental leadership.

Participants responded to a series of statements requiring Likert-like scales

responses. To score the Likert-like scale each item was associated with a value point with

individual scores ranging from 5 the highest, to 1 for the lowest. The respondents were

asked to respond to question three, seven and eight using strongly disagree to strongly

agree. The respondents were also asked to respond to very important to not very

important for question six and no improvement to significant improvement for question

nine respectively. In addition to the Likert-like scale responses, participants were asked to

answer closed ended questions, and two open ended questions. The responses from the

open ended questions were grouped for analysis. A total of 75 items completed the

instrument.

Four individuals with expertise in higher education and Continuous Quality

Improvement were asked to review the survey for content validity. These individuals

69

were asked to examine the survey and determine if it addressed the research questions,

and if all the sections of the survey met the intended objectives (see Appendix F).

Comments were examined and revisions made as necessary

The survey was reviewed and piloted by 32 randomly selected retention directors,

assistant directors, and senior personnel from retention departments at several HBCUs

and predominately white institutions. The pilot group was asked to complete the survey

and provide feedback on the time and ease of having it completed. The returned surveys

were collected through Survey Monkey and the results tested in the SPSS software.

Likert-scale items were tested for internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha. The mean

of the Cronbach’s Alpha test was 0.77 with a high of 0.86 and a low of 0.071 (see Table

1). Barker, Pistrang & Elloitt (2002) suggested that reliability standards for alpha should

consider .50 as poor, .60 marginally reliable, .70 acceptable, .80 good, .90 and higher

unacceptable. As evidenced in table 1 the items tested were within the reliability

guidelines recommended by Barker, Pistrang & Elloitt (2002).

Table 1

Results of Cronbach’s Analysis

Question Number of items Cronbach’s Alpha

Q5 10 0.75

Q11 12 0.71

Q12 7 0.75 Q13 9 0.86 Q14 6 0.80

70

Table 1 (cont’t)

Results of Cronbach’s Analysis

Question Number of items Cronbach’s Alpha

Q15 6 0.86 Q16 7 0.73 Q17 8 0.73

Data Collection Procedures

Before the survey was distributed, a research protocol was submitted to the

Tennessee State University Institutional Review Board Human Subject Committee for

review and approval. The research protocol was approved on November 11, 2007 (see

Appendix G). A file was then created to include all academic support directors along with

their email addresses and contact phone numbers. The file was imported into Survey

Monkey and added to a distribution list.

An email was sent to each Academic Support Director soliciting their

participation in the study. The letter outlined the purpose and objectives of the study as

well as instructions on how to find and complete the instrument. Embedded in each letter

was a survey monkey web linked to the instrument (see Appendix A).

The web surveys were linked to a tracking system that was directed to the data

collection program. To maintain anonymity the participants’ names were not required on

the instruments. However, each instrument was tracked by a survey tracking system

which provided information on responders and non-responders. The return rate was not

71

acceptable after three weeks and a follow up call was made to each non responder. This

was followed by an email reminder (see Appendix B). The process was repeated in week

six. A fourth and final email reminder was sent to those individuals who did not respond

by week eight (see Appendix C)

Data Analysis

The responses from the survey were compiled in the Survey Monkey and

exported into Excel. The data was reviewed to ensure that the data sets were imported

correctly. The data was coded, imported from Excel, and transferred into Statistical

Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), 16.0. The open-ended questions were grouped in the

Survey Monkey software. The responses were added to a file and exported to Microsoft

word. Responses with common themes were grouped and compared with the rest of the

data.

Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the mean and standard deviation.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to test hypothesis one through four and six

through 10. A t-test was performed to test the hypothesis five. The level of significance

was tested at an alpha of .05. According to Gay & Airasian (2003), the means in ANOVA

are less likely to be identical, so it is easier to decide whether the difference was due to

sampling error or the difference was significant.

72

Null Hypotheses

The following hypotheses were developed from the questions and the review of

the literature.

Hypothesis 1

There is no statistically significant difference between the retention programs,

policies, and practices for African American male students at the various HBCUs.

Hypothesis 2

There is no statistically significant difference between the number of years

practicing CQI by academic support directors among two year HBCUs, four-year

public, and four-year private HBCUs.

Hypothesis 3

There is no statistically significant difference between the benefits achieved from

CQI implementation in retention management for African American male

students among the various HBCUs.

Hypothesis 4

There is no statistically significant difference between the obstacles faced by

academic directors in implementing CQI at the various HBCUs.

Hypothesis 5

There is no statistically significant difference between practitioners and non

practitioners of CQI when using data for making decisions on African American

male student retention.

73

Hypothesis 6

There is no statistically significant difference between the use of data by

Academic Support Directors in making decisions for African American male

student retention and the various colleges.

Hypothesis 7

There is no statistically significant difference between the extent of senior

administrative support for African American male student retention and various

HBCUs.

Hypothesis 8

There is no statistically significant difference between the perception of senior

leadership support for CQI and the time practicing CQI at the various HBCUs.

Hypothesis 9

There is no statistically significant difference between the provision of leadership

in campus retention initiatives for African American male students and the

various HBCUs.

Hypothesis 10

There is no significant difference between the provision of leadership in campus

retention initiatives and the years practicing CQI.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the extent of the use of

Continuous Quality Improvement among Academic Support Directors in integrating

retention strategies for African American male students at two-year HBCUs, four-year

public, and four-year private HBCUs. An objective of the study was to identify the

impact of institutional policies and practices on retention practices for African American

male students and evaluate the level of awareness and practice of quality improvement

practices among academic support directors at different HBCUs. Another objective of the

study was to also examine the perception of the impact of Continuous Quality

Improvement strategies on retention management of African American males and

examine the role of leadership in the practice of CQI in retention management.

In analyzing the data collected, it was found that two or 3.6% of the institutions

had an enrollment of over 15,000 students; eight (14.4%) had an enrollment range of

10,000-15,000; and eight or (14.4%) had an enrollment of 5,000-10,000. Twenty six

(46.4%) of the institutions had an enrollment between 1,000-5,000 students, and 12 or

(21.4%) had an enrollment under 1,000 (see table 2).

75

Table 2

Responses by College Size

Institution Enrollment Responses Response %

Over 15,000 2 3.6

10,000-15000 8 14.3

5,000-10,000 8 14.3

1,000-5,000 26 46.4

Under 1,000 12 21.4 Total 56 100%

Of the 99 surveys sent, 57 (55.44%) were returned. One survey was rejected

because the respondent did not accept the terms and conditions. All 56 usable surveys

were used in the analysis, but only 47 (82.5%) of the respondents completed the survey in

its entirety. There were 22 (39.3%) responses from private four-year colleges and

universities, 24 (42.9%) were from public four-year colleges and universities and 10

(17.9%) were from two- year colleges (see Table 3).

Table 3

Table of Colleges by Classification

School classification Number of returned surveys Percentage of returned surveys

Private four-year 22 39.2%

Public four- year 24 42.9%

Two-year 10 17.9% Total 56 100

76

Findings on the Research Questions

Question 1

What percentage of HBCUs have a center designated for student retention?

Of the respondents surveyed 33 (60.0%) indicated that they had a designated retention

department compared to 22 (38.9%) who did not.

Question 2

What percentage of HBCUs have support services designed to target traditional and non-

traditional African American male populations?

Fourteen (25.9%) of the respondents have programs that target traditional African

American males, 31 (57.4%) have programs for both non-traditional and traditional

African American males, and 10 (18.5%) had programs for neither non- traditional nor

traditional African American male students.

Question 3

How effective are the current retention programs and policies in meeting the needs of

African American male students at historically black colleges and universities (i.e.

student preparedness, faculty, mentors and role models, academic advising, financial aid,

campus environment and services and socialization and integration)?

The respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed to

statements relating to campus programs, policies and practices at their respective

institutions. The rankings of the mean scores are shown in table four. In order of rank,

the respondents agreed that information on campus services is communicated to African

American male students throughout the year (M = 3.91). The respondents also agreed that

77

African American male students are provided with adequate information about the

financial aid process (M = 3.9). The respondents ranked two variables the lowest: at risk

African American male students frequently participate in mentorship programs (M=2.63),

and academic advisors are trained on issues impacting African American male students

(M=2.62) (see Table 4). Overall, the mean score was 3.33 which indicated that Academic

Support Directors where undecided on whether their current retention programs were

effective at meeting the needs of African American male students.

Table 4

The Effectiveness of Retention Programs at Meeting the Needs of African American Male Students Factors Mean SD

Information on campus services are 3.91 .996 communicated to African American males throughout the school year. African American males are provided 3.90 1.053 with adequate information on the financial aid process. African American men’s academic 3.78 .945 needs are met by services provided by the institution. There are programs that integrate African 3.57 1.08 American male students into the institution. African American men’s social needs are 3.41 1.09 met by the services provide by the institution. Retention programs at your institution 3.26 1.05 positively impact African American male student retention. 5 = Strongly Agree, 4 =Agree, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Disagree, 1= Strongly Disagree

78

Table 4 (continued) The Effectiveness of Retention Programs in Meeting the Needs of African American Male Students Factors Mean SD

Academic advisement focuses on early 3.25 1.12 proactive engagement of African American men. There are avenues for contact outside 3.11 1.14 of the classroom between at risk African American male students and faculty. At risk African American males 2.63 1.14 frequently participate in mentorship programs. Academic advisors of African American 2.62 1.08 males are trained on issues impacting African American male students. 5 = Strongly Agree, 4 =Agree, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Disagree, 1= Strongly Disagree

Question 4

To what extent are academic support directors aware of and adopting quality

improvement models to their department?

Participants were asked the following questions;

(a) Are you aware of quality improvement practices in higher education?

(b) Is your department currently practicing continuous quality improvement? and

(c) How many years have you being practicing CQI?

The results revealed that 35 (66%) of the respondents were aware of CQI practices in

higher education compared to 18 (35%) who were not aware. In addition, 35 (67.3%)

79

indicated that they are currently practicing CQI compared to 17 (32.7%) who are not. The

respondents indicated that 13 (46.4%) have practiced CQI for over five years, four

(14.3%) for three to five years, and 11 (39.3%) for 1-3 years.

Question 5

What Continuous Quality Improvement models are used if any to manage retention

outcomes?

The findings showed that 25 (58.1%) of the respondents used only one method of

CQI, while 21 (41.9%) used multiple methods. As indicated in table five, the CQI method

used by retention directors was strategic management 30 (69.8%), followed by

Benchmarking 17 (39.5%), Process Management 15 (34.9%), Balance Scorecard (14)

32.6%, Baldrige Criteria 6 (14%) and other methods 4 (9.3%) respectively (see Table 5).

Table 5

CQI Method Practiced by Retention Directors

Method Response Count Response %

Strategic Planning 30 69.8

Benchmarking 17 39.5

Process Management 15 34.9 Balance Scorecard 14 32.6 Baldridge Criteria for 6 14.0 Education Excellence Others 4 9.3

80

Question 6

What factors are driving Academic Support Directors to continuously improve the

retention of African American male students?

The study asked the respondents to indicate the extent of the importance placed

on the reasons driving the institution to improve African American male retention. As

shown in Table six, the factors were ranked from highest to lowest. The results showed

that the socio-economic implications of the African American community (M=4.49) and

the management strategy of the institution (M=4.15) were the two most important factors

driving HBCUs to improve African American male retention. In contrast, pressure from

alumni (M=2.88) and online for profit institutions (M=2.62) were the least important

factors driving the HBCUs, to improve African American male retention.

Table 6

Factors Driving the Support for CQI in the Retention of African American Male Student

Factors Mean SD The socio-economic implications of the 4.49 0.771 African American community Management strategy of the institution’s president 4.15 0.963 African American male performance in comparison to other ethnic groups 4.10 1.091 The need to improve the quality of the system that caters to underperforming male students 4.15 0.91 Student’s complaints and expectations 4.07 0.383 Accreditation Expectations 3.93 0.959 ________________________________________________________________________

81

Table 6 (continued) Factors Driving the Support for CQI in the Retention of African American Males

Factors Mean SD

The need to improve campus services catering to African American males. 3.85 0.823 The need for revenue improvement 3.83 0.946 The damage to the institution reputation 3.56 1.074 Response to budgetary reductions 3.55 1.176 Pressure from Alumni 2.88 1.14 Pressure from online and for profit institutions 2.62 1.102 5 = Very Important, 4 = Important, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Not Important, 1 = Not Very Important

Question 7 What obstacles were encountered by implementers in the application of CQI to retention

practices?

Respondents were asked to indicate their perception of the obstacles encountered

in their department while implementing Continuous Quality Improvement methods.

Table seven displays the rankings of the responses. The respondents rated the statements:

the lack of financial resources (M=3.95), turf protection (M=3.71) and lack of

accountability (M=3.61) the highest. Lack of feedback and support (M=3.24), faculty

resistance (M=3.16) and lack of leadership support were ranked the lowest (see Table 7).

82

Table 7 Obstacles Faced by Retention Directors Implementing CQI in Retention Management Factors Mean SD Lack of financial resources 3.95 1.23 Turf Protection 3.71 0.956 Lack of accountability 3.61 1.05 Poor communication of initiatives 3.53 1.059 among departments Institution culture 3.50 1.109 Lack of support between departments 3.44 1.25 Lack of openness 3.24 1.125 Lack of feedback and support 3.24 1.10 Faculty Resistance 3.16 1.285 Lack of leadership support 2.68 1.27 5 = Strongly Agree, 4 =Agree, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly Disagree

To strengthen question seven the respondents were asked open ended questions to

comment on applying CQI models to retention management at their institution. The

comments can be seen in Appendix H.

Question 8

What factors contributed to non implementers not pursuing CQI in retention practices

for African American males?

83

The respondents were asked to determine the extent they perceived the following

factors listed in table eight contributed to the department not pursing Continuous Quality

Improvement methods for retention management. As indicated in table eight, the

participants rated lack of training for administrators, staff, and faculty (M=4.57), lack of

knowledge and understanding of continuous improvement by administrators (M=4.29)

the highest. Factors such as: there was no financial resources for CQI (M=3.86) and it is

not required by the department (M=3.71) were ranked lowest by the respondents.

Table 8

Factors Driving Non Implementers from Supporting CQI in Retention Management for African American Male Students

Factors Mean SD

Lack of training for administrators 4.57 0 .535 staff and faculty Lack of knowledge and understanding of 4.29 0.756 continuous improvement by administrators. Lack of staff support for CQI improvement 4.0 1.00 Resistance to continuous quality 4.0 0.816 improvement by administrators There was no financial resources for CQI 3.86 1.345 It is not required by the department 3.71 0.756 _______________________________________________________________________ 5 = Strongly Agree, 4 =Agree, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly Disagree

Question 9

What are the benefits gained from the application of CQ I methods?

84

The respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which the following benefits

were achieved from CQI implementation at their institution. Table 9 displays the ranking

of the benefits gained from the implementation of CQI from highest to lowest. The

respondents rated collaboration with other departments (M=3.77), communication

between university partners and other departments (M=3.53) and intrusive advising

(M=3.49) as the top benefits gained. The participants rated academic performance

(M=3.21) and cohort graduation rates for African American males (M=2.95) as the least

benefits gained. .

Table 9

Benefits Derived from Implementing CQI in Retention Management for African American Male Students

Factors Mean SD

Collaboration with other departments 3.77 1.16 Communication between university partners and other departments 3.53 1.109 Intrusive advising 3.49 1.14 Response to academic complaints 3.38 0.990 The use of retention services by African 3.28 1.169 American males Academic performance 3.21 0.923 Cohort graduation rates for African 2.95 0.972 African American males 5 = Significant Improvement, 4 = Moderate Improvement, 3 = Neutral, 2 = Marginal Improvement, 5 = No Improvement

85

Results of Hypotheses Testing Hypothesis 1

There is no statistically significant difference between the retention programs,

policies, and practices for African American male students at the various HBCUs.

An Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test was conducted to determine if there were

statistical differences between the institution retention programs, policies and practices

for African Americans male students and the type of college they attend. The hypothesis

was tested at 0.05 level of significance. Table 10 illustrates that the variables associated

with academic and social support had an overall p value greater than 0.05 level of

significance. The null hypothesis was retained. The results indicate that the retention

programs, policies and practices, for African American males do not differ based on

whether the college is a two year, four year private or four year public HBCU.

Table 10

ANOVA Results of Significant Differences Between Program Policies and Practices for African American Male Students and the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Academic needs are Between Groups 1.10 2 0.550 0.607 0.549 met by services Within Groups 46.23 51 0.907 provided Total 47.33 53 Social needs are Between Groups 0 .53 2 0.264 0.216 0.807 met by services Within Groups 62.51 51 1.23 provided Total 63.03 53 ________________________________________________________________________

86

Table 10 (continued)

ANOVA Results for Program, Policies and Practices

Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Retention programs Between Groups 1.98 2 0.990 0.838 0.438 integrate African within Groups 59.03 50 1.18 male Total 61.02 Information on Between Groups 1.60 2 0.80 0.803 0.454 campus services Within Groups 50.93 51 0.99 are communicated Total 52.54 53 Advisement focuses Between Groups 0.80 2 0.401 0.615 0.736 on proactive Within Groups 65.0 50 1.30 engagement Total 65.8 52 Advisors are trained Between Groups 1.45 2 0.725 0.615 0.545 on issues impacting Within Groups 59.0 50 1.18 African American Total 60.45 52 men There are avenues Between Groups 0 .69 2 0.347 0.261 0.772 for out of class Within Groups 66.6 50 1.18 contact Total 67.32 52 Males are provided Between Groups 3.68 2 1.84 1.71 0.192 with adequate Within Groups 52.8 49 1.07 financial aid Total 56.51 51 information At risk males Between Groups 0.74 2 0.371 0.352 0.705 participate in Within Groups 53.8 51 1.06 mentorship Total 54.59 53 _______________________________________________________________________

87

Hypothesis 2

There is no statistically significant difference between the number of years practicing

CQI by academic support directors among two year HBCUs, four-year public, and four-

year private HBCUs.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether there was a

statistically significant difference between the years practicing CQI by academic directors

and the types of HBCUs. The data was tested at 0.05 level of significance. The results

shown in Table 11 reveal no significant differences F (2, 25) = .772, p > .05. Since p >.05

the null hypothesis is retained. The results indicated that the numbers of years practicing

CQI by retention directors is not impacted by the various college types.

Table 11 ANOVA Results for Significant Differences Between Years of Practice and the Various Colleges ______________________________________________________________________ Years with CQI Sum of Squares df Means of Squares F p Between Groups 1.39 2 0.694 0.77 0.47 Within Groups 22.5 25 0.899 Total 23.6 27 ______________________________________________________________________ Hypothesis 3

There is no significant statistical difference between the benefits achieved from CQI

implementation in retention management for African American males among the various

HBCUs.

An Analysis of Variance was generated to determine whether there is statistically

significant difference between the benefits achieved from CQI implementation in

88

retention management for African American males among the various of HBCUs. The

hypothesis was tested at 0.05 level of significance. As observed in Table 12, the overall

finding revealed p > 0.05 for all the variables tested. The results revealed no significant

difference between the benefits achieved from CQI implementation in retention

management for African American males among the different types of HBCU. The null

hypothesis was retained. The results indicate that the benefits derived from implementing

CQI in retention management is not based on whether the institution is a two-year, four-

year public, and two-year private HBCU.

Table 12

Differences Between Benefits Achieved from Implementing CQI in the Retention of African American Male students Among the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Increase cohort Between Groups 2.32 2 1.19 1.28 0.30 graduation rates Within Groups 33.52 36 0.93 Total 35.90 38 The use of retention Between Groups 3.0 2 1.50 1.10 0.34 services by African Within Groups 48.90 36 1.36 American males Totals 51.90 Academic performance Between Groups 4.07 2 2.04 2.59 0.09 Within Groups 28.28 36 0.79 Totals 32.26 38 Response to student Between Groups 5.05 2 2.52 2.82 0.73 complaints Within Groups 32.18 36 0.90 Total 37.23 38 Intrusive advising Between Groups 2.35 2 1.17 0.90 0.42 Within Groups 32.18 36 1.32 Total 37.23 _______________________________________________________________________

89

Table 12 (continued)

Differences Between Benefits Achieved from Implementing CQI in the Retention of African American Males Among the Various Colleges

Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Collaboration with Between Groups 2.89 2 1.44 1.08 0.35 other departments Within Groups 48.04 36 1.33 Total 50.9 38 Communication Between Groups 5.54 2 2.78 2.43 0.10 between university Within Groups 39.92 35 1.14 partners Total 45.74 37 Hypothesis 4 There is no statistically significant difference between the obstacles faced by retention

directors implementing CQI at the various HBCUs.

An ANOVA was generated to determine whether there is statistically

significance difference between the obstacles faced by academic directors implementing

CQI at the various HBCUs. The hypothesis was tested at 0.05 level of significance.

Investigation of the data shows an overall result of p > 0.05 (see table 13). The factors

tested are not statistically significant. The hypothesis was retained. The findings suggest

that the obstacles faced by Academic Support Directors are similar among two year

colleges, four year public and four year private colleges.

90

Table 13 ANOVA Results of the Differences in Obstacles Faced Implementing CQI and the Various Colleges

Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Lack of leadership Between Groups 3.85 2 1.92 1.20 0.315 support Within Groups 56.36 35 1.61 Total 60.21 37 Lack of support between Between Groups 0.04 2 0.020 0.012 0.99 departments Within Groups 59.55 36 1.65 Total 59.6 38 Poor communication Between Groups 1.28 2 0.64 0.56 0.58 of initiatives Within Groups 40.20 35 1.15 Total 41.47 Faculty and Staff Between Groups 6.14 2 3.07 1.96 0.16 resistance Within Groups 54.9 35 1.57 Total 61.1 37 Lack of openness in the Between Groups 0.48 2 0.241 0.182 0.84 System Within Groups 46.40 37 1.32 Total 46.70 37 Communication Between Groups 5.54 2 2.78 2.43 0.10 between university Within Groups 39.92 35 1.10 partners Total 45.74 37 Turf protection Between Groups 0.215 2 0.107 0.112 0.89 Within Group 33.60 35 0.96 Total 33.81 37 Rigid institution Between Groups 2.47 2 1.23 1.00 0.38 culture Within Groups 43.03 35 1.23 Total 45.50 37 Lack of financial Between Groups 7.91 2 3.94 2.84 0.07 Resources Within Groups 47.98 35 1.37 Total 44.89 37 ________________________________________________________________________

91

Table 13 (continued) ANOVA Results of the Differences in Obstacles Face Implementing CQI and the Various College Type Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Lack of continuous Between Groups 2.81 2 1.41 1.17 0.32 support & feedback Within Groups 42.05 35 1.20 Total 44.86 37 Lack of accountability Between Groups 3.06 2 1.53 1.41 0.26 in other parts of the Within Groups 38.02 35 1.07 system Total 41.08 37

Hypothesis 5

There is no statistically significant difference between practitioners and non practitioners

of CQI when using data for decision making on African American male student retention.

An independent sample t -test was conducted to determine whether there was a

significant statistical difference between the practitioners and non-practitioners of CQI

when using data to make decisions relating to African American male students’ retention.

The hypothesis was tested at a .05 level of significance. Generally speaking the result of

the t-test showed p > 0.05 for all the factors studied (see table 14). The null hypothesis

was retained. The data can be interrupted to mean that there was no statistically

significant difference between practitioners and non- practitioners of CQI in using data in

decision relating to African American male student retention.

92

Table 14

T-test Comparing Practitioners and Non-Practitioners when using of Data for Decision Making when Managing African American Male Student Retention Factors T df p

Data are collected on effectiveness -1.21 37 0.236 on institutional effectiveness Data are compared to leading -1.81 36 0.857 departments at other institution Retention data are communicated 1.92 37 0.06 to institution constituents Data are used for early intervention 1.20 36 0.238 and monitoring of student at risk Plan for African American 1.81 36 0.245 male student improvement Are made base on data analysis Data files are created for 0.87 36 0.91 At risk African American males after admission _______________________________________________________________________

Hypothesis 6

There is no statistically significant difference between the use of data by Academic

Support Directors in making decisions for African American male student retention and

the various colleges.

An ANOVA was conducted to test the level of significance between data used to

decision making with regards to African male retention and the college types. The

hypothesis was tested at a 0.05 level of significance. As shown in Table 15, the overall

93

result is p> 0.05. Therefore, the hypothesis was retained. This can be interpreted to mean

that there is no statistically significant difference between the use of data in decision

making by retention directors for African American male student’s retention among two-

year, four-year private, and four-year HBCU’s.

Table15

ANOVA Results for Differences in the Use of Data for Decision Making and the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Data are collected on Between Groups 2.86 2 1.43 1.45 0.25 effectiveness Within Groups 35.50 36 0.99 on institutional Total 38.36 38 effectiveness Data are compared to Between Groups 1.82 2 0.91 0.55 0.58 leading departments at Within Groups 57.55 35 1.64 other institution Total 59.37 37 Retention data are Between Groups 1.95 2 0.98 0.79 0.46 communicated to institution Within Groups 44.7 36 1.24 constituents Total 46.7 38 Data are used for early Between Groups 3.57 2 1.78 1.32 0.28 intervention and monitoring Within Groups 47.19 35 1.34 of student at risk Total 50.76 37 Plan for African American Between Groups 3.91 2 1.96 1.37 0.27 male student improvement Within Groups 49.80 35 1.43 are made base on data Total 53.7 37 1.78 analysis Data files are created for Between Groups 2.44 2 1.22 0.68 0.51 at risk African American Within Groups 62.4 35 1.78 males after admission Total 64.84 37 ________________________________________________________________________

94

Hypothesis 7

There is no statistically significant difference between the extent of senior administrative

support for African American male student retention and the various college types.

An Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted to determine if there is

statistically significant difference between the extent of senior administrative support for

African American male retention and the college type. The hypothesis was tested at 0.05

level of significance. As demonstrated in Table 16, the results indicate that p > 0.05. The

null hypothesis was retained. This indicates that there is no statistically significant

difference between the extent of senior administrative support for African American male

student retention and the various colleges.

Table 16

ANOVA Results of the Differences between the Extent of Senior Administrative Support and the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Facilities and financial Between Groups 2.76 2 2.64 1.18 0.32 resources are allocated to Within Groups 36.21 30 1.09 CQI effort for African Total 38.97 33 American males Support to integrate CQI Between Groups 3.44 2 1.72 1.79 0.84 initiatives as of institutional Within Groups 28.79 30 0.96 strategy Total 32.42 32 There is visible presidential Between Groups 4.25 2 2.12 1.92 0.16 support for African Within Groups 34.36 31 1.11 American male initiatives Total 38.61 33 Resistance Between Groups 0.26 2 1.31 0.32 0.51 at the president and vice Within Groups 12.8 30 0.40 presidential level Total 12.54 32

95

Table 16 (continued) ANOVA Results of the Differences between the Extent of Senior Administrative Support and the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

There is institutional reward Between Groups 2.08 2 1.04 0.71 0.50 and recognition for Within Groups 43.98 30 0.51 improvement in retention Total 46.06 32 Departments are held Between Groups 3.01 2 1.53 1.18 0.32 accountable for retention Within Groups 38.83 30 1.28 performance of African Total 41.88 32 American males. Administrators are Between Groups 2.18 3 1.01 1.17 knowledgeable of CQI Within Groups 28.06 30 0.94 principles in higher Total 30.24 32 education ____________________________________________________________________

Hypothesis 8

There is no statistically significant difference between the perception of senior leadership

support for CQI and the time practicing CQI.

An ANOVA was generated to determine that significant exits difference between

the perception of senior leadership support for CQI and the time practicing CQI. The

ANOVA test was administered at the .05 level of significance. The results of the

ANOVA test showed in general p > 0.05 (see Table 17). The null hypothesis was

retained. The results suggest the perception of senior director’s support for CQI do not

vary based on the length of time practicing CQI.

96

Table 17

ANOVA Results of the Differences in the Perception of Senior Leadership Support for CQI and the Time Practicing CQI Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Facilities and financial Between Groups 5.42 2 2.71 2.90 0.85 Resources are allocated to Within Groups 15 16 0.94 CQI effort for African Total 20.42 18 American males Support to integrate CQI Between Groups 0.56 2 0.28 0.30 0.74 initiatives as of institutional Within Groups 13.88 15 0.93 strategy Total 14.44 17 There is visible presidential Between Groups 0.03 2 1.34 1.0 0.91 Support for African Within Groups 21.41 16 1.34 American male initiatives Total 21.68 18 Resistance to support African Between Groups 0.30 2 0.01 0.04 0.96 at the president and vice Within Groups 5.97 15 0.40 presidential level Total 6.0 17 There is institutional reward Between Groups 0.04 2 0.02 0.02 0.98 and recognition for Within Groups 21.73 15 1.45 improvement in retention Total 21.78 17 Departments are held Between Groups 1.07 2 0.54 0.36 0.71 accountable for retention Within Groups 22.54 15 1.50 performance of African Total 23.61 17 American males. Administrators are Between Groups 0.02 2 0.008 0.1 0.45 knowledgeable of CQI Within Groups 19.59 15 1.31 principles in higher Total 19.61 17 education

97

Hypothesis 9

There is no significant difference between the provision of leadership in campus retention

initiatives for African American males and the various colleges.

An ANOVA was conducted to determine whether there is a significant difference

between the provision of leadership in campus retention initiatives and the college type.

The ANOVA was administered at 0.05 level of significance (see Table 18). The result

revealed that p>.05. The hypothesis was retained. The findings suggest that there is no

statistically significant difference in the provision of leadership by Academic Support

Directors in campus retention initiatives for African American male students at the

various colleges.

Table 18

ANOVA Results Comparing the Differences Between the Provision of Leadership in Campus Retention and the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Having a major influence Between Groups 5.31 2 2.66 2.44 0.10 on policy decisions relating Within Groups 34.85 32 1.09 to African American males Total 40.17 34 Draw senior administrators Between Groups 6.29 2 0.61 6.78 0.42 to issues relating to African Within Groups 14.85 32 0.67 American male Total 21.14 34 Retention activities and Between Groups 1.22 2 0.61 0.91 0.41 success are communicated Within Groups 21.52 32 0.67 from your department Total 22.74 34 _______________________________________________________________________

98

Table 18 (continued)

ANOVA Results Comparing the Differences Between the Provision of Leadership in Campus Retention and the Various Colleges Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Retention is initiatives Between Groups 5.08 2 2.54 2.50 0.10 articulated across Within Groups 32.46 32 1.01 departmental lines Total 32.34 34 Able to attract grants Between Groups 2.61 2 1.30 0.99 0.38 and external support Within Groups 39.6 30 1.32 Total 42.2 32 There is constant dialogue Between Groups 6.86 2 3.43 2.88 0.07 with administrators relating Within Groups 38.11 32 1.19 to African American male Total 44.97 Staff is motivated to deliver Between Groups 0.36 2 0.18 0.21 0.81 quality services to African Within Groups 27.18 32 0.85 American male Total 27.54 Major proponent of changes Between Groups 4.89 2 2.45 2.16 0.13 for campus services for Within Groups 36.25 32 1.13 African American males Total 41.15

Hypothesis 10

There is no significant difference between the provision of leadership in campus retention

initiatives and the years of practicing CQI.

An ANOVA was conducted to determine whether there was significant difference

between the provision of leadership in campus retention initiatives and the years of

practicing CQI. The hypothesis was tested at the 0.05 level of significance. The overall

results revealed p>0.05 (see Table 19). The null hypothesis was retained. The finding

99

suggests that the provision of campus leadership for African American males students

retention do not differ based on the years practicing CQI.

Table 19

ANOVA Results Comparing the Differences Between the Provision of Leadership in Campus Retention Initiatives and the Years Practicing CQI Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Having a major influence Between Groups 0.73 2 0.36 0.24 0.79 on policy decisions relating Within Groups 26.22 17 1.54 to African American males Total 26.95 19 Draw senior administrators Between Groups 2.44 2 0.12 0.18 0.84 to issues relating to African Within Groups 11.57 17 0.68 American male Total 11.80 19 Retention activities and Between Groups 1.49 2 0.75 0.18 0.84 success are communicated Within Groups 15.06 17 0.89 from your department Total 16.55 19 Retention is initiatives Between Groups 0.07 2 0.04 0.03 0.10 articulated across Within Groups 32.46 17 0.89 departmental lines Total 22.95 19 Able to attract grants Between Groups 4.02 2 2.02 1.50 0.26 and external support Within Groups 20.26 15 1.35 Total 24.28 17 There is constant dialogue Between Groups 1.77 2 0.88 0.64 0.54 with administrators relating Within Groups 23.4 17 1.38 to African American male Total 25.2 19 Staff is motivated to deliver Between Groups 0.94 2 0.47 0.42 0.66 quality services to African Within Groups 19.06 17 1.12 American male Total 20.00 _______________________________________________________________________

100

Table 19 (continued)

ANOVA Results Comparing the Differences Between the Provision of Leadership in Campus Retention Initiatives and the Years Practicing CQI Factors Sources SS df Mean Square F p

Major proponent of changes Between Groups 0.10 2 0.05 0.04 0.96 for campus services for Within Groups 20.1 17 1.18 African American males Total 20 __________________________________________________________________

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

The retention of African American male students at HBCUs have become a

national concern. On an average only 34% of all African American males who enter

HBCUs graduate within six years (NCES, 2003). These low retention rates impact the

reputation of the institutions and have long term financial implications for the African

American males who fail to matriculate from these institutions.

African American male student retention at any institution is shaped by academic

and non-academic factors encountered before and after they enter the institution. The

students’ progress towards graduation is impacted by their satisfaction with interactions

they have with members of the institution (Tinto, 1993). Historically Black Colleges and

Universities leadership have begun to understand the issues affecting African American

male retention. They have become proactive in planning and implementing programs to

engage students, empowering the stakeholders by addressing African American male

students’ academic and social interactions within the institution.

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the extent of the use of

Continuous Quality Improvement among Academic Support Directors in integrating

retention strategies for African American male students at two-year HBCUs, four-year

public, and four-year private. Continuous Quality Improvement is embedded in the

Deming philosophy that focuses on developing a management system that is customer

102

focused, data driven and utilizes performance indicators to assess progress (Deming,

1983).

A quantitative study was done with 99 Academic Support Directors from 99

HBCUs. The study was based on nine research questions and 10 hypotheses. A web

based survey was utilized. Fifty seven (55.44%) of the surveys were returned. The data

were coded and analyzed utilizing the Statistical Program for Social Sciences (SPSS)

version 16.0. The hypotheses were tested using ANOVA and an independent sample t-

test. The hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance.

Summary of the Findings

The returned sample distribution was as follows: 22 (39.3%) from private four-

year colleges and universities; 24 (42.9%) from public four-year colleges; and university

and 10 (17.9%) were from two-year colleges.

The results from the research questions were:

1. Thirty three (60%) of the HBCU studied had a designated retention department.

2. Thirty one (57.4%) of the HBCUs studied targeted of both traditional and non-

traditional African American male students only, 31 (25.9%) had programs

targeting traditional students and 10 (18.5%) had programs targeting neither

traditional nor non-traditional students.

3. The respondents agree that campus services are communicated to African male

students throughout the year, but where undecided on whether their current retention

programs were effective at meeting the needs of African American male students.

103

4. Thirty five (66%) of the respondents were aware of Continuous Quality

Improvement practices and 35 (67.3%) were currently practicing CQI. Thirteen (46.4%)

of the practitioners practiced CQI for over five years, four (14.3 %) for three to five years

and 11 (39.3%) between 3-5 years respectively. The findings also revealed that the most

practiced method of CQI, in the order of use, were Strategic Planning, Benchmarking,

Process Management, Balance Scorecard, and Baldridge Criteria for Educational

Excellence respectively;

5. Comments concerning the application of CQI models to retention management, the

respondents indicated that it requires a lot of time, the methods were new to the

institution, and the improvement plans were at odds with the institution’s culture. The

topic of implementing CQI was frequently discussed but seldom implemented and it

should be campus wide and be a part of the institution’s plan;

6. The socio-economic implications of the African-American community, the

management strategy of the institution’s President and the performance of African

American males when compared to other ethnic groups are the most important factors

driving Academic Support Directors to apply CQI to retention management of African

American males;

7. The major benefits from CQI implementation are improvements in collaboration with

other departments, communication with other departments, and intrusive advising,

respectively. The participants, however, rated academic performers and cohort graduation

rates as the least rated benefits;

104

8.The obstacles rated highest in implementing Continuous Quality Improvement to

retention practices for African American male students were a lack of financial resources,

turf protection and a lack of accountability while lack of feedback and support, faculty

resistance and lack of leadership support ranked the lowest as obstacle;

9. Lack of training for administrators, staff, and faculty, as well as a general lack of

knowledge and understanding of CQI by administrators, and a lack of staff and faculty

support for CQI improvement, were some of the factors that contributed to non-

implementers not pursuing CQI.

Retention programs, practices and policies that positively impact African American

males are a part of the HBCU retention management landscape. The results from the

hypotheses testing showed no statistically significant difference between the retention

programs polices and practices for African American male student irrespective of the

college type. The result show that retention programs, policies and practices for African

American male students do no differ based on the college type.

The practice of CQI by Academic Support Directors to improve African American

male student retention creates the need to examine, if statistically significant differences

exist between the application of CQI by Academic Support Directors and the obstacles

they encounter practicing CQI. In addition, the study focused on whether the various

colleges derived more benefits from CQI based on the length of time practicing CQI. The

results revealed no statistically significant difference in the use of CQI by Academic

Support Directors’, no statistically significant differences in the obstacles faced by

105

implementing CQI, and no statistically significant difference in the time practicing CQI

and the benefits derived among the different college types.

Continuous Quality Improvement is a system which promotes data driven

performance management decisions (Baldrige Criteria, 2006). The hypothesis was tested

to determine whether statistically significant differences exist between the use of data in

decision making at the various colleges types. Also tested was whether differences exist

between practitioners and non-practitioners of CQI when using data for decision making

in managing African American male students’ retention. The results indicated that the use

of data in decision making does not differ significantly among the various colleges and

did not differ among practitioners and non-practitioners of CQI.

The role of leadership support in CQI is important when making data driven

decisions, by integrating the business processes and communicating the decisions to the

stakeholders (Kay & Anderson, 1999). The results from the hypotheses testing indicate

no statistically significant difference between the extent of senior administrative support

for retention initiatives for African American males and the college type. The perception

of senior leadership support for CQI also did not vary based on the years of practicing

CQI in the retention management of African American male students.

Academic Support Directors are expected to show leadership in initiatives for

African American male student retention on the respective campuses. There was also no

statistically significant difference between the provision of leadership in campus retention

initiatives and the number of years practicing CQI. There were also no statistically

significant differences between the provision of leadership for retention initiatives and

106

the years practicing CQI. The results from the hypotheses testing suggested that

Academic Support Directors are providing leadership for African American male student

retention initiatives irrespective of the college type and their leadership do not differ

based on the years practicing CQI.

In conclusion, the results from null hypotheses testing revealed no statistically

significant differences in the use of CQI in African American male retention among two

year, four-year public, and four-year private HBCUs. The results also revealed no

significant statistical difference between the factors impacting CQI and the years

practicing CQI in various institutions.

Discussion of the Findings

The study revealed that more than a third of the institutions have retention

departments and have retention programs targeting traditional and non-traditional African

American male students. This finding is consistent with the literature. According to the

literature, students’ experiences contribute to their departure from institutions (Gary,

2004). African American male students have different socialization patterns (Cuyject,

1997; Harper, 2008) and must have programs targeting the issues faced by both the

traditional and nontraditional male student population (Gary, 2004; Widoff, 2000;

Marshal, 2005; Pusser et al., 2007).

The study found that in general, campus services are communicated to the African

American males. This is consistent with Hermanowiz (2004) who report that the decision

to stay at an institution is based on the communication network established between the

student and the institution’s personnel. The literature revealed that services must be

107

communicated to students and the ability to communicate services increases student’s

persistence (Peters, 2005).

The study revealed an awareness and practice of CQI by Academic Support

Directors. This was contrary to the findings by Birnbaum (1998), who found that there

was minimal use of TQM/CQI in higher education after implementation, and in some

cases was no longer practiced on the institutions studied. Other studies refute Birnbaum’s

(1998) findings. Institutions are using CQI mainly in administrative areas (Zhiming,

1998), are practicing CQI with success (Rice 2003), and have attempted and continue to

use CQI (Thalner, 2005) with the highest participation rates at two-year community and

technical colleges and four-year private and public colleges (McMillan, 1999).

The CQI methods practiced by the various HBCUs are consistent with the

findings from the literature. The literature revealed strategic planning (Aloi, 2005; Welsh,

Nunez & Petrosko, 2007) Benchmarking (Mosier & Schwarzmueller, 2002; Thalner,

2005), Baldrige Criteria for Educational Excellence (Clarke, 1999; Winn, 2003; Wallace,

2001; Faulker, 2000) and Balance Scorecard (Ewell, 1994) are the common CQI methods

used in higher education.

In this study, it was found that the number of years practicing CQI is not based on

whether the college is two-year, four-year private or four-year public. This is consistent

with studies by Zhiming (1998), Benson (2000), Robin (2005) and Thalner, (2005) all of

which found no differences between the number of years practicing CQI and the

institutions in this studied. However, the practice of CQI by retention directors was found

to be fairly new (less than five years). This result is consistent with Thalner (2005) who

108

found users of CQI are often between 1- 5 years and are new to the process of

implementing CQI.

Continuous Quality Improvement is driven by the need to improve services,

improve efficiencies through communication across departmental lines as well as the

allocation of resources to meet student and institutional needs (Kay & Anderson, 1998;

Thalner, 2005; Paris, 2007 & Lotowiski et al., 2007). While these studies do not focus on

retention, they lay the foundation for what drives the need to continuously improve

African American male retention at the respective institutions.

The study found several variables that impact CQI in retention management for

African American male students. In order of rank, starting with the highest, the study

found the socio-economic implications of the African-American community, the

management strategy of the institution’s president, and the performance of African

American male students in comparison with other ethnic groups are the top drivers of

CQI in retention management. Studies relating to low earning, and the black family (The

College Board, 1999), poor preparation and the impact of non- academic factors on

retention (Lotoski. et al., 2004; Peters, 2005; Straus, 2004; Jiles- Jones, 2004;Bush &

Bush, 2005), the need to improve performance of other ethnic group (Flowers, 2006) are

consistent in supporting the socio-economic problems affecting African American males.

The study also found that the top benefits derived from implementing CQI are

improved collaboration and communication across departments and an improvement in

intrusive advising. The benefits do not differ based on the college type. The results are

consistent with the findings of Kaye & Anderson (1998); Freed, (1998); Paris, (2005);

109

Thalner, (2005); Siedman, (2005); Klocinski, (1999) & Thalner, (2005). The study,

however, found that measurable outcomes, such as increased overall academic

performance and graduation rates were ranked lowest by the respondents. This finding

lends credence to studies by Birnbaum (1999) which implied that management strategies

imported from business do not have the positive measurable outcomes promised.

There are several obstacles faced by implementers of CQI, but there is no

statistical significant difference between the college types and the obstacles faced. The

obstacles faced are consistent with those faced by industry (Kaye and Anderson, 1998)

and those found in higher education (Klocinski, 1999; Benson, 2000; Thalner, 2005 and

Paris 2007). The respondents ranked lack of leadership as the lowest obstacle to CQI

implementation which contradicts the importance of sustained leadership support of CQI

implementation (Benson, 1999 & Freed, 1998) and in improving the retention process

(Lau, 2003).However, does not gauge the extent of senior leadership initiative and

support in implementing CQI which could be responsible for its low ranking among the

directors.

The lack of training, support, understanding by senior leadership, and

faculty/staff resistance to change were ranked the highest reasons for not pursuing CQI

by non- implementers. This is consistent with findings of Klocinski (1999) who found

unsuccessful implementers having show similar characteristics, such as a lack of

commitment by leadership, faculty, and staff, along with poor communication.

To continuously improving performance, there must be a business model based on

regular assessment and feedback (Kaye and Anderson, 1999). This study, however, did

110

not find any statistically significant differences between non-implementers and

implementers of CQI in the use of data when making decision among the different

college types. The study also did not find any statistical difference between the uses of

data for assessment and decision making among the different college types. The

literature, however, was sparse on the use of data by non implementers in their decision

making. Research indicated that the best practices in linking assessment and planning

should include leadership guidelines, specifically the use of data in decision making

(Seanor, 2004), proficient use of data for decision making (Winn, 2003), and making data

driven decisions which is communicated to the constituency (Aloi, 2005).

The study did not find any statistically significant differences between the extent

of senior leadership support for CQI among the various colleges. This is consistent with

findings by McMillan (1999). McMillian found TQM/CQI support and participation

rates among senior managers was highest at two-year community, four-year public, two-

year technical and four year private colleges respectively.

This study found no statistically significant differences between the perception of

senior administrators support and the length of time practicing CQI. The study also found

no significant difference in the provision of leadership for African American male

retention and the years of practicing CQI. This plays into Birnbaun’s (1999) study,

which indicated that CQI looses its impetus on college campuses with time, and is just a

fade that comes and goes with no long term leadership support on college campuses.

Robinson (2005) indicated from his study at the community colleges that management

traits must include long term commitment (10- 15 years) to the CQI process to ensure

111

success. Yet Thalner’s (2005) study, found that that CQI is still in effect even beyond the

time that Birnbaun (2005) recommended that it would disappear after implementation.

Conclusions

There are two common themes emerging from this study; institutions are taking

action to improve the African American male experience on HBCU campuses and CQI is

used in retention management of African American male students. The obstacles and

problems faced when implementing CQI were similar across the respective institutions

and were consistent with those obstacles found in industry and higher education. Many of

these obstacles were embedded in the institutions, have an impact on customer

satisfaction, and ultimately affect retention.

The issue of African American male retention at HBCUs has several common

elements, namely, the academic and non-academic factors associated with the socio-

economic problems that impact students adjusting to the college environment. The study

indicated that retention directors were undecided as to the effectiveness of the current

programs in meeting the needs of African American male students. Within the context of

the CQI strategy, there were institutional problems such as lack of financial resources, a

culture of turf protection and resistance to change by factions within the institutions.

These issues are not institution specific, but are a pandemic that stretches across the

various HBCUs. Success in retention depends on how these issues are addressed by

senior leadership and policy makers at the respective institutions.

The research did indicate that Academic Support Directors perceived that

Continuous Quality Improvements has potential benefits that can improve the retention

112

process. Success in utilizing CQI to improve the retention process for African American

males, must be celebrated and communicated to other departments within the institution

so as to improve cooperation across departmental lines. This will require close

collaboration between executive leadership and academic support directors in creating

collaborative data driven plans that are communicated, accepted, and supported by the

different factions within the campus community.

Academic Support Directors rate academic performance and cohort graduation

rates as the lowest benefits derived from CQI implementation. This creates an issue

justifying the continued use of CQI at HBCUs. To justify CQI implementation and its

subsequent expansion, there has to be quantifiable results to ensure a commitment by the

institutions’ leadership to the cultural shift and monetary allocation necessary for CQI

success over time. This is also important when convincing skeptics, resistors, and non-

implementers to adopt and participate in CQI process.

Having quantifiable justification for CQI implementation in retention

management for African American males, is not enough to ensure success. There must be

increased knowledge and participation by members of the institution’s community.

Administrators, faculty, and staff must be educated on the benefits of CQI in order to

garnish support in the implementation of CQI. Only by educating all of the parties

involved on campus, will the retention of African American male students be improved.

Recommendations for the Profession

113

The current economic events gripping the nation have many HBCU education

leaders keeping a close watch on the availability and affordability of credit for student

financial aid. In addition, economic downturns generally have tax revenue shortfalls for

the states and federal government, which ultimately affects the disbursements available

for higher education. These issues have the potential to impact the financial and

operational viability of all HBCUs.

African American male students who leave an institution create revenue

shortfalls. Improvement in African American male student retention increases the

revenue available from tuition and fees which ultimately increases the financial viability

of the institutions. For HBCUs to remain financially viable they must re-examine their

CQI systems and determine the breakdown in the retention process. Historical black

colleges and universities must re-examine Deming’s (1985) 14 points on operations in a

quality environment to ensure that their CQI models are aligned with Deming’s

philosophy. HBCUs must also look at their unique culture, campus climate, resources and

student population to improve African American male student experience on the

respective campuses. These issues will require a concerted effort in reversing the current

retention trend for African American male students across the various HBCU campuses.

Recommendations for Future Research

Continuous Quality Improvements have success at many Predominantly White

Universities (Seanor, 2005). A study should be performed on the impact of CQI on the

retention policies and practices for African American male students at predominately

white universities. This is important when making a comparative analysis on the impact

114

of CQI in retention management, specifically on African American male students at both

HBCUs and predominantly white universities.

Success of CQI in retention management for African American male students

requires financial justification. A study is needed to assess the financial impact of

applying CQI to African American male student retention management at the respective

HBCU’s .This is needed to determine which CQI models have the greatest impact on

improving the financial health of the institutions. This information is vital when

ascertaining which model or combination of models is best suited for HBCUs.

There is a need for a study on the strategies and techniques used by non-

implementers of CQI in retention management for African American male students. The

study should be designed to examine the successes in African American male retention at

these institutions and determine if there are other non-CQI strategies that generate

success in African American male student retention. This is important in validating the

use of CQI in retention management for African American males.

Leadership is the cornerstone of the CQI system (Deming, 1983). It is, therefore,

important for a study to be completed on the extent of leadership support for CQI in the

retention of African American males. Areas that can be examined are the support to

Academic Support Directors through resource allocation, campus communication,

knowledge of the CQI system, and the decision making process.

REFERENCES

Adams, R.A. (2000). Improving student services at Santa Monica College.

Dissertation Abstract International, 61(08), 3035A. (UMI No. AAT 99983681)

Allgood, T.L. (2005). An investigation of the level of financial aid, knowledge and

degree of financial aid satisfaction among students of Tennessee State university.

Dissertation Abstract International, 66(03), 832A. (UMI No. AAT 3167768)

Aloi, S.L. (2005). Best practices in linking assessment and planning. Assessment

Update, 17(3), 4-7.

Alderman, K.M. (2004). Motivation for achievement: Possibilities for teaching and

learning. New Jersey: Mahwah.

American Council on Education. (2004). Shifting ground: Autonomy, accountability and

privatization in higher education. Retrieved April 10, 2007,

http://ww.acenet.edu/programs/chamging-relationship/roundtables.cfm.

American College Testing Program. (2005). Courses count: Preparing students for post

secondary student success. A ACT Policy Report. Retrieved April 21, 2007, from

http://www.act.org/path/policy/pdf/coursescount/pdf.

American Society of Quality (2006). Organization wide approaches: Benchmarking.

Retrieved April 10, 2006, from

http://www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/benchmarking/overview/overview.html.

Arcaro, J.S. (1995). Quality in Higher Education: An Implementation Handbook. Baca

Raton: St Lucie Press.

116

Averson, P. (1998). The Deming Cycle. Retrieved on March 04, 2007, from

http://.balancescorecard.org/bkgd/pdca.html.

Baldridge National Quality Program. (2006). Education Criteria for Performance

Excellence. Retrieved on September 20, 2006, from

http://www.quality.nist.gov/Education_Criteria.htm.

Barker, C., Pistrang, N., & Elliott, R. (2002). Research Methods in Clinical Psychology.

West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Barth, J.B., Zona, S., Serfass, R., Harms, B.A., Houlihan, G.T., Anderson, G.,

Farley, R.P., Reigsby, K., & O’Rourke, J. (2000). Strategies for

meeting high standards: Quality management and the Baldbrige Criteria in

education. Lesson from the States. Educational Management. (Available from

ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EA031119)

Bean, J.P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a casual model of

student’s attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(2), 34-50.

Bean, J.P., & Eaton, S.B. (2002). The psychology underlying successful retention

practices. Journal of College Student Retention: Research Theory and Practice,

3(1), 73-79.

Benson, D.S. (2001). Measuring perceptions of continuous improvement at multiple

universities of a state system. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(10), 3833A.

(UMI No. AAT 99902994)

Birnbaun, R. (2000). Management fades in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

117

Birnbaun, R. (1999). Has the academy adopted TQM ? Planning for Higher Education,

28(1), 29-37.

Bogue, E.G. (1998). Quality Assurance in higher education: The Evolution of systems

and design ideals. New Directions for Institutional Research, 99, 7-19.

Bonstingl, J.J. (1996). An introduction to total quality in education. Alexandria, Virginia:

Association for Supervisors and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Boyer, E. L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New

York: Harper & Row.

Boyd, D. (2002). State fiscal outlook from 2005 to 2013: Implications for higher

education. National Center for Higher Education management Systems

(NCHEMS). Retrieved September 20, 2006, from

http://www.nchems.org/State_Spending.doc.

Braunstien, A., & McGrath, M. (1997). The retention of freshmen students: An

examination of the assumptions, beliefs and perceptions held by college

administrators and faculty. College Student Journal, 31(2), 188-201.

Brocka, B., Brocka, M.S. (1992). Quality management: Implementing the best practices

of the masters. Homewood, Ill: Business One Irvin.

Brown, W.A & Allen, D. E. (2002). Ensuring financial stability of HBCU’s in the 21st

century. Black Issues in Higher Education, (20)22, 90-91.

Burrill, C.W. & Ledolter, J. (1999). Achieving quality through continual improvement.

New York: John Wiley and Sons.

118

Bush, E.C., & Bush, L. (2005). Black male achievement and the community college

Black Issues in Higher Education, (22)2, 44-44.

Cabrera, A.F., Nora, A., & Cataneda, M.B. (1993). College persistence: Structural

equations modeling test of an integrated model of student retention. Journal of

Higher Education, (64)2, 123-140.

Camp, R.C. (1995). Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices that lead to

superior performance. Cambridge: Productivity Press

Canady, D.M. (2007). African American college dropouts: Expectations of an experience

with historically black university’s customer service delivery and student service

provisions and implications for retention. Dissertation Abstracts International,

68(01). (UMI No. AAT 324666

Chambliss, C. (2003). Making departments distinctive: The continuous quality

improvement (CQI) mindset. (Retrieved from ERIC Document Reproduction

Service No. ED 479751)

Chenoweth, K. (1999). HBCUs tackle the knotty problem of retention. Black Issues in

Higher Education, 15(26), 38-42.

Clarke, D. (1999). Putting ISO 900 Standards and Baldrige quality criteria to work now

in public education. NAIEC Newsletter, 35(3), n3.

Clearly, T.S. (2000). Perceptions of selected performance indicators as measures of

institutional quality. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(07), 2616A. (UMI

No. AAT 9981498)

119

Cody-Mitchell, E.D. (2000). The economic health of private historically black colleges

and universities: 1986-1995. Dissertation Abstracts International,

61(09), 3482A. (UMI No. AAT 9985614)

Cohen, A.M. (1998). The shaping of American higher education: Emergence and growth

of the contemporary system. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

College Board. (1999). College achievement. Retrieved September 8, 1999, from

http://store.collegeboard.com/productdetail.do?Itemkey=201635 .

Consortium for Student Retention Data Exchange (CSRDE). (2004). Institution wide

Rates. CSRDE Retention Report. Retrieved May 23, 2008, from

http://csrde.ou.edu/web/reports.html.

Cook, K.T. (1998). The impact of the home environment of black males not pursing

higher education between ages 18-22. Dissertation Abstracts International,

59(3A), 745A. (UMI No. AAT 9828168)

Cowhan, S. (2005). Strategic planning higher education: Fact or fiction?

Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher education, 9(4), 103-109.

Creadle, J.O., & Dean, G.J. (1991). A comprehensive model for enhancing black student

retention in higher education. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 19(4), 158-165.

Crosby, P. (1979). Quality is free: the art of making quality certain.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Crosby, P. (1997) Quality management. In R.J. Kimber, (Ed.), Quality management

handbook. New York: Mercel Dekker.

120

Cusoe, J. (2003). Academic advisement and student retention: Empirical connections

and systematic intervention. Retrieved February 17, 2004, from

http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/listserve/remarks/cuseoretention.pdf.

Cuyjet, M. (Ed.). (1997) Helping African American men succeed in college. New

Directions for Student Services, No. 80. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cuyjet, M.J. (2006). African American college men: Twenty-first century issues and

concerns. In M.J. Cuyjet, (Ed.), African American men in college. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Czarenecki, M.T., (1999) Managing by measurement: How to improve your

organization’s performance through effective benchmarking. Houston, Tx:

American Management Association.

Davis, J.E. (1999). What does gender have to do with the experiences of African

American college men. In J.E Davis & V.C. Polite (Eds.), African American

males in schools and society, practices and policies for effective education. New

York: Teacher College Education Press.

Deberard, M.S., Spieldman, G., & Julka, D.C. (2004). Predictors of Academic

achievement and retention among college freshman: A longitudinal study

College Student Journal, 38(1), 66-70.

Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of this crisis. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, Center for Advance Engineering Studies.

Deming, W.E. (1993). The new economics for industry government and education.

Cambridge, MA: M.I.T Center for the Advance Engineering Study.

121

Deming, W.E. (2000). The new economics for industry, government and education.

Cambridge: MIT Center for the Advancement of Educational Studies.

Deberad, M.S., Spieldman, G., & Julka, D.C. (2004). Predictors of academic

achievement and retention among college freshman: A longitudinal study

College Student Journal, 38(1), 66-70.

Dew, J.R. (2006). Go Beyond. National Association of Colleges and University

Business Officers (NACUBO). Retrieve July 15, 2007, from

http://www.nacubo.org/x8456.xml?ss=pf.

Dew, J.R., & Nearing, M.M. (2004 ). Continuous quality improvement in higher.

Education. Westport: American Council on Higher Education Praeger Series on

Higher Education.

Dey, E.C. & Hurtado. S. (2005). College students in a changing context. American

higher education in the twenty first century. In P.G. Altbach, R.O. Berdahl &,

P.J. Gumport (Eds.), American higher education in the twenty-first century:

Social, political and economic challenges. Baltimore: John Hopkins University

Press.

Doerfel, M.L., & Ruben, B.D. (2002). Developing more adaptive, innovative,

and interactive organizations. New Directions for Higher Education, 118, 5-26.

Dooris, M.J., Kelly, J.M., & Trainer, J.F. (2004). Strategic planning in higher education.

New Directions for Institutional Research, 123, 5-11.

Edirisooriya, G. (2002). Information management in higher education: A slow drive on

the information superhighway. Hershey: Idea Group.

122

Evans R. E., & Lindsay, W.M. (2005).The management and control of quality (6th ed.).

Eagan: Thompson-West.

Ewell, P. (1994). Developing statewide performance indicator for higher education. In

Ruppert, S.S (Ed.), Chartering Higher education accountability: A sourcebook on

state-level performance indicators (pp. 147-174). Denver: Education

Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.

ED375789)

Faulkner, J.B. (2002). Baldrige educational quality as another model for accreditation in

American colleges and universities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(06)

2102A. (UMI No. AAT 3056547)

Fleming, J. (2002). Who will succeed in college? When the SAT predicts black students’

performance. Review of Higher Education (25)3, 281-296.

Flowers, L.A. (2006). Effects of attending a 2-year institution on African American

males’ academic and social integration in the first year of college. Teachers

College Record, (108)2, 267-286.

Foley. J.A. ( 1996). The science of college students tell it like it is. New York: Cowles

Book Company.

Fortson, S.B. (1997). An evaluation of a program to influence academic self concept

among African American male college students. Journal of Employment

Counseling, 34(3), 104-107.

123

Freed, J.E. (1998). The challenges of change: Creating a quality culture. Paper presented

at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education,

November 5-8, 1998, Miami, Florida. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service

No. ED427583)

Friedlander, J. (1980). Are college support programs and services reaching high-risk

students? Journal of College Student Personnel, 21(1), 23-28.

Fritz, R. (1999). The path of lease resistance for managers: Designing organizations

to succeed. San Francisco: Koehler.

Furr, S.R., & Elling, T.W. (2002). African American students in predominantly white

universities: Factors associated with retention. College Student Journal, 36(2),

188-203.

Gatiss, G.F. (1996). Total quality management: A quality approach. New York; Cassell

Gay, L.R., & Airasian. (2003). Education research: Competencies for analysis and

application. New Jersey; Pearson.

Gladieux, L., & Perna.L. (2005). Borrowers who drop out: A neglected aspect of the

college loan trend. Retrieved April 30, 2008, from

http://www.highereducation.org/reports/borrowing/index.shtml.

Glenn, F.S. (2004). The retention of black students in Texas Public Community Colleges.

Journal of College Student Retention: Research Theory & Practice, 5(2), 115-

133.

Goenner, C.F. & Snaith, S. (2004). Assessing the effects of increase admission standards

College and University 80(1), 29-34.

124

Graunke, S.S., & Woolsey S.A. (2005). An explanation of factors that affect the

academic success of college sophomores. College Student Journal, 39(2), 367-

376.

Gray, J. (2004). Why can’t brother man stay in school: A phenomenological study

black male student attrition at a black urban community college. Dissertation

Abstract International, 67(05), 1624A. (UMI No. AAT 3133761)

Habely, W.R., & MacClanahan, R. (2004). What works in student retention? Retrieved

October 1, 2007, from

http://www.act.org/path/postsec/droptables/pdf/AllColleges.pdf.

Harleston, S.H. (2005). Retention strategies employed by faculty and administrators of

music programs at Historically Black Colleges and Universities and the

effectiveness of these strategies in retaining music majors. Dissertation Abstract

International, 65(12), 4502A. (UMI No. AAT 3156269)

Harper, V.R. (2003). Most likely to succeed: The self perceived impact of involvement of

experiences of high achieving African American undergraduate men at

predominantly white universities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(06),

1995A. (UMI No. AAT 3094105)

Harper, V.R. (2005). Inside the experiences of high achieving African American male

students. About Campus, March/ April 2005.

Henderson, W.E., Henderson, D., & Hudson, J. (2002). The retention of entering and

returning freshmen at Florida A & M University’s School of General Studies.

Education, 123(1), 210-214.

125

Hermanowiz, J.C. (2004). The college departure process among the academic elite.

Education and Urban Society, 37(12), 74-93.

Hickson, M.G. (2002). What role does race of the professors have on the retention of

students attending Historically Black College and University. Education, 123(1),

188-190.

Hill, Y., Laurie, L., & MacGregor, J. (2003). Student’s perception of quality in higher

education. Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 11, 15-20.

Holomb, J.H. (1993). Educational marketing: A business approach to schools

community. Lanham: Relations University Press of America.

Hoy,W.K., & Miskel, C.G. (2004). Educational administration: Theory, research, and

Practice (6th ed.). New York: Random House.

Hossler, D., Shmitt, J., & Vesper, N. (1999). Going to college: How social economic and

educational factors influence the decisions students make. Baltimore: John

Hopkins University Press.

Hurd. H. (2000). Staying power: Colleges work to improve retention rates. Black Issues

in Higher Education,17(18), 42-46.

Hutto, C.P., & Fenwick, L.T. (2002). Staying in college: Student services and freshman

retention at Historically Black Colleges and Universities. ( Eric Document

Reproduction Service No.468397)

126

Ibekwe, L. (2007). Using total quality management to achieve academic program

effectiveness: An evaluation of administrator and faculty perceptions in business

schools at historically black colleges and universities. Dissertation Abstracts

International (67) 11, 263A (UMI No. ATT 3241788)

Imai, M. (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s competitive success. Tokyo: McGraw-Hill

Publishing.

Ishanti, T.T., and Snider, K. (2004). Longitudinal effects of college preparation programs

on college retention. Online paper presented at the annual forum of the

Association for Institutional Research. Boston, May 28th-June 2, 2004. (ERIC

Document Production Service No. ED491012)

Ishanti,T.T, and DesJardins (2002). A longitudinal investigation of dropout from college

in the United States. Journal of College Student Retention (4)2, 173-201.

Jaynes, G.D. & Williams, R.M. (1989). A common destiny: Blacks and the American

dream. Washington D.C: National Academy Press.

Jenkins T.S. (2006). Mr. Nigger: The challenges of educating black males within

American Society. Journal of Black Studies, 37(1), 127-155.

Jiju, A., Preece, D. (Eds.). (2002). Understanding managing and implementing quality.

London and New York: Rutledge.

Johnson, J.L. (1997). Commuter students: What factors determine who will persist or

who will drop out? College Student Journal, 33(3), 323-333.

127

Jones-Giles, J. (2004). Current and future institutional practices and policies established

to address student retention at selected historically black colleges and universities

Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(03), 781A. (UMI No. AAT 3010522)

Juran, J. M. (1989). Juran on leadership quality (1st ed.). New York: Simon &

Schuster.

Jurow, S. (2006) Set in your ways. National Association of Colleges and University

Business Officers. Retrieved April 5, 2007 from

hppt://www.nacubo.org/x7741.xmlon.

Kaplan, R.S., & Norton, D.P. (1996). The Balance Scorecard: Translating Strategy into

Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Kaplan, R.S., & Norton, D.P. (1996). Using Balance scorecard as a strategic management

system. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75-85.

Kaye, M. & Anderson, R. (1999). Continuous improvement: Ten essential criteria.

International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management (16)5, 485-506.

Key, H.E. (2003). A comparative study of the perceived effect of nurturing as a factor

contributing to graduation of African American students at a historically black

university and a predominately white university. Dissertation Abstracts

International (64)04, 1190A. (UMI AAT 3087221)

Kincaid, E. (2003). Perceptions of factors that influence the academic success of African

American males. Dissertation Abstract International, 64(11), 4228A. (UMI No.

AAT 3111481)

128

Klocinski, R.J. (2000). Evaluation of success and failure factors and criteria in the

implementation of total quality management principles in the administration at

selected institutions of higher education. Dissertation Abstracts International,

(60)07, 2403A. (UMI No. AAT 9936335)

Kuh, G.D., Kinzie,J., Whitt, E.J. and Associates. (2005). Student Success in College.

San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Labunski.R. (2003). The educated student: Getting the most of your college years.

Versalles, Ky: Marley and Beck.

Lachman, K.S. (2002). The impact of financial aid on year to year persistence: A

desegregation of federal student loan programs. Dissertation Abstract

International, (62)10, 3313. (UMI No. AAT 3031308)

Lamberg, P. (1999). In the beginning there were Deming and Duran. The Journal for

Quality and Participation, 22(6), 59-62.

Landesberg, P. (1999). In the beginning, there were Deming and Juran. Journal for

Quality and Participation, (22)6, 59-62.

Latiker,T.T. (2003). A quality study of African American Student persistence in a private

black college. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational

Research Association Chicago IL April 21-25, 2003. (ERIC Document

Production Service No. ED 477444)

Lau, L.K. (2004). Institutional factors affecting student retention. Education,

124(1), 126-136.

129

LaVant, B.D, Anderson, J.C., & Tiggs, J.W. (1997). Retaining African American Men

through mentoring initiatives. New Directions for Student Services, 80, 43-53.

Lee, C.C. & Bailey, D. F.(1999). Counseling African American male and youth. In C.C.

Lee (Ed.) Multicultural issues in counseling. New approaches to counseling.

Alexandria: American Association for Counseling and Development.

Leveille, D.E. (2005). An emerging view on accountability in higher education. Research

and Occasional Paper Series: Center for Studies in Higher Education.

CSHE.8.05. Retrieved April 19, 2006, from http://cshe.berkely.edu/ .

Leveille, D.E. (2006). Accountability in Higher education: A public Agenda for trust and

cultural change. Center for Studies in Higher Education. Retrieved April 3, 2007,

from http://www.repositories.cdlib.org/cshe/CSHE-20-06.

Levitz, R., & Noel, L. (2000). The earth-shaken but quite revolution in retention

management. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://www.noellevitz.com

Lewis, R.G. & Smith, D.H. (1994). Total quality in higher education. Total quality series

(ERIC Document Production Service No. ED364150)

Lotkowski, A.V., Stevens, B.R., & Richard, J.N. (2004). The role of academic and non

academic factors in improving college retention: An ACT Policy Report.

Retrieved March 3, 2004, from

http://www.act.org/path/policy/pdf/college_retention.pdf

Low, L. (1999). Successful retention planning: A step by step approach. Paper presented

at the fourth annual National Enrollment Management Institute, June 28, 1999.

Vail: Colorado.

130

Lowe, A. & Michael, T. (2000). Academic advising: Views of the givers and takers.

Journal of College Student Retention: Research Theory and Practice, 2(2),

150-170.

Marshal, D. (2006). A qualitative study of African American student’s perceptions of

retention programs at a historical black college/university and a predominantly

white institution. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(10), 3706A. ( UMI No.

ATT 3193344)

McDaniel, C., & Graham, S.W. (2001). Student retention in a historically black

institution. College Student Journal, 35(1), 143-158.

McElroy, S.W. & Andrew, L.T. (2000). The Black male in the U.S. economy (The

African American male in life and thought). The Annals of the American Academy

of Political and Social Sciences, 569, 160-176.

McGaha, V., & Fitzpatrick, J. (2005). Personal and social contributors to dropout risk for

undergraduate students. College Student Journal, 39(2), 287-297.

McMillian, J.M. (1999) Total Quality Management in higher education: A study of senior

administrator’s perception about total quality management in institutions of higher

education in Ohio. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(07), 2276A. (UMI No.

ATT 39842495)

Mihok, S.Y. (2005). The persistence of first-generation low- income student receiving

financial aid at a regional New England University. Dissertation Abstract

International, 66(05), 1668A. (UMI No. AAT 3177198)

131

Miller, C. (2005). The National Secretariat of the Secretary of Education Commission

on the Future of Higher Education. Retrieved November 2, 2006, from

http://ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/miller.pdf.

Mosier, R.E., & Schwarzmueller (2002). Benchmarking in Student Affairs. New

Directions in Higher Education, 118, 103-112.

Muraskin, L. & Lee, J. (2004). Raising the graduation rates of low income college

students. Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.

(Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED490856)

Mustiful, A.M. (2005). Resistance of African American males at four year institutions.

Dissertation Abstract International, (66)04, 1298A (UMI No. AAT 3172901)

National Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities (NASULGC) (2001).

Returning to our roots. Executive summaries of the reports of the Kellogg

Commission on the Future of Land Grant Colleges and Universities. Retrieved

May 20, 2007, from

https://www.nasulgc.org/NetCommunity/Document.Doc?id=187

National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education. (2005). Accountability for

Better Results: A national Imperative for higher Education. Retrieved August 10,

2007, from http://www.sheeo.org/pubs/pubs_search.asp.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1994). Persistence and attainment of non

traditional students: Post secondary longitudinal study. Retrieved October 25,

2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/web/97578g.asp.

132

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002). Profile of undergraduate students

in U.S secondary education:1999-2000. Retrieved October 12, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/das/epubs/2002168/profile2.asp.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2002). Findings from the conditions of

education 2002: Non traditional undergraduates. Retrieved October 15, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002012.pdf.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). The Condition of education:2002.

Education Statistics Quarterly, 4, 3. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_4/4_3/6_1.asp.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Digest of education static tables

figures. Retrieved September 8, 2007, from

hpp://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d03/tables/dt224.asp.

National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). (2007). NCAA Division I, II & III

Federal Graduation Rate. Retrieved May 15, 2008, from

http://www2.ncaa.org/portal/academics_and_athletes/education_and_research/aca

demic_reform/grad_rate/2007/d2_school_grad_rate_data.html.

Neal, L.I., McCray, A.D., Webb-Johnson, G., & Bridgest, S.T. (2003). The effects of

African American movement styles on teachers perceptions and reactions.

Journal of Special Education, 37(1 ), 49-57.

Nettie, L., McDill, E., & McPartland, J. (1994). Education reforms and students at risk:

A review of the current state of the art. Education Review, 34(4), 145-162.

133

Noel, L., Levitz, R., Saluri, D. (1985). Increasing student retention. San Francisco:

Jossey- Bass.

Noel-Levitz. (2007). Student retention practices at four year colleges. Retrieved

December 10, 2007, from www.noellevitz.com/retention practices.

Nora, A., & Cabrera, A.E. (1996). The role perceptions in prejudice and discrimination

and the adjustment of minority students to college. Journal of Higher Education,

67(2), 119-48.

Niven, P.R. (2003). Balance Scorecard step by step for government and non profit

agencies. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.

Padilla, R.V. (2000). College student retention: Focus on success. Journal of College

Student Retention: Research Theory and Practice, 1(2), 131-146.

Paris, K.A. (2007). Models for Organizational Improvement: A comparison. The

National Consortium for Continuous Improvement in Higher Education (NCCI).

Retrieved August 29, 2007, from http://www.ncci-cu.org.

Pascarella, E. (1985). College environment influences on learning and cognitive

development: A critical review and synthesis. In J. Smart (Ed). Higher

Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, V5, New York: Agathon.

Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How college affects students. Finding and

insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

134

Poirier, C.C., & Houser, W. F. (1993). Business partnering for continuous improvement:

How to forge enduring alliances among employees, suppliers & customers. San

Diego, CA: Berrett Koehler.

Pusser, B., Breneman, D.W., Gansneder, B.M., Kohl, K.J., Levin, J.S.,Milam, J.H., &

Ravid, R. (2005). Practical statistics for educators. Lanham: University Press

of America.

Peters, K.A. (2007. The academic success of students at an HBCU in Maryland.

Dissertation Abstract International (66)04. (UMI ATT 3258434)

Reuben, R.D. (1999). Towards a balance scorecard for higher education: Rethinking the

college and university indicators of excellence. Retrieved March 02, 2007, from

http://www.cedarcrestone.com/whitepapers/Toward_a_Balanced_Scorecard.pdf

Reuben, B.D. (2004). Pursuing excellence in higher education: eight fundamental steps

San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Rice, K.G. & Taylor, D.C. (2003).Continuous Quality Improvement strategies in higher

Education: A progress report. Retrieved March 05, 2007, from

http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERB0320.pdf.

Robinson, B.S. (2002). A model for effective leadership in community colleges to

Continuous Quality Improvement. Dissertation Abstract International, (63)06,

2104. (UMI No. AAT 3172901)

Rose, R., & Kirk, C.M. (2001). The strategy of planning. Planning for Higher Education.

29(4), 50-55.

135

Ross, M.J. (1998). Success factors of young African American males at a Historically

Black College. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Rowley, D. J. & Herman, D.C. (1997). Strategic planning in universities and colleges:

Planning to survive and prosper. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Sallie Mae Fund. (2005). The Sallie Mae fund launches African- American college

access campaign. Retrieved April 21 from

http://www.thesalliemaefund.org/smfnew/news_nr227.html

Schaeffer, G., Epting, K., Zina, T., & Buskit, W. (2003). Teaching of Psychology

30(20), 133-136.

Schonlua, M., Fricker, R.D.J., & Elliott, M.N. (2002). Conducting research surveys via

e-mail and the web. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Schray, V. (2006). Assuring quality in higher education. Recommendation for improving

accreditation. A National dialogue: The Secretary of Education Commission

on the Future of Higher Education. Retrieved November1, 2006, from

http://ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/schray.pdf.

Schmidt, P. (2006). Civil rights group challenges CUNY’s effort to help black

men. Chronicle of Higher Education , April, 52, 34.

Schuh, J.H., & Upcraft, L.M., and Associates. ( 2001). Assessment practices in student

affairs: An application manual. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass.

Seanor, A.T. (2005). Analysis of the leadership of UW-Stout in winning the Malcolm

Baldrige National Quality Award in education. Dissertation Abstracts

International, 65(08), 2857.

136

Secretary of Higher Education Report. (2006). A test of leadership. Charting the future of

higher education. A report commissioned by the Secretary of Education

Margaret Spelling. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from

http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/final-report.pdf

Sheldrade, J. (1996). Management theory from Taylorism to Japanism. Boston, MA:

International Thompson.

Seymour, D. T. (1993). On Q causing quality in higher education. American Council on

Education. Phoenix, AZ: The Oryx Press.

Seymour. D.T. (1996). Charting a future. About Campus. (2)1, 4-11.

Siedman, A. (2005). Minority student retention: Resources for practitioners. New

Direction for Institutional Research, 125, 7-24.

Shwitzer, A.M. (1993). Implementing and utilizing of peer counselors for minority

freshmen at a predominately white university. Journal of Freshman Experience,

10(1), 31-50.

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (2002). The impact of budget reductions

on higher education: A position statement. Retrieved August 22, 2007, from

www.sacscoc.org/pdf/Budget%20Reductions%20Statement.pdf.

Spanbauer, S.J. (1992). A quality system for education. Milwaukee: ASCQ Quality

Press.

Spradley, P. (2001). Strategies for educating the adult black male in college in

College. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED.464524).

137

Strahan, Y.E. (2003). The effects of social anxiety and social skills on academic.

performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(2), 347-367.

Strauss, L.C., & Volkvien, F.J. (2004). Predictors of student commitment at two year to

four year institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 75, 204 -227.

Stokes, P. J. (2005). Hidden in Sight: Adult learners forge a new tradition in Higher

Education. A National Dialogue: Secretary of Education Commission on the

Future of Higher Education. Retrieved September 1, 2007, from

http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/stokes.pdf.

Swail, W.S., Redd, K.E., & Perna, L.W. (2004). Retaining minority student in higher

Education: A framework for success ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report (30),

2. San Francisco :Jossey Bass.

Swanson, D.P. (2003). Black males structural conditions, achievement pattern, needs and

opportunities. Urban Education, 38(5), 608-633.

Thalner, D.M. (2005). The practice of continuous improvement in higher education.

Dissertation Abstract International, 66(05), 1675A. (UMI No. AAT 3177396)

The Secretary of Education Commission on Higher Education. (2006). A test of

leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education. Retrieved October 10,

2007, from

http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/final-report.pdf.

Thomas, S., Giles, M. G. (1994). Assessment and retention of blacks students in higher

education. Journal of Negro Education, 63(2), 164-178.

138

Thompson, J.A., & Strickland, A.J. (1999). Strategic Management.

New York: Mcglaw- Hill.

Tinto, V. (1987). Increasing student retention. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student Attrition.

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1997). Student retention and graduation: Facing the truth, living with the

consequences. The Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher

Education. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from

http://www.pellinstitute.org/tinto/TintoOccasionalPaperRetention.pdf.

Tinto, V. (2000). What have we learned about the impact of learning communities on

students? Assessment Update. 12(2), 1-3.

Tippett, C. (2005). Leadership under conditions of decline in a small private black.

college. Dissertation Abstract International, 65(11), 4123A. (UMI No. AAT

3010522)

Turner, S.E. (2007). Returning to lean: Adults success in collage is key to America’s

future. Lumina Foundation for Education, New Agenda Series. Retrieved

September 20,2007, from

http://www.Luminafoundation.org/publications/return to learningApril2007.pdf.

United Negro College Fund. (2004). United Negro College Fund statistical report.

Retrieved March 10, 2007, from

http://www.patterson-uncf.org/2004-05_Stat_Report.pdf.

United States Department of Education. ( 2002). White house initiative on historically

139

black colleges and universities. Retrived April 10, 2007 from

http://www.ed.gov/about/inits/list/whhbcu/edlite-index.html.

United States Department of Education. (2006). Fullfilling the covenant- the way forword

2004-2005 annual report to the presedent on the results of participation of historically black colleges an universities in federal programs.

http://www.ed.gov/about/inits/list/whhbcu/pba-hbcu-report-2004-05.doc.

Wallace, L.H. (2002). Strategy for institutional improvement: Application of

Baldrige criteria at a selected community college. Dissertation Abstracts

International, 62(09), 2957A. (UMI No. AAT 3026197)

Weidman, J.C. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J. Smart

(Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol 5. New York:

Agathon.

Welsh, J. F., Nunez, W.J. & Petrosko, J. (2006). Assessing and cultivating support for

strategic planning: Searching for best practices in reform environment.

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(6), 693-708.

Wesley, R.H., & McClanahan. (2004).What works in student retention: Four-year

public colleges: An ACT Policy Report. Retrieved March 3, 2006, from

http://www.act.org/path/postsec/droptables/pdf/FourYearPublic.pdf.

Widoff, J. (2001). Returning male students struggle with balance. ACUI Bulletin (9)4,

31-34.

Wilson, M. (2000). Reversing the plight of African American male college students.

Black Issues in Higher Education, 17(18), 175-176.

140

Winn, R.A. (2003). QA or CQI? The role of the Malcolm Baldrige national quality

award program in higher education planning. Dissertation Abstracts International,

(63)07, 2432A. (UMI No. AAT 3030180) Retrieved August 24, 2006, form

Dissertations and Theses database.

Wyckoff, S.C. (1999). The academic advising process in higher education: History,

research and improvement. Recruitment and Retention in Higher Education,

13(1), 1-3.

Zhiming, X. (1999). Effective practices of continuous improvement in United States

colleges and universities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(07), 2294A.

(UMI No AAT 3010522) Retrieved August 21, 2006, form Dissertations and

Theses database.

141

APPENDIX A

First Letter of Solicitation

142

Dear:[LastName]

I am a doctoral candidate in education administration and supervision at Tennessee State University. I am soliciting your participation in this web-based survey for my dissertation research. There are no known published research on the use of continuous quality improvement by retention departments to improve the factors that impact African American student retention at historically black colleges and universities. The purpose of my research is to assess the extent to which continuous quality management is used by academic support directors to integrate institutional resources and personnel in improving the factors impacting African American male students. Directors with responsibilities for retention at all historically black colleges and universities will be contacted for this study. Your in-depth understanding of African American student retention at your institution puts you in a unique position to assist with this study. The Tennessee State University Human Subjects Review Board has approved the study. Your participation is important, but you may choose not to answer any question and discontinue the survey at anytime. The instrument takes 5 to 15 minutes depending on your institution’s retention practices. The information provided will be treated with the strictest confidence, and the responses will not be traceable to you or your institution during publication. Feel free to contact me by phone at (256)468-6640 or by email at Joetex29@hotmail.com. My advisor, Dr. D. Dunbar can be contacted by phone at(615)693-5128 or by email at Ddunbar@tnstate.edu. Please click http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx to access the survey. You may click the DONE button upon completion of the instrument to exit. I look forward to your assistance and will be happy to share the summary of the results with you upon completion of the study. Thank you in advance. Regards,

143

Howard Wright Doctoral Candidate College of Education Tennessee State University Please note: If you do not wish to receive further emails, please click the link below, and you will be automatically removed from the mailing list. http://www.surveymonkey.com/optout.aspx

144

APPENDIX B

Second Letter of Solicitation

Dear , I have solicited your participation in a web-based survey for my dissertation research on the use of continuous quality improvement in African American male retention. If you have completed the

145

instrument, please ignore this message. If you have not completed the instrument, I am again asking for your participation. Your insight into African American issues at your institution is important for the success of this study. Your responses will be treated with the strictest confidence, and will not be traced to you or your individual institution. Feel free to contact me by phone at (256)468-6640 or by email at Joetex29@hotmail.com. My advisor, Dr. D. Dunbar can be contacted by phone at(615)693-5128 or by email at Ddunbar@tnstate.edu. Please click http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=VQoM6qYCFGiH44gMipCF4HL57jK1VoPbESVpp0it9Qs_3d to access the survey. You may click the DONE button upon completion of the instrument to exit. I look forward to your assistance and will be happy to share the summary of the results with you upon completion of the study. Thank you in advance. Regards, Howard Wright Doctoral Candidate College of Education Tennessee State University Please note: If you do not wish to receive further emails, please click the link below, and you will be automatically removed from the mailing listhttp://www.surveymonkey.com/optout.aspx.

146

APPENDIX C

Final Appeal Letter

Dear The research project on the application of continuous quality improvement to African American male retention has enjoyed tremendous success. Todate, fifty HBCUs have responded. I do believe that the issue of African American male retention warrants a response from all

147

our campuses. I am at this time making a final appeal for your participation. Feel free to contact me by phone at (256)468-6640 or by email at Joetex29@hotmail.com. My advisor, Dr. D. Dunbar can be contacted by phone at(615)693-5128 or by email at Ddunbar@tnstate.edu. Please click http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=D0DBCPj1Aw7ZGt3IdWdy6g_3d_3d to access the survey. You may click the DONE button upon completion of the instrument to exit. I look forward to your assistance and will be happy to share the summary of the results with you upon completion of the study. Thank you in advance. Regards, Howard Wright Doctoral Candidate College of Education Tennessee State University Please note: If you do not wish to receive further emails, please click the link below, and you will be automatically removed from the mailing listhttp://www.surveymonkey.com/optout.aspx?sm=D0DBCPj1Aw7ZGt3IdWdy6g_3d _3d.

148

APPENDIX D

Permission to Use Instrument

149

150

APPENDIX E

Survey Instrument

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

APPENDIX F

Panel of Experts for Content Validity

164

Panel of Experts for Content Validity Wilton Barham, Ph.D.

Professor of Educational Leadership

Grambling State University

Ph: 318-274-2509

Fax: 318-274-6249

Email: Barhamw@gram.edu

Jon C Acker, Ph.D.

Coordinator for Assessment

Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

University of Alabama

Ph 205 378-7208

Email: jon@oir.ua.edu

Darin J Harris

Consultant

Office of Quality Improvement

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Ph: 608- 262-1289

Email: djharris@wisc.edu

165

Kathleen M. Immordino, Ph.D.

Manager, Organizational Research and Assessment

Center for Organizational Development and Leadership

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Ph: (732) 932-3020, Ext. 4022

Email: immordino@odl.rutgers.edu

166

APPENDIX G

Institutional Review Board Approval Letter

167

168

APPENDIX H

Responses to Open Ended Question on Applying CQI to Retention Management

169

To strengthen question six the respondents were asked open ended questions to

comment on applying CQI models to retention management at their institution. The

participant’s comments were:

1. It requires a lot of time, attention, and cooperation of staff and faculty across the

curriculum.

2. The quality enhancement plan and the university retention plan are new

initiatives.

3. The idea of improvement and innovation is at odds with the institution culture,

making improvement a difficult exhausting work.

4. Processes were planned but fell short due to loss of accreditation and resources.

5. It is a topic that is frequently discussed, but seldom implemented.

6. Historically, CQI was sporadic throughout the institution, but now the entire

institution is involved and there has been measurable improvement for all

students.

7. We have continuous discussions in our staff meeting regarding ways to improve

our retention rates for all students.

8. There is no specific retention management model or department that has

responsibility for tracking retention

9. I know it will work with the right people in place.

10. The institution should put a major emphasis in African American male retention

but none is done.

170

11. Continuous quality improvement models to retain all students, African American

males in particular will be part of the new transformation plan.

12. There is evidence that there is improvement in the quality of our African

American male students who entered the institution upon graduation from high

school.

13. Continuous quality improvement should be campus wide and be a part of the

institution’s strategic plan.

171

APPENDIX I

Four Year Class Graduation Average for 1999-2000 Cohort

at Historically Black Colleges and Universities

172

SCHOOLS PUBLIC BLACK MALE % BLACK FEMALE% BLACK GRADUATION % Elizabeth State University 46 58 53 University of Maryland- Eastern Shore 40 46 44 South Carolina State University 40 51 46 Alcorn State University 39 50 45 North Carolina Central University 37 56 49 Tennessee State University 37 53 47 North Carolina A & T University 35 49 42 Winston-Salem State University 35 44 41 Virginia State University 35 44 41 Cheney State University 34 38 32 Fayetteville State University 33 46 41 Morgan State University 31 47 40 Jacksonville State University 30 43 38 Mississippi Valley State University 29 44 37 Prairie View A & M University 29 45 37 Florida A & M University 27 40 35 Alabama A & M University 26 44 35 Grambling State University 25 41 34 Norfolk State University 23 32 28 University of Arkansas-Pine Bluff 21 40 31 Delaware State University 21 40 31 Southern University A & M College 20 33 25 Lincoln University 19 37 27 West Virginia State University 19 22 30 Bowie State 18 26 24 Savannah State University 16 31 24

173

Alabama State 15 29 22 Fort Valley State University 14 35 26 Texas Southern University 13 15 16 University of the District of Columbia 9 8 8 Albany State University Kentucky State University Southern University at New Orleans Coppin State University Harris-Stowie State University Central State University Langston College Bluefield State University

Source: 2006 NCAA Division l, ll, lll Federal Graduation Report.

SCHOOLS PRIVATE BLACK MALE % BLACK FEMALE% BLACK GRADUATION % Miles College 60 60 60 Morehouse College 55 55 Fisk University 52 67 63 Tillman College 44 51 48 Hampton University 44 61 55 Lemoyne-Owen College 43 48 47 Tuskegee University 38 53 47 Johnson C. Smith University 33 44 39 Lane College 31 31 31 Clarke Atlanta University 30 32 32 Shaw University 23 32 28 Bethune Cookman College 22 42 32 Paine College 20 30 27 Rust College 20 35 28 Livingston College 17 41 27 Benedict College 17 33 24 Virginia Union University 17 33 27