Adult College Students: Changes in Economic, Social and Cultural Capital from High School to College

ADULT COLLEGE STUDENTS:CHANGES IN ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CAPITAL

FROM HIGH SCHOOL TO COLLEGE

A Dissertation Presented to

The Faculty of the Curry School of Education University of Virginia

byAndrea Spreter

B.A. Penn State University, 1991 M.A. DePaul University, 1999

May 2006

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

UMI Number: 3225933

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and

photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper

alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized

copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

®UMIUMI Microform 3225933

Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346


© Copyright by Andrea Spreter

All Rights Reserved May 2006


Center for the Study of Higher Education Curry School of Education University of Virginia

Charlottesville, Virginia

APPROVAL OF THE DISSERTATION

This dissertation, "Adult College Students: Changes in Economic, Social and Cultural Capital from High School to College", has been approved by the Graduate Faculty of the Curry School of—Sdyoation in partial fulfillment of the requirement^for tiyd degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Brian Pusser, Ph.D., Advisor

Hal Burbach, Ph.D.

Bruce Gansneder, Ph.D.

UjLIX. (—Margaret Miller, Ph.D.

Date


ABSTRACT70 percent of all jobs in the United States require

some form of postsecondary education; however, only 24

percent of adult Americans have an undergraduate degree.

If educational leaders and policy makers wish to extend

equality of opportunity to all citizens, they need to find

ways to encourage greater rates of postsecondary

participation by the adult population.

The purpose of this study was to investigate if adult

undergraduate students had greater degrees of economic,

social and/or cultural capital than they did when they

graduated high school and to assess to what degree

respondents believed these factors influenced their return

to college. Academic research suggests that these three

forms of capital are significantly correlated with academic

achievement and the pursuit of college. However, this

research has been limited to the traditional-aged college

student.

A survey was delivered to adult college students

participating in a baccalaureate degree program at an

urban, private university. 186 of the 202 students who


received the survey completed it, for a response rate of 92

percent.

The adult college students in this sample had

significantly gained economic, social and cultural capital

since graduating high school and entering college.

Overall, respondents experienced increases in all forms of

capital; however, non-economic factors had increased the

most. Financial resources (economic capital) were

certainly significant but they were not as significant as

were non-financial resources such as family, a greater

understanding of the importance of an education and

encouragement from social networks.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis dissertation would not have been possible without the

support and encouragement of many people. My husband, Mans

Backman, deserves credit for being my rock and my sounding board

and for sacrificing a great deal of himself to allow me to be a

success in this program. My dear friend, Luis Galarza, saw

something in me that I did not see in myself. He persuaded me

see it and encouraged me to pursue it and for that I am very

grateful. My dad and stepmother deserve a tremendous deal of

thanks as do my aunt, my grandmother, and my brother for helping

me believe that I could accomplish anything, no matter what the

obstacles. I also express thanks to my colleagues and very good

friends in the program, who understand this academic journey

better than anyone and who were always available to listen,

encourage and gently push. Special thanks go to John Donnelly

for traveling with me to Chicago to collect data and for being by

my side throughout the process. I thank Brian Pusser, my advisor

and dissertation chair, for his sound counsel and steadfast

support of my research and of adult learners; Bruce Gansneder for

devoting many hours of his time to guide me through the data

analysis; and Peg Miller and Hal Burbach for agreeing to serve on

my committee and bringing energy to my topic.

IV


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

LIST OF TABLES vii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1Introduction 1Background of the Study 3

Economic Capital 4Social Capital 4Cultural Capital 5

Purpose of the Study 6Rationale for the Study 7Research Questions 9Profile of the University 10School for New Learning 11Research Design 12Instrument Construction 13Data Analysis 15Limitations 15Definition of Terms 16

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 18Economic Capital 19Social Capital 21

Non-family influences 23Closure 26Institutional Ties 27

Cultural Capital 30Summary 38

v


III. METHODOLOGY 40Purpose of the Study 40Research Questions 40Instrument Construction 41Data Analysis 47Data Collection and Sample 47

IV. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA 50Introduction 50Research Question 50Data Analysis 51

Economic Capital 54Economic Capital Questions Not 54Included in SetEconomic Capital Questions Included 61in Set

Social Capital 62Cultural Capital 65Students' Perceptions of Influential 68FactorsRelationships Among and Between Economic, 72Social and Cultural Capital

Summary 74V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 76

Purpose 76Research Questions 77Summary of Results, Literature and Discussion 78

Economic Capital and Changes Over Time 78Social Capital and Changes Over Time 80Cultural Capital and Changes Over Time 81Students Perception of Influential 83Factors

Additional Findings 84Implications of Findings 85Future Research 89Conclusion 91

REFERENCES 93APPENDICES

Appendix A 102Appendix B 112Appendix C 114


LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 4.1: Summary of Means and SDs of Change Over Time in Economic, Social and Cultural Capital

53

Table 4.2: Change Over Time in Home Ownership 55

Table 4.3: Change Over Time in Neighborhood (a) 56

Table 4.4: Change Over Time in Neighborhood (b) 56

Table 4.5: Change Over Time in Occupation (a) 58

Table 4.6: Change Over Time in Occupation (b) 58

Table 4.7: Change Over Time in Level of Education (a) 59

Table 4.8: Change Over Time in Level of Education (b) 60

Table 4.9: Change Over Time in Vehicle Ownership 60

Table 4.10: Summary of t-test Results for Changes Over Time in Economic Capital

62

Table 4.11: Summary of t-test Results for Changes Over Time in Social Capital

64

Table 4.12: Summary of t-test Results for Changes Over Time in Cultural Capital

66

Table 4.13: Summary of Student Perceptions of What Influenced Their Return to College as Adults

68

Table 4.14: Summary of Student Responses Related to an Understanding of the Importance of a College Degree (past)

69

Table 4.15: Summary of Student Responses Related to an Understanding of the Importance of a College Degree (present)

69


Table 4.16: Summary of Student Responses Related to the Importance of Economic Resources (past)

70

Table 4.17: Summary of Student Responses Related to the Importance of Economic Resources (present)

70

Table 4.18: Summary of Correlation Between Past and Present Economic, Social, and Cultural Capital

73

4.19: Table 4.19: Summary of Correlation Between Measures of Economic, Social and Cultural Capital

73

VI is


1

CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Introduction

Due to dramatic shifts in the U.S. labor market,

incessant advancements in technology, and the

globalization of the U.S. economy, the education of

adult students has become vital to the future of 21st

century America (Cook & King, 2004).

Adult learners are participating in degree programs in

greater numbers than ever before. Between 1970 and 2000,

the number of adult college students grew by 170 percent,

from 2.4 million to 6.5 million (Aslanian, 2001). Although

there has been significant progress in expanding

educational opportunities for those who did not pursue

college immediately following high school, only one quarter

of adults in the United States has a bachelor's degree, and

more than one half has never participated in formal

postsecondary education (Lifelong Learning Trends, 2004).

An additional 21 percent of the adult population has less

than a high school diploma or equivalent (Elliot, 2003).


Policy makers, institutional leaders and educators

need to better understand what factors influence adult

students to return to college, and they need to encourage

greater rates of participation. Encouraging adults to

pursue higher education is important for a number of

reasons.

First, there is strong evidence to suggest that

children are greatly influenced by the academic

achievements of their parents (Conley, 1999; Conley &

Albright, 2004). Encouraging adults to return to school

can have a positive impact not only on American society but

also on each student's immediate family, as parents become

educational role models for their children (Merriam &

Caffarella, 1999). "As parents' education and family

income increases, high school graduates are more likely to

plan to continue their education immediately following high

school, are more likely to enroll within two years and, if

they plan to attend a four-year college immediately

following high school, are more likely to do so" (Choy,

2002, pg. 11). Second, a more educated American society

will produce a greater degree of public benefits for all

citizens. Research suggests that decreased rates of crime,

poverty and health care costs are positively associated


with increased levels of education (Putnam, 2000). Third,

each citizen should have the opportunity to achieve a

middle-class lifestyle. With the shift to a knowledge-based

economy, 70 percent of all jobs in the United States now

require some form of postsecondary education, and in the

coming decades the number of jobs requiring such

credentials is expected to grow (Cook, 2004). Fourth,

educating more Americans (regardless of age) will produce a

more highly skilled workforce, which in turn will promote

national productivity and economic growth (Fitzgerald,

2003). Finally, education is a public good that should be

made available to all citizens; this is part of the

American democratic ideal. We have made great strides in

increasing access for women, persons of color and the

financially disadvantaged. We could do more in expanding

postsecondary opportunities, especially at the four-year

level, for those individuals who did not attend college

immediately following high school.

Background of the Study

Prevailing models of postsecondary attendance patterns

use economic indicators to determine an individual's

likelihood of pursuing an undergraduate degree. By

addressing the importance of economic capital.-, scholars


(Bowen et al, 2005; Bowen & Bok, 1998; Heller, 2001, 2002;

Hoxby, 2004) have influenced federal, state and

institutional policies to encourage greater participation

by financially disadvantaged students. Other models of

postsecondary attendance employ non-economic, sociological

indicators to explain such patterns. Scholars interested

in this line of study (Bourdieu, 1983; Coleman, 1988;

Lareau, 1989; McDonough, 1997; Putnam, 2000) consider the

relationship between social and cultural capital and

patterns of educational participation.

Economic Capital

Economic capital refers to the financial resources an

individual has available to obtain goods or services

(Hofferth et al, 1998). It is a measure of financial

assets, including income and accumulated capital assets.

Understanding economic capital is important in evaluating

postsecondary attendance patterns because research

demonstrates that income and wealth are highly correlated

with educational attainment and persistence (Bowen, 2005;

Heller, 2001, 2002).

Social Capital

Social capital refers to the various networks, both

formal and informal, with which people are associated.


These networks can form around any number of affiliations

such as religion, ethnicity, geography, athletics,

occupation, fraternities, clubs, friends, associates, and

so on. Through social networks, individuals obtain

information, come to understand shared norms and feel

kinships with others in the network; in essence, they form

distinct communities of trust. Individuals with access to

social communities that provide assistance with the college

application process, referrals to admission officers, and

general encouragement to consider further education have

advantages over those who do not have access to such

networks (Stanton-Salarzar & Dornbusch, 1995). In this

way, networks translate into social capital, implying that

there is non-economic value in certain types of

relationships (Carbonaro, 1998).

Cultural Capital

Although linked to social capital, cultural capital

refers to the cultural advantages or disadvantages with

which one is raised. The degree of cultural capital one

possesses ultimately shapes one's life chances. Non

economic influences, attained during the socialization

process, are significant in determining a person's

likelihood of attending college. These cultural assets are


things such as language and vocabulary, appreciation of the

arts, feelings of entitlement, tastes, preferences, and

parents' level of education. Pierre Bourdieu, who coined

the term in the 1980s, suggests that individuals who

possess high levels of "good" culture are able to translate

it into capital. Various institutions, including

postsecondary institutions, respond positively to signals

of cultural capital and tend to provide distinct privileges

to those who effectively display such signals. Because

cultural capital is integrally linked to family life, it is

socially reproduced. Cultural capital can either

supplement economic capital or replace it in certain

situations as a means of displaying and maintaining

privilege (Bourdieu, 1983).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate to what

degree individuals who participate in a four-year

postsecondary degree program at a non-traditional age (24

years of age or older) had greater degrees of economic,





to college. Academic research suggests that these three

forms of capital are significantly correlated with academi



student. Since evidence suggests that various forms of

capital are relevant for the traditional-aged student, one

might hypothesize that they also matter for those who

return to college at a nontraditional age. This research

explored whether or not individuals who pursue college as

adults have alleviated economic, social and/or cultural

barriers since high school. This was done by measuring

changes in capital (economic, social and cultural) over

time.

Rationale for the Study

Academicians have produced a wide body of scholarly

literature to address issues of postsecondary attendance

patterns, focusing on why some participate in the academy

and others do not (Bowen, 2005; Bowen & Bok, 1998;

McDonough, 1997). This scholarship often links various

forms of capital (economic, social and cultural) with an

individual's likelihood of pursuing college. Research

demonstrates that capital, in all of its forms, is

important in evaluating the factors that motivate or hinde


individuals to pursue higher education and in expanding

postsecondary opportunities for nontraditional groups.

However, existing research yields little information about

one segment of the non-traditional student population—adult

learners. Theoretical frameworks about the economic,

social and cultural factors that influence postsecondary

attendance offer a great deal of promise for this under-

studied population.

If educational policy makers and leaders are to ensure

that the greatest number of prepared citizens is pursuing

education, regardless of age, they need to do more than

offer financial aid packages in the form of loans and

grants. Research demonstrates that a variety of factors—

both economic and non-economic—influence college decision

making, attendance and persistence patterns; therefore, a

variety of programs should be in place to stimulate greater

degrees of participation and success for all citizens.

This is particularly important as vast numbers of

traditional-aged students enter the postsecondary arena but

do not persist to graduation (U.S Department of Education,

1998).

While this study focuses solely on adult participation

in four-year degree programs, it is informed by literature


related to adult participation in continuing education and

lifelong learning programs. People who participate in

continuing education tend to be those who have already-

acquired, through socialization, "a positive disposition

towards adult education" (Jarvis, 1985, p. 138). In other

words, "those adults who have been socialized into valuing

and acquiring these attitudes and skills will be the ones

to take advantage of learning opportunities" (Merriam &

Caffarella, 1999, p. 80). While this is true of continuing

education, there is no evidence to suggest that this is

true of adult degree programs. In fact, we must not assume

that if we build and offer programs, adults will

automatically have knowledge about them, be able to enroll,

have the financial resources to attend or the social and

cultural capital to move forward with application (Jarvis,

1985). Instead, we must gain a better understanding,

through empirical research, of the factors that motivate

adults, of all backgrounds, to pursue postsecondary

education.

Research QuestionsThe following research questions were addressed in this study:

1. To what extent do adult college students have greater degrees of economic capital than they did when they were completing high school?


10

2. To what extent do adult college students have greater degrees of social capital than they did when they were completing high school?

3. To what extent do adult college students have greater degrees of cultural capital than they did when they were completing high school?

4. Do adult students perceive that any or all of these forms of capital have prompted their return to college?

Profile of the UniversityDePaul University, a four-year, non-profit

institution, was founded in 1898 to provide education to

working-class men in the city of Chicago. With six

campuses in the state of Illinois, DePaul is the seventh

largest private university in the United States. It is

also the largest Catholic university in the country,

serving over 24,000 students.

DePaul is committed to serving first-generation

college students, especially those from diverse backgrounds

within the Chicago metropolitan area. In 2003, 38 percent

of full-time freshmen were the first in their families to

attend college.

DePaul considers its three most distinguishing

characteristics to be Catholic, Vincentian and urban. As a


11

Catholic institution, DePaul stresses critical moral

thinking and fosters religious ideals. The University

distinguishes itself as Vincentian because it was founded

on the vision of St. Vincent de DePaul, who was committed

to public service, humility and respect for all people. As

an urban university, DePaul faculty and staff are deeply

involved in the life of the Chicago community. The

University connects itself with the community, both by

drawing from its rich resources and by giving back by

providing educated citizens. In fall 2002, 78 percent of

DePaul students were from the Chicago metropolitan area.

School for New Learning

Extending its mission to serve the Chicago area and to

meet the unmet needs of the community, DePaul established

the School for New Learning (SNL) in 1972. The central

purpose of the School was to provide educational access to

working adult students in the metropolitan area. SNL now

serves approximately 3,500 undergraduate students; it also

serves a small number of students in its two graduate

degree programs.

Unlike DePaul's other undergraduate programs, which

focus on traditional-age students, SNL's program centers on

adult learning theory and therefore has several unique


12

characteristics. First, SNL's program is competency-based.

Students must demonstrate competence across 50-degree

requirements in order to graduate. Second, SNL's program

encourages experiential learning, allowing students to

incorporate life and work experiences. Third, SNL's

program is interdisciplinary, exploring the connection

among the disciplines in all courses. Fourth, SNL's

program is individualized, allowing students to choose

their own area of focus.

Graduates receive a Bachelor of Arts degree from

DePaul University with a focus that they select and refine

with a faculty mentor. The School does not offer

prescribed focus areas or concentrations; therefore,

students graduate with a wide range of academic

specialties.

Research Design

Survey research explored the degree to which adult

college students (participating in a four-year degree

program) had experienced a significant change over time in

their levels of economic, social and cultural capital.

A sample of adult, degree-seeking students

participating in at least one class during the DePaul

winter 2006 term was invited to participate. To ensure a


13

high rate of return and to reach a representative sample of

students, the researcher purposefully visited a sample of

School for New Learning classes. All classes were offered

at the downtown Loop campus during the 2006 winter quarter

term; the courses varied by subject matter, instructor and

day of the week. The researcher explained and distributed

the survey (Appendix A) to students and asked the students

to take ten to fifteen minutes to complete the instrument.

In addition to the instrument, students received an

information sheet detailing the study (Appendix C) and were

read a script before the instrument was distributed

(Appendix B). Students also had the opportunity to ask

questions of the researcher. Students were not required to

fill out the survey, and they were assured that

participation was not related to the assessment of their

class work.

Instrument Construction

All but two survey questions were closed-ended. The

majority of questions used a Likert scale to gauge

respondents' agreement or disagreement with particular

statements. Other questions were multiple choice and

categorical. Respondents were asked to recall life

situations from their teenage years. Then, they were asked


14

to answer the same questions about their current life

situation. Each question was grounded in existing academic

literature on social, cultural and economic capital and

responses were coded as such. The instrument included

questions related to all three measures of capital, in both

the past and the present sections for a total of 69

responses. There were also an additional 9 demographic

questions.

Using Cronbach's alpha, questions in all three

categories of capital were analyzed for internal

consistency. This helped in determining whether the

questions in each category were measuring the same

characteristics. As a result of these analyses, some scale

revisions were done before analysis of the main research

questions.

In order to investigate if respondents had experienced

a change over time in economic, social and cultural

capital, they were asked to provide detail about current

and past life situations. Paired-samples t-tests were

performed for each of the questions in order to compare the

mean responses of the current situation and the former

situation and to test the significance of any change over


15

time. For the purposes of this study, the statistical

significance level was 95 percent (p ^ .05).

Data Analysis

Collected data were analyzed using the quantitative

software package, SPSS. All data were coded, manually

entered and re-checked for accuracy. The goal of the data

analysis was to explore changes in economic, social and

cultural capital over a period of time for a specific group

of adult learners.

Limitations of the Study

There are a few limitations associated with this

study. First, this research was conducted with students at

one postsecondary institution. Although the student

population was quite diverse, results may be reflective of

DePaul SNL students and not adult students at other

postsecondary institutions.

Second, DePaul University is a four-year, private

institution. In general, private institutions have higher

tuition and fees than public institutions; therefore, they

may attract students with different levels of social,

cultural and economic capital.


Definition of Terms

The following is a list of terms and definitions used in

this study:

1. Adult Learners: students 24 years of age or older who

are participating in a baccalaureate degree program.

2. Capital: something that possesses market or exchange

value; a resource that can be used to one's advantage.

3. Continuing Education: credit and non-credit education

that does not lead to a degree; education for

individuals who already possess a degree but return to

school for personal or professional skills and

enhancement.

4. Lifelong Learning: a process of learning throughout

one's lifetime.'

5. Public Good: a resource that provides benefits for a

group, community or society; resources can be both

economic and non-economic.

6. Non-traditional Students: any college student who

does not fit all of the criteria listed in item seven

below.

7. Traditional Students: college students who are

between the ages of 18-24, living on campus, and going

to school full time.


17

8. Traditional-aged College Students:

between the ages of 18 and 23.

college students


18

CHAPTER TWOREVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

It is in fact impossible to account for the structure

and functioning of the social world unless one

reintroduces capital in all its forms and not solely

in one form recognized by economic theory (Bourdieu,

1983).

Academicians have produced a wide body of scholarly

literature to address issues of postsecondary attendance

patterns, focusing on why some participate in the academy

and others do not (Bowen, 2005; Bowen & Bok, 1998;

McDonough, 1997). This research suggests that capital, in

all of its forms, is important in understanding the factors

that motivate (or discourage) individuals to pursue higher

education and in expanding postsecondary opportunities for

nontraditional groups.

This literature review is divided into three

sections. The first section analyzes the meaning of

economic capital and its relationship to educational

attendance patterns. The second and third sections analyze


19

the meaning of social and cultural capital respectively in

relation to educational attendance patterns.

Economic Capital

Economic capital refers to the financial resources an

individual has available to obtain goods or services

(Hofferth et al, 1998). It is a measure of financial

assets, including income and accumulated capital assets.

It is also a measure of an individual's class position

(Conley, 1999).

Understanding economic capital is important in

evaluating postsecondary attendance patterns, as research

demonstrates that one's wealth is highly correlated with

educational attainment and persistence (Bowen; 2005;

Heller, 2001, 2002). Individuals from low-income

backgrounds pursue postsecondary education at a far lower

rate than those with more financial resources. In 2004 for

example, only 54 percent of high school graduates in the

lowest income quartile enrolled in college, compared to 82

percent of those in the top income quartile (College Board,

2004). Even low-income students with high academic

qualifications participate at far lower rates; if they

participate at all, they often choose less expensive


2 0

institutions (Heller, 2002). There are a number of reasons

why financial assets correlate with postsecondary

attendance.

First, middle- to high-income families tend to have

more savings and investments than low-income families (Lee,

2001); therefore, they have more resources to pay for the

cost of a college education. They are also less likely to

be deterred by increases in tuition rates (Ehrenberg,

2002). Price is a significant factor for most individuals

considering college; however, the elasticity of demand for

low-income students is much greater than it is for students

from other family backgrounds (Baum, 2001; Heller, 2002).

Even when financial aid is available to students, there is

often a great deal of unmet need. In 1995, for example,

low-income students at community colleges had, on average,

$3,200 in un-met financial need; low-income students in the

four-year sector had an average of $3,800 in un-met

financial need (Heller, 2002).

Moreover, individuals from underprivileged backgrounds

tend to be less academically prepared for college than

their more wealthy counterparts. There are a number of

reasons why this is the case. One reason is that low-

income children often attend schools with inadequate


resources (Bowen, 2005; Heller, 2002). These resources

include everything from educational materials such as books

and supplies to spending per pupil and student/teacher

ratios. In addition, low-income parents often lack the

educational expertise to prepare their children for the

scholastic work required in school (Bowen, 2005) and to

ensure that their children are getting the needed

preparation for post-secondary education (Tierney &

Hagedorn, 2002). The amount of preparation one gains

during the early years is a strong indicator of that

individual's academic success (Conley, 1999). Furthermore,

violent neighborhoods, single-parent households, and other

attributes of an impoverished community contribute to

inequality of preparation (Bowen, 2005).

Social Capital

Scholars from various disciplines often debate about

the origins of the term social capital and its intended

use. Some claim that the idea originated with Bourdieu and

Coleman in the 1980s; others posit that the idea was

introduced earlier by seminal sociological thinkers such as

Marx, Weber and Durkeim. At least one historian has traced

the term back to an early educator by the name of L.J.


22

Hannifan, who introduced social capital in 1916 to describe

"goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy, and social

intercourse among a group of individuals and families who

make up a social unit" (Farr, 2003, p. 6). While the

debate about who engineered the idea of social capital

continues, many of the scholars listed here used social

capital as a way to explain degrees of educational

achievement and attainment (Dika & Singh, 2002).

Social capital, although often confused with cultural

capital1, refers to various social networks, both formal and

informal, with which people are associated. These networks

can form around any number of affiliations such as

religion, ethnicity, geography, athletics, occupation,

fraternities, clubs, friends, associates, and so on.

Through social networks, individuals obtain information,

come to understand shared norms and feel kinships with

others in the network; as a result, they form distinct

communities of trust. Individuals with access to social

communities that provide assistance with information about

the college application process, referrals to admission

1 Unlike social capital, which is meant to describe group membership and networks, cultural capital, as was originally defined by Pierre Bourdieu, refers to attitudes, preferences, tastes and knowledge that families pass on to their children. Tastes and preferences provide individuals from certain backgrounds with degrees o f entitlement or expectations o f se lf that often translate into social privilege.


2 3

officers, and general encouragement to consider further

education, have advantages over those who do not have

access to such networks. In this way, social networks

translate into social capital, implying that there is non

economic value in certain types of relationships. Social

capital produces resources that "allow actors to improve

their performance in a variety of activities in which they

engage" (Carbonaro, 1998, p. 296).

Non-Family Influences

A number of studies consider networks outside of the

family unit as a measure of social capital. Research

suggests that non-kin relationships, fostered by parents,

are important in fully understanding levels of educational

attainment. Family influences, resources and relationships

are clearly important, but the idea of social capital

extends to non-kin relationships as well, which tend to be

reciprocal in nature (Coleman, 1988). The social networks

with which people have connections provide links to

resources, contacts, and support systems. Members of the

network consciously or unconsciously invest in

relationships so that they can draw on these resources and

support mechanisms when needed (Hofferth et al, 1998).


24

Hofferth et al (1998) examined the degree to which

relationships among neighborhood residents—that is "social

relationships between households"—could be used as a

predictor of children's and young adults' years of

schooling. The researchers observed (using the Panel Study

of Income Dynamics [PSID]) 901 black and white children, at

ages 11-16. Then, using similar questions included in the

PSID, they interviewed those same children again at age 22.

The researchers considered years of schooling on two

levels: completion of high school and college attendance.

What they found is that weak ties2 were strongly

related to college attendance patterns but had no net

effect on the high school completion rates. Also, their

research suggested that while weak ties were better than

strong ties at connecting people to beneficial information,

children from high-income families benefited more from

their social networks than did low-income children. While

Hofferth et al did not set out to find this interaction,

they were clear in their conclusion that economic capital

had a significant influence on educational attainment.

2 Weak ties refer to relationships that one has with acquaintances or people other than family and close friends.


Fustenburg and Hughes (1995) studied the relationship

among parental investment in children, networks and

relationships outside of the family and the children's

development and success as adults. The researchers used

data from a 20-year longitudinal study of teenage mothers

and their children who were at-risk of what the researchers

called "lifelong disadvantage." They then engaged in a

follow-up study, 17 years after the start of the original

study, with 252 children. One of the seven indicators of

adult success was college enrollment. What Fustenburg and

Hughes found was that three measures of life success were

all correlated with social capital. "Completion of high

school, enrollment in college, and the global measure of

socioeconomic status are significantly associated with at

least half of the social capital measures" (p. 586).

However, they note that their findings are only suggestive,

since social capital is not easily or uniformly measured

and since not all correlations they predicted were

significant.

Putnam (1995, 2000) studied the correlation between a

state's level of social capital and five different

outcomes, one of which was education. Drawing from a

variety of state-level data sources, which contained


indicators of social life in America, Putnam created a

Social Capital Index by state. The Index measured

characteristics such as community organizational life,

engagement in public affairs, community volunteerism,

informal sociability and social trust. Putnam's research

suggested that racial composition, economic inequalities

and rates of poverty were all predictors of a state's

educational success but no one factor was as important as a

state's level of social capital. While Putnam's work was

not related to individual success, it did explore how

social connectedness within a state positively correlates

with how well the state's children perform in school. What

he found was that "the beneficial effects of social capital

persist even after accounting for a host of other factors

that might affect state educational success. Social

capital was the single most important explanatory factor"

(Putnam, 2000, pgs. 299-300).

Closure

Scholars interested in social capital have also

explored the degree to which closure correlates with

educational attainment (Carbonaro, 1998; Coleman, 1988).

The term social closure was originally introduced by Max

Weber to describe how certain groups exclude those without


27

similar characteristics as a way of maximizing their own

access to resources and opportunities (Parkin, 1979) .

Intergenerational closure suggests that parents know and

associate with the parents of their children's friends and,

in so doing, create strong intergenerational networks that

often translate into capital (Coleman, 1988).

Carbonaro (1998) tested the theory that the greater

the degree of closure, the more easily social capital is

generated. Analyzing data from the 1988 National Education

Longitudinal Study, which includes information about social

networks, Carbonaro found mixed results. In some

instances, such as math achievement, a high degree of

closure was positively correlated, although this was not

true for all subject areas. Overall, however, Carbonaro

found that social closure positively influenced students'

educational outcomes in certain subject areas. Future

research is needed to assess, "what it is about social

networks with more closure that improves certain

educational outcomes" (p. 310)..

Institutional Ties

In addition to non-kin, closed networks, some scholars

have explored how institutional ties influence college

aspirations and educational attainment (McDonough, 1999;


28

Stanton-Salazar & Dornbusch, 1995). Institutions such as

schools can provide affiliates with useful information

about the college application process, the social and

economic benefits of a college education, and ways to

navigate the academic experience.

Stanton-Salazar and Dornbusch (1995) explored how

various institutions create information networks that

translate into social capital. By studying high school

students of Mexican origin, the researchers assessed the

degree to which institutional resources such as teachers

and guidance counselors help in shaping students'

aspirations about college and expectations about the

future. Their findings suggest that "success within the

educational system for working-class and minority students

is dependent on the formation of genuinely supportive

relationships with institutional agents" (p. 117).

According to the authors, institutional ties are

critical in helping disadvantaged individuals engage and

succeed in high school and in the American occupational

structure. Like many other scholars, Stanton-Salazar and

Dornbusch suggest that an individual's level of social

capital is directly tied to his/her family's socioeconomic

background. In other words, they too acknowledge the


2 9

importance of more than one type of capital in studying

American's levels of educational attainment.

Summary

While there is some debate about the origins and

specific meaning of the term social capital, the studies

mentioned in this paper do point to various advantages of

social capital on a person's likelihood of successfully

completing high school and entering the postsecondary

arena. However, the advantages are often linked to other

attributes such as economic capital, educational

preparation and family composition. While there have been

a number of studies, both qualitative and quantitative,

that demonstrate the correlation of educational attainment

with social capital, the empirical evidence that has been

presented does not provide strong support to suggest that

social capital alone influences educational attainment

patterns. This is due, in part, to the various

interpretations of the term social capital and its

confusion with the notion of cultural capital (Dika &

Singh, 2002). It is also due to the strong link between

socioeconomic status and degrees of social capital--it is

hard to measure one without the other.


30

Cultural Capital

In the 1980s, Pierre Bourdieu, a French sociologist,

introduced the idea of cultural capital. He asserted that

each person is raised with certain cultural advantages or

disadvantages, which ultimately shape his/her life chances.

Non-economic influences, attained during the socialization

process, are significant in determining a person's

likelihood of attending college. These cultural assets are

things such as language, appreciation of the arts, feelings

of entitlement, tastes, preferences, and parents' level of

education. Bourdieu suggested that individuals who possess

high levels of "good" culture are able to translate it into

capital, and that various institutions provide distinct

privileges to those who effectively signal high culture.

Because cultural capital is integrally linked to family

life, Bourdieu suggested that it is socially reproduced.

"Cultural capital is that property that middle and upper

class families transmit to their offspring which

substitutes for or supplements the transmission of economic

capital as a means of maintaining class status and

privilege across generations" (Bourdieu, 1983). Cultural

capital, therefore, is an outcome of one's socialization

and is acquired without effort (DiMaggio, 2001).


31

Both individual and institutional notions of cultural

capital are presented here. Individual capital refers to

the tastes, norms and expectations that children are taught

in their home environments and come to take for granted.

Cultural capital at the institutional level, however,

refers to programs that exist or do not exist to provide

individuals with access to cultural capital.

Children who are raised with high levels of cultural

capital become accustomed to certain norms such as manners,

sophisticated vocabularies and language skills, certain

forms of entertainment, gourmet foods and so on. They also

acquire expectations of themselves that give them an

advantage in the pursuit higher education. This is because

one's decision to attend college is greatly influenced by

the expectations that others have for the individual.

Eventually, the individual internalizes others'

expectations and carries them forward (Morgan, 2005). As a

result, the pursuit higher education becomes a natural

expectation for some children.

Using Bourdieu's foundation, some scholars have

researched the degree to which culture influences

educational expectations and attainment. Lareau (2003)

focused on the role that class and culture play in shaping


32

the lives of young children. She purposefully selected

twelve families from two different schools in an unnamed

metropolitan area. Each of the families (six black, five

white and one interracial) had at least one child in the

third grade. Over an extended period of time, Lareau

interviewed parents and teachers and observed each of the

twelve children in their respective classrooms and home

environments.

By comparing and contrasting the social interactions

of poor and working-class families with those of middle-

class families, Lareau identified two distinct child-

rearing practices: concerted cultivation and the

accomplishment of natural growth. According to her, both

practices informed the ways in which children interact with

adults, authority figures and institutions— notably

educational institutions.

Lareau defined concerted cultivation as the process

parents use when they negotiate with their children,

teaching them not only to reason with adults and to

question authority but also to build extensive language

skills. Parents who participate in this type of child-

rearing fill their children's schedules with planned

leisure activities and teach them life skills that will


33

assist them in becoming "job wise." Part of becoming job

wise is ensuring that one has the needed credentials to

move forward with success. In the second approach, the

accomplishment of natural growth, parents serve as

authority figures more than as persons with whom children

learn to reason. Rather than scheduled activities,

children have autonomy in deciding how to entertain

themselves and often spend a good deal of time interacting

with kin. Her general findings suggest that children who

grow up in middle-class households are raised by methods of

concerted cultivation and gain a strong sense of

entitlement, whereas children of poor and working-class

families are raised by methods of natural growth and are

taught constraint. In Lareau's view then, class dictates

the "cultural logic of child-rearing" (p. 3).

One of the central premises of Lareau's research is

that parents' social positions (the jobs they hold, the

complexity of their work, their level of educational

attainment, etc.) greatly influence children's achievement

in school and ultimately their chances of becoming

successful individuals. Her research suggests that success

is not a result of one's natural ability or aptitude;

rather, the chances of becoming an accomplished individual


34

are directly related to one's socialization process and the

amount of cultural capital a person gains in his/her

younger years. Lareau links how much quality information a

child receives, how he/she learns to navigate the world and

how he/she interacts with institutions and people with

varying levels of success in adult life. She also links

linguistic interaction with the ways in which children

approach schooling, adults and institutions.

While Lareau finds benefits and drawbacks to both

practices of natural growth and concerted cultivation, she

stresses that children from middle-class families have more

than economic advantages; they possess cultural advantages

(capital) that are valued by institutions within American

society, especially selective institutions—those that get

to choose whom they prefer to recruit and/or serve. In

this view, success is limited to a select few and the

process of social reproduction and social inequality is

further perpetuated.

Like Lareau, McDonough (1997) explored how cultural

capital influences educational attainment. Using

qualitative research, she studied 24 white, female high

schools seniors to understand what influenced their college

decision-making processes. She held race and gender


35

constant and selected subjects from high schools with

certain characteristics, including low and high-income

populations and strong or weak guidance counseling

programs.

McDonough studied the different ways that high school

students receive and process information; she also studied

how families and social organizations influence the

decisions that students make about college. She suggested

that the degree of cultural capital one possesses is

directly linked to the expectations the individual has for

himself/herself and the choices he/she makes about life.

"Not all college-bound students face equal choices if they

start out with different family and school resources that

enable or constrain their educational and occupational

mobility patterns. These differential resources contribute

to the persistence and reproduction of a social-class-based

stratified system of postsecondary opportunities that

thwarts meritocratic ideals" (p. 150).

Her research not only focused on why some go to

college and some do not but also on the types of

institutions that people choose based on cultural

influences. According to McDonough, institutional

stratification exists within the American higher education


3 6

system, and this stratification serves to produce

inequality in the adult years. Her research suggests that

cultural values, nurtured in both the home and high school

environments, influence a person's view of the type of

institution he/she is permitted to attend or the type of

institution that is a good cultural fit. Research

demonstrates that those with elite cultural upbringings—

where access to top-notch higher education is expected—

often obtain access to the best colleges and universities

in the United States. Graduating from such elite

institutions further solidifies a person's level of non

economic resources--that is cultural and social capital.

McDonough argued that providing underprivileged young

adults with access to certain kinds of institutions

(community colleges, for example) does not level the

educational playing field. Credentials from certain types

of institutions are signals of cultural capital, signals

that are recognized by employers and graduate postsecondary

institutions. Her general finding was that, while economic

factors are very important in one's decision to choose a

college or university, other social influences such as

family, friends and high school guidance counselors were

equally important. Cultural capital further advantages


37

"those students who have and use family, financial, network

capital...in trying to maximize their educational choices"

(p. 151).

In addition to family influences and guidance from

counselors, scholars have explored the connection between

educational attendance patterns, cultural capital and

college preparatory programs. The majority of efforts to

encourage greater participation by disadvantaged students

focus on financial aid programs (Swail & Perna, 2002).

Some scholars suggest, however, that college preparation

programs, especially those aimed at low-income and minority

students, offer a great deal of promise in generating

cultural capital outside of the home environment

(McDonough, 1997; Tierny & Hagedorn, 2002; Tierny et al,

2005). They do so by stimulating cultural exchanges;

these exchanges have the potential to give participating

students access to academic content that is of value to

institutions of higher learning. In this way, preparation

programs redistribute cultural capital to those who would

not otherwise possess it (Yonezawa, Jones & Mehan, 2002).

However, many scholars who favor preparatory programs also

realize that even if such programs "equip children with the

capital that delivers them to the college door, they often


38

do not have the requisite capital to graduate from college"

(Tierney & Hagedorn, 2002, p. 5).

Summary

Each person possesses varying degrees of cultural

capital based on family values, norms and expectations.

Cultural capital is acquired during the socialization

process. Research demonstrates that socioeconomic status is

a strong indicator of one's access to such capital.

Several studies have explored the differences between poor

and wealthy individuals, their levels of cultural capital

and their educational attendance patterns. Most have found

that economic status is strongly linked to cultural

capital; for instance, low-income families have less money

to spend on cultural resources such as vacations, trips to

museums and tickets to the opera than do middle-income

families. Given these findings, it is difficult to

conclude that cultural capital alone encourages or hinders

college attendance patterns. However, research

demonstrates that the way in which an individual is

socialized and the expectations he/she comes to understand

influence decisions about postsecondary education. While

the studies presented here help to inform ways one can

measure cultural capital, more empirical research about the


39

correlation of culture and postsecondary attendance is

needed.

Conclusion

Research suggests that various levels of economic,

social and cultural capital are all related to educational

attainment and postsecondary attendance patterns. Since

economic advantage is often linked with cultural and social

advantage, it is difficult to measure one factor without

also considering the other factors. Much of the research

presented here acknowledges that while it is possible to

measure an individual's social capital and cultural

capital, economic capital is intrinsically tied to both.


40

CHAPTER THREEMETHODOLOGY


The purpose of this study was to investigate whether

or not individuals who participate in a four-year


years of age or older) have greater degrees of economic,




to college. Research suggests that these three forms of

capital are positively correlated with academic achievement

and the pursuit of college. However, this research has been

limited to the traditional-aged college student.

Research Questions

The following research questions were addressed in this study:

1. To what extent do adult college students have greaterdegrees of economic capital than they did when they werecompleting high school?

2. To what extent do adult college students have greaterdegrees of social capital than they did when they werecompleting high school?


41



Instrument Construction

Survey research explored the degree to which adult

college students (participating in a four-year

baccalaureate degree program) had experienced a change over

time in their levels of economic, social and cultural

capital.

All but two survey questions were closed-ended. The

majority of questions used a Likert scale to gauge

respondents'' agreement or disagreement with particular

statements. Other questions were multiple choice and

categorical. Respondents were asked to recall life

situations from their teenage years. Then, they were asked

to answer the same questions about their current life

situation. Each question was grounded in existing academic

literature on social, cultural and economic capital and

responses were coded as such. The instrument included

questions related to all three measures of capital, in both

the past and present sections for a total of 69 responses.

There were also an additional 9 demographic questions.


42

Using Cronbach's alpha, questions in all three

categories of capital were analyzed for internal

consistency. This helped in determining whether the

questions in each category were measuring the same

characteristics. As a result of these analyses, some scale

revisions were done before analysis of the main research

questions.

In order to investigate if respondents had experienced

a change over time of economic, social and cultural

capital, they were asked to provide detail about current

and past life situations. Paired-samples t-tests were

performed for each of the questions in order to compare the

mean responses of the current situation and the former

situation and to test the significance of any change over

time. For the purposes of this study, the statistical

significance level was 95 percent (p ^ .05).


Survey questions were coded follows:

EconomicCapital

My parents (caretakers) owned their own home:□ True □ False

Most of the people in my neighborhood:□ Rented their homes □ Owned their homes □ Lived in public housing

I would best describe my neighborhood as:□ Wealthy 0 Middle-Class □ Poor

My father's (male caretaker's) occupation was:□ Academic □ Professional □ Managerial □ Laborer □Clerical □ Small Business Owner □ Homemaker □ Unemployed

My father's (male caretaker's) highest level of education was:□ More than doctorate □ Doctorate □ Master's □ Bachelor's□ Associate's□ Some College □ High School or GED □ Less than High School

My mother's (female caretaker's) occupation was:0 Academic □ Professional □ Managerial □ Laborer □Clerical □ Small Business Owner 0 Homemaker □ Unemployed

My mother's (female caretaker's) highest level of education was:□ More than doctorate □ Doctorate □ Master's □ Bachelor's□ Associate's0 Some College □ High School or GED □ Less than High School

My parents or (caretakers) owned more than one vehicle.□ True 0 False

My parent(s) or (caretakers) had significant savings in the bank.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My parent(s) or (caretakers) had significant financial assets.0 Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree 0 Strongly Disagree

1 was aware that financial aid was available for college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

We often ate at restaurants where you are seated and served.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree


44

We regularly took vacations._____________ □ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly DisagreeSocial A non-family member explained the college applicationCapital process to me.

□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

Most of the people in my neighborhood went to college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree 0 Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

Most of the people in my high school went to college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

Most of my friends went to college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

Someone I knew well went to college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My employer encouraged me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

A colleague encouraged me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

A friend encouraged me to pursue college.0 Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My family and I regularly participated in church services. D Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My family and I regularly participated in group activities with extended family.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

At least one of my parents or caretakers regularly participated in community gatherings.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree 0 Strongly Disagree

Cultural My parent(s) (caretakers) stressed the importance of anCapital education.

□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My parent(s) (caretakers) encouraged me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

An authority figure encouraged me to attend college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

I always saw myself as a college student.


45

□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree 0 Strongly Disagree

My parent(s) or caretaker(s) took me to museums.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree 0 Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My parent(s) or caretaker(s) exposed me to classical music and/or opera.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

My parent(s) or caretaker(s) took me to art exhibitions.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree 0 Strongly Disagree

There were many educational resourdes (such as books) in my house.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree D Strongly Disagree

At least one of my parents or caretakers voted regularly.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

Influences Which of the following have influenced your decision to return to college at this time? (check all that apply)0 friends □ family Oco-workers □ acquaintances 0 employer□ financial resources □ tuition assistance ^financial aid D understanding of the importance of a college degree □ career change 0 life transition □ work-related opportunities □ none of the above

If I had had more economic resources, I would have pursued college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

If I had understood the importance of a college degree earlier in life, I would have pursued college earlier.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

A greater understanding of the importance of a college degree has encouraged me to pursue college at this time.0 Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

An increase in economic resources has encouraged me to pursue college at this time.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree 0 Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

Demographic data were also collected including gender,

. race/ethnicity, income level, age, family structure and


46

number of siblings. These data further inform this study

by providing a more detailed profile of sample respondents.

The following demographic questions were included in

the survey:

Demographic Are you the first person in your family to attend a university or college?□ yes □ no

How old were you when you graduated high school or earned your GED?

What is your gender?□ Female□ Male

What is your racial background?□ African American □ Asian/Pacific Islander □ Caucasian□ Hispanic/Latino □ Native American □ Multiracial □ Other

What is your age? ___________

During my childhood years, I lived with the following number of parents:D None □ One □ Two □ One plus a step-parent

How many children did your parents (caretakers have)?□ 0 D 1 D 2 D 3 D 4 D 5 O 6 D 7 D more than 7

Please indicate your annual household income range.□ Less than $9,600 0 $9,600-$24,999 □ $25,000-$49,999 0 more than $50,000


47

Data Analysis

Collected data were analyzed using the quantitative

software package, SPSS. All data were coded, manually

entered and re-checked for accuracy.

Since research suggests that forms of capital (both

economic and non-economic) are positively correlated with

postsecondary participation, the goal of the data analysis

was to explore changes in economic, social and cultural

capital over a period of time for a specific group of adult

learners.

Data Collection and Sample

Over a period of one week in January 2006, self

administered paper surveys (Appendix A) were distributed

and collected at DePaul University in Chicago, Illinois.

During DePaul''s winter quarter term, there were 1, 975 adult

degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled in School

for New Learning (SNL)3 classes. Of the 1,975 adult degree-

seeking students, 202 students were asked to participate in

this study. Of the 202, 186 responded for a response rate

of 92 percent. Three students chose not to complete the

survey. In some cases, students had received the survey in

3 The School for N ew Learning is one o f the eight colleges o f DePaul University. It offers a portfolio o f degree programs for adult college students.


48

a previous class (for example, the evening before); these

students did not fill out the survey a second time.

To ensure a high rate of return and to reach a

representative sample of students, the researcher

purposefully visited a sample of School for New Learning

classes. All classes were offered at the downtown Loop

campus during the 2006 winter quarter; the courses varied

in subject matter, instructor and day of the week. The

researchers explained and distributed the survey to

students and asked the students to take ten to fifteen

minutes to complete the instrument. In addition to the

instrument, students received an information sheet

detailing the study (Appendix C) and were read a script

before the instrument was distributed (Appendix B).

Students also had the opportunity to ask questions of the

researchers.

Of the 186 respondents, 59.7 percent were female; 40.3

percent were male. The racial composition of the

respondents was: 42.9 percent Caucasian; 37.4 percent

African American; 11 percent Hispanic/Latino; 4.4 percent

Asian/Pacific Islander; 2.2 percent Multiracial; 1.1

percent Native American; and 1.1 percent "Other". Students

had completed an average of 6.2 classes in the DePaul SNL


program. The mean age of the sample was 38, although

respondents ranged in age from 24 to 59. 17.2 percent of

respondents identified themselves as the first person in

their families to attend college; 82.8 percent did not

(please see the additional findings section in Chapter 5).

95.2 percent of respondents were between the ages of 16-19

when they graduated from high school or earned their GEDs;

4.6 percent were between the ages of 20-35. When asked

about current family income, 2.8 percent of respondents

reported annual family incomes less than $9,600; 4 percent

reported $9,600-24,999; 27.3 percent reported $25,000-

$49,999; 26.1 percent reported $50,000-74,000; and, 39.8

percent of respondents reported annual family incomes of

$75,000 or more. This sample was representative of the

larger DePaul SNL population.


50

CHAPTER FOURPRESENTATION OF THE DATA

Introduction






graduated high school. This chapter presents the results

of the survey data compiled for this study.

Research Questions






51

Data Analysis

Each survey question corresponded to one of the four

research questions, with the exception of the demographic

questions, which sought to get a profile of respondents.

There were five types of questions. They dealt with:

economic capital, social capital, cultural capital,

demographics, and students' perceptions of influential

factors. Since questions about economic, social, and

cultural capital were asked about the past and present,

there were eight sets of questions. Those sets are listed

below:

• Economic Past (all economic capital variables for the

high school years)

• Economic Present (all economic capital variables for

the present time)

• Social Past (all social capital variables for the high

school years)

• Social Present (all social capital variables for the

present time)

• Cultural Past (all cultural capital variables for the

high school years)


52

• Cultural Present (all cultural capital variables for

the present time)

• Influences (all variables related to students'

perceptions of what influenced their return to

college)

• Demographic (all demographic variables)

Each set of economic, social and cultural capital

questions was tested for internal reliability (using

Cronbach's Alpha) to ensure that questions within each set

were measuring the same characteristics so that scale

scores could be derived. Based on this analysis,

appropriate scale revisions were made.

The following Cronbach alpha coefficients were found

for each of the scale sets: Economic Capital Past (.82);

Economic Capital Present (.70); Social Capital Past (.74);

Social Capital Present (.69); Cultural Capital Past (.84);

Cultural Capital Present (.73).

After scale revisions were made, each of the measures

of capital was assigned a score in both the past and the

present based on the sum of the answers to each of the

questions within the sets. For example, there were a total

of four Likert scale questions about economic capital


53

during the teenage years and each question had a score

between 1 and 4 (l=strongly degree, 4=strongly agree). As

a result, respondents could have a total score between four

and 16 for this set of questions. The past score (high

school years) was subtracted from the present score

(current situation) for a score of "change over time" (see

Table 4.1). The mean change over time for economic capital

was +2.1547 with a standard deviation of 3.58676; the range

of scores for economic capital change was between -9.0 and

+12.0. The mean change over time for social capital was

+2.2485 with a standard deviation of 3.54140; the range of

scores for social capital change was between -7.0 and

+11.0. The mean change over time cultural capital was

+4.3652, with a standard deviation of 5.95333; the range of

scores for cultural capital change was between -8.0 and

22 . 0 .

Table 4.1: Summary of Means and Standard Deviations of Change Over Time in Economic, Social and Cultural Capital

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. DeviationEconomic Past 185 4.00 16.00 8.9459 3.13419Economic Present 181 5.00 16.00 11.1050 2.29372Econ. Change 181 -9. 00 12.00 2.1547 3.58676Social Past 179 10.00 32.00 21.4860 4.02849Social Present 170 14.00 32.00 23.8235 3.64449Social Change 165 -7.00 11.00 2.2485 3.54140Cultural Past 182 14.00 44.00 29.9451 6.11648Cultural Present 181 20. 00 44.00 34.3923 4.34559Cult. Change 178 -8.00 22.00 4.3652 5.95333


54

Economic Capital

In order to measure change over time as it relates to

research question #1, respondents were asked identical

questions related to economic capital for both the present

time and the time when they were graduating from high

school. By taking the current situation and comparing it

to the former situation, the researcher was able to

determine if any or all of the economic indicators had

significantly changed for this adult student population.

Economic Capital Questions Not Included in Sets

Economic questions that were not included in the sets

had a reliability alpha of .683 in the past tense and .219

in the present tense. These questions did not provide a

reliable set of questions; however, they are all important

indicators of a person's level of economic capital. These

data are presented in this section.

Corresponding past and present tense questions are

listed (italicized questions represent those asked with

regard to respondents' current life situation). Figures

listed are the valid percentages for each response. The

difference represents the change over time.


When asked if their parents owned their own home

during their teenage years, 68.1 percent of respondents

indicated yes. When asked if respondents currently own

their own home, 55.7 said yes for a mean difference (loss)

of -12.8 percent on the economic capital measure of home

ownership.

My parents (caretakers) owned their own home:I currently own my own home:

Table 4.2: Change Over Time in Home OwnershipPast Present Difference

True 68.1 55.7 -12.8False 31. 9 44.3 12.4

When asked if most of the people during their teenage

neighborhoods owned their own homes, rented their homes or

lived in public housing, respondents answered that 77.7

percent of people owned, 20.1 percent rented, and 2.2

percent lived in public housing. When asked the same

question about their current neighborhoods, 81.2 percent of

respondents noted that the people in their neighborhoods

own their own homes (+3.5), 17.7 percent rent (-2.4) and

1.1 percent live in public housing (-1.1). Overall, there

was a positive gain on this measure of economic capital.


56

Most of the people in my neighborhood (past):Most of the people in my neighborhood (present):

Table 4.3: Change Over Time in Neighborhood (a)Past Present Difference

Lived in Public Housing

2.2 1.1 -1.1

Rented 20.1 17.7 -2.4Owned 77. 7 81.2 3.5

When asked to describe the economic profile of their

teenage neighborhoods, 2.2 percent of respondents indicated

wealthy, 81.1 percent indicated middle-class and 16.8

percent indicated poor. When asked the same question about

their current neighborhood, 15.4 percent said wealthy

(+13.2), 79.1 percent said middle (-2.0) and 5.5 percent

said poor (-11.3). Overall, there was a positive gain on

this measure of economic capital.

I would best describe my neighborhood as (past):I would best describe my neighborhood as (present):

Table 4.4: Change Over Time in Neighborhood (b)Past Present Difference

Poor 16.8 5.5 -11.3Middle-class 81.1 79.1 -2.0Wealthy 2.2 15.4 13.2

When asked about fathers' occupation during the teenage

years, 51.7 percent of respondents noted laborer; 17.8

percent professional; 12.6 percent small business owner,

10.9 percent managerial; 2.9 percent academic; 2.9 percent

unemployed, and less than one percent noted that their

fathers were either unemployed or were homemakers.


57

Overall, 55.8 percent of respondents noted that their

fathers were employed in jobs that are not typically

associated with high wages.4

When asked about mothers' occupation during the teenage

years, 31.9 percent of respondents noted that their mothers

were homemaker; 23.1 percent clerical; 14.8 percent

laborer; 14.3 percent professional; 6.6 percent managerial;

5.5 percent academic; 2.2 percent small business owner; 1.6

unemployed. Overall, 71.4 percent of respondents noted

that their mothers were employed in jobs that are not

typically associated with high wages.

When asked about their own current occupations, the

majority of respondents (43.7 percent) indicated that they

were homemakers; 18.5 percent small business owners, 17.5

percent laborers; 6.0 percent academic; 4.9 percent

managerial; 4.9 percent clerical; 2.2 percent professional;

and 2.2 percent unemployed. Overall, 84.4 percent of

respondents noted that they worked in jobs that are not

typically associated with high wages. For this measure of

4Occupational categories were classified into working class or professional, in order to distinguish

between high and low wage earners. For the purposes o f this study, unemployed, homemaker, laborer and clerical were classified as working class or low wage.


58

economic capital, respondents experienced an overall

decline.

My father's occupation was:My current occupation is:

Table 4.5: Change Over Time in Occupation (a)Father Self Difference

Unemployed 2.9 2.2 -0.7Homemaker 0.6 43.7 43.1Laborer 51. 7 17.5 34.2Clerical 0.6 4.9 4.3Small Business Owner

12.6 18.6 6.0

Managerial 10. 9 4.9 -6.0Professional 17 . 8 2.2 -15. 6Academic 2.9 6.0 3.1

My mother's occupation was:My occupation is:

Table 4.6: Change Over Time in Occupation (b)Mother Self Difference

Unemployed 1.6 2.2 0.6Homemaker 31. 9 43.7 11.8Laborer 14.8 17.5 7.3Clerical 23.1 4.9 -18.2Small Business Owner

2.2 18.6 16.4

Managerial 6.6 4.9 -1.7Professional 14.3 2.2 -12.1Academic 5.5 6.0 0.5

When asked about fathers' highest level of education,

64.6 percent of respondents replied that their fathers had

high school diplomas or less; 14.3 percent had some

college; and 2.3 percent had an associate's degree. 17.8

percent of respondents reported that their fathers had a

bachelor's degree or higher.


. 5 9

When asked about mothers' highest level of education,

53.3 percent of respondents replied that their mothers had

a high school degree or less; 22.2 had some college; and

5.9 percent had an associate's degree. 18.4 percent of

respondents reported that their mothers had bachelor's

degrees or higher.

When asked about their own highest level of education,

8.7 percent of respondents replied that they had a high

school degree; 61.2 percent had some college; and 25.1

percent had an associate's degree. 4.4 percent of

respondents reported having a bachelor's degree and less

than one percent reported having a master's degree.

My father's highest level of education was:My highest level of education is:

Table 4.7: Change Over Time in Level of Education (a), Past Present Difference

Less than high school 20.0 0 -20.0High school or GED 44.6 8.7 -35. 9Some College 14.3 61.2 -46.9Associate's Degree 2.3 25.1 22.8Bachelor's Degree 11.4 4.4 -7.0Master's Degree 4.0 0.5 -3.5Doctorate 1.7 0 -1.7More than Doctorate 1.7 0 -1.7


60

My mother's highest level of education was:My highest level of education is:

Table 4.8: Change Over Time in Level of Education (b)Past Present Difference

Less than high school 16.2 0 -16.2High school or GED 37.3 8.7 -28.6Some College 22.2 61.2 39.0Associate's Degree 5.9 25.1 19.2Bachelor's Degree 14.1 4.4 -9.7Master's Degree 3.8 0.5 -3.3Doctorate 0.5 0 -0.5More than Doctorate 0 0 0

When respondents were asked if their parents owned

more than one vehicle during their teenage years, 50

percent answered yes and 50 percent answered no. When

asked if participants currently own more than one vehicle,

37.3 percent of respondents answered yes and 62.7 answered

no. Overall, there was a decline on this measure of

economic capital.

My parents (caretakers) owned more than one vehicle:I own more than one vehicle:

Table 4.9: Change Ovec Time in Vehicle OwnershipPast Present Difference

True 50.0 37.3 -12.7False 50.0 62.7 12.7


61

Economic Capital Questions Included in Sets

This section provides information about measures of

economic capital included in the economic capital sets.

Corresponding past and present tense questions are listed

(italicized questions represent those asked with regard to

respondents' current life situation).

The following economic capital questions used a Likert

scale to gauge respondents' agreement or disagreement with

particular statements. Likert scale response options were

coded in the following way: l=strongly disagree;

2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree. A paired-samples t-

test was performed for each of the questions in order to

compare the mean responses of the current situation and the

former situation and to test the significance of any change

over time. For the purposes of this study, the

statistical significance level was 95 percent (p ^ .05).

Results of the t-tests (shown in Table 4.10)

demonstrate that the change over time for each of these

economic capital measures was statistically significant.

In other words, respondents were more likely to have

significant financial savings and assets than were their

parents. Respondents were also more likely than their

parents to dine out and to take regular vacations


62

Table 4.10: Summary of t-test Results for Changes Over Timein Economic CapitalEconomic Capital Past Present tQuestion Mean SD Mean SD

My parents had significant savings in the bank.I have significant savings in the bank.

2.06 . 947 2.26 . 798 2.405*

My parents had significant financial assets.I have significant financial assets.

1.97 . 910 2.30 . 828 4.088***

We often ate at restaurants where you are seated and served.I often eat at restaurants where I am seated and served.

2.45 . 995 3.40 . 655 11.890***

We regularly took vacations. I regularly take vacations.

2.45 1.017 3.13 .863 7 .344***

* p. ^ .05** p. < .01*** p. * .001

Social Capital

In order to measure change over time as it relates to

research question #2, students were asked identical

questions related to social capital for both the present



to the former situation, the researcher was able to

determine if any or all of the social capital indicators

had significantly changed for this adult student

population. Questions related to social capital are

presented in Table 4.11. Italicized questions represent


63

those asked with regard to respondents'' current life

situation.

All social capital questions used a Likert scale to

gauge respondents' agreement or disagreement with



2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree. Paired -samples t-

tests were performed for each of the questions in order to





The results of the t-tests demonstrate that the change

over time for eight of the eleven measures of the social

capital were statistically significant. Any t-test score

that was not statistically significant was noted in Table

4.11 by NSD (no significant difference between the means).

Overall, respondents were more likely to have connections

with and get encouragement from other college graduates

than during their teenage years. In addition, respondents

were participating in social groups more than their parents

had.


64

Table 4.11: Summary of t-test Results for Changes Over Time in Social CapitalSocial Capital Past Present tQuestion Mean SD Mean SD

A non-family member explained the college application process to me. A non-family member explained the college application process to me.

2. 32 1.015 2.30 . 944 -.250NSD

Most of the people in my neighborhood went to college.Most of the people in my neighborhood went or are going to college.

2.40 .852 2.84 .866 5.989***

Most of the people in my high school went to college.Most of my colleagues went or are going .to college.

2.84 .827 3.19 . 831 4.624***

Most of my friends went to college. Most of my friends went or are going to college.

2.76 .855 3.02 .822 4 .493***

Someone I knew well went to college. Someone I know well went or is going to college.

3.48 . 663 3.52 . 602 . 943 NSD

My employer encouraged me to pursue college.My employer encourages me to pursue college.

2.54 . 954 2.86 .888 5.519***

A colleague encouraged me to pursue college.A colleague encourages me to pursue college.

2. 62 .866 2.97 . 822 5.809***

A friend encouraged me to pursue college.A friend encourages me to pursue college.

2.73 .868 3.03 .806 4. 918***

My family and I regularly participated in church services. My family and I regularly participate in church services.

2.81 . 976 2.51 1.036 -4.504***


65

My family and I regularly participated in group activities with extended family.I regularly participated in group activities with extended family.

bo 00 . 865 2. 90 . 885 . 423 NSD

At least one my parents regularly attended social events.I regularly attended social events.

2.76 .833 3.06 .708 4 .369***

* p. * .05** p. Z .01*** p. Z .001

Cultural CapitalIn order to measure change over time as it relates to

research question #3, students were asked identical

questions related to cultural capital for both the present



to the former situation, the researcher was able to analyze

if any or all of the cultural capital indicators had

significantly changed for this adult student population.

Questions related to cultural capital are listed in Table

4.12. Italicized questions represent those asked with

regard to respondents' current life situation.

All cultural capital questions used a Likert scale to

gauge respondents' agreement or disagreement with



2=disagree; 3=agree; 4=strongly agree. Paired-samples t-


66

tests were performed for each of the questions in order to





Results of the t-tests demonstrate that the change

over time for eight of the 11 measures of cultural capital

were statistically significant. Any t-test score that was

not statistically significant was noted in Table 4.12 by

NSD (no significant difference between the means).

Overall, respondents had greater family support and

encouragement to attend college than they had during their

teenage years. In addition, they were more likely to

participate in highly cultural activities than they did

during their teenage years. Finally, respondents were more

likely to see themselves as college students than they were

during their teenage years.

Table 4.12: Summary of t-test Results for Changes Over Time in Cultural CapitalCultural Capital Past Present tQuestion Mean SD Mean SDMy parents stressed the importance of an education.My family stresses the importance of an education.

3.19 .784 3.45 7.00 4.113***


67

Cultural Capital ast Pres sntQuestion Mean SD Mean SDMy parents encouraged me to pursue college.My family encourages me to pursue college.

3.04 .883 3.39 .701 5.189***

An authority figure encouraged me to pursue college.An authority figure encourages me to pursue college.

2.83 . 909 2.78 . 924 -.511NSD

I always saw myself as a college student.I see myself as a college student.

2. 95 .882 3.44 . 633 7 .486***

My parents often took me to museums. I often visit museums.

2.48 . 840 2.77 . 698 4.259***

My parents often exposed me to classical music and/or opera.I often listed to classical music and/or opera.

2.14 . 832 2. 64 . 840 6.713***

There were many educational resources in our house.There are many educational resources in my house.

3.02 .840 3. 38 .634 5.64 9***

At least one of my parents voted regularly.I vote regularly.

3.34 . 812 3.28 . 889 -.937NSD

My parents often took me to art exhibitions.I often attend art exhibitions.

2.17 . 888 2.74 .814 11.890***

We often ate at restaurants were you are seated and served.I often eat at restaurants were I am seated and served.

2.45 .995 3.40 . 655 7.344***

We regularly took vacations. I regularly take vacations.

2.45 1.017 3.13 .863 NSD

* P- .05kk P- .01k k k P- < r . 001


68

Students' Perceptions of Influential Factors

The survey also included five questions related to

students' perceptions of what had most influenced their

return to college. Those questions and the results are

provided in this section.

Students were asked to check all that apply for the

following question:

Which of the following have influenced your decision to

return to college at this time? 68.8 percent of

respondents said that a better understanding of the

importance of a college degree had influenced their return

to college. This was the only influence that more than

half of the respondents checked. The second most frequently

checked influence was family (36.6%). Details are provided

in Table 4.13.

Table 4.13: Summary of Student Perceptions of What InfluencedTheir Return to College as Adults_____________________________

Frequency PercentFriends 43 23.1Family 68 36.6Co-Workers 21 11.3Acquaintances 4 2.2Employer 40 21.5Financial Resource 35 18.8Tuition Assistance 53 28.5Financial Aid 16 8.6Understanding of the Importance of a College Degree 128 68.8Career Change 51 27.4Life Transition 42 22.6Work-related Opportunities 58 31.2None of the Above 7 3.8


69

Respondents were asked how well they agreed or

disagreed with the following question with regard to their

high school years: If I had understood the importance of a

college degree earlier in life, I would have pursued

college earlier. 129 of the respondents (71.6%) who

answered this question agreed or strongly agreed with this

statement.

Table 4.14: Summary of Student Responses Related to anUnderstanding of the Importance of a College Degree (past)

Frequency PercentStrongly Disagree 11 6.1Disagree 40 22.2Agree 42 23.3Strongly Agree 87 48.3

Respondents were asked how well they agreed or disagreed

with the following question with regard to their current

situation: A greater understanding of the importance of a

college education has encouraged me to pursue college at

this time. 163 of the respondents (89.0%) who answered

this question agreed or strongly agreed with this

statement.

Table 4.15: Summary of Student Responses Related to anUnderstanding of the Importance of a College Degree (present)



70



high school years: If I had more economic resources, I

would have pursued college earlier. 109 of the respondents

(59.9%) who answered this question agreed or strongly

agreed with this statement.

Table 4.16: Summary of Student Responses Related to theImportance of Economic Resources (past)

Frequency PercentStrongly Disagree 21 11.5Disagree 52 28 . 6Agree 40 22.0Strongly Agree 69 37.9



current life situation: An increase in economic resources

has encouraged me to pursue college at this time. 96 of

the respondents (52.7%) who answered this question agreed

or strongly agreed with this statement.

Table 4.17: Summary of Student Responses Related to theImportance of Economic Resources (present)


When respondents were asked how many parents they

lived with during their teenage years, the majority (56.5


percent) indicated two; 33.1 percent indicated one; 8.1

percent indicated one plus a stepparent; and 1.6 percent

indicated none. When asked how many children their parents

or caretakers had the mean response was 3.54.


72

Relationship Among and Between Economic, Social and Cultural Capital

After sufficient data had been gathered and analyzed

to effectively answer the original research questions, the

researcher then explored the relationship between and among

the following variables: economic past, economic present,

social past, social present, cultural past, cultural

present, economic difference, social difference, and

cultural difference. There were several significant

findings across all but one measure using a significance

level of 95 percent (p ^ .05).

First, there was a positive correlation between past

and present capital. In other words, respondents with the

lowest capital to begin with still had the lowest capital

and those with the highest levels of capital to begin with

still had the highest capital (see Table 4.18). Second,

those who started out with the lowest levels of economic,

social and cultural capital made the biggest gains overall.

This is evident because all present measures of capital are

positively correlated with the change over time

(difference) and all past measures of capital are

negatively correlated with the change over time

(difference). Third, those with the highest capital had


made the greatest gains. Fourth, there were positive

correlations between all measures of capital. For example,

those with the lowest levels of economic capital tended to

have the lowest levels of social and cultural capital as

well (See Table 4.19).

Table 4.18: Summary of Correlation Between Past and PresentCapital ___________

liiiiiiil! (2) ChangeEconomic Capital Past (1) 1.0 .142 -.774Economic Capital Present (2) 1.0 .517

SIZlSlSi:! (2) ChangeSocial Capital Past (1) 1.0 . 573 -.535Social Capital Present (2) 1.0 .386

(1) (2) llliiilhgiiiiftCultural Capital Past (1) 1.0 .371 -.743Cultural Capital Present (2) 1.0 . 346

Table 4.19: Summary of Correlation Between Measures ofEconomic, Social and Cultural Capital

, (1) (2) (3)Economic Capital Past (1) 1.0 .41 . 67Social Capital Past (2) 1.0 .54Cultural Capital Past (3) 1.0

(1) (2) (3)Economic Capital Present (1) 1.0 .265 .426Social Capital Present (2) 1.0 . 445Cultural Capital Present (3) 1.0

(1) (2) (3)Economic Capital Change (1) 1.0 . 404 . 636Social Capital Change (2) 1.0 .526Cultural Capital Change (3) 1.0


74

Summary

This study has answered the research questions that it

set out to answer. Across all measures of capital, adult

college students in this sample had gained economic, social

and cultural capital since graduating from high school (the

time designated in the United States as the

"traditional"/appropriate time to pursue higher education).

While the majority of respondents had alleviated social,

cultural and economic barriers, it is important to note

that in a few instances, individuals made no significant

gains in any or all measures of capital.

In addition to the measures of social, cultural, and

economic capital, respondents indicated that a greater

understanding of a college education was the single most

important influence in prompting their return to college.

While economic support was also important, it was not as

strong an influence as was awareness about the importance

of higher education.

Finally, these data indicate that there was a

significant relationship between and among economic, social

and cultural capital for this adult student population.


75

Chapter 5 reviews the implications of this research

and the importance of future research related to this

topic.


7 6

CHAPTER FIVESUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS









to college. Research indicates that these three forms of

capital are significantly correlated with academic



student. Since evidence suggests that various forms of

capital are relevant for the traditional-aged student, one

might hypothesize that they also matter for those who

return to college at a nontraditional age. This research

sought to answer whether individuals who pursue college as

adults had alleviated economic, social and/or cultural

barriers since high school. This was done by measuring


77

changes in capital (economic, social and cultural) over

time.

Research QuestionsThe following research questions were addressed in this study:






78

Summary of Results, Literature and Discussion on Findings

Economic Capital and Changes over Time

The first research question considered the degree to

which adult college students had significantly changed

their economic capital from high school to college. The

researcher did this by comparing the economic situation of

respondents' parents to respondents' current economic

situation. The results of this study indicate that when

compared to their parents' earlier financial situations,

respondents had significantly gained economic capital on a

number of measures. Study participants were more likely

than their parents to have financial assets, to have

significant savings, to dine at restaurants where they are

seated and served, and to take regular vacations. In

addition, they lived in more affluent neighborhoods when

compared to their teenage years.

As tables 4.2, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 show, respondents

did not experience significant increases on three measures

of economic capital: occupation, education and home

ownership. In fact, all three of these measures had

decreased (when compared to respondents parents'

situations). However, these results do not come as a

surprise since individuals with less than a college


79

education tend to have low amounts of economic capital.

Economic capital is more likely to increase after

respondents earn their baccalaureate degrees or increase

their human capital.

These findings support existing literature about the

relationship between economic capital and college

attendance. Most studies suggest that the more favorable

one's financial situation, the more likely one is to pursue

college (Bowen et al, 2005; Heller, 2001, 2002). Fifty

four percent of low-income high school students enroll in

college immediately following high school compared to 82

percent of high-income high school students (Bowen et al,

2005). This is due, in part, to an individual's ability to

pay for tuition. It is also due to one's preparation for

education and the academic skills that are gained (or not

gained) both in the home and school environments

(McDonough, 1997). College attendance patterns can also be

attributed to the opportunity costs that low-income

students encounter that more affluent students may not—

costs such as foregone income and the inability to support

one's family (Tierney & Hagedorn, 2002). These opportunity

costs are often significant for adult students as well, who

are balancing multiple life priorities such as work,


80

family, aging parents and school. In addition, poorer

individuals who make it to college at a late age persist at

far lower rates than their younger or more affluent adult

counterparts (Cook & King, 2004).

Social Capital and Changes over Time

The second research question considered the degree to


their social capital from high school to college. The

results of this study indicate that participants had

significantly gained social capital over time. Respondents

indicated that they now have much more encouragement to

pursue college than they did when they were finishing high

school. More specifically, there were significant

increases in encouragement from respondents' employers,

colleagues and friends— individuals with whom they interact

and socialize on a regular basis (see Table 4.11). In

addition to encouragement, there was a significant gain in

the amount of contact respondents had with college

graduates. Overall, respondents had much more interaction

with colleagues, neighbors and friends who had either

completed college or who were currently pursuing college

educations.


81

This finding is consistent with existing research on

social capital, which indicates that the investments people

make in relationships outside of their family units,

relationships with non-family members and with

institutions, directly influence their level of social

capital (Putnam, 1995, 2000; Furstenburg & Hughes, 1995;

Hoffeth et al, 1998). As individuals expand their social

networks, they generate support systems and increase their

access to important information and contacts. The type of

social groups with which one affiliates is also important

(Portes, 1998). Research demonstrates that individuals

with access to social communities that provide assistance

with the college application process, referrals to

admission officers, and general encouragement to consider

further education, have advantages over those who do not

have access to such networks (Carbonaro, 1998; Choy, 2001).

Cultural Capital and Changes over Time

The third research question considered the degree to


their cultural capital from high school to college. As

table 4.12 shows, the results of this study indicate that

participants had significantly gained cultural capital over

time. In particular, they received more encouragement from


82

family than they did when they were younger. They were

also more likely to see themselves as college students than

they did when they were teenagers. In addition,

respondents were more likely to participate in cultural

activities such as visiting museums, listening to classical

music and opera, and attending art exhibitions.

These findings concur with the literature on cultural

capital. Research indicates that support and encouragement

to attend college, even from just one family member, can

have a very positive influence on an individual's ability

and desire to pursue higher education (Levine & Niddifer,

1996; McDonough, 1997). In addition, the educational

aspirations one forms about oneself directly influence that

individual's educational attainment (Heller, 2001). These

aspirations are often formed by the expectations of family

members. Individuals internalize the expectations others

have for them, including expectations about college, and

carry them forward (Morgan, 2005). Finally, scholars

suggest that those who have access to and participate in

highly cultural events are more likely to increase their

cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1983; McDonough, 1997; Tierney

& Hagedorn, 2002).


83

Students' Perception of Influential Factors

The fourth research question considered the factors

that adult college students believe most influenced their

return to college. As table 4.13 illustrates, the majority

of respondents indicated that "a greater understanding of

the benefits of a college education" was the single most

important influence (69%); the second most important

influence was family (37%). When asked another way, 89

percent of respondents agreed that an understanding of the

benefits of a college education was an important factor in

their decision to pursue college as an adult (see Table

4.15). When asked if an increase in economic resources had

influenced their return to college at this time, 52.7

percent of respondents agreed that financial resources

mattered (see Table 4.17).

While economic factors were certainly an important

influence for this sample of adult college students, they

were not as important as non-economic factors.

Respondents'' answers about influences were consistent with

other study findings, which indicated that economic, social

and cultural influences all make a difference in the


84

pursuit of college, but that non-economic influences make

the greatest difference.

Additional FindingsA few additional findings are present in the data

collected for this study. Those findings are listed in

this section.

First, 80 of the 186 respondents (43 percent) reported

that their current occupation was that of a homemaker. Of

the 80 homemakers, 43 were female and 37 were male. This

is in addition to the 2.2 percent who reported being

unemployed (See Tables 4.5 and 4.6). This finding is

curious since a great deal of literature suggests that

employer support is the single most important influence for

adults to pursue postsecondary education. While 21 percent

of respondents noted that employer support greatly

influenced their decision to return to college, it was

certainly not the most important factor.

In addition, when asked if they were the first person

in the family to attend college, 17.2 percent of

respondents identified themselves as the first in family

and 82.8 percent did not. However, when respondents were

asked about their parents' highest level of education, 64.6

percent indicated that their fathers' highest level of


85

education was a high school diploma or less; 53.5 percent

indicated that their mothers' highest level of education

was a high school diploma or less (see tables 4.7 and 4.8).

Respondents might have answered differently if the

question were related to "first generation" rather than

"first in family". Adult students may participate in

postsecondary education after their children have earned

their degrees or at the same time that their children are

studying. Similarly, "first generation" would eliminate

siblings and cousins who might have studied before

respondents.

Implications of Findings

Academic research related to the various forms of

capital and the pursuit of postsecondary education by adult

students is currently incomplete. This data set provides a

good foundation for future research.

The adult college students in this sample had

significantly gained economic, social, and cultural capital

since graduating high school and entering college.

Overall, respondents experienced increases in all forms of

capital; however, non-economic capital had increased the

most. Financial resources (economic capital) were

certainly significant but they were not as significant as


86

were non-financial influences such as family, a greater

understanding of the importance of an education, and

encouragement from social networks.

In addition, there were positive relationships among

economic, social and cultural capital. For example, those

with the highest levels of economic capital in high school

tended to have the highest levels as returning adult

college students. The same was true for social and

cultural capital. As table 4.18 highlights, there were

also positive relationships between each of the measures.

For example, respondents with the lowest levels of economic

capital at the time of the survey tended to have the lowest

levels of social and cultural capital as well.

These findings are consistent with the academic

literature that was reviewed for this study. Research

indicates that economic capital is often linked to social

and cultural capital(Hofferth et al, 1998; Stanton-Salazar

& Dornbusch, 1995) . In other words, material forms of

capital (economic) can often present themselves in non

material forms (non-economic) (Bourdieu, 1983). For

example, those who attend highly cultural events also tend

to have more financial resources (Kingston, 2001). In

addition, individuals with parents and family members who


87

are college graduates tend to receive more support,

encouragement and needed information about the importance

of college and how to be successful in the academy (Tierney

& Auerbach, 2005).

These findings will be useful to future research about

adult learners and the various forms of capital. Most of

the governmental and institutional policies that exist to

encourage adults to pursue college focus on economic

barriers to entrance. While alleviating economic obstacles

is key to making positive change, this study suggests that

educational leaders and policy makers should also consider

the non-economic factors that might positively influence

attendance for adult students. This study supports

existing literature related to the traditional-aged college

student which suggests that academic preparation,

expectations of self, needed information about the

importance of a college degree and general support from

others are key to effectively increasing participation by

underrepresented students (Tierney & Hagedorn, 2002).

Outreach programs that currently exist for middle

school and high school students have successfully

encouraged economically, socially and culturally

disadvantaged individuals to pursue postsecondary


88

education. These programs help to disseminate information,

provide encouragement, and offer advising—in essence, they

help prospective traditional-aged students acquire some

degree of non-economic capital (Tierney et al, 2005) .

There is no reason to believe that effective programs such

as these should be provided only to young individuals.

Outreach programs, adapted for the needs of the adult

population, could be made available. This study indicates

that people who do not make it to college just out of high

school and who return to college as adults may have

returned due to non-economic influences such as

encouragement to pursue a degree and an understanding of

the importance of a college education.

Adults without access to social networks and/or home

environments that provide information about college and

encouragement to pursue higher education are at a

disadvantage over those who do have access. In order to

allow those without networks and encouragement to gain

access, state and institutional initiatives could be in

place. Some initiatives that might make a difference for

the adult population are: counseling at the workplace;

networking with other adult college students and graduates;

seminars about how to finance one's education, how to


89

navigate the application process and how to succeed as a

college student; conversations about the numbers of adults

now participating in college; presentation of the

statistics related to career opportunities and earnings

over one's lifetime for college and non-college graduates;

programs that provide general support and encouragement to

pursue higher education; and remedial programming for those

who do not have sufficient academic preparation to enter

the academy. These types of opportunities, which are

currently available to younger individuals, may expose

adults to attitudes and beliefs about the importance of

higher education and help them actualize themselves as

college students.

Future ResearchAcademic research related to the various forms of

capital and the pursuit of postsecondary education by adult

students is currently incomplete. This data set provides a

good foundation for future research. A few possible future

research initiatives are listed below.

First, the survey instrument used for this research

was developed based on existing economic, social and

cultural capital literature, especially as it relates to

postsecondary attendance and attainment. From this


90

literature and the definitions it provided about how to

measure the various forms of capital, the researcher

compiled the items and the instrument used for this study.

No previous instrument operationalized measures of

economic, social and cultural capital in quite this way.

As a result, the instrument itself may be an important

contribution to the field as it can be refined and used by

others interested in quantitatively measuring various forms

of capital.

Second, this study could be replicated to include both

adult college students and a sample of adults who are not

pursuing higher education. Studying both groups would lend

further insights into whether or not changes in capital or

current capital alone have any relationship to

participation in higher education.

Third, in order to get a clear profile of respondents,

the researcher collected demographic data such as race,

gender, age and current income level. A future study could

test these variables to determine if there is a significant

relationship(s) with any or all measures of capital in the

past, present or the change over time.

Fourth, this same survey could be administered at

various types of institutions, such as a four-year public


91

college or university, a community college or a for-profit

higher education institution to see if adults participating

in undergraduate degree programs have different levels of

economic, social and cultural capital by institutional

type. Since community colleges and for-profit institutions

enroll large numbers of returning adult students, learning

more about these students will be important.

Finally, since the act of participating in formal

learning may have a positive effect on an individual's

economic, social and/or cultural capital, a future study

might measure the changes in capital over time for adults

in postsecondary degree programs. A longitudinal study

could track their gains/losses at postsecondary entry,

throughout the degree process and after college graduation.

Conclusion

Understanding the attributes of adults who return to

college is important if we are to extend equality of

opportunity to all citizens. Higher education has long

been considered a public good and now, more than ever, it

is the key to a middle-class lifestyle. 70 percent of all

jobs in the United States now require some form of

postsecondary education, and in the coming decades the

number of jobs requiring such credentials is expected to


grow (Cook, 2004). Unfortunately, only 28 percent of

adult Americans now possess a college degree and 13 percent

of the adult population who are either unemployed or in the

labor market do not have a high school diploma (Bailey &

Mingle, 2003).

That being said, educational leaders and policymakers

must find ways to encourage greater rates of participation

for this group. One way to begin to encourage greater

rates of participation and success is through empirical

research about the reasons that adults return and the

factors that most influence their likelihood to succeed.

The health of the nation's economy and the commitment to

democratic ideals are at stake if we do not find ways to do

this.


REFERENCES

Aslanian, C.B. (2001). Adult students today. New York:

The College Board.

Bailey, A.A., & and Mingle, J.R. (2003). The adult

learning gap: Why states need to change their

policies toward adult learners. Denver: Education

Commission of the States.

Baum, S. (2001). College education: who can afford it? The

financing of higher education: Theory, research,

policy & practice. In M.B. Paulsen & J.C. Smart (eds)

New York: Agathon Press.

Baum, S. (2001). Higher education dollars and sense. New

York: College Entrance Examination Board.

Borgatta, E.F. & Montgomery, R.J.V. (eds.), (2000). In

Encyclopedia of Sociology (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 2637-

2641). New York: Macmillian Reference USA.

Bowen, W.G., Kurzweil, M.A. & Tobin, E.M.. (2005). Equity

and excellence in American higher education.

Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.

Bowen, W.G & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river: Long

term consequences of considering race in college and


94

university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1983). Economic capital, cultural capital,

social capital." In R. Kreckel (ed). Soziale

Ungleichheiten (Soziale Welt, Sonderheft 2).

Goettingen: Otto Schartz & Co. pp. 183-98.

Carbonaro, W. (1998). A little help from my friend's

parents: Intergenerational closure and educational

outcomes. Sociology of Education, 71, 295-313.

Choy, S.P. (2002). Access and persistence: Findings from

10 years of longitudinal studies on students.

Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human

capital. American Journal of Sociology 94: S95-S120.

The College Board. (2004). Trends in college pricing.

Washington, D.C.: College Board.

Conley, D. & Albright, K. (2004). After the bell: Family

background, public policy and educational success.

New York: Routledge.

Conley, D (1999). Being black, living in the red: Race,

wealth, and social policy in America. Los Angeles:

University of California Press


95

Cook, B & King, J.E. (2004). Low income adults in profile:

Improving lives through higher education. Washington,

D.C.: American Council on Education.

Cunningham, P.M. The adult educator and social

responsibility. In R.C. Brockett (ed). Ethical issues

in adult education. New York: Teachers College

Press.

Dika, S.L., & Singh, K. (2002). Applications of social

capital in educational literature: A critical

synthesis. Review of Educational Research,. 12(1) , 31-

60.

DiMaggio, P. (2001). Social stratification, life style,

social cognition and social participation. In D.B.

Grusky (ed.). (2001). Social stratification: Class,

race and gender in sociological perspective. Boulder,

Colorado: Westview Press.

Ehrenberg, R.G. (2002). Tuition rising: Why college costs

so much. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Farr, J. (2003). Social capital: A conceptual history.

Political Theory, 31, 1-28.

Fitzgerald, B.K. (2003). The opportunity for a college

education: Real promise or hollow rhetoric? About

Campus (November-December, 2003).


Furstenberg, F. & Hughes, M. (1995). Social capital and

successful development among at-risk youth. Journal

of Marriage and the Family, 5 7(3), 580-592.

Hearn, J.C. (2001). Access to postsecondary education:

Financing equity in an evolving context. In M.B.

Paulsen and J.C. Smart (eds). The financing of higher

education: Theory, research, policy & practice. New

York: Agathon Press.

Heller, D.E. (2001). The States and public higher

education policy: Affordability, access and

accountability. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University

Press.

Heller, D.E. (2002). Condition of access: Higher

education and low income students. Connecticut:

Praeger Publishers.

Hofferth, S., Boisjoly,, J. & Duncan, G. (1998). Parents'

extrafamilial resources and children's school

attainment. Sociology of Education, 71, 246-268.

Hoxby, C.M. (2004). College choices: The economics of where

to go, when to go and how to pay for it. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Jarvis, P. (1985). The sociology of adult and continuing

education. London: Croom Helm.


Jencks, C., Bartlett, S., Corcoran, M. , Crouse, J.,

Eaglesfield, D., Jackson, G et al. (1979). Who gets

ahead: The determinants of economic success in

America. Basic Books: New York.

Kingston, P.W. (2001). The unfulfilled promise of cultural

capital theory. Sociology of Education. Vol. 74,

Extra Issue: Current of Thought: Sociology of

Education at the Dawn of the 21st Century. P 88-99.

Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods: class, race and

family life. Berkeley: University of California

Press.

Lareau, A. (1989). Home advantage: social class and

parental interventions in elementary education. New

York: Falmer Press.

Lee, J.B. (2001). An issue of equity. In D.E. Heller (ed).

The states and public higher education policy:

Affordability, access and accountability. Baltimore:

Johns Hopkins University Press.


Levine, A. & Niddifer, J. (1996). Beating the odds: How

the poor get to college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,

Inc.

Lifelong learning trends: A profile of continuing higher

education. (2004). Washington, D.C: University

Continuing Education Association.

Reed, S. (2005). Lumina Foundation for Education.

Retrieved March 30, 2006 from

http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/focus_arc

hive/adult_learner_2005/learning.html

McDonough, P.M. (1997). Choosing colleges: how social

class and school structure opportunity. Albany, NY:

State University of New York Press.

Merriam, S.B., & Caffarella, R.S (1999). Learning in

adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd ed). San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Morgan, S. (2005). On the edge of commitment. Stanford,

CA: Stanford University Press.


http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/focus_arc

Elliot, B.G. (2003). Organization for Economic Cooperation

and Development. (2003). Thematic Review on Adult

Learning. Background Report. Retrieved March 20,

2005 from

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4 6/4 9/344 67 8 56.pdf

Parkin, F. (1979). Marxism and class theory: A bourgeois

critique. In D.B. Grusky (ed.). (2001). Social

stratification: Class, race and gender in

sociological perspective. Boulder, Colorado:

Westview Press.

Paulsen, M.B. & Smart, J.C. (2001). The finance of higher

education: theory, research, policy and practice.

New York: Agathon Press.

Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and

applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of

Sociology, 24, 1-24

Putnam R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining

social capital. Journal of Democracy. Vol. 6, no. 1.

pp 65-78.

Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and

revival of American community. New York: Simon &

Schuster.


http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/4

100

Roscigno, V.J., & Ainsworth-Darnell, J.W. (1999). Race,

cultural capital, and educational resources:

Persistent inequalities and achievement returns.

Sociology of Education, 72(3), 158-178.

Stanton-Salazar, R.D., & Dornbusch, S.M. (1995). Social

capital and the reproduction of inequality:

Information networks among Mexican-origin high school

students. Sociology of Education, 68, 116-135.

Swail, W.S. & Perna, L.W. In W.G. Tierney & L.S. Hagedorn

(eds). (2002). Increasing access to college:

Extending possibilities to all students. Albany:


Tierney, W.G. & Auerbach, S. (2005). Toward developing an

untapped resource: The role of families in college

preparation. In W.G. Tierney et al (eds.). (2005).

Preparing for college: nine elements of effective

outreach. Albany: State University of New York

Press.

Tierney, W.G., Cofrwin, Z.B. & Colyar, J.E. (eds.). (2005).

Preparing for college: nine elements of effective

outreach. Albany: State University of New York

Press.


101

Tierney, W.G. & Hagedorn, L.S. (2002). Increasing access

to college: Extending possibilities to all students.

Albany: State University of New York Press.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Educational Statistics. (1998). Reconceptualizing

Access in Postsecondary Education: Report of the

Policy Panel on Access, NCES 98-283, prepared by

Sandra Ruppert, Zelema Harris, Arthur Hauptman,

Michael Nettles, Laura Perna, Catherine Millett, Laura

Rendon, Vincent Tinto, Sylvia Hurtado, and Karen

Inkelas for the Council of the National Postsecondary

Education Cooperative, Subcommittee on the Policy

Panel on Access, Washington, DC.

Yonezawa, S., Jones, M. & Mehan, H. In W.G. Tierney & L.S.

Hagedorn (eds). (2002). Increasing access to college:

Extending possibilities to all students. Albany:



APPENDIX A


1 0 3

A Survey of Adult College Students

This survey is being distributed to adult college students (24 years of age and older) participating in baccalaureate degree programs at DePaul University.

Your individual responses will be kept in the strictest confidence. Your participation is completely voluntary and you are not required to fill out the survey.

Your responses will be critical in understanding how institutions and educators can support adult students and encourage greater rates of participation in higher education. Thank you in advance for your participation.

The questionnaire should take approximately 15 minutes to complete. Please return completed or uncompleted questionnaires to the envelope at the front of the room.

For the questions listed below, please check the box that most closely relates to your academic history.

1. Which of the following have influenced your decision toreturn to college at this time? (check all that apply)D friends D family Dco-workers D acquaintances Demployer D financial resources D tuition assistanceDfinancial aid □ understanding of the importance of acollege degree D career change D life transition □ work-related opportunities D none of the above

2. How many SNL classes have you completed (not including transfer credits)?□ 1 □ 2 □ 3 □ 4 □ 5 □ 6 □ 7 □ 8

3. Are you the first person in your family to attend auniversity or college?□ Yes □ No

4. How old were you when you graduated high school or earned your GED?


1 0 4

The following questions seek to get a profile of respondents. Please check the following as appropriate:

5. What is your gender?D Female D Male6. What is your racial background?D African American D Asian/Pacific Islander D Caucasian D Hispanic/Latino D Native American □ Multiracial □ Other7. What is your age?

8. How many parents did you live with during your teenage years?D None D One □ Two D One plus a step-parent

9. How many children did your parents (caretakers) have?□ 0 □ 1 □ 2 □ 3 □ 4 □ 5 □ 6 □ 7 □ more than 7

10. Please indicate your current annual family income range.□ Less than $9,600 □ $9, 600-$24, 999 □ $25, 000-$49, 999 □ $50,000-$74,999 □ over $75,000

In the following section, you are asked to recall life situations from your teenage years (ages 13-19). Please select the answer that most closely applies to your situation.

11. My parents (caretakers) owned their own home:D True D False

12. Most of the people in my neighborhood:D Rented their homes □ Owned their homes D Lived in public housing

13. I would best describe my neighborhood as:□ Wealthy □ Middle-Class □ Poor


1 0 5

In the next section, you are asked to recall life situations from your teenage years (13-19). Specifically, you are asked about the occupations of your mother and father (caretakers). Please answer these questions to the best of your ability.

14. My father's (male caretaker's) occupation was:□ Academic D Professional D Managerial D Laborer □ Clerical 0 Small Business Owner D Homemaker □ Unemployed15. My father's (male caretaker's) highest level of education was:D More than doctorate D Doctorate D Master's □Bachelor's D Associate's□ Some College □ High School or GED □ Less than High School

16. My mother's (female caretaker's) occupation was:□ Academic □ Professional □ Managerial □ Laborer □ Clerical □ Small Business Owner □ Homemaker □ Unemployed

17. My mother's (female caretaker's) highest level of education was:□ More than doctorate □ Doctorate □ Master's □Bachelor's □ Associate'sD Some College □ High School or GED □ Less than High School

18. My parents or (caretakers) owned more than one vehicle at the same time.□ True D FalseIn the following section, you are asked to recall life situations from your teenage years (ages 13-19). Please indicate the extent to which you agree with each statement by checking the appropriate box.

19. My parent(s) (caretakers) stressed the importance of education.□ Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree


1 0 6

20. My parent(s) (caretakers) encouraged me to pursue college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

21. An authority figure (such as a teacher or school guidance counselor) encouraged me to pursue college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

22. If I had understood the importance of a college degree earlier in life, I would have pursued college earlier.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

23. My parent(s) (caretakers) had significant savings in the bank.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

24. My parent(s) or (caretakers) had significant financial assets.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

25. I was aware that financial aid was available forcollege.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

26. If I had had more economic resources, I would have pursued college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree D Strongly Disagree

27. I always saw myself as a college student.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

28. A non-family member explained the college application process to me.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

29. Most of the people in my neighborhood went to college.□ Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

30. Most of the people in my high school went to college.□ Strongly Agree D Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree


1 0 7

31. Most of my friends went to college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

32. Someone I knew well went to college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

33. My employer encouraged me to pursue college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

34. A colleague encouraged me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

35. A friend encouraged me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

36. My family and I regularly participated in church services.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

37. My family and I regularly participated in group activities with extended family.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

38. At least one of my parents (caretakers) regularly attended social events.D Strongly Agree D Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

39. My parent(s) (caietakers) often took me to museums.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

40. My parent(s) or (caretakers) often exposed me to classical music and/or opera.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

41. My parent(s) or (caretakers) often took me to art exhibitions.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

42 There were many educational resources (such as books) in my house.


1 0 8

D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

43. At least one of my parents (caretakers) voted regularly.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

44. We often ate at restaurants where you are seated and served.D Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree D Strongly Disagree

45. We regularly took vacations.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

In the following section, you are asked about certain aspects of your current life situation. Please check the response that most closely applies.

46. I currently own my own home:D True D False47. Most of the people in my neighborhood:D Rent their homes D Own their homes D Live in public housing

48. My neighborhood can best be described as:□ Wealthy □ Middle-Class D Poor

49. My current occupation is:□ Academic □ Professional □ Managerial D Laborer □ Clerical D Small Business Owner D Homemaker D Unemployed

50. My highest level of education is:□ More than doctorate □ Doctorate □ Master's □Bachelor's □ Associate's□ Some College D High School or GED D Less than High School

51. I own more than one vehicle.D True D False


1 0 9

In the following section, you are asked about certain aspects of your current life situation. Please indicate the extent to which you agree with each statement by checking the appropriate box.

52. My family stresses the importance of an education.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

53. My family encourages me to pursue college.D Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

54. An authority figure (such as an employer or manager) encourages me to pursue college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

55. A greater understanding of the importance of a college degree has encouraged me to pursue college at this time.□ Strongly Agree D Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

56. I have significant savings in the bank.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

57. I have significant financial assets.D Strongly Agree D Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

58. I am aware that financial aid is available for college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

59. An increase in economic resources has encouraged me to pursue college at this time.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

60. I see myself as a college student.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

61. A non-family member explained the college application process to me.□ Strongly Agree D Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

62. Most of the people in my neighborhood went to college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree


110

63. Most of my co-workers went (or are going) to college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

64. Most of my friends went (or are going) to college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

65. Someone I know well went (or is going) to college.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

66. My employer encourages me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

67. A colleague encourages me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

68. A friend encourages me to pursue college.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

69. I regularly participate in church services.D Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

70. I regularly participate in group activities with other members of my extended family.U Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

71. I regularly participate in social events.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

72. I often go to museums.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

73. I often listen to classical music and/or opera.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree □ Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

74. I often attend art exhibitions.□ Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

75. I have many educational resources (such as books) in my home.


Ill

□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree □ Strongly Disagree

76. I vote regularly.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

77. I often eat at restaurants where I am seated and served.D Strongly Agree D Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

78. I regularly take vacations.□ Strongly Agree □ Agree D Disagree D Strongly Disagree

Thank you for your participation. If you have questions or concerns about this survey please contact Andrea Spreter at [email protected].


mailto:[email protected]

APPENDIX B


1 1 3

ADULT COLLEGE STUDENTS:CHANGES IN ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CAPITAL

FROM HIGH SCHOOL TO COLLEGE

Script for Survey Distribution By Andrea Spreter

I am a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Virginia's Curry School of Education. I am conducting research about factors that influence academic achievement and the pursuit of college for adult students. I am reguesting that you fill out the survey that I will distribute in a few minutes. The survey should take approximately 15 minutes to complete. I am not collecting personal information; therefore, your survey responses will be anonymous. Your participation in this study will, in no way, influence your grade for this class and your instructor is not involved in this study.

I am now going to distribute the survey. If you would, please fill it out and return it to the envelope at the front of the room. Your participation is completely voluntary and you are not reguired to fill out the survey. If you choose not to, please simply place the blank survey in the envelope. I will return at break to collect the envelope.

I will be sitting just outside the classroom. I am happy to answer any questions you might have about the survey so please feel free to ask for clarification.

Thank you again for your time and your responses.

Andrea Spreter Doctoral Candidate University of Virginia Curry School of Education 434-982-5338 aspreter0virginia.edu


APPENDIX C


1 1 5

Information for Participation in Research Study

A Survey of Adult College Students

You have been asked to participate in this research study because we are trying to learn more about factors that influence academic achievement and the pursuit of college for adult students. This study will take approximately 15 minutes to complete. If you agree to be in this study, you will be asked to fill out a paper survey. You can choose not to participate. There will be no negative consequences if you decide not to participate or change your mind later.

If you have questions about this study, please contact Andrea Spreter at 434-977-4018 (or by email at [email protected]). If you have questions about your rights as a research subject, you may contact Shay-Ann Heiser Singh, Coordinator of the DePaul University's Institutional Review Board at 312-362-7593 or by email at [email protected].

You may keep this information for your records.


