ABOUT
THE MICHIGAN STUDENT STUDY
Current
Research Synopsis
The research
activities of the Michigan Student Study are continuing, supported
by a grant from the Ford Foundation. With this Ford Foundation
support, we are currently conducting two major research projects.
One is a replication of the Michigan Student Study 10 years
later, involving both a longitudinal survey component and
intensive focus group interviews. The second is an Alumni
Study, following the original Michigan Student Study participants,
eight years after their graduation from the University.
Replication
of the Michigan Student Study – 10
Years Later
In September
2000 we began a study of the 2000 – 2004 cohort of undergraduates
at the University of Michigan, which will replicate the original
study of the 1990 – 1994 cohort. The original study
provided a database that allowed us to examine the value of
student diversity, and the impact of multicultural diversity
efforts on students as they moved through their four-year
college experience. Data from the study were used in subsequent
secondary analyses that broadened major empirical support
for the University’s legal defense of its undergraduate
admissions policies related to student diversity. In the ten
years since the Michigan Student Study, the political climate
has changed dramatically, with affirmative action increasingly
attacked in state referendum initiatives and the legal system.
The replication
study will provide more current and comparative data that
will allow us to document and examine the impact of this changed
climate and the other changes that have occurred on the Michigan
campus and throughout higher education since that time. The
current study will also enable us to utilize our experiences
with the original study particularly in our analysis of the
data for Michigan’s legal defense of its affirmative
action policies, and to explore a number of diversity issues
in greater depth, e.g., the impact of diversity on learning
and citizenship outcomes. Data results again are being shared
with other academic and non-academic units on campus, and
the data will also be available for doctorate dissertations
and other scholarly reports. As in the original study, issues
explored will go beyond racial and ethnic diversity, though
these are still the most salient issues.
Entrance
Survey
In August
2000 a survey was mailed to the approximately 5,000 students
who were entering the University of Michigan. The survey was
part of the “Diverse Democracy” Project, directed
by Professor Sylvia Hurtado (University of Michigan). Michigan
is one of ten institutions participating in this study. The
Diverse Democracy entrance survey, as well as 15 questions
that the Michigan Student Study team added for the University
of Michigan students, included a number of key questions from
the original Michigan Student Study that were central to the
analysis of the impact of diversity that were prepared for
the defense in the legal case involving U-M’s affirmative
action policies.
Three
weeks after the first mailing, surveys were again sent to
all students who had not returned a completed questionnaire.
In addition, because of lower response rates among African
American and Latino/a students, non-respondents in these two
groups were contacted by telephone and encouraged to participate.
All in all, approximately 2,000 students returned a completed
survey yielding an overall response rate of 40%, with 47%
of the African American and 43% of the Latino/a students responding.
End
of First Year Survey
In March
2001 we prepared and administered a follow-up questionnaire
on their first year college experience to a sample of 2,000
students, representing those who did not respond to the entrance
questionnaire, as well as students who did respond. The support
from the Ford Foundation enabled us to provide an incentive
of $10 to students who returned a completed questionnaire.
Three weeks later, a second mailing of the questionnaire was
sent to all non-respondents. Phone calling was again conducted
to increase the response rates of African American and Latino/a
students. Approximately 1,200 students returned completed
surveys, reporting an overall response rate of 60%, a significant
increase over the 40% response rate to the entrance questionnaire.
Sophomore
Year Focus Groups
In November
2001, fourteen focus groups were conducted with the different
racial groups of students on campus. These focus groups were
conducted to get a more in-depth assessment of how various
racial groups on campus were perceiving and being impacted
by issues of diversity and multiculturalism, particularly
during their first year experience. We wanted to hear from
students “in their own voices” how they experienced
diversity on the Michigan campus, and how this related to
their general experiences as students. Of the focus groups
that were conducted, there were three African American groups,
three Asian American groups, three Latino/a groups, two Native
American groups (only two groups were conducted due to the
limited number of Native American students on campus), and
three White student groups.
Approximately
100 students participated in the focus groups. Students who
completed the End of First Year Survey were randomly selected
within each racial group to participate in the focus groups.
Each focus group had between 6-8 participants, and a male
and female facilitator of the same race. We believe that these
two elements, small group size and same race facilitators,
helped to create a comfortable environment for the participants
– one in which students would feel relaxed and be forthcoming
with their responses. At the conclusion of each focus group,
students were compensated $25 for their participation, and
were invited to stay and have pizza and soda.
These
in-depth focus groups will again be conducted in the students’
senior year (Winter 2004).
Data
Analyses
We have
begun analyses comparing responses of the Michigan students
in the 2000 – 2004 cohort at entrance and at the end
of the first year, with those of the students in the 1990
– 1994 cohort. We have presented preliminary findings
on the 10-year changes at several national conferences and
other fora, and to various administrative and faculty groups
on the University of Michigan campus. In the coming year we
will undertake more systematic analyses, and prepare summary
reports for the University community, involving the following:
- Ten-year
changes in characteristics, values, attitudes of students
enrolling at the University of Michigan (comparison of 1990
and 2000 Entrance Questionnaires).
- Ten-year
changes in the first year experiences of University of Michigan
undergraduates (comparison of 1991 – 2001 First Year
Experience Questionnaires).
- Ten-year
changes in the impact of the first year experience on University
of Michigan undergraduates (comparison of the entrance and
first year student changes in 1990 – 1991, with the
changes in 2000 – 2001).
In addition
to our own analyses of these data, we will continue to encourage
and support the use of these data by doctoral students for
their dissertations which will further the contributions of
new knowledge to the scholarly literature.
Preliminary
Findings: Surveys
In preliminary
analyses of our 2000 and 2001 survey findings, we have compared
the responses of our four racial/ethnic groups on campus (African
American, Asian American, Latino/a, and White students) and
compared these responses with those of student groups in 1990
and 1991. Following are some preliminary examples of student
changes over the past 10 years:
In general,
the four groups of students that come to Michigan have not
changed significantly in the racial/ ethnic composition of
the neighborhoods they come from. In 2000 as in 1990, White
students come from the most segregated backgrounds –
about 90% of them from predominantly or all White neighborhoods.
At the other extreme, only 15% of Latino/a students come from
neighborhoods that were predominantly Latino/a or other people
of color. In contrast, there is some change in the backgrounds
of African Americans and Asian Americans. In 1990, 52% of
African American students entering Michigan came from predominantly
or all non-White neighborhoods; in 2000 this had been reduced
to 41%. In contrast to this pattern of increasing integration,
Asian American students changed somewhat in the direction
of less integration. In 1990, 73% of Asian American students
came from neighborhoods that were predominantly or all White;
in 2000 this figure was 63%.
For African
American and Asian American students the data on ethnic identity
mirror to some extent the changes in the integration of their
neighborhoods. Compared to 1991, African American students
in 2001 indicate much less involvement their first year at
Michigan in-group activities reflecting their racial/ ethnic
background. In contrast, Asian American students indicate
much more involvement in ethnically related activities in
2001 than in 1991.
Three
of four groups of students show a great increase in the importance
of diversity over the ten-year period. The proportion of students
who indicated in the entrance questionnaire that “ a
racially/ethnically diverse student body” was an important
reason for their decision to come to Michigan increased from
54% in 1990 to 74% in 2000 for African Americans, from 45%
to 66% for Asian Americans, and from 30% to 38% for White
students. The Latino/a students stayed about the same in their
view of a racially/ ethnically diverse student body as an
important reason for choosing Michigan (48% to 46%). At the
end of their first year at Michigan, the proportion of students
who said that the diversity at Michigan had a major impact
on their freshman year experience increased from 8% in 1991
to 23% in 2001 for African Americans, from 5% to 30% among
Asian Americans, and from 15% to 25% among both Latino/a and
White students.
Questions
about students’ perceptions of the racial climate at
Michigan are possibly reflective of the role that the University
has played in leading higher education’s defense of
affirmative action in the legal cases challenging affirmative
action in the past decade. There has been a significant increase
in the proportion of students who feel that the University
is committed to students of color. When asked about the University’s
commitment to the success of students of color, African Americans
who felt the University had a major commitment increased from
21% in 1991 to 47% in 2001; Asian Americans increased from
49% to 71%; Latino/as from 57% to 80% and White students from
68% to 86%. Among African American students who in 1991 were
particularly critical of the campus racial climate, the more
positive view in 2001 was also reflected in their view about
how much respect they felt that White faculty had for students
of color. In 1991, only 34% of African American students felt
the respect was considerable; in 2001, 56% of the African
American students felt that White faculty had considerable
respect for students of color.
Preliminary
Findings: Focus Groups
Preliminary
analyses of our focus group data identified five emerging
themes. They were: 1) “The importance of intragroup
exploration and appreciation;” 2) “There is a
great diversity at Michigan, but little is done to foster
intergroup interaction;” 3) “The importance of
residence halls in fostering intergroup understanding;”
4) “The importance of diversity in the classroom;”
and 5) “The multiple meanings of diversity.” A
brief description of each theme and accompanying sample student
quotes are presented below. It is important to note that the
views expressed are owned by individual students and may or
may not represent a widespread view among any particular group.
Moreover, people may change their views over time and experience.
Theme
1: The Importance of Intragroup Exploration and Appreciation
Students
in our focus groups expressed a sincere appreciation for the
varied opportunities to interact with diverse others at Michigan.
However, they commented that much of the push to encourage
student interactions is focused on fostering contact with
individuals in a different racial/ethnic group. While many
of the students felt that they greatly benefited from these
intergroup interactions, a number of them articulated that
they would like to see a greater emphasis on the exploration
and appreciation of the various sub-group identities within
their broader racial grouping. Given that the Latino/a American
and Asian American students on campus are represented by a
large number of sub-groups, this idea was particularly expressed
by these students in our sessions. The following quote from
an Asian American woman highlights this sentiment:
Asian
American Female:
I think it’s empowering to see so many groups of Asian
Americans on this campus. For me it was so nice to come and
be around such diversity where I wasn’t before. And
that was a lot of the reason why I chose Ann Arbor, Michigan.
I come from a predominantly White community. And I like the
diversity a lot, I enjoy it, and I think it’s definitely
a venue for getting to know things about people. I’m
so much happier here because I have the opportunity to make
great friends that are like me in ways but learn more from
them in ways that they are different too. So, it’s been
I think one of the most positive aspects of my career so far
at Michigan.
Theme 2: There is Great Diversity at Michigan; But Little
is Done to Foster Intergroup Interaction
Focus
group participants across all of the racial/ethnic groups
agreed that there is great diversity represented at the University
of Michigan. However, they were somewhat more critical about
the actual level of interaction among the various groups of
students on campus. Students commented that they would like
to see much more intermingling among the students groups,
and many felt that the University had a primary responsibility
to foster this intergroup interaction. However, it is important
to note that while students call for greater action on the
part of the University to foster intergroup interaction, any
mandated actions handed down by University officials would
probably be met with great student resistance. Realistically,
the responsibility is one that needs to be shared between
the University and the students who attend the institution.
The two quotes presented below illustrate student sentiment
around this issue:
African
American Male:
I think that as far as ethnic and racial diversity goes, they’re
[the University] doing a great job of getting people to come
here. At the same time, it's not like everyone hangs out together
or even talks to each other, or intermixes at all. This is
something that the university can work on.
Latino
Male:
If you look from a broad, general sense, it does seem like
there’s diversity here at Michigan, but it doesn’t
seem like there’s a real community with people interacting
and taking advantage of the diversity as much as it would
be good for us.
Theme 3: The Importance of Residence
Halls in Fostering Intergroup Understanding
Student
focus group comments repeatedly highlighted the important
role that residence halls can play in fostering intergroup
understanding. Particularly in the first year, students probably
spend more time in their residence hall than any other place
on campus. Therefore, it is important to understand this context
and its role in fostering positive diversity-related experiences.
Here’s what some students had to say about their experiences
with diversity in the residence halls:
White
Male:
Well, my friends and I are pretty diverse. My roommates are
White and Native American and I have Chinese American friends
and White friends and African American friends as well. So
I feel like our hall has been very open.
Asian
Female:
My roommate now is African American, and she’s from
Harlem. And then I’m from California, you know, like
a little suburb, and then my other roommate she’s from
Michigan but in a rural area. She had only interacted with
Caucasians. So we all came here with very different backgrounds
and different perspectives. So I got to learn a lot from them
just because how narrow-minded my perspectives were. All the
stereotypes that she had—a lot of them got dispelled
because I was the first Asian person she really actually encountered.
And so, I think my whole experience was really good. Both
of them were the first people I actually like developed a
really close relationship with outside of my race. So, it
was real good.
African
American Female:
I’d have to say that overall for me the diversity has
been a good thing. I come from a predominantly Black city
in Michigan, and if I really didn’t want to run into
White people, I didn’t have to, because there really
aren’t that many White people in my city, let alone
other ethnicities. So, it has been interesting. When I came
here my roommate was Korean, and I had never been around Korean
people in any situation. She had never been around Black people,
so that was interesting. We got along fine and we were able
to dispel stereotypes and myths that we had about each other
and different things, and expose each other to aspects of
our culture that we hadn’t seen before.
Theme
4: The Importance of Diversity in the Classroom
Students
value their experiences with diversity in the classroom. Moreover,
this exposure to diverse individuals and course material is
particularly important when many students have commented that
they have had limited interactions with diverse others elsewhere
on campus. The classroom represents a more structured setting
to foster this intergroup understanding and appreciation.
Here’s what some students are saying about diversity
in the classroom:
Native American Male:
I don’t personally see that much interaction besides
maybe the classroom. In terms of the classroom, I interact
with White people and stuff like that. But, in terms of social
activities or extra-curricular activities,
or what I do with the rest of my time, I personally don’t
interact much with White students.
Asian
American Female:
I think there’s a lot of different races of people here,
but they don’t interact. Like maybe that’s just
my experience. For example, My roommate last year. I roomed
blind and I had an African-American roommate. We basically
just slept in the same room, you know. We never really talked.
But in class, I have African-American students in class and
when we have debates, it’s great to see their perspective.
So I mean, what do we really need diversity for? It’s
for education. So who cares if my roommate and I didn’t,
you know, hang out all the time last year. It doesn’t
matter. But in classrooms, they can sometimes offer, you know,
a different perspective.
Theme
5: The Multiple Meanings of Diversity
A common
thread that runs through all of our data is that diversity
means different things to different students. And very often
the different perceptions are a function of the racial/ethnic
identity of the people that you are asking. We have found
that when White students at Michigan conceptualize diversity
they are more likely to stress the importance of the personal
relationships they have formed across racial and ethnic lines.
According to our data, these represent relationships they
didn't have in their homogeneous white backgrounds. While
interpersonal relationships are an important component of
how students of color think about diversity, they also incorporate
an institutional focus and are often more critical of the
University in its role of fostering diversity throughout the
institution. The two quotes below present a sampling of these
varied viewpoints:
White
Female:
Well, you can look at the statistics, and I think it clearly
shows that Michigan is pretty diverse. I think the diversity
here is one thing that this University prides itself on. And
it has been nationally recognized, whether in a positive or
negative way, you know. But I think that it’s obvious
when you walk down the street and you see the numbers; you
see how many different kids are in your class and there’s
such great diversity, and it’s also apparent when you
see how many different types of clubs and organizations there
are.
Latino
Female:
There is one thing that bothers me about this diversity. I
know that they’re [the University] showing a strong
commitment towards diversity. But first of all it seems really
forced…..it just seems kind of half-hearted because
every professor I have had has been a White male, with maybe
one exception since I have been here, and I am a sophomore
now. It seems like if they really want to promote diversity
maybe they should look into the faculty and staff as well
as their studies.
Alumni
Study of the Original Michigan Student Study Participants
The Michigan
Student Study Team has commenced planning for the survey follow-up
of the 1,700 students who in 1994 answered the senior questionnaire
in our original Michigan Students Study. We plan to administer
the survey in the fall of 2002 with telephone interviews involving
selected sub-samples (e.g., students who experienced a major
impact of diversity in their college years).
These
surveys and interviews will assess the level of diversity
in the respondents’ work, neighborhood, friendships,
and public lives. They will also assess, from their post-college
perspective, the meaning that the diversity at the University
of Michigan had in their post – college lives, how it
may have helped them in their relationships with diverse others,
and how the challenges they face in a diverse America might
have been helped by experiences that they had at Michigan.
The alumni
study is unique in that our data analyses will be able to
relate these post-college experiences and perspectives to
their diversity experiences as students at the University
of Michigan. Particularly significant will be analyses that
relate these post-college experiences and views with respect
to diversity, to changes that students experienced in their
college years. Since our original study was longitudinal,
we can identify students whose involvements with diversity
in college were not just a reflection of selection factors,
but represented a significant impact of Michigan’s diversity
environment. We will thus be able to examine the long-range
continuity (or lack of continuity) of the impact of college
diversity experiences.
|
