Third Working Paper

STUDENT PERSISTENCE

Proyecto Carvajal para

la Democratizacin del
Conocimiento

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student

Persistence at the University of Puerto Rico
by Sandra Dika, Ph.D.

(JPEG Image, 388x175 pixels)

https://mail.go

About the Proyecto Carvajal para la Democra1zacin del Conocimiento

The Center for University Access (CUA) is based at the Mayagez campus of the University of Puerto Rico, and started operaAng
in 2007. Its goal is to carry out academic research and outreach acAviAes that address the connecAon between socioeconomic
inequality and educaAonal inequality, and to make a contribuAon to the important work of increasing the proporAon of low
income students that apply, get admiKed and graduate from public higher educaAon in Puerto Rico. Its main project is the
Carvajal Project for the DemocraAzaAon of Knowledge (2008-2013), that with the support of the Carvajal FoundaAon, the
University of Puerto Rico, and developing sinergies with other donors, carries out academic research with diverse
methodologies and also develops outreach acAviAes with Mayagez students, grades 7-12, that live in public housing projects.
The following researchers are aliated with the Center for University Access:
Rima Brusi Gil de Lamadrid, Ph.D. Anthropology: Ethnography and QualitaAve Methods
Walter Daz, Ph.D. PoliAcal Science: QuanAtaAve Methods, GIS
Sandra Dika, Ph.D. EducaAonal Research: QuanAtaAve and QualitaAve Methods
David Gonzlez, Ph.D. Industrial Engineering: InsAtuAonal StaAsAcs

About the Carvajal Working Paper Series

The Carvajal Working Papers are the product of academic research carried out as part of the Carvajal Project. The papers des-
cribe the ndings of our research team, and aim to disseminate academic knowledge that may be relevant to the development
of insAtuAonal and public policies directed at increasing access and success among low income populaAons. Each paper is based
on original research and/or reviews of exisAng literature, and all include recommendaAons for policy and intervenAon.

About the 3rd Working Paper

In this working paper, the author shares the results of a study using insAtuAonal data from the University of Puerto Rico to
examine the eects of socioeconomic factors on student persistence in college. The study was funded by the Puerto Rico Higher
EducaAon Council (CESPR). Findings indicated that for students entering between the years 2000 to 2007, high income/
conAnuing generaAon students were signicantly more likely to persist than low income/rst generaAon students. Using
another database, for students entering between 2005 and 2009, ndings indicated that high school GPA was a posiAve
inuence on persistence, while students aKending a public high school were less likely to persist. For young women, having
married parents was a posiAve inuence on persistence. Contrary to expectaAons, parental income alone was not a predictor of
retenAon in college.

About the photos

The photos presented in this working aoer were taken at outreach acAviAes carried out through the Proyecto Carvajal para la
Democra1zacin del Conocimiento.

Table of Contents
ExecuHve Summary

Project Summary

Background

Process

Findings and Conclusions

Policy ImplicaHons and RecommendaHons

IntroducHon and Purpose

Context of Higher EducaHon Access and Success in Puerto Rico

Social structural factors in the educaHonal aRainment of low-income populaHons

11

Family Structural and Social Capital Factors Related to EducaHonal ARainment

11

Family size and structure

12

Parent educaHon, occupaHon, and income

12

Social capital

12

School and Neighborhood Structural Factors Related to EducaHonal ARainment

13

QualitaHve Research on Structural Constraints

13

Summary

14

Methodology

17

Sample

17

Data Sources

17

Variables

18

Data analysis

20

Results

23

Analysis 1 Results

23

Analysis 2 Results

24

Discussion

29

Conclusions

33

Policy ImplicaHons and RecommendaHons

34

Endnotes

35

References

37

ii

Executive Summary
Project Summary
This study was part of a mixed-methods research project, Socioeconomic StraAcaAon of EducaAonal
AKainment in Puerto Rico conducted by researchers from the Center for Applied Social Research at the
University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez (UPRM) from January 2009 to March 2010. The project was funded
by the Puerto Rico Higher EducaAon Council (CESPR). Socioeconomic factors are well-known to play a
role in individual educaAonal outcomes in the research literature, but empirical evidence is lacking to
substanAate this relaAonship in Puerto Rico. The study used exisAng data from insAtuAonal databases at
UPRM to examine how socioeconomic factors inuence persistence in college in Puerto Rico. The n-
dings of the study and its recommendaAons will benet higher educaAon, community, and non-prot
leaders in Puerto Rico as they aim to ensure all social sectors of Puerto Rico have access to higher edu-
caAon and enjoy the social and economic benets of advanced educaAonal preparaAon.

Background
Since 2004, the Center for Research and DocumentaAon on Higher EducaAon in Puerto Rico (CEDESP) of
the Puerto Rico Higher EducaAon Council (CESPR) has awarded $993,000 toward 26 research projects on
higher educaAon in Puerto Rico. The current project is the rst of its kind for CESPR, both for its broad
focus on socioeconomic factors and educaAonal aKainment, and for the size of the award ($76,000).
The project is also the rst publicly funded, mulA-method research study in Puerto Rico to empirically
examine the links between socioeconomic status, geographic locaAon, and educaAonal outcomes.
The principal invesAgator for the study is a faculty member and researcher at the University of Puerto
Rico-Mayaguezs Center for Applied Social Research (CISA). The funds allocated by CESPR provided relea-
se Ame for the researcher, wages for undergraduate research assistants, and materials and supplies. The
administraAve assistant for the Center for University Access at UPRM provided administraAve support.
The Carvajal Project for the DemocraAzaAon of Knowledge supported the wriAng and ediAng of the re-
sults as part of its Working Paper series.

Process
This project included four separate but related studies that provide empirical evidence for the inuence
of socioeconomic factors on overall levels of educaAonal aKainment in Puerto Rico. The bulk of the
research for this study was conducted between August and December 2009, based on the availability of
data and the schedule of the researcher.

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Data from admissions, enrollment, and economic assistance databases at the University of Puerto Rico-
Mayaguez (UPRM) were compiled with assistance from personnel from the UPR Oce of the Vice-
President of Student Aairs, the UPRM InformaAon Technology Center, and the UPRM Oce of
InsAtuAonal Research and Planning to study how socioeconomic factors predict retenAon in college. Two
separate samples of rst year, rst Ame degree seeking students were created, based on availability of
valid and reliable data on academic preparaAon, family structure, and parent educaAon and income.

Findings and Conclusions

Previous research on socioeconomic straAcaAon of educaAonal aKainment in the United States

and internaAonally links structural factors in families, schools, and neighborhoods to educaAonal
aKainment. Low-income families tend to have more restricted access to the forms of social
capital associated with higher aKainment (parent educaAon level, parent-child interacAon, and
interacAons of parents and children with school personnel). School quality is an important factor
in aKainment, and low-income youth are also more likely to aKend middle and high schools that
do not provide the academic preparaAon or the college-going culture enjoyed by their higher
income peers.

High income students whose parents aKended college were signicantly more likely to persist in
college than low income/rst generaAon students. There were some gender-based dierences in
academic preparaAon and socioeconomic factors that predict retenAon among students who
apply for nancial aid. Young mens persistence appears to be related to academic preparaAon
and public school aKendance, while young womens persistence is related to high school GPA,
parents marital status, and public school aKendance.

These ndings provide empirical evidence for educaAonal aKainment inequiAes in Puerto Rico. Even
among those who enroll in the most selecAve higher educaAon insAtuAon on the island University of
Puerto Rico - socioeconomic and structural factors play a role in whether they conAnue their studies
beyond the rst year.

Policy ImplicaHons and RecommendaHons

While the study was not designed to analyze or evaluate any parAcular state or insAtuAonal policies, the
ndings certainly call aKenAon to areas of policy and research focus for higher educaAon in Puerto Rico.
Based on our experiences and on the ndings of our research, we idenAed ve recommendaAons for
public government and higher educaAon insAtuAonal leaders.
1. The Legislature and the Puerto Rico Higher EducaHon Council (CESPR) must foster increased
availability of basic student data to allow the analysis of socioeconomic factors and college
outcomes at the island level. A limitaAon of the current project was the sample from a single
insAtuAon. InsAtuAonal data are simply not shared at the island level. InsAtuAons already com-
pile student-level data to comply with the insAtuAonal-level federal reporAng requirements of

the Integrated Postsecondary Data System (IPEDS) these data could be provided to CESPR,
without personal or insAtuAonally idenAfying informaAon.
2. All students must have access to a college preparaHon curriculum in middle and high school.
The ndings of this study clearly show that previous academic preparaAon is criAcal for students
success in college. Policies that track certain students into less challenging curricula at an early
age discourage further study, and in gaps in student knowledge which become apparent when
students enroll in university-level classes. While not all students will want to aKend university,
the fact that they are prepared to do so would be an advantage for them, individually, in the
labor market, and for Puerto Rico as a naAon, by having a well-educated public.
3. All students in high school must have access to preparaHon for College Board tests, as well as
equal opportuniHes to take the tests. Given the importance of standardized test scores for
student success in college, as shown in the ndings of this study, access to test preparaAon and
opportunity to parAcipate in the test is imperaAve to increasing socioeconomic diversity in the
public university. The College Access Challenge Grant project as the University of Puerto Rico has
made important strides in this direcAon, by subsidizing the cost of taking the test for all grade 12
students in 2009.
4. Higher educaHon insHtuHons must develop or strengthen eorts to retain lower SES students.
Using insAtuAonal research infrastructure, insAtuAons should focus on studying which students
are more likely to leave aper their rst year, along with the specic needs of those students for
extended orientaAon or academic support. Then, resources must be allocated (or re-allocated)
to eorts that will promote the persistence of those students most likely to leave. Ample evi-
dence on best pracAces is available in the literature but it is important to examine what will
work in a parAcular insAtuAonal context.
5. Further research is necessary to understand the barriers to college retenHon among low in-
come students in Puerto Rico. Evidence from UPRM suggests that the aKriAon rates for low in-
come students are twice as high as their higher income peers; and the ndings in the current
project showed that parent income and educaAon level play a key role in predicAng retenAon.
Further research is needed to understand what barriers these students face, in contrast to higher
income peers; qualitaAve research should play an important role. Conceptual frameworks includ-
ing social and cultural capital would also help to provide more theoreAcal tools to understand
educaAonal inequity in PR.

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Introduction and Purpose

Access to and success in higher educaAon for low-income students has emerged as a focus in recent
years given the ever-increasing importance of the bachelors degree for social mobility (e.g., Bowen, Kur-
zweil, & Tobin, 2005; Tinto, 2006). Among the most prominent theoreAcal and conceptual models used
to examine student success in college are cultural reproducAon, cultural capital, and status aKainment
theories (Perna & Thomas, 2008; Walpole, 2008), emphasizing the inuence of social class origins on
educaAonal outcomes. This study uAlized data from one public four-year insAtuAon in Puerto Rico the
University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez Campus - to examine the eects of socioeconomic factors and aca-
demic preparaAon on rst to second year retenAon.i
Socioeconomic factors, including parent educaAon, income, and social capital, are associated with edu-
caAonal aKainment and achievement. While college compleAon is a classic aKainment measure, reten-
Aon is another indicator of aKainment that is used in higher educaAon research. Given that the probabi-
lity of dropping out of college is highest in the rst year (Levitz, Noel, & Richter, 1999), retenAon to se-
cond year of studies serves as an indicator of likelihood to graduate. Overall, higher educaAon research
shows that socioeconomic factors including family income and parent educaAonal aKainment are posiA-
vely associated with student retenAon in college (e.g., Hossler & Vesper, 1993; Pascarella & Chapman,
1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980). More recent research has focused on lower retenAon rates among
students whose parents did not complete college, or rst-generaAon college students (Horn, 1998;
Ishitani, 2003, 2006; Nunez & Cuccaro-Alamin, 1998; Riehl, 1994).
Academic preparaAon reects college readiness (Perna & Thomas, 2008), and prior academic achieve-
ment is posiAvely linked to persistence in college (Braxton, Duster, & Pascarella, 1988; Pascarella &
Chapman, 1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980). In a recent study of 20 years of naAonal data, researchers
from ACT found that high school GPA and standardized test scores are the academic factors most stron-
gly associated with college retenAon (Lotkowski, Robbins, & Noeth, 2004). Further, it is known that aca-
demic preparaAon, including tracking and advanced course taking, is linked to social class (Cabrera &
LaNasa, 2000; Gamoran, Porter, Smithson, & White, 1997), demonstraAng the complexity of the study of
the contribuAon of academic and background characterisAcs to educaAonal outcomes.
RelaAvely liKle research has been done to examine the predictors of college retenAon outside of the Uni-
ted States. Recent research on college going plans among Puerto Rican high school students has de-
monstrated that factors such as family income, parent educaAonal level, owning the family home, and
school type (public vs. private) play a role (Muiz Gracia, 2010; Vsquez, Torres, & Negrn, 2004). Howe-

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

ver, there is limited published research in Puerto Rico that looks at socioeconomic factors related to per-
sistence and performance in college. This study addresses this gap through invesAgaAon of the predicAve
ability of academic preparaAon and social structural factors on retenAon using two dierent data sets
compiled from the University of Puerto Rico-Mayaguez data bases. The analyses involved modeling aca-
demic preparaAon and socioeconomic factors as predictors of retenAon.
Slightly dierent family and school socioeconomic measures are used in each of the two analyses, to ex-
plore their uAlity and appropriateness. SelecAon and operaAonalizaAon of these variables was guided by
the ndings of the literature review. In the rst analysis, socioeconomic status was measured as the stu-
dent belonging to one of four family income-educaAon groups based on rst generaAon status and in-
come category (low vs high). Based on the known importance of school structure variables, socioecono-
mic and achievement variables from the students high school of origin were also included. School com-
posiAon variables comprised average English achievement and proporAon rst generaAon, among stu-
dents admiKed to UPRM. We were unable to access any neighborhood level variables due to the limited
informaAon available in the UPRM database and the limited Ame frame for compleAon of this study1. In
the second analysis, family structural variables available from nancial aid applicaAon data (size, parent
marital status, teen mother), rst generaAon status, and parent income were included as socioeconomic
background factors, while school type (public vs private) was included as a measure of school socioeco-
nomic composiAon.

Using the Census and GIS database recently created by CISA researchers for the larger project, in future analyses we should be
able to add neighborhood level socioeconomic variables to allow modeling of neighborhood eects.
6

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Context of Higher Education

Access and Success in Puerto
Rico
There are unique challenges to educaAonal access and aKainment in Puerto Rico. While the current dia-
logue is the United States is focused on high costs of college educaAon, the conversaAon in Puerto Rico
open focuses on the dichotomy of public vs. private educaAon. The majority of Puerto Rican youth at-
tend public schools; about 80% of students in the nal year of high school. Inversely, the majority of stu-
dents enrolled in higher educaAon 59% - aKend private insAtuAons (Cmara Fuertes, 2007). A look in-
side the largest public higher educaAon insAtuAon the University of Puerto Rico (UPR) reveals that
only about 60% of the entering class aKended a public school. Why do the public/private enrollment
paKerns for K-12 and higher educaAon so dier so drasAcally? Isnt public educaAon supposed to be mo-
re accessible than private educaAon? Indeed, tuiAon and fees for the UPR are signicantly lower than for
the private insAtuAons only $45 per credit hour in 2009-10. The maximum Pell Grant more than covers
full-Ame enrollment and room and board costs. The UPR is arguably more accessible, cost-wise, for even
the lowest income families in Puerto Rico when compared to other opAons. However, on other criteria,
UPR is much less accessible than its private counterparts. While enrollment in high demand programs
such as engineering and biology is controlled by admission index requirements, many of the private insA-
tuAons have an open admissions policy. Even more troubling are other tendencies; for high demand
programs to aKract students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds, and from private high schools;
and for students from higher income families to persist at higher levels that students from low income
backgrounds. Thus, it is apparent that we cannot talk about the public/private dichotomy in Puerto Rico
without talking about socioeconomic factors that inuence academic preparaAon and enrollment.

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

10

Social structural factors in the

educational attainment of
low-income populations
Both social structural and cultural explanaAons have been examined in the literature on educaAonal at-
tainment and achievement (see Pearce, 2006 for a summary; see also Fram, Miller-Cribbs, & Van Horn,
2007). Further, cultural reproducAon and cultural capital theories are increasingly used to frame studies
of educaAonal experiences and outcomes, including college enrollment and success (Perna & Thomas,
2008; Walpole, 2008). This review is focused on studies of eects of social structural and social capital
factors on high school and college aKainment published since 1995. This review includes representaAve
studies from three bodies of literature: research examining the eects of family structural factors such as
family size, family structure, and socioeconomic status; research examining the eects of school and
neighborhood/community structural factors, such as socioeconomic segregaAon; and studies using qua-
litaAve methods that incorporate family, school, and neighborhood contexts to understand how socioe-
conomic status intersects with race and ethnicity to limit or enhance young peoples aKainment.

Family Structural and Social Capital Factors Related to Educational

Attainment
Interest in the eects of family structure variables on educaAonal outcomes has been prominent in the
U.S. research literature since the publicaAon of James Colemans Equality of EducaAonal Opportunity
in 1966. Twenty years later, Coleman (1988) used data from the High School and Beyond Study (HSB) to
demonstrate that certain family characterisAcs two parents in the home, lower number of siblings,
higher parental expectaAons, and intergeneraAonal closure are associated with staying in school. Co-
leman dened these characterisAcs as forms of social capital that are generated by parents in their
relaAons with their children, with school agents, and with the parents of their childrens friends. In con-
trast, French sociologist Pierre Bourdieus (1986) concept of social capital built on theories of cultural
reproducAon to suggest that structural constraints (social class, gender, ethnicity) reinforce unequal ac-
cess to resources.

11

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Family size and structure

The results of research that links family size and structure with educaAonal aKainment generally show
that higher aKainment is related with smaller household size and two-parent family structures. For
example, analyses of longitudinal data from the 1960s through early 1980s link tradiAonal family struc-
ture (father in the home) with college enrollment and compleAon (Furstenberg & Hughes, 1995), and
household size with years of schooling (Dyk & Wilson, 1999). Analyses of large scale panel data from the
early and mid 1980s demonstrate that nontradiAonal family structure (i.e., single parent) and greater
number of siblings predict dropping out of high school (Israel, Beaulieu, & Hartless, 2001; Smith, Beau-
lieu, & Israel, 1992). In recent years, these variables have become less visible in the sociology and edu-
caAon literature. We contend that this represents a conceptual ship in these elds to incorporate social
and cultural capital explanaAons of educaAonal achievement and aKainment.

Parent education, occupation, and income

EducaAon, occupaAon, and income are the three tradiAonal components of socioeconomic status (SES),
and status aKainment theories have purported that ones social class is correlated with the social class of
origin since the 1960s. Recently published studies illustrate the conAnued importance of SES in explai-
ning educaAonal aKainment, but incorporate ecological inuences and cultural explanaAons as well.
Comparing high ability-low SES with moderate ability-high SES 8th graders in the U.S., Baker (2009)
found that the former were twice as likely to complete a bachelors degree. These results, he indicates,
suggest that ability is more important than SES for predicAng economic mobility. Based on analyses of
longitudinal and ethnographic data from rural Appalachian youth, Brown and colleagues (2009) found
that lower exposure to family poverty and higher levels of parent educaAon were associated with higher
levels of aKainment (high school and college graduaAon), and that community poverty and aKainment
levels were not signicant in predicAng aKainment aper adding family inuences to their model. Similar-
ly, Marie, Fergusson, and Boden (2008) found that controlling for parent educaAon and income neutrali-
zed the predicAve power of cultural idenAty in explaining years of schooling aKained by Maori youth in
New Zealand. Together these results suggest that the current pracAce of controlling for SES when
studying other inuences on aKainment (e.g., cultural idenAty, academic ability), is an important one to
ensure that the unique eects of those other factors can be esAmated.

Social capital
During the late 1990s and early 2000s, research on educaAonal aKainment began to incorporate family
social capital variables as possible predictors of high school graduaAon and college aKainment, drawing
primarily from the data available from the NaAonal EducaAonal Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88)
and other panel studies (see Dika & Singh, 2002 for an extensive review). Results of analyses of NELS:88
show that parental expectaAons and aspiraAons, parent-teen communicaAon and parent monitoring,
number of moves (residenAal stability), parent communicaAon with school, and intergeneraAonal closu-
re predict high school compleAon (Carbonaro, 1998; Israel et al., 2001; Muller & Ellison, 2001;
Teachman, Paasch, & Carver, 1996; Yan, 1999). Other longitudinal studies evidence the importance of
intergeneraAonal closure, parents social network, parent monitoring, number of friends known by pa-
rent, and parent involvement in the school in high school graduaAon and college enrollment (Fursten-
12

berg & Hughes, 1995; White & Glick, 2000). Moving is negaAvely related to these two outcomes
(Hoerth Boisjoly, & Duncan, 1998). Family discussion, parents inuence and expectaAons, parent-
school involvement, and parent monitoring have also been found to predict years of schooling (Dyk &
Wilson, 1999; Kalmijn & Kraaykamp, 1996; Lpez, 1996).

School and Neighborhood Structural Factors Related to Educational

Attainment
Another explanaAon for educaAonal aKainment gaps focuses on socioeconomic segregaAon in schools
and neighborhoods as possible causes of dierenAal outcomes. Mayer (2002) notes that research on
school nance and neighborhood socioeconomic composiAon provides a useful background to unders-
tand how such segregaAon aects aKainment.
Rouse and Barrow (2006) summarize contradictory research in the area of school nance. While Ha-
nushek (1989; 1996) has suggested that, aper controlling for SES, school funding does not predict stu-
dent achievement, other researchers have challenged his methods (Hedges, Laine, & Greenwald, 1994;
Krueger, 2003). Increased funding to schools serving low income students has resulted in improved
achievement, based on the analysis of federal Title I program evaluaAons (Borman & DAgosAno, 1996).
Other researchers have found that inequaliAes in school funding (per pupil spending) are linked to ine-
qualiAes in teacher and school quality, and ulAmately, in educaAonal outcomes (BeKs, Rueben, & Da-
nenburg, 2000; Biddle & Berliner, 2003).
Research invesAgaAng neighborhood eects suggests the advantages and disadvantages of having
auent community members; they can generate benets for their neighbors, but tend to win out
against their more disadvantaged peers when compeAng in the school and the job market, creaAng mo-
re economically homogeneous neighborhoods (Mayer, 2002). Using U.S. census and Panel Study of In-
come Dynamics (PSID) data, Mayer (2002) suggests that increases in economic segregaAon between
1970 and 1990 did not aect overall educaAonal aKainment levels, but resulted in a widened gap bet-
ween the aKainment levels of low- and high-income children.

Qualitative Research on Structural Constraints

The aim of this review is quite narrowly focused on socioeconomic and structural factors related to at-
tainment, which privileges the inclusion of quanAtaAve research. We would like to highlight the fo-
llowing three studies as they represent the nature of qualitaAve research on aKainment that invesAgates
the interacAve eects (Horvat, 2003) of race and ethnicity, gender, and class on young peoples trajec-
tories, taking into account family, school, and neighborhood contexts.
Stanton-Salazar (2001) studied the social networks of Mexican American youth to develop a model of
the principal factors aecAng network development, parAcularly with school agents. These factors inclu-
de straAcaAon forces, counterstraAcaAon forces, subcultural forces, and societal hierarchies. He na-
mes seven forms of insAtuAonally-based funds of knowledge that are essenAal for students to acAvate
social capital: (a) insAtuAonally-sancAoned discourse; (b) academic task-specic knowledge; (c)
knowledge of how bureaucracies work; (d) networking skills; (e) technical funds of knowledge (computer

13

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

use, studying, test taking, Ame management); (f) knowledge of the labor and educaAonal markets, and
(g) problem-solving knowledge. Stanton-Salazar also idenAes the forms of insAtuAonal support that
facilitate the acAvaAon process, including implicit and explicit socializaAon into insAtuAonal discourses,
bridging connecAons to gatekeepers and other social networks, advocacy, modeling eecAve coping with
straAcaAon forces (help-seeking, problem solving), emoAonal and moral support, and personalized ad-
vice and guidance.
Horvat (2003) discusses the uAlity of Bourdieus concept of habitus to understand how educaAonal expe-
riences and outcomes are inuences by structural factors namely, race and class. Horvat presents an
example from a longitudinal study of African American women from college applicaAon through gradua-
Aon. She asserts that race and class interact to shape how these women interpret educaAonal opportu-
nity, and that the meaning of race and class shiped for the students as they moved through dierent
elds of interacAon high school through college.
Lews (2006) research on Korean-American dropouts draws on parAcipant observaAon, interviews, sur-
vey and document analysis. He looked at how SES background, social capital, and school resources aect
aspiraAons and aKainment of Korean American youth in New York City. Lew references the work of
Stanton-Salazar (2001), and notes how economic, linguisAc, and cultural barriers limit access to insAtu-
Aonal support and accumulaAon of social capital for low income Korean Americans. He also explores the
ineecAve learning environment and lack of caring relaAonships with school personnel as barriers to
conAnuing in school. Lew found that these young people were highly aware of their otherness as mi-
nority and low income status. Lew suggests that variability within ethnic groups must be criAcally exami-
ned to understand barriers to developing and accessing resources in social networks.

Summary
The research evidence overwhelmingly conrms that social structural factors restrict and facilitate edu-
caAonal aKainment. Research on family structures and social capital generally demonstrates posiAve
links between higher SES and educaAonal aKainment. Most of the studies uAlizing social capital have
conceptual and methodological limitaAons, including conceptual validity. Studies on school and
neighborhood structural factors suggest that socioeconomic segregaAon and educaAonal aKainment
gaps may perpetuate one another, and that gaps between low income and high income groups will con-
Anue to widen.
The ndings of the review have implicaAons for the design of research studies on the eects of SES on
aKainment:
Parent educaAon and income are important variables that must be modeled as part of students so-
cioeconomic status (SES).
Social capital variables such as interacAon with parents or with educaAonal agents may also help
explain educaAonal aKainment; but some researchers have criAcized the measurement of social capi-
tal in educaAonal research, ciAng that it primarily acts as a proxy for SES (see Dika & Singh, 2002 for a
discussion).

14

 In studies on educaAonal aKainment among marginalized groups, it is essenAal to ask parAcipants

about understandings of the barriers they and others faced in their homes, schools, and communiAes
to conAnuing their educaAon through and beyond high school.

15

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

16

Methodology
Sample
This study involves the use of two dierent samples of student data from UPRM. The samples were
created by the researchers from exisAng data based on availability of valid and reliable data. While they
overlap somewhat, together they represent an eleven year Ame span of UPRM entering freshmen
between 1998 to 2009.
The sample for the rst analysis was composed of the records of 5,987 undergraduate students selected
from the enAre populaAon of rst-Ame undergraduate students entering UPRM between 1998 and 2006
(N=20,151). The criterion for inclusion in the sample was based on two extremes of family income: from
below $7,499 to $14,999, and $40,000 or higher. These ranges represent the rst three and last two
income ranges on the UPR admissions form. The categories were labeled low-income and high-income,
roughly equivalent to the two lower quinAles and the top quinAle of median family incomes in Puerto
Rico, based on the 2007 American Community Survey.
The sample for the second analysis included records of rst-year, rst Ame degree seeking students who
applied for nancial aid to study at UPRM between 2005 and 2009 (n=7,006). Student records were
included in the sample if they were admiKed to and enrolled in UPRM.
Data Sources
This study uAlizes admissions and enrollment data available in the student informaAon system at the
insAtuAon. There are a limited number of socioeconomic variables available in these databases;
essenAally, parent income and educaAon; based on the informaAon that students provide during the
admissions process. The income measure is truncated at the higher end, as the nal category includes
incomes of $50,000 or higher. We obtained data from the nancial aid applicaAon process (FAFSA) for
the second set of analyses, specically to allow us to model social structure and socioeconomic variables
that are not available in the admissions and enrollment data; for example, family size, parent marital
status, and exact family income; which have shown to be important predictors of aKainment in previous
research. Personnel from the UPR Oce of the Vice-President of Student Aairs, the UPRM InformaAon
Technology Center, and the UPRM Oce of InsAtuAonal Research and Planning were instrumental in
obtaining and preparing the data from various databases. The data les were provided in Excel format,
and merged les containing the variables of interest were created. These les were exported to Minitab
(Analysis 1) and SPSS (Analysis 2) to carry out the descripAve and staAsAcal analyses.

17

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Variables
All variables used in the analyses, along with names, descripAons, and descripAve staAsAcs, are shown in
Tables 1 (Analysis 1) and 2 (Analysis 2).
Previous academic achievement. Students scores on standardized university admission tests and high
school GPA are used as measures of previous academic achievement. The achievement and apAtude
tests (Prueba de Evaluacin y Admisin Universitaria, or PEAU) were developed by the College Board for
Puerto Rico, and have the same scoring as the SAT (range 200 to 800). English achievement and
mathemaAcs apAtude are included in Analysis 1, along with Spanish verbal apAtude in Analysis 2. Both
analyses included measures of high school GPA (four point scale). These academic achievement variables
were chosen because they represent the components of the admission index for the University of Puerto
Rico.
Individual socioeconomic factors. In Analysis 1, the variable family income-educaAon group was created
by combining a students income status (low= below $7,499 to $14,999 and high=$40,000 or higher)
with rst generaAon status. While the rst and last categories of the admissions income scale (below
$7,499 and $50,000 or higher) roughly represent the top and boKom quinAles of median income in
Puerto Rico, we included addiAonal categories on either end to have a sucient number of cases for
analysis. While rst generaAon status is open dened as neither parent having completed a four-year
degree, we dened rst generaAon in Analysis 1 as students for whom neither parent had aKained any
more years of schooling beyond a high school degree. This deniAon was considered to be more
appropriate for the Puerto Rican context, as any years of schooling beyond high school generally
represent a signicant dierence in income and occupaAonal opAons. First generaAon status was
computed by recoding mothers and fathers educaAon variables, then compuAng a single parent
educaAon variable. In Analysis 2, parents gross income, number of family members, parents marital
status (1=married, 0=other), whether mother was teen mother (19 or younger), and rst generaAon
status were all included as structural factors. In the second analysis, the more tradiAonal deniAon of
rst generaAon was used; that is, students were dened as rst generaAon if neither parent had
completed a bachelors degree. In both analyses, students who are not rst generaAon are called
conAnuing generaAon.
School composiHon. For Analysis 1, the average English achievement score (school level English
achievement) and the proporAon of rst generaAon students (school level rst generaAon) at the
students high school of origin were included as measure of school composiAon. The esAmaAon of these
school level values is limited because it could only be calculated for students admiKed to UPRM. While
these variables do not provide an accurate representaAon of the composiAon of the students schools of
origin, we can use them in a cauAonary way to invesAgate the relevance of school composiAon to
retenAon. In Analysis 2, school type (public vs private) was the sole measure of school composiAon.
RetenHon. The dependent variable for both of these analyses is retenAon, measured as a dichotomous
variable (0=student did not re-enroll in rst semester of second year; 1=student re-enrolled in rst
semester of second year).
18

Table 1. DescripAons of previous academic achievement, individual socioeconomic factors, and school
composiAon factors modeled in the predicAon of retenAon in Analysis 1
Variable
High school GPA

DescripHon and Possible Values

Mean

SD

3.56

0.40

Standardized English achievement Score on PEAU English achievement test

(200-800)

594.28

103.96

Standardized math apAtude

Score on PEAU MathemaAcs apAtude test

(200-800)

645.97

87.11

Family income and educaAon

(dummy variable)

Low-income, First GeneraAon (reference)

Low-income, ConAnuing GeneraAon
High-income, First GeneraAon
High-income, ConAnuing GeneraAon
Average PEAU English achievement test
score amongst admiKed UPRM students
from same school of origin
(200-800)
ProporAon of students classied as rst
generaAon amongst admiKed UPRM stu-
dents from same school of origin
(0.00-1.00)

--

--

585.77

55.20

0.26

0.17

School-level English achievement

School level rst generaAon

High school GPA (2.00 to 4.00)

19

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Table 2. DescripAons of previous academic achievement, individual socioeconomic factors, and school
composiAon factors modeled in the predicAon of retenAon in Analysis 2
Variable
High school GPA

DescripHon and Possible Values

High school GPA (2.00 to 4.00)

Mean
3.67

SD
0.34

Standardized English achievement Score on PEAU English achievement test

(200-800)

562.01

112.59

Standardized math apAtude

Score on PEAU MathemaAcs apAtude test

(200-800)

621.27

87.50

Standardized Spanish apAtude

Score on PEAU Spanish apAtude test

(200-800)

579.81

71.97

First generaAon status

(dummy variable)

Whether at least one parent completed a

bachelors degree
(0=no, 1=yes)
Parents gross income reported on FAFSA
for year of admission ($)

--

--

$30,074.16

$29,877.38

Parent income
Number of family members

Number of members in family as reported

on FAFSA for year of admission

3.85

1.38

Parents married
(dummy variable)

Whether parents were married as re-

ported on FAFSA for year of admission
(0=no, 1=yes)
Whether mother was 19 or younger when
student born as reported on FAFSA for
year of admission (calculated using
mother and student years of birth)
(0=no, 1=yes)
Whether student aKended public or pri-
vate high school
(0=private, 1=public)

--

--

--

--

--

--

Teen mother
(dummy variable)

Public school aKendance

(dummy variable)

Data analysis
DescripAve staAsAcs, including correlaAons, as well cross-tabulaAons and ANOVA were conducted prior
to conducAng logisAc regression analyses, to determine the relaAons among variables in the models and
to make the nal selecAon of variables to include in the models. LogisAc regression was used because
the dependent variable, retenAon, is dichotomous (yes/no). While Microsop Excel was used to compile
the databases, data were exported to other programs for analysis. The staAsAcal packages Minitab
(Analysis 1) and SPSS (Analysis 2) were used to run all analyses. All staAsAcal tests were evaluated at the
=.05 level.

20

21

Results
Analysis 1 Results
The descripAve staAsAcs (means, standard deviaAons) for the variables used in this analysis are shown in
Table 1. The correlaAons between the variables (see Appendix C) were all posiAve and staAsAcally
signicant at the p<.001 level. The strongest correlaAon among the individual variables was between
English achievement and math apAtude (r=.31).
Next, a series of ANOVAs were conducted to determine if dierences in academic achievement existed
among the four family income and educaAon (FIE) groups (Appendix C). High school GPA was
signicantly higher for low income students, regardless of parent educaAon level. This result seems to
reect the known phenomenon that GPA are higher for public vs private school students at UPRM, and
that low income students are more concentrated in public schools island-wide. English achievement was
signicantly higher for high income students, regardless of parent educaAon level; and English
achievement was signicantly higher for low income/conAnuing generaAon students than for low
income/rst generaAon students. College academic achievement (rst year GPA) was signicantly higher
for high income/conAnuing generaAon students compared to all other groups, but there were no
dierences among the other 3 groups. These results indicate that socioeconomic factors clearly seem to
be a factor in college academic achievement for this sample.
The logisAc regression model is shown in Table 3. Three individual level factors were staAsAcally
signicant for predicAng retenAon: high school GPA (z=14.30, p<.001), standardized math apAtude
(z=3.37, p<.01), and family income and educaAon; as expected, high-income/conAnuing generaAon
students were more likely to persist to second year than low-income/rst generaAon students (z=4.01,
p<.001). None of the school factors were signicant for predicAng retenAon.ii

23

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Table 3. LogisAc regression analysis of retenAon from rst to second year of college, Analysis 1 (n=5,987)
Predictor
High school GPA

SE B

Odds RaHo

1.50

0.11

14.30

.00

4.49

-0.00

0.00

-1.02

.31

1.00

0.00

0.00

3.37

.00

1.00

-0.01

0.00

-1.67

.10

0.99

Average English Achievement (School)

0.00

0.00

0.97

.33

1.00

Low income/conAnuing generaAon

(0=low income/rst generaAon)
High income/rst generaAon
(0=low income/rst generaAon)
High income/conAnuing generaAon
(0=low income/rst generaAon)

0.12

0.13

0.92

.35

1.13

-0.03

0.21

-0.15

.88

0.97

0.50

0.13

4.01

.00

1.66

Individual English Achievement

Individual Math ApAtude
ProporAon First GeneraAon (School)

Analysis 2 Results
Means and standard deviaAons for the variables in Analysis 2 are presented in Table 2. Prior to
conducAng the logisAc regression analyses, exploratory cross-tabulaAons were conducted. First, gender
was crossed with rst generaAon status and retenAon. The results indicated that both of these factors
are not independent of gender in the sample. First generaAon students are more likely to be women
(2=27.77, p<.001), as are students who persist to the second year of studies (2=22.85, p<.001). Based
on these ndings, it was decided to run separate regression models for men and women to see how well
the selected factors predict retenAon based on gender. The other cross-tabulaAons indicate that
retenAon status is not independent of rst generaAon status, school type, whether the mother was 19 or
younger at students birth, and whether parents are married. These results suggest that the variables
selected for the model are appropriate ones for predicAng retenAon.
The logisAc regression analyses for men and women are shown in Tables 5 and 6. Standardized scores of
the conAnuous variables in the model; test scores, GPA, income, and number of family members; were
used to aid in the interpretaAon of odds raAos. Four predictors were staAsAcally signicant in the
predicAon of young mens retenAon in college high school GPA (2=131.468, p<.001), mathemaAcs
apAtude (2=5.238, p<.05), Spanish apAtude (2=3.67, p<.05) and school type (2=3.380, p<.05). Young
men from private schools are 1.27 Ames more likely to persist to the second year of studies than those
from public schools.

24

Table 5. LogisAc regression analysis of mens retenAon from rst to second year of college, Analysis 2
Walds 2
Predictor
B
SE B (df=1)
p
Odds RaHo
Z- Individual Spanish ApAtude

0.120

0.062

3.761

.052

1.128

Z -Individual Math ApAtude

0.133

0.058

5.238

.022

1.142

-0.012

0.062

0.036

.850

0.988

Z- High school GPA

0.567

0.049

131.468

.000

1.764

Z- Parents gross income

0.042

0.068

0.393

.531

1.043

Z- Number of family members

-0.051

0.062

0.685

.408

0.905

Parent educaAon
(0=rst generaAon; 1=conAnuing
generaAon)
Parent marital status
(0=married; 1=not married)
Mothers age when S born
(0=teen mother; 1=not teen mother)
School type
(0=public; 1=private)

-0.057

0.112

0.263

.608

1.059

-0.049

0.129

0.144

.704

0.952

-0.035

0.223

0.025

.874

0.965

0.235

0.120

3.380

.050

1.265

Z- Individual English Achievement

Table 6. LogisAc regression analysis of womens retenAon from rst to second year of college, Analysis 2
Walds 2
Predictor
B
SE B (df=1)
p
Odds RaHo
Z- Individual Spanish ApAtude

0.113

0.067

2.803

.094

1.119

Z -Individual Math ApAtude

0.044

0.067

0.425

.514

1.045

-0.069

0.068

1.015

.314

0.933

Z- High school GPA

0.443

0.051

74.654

.000

1.558

Z- Parents gross income

0.034

0.071

0.230

.631

1.034

-0.102

0.068

2.231

.135

0.903

0.233

0.125

3.501

.061

1.263

-0.349

0.134

6.783

.009

0.705

0.379

0.199

3.608

.057

1.460

0.310

0.141

4.860

.027

1.364

Z- Individual English Achievement

Z- Number of family members

Parent educaAon
(0=rst generaAon; 1=conAnuing
generaAon)
Parent marital status
(0=married; 1=not married)
Mothers age when S born
(0=teen mother; 1=not teen mother)
School type
(0=public; 1=private)

25

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

The logisAc regression model to predict young womens persistence in college showed a slightly dierent
paKern of staAsAcally signicant predictors - high school GPA (2=74.654, p<.001), parents marital status
(2=6.783, p<.01), and school type (2=4.860, p<.05). Young women whose parents are married are 1.4
Ames more likely to persist than those whose parents are not married (1/.705). Finally young women
who aKended private school are 1.3 Ames more likely to conAnue to second year studies than young
women who studied at public schools.
The logisAc regression analyses in this second analysis revealed some gender-based dierences in
academic preparaAon and socioeconomic factors that predict retenAon. Young mens persistence
appears to be related to academic preparaAon (College Board scores, high school GPA), and aKending
private school, while young womens persistence is related to high school GPA, parents marital status,
and private school aKendance.
In an exploratory vein, an addiAonal logisAc regression analysis was conducted, leaving school type out
of the model, to see if any of the other socioeconomic factors would become signicant predictors. None
of the socioeconomic factors were signicant predictors of mens retenAon. However, rst generaAon
status and whether mother was a teenage mother, were staAsAcally signicant, favoring young womens
whose families have higher educaAon levels and women whose mother was over 19 years when she was
born.

26

27

Discussion
There is scarce research available on factors that predict college student retenAon in Puerto Rico.
RetenAon is an important indicator of educaAonal aKainment, as it approximates the likelihood to
graduate from college. This study included several measures of two factors idenAed in the research
literature socioeconomic indicators and academic preparaAon to determine whether these factors
are important in the predicAon of student persistence.
In the rst set of analyses, high school GPA and math apAtude were shown to be important predictors of
staying in college, as well as the family income and educaAon. These results have parAcular implicaAons
for policy and pracAce at the UPR and other universiAes in Puerto Rico. Both high school GPA and math
apAtude are included in the admission index for UPR, thus, the results demonstrate that those
requirements are appropriate ones for adming students that are most likely to complete university
studies. However, knowing that socioeconomic factors parent educaAon and income - aect a
students chances of conAnuing and compleAng university studies suggests that insAtuAons must have
resources and supports in place to assist those students. In parAcular, rst generaAon students are a
group that insAtuAons should target for improved and extended orientaAon services. It is in both the
individual and public interest that the retenAon and graduaAon rates of our insAtuAons improve, and
insAtuAons must make conscious eorts to improve retenAon to ght impressions that solo los duros
pueden.
The second set of analyses were undertaken to incorporate several social structural variables and
determine whether these would result in a more suitable model for predicAng retenAon. The decision to
analyze the models separately for men and women was made aper examining the rst generaAon and
retenAon dierences between these groups. Contrary to expectaAons, the parental income variable
(gross income) and the number of family members did not make signicant contribuAons to the
predicAon of retenAon for either men or women. The only socioeconomic variable that was important
for predicAng retenAon for both groups was aKendance at a public high school; that is, that students
from public schools are less likely to persist at UPRM than from private schools. Given that the College
Board scores for public school students tend to be lower, this may parAally explain this result. However,
College Board scores were included in the model, so there are possibly other factors at play. Given that
about 60% of the incoming student populaAon comes from the public sector, UPRM must do a beKer job
of trying to understand why this is happening and to determine how to improve the retenAon of these
groups.
The most interesAng result of the second analysis was indeed the dierences between the models for

29

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

men and women, and how family background characterisAcs may aect them dierently at the moment
of conAnuing their educaAon. AddiAonal research using these data should explore other combinaAons of
the socioeconomic variables, for individuals, schools, and neighborhoods perhaps incorporaAng census
tract data developed in Study #2. These results raise quesAons about how boys and girls are socialized,
and whether their educaAonal trajectories and moAvaAons are similar as they aspire to complete a
college educaAon. Research uAlizing data from other public and private insAtuAons in Puerto Rico would
be an important next step to understand whether these ndings are insAtuAonally-specic, or indicaAve
of a broader cultural trend. Given that we know that retenAon rates tend to be lower for men, it also
suggests that insAtuAons should be working to gure out which young men we are losing and how to
beKer retain them, perhaps through mentoring programs.
While these results were obtained from analyses of data from a single insAtuAon in Puerto Rico, they
shed light on class-based dierences in the experiences of higher educaAon in Puerto Rico. If other
insAtuAons are doing these types of analyses for insAtuAonal research purposes, these results should be
shared more widely so that insAtuAons may work together to use limited resources to improve
educaAonal aKainment island-wide. Further, there should be more basic data available for analysis, from
both the public and private higher educaAon sectors, to allow a more comprehensive analysis of the
eects of socioeconomic factors on higher educaAon aKainment in Puerto Rico.

30

31

Conclusions
Prior to this study, there had been few publicly available studies on socioeconomic factors and
educaAonal aKainment in Puerto Rico. The most important ndings of the study were as follows:

Previous research on socioeconomic straAcaAon of educaAonal aKainment in the United States

and internaAonally links structural factors in families, schools, and neighborhoods to educaAonal
aKainment. Low-income families tend to have more restricted access to the forms of social
capital associated with higher aKainment (parent educaAon level, parent-child interacAon, and
interacAons of parents and children with school personnel). School quality is an important factor
in aKainment, and low-income youth are also more likely to aKend middle and high schools that
do not provide the academic preparaAon or the college-going culture enjoyed by their higher
income peers.

High income students whose parents aKended college were signicantly more likely to persist in
college than low income/rst generaAon students. There were some gender-based dierences in
academic preparaAon and socioeconomic factors that predict retenAon among students who
apply for nancial aid. Young mens persistence appears to be related to academic preparaAon
and public school aKendance, while young womens persistence is related to high school GPA,
parents marital status, and public school aKendance.

These ndings provide empirical evidence for educaAonal aKainment inequiAes in Puerto Rico; even
among those who enroll in the most selecAve higher educaAon insAtuAon on the island, socioeconomic
and structural factors play a role in whether they conAnue their studies beyond the rst year.
The limited availability of research on higher educaAon in Puerto Rico became apparent during the
course of the study. While we were aware of several dierent research and outreach iniAaAves, both
large and small, across dierent insAtuAons in Puerto Rico, very liKle informaAon was available about
the outcomes and ndings of this work. Publically available research reports and peer-reviewed
published research on higher educaAon in Puerto Rico are scarce. Even the CESPR research reports are
not published online. Also during the course of this project, Puerto Rico experienced the largest
government layo in history over 17,000 employees and the CESPR was drasAcally downsized like
many other Puerto Rican public agencies. In a Ame when liKle informaAon is available to understand
challenges facing higher educaAon in PR, fewer resources are being allocated to this eort.

33

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Policy ImplicaHons and RecommendaHons

While the study was not designed to analyze or evaluate any parAcular state or insAtuAonal policies, the
ndings certainly call aKenAon to areas of policy and research focus for higher educaAon in Puerto Rico.
Based on our experiences and on the ndings of our research, we idenAed ve recommendaAons for
public government and higher educaAon insAtuAonal leaders.
1. The Legislature and the Puerto Rico Higher EducaHon Council (CESPR) must foster increased
availability of basic student data to allow the analysis of socioeconomic factors and college
outcomes at the island level. A limitaAon of the current project was the sample from a single
insAtuAon. InsAtuAonal data are simply not shared at the island level. InsAtuAons already com-
pile student-level data to comply with the insAtuAonal-level federal reporAng requirements of
the Integrated Postsecondary Data System (IPEDS) these data could be provided to CESPR,
without personal or insAtuAonally idenAfying informaAon.
2. All students must have access to a college preparaHon curriculum in middle and high school.
The ndings of this study clearly show that previous academic preparaAon is criAcal for students
success in college. Policies that track certain students into less challenging curricula at an early
age discourage further study, and in gaps in student knowledge which become apparent when
students enroll in university-level classes. While not all students will want to aKend university,
the fact that they are prepared to do so would be an advantage for them, individually, in the
labor market, and for Puerto Rico as a naAon, by having a well-educated public.
3. All students in high school must have access to preparaHon for College Board tests, as well as
equal opportuniHes to take the tests. Given the importance of standardized test scores for
student success in college, as shown in the ndings of this study, access to test preparaAon and
opportunity to parAcipate in the test is imperaAve to increasing socioeconomic diversity in the
public university. The College Access Challenge Grant project as the University of Puerto Rico has
made important strides in this direcAon, by subsidizing the cost of taking the test for all grade 12
students in 2009.
4. Higher educaHon insHtuHons must develop or strengthen eorts to retain lower SES students.
Using insAtuAonal research infrastructure, insAtuAons should focus on studying which students
are more likely to leave aper their rst year, along with the specic needs of those students for
extended orientaAon or academic support. Then, resources must be allocated (or re-allocated)
to eorts that will promote the persistence of those students most likely to leave. Ample evi-
dence on best pracAces is available in the literature but it is important to examine what will
work in a parAcular insAtuAonal context.
5. Further research is necessary to understand the barriers to college retenHon among low in-
come students in Puerto Rico. Evidence from UPRM suggests that the aKriAon rates for low in-
come students are twice as high as their higher income peers; and the ndings in the current
34

project showed that parent income and educaAon level play a key role in predicAng retenAon.
Further research is needed to understand what barriers these students face, in contrast to higher
income peers; qualitaAve research should play an important role. Conceptual frameworks includ-
ing social and cultural capital would also help to provide more theoreAcal tools to understand
educaAonal inequity in PR.

Endnotes
i.

This working paper includes secAons of the project report Socioeconomic StraAcaAon of
EducaAonal AKainment wriKen by the papers author (Dr. Sandra Dika) as submiKed to the
Puerto Rico Council of Higher EducaAon (CESPR) in June 2010. The co Principal InvesAgators of
the project; Drs. Rima Brusi and Walter Daz; provided editorial suggesAons.

ii. As a follow up to the logisAc regression in Analysis 1, a stepwise regression was conducted to
explore how well the individual and social level variables predict achievement in college.
Achievement was measured using rst year GPA. Alpha to enter and remove variables was set
at .15. Overall, the model explained 35% of variance in rst year GPA, illustraAng the
appropriateness of the variables selected. High school GPA made the strongest contribuAon
(26%), echoing the results of the logisAc regression model for retenAon. While neither of the
school composiAon variables contributed to the predicAon of retenAon, school level English
achievement explained an addiAonal 7% of the variance in rst year GPA. The other factors that
contributed to the predicAon of grades included math apAtude, English achievement, and family
income-educaAon. High income/conAnuing generaAon students had higher rst year GPA than
low income/rst generaAon students, while the low income/rst generaAon students had beKer
results than high income/rst generaAon students.

35

References
Baker, J. G. (2009). Class, ability, and mobility: Economic and
academic paths from middle school to early adulthood. Journal
of EducaAon Finance, 34(4), 355-371.
BeKs, J. R., Rueben, K. S., & Danenberg, A. (2000). Equal re-
sources, equal outcomes? The distribuAon of school resources
and student outcomes in California. San Francisco: Public Policy
InsAtute of California.
Biddle, B. J. & Berliner, D. (2003). What research says about
unequal funding for schools in America. Available online at:
hKp://www.wested.org/online_pubs/pp-03-01.pdf. Accessed
January 2010.
Borman, G. J., & DAgosAno, J. V. (1996). Title I and student
achievement: A meta-analysis of federal evaluaAon results.
EducaAonal EvaluaAon and Policy Analysis, 18(4), 309-326.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.),
Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of educaAon
(pp. 241258). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Bowen, W. G., Kurzweil, M., & Tobin, E. (2005). Equity and excel-
lence in American higher educaAon. CharloKesville, VA: Univer-
sity of Virginia.
Braxton, J. M., Duster, M., & Pascarella, E. T. (1988). Causal
modeling and path analysis: An introducAon and an illustraAon
in student aKriAon research. Journal of College Student Devel-
opment, 29(3), 263272.
Brown, R., Copeland, W. E., Costello, E. J., Erkanli, A., &
Worthman, C. M. (2009). Family and community inuences on
educaAonal outcomes among Appalachian youth. Journal of
Community Psychology, 37(7), 795-808.
Brusi, R. (2009). Si te dejas llevarUniversidad, geograa y
desigualdad. Primer Cuaderno de Trabajo, Proyecto Carvajal
para la DemocraAzacin del Conocimiento, 57 pp. Mayagez,
PR: Centro Universitario para el Acceso. Available online at:
hKp://blogs.uprm.edu/cuacceso/documentos-invesAgacion-y-di
fusion/. Accessed November 2009.
Carbonaro, W. (1998). A liKle help from my friends parents:
IntergeneraAonal closure and educaAonal outcomes. Sociology
of EducaAon, 71, 295313.
Cabrera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2000). Three criAcal tasks Amer-
ica's disadvantaged face on their path to college. New DirecAons
for InsAtuAonal Research, 27(3), 23-29.
Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creaAon of human capi-
tal. American Journal of Sociology, 94 (Issue Supplement), S95
S120.
Daz, W. (in press). Pobreza, clase, y logro educaAvo en Puerto
Rico. Segundo Cuaderno de Trabajo, Proyecto Carvajal para la
DemocraAzacin del Conocimiento. Mayagez, PR: Centro Uni-
versitario para el Acceso. (available online at:
hKp://blogs.uprm.edu/cuacceso/documentos-invesAgacion-y-di
fusion/ in May 2010).

Dika, S. L., & Singh, K. (2002). ApplicaAons of social capital in

educaAonal literature: A criAcal synthesis. Review of EducaAonal
Research, 72(1), 31-60.
Dyk, P. H., & Wilson, S. M. (1999). Family-based social capital
consideraAons as predictors of aKainments among Appalachian
youth. Sociological Inquiry, 69(3), 477503.
Fram, M. S., Miller-Cribbs, J. E., & Van Horn, L. (2007). Poverty,
race, and the contexts of achievement: Examining educaAonal
experiences of children in the U.S. South. Social Work, 52(4),
309-319.
Furstenberg, F., & Hughes, M. (1995). Social capital and success-
ful development among at-risk youth. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 57(3), 580592.
Gamoran, A., Porter, A. C, Smithson, J., & White, P. A. (1997).
Upgrading high school mathemaAcs instrucAon: Improving
learning opportuniAes for low-achieving, low income youth.
EducaAonal EvaluaAon and Policy Analysis, 19(4), 325338.
Hanushek, E. A. (1996). Measuring investment in educaAon.
Journal of Economic PerspecAves, 10(4), 9
Hanushek, E. A. (1989).The impact of dierenAal expenditures
on school performance. EducaAonal Researcher, 18(4), 45-65.
Hedges, L. V., Laine, R., & Greenwald, R. (1994). Does money
maKer? A meta-analysis of studies of the eects of dierenAal
school inputs on student outcomes. EducaAonal Researcher,
23(33), 5-14.
Hoerth, S., Boisjoly, J., & Duncan, G. (1998). Parents extrafa-
milial resources and childrens school aKainment. Sociology of
EducaAon, 71, 246268.
Horn, L. (1998). Stopouts or stayouts? Undergraduates who
leave college in their rst year (NCES 1999087). Washington,
DC: U.S. Government PrinAng Oce.
Horvat, E. M. (2003). The interacAve eects of race and class in
educaAonal research: TheoreAcal insights from the work of
Pierre Bourdieu. Penn GSE PerspecAves on Urban EducaAon,
2(1), 25 pp. Available online at: hKp://www.urbanedjournal.org.
Accessed October 2008.
Hossler, D., & Vesper, N. (1993). An exploratory study of the
factors associated with parental saving for postsecondary edu-
caAon. Joumal of Higher EducaAon, 64(2), 140-165.
Ishitani, T. T. (2006). Studying aKriAon and degree compleAon
behavior among rst generaAon college students in the United
States. The Journal of Higher EducaAon, 77(5), 861-884.

Ishitani, T. T. (2003). A longitudinal approach to assessing aKri-

Aon behavior among rst-generaAon students: Time-varying
eects of pre-college characterisAcs. Research in Higher Educa-
Aon, 44(4), 433449.
Israel, G. D., Beaulieu, L. J., & Hartless, G. (2001). The inuence
of family and community social capital on educaAonal achieve-
ment. Rural Sociology, 66(1), 4368.
Kalmijn, M., & Kraaykamp, G. (1996). Race, cultural capital, and
schooling: An analysis of trends in the United States. Sociology
of EducaAon, 69, 2234.

37

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

Krueger, A. B. (2003). Economic consideraAons and class size.

Economic Journal, 113, F34-63.

Understanding the contribuAons of the disciplines. ASHE Higher

EducaAon Report, 34(1).

Levitz, R., Noel, L., & Richter, B. (1999). Strategic moves for re-
tenAon success. New DirecAons for Higher EducaAon, 108, 31-
49.

Portes, A., & Landolt, P. (1996). The downside of social capital.

The American Prospect, 26, 1821, 94.

Lopez, E. (1996). Social capital and the educaAonal performance

of LaAno and Non-LaAno youth (11). San Luis Obispo, CA: Julian
Samora Research InsAtute.
Lotkowski, V. A., Robbins, S. B. , Noeth, R. J. (2004). The role of
academic and non-academic factors in improving college reten-
Aon: ACT Policy Report. Iowa City, IA: ACT.
Marie, D., Fergusson, D. M., & Boden, J. M. (2008). EducaAonal
achievement in Maori: The roles of cultural idenAty and social
disadvantage. Australian Journal of EducaAon, 52(2), 183-196.
Mayer, S. E. (2002). How economic segregaAon aects childrens
educaAonal aKainment. Social Forces, 81(1), 153-176.
Morrow, V. (1999). Conceptualising social capital in relaAon to
the well-being of children and young people: A criAcal review.
The Sociological Review, 744765.
Muller, C., & Ellison, C. G. (2001). Religious involvement, social
capital, and adolescents academic progress: Evidence from the
NaAonal EducaAon Longitudinal Study of 1988. Sociological
Focus, 34(2), 155183.
Muiz Gracia, A. Y. (2010). Factors inuencing high school
graduaAng seniors decisions about pursuing post-secondary
studies in Corozal, Puerto Rico. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
Aon. University of San Diego, San Diego, California, United
States.
NaAonal Center for EducaAon StaAsAcs (NCES). (2009). The
condiAon of educaAon 2009. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of EducaAon. Available online at:
hKp://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe. Accessed January 2010.
NaAonal Center for EducaAon StaAsAcs (NCES). (2003). The
condiAon of educaAon 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of EducaAon. Available online at:
hKp://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe. Accessed January 2010.
Lew, J. (2006). The other story of model minoriAes: Korean
American high school dropouts in an urban context. Anthropol-
ogy and EducaAon Quarterly, 35(3), 303-323.
Nunez, A. M., & Cuccaro-Alamin, S. (1998). First-generaAon
students: Undergraduates whose parent never enrolled in post-
secondary educaAon (NCES 1999082). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government PrinAng Oce.
Pascarella, E. T., & Chapman, D. (1983). A mulA-insAtuAonal
path analyAcal validaAon of Tintos model of college withdrawal.
American EducaAonal Research Journal, 20(1), 87102.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. (1980). PredicAng freshman per-
sistence and voluntary dropout decisions from a theoreAcal
model. Journal of Higher EducaAon, 51(1), 6075.
Pearce, R. R. (2006). Eects of cultural and social structural fac-
tors on the achievement of White and Chinese American stu-
dents at school transiAon points. American EducaAonal Re-
search Journal, 43(1), 75-101.
Perna, L. W. & Thomas, S. L. (2008). TheoreAcal perspecAves on
student success:
38

Riehl, R. J. (1994). The academic preparaAon, aspiraAons, and

rst-year performance of rst-generaAon students. College and
University, 70(1), 1419.
Rouse, C. E., Y Barrow, L. (2006). U.S. elementary and secondary
schools: Equalizing opportunity or replicaAng the status quo?
The Future of Children, 16(2), 99-123.
Smith, M. H., Beaulieu, L. J., & Israel, G. D. (1992). Eects of
human capital and social capital on dropping out of high school
in the South. Journal of Research in Rural EducaAon, 8(1), 75
87.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Manufacturing hope and despair:
The school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Teachman, J., Paasch, K., & Carver, K. (1996). Social capital and
dropping out of school early. Journal of Marriage and the Family,
58, 773783.
Tinto, V. (2006). Research and pracAce of student retenAon,
Whats next? Journal of College Student RetenAon, 8(1), 1-19.a
Vsquez, F., Torres, M., & Negrn, S. (2004). Estudio de los facto-
res socioeconmicos que le impiden o le dicultan a los egresa-
dos de escuela superior realizar estudios en las insAtuciones de
educacin superior en Puerto Rico al inicio del Siglo XXI, 66 pp.
San Juan, PR: Centro de Estudios y Documentacin sobre la
Educacin Superior Puertorriquea (CEDESP).
Walpole, M. (2008). Economically and educaAonally challenged
students in higher educaAon: Access to outcomes. ASHE Higher
EducaAon Report, 33(3).
White, M. J., & Glick, J. E. (2000). GeneraAon status, social capi-
tal, and the routes out of high school. Sociological Forum, 15(4),
671691.
Yan, W. (1999). Successful African American students: The role
of parental involvement. Journal of Negro EducaAon, 68(1), 5
22.

39

Carvajal Working Paper Number 3

Socioeconomic Factors Related to Student Persistence at UPR

40

Acknowledgments
The author acknowledges the contribuAon of Dr. David Gonzlez, Professor of Industrial Engineering at
UPRM, in the data preparaAon and analysis for the rst set of analyses described in this secAon. Dika and
Gonzlez presented a preliminary version of this work at the 2009 AssociaAon for InsAtuAonal Research
(AIR) Forum (see references).
As always, any error in the text is the sole responsibility of the author.
The research presented in this working paper was funded by Fundacin Carvajal and the University of
Puerto Rico-Mayagez.

41

Centro Universitario para el Acceso Universidad de Puerto Rico - Mayagez e centro.accesso@upr.edu w cua.uprm.edu