1. + #track45 Diverse Students’ Decisions on Grad Programs Erica Yamamura, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Seattle University Dustin Grabsch (@dgrabsch) MA Candidate, Seattle University NASPA V Western Regional Conference San Diego, CA

2. + Introductions Name Position Institution Main reason for attending/why you decided to attend presentation?

3. + Agenda Introduction and Overview of Research Methodology and Findings Implications and Reflection Large Group Discussion Questions

4. + Review of The Literature Higher Education Access and Choice Focus on Undergraduate Student Choice Baird, 1976; Ethington & Smart, 1986; Goldberg & Koenigsknecht, 1985; Malaney & Isaac, 1988 students of greater academic achievement, higher socioeconomic background, and greater academic and social integration pursue graduate education Baird, 1976, Kallio, 1995, Malaney & Issac, 1988 Access to Graduate Education Strategies to Attract and Retain Students of Color minority faculty and students in recruitment activities, offering attractive financial aid packages, having faculty members make personal contacts with prospective students, creating linkages with historical institutions of color, having a critical mass of faculty and students of color, offering a diversity issues course, and engaging students in diversity issues research. Rogers & Molina, 2006

5. + Site: Evergreen University (EU) Private, independent university Approximately 8,000 students 50% graduate students Student Affairs Master’s Program Loosely-based cohort model (75% full time) 65% in graduate assistantships on campus 20% part time (on or off campus) 10% work full time (on or off campus) 5% full time student only

6. + Conceptual Framework Ground Up Higher Edu. Assessment for Equity & Diversity Intercultural Assessment University-Level Assessment for Equity & Diversity Equity Scorecard (Harris & Bensimon, 2007) Campus Climate (Hurtado, et al., 2003) Ground Up Assessment for Equity & Diversity Equity Audits (Skrla & Scheurich, 2003) Action Research (Stringer, 2007)

7. + Methodology: Purposeful Sample DeclinedCurrentAlumni 5 Year Assessment of 3 Student Groups

8. + Methodology: Mixed Methods Qualitative Follow Up Individual Interviews Focus Groups Survey Institutional Data Analysis

9. + Characteristics for Consideration Diversity Feeling Supported in my Diverse Identities (Race, Class, Gender, Sexual Orientation, etc.) Diversity of the Graduate Student Population Diversity of the Undergraduate Student Population LGBTQ Inclusivity Gender Balance Disability Inclusivity Program Connection to the Program Local Reputation of the Program National Reputation of the Program Size of program Positive Program Climate Loosely-Based Cohort Model Program Cost Scholarship Opportunities Availability of a Graduate Assistantship Possible Offer of a Graduate Assistantship Additional characteristics. Social Capital Connection with faculty Connection with Professionals Connection with other admitted students Reputation of Faculty Reputation of Professionals Alumni Network Local Network of Professionals National Network of Professionals Mentoring University Connection to Campus Geographical Location Urban Location Positive University Climate Mission of the University Jesuit Mission of the University Religious Pluralism Value of Diversity at the University Global Opportunities

10. + Survey Sample What is your race/ethnicity? Declined Asian – 21% Black – 0% Hispanic – 8% Native American – 3% Pacific Islander 5% White – 77% Two or more races – 5% Current Asian – 10% Black – 7% Hispanic – 7% Native American – 0% Pacific Islander - 0% White – 79% Two or more races – 5% Alumni Asian – 5% Black – 4% Hispanic – 5% Native American – 2% Pacific Islander - 2% White – 87% Two or more races – 7%

11. + LocalNational How many graduate programs did you apply to? Applicant Behaviors Declined Current Alumni 18% 1-2 84% 3+ 18% 1-2 84% 3+ 73% 1-2 27% 3+ 73% 1-2 27% 3+ 65% 1-2 35% 3+ 65% 1-2 35% 3+

12. + Nat’l Financial Considerations Nat’l Geography Program Characteristics Institutional Type Local Geography Graduate Search Process Logistical Process

13. + Final Graduate Program Selection Process Nat’l Emotional Connection “My application process was guided by logistical concerns (location, size of program, etc.) but my [final] selection process focused more on the emotional connection to the program, people, and campus” Local If accepted, attend

14. + Implications for Practice Preview/Interview Days Areas of emphasis and shifting focus on relationships Facebook groups, blog of student experiences, etc. Creating opportunities and experiences for personal connection – not just transaction Access and Equity for Graduate Students of Color National attraction to the program Lack of local applicants Financial Considerations Core group of students concerned with funding throughout process Assistantships play a role in the consideration of a program, but not highest weighted during choice process

15. + Reflections on the Process

16. + Discussion How do our findings resonate with your graduate search process? Predisposition Search Choice How might graduate search processes look different for additional institutional types/program characteristics? Cohort-only model 4-year public GA Only How might we increase access for NASPA identified underrepresented student? Students of color LGBTQ Students with Disabilities

17. + Questions?

18. + Contact Information Erica Yamamura, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Seattle University yamamur1@seattleu.edu Dustin Grabsch (@dgrabsch) MA Candidate, Seattle University grabschd@seattleu.edu What did you think about the presentation? Tweet your thoughts to #track45