Eis 500 Position Paper

Running head: PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR CULTURE CENTERS 1
PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR CULTURE CENTERS
Eden Driscoll, Yvette Bahena, Van Ha
Western Illinois University

PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR CULTURE CENTERS 2
Providing Support for Culture Centers
Our position is that cultural centers at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) need to
receive greater institutional support. In recent years there has been an increase in multicultural
students attending higher education institutions. Regrettably, many universities have not been
equipped to support the needs and demands of these students. Some institutions, on the other
hand, have responded by creating multicultural centers.
Unfortunately the recent financial crisis has impacted many institutions, causing them to
cut monetary support to certain divisions. In many cases, services such as those that
multicultural centers offer are among the first that have their budgets reduced. This is especially
problematic as the number of students who identify as multicultural increasingly enter higher
education. Multicultural centers not only offer a space for students to be able to identify with
their own culture, they also provide a supportive environment that empowers them to excel in
their education.
A common theme throughout our research was the cold climate at PWIs for students of
color. One case study conducted at a “mid-size, research-type institution” revealed that all four
focus groups representing African American, Asian-Pacific American, Chicano/Latino, and
Native American students “reported a non-welcoming environment and addressed the lack of
representation of students of color on campus” (Jones, Castellanos, & Cole, 2002, p. 28). While
this research may be limited to only one institution, another study conducted at the University of
Minnesota revealed the same results. Study participants also described the atmosphere there as
“unwelcoming” and “lonely” for students of color (Turner, 1994, p. 359). The feeling is further
described as “being a guest in someone else’s house” (Turner, 1994, p. 356). Black students who
participated in a study at the University of Florida similarly described a “climate of covert
racism, separatism, and apathy” on their campus (Patton, 2006, p. 635). In Harper and Hurtado’s
(2007) study of five large PWIs, it was reported that “beyond ethnic and multicultural centers on
the five campuses, Asian American, Black, Latino, and Native American students found it
difficult to identify other spaces on campus in which they felt shared cultural ownership” (p. 18).
This leads into the second theme of our research: cultural centers are the only places on
PWI campuses where students of color truly feel a sense of belonging. The term “home away
from home” was used by participants in three separate studies to describe cultural centers (Jones,
Castellanos, & Cole, 2002, p. 30; Patton, 2006, p. 644; Turner, 1994, p. 362). These centers are
the only support that help alleviate “cultural isolation” in an otherwise hostile environment
(Turner, 1994, p. 361). In addition to being safe havens, cultural centers have also been
established as places to help students of color develop their identities. Yang, Byers, Salazar, and
Salas (2009) conclude from their research that cultural offices can help ethnic minority students
navigate and develop their dual identities, the first being that of their cultural origins and the
other being that which is acculturated into campus life (p. 126-127). Patton (2006) also
describes how the Institute of Black Culture at the University of Florida gives its students a sense
of identity as Black individuals (p. 643).
Since cultural centers are the only places on PWI campuses where ethnic minority
students feel truly welcomed and supported in their identity development, the centers play a
crucial role in their success and retention. In Jones, Castellanos, and Cole’s study (2002), all
four groups of minority students “highlighted the benefits of the facility [cultural center] as
contributing to their retention” (p. 30). Patton (2006) also concludes from her research that
“BCCs [Black Cultural Centers] contribute greatly to student experiences and make the
difference for Black students at PWIs” (644). If PWIs are truly dedicated to the success and
inclusion of its ethnic minority students, increased institutional support is needed for cultural
centers since they are the resources that are most effectively contributing to this outcome.
The mere existence of cultural centers at higher education institutions is not enough to
create a welcoming atmosphere for multicultural students. Students have identified several
predominant issues that exist when administration believe that the establishment of a designated
space is sufficient to keep multicultural students enrolled. One of these issues is the lack of
acknowledgement that students receive. Students have stated the frustrations that often occur
with misconceptions of diversity, particularly when discussions on the topic are only being
addressed either in the cultural centers or by people of color. “The lack of resources for diversity
efforts and collaboration between the cross-cultural center and campus wide services led students
to perceive the ethnic centers as the only place where diversity issues were important” (Jones,
Castellanos, & Cole, 2002, p. 33). It is often the perception that multicultural students, centers,
or faculty are the ones who need to educate the rest. This common misconception often results
in multicultural students not feeling validated by their White peers, who rarely show interest in
initiating the conversation.
In addition to the lack of discussion, other factors such as underrepresentation of
multiculturalism in administration and faculty are troublesome. “Students questioned
institutional commitment to diversity by the underrepresentation of faculty of color and placing
sole responsibility of diversity education on the cultural center” (Toya, 2011, p. 19). Students
not only need to be able to see people who look like them in advanced positions; they also need
the relational connection to faculty in order to motivate them in the classroom setting. It has
been argued that students are able to respect and identify better with faculty who share the same
cultural identity.
A space is not enough for the students to feel connected to campus, they also need
recognition by their peers and institution to help them feel validated. The existence of cultural
centers are only a small fraction of what underserved students need. Institutions need to uphold
the importance of conversations on diversity in order for the whole campus to be involved.
Another group of students who are benefited by cultural centers are international
students, many of whom are experiencing being an ethnic minority for the first time. These
centers provide spaces for international students to interact with American students more
profoundly than if they just went to a programming event. Although many cultural events hosted
by universities seem to encourage interaction between American and international students, they
do not actually prove to be practical (Rose-Redwood, 2010). Rose-Redwood (2010) conducted
interviews with students in which they stated that spending a couple of hours participating in
those kinds of events is fun, but it does not guarantee that students from different countries will
shake hands and become friends afterwards (p. 393). In fact, there were a limited number of
American students taking part in these events, and the social gatherings on campus were often
seen to be organized primarily for international students (Rose-Redwood, 2010, p. 394).
Therefore, while many cultural events are aimed at bridging cultural differences and connecting
students of all ethnicities, they do not prove to be very successful in actually creating binding
friendships among students. Students have to have more regular interactions with one another.
By creating a space where this can take place, cultural centers play an important role in
facilitating these friendships.
Opposition Arguments
While there is much literature in favor of providing support for cultural centers, some
indicate various issues that could arise by doing so. The most important of these arguments is
that cultural centers can further segregate the student population by allowing each minority
group to limit their interactions to the center and thus stay with their own ‘group.’ White
students may also be discouraged from visiting these centers because they feel that they are
intruding in a place where they do not belong. Patton and Hannon (2008) bring up this issue
when they point out that “continued use of a Black culture center by White students could impact
the number of Black students who use the facility; they may not feel comfortable with White
students in a space they perceive and believe is designated specifically for Black students” (p.
146).
We do not deny the validity of this concern. However, we would argue that not having
cultural centers would be more dangerous than their potential to divide students. As described
earlier in this paper, cultural centers are the only effective places of support on PWI campuses
for minority students and therefore play an essential role in their retainment. Without these
centers, minority students would be left to struggle against an unwelcoming campus climate
alone, and many would either drop out or choose not to come to the institution in the first place
due to its reputation.
Hopefully, there will one day be no need for cultural centers because all cultures will be
represented equally throughout campus. Unfortunately that day is not today. Whiteness is still
too pervasive at PWI institutions for this to happen. Cultural centers are the first step in
disrupting this norm. They serve as a call to celebrate and respect differences, and, with the right
support from the institution, one day the entire campus will finally listen.
Suggestion Resolutions
One problem frequently mentioned in our research was the lack of resources, both human
and otherwise, dedicated to cultural centers. In Patton’s (2006) journal article, she mentioned
that the location of the Institute of Black Culture was hard to find because it was located on the
outskirts of campus (p. 643). Cultural centers should be located in the heart of campus to make
the students who use them feel like an important part of the community rather than brushed
aside.
Moreover, many cultural centers inhabit old buildings in need of repair. Financial
support should be given to those culture centers in order to upgrade their facilities and increase
needed services (Jenkins, 2010, p.145). Regarding facilities, Jenkins also suggests that lounge
areas for social interactions, conference rooms, and dance studios would be useful to provide
social activities and weekly events for students. Putting cultural artifacts and artwork around the
center would also provide a great visual impression on visitors (p. 146-147).
Furthermore, there are many ways to increase students’ participation in cultural center
events. On an institutional level, Jenkins (2010) shows that this could be accomplished by
increasing “institutional commitment.” This could be done by encouraging institutional staff to
have more welcoming interactions with students by having them participate in cultural training
and events that improve their ability to work with diverse students (p. 149). It is also
recommended that cultural workshops be organized throughout the year during which
international students will demonstrate what discrimination is, how they are discriminated
against, and share their feelings so that the institutional community can have a better
understanding of minority groups (Poyrazli & Lopez, 2007, p. 276). On a departmental level,
research done by Rose-Redwood (2010) indicates that students who are committed to social
events hosted by their departments are likely to have more social interactions with others from
different races (p. 395).
Faculty participation also plays an important role. As one Turkish graduate stated, “I
think I was fortunate. Our professor himself is a different individual in the sense that, like he is
open to new cultures and willing to learn about them” (Rose-Redwood, 2010, p. 395). Another
possible solution is for the cultural center to host social activities such as “multicultural potluck
dinners or movie nights” with the participation of faculty (Poyrazli & Lopez, 2007, p. 276).
Therefore, it is suggested that cultural centers and academic departments collaborate with each
other for small-scale, culturally interactive events to bridge the cultural differences between
students.
Finally, overworked staff is another common issue. Turner (1994) describes the high
level of “burn-out, stress, and bitterness” that exists among staff of minority support programs,
most of whom are graduate assistants who work in “generally unsupportive environments” and
have the additional burden of “being teachers to their teachers and mentors to other students of
color” (p. 362). The hiring of full-time staff could go a long way in easing this burden.
Conclusion
In conclusion, cultural centers at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) need to receive
greater institutional support. Since cultural centers provide a ‘home away from home’ for
students, they are of extreme importance to the retention of multicultural student populations.
However, cultural centers are only the first step towards students feeling truly validated about
their culture and differences. They start the conversations on diversity, but institutional support
is needed to expand these conversations to the rest of the campus community. Additionally,
cultural centers serve more than domestic students. They are often a bridge for international
students to connect and engage with American culture. All in all, cultural centers are more than
physical spaces; they provide an atmosphere of support and empowerment so that multicultural
students can connect with their roots, gain ambition to excel in their education, and engage with
their campus.
References
Jenkins, T. S. (2010). Viewing cultural practice through a lens of innovation and intentionality.
Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and practice,
137-156.
Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine Themes in Campus Racial Climates and Implications
for Institutional Transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 120, 7-24.
Jones, L., Castellanos, J., & Cole, D. (2002). Examining the ethnic minority student experience
at predominantly White institutions: A case study. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, I(I), 19-39.
Patton, L. D. (2006, November/December). The Voice of Reason: A Qualitative Examination of
Black Student Perceptions of Black Culture Centers. Journal of College Student
Development, 47(6), 628-646.
Patton, L. D., & Hannon, M. D. (2008). Collaboration for cultural programming: Engaging
culture centers, multicultural affairs, and student activities offices as partners.
Poyrazli, S., & Lopez, M. D. (2007). An exploratory study of perceived discrimination and
homesickness: A comparison of international students and American students. The
Journal of Psychology, 141(3), 263-280.
Rose-Redwood, CindyAnn, R. (2010). The challenges of fostering cross-cultural interactions: A
case study of international graduate students’ perceptions of diversity initiatives. College
Student Journal, 44(2), 389-399.
Toya (2011). Cultural Center Staff: Grounded Theory of Distributed Relational Leadership and
Retention. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0dv8v2sw

Turner, C. S. V. (1994). Guests in Someone Else's House: Students of Color. The Review of
Higher Education, 17(4), 355-370.
Yang, R. K., Byers, S. R., Salazar, G., & Salas, R. A. (2009, April). Cultural Adaptation to a
University Campus: The Case of Latino Students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
8(2), 115-129.
Research Notes
Jones, L., Castellanos, J., & Cole, D. (2002). Examining the ethnic minority student experience
at predominantly White institutions: A case study. Journal of Hispanic Higher
Education, I(I), 19-39.
Problem
“Ethnic minority undergraduate representation at 4-year institutions continues to be dismal, with
African Americans constituting 12.3%, Chicano/Latinos constituting 8.7%, and Native
Americans accounting for less than 1% of all higher education students” (20). As America
becomes ever more ethnically diverse, greater support for minority students in higher education
is needed. “The impending cultural revolution, as well as institutional survival, calls for a
pluralistic perspective in higher education to enlarge the support system for ethnic minority
students in terms of access, quality, and persistence” (20).
Purpose of Study
“The purpose of this study is to examine ethnic minority students; college experiences at a
predominately White 4-year research institution and their perspectives of the campus climate,
school resources, and quality of student service programs provided” (20).
Research Questions (p. 21)

1. What is the perceived campus climate of ethnic minorities at this predominantly White
institution (PWI)?
2. What is the ethnic minority experience at this PWI as it relates to services provided by
student affairs?
3. What role does the cross-cultural center play in their undergraduate experience?
4. What recommendations do students have for the university in general and student
services to enhance their experience?
Variables
The independent variable was the ethnicity of the participant: African American,
Chicano/Latino, Native American, or Asian-Pacific American. Dependent variables were
perceived campus climate, ethnic minority experience, role of the cross-cultural center, and
recommendations.
Methods and/or Procedures

“This is a qualitative study in which ethnic minority students who frequented a university
cross-cultural center were asked to participate in focus groups and share their thoughts and
opinions” (20-21). Focus group interviews and observations were 2 hours long and were audio
recorded. Notes on both the discussion and the participants’ non-verbal cues were also taken.
Topics discussed were “general campus climate, student involvement, student experience,
campus services, and recommendations to improve their undergraduate education” (26-27).
Participants were recruited by flyers posted across campus and throughout the
cross-cultural center. Dinner was provided and participants were informed of the study’s
purpose. The collected data was afterwards separated into categories based on common themes
and patterns. “To ensure internal validity, the three members of the research team reviewed each
data packet separately and identified emerging patterns. Once each member reviewed the data,
the three reviews were compared in a research feedback data session” (27).
Description of subjects
All students were from one selected university that was “a predominantly White, midsize
research-type institution with approximately 20,000 students. An estimated 1,500 students were
ethnic minorities” (26). The cross-cultural center is comprised of four individual centers serving
African American, Chicano/Latino, Native American, and Asian-Pacific American students.
Students from each group were represented in the study. “There were a total of 35 student
participants: 14 males and 21 females; 7 African Americans, 7 Asian-Pacific Islanders, 11
Chicano/Latinos, and 10 Native Americans” (26). Participants were identified as students who
were active in campus life.
Results
“The results were divided into six main categories: (a) general campus climate, (b) student
experiences, (c) student involvement, (d) cross-cultural center, (e) departmental units, and (f)
student recommendations” (28).
● Campus climate was described as a “non-welcoming environment” that lacked
representation of students of color (28).
● Participants reported a sense of alienation from White students as well as a separation
between different ethnic groups.
● Chicano/Latino students reported being active campus-wide while the majority of African
American participants limited their interactions across campus (30).
● The cross-cultural center was identified as contributing to the retention of the participants
and was “viewed as a location to hang out with their friends, an avenue to get assistance,
and a place to feel safe” (30).
● Most participants felt that the cross-cultural center was isolated from the rest of the
institution and that other departments considered it the center as the only place
responsible for diversity programs.
● There was a wide variety of student recommendations, some of which were the
recruitment and retention of more students and staff of color and a strong mentoring
program (32).
Conclusion
Ethnic centers are significant for personal ethnic identity development as well as for the diversity
efforts of the institution (33). Although the cross-cultural center was seen as isolated from the
rest of campus, its existence “enhanced the students’ undergraduate experience at a PWI and
created a location to gain support and guidance” (34).
Strengths of Study
Information on the impact of cross-cultural centers is severely lacking, so this study addresses
this deficiency by contributing new knowledge to the topic. The methods, procedures, and data
analysis used by researchers are described in detail and seem reliable. Steps to ensure internal
validity were taken.
Limitations of Study
Since this is a case study, its conclusions only represent the situation at that one particular
institution of higher education. The sample size was also very small and made up of students
who were active on campus and in the cultural center. Therefore this sample was not
representative of all the students belonging to those four ethnic groups on campus. All in all, the
study and its findings are very limited.
How It Applies
This study helps me address my group’s research question by providing evidence that
cross-cultural centers are relevant in providing assistance to minority students. Furthermore, the
conclusion that the ethnicities within the cultural center were separated from each other just as
the center itself was isolated from the rest of the university leaves room to argue that changing it
to a social justice center could fix these issues.
Patton, L. D. (2006, November/December). The Voice of Reason: A Qualitative Examination of

Black Student Perceptions of Black Culture Centers. Journal of College Student
Development, 47(6), 628-646.
Problem Being Addressed

The Civil Rights Movement prompted a massive increase in Black students attending
predominantly White institutions (PWIs). Ever since then, providing for the “social, cultural,
and academic needs” (628) of Black students at PWIs has been an ongoing issue.
Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to determine what role Black Culture Centers (BCC) play at PWIs.
Research Questions and/or Hypotheses

“The question framing this study was, how do Black students make meaning of their interactions
within the BCC environment and in what ways do their perceptions regarding the physical space,
location, size, programming, staff, and general atmosphere of the BCC ultimately shape their
involvement with their culture center?” (632)

“Data collection in this study involved semi-structured interviews lasting approximately 1 to 1½
hours in length. I conducted semi-structured, open-ended individual interviews to gather
information on how these students constructed meaning of the culture center on campus in their
own terms” (634).
“In order to conduct data analysis, all interviews were transcribed, compiled, and analyzed. I
followed a phenomenological approach to analysis, which consisted of epoche, bracketing, and
horizontalization” (634).
“As a result of analysis, four major themes were identified: (a) a climate of covert racism,
separatism, and apathy; (b) learning about the center and student impressions; (c) using the
center; and (d) why we need the BCC” (634).
Description of subjects/sample/participants
“In order to identify potential sites for this study, I first explored the websites of BCCs affiliated
with the Association of Black Culture Centers (ABCC) and spoke with colleagues at a variety of
institutions to learn about culture centers that met the following criteria: established in the late
1960s to early 1970s as a result of student protest, led by a professional staff member, existed as
a stand-alone facility” (633). This led to the selection of the Institute of Black Culture at the
University of Florida as the site for the study.
“Chain and opportunistic sampling were applied in this study. The IBC Director served as a key
informant by identifying potential participants for the study. During the fieldwork phase of this
study participants and IBC staff members identified fellow students who had some involvement
in the IBC” (633). There were 11 interviews conducted with 6 male participants and 5 female.
“This sample consisted of Black undergraduate students ranging from their first year to their
senior year who had involvement or interaction with the IBC” (633).
Variables examined in the study

Independent variable = BCC environment
Dependent variable = Black students involvement with and perceptions of the BCC
Results
There were six key findings that emerged from this study: (a) the staff members of the BCC
are extremely influential in how students perceive the BCC; (b) BCCs are beneficial in helping
Black first-year students become acclimated and adjusted to the campus environment; (c)
students perceived that the merging of BCCs into multicultural centers would be counter to the
role initially intended for BCCs; (d) location, size, and available resources of the BCC influence
Black student perceptions of the usability of the center; (e) BCCs provide a sense of historical
and personal identity for Black students at PWIs; (f ) Black students perceive the BCC as
‘home’” (640).
“It seemed that although other facets of campus may or may not have espoused Black cultural
values, the IBC was the central representative of Black culture on campus” (643)
Conclusions
“BCCs contribute greatly to student experiences and make the difference for Black students at
PWIs” (644).
Strengths and Limitations of the study

A strength of this study is how aware the researcher was of her limitations and the measures she
took to address them.
Since she was a Black female interviewing Black students, she probably received more honest
answers from students than if she was male and of another gender. However, she admits her
experiences that as a “Black woman, a former student, a former administrator, and one who has
experienced BCCs” (632) led to a bias about the value of BCCs that she tried to address.
Limitations of Sample: “Although every effort was made to ensure the trustworthiness and
credibility of this study, there are two limitations that must be addressed. The first limitation is
nominator bias. Although the director of the culture center was asked to identify a variety of
students involved with the IBC, it is possible that students who would speak highly of the center
were nominated. Even though this did not seem to be the case, it is certainly a possibility. The
second limitation deals with the challenges I experienced as a researcher in identifying potential
centers. There were a number of instances when BCC directors and staff members were
uncooperative or simply disinterested in this study, citing a lack of trust” (634).
Checks for internal validity: To ensure the trustworthiness of the findings, member checks were
conducted with 6 of the 11 study participants. These participants were asked to review the
findings of the study and to verify whether or not I had accurately and completely captured their
experiences (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 1999). During this process, they offered additional insights,
clarified meanings, and verified their comfort with the information being reported in the study.
Peer-debriefing strategies were also implemented. Six peer debriefers, each having vast
familiarity with BCCs, reviewed the compilation of findings, critically analyzed them, offered
suggestions, and challenged findings to help me address unanswered questions and to ensure the
findings addressed the stated research questions” (634).
Limitations of External Validity: Findings can only can apply to one institution since this is a
case study. She explains that “this study was not intended to be applicable to all Black students
at PWIs that have BCCs. Its transferability is contingent upon fellow practitioners and scholars
identifying findings and conclusions that may be relevant for their particular BCC” (634).
How does study help answer our research problem

This study states that “merging individual culture centers to bring underrepresented groups under
one roof has the potential to undermine the rich history that each of these groups brings to the
campus” (642). Since our group is investigating what is the most effective set up of
multicultural centers at PWIs, this article provides a contradicting perspective because it argues
that individual cultural centers are more effective than one comprehensive multicultural center.
Furthermore, our group is investigating the roles of cultural centers on PWI campuses, and this
provides strong support for the argument that cultural centers are valuable as safe havens for
underrepresented students.
Poyrazli, S., & Lopez, M. D. (2007). An exploratory study of perceived discrimination and
homesickness: A comparison of international students and American students. The
Journal of Psychology, 141(3), 263-280.
Problem
Homesickness and discrimination have negative effects on students’ experience on campus. They
can cause “feelings of loneliness, alienation, depression, and anxiety for college students.” (p.
264)
Purpose of Study
The “main purpose in this study was to explore discrimination and homesickness among a group
of international and U.S. college students and examine within-group differences in the
international student group.” (p.268).
Research Questions (p. 268)

1. What are the group differences between international and U.S. students in homesickness
and discrimination?
2. What are the relationships between age, English proficiency, length of residence in the
United States, perceived discrimination, and homesickness among international students?
3. What are the predictors of homesickness and discrimination for international students?
Hypotheses
1. International students would report higher levels of homesickness and perceived
discrimination than would U.S. students.
2. International students who have lived in the United States longer would report higher
levels of perceived discrimination than would international students who have lived in the
U.S. for less time.
3. Level of perceived discrimination would predict the level of homesickness that
international students experience.
4. Race or ethnicity would predict the level of discrimination that international students
experience.
Variables
The independent variables include American students and international students. Dependent
variables were perceived homesickness and discrimination.

Participants were selected from “random courses and advanced English-as-a-second-language
courses” at two different colleges. “American and international students received separate survey
packages”, in which they “contained a copy of the measures and a self-addressed, stamped
envelope for the students to send us the completed surveys. All students had the opportunity to
enter a gift certificate drawing, regardless of their decision to participate in the study.” (p. 269)
There were a total of 429 participants of which 241 were America. “In the U.S. group, 29% were
men and 71% were women. Their ages ranged from 18 to 48 years (M = 23.38 years, SD = 5.33
years). The majority (81%) of students reported that they were White, 10% were African
American, 4% were Asian or Pacific Islander, 2% were Latino, and 3% reported that they
belonged to another racial or ethnic group. In the international group, 58% were men and 42%
were women. Ages of these students ranged from 18 to 46 years (M = 26.1 years, SD = 4.78
years). Sixteen percent of the students were undergraduates, 41% were master’s students, and
42% were doctoral students. In regard to race and ethnicity, 19% were European, 65% were
Asian or Pacific Islander, 4% were Middle Eastern, 3% were African, 5% were Latino, and 4%
belonged to another racial or ethnic group.” (p.269)
Results
● “The results supported H1 , that international students would report higher levels of
homesickness and perceived discrimination than would American students.”
● “In H2, we predicted that international students who have lived in the United States
longer would report higher levels of perceived discrimination.”
● “H3 was also supported: Level of perceived discrimination among international students
predicted their level of homesickness. This result indicates that international students who
are likely to experience discrimination would be more likely to feel homesick.”
· “H4 was supported by the findings showing that race or ethnicity predicted international
students’ level of perceived discrimination. European students reported lower levels of perceived
discrimination than did students from other regions.” (p. 272-275)
Conclusion
This study compares the experience of American and international students in U.S. colleges and
universities in terms of the way they perceive their homesickness level and discrimination on
campus. It suggests several implications for higher education personnel.
● “First, the findings highlight the importance of intervention programs designed to help
international students, especially the younger ones, cope with and overcome their
experiences related to homesickness” (p. 276)
● “Second, our results highlight the importance of multicultural training about
discrimination both for U.S. groups and international students.”
● “Third, our results further suggest that international students show within-group
differences and that European students experience less perceived discrimination than do
international students from other regions. Therefore, these intervention programs should
target non-European international students.”
Strengths of Study
There were equal number of American and International students participated in this study.
Limitations of Study
This study “exploratory and correlational. Thus, no causal conclusions can be made”. In
addition, it was conducted at predominantly White colleges, which could affect the homesickness
and discrimination as compared with others.
How It Applies
This study provides useful comparison between international students and American peers
regarding their perception of stress level and feeling of discrimination. The findings and
applications are crucial in practical activities on U.S. campuses because they propose
implications for faculty and staff to reduce discrimination and encourage social gathering among
college students.
Turner, C. S. V. (1994). Guests in Someone Else's House: Students of Color. The Review of
Higher Education, 17(4), 355-370.
Problem being addressed

Students of color face an unwelcoming environment at predominantly white institutions.
Research questions, and/or hypotheses, or purpose of the study

The purpose is to describe how students of color perceive the campus climate at the University of
Minnesota, as well as to “inform educational policy makers and practitioners as they attempt to
develop an inclusive campus community” (356).
Methods and/or procedures

This was a qualitative study consisting of one-two hour long interviews. Researchers reviewed
interview results separately before comparing and discussing findings. They then coded the data
into categories and identified common themes. Participants checked drafts of the article to
ensure their responses had been interpreted correctly.
Description of subjects/sample/participants
All participants were selected from the University of Minnesota. Nine administrators in minority
support programs, six faculty in ethnic studies, and seventeen students composed the sample.
Researcher used purposive sampling; students had to have been on campus for at least one year
and participated in minority support programs. Recruits were asked to nominate others to
participate in the study. The total participants consisted of seven Asian Americans, eight
Hispanics, eight African Americans, and nine Native Americans.
Any variables examined in the study

Independent = Race, Dependent = perceptions of campus climate
Results
Four overall themes emerged. The first was that students of color agreed that the campus climate
was unwelcoming. Secondly, these students found isolated support in the ethnic-specific
resource centers and ethnic studies programs. Minority support staff were also subjected to
unwelcoming climate. The final theme was how to create a more welcoming environment.
Conclusion
“It is clear that universities must go beyond supplying supportive niches for people of color to
improving the overall campus climate and increasing the receptivity of the university as a whole
to students of color” (367).
Strengths and limitations

The sample size was very limited, so it cannot be used to compare different ethnic groups or to
generalize the results to the larger population. The sample was also only drawn from one
university. The methods did include some checks for internal validity as discussed in the
methods section.
How it applies
Cultural centers are important because they are the only places that minority students can turn to
for support in an unwelcoming environment.
Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine Themes in Campus Racial Climates and Implications
for Institutional Transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 120, 7-24.

Predominantly White campuses pose a hostile campus climate for minority students.
Research questions, hypotheses, or purpose of the study

“The primary goals were to pursue a deeper understanding of how contemporary cohorts of
students experience campus racial climates in the three areas consistently noted in the literature,
while searching for additional themes that have not been captured as fully in previous research”
(15).
Methods
This was a qualitative study during which racially homogeneous focus group sessions were
conducted. Each was audiorecorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed with the NVivo
Qualitative Data Analysis Software Program, and nine recurring themes were identified.
“Member checks” were used to check internal validity.
Description of sample/participants
Five large PWI institutions were chosen (two were rural, three were urban). Across the five
campuses, 278 Asian American, Black, Latino, Native American, and White students were
recruited by mass e-mail invitations to “all undergraduates from each of the racial/ethnic
minority populations on campus” (15). Each White participant led a major campus organization
(not representative all White students). The specific number of students who make up each
racial category is not listed, so they may not have been equally represented (5 Native American
vs. 100 Black students, etc.). One additional focus group was made up of staff from academic
affairs, student affairs, and multicultural affairs at each institution (only 5 of 41 were White).
Variables
Independent = Racial identity, Dependent = campus climate
Results
The nine themes are as follows:
1) Cross-Race Consensus Regarding Institutional Negligence
2) Race is an Avoidable Topic
3) Self-Reports of Racial Segregation
4) Gaps in Social Satisfaction by Race (Whites and Asian Americans have higher
satisfaction)
5) Reputational Legacies for Racism
6) White Student Overestimation of Minority Student Satisfaction
7) The Pervasiveness of Whiteness in Space, Curricula, and Activities
8) The Consciousness-Powerlessness Paradox among Racial/Ethnic Minority Staff
9) Unexplored Qualitative Realities of Race in Institutional Assessment
Conclusions
There is a “need for greater transparency regarding racial realities in learning environments at
PWIs” (19). Race must be discussed so that there can be a true “transformation” of campus
climate.
Strengths and Limitations

“Seemingly unpopular or minority points of view might not feel empowered to offer divergent
perspectives in focus groups” (15). Another limitation is that White participants each led student
organizations, which is not representative of the entire White student population since student
leaders make up a handful of that population. A strength was the internal validity check by
having participants read over the researchers’ interpretation of what was reported in focus
groups. It was also beneficial that this study was conducted in more than one university, but it is
still limited to five large institutions.
How it applies
“Beyond ethnic and multicultural centers on the five campuses, Asian American, Black, Latino,
and Native American students found it difficult to identify other spaces on campus in which they
felt shared cultural ownership” (18). This supports our position that multicultural centers should
be supported because they are one of the very few places in PWIs where minority students feel a
sense of belonging.
Yang, R. K., Byers, S. R., Salazar, G., & Salas, R. A. (2009, April). Cultural Adaptation to a
University Campus: The Case of Latino Students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
8(2), 115-129.

A large percentage of Latino students do not enroll in college directly after high school
graduation. Even if they do attend college, many do not have continuous, full-time enrollment
(116).
Research questions, hypotheses, or purpose of the study

The social integration of Latino students in institutions of higher education is “essential to
academic persistence” (116).
Methods
Students responded to two surveys received by mail. “The Basic Human Needs (BHN) Scale
was modified from Ossorio (1979), who developed the scale to assess the broad-ranging needs of
persons suffering cultural displacement” (119). “The My Life Then and Now (MLTaN) is an
original scale designed to compare a person’s current context with his or her culture-of-origin”
(119). Both surveys included Likert-type responses. “On a cover sheet for the surveys, students
reported their age, class standing (e.g., freshman), grade-point average (GPA), and responded to
a question about their use of the office designated to assist Latino students” (120).
Analyses of the responses are as follows: “Our analyses were conducted in three steps: (a) BHN
and MLTaN scales were factor analyzed (principal component analyses) to reduce each scale to a
smaller set of empirically derived dimensions; (b) relations between the reliable BHN and
MLTaN factors were examined to determine whether students’ on-campus needs are related to
their sense of their cultural tradition; and (c) relation between the reliable factors and use of the
student-support office was examined” (120).
Description of sample/participants
“Surveys were mailed to 1,000 students who self-identified as Hispanic, Latino, Chicano, Cuban,
Puerto Rican, or Mexican American on their university applications. All students attended a
large Land-Grant research-oriented university in the West...A total of 170 students participated
in the study by returning completed surveys. Respondents averaged 22-years of age (SD = 3.4
years; range: 17 to 41 years; freshmen through graduate students). Of the respondents, 71% were
female” (119).
Variables
Independent = degree of social integration on campus Dependent = academic success
Results
BHN factors include Insecurity/Confusion, Acceptance/Support, Poor Health, Confidence,
Reactive Loneliness, Anxiety/Self-Consciousness, Self-Directed. Correlation between
Acceptance/Support, class standing, and GPA “suggest that GPA improves as students gain more
experience on campus and are supported socially” (123). “Being confused, socially
unconnected, and insecure was not correlated with use of the student-support office” (125).
Conclusions
Student support offices for minority students should be expanded.
Strengths and Limitations

The sample was not representative of the populations since there was a very low rate of return on
the surveys, and females constituted the majority of respondents. Since the “My Life Then and
Now” survey is original, it has not been evaluated for validity before. I’m also not sure that the
results adequately support the conclusions they draw.
How it applies
This study supports the argument that minority student-support centers help with minority
students’ social integration into the campus community, which in turn increases their chance for
academic success.
Pieterse, Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins, Mason (2009). Multicultural Competence and Social
Justice Training in Counseling Psychology and Counselor Education. Retrieved from
http://tcp.sagepub.com/content/37/1/93.full.pdf+html
Problem Being Addressed

The case study is researching the instructional way in which multicultural competence and social
justice advocacy is taught in Counseling Psychology and Counselor Education. The article refers
to the key terms of multicultural and social justice being used intertwined often in educational
settings. The case study will analyze different classes that are required as part of the master
programs.
Purpose of the Study
The overall purpose of the study is that the results gained will help evaluate and better structure
counseling approaches.
“The hope is that the information gleaned will provide a lens through which current approaches
in multicultural counseling competence and social justice training can be critiqued and improved
on where necessary.” (Pieterse, Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins, Mason, 2009, p.99)
Research questions and/ or hypothesis

The hypothesis for this case study is the overlap that occurs in classrooms when addressing the
multicultural and social justice components of the field.
“The extent to which multicultural competence and social justice advocacy are considered
critical components of counselor and counseling psychological training should therefore be
evident in the classroom instruction provided to students in these disciplines.” (Pieterse, Evans,
Risner-Butner, Collins, Mason, 2009, p.94)
Methods and/or procedures

-Identified counseling and counseling psychology graduate programs.
- Initially targeted 200 and reviewed their Website to see if the program contained mandatory
courses related to multiculturalism and/or social justice. Due to research only 169 programs
fitted the criteria.
- E-mailed professors requesting a copy of the syllabus. Only 37% responded.
-Reviewed the syllabus to determine the classroom material. There were some that where
electives and therefore did not fit the criteria leaving it to 54 classroom settings.
Types of programs: 29 were doctoral programs and 25 were master level programs.
Regions: 27 from the south, 13 from the Midwest, 8 from the west and 6 from the northeast
Results
The research concluded that there is an overlap of the two topics in the programs.
“The majority of instructors appeared to consider social justice to be within the rubric of
multicultural counseling or diversity training; that is, 59% of the goal statements and objectives
of the syllabi included a reference to social justice – for example, “Students will demonstrate an
understanding of the historical legacy of inequitable power, oppression and racism.” (Pieterse,
Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins, Mason, 2009, p.105)
Conclusions
Multicultural content was more prominent on the classroom syllabus.
“Content that generally fell into a multicultural category was more prominent than content that
was more consistent with a social justice focus. “ (Pieterse, Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins,
Mason, 2009, p.107)
Strengths of the study

The number of syllabus is equitable to the representation of programs that are for counseling.
Limitations of the study

The classroom syllabuses that were received were only based on those who were willing to
participate. There could have been more representation of other programs.
The study only evaluated book material that was required and did not review articles that were
assigned separately. This only gives us a narrow perspective of what could have been the
classroom environment.
We only know the material presented but do not know how the material was received by the
students.
Davis, Laura, LePeau, Lucy, Patricoski, Adam, Schmeckebier (2005). An
Investigation of Student and Perception of the Neal-Marshall Black Culture Center.

Retrieved form
https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/jiuspa/article/viewFile/4640/4278
· Problem being addressed

● “researched examined how the environment of the NMBCC initiates this
transactional relationship with student patrons” (Davis, LePeau, Patricoski,
Scmeickebier p.57)
· Purpose of the study
● “The assessment examined the climate and cultural interplay between physical
space, student perception, and espoused mission” (Davis, LePeau, Patricoski,
Scmeickebier p.55)
· Research questions and/or hypotheses
● The researchers identified three core questions that would give their research,
but they were not limited to the following:
○ 1. How do student patrons use the NMBCC?
○ 2. How do student patrons perceive the NMBCC?
○ 3. Is the NMBCC facility congruent with its mission?
● “Questions focused on four areas: facility perceptions, mission perception, a
frequency of facility usage, and background information” (Davis, LePeau,
Patricoski, Scmeickebier (p.57)
· Methods and/or Procedures

● Researchers conducted a two pronged approach, meaning they observed and
collected data that could be classified as either qualitative and quantitative
● The study was done by researchers using a modified environmental assessment
model outlined by Upcraft and Schuch. They focused their study based on two
methods: observation by researchers and conducting a student questionnaire.
● Researchers developed the questionnaire based on two sources “College Student
Experiences Questionnaire” and the “College Student Report”
● They developed four types of things they wanted to focus on and the type of
questionnaire, given them numerical assessment to be easily measure.
● They sat a two week time period to collect data.
● Used Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) in order to fully
understand the findings.
· Description
of subjects/sample/participants
● There was a an unequal numerical representation of other minorities on campus.
● There were 5 types of classification based on race such as:
○ Asian Pacific Islander
○ Black African American
○ Caucasian
○ Latino/Hispanic
○ Other
● Only two types to classify for gender: Female or Male.
● There was representation of at least one person per Year in School
● Students who participated on the research were current students of Indiana
State University
· Variables examined in the study (if you have trouble with this part, be sure to
contact me. I do what I can to help)

● The variables of the study where how long the student had been in the
institution, the connection with the center, the independent need of the students.
· Results
● The results concluded that NMBCC is not fulfilling with their mission statement.
The students do not feel an academic support as they had thought of, while
others did.
● Overall there where mixed reviews based on the scale of how people felt towards
the center.
· Conclusions
● The research concluded that the center needs to focus on the following:
○ To try to listen to the feedback students give about the center
○ Create a home-like atmosphere
○ To evaluate the mission and analyze how the programs can be more of a
representation of such.
○ Ensure the students are creating connections with administration.
○ Continue to do research
· Strengths and Limitations of the study

● The strengths: Formulated appropriately the questions
○ Understood the process of actually doing a research.
● Limitations:
○ Time constraint
○ Study composed of all white researchers
· Note how the study helps you answer your research problem
● The study helps me understand the need other institutions have for cultural
centers and the needs they are trying to push for and to what potential they are
doing at. It creates a definition of the purpose of Multicultural Centers.
Yvette Bahena
Research Report 3
Your notes should include:
· Reference information in APA style)

· Jones, Mazur, Montoya, Rairden, Ramos, White (2004). The Impact Cultural Centers on

Student Development.
· Problem
being addressed
The research aims to investigate the purpose and significance the cultural centers have
on the students.
● Purpose of the study
○ “The team wanted to know why students are involved with the cultural centers,
why the cultural centers are so fundamental for some students, and what they
provide. (p. 5)
● The researchers identified one core question that would give their research.
○ 1. What is the importance of the cultural houses to the development to students at
UIUC? (p. 5)
· Hypothesis
· “The mission, as qualitative, ethnographic researchers is meant to give evidence to the
importance of the cultural centers to underrepresented students at this university and in

contemporary institutions of higher education in general; further, this research may be used as a
starting point for future study” (p. 4).

· “The team conducted observations and individual interviews of students, staff, and an

alumna at the three cultural centers.” (p. 5)

· There were a total of 13 observations and 14 interviews
· Questions were made prior to the interviews based on assumptions
· Descriptionof subjects/sample/participants
● There was an unequal numerical representation of other minorities for each
center.
● There were 3 types of centers/ organizations
○ La CASA
○ AACP ( African American Center)
○ Cosmopolitan Club ( For students studying abroad)

● The variables of the study where the type of connection the students felt with
the campus. They were measured by the type of program they attended.
· Results
○ “The group found that underrepresented students are drawn to cultural centers
because they do not feel at home on campus. They do not have a sense of
ownership and privilege at this university. They seek out the cultural centers as
safe houses, as protection from the oftentimes, unfriendly environment if not
racist structures of the university” ( P. 29)
● Conclusions
○ The research and found 5 core themes to be important for their research
■ Orientation
■ Impact
■ Perceptions
■ Involvement
■ Sense of Community
○ The centers are a place of comfort for the students as they navigate being
away from home.

● The strengths: Formulated appropriately the questions
○ Were open minded about their findings
○
● Limitations:
○ Not all of the researchers participated in the study
○ Went in formatting prior biases
○ Time to do the study
○ Non-attendees
○ Access to students
○ Cultural house communication
○ Technology
● The study is guided on analyzing the benefits of cultural centers at a university.
This is important as it gives us testimonies of the connection students feel with
them.
Yvette Bahena
Research Report 4

· Jones, Castellanos, Cole (2002). The Examining the Ethnic Minority Student Experience at

Predominantly White Institutions: A case Study. Retrieved.

http://jhh.sagepub.com/content/1/1/19.refs#cited-by
● The purpose of the study was threefold: (a) to examine the experiences of ethnic
minority students at a predominately White institution, (b) to discuss the
similarities and differences of the experiences among the four groups, and (c) to
identify student perspectives on the delivery of student services in the
institution. The study examined African American, Asian-Pacific American,
Chicano/Latino, and Native American student experiences at a research
institution. Purpose of the study ( P. 1)
● Purpose:
· 1.What is the perceived campus climate of ethnic minorities at this predominantly
White institution (PWI)?

· 2. What is the ethnic minority experience at this PWI as it relates to services
provided by student affairs?

· 3. What role does the cross-cultural center play in their undergraduate experience?
· 4. What recommendations do students have for the university in general and
student services to enhance their experience?

· H
ypothesis
“Hence, the quality of student involvement opportunities has an impact on an ethnic minority
student’s involvement and subsequently a student’s sense of integration.” ( p 23)

· Qualitative

· It seeks to understand the minority experience at PWI
· Focus Groups and observation
· Description of subjects/sample/participants
● Participants included but were not limited to
○ African American
○ Asian Pacific
○ Chicano/Latino
○ Native Americans

● Campus Climate
● Student involvement
● Student Experience
● Campus Services
· Results
○ Each student had different experiences based on their involvement.

● Conclusions
“Students of color not only identified ethnic segregation from White students but also
identified separatism between ethnic groups. The ethnic minority groups did not sense
a collaborative effort to interact, unite, and form coalitions” (p. 29)

● The strengths: Formulated appropriately the focus groups
○ Included a variety of ethnic representation
● Limitations:
○ People who they interviews were only perceptions of a selected few
● The study is guided on analyzing the climate and participation of the students on
PWI.
Research Report 5

· Toya (2011). Cultural Center Staff. Retrieved. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0dv8v2sw


● Understanding the impact of cultural center staff on the students success and the
institution.
● Purpose:
· “As a rich emergent finding, identity development was added to this study’s conceptual
framework of sense of belonging, mattering, and retention. Distributed relational leadership,

sense of community, the physical space of the Center, and programs influenced the sense of
belonging, mattering, identity development, and retention of underserved students. This study’s
grounded theory guides ongoing retention theory research and university cultural center
practices” ( p. 14).
1. In what ways does a cross-cultural center influence sense of belonging and mattering for
underserved students?
2. In what ways does a cross-cultural center staff influence sense of belonging and mattering for
underserved students?
3. How do underserved students relate to mattering and sense of belonging constructs?
Hypothesis
To inform the importance of sense of belonging, mattering, and other retention theories to
underserved students

· Qualitative

· 7 undergraduate students
· 1 fulltime staff
· Description of subjects/sample/participants
· 7 undergraduate students

· 1 full time staff
· Variables
examined in the study (if you have trouble with this part, be sure to
● Mattering
● Retention
● Sense of belonging
· Results
○ Each student had different experiences based on their involvement.

● Conclusions
Mission of the university are key to the retention of student depending on the programs
that are implemented to enforce them.
Staff are important to the role of success for the student
● The strengths: Formulated appropriately the focus groups

● Limitations:
○ Very narrow population
● It embarked the importance of staff for cultural centers

Eis 500 Position Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eis 500 Position Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR CULTURE CENTERS 1

PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR CULTURE CENTERS

Eden Driscoll, Yvette Bahena, Van Ha

Western Illinois University

Providing Support for Culture Centers

hand, have responded by creating multicultural centers.

focus groups representing African American, Asian-Pacific American, Chicano/Latino, and

participated in a study at the University of Florida similarly described a “climate of covert

of identity as Black individuals (p. 643).

initiating the conversation.

In addition to the lack of discussion, other factors such as underrepresentation of

multiculturalism in administration and faculty are troublesome. “Students questioned

institutional commitment to diversity by the underrepresentation of faculty of color and placing

do not actually prove to be practical ​(Rose-Redwood, 2010). Rose-Redwood (2010) conducted

seen to be organized primarily for international students (Rose-Redwood, 2010, p. 394).

facilitating these friendships.

due to its reputation.

increasing “institutional commitment.” This could be done by encouraging institutional staff to

different races (p. 395).

In conclusion, ​cultural centers at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) need to receive

Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and practice​,

at predominantly White institutions: A case study. ​Journal of Hispanic Higher

Education,​ I(I), 19-39.

Patton, L. D. (2006, November/December). The Voice of Reason: A Qualitative Examination of

Black Student Perceptions of Black Culture Centers. ​Journal of College Student

Development, 47​(6), 628-646.

culture centers, multicultural affairs, and student activities offices as partners.

homesickness: A comparison of international students and American students. ​The

Journal of Psychology​, ​141​(3), 263-280.

Rose-Redwood, CindyAnn, R. (2010). The challenges of fostering cross-cultural interactions: A

case study of international graduate students’ perceptions of diversity initiatives. ​College

Student Journal​, ​44​(2), 389-399.

Retention. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0dv8v2sw

Higher Education​, ​17​(4), 355-370.

Research Questions ​(p. 21)

Methods and/or Procedures

Patton, L. D. (2006, November/December). The Voice of Reason: A Qualitative Examination of

Problem Being Addressed

Purpose of the Study

Research Questions and/or Hypotheses

Methods and/or Procedures

Variables examined in the study

Strengths and Limitations of the study

How does study help answer our research problem

Research Questions ​(p. 268)

Methods and/or Procedures

Problem being addressed

Research questions, and/or hypotheses, or purpose of the study

Methods and/or procedures

Any variables examined in the study

Strengths and limitations

Problem being addressed

Research questions, hypotheses, or purpose of the study

Strengths and Limitations

Problem being addressed

Research questions, hypotheses, or purpose of the study

Strengths and Limitations

Problem Being Addressed

Research questions and/ or hypothesis

Methods and/or procedures

Strengths of the study

Limitations of the study

Investigation of Student and Perception of the Neal-Marshall Black Culture Center.

do not actually prove to be practical (Rose-Redwood, 2010). Rose-Redwood (2010) conducted

In conclusion, cultural centers at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) need to receive

Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and practice,

at predominantly White institutions: A case study. Journal of Hispanic Higher

Education, I(I), 19-39.

Black Student Perceptions of Black Culture Centers. Journal of College Student

Development, 47(6), 628-646.

homesickness: A comparison of international students and American students. The

Journal of Psychology, 141(3), 263-280.

case study of international graduate students’ perceptions of diversity initiatives. College

Student Journal, 44(2), 389-399.

Higher Education, 17(4), 355-370.

Research Questions (p. 21)

Research Questions (p. 268)

· Problem being addressed

· Methods and/or Procedures

· Strengths and Limitations of the study

· Reference information in APA style)

· “The mission, as qualitative, ethnographic researchers is meant to give evidence to the

· Methods and/or Procedures

· Questions were made prior to the interviews based on assumptions

· Strengths and Limitations of the study

· Reference information in APA style)

· 1.What is the perceived campus climate of ethnic minorities at this predominantly

· Methods and/or Procedures

· It seeks to understand the minority experience at PWI

· Focus Groups and observation

· Strengths and Limitations of the study

· Reference information in APA style)

· Problem being addressed

· Methods and/or Procedures

· 1 full time staff