Validation of the Community College Survey of Men: An Overview of the Intrapersonal Factors in the Noncognitive Domain

Postsecondary scholars have sought to illuminate the experiences, perceptions, and outcomes of men of color (particularly Black men) in 4-year colleges and universities (Bonner, 2010; Cuyjet, 2006; Dancy, 2012; Davis, 1994; Flowers, 2002; Harper, 2010, 2012). In recent years, scholars have focused intently on improving success rates for men of color (notably Black, Latino, Native American, and Southeast Asian men) in community colleges (e.g., Bonner, 2014; Bush & Bush, 2010; Palmer & Dubord, 2013; Sáenz, Bukoski, Lui, & Rodriguez, 2013; Vasquez Urias, 2012). Currently, only 12.0% of Black, 14.9% of Latino, and 15.2% of Native American men, compared to 22.1% of White and 25.1% of Asian men, graduate from a community college in 3 years (Snyder & Dillow, 2013). This point is particularly salient given that community colleges serve as the primary pathway to postsecondary education for men of color (Bush & Bush, 2010). To address outcome disparities, many colleges have sought to employ targeted interventions (e.g., programs, policies, and practices); however, many of these efforts are chronically underresourced, necessitating that interventions be informed by inquiry to maximize the efficacy of newly established efforts (Harper, 2014; Wood, Reid, Harris, & Xiong, 2016).

Using the Community College Survey of Men (CCSM; Wood & Harris, 2013), an instrument designed to aid community colleges in understanding challenges facing historically underserved men, we focused on the items in the instrument’s intrapersonal (noncognitive) subdomain that measure students’ affective response to the collegiate environment. Prior research has shown the important influence of noncognitive factors on student success outcomes for men of color (Moore, Madison-Colmore, & Smith, 2003; Palmer & Strayhorn, 2008; Strayhorn, 2012). These intrapersonal factors include: (a) self-efficacy—students’ confidence in their abilities to succeed in academic endeavors, (b) degree utility—students’ perception of the worthwhileness of their collegiate pursuits, (c) locus of control—the extent to which students believe they have control over their academic futures, (d) action control—the directed attention or focus students place on academic matters, and (e) intrinsic interest— the authentic interest students have in course content (Harris & Wood, 2016).

ABOUT THE CCSM

The CCSM is an institutional-level needs assessment tool designed to examine factors that are predictive of the success of men of color in community colleges. The instrument has been distributed at 38 colleges in eight states (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Texas) who partnered with the Minority Male Community College Collaborative. Colleges receive comprehensive reports on between-group differences by race and key factors most predictive of achievement for men of color. Reports are used for establishing benchmarks and identifying areas of need. The instrument is based on findings from a litany of studies on men of color in community colleges (e.g., Hagedorn, Maxwell, & Hampton, 2001; Harper, 2009; Mason, 1998; Palmer & Dubord, 2013). The CCSM is the only instrument that focuses specifically on factors relative to the success of men of color in community colleges (Wood & Harris, 2013). It comprehensively assesses students’ perceptions and experiences based on Harris and Wood’s (2016) socioecological outcomes (SEO) model.

The SEO model suggests that men of color enter college influenced by their background characteristics as well as by societal factors (e.g., racial prejudice, economic conditions). The model indicates that there are four essential domains that influence student success: the campus ethos domain (e.g., perceptions of belonging, validating experiences, racial– gender climate), environmental domain (e.g., familial responsibilities, employment, stressful life events), academic domain (e.g., faculty–student interaction, use of services), and noncognitive domain (e.g., intrapersonal factors, identity). The latter, noncognitive domain, is the focus of this article. Intrapersonal factors in this domain include: self-efficacy, locus of control, degree utility, action control, and intrinsic interest. The model postulates that environmental and campus ethos factors influence noncognitive and academic factors, which in turn affect student success.

INITIAL VALIDATION PROCESSES

The CCSM was subject to a three-phase, 2-year validation process. Based on a synthesis of research, the instrument was developed in...