1. Service and Diverse Interactions in College as Predictors of Civic Engagement in the Post-college Years: Differences Across Institutional Types Erica Yamamura, M.A. Nida Denson, M.A UCLA Higher Education Research Institute AIR Annual Forum San Diego, CA May 2005

2. Introduction Shifts in community service and service learning (K-12 & Higher Education) Increasingly diverse college campuses Impact of College on Volunteerism after college

3. Background: Community Service and Service Learning Few studies have looked at the long- term impact of college community service on post-college civic engagement. (Astin, Sax, & Avalos, 1999; Denson, Vogelgesang, & Saenz, 2005; Eyler, 2000)

4. Background: Racial Diversity in Higher Ed Types of Diversity –Structural Diversity –Diversity Initiatives –Cross-racial Interaction (Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen, 1999; Milem, 2003)

5. Background: Cross-Racial Interaction Cross-racial interaction (CRI): type of college diversity that looks directly at peer interaction with students of different racial and ethnic groups (Antonio, 1998; Milem, 2003).

6. Background: Cross-Racial Interaction Few studies have looked at the long- term benefits of cross-racial interaction. A notable exception: Bowen and Bok’s (1998) study of graduates of selective schools

7. Theoretical Framework: Institutional Type Analysis No current study on the impact of college service and diversity on civic engagement post-college by institutional type Institutional Types for Study: –Public –Private –Religious

8. Data Sources CIRP 1994/1998 Data 2004 Post-College Follow Up Survey –supported by a three-year grant from the Atlantic Philanthropies U.S.A., Inc

9. Method Sample –6,515 students from 138 institutions –1994 SIF, 1998 CSS, 2004 PCFS Analytic Approach –Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM)

10. Logic of Hierarchical Linear Modeling (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002) HLM decomposes relationships between variables into separate student-level and institution-level components The different effects of a variable resulting from differing levels can be included in one model Allows for formulation and testing of hypotheses about cross-level effects

11. Institution -level Student -level Outcome Post-College Volunteerism Type AVG: service AVG: CRI ServiceCRI % URM Conceptual Framework

12. Research Question #1: Student-Level Effects Institution -level Student -level Outcome Post-College Volunteerism Type AVG: service AVG: CRI ServiceCRI % URM

13. Research Question #2: Institution-Level Effect Institution -level Student -level Outcome Post-College Volunteerism Type AVG: service AVG: CRI ServiceCRI % URM

14. Research Question #3: Institution-Level Effects Institution -level Student -level Outcome Post-College Volunteerism Type AVG: service AVG: CRI ServiceCRI % URM

15. Research Question #4: Cross-Level Effects Institution -level Student -level Outcome Post-College Volunteerism Type AVG: service AVG: CRI ServiceCRI % URM

16. 2004 Volunteerism Outcome (α=.81) 12 Items - Frequency: performed volunteer work (.74) - HPW: volunteer work (.68) - Collect, prepare, distribute, or serve food (.60) - Collect, make or distribute clothing, crafts, or goods other than food (.49) - Teach, tutor, mentor, coach, or referee (.56) - Fundraise or sell items to raise money (.54) - Supply transportation for people (.55) - Provide general office services (.49) - Provide information, be an usher, greeter or minister (.60) - Engage in music, performance, or other artistic activities (.49) - Perform physical labor (.64) - Other (.49)

17. Variables of Interest Student-Level –Service (no service, community service only, both community service and SL) –Cross-racial interaction (CRI) Institution-Level –Institutional type (public, private, religious) –Structural diversity (% URM) –Peer average levels of volunteerism –Peer average levels of CRI

18. Control Variables Student-Level –Freshman pretest for volunteerism –Pre-college characteristics –College experiences Institution-Level –Size, selectivity –Student-level aggregates (peer effects)

19. Sample – Percent by institutional type

20. Service by Institutional Type

21. CRI by Institutional Type

22. 2004 Volunteerism by Institutional type

23. Student-Level Findings Volunteer (+++) Volunteer & SL (+++) Cross-racial interaction (++) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

24. Student-Level Findings HS volunteering (+++) Curricular/co-curricular diversity acts (+++) Attended religious services (+++) Leadership/honors acts (+++) Challenged prof’s ideas in class (+++) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

25. Student-Level Findings Asian/Asian-American (-) Joined a fraternity/sorority (-) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

26. Institution-level findings Institutional type: private (ns) Institutional type: religious (ns) Structural diversity: %URM (ns) AVG: volunteerism (ns) AVG: CRI (ns) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

27. Institution-level findings AVG: attended religious services (++) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

28. Cross-Level Findings AVG: volunteerism (ns) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

29. Cross-Level Findings Structural diversity: % URM (--) AVG: attended religious services (++) * p <.05 ** p<.01 *** p<.001

30. Summary Student participation in service and/or cross-racial interaction in college positively influences volunteerism after college Attending religious services also positively influences volunteerism after college

31. Summary Student peer group influence plays a larger role than institutional type (i.e. religious colleges) in predicting volunteerism after college

32. Summary Structural diversity (as measured by %URM) had a weakening effect on the CRI  volunteerism relationship Peer average levels of attending religious services had a strengthening effect on the CRI  volunteerism effect

33. For copies of our presentation… http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri

34. Question & Answer Session Thank you!