Examining Psychosociocultural Influences as Predictors of Black College Students’ Academic Self-Concept and Achievement

Abstract

Using the psychosociocultural framework, this study concurrently examined the influence of psychological (academic self-concept and academic engagement attitudes), social (caring student-faculty relationships), and cultural variables (racial centrality and perceived university environment) on the academic achievement of Black college students. Participants were 247 Black collegians recruited from a large, Southwestern predominately White institution. Results of structural equation modeling largely supported hypothesized relationships between variables, accounting for 16% of the variance in grade point average (GPA), 75% of the variance in academic engagement, and 29% of the variance in academic self-concept. Results revealed two positive direct paths to GPA: (a) racial centrality and (b) academic self-concept; academic self-concept had a key role in facilitating indirect effects on academic engagement and GPA. Findings highlight multiple noncognitive predictors that can facilitate Black students’ academic functioning. Research and practice implications of these findings are outlined.

Keywords

academic self-concept academic engagement psychosociocultural model student-faculty relationships

The postsecondary enrollment rate of Black students has significantly increased over the past 5 decades (Snyder et al., 2019). Per the National Center for Educational Statistics (Snyder et al., 2019), Black students’ enrollment improved from 16% in 1970 to 37% in 2017. Over this same time period, an increasing number of Black students enrolled in predominately White institutions (PWIs). Currently, the vast majority (89%) of Black postsecondary students attend PWIs (Synder et al., 2019). Prior research indicates Black students attending PWIs report experiencing race-specific stressors that contribute to differential educational experiences at these institutions compared to their peers (Greer & Brown, 2011; Harper & Hurtado, 2007). These experiences have been linked to negative outcomes for Black collegians, including poorer college adjustment (Anglin & Wade, 2007), less satisfaction (Danoff-Burg et al., 2004), and lower persistence rates (Johnson et al., 2014).

In an effort to understand and contextualize Black students’ experiences at PWIs, scholars have called for more research that examines the relationship between the sociocultural context at PWIs and Black students’ outcomes (Beasley et al., 2016; Cabrera et al., 2017). Integrating information about the context of PWIs using sociocultural factors provides both postsecondary researchers and practitioners with information that can be used to maximize the benefits Black students receive from their increased presence in institutions of higher learning. To aid in this effort, the current study tested a model that examines the influence of psychological (academic self-concept and academic engagement), social (perceptions of caring faculty), and cultural variables (racial identity and perceptions of the university environment) on Black students’ academic achievement (measured via grade point average [GPA]).

Theoretical Framework

This study draws on the psychosociocultural (PSC) framework to shed light on how psychosociocultural variables influence Black collegians’ outcomes within the context of PWIs (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003; Gloria et al., 1999). This framework offers a culturally contextualized lens that centers students of color’s educational experiences while investigating variables that shape to their academic outcomes (e.g., persistence, GPA, and graduation) at PWIs. It recognizes that, due to their racial or ethnic group membership, students of color attending these institutions encounter unique stressors and environmental challenges above and beyond that experienced by their White peers (Bourke, 2010; Harper & Hurtado, 2007). These stressors are negatively associated with the adjustment, sense of belonging, motivation, and retention of students of color (Griffith et al., 2019; Leath & Chavous, 2018; Lewis et al., 2019).

The PSC framework calls for an exploration of influences across three interrelated dimensions: psychological, social, and cultural (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003). The psychological dimension includes factors such as academic identity, self-efficacy, and academic motivation that highlight students’ self-beliefs and academic attitudes. The social dimension incorporates sources of perceived social support from faculty, peers, or family that are available to students of color at their respective institutions. The cultural dimension includes variables that facilitate or hinder students’ comfort in the university environment, such as perceptions of cultural congruity or fit and racial or ethnic identity. Using variables that are relevant for the student population being studied, the PSC framework examines these three dimensions to better understand the educational outcomes of students of color within majority White educational contexts (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003).

Prior research provides support for using the PSC framework with college students of color. In a large heterogeneous sample from a Southwestern PWI (N = 703), Gloria et al. (1999) reported that students of color endorsed lower levels of cultural congruity, less positive views of the campus climate, and lower help-seeking attitudes compared with their White peers. This study also found that perceptions of the university environment and cultural congruity significantly predicted help-seeking attitudes among students of color.

Other research using the PSC framework has examined PSC variables as predictors of persistence for students of color. Gloria and Robinson Kurpius (1996) found that cultural congruity and perceptions of the university environment represented significant predictors of academic persistence for Latino college students. A separate study of American Indian undergraduates demonstrated that psychological (self-esteem, college self-efficacy), social (family and friend support, faculty mentorship), and cultural (perceptions of university environment, cultural congruity) variables predicted these students’ persistence attitudes (Gloria & Robinson Kurpius, 2001). Similar findings have emerged using the PSC framework with Chinese American female collegians (Guan et al., 2020) and Hmong college students (Xiong, 2020). Together, these studies provide support for the utility of the PSC framework when studying collegians of color at PWIs (Gloria et al., 2001).

Although more limited, there are a few studies that use the PSC framework with Black students. In a sample of 98 Black college students at a large Southwestern PWI, Gloria et al. (1999) found that psychological (self-efficacy, self-esteem), social (faculty mentorship, family and friends social support), and cultural (college environmental stress, perceptions of the university environment, cultural congruity) variables predicted their persistence. Black students who reported higher cultural congruity, endorsed more support from faculty mentors, and had more positive views of campus were more likely to persist. Beasley (2020) found that cultural congruity, perceptions of the university environment, and caring faculty relationships were significant predictors of Black students’ academic and social engagement attitudes.

While these studies offer evidence supporting the PSC framework with Black college students, there is limited research using the PSC framework with Black collegians. Given that prior studies indicate Black students consistently report negative sociocultural experiences at PWIs (e.g., Gloria et al., 1999), use of this framework can offer more insights for enhancing their experiences. Additionally, much of the available literature using the PSC with students of color has primarily focused on persistence attitudes as an outcome variable. While persistence represents an important way to understand Black students’ outcomes at PWIs, other academic outcomes, such as GPA and engagement, could provide additional insights that are missed by only targeting persistence. This relationship between PSC variables and Black students’ GPA has not been examined in the literature previously although understanding this relationship could offer additional avenues for academic interventions with Black students at PWIs. In this study, we will outline and then empirically examine how each of the three dimensions of the PSC framework (psychological, social, and cultural) are linked to Black students’ self-reported GPA.

Psychological Variables and Black Students’ Academic Outcomes

The first dimension of the PSC framework includes psychological variables, which assess students’ self-beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003). Academic self-concept constitutes a key psychological variable for Black college students (Cokley, 2000). Academic self-concept has been defined as students’ attitudes, feelings, and perceptions about their general academic competence (Lent et al., 1997). It combines students’ self-beliefs and feelings in an academic setting and has been shown to directly contribute to their scholastic performance (Marsh & Martin, 2011). Researchers have consistently documented that academic self-concept is positively correlated with and is a strong noncognitive predictor of academic achievement for Black undergraduates (Cokley & Chapman, 2008; Cokley et al., 2015; Franklin et al., 2017; Gerardi, 1990). Given this strong evidence supporting academic self-concept as a critical tool for assessing Black students’ psychological self-beliefs in academic settings, it is expected that academic self-concept will be directly related to Black students’ GPA.

The engagement attitudes of students represent another influential psychological variable for Black learners (Quaye et al., 2019). Student engagement has been defined as “both the time and energy students invest in educationally purposeful activities” (Kuh et al., 2008, p. 542). In their systematic literature review, Kuh et al. (2006) reported that students’ engagement in educationally purposeful activities is positively related to their academic achievement and persistence. Engagement both inside and outside the classroom is generally related to positive student outcomes for Black college students. For example, it promoted the use of proactive coping strategies to manage academic stressors (Shahid et al., 2018), facilitated peer and faculty relationships (Madyun et al., 2013), enhanced adjustment at PWIs (Griffith et al., 2019), and positively affected their persistence and academic achievement (Kuh et al., 2008; Robbins et al., 2004). Additionally, academically engaged students sought out and utilized on-campus student support services (e.g., tutoring, writing center), which likely bolsters their global academic self-concept. Thus, academic engagement attitudes are expected to have a direct relationship with Black students’ academic achievement as well as their academic self-concept.

Social Variables and Black Students’ Academic Outcomes

The social dimension of the PSC framework specifically highlights the interpersonal connections and social networks available to students of color on campus (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003). Student-faculty relationships constitute one of the primary and most influential social relationships for Black college students during their postsecondary years (Cole & Griffin, 2013). These relationships have been positively associated with intellectual and personal growth (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005), academic motivation (Trolian et al., 2016) in-class engagement (Kim & Lundberg, 2016), and enrollment in graduate or professional school (Astin, 1993).

Available studies on the relationship between student-faculty relationships and GPA for Black collegians has produced inconsistent findings. While some studies have reported that student-faculty relationships are related to academic achievement (Cokley et al., 2006), others have found that course-related student-faculty interactions were negatively correlated with Black students’ GPA (Cole, 2010; Kim & Sax, 2009). These discrepant findings may be related to the emphasis on the overall number of student-faculty interactions in prior studies rather than on the relational dynamics that occur within these interactions (Cokley et al., 2006). Integrating Black students’ perceptions of the qualitative aspects of their relationships with faculty provides information on how students assess their relationships with faculty and adds information on specific aspects of student-faculty relationships that may be related to Black students’ outcomes. The current study focuses on perceptions of caring student-faculty relationships to better assess the qualitative dimensions of one of the key social relationships for Black students on campus.

Although caring student-faculty relationships may not be directly associated with Black students’ GPA, they may indirectly affect GPA and academic engagement via their academic self-concept (Cole, 2008; Kim & Sax, 2014). If Black students perceive their faculty as caring and invested in them, these close connections ensure that Black students receive critical feedback without threatening their sense of fit at PWIs or diminishing perceptions of their future academic potential (Neville & Parker, 2017). Consequently, Black students who receive and are responsive to constructive criticism from caring faculty may experience an elevation in their academic self-concept (Cole, 2008), which will indirectly enhance their academic engagement and achievement (Komarraju et al., 2010). Thus, we expect that caring student-faculty relationships would be directly linked to students’ academic self-concept, which would in turn be predictive of higher academic engagement and GPA.

Other studies have found that interactions with caring faculty positively influenced Black students’ perceptions of the campus climate, sense of belonging, and willingness to engage on campus (Beasley, 2020; Beckowski & Gebauer, 2018; Grantham et al., 2015). Harper’s (2010) national study of 319 Black men found that these students’ relationships with faculty contributed to them working harder in their classes. The men reported that their on-campus engagement contributed to faculty being more invested in their future success. This study illustrates the cyclical relationship between caring student-faculty relationships and students’ engagement for Black students (Cole, 2010; Patton et al., 2011). Through their interactions with Black students in multiple settings (e.g., classes, research teams, extracurricular activities), caring faculty not only contributed to boosting students’ engagement but they can also strengthened their academic identity (Kim & Sax, 2009; Neville & Parker, 2017). Thus, a direct association is expected between perceptions of caring faculty and students’ academic engagement and academic self-concept.

Cultural Variables and Black Students’ Academic Outcomes

Postsecondary scholars recognize that the institutional and cultural context of PWIs matters for Black students’ outcomes (Cabrera et al., 2017; Gloria & Castellanos, 2003). Decades of campus climate research have documented that Black students at PWIs consistently report more negative perceptions of the university environment and endorse higher rates of racial marginalization, harassment, and discrimination compared with their White peers (Griffith et al., 2019; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Pieterse et al., 2010). This persistent and differential mistreatment of Black college students is perpetuated by White peers, faculty, and staff (McCabe, 2009; Park et al., 2019). Per the PSC framework (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003), Black students’ perceptions of the university environment at PWIs is a cultural variable that needs attention considering that their evaluation of the campus offer important insights for contextualizing their academic outcomes and experiences on campus.

Cumulatively, the negative experiences Black collegians report can color their perceptions of the university environment and affect their on-campus engagement (Bourke, 2010). More favorable perceptions of the institution contributed to students being more academically and socially engaged on campus (Beasley, 2020) and accessing available institutional resources (Gloria et al., 1999). These positive views of the campus environment likely enhanced Black students’ academic identity since they are not experiencing identity challenges that question their presence at PWIs (Chapman-Hilliard & Beasley, 2018; Chavous et al., 2018). Thus, there is likely a positive relationship between perceptions of the university environment and Black students’ academic engagement and academic self-concept at PWIs.

Furthermore, as Black students endorsed more positive perceptions of the campus environment at PWIs, their academic self-concept may improve due to reduced concerns about dealing with racial and cultural hassles, such as stereotype threat (Bourke, 2010). This improved academic self-concept would, in turn, directly enhance their GPA (Marsh & Martin, 2011). Thus, it is expected that Black students’ perceptions of the campus will be directly linked with their academic self-concept and indirectly affect their GPA via academic self-concept.

Furthermore, given the racialized context of PWIs (Cabrera et al., 2017), Black students’ racial identity constitutes another important cultural variable within this setting. Racial identity has been defined as one’s sense of sharing common heritage with a particular racial group and one’s psychological connectedness to this reference group (Cokley & Vandiver, 2012). This aspect of Black students’ identity has received significant empirical attention given it is correlated with the academic and psychological adjustment of Black students at PWIs (Chavous et al., 2018; George Mwangi et al., 2018). However, if race is not seen as an important component of the Black learner’s overall identity, it may be less likely to have an influence on their academic performance (Thomas et al., 2009). Using a measure that assesses the personal importance of one’s racial group membership, such as racial centrality, may provide a better barometer for evaluating whether one’s racial group membership will influence their behavior.

Racial centrality is defined as the extent to which Black individuals normatively emphasize racial group membership as part of their overall self-concept (Sellers et al., 1998). According to Sellers et al. individuals with higher racial centrality perceive being Black as a prominent feature of their overall identity, thus race-central Black students may perceive and engage in academic settings differently than their less race-central Black peers (Chavous et al. 2018). Given the cultural exclusion reported by Black students at PWIs (Bourke, 2010), race-central Black students are more likely to endorse negative perceptions of the university. While some Black students who have more negative perceptions of the university are at higher risk for disengagement and alienation at PWIs (Harper & Hurtado, 2007), other studies indicate that a stronger racial identity contributes to Black students’ engagement (Chavous et al. 2018; Szymanski & Lewis, 2015). For example, students’ racial centrality can contribute to them entering cultural enclaves or counterspaces where they develop strong social connections with Black peers and caring faculty (Grier-Reed, 2013; Madyun et al., 2013). Black students at PWIs who are more engaged are able to identify supportive spaces and individuals on campus (Szymanski & Lewis, 2015). Thus, we expect that racial centrality will be negatively associated with perceptions of the university environment and positively linked to Black students’ academic engagement and perceptions of caring student-faculty relationships.

Additionally, Black students who see race as a central aspect of their identities may be more motivated to excel academically so they can maintain a positive image of Black learners. To the extent that these individuals see academic achievement as a central part of being Black, their academic identity would be bolstered by their racial centrality given that their racial group membership is key to their overall identity (Chavous et al., 2018). Elevated levels of racial centrality can also stimulate relationship building with supportive faculty and increasing engagement on campus (Madyun et al., 2013; Neville & Parker, 2017). These actions would strengthen students’ academic self-concept and indirectly enhance their academic achievement. Thus, we expect that racial centrality will positively affect Black students’ academic engagement and increase their interactions with caring faculty. We also expect that racial centrality will indirectly affect GPA via Black students’ academic self-concept. In the current study, perceptions of the university environment and racial identity will represent the cultural dimension of the PSC framework.

Purpose of the Study

Given the increased enrollment of Black students at PWIs and their differential experiences at these institutions (Harper & Hurtado, 2007), it is important to examine how this particular learning context affects their academic experiences and outcomes, such as their academic identity, engagement, and GPA. The PSC framework allows practitioners and researchers to examine psychological, cultural, and social factors that are specifically related to Black students’ GPA. Prior studies indicate that Black students’ academic self-concept and academic engagement attitudes represent strong indicators of Black students’ self-beliefs and are positively associated with Black students’ academic achievement (Cokley et al., 2015; Kuh et al., 2008). These two variables will represent the psychological dimension of the PSC framework, which are expected to be directly linked to Black students’ GPA.

Considering the central role student-faculty relationships have for college students, they are used to account for the social dimension of the PSC framework. The study specifically centers caring student-faculty relationships to capture the relational aspects of these relationships and their effects on Black students. Caring faculty have been identified as an important resource for Black collegians at PWIs since they can help Black students buffer some of the race-related stressors they encounter (Cress, 2008). These caring relationships can affect how the campus is perceived by Black students, boost their academic engagement in this setting, and foster strategies that build their academic self-concept. As these caring relationships with students directly strengthen students’ educational self-beliefs (i.e., academic self-concept), they would indirectly boost their academic engagement and GPA.

The cultural dimension of the PSC framework will incorporate Black students’ perceptions of the university environment and racial identity. Given that Black students endorse encountering significant race-related stressors at PWIs (Lewis et al., 2019), it is useful to capture their perceptions of this cultural milieu when examining its relationship to their academic engagement and self-concept. Additionally, while perceptions of the university may not be directly linked to Black students’ GPA, it may be indirectly affecting GPA via students’ academic self-concept. Black students who are in postsecondary settings that are perceived more positively may develop stronger academic identities (Chavous et al., 2018), which would bolster their academic achievement.

Racial centrality will represent a separate cultural variable in the PSC framework. The use of racial centrality can better account for the importance of students’ racial group membership and its potential influence over their views of the PWI campus, perceptions of their relationships with faculty, academic engagement, and academic self-concept. While more race-central students may perceive the campus environment negatively, they may be more likely seek out caring student-faculty relationships and engage more academically as strategies to deal with this setting (Gloria et al., 1999). These actions would not only help to mitigate negative perceptions of the campus environment, but they may directly boost Black students’ academic self-concept, which would indirectly enhance their GPA given academic self-concept’s strong and reciprocal relationship with GPA (Cokley, 2000; Marsh & Martin, 2011).

In summary, the present study seeks to determine whether PSC factors predicted the academic achievement of Black students attending PWIs. The proposed structural equation model included psychological (academic self-concept and academic engagement), social (perceptions of faculty caring), and cultural (racial centrality and perceptions of the university environment) variables as predictors of academic achievement. By examining these variables, we can elucidate how these particular PSC variables are linked to Black collegians’ academic achievement at PWIs as well as their interconnections with each other. The model is outlined in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Final structural model for psychosociocultural variables and GPA.

Based on prior theory and research, our proposed structural equation model tested the following hypotheses with regard to our latent variables:

Hypothesis 1: Academic self-concept will have a positive relation with academic engagement and GPA.

Hypothesis 2: Academic engagement will have a positive relation with GPA.

Hypothesis 3: Perceptions of caring faculty will (a) have a positive relation with perceived university environment, academic engagement, and academic self-concept and (b) be indirectly related to both academic engagement and GPA through its relation with academic self-concept.

Hypothesis 4: Perceived university environment will (a) have a positive relation with academic engagement and academic self-concept and (b) be indirectly related to both academic engagement and GPA through its relation with academic self-concept.

Hypothesis 5: Racial centrality will (a) have a negative relation with perceived university environment, (b) positive relations with perceptions of caring faculty, academic engagement, and academic self-concept, and (c) be indirectly related to academic engagement and GPA by influencing academic self-concept.

A test of two alternative path models will provide a poorer fit when compared with the hypothesized model: Alternative Model 1, in which paths are added from faculty caring to GPA and perceived university environment to GPA and Alternative Model 2, in which GPA predicts academic self-concept.

Method

Participants

The sample consisted of 247 Black students enrolled at a public research university in the Southwest United States. This flagship university had a total student enrollment of over 50,000 students, with Black students accounting for less than 5% of the total student body. In the sample, there were 163 Black women and 84 Black men. The mean age of participants was 21.83 years (SD = 4.27; range: 18-54 years). In terms of classification, the sample included 41 first year students, 44 sophomores, 56 juniors, 62 seniors, and 44 graduate students.

Measures

Academic self-concept was assessed using the Academic Self-Concept Scale (ASCS; Reynolds, 1988), which measures the academic component of self-concept for college students. The ASCS includes 40 items measured on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. Higher scores on the ASCS indicate higher academic self-concept. A total scale score is calculated by summing all items to obtain one global score. One representative item for the ASCS is “Being a student is a very rewarding experience.” A prior study with Black college students found strong reliability estimates of .87 for scores on the ASCS (Cokley & Chapman, 2008). This reliability estimate is similar to the ASCS’s scores of .94 found in the current study. Cokley et al. (2006) reported on a principal axis analysis with 396 Black students at a Midwestern university. These authors found a 9-factor solution for the ASCS. Cokley and Moore (2007) found a negative association between the ASCS and devaluing academic success as well as a positive correlation between the ASCS and GPA for Black college students, thus highlighting the ASCS’s discriminant and convergent validity, respectively.

Student engagement was assessed with the Academic Engagement subscale of the College Resilience Questionnaire (Carlson, 2001). The Academic Engagement scale includes 18 items measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = always false to 5 = always true). One sample item for the subscale was “I like to take charge of my education.” Scores are computed by calculating a total scale score with higher scores on the scale indicates students are more academically engaged. In the initial study, reliability estimates for the Academic Engagement scores was .94 (Carlson, 2001), which is similar to the reliability estimate of .93 for the scores found in the current study. Additionally, Carlson reported a two-factor structure for the College Resilience Questionnaire using principal components analysis. Supporting its discriminant and convergent validity, prior research has demonstrated that the Academic Engagement subscale was strongly associated with intrinsic motivation and negatively correlated with amotivation among Black college students (Reynolds et al., 2010).

Student-faculty relationships were measured using eight items on the Caring Attitudes Scale from the Student Professor Interaction Scale (SPIS; Cokley et al., 2006). Higher scores on the scale indicate that faculty are perceived as more caring when interacting with students. The Caring Attitudes Scale is measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). The total scale score is obtained by adding all of the scale items. A sample item from this subscale was “I believe that there is at least one professor who cares about my well-being.” Cokley et al. (2006) reported reliability estimates of .87 for this scale’s scores using a sample of 290 Black students at a Midwestern university. In this same study, Cokley et al. (2006) reported a nine-factor solution for the SPIS using principal axis analysis. Komarraju et al. (2010) reported that caring attitudes of faculty were positively associated with intrinsic motivation and negatively associated with amotivation for college students. In the current study, reliability estimates of the Caring Attitudes scores was .87.

Campus climate was measured using the University Environment Scale (UES; Gloria et al., 1999). The UES evaluates students of color’s perceptions of the university environment. It contains 14 items measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale that ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Higher scores indicates that students have a more positive evaluation of the university environment. A total score is calculated using all items on the scale. A sample item for the UES is “The university seems to value minority students.” Gloria et al. (1999) found scores on the UES to be internally consistent at .81, which aligns with the internal consistency for UES scores found in the current study of .84. No prior studies have been published on the factor structure of the UES. To demonstrate convergent validity, one study with Black students at a Midwestern university found that the UES was correlated with perceptions of mentoring and persistence (Constantine et al., 2002). This same study highlighted discriminant validity was highlighted by negative association with the College Environmental Stress Index-Modified.

Racial identity was evaluated using the Racial Centrality Scale from Sellers et al.’s (1998) Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity. Racial centrality is defined as a stable personality characteristic that incorporates the importance or valuing of race as an important component of their self-identity. This scale includes eight items anchored with a 7-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree), with higher scores indicating that race is a more central aspect of the person’s identity. Scores are calculated by summing all of the items on the scale. One sample item for the Racial Centrality Scale was “Being Black is an important reflection of who I am.” Scores on this scale have been found to be internally consistently when used with Black college students (Cokley & Moore, 2007). The reliability estimate was .86 for scores on the Racial Centrality in the current sample. A one-factor solution was supported for the Racial Centrality Scale (Sellers et al., 1997). Positive relationships with nationalist racial ideology and negative correlations with assimilationist racial ideology supported the Racial Centrality measure’s convergent and discriminant validity respectively (Sellers et al., 1998).

GPA was measured using student self-report. Self-reported GPA in the study was 3.16 (SD = 0.54; range: 1.45-4.0). A brief demographic form collected information on race, gender, classification, age, socioeconomic status, mother’s and father’s educational status, and academic major.

Sampling and Data Collection Procedures

The study was approved by the university’s human subjects review board. Participants were recruited from two university subject pools. Other participants were recruited from Black student organizations and Black Studies courses offered at the university to increase the sample size. Participants were sent an online link to a survey hosted on Qualtrics. Participants were asked to provide informed consent prior to completing the study’s measures in a randomized order. Filler items were included to monitor for inattentive, careless, or random responding. The approximate completion time on the survey was 20 minutes. Participants received class credit for completing the study.

Data Analysis

Structural equation modeling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation method was used to test measurement and structural models (Kline, 2005). Analyses were conducted using SPSS AMOS 26.0. The following criteria were used for acceptable model fit: comparative fit index (CFI) >.90, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) <.10, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) <.08, and a lower Akaike information criterion (AIC) indicating a better fitting model (Keith, 2015). Examination of indirect effects was conducted using bias-corrected bootstrapping (Preacher & Hayes, 2008), computing the means of 5,000 estimated indirect effects by creating 5,000 bootstrap samples using random sampling with replacement. Significant indirect effects are detected if the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the indirect effects do not include zero.

Item parcels were created for each latent variable given that the use of latent variables allows us to better account for measurement error in our model and each of our constructs is represented by a single measured variable. On the basis of theory and previous research with Black college students (Cokley et al., 2003), eight domain representative item parcels were used for academic self-concept in order to reduce the number of estimated model parameters (Little et al., 2002). Individual items were used to create a latent variable for perceptions of caring faculty relationships (i.e., four items as observed indicators of the latent factor). To create parcels for unidimensional measured variables with five or more items (i.e., racial centrality and perceived university environment), we created at least three parcels for each latent variable as recommended by Russell et al. (1998). To do this, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis using the maximum-likelihood method and then successively assigning pairs of the highest and lowest items, based on the magnitude of the factor loadings, to each parcel in order to equalize the average loadings of each parcel on its respective factor. Secondary confirmatory factor analyses were then conducted to ensure each item and parcel significantly loaded onto its respective latent variable (Hagtvet & Nasser, 2004). To create a latent variable for a construct with a single measured variable (i.e., GPA), a single indicator factor was created by constraining the error-unique variance of the measured variance to a value of 1 minus the estimated reliability of the measured variable (Keith, 2015). Based on prior research examining the reliability of self-report GPA in college student samples (Kuncel et al., 2005), the reliability was estimated to be .90. The variance of the measured GPA variable was .284. Thus, the error variance of the GPA variable was constrained to be .2556, allowing for us to account for unreliability in self-report GPA.

Hypothesized and alternative structural models were tested. Alternative Model 1 considered the possibility of more distal variables having a direct effect on GPA. Thus, we tested a model in which paths were added from faculty caring to GPA and perceived university environment to GPA, comparing this model to the original nested model in which these two paths are constrained. Alternative Model 2 considered the possibility that GPA may predict academic self-concept and thus that engagement may have an indirect effect on academic self-concept through GPA.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Prior to the main analyses, we conducted missing data analysis and tested the assumptions required for SEM. A total of 253 individuals completed the surveys in the initial sample. To proceed with data cleaning, first four cases (i.e., <2% of total cases) were removed because they were missing an entire measure included in the analysis. Next, using AMOS 26 software, two multivariate outliers were identified by calculating Mahalanobis distance (Mahalanobis D²; ps < .001). Given that these two cases evidenced patterns of unusual responding, we removed these two outliers (Lei & Lomax, 2005), resulting in a final sample of 247 for analysis.

In the final sample, 48 participants (19.4%) were missing at least one data point, while 199 (80.57%) were missing no data points. Missing values represented less than 0.4% of the final data set. The range of missing data across scales varied from a low of four missing data points out of 1,976 possible data points (0.2%) on the Racial Centrality Scale, to a high of 18 missing data points out of 3,458 (0.5%). Missing data were analyzed to detect if there was a pattern to missing data, or if data were missing at random. Little’s missing completely at random was not significant, χ²(2, 7773) = 2862.71, p = .12, suggesting that the data were missing at random. Missing values were replaced using multiple imputation to estimate missing data (Enders, 2010; Shafer, 1997).

It was determined that the data met the necessary assumptions of structural equation modeling, including homoscedasticity, multicollinearity, and linearity. An assessment of normality was conducted using AMOS 26, which revealed univariate normality (i.e., skewness < 3, kurtosis < 10; Weston & Gore, 2006) and multivariate normality following the removal of two multivariate outliers (i.e., examination of Mardia’s coefficient, C.R. [critical ratio] <1.96).

Descriptive statistics, including means, standard deviations, and correlations for the variables of interest are represented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Intercorrelations and Descriptive Data for Study Variables.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	Possible range	M	SD
1. GPA	—						0-4	3.16	0.53
2. Academic engagement	.22**	—					1-5	3.93	0.59
3. ASC	.45**	.72**	—				1-4	2.78	0.40
4. Perceived university environment	.07	.34**	.34**	—			1-7	5.00	0.84
5. Perceptions of caring faculty	.15*	.46**	.38**	.47**	—		1-7	5.27	1.32
6. Racial centrality	.30**	.23**	.24**	−.06	.25**	—	1-7	4.76	1.31

Note. N = 247; Ranges denote the Likert scale for the measures. GPA = grade point average; ASC = academic self-concept.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Measurement Model

Confirmatory factor analysis was first performed to assess whether the measurement model was a good fit to the data. The initial measurement model provided a less than adequate fit: χ²(195) = 496.48, p < .001; CFI = .886; RMSEA = .079; SRMR = .069. Model modification considers adding or subtracting paths in the measurement or structural model to achieve a better fitting model (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004). An analysis of the results suggested that two modifications were necessary to achieve a better fitting model: (a) specifying that the error variances between ASC Parcel 1 and ASC Parcel 8 covary and (b) specifying that the error variances between ASC Parcel 2 and ASC Parcel 6 covary. These additional covariances were entered into the data analysis procedures resulting in a respecified model.

All latent variable covariances were significant and a review of the global fit indices suggests that the modified model had a more acceptable fit compared with the original model, as evidenced by fit indices: χ²(193) = 413.82, p < .001; CFI = .93; RMSEA = .068; SRMR = .065. Furthermore, all items and parcels significantly loaded onto their respective factors (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Factor Loadings of Observed Variables.

Variable	M	SD	Factor loading
GPA
Item 1	3.16	0.53	.90
Academic engagement
Parcel 1	3.90	0.64	.85
Parcel 2	3.87	0.61	.91
Parcel 3	4.00	0.65	.88
ASC
Parcel 1	2.78	0.53	.74
Parcel 2	3.22	0.46	.53
Parcel 3	3.01	0.43	.80
Parcel 4	2.16	0.60	.42
Parcel 5	2.52	0.61	.71
Parcel 6	2.46	0.64	.61
Parcel 7	2.48	0.62	.64
Parcel 8	2.66	0.72	.55
Perceived university environment
Parcel 1	4.86	0.96	.81
Parcel 2	4.99	1.00	.56
Parcel 3	5.19	1.07	.84
Perceptions of caring faculty
Item 1	5.40	1.51	.79
Item 2	5.56	1.57	.89
Item 3	4.36	1.66	.81
Item 4	4.78	1.50	.67
Racial centrality
Parcel 1	4.69	1.46	.85
Parcel 2	4.85	1.54	.87
Parcel 3	4.74	1.35	.78

Note. N = 247. ASC = academic self-concept; GPA = grade point average.

Primary Analyses

Next, the hypothesized structural model was tested. The fit statistics indicated the model was an adequate fit to the data: χ² = 375.10(196), p < .001; CFI = .94; RMSEA = .061; SRMR = .066. An examination of modification indices suggested model fit could be improved by the following: (a) adding a path between racial centrality and GPA and (b) correlating residual error of ASC Parcel 5 and the disturbance of the latent variable GPA. When allowing residuals to correlate, it is important that this is theory driven. Examination of ASC parcel 5 revealed items that measured students’ satisfaction with their grades (e.g., “I am proud of my college grades” and “my parents are not satisfied with my grades in college.”). Given that these items are specific to grades, it makes theoretical sense that a student’s satisfaction with their grades and their self-reported grades have common causes other than the factors included in this model (i.e., that they may be related in other ways beyond the paths shown; Keith, 2015). Thus, these error terms were allowed to covary with a covariance estimate of .13. Two hypothesized pathswere trimmed after results revealed they were nonsignificant: racial centrality to academic engagement (β = −.04, p = .42) and university environment to academic engagement (β = −.06, p = .43).

The modified structural model produced the following statistics: χ² = 366.80(197), p < .001; CFI = .94; SRMR = .063; RMSEA = .060. A lower AIC of 478.80 suggested a better fit to the data (AIC = 489.07 for original model). Figure 1 depicts the final structural model. Overall, the model accounted for 16% of the variance in GPA, 75% of the variance in academic engagement, 29% of the variance in academic self-concept, 34% of the variance in perceived university environment, and 9% of the variance in perceptions of caring faculty. These findings indicated that the academic self-concept and racial centrality were the only two direct and positive predictors of Black students’ GPA. Similarly, academic self-concept and perceptions of caring faculty represented the two direct, positive predictors of students’ academic engagement. Perceptions of caring faculty, perceptions of the university environment, and racial centrality were direct predictors of Black students’ academic self-concept.

The first alternative model tested added paths from faculty caring to GPA and perceived university environment to GPA and produced the following statistics: χ² = 370.02(195), p < .05, CFI = .94; SRMR = .063; RMSEA = .060; AIC = 484.07. The second alternative model included GPA as a predictor of academic self-concept and produced the following statistics: χ² = 386.05(197), p < .001; CFI = .94; SRMR = .072; RMSEA = .06. Differences in fit between structural models were then evaluated, comparing Alternative Models 1 and 2 to the final structural model, using change in AIC values given that chi-square difference test is sensitive to sample size and model complexity (Burnham & Anderson, 2010). A lower AIC indicates a better fitting model and change in AIC should be greater than 2, with a value of less than 2 interpreted as both models fitting the data equally well (Burnham & Anderson, 2004). The modified hypothesized structural model was selected as the best representation of the data: ΔAIC = 5.27 and 19.25 for Alternative Models 1 and 2, respectively. Table 3 includes a summary of model fit statistics.

Table 3.

Summary of Data Model Fit Statistics.

Model	χ²	df	CFI	SRMR	RMSEA	90% CI for RMSEA	AIC	Δ AIC
First CFA model without covarying residual pairs	498.06	195	.886	.069	.08	[.07, .09]	612.48	—
Second CFA model with covarying residual pairs	413.82	193	.93	.065	.07	[.06, .08]	533.82	78.66
Hypothesized structural model	375.10	196	.94	.066	.06	[.05, .07]	489.07	—
Final structural model with added a path from RC to GPA and correlated error of ASC parcel 5 and GPA	366.80	197	.94	.063	.06	[.05, .07]	478.80	—
Alternative Model 1: Paths added from faculty caring to GPA and perceived university environment to GPA	370.02	195	.94	.063	.06	[.05, .07]	484.07	5.27
Alternative Model 2: GPA predicts academic self-concept.	386.05	197	.94	.072	.06	[.05, .07]	498.05	19.25

Note. N = 247. CFI = comparative fit index; SRMR = standardized root-mean-square residual; RMSEA = root-mean-square error of approximation; AIC = Akaike information criterion; RC = racial centrality; ASC = academic self-concept; GPA = grade point average. Boldface indicates the best representation of the data.

Finally, we examined our indirect effects hypotheses in the modified hypothesized structural model. In support of Hypothesis 3b, through academic self-concept, perceptions of caring faculty had a significant indirect effect on both academic engagement (β = .15, p < .05, CI [.011, .123]) and GPA (β = .09, p < .05, CI [.011, .114]). In support of Hypothesis 4b, through academic self-concept, perceived university environment had a significant indirect effect on academic engagement (β = .28, p < .01, CI [.118, .304]) and GPA (β = .17, p < .001, CI [.062, .206]). In support of Hypothesis 5c, through academic self-concept, racial centrality had a significant indirect effect on both academic engagement (β = .18, p < .001, CI [.038, .133]) and GPA (β = .11, p < .001, CI [.021, .091]). Together, these indirect effects suggest academic self-concept partially mediated the relations between (a) perceptions of caring faculty and academic engagement, (b) perceptions of caring faculty and GPA, (c) perceived university environment and academic engagement, (d) perceived university environment and GPA, (e) racial centrality and academic engagement, and (f) racial centrality and GPA.

Discussion

Using the PSC framework, the goal of the study was to investigate a structural equation model using PSC predictors of Black college students’ academic achievement at PWIs. The model examined the influence of psychological (academic self-concept and academic engagement attitudes), social (perceptions of caring faculty), and cultural variables (racial centrality and perceived university environment) on Black college students’ self-reported GPA. The model revealed a positive direct path to GPA via academic self-concept and another direct path via racial centrality. Taken together, these findings add to the limited literature on the value of noncognitive PSC predictors of academic achievement for Black students (Gloria et al., 1999; Robbins et al., 2004). Additionally, they provide more targeted information for understanding and enhancing key academic outcomes for Black students attending PWIs.

As predicted, academic self-concept had a direct, positive path to the academic engagement attitudes and self-reported GPA of Black students. The study expands available literature by demonstrating that academic self-concept not only directly affects Black students’ GPA (Cokley, 2000; Cokley & Moore, 2007) but it is also related to their academic engagement attitudes. This study represents one of the first empirical studies to document the link between Black students’ academic self-concept and their engagement attitudes at PWIs. Black students’ engagement attitudes may encourage them to seek out opportunities to test out their competency in both formal and informal academic milieus (Quaye et al., 2019). These engagement attitudes allow them to acquire learning strategies for handling various academic challenges, which may account for the positive relation with their academic self-concept and GPA (Harper, 2010).

Contrary to expectations, the path between academic engagement attitudes and self-reported GPA was not significant. These unexpected findings may be explained by the stronger relationship between academic self-concept and GPA. The relationship between academic self-concept and GPA has been strongly established in the literature on Black students at PWIs (e.g., Cokley et al., 2015). The inclusion of both academic self-concept and academic engagement attitudes as psychological measures may have weakened the relationship between academic engagement attitudes and GPA since academic self-concept is more proximal to GPA (Cokley, 2000). Future researchers should consider using measures that differentiate between engagement attitudes as a psychological variable and academic engagement behaviors when evaluating their relationship to Black students’ academic achievement.

When focusing on the hypothesized pathways for student-faculty relationships, the results revealed a positive, direct path between caring student-faculty relationships and perceptions of university environment, academic engagement, and academic self-concept. Working with caring faculty may allow Black students to concentrate more energy on their studies rather than on dealing with on-campus racial stressors (Cress, 2008), which would contribute to higher levels of academic engagement and a more positive academic self-concept. These findings extend the literature on student-faculty relationships by linking a specific dimension of student-faculty relationships (i.e., caring faculty) with Black students’ perceptions of the campus climate and their academic engagement. Furthermore, the presence of caring faculty at PWIs illustrate one potential pathway for improving Black students’ perceptions of the campus climate and improving their engagement on campus (George Mwangi et al., 2018).

Providing partial support for our hypotheses on perceptions of the university environment, this study extends available PSC literature by highlighting its direct, positive links to Black students’ academic self-concept. Black students often encounter negative messages at PWIs about their place on campus which challenge their academic identity (Thelamour et al., 2019). As students’ perceptions of the university environment improve, they may experience more of a fit on campus and feel more competent in their academic abilities (Cokley et al., 2015). Our findings also revealed that through academic self-concept, perceptions of caring faculty and perceptions of the university environment had a significant indirect effect on both academic engagement and self-reported GPA. Through the relationships faculty build with students, Black students have their academic self-concept affirmed within an often hostile climate (Neville & Parker, 2017). Through their explicit and implicit actions, caring faculty convey to Black students that they belong on campus and can make valuable contributions to the broader campus community (Chapman-Hilliard & Beasley, 2018). These actions by caring faculty strengthen Black students’ academic identity not only encouraging them to improve their basic academic skills but likely serve as role models who can provide them with strategies for navigating racism on campus and engaging on campus (Madyun et al., 2013; Neville & Parker, 2017). Thus, caring faculty’s investment in bolstering Black students’ academic identity would indirectly enhance their perceptions of the university environment, academic engagement, and their academic achievement.

Although, as expected, racial centrality was negatively linked with perceptions of the university environment, as also predicted, more race-central Black students may counteract these negative perceptions via their interactions with more caring student-faculty relationships and possessing a stronger academic self-concept. Perhaps race-central students were more likely to seek out and engage with supportive and caring faculty and other resources since their racial identity was central to their academic identity. Our findings suggest that higher racial centrality may stimulate Black students to engage with caring faculty members even though the campus may be perceived as racially unwelcoming or hostile (Chapman-Hilliard & Beasley, 2018).

Additionally, the findings supported the hypothesis that racial centrality would have a significant indirect effect on academic engagement and self-reported GPA through academic self-concept. Prior qualitative work shows that Black students who feel more connected to their racial group endorse using their academic achievement in White spaces as an intentional resistance strategy designed to “prove them wrong” about the intellectual capabilities of Black students (Carter, 2008; Moore et al., 2003). These prior research findings suggest that racial centrality may contribute Black students’ academic engagement and academic self-concept, which may indirectly boost their academic achievement.

More importantly, while we hypothesized that racial centrality would only be indirectly linked to GPA via academic self-concept, we discovered that after adding a direct path to GPA, the model’s fit was improved. By focusing on racial centrality, our findings revealed that Black students who saw their racial group membership as more central to their identities reported higher GPAs. The current study differs from previous scholarship that have found a nonsignificant relationship between racial identity and academic performance for Black students since it used a specific aspect of racial identity (e.g., racial centrality) rather than focusing on global measures of racial identity (e.g., Awad, 2007; Lockett & Harrell, 2003). More race-central students likely have a strong motivation to dispel deficit-oriented messages about the educational abilities of Black students. They may use their academic achievement as a way to bolster their racial self-concept and improve others’ perceptions of Black learners (Carter, 2008). For these race-central students, performing well academically may be perceived as an important aspect of being a part of the Black community (Carter, 2008; Moore et al., 2003), thus contributing to these students’ more positive academic outcomes in majority White spaces.

Implications

This study offered one of the first examinations of the relationship between PSC variables and the academic achievement of Black students at PWIs. Given that much of the research using the PSC framework has primarily focused on the relationship between PSC factors and the persistence attitudes of students of color at PWIs (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003; Gloria et al., 1999), this study extends the literature using the PSC framework in multiple ways. It adds to the limited empirical research in this area by focusing specifically on Black students rather than on students of color broadly (e.g., Beasley, 2020; Gloria et al., 1999). Furthermore, consistent with calls for more research on noncognitive PSC variables among college students of color (Sedlacek, 2017), this study highlights multiple noncognitive predictors that can facilitate Black students’ academic functioning and performance. It provides a clearer picture of the interconnections of contextual variables with the academic achievement of Black students at PWIs. Situating Black students’ academic outcomes within this context allows researchers and practitioners to better understand how this milieu influences Black students.

Our findings confirm that PSC variables can help increase the incremental predictive validity of one of the traditional measures of academic achievement within postsecondary settings (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003; Robbins et al., 2004) This study represents one of the first studies of the direct and indirect relationships between PSC variables and their relationship to Black students’ self-reported GPA. It also documented the relationship between culturally contextualized variables and Black students’ GPA that have not previously been explored in the literature, such as the facilitative role of academic self-concept and the importance of racial centrality.

Limitations and Implications for Research

While this study does provide a more contextualized understanding of Black students’ outcomes, it does have limitations. One limitation of the study is that the data were collected at one postsecondary research institution in the Southwest. Replicating these findings using Black college students at other types of institutions (e.g., liberal arts, HBCUs [historically Black colleges and universities]) would increase the generalizability of the study’s results for Black students at other educational institutions. Studies that also include more information about the different subgroups of Black students would add to the literature given that demographic trends indicate that African, Caribbean, and bi/multiracial college students will increase in the coming years. Another limitation of the current study is its reliance on self-reported GPA, which depends on students accurately reporting their GPA. This limitation could be addressed by using university records to verify students’ self-reported GPAs.

These limitations highlight several directions for future research. Researchers can work to link the scholarship that focuses on traditional academic variables (e.g., academic self-concept) with variables that emphasize the lived, cultural experiences of Black students in tertiary educational settings. The study’s model would benefit from being tested longitudinally given that the current study is unable to establish the causal relationships between the variables under investigation due to its use of cross-sectional design. Longitudinal research on how PSC variables affects academic self-concept and academic achievement for Black college students will be needed. Additionally, this study highlighted the key direct and indirect role of academic self-concept to academic engagement, perceptions of university environment, student-faculty relationships, and aspects of their racial identity. More research on academic self-concept is needed. Future research should explore whether a reciprocal dynamic exists between academic self-concept and PSC variables, particularly academic engagement and racial centrality. Finally, given the study’s findings on the positive impact of racial centrality, researchers can explore the differential impact of racial identity variables, including racial centrality. Researchers could examine how and when racial centrality exerts a positive or negative effect within educational settings and clarify the role of racial identity in shaping Black learners’ educational outcomes.

Implications for Practice

The PSC framework emphasizes the value of an integrative effort by all stakeholders, including faculty, administrators, and practitioners (Gloria & Castellanos, 2003). Practitioners can work with Black students since engaging them in identity-enhancing milieus at PWIs fosters their academic motivation, belongingness, and academic identity (Chapman-Hilliard & Beasley, 2018; Graham & McClain, 2019). By providing Black students with opportunities to explore their racial identity in an educational setting and examining its connections to their academic identity, they can address academic disengagement for some Black learners (Cokley & Moore, 2007). Practitioners can create identity-enhancing settings that stimulate Black students to reassess messages about their academic abilities (Chapman-Hilliard et al., 2016; McDougal et al., 2018).

Caring faculty members have been identified as important factors in culturally supportive college settings (Grantham et al., 2015). Faculty members and practitioners should focus on the quality of the relationships they establish with Black college students. Park et al. (2019) found that Black students experienced racism at the hands of faculty, thus getting faculty to address racist behavior must be a starting point to improving student-faculty relationships. Although most faculty and their institutions express a desire to embrace diversity and avoid being labeled racist, institutions must take racist behavior by White faculty, staff, and students seriously (Cabrera et al., 2017). Black students are aware of the quality of these relationships and are attuned to their unique cultural experiences at PWIs (Madyun et al., 2013; George Mwangi et al., 2018). Taking these actions will help to enhance the PSC context of PWIs, which contributes to positive academic performance of Black students at these institutions.

Alongside faculty, psychologists and student affairs professionals can work to create formal and informal spaces where students can connect with same-race peers to process their experiences (Grier-Reed, 2013). Concentrating energy on helping Black students identify tangible sources of campus support and mitigating racial stressors they encounter can be supplemented by university counseling center staff who can provide outreach and other activities focused on Black students. They can create support groups that target race-specific issues related to Black students considering the study’s link between campus climate, racial identity, and positive academic outcomes (Jones & Sam, 2018; McClain et al., 2016). The combination of these efforts can improve both the PSC climate for Black students and their overall academic outcomes.

Collective efforts are needed to continue making our nation’s postsecondary institutions a welcoming place for Black students to learn and grow (Chapman-Hilliard et al., 2017; Wei et al., 2011). Stakeholders must address the PSC context as it is experienced by Black students given that these variables directly and indirectly affect the institution’s primary objective to graduate students. At present, these institutions have an opportunity—and obligation—to ensure that optimal conditions for academic excellence are fostered for Black students.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-jbp-10.1177_0095798420979794 – Supplemental material for Examining Psychosociocultural Influences as Predictors of Black College Students’ Academic Self-Concept and Achievement

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-jbp-10.1177_0095798420979794 for Examining Psychosociocultural Influences as Predictors of Black College Students’ Academic Self-Concept and Achievement by Samuel T. Beasley and Shannon McClain in Journal of Black Psychology

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Samuel T. Beasley

Shannon McClain

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Anglin

D. M.

Wade

J. C.

(2007). Racial socialization, racial identity, and Black students’ adjustment to college. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13(3), 207-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.13.3.207

Astin

A. W.

(1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. Jossey-Bass.

Awad

G. H.

(2007). The role of racial identity, academic self-concept, and self-esteem in the prediction of academic outcomes for African American students. Journal of Black Psychology, 33(2), 188-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798407299513

Beasley

S. T.

(2020). Student-faculty interactions and psychosociocultural influences as predictors of engagement among Black college students. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000169

Beasley

S. T.

Chapman-Hilliard

McClain

(2016). Linking the emancipatory pedagogy of Africana/Black studies with academic identity outcomes among Black students attending PWIs. Journal of Pan African Studies, 9(8), 9-25.

Beckowski

C. P.

Gebauer

(2018). Cultivating deeper life interactions: Faculty–student relationships in a nonresidential learning community. Journal of College Student Development, 59(6), 752-755. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2018.0070

Bourke

(2010). Experiences of Black students in multiple cultural spaces at a predominantly White institution. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 3(2), 126-135. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019025

Burnham

K. P.

Anderson

D. R.

(2004). Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research, 33(2), 261-304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124104268644

Burnham

K. P.

Anderson

D. R.

(2010). Model selection and multimodel inference. Springer.

10.

Cabrera

N. L.

Franklin

J. D.

Watson

J. S.

(2017). Whiteness in higher education: The invisible missing link in diversity and racial analyses. Jossey-Bass.

11.

Carlson

D. J.

(2001). Development and validation of a College Resilience Questionnaire (Publication No. 3016308) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska–Lincoln]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

12.

Carter

(2008). Achievement as resistance: The development of a critical race achievement ideology among Black achievers. Harvard Educational Review, 78(3), 466-497. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.78.3.83138829847hw844

13.

Chapman-Hilliard

Beasley

S. T.

(2018). “It’s like power to move”: Black students’ psychosocial experiences in Black Studies courses at a predominantly White institution. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 46(2), 129-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmcd.12097

14.

Chapman-Hilliard

Beasley

S. T.

McClain

Awosogba

Cokley

(2017). “A stranger no more”: Applying African American psychology to address social issues. In Blum

(Ed.), Social issues in living color: Challenges and solutions from the perspective of ethnic minority psychology (pp. 1-28). Praeger.

15.

Chapman-Hilliard

Beasley

S. T.

McClain

Cokley

K. O.

Nioplias

Taylor

D. S.

(2016). Do culturally empowering courses matter? An exploratory examination of cultural identity and academic motivation among Black collegians. Journal of Pan African Studies, 9(8), 43-63.

16.

Chavous

T. M.

Richardson

B. L.

Webb

F. R.

Fonseca-Bolorin

Leath

(2018). Shifting contexts and shifting identities: Campus race-related experiences, racial identity, and academic motivation among Black students during the transition to college. Race and Social Problems, 10(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-017-9218-9

17.

Cokley

(2000). An investigation of academic self-concept and its relationship to academic achievement in African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 26(2), 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798400026002002

18.

Cokley

Awad

Smith

Jackson

Awosogba

Hurst

Stone

Blondeau

Roberts

(2015). The roles of gender stigma consciousness, impostor phenomenon and academic self-concept in the academic outcomes of women and men. Sex Roles, 73(9-10), 414-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0516-7

19.

Cokley

K. O.

Chapman

(2008). The roles of ethnic identity, anti-White attitudes, and academic self-concept in African American student achievement. Social Psychology of Education, 11(4), 349-365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-008-9060-4

20.

Cokley

Komarraju

King

Cunningham

Muhammad

(2003). Ethnic differences in the measurement of academic self-concept in a sample of African American and European American college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(4), 707-722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164402251055

21.

Cokley

K. O.

Komorraju

Rosales

Shen

Pickett

Patel

(2006). Assessing quality of student-faculty interactions. Journal of the Professoriate, 1(2), 55-67.

22.

Cokley

Moore

(2007). Moderating and mediating effects of gender and psychological disengagement on the academic achievement of African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 33(2), 169-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798407299512

23.

Cokley

K. O.

Vandiver

B. J.

(2012). Ethnic and racial identity. In Altmaier

E. M.

Hansen

J. I. C.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of counseling psychology (pp. 291-325). Oxford University Press.

24.

Cole

(2008). Constructive criticism: The role of student-faculty interactions on African American and Hispanic students’ educational gains. Journal of College Student Development, 49(6), 587-605. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0040

25.

Cole

(2010). The effects of student-faculty interactions on minority students’ college grades: Differences between aggregated and disaggregated data. Journal of the Professoriate, 3(2), 137-160.

26.

Cole

Griffin

K. A.

(2013). Advancing the study of student-faculty interaction: A focus on diverse students and faculty. In Paulson

(Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 561-611). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5836-0_12

27.

Constantine

M. G.

Robinson

J. S.

Wilton

Caldwell

L. D.

(2002). Collective self-esteem and perceived social support as predictors of cultural congruity among Black and Latino college students. Journal of College Student Development, 43(3), 307-316.

28.

Cress

C. M.

(2008). Creating inclusive learning communities: The role of student–faculty relationships in mitigating negative campus climate. Learning Inquiry, 2(2), 95-111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11519-008-0028-2

29.

Danoff-Burg

Prelow

H. M.

Swenson

R. R.

(2004). Hope and life satisfaction in Black college students coping with race-related stress. Journal of Black Psychology, 30(2), 208-228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798403260725

30.

Enders

C. K.

(2010). Applied missing data analysis. Guilford Press.

31.

Franklin

A. S.

Debb

S. M.

Colson

D. G.

(2017). Predictors of academic self-concept for African American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 43(6), 636-653. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798416671578

32.

George Mwangi

C. A.

Thelamour

Ezeofor

Carpenter

. (2018). “Black elephant in the room”: Black students contextualizing campus racial climate within US racial climate. Journal of College Student Development, 59(4), 456-474. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2018.0042

33.

Gerardi

(1990). Academic self-concept as a predictor of academic success among minority and low-socioeconomic status students. Journal of College Student Development, 31(5), 402-407.

34.

Gloria

A. M.

Castellanos

(2003). Latina/o/a and African American students at predominantly White institutions: A psychosociocultural perspective of cultural congruity, campus climate, and academic persistence. In Castellanos

Jones

(Eds.), The majority in the minority: Expanding the representation of Latino faculty, administrators and students in higher education (pp. 71-92). Stylus.

35.

Gloria

A. M.

Hird

J. S.

Navarro

R. L.

(2001). Relationships of cultural congruity and perceptions of the university environment to help-seeking attitudes by sociorace and gender. Journal of College Student Development, 42(6), 545-562.

36.

Gloria

A. M.

Robinson Kurpius

S. E.

(1996). The validation of the Cultural Congruity Scale and the University Environment Scale with Chicano/a students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18(4), 533-549. https://doi.org/10.1177/07399863960184007

37.

Gloria

A. M.

Robinson Kurpius

S. E.

(2001). Influences of self-beliefs, social support, and comfort in the university environment on the academic nonpersistence decisions of American Indian undergraduates. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7(1), 88-102. https://doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.7.1.88

38.

Gloria

A. M.

Robinson Kurpius

S. E.

Hamilton

K. D.

Willson

M. S.

(1999). African American students’ persistence at a predominantly White university: Influence of social support, university comfort, and self-beliefs. Journal of College Student Development, 40(3), 257-268.

39.

Graham

McClain

(2019). A canonical correlational analysis examining the relationship between peer mentorship, belongingness, impostor feelings, and Black collegians’ academic and psychosocial outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 56(6), 2333-2367. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831219842571

40.

Grantham

Robinson

E. E.

Chapman

(2015). “That truly meant a lot to me”: A qualitative examination of meaningful faculty-student interactions. College Teaching, 63(3), 125-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2014.985285

41.

Greer

T. M.

Brown

(2011). Minority status stress and coping processes among African American college students. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4(1), 26-38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021267

42.

Grier-Reed

(2013). The African American student network: An informal networking group as a therapeutic intervention for Black college students on a predominantly White campus. Journal of Black Psychology, 39(2), 169-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798413478696

43.

Griffith

A. N.

Hurd

N. M.

Hussain

S. B.

(2019). “I didn’t come to school for this”: A qualitative examination of experiences with race-related stressors and coping responses among Black students attending a predominantly White institution. Journal of Adolescent Research, 34(2), 115-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558417742983

44.

Guan

T. C.

Gloria

A. M.

Castellanos

(2020). Second-generation Chinese American female undergraduates: Psychosociocultural correlates of well-being. Asian American Journal of Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aap0000209

45.

Hagtvet

K. A.

Nasser

F. M.

(2004). How well do item parcels represent conceptually defined latent constructs? A two-facet approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(2), 168-193. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1102_2

46.

Harper

S. R.

(2010). Black male student success in higher education: A report from the National Black Male College Achievement Study. University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education.

47.

Harper

S. R.

Hurtado

(2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.254

48.

Johnson

D. R.

Wasserman

T. H.

Yildirim

Yonai

B. A.

(2014). Examining the effects of stress and campus climate on the persistence of students of color and White students: An application of Bean and Eaton’s psychological model of retention. Research in Higher Education, 55(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9304-9

49.

Jones

Sam

(2018). Cultural connections: An ethnocultural group intervention for Black women in college. Journal of College Counseling, 21(1), 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocc.12088

50.

Keith

T. Z.

(2015). Multiple regression and beyond: An introduction to multiple regression and structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749099

51.

Kim

Y. K.

Lundberg

C. A.

(2016). A structural model of the relationship between student–faculty interaction and cognitive skills development among college students. Research in Higher Education, 57(3), 288-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9387-6

52.

Kim

Y. K.

Sax

L. J.

(2009). Student–faculty interaction in research universities: Differences by student gender, race, social class, and first-generation status. Research in Higher Education, 50(5), 437-459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9127-x

53.

Kim

Y. K.

Sax

L. J.

(2014). The effects of student–faculty interaction on academic self- concept: Does academic major matter? Research in Higher Education, 55(8), 780-809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-014-9335-x

54.

Kline

R. B.

(2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Guilford.

55.

Komarraju

Musulkin

Bhattacharya

(2010). Role of student-faculty interactions in developing college students’ academic self-concept, motivation, and achievement. Journal of College Student Development, 51(3), 332-342. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0137

56.

Kuh

G. D.

Cruce

T. M.

Shoup

Kinzie

Gonyea

R. M.

(2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540-563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116

57.

Kuh

G. D.

Kinzie

Buckley

J. A.

Bridges

B. K.

Hayek

J. C.

(2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Indiana University and National Postsecondary Education Cooperative.

58.

Kuncel

N. R.

Credé

Thomas

L. L.

(2005). The validity of self-reported grade point averages, class ranks, and test scores: A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 63-82.

59.

Leath

Chavous

(2018). Black women’s experiences of campus racial climate and stigma at predominantly white institutions: Insights from a comparative and within-group approach for STEM and non-STEM majors. Journal of Negro Education, 87(2), 125-139. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.87.2.0125

60.

Lei

Lomax

R. G.

(2005). The effect of varying degrees of nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1201_1

61.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Gore

P. A.

Jr. (1997). Discriminant and predictive validity of academic self-concept, academic self-efficacy, and mathematics-specific self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44(3), 307-315. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.44.3.307

62.

Lewis

J. A.

Mendenhall

Ojiemwen

Thomas

Riopelle

Harwood

S. A.

Browne Huntt

(2019). Racial microaggressions and sense of belonging at a historically white university. American Behavioral Scientist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219859613

63.

Little

T. D.

Cunningham

W. A.

Shahar

Widaman

K. F.

(2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151-173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1

64.

Lockett

C. T.

Harrell

J. P.

(2003). Racial identity, self-esteem, and academic achievement: Too much interpretation, too little supporting data. Journal of Black Psychology, 29(3), 325-336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798403254216

65.

Madyun

Williams

S. M.

McGee

E. O.

Milner

H. R.

IV . (2013). On the importance of African American faculty in higher education: Implications and recommendations. Educational Foundations, 27(3-4), 65-84.

66.

Marsh

H. W.

Martin

A. J.

(2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910X503501

67.

McCabe

(2009). Racial and gender microaggressions on a predominantly White campus: Experiences of Black, Latina/o and White undergraduates. Race, Gender & Class, 16(1/2), 133-151.

68.

McClain

Beasley

S. T.

Jones

Awosogba

Jackson

Cokley

(2016). An examination of the impact of racial and ethnic identity, impostor feelings, and minority status stress on the mental health of Black college students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 44(2), 101-117. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmcd.12040

69.

McDougal

III. Cox

Dorley

Wodaje

(2018). Black student engagement: Resilience and success under duress. Journal of Pan African Studies, 12(7), 192-215.

70.

Moore

J. L.

III Madison-Colmore

Smith

D. M.

(2003). The prove-them-wrong syndrome: Voices from unheard African-American males in engineering disciplines. Journal of Men’s Studies, 12(1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1201.61

71.

Neville

K. M.

Parker

T. L.

(2017). A breath of fresh air: Students’ perceptions of interactions with African American faculty. Journal of College Student Development, 58(3), 349-364. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2017.0027

72.

Park

J. J.

Kim

Y. K.

Salazar

Hayes

(2019). Student–faculty interaction and discrimination from faculty in STEM: The link with retention. Research in Higher Education, 61(3), 330-346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-019-09564-w

73.

Pascarella

E. T.

Terenzini

P. T.

(2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research (Vol. 2). Jossey-Bass.

74.

Patton

L. D.

Bridges

B. K.

Flowers

L. A.

(2011). Effects of Greek affiliation on African American students’ engagement: Differences by college racial composition. College Student Affairs Journal, 29(2), 113-123.

75.

Pieterse

A. L.

Carter

R. T.

Evans

S. A.

Walter

R. A.

(2010). An exploratory examination of the associations among racial and ethnic discrimination, racial climate, and trauma- related symptoms in a college student population. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(3), 255-263. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020040

76.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

77.

Quaye

S. J.

Harper

S. R.

Pendakur

S. L.

(Eds.). (2019). Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. Routledge.

78.

Reynolds

A. L.

Sneva

J. N.

Beehler

G. P.

(2010). The influence of racism-related stress on the academic motivation of Black and Latino/a students. Journal of College Student Development, 51(2), 135-149. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0120

79.

Reynolds

W. M.

(1988). Measurement of academic self-concept in college students. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(2), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5202_4

80.

Robbins

S. B.

Lauver

Davis

Langley

Carlstrom

(2004). Do psychosocial and study skill variables predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130(2), 261-288. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.2.261

81.

Russell

D. W.

Kahn

J. H.

Spoth

Altmaier

E. M.

(1998). Analyzing data from experimental studies: A latent variable structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45(1), 18-29. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.45.1.18

82.

Schafer

J. L.

(1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. Chapman & Hall.

83.

Schumacker

R. E.

Lomax

R. G.

(2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

84.

Sedlacek

(2017). Measuring noncognitive variables: Improving admissions, success and retention for underrepresented students. Stylus.

85.

Sellers

R. M.

Rowley

S. A.

Chavous

T. M.

Shelton

J. N.

Smith

M. A.

(1997). Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity: A preliminary investigation of reliability and construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(4), 805-815. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.805

86.

Sellers

R. M.

Smith

M. A.

Shelton

J. N.

Rowley

S. A. J.

Chavous

T. M.

(1998). Multidimensional model of racial identity: A reconceptualization of African American racial identity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 18-39. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0201_2

87.

Shahid

N. N.

Nelson

Cardemil

E. V.

(2018). Lift every voice: Exploring the stressors and coping mechanisms of Black college women attending predominantly White institutions. Journal of Black Psychology, 44(1), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798417732415

88.

Snyder

T. D.

de Brey

Dillow

S.A.

(2019). Digest of Education Statistics 2018 (NCES 2020-009). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

89.

Szymanski

D. M.

Lewis

J. A.

(2015). Race-related stress and racial identity as predictors of African American activism. Journal of Black Psychology, 41(2), 170-191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798414520707

90.

Thelamour

George Mwangi

Ezeofor

(2019). “We need to stick together for survival”: Black college students’ racial identity, same-ethnic friendships, and campus connectedness. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 12(3), 266-279. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000104

91.

Thomas

O. N.

Caldwell

C. H.

Faison

Jackson

J. S.

(2009). Promoting academic achievement: The role of racial identity in buffering perceptions of teacher discrimination on academic achievement among African American and Caribbean Black adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 420-431. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014578

92.

Trolian

T. L.

Jach

E. A.

Hanson

J. M.

Pascarella

E. T.

(2016). Influencing academic motivation: The effects of student-faculty interaction. Journal of College Student Development, 57(7), 810-826. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2016.0080

93.

Wei

T. Y.

Liao

K. Y. H.

(2011). Minority stress and college persistence attitudes among African American, Asian American, and Latino students: Perception of university environment as a mediator. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2), 195-203. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023359

94.

Weston

Gore

P. A.

(2006). A brief guide to structural equation modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(5), 719-751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286345

95.

Xiong

(2020). Research on Hmong American college students. Journal of Underrepresented & Minority Progress, 4(1), 65-84. https://doi.org/10.32674/jump.v4i1.1537

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.10 MB