Perceived Educational Barriers, Cultural Fit, Coping Responses

10.1177/0739986305275097Hispanic Journal of Behavioral SciencesGloria et al. / Coping and W ell-Being of Latina Undergraduates

Perceived Educational Barriers, CulturalFit, Coping Responses, and PsychologicalWell-Being of Latina Undergraduates

Alberta M. GloriaUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison

Jeanett CastellanosUniversity of California–Irvine

Veronica OrozcoOhio State University

Given the unique educational experiences and disproportional representation of Latinasin higher education, this study examined how Latinas’perception of educational barriersand cultural fit influenced their coping responses and subsequent well-being in college.Participants (N = 98) were primarily second-generation Mexican-heritage women whowere highly motivated to pursue advanced graduate training. Differences by generationand educational characteristics were not found. Cultural congruity and the copingresponse of taking a planned, positive action were the strongest predictors of psychologi-cal well-being accounting for 31% of the variance. The study’s findings challenge stereo-types of Latina students in higher education, as they valued higher education, believedthat they could overcome any barriers to achieve their educational goals, and used activecoping responses, which informed their positive and healthy functioning.

Keywords: Latina; undergraduates; coping responses

Although Latina/os represent the largest ethnic minority group in theUnited States (32.8 million or approximately 12%; Pew Hispanic Center FactSheet, 2002; Therrien & Ramirez, 2000), they continue to be underrepre-sented in institutions of higher education (National Center for Education Sta-tistics [NCES], 2002). For the last 2 decades, nearly half of Latino studentsimmediately enter college from high school (NCES, 1997), yet their enroll-ments are the lowest at research universities (NCES, 2000b). When exam-ined by ethnic group, individuals of Mexican descent have the lowest collegecompletion rates, lagging far behind Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and South and

Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 27 No. 2, May 2005 161-183DOI: 10.1177/0739986305275097© 2005 Sage Publications

161

Central Americans (Aguirre & Martinez, 1993). Of the bachelor’s degreesconferred from 1996 to 1997 (n = 1,168,023), Latina/os accounted for only5.5% with Latinas earning slightly more degrees (n = 35,934, 5.7%) thantheir male Latino counterparts (n = 26,007, 5.2%; NCES, 2000a). However,Latinas also have substantially lower college completion rates than AfricanAmerican and White females (Rodriguez, Guido-DiBrito, Torres, & Talbot,2000).

Despite enrolling in and graduating from 4-year institutions at a higherrate than Latinos, Latinas face many obstacles that affect their educationalpursuits. For example, Young (1992) found that Mexican American femalecollege students encountered financial constraints, needed to take time fromschool to work, had consistent interruptions to attend to family matters athome, and had limited time to study. Earning a higher education is importantfor socioeconomic mobility and independence for Latinas (Cardoza, 1991),as those with a bachelor’s degree earn 82% more than those Latinas who holdonly a high school diploma (NCES, 1995). Because Latinas tend to havemore stressful educational experiences than Latinos (Gándara & Osugi,1994) and report unique educational experiences (Rodriguez et al., 2000;Vasquez, 1982; Wycoff, 1996), this study heeds Rodriguez et al.’s (2000) callfor intentional and focused research on Latina students in higher education.

Educational theorists and previous research have investigated both thecognitive and noncognitive factors that impede the educational success ofracial and ethnic minority students, and researchers have recently empha-sized the integration of the social, environmental, and interpersonal non-cognitive aspects of educational experiences (Allen, 1992; Suzuki, 1994).For Latinas, it is well documented that factors such as a lack of finances,lower familial support, few mentors, cultural stereotypes, inhospitable cam-pus climates, and a sense of cultural misfit influence their college navigation(e.g., Capello, 1994; Cardoza, 1991; Cuadraz, 1996; Gloria, 1997; Hurtado& Carter, 1997; Quintana, Vogel, & Ybarra, 1991; Rodriguez et al., 2000).However, there are a limited number of studies that integrate the educationalcontext and subsequent psychological impact on Latina students when exam-ining their educational experiences. As such, the perception of environmen-tal context and cultural fit within the university environment were the basisfrom which coping responses and subsequent psychological well-being ofLatina undergraduates were examined.

The university climate of predominantly White institutions of higher edu-cation have consistently been identified as a White, male, middle-class set-ting that values individualism and competition—a climate that is oftenunyielding to individuals who have different values or approaches (Gloria &Pope-Davis, 1997; Watson et al., 2002). Studies of the university environ-

162 Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

ment have found that African American students reported racial tension, per-ceived hostility (Sailes, 1993), and felt marginalized on campus (Gossett,Cuyjet, & Cockriel, 1998). American Indian students similarly experiencedthe university environment as racist (Huffman, 1991), oppressive, and indif-ferent (Benjamin, Chambers, & Reiterman, 1993). Latina/o students havealso reported feeling unwelcomed and marginalized on university campuses(Hurtado, 1994; Hurtado & Carter, 1997). Despite university efforts to read-dress campus climate, racial and ethnic minority students attending predomi-nantly White institutions continue to experience the university environmentas stressful (Ponterotto, 1990; Watson et al., 2002).

In addition to the stressful aspects of racism, sexism, and classism withineducational settings (McWhirter, 1997), Rodriguez et al. (2000) contendedthat there are two distinct yet interrelated categories of barriers faced byLatinas in higher education. Barriers included those that exist prior to enter-ing college (e.g., low socioeconomic status, effects of cultural and gender-role stereotyping) and those that are encountered upon entering college (e.g.,lack of educational preparation, financial concerns, social and familial obli-gation, alienation or cultural incongruity). For example, many Latinas areoften the first in their families to attend college and often lack easy access toinformation that would make their transition to college easier (Gloria &Segura-Herrera, 2004). Similarly, Latina students find themselves balancingtheir home and family values with the university environment, often pushingthem to assimilate to institutional values (Gloria & Rodriguez, 2000). Deal-ing with the conflict of one’s personal cultural values and those of the univer-sity environment (i.e., cultural incongruity; Gloria & Robinson Kurpius,1996) adds to the unique experiences of Latino students. A decreased senseof cultural congruity is associated with increased academic nonpersistencedecisions for Latino/a (Gloria, Castellanos, Lopez & Rosales, 2005) andChicana (Gloria, 1997) undergraduates—a decision that is likely stressful.

In dealing with the perceived barriers and stresses of their higher educa-tion experiences, the responses or strategies by which Latinas cope hasreceived little attention. Mena, Padilla, and Maldonado (1987) examinedacculturative stress and coping strategies of multicultural undergraduatesand found that late-immigrant (i.e., in the United States for 12 or more years)students coped with stress by taking a direct, planned action whereas second-and third-generation students more often coped by talking with others aboutthe problem. The majority of the first-generation students were Asian (n =86) with only 9 Hispanics in the study sample. Other racial and ethnic demo-graphics were not provided for the overall student sample. In Vásquez andGarcía-Vásquez’s (1995) study of acculturation, acculturative stress, andcoping responses of Mexican American college students’ academic achieve-

Gloria et al. / Coping and Well-Being of Latina Undergraduates 163

ment, the two most frequently reported coping responses were also taking apositive, planned approach and talking to others about the problem. Reportedstress levels did not vary by generation or acculturation level.

Zea, Jarama, and Bianchi (1995) found that active coping and perceptionof a supportive social context predicted college adjustment for 357 collegestudents of diverse ethnic backgrounds attending a private Northeastern uni-versity. Similarly, Gárcia-Vásquez, Vásquez, and Huang (1998) also foundthat direct and active coping strategies were most often used to alleviatestress with stress differing by gender for 120 Mexican American collegestudents. Latinos experienced higher levels of stress than Latinas with theauthors suggesting that Latinas may have had to adapt to numerous experi-ences as women (e.g., dealing with parents to leave home to attend univer-sity) and thus may not have experienced stress in the same way as their malecounterparts.

Coping strategies or responses are the cognitive and behavioral efforts tomanage internal or external demands that are considered taxing or exceedingone’s resources (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Coping responses are consid-ered active (adaptive behaviors that manage problems) or avoidant (behav-iors that ease emotional distress). Active coping responses are also known asproblem focused, and avoidant coping is referred to as emotion-focused cop-ing (Carver, Scheier, & Weintraub, 1989). In that coping responses are inter-dependent (Guinn & Vincent, 2002) and co-occur in stressful situations(Carver & Scheier, 1994) as evidenced in the previously reviewed literature,it is expected that Latina college students will use various coping responsesrelative to their environment such that they can maintain their sense ofpsychological health.

Various studies have examined well-being, also known as healthy positivefunctioning. Well-being has been conceptualized as a theoretically based andmultidimensional construct defined as having six specific components: self-acceptance, personal growth, purpose in life, positive relations, autonomy,and environmental mastery (Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Despitedemands to better understand well-being within the general literature,research has yet to examine racial and ethnic minority college student func-tioning, in particular, Latina coping and psychological well-being. One studyexamined the relationship of stress and physical and psychological distressfor Latino/a college students (Solberg & Villarreal, 1997) and found that effi-cacy expectations led to less physical and psychological distress.

In that stressful environments are related to psychological well-being(Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), the purpose of this study is to examine thedegree to which perceived educational barriers, cultural fit, and coping


responses predict the psychological well-being of Latina undergraduates. Asthe first study to empirically examine Latina college students’ psychologicalwell-being within the context of higher education, differences in background(e.g., generational level) and educational characteristics (e.g., class standing)were assessed and interrelationships of the study’s variables were examined.

Method

Student Participants

Of the 102 returned surveys, there was 1 Asian American male, 2 AsianAmerican females, 1 Latina master’s student, and 98 Latina undergraduates.Because the study’s focus was on Latina undergraduates, analyses were con-ducted with 98 students. By ethnicity, the majority of the students were ofMexican heritage (n = 77, 79.4%), and the remaining were Central American(n = 9), South American (n = 4), Cuban American (n = 1), and Puerto RicanAmerican (n = 1). Five students were biracial with Mexican and some non-Latino/a heritage. One student did not report her ethnicity; however, sheidentified as Latina. For generational status, 14 reported that no one in theirfamily was U.S.-born (i.e., first-generation Latino/a Americans), whereas 58students indicated that either they or their sibling(s) was U.S.-born (i.e.,second-generation Latino/a Americans). Eleven identified as third genera-tion (i.e., their parents were U.S.-born), 6 were fourth generation (i.e., theirgrandparents were U.S.-born), and 3 were fifth-generation Latinas (i.e., theirgreat grandparents were U.S.-born). Six students did not respond to thisquestion.

By class standing, there were 16 freshmen, 14 sophomores, 34 juniors,and 33 seniors (1 missing). All but three of the students were continuouslyenrolled in college since beginning their bachelor’s degree, and 12 studentstransferred from other institutions (i.e., 10 from community colleges, 1 froma 4-year university, 1 missing). Student-reported grade point averages(GPAs) ranged from 1.25 to 3.90 (M = 2.99, SD = 0.49; 5 missing).

When asked about familial education, almost three fourths (n = 70) of theLatinas reported that one or both or their parents had not attended college.Similarly, almost half (n = 48) of the sample reported not having sibling(s)who attended college. Almost all (n = 93) of the Latinas reported that theyvalued the degree that they were currently working toward. Furthermore,when asked what was the highest academic degree they expected to earn, allbut two students anticipated earning a graduate or professional degree. Morespecifically, the students expected to earn a master’s degree (unspecified; n =


34), master’s in business administration (n = 5), law degree (n = 5), medicaldegree (n = 8), or Ph.D. or Ed.D. (n = 43). One student did not respond.

The majority of the participants (n = 34) reported a family income of$20,000 to $39,000, followed by $60,000 and above (n = 29) and $40,000 to$59,000 (n = 19). Twelve students reported a family income of less than$20,000. When asked how they financed their education, student loans (n =68) were the most frequently reported method, closely followed by workingpart-time (n = 66). The next tier of reported financial sources was family (n =55) and scholarships (n = 46). Three students worked full-time, and 12 stu-dents used personal savings to fund their education.

Most of sample reported being single (n = 94). Three students were mar-ried, and 1 student did not provide this information. Almost half of the stu-dents lived off campus with friends (n = 44), followed by those who lived oncampus (n = 38) and those who lived off campus with family (n = 15). Onestudent reported having other living arrangements.

Procedure and Setting

After securing appropriate institutional review board approval, surveyswere distributed to members of Latina-based sororities, Latina/o-based orga-nizations (e.g., Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanos de Aztlan), and in socialsciences classes at a Southwestern university. The university has a large num-ber of racial and ethnic minority students (57% of the student population),and Latino/as constitute 18% of the total racial and ethnic minority popula-tion. Within the Latino/a student population, 73% of students are of Mexicanheritage.

Students were informed both in writing and verbally that participationwas voluntary and that return of their completed survey would serve as theirparticipation consent. The survey took approximately 15 to 20 minutes tocomplete and no incentive was provided. Surveys were returned via campusmail or picked up by one of the researchers at a subsequent class or organiza-tional meeting. A total of 261 surveys were distributed, and 102 were com-pleted and returned for a response rate of 39%.

Survey Instrument

The questionnaire packet consisted of a demographic sheet and five stan-dardized instruments. The instruments were administered in English onlyand counterbalanced to avoid a response set. The demographic sheet wasalways placed first.


Demographic sheet. The demographic sheet had 18 questions, of which 7questions addressed general personal information and 11 questions wereeducationally focused. Personal information questions assessed sex, age,race/ethnicity, marital status, living arrangements, family income, and gener-ational status. The education-related questions addressed GPA, class standing,transfer status, degree sought, highest academic degree expected, depart-ment(s) affiliation, financial resources, continuity of enrollment, parentaland sibling education, and the extent to which they valued their degree.

Perception of Barriers (POB) Scale. The POB Scale (McWhirter, 1997)assessed students’ perceptions of their encounter of specific barriers to edu-cational and career goals. Consisting of 24 items, the scale has four subscalesaddressing future job discrimination (i.e., sex and ethnic discrimination),perceived barriers to attending college (i.e., withdraw and stay), and twoitems on general perceptions of barriers. In that this study’s focus was onexperiences in college, the directions for the two educational subscales wereslightly modified: “If I were to withdraw from college, it would be becauseof . . . ” (n = 9) and “If I were to stay in college, I would most likely encoun-ter . . . ” (n = 5). Participants were asked the extent to which money problems,family problems, not being smart enough, family attitudes, fitting in, gettinginto one’s major, already having a good job, lack of interest, and college nothelping one’s future would be reasons for withdrawing from college. Simi-larly, participants identified the extent to which they would experience thesesame difficulties if they stayed in college. Each of the items was based on a 5-point Likert-type format ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly dis-agree) such that a higher score indicated more perceived barriers. For theoriginal subscales, which were originally normed with 1st-semester collegestudents, McWhirter (1997) reported a Cronbach’s alpha of .79 for barriersthat would most likely prompt withdrawal (POB-Withdraw) and a .74 forbarriers that would be experienced if one were to remain in school (POB-Stay). Cronbach’s alphas of .74 and .79 were indicated for the POB-Withdraw and POB-Stay subscales, respectively, for this study.

University Environment Scale (UES). The UES examines racial and eth-nic minority student perceptions of the university environment (Gloria &Robinson Kurpius, 1996). The 14-item scale includes five reverse-codeditems with a higher score indicating a more positive perception of the univer-sity’s environment. Sample items include, “University staff has been warmand friendly” and “The university seems to value minority students.” A pilotstudy yielded Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .81 to .85, and other research


has reported alphas of .75 and .79 for two groups of Chicana undergraduates(Gloria, 1997). Recent use of the UES with Asian American (Gloria & Ho,2003) and American Indian (Gloria & Robinson Kurpius, 2001) undergradu-ates revealed adequate internal consistency coefficients (.81 and .82, respec-tively). The scale has also been used on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (stronglyagree) format (Gloria, Hird, & Navarro, 2001) revealing an alpha of .77for racial and ethnic minority undergraduates. Using a 4-point scale, theCronbach’s alpha for this study was .80.

Cultural Congruity Scale (CCS). The 13-item CCS measures students’perceptions of cultural congruity or cultural fit between the values of the uni-versity and their personal values (Gloria & Robinson Kurpius, 1996). Higherscores reflect greater congruity of values with response options ranging from1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true). Sample items include, “I feel that I have tochange myself to fit in at school” and “I try not to show parts of me that are‘ethnically’ based.” A total of seven items are reverse-coded. Originallypiloted and validated with racial and ethnic minority students, the internalconsistency coefficients ranged from .81 to .89 (Gloria & Robinson Kurpius,1996). Used with different student populations, internal consistencies havebeen reported at .93 for African American college women (Constantine &Watt, 2002), .71 for Latino and Black college students (Constantine, Robin-son, Wilton, & Caldwell, 2002), and .81 for Asian American undergraduates(Gloria & Ho, 2003). Also used with a 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (stronglyagree) response format, the CCS has shown an adequate internal consistencycoefficient of .86 for racial and ethnic minority students (Gloria et al., 2001).The Cronbach’s alpha for this study was also .86.

List of Coping Responses (LCR). Developed specifically to assess the cop-ing responses for Mexican American college students, this scale was origi-nally developed by Sidle, Moos, Adams, and Cady (1969). Mena et al. (1987)modified the items to provide additional choices given differing accultura-tion levels and generational statuses for Mexican American students. TheLCR includes strategies such as talking with others about the problem, draw-ing on past experiences, or seeking support from cultural group members.Intended to measure the frequency with which the different and independentcoping responses are used based on a true/false format, previous scholars(e.g., Mena et al., 1987; Vázquez & García-Vázquez, 1995) have not reportedintercorrelations. Sidle et al. (1969), however, reported moderate to low cor-relations of the different responses and suggested independent item use. Forthis study, the LCR was modified such that participants were asked to iden-tify the degree to which they used the coping responses on a 1 (strongly dis-


agree) to 4 (strongly agree) scale to allow for intercorrelation of copingresponses.

Psychological Well-Being–Short Scale (PWBSS). The PWBSS measuressix theoretical constructs that address different dimensions of well-beingor positive functioning (Ryff, 1989). These dimensions include self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mas-tery, purpose in life, and personal growth. The orginal scale consisted of 120items with 10 negative and 10 positive items (which are reverse-coded) foreach dimension. High scores reflect a positive attitude toward self (self-acceptance), satisfying and intimate relationships (positive relations withothers), self-determination and independence (autonomy), control and com-petence over one’s environment (environmental mastery), belief in meaningand purpose in life (purpose in life), and seeing oneself as growing anddeveloping (personal growth; Ryff, 1989).

A shortened version of the scale, containing 18 items or 3 items perdimension, was used for this study (Ryff & Keyes, 1995). Three items wereselected from each of the 20-item dimensions. High correlations (.70 to .89)of the 3-item shortened scales were achieved with each of the original scales.Participants rated each item from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree)with higher scores indicating increased positive functioning. Sample itemsinclude, “I have confidence in my own opinions, even if they are contrary tothe general consensus” and “Maintaining close relationships has been diffi-cult and frustrating for me.” Previous use of the PWBSS with Mexican Amer-ican adults revealed an adequate internal consistency coefficient of .73(Murguía, 2001). The Cronbach’s alpha for this study was .71.

Results

Prior to analyses, data were reviewed for multivariate normalcy (Quintana& Maxwell, 1999) and adequacy of the scale’s internal consistencies (seeTable 1). Descriptive statistics and correlations of the study’s variables arepresented in Tables 1 and 2.

Descriptors

Examination of individual items revealed that the most common copingresponse was talking with others about the problem (CR 2). The next fre-quent coping response was to actively find out more about the situation andtaking a positive, planned action (CR 1), followed closely by students draw-ing upon their past experiences (CR 7). The least frequently used responses


170

Tab

le 1

.D

escr

ipto

rs,I

nte

rnal

Co

nsi

sten

cy C

oef

fici

ents

,an

d C

orr

elat

ion

s o

f S

tud

y V

aria

bles

MS

Dα

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

UE

S2.

930.

39.8

0.—

.57*

**.2

6**

.32*

*.1

2.3

1**

.14

.10

.15

.05

.19

.04

.04

–.07

CC

S3.

180.

49.8

6.—

.28*

*.3

9***

.30*

*.2

7**

.15

.18

.08

.05

.17

.13

–.03

–.11

PO

B-

With

draw

3.98

0.63

.74

.—.4

2***

.16

.05

.06

.02

–.06

.20

.12

.19

.06

–.09

PO

B-S

tay

3.78

0.86

.79

.—.1

1.0

6.1

7.2

2*.0

4–.

03.0

4.3

4***

.05

–.46

PW

BS

S4.

130.

46.7

1.—

.44*

**.0

3.0

3.0

5.1

6.1

4.2

5**

.24*

.02

CR

13.

160.

62.—

.22*

–.11

.18

.10

.20*

.24*

.24*

.07

CR

23.

380.

60.—

–.14

.11

.18

.12

.30*

*.3

3***

.12

CR

32.

070.

82.—

.15

–.10

–.21

*.0

8–.

16.0

2C

R4

2.65

0.89

.—.0

3.1

0.0

4.0

7.2

1*C

R5

2.59

0.95

.—.1

6–.

01.1

5–.

21*

CR

61.

980.

94.—

.33*

**.0

7.1

7C

R7

3.13

0.68

.—.4

5***

.32*

**C

R8

3.04

0.76

.—.2

7**

CR

92.

620.

99.—

CR

1th

roug

hC

R9

are

indi

vidu

alite

ms

from

the

List

ofC

opin

gR

espo

nses

.See

Tabl

e2

forf

ulli

tem

desc

riptio

ns.U

ES

=U

nive

rsity

Env

ironm

ent

Sca

le;C

CS

=C

ultu

ralC

ongr

uity

Sca

le;P

OB

-With

draw

=P

erce

ptio

nof

Bar

riers

–With

draw

;PO

B-S

tay

=P

erce

ptio

nof

Bar

riers

–Sta

y;P

WB

SS

=P

sych

olog

ical

Wel

l-Bei

ng–S

hort

Sca

le;C

R =

cop

ing

resp

onse

.*p

≤.0

5.**

p≤

.01.

p≤

.001

.

171

Tab

le 2

.D

escr

ipto

rs a

nd

Per

cen

tag

es o

f P

arti

cip

ants

Ch

oo

sin

g In

div

idu

al C

op

ing

Res

po

nse

s

Str

ongl

yS

tron

gly

Cop

ing

Res

pons

e (C

R)

Dis

agre

eD

isag

ree

Agr

eeA

gree

CR

1:I t

ry to

act

ivel

y fin

d ou

t mor

e ab

out t

he s

ituat

ion

and

I tak

e so

me

posi

tive,

plan

ned

actio

n.1.

09.

262

.227

.6C

R2:

I tal

k w

ith o

ther

s ab

out t

he p

robl

em (

frie

nds,

rel

ativ

es).

0.0

6.1

50.0

43.9

CR

3:I d

on’t

wor

ry a

bout

it.E

very

thin

g w

ill p

roba

bly

wor

k ou

t fin

e.24

.549

.021

.45.

1C

R4:

I bec

ome

invo

lved

in o

ther

act

iviti

es to

kee

p m

y m

ind

off t

he p

robl

em.

10.2

31.6

40.8

17.3

CR

5:I p

ray

and/

or c

onsu

lt a

prie

st o

r m

inis

ter.

17.3

21.4

45.9

15.3

CR

6:I s

eek

prof

essi

onal

adv

ice

(phy

sici

an, p

sych

olog

ist,

coun

selo

r).

35.7

39.8

15.3

9.2

CR

7:I d

raw

upo

n m

y pa

st e

xper

ienc

es;p

erha

ps s

imila

r si

tuat

ions

mig

ht h

elp.

3.1

8.2

61.2

27.6

CR

8:I s

eek

supp

ort f

rom

mem

bers

of m

y cu

ltura

l gro

up.

3.1

17.3

52.0

27.6

CR

9:I t

ry to

red

uce

tens

ion

(e.g

., dr

ink,

eat

, dru

gs, s

mok

e, m

ore

exer

cise

).18

.419

.443

.918

.4

were to not worry about the problem (CR 3) or to seek professional advice(coping response 6). Based on the two general POB items, 38.8% of theLatinas believed that barriers would make it difficult to achieve their educa-tional goals; however, almost all (n = 92) agreed that they could overcomeany barriers that stood in the way of achieving their educational goals.

Mean Group Differences

To assess whether participant background and educational characteristicswould reveal differences in coping responses for the Latinas, a series ofgroup mean analyses (i.e., an analyses of variance and t tests) was conducted.Some analyses (e.g., GPA) required aggregating the data such that groupshad sufficient sample size. No differences (p > .05) were found by genera-tional status (i.e., first, second, and third/fourth/fifth), class standing (i.e.,lower and upper division), GPA (below 3.0 and 3.0 and above); heritage (i.e.,Mexican-heritage Latinas and non-Mexican-heritage Latinas), place of resi-dence (i.e., on- or off-campus residence), income ($39,000 and less or$40,000 and more), or parental and sibling college attendance for copingresponses. No differences were revealed for the study’s variables by genera-tional level (p > .05).

Hierarchical Regression

To address the extent to which perceived educational barriers, cultural fit,and coping responses predicted psychological well-being for Latina stu-dents, a three-step hierarchical regression was conducted. The overall omni-bus equation indicated that POB-Withdraw, POB-Stay, UES, CCS, and theLCR together accounted for approximately 31% of the variance of PWBSS,F(13, 83) = 2.92, p ≤ .01. More specifically, a perceived educational barriervariable cluster (i.e., POB-withdraw, POB-stay) was entered as step 1 andresulted in a nonsignificant r2 change of .02, F = 1.09, p ≥ .05. In step 2, a cul-tural fit variable cluster (i.e., UES and CCS) was entered and resulted in a sig-nificant r2 change of .08, F = 3.90, p ≤ .05. In step 3, each of the nine items ofthe LCR was entered, thereby revealing a significant r2 change of .22, F =2.89, p ≤ .01. With the LCR uniquely accounting for 22% of the PWBSS vari-ance (after entering steps 1 and 2), CR 1 was the only significant predictor, β= .38, t = 3.69, p ≤ .001. For the cultural fit cluster, only CCS, β = .28, t = 2.33,p ≤ .05, predicted variance.


Correlations

In conducting bivariate correlations of the study’s variables (see Table 1),significant relationships emerged between the PWBSS and CCS (r = .30, p ≤.01), CR 1 (r = .44, p ≤ .001), CR 7 (r = .25, p ≤ .05), and CR 8 (r = .24, p ≤.05). That is, Latinas who reported higher levels of psychological well-beingalso reported higher cultural congruity. These students were more likely touse the coping responses of taking some positive, planned action, drawingupon past experiences, and seeking support from members of their culturalgroup. In turn, CCS was correlated positively and significantly with POB-Withdraw (r = .28, p ≤ .01), POB-Stay (r = .39, p ≤ .001), and CR 1 (r = .27, p≤ .01). Specifically, those students with higher cultural congruity perceivedfewer educational barriers that would prompt them to withdraw from col-lege and also perceived fewer educational barriers should they stay in col-lege. Furthermore, those who reported higher cultural congruity also tendedto use the coping response of actively finding out more about the situationand taking a positive, planned action.

POB-Withdraw (r = .26), POB-Stay (r = .32), and CR 1 (r = .27) were eachsignificantly correlated (p ≤ .01) to UES such that Latinas who held morepositive perceptions about the university environment tended to perceivefewer educational barriers that would result in them withdrawing from col-lege, perceived fewer barriers should they stay in college, and tended to usethe coping response of taking a positive, planned action. Also, the UES wassignificantly correlated with CCS (r = .54, p ≤ .01) where those students whoheld more positive perceptions of the university environment reportedincreased cultural congruity.

Examining selected coping response correlations, CR 1 was significantly(p ≤ .05) related to CR 2 (r = .22), CR 6 (r = .20), CR 7 (r = .24), and CR 8 (r =.25). That is, those students who used the coping response of actively findingout more about the situation and taking some positive, planned action werealso more likely to talk with others about their problem, seek professionaladvice, draw on past experiences, and seek help from members of their cul-tural group. Also, those seeking professional advice were more likely to drawupon past experiences (CR 6 and CR 7, r = .33, p ≤ .001). Furthermore, thoseseeking support from their cultural group reported being more likely to try toreduce tension via some external method (e.g., drinking, eating, using drugs,smoking, or exercising; CR 6 and CR 7, r = .27, p ≤ .01).


Discussion

Consisting primarily of second-generation Mexican American womenwho had expectations to earn a graduate degree, this study examined per-ceived educational barriers, cultural fit, coping responses, and psychologicalwell-being for 98 Latina undergraduates. To assess their coping responseswithin the context of perceived barriers, cultural fit, and subsequent well-being, a hierarchical regression was conducted. Although 31% of psycholog-ical well-being was predicted overall by the variable clusters, cultural con-gruity and one coping response (i.e., taking planned, positive action) werethe only two predictors within the cultural fit and coping response clusters,respectively.

Similar to Vázquez and García-Vázquez (1995), differences in copingwere not differentiated by generational status. Acculturative stress occurs forLatina/os as they spend more time within a host culture (Smart & Smart,1995); however, these Latinas did not differ in reported perception of educa-tional barriers, cultural fit, or psychological well-being based on their gener-ational level. Their use of different coping responses also did not differ basedon their generational level. These findings suggest that other factors such asself-efficacy (Torres & Solberg, 2001), time spent working while attendingcollege (García-Vázquez et al., 1998), or their level of ethnic identity mayhave more of an effect on their academic perceptions and well-being thandoes generational level. In that different generational levels were unequallyrepresented in the current study, additional research is needed to support thefindings.

Overall, the study’s findings challenge many of the myths and stereotypescommonly associated with Latinas in general (Niemann, 2001) and Latinastudents in higher education (Rodriguez et al., 2000). Contrary to the societaland educational myth that Latina/os do not value education (Kavanaugh &Retish, 1992), Latinas in this study valued their higher education and hadadvanced degree aspirations. Specifically, the Latinas had high academicmotivations for continued educational training with the majority expecting toearn a Ph.D. or Ed.D. Next, the Latinas did not take a fatalistic approach totheir perceived educational difficulties, as almost all of the Latinas were opti-mistic in believing that they could overcome any barriers to achieve their edu-cational goals. Finally, the Latinas were not passive in their approach to cop-ing, as all but 6 of the Latinas reported actively seeking out more informationabout the situation and took some planned, positive action. Casas andPonterotto (1984) described a similar Chicana undergraduate profile (e.g.,active learners who valued their education and whose actions were counter to


stereotypes), yet stereotypes and negative social (Niemann, 2001) andeducational (Rodriguez et al., 2000) perceptions of Latinas persist.

Although not all students reported using each of the coping responses andthe different responses were used with varying frequency, each copingresponse was used by the group as a whole. Consistent with previousresearch (Mena et al., 1987; Vázquez & García-Vázquez, 1995), the two mostfrequently used coping responses were talking with others about the problemand taking a positive, planned action. As per Mena et al.’s (1987) findings, thecoping response of taking a positive, planned action was found in high-stresssituations. In that Latinas have been identified as invisible within the univer-sity setting (Casas & Ponterotto, 1984; Rodriguez et al., 2000), and their per-sonal values are often in conflict with university values, this could realisti-cally be considered as stressful (Gloria & Rodriguez, 2000; Mena et al.,1987).

Similarly, it was the individual coping response of taking a positive,planned action that most strongly predicted psychological well-being of thecoping response variable cluster. That is, using a problem-focused responseto manage the situation accounted for positive and healthy functioning forLatina students. The focus on response actions may have positively influ-enced perceptions of oneself—a similar finding with Mexican Americanadolescent coping responses (Guinn & Vincent, 2002). Such positive percep-tions may, in part, explain Latina willingness to stay in a system where theyperceive barriers and experience cultural incongruity.

The most frequently used coping response of talking with others (friendsand relatives) about the problem is interesting given that most of the Latinasdid not have parents who attended college, and only half of them had siblingswho also attended college. This coping response challenges the notion thatLatina/o students do not talk with their families because they lack the infor-mational resources or experiential basis from which to provide academicadvice (Gloria & Segura-Herrera, 2004; Hernandez, 2000). This finding alsounderscores the need for the educational system to involve parents and fami-lies in Latina/o students’ higher education. It calls for student affairs profes-sionals (specifically, university counseling center counselors) to include par-ents and extended family members in student programming andinterventions. Doing so would consider that Latinas often look to their fami-lies when making life decisions (e.g., college attendance, long-term educa-tional attainment) as a function of their strong values for family andcommunity (Quevedo-García, 1987).

This study did not assess which relatives or family members with whomthe Latinas talked; however, mothers have been identified as a primary sourceof support for Latina college students (Gándara, 1982; Wycoff, 1996). As


such, investigations that address which family members are sought out as ameans for coping with educational difficulties and stresses is needed. Finally,previous research with racial and ethnic minority college students suggeststhat those who actively cope are better able to enlist the support of others (Zeaet al., 1995)—a finding also supported by the results of this study. Specifi-cally, Latinas who endorsed taking a planned, positive action also talked withothers about the problem (friends and relatives), sought professional advice,and sought support from members of their cultural group.

Important to note is that the coping response of drawing upon past experi-ences was the third most frequent response, which was reported by only 1less participant than the coping response of taking a planned, positive action.This finding is consistent with Vázquez and García-Vázquez’s (1995) researchin which drawing on past experiences was also the third most-identifiedresponse by Mexican American college students. The frequency of its use inVázquez and García-Vázquez’s research, however, was substantially lowerthan coping responses of a planned action and talking with others about theproblem. Furthermore, the response of drawing upon past experiences wasused primarily with lower stress situations (Mena et al., 1987). The fact thatmore than two thirds of the sample were upper division students who mostlikely had substantial past experiences from which to draw in comparison tolower division students may, in part, explain the findings. Although a non-significant difference for lower and upper division Latinas in their use of acoping response, it approached significance (p = .054). As such, additionalresearch is needed to either support or refute the current findings. Anotheraspect of this finding is that the response of drawing upon past experiences isan emotion-focused or avoidant response, which may help students ease thedistress experienced. That both a problem-focused (talking with others) andan emotional-focused (drawing on past experiences) response are used con-currently is also supported by previous literature (Carver & Scheier, 1994).Examining when and how Latina college students use problem- and emo-tion-focused coping responses warrants further investigation.

The two least frequently used coping responses were to not worry aboutthe problem and to seek professional advice, findings similar to earlierresearch (Mena et al., 1987; Vázquez & García-Vázquez, 1995). First,Latinas did not passively respond by not worrying but instead took a positive,planned action. Second, the least frequently identified coping response wasto seek out professional advice (39 disagreed, 35 strongly disagreed). ThatLatinas did not use the response of seeking out professional advice is not sur-prising given that many Latina/os do not discuss personal issues with personsoutside of their families (Santiago-Rivera, Arredondo, & Gallardo-Cooper,2002) and that racial and ethnic minority students tend to hold more negative


attitudes toward seeking professional psychological help than their Whitestudent counterparts (Gloria et al., 2001). In light of the finding that MexicanAmerican female college students expressed more positive help-seeking atti-tudes than their Latino counterparts (Sanchez & Atkinson, 1983), the num-ber of students whose coping response was to seek professional advice mayhave been higher than those of a comparable sample of Latinos from the sameuniversity. This finding is disconcerting given that racial and ethnic minoritystudents often have a greater prevalence of personal concerns than theirWhite counterparts due to environmental and situational stressors associatedwith being a cultural minority. Nevertheless, these students tend to useprofessional counseling services less (Leong, Wagner, & Tata, 1995).

Choosing not to seek professional services as a coping response under-scores how Latina students often rely on family for advice before seekingoutside resources for their educational goals (Gándara, 1982). It also directsstudent affairs professionals to provide programming and services that areconsidered useful and relevant to them as Latinas (gender and ethnicity)rather than relying on the services created by the university system (Cokley,1999; Watson et al., 2002). Unfortunately, students may also be unaware ofthe existence of campus counseling centers or other available resources(Kahn, Wood, & Wiesen, 1999) and might be more willing to seek out ser-vices if they were offered in a familiar setting (e.g., multicultural student cen-ter). For example, providing psychoeducational support groups in the resi-dence halls or after Latina/o-based organizational meetings would allowLatinas to learn from each other, gain support, and develop space where theycan create positive and planned actions for dealing with barriers, culturalincongruity, and well-being (Capello, 1994; Gloria & Castellanos, 2003).Promoting active coping responses may enhance students’ willingness andability to seek help (either from family or from student affairs professionals),which subsequently influences their college experience (Zea et al., 1995).

The context of the coping responses also warrants discussion. The percep-tion of educational barriers, both those that would influence withdrawing andthose that students would encounter if they stayed in school, did not directlyaccount for students’ well-being. Instead, both of the POB subscales wererelated to cultural congruity, which, in turn, significantly predicted well-being. The reasons that perception of barriers would not directly affect well-being remain speculative. Certainly, research has identified that MexicanAmerican females anticipate more educational barriers than males(McWhirter, 1997); however, the manner in which barriers affect psycholog-ical functioning needs further exploration. Variables such as self-efficacymay moderate one’s sense of well-being, as previous research has found thatstrong efficacy expectations lead to the experience of less physical and psy-


chological distress for Mexican American and Latino college students(Solberg & Villarreal, 1997).

In understanding educational barriers for Latinas, further studies areneeded, as intolerant university environments often discount culture therebyresulting in Latina students feeling unwelcomed, alienated (Cardoza, 1991),invisible (Rodriguez et al., 2000), and culturally incongruent (Gloria, 1997)as few mentors, limited financial resources, an abundance of cultural stereo-types, and familial and cultural expectations contribute to Latinas’ educa-tional experiences (Gloria & Rodriguez; 2000; Rodriguez et al., 2000).Assessing personal perspectives of educational barriers would assist studentaffairs professionals in understanding student needs and facilitate retentionefforts. Similarly, these findings highlight the need to create and maintain acampus climate for Latina students (and other racial and ethnic minorities)that is positive (Hurtado & Carter, 1997) and inclusive of all cultures.

Limitations of the Study

Several limitations warrant consideration. Given the nonrandom sam-pling method and cross-sectional approach of this study, generalizability islimited (Heppner, Kivlighan, & Wampold, 1992). Furthermore, that themajority of the study’s participants was of Mexican heritage and representsan educationally select group (Quintana et al., 1991), generalization of thefindings should be limited to Latinas of similar demography and ethnicity.Because Mexican Americans have the lowest college graduation rate whencompared to other Latina/o groups (Gloria & Segura-Herrera, 2004) andthere exist many differences between different Latina/o ethnic groups (Santi-ago-Rivera et al., 2002), identifying their specific needs in comparison toPuerto Rican or Cuban females is required to develop and implement ethnic-and gender-specific student programming. In addition to using standardizedmeasures of coping responses that are circumscribed, allowing students toidentify their coping systems and methods and differentiating types of cop-ing responses (e.g., problem focused and emotion focused) is warranted.Studies that examine the coping responses of Latinas with advanced (i.e.,college degrees) versus limited (e.g., less than a high school diploma) educa-tional training could establish data-reflected needs rather than unsupportedmyths or stereotypes for student affairs professionals working with Latinastudents (Lujan & Zapata, 1983). Similarly, research that examines ethnic-related active coping responses (e.g., maintaining a strong sense of one’s eth-nicity at school) may highlight the choices of coping responses for Latinaundergraduates. Such information would provide academic advisors, coun-


seling center staff, and administrators the means to assist Latinas towardcultural congruity and psychological well-being.

References

Aguirre, A., Jr., & Martinez, R. O. (1993). Chicanos in higher education: Issues and dilemmasfor the 21st century [ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 3]. Washington, DC:George Washington University, School of Education & Human Development.

Allen, W. R. (1992). The color of success: African-American college student outcomes at pre-dominantly White and historically Black public colleges and universities. Harvard Educa-tional Review, 62, 26-34.

Benjamin, D., Chambers, S., & Reiterman, G. (1993). A focus on American Indian college per-sistence. Journal of American Indian Education, 32, 25-40.

Capello, D. C. (1994). Beyond financial aid: Counseling Latina students. Journal of Multicul-tural Counseling and Development, 22, 28-36.

Cardoza, D. (1991). College attendance and persistence among Hispanic women: An examina-tion of some contributing factors. Sex Roles, 24, 133-147.

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. G. (1994). Situations coping and coping dispositions in a stressfultransaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 184-195.

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. G., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoreti-cally based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267-283.

Casas, J. M., & Ponterotto, J. G. (1984). Profiling an invisible minority in higher education: TheChicana. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 62, 349-353.

Cokley, K. (1999). Reconceptualizing the impact of college racial composition on AfricanAmerican students’ racial identity. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 235-246.

Constantine, M. G., Robinson, J. S., Wilton, L., & Caldwell, L. D. (2002). Collective self-esteemand perceived social support as predictors of cultural congruity among Black and Latino col-lege students. Journal of College Student Development, 43, 307-316.

Constantine, M. G., & Watt, S. K. (2002). Cultural congruity, womanist identity attitudes, andlife satisfaction among African American college women attending historically Black andpredominantly White institutions. Journal of College Student Development, 43, 184-194.

Cuadraz, G. H. (1996). Experiences of multiple marginality: A case study of Chicana “scholar-ship women.” In C. Turner, M. Garcia, A. Nora, & L. Rendón (Eds.), Racial and ethnic diver-sity in higher education (pp. 210-222). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster.

Gándara, P. (1982). Passing through the eye of the needle: High-achieving Chicanas. HispanicJournal of Behavioral Sciences, 4, 167-179.

Gándara, P., & Osugi, L. (1994). Educationally ambitious Chicanas. Thought & Action, 10, 7-35.García-Vázquez, E., Vásquez, L. A., & Huang, C. Y. (1998). Psychological factors and language:

Impact on Mexican-American students. College Student Journal, 32, 6-18.Gloria, A. M. (1997). Chicana academic persistence: Creating a university-based community.

Education & Urban Society, 30, 107-121.Gloria, A. M., & Castellanos, J. (2003). Latino/a and African American students at predomi-

nantly White institutions: A psychosociocultural perspective of educational interactions andacademic persistence. In J. Castellanos & L. Jones (Eds.), The majority in the minority:Retaining Latina/o faculty, administrators, and students (pp. 71-92). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Gloria, A. M., Castellanos, J., Lopez, A., & Rosales, R. (2005). An examination of academicnonpersistence decisions of Latino undergraduates. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sci-ences, 27,202-223 .


Gloria, A. M., Hird, J. S., & Navarro, R. L. (2001). Relationships of cultural congruity and per-ceptions of the university environment to help-seeking attitudes by sociorace and gender.Journal of College Student Development, 42, 545-562.

Gloria, A. M., & Ho, T. A. (2003). Environmental, social, and psychological experiences ofAsian American undergraduates: Examining issues of academic persistence. Journal ofCounseling and Development, 81, 93-105.

Gloria, A. M., & Pope-Davis, D. B. (1997). Cultural ambience: The importance of a culturallyaware environment in the training and education of counselors. In D. B. Pope-Davis &H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment, educationand training, and supervision (pp. 242-259). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gloria, A. M., & Robinson Kurpius, S. E. (1996). The validation of the Cultural Congruity Scaleand the University Environment Scale with Chicano/a students. Hispanic Journal of Behav-ioral Sciences, 18, 533-549.

Gloria, A. M., & Robinson Kurpius, S. E. (2001). Influences of self-beliefs, social support, andcomfort in the university environment on the academic persistence issues for AmericanIndian undergraduates. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 88-102.

Gloria, A. M., & Rodriguez, E. R. (2000). Counseling Latino university students: Psychosocio-cultural issues for consideration. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78, 145-154.

Gloria, A. M., & Segura-Herrera, T. M. (2004). Ambrocia and Omar go to college: A psycho-sociocultural examination of Chicanos and Chicanas in higher education. In R. J. Velasquez,B. McNeill, & L. Arellano (Eds.). Handbook of Chicana and Chicano psychology (pp. 401-425). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gossett, B. J., Cuyjet, M. J., & Cockriel, I. (1998). African Americans’perception of marginalityin the campus culture. College Student Journal, 32, 22-32.

Guinn, B., & Vincent, V. (2002). Determinants of coping responses among Mexican Americanadolescents. Journal of Social Health, 72, 152-156.

Heppner, P. P., Kivlighan, D. M., Jr., & Wampold, B. E. (1992). Research design in counseling.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Hernandez, J. (2000). Understanding the retention of Latino college students. Journal of CollegeStudent Development, 41, 575-588.

Huffman, T. E. (1991). The experiences, perceptions, and consequences of campus racismamong Northern Plains Indians. Journal of American Indian Education, 30, 25-34.

Hurtado, S. (1994). The institutional climate for talented Latino students. Research in HigherEducation, 35, 21-41.

Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campusracial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education, 70,324-345.

Kahn, J. S., Wood, A., & Wiesen, F. E. (1999). Student perceptions of college counseling centerservices: Programming and marketing for a seamless learning environment. Journal of Col-lege Student Psychotherapy, 14, 69-80.

Kavanaugh, P. C., & Retish, P. M. (1992). Myth: America’s public schools are educating Mexi-can American students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 20, 89-96.

Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.Leong, F. T. L., Wagner, N. S., & Tata, S. P. (1995). Racial and ethnic variation in help-seeking

attitudes. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbookof multicultural counseling (pp. 415-438). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lujan, S., & Zapata, J. T. (1983). Personality difference among Mexican-American collegefreshman. Journal of College Students Personnel, 24, 105-111.


McWhirter, E. H. (1997). Perceived barriers to education and career: Ethnic and gender differ-ences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50(1), 124-140.

Mena, F. J., Padilla, A. M., & Maldonado, M. (1987). Acculturative stress and specific copingstrategies among immigrant and later generation college students. Hispanic Journal ofBehavioral Sciences, 9, 207-225.

Murguía, M. (2001). Machismo, marianismo, and hembrismo, and their relationship to accultur-ation as predictors of psychological well-being in a Mexican and Chicano population.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1995). Findings from the Condition of Education1995: The educational progress of Hispanic students [NCES 95-767]. Washington, DC:Government Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Minorities in higher education [NCES 97-372].Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2000a). The condition of education 1999 [NCES 2000-009]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2000b). The condition of education 2000 [NCES 2000-062]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). The condition of education 2002 [NCES 2000-025]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Niemann, Y. F. (2001). Stereotypes about Chicanas and Chicanos: Implications for counseling.The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 55-90.

Pew Hispanic Center Fact Sheet. (2002). U.S.-born Hispanics increasingly drive populationdevelopments. Los Angeles: Annenburg School for Communication, University of SouthernCalifornia.

Ponterotto, J.G. (1990). Racial/ethnic minority and women students in higher education: A statusreport. New Directions for Student Services, 52, 45-59.

Quevedo-García, E. L. (1987). Facilitating the development of Hispanics college students. NewDirections for Student Services, 38, 49-63.

Quintana, S. M., & Maxwell, S. E. (1999). Implications of recent developments in structuralequation modeling for counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 27, 485-527.

Quintana, S. M., Vogel, M. C., & Ybarra, V. C. (1991). Meta-analysis of Latino students’adjust-ment in higher education. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13, 155-168.

Rodriguez, A. L., Guido-DiBrito, R., Torres, V., & Talbot, D. (2000). Latina college students:Issues and challenges for the 21st century. NASPA Journal, 37, 511-527.

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Exploration on the meaning of psychologi-cal well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1089-1081.

Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719-727.

Sailes, G. A. (1993). An investigation of Black student attrition at a large, predominantly White,Midwestern university. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 17, 179-182.

Sanchez, A. R., & Atkinson, D. R. (1983). Mexican-American cultural commitment, preferencefor counselor ethnicity, and willingness to use counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychol-ogy, 30, 215-220.

Santiago-Rivera, A. L., Arredondo, P., & Gallardo-Cooper, M. (2002). Counseling Latinos andla familía. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sidle, A., Moos, R., Adams, A., & Cady, P. (1969). Development of a coping scale: A preliminarystudy. Archives of General Psychiatry, 20, 226-232.

Smart, J. F., & Smart, D. W. (1995). Acculturative stress of Hispanics: Loss and challenges. Jour-nal of Counseling and Development, 73, 390-396.


Solberg, V. S., & Villareal, P. (1997). Examination of self-efficacy, social support, and stress aspredictors of psychological and physical distress among Hispanic college students. HispanicJournal of Behavioral Sciences, 19, 182-201.

Suzuki, B. H. (1994). Higher education issues in the Asian American community. In M. J. Justiz,R. Wilson, & L. J. Björk (Eds.), Minorities in higher education (pp. 258-285). Phoenix, AZ:Oryx.

Therrien, M., & Ramirez, R. R. (2000). The Hispanic population in the United States: March2000. Current population reports, P20-535. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

Torres, J. B., & Solberg, V. S (2001). Role of self-efficacy, stress, social integration, and familysupport in Latino college student persistence and health. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59,53-63.

Vasquez, M. J. T. (1982). Confronting barriers to the participation of Mexican American womenin higher education. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 4, 147-165.

Vázquez, L. A., & García-Vázquez, E. (1995). Variables of success and stress with MexicanAmerican students. College Student Journal, 29, 221-226.

Watson, L. W., Terrell, M. C., Wright, D. J., Bonner, F. A., II, Cuyjet, M. J., Gold, J. A., et al.(2002). How minority students experience college. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Wycoff, S. E. M. (1996). Academic performance of Mexican American women: Sources of sup-port that serve as motivating variables. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Develop-ment, 24, 146-155.

Young, G. (1992). Chicana college students on the Texas-Mexico border: Tradition and transfor-mation. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 14, 341-352.

Zea, C. M., Jarama, L., & Bianchi, F. T. (1995). Social support and psychosocial competence:Explaining the adaptation to college of ethnically diverse students. American Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 23, 509-531.

Alberta M. Gloria holds a doctorate in counseling psychology from Arizona State Uni-versity. She is currently a professor in the Department of Counseling Psychology and anadjunct faculty with the Chican@/Latin@ Studies Program at the University of Wiscon-sin–Madison. Her primary research interests include psychosociocultural factors forLatina/o and other racial/ethnic students in higher education and addressing issues ofcultural congruity, educational and social coping supports, and academic well-being. Anactive member of the American Psychological Association (APA), she is chair for theSection for Ethnic and Racial Diversity for Division 17 (Society of Counseling Psychol-ogy) and member-at-large for Division 45 (Psychological Study of Ethnic MinorityIssues). She received the 2002 Emerging Professional Award from Division 45 of the APAfor outstanding early career contributions in promoting ethnic minority issues in the fieldof psychology, and in 2003, she received the Kenneth and Mamie Clark Award from theAPA of Graduate Students for her contributions to the professional development of ethnicminority graduate students. She enjoys making cards; plinking the piano; being a tía toWilliam, Christopher, and Nathan; and taking weekend road trips with her partner, Jeff,and dog, Fenway.

Jeanett Castellanos is the director for the Social Science Academic Resource Center inthe School of Social Sciences at the University of California–Irvine. She is responsiblefor coordinating many functions within the Social Science Academic Resource Centerincluding the Social Science Internship Program, Post Baccalaureate Opportunities


Program, Research Liaison Program, and Graduate School Preparation Services. She isalso a lecturer for the Department of Social Sciences and the Chican@/Latin@ StudiesProgram. In addition, she has served as a consultant for various higher education institu-tions in the area of cultural competency. She holds a baccalaureate degree from the Uni-versity of California–Irvine and a master’s of education in counseling psychology and aPh.D. in education from Washington State University. She also completed a summerpostdoctoral fellowship at Indiana University–Bloomington. She is a member of theAmerican Psychological Association, actively participating in Division 17 (Society ofCounseling Psychology) as programming chair for the Section on Ethnic and RacialDiversity. She also serves as the student and professional development officer for both theNational Latina/o Psychological Association and the California Latina/o PsychologicalAssociation. She values her time with friends and family, writing poetry, going to Disney-land on the weekends, and attending cultural arts events.

Veronica Orozco received her B.A. in psychology from the University of California–Irvine in 2002. She is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in counseling psychology atOhio State University where she received her M.A. in psychology in 2004. She has taughtintroductory psychology for the past 2 years. Her research interests are aligned withissues that affect Latina/o populations, such as career aspirations of Mexican Americancollege women, coping strategies utilized by Latina/o students, and folk healing. She is anactive member of the National Latina/o Psychological Association and the AmericanPsychological Association, having presented research at their national conferences. Sheenjoys reading poetry by Pablo Neruda and Alfonsina Storni, spending time with familyand friends, and learning about other cultures.


Documents

Perceived Educational Barriers, Cultural Fit, Coping Responses