Minority Officers Recruitment and Retention PDF

Running head: MINORITY OFFICER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION i
Minority Reserve Officer Training Corps
Officer Candidate Recruitment and Retention: A Gap Analysis
Matthew W. Weaver
University of Southern California
A Dissertation Proposal Presented to the

FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
July 2016
Copyright 2015 Matthew W. Weaver

ProQuest Number: 10801150

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest 10801150

Published by ProQuest LLC (2018 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
MINORITY OFFICER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION
Acknowledgements
I’d like to start off by just taking a moment to publicly thank God. While I recognize that
for most, religion is a private matter, without Him I would not have been able to complete this
journey. When I prayed about what to do with my new-found passion for education the first
thing I heard God say was, “preparation time is never lost time.” These past two years have been
a crucible of preparation and I want to thank you for seeing me through it all.
Thank you to my dissertation chair and fellow Wolverine, Dr. Cathy Krop. Your ability
to teach, advise, mentor, instruct, guide, push and motivate was exactly what I needed to get me
through this process. I appreciate the way you helped me to maintain focus on what was
important in my dissertation and more importantly, in life. You kicked me in the butt when I
needed it but you also gave me room to breathe. I truly hope this is just the first of many
journey’s that we will take together. It has been an honor and pleasure working with you.
To the USC Rossier Global Ed.D. program faculty and staff, thank you for making me
feel and eventually believe that I belonged at Rossier. As the student with perhaps the most
“non-traditional” professional background, you always challenged and encouraged me to bring
my perspective, and for that I appreciate you. Thank you for the unparalleled logistical support,
intentional program design, flexibility to change things (for the better) on the fly and an undying
pursuit of excellence. I am confident that this program will be one of the most elite programs of
its kind in a very short time. I am proud to say that I am a USC and Rossier alumni. Fight On!
To my classmates, all I can say is you guys are amazing! Each of you have in one way or
another had a long-lasting effect on my life professional and personally. During the past two
years I have had to lean on several of you… a lot. With the birth of our twins and an unexpected
deployment, things could have been extremely difficult, but you guys never let me skip a beat.
Thank you for praying for me, checking on me and in many cases making sure I didn’t fall off
pace. “Thank you,” seems to be an inadequate offering for all that you have done, but in the
absence of a more fitting phrase… Thank you all!
To my father and mother, thank you for instilling in a burning desire for knowledge. Papa
you always say that children should be better than their parents. Thank you for teaching me that
and I hope to one day see that in my children. I appreciate your example of consistency, never
wavering in the face of the hard things and attacking life with a spirit of excellence. Mom, thank
you for your unconditional love and sacrifice. I know that you never got the chance to finish your
doctorate because motherhood and its responsibilities took precedence. However, this
dissertation and ultimately this degree is something that WE did. Without you all, and your love,
encouragement and sacrifice I would not be standing here today. I honor you mom and dad.
To my children Ava, Noah and Eli, if any of you for some reason find yourself reading
my dissertation at any point in your life, know that I did it with you in mind and in my heart. I
wanted to intentionally set the bar high. Not because I want you earn a doctorate degree but to
show you that when you are obedient to God’s word and follow His purpose for your life that He
will do exceedingly, abundantly above all that you can ask or think.
Finally, to my wife, my friend, my support and my help-meet Malaika. You are my
GOOD thing. Thank you for giving me space, love, encouragement to chase my dream. Thank
you for listening me when I wanted to “nerd out,” thank you for lifting me when I felt
discouraged. Thank you for pushing me when I didn’t want to go on. Thank you for focusing me
when life got crazy. You are the best wife on the face of the planet and I am a better man, father,
husband, brother, officer and now Doctor because of you!

Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
Introduction of the Problem of Practice ............................................................................................... 1
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................................... 3
Organizational Performance Status of AFROTC at USC .................................................................. 5
Related Literature .................................................................................................................................. 7
Importance of the Problem .................................................................................................................. 10
Organizational Performance Goal ...................................................................................................... 10
Organizational Stakeholders and Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ............................................. 11
Stakeholder for the Study .................................................................................................................... 13
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................................. 14
Methodological Framework................................................................................................................. 14
Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 15
Organization of the Study .................................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .......................................................... 17
Diversity in the Air Force .................................................................................................................... 17
Historical Perspective ......................................................................................................................... 17
Catalyst of Change in the Diversity Climate ...................................................................................... 20
Current Diversity Goals ..................................................................................................................... 20
Air Force Diversity Recruitment and Retention Programs and Initiatives .................................... 22
Air Force Mentoring Program ............................................................................................................ 23
Air Force Diversity Committee (AFDC)............................................................................................ 24
AFROTC Specific Recruiting and Retention Efforts ......................................................................... 24
USAFA Recruitment and Retention Programs .................................................................................. 27
Recruitment and Retention in Post-Secondary Education.................................................................. 29
History and Trends of Retention in Post-Secondary Education ......................................................... 30
Models of Student Recruitment and Retention .................................................................................. 32
Current Retention Program Model at an Institution of Higher Education ......................................... 35
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Issues Related to Recruitment and Retention in Post-
Secondary Education............................................................................................................................ 38
Socio-demographic/Economic Issues................................................................................................. 38
Student Knowledge Issues ................................................................................................................. 39
Student Motivation Issues .................................................................................................................. 40
Organization and Institutional Culture Issues .................................................................................... 41
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 42
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 43
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................................. 43
Methodological Framework................................................................................................................. 44
Assumed Performance Causes............................................................................................................. 45
Preliminary Scanning Data................................................................................................................. 46
Learning and Motivation Theory ........................................................................................................ 48
Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 52
Data Collection...................................................................................................................................... 54
Surveys ............................................................................................................................................... 55
Interviews ........................................................................................................................................... 56
Document Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 56

Validation of the Performance Issues ................................................................................................. 57
Data Analysis......................................................................................................................................... 59
Trustworthiness of Data ....................................................................................................................... 59
Role of Investigator .............................................................................................................................. 60
Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................................. 61
Limitations ......................................................................................................................................... 61
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ............................................................................. 63
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes ..................................................................................... 63
Basic Knowledge and Understanding of Benchmarks and Critical Milestones ................................. 64
Cadets Knowledge or Skills to Navigate Multiple Demands ............................................................. 68
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes ................................................................ 70
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes...................................................................................... 70
Cadets’ Understanding/Recognition of USAF Graduation/Commission Value ................................ 74
Active Choice to Stay Actively Involved Due to Lack of Individual Valuation ................................ 75
Lack of Motivation to Strengthen Decision Making Abilities and Persistence ................................. 77
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Causes ................................................................. 81
Results and Findings for Organizational Causes ............................................................................... 81
No Formal Mentorship/Retention Program(s) ................................................................................... 82
Detachment Environment Viewed as “Too Competitive” by Cadets................................................. 85
Low Representation of Ethnically Similar Role Models for Cadets .................................................. 86
Lack of Organizational Value on Cultural Settings ........................................................................... 88
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Organization Causes .............................................................. 92
CHAPTER FIVE: SOLUTIONS, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION ................. 93
Validated Needs Selection and Rationale ........................................................................................... 94
Solutions ................................................................................................................................................ 95
Solution 1: Capitalize on Established AF Accessions Recruitment and Retention Programs ....... 96
USAFA Falcon Visit Program (FVP) ................................................................................................ 97
Gold Bar Recruiting Program ............................................................................................................ 98
Solution 2: Provide Recruitment and Retention Training for Cadre ............................................ 100
Solution 3: Develop a “Cadet/Active Duty/Student Veteran” Mentorship Program…………... 102
Implementation Plan .......................................................................................................................... 104
Organizational Features Relevant to Implementation ...................................................................... 104
Key Implementation Action Steps ................................................................................................... 106
Human Resource Needs for Implementation ................................................................................... 106
Implementation Strategy .................................................................................................................. 107
Evaluation Plan ................................................................................................................................... 109
Level 1: Reactions ............................................................................................................................ 110
Level 2: Learning ............................................................................................................................. 111
Level 4: Results and Impact ............................................................................................................. 113
Limitations .......................................................................................................................................... 113
Future Research ................................................................................................................................ 114
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 115
References ........................................................................................................................................... 117
APPENDIX A – Survey Questions .................................................................................................... 128
APPENDIX B - Interview Questions ................................................................................................ 131
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: 2014 Ethnic Demographic Data for United States (USAF, AFROTC) 1
Table 2: AFROTC Enrolled and Commissioned, 2014 6
Table 3: AFROTC Mission, Goal of Case Study and Stakeholders 13
Table 4: Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation and 52

Organizational Issues
Table 5: Methods for Validation of Assumed Causes 58
Table 6: Assumed Knowledge Causes Validated and Not Validated 64
Table 7: Assumed Motivational Causes Validated and Not Validated 73
Table 8: Assumed Organizational Causes Validated and Not Validated 82
Table 9: Summary of Validated Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and 94

Organizational Causes
Table 10: Proposed Implementation Strategy for Solutions #1 and #2 107
Table 11: Proposed Implementation Strategy for Solution #3 108

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Tinto’s Conceptual Schema for Departure from College (Tinto, 1975) 33
Figure 2: Cadet Programmatic Knowledge 65
Figure 3: Knowledge and skills to navigate multiple demands. 68
Figure 4: Chart of responses to choices from the survey for interviewee

decision to join AFROTC. 71
Figure 5: Confidence in time management skills. 79
Figure 6: Confidence in study habits to graduation. 80
Figure 7: Formal mentorship to meet the needs of cadets. 83
Figure 6: Ethnically similar role models in detachment. 87
Figure 9: Organization ethnicity valuation. 88
Figure 10: Organization individual ethnicity valuation 89
Figure 11: Ethnic distribution of Det. 60 from survey 91
Figure 12: Overlay of Tinto’s Model of Student Departure and gap analysis framework 95
Abstract
This case study examined the knowledge, motivation and organizational factors that contribute to
the low recruitment and retention of minority Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps cadets in
Detachment 60 at the University of Southern California, using Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis framework. Assumed causes were developed through both literature review and
personal experience. Through the implementation of surveys and interviews data was collected
to ascertain the specific factors that contribute to the identified gap. Six of the ten assumed
causes were validated by the study. Chapter 5 presents comprehensive strategies and
implementation plans for addressing the evidenced knowledge, motivation and organization
needs. More specifically, the three suggested solutions are: 1) Capitalize on established Air
Force accessions recruitment and retention programs 2) Provide recruitment a retention training
for all cadre 3) Develop and establish a “cadet/Active Duty/student-veteran” mentorship
program. The paper concludes with a detailed framework for evaluation to continuously
ascertain the progress and overall impact of the solutions that were proposed.
MINORITY OFFICER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION 1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
The report “United States National Military Strategy” makes this statement about the
demographic make-up of the U.S. military, "An all-volunteer force must represent the country it
defends. We will strengthen our commitment to the values of diversity and inclusivity...” (United
States Department of Defense, 2011, p. 17). Despite commitments from military leadership that
reach even the Commander-In-Chief, the U.S. Air Force has not reached the stated diversity goal
of ethnic parity. This is evidenced by the comparison of ethnic demographic data reported by
U.S. Census Bureau (2013), United States Air Force (USAF) Personnel Center (2014), Air Force
Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) Headquarters (2014), and University of Southern
California (USC) AFROTC Detachment 60 (2014).
Table 1: Ethnic Demographic Data for United States, United States Air Force, Air Force
Reserve Officer Training Corps and Univ. of Southern California AFROTC Det. 60, 2014
Org Total Caucasian African- Hispanic Asian Nat. Native Other
American Amer Hawi/OPI
US (2014) 316M 62.6% 13.2% 17.1% 1.2% 1.2% 0.2% 2.4%
Active 65021 82% 6% 3% 4% 0.4% 0.4% 4.2%
Duty AF
Officers
AFROTC 14,419 69.3% 9.5% 11.5% 7.9% 0.9% 0.9 5.4%
USC 42 31% 4.8% 16.6% 31% N/A N/A 16.6%
AFROTC
Sources: US Census Bureau (2013), USAF Personnel Center (2014), AFROTC HQ (2014),
USCAFROTC (2014)
The U.S. Air Force’s representation of ethnic minorities, including African-Americans,
Hispanics and Native Americans, within the active duty officer ranks is lower than the U.S.
general population. Although current representation of different ethnicities enrolled in all of the
nation’s Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC), and more specifically in the
University of Southern California (USC) AFROTC Detachment 60 (Det. 60), is not as low as the
representation in the active duty officer ranks of the Air Force, there remains a significant gap
between the current representation for ethnic minorities versus that of the U.S. general
population.
The low retention rate of minority officer candidates in AFROTC contributes to the
larger problem of the military not reaching the stated organizational performance goal of
maintaining a military that reflects the racial make-up of the country. This area of performance
can also be closely correlated to other significant organizational issues, such as retention of
minorities in all military commissioning sources as well as retention of minority students in
higher education. In 2012, the U.S. Department of Education’s “National Center for Education
Statistics” published a report titled, “The Condition of Education”, documenting the number of
degrees conferred to U.S. residents by degree-granting institutions by race and ethnicity:
Caucasian 72.9%, African-American 10.3%, Hispanic 8.8%, Asian-Pacific Islander 7.3%, and
American-Indian/Alaskan Native 0.8% (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012). Failure
to achieve the stated diversity goal has a significant impact on not only the USC AFROTC
program, one of the approximately 1,100 AFROTC programs or “Detachments” in colleges and
universities across the country, but also the Air Force as a whole. Educational research shows
that environments with unevenly skewed distributions of students have a substantial effect on
social interactions. Campuses with large numbers of white students give few chances for
interaction across race/ethnicity hurdles and decrease student learning opportunities with socio-
culturally diverse groups (Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen, 1998). The same
phenomenon can happen when extrapolated into the AFROTC cadet environment, which is a
subset of the larger college student demographic. Furthermore, this failure will only continue to
produce an ethnically monolithic leadership ultimately responsible for the defense of the United
States on a world stage that is becoming more and more culturally diverse.
Organizational Context and Mission
The United States Air Force (USAF) was founded on September 14, 1947 with the
mission, “to fly, fight and win … in air, space and cyberspace” (United States Air Force, para 1).
Headquartered in Washington, D.C, the USAF consists of three separate components: Active
Duty, the Air Force Reserves, and the Air National Guard. Currently, there are approximately
320,000 active duty members spanning the globe. Of those, approximately 60,477 or
approximately 19.9% are officers. The three different paths to becoming an officer in the United
States Air Force are graduation and commission from: a) the United States Air Force Academy;
b) an AFROTC program at a civilian college or university; and c) the Officer Training Program.
The common path for these commissioning sources is a candidate must first earn a bachelor’s
degree, and then complete all commissioning requirements.
Of the three commissioning paths, AFROTC is the most popular. Commissioning over
42%, AFROTC produces the largest number of commissioned officers each year (United States
Air Force Personnel Center, 2014). The University of Southern California AFROTC Det. 60
specifically will serve as the research base for this dissertation given the author’s prior
experience as an AFROTC instructor and current proximity to the University of Southern
California.
Captain Aldridge Partridge, a West Point graduate, developed a system of education that
combined civilian and military studies with the goal of producing enlightened citizen-soldiers
(United States Army Cadet Command, 2014). The “Morrill Act”, also commonly known as the
Land-Grant Act of 1862, actually marked the unofficial beginning of ROTC as we know it today,
and provided free land from the U.S. Government in exchange for an agreement from civilian
colleges to offer military instruction to their students (Bruck, 1968). In 1916, President Woodrow
Wilson signed the “National Defense Act” that officially recognized the Army Reserve Officer
Training Corps.
Three decades later in 1948, ROTC experienced a large influx of cadets after the
“Selective Service Act” was enacted. With the hopes of serving their nation and steering their
futures, thousands of draft eligible young men voluntarily signed up for ROTC programs at their
respective colleges. While these were two significant milestones in the history of ROTC, one of
the most important moments in ROTC’s history came in 1964 with the “Vitalization Act”. This
act established Junior ROTC units at high schools around the United States and allocated federal
funding in the form of scholarships to attract highly qualified men and women to ROTC (United
States Army Cadet Command, 2014).
Today, approximately 14,000 cadets are enrolled in AFROTC at over 1,100 colleges and
universities across the U.S. The mission of AFROTC is to “develop quality leaders for the Air
Force” (United States Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps, 2014). The current ethnic
composition of AFROTC nationwide is as follows: 69.3% Caucasian, 9.5% African-American,
11.5% Hispanic, and 7.9% Asian. Comparatively the current ethnic make-up of the AFROTC
cadet corps at the University of Southern California is as follows: 31% Caucasian, 4.8% African-
American, 16.61% Hispanic, 31% Asian and then 1% for both Native Americans and Native
Hawaiians respectively. While USC is more diverse than most AFROTC programs, gaps in
diversity remain. Historically the Air Force, AFROTC, and the individual AFROTC Detachment
at any college or university have demonstrated a very rich and diverse history; nevertheless, none
has truly reflected the ethnic demographics that are comparable to population of the United
States ethnic demographics. If this issue is not addressed, AFROTC Detachment 60 at USC, as
well as the Air Force and AFROTC more generally, will remain ethnically undiversified, which
has existed for years.
Organizational Performance Status of AFROTC at USC
The organizational performance problem for this study is a lack of effective recruitment
and retention of minority AFROTC officer candidates at The University of Southern California,
AFROTC Detachment 60. This gap in the recruitment and retention of minority officer
candidates directly affects the number of minority candidates who successfully earn a
commission to the active duty USAF. Furthermore, it also directly affects the stated National
Defense Strategy goal of maintaining a military that is reflective of the ethnic demographic of
the nation at large.
In order to reach the goal of a military that is ethnically reflective of the country it serves,
the Department of Defense (DoD) and more specifically the Air Force will have to significantly
improve and increase both its recruiting and retention efforts as it relates to ethnic minorities. For
example, as shown in Table 2, in 2014, AFROTC did not recruit or retain (as evidenced by
commissioning percentages) a cadet force that represented the ethnic demographics of the
country.
One specific example of the ethnicity gap that exists is that between the percentage of
African-Americans in the U.S. population as compared to African-Americans represented in
AFROTC and more specifically Det. 60. While African-Americans represented 13.2% of the
U.S. population in 2014, they represented only 9.5% of AFROTC. Moreover, AFROTC’s ethnic
demographic trends have held almost steady over the past six years and show no significant signs
of improvement (United States Air Force Personnel Center, 2014). Amongst African-Americans
(and a few other demographics) this trend continues, as can be seen in Table 2, Det. 60’s is only
comprised of 2.8% African-Americans resulting in zero commissioned officers.
Table 2: AFROTC Enrolled and Commissioned, 2014
African- Native Native Other

Category Total Caucasian Hispanic Asian
American Amer Hawi/OPI or N/A
2014 US 316M 62.60% 13.30% 17.10% 1.20% 1.20% 0.20% 2.40%
Population
2014 AFROTC 14,41
69.30% 9.50% 11.50% 7.90% 0.90% 0.90% 5.40%
Enrolled 9
2014 AFROTC
1340 78.1% 5.1% 7.4% 5.5% 0.4% 0.97% 3.1%
Commissioned *
2016 USC 35 25.70% 2.80% 17.10% 40% N/A N/A 14.50%
AFROTC
Enrolled
2016 USC
AFROTC 9 44.40% 0 11.10% 22.20% N/A N/A 22/2%
Commissioned
Sources: US Census Bureau (2013), USAF Personnel Center (2014, 2016), AFROTC/HQ
(2014), USC AFROTC (2014). (Note: 89 people declined to answer the demographic question(s)
on the 2014 AFROTC Commissioned officer census)
Again, the focus of this case study will be ascertaining the reasons why there currently
exists disproportionately low number of minority (non-White) officer candidates who start in the
USC AFROTC versus those who finish the program as compared to non-minorities (Whites).
Nationally AFROTC commissions 42.7% of all new Air Force officers each year (United States
Air Force Personnel Center, 2014). Comparatively, the next closest source, the Air Force
Academy, which produces about 22.8% per year, is about half the rate of the AFROTC. While
USC AFROTCs ethnic representation is not as poor as AFROTC at-large, there are still
significant gaps.
Failure of the AFROTC at USC to recruit and retain minority officer candidates will
result in a significant contribution to the United States Air Force’s continued low representation
of minority officers. More importantly, this trend has the insidious potential of producing a
homogenized leadership structure and organizational culture in a world that is becoming
increasingly diverse.
Related Literature
Statistics show that over the past five years the rates of ethnic minorities commissioning
into the Air Force as active duty officers has remained consistent (United States Air Force
Personnel Center, 2014). Several other studies have also suggested that there is still an
overwhelming need to increase the retention rates of minority cadets in AFROTC and the Air
Force as a whole:
The Armed Forces have not yet succeeded in developing a continuing stream of
leaders who are as diverse as the Nation they serve. Racial/ethnic minorities and
women still lag behind non-Hispanic white men in terms of representative
percentage of military leadership positions held (Military Leadership Diversity
Commission, 2011, vii).
This problem is directly related to the larger problem of minority student participation in post-
secondary education. Collegiate graduation rates among most minority demographic groups,
especially when compared to white students, are low (Carey, 2008). In 2012, the National Center
for Education Statistics reported the distribution of bachelor’s degrees earned from degree
granting institutions in 2010 to be as follows: Whites, 72.9% African-Americans 10.3%,
Hispanics 8.8%, Asian/Pacific Islander 7.3% and American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.8%
(National Center for Education Statistics website, 2012). Again, compared to the ethic
construction of the United States, all minority ethnicities are underrepresented when it comes to
degree confirmation. To effectively address the issue of minority cadet retention, the problem
cannot be decoupled from the larger problem of minorities’ representation and retention at the
collegiate level.
The minority retention problem is complex. Research shows that there are a number of
factors that play a significant role in collegiate student success and retention. Among those
factors are personal attributes (motivation, prior achievement, and intellectual acumen),
demographic attributes, socio-cultural attributes (socio-economic status and ethnic background),
institutional attributes (campus logistics, regional location, selectivity, control, curriculum, and
enrollment), and, institutional climate (student-faculty interaction, student activities, commuter
or residential campus) (Zamani, 2000; Tinto, 1987, 2006; Hurtado, 1994; Hurtado & Carter,
1996; Rendón, Jalomo, & Nora, 2000). Furthermore, Heisserer and Parette (2002) analyzed
research related to college student success and retention noting that “retention and matriculation
are positively impacted by substantial contact with a person of significance within an institution
of higher education and that it is a critical component in a student’s the decision to stay in
school” (p. 69). Thus, to close the long-standing gap between minority and non-minority
retention in institutions of higher education there needs to be a multi-dimensional approach.
The 2009 Rand Corporation study discussed the specifics of minority AFROTC cadet
retention. It found that in order to increase representation in higher officer ranks in the future,
AFROTC should take two proactive steps:
1. Seek to bring the quality (qualifications of individuals) of minority accessions up to
parity with majority accessions.
2. Encourage minorities to enter operational career fields in much higher proportions
(Lim, Marquis, Curry Hall, Schulker, & Zhuo, 2009).

These findings suggest possible courses of action related to student support and mentorship to
address minority AFROTC cadet retention.
In 2011 there was a study commissioned by the United States Air Force and conducted
by the Rand Corporation titled, “Air Force Diversity at the Cadet Level.” In this study
researchers found that the female gender and racially ethnic minority cadet experience is
negatively affected if the individual is one of a few similar cadets (Cox, Gonzalez, Johnson,
Hanser, & Mariano, 2011). The study recommended that the USAF should focus their efforts
towards the improvement of both minority and female cadet retention; however, they did not
include in the recommendations ways to accomplish this goal.
In order to effectively combat low retention rates among minorities in AFROTC and at
the greater collegiate level, research suggests that several strategic and targeted intervention
strategies are needed. Braxton et al. (2013), along with other literature to be presented later in
chapter two, addressed the issue of retention in great depth asserting that there are three key steps
higher education institutions need to take to improve retention within ethnic minority
communities: a) maintain “critical mass” enrollment; b) consciously create an environment for
diverse students via programs, events and other visible efforts; and c) ensure the institution
adopts a culture of student affirmation and incorporation. These steps incorporate Tierney’s
(1997) intervention model for at-risk students that, “emphasizes affirming students’ identities
and feeling incorporated (not assimilated) into their college environments” (Braxton et al., 2013).
This holistic approach is applicable to retaining both minority cadets and minority
students at large. Monolithic approaches, such as individualized programs, annual symposiums
or creation of ad-hoc committees may produce short-term benefits, but will not resolve the
underlying problem of low retention rates of minority candidates. Successful retention programs
require supportive institutional leadership, an openness to be a change agent on campus, and a
thoughtful planning effort. Swail (2003) found in his study of minority students in higher
education, if any of these facets is missing from retention programs, chances for success are
greatly reduced.
Importance of the Problem
The problem of minority cadet retention in USC’s AFROTC is important to solve for a variety of
reasons. First, it negatively affects the ability of the United States military to meet the stated goal
of maintaining a military that reflects the racial and ethnic diversity of the nation, a quality that it
deems a “military necessity” (Air Force Instruction [AFI] 36-7001, 2012). Second, this lack of
retention leads to lower percentages of minority officers in senior leadership positions in the
United States military. Lastly, it parallels the larger problem of retention of minorities in post-
secondary education as a whole. If AFROTC and the military do not make deliberate and
systematic changes to retain minority cadets and officers, the status quo will remain.
Organizational Performance Goal
The organizational performance goal for diversity, set by the National Military Strategy
and signed by President Barak Obama, is that "an all-volunteer force must represent the country
it defends. We will strengthen our commitment to the values of diversity and inclusivity...” (The
National Military Strategy of the United States of America, 2011, p. 17). More explicitly, the
overarching goal is to have a military that mirrors the racial and ethnic composition of the United
States. This distribution has been a goal of the U.S. military since 2011. The organizational
performance goal for USC’s AFROTC Det. 60 is to raise the recruitment and retention rates of
minority cadets such that they graduate and commission within 4-5 years of entering at the same
rate as non-minority students by May 2021.

Organizational Stakeholders and Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
The stakeholders in AFROTC at USC include the cadets, the cadre (administrators,
instructors and detachment commanders) and AFROTC Headquarters who serve as the policy
makers. Each stakeholder serves a unique and significant role in the lifecycle of a cadet and their
matriculation through the AFROTC program.
Among the stakeholders, the cadet plays a significant role. A cadet is a young man or
woman (usually 18-24 years old) seeking to complete the AFROTC program and earn a
commission as an officer in the United States Air Force upon graduation. A commission is
attained through successful completion of all AFROTC program requirements including passing:
fitness tests, health screenings, aptitude batteries, field training, and academic institutional
requirements to earn a bachelor’s degree from an accredited four-year college or university.
There are several significant responsibilities that a cadet has during their career. They are
expected to meet with the assigned cadre member on a regular basis (at least once each semester)
to ensure graduation and earning a commission. In addition, the assigned institutional academic
advisor monitors through regular meetings the academic progress according to the academic plan
as prescribed by the cadre member. There are mandatory cadet-related events including
AFROTC classes, leadership laboratories, as well as, traditional academic classes. The demands
placed on an AFROTC cadet are high due to the nature of the profession when compared to the
traditional student.
The detachment administrators are seasoned, enlisted, active duty Air Force members
who assist and guide the cadets through all administrative processes including things like
program registration, uniform distribution and administrative actions. Due to their wealth of
knowledge about the active duty Air Force, the administrators are an excellent resource for the
cadets throughout their cadet life and in some cases they even serve as advisors and mentors well
after a cadet has commissioned.
The detachment instructors play an integral role within the AFROTC program. While
they serve in several capacities within the detachment and the institutions at which they serve,
their primary responsibility is military instruction within the program. Over the four years it
takes to complete the AFROTC program, instructors will teach their cadets military concepts not
provided in the traditional academic setting such as military structure, drill and ceremonies,
military history, principles in leadership, issue surrounding regional military affairs, effective
decision making and conflict management. More than any other stakeholder, the cadre spends
the most time with the cadets.
The detachment commander provides the vision for the detachment, is directly
responsible for every cadet with the ultimate goal of getting that cadet to meet all standards to
earn a commission in the U.S. Air Force as an officer. The detachment commander provides
guidance on all official orders, correspondence from AFROTC Headquarters and approves all
significant actions during a cadet’s tenure in order to fulfill their mission of developing quality
leaders for the Air Force.
Finally, AFROTC Headquarters (HQ) serves as governing body of the AFROTC
program. Guided by the operational needs of the Air Force, AFROTC develops strategic and
organizational plans, drafts organizational policy and liaises with both Air Force Officer
Accessions and the greater Air Force at-large. With the primary goal of producing officers and
leaders for the Air Force, AFROTC sets the operational tempo at which all regions and
detachments work. While the commander of each detachment wields a significant amount of
influence in the life of a cadet and in the detachment they command, this is subject to the
scrutiny and direction of AFROTC HQ. A description of the basic tenants of AFROTC is
depicted in Table 3, including the AFROTC mission, the organizational goal established for this
study, as well as the stakeholder goals to meet that larger organizational goal.
Table 3: Air Force ROTC Mission, Goal of Case Study and Stakeholders
AFROTC Mission
The mission of AFROTC is to develop quality leaders for the Air Force
Organizational Goal
By May 2021 USC’s AFROTC will have retention rates of minority students such that they
graduate and commission within 4-5 years of entering at the same rate as non-minority
students.
Cadets Cadre AFROTC HQ
By May 2020, all Air Force By January 2017, instructors By January 2019, Air Force
minority ROTC students at at Detachment 60 will ROTC leadership will enact
USC will be on track to institute a cadet-mentor policies that directly address
complete all tasks necessary relationship between all the retention of minority
to successfully graduate and minority cadets and either students in all of its
commission based on a five active duty members or commissioning sources.
year academic plan. Student-Veterans at USC.
Stakeholder for the Study
The minority cadets at USC in Det. 60 are the stakeholders that will be the primary focus
of this study. The dissertation will focus on the knowledge, motivation and organizational
(KMO) causes that are barriers to retention and recruitment of minority cadets in AFROTC at
USC. The cadets have been chosen as the central focus of this dissertation because it is important
to assess the barriers and needs that minority students have in completing AFROTC so that both
USC and AFROTC leadership can be made aware of these challenges and address them.
As mentioned earlier, AFROTC is just one of three pathways to earning a commission as
an officer in the USAF. Given the fact that AFROTC is the largest commissioning source, it is
vitally important that AFROTC take greater strides to recruit and retain greater percentages of
minority cadets. Currently, 42% of USC’s minority AFROTC cadets graduate and commission
within five years of entering, as compared with 80% of non-minority AFROTC cadets. The
performance gap, therefore, is 38%.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to conduct a gap analysis to examine the causes of the low
retention rate of minority cadets in AFROTC at USC by focusing on causes of low retention due
to assumed gaps in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational issues of the
minority cadets. After constructing a comprehensive list of assumed causes, the analysis will
examine the results to systematically identify the causes that prove to be substantiated and
validated from the gap analysis. While a complete analysis would focus on all stakeholders, this
analysis will focus on the AFROTC cadets at USC as stakeholders. The questions for the gap
analysis are:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational issues preventing AFROTC
minority cadets at USC to be eligible to graduate and commission within 4 - 5 years of
entering the Detachment 60?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to
address these causes?
Methodological Framework
A mixed method approach will be utilized to gather and analyze data related to the study
of minority AFROTC cadets at USC. The primary focus of the approach will be to ascertain their
related knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences as it relates to their retention in the
program. The cadets will be studied using interviews, surveys, and descriptive statistics.
Definitions
AFROTC: Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps. AFROTC is a 4 to 5-year program (based
on academic major) designed to prepare young men and women to become officers in the United
States Air Force. The program sets standards that, when met, will qualify a cadet to become a
commissioned officer in the United States Air Force.
Cadet: a student who is enrolled in the AFROTC program at a college or university and actively
pursuing a commission in the United States Air Force upon successful completion of all
necessary requirements. (Note: A student can be enrolled in AFROTC classes and not hold the
classification of cadet. These are usually students who are simply taking the course(s) for
academic credit as a traditional student.)
Cadre: The collective group of officers and enlisted members who work in a detachment. They
serve in roles such as Commander, administrators, instructors, curriculum/academic advisors,
guidance counselors, career counselors and student auxiliary group advisors.
Commission: An order signed by the Commander-in-Chief appointing a man or woman, in this
case a cadet, to a particular office. For the purposes of this dissertation cadets seek to earn a
commission as a 2nd Lieutenant upon graduation and completion of all AFROTC requirements
Detachment: Nomenclature that refers to the collective group of cadets and cadre at a specific
institution
Enlistment: the period of time for which one is committed to military service. Officers have
indefinite enlistment periods whereas the standard enlistment period for a Non-commissioned
officer (enlisted member) is four or six year period which can be renewed
Officer: An officer the United States armed services whose rank is confirmed by a government
document (a commission). Commissioned officers Unites States Air Force are those of the rank
of Second Lieutenant and above
Minority: non-white, of an ethnicity other than Caucasian.
Organization of the Study
Five chapters are used to organize this study. Chapter One provides the key concepts and
terminology commonly found in a discussion about minority cadet retention in AFROTC, while
identifying the need for improvement in the area of retention as it relates to meeting the overall
stated goal as outlined in the National Defense Strategy. In addition, the missions of both the
USAF and AFROTC, and their interdependent relationship, along with the specific stakeholders
of Det. 60 at USC who have an invested interest in the fulfillment of those missions, are
described. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature related to the scope of the study.
Topics of diversity in the US Air Force, Air Force and AFROTC diversity recruitment and
retention programs and efforts, general recruitment and retention of minorities in higher
education, as well as, successful recruitment and retention strategies will be discussed. Chapter
Three details the assumed causes for this study, as well as, methodology as it relates to choice of
participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are assessed and
analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions based on data and literature, recommendations for
improvement and implementation, as well as, an evaluation plan.

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Diversity in the Air Force
Compared to the stated goal of the U.S. Air Force of equitable representation of the U. S.
population, diversity among the officer ranks in the Air Force falls notably short. Officers who
identify themselves as “White” make up the largest percentage of Active Duty Officers (82%).
Comparatively, officers who report themselves as Black or African-American make up 6%,
Hispanic or Latino 3%, followed by Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander who make up 4%, 0.4%, and 0.4% respectively (U.S. Department of
Defense, 2014). This deviates significantly from the last U.S. Census data that reports the
following demographic figures for the U.S. population: 62.6% White, 13.2 % African-American;
17.7% Hispanic or Latino; 1.2% Asian; and 1.2% American Indian/Alaskan Native (United
States Census Bureau, 2013).
Historical Perspective
To fully comprehend the seriousness of the minority recruitment and retention gap
present in AFROTC today, having proper historical context is critical. Today’s armed forces, and
more specifically the USAF, is extremely vocal about the premium it places on diversity and
purposed diversity inclusion. Nevertheless, the road to equitable diversity has been a long one
and the Air Force has yet to reach its stated goals.
During the late 1930’s and early1940’s, the Army and Army Air Forces (AAF, precursor
to the Air Force) severely limited or in many cases fully excluded active duty service by
minorities, especially African-American (Osur, 1981).
The rationale for those policies that supported this type of exclusion has been consistent
throughout the U.S. military. In short, racial prejudice and the military’s concept of efficiency
were inextricably tied. In a 1940 letter to Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., Army Chief of Staff
General George C. Marshall conveyed his belief that societal conditions made it necessary for
the War Department to uphold a policy of segregation, and that the military should continue with
the status quo without offering Blacks any concessions beyond those they had in civilian life.
Furthermore, he avowed that any change would have a damaging effect on military efficiency, as
the military was not the “proper vehicle for critical social experiments.” Finally, in later
correspondence he continued to maintain, "Experiments within the Army in the solution of social
problems are fraught with danger to efficiency, discipline, or morale" (Ousr, 1981).
One salient and tangible example of this pervasive segregation was in the Army. In the
late 1930’s, in response to heavy political pressure from Congress, the Army finally permitted
four Black regiments to serve in the active force. This token force amounted to 3,640 men of a
total Army strength of 189,839, which represented 2%. During a time when officers made up
approximately 10% of the total force across all services, there were only five Black officers in
the entire military; three were chaplains and two were father and son, then Colonel Benjamin O.
Davis, Sr., and Lieutenant Benjamin O. Davis, Jr. (Foner, 1974, p. 131). Comparatively, the
Army Air Forces’ (AAF) record was even poorer than that of the general Army. The policies of
the Marine Corps followed suit with those of the AAF, and of the Navy’s 19,477 commissioned
and warrant officers in the Navy in the mid 1940’s, none were Black (Osur, 1981).
In 1947, the United States Air Force became its own independent military branch,
breaking away from the Army Air Forces. However, it still faced the same diversity challenges.
In 1948, in response to the delegates at the Democratic National Convention calling for civil
rights initiatives that included desegregation of the armed forces, President Truman acted and
issued Executive Order No. 9981 on July 26. With that order, Truman abolished racial
discrimination in the United States Armed Forces (Truman, 1947). The order affirmed, "It is
hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and
opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or
national origin" (Truman, 1947). In addition, the order also established the President's
Committee on Equality of Treatment and opportunity in the Armed Services.
Despite this order to integrate the services, the military as a whole did not fully comply
until about the time of the Korean War. Due to extraordinary personnel demands of the war and
the consummate performance of Blacks in newly integrated units, misperceptions were
identified and by1956 the remnants of the overt “Jim Crow” segregation had effectively
disappeared from the U.S. military (Marsh, 2009). However, institutional discrimination
continued to be pervasive. By 1964, Black enlisted personnel had grown to 10%, but the
population of Black officers only increased to 1.5% (Bowman et. al, 1986, p. 75).
The issue of racial inequality and lack of diversity inclusion has not affected only Blacks,
but all minorities in the military, and more specifically the Air Force. Recognizing this fact, and
in an effort to better understand and solve the issue, in 1971 Pentagon officials commissioned the
“Inter-service Task Force on Education in Race Relations”, also known as the “Theus
Committee”, led by then Major General Lucius Theus, USAF (Stewart, 2002, p.2). The Theus
Committee was responsible for the recommendation that ultimately established the “Defense
Race Relations Institute”, which ultimately settled on Defense Equal Opportunity Management
Institute (DEOMI) as its official title. Today, DEOMI is responsible for establishing Equal
Opportunity (EO) Offices that report directly to installation commanders. Mandatory
multicultural training for all commanders, investigating off-base agencies accused of
discriminating against military personnel, and closely monitoring the promotion evaluation
system changes to ensure that bias is mitigated are some of its responsibilities (Marsh, 2009 p.
4). These initiatives were and continue to be critical in safeguarding diversity inclusion and
remains a priority amongst all services. Furthermore, formalizing efforts to ensure that the
Officer Development and Retention model stays intact is integral to maintaining the type of
diversity targeted by the nation’s National Defense Strategy.
Catalyst of Change in the Diversity Climate
In a recent email correspondence to all Airmen, Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF)
Deborah Lee James addressed the issues of diversity and inclusion in the Air Force. In her letter,
she openly spoke about the effects that issues of diversity and inclusion have in the United States
and the USAF. She wrote, “The challenges we face today are far too serious, and the
implications of failure are far too great, for our Air Force to do less than, fully, and inclusively,
leverage our Nation’s greatest strength: its remarkably diverse people” (James, 2015). While
there have been several diversity-based initiatives in the history of the Air Force, this particular
stance made by the SECAF addresses the crux of the diversity issue and ultimately the impetus
behind current changes related to diversity in the United States Air Force.
In the same correspondence, the SECAF went on to speak about a future organizational
best-practices assessment that would study current Air Force initiatives used to attract, recruit,
develop and retain Airmen. This message speaks directly to all Airmen. Furthermore, it sets a
proverbial benchmark to be met and surpassed.
Current Diversity Goals
The diversity goals of the Air Force are outlined by the “United States Air Force
Diversity Strategic Roadmap.” This document outlines roles, responsibilities and priorities based
on level of value to the overall Air Force mission, which is defined as “enable the Air Force to
attract, recruit, develop and retain a high-quality, diverse total force” (United States Air Force,
2013, p. 2). Before the details of the specific actions being taken to accomplish the mission are
analyzed, it is helpful to understand the definition of diversity by the Air Force, “incorporates but
is not restricted to: personal life experiences, geographic socioeconomic, educational and work
backgrounds cultural knowledge, language and physical capabilities, philosophical and spiritual
perspectives, age, race, ethnicity, and gender. Moreover, diversity is also further subdivided into
demographic, cognitive, behavioral, organizational/structural and global diversity” (United
States Air Force, 2013, p. 5). While the Air Force is ultimately interested in multiple aspects of
diversity, the focus of this particular study will be on one aspect of that diversity, specifically
racial and ethnic diversity.
The construction of the “Air Force Diversity Strategic Roadmap” document leads to a
clear understanding of the Air Force’s diversity vision. It outlines the priorities that are to be met,
the specific goals that will fulfill those priorities, the incremental actions that will fulfill the goals
and then the performance measures by which all of the above will be analyzed. The following
are a few excerpts from the 2013 “Air Force Diversity Strategic Roadmap”:
I) Priority: Institutionalize diversity as necessary to mission success
1. Goal: Develop and sustain policies and procedures to ensure diversity
and inclusion are and institutional priority
a. Action: Establish and/or leverage forums, i.e. the Air Force
Diversity Committee (AFDC) and Cross Functional Diversity Teams (CFDT’s) to
oversee and monitor key diversity and inclusion initiatives
II) Priority: Develop a high-quality, talented and diverse total force (active duty,
Guard, Reserve and civilians)

1. Goal: Promote diversity and inclusion through training, leadership
development, and employee engagement programs
a. Action: Review leadership development programs, determine
whether they draw from all segments of the total force, and develop strategies to
eliminate barrier to where they exist
Performance measure: Diversity and inclusion training blended
throughout the professional development and training continuum
While the excerpts are only representative of two of the five priorities and even fewer actions
and goals, they are certainly indicative of the tenor of the document and the goals for diversity
and inclusion of the Air Force.
National military strategy. The diversity goals of the United States Air Force are
directly in line with those stated in the 2011 National Military Strategy: "An all-volunteer force
must represent the country it defends. We will strengthen our commitment to the values of
diversity and inclusivity...” (United States Department of Defense, 2011, p. 17).
Related Air Force Instructions (AFIs). There are several Air Force Instructions that
directly address the issue of diversity in the United States Air Force. The foremost documents are
AFI 36-7001 titled “Diversity” and AFI 36-2624 titled “Air Force Mentoring Program.”
Collectively these documents established guidance and procedures for the administration and
management of all Air Force Diversity Initiatives (Department of the Air Force, 2012).
Air Force Diversity Recruitment and Retention Programs and Initiatives
To fully understand the following section there must be context given to the text. The Air
Force has a very rigid hierarchal structure. While policies and procedures can be created locally
(at respective Air Force Bases or Major Commands), most policies and all Air Force instructions
are created by Air Force Headquarters. In that same vein, all policies related to diversity
inclusion were authored at Air Force Headquarters. While the policies are digested and executed
in various fashions at the lower levels, the general intent is dictated by the Air Force at-large. Of
the diversity and inclusion initiatives that Secretary James mentioned in her March address to all
Airmen, there are several that pertain directly to or tangentially affect AFROTC cadets. They
include the Air Force Mentorship Program, establishment of the Air Force Diversity Committee
(AFDC), commitment to prominent national diversity outreach events, and ROTC Rated Height
Screening Initiative, and the Gold Bar Recruiting just to name a few.
Air Force Mentoring Program
Recognizing a need to formalize instructions on what mentorship should look like, the
Air Force drafted Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2643, titled “Air Force Mentoring Program”,
this document outlines how to “create an effectual mentoring program for Airmen at various
stages of their careers and is applicable to officers, enlisted, civilians, Air National Guardsmen,
Air Force Reservist” (Secretary of the Air Force, 2013, p. 1).
While the document addresses the entirety of the vision detailing the mentorship program
for the Air Force, there are two particular sections that address AFROTC. In short, these two
sections state, “major commands (MAJCOM in the case of AFROTC Air Education Training
Command or AETC) will offer ample mentorship opportunities to all Airmen (including cadets)”
(Secretary of the Air Force., 2013, p. 3). It also says the purpose of the program is in large part,
“to promote a climate of inclusion that ultimately assist in fostering diverse strengths,
perspectives and capabilities of Airmen” (Secretary of the Air Force., 2013, p. 3). Through the
lens of minority cadet recruitment and retention, the Air Force Mentorship program is not
meeting its original intent. While the policy clearly defines and details what the Air Force
Mentorship program should look like, many AFROTC programs do not have formal mentorship
programs in place or the way they are administered is not as prescribed by regulation. The Air
Force Mentoring Program “is an essential ingredient in developing well-rounded, professional,
and competent future leaders. The overall goal of mentoring is to help Airmen (civilian, enlisted,
and officer) reach their full potential, thereby enhancing the professionalism of the Air Force”
(Secretary of the Air Force, 2013, p. 4).
Air Force Diversity Committee (AFDC)
The Air Force Diversity Committee is described in Air Force policy as a group that “will
provide recommendations on major diversity policy issues and long-term strategic oversight and
perspectives.” In addition, their specific focus pertains to policy, strategic planning, diversity
leadership and initiatives, conference/summits, performance measures (including analyses and
assessments), and outreach. The committee is co-chaired by the assistant Secretary of the Air
Force (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) who is only subordinate to the SECAF and Deputy Chief
of Staff, Manpower, Personnel and Services. In addition, the committee is staffed by other
significant, high-ranking Air Force Officials. The composition of this committee signifies a
significant investment by the Air Force and its leaders.
AFROTC Specific Recruiting and Retention Efforts
Given the hierarchal structure of the United States Air Force all Major Commands or
MAJCOM’s are subordinate to Air Force Headquarters. While they have the autonomy to
develop their own Air Force Instructions (AFIs) to govern their day-to-day execution of mission,
policy flows from AF headquarters. With that, all policies concerning Air Force diversity,
diversity inclusion, recruitment and retention of Airmen is developed at Headquarters and
disseminated through the MAJCOM’s to the rest of the Air Force. Air Education Training
Command (AETC) is the MAJCOM that governs USAFA, AFROTC and OTS (Officer Training
School). Thus, all diversity policy for these three accessions organizations is in actuality, dictated
by Air Force Headquarters. The Air Force’s targets for diversity of Air Force ebbs and flows
with the current needs of the Air Force. As diversity declines in the Air Force, efforts to recruit
future officers with diverse ethnicities increase. As diversity of new accessions increases,
recruiting efforts targeted at ethnic minorities either stay steady or decrease. This correlation
must be recognized to understand the complexity of potential desired change.
Similar to Air Force at-large, AFROTC also reaps the benefits of the aforementioned
policies, initiatives and programs. Supplementing those efforts are two additional AFROTC-
specific initiatives, ROTC Rated Height Screening Initiative and Gold Bar Recruiting Program,
that are purposed to directly address the minority recruitment and retention gap.
ROTC Rated Height Screening Initiative. This initiative was a result of extensive
research done at both the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) and in AFROTC. That
research found there was a significant cross-section of highly talented officer candidates -
predominantly female - who did not know about, understand, or have access to the standard rated
height waiver process. In turn that process was eliminating more than one-third of female cadet
applicants and a good number of male applicants (James & Welsh, 2015a). While not directly
linked to racial and ethnic diversity, this initiative shows the ROTC’s priority and focus on
increasing multiple aspects of diversity. By implementing the “ROTC Rated Height Screening
Initiative”, the aim is to remove the unnecessary elimination of otherwise qualified cadets, create
additional opportunities, and hopefully, bolster both recruitment and retention. In the future, the
process will be centralized at AFROTC Field Training for two specific purposes: to ensure the
greatest standardization possible and to reach the greatest number of cadets possible.
Gold Bar Recruiting (GBR) Program. The “Gold Bar Recruiting Program” is perhaps
one of the most visible and tangible expressions of the commitment by the Air Force to diversity
inclusion; and simply stated, the purpose of the GBR program is to increase the diversity of the
Air Force.
The program began in 1991 and was summarily cancelled in 2001. The reason for this
cancellation was twofold: the composition of the recruiters became primarily non-minority and
the purpose of the program shifted from targeted recruiting to general recruiting (Millier, 2014).
The program was reinstituted in 2009 and has continued until today with only a brief hiatus in
2013 due to sequestration.
Former Commander of the Janine M. Holm Center (the higher headquarters for
AFROTC) was quoted in saying, "Through the Gold Bar Recruiting program, we have the
opportunity to recruit and grow a more diverse Air Force. A diverse Air Force ensures diversity
of thought. Diversity of thought leads to many operational courses of action versus 'groupthink.'
It all starts with ROTC” (Casserly, 2009). While the focus of the program is to attract and recruit
more minorities, that is not the only goal of the program. The Gold Bar recruiters are there to
help all those interested, regardless of ethnic background, through every step of the application
process. The purpose of the GBR program is to serve as the focal point for diversity recruiting in
high schools, colleges, and major minority markets (Aaron, 2014).
Recognizing previous shortcoming of some of the programs and to ensure the staffing of
the program is as effective as possible, leadership within Air Force accessions programs have
taken grass roots and modeling approach. Air Force accessions leadership targets minority
officers to fill the GBR positions. In many instances those officers hail from the very
communities the GBR program aims to meet. By doing this, the hope is to engender a sense of
connection and familiarity with potential recruits. In 2011 the following was the demographic
composition of the Gold Bar Lieutenants: 20 total officers, 55% minority background with 5%
African-American, 25% Hispanic, 20% Asian, 5% Native American (Aaron, 2014). The
recruiters were all thoroughly trained to meet all recruiting needs of the Air Force; their
specialization is the recruitment of highly qualified, diversified talent into the force.
USAFA Recruitment and Retention Programs
Similar to the AFROTC, the USAFA is another route by which a young man or woman
can earn a commission to the United States Air Force. While the nuances and logistics of a
cadet’s career at USAFA are not exactly the same as those of a traditional AFROTC cadet, there
are indeed many parallels that can be drawn. Some of those parallels are the recruitment and
retention challenges that face minorities in both environments.
In addition to all of the Air Force diversity policies, initiatives and efforts USAFA has
two additional programs: The Tri-City Outreach Program and the Diversity Visitation Program.
As detailed in personal correspondence with Colonel Carolyn Benyshek, Director of Admissions
at USAFA, these two programs have yielded increasingly significant results and have become
tools to close the recruitment and retention gap that exists amongst minority cadets (personal
communication, March 15, 2015).
The Tri-Cities Outreach Program. The Tri-Cities Outreach Program is designed for the
USAFA admissions team to target congressional districts that are underrepresented in the cadet
population at USAFA. According to Title X Ch. 903 section 9342 (4), “five cadets from each
congressional district, will nominated (each academic year) to attend USAFA by the
Representative from the district.” Thus, the Tri-Cities Outreach Program targets the currently 59
underrepresented congressional districts; and, those 59 congressional districts are areas with
large concentrations of minority residents (C. Benyshek, personal communication, March 15,
2015). Targeting those areas is essentially diversity recruiting.
Outlined in the yearly “Strategic Cities Plan” produced by USAFA admissions, the
program targets cities like Miami, Philadelphia, Kansas City, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
Outreach to those areas happens in a myriad of ways. According to the USAFA Director of
Admissions, the most important method is forging and then the continuous development of
relationships between the USAFA admissions team and local community influencers. By
definition, local community influencers are those individuals who are well connected to the
community and exert a positive and healthy influence. Oftentimes these influencers are
principals, counselors, coaches, pastors and mentors in the target schools and communities. By
developing and maintaining relationships with these individuals, the Academy Admissions team
creates an enrollment pipeline so that the qualified and talented minority students can have
access to all the resources needed on the journey to becoming a cadet at USAFA. Furthermore,
that pipeline also serves as a generational connection, linking those who ultimately made the
decision to become a cadet at the Academy to those who are going through the decision process
(C. Benyshek, personal communication, March 15, 2015).
Logistically, the way the Tri-Cities Outreach Program works is the USAFA Admissions
Team selects a particular city their “Strategic Cities Plan”. They contact and personally visit the
city to meet with potential candidates face to face. After meeting with the candidates in school
assemblies, small groups or even individually, those that show any amount of interest will be
asked to fill out an application and then paired with one of the 15 Lieutenants on the Admissions
team. That Lieutenant will then serve a personal guide to the applicant, assisting them with
navigating the congressional letter of recommendation process, physical fitness requirements as

well as any other outstanding things the admissions process necessitates. In short, the admissions
representative serves as a “cradle-to-grave” resource for the potential cadet. This approach not
only ensures that the highest numbers of interested students apply; it also equips the potential
cadet with the tools necessary to navigate the arduous process. If AFROTC cadets had similar
program that would provide this level exposure to information and follow-up support it is
possible that their diversity of cadets would also increase.
Diversity Visitation Program (DVP). Like the Tri-City Outreach Program, the DVP is
designed to target highly qualified, minority students who have shown interest in the Air Force
Academy. Each year, the Falcon Foundation, which serves as the endowment agency of USAFA,
funds approximately 100 - 125 students about 75% of the cost to take a four or five-day visit to
the Air Force Academy. During that visit the prospective cadets are allowed a behind-the-scenes
view of Air Force Academy life. They have the opportunity to be partnered with cadets, go to
classes, live in the dorms, visit the USAFA Preparatory School, have meals in the chow hall and
much more. According to Col. Benyshek, “100% of the students who visit apply for the academy
and 75 to 80 of those cadets are accepted to either USAFA, USAFA prep or The Civilian Prep
School”. With such a high return on investment and its relative ease of execution, it serves as an
example for AFROTC to consider implementing at target colleges and universities across
America.
Recruitment and Retention in Post-Secondary Education
The issues of minority retention in AF and AFROTC are similar to those in post-
secondary institutions across the U.S. While there are some nuances that differ between the two
groups, many of the major challenges are similar and provide a lens in order to better understand
minority retention and recruitment in AFROTC. Understanding, addressing and ultimately

solving recruitment and retention issues for minority students in post-secondary education offers
significant insights on recruitment and retention of minority cadets in AFROTC across the
country.
History and Trends of Retention in Post-Secondary Education
From the advent of colleges and universities in the early 1600’s, and for some 200 years
thereafter, institutions of higher learning targeted a demographic of select populations
(Demetriou & Schmitz-Sciborski, 2011). Typically, those populations were the affluent
individuals of society who were almost always White males. Significant change was made to the
state of institutions of higher learning with the Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862 that provided
grants of land to states to finance the establishment of colleges specializing in “agriculture and
the mechanic arts” (Demetriou & Schmitz-Sciborski, 2011). This allowed institutions to focus
less on existence and more on educational acumen.
Although the Morrill Act of 1862 changed the landscape of education in the United
States, the recipients of education were still predominantly of the White majority (Department of
Education, 1993). Thus, one could conclude that the myriad of issues dealing with minority
recruitment and retention are historically engrained into the fabric of the educational history for
the United States. Nevertheless, a keen understanding of the historical progression of recruitment
and retention of minority students in post-secondary education is essential to developing
solutions.
In a report titled “120 Years of Education: A Statistical Portrait” published by the
Department of Education in 1993, a plethora of statistics about education in the United States
were given. Of those, there are several that offer an even more succinct, statistical roadmap of
progression for minority students. In 1940, more than half of the U.S. population had completed
no more than an eighth grade education ((Department of Education, 1993, p. 7). That number for
Blacks during the same time period stood at 12.3% (United States Census Bureau, 2010).
Interestingly, it was not until 1940 that the U.S. Census Bureau began to record educational
background by race; but, the caveat is that the only races recorded were White and Black. It was
not until 1974 that Asians and Hispanics were tracked as their own respective group, and even
later for other ethnicities that are tracked by the U.S. Census Bureau today. It is important to
highlight this detail because it supports the argument that educational disparities for minorities in
higher education have always existed; however, it was not until about 40 years ago that data
were available to clearly document and support these disparities.
Using NCES data from 20 - 30 years to further contextualize the discussion, it can be
seen that the overall percentages of minority students enrolled in institutions of higher learning
increased from 1976 to 2008; African-Americans 10% to 13.9%, Hispanic 3.8% to 12.9%,
Asian/Pacific Islander 1.8% to 6.8%, and American Indian/Alaskan Native 0.7% to 1.1%
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2010, p. 125). With the end-state of educational
equitability amongst ethnicities in mind, this increase is noteworthy However, it must be
recognized that the high school to college transition and college persistence are still significant
challenges for students of color. Numerous studies (Ishitani, 2006; Tinto, 1996; Tinto & Pusser,
2006) demonstrate that for a variety of reasons (preparedness, finances etc.) minority students
face a far more difficult transition from high school to college than their White peers. Research
also shows that minority students discontinue college early at rates that are disproportionately
higher than the student body in general (Swali, 2003). It is this understanding of both historical
context as well as current cultural challenges that frame the issue of recruitment and retention of
minority cadets in AFROTC.

As literature about recruitment and retention is further explored, it can be seen that
minority students persist and graduate from college at significantly lower rates than their White
counterparts. For the cohorts who entered college between 1996 to 2007, the within 6 year
graduation rates for Whites was 61% whereas Hispanics and Pacific Islanders were 49%, Blacks
were 40%, American Indian/ Alaskan Natives were 39.% (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2014). A likely contributing factor to lower retention rates for minorities is that not
until 1995 was it a legal requirement for universities (specifically those receiving Title IX
funding) to calculate and report student graduation rates by race. Former New Jersey Senator,
Rhodes Scholar and member of the Basketball Hall of Famer, Bill Bradley, pushed the “Student
Right to Know Act” through Congress in 1990 because of his strong concern for the egregiously
low graduation rates of collegiate student-athletes (Carey, 2008). With the data gathered from
those institutions who voluntarily reported before 1995, and all institutions thereafter, it can be
seen that the persistence rate of minority students is significantly lower than that of their white
counterparts.
Models of Student Recruitment and Retention
Recognizing that recruitment and retention of minority students in post-secondary
education is vital to an institution’s existence, many have studied the potential contributing
factors, barriers, and possible solutions to the problem. One of the foremost researchers in this
field is Dr. Vincent Tinto. His theory of persistence suggests that students (regardless of race) are
more likely to persist when they are integrated into the system(s) of the institution (Tinto, 1975).
In the context of an institution of higher learning, Tinto (1975) suggests that there are two
separate and distinct systems: an academic system and a social system. The level of integration
by students into those systems is directly influenced by several factors, such as family
background, individual attributes of educational expectations, and college preparedness. Those
factors lead to either academic integration though goal commitment and/or social integration
through institutional commitment. Both of these types of commitment are either developed or
degraded through academic performance, intellectual development, peer-group interaction, and
faculty interaction. The level of development that a student does or does not have in these
particular areas during their tenure at a given institution ultimately dictates their current level of
academic and/or social integration which also directly influences their level of persistence.
Figure 1: Tinto’s conceptual schema for departure from college (Tinto, 1975)
Over the past 40 years Tinto’s (1975) model has been discussed, debated, and modified
by administrators, counselors, educators and even behavioral psychologists. To build on the
model, Dr. John P. Bean (2005) of Indiana University suggests that retention can be studied from
at least four perspectives; theoretical, policy, institutional and individual. While other
perspectives can be relevant in the case of student persistence, Bean (2005) uses these four in
particular to introduce and address nine themes of student retention; intentions, institutional fit
and institutional commitment (loyalty), psychological processes and key attitudes, academics,
social factors, bureaucratic factors, the external environment, the student’s background and
finally money and finance.
Scaffolding on the research by Bean (2005), Habley, Bloom, and Robbins (2012) also
present conceptual perspectives; however, their research attempts to comprehensively explain
how college student persistence is achieved using perspectives that are economic, organizational,
psychological, and sociological. Their research suggests the following: a) Economic: student
persistence is more likely to occur if a student believes that benefits of attendance outweigh the
costs (Braxton, 2003); b) Organization: the behavior/actions of administrators, faculty and staff
can influence student persistence decisions (Tinto, 1986); c) Psychological: a student’s academic
aptitude, skills, motivation, personality traits, and progression of development influence their
level of desire to persist; d) Sociological: a student’s peers, family socioeconomic status, and
support of significant others constitute important social forces that influence college student
persistence. It is possible from the research that the more that these categories are fulfilled, the
greater the possibility for student persistence.
It is important to understand that the models addressed thus far are mostly dependent
upon Tinto’s (1975) Model of Student Departure and are interactional. Tinto (1993) views
student departure, or student persistence, as a longitudinal process that involves meanings the
individual student places on their interactions with formal and informal dimensions of a given
college or university (Braxton, Sullivan and Johnson 1997; Tinto, 1986, 1993). What it does not
fully consider is the causal relationship behind the longitudinal process. There are, however, a
few models that scaffold Tinto’s (1975) original model with causal relationships and measure
their influence on the longitudinal process (Bean, 1980). Based on information provided in other
studies, especially when referencing minority students, using both longitudinal models and
causal models simultaneously is particularly appropriate. This affords researchers the
opportunity to consider and evaluate important variables that may vary widely between different
ethnic groups. This includes background variables, such as college readiness, logistical issues, as
well as, organizational determinants, such as institutional quality, choice of major, and job
opportunities (Bean, 1980).
Current Retention Program Model at an Institution of Higher Education
As mentioned earlier, there are several widely regarded theories on college persistence. In
addition, several critical areas need to be successfully addressed in order to yield higher retention
rates, whether in AFROTC or in higher education institutions more generally. According to
Chickering and Gamson (1987), seven specific practices are needed by institutions of higher
education for programs targeting higher retention rates. Programs should:
1. Encourage contacts between students and faculty
2. Develop reciprocity and cooperation among students
3. Use active learning techniques
4. Give prompt feedback
5. Emphasizes time on task
6. Communicate high expectations
7. Respect diverse talents and ways of learning (p. 2).
These seven principles are critical to the vitality and success of any higher educational institution
or program that desires to maintain or even increase the persistence level amongst its students,
especially those of diverse background.
Center for Academic Retention and Enhancement (CARE). One program being
instituted to address student retention is the Center for Academic Retention and Enhancement
(CARE) at Florida State University (FSU). Established in 1968 the CARE program was
established to, “contribute to the successful retention and graduation of undergraduate students
who have been disadvantaged by virtue of economic or educational circumstances (Florida State
University, 2015). Through several comprehensive pre-college and college programs CARE’s
vision is to, “motivate and prepare targeted middle/high school students to pursue higher
education. Recruit, prepare, and support targeted first generation college students for successful
adaptation and academic success at the undergraduate level” (Florida State University, 2015).
CARE programs. The specific method by which CARE addresses the recruitment and
retention gap in postsecondary education, and specifically at FSU, is through its comprehensive
pre-college and college programs, as well as, its connections to and relationships with student
recourses. Those programs are the College Reach-Out Program (CROP), Upward Bound,
Summer Bridge Program, Unconquered Scholars Program, CARE Academic Advising, CARE
Financial Aid, and CARE Life Coaching (Florida State University, 2015).
College Out-Reach Program (CROP). Beginning in 1992 in response to a state-wide
initiative, CROP was established as an educational and motivational program designed to aid
students preparing for a successful postsecondary career. Prospective students must be in grades
6-12 and meet certain educational and economic criteria as set forth by the State of Florida.
Upward Bound. Divided into academic year and Summer Residential Program, FSU’s
Upward Bound program was established in 1989 and partners with East Gadsden High School in
Gadsden County, FL. The program is constructed to bolster academic and eventual
postsecondary success of typically underrepresented students.
Summer Bridge Program. This provides an all-inclusive program of orientation and
academic support in order to ease the transition from high school to college, while
simultaneously building a solid academic foundation. The Summer Bridge Program stipulates
that selected applicants be first-generation college students from socio-economically
disadvantaged backgrounds who have exhibited a strong desire to succeed.
Unconquered Scholars Program. The Unconquered Scholars Program offers a myriad of
support services promoting holistic achievement to those who experienced foster care,
homelessness, relative care, or ward of the State status.
POSSE Foundation, Inc. Unlike the CARE program, POSSE is not sponsored by and
therefore not beholden to any particular institutions; rather, POSSE is an independent
organization with the same focus as the other programs in the recruitment and retention of
minority student in postsecondary education.
In order to reach the stated diversity goal, recruitment and retention of minority students
in AFROTC is vitally important. It is informed by the larger body of research on recruitment and
retention of minority student in institutions of higher education. In order to increase student
retention, research has demonstrated that economic, organizational, psychological, and
sociological barriers must be decreased or even eliminated (Habley, Bloom, & Robbins 2012;
Tinto, 1986; Bean, 1980). Recruitment and retention programs that focus on minority students
with the intent of removing these barriers have been successful because they directly and
systematically address the issues and challenges of their target population of prospective
students. With proper resourcing, adequate training and active, consistent institutional
involvement, there exists the potential that other organizations – in this case Det. 60 – can find
similar success.
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Issues Related to Recruitment and Retention in
Post-Secondary Education
Socio-demographic/Economic Issues
“Every college freshman whether rich or poor, white or minority, first-generation or
legacy experiences academic setbacks and awkward moments when they feel they don’t belong.
But white students, wealthy students, and students with college graduate parents tend not to take
those moments too seriously or too personally” (Tough, 2014). In order to fully understand and
grasp the importance of minority student retention, one must understand the implications of the
at-risk student, which usually refers to those who are identified as one or more of the following:
a) ethnic minorities; b) academically disadvantaged; c) disabled; d) of low socioeconomic status;
and 5) probationary students (Heisserer & Parette, 2002). Keeping this definition in mind, the
“minority” quickly becomes the majority on campuses across the United States; thus, it should
be recognized that at-risk student retention and successful matriculation has a profound effect on
institutions and society as a collective whole. Looking at the issue holistically, retention
influences areas such as funding patterns, facilities planning, and academic curricula offered
(Jones & Watson, 1990). Retention also has a profound effect on the future labor market due to
its workforce and vocational aptitude implications.
To further comprehend the socio-demographic implications of minority student
recruitment and retention, a base understanding of students in the at-risk category needs to be in
place.
Low-income, underrepresented ethnic minority and first-generation students often
originate from schools with fewer academic resources, less academic preparation,
and may have lower expectations. In Jonathan Kozol’s view, the variance in the
resources accessible to rich and poor school districts have fashioned “savage
inequalities” in the education their students receive. Unless higher education
institutions work with low-wealth schools and communities to champion
increased resources and improve students’ college readiness, U.S. society will
lose the talents of a growing segment of the population. (Zusman, 2005)
In addition, with the continually increasing cost of college tuition, college choice is just
as much a financial decision as anything else. The socio-economic status of a student is a
substantial indicator of the type of higher education institution a student can attend (Pascarella,
Smart, & Smylie, 1992). An important factor to be cognizant of is that the economic
consideration is just as important to recruitment (college entrance) as it is to retention
(persistence). In other words, there is a critical interconnection between an individual student’s
financial reasons to begin attending a college or university and their consequent retention
behavior.
Considering the aforementioned socio-demographic and economic factors, a more salient
picture of the challenges they present to minority student retention crystalizes. The sections
below discuss particular student knowledge, motivation and organizational issues as they pertain
to minority retention.
Student Knowledge Issues
Compounded with the socio-economic issues, oftentimes minority students also have to
overcome the hurdle of a knowledge gap. The largest contributor to that knowledge gap is the
minimum basic skill-set needed to graduate from high school and enter college. Over 50% of the
students who graduate from high school do not graduate with the minimal requirements needed
to apply to a four-year college or university (Greene & Foster, 2003). As with graduation itself,
Black and Hispanic students are disproportionately unlikely to be college ready because only
51% of all African-American students and 52% of all Hispanic students graduate from high
school, and of that group, only 20% of all African-American students and 16% of all Hispanic
students leave high school college ready (Greene & Foster, 2003). Furthermore, where ethnic
differences in long-term educational attainment have been researched, the findings suggest that
minority students exhibited less academic success during their respective educational careers and
were far more likely than whites to exit postsecondary education without a degree (Lavin &
Crook, 1990). This lack of preparation results in a degraded ability to overcome existing socio-
economic disparities and the knowledge gap that affects their persistence in higher education.
Student Motivation Issues
Motives of students to attend college are shaped by their cultural values (Phinney,
Dennis, & Osorio, 2016). Markus and Kitayama (1991) suggest that individuals with
collectivistic orientations are motivated to achieve in order to meet external demands and
expectations, particularly family members, whereas those with an individualistic orientation are
more likely to be motivated for personal reasons. Nevertheless, motivation to start attending and
persist with higher education can be both collectivist and individualistic in nature. The
motivation to attend college can be related to both individual and collective concerns.
“Individual motivations are based on personal interest, intellectual curiosity, and the desire to
attain a rewarding career. Collectivist motivations include going to college in order to meet the
expectations of the family” (Cote and Levine, 1997). This research suggests that student
motivation issues are connected, at least in part, to cultural associations. For example, a Native-
American student may be motivated more by a sense of collective responsibility (due to a
culturally collectivist view) than individual achievement. Conversely, an ethnic minority student
who may have been from an orphan background may adopt a more individualistic approach due
to their cultural experience; thus, motivation issues are strongly influenced by a student’s cultural
identity.
After student cultural identity, self-efficacy and goal orientation are the pillars of student
motivation. Bandura (1997) defines self-efficacy as a person’s judgment of their capabilities to
organize and successfully complete a task. Goal orientation is defined as the motive that
individuals have for completing their academic tasks (Ames, 1992; Dweck, 1986). In a particular
study, Sullivan and Guerra (2007) showed that “self-efficacy and mastery goals are positively
correlated with academic standing. Furthermore, students in good academic standing reported
having higher self-efficacy and adopted significantly more mastery goals toward learning than
students on academic probation.”
These results and literature from other research shows that students with higher self-
efficacy are inclined to contribute more readily, work more diligently, pursue challenging goals,
expend greater effort toward fulfilling identified goals, and persist longer when faced with
difficulty (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 2003; Schunk, 1991). Therefore, all attempts to improve
recruitment and retention of students in general and especially minority students must consider
the issue of motivation.
Organization and Institutional Culture Issues
An inclusive and welcoming institutional environment and the connection of students to
that environment have been linked to persistence. Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pederson, and Allen
(1998) found that the campus climate, or the institutional environment with respect to inclusion,
affects the retention of students. According to Kuh (1995), students’ connection to the campus
environment, often called student engagement, and student involvement are important factors in
retaining students.
Conclusion
Closing the recruitment and retention gap between for minority cadets at Det. 60 is
informed by several areas in the larger body of literature centered on recruitment and retention of
minority students in institutions of higher learning. In order to close this gap, the knowledge,
motivation and organizational factors that negatively affect student persistence must be
minimized or if possible, eliminated. These factors have been addressed at both the national and
institutional level through mentorship programs, diversity initiatives and one-on-one
interventions. Moreover, based on their initial success, some of the diversity based programs at
the US Air Force Academy could potential serve as models for Det. 60. The next chapter
discusses the methodology to better understand the knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences on minority recruitment and retention at USC AFROTC Det. 60.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The United States Air Force was founded on September 14, 1947. The mission is “to fly,
fight and win … in air, space and cyberspace” (United States Air Force, 2014). Headquartered in
Washington, D.C, the USAF consists of three separate components: Active Duty, the Air Force
Reserves, and the Air National Guard. Currently, there are approximately 310,000 active duty
members spanning the globe. Of those, approximately 61,000 or 20% are officers (Air Force
Personnel Center, 2014). There are three unique ways to become an officer in the United States
Air Force: a) graduation and commission from the United States Air Force Academy; b)
graduation and commission from an AFROTC program at a civilian college or university; c)
graduation and commission from the Officer Training Program. The commonality between all of
these commissioning sources is that cadets aspiring to earn a commission must first earn a
bachelor’s degree and then complete all requirements necessary to earn a commission. This study
examined the comparatively low rate that ethnic minorities graduate and earn commissions into
the Air Force, which is much lower than the stated goal in the National Defense Strategy.
The purpose of this project was to conduct a gap analysis to examine the causes of the
low retention rate of minority cadets in AFROTC at USC by focusing on causes of low retention
due to assumed gaps in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organizational issues of
the minority cadets. After constructing a comprehensive list of assumed causes, the analysis
examined the results to systematically identify the causes that prove to be substantiated and
validated from the gap analysis. While a complete analysis would focus on all stakeholders, this
analysis will focus on the AFROTC cadets at USC as stakeholders.

The questions for the analysis in the areas of knowledge and skills, motivation, and
organization causes are:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational issues preventing minority
AFROTC cadets at USC to be eligible to graduate and commission within 4 - 5 years of
entering the detachment?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to
address these causes?
Methodological Framework
The methodological framework for this dissertation of practice was a gap analysis as
defined by Clark and Estes (2008). With a systematic approach, the purpose of this dissertation
was to accomplish three tasks:
1. Provide better clarity to the stated organizational goal(s).
2. Identify and articulate the gap(s) that exist between the current performance level and
the stated goal(s).
3. Effectively categorize the knowledge, motivation and organizational causes that
directly affect attainment of those goals.
Clark and Estes (2008) defined knowledge as the “how, along with the when, what, why,
where and who to attain their stated goals” (p. 44). Motivation is what "gets us going, keeps us
moving, and tells us how much effort to spend" (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 81). Finally,
organizational performance is loosely defined as the barriers that are imposed by the greater
organizational structure. Organizational performance can be separated into three smaller
categories of work processes, material resources and value chains and streams (Clark & Estes,
2008, p. 104-105).
Using Clark and Estes' (2008) gap analysis, this dissertation provides measurable
organizational performance goals for diversity for the United States Air Force and more
specifically, the Air Force ROTC at USC. The documents for determining these goals included,
but are not limited to, the U.S. National Military Strategy, Air Force Instructions (rules and
regulations) and other U.S. military and Air Force specific doctrine documents. After the
organizational goals were clearly defined and measured, this dissertation identified and
articulated the performance gap(s) that exist between the stated diversity goals and the current
organizational performance. Assumed causes for those gaps were identified in relation to several
possible critical factors: the cadets' knowledge, skills, and motivation, along with the
organizational causes or barriers (Clark & Estes, 2008). Finally, validating and prioritizing
causes for the gaps in knowledge, skills, and motivation, along with organizational barriers was
determined. After the analysis and the validated causes were identified, this study developed
solutions to close the current gaps and evaluate outcomes to help the USAF to attain its stated
goal of minority retention.
Assumed Performance Causes
Organizational success is measured in a group’s ability to self-assess and correct
shortcomings or as Clark and Estes (2008) assert, “to close the performance gap” (p. 42). In an
effort to maintain a competitive edge, many organizations self-diagnose their perceived
performance gaps quickly, often assuming unproven conclusions in the hopes of solving their
issues, which address only the symptoms of probable issues.
The way to eliminate organizational gaps is a systematic, performance-based approach that
generates assumed causes for the organizational performance gap by informal interviews with
stakeholders, understanding learning, motivation, and organization/culture theories, and a review

of related literature. Assumed causes from related literature were discussed in Chapter Two and
included as a summary in Table 4. The following is a discussion of the assumed knowledge,
motivation and organizational barriers based on preliminary scanning data and learning and
motivation theory.
Preliminary Scanning Data
Knowledge and Skills. At USC, cadets in the Air Force ROTC program are well
informed about the general requirements for graduation and commission. However, preliminary
scanning data suggest minority cadets may lack the basic knowledge, skills or preparation to
actually reach those requirements. One noteworthy perspective that explains this possibly lack of
knowledge comes from Conely (2008), “understanding that the U.S. education system was
consciously constructed to not have strong correlation between high school and colleges is key to
understanding how and why discrepancies exist between what high schools equip students with
and what colleges expect them to be able to achieve” (p. xii). At a macro level, the cadets may
understand and recognize that to become commissioned officers in the USAF they must graduate
with a bachelor’s degree and fulfill all requirements necessary to earn a commission; however, at
a micro level, they may not know the interim steps necessary to reach those overarching goals.
According to psychologist Rueda (2011), “one way to concretize issues inclusive of learning and
teaching is to simply pose the question, what does one need to have knowledge of to achieve his
or her goals?” (p. 27). During a cadet’s tenure at Detachment 60, they will need to have a base
knowledge to successfully navigate several hurdles. Among them are declaration of a major,
earning an enrollment allocation (EA) to field training (also known as “boot camp), completion
of boot camp, and fulfillment of all requirements within their respective department to graduate.
This study seeks to determine whether the Det. 60 minority cadets have the knowledge and skills
to successfully navigate the hurdles and persist in the program through to commissioning as
officers.
Motivation. Based upon my four years as an AFROTC instructor at San Diego State
University and my involvement with AFROTC at USC, there are two major motivational factors
that may dramatically affect the persistence of minority AFROTC cadets. These are a lack of
financial support and ethnically similar role models. Financial support is an issue for many
undergraduates and is compounded given the extra requirements that AFROTC cadets must
fulfill. Many minority cadets are from lower family income levels than nonminority students. In
addition, because of the current lack of ethnic diversity among active duty Air Force officers,
there may be few role models for minority cadets to emulate and serve as mentors. The lack of
ethnically diverse role models could explain why some cadets do not persist, as well as,
perpetuate the cyclical nature of the problem (Hurtado, 1996; Smedley, Myers, & Harrell, 1993).
Organization. The AFROTC at USC may not have the cultural models and cultural
settings to increase retention of minorities. The lack of significant and sustained exposure to
successful, ethnically similar role models may limit minority AFROTC retention. In addition to a
lack of exposure to role models, another observation is that there do not appear to be formalized
organizational retention efforts for minority AFROTC cadets. Cadets enter the program, and
receive advising throughout; however, if a student has significant academic trouble, difficulties
with adjusting to a military lifestyle, financial challenges or any other significant issues that
would affect retention, there do not appear to be thresholds or programs offered by the
detachment to identify these at-risk cadets. According to a 2004 study published by the
American College Test (ACT) organization, “academic self-confidence, educational goals,
commitment from the institution, social support, selectivity of institution, financial aid and social
involvement all had a positive affiliation to retention” (Lotkowski, Robbins, & Noeth 2004, p.
vii). The contributors to the lack of retention of minority cadets may be the lack of role models,
social support, institutional investment, and an overall formalized retention effort or program.
This study will endeavor to ascertain to what extent these contributors exist and how they can
possibly be altered.
Learning and Motivation Theory
Learning theory provides a comprehensive lens through which organizations can be
viewed and assessed. The dynamics of an organization or entity can be assessed in order to make
evidence-based conclusions about the organization and how to improve the organization’s
processes. It is through the learning and motivation theory that USC AFROTC will be viewed
and assessed.
Knowledge and Skills. According to Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), knowledge can be
dissected into subheadings of factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Factual
knowledge is the basic information within a discipline or necessary to solve issues. More
specifically, in the case of an ROTC cadet, basic factual knowledge includes the minimum
requirements to apply to the program, purpose for commissioning, and academic requirements
needed for graduation. Conceptual knowledge is the ability to link relationships, which is as
important as the factual knowledge. In the case of the cadet, a few examples of conceptual
knowledge are understanding punctuality, as well as, customs, courtesies and the rank structure.
A cadet can know what those things are; however, to show mastery the cadet must know how to
apply them. Procedural knowledge is simply defined as how to complete a task, such as drilling
and AFROTC requirements in academics and physical fitness. Finally, metacognitive knowledge
is awareness of one’s own cognitive processes, when an individual thinks about how they think
(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). They ask questions like, “how did I arrive at this conclusion?”
or “why did I think about it that way?” How to assess strengths and weaknesses as related to
leadership is one important metacognitive skill necessary for graduation and commissioning
from AFROTC.
There are several assumed knowledge causes that could potentially affect the recruitment
and retention of minority AFROTC cadets. The most salient could be that minority cadets lack
the basic understanding of processes and procedures to access and navigate student resources,
such as tutoring, counseling, financial aid, and career guidance in order to choose an effective
major. This could be attributed to a lack of knowledge that the resources exist and how to access
them due to poor exposure of the resources by the institution or AFROTC or to a lack of
initiative on the part of the cadet that could be the result of an overwhelming fear or shame
associated with getting help.
Paul Tough (2014) chronicled a University of Texas chemistry professor named Laude,
“In 1999 Laude analyzed the records of all students in his freshman chemistry courses and
identified approximately 50 who possessed at least two ‘adversity indicators’ common among
students who failed the course in the past: low SATs, low family income, and less-educated
parents.” Recognizing that many minority students possess one or multiple risk factors is critical
to understanding the complexity of the retention problem so that solutions may be found. A
student’s attributes directly and indirectly affect their performance in the post-secondary
educational environment. They must be identified while seeking solutions that will close the
performance gap of retaining minority cadets.
Motivation. This study employed the Clark & Estes (2008) gap analysis framework,
which identifies active choice, mental effort, and persistence as the three key components of
motivation. Active choice is when an individual chooses to consciously work towards a goal,
while persistence is the amount and rate working towards the goal, and an individual’s
confidence to complete a task is mental effort. By identifying the motivating factors of minority
cadets that contribute to successful matriculation and ultimately graduation and commissioning,
the purpose of the study was to find specific factors related to motivation that may contribute to
the performance gap. In order to close the performance gap as it relates to recruitment and
retention of minority cadets, the AFROTC cadets at USC will need to successfully master all
three of these motivation areas.
Currently, the assumed motivation causes for the retention gap are a) Cadets do not
understand or recognize the value of graduating and commissioning into the USAF; b) Cadets do
not want to make the active choice to become and stay actively involved in the AFROTC
program because they do not feel valued (as individuals) by the program; and c) Cadets lack the
motivation to obtain valuable skills and eventually strengthen their ability to make (wise)
choices, persist and continually apply adequate mental effort to graduate and commission.
These assumed motivational causes are supported by motivation theory and the literature.
According to a research conducted by Swali (2003) “there are several critical factors that directly
affect minority student retention; academic preparedness, campus climate, commitment to
educational goals and institution, social and academic integration and financial aid” (p. 9-10).
These factors have the potential to dramatically affect the retention rates of all students,
especially minorities.
Motivation is dramatically affected by a myriad of background attributes, which include
personal characteristics, family demographics and academic grounding, as well as, actual intent
to attend and graduate from the institution (Tinto, 1987). Minority cadets must be highly
motivated to persist through the rigors of their undergraduate course of study and the numerous
requirements of the AFROTC program with the ultimate goal of earning a commission as an
officer in the United States Air Force.
Organization. According to Clark and Estes (2008), organizational culture is defined as
the goals, beliefs and values of a particular group of individuals. Further dissected by
Goldenberg and Gallimore (2010), organizational culture can be broken down into two distinct
parts: cultural models and cultural settings. Models are, “shared mental outlines or normative
understandings of how an organization works” whereas settings are, “anytime two or more
individuals gather, over time, to achieve something” (Goldenberg & Gallimore, 2010). It is
through these concepts of organizational culture that this dissertation will approach the USC
AFROTC detachment and assumed organizational issues affecting recruitment and retention of
minority cadets.
Some of the assumed organizational causes that may affect minority recruitment and
retention are as follows: a) The AFROTC environment is too competitive and individualistic for
some cadets; b) The lack of representation or a low frequency of representation of ethnically
similar minorities is demotivating to cadets; and, c) AFROTC does not have a formalized
retention program.
Active participation in the cadet academic curriculum, leadership laboratories, successful
completion of field training, and immersion into the cadet leadership structure are just a few of
the cultural settings that serve as environments in which success can be fostered and the
performance gap closed. In order to recruit and retain minority cadets, adopting and embracing
the organizational culture of AFROTC are critical components.

Summary
A summary of all assumed issues, categorized by Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organization, is found in Table 4.
Table 4: Summary of Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Issues
Sources Knowledge Motivation Organization

Preliminary Cadets do not know the Cadets do not AFROTC at-large
Scanning Data benchmarks they must understand or and Detachment
(informal meet throughout their recognize the value 60 specifically do
knowledge about academic and cadet life of graduating and not offer a formal
the organization) to successfully graduate commissioning into mentorship /
and commission the USAF. retention program
for minority
Cadets do not have the cadets.
knowledge or skills to
navigate the multiple There exists a low
demands placed on them representation of
to graduate and ethnically similar
commission role models for
cadets to aspire to.
Learning & Cadets lack the basic Cadets do not want There is a lack of
Motivation knowledge and to make the active organizational
Theory understanding about choice to become value (through
critical milestones (the and stay actively tangible action) on
“how”) that must be met involved in the cultural settings.
in order to successfully AFROTC program There is also a lack
graduate and because they do not of inclusion of
commission. (e.g. feel valued (as positive minority
tutoring, counseling, individuals) by the role models in
financial aid, career program. continual
guidance to drive choice development of the
in major) Cadets lack the minority cadet.
motivation to obtain
valuable skills and The environment
eventually is too competitive
strengthen their and individualistic
ability to make for some cadets
(wise) choices,
persist and
continually apply
adequate mental
effort to graduate
and commission.
Related Cadets may possess Among other things How successful an

Literature what are considered to research finds that institution is at
be “adversity indicators” academic retaining minority
which are common preparedness, students is
among students who campus climate, correlated with
struggle in the college commitment to how students
environment. Those educational goals perceive that
indicators are low SATs, and the institution, environment.
low family income, less- social and academic Furthermore, the
educated parents (as integration and diversity of the
compared to the financial aid are all faculty/staff is a
“mainstream” student factors that effect a significant
body) student’s motivation indicator of the
institution’s
investment in
diversity.
Participating Stakeholders
The population for this study was comprised of the approximately 50 cadets that were in
the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) Detachment 60 at the University of
Southern California (USC) in fall 2015. In the spring due to increased summer and fall recruiting
activity, the cadet population tends to be a bit higher; in the fall, the cadet population will yield a
rich yet manageable sample size. All 50 cadets that were in the AFROTC Detachment 60 at the
University of Southern California in fall 2015 were included in the study. In addition, a sample
of four minority cadets who had previously not persisted and dropped out of USC AFROTC
were included in the study.
Cadets were selected as subjects of focus of this study for several reasons, but the most
important was that they are part of the majority of new accessions. Of the three commissioning
sources, AFROTC annually produces the largest percentage of new commissioned officers each
year at 42.5% (Air Force Personnel Center, 2014). Thus, from the perspective of the minority
cadet and future Air Force officer, AFROTC minority cadets have the intrinsic ability to affect
direct change as it relates to retention of minority cadets and future minority officers in the
USAF. AFROTC at USC directly contributes to that demographic.
AFROTC minority cadets’ retention has remained low nationally due to barriers in
knowledge, motivation and organizational issues resulting in recognizably low commissioning.
A study of the factors that lead to low retention at USC for the minority cadets may reveal ways
to improve the success of minority cadets at USC AFROTC and in the organization as a whole.
Air Force instructors and policy makers are stakeholders that have an undeniable role to play in
the retention of minority cadets; however, the most immediate change will happen for the cadets.
The ethnic diversity of the cadet population at USC has historically been better balanced
than that of both the AFROTC nationally and the Air Force at-large, so the results of the surveys
and interviews provided valuable insights into the issues that limit their graduating and
commissioning.
Data Collection
A mixed method was utilized to gather and analyze data for the study of minority
AFROTC cadets at USC. The primary focus was to ascertain their knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences to understand minority retention. The cadets were studied using
surveys, interviews, and document analysis. Including these three data collection tools ensured
triangulation of data for purposes of trustworthiness. Permission from University of Southern
California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) was obtained to conduct the surveys and
interviews.
Surveys
After the approval from the IRB, an online survey was distributed to all currently
enrolled cadets as well as those former cadets who were interviewed. An online survey was used
to ensure maximum participation and was administered during AFROTC Leadership laboratory,
a mandatory weekly lab that is attended by all AFROTC cadets. While attendance to the actual
lab is mandatory, participation in the study was voluntary and cadets were not penalized for not
participating. The survey was delivered in English, as all cadets in the program are native
English speakers and consisted of several demographic questions to ascertain the ethnicity of the
cadet. In addition, a mix of Likert scale, binary and open-ended questions was utilized for the
purposes of exploring the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that directly or
indirectly affect minority cadet recruitment and retention in the AFROTC program at USC. Due
to the small sample size surveys were given to all Det. 60 AFROTC students. In addition, the
results presented in the findings include all cadets. The primary focus of the interviews however,
were the minority cadets within the detachment. Responses were collected and kept anonymous
to all others for the purposes of confidentiality. Data were analyzed and then stored on a
password-protected laptop as well as in a cloud service with similar protection measures. Upon
completion of the data analysis, all copies of data and all related recordings were securely
maintained by the primary investigator and will be destroyed after a two-year storage period.
This destruction delay timeframe will serve as an insurance period in the unlikely event that the
data need to be referenced in the future. The survey instrument can be found in Appendix
A. Interviews
Interviews were conducted with eight minority (non-white) cadets. The eight included a
total of four students who have discontinued the program. Subjects were chosen at random after
expressing a desire to participate. One-on-one interviews were conducted with minority cadets,
which provided a protected environment for the interviewee, as well as, ensured their
confidentiality. The interviews were conducted both in-person and telephonically as well as on
and off-campus. The intent of variance in environment was to make it as convenient for the
interviewee as possible. The interviews lasted on average of 30-45 minutes with the express
purpose of gaining a more in-depth understanding of the knowledge, motivation and
organizational influences that directly or indirectly affect a cadet’s retention and completion of
AFROTC.
Most interviews were conducted on Friday afternoons, immediately following the
leadership laboratory or by appointment, and were conducted over a 30-day period to ensure an
adequate quantity of responses. Each interview followed a standard interview protocol that
included permission to record the interview for later transcription and coding. The interview
included approximately X questions and lasted about 45 minutes. Recordings were collected and
kept confidential. Data were analyzed and then stored on a password-protected laptop as well as
in a cloud service with similar protection measure. The interview protocol is included in
Appendix B.
Document Analysis
Demographic data released about cadets via the Freedom of Information Act requests
(demographic, class sizes by fiscal year, commissioning statistics, and graduation statistics etc.)
served as the primary source of document analysis for this dissertation. To the greatest extent
possible, they were reviewed, synthesized and included, when applicable with the survey and
interview tools.
Validation of the Performance Issues
A mixed methodology approach was utilized to validate the assumed knowledge,
motivation and organization issues of minority cadets at USC AFROTC that affect their
graduating and commissioning. This approach included surveys, interviews and document
review. The goal of the mixed methodology is to successfully determine the root causes of the
retention gap for minority students in AFROTC and help to generate solutions. A summary of
how each assumed cause was validated is shown in Table 5.

Table 5: Methods for Validation of Assumed Causes
Document
Assumed Causes Survey Interview
Review
Cadets do not know the benchmarks
they must meet throughout their
x
academic and cadet life to successfully
graduate and commission
Cadets lack the basic knowledge and
Knowledge
understanding about (the "how") critical

milestones that must be met in order to x
successfully graduate and commission.
Cadets do not have the knowledge or
skills to navigate the multiple demands
x x
placed on them to graduate and
commission
Cadets do not understand or recognize
the value of graduating and x x
commissioning into the USAF.
Cadets do not want to make the active
choice to become and stay actively
Motivation
involved in the AFROTC program x x

because they do not feel valued (as
individuals) by the program.
Cadets lack the motivation to obtain
valuable skills and eventually strengthen
their ability to make (wise) choices,
x x
persist and continually apply adequate
mental effort to graduate and
commission.
AFROTC at-large and Detachment 60
specifically do not offer a formal
x x
mentorship / retention program for
minority cadets.
The environment is viewed as “too
x
competitive” by the cadets
Organization
There exist a low representation of

ethnically similar role models for cadets x x
to aspire to.
There is a lack of organizational value
(through tangible action) on cultural
settings. There is also a lack of inclusion
x x
of positive minority role models in
continual development of the minority
cadet.
Data Analysis
A mixed method approach allowed for collection of both quantitative and qualitative data
from surveys, interviews and document analysis. Using Qualtrics and its analytical tools, survey
responses were grouped into three categories: knowledge, motivation and organizational issues.
During the coding process each category was dissected into further subheadings according to
knowledge (factual, procedural, conceptual, and metacognitive), motivation (active choice,
persistence, and mental effort), and organizational issues (cultural models, settings, and policies).
Interviewees were selected based on an expressed desire to participate after completing
the survey. Similar to the surveys, responses from interviewees was also coded in similar fashion
as to create correlation between answers and corresponding headings, as well as, surveys and
interviews. In addition, data obtained through several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
requests to Headquarters AFROTC were analyzed to triangulate survey and interview results,
and in-turn produce a comprehensive end product.
Trustworthiness of Data
Triangulation of data was accomplished through utilizing surveys, interviews and
document analysis to ensure that data were robust, comprehensive and well developed. In
addition, by using multiple means to assess the same issue, the goal of this study was to capture
multiple dimensions of the retention performance gap as described earlier. The survey
instruments were examined intensely from fellow peers and the dissertation committee, as well
as, the approval process from USC’s Institutional Review Board. Assurance of anonymity and
confidentiality was guaranteed through the proper electronic safeguarding and protection of all
acquired data (as described earlier in the chapter). Close observation of community accepted
standards and practices when conducting surveys and similar interviews was followed. Finally,
member checks were accomplished as the initial part of the survey and all pursuant accepted data
and future interviewees were selected based on pre-designated criteria.
Role of Investigator
I currently serve as a Captain in the United States Air Force and am stationed at Los
Angeles Air Force Base. Although I have intimate knowledge of the AFROTC program because
I was an instructor at San Diego State University from 2008 -2011, I am not acquainted with any
of the cadets at USC AFROTC, Detachment 60, nor am I in their chain-of-command. My
affiliation with the organization stems from my membership in the greater Air Force as an active
duty officer, as well as, my past experience as an AFROTC instructor as Stan Diego State
University. It is my earnest hope to obtain reliable responses from all subjects during the survey
and interview periods.
While the cadets technically play a subordinate role due to the Air Force/AFROTC rank
structure, cadets did not feel in any way obligated to participate in nor were they intimidated by
this study. To ensure this, during one of the fall Leadership Laboratory sessions, where all cadets
simultaneously gather, I introduced myself, the purpose of the study and assured all present that
a decision to participate would in no way affect their performance or standing. Cadets were also
made aware that I was conducting this project as a doctoral candidate and the findings would be
presented to both the Det. 60 AFROTC commander, as well as, to Headquarters Moreover, I
explained in detail to them all steps that will be taken to ensure and maintain the confidentiality
of their feedback. Finally, to engender support of those who were not comfortable with the
laboratory environment, I offered the option of taking the survey outside of class (but within the
survey period), as well as, conducting the interview as an individual student’s schedule
permitted.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations
There are several limitations that existed within this study. In the cultural context of the
military, the model is that a subordinate follows the directions of the leader. Based on the rank of
the researcher, which is a superior rank, the cadets of AFROTC at USC may have felt that they
were obligated to participate in the survey and interview. Because the AFROTC at USC is
comprised of students from approximately 40 schools across the southern California area, the
best time to ensure that the most students had the opportunity to participate in the survey was
during their Leadership Laboratory. This laboratory is a high-intensity training environment and
thus the results from surveys administered during this time are likely not optimal due to stress
factors from their training in the laboratory. This study focused on the knowledge, motivation
and organizational influences on minorities; therefore, cadets may not have chosen to identify
themselves as minorities, even though by the U.S. Census Bureau they may be classified as such
or they may not have wanted to be “singled out” because of their minority status, thus affecting
the sample. In addition, there are other representational issues, such as a large gender disparity,
that are beyond the scope of this study (but should be looked at in further research) that might
affect the outcome.
Delimitations. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the reasons that retention is
lower among minority cadets in the USC AFROTC program. Accurate retention data was not
gained directly from the subjects, but rather from historical documentation from the detachment
itself. It is possible that the reasons given by the current cadets for the gap in retention may not
accurately depict the reasons associated with those who did not persist, which could be the
primary delimitation. In addition, the USC detachment is just one of approximately 1100+ across
the United States, therefore extrapolating any causes should be, at best, done with extreme
caution.
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This study examined the knowledge, motivational and organizational barriers to effective
recruitment and retention of minority AFROTC officer candidates at The University of Southern
California, AFROTC Detachment 60. Using Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework,
both surveys and interviews were conducted to validate or not validate the assumed causes
established in Chapter Three. The purpose of this systematic analytical approach was to identify
causes of the gap between the current performance level and the desired performance level.
This chapter will provide a comprehensive view of the findings from both the survey
results and interviews. The presentation of this chapter will explore the findings as related to
knowledge, motivation and organizational assumed causes. As will be discussed below, the data
suggest that cadets’ motivation was very high but there are several knowledge gaps and
organizational challenges that are significant barrier to effective recruitment and retention of
minority AFROTC cadets.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
In this gap analysis, surveys and interviews were used to validate the assumed knowledge
causes. Utilizing the framework provided by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), both interview
and survey questions related to knowledge were framed and categorized into four specific types;
factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive. While each specific category was not covered
by the survey and the interview, they were all addressed to some extent. Table 6 displays the
assumed knowledge causes that were validated and not validated through the data collection.
Table 6: Assumed Knowledge Causes Validated and Not Validated
Not
Assumed Causes Validated
Validated
Cadets do not know the benchmarks
they must meet throughout their
Factual
academic and cadet life to successfully x

graduate and commission
Cadets lack the basic knowledge

Conceptual
Knowledge
understanding about (the “how”)

critical milestones that must be met in x
order to successfully graduate and
commission.
Cadets do not have the knowledge or
Metacognitive
skills to navigate the multiple

demands placed on them to graduate
x
and commission
Basic Knowledge and Understanding of Benchmarks and Critical Milestones
One of the original assumed knowledge causes affecting retention of minority cadets was
that cadets would have strong, macro-level knowledge about the program but lack understanding
about the interim tasks needed to accomplish those larger goals. In simpler terms, cadets would
be able to effectively communicate most of the large/critical milestones they needed to reach to
ultimately graduate and commission; but, they would display a lack of factual knowledge about
benchmarks and understanding about how to actually reach those milestones. While these
matters are closely related, they are not identical. Again, for emphasis, one is factual knowledge
while the other is conceptual.
To provide more in-depth understanding the terms “critical milestone” and “benchmark”
must be understood. They refer to the individual/specific tasks, timelines or events a cadet must
accomplish in order to join, matriculate through and finish the program. Those milestones
include but are not limited to: successfully passing DOBMERB (Department of Defense Medical
Review Board aka an Air Force physical exam), fulfilling the minimum basic requirements to
join the program, GMC to POC transition (Field Training), meeting of academic requirements,
physical fitness standards, continuous display of good moral character, demonstrating great
leadership potential, and ultimately graduating and commissioning. In order to assess both
assumed causes, surveys and interviews were utilized. The interview responses to questions
strongly correlated to the survey responses.
Cadet Programmatic Knowledge N=40
I know the Air Force/Detachments requirements

for comissioning
Knowledge
I know my institutions academic requiremets for

graducation
I feel confident that I can list several academic

resources/organizations that are available at USC
to aid me in reaching graduation successfully
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Figure 2: Cadet programmatic knowledge.

As shown in Figure 1, the majority of all current cadets strongly agreed or agreed that
they knew the institution’s and Air Force/Detachment’s academic and commissioning
requirements. Similarly, when current and former cadets were asked in the interview if they
could list the academic requirements for graduation of both their respective institutions and
AFROTC, the majority of respondents were able to list several, and almost all of them recounted
the major requirements including but not limited to good academic standing, successful degree
completion, good moral character, and successful completion of Field Training. During an
interview, a former cadet said, “I think the school does a very good job providing us with a very
straightforward layout of what we need to do in order to obtain our degree” (Interviewee 7). The
survey and interviews did not validate the assumed cause that cadets do not know the
benchmarks they must meet throughout their academic and cadet life to successfully graduate
and commission.
As it relates to the “understanding” however, stakeholders responded less favorably on
the survey question about whether they feel confident they can list the academic resources
available to them with approximately 30% responding “disagree” or “strongly disagree”. The
interviews suggested further that current and former cadets lack a conceptual understanding
about critical milestones. In the interviews, when asked to list institutional and programmatic
aids available to them, respondents had little difficulty, listing tutoring resources, academic
counselors, libraries, cultural centers financial aid, and quality professors. However, the gap in
understanding became more evident when respondents began to discuss how they do, or in some
cases do not, utilize those resources. One such resource that cadets and former cadets named as
lacking was the availability and quality of student academic counselors. A current cadet said,
Day one coming into school, I really didn't understand anything, they toss all
these like graphs and charts at me, I was like, I don't really understand this.
Especially coming out of high school where you have counselors pretty much set
up your whole schedule and then coming to college, it's like, [dismissively] “Here
are all the courses you need to take.” (Interviewee 6)
When questioned about resource availability, a former cadet said, “They were just always
trying to teach us how to manage our time but I always felt like they wanted so much from us
and I thought it was really difficult to do it.” These statements provide a glimpse into how
important resources, such as counselors and utilizing effective time management, may be to both
recruitment and retention.
The survey and interviews suggest that while cadets have basic factual knowledge of the
benchmarks they need to meet, they do not thoroughly understand them or the resources
available to them to gain that understanding. The aforementioned disparities evidence a gap in
applicability showing that they do not understand how to fully exercise the resources available to
reach the critical milestones. The interviews and surveys suggested that cadets know that the
resources exist and are available to them; but, they do not display a good understanding how to
utilize the available resources to assist them to graduate and commission.
In conclusion, the majority of the stakeholders, both cadets and those who have left the
program, suggest through both interviews and surveys that there is not a factual knowledge gap;
however, from the findings a gap in understanding appears to exist in how to reach the critical
benchmarks for successful graduation and commission.

Cadets Knowledge or Skills to Navigate Multiple Demands
The findings illuminated that knowledge of a process and knowledge of how to execute
that process can be quite different. For instance, one may know that in order to be academically
successful, he or she must study; however, that does not necessarily mean that he or she knows
how to study. An additional assumed cause in this research was that cadets do not have the
knowledge or skills to navigate the multiple demands placed on them to graduate and
commission. When asked several survey questions that directly or indirectly related to a cadet’s
ability to successfully navigate multiple demands simultaneously, as shown in Figure 2, of the 39
respondents, the overwhelmingly majority responded rather favorably. They indicated in the
survey that they possessed the knowledge and skills necessary to successfully navigate those
demands.
Knowledge & Skills to

Navigate Multiple Demands
I feel confident in my time management skills

(ability to balance academic, AFROTC, social, etc.)
My current study habits will get me through to

graduation successfully
I know how to access & utilize student resources

(e.g. tutoring, counseling, career guidance).
I maintain a proper diet and exercise routine.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Strongly Agree Agree Disgree Strongly Disgree
Figure 3: Knowledge and skills to navigate multiple demands

However, one area where a notable disparity occurred was in response to the statement,
“I feel confident in my time management skills (ability to balance academic, AFROTC, social,
etc.)”; 29% of respondents replied negatively. This response suggests that there may be a
knowledge gap as it relates to the cadets’ knowledge or skills to navigate multiple demands on
them. Furthermore, this gap was more pronounced through interviews among those cadets who
are no longer in the program versus those who were retained, which was an important finding
suggesting an area of concern for retention efforts.
The same gap in knowledge is also suggested though multiple interview responses about
“ability to navigate multiple demands.” Even though expressed in a positive light, the demanding
nature of the program posed a significant time management challenge to several cadets in the
interview. Successfully juggling academic requirements, maintaining above average physical
fitness, participating in student organizations, and, in some cases, fulfilling an additional job can
be quite daunting. In some cases, the sheer time demand placed on cadets is what forced them to
make a decision to leave the detachment. As one former cadet stated,
What was difficult also was like for as far as this detachment you have to have a
certain amount hours and you have to have decent attempts, like put in so much
time per hour, per point (participation points to earn the distinction of “warrior”
flight). It was like a lot of consuming kind of stuff and I didn't know that part. I
didn't know it was going to be that much time you had to put in so that you can
look good. (Interviewee 8)
The responses to the surveys and interviews indicated that management of multiple
demands was an issue that could lead to leaving the program. As a result of the findings, it is
important that this issue be recognized and addressed if AFROTC hopes to improve its
recruitment and retention of minority cadets. While it is unlikely that AFROTC can change its
requirements, the multiple demands can be carefully considered and supported on a regular basis.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
Of the assumed knowledge influences on minority retention, two of the three causes were
validated. The majority of respondents demonstrated that they had no knowledge gap as it relates
to the baseline requirements and expectations of the AFROTC program or their respective
institutions. In contrast, when queried about understanding of critical milestones and the
management of multiple demands, respondents suggested that there was a knowledge gap.
Overall, cadets displayed a strong baseline of programmatic and institutional
requirements and expectations of both AFROTC and their educational institutions. In contrast,
they did not show a mastery of knowledge as it relates to management of multiple demands. To
address the knowledge gap, several potential solutions will be offered in Chapter 5.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
Following the previous format and again using Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001)
framework, the motivation inquiries also consisted of both interviews and surveys. The
motivational assumed causes are categorized in the following manner: task value, attributions,
goal orientation, goals and affect.
It is important to establish a baseline of understanding in order to gain insight as to the
cadets’ initial reason(s) for joining and to understand why an individual would be motivated to
graduation and commission, before the specific responses to motivation related questions are
discussed. The answer to those questions better informs the “why” related to both recruitment
and retention.
When asked “What influenced your initial decision to join AFROTC,” as shown in
Figure 3, individuals replied with various answers ranging from, for most, a “personal sense of
duty/service” to, for the fewest, interest in piloting or flight operations.
Influence to join AFROTC
Pilot or Flying Opps
Family (other members who have served)
Leadership Opps
Skills & Training
Potential Pay/Benefits
Scholarship/Educational Opps.
Personal Sense of Duty/Service
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Figure 4: Chart of responses on decision to join AFROTC.
An interesting result from this particular question was that most respondents selected
choices that are not specifically related to the Air Force. The top responses in order were the
following:
1. A personal senses of duty/service
2. Leadership opportunities
3. Skills and training and potential pay and benefits

The interviews echoed the same sentiments; people join for a variety of reasons not
necessarily directly related to the Air Force in particular. Several interviewees recounted the
reasons they decided to join or stay in the program. As one AFROTC cadet stated,
I joined the reserves so I can do something different with my life. Eventually,
after I joined, I found out ways to advance myself and that was becoming an
officer. The other reason why is because since I have joined the military I've
gotten criticism from people in my (Muslim) community. They say you're in the
military, you're probably killing our own people and all that stuff…that's not true
at all. I think me being an officer in the military will help show the younger
generation in my community that they can consider a career in any branch of the
service as a viable career option. (Interviewee 1)
Another current cadet responded, “I wanted to do something extraordinary in my life, and
when I followed my dad's footsteps. He was enlisted in the Air Force. I figured I want to become
an Air Force officer instead” (Interviewee 4). Interestingly, the former students who were
interviewed who had left the program without graduating or commissioning responded in similar
fashion. As one stated,
The only reason why I joined the Air Force was because my cousin was a part of
it and I have a huge family hierarchy in the Air Force. Another thing that I saw, at
least in the ROTC and Officer Training Program was self-development. I felt like
it was going to be a good way to develop myself into a leader. I think part of that
comes with wanting to get into a career field that's going to be beneficial to me in
the long run.

The nuance of why an individual initially join the AFROTC program is important as it
relates to overall motivation for recruitment and retention. If the AFROTC program as a whole
can continue to maintain focus on the original “why” as a motivational tool, the path to both
successful recruitment and retention becomes clearer.
Table 7 displays the assumed causes, their associated motivational category, and whether
they were validated or not validated. One of the assumed motivation causes was validated. The
other two assumed causes were not validated based on interview and survey results.
Table 7: Assumed Motivational Causes Validated and Not Validated
Not
Validated
Task Value (cost
Cadets do not understand or

Value)
recognize the value of graduating and x

commissioning into the USAF.
Cadets do not want to make the active

Motivation
choice to become and stay actively

Affect
involved in the AFROTC program x

because they do not feel valued (as
individuals) by the program.
Cadets lack the motivation to obtain

Orientation,
Goals, Goal
Attribution
valuable skills and eventually

strengthen their ability to make (wise)
x
choices, persist and continually apply
adequate mental effort to graduate
and commission.
Cadets’ Understanding/Recognition of USAF Graduation/Commission Value
The assumed cause was connected with the understanding that if cadets fully recognized
and valued graduation and earning a commission, their motivation to join and stay in the
program would be higher. It was assumed that cadets who discontinued the program may, at least
in part, not fully comprehend the value of graduation and/or commission. The results from both
the interviews and surveys suggested that cadets do understand and recognize the value of
graduating and commissioning. The survey showed that over 90% of respondents agreed that
they could list the benefits of finishing the AFROTC program and commissioning.
During the interviews, cadets and former cadets alike cited the benefits of a commission
as a source of motivation. As one current cadet stated,
There's more job security, there is job availability than there is outside. Definitely
we see a lot of people that are out there still looking for jobs, two or three years
later and I know coming out of it, I'm going to have a job. Other than that,
hopefully being able to go through a 20-year career, being able to retire at forty-
three, forty-four, something like that. Scholarship is another benefit, I won't have
these loans coming up that I have to keep paying for years and years. Everything
is going to be paid off by the time I get out of school. (Interviewee 3)
The financial benefit is one that cadets clearly recognize. The average per year cost of a
four-year college in the United States is $23,872 (NCES, 2015). Over four years, this number
balloons to approximately $95,000. With an AFROTC four-year scholarship, this amount is zero,
a factor that interviewees suggested increases motivation to join and matriculate through the
AFROTC program.
According to the respondents, the long-term benefits of graduation and commissioning
are not just financial. As one current/former cadet suggested,
This [AFROTC] will be the maximum amount of training that I could present
myself my future enlisted troops. I did do some training and I worked hard for it. I
did not just go to some six-week [reference to OTS] and then appear here in front
of you (enlisted member) with minimum knowledge. I did go to field training and
I really worked hard to be here. I want present myself the best officer I could be
when I join the military. (Interviewee 6)
According to this case study, the leadership opportunities along with the skills and
training a cadet receives while in the AFROTC program were the second and third most
important aspects of the program.
A personal sense of duty, leadership opportunities, and gaining a set of new skills were
important reasons why Detachment 60 cadets in this study suggested that they joined the
AFROTC. This case study additionally suggested that they understand and are taught the short
and long term program benefits. It was assumed that cadets who discontinued the program would
not fully comprehend the value of graduation and/or commission; however, from the results, it
can be concluded that an understanding of benefits related to graduation and commissioning into
the USAF was understood even by those who were not retained and was not a motivational
barrier.
Active Choice to Stay Actively Involved Due to Lack of Individual Valuation
Another assumed cause related to motivation was that cadets do not want to make the
choice to become and stay actively involved in the AFROTC program because they do not feel
valued (as individuals) by the program. This particular assumption also extends into the
“organizational influence” realm of this KMO study; however, for the purposes of discreet
categorization it will be classified under motivation here. According to Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, and
Perry (2002), “positive intrinsic emotions may be presumed to direct notice to the task, thus
directly enabling learning and performance.” Holistically, developing positive emotions and
decreasing negative emotions improves learning, motivation and performance.
The results from this research suggested that the overall individual cadet valuation
trended positively. However, while there were several cadets, and even former cadets, who spoke
highly of their valuation in the program, there were enough mixed and negative responses given
that they were taken into account when considering the individual and collective motivational
climate of AFROTC Det. 60. For instance, one current cadet responded to a line of questioning
related to motivation in this manner, “I have heard so many stories of really good cadets are not
getting commissioned because of the needs of the Air Force. There are cases where you can be
an outstanding cadet and [in a given year], that cadet might not make it. It’s not given that you'll
get a commission which I think is kind of unfortunate” (Interviewee 1). There were several
responses that echoed the same sentiments as it pertains specifically to individual valuation. As
another former cadet stated,
I remember being super upset at just the way our cadre handled it (an individual
situation). They were never open about what was going on with Holm Center
(AFROTC HQ). At the end of the day, I feel the college really even had no idea
what was going on. There was a lot of miscommunication, I think, and we really
were left in the blind and in the dark about a lot of the decisions that were being
made from above”. (Interviewee 5)

The responses from the cadet stakeholders as a group, however, did not indicate that an
individual communication issue was a pervasive one.
Another area of concern raised by respondents was the detachment’s lack of recognition
of individual time commitments and the level of demands placed on them by the program. A few
current and former cadets spoke about how in conjunction with the other activities a cadet might
be involved in, the program can be even more challenging. One interviewee who discontinued
several years ago said, “It was just the pressure of how stressful it was to do well. I pushed
myself, and I pushed myself I think a little too hard. I was the director of training, the GMC
director of training, and I was just putting in so much time, like actual time and effort”
(Interviewee 7). In another interview, when asked how cadets were treated in the program, one
respondent had this to say, “I think everyone is literally treated equally. The only thing that
someone wouldn't be treated [equally] is because of how much time they put into the program... I
think that's the only thing” (Interviewee 2). The perception appeared that cadets who spend more
time with the detachment are more dedicated or favored more than those who do not spend the
same amount of time, regardless of other commitments such as extra-circular activities,
employment, or logistical limitations. This perception can negatively affect the motivation of the
individual cadets as it relates to graduation and commissioning from the detachment.
Lack of Motivation to Strengthen Decision Making Abilities and Persistence
To fully analyze the last assumed motivation cause to relatively low AFROTC minority
recruitment and retention, its individual nuances must be understood in both isolation and
totality. As originally framed, the assumed motivation cause was, “Cadets lack the motivation to
obtain valuable skills and eventually strengthen their ability to make (wise) choices, persist and
continually apply adequate mental effort to graduate and commission.” Individually, the terms
“valuable skills,” “wise choice,” and “mental effort” need further clarification. Within the
context of this case study, “valuable skills” are attributes pertaining or related to tools that will
help a cadet graduate and commission. Some of those skills include, but are not limited to, good
study habits, communication skills, prioritization, good health (proper diet and exercise) and
effective time management. “Wise choice” is defined as a decision that will ultimately lead to
both graduation and commissioning. Finally, “mental effort” is defined as the number of non-
automatic elaborations applied to a unit of material to be learned, or simply stated, is the level of
energy related to a task to be mastered (Salomon, 1984, p. 648).
To assess survey respondents on this particular assumed cause, several Likert scale
statements were made, to which respondents replied on a scale ranging from “strongly disagree”
to “strongly agree.” These were as follows:
1. My current study habits will get me through to graduation successfully;
2. I feel confident in my time management skills (ability to balance academic, AFROTC,
social, etc.);
3. I feel confident in my ability to finish the AFROTC program; and
4. It is very important to me to finish the AFROTC program and earn a commission.
As evidenced in the answers to the previous questions (and especially highlighted by
Figures 3 and 4) the vast majority of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed to all four
survey questions. In response to the interview question, “Why is graduation/commissioning
important to you?” a cadet said, “In the beginning I was like, if I finish it, I finish. But now that
I've actually been in the program I feel so inspired…ROTC has made that much of an impact in
my life. Even if I feel like everything is falling apart ROTC feels like my one thing that is
leading me. My one goal…” (Interviewee 6). Comparably, a former cadet said if it were not for
her poor grades because of an inordinate employment commitment that she would have stayed in
the program. From a holistic perspective, cadets and non-cadets alike cited reasons related to
purpose, goal orientation, job security, and even being an example to their community as reasons
why graduation and earning a commitment are important. As the data produced from the
motivation questions of this research were further examined, answers to some of the questions
reveal some deeper complexities. The responses in two particular areas stand out: time
management and study skills.
I FEEL CONFIDENT IN MY TIME MANAGEMENT

SKILLS (ABILITY TO BALANCE ACADEMIC,
AFROTC, SOCIAL, ETC.)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree
0% 8%
47%
45%
Figure 5: Confidence in time management skills.

MY CURRENT STUDY HABITS WILL GET ME

THROUGH TO GRADUATION SUCCESSFULLY.
0% 8%
Strongly Disagree
47% Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
45%
Figure 6: Confidence in study habits to graduation.
98% of the responses stated that graduating and earning a commission was extremely
important. This can be directly correlated to the 92% of respondents who indicated that they are
confident in their management skills and study habits. Furthermore, several interviewees stated
that both study habits and time management were substantial factors that affected their
motivation. While several interview responses could be interpreted as mildly contrary to the
results of the survey, the overall effects were not poignant enough to alter any of the
respondent’s decisions whether to continue or leave the program. One cadet who left the
program stated, “I guess just constantly pushing myself, I got to the point that I needed to chill
out for two seconds and get myself together, because I've been pushing myself twenty times and
I haven't stopped to breathe once” (Interviewee 7). Again, based upon the survey percentages and
the interview responses, the concern is not high enough for validate this assumed motivation
cause to minority cadet recruitment and retention.
Synthesis of Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
Of the three assumed causes related to motivation, one was validated and two were not
validated. The evidence suggested that the respondents, both current and former cadets,
recognized the value of graduation and commissioning. Their motivation to graduate and receive
a commission was relatively strong. The findings reflected their understanding that to achieve
this goal required continual improvement by obtaining valuable skills, strengthening their ability
to make wise choices, persisting, and applying adequate mental effort. However, their motivation
appeared to be negatively affected due to individual valuation by the program. Overall,
motivation does not seem to be a key factor causing the relatively low recruitment and retention
of minority cadets in AFROTC Detachment 60.
Results and Findings for Organizational Causes
The last general area of study was organizational barriers. Organization-related causes
may positively or negatively affect the stated organizational goal. As it relates to this case study,
organizational causes may affect recruitment and retention of minority cadets in AFROTC Det.
60. Similar to the knowledge and motivation sections of this chapter, the organizational issues
section used Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) framework. Using the methodology of a survey
and interviews, organizational assumed causes were explored in terms of “cultural models,” and
“cultural settings.” As demonstrated in Table 7, three of the four assumed causes were validated
and one new cause identified.

Table 7: Assumed Organizational Causes Validated and Not Validated
Not
Validated
Cultural AFROTC at-large and Detachment 60

Model specifically do not offer a formal
x
mentorship / retention program for
minority cadets.
Cultural
Model
The environment is viewed as “too

x
competitive” by the cadets
Organization
Cultural
Settings
There exists a low representation of

ethnically similar role models for x
cadets to aspire to.
There is a lack of organizational value

(through tangible action) on cultural
Cultural
Settings
settings. There is also a lack of

x
inclusion of positive minority role
models in continual development of
the minority cadet.
No Formal Mentorship/Retention Program(s)
The findings gained during this case in relation to Det. 60 having a formal mentorship
program are informative. Using the Likert-scale, survey subjects were probed as to whether,
“The detachment offers a formal mentorship/retention program and it is adequate enough to meet
the needs cadets might have.” Figure 6 shows the responses:

The detachment offers a formal

mentorship/retention program and it is
adequate enough to meet the majority of
needs that cadets might have.
0%
8%
29%
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
63%
Figure 7: Formal mentorship to meet the needs of cadets
It was assumed prior to the research that the detachment did not have a formalized
mentorship program; however, based on the survey responses and after further investigation, it
was found that the detachment does offer a mentorship program, which is currently structured to
match new GMC (1st & 2nd year) cadets with seasoned POC (3rd and 4th year) cadets. By
definition, if a more experienced individual is intentionally paired with a less experienced
individual for the purpose of learning, it constitutes a mentor-mentee program. Nevertheless, in
this assumed cause, the word “mentor” was intended to refer to an active duty member or
veteran, not another cadet. While senior cadets can indeed mentor junior cadets in certain
instances, they cannot be reasonably expected to mentor them in issues related to active duty Air
Force life, future Air Force career choices, officership or any of the many capacities in which an
Air Force officer is expected to operate. While the survey responses suggested a mentorship
program exists, the scope of the program is limited according to the standards proposed in this
study and does not offer cadets the expected full range of organizational support to enhance
retention, thus validating the original assumed organizational cause.
Several responses about the actual state of the mentorship program at Det. 60 provide
further evidence that the program, as structured, does not meet all of the needs of cadets. In fact,
the majority of the interview responses about the program only speak to present cadet life, not
anything related to a future in the Air Force. One cadet responded, “He [unnamed POC cadet] is
the same cadet rank I am, he’s going rated for pilot, just kinda in the same situation I am, and
having him telling me what he did kind of got me ... I knew what I wanted to do, if I had any
questions on what he’s done I just go ask him” (Interviewee 3). Another cadet responded, “They
[the POC] try to have somebody that you can ask questions to. They say if you need to talk to me
about anything you know life, just cry, you can call me anytime. Call me, text me…or if you're
confused about anything and having a hard time in life or adjusting to ROTC life, they are very
much here for you” (Interviewee 6).
These and other responses suggested limitations with the mentorship program for Det. 60
that include, the current mentorship program is geared to assist junior cadets, the program may
be somewhat informal, and the current program may not have cadre oversight or an overarching
mission and vision. Moreover, the program may not actually be benefiting all cadets. As another
cadet stated, “The mentorship program is sometimes ineffective due to cadets with dissimilar
(academic) background being paired (Interviewee 2).” Recognizing that the current program as
designed was not directly addressing either recruitment nor retention goals, this assumed cause is
validated.
Detachment Environment Viewed as “Too Competitive” by Cadets
The environment within which one works is the cultural setting. The cultural setting must
be conducive in order for all stated goals of an organization to be met. If/when the cultural
setting is not nurturing all components that will contribute to the stated goals, it is coined an
“inhospitable environment.” Of all evidence presented from the surveys and interview questions
related to organizational barriers, the most poignant came by way of responses related to
organizational settings.
During the interview portion of the research for this cases study, several respondents
offered insights related to the cultural setting or environment of Det. 60. One former cadet said,
“Det. 60 really fostered a group of, not only hard-headed cadets, but very ‘in it for themselves’
cadets. I never felt like anybody supported one another, myself included. I felt like the Det. 60
created an environment where it was either you or it was nobody else” (Interviewee 5).
Another former cadet responded this way:
I felt like it was so many things being thrown at you. You have this Leadership
Lab to study for and if you failed to perform well there, then it looks badly on
you. Then of course you have personal struggles… That's what I mean by stretch
yourself thin because you're just dealing with so many different pressures from
various sides and we're human. We're not robots. We're not designed to take that
kind of pressure. You can take a really outstanding and distinguished candidate
and put them in a very bad situation like that and don't be surprised if they don't
work out, because it's only natural.
The climate of an organization’s cultural setting directly relates to its ability to meet
organizational goals. While the previous responses were from former cadets, there are reactions
from current cadets that echo the same sentiments. A current cadet stated, “It’s definitely a
competitive environment. They [the cadre] are always available but it’s always that little element
of us [need to be] being self-sufficient going out and looking for it [the answers].” Another third-
year cadet replied, “There's lots of stuff I have to put up with but I can do it. To me it's all in my
head than the end of the day, but I guess the only thing that's getting in the way is commander's
rating and AFOQT and all that stuff (Interviewee 3).” These two particular statements reflected
the very competitive nature of the detachment. The latter statement referenced the commander’s
rating which is a composite score and corresponding cadet ranking given to each cadet based
upon their performance. The score is partially objective and partially subjective. The former
statement addressed the high level of self-sufficiency that each cadet is expected to have.
Combined, a majority of the responses painted a picture of an organization that, perhaps, could
be having a negative impact on its recruitment and retention goals simply because of its cultural
setting.
Low Representation of Ethnically Similar Role Models for Cadets
One particular indicator of effective cultural role modeling is consistent organizational
role models that are utilized by the organization. To improve the recruitment and retention of
minority cadets, as a focus of this study, a detachment should consistently provide positive
cultural role models. When asked about the presence of ethnically similar role models in Det. 60,
approximately 75% of respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed” with the statement, as shown in
Figure 7.
There are ethnically similar role models

(to me) in Detachment 60.
3%
31% 21%
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
45% Strongly Agree
Figure 8: Ethnically similar role models in detachment.
This response was also repeated in the observations as part of the study, as well as, a few
of the responses given by the cadets during the interviews. The diversity of the staff was one
apparent aspect of Det. 60, which could be unlike any other detachment because it includes all
ethnic minorities along with a dominance of women. In an interview one cadet said, “One big
thing that I feel that is really unique, that you don't always see, is that the cadre is (majority)
females and there are very few females in the detachment so they try to be very user-friendly
(Interviewee 6).”
Having a diverse cadre is the paragon of cultural modeling; moreover, it has the potential
to garner the desired improvements in recruitment and retention of minority cadets. The way Det.
60 was currently staffed as compared to AFROTC as a whole is an anomaly. However, if and
when it is capitalized upon, it could reap benefits by way of closing the existing recruitment and
retention gap. The assumed cause that there exists a low representation of ethnically similar role
models for whom cadets can aspire was not validated.
Lack of Organizational Value on Cultural Settings
Both cultural role models and organizational cultural settings are necessary and one
cannot be obtained without the other. Without a positive cultural setting, cultural role models
cannot thrive. Without positive cultural role models, a fruitful cultural setting cannot be obtained.
The results from this case study supported this. From the findings, there was a gap, whether real
or perceived, that exists between what Det. 60 says and what it does. That gap was demonstrated
in both the survey and interview results. Figure 8 presents the survey responses to a question
about the organization’s ethnicity valuation.
The Detachment participates in activities

(e.g. lectures, lessons, career days, provides
mentors) that show that they are actively
engaged in valuing ethnic diversity.
0%
16%
29%
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
55% Strongly Agree
Figure 9: Organization ethnicity valuation

The findings provided insight and understanding into cadets’ perceptions on how Det. 60
values diversity. While 92% of respondents agreed that Det. 60 values ethnic diversity within the
cadet corps, one in four respondents indicated that their ethnicity was not valued.
I feel that my ethnicity is valued

by the Detachment.
0%
16% 24%
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
60% Strongly Agree
Figure 10: Organization individual ethnicity valuation.
This trend is noteworthy because, if an organization has a goal of building or maintain a
positive cultural setting they must show it consistently. In response to interview questions about
the organization’s valuation of ethnic diversity, one current cadet said, "I don't think this
detachment is as diversified as I would hope it would be. I've seen most people here are
Caucasian, afterwards next would be Asian then Latinos. I think there's two African American
cadets here and I'm the only Middle Eastern cadet in this detachment. I think that says a lot about
diversity here (interviewee 1).” This statement demonstrated that there is room to grow.
Another aspect of cultural setting that should be observed is the cultural tone set by both
cadet and cadre leadership. By design, the AFROTC environment is stressful. The reason for this
design is to stretch and grow cadets by putting them in stressful but controlled situations to
improve their ability to become future Air Force officers. Nevertheless, that growth should not
come at the expense of devaluing (ethnically or otherwise) a particular cadet or group of cadets.
While discussing cultural models and settings, one former cadet who has since graduated said,
“He [former detachment commander] did see more potential from cadets who were actually at
the top. Whereas, in the middle or the bottom, there was barely paying attention to them… You
would want fair share, expectations from all cadets in the program, not just from a certain group
(interviewee 4).” Favoritism by leadership whether perceived or real can irreparably damage
organizational cultural settings.
At the same time, there are characteristics of Det. 60 that demonstrated positive strides
toward a healthy cultural setting. Det. 60 has a bevy of tools necessary to provide both a healthy
cultural setting and positive cultural models. First, the demographic makeup of their staff
includes three African-American women (the commander and two NCO’s), one Hispanic female,
one Pilipino male and one Caucasian male. Second, for particular ethnicities, there is a high
representation of ethnic minorities within the detachment, as shown in Figure 9.

Det 60 Ethnic Demographics

Native Hawaiian /
Other Pacific
Islands
5%
Black / Multiple Races
African- 13% caucasian
American 30%
0%
Asian/Pacific
Islander
30% Hispanic /
Latino
22%
Native American /
Native Alaskan N = 40
0%
Figure 11: Ethnic distribution of Det. 60 from survey
Nevertheless, again, the detachment still has room for significant growth. They currently have no
African-American or Native American/Native Alaskan cadets and their numbers of Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander representation is very low. In addition, the representation of female
cadets is not representative with the population the detachment serves. As one interviewed cadet
stated, “Right now, we have six females, five are GMCs one is POCs. Technically we have seven
but one went to study abroad. We originally started with three other females who were GMCs
and they kinda dropped (interviewee 6).” While the detachment shows promise in some areas,
they also exhibit significant gaps in others; therefore, the assumed cause of “lack of
organizational value on cultural settings” is validated.

Synthesis of Results and Findings for Organization Causes
Of the four assumed causes related to organization, three were validated and one was not
validated. The evidence presented from the surveys and interviews suggested four distinct
conclusions. First, while a formal mentorship program exists, it was not optimally structured to
obtain the goal of increased recruitment and retention of minority cadets. Second, while cadets
recognize the necessity of being in a strategically stressful training environment, they also
responded that the pressure can, at times, be too much to overcome. Additionally, that pressure
can in some cases be directly related to minority cadet recruitment and retention issues. Third,
the cadre is very diverse which provides good cultural models pertaining to ethnic diversity in
leadership for the detachment. Finally, while the detachment consists of a significant number of
minority cadets, growth in several ethnic demographics would provide optimum diversity for the
detachment. Overall, the organizational issues sector of this research presented the largest
contribution to the gap that exists in minority cadet recruitment and retention.
CHAPTER FIVE: SOLUTIONS, IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION
The overarching deficit in this gap analysis study is the U.S. Air Force’s
underrepresentation of ethnic minorities, including African-Americans, Hispanics and Native
Americans, within the active duty officer ranks relative to the U.S. general population. The low
recruitment and retention rates of minority cadets in the AFROTC program at-large, which
serves as the largest commissioning path to becoming an officer in the USAF, contributes to this
underrepresentation. The organizational performance problem for this study is a lack of effective
recruitment and retention of minority AFROTC officer candidates at The University of Southern
California, AFROTC Detachment 60. The organizational improvement goal pursuant to this gap
analysis is that by May 2021 USC’s AFROTC will have retention rates of minority students such
that they graduate and commission within 4-5 years of entering at the same rate as non-minority
students.
During the research phase of this case study, Clark and Estes (2008) analysis framework
was used to identify assume knowledge, motivation and organizational issues (KMO)
contributing to the low recruitment and retention of minority cadets at USC’s AFROTC. Of the
ten assumed causes for low recruitment and retention of minority cadets at Det. 60, six were
validated and one new cause identified. The purpose of this chapter is to offer solutions to those
seven validated causes with the intent of reaching the aforementioned organizational goal.
While Clark and Estes (2008) clearly differentiate between the categories of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational issues, the validated causes in this case study are closely
interconnected and suggest the need for proposed alternatives that address each area
simultaneously. Coupling Clark and Estes (2008) analysis framework with Tinto’s (1975)
“Conceptual Schema for Departure”, this chapter will discuss proposed solutions,
implementation suggestions, and a prescribed evaluation plan.
Validated Needs Selection and Rationale
The original hypothesis guiding this case study was that the majority of the validations of
assumed causes would stem from the organizational category. While data proved that hypothesis
correct, it also showed that there are validated assumed causes in both the knowledge and
motivation categories. Based on these findings, three solutions will be offered. While all of the
proposed solutions are unique and can be implemented independent of one another, in concert
they have the potential to address all of the validated assumed causes in the categories of
knowledge, motivation and organization.
Table 9: Summary of Validated Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Causes
KNOWLEDGE
Cadets lack the basic knowledge understanding about critical milestones that must be met in order to successfully graduate and
commission.
Cadets do not have the knowledge or skills to navigate the multiple demands placed on them to graduate and commission
MOTIVATION
Cadets do not want to make the active choice to become and stay actively involved in the AFROTC program because they do not feel
valued (as individuals) by the program.
ORGANIZATION
AFROTC at-large and Detachment 60 specifically do not offer a formal mentorship / retention program for minority cadets.
There exist a low representation of ethnically similar role models for cadets to aspire to.
The environment is viewed as “too competitive” by the cadets

There is a lack of organizational value (through tangible action) on cultural settings. There is also a lack of inclusion of positive minority
role models in continual development of the minority cadet.
Solutions
In order to frame the suggested solutions, this chapter will reference two specific
models/frameworks. It is those frameworks that will underpin the proposed solutions. First,
Tinto’s (1975) model of “Student Departure” will be utilized to frame the solutions with an
educational institution perspective. Second, Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis framework will
be overlaid to directly address the specific identified gaps. There are some logical intersections
across these two models. More specifically, specific domains of Tinto’s (1975) model can be
directly connected to one or more of the domains presented by Clark and Estes. Figure 10 is a
visual depiction of these intersections as evidenced by the results of this case study. Knowledge,
Motivation and Organization are represented by the colors blue, orange and green. Blends of
those colors represent their cross sections.
Tinto Model of Student Departure + Clark & Estes Gap Analysis Framework
Family Grade
Background Performance
Intellectual Academic
Goal Goal
Development Integration
Commitment Commitment
Individual
Attributes Dropout
Decisions
Institutional Social Institutional
Commitment Peer Group
Integration Commitment
Interaction
Pre-College Faculty
Schooling Interaction
Knowledge Motivation Organization
Figure 12: Overlay of Tinto’s Model of Student Departure and gap analysis framework.
Using the evidence from the case study and the framework of this combined overlay,
three suggested alternative solutions are proposed to address the validated knowledge,
motivation and organizational causes affecting minority recruitment and retention in USC’s
AFROTC Det. 60. These solutions are:
1. Capitalize on already established Air Force accessions recruitment and retention programs;
2. Develop a comprehensive recruiting and retention training program for all cadre members;
3. Develop and establish a “Cadet/Active Duty/Student Veteran” mentorship program.
Solution 1: Capitalize on Established AF Accessions Recruitment and Retention Programs
The results from surveys and interviews validated several gaps in the areas of knowledge,
motivation and organization (KMO). In the area of knowledge, cadets lacked basic conceptual
knowledge to successfully graduate and commission. From a metacognitive standpoint, cadets
also showed a deficit in basic knowledge and understanding about critical milestones that must
be met in order to successfully graduate and commission. Additionally, cadets’ motivation levels
suggested that they do not make the choice to become and stay actively involved in the AFROTC
program because they do not feel valued (as individuals) by the program. Finally, in the area of
organization issues, cadets’ responses suggested that there is a lack of organizational value
(through tangible action) on cultural settings evidenced through a lack of inclusion of positive
minority role models in continual development of minority cadets.
While there exists a myriad of programs and initiatives that have shown success in
recruiting and retaining minority students in higher education as a whole, several programs exist
in the USAF that could be uniquely suited to address the validated knowledge, motivation and
organizational gaps for USC’s AFROTC Det. 60. Two suggested programs are the “Falcon Visit
Program” (FVP) at the United States Air Force Academy and the AFROTC “Gold Bar
Recruiting” (GBR) program.
USAFA Falcon Visit Program (FVP)
Oftentimes organizations look for new and innovative ways to address challenges they
face; similarly, AFROTC Det. 60 can look to their sister commissioning source, the United
States Air Force Academy (USAF), for an effective minority recruitment and retention program.
To address the issue of poor recruitment and retention of minority cadets, in 2007, the Falcon
Foundation established the Falcon Visit Program (FVP). As one of the many outreach programs
sponsored by the Falcon Foundation, the FVP serves to aid the larger mission of, “Further[ing]
the ability of exceptional young men and women to attend the United States Air Force Academy
and pursue Air, Space, Cyber careers in the United States Air Force through awarding junior
college and preparatory school Falcon Foundation scholarships, providing ongoing support to US
Air Force Academy programs, and mentoring our Falcon scholars” (S. Hargett, personal
communication, May 11, 2016). According to Captain Saily Hargett of the Admissions and
Outreach Division of USAF, “the program specifically targets diverse students, especially those
who display diversity in the area of race, gender, 1st generation college students as well as those
with diverse socio-economic and geographical backgrounds” (personal communication, May 11,
2016). The FVP sponsors potential promising applicants to take a five-day trip to the Academy.
They are paired with a host student and are given the opportunity to experience cadet life for the
duration of the experience. The trip also includes meetings hosted by the Commandant of Cadets,
Dean of Students, Athletic Director as well as other senior staff members. The focus of the visit
is exposure to USAF life as well as hands-on assistance throughout the entire admissions
process. The effectiveness and ultimately success of FVP is measured in two ways. First, how
many students who partake in FVP complete the USAF application process? Second, how many
of the students who apply are admitted? Currently, the FVP is developing tracking procedures to
gauge how many FVP attendees start the application process, finish the application process, get
an appointment to USAF, accept the appointment to USAF, and finally, graduate earning a
commission. Thus far, the overall results seem promising (S. Hargett, personal communication,
May 11, 2016). Taking this “high-touch” approach with potential minority cadets actively
addresses several of the gaps evidenced in this case study.
The FVP is just one USAF initiative that demonstrates their institutional commitment to
diversity. If Det. 60 developed a similar visitation program to mirror the FVP they too could
directly address some of the gaps evidenced in the case study. Simultaneously they could have
the proposed “Grass Roots” USC recruiters run the program. This would not only effectively
bridge the logistical gap between high school and college for the potential students, it could also
serve as a way to purposely address and eliminate the knowledge, motivation and organizational
gaps evidenced in the case study
Gold Bar Recruiting Program
Recruitment of minority students must be a comprehensive process with an enduring,
institution-wide commitment to diversity (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association,
2016). Commitment to diversity at all levels of the institution, on a philosophical, as well as, a
pecuniary basis, must shape the base of all admission and recruitment efforts. Similar to FVP, the
GBR program is a USAF initiative targeted at closing the minority recruiting gap. Focusing on
large metropolitan areas with high saturations of diverse students, the GBR casts a “wide net” on
a large pool of potential applicants. In large metropolises such as Los Angeles, San Diego,
Houston and Miami, Gold Bar recruiters are given specific training and then assigned to recruit
students with diverse backgrounds. Through college and career fairs, high school visits and
industry events targeting potential college attendees, Gold Bar recruiters aim to initiate as many
“contacts” as possible. They get basic demographic and academic information from current high
school students who show any interest and enter them into a database for future contact. In
addition, the recruiters offer general information about the who, what, where, when and why of
AFROTC to students and families of students who have questions.
With several modifications, Det. 60 could develop and institute its own “grass roots”
recruitment program to address the minority cadet recruitment gap at this detachment. First, the
potential Det. 60 recruiters could be former AFROTC graduates. After graduation, newly minted
2nd Lieutenants could immediately join a “recruitment track” where they would get fully job
qualified within their Air Force career field, work for 1-2 years, and then return to the
detachment from which they graduated as a “Grass Roots Recruiter.” The lieutenants would then
sign a contract (for a determined length) to serve as a recruiter at the detachment they graduated
from – in this case Det. 60. The differences between this and the Gold Bar program as currently
constructed are:
1. The recruiters would have Air Force experience in contrast to a GBR who is fresh out
of college.
2. This experience gives them the unique ability to address several knowledge gaps
identified through this study
3. The recruiters would already be familiar with the institution, its demographics, and its
nuances thus they could more successfully navigate and address specific knowledge issues.
Taking these steps would directly address the organizational gaps of not having a formalized
program, as well as, the issue of Det. 60 not displaying a tangible commitment to recruitment
and retention. These prospective recruiters would be fully dedicated to improving specific
geographical areas vs AFROTC as a whole thus increasing both institutional and potentially
student motivation.
Solution 2: Provide Recruitment and Retention Training for Cadre
Pursuant to instituting a grass roots recruitment and Trojan Visitation program to address
the recruitment gap, the retention aspect of the issue will also need to be addressed. The results
from surveys and interviews validated several gaps in the areas of knowledge, motivation and
organization that can potentially be addressed with the introduction of comprehensive
recruitment and retention training for all cadre members. This kind of training program could
potentially address several validated needs that include cadets do not know the benchmarks they
must meet throughout their academic and cadet life to successfully graduate and commission;
AFROTC at-large and Detachment 60 specifically do not offer a formal mentorship and retention
program for minority cadets; and, there is a lack of organizational value through tangible action
on cultural settings.
“If higher education institutions are to effectively attract and retain racially and ethnically
diverse students, they must be able to meet the psychological, safety, sense of belonging, self-
esteem, and self-actualization needs that these students bring with them to campus” (American
Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2016). Through comprehensive recruitment and
retention training, the cadre will learn the most effective tools, techniques and procedures to
ensure they are optimally producing as many cadets as possible to successfully graduating and
commissioning.
Later in this chapter, a detailed implementation and assessment plan for the
comprehensive recruitment and retention training will be presented. Before doing so, however,
there are several key factors that arise in research on recruitment and retention programs that
must be acknowledged. First, the issues of educational access for minority students will
undoubtedly play a role in any recruitment effort and most likely could affect retention efforts.
As suggested by Ntiri (2001), “some of these barriers include financial hardship, lack of family
support, and lack of information about the college preparation and application process and often,
an absence of role models who have gone to college.” Before any training program can be
developed, the manner in which these challenges affect potential in-coming cadets of Det. 60
must be considered.
The next difficulty that must be taken into account is “any institution or profession
looking to attract minorities must ascertain which strategies are more effective for attracting
minority students” (Dumas-Hines, Cochran, & Williams, 2001). More importantly, Det.60 must
discover best practices to attract diverse students to their specific detachment because
“recruitment must answer to the specific needs and impediments of each group” (American
Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 2016).
Finally, any recruitment and retention program developed at Det. 60 must ensure that all
cadre members are properly trained to successfully administer quality academic advising. The
academic path of a Det. 60 cadet is different from that of a traditional college student in that the
cadet has more requirements than a traditional student. These include the cadet must a) graduate
in a four-year period unless otherwise authorized; b) maintain a “full-time” student status at all
times; c) must also take all necessary Aerospace Science (AS) classes in addition to the standard
academic load; and, d) maintain a 2.5 GPA during the duration of the program if they are on a
scholarship. With these additional requirements, the academic success of a cadet is integral to
their ability to graduate and commission. Accounting for all of these additional factors, the
AFROTC cadre must learn how to become effective academic advisors. They are not to serve as
a replacement to the overall institution or college specific academic advisors. Rather, they are to
serve as a strong support, constantly informing cadets of any additional AFROTC related
obligations in addition to keeping them on track academically by the cadet’s respective
institution standards. In some cases, academic advising for minority students can present even
greater challenges (Heisserer & Parette, 2002) Thus, the cadre needs to be prepared to meet those
needs as, “academic advising is central to the minority student. Academic advisors and student
services workers who are dedicated to working with minority students and offering great support
will increase the probability of student persistence retention” (Priest & McPhee, 2000; Stewart,
Russell, & Wright, 1997).
Solution 3: Establish & Develop a “Cadet/Active Duty/Student Veteran” Mentorship
Program.
The third, and perhaps most involved, solution for Det. 60 to address the low recruitment
and retention of minority students is to establish a mentorship program. Based on the results
from the interviews and surveys, six of the ten assumed causes were validated along with one
new cause; therefore, developing and instituting a mentorship program has the potential to
address all of the validated assumed causes. At a very basic level, a mentorship relationship
capitalizes on the wisdom and experience of the mentor in hopes of assisting the mentee to
accomplish a task or goal. In the case of Det. 60, the mentorship program would partner cadets
with current active duty members and/or student-veterans who have had active duty experience
with the goal of increasing their knowledge and motivation, as well as, aiding AFROTC. Based
on the findings from this study, developing and executing a robust mentorship project could have
a profoundly positive effect on the detachment.

As is the goal of the other proposed solutions, increasing recruitment and retention of
minority cadets would be the central aim of a mentorship program. To better inform the logistics
of establishing an effective mentorship program, models that are successful would need to be
analyzed. In doing so, Det. 60 will need to answer several questions:
1. What are the specific/tangible goals of the mentorship program?
2. What models/best practices already show promise in those areas?
3. How can we scale/modify successes from other models to work at Det. 60?
As suggested by the literature, mentoring programs have been particularly successful in
increasing minority student retention and graduation (American Speech-Language-Hearing
Association, 2016). Using the seven validated gaps in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organization at Det. 60 as a guide as to which programmatic aspects to focus on, several current
mentorship programs could be used as models for Det. 60 for achieving lower gaps in the
retention of minorities. Some of the programs that can be analyzed to eventually structure Det.
60’s mentorship program are “Summer Bridge” programs (Jalomo, 2001; Underwood & Fay,
1996); education and mentorship programs initiated by professional associations and private or
government organizations (Carruthers, 1995); and many other pre-college programs that attract
students to specific careers and in some many cases peer mentorship programs. Through a
comprehensive analysis of currently utilized programs and initiatives that have shown positive
results, AFROTC Det. 60 can select the programmatic aspects they deem necessary and
appropriate to construct a mentorship program that will potentially close the recruitment and
retention gaps.
Implementation Plan
To address the low recruitment and retention rates of minority AFROTC cadets at USC
and the associated validated causes of that gained through the research findings, three solutions
have been presented: 1) capitalize on already established Air Force accessions recruitment and
retention programs; 2) develop a comprehensive recruiting and retention training program for all
cadre members; and 3) develop and establish a “Cadet/Active Duty/Student Veteran” mentorship
program. Each of these solutions is to be implemented and fully functional by August 2017. The
three policy alternatives will initially be implemented on a pilot basis at USC’s AFROTC Det.
60, evaluated for their effectiveness, and then, hopefully serve as recognized programs that can
be expanded for use for the whole of AFROTC.
Organizational Features Relevant to Implementation
To truly understand the possible implementation challenges in instituting these policies,
several detachment specific contextual reference points must be understood. First, Det. 60 is
currently made up of approximately 40 cadets. Its ethnic demographic is: 30% Caucasian, 23%
Hispanic/Latino, 30% Asian/Pacific Islander, 5% Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander and
13% Multi-racial. The ethnic representation of cadets at USC is more diverse than that of a
standard detachment; thus, if comprehensive diversity inclusion is an issue at a detachment that
is already relatively diverse, it is likely to be an even greater problem at many of the other 1000+
detachments and institutions across the United States.
To provide greater insight to the policy development and approval process within the Air
Force, it is important to understand that the majority of policies are developed where they will be
implemented and then approved at one or multiple levels higher. All policy changes at Det. 60,
and all others for that matter, that would not be considered “local policy” or within the limits of
command discretion of the Detachment Commander must be vetted and approved by AFROTC
higher headquarters. The structure from the top down is: Department of Defense (DoD),
Department of the Air Force (AF), Air and Education Training Command (AETC), Air Force
Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC), and then USC Det. 60. The primary intent of this
comprehensive pilot program is to increase recruitment and retention of minority cadets at Det.
60, thus it would fall within the commander’s discretion to enact and monitor the program.
Nevertheless, the overarching goal of this policy is to ultimately increase recruitment and
retention for the entirety of AFROTC, so both initial buy-in from higher headquarters for the
pilot program would be advantageous and ultimate approval for a wider execution would be a
must. If the merits are deemed both valid and executable, AFROTC can make them official
AFROTC policy. Keeping these contextual reference points in mind, the execution of the
proposed policy solutions is to take place using USC Det. 60 as a pilot program informing the
overall feasibility of the policies and their implementation more broadly. If the results are
favorable in boosting the recruitment and retention of minority AFROTC cadets in USC Det. 60,
they will be presented to AFROTC/HQ as a strong case study with the ultimate goal of
expanding the programs to become AFROTC wide policy.
From an organizational culture perspective, an effort of this nature would be highly
supported as Secretary of the Air Force, Ms. Debora Lee James, said that “we must continue a
strong commitment to diversity and inclusion” (James & Welsh, 2015a). From that perspective,
and given the hierarchal construct of the Air Force, this type of initiative, if effective, could be
expanded quickly. Nevertheless, due to the slow moving nature of the Air Force as an
organization, if not given constant attention and frequent emphasis, new policies can take a long
time to institute across the organization.

Key Implementation Action Steps
Major action steps need to take place to operationalize the implementation of each
proposed solution at Det. 60. The timeline, duration in which the action step is to be
accomplished, is the foundation for the pilot case study with a start date of August 2017 and
then, an official start date of January 2018. The semester will allow for significant feedback and
needed adjustments to be made.
Human Resource Needs for Implementation
An individual or group can support and operationalize the action steps. Unlike many
larger organizations, AFROTC Det. 60 is unique in that the development and implementation of
the action steps and resources must be managed by a very small group known as the cadre. The
cadre at Det. 60 consists of the commander, two officers and three enlisted members. While the
implementation of the cadet mentorship program will be the responsibility of one appointed
leader, it will take the combined effort of the full cadre to ensure its success.
These policy alternatives are not suggested in a vacuum. Rather, they are informed by
research within AFROTC, as well as, the larger body of research on recruitment and retention of
minority students in college settings. This larger body of research suggests other entities that can
aid in closing the minority cadet recruitment and retention gap, including, but not limited to, an
institution’s student life or student affairs office and admissions office. Detailed in Table 9 and
Table 10 are the action steps, human resource needs, possible partnerships, and projected
timeline for the three proposed solutions to close the performance gap at USC Det. 60.
Implementation Strategy
Proposed Solutions #1 and #2 are closely connected in aim and audience. Additionally,
one informs the other; therefore, these two proposed solutions share a common implementation
strategy. For the implementation for all proposed solutions, the most important aspects will be
selecting a willing and capable program lead that can attain the knowledge necessary to guide the
cadre. In addition, resource allocation to these efforts cannot be overstated. In order for them to
flourish, they must be adequately funded and supported by all involved.
Solution #1: Capitalize on already established Air Force accessions and other “model”
recruitment and retention programs
Solution #2: Provide recruitment and retention training for Cadre
TABLE 10: Proposed Implementation Strategy for Solutions #1 and #2
Action Step Human Resource Needs/ Timeline

Possible Partnerships
Select a specific cadre member to Present - Oct 2016
serve as the leader of the program
(R&R development program) Det. Commander
Evaluate other models that have Present - Dec 2016
Cadre / USAF Recruitment
best practices that could modified
& Retention Staff, Model
for Det. 60. (USAF included)
partner organizations
Select specific best practices that Cadre Present - Feb 2017
will aid in reaching stated goals
Select metrics used by model Det. Commander/Program Present - Feb 2017
program which can be used at Det. Ldr
60 to measure effectiveness
Develop specific goals & guidelines Cadre & Present - April 2017
for the program using all model Mentor focus groups
information gathered
Select individuals who will serve as Present - April 2017
training leaders and ensure they are Det. Commander/Program
trained Ldr
Execute Training with perspective Training Leads June 2017- ongoing

mentors
Retool program to continually fit Cadre, ongoing after
needs of both mentors and mentees Mentor & Mentee focus program initiation
groups
Solution #3: Develop and establish a Cadet/Active Duty/Student Veteran mentorship program.
TABLE 11: Proposed Implementation Strategy for Solution #3
Action Step Human Resource Needs/ Timeline

Possible Partnerships
Select a specific cadre member to Det. Commander Present - Oct 2016
serve as the leader of the
mentorship program
Based upon outcome/products Program Lead with support Oct 2016 - Dec
produced from solutions 1 & 2 of cadre / student affairs, 2016
develop internal Operating model mentorship
procedures for Mentorship program organizations
Develop mentor selection process Program Lead with support Jan 2017-Mar 2017
of cadre / student affairs,
model mentorship
organizations
Construct then institute a Program Lead with support Jan 2017-Mar 2017
comprehensive training program of cadre
for all mentors
Develop a matching process (e.g. Program Lead Jan 2017-Mar 2017
entrance survey that matches
identified/critical needs
Start mentor training May 2017 - Sept
Program Lead 2017
Implement Cadet/Mentor Training Program Lead, Mentors, Aug-17
Program Mentees
Develop feedback mechanisms Program Lead, Mentors , Ongoing
with specific timelines Mentees (First Target Jan
2018)
Evaluation Plan
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006) evaluation framework will be used to assess the
effectiveness of all three of the proposed policy solutions. This particular framework is effective
because all of the proposed solutions are either training based or at a minimum have a significant
training component embedded within. The evaluation will use Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s
(2006) four levels of assessment including: reaction, “how participants react to the proposed
alternative”; learning, “the extent to which participants change attitudes/improve knowledge
and/or increase skill”; behavior, “the effect a participant’s behavior as a result of participating in
the alternative”; and results, “the overall outcome due to participation” (p. 21-25). Kirkpatrick
and Kirkpatrick (2006) identifies each of these levels of assessment with the progressive labels
of one through four, and notes that, “the four levels represent a sequence of ways to evaluate
programs” (p. 21). In this particular case, the four levels of assessment will be used to evaluate
the proposed solutions.
Also embedded in Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006) framework are “transfer” and
“impact”. Transfer is how participants take what they learn and apply it to their daily tasks or
behavior modification. It is extremely important to assess this area because without a transfer of
skills or change in behavior, no positive and sustainable impact can be expected (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2006). According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006), it is essential that the
impact or result of executing the proposed solution be measured using a thorough and effective
impact assessment that determines the measurable outcomes, whether the organizational goals
have been met. Transfer and impact are the glue of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006)
framework which ultimately begs the most important question, “Do the proposed solutions meet
their intent?”
Level 1: Reactions
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006), “assessing reaction is identical to
measuring customer satisfaction.” With all of the proposed solutions, if they are to be effective, it
is important that all involved including those implementing the solutions respond favorably
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006).
Surveys and focus groups would be an effective way to assess the reactions of
participants. A Likert scale survey could capture reactions to capitalizing on model recruitment
programs, as well as, the proposed training program and mentorship program to measure
satisfaction. Some of the questions for both proposed solutions are:
1. Did the cadre actually conduct the interviews of model organizations? If so, what types
of questions were asked?
2. What did the cadre like/dislike about the interview process?
3. Did the cadre deem the research beneficial? If so, why?
4. Did the cadre use a significant amount of what they learned to begin developing a
training plan? If so what tools/techniques?
5. What was the participation level, was it 100%?
6. Why does the cadre feel that using what they've learned from interviews in Det. 60 will
help recruitment and retention?
All of these questions focus on the reaction pillar of the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s
(2006) model and give the first assessment related feedback. Comprehensively assessing reaction
is essential for several reasons: a) it gives valuable feedback that helps evaluate the program as
ways to improving; b) critical feedback is essential if the goal is continued programmatic
effectiveness; c) surveys and focus groups provide both qualitative and quantitative data; and d)
reactions can provide developers and trainers with information that can be used to establish and
improve standards of performance for future programs. Compiling the reaction feedback will
provide results that can help determine whether the proposed solutions were effective along with
ways to potentially sustain and expand the programs.
Level 2: Learning
Step two of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006) evaluation framework is learning.
Evaluating the learning that has taken place during the implementation of these policy solutions
occurs when one or more of the answers to the following questions are determined: a) what
knowledge was learned? b) what skills were developed or improved? and c) what attitudes were
changed? (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006, p. 42). Measuring learning is crucial to improve
recruitment and retention. For instance, two of the three proposals are learning-based solutions;
thus, if learning is not thoroughly and continuously measured, the effectiveness of the solutions
cannot be determined. According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2006), “no modification in
behavior can be projected unless one or more of the aforementioned questions is fully answered”
(p. 43). Without a change in behavior, the proposal is ineffective; therefore, to know whether the
desired change was achieved, the behaviors require assessment. In addition, by assessing
learning it can be determined what specific tools, techniques, and procedures were successful in
achieving the desired outcomes and which ones were not. With each policy solution, there exists
the potential for certain aspects or components of the solution to work better than others. Until
Det. 60 can accomplish the best strategy, continual assessment of the learning must be conducted
with the goal of closing the performance gap in the recruitment and retention of minorities.
Again, since all suggested policy alternatives scaffold off of one another, the learning
questions to be asked are interchangeable across each alternative. These questions drive to the
core of understanding what has truly been learned; and, through assessment of that learning, an
accurate measurement of programmatic effectiveness can occur. Questions for a Likert scale
survey of participants for evaluation of learning could include:
 What did you learn during this process?

 Do you feel you have more knowledge; and, if so, about what specifically?
 Describe the common strategies that contributed to the success of these programs.
 Has your attitude about recruitment and retention programs changed?
 Do you believe the successful aspects from your interviews can be tailored for
Det. 60; and, if so, how?
 How willing are you to change the AFROTC program to incorporate strategies you have
learned to improve retention?
Level 3: Behavior (Transfer)
Transfer is the level or degree to which learning translates into changed behaviors. More
directly, how does learning about best practices in model recruitment and retention programs
transfer into tangible programmatic changes at Det. 60? How does the development of an
internal training plan transfer into behaviors exhibited by the cadre? How does the introduction
and execution of a comprehensive cadet, active duty member, student-veteran program transfer
into behavior change amongst the cadets and the detachment culture? All of these are questions
of transfer and accurately assessing the transfer category.
Similar to response and learning, transfer can also be measured by using Likert scale
surveys; however, a more accurate assessment could be the inclusion of post-interviews, small
group focus groups, as well as, direct observation. The challenges in measuring transfer mean
that using a solitary methodology may present a skewed assessment. If only surveys are used,
respondents could reply in a way that is not fully representative of reality. If the surveys are used
in combination with the other methods, a more accurate depiction of transfer can be determined,
which is particularly true for the transfer category because behavior is difficult to quantify so
more in depth assessment is valid. Transfer outcomes can also be assessed using statistical
evidenced changes, such as improved retention numbers and academic performance.
Level 4: Results and Impact
Ultimately, impact is the most important aspect of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006)
assessment model as it relates to this problem of practice. Questions that pertain to impact are: a)
What do the suggested policy solutions influence or change?; b) Do the suggested policy
solutions drive the organization towards closing the gap?; and C) Are minority students recruited
and retained at target rates? The success of each suggested solution is predicated on the question
of does it make the detachment more diverse by meeting recruitment and retention goals? To
varying degrees, each of the other areas of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2006) assessment
model will serve as indicators to inform impact. When any modifications are made to the
program, the question of effectiveness in recruitment and retention must be raised. If the answer
is “no,” the solution must be further examined, modified or eliminated. If the answer is “yes,” it
must be enhanced and capitalized upon. Impact is the single most important aspect of each
proposed solution; and ultimately, the statistics yielded by the ongoing demographic assessment
of Det. 60 will answer how well the policy solutions are achieving the desired outcome to lower
the performance gap.
Limitations
The limitations of this study were initially addressed in Chapter Three. However, during
the study, two other limitations presented themselves as noteworthy enough to consider in this
section. First, by comparing survey responses about ethnicity recognition to national AFROTC
averages, it became apparent that USC Det. 60 is a relatively diverse detachment. This may be
because USC has a unique demographic spread amongst the general student body (a significantly
large percentage of Asian and international students). This is a limitation because it partially
skews the data when attempting to ascertain a “true” gap and ultimately address the larger
problem of minority student recruitment and retention in the AFROTC program in general. USC
Det. 60 may not be representative of other AFROTC detachments.
A second limitation is the availability of historical data and statistics available from Det.
60. While the data presented depict a relatively current representation of the existing gaps,
historical data would offer trends with a more complete viewpoint of the problem and any
progress made over the years. These two limitations should be considered in future research at
both the detachment and national levels.
Future Research
The possibilities for future research in the areas of recruitment and retention in AFROTC
are vast. Since this particular area of study is informed by the larger body of work in recruitment
and retention in post-secondary education, there are many paths that can be followed.
Specifically concerning Det. 60, one area of study that could be explored is the provision of
recruitment and retention resources made available, such as financial, educational, program, and
human resources to close the gap.
Another of area of research that could be explored in more depth is the value of diversity
in both post-secondary education and the military. It can be said that when individuals recognize
and understand the value of dramatic organizational and culture change, they are more willing to
explore that change. Without making a “good case” for diversity, the potential for policy makers
to continue with the status quo will remain high.

Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to conduct a gap analysis in the areas of knowledge,
motivation and organizational factors necessary to reach the stated diversity performance goal as
outlined in the 2011 “National Military Strategy of the United States”. Through its three
commissioning sources, the USAF produces all of its new officers. With an ever diversifying
country, the USAF has continuously found itself operating in a diversity deficit among its officer
corps. This deficit is contributed to by the relatively low recruitment and retention of minorities
in AFROTC; thus, the gap should be specifically addressed with AFROTC. This case study
focused on the knowledge, motivation and organizational factors effecting recruitment and
retention of minority cadets at USC AFROTC Det. 60.
The problem of minority recruitment and retention in higher education is well researched
but in a broader post-secondary context. The larger body of literature that informs this study
focuses on recruitment and retention of minority student in post-secondary educational
institutions. It highlights how recruitment and retention of minority students are effected by
socio-demographic background, economic stability, cultural influences, societal and communal
expectations, and self-efficacy in addition to institutional cultures and perceptions. It is through
these lenses that the case study was framed with the ultimate goal of ascertaining possible
solutions that could close the gap of minority recruitment and retention within AFROTC.
This research validated seven knowledge, motivation and organizational causes that
affect minority recruitment and retention at AFROTC Det. 60. These range from X to Y. It was
determined that capitalization on already established Air Force accessions along with other
“model” recruitment and retention programs, provision of a comprehensive recruitment and
retention training program, and the development of a mentorship program would need to occur in
order to address the validated causes and ultimately close the performance gap at Det. 60. These
three solutions are a result of case study results analysis as well as inclusion of solutions from the
literature review. It is the goal of these policy alternatives to not only address the evidenced gap,
but close that gap entirely by 2021 so that Det. 60 at USC could become a model program that
would then be adapted by AFROTC at large.

References
Aaron, R. E. (2014). Memorandum for all AFROTC region and detachment commanders:
Nomination of "2015 gold bar" recruiting program volunteers (ARMS-AFROTC-15-017
Publication). Maxwell AFB, AL: HQ AFROTC - Director of Operations.
Air Education Training Command. (2014). In Weaver M. (Ed.), Freedom of Information Act:
AFROTC enrollment fiscal years 2009-2014. Maxwell AFB, AL: Government
Publication.
Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps. (2015). AFROTC: About. Retrieved from
https://www.afrotc.com/about
Air Force Times Staff Report. (2015). Air force secretary announces bold moves to boost
women, minorities. Retrieved from
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/careers/air-force/2015/03/04/af-secretary-
deborah-lee-james-bold-moves-to-boost-women-and-minorities/24365719/
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2016). Minority student recruitment,
retention and career transition practices: A review of the literature. Retrieved from
http://www.asha.org/practice/multicultural/recruit/litreview.htm
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 84(3), 261.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives (abridged ed.). New
York, NY: Longman.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191.

Bandura, A. (1997). Editorial. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1), 8-10.
Bean, J. P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a causal model of student
attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(2), 155-187.
Bean, J. P. (2005). Nine themes of college student retention. In A. Seidman (Ed.), College
student retention: Formula for student success (215-244). Westport, CT: Prager
Publishers.
Bowman, W., & Little, R. (1986). The all-volunteer force after a decade: Retrospect and
prospect. Website Pergamon-Brassey's
Braxton, J. M., Doyle, W. R., Hartley III, H. V., Hirschy, A. S., Jones, W. A., & McLendon, M.
K. (2013). Rethinking college student retention. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Bruck, D. I. (2010, June 1). A history of ROTC: On to recruitment. Retrieved from
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1968/3/14/a-history-of-rotc-on-to/
Carey, K. (2008). Graduation rate watch: Making minority student success a priority. Education
Sector Reports. Retrieved from http://cpe.ky.gov/nr/rdonlyres/550f05d8-a9d2-45ea-928c-
6b5561409ace/0/ss_related_info_6_22_4_graduation_rate_watch_making_minority_stud
ent_success_a_priority.pdf
Carruthers, P. (1995). Mentorship and clinical supervision. Practice Nurse,10(6), 379-382.
Carter, D. F. (2006). Key issues in the persistence of underrepresented minority students. New
Directions for Institutional Research, 2006(130), 33-46.
Casserly, J. (2009, July 24). Gold Bar Recruiter program returns to the Holm Center. Retrieved
from http://www.maxwell.af.mil/News/Display/tabid/10067/Article/421138/gold-bar-
recruiter-program-returns-to-the-holm-center.aspx
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate
education. AAHE Bulletin, 3(7).
Clarke, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Conley, D. T. (2008). College knowledge: What it really takes for students to succeed and what
we can do to get them ready. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Cote, J. E., & Levine, C. (1997). Student motivations, learning environments, and human capital
acquisition: Toward an integrated paradigm of student development. Journal of College
Student Development, 38, 229-243.
Cox, A. G., Gonzalez, G. C., Johnson, C., Hanser, L. M., & Mariano, L. T. (2011). Air force
diversity at the cadet level. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Dalfiume, R. M. (1968). The FAHY committee and desegregation of the armed forces.
Historian, 31(1), 1-20.
Demetriou, C., & Schmitz-Sciborski, A. (2011). Integration, motivation, strengths and optimism:
Retention theories past, present and future. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 7th
National Symposium on Student Retention, pp. 300-312.
Dumas-Hines, F. A., Cochran, L. L., & Williams, E. U. (2001). Promoting diversity:
Recommendations for recruitment and retention of minorities in higher education.
College Student Journal, 35(3), 433-442.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10),
1040.
Florida State University. (2015). About CARE. Retrieved from http://care.fsu.edu/About-CARE

Foner, J. D. (1974). Blacks and the military in American history: A new perspective. New York,
NY: Praeger
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56.
Greene, J. P., & Forster, G. (2003). Public High School Graduation and College Readiness Rates
in the United States. Education Working Paper No. 3. Center for Civic Innovation.
Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory
and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330-367.
Heisserer, D. L., & Parette, P. (2002). Advising at-risk students in college and university
settings. College Student Journal, 36(1), 69.
Habley, W., Bloom, J., & Robbins, S. (2012). Increasing persistence.
Heisserer, D. L., & Parette, P. (2002). Advising at-risk students in college and
university settings. College Student Journal, 36(1).
Hoggard, M. Z. (2015). In Weaver M. (Ed.), Demographics of USC AFROTC detachment 60
Hurtado, S. (1994). Graduate school racial climates and academic self-concept among minority
graduate students in the 1970s. American Journal of Education, 330-351.
Hurtado, S. (2001). Linking diversity and educational purpose: How diversity affects the
classroom environment and student development.
Hurtado, S., Carter, D. F., & Spuler, A. (1996). Latino student transition to college: Assessing
difficulties and factors in successful college adjustment. Research in Higher Education,
37(2), 135-157.
Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review
of Educational Research, 61(4), 505-532.
James, D. L., & Welsh III, M. A. (2015a). Air force diversity & inclusion (memo 1).
Memorandum for All Airmen. Retrieved from
http://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/SECAF/FINALDiversity_Inclusion_Memo1.pdf
James, D. L., & Welsh III, M. A. (2015b). 2015 Diversity and inclusion (D&I) initiatives (memo
2). Memorandum for All Airmen. Retrieved from
http://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/SECAF/FINALDiversity_Inclusion_Memo2.pdf
Jalomo Jr., R. (2001). Institutional policies that promote persistence among Community
Colleges: Policy in the future context. In B. K. Townsend & S. B. Twombly (Eds.),
Community Colleges: Policy in the future context (pp. 261-281). Westport, CT: Ablex
Publising.
Jones, D. J., & Watson, B. C. (1990). High-risk students and higher education: Future trends.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 3.
Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Brett Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Kuh, G. D. (1995). The other curriculum: Out-of-class experiences associated with student
learning and personal development. The Journal of Higher Education, 123-155.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212-218.
Lim, N., Marquis, J. P., Curry Hall, K., Schulker, D., & Zhuo, X. (2009). Officer classification
and the future of diversity among senior military leaders: A case study of the Army
ROTC. Retrieved from
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/technical_reports/2009/RAND_TR731.pdf
Lotkowski, V. A., Robbins, S. B., & Noeth, R. J. (2004). The role of academic and non-academic
factors in improving college retention. ACT policy report. American College Testing
ACT Inc.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion,
and motivation. Psychological review, 98(2), 224.
Marsh, A. G. (2009). From Travis to Today: An Analysis of Racial Progress in the Us Air Force
Officer Corps since 1971,
McDonald, D. P., & Parks, K. M. (2013). Managing diversity in the military: The value of
inclusion in a culture of uniformity Routledge.
Milem, J. F., Clayton-Pedersen, A. R., Hurtado, S., & Allen, W. R. (1998). Enhancing campus
climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The Review of
Higher Education, 21(3), 279-302.
Military Leadership Diversity Commission. (2011). From representation to inclusion: Diversity
leadership for the 21st-Century military final report. Retrieved from
http://diversity.defense.gov/Portals/51/Documents/Special%20Feature/MLDC_Final_Rep
ort.pdf
Millier, D. (2014). Fiscal year 15 gold bar recruiting program [PowerPoint Slides]. Maxwell
Air Force Base: Air Education & Training Command.
Munnell, A. H. (2015, March). The average retirement age - an update. Center for Retirement
Research at Boston College, (15-4).

National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Status of trends in the education of racial and
ethnic groups. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010015.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The condition of education 2011 [Data file].
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=72
National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). Digest of education statistics 2013. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015011.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Digest of education statistics. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d14/
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Status and trends in the education of racial and
ethnic minorities [Data file]. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010015/tables/table_24_1.asp
Ntiri, D. W. (2001). Access to higher education for nontraditional students and minorities in a
technology-focused society. Urban Education, 36(1), 129-144.
Osur, A. M. (1981). Black-White relations in the US Military, 1940-1972. Air University Review,
33, 69-78.
Pascarella, E. T., Smart, J. C., & Smylie, M. A. (1992). College tuition costs and early career
socioeconomic achievement: do you get what you pay for? Higher Education, 24(3), 275-
290.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the
literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158.
Pajares, F. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy beliefs. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-
regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research.
Educational psychologists, 37(2), 91-105.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667.
Phinney, J. S., Dennis, J., & Osorio, S. (2006). Reasons to attend college among ethnically
diverse college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 12(2), 347.
Rendón, L. I., Jalomo, R. E., & Nora, A. (2000). Theoretical considerations in the study of
minority student retention in higher education. In J. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the Student
Departure Puzzle, (pp. 127-156). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Rueda, R. (2011). The three dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Salomon, G. (1984). Television is" easy" and print is" tough": The differential investment of
mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76(4), 647.
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2013). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26,
207-231.
Secretary of the Air Force. (2013, May 1). Air force manual 36-2643: Air Force mentoring
program. Retrieved from http://static.e-
publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_a1/publication/afman36-2643/afman36-2643.pdf
Seidman, A. (Ed.). (2005). College student retention: Formula for student success. Westport,
CT: Prager Publishers.
Smedley, B. D., Myers, H. F., & Harrell, S. P. (1993). Minority-status stresses and the college
adjustment of ethnic minority freshmen. Journal of Higher Education, 434-452.
Snyder, T. D. (Ed.). (1993). 120 years of American education: A statistical portrait. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs93/93442.pdf
Stage, F. K. (1989). Motivation, academic and social integration, and the early dropout.
American Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 385-402.
Stewart, J. B. (2001). The effects of racial incidents on satisfaction with military life: Evidence
from the Armed Forces Equal Opportunity climate survey. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235061245_The_Effects_of_Discrimination_on
_Job_Satisfaction_in_the_Military_Comparing_Evidence_from_the_Armed_Forces_Equ
al_Opportunity_Survey_and_the_Military_Equal_Opportunity_Climate_Survey
Sullivan, J. R., & Guerra, N. S. (2007). A closer look at college students: Self-efficacy and goal
orientation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(3), 454-476.
Swail, W. S. (2003). Retaining minority students in higher education: A framework for success.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, (30)2.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of Educational Research, 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1986). Theories of student departure revisited. Higher Education: Handbook of
Theory and Research, 2, 359-384.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What next? Journal of College
Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 8(1), 1-19.
Tough, P. (2014, May). Who gets to graduate? New York Times Magazine, 18, 26-54.
Truman, H. (1948). Executive order 9981. Harry S. Truman Library and Museum [Online], 26
Underwood, S. M., & Fay, T. (1996). The UWM Health Careers Bridge Program: An innovative
approach for improving the recruitment, retention and graduation of minority students in
nursing and health careers. Journal of Nursing Education, 35(4), 179-181.
United States Air Force Website. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.airforce.com
United States Air Force (2013, March 12). United States Air Force diversity strategic map.
Retrieved from http://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/diversity/diversity-strategic-
roadmap.pdf
United States Air Force Personnel Center. (2015). Air force personnel demographics [Data file].
Retrieved from http://www.afpc.af.mil/library/airforcepersonneldemographics.asp
United States Army Cadet Command. (2014). History of army ROTC. Retrieved from
http://www.cadetcommand.army.mil/history.aspx
United States Census Bureau. (2015). Percent of people 25 years and over who have completed
high school or college, by race, Hispanic origin and sex: selected years 1940 to 2014
[Data file]. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/historical/
United States Census Bureau. (2015). State & county quick facts [Data file]. Retrieved from
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
United States Department of Defense. (2014). 2014 Demographics: Profile of the military
community. Retrieved from
http://download.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/Reports/2014-Demographics-
Report.pdf
United States Department of Defense. (2011, February 8). The national military strategy of the
United States of America: Redefining America’s military leadership. Retrieved from
http://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2011-National-Military-Strategy.pdf
Zamani, E. M. (2000). Sources and information regarding effective retention strategies for
students of color. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2000(112), 95-104.

APPENDIX A – Survey Questions
Demographic Questions
1. Please indicate your ethnicity:

A. Caucasian/White
B. Hispanic/Latino
C. Native American
D. Asian/Pacific Islander
E. Native American
F. African-American/Black
2. Please indicate your student classification

A. Freshman
B. Sophomore
C. Junior
D. Senior
E. 5th Year Senior
3. Please indicate your gender

A. Male
B. Female
4. Please indicate your current major or intended field of study

A. Engineering / Architecture
B. Math
C. Science
D. English/Language Arts
E. Music/Theatre /Art
F. Medicine / Nursing / Pharmacy
G. Education
H. Public Policy
G. Business
5. What most influenced your initial decision to join AFROTC (Please check all that apply).
A. Personal sense of duty/service
B. Scholarship / Educational Opportunities
C. Potential Pay and Benefits (including travel)
D. Skills & Training
E. Leadership Opportunities
F. Family (other members who served)
G. Other: (please write in any other applicable influences: _______________
The following questions are to be answered with a 4-tierd Likert scale answers.
(Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree)
KNOWLEDGE
I know the academic requirements for graduation.
I know the of Air Force/Detachment requirements for commissioning.
I feel prepared/equipped with the basic skills necessary to graduate from USC.
I feel confident in my ability to finish the AFROTC program.
I know the academic resources/organizations that are available at USC to aid me in reaching
graduation successfully.
I know the USC financial aid sources that are available to aid me in reaching graduation
successfully.
I know how to access the following student resources:

Tutoring
Counseling
Financial aid
Career guidance
I have the family support needed to graduate and commission
I have the academic preparedness to successfully graduate and commission
MOTIVATION
There are long-term benefits of finishing the AFRTOC program and commissioning.
I feel confident that I can list the benefits of finishing the AFROTC program (and
commissioning in the USAF).
I have clear goals for what I want to do following graduation and commissioning.
It is very important to me to finish the AFROTC program and earn a commission.
I have adequate financial support to fund all necessary education required to graduate and
commission into the USAF.
I feel confident in my time management skills (ability to balance academic, AFROTC, social,
etc.)
My current study habits will get me through to graduation successfully.

I maintain a proper diet and exercise routine
ORGANIZATION
I feel that the detachment values ethnic diversity within the Cadet Corps.
I feel that my ethnicity is valued by the detachment.
The detachment participates in activities (lectures, lessons, career days, provides mentors) that
show that they are actively engaged in valuing ethnic diversity.
I feel that the Detachment does its best to directly provide or direct me to retention resources
(academic, mentorship, academia counseling, financial, military support, time management etc.).
There are ethnically similar role models (to me) in Detachment 60.
The detachment offers a formal mentorship/retention program and it is adequate enough to meet
the majority of needs that cadets might have.
APPENDIX B - Interview Questions
1. Why did you join AFROTC? Now that you have been here for XX years, has that reason
changed? Do any additional reasons now affect your decision to finish the program?
2. What are the requirements levied by USC to graduate in your given major?
Probing: Can you name them?
3. What are the requirements for you to successfully earn a commission via AFROTC at USC?
4. What are some of the resources provided by the University that aid you to reaching graduation
successfully?
Probe: What are the academic resources available to you? How often do you use them?
Probe: What are the financial resources available to you?
5. What additional resources could the University provide that could potentially aid you in
finishing the program and earning a commission?
6. What are the ways that the detachment supports you in your pursuit of graduation &
commissioning?
Probing: What are the academic resources available to you via AFROTC? How often do you use
them?
Probing: What are the financial resources available to you via AFROTC?
7. What additional resources could the Detachment provide that could potentially aid you in
finishing the program and earning a commission?
8. Do you know of any AFROTC (retention related) resources available to you?

Probing: what are those resources?
9. How confident are you that you can finish the AFROTC program?
Probing: What gives you this confidence?
Probing: What limits your confidence?
10. How important is it to you to finish the AFROTC program and earn a commission? Probing:
Why?
11. What are some of the long-term benefits to you finishing the AFROTC program?
12. What are your goals once you commission?

Probing: What opportunities are available to you?

Minority Officers Recruitment and Retention PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Minority Officers Recruitment and Retention PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: MINORITY OFFICER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION i

Minority Reserve Officer Training Corps

Officer Candidate Recruitment and Retention: A Gap Analysis

University of Southern California

A Dissertation Proposal Presented to the

Copyright 2015 Matthew W. Weaver

“non-traditional” professional background, you always challenged and encouraged me to bring

absence of a more fitting phrase… Thank you all!

Finally, to my wife, my friend, my support and my help-meet Malaika. You are my

husband, brother, officer and now Doctor because of you!

Document Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 56

Table 2: AFROTC Enrolled and Commissioned, 2014 6

Table 3: AFROTC Mission, Goal of Case Study and Stakeholders 13

Table 4: Summary of Assumed Causes for Knowledge, Motivation and 52

Table 5: Methods for Validation of Assumed Causes 58

Table 6: Assumed Knowledge Causes Validated and Not Validated 64

Table 7: Assumed Motivational Causes Validated and Not Validated 73

Table 8: Assumed Organizational Causes Validated and Not Validated 82

Table 9: Summary of Validated Assumed Knowledge, Motivation, and 94

Table 10: Proposed Implementation Strategy for Solutions #1 and #2 107

Table 11: Proposed Implementation Strategy for Solution #3 108

Figure 2: Cadet Programmatic Knowledge 65

Figure 3: Knowledge and skills to navigate multiple demands. 68

Figure 4: Chart of responses to choices from the survey for interviewee

Figure 5: Confidence in time management skills. 79

Figure 6: Confidence in study habits to graduation. 80

Figure 7: Formal mentorship to meet the needs of cadets. 83

Figure 6: Ethnically similar role models in detachment. 87

Figure 9: Organization ethnicity valuation. 88

Figure 10: Organization individual ethnicity valuation 89

Figure 11: Ethnic distribution of Det. 60 from survey 91

for all cadre 3) Develop and establish a “cadet/Active Duty/student-veteran” mentorship

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Introduction of the Problem of Practice

California (USC) AFROTC Detachment 60 (2014).

The U.S. Air Force’s representation of ethnic minorities, including African-Americans,

minorities in all military commissioning sources as well as retention of minority students in

degrees conferred to U.S. residents by degree-granting institutions by race and ethnicity:

Organizational Context and Mission

degree, and then complete all commissioning requirements.

experience as an AFROTC instructor and current proximity to the University of Southern

States Army Cadet Command, 2014).

composition of AFROTC nationwide is as follows: 69.3% Caucasian, 9.5% African-American,

has existed for years.

Organizational Performance Status of AFROTC at USC

the nation at large.

African-Americans in the U.S. population as compared to African-Americans represented in

comprised of 2.8% African-Americans resulting in zero commissioned officers.

Table 2: AFROTC Enrolled and Commissioned, 2014

African- Native Native Other

homogenized leadership structure and organizational culture in a world that is becoming

women still lag behind non-Hispanic white men in terms of representative

percentage of military leadership positions held (Military Leadership Diversity

Commission, 2011, vii).

granting institutions in 2010 to be as follows: Whites, 72.9% African-Americans 10.3%,

demographic attributes, socio-cultural attributes (socio-economic status and ethnic background),

enrollment), and, institutional climate (student-faculty interaction, student activities, commuter

retention in institutions of higher education there needs to be a multi-dimensional approach.

AFROTC should take two proactive steps:

1. Seek to bring the quality (qualifications of individuals) of minority accessions up to

parity with majority accessions.

2. Encourage minorities to enter operational career fields in much higher proportions

(Lim, Marquis, Curry Hall, Schulker, & Zhuo, 2009).