A QUANTITATIVE STUDY ON THE INFLUENCE OF PERSISTENCE FACTORS ON AMERICAN INDIAN GRADUATE STUDENTS

............................................................................................................................ iii Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... iv List of Figures .................................................................................................................... x List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... xi Chapter One ...................................................................................................................... 1 Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Study.................................................................................................................. 2 Delimitations .............................................................................................................................. 5 Limitations ................................................................................................................................. 5 Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................... 6 Summary .................................................................................................................................... 8 Chapter Two: Review of the Related Literature ............................................................ 9 History of Higher Education .................................................................................................... 9 History of American Indian Education ................................................................................. 13 Mainstream Colleges and Universities................................................................................... 21 American Indian Master and Doctoral Graduate Degree Completions ............................. 24 Barriers ..................................................................................................................................... 25 Resilience .................................................................................................................................. 27 Persistence ................................................................................................................................ 29 Summary .................................................................................................................................. 37 Chapter Three: Methodology......................................................................................... 38 Research Design ....................................................................................................................... 38

These acknowledgements are meant to recognize the people and support I had along this journey and to humbly say thank you; words that don't seem enough in comparison to this magnanimous task.
Creator, I am so thankful I was called upon to walk this path. Although at times it was beyond hard and I truly considered giving up, you worked miracles to help me see this through to the end. Thank you for hearing my prayers. To all of those who have gone on before me -thank you for letting me call on you, for help, clarity, and strength at the most challenging times.
To my mother, Sim-sin, thank you for your sacrifices and unconditional love while we were together in this world. Your own educational journey paved the way not only for myself but for so many others I continue to learn of until this day. I love you and miss you dearly! To my mother, Iris, I am forever indebted to you for reigning me in when I needed it the most and helping me to "see" that small, consistent, steps can take you far on a long journey.
Your example, support, understanding, patience, faith, hope, and love carried me through to the finish line. Thank you for always encouraging me, teaching me to learn more, and to always do x   Tables   TABLE 1 AMERICAN INDIAN GRADUATE DEGREES CONFERRED SINCE

Chapter One
This chapter introduces the proposed study on how persistence factors affect American Indian graduate students. The statement of the problem will outline the issue to be addressed and the need for this study, followed by the purpose of the study. Next, the research question is presented along with key definitions. The delimitations and the limitations of the study are then outlined, and the chapter concludes with the significance of the study and the summary.

Statement of the Problem
The number of American Indian students enrolled in higher education has increased consistently since the 1950s. The enrollment numbers for American Indian students in postsecondary education includes students enrolled in undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs. Despite these increasing trends, American Indian students remain the highest underrepresented minority in postsecondary institutions, representing less than 1% of enrolled students (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2013).
American Indian students have historically been and continue to be an underrepresented minority in mainstream higher education institutions across the United States (NCES, 2013).
The underrepresentation of American Indian students exists not only at the undergraduate level but also at the graduate level. The number of American Indians enrolled in graduate programs is significantly lower. Less than 0.5% of all students enrolled in graduate programsmaster's and doctoral-across the United States identify as American Indian (NCES, 2013). The underrepresentation of American Indian student enrollment naturally contributes to the underrepresentation of those earning degrees, most notably at the graduate level (NCES, 2013).
The National Center for Educational Statistics started tracking graduate degree confirmation data in 1976; in 1980, these data were reported by decade including the most recent collection period in 2010. In the past fifty years, less than one percent of conferred graduate degrees in the United States-master's, doctoral, or professional degrees-have been awarded to American Indians. Even more astonishing is the number of awarded doctoral degrees; American Indians hold only 0.6% of all conferred doctoral degrees since the 1950s (NCES, 2013). Table 1 compares the data of conferred graduate degrees for American Indians versus the general U.S. population since 1980, every 10 years.  to American Indian students in the United States has more than doubled since 1980. When the total of American Indian conferred graduate degrees is compared with the number of conferred degrees in the general U.S. population, however, the results have been consistently below 0.6% since 1976 (NCES, 2013;Shotton, Lowe, & Waterman, 2013). Despite the increase in degrees conferred, the underrepresentation is present even today.

Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this quantitative survey study was to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students. The underrepresentation of American Indian students continues to exist at the undergraduate and graduate levels of postsecondary education despite increases of American Indian student enrollment. This study sampled American Indian students enrolled in graduate programs to identify relationships between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students.

Research Question
The following empirically based research questions were addressed to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students: 1. What factors contribute to American Indian graduate student persistence? a. Do academic success factors relate to American Indian graduate student persistence?
b. Do American Indian academic programs relate to American Indian graduate student persistence?
c. Do student self-perceptions relate to American Indian graduate student persistence?
These research questions were investigated through the testing of hypotheses postulated for each factor individually as well as the combined factors. Each hypothesis tested to what degree these factors influence American Indian graduate student persistence. Once the results were determined for each quantitative question (1 a, b, and c), the main research question was tested to determine the total effects on persistence of American Indian graduate students.

Definition of Terms
The following terms were used throughout this study, as defined below.
American Indian. A person who has a degree of blood from a federally recognized tribe or village and is recognized as such by and/or from the United States (U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs [BIA], n.d.).
Cultural protective factors. These factors contribute to the resilience of American Indian students: spirituality, family strength, elders, ceremonial rituals, oral traditions, tribal identity, and support networks (HeavyRunner & Marshall, 2003: p. 15).
Graduate student. A student who has earned a bachelor's degree, is currently enrolled in a graduate program, and is taking courses toward an advanced degree such as a master's, doctoral, or professional degree (Graduate Student, 2017).
Persistence. The continued mobility of students to the next level in their education, such as progressing through the levels in basic skills or staying enrolled in college from term to term or year to year (Seppanen, 2007).

Persistence factors. Factors known to influence the academic performance of American
Indian students and contribute to degree completion, including individual awareness, culture, family, support systems, and community (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009;Kicking Woman, 2011;Shotton et al., 2013).
Resilience. The natural, human capacity to navigate life well. It is something every human being has-wisdom, common sense. It means coming to know how you think, who you are spiritually, where you come from, and where you are going (HeavyRunner & Marshall, 2003: p. 15).

Success factors. The influential factors known to help American Indian students succeed
in academia, including family support, structured support systems, supportive faculty and staff, self-efficacy, connection to culture, and connections to home (Shotton et al., 2013).

Delimitations
This study focused on factors that affect American Indian graduate students' persistence.
Delimitations narrow the scope of the study to focus on a specified population/sample, setting, and instrumentation. The population for this study consisted of American Indian graduate students from which the sample was selected and did not include Alaska Natives. Often, American Indians and Alaska Natives are combined into the same category in research investigations. However, the terms refer to two distinctive geographic groups; Alaska Natives reside in Alaska, whereas American Indians live in the lower 48 states. The languages, worldview, philosophies, customs, regional context, communities, and other characteristics are unique to the Alaska Natives and where they live. Therefore, the researcher chose to focus on American Indians for this study. This study is delimited to American Indian graduate students in the lower 48 United States.

Limitations
As with any research, this study had limitations, which include the sampling strategy, instrument, and lack of generalization. The sample in this study was limited to self-identified American Indian graduate students. Self-identification lends itself to a robust definition of American Indian due to individuals determining this for themselves. The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs defines American Indian as a person who has a degree of blood from a federally recognized tribe or village (n.d.). The study used this definition to define American Indians along with an additional question inquiring about identifying as American Indian by the respondents.
A survey instrument on measuring persistence factors of American Indian students was identified and used for this study (Secatero, 2009). This instrument was adapted, and was used to inform the development of an instrument for this study. The instrument(s) contained questions on the known persistence factors of American Indian students, unique factors different from those of mainstream students. The limitation was the reliability of the instrument(s) used in the study and is further addressed in Chapter 3.
The analysis took into consideration the contextual data that speaks to the uniqueness of American Indian students. In addition, in this type of quantitative study, outcomes are limited to correlational results and not causation. The results determined the relationships, the strengths of the relationships, and how much these persistence factors influence American Indian graduate students.

Significance of the Study
A study to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students, is important for several reasons. These reasons include furthering the understanding of persistence factors (individual awareness, culture, family, support systems, and community (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009)) and how they influence American Indian students, developing an instrument to assess persistence factors with American Indian students, conducting a study on an American Indian sample of students, and gaining further insight to the experience of American Indian students, especially at the graduate level.
In addition to the reasons stated above, the importance of this study reaches into the exploration of validating the known protective factors for American Indian students, giving this study evidence based conclusions. These conclusions directly feed into the continuation of undergraduate American Indian students into graduate school and mainstream institutions having the capacity to support these students to complete graduate degrees. The next step in the pipeline is graduate education. Gaining insight into what factors contribute to American Indian persistence assists the support structure in academic institutions' target strategies for American Indian students.
Another implication for the proposed results of this study is the impact at the administrative and policy level of postsecondary education. If proven factors are identified to benefit American Indian graduate students, the justification for the infrastructure and financial commitment from these institutions can be made in confirming these known methods and putting them into action. The support system for American Indian graduate students targets the identified protective factors discussed in Chapter 2 and develops strategies around these factors to encourage students in completing graduate degrees.
Another significance of this study is the implications for two audiences: American Indian researchers and non-American Indian researchers. The results of this study will have research conclusions however the findings will be applied differently between the two audiences. This study extends the literature and research on American Indian persistence by building on the previous studies, specifically Secatero's study of American Indian graduate students, by examining persistence factors of American Indian graduate students through statistical analysis.
The results of this study are not to generalize conclusions about American Indian graduate students but to expand the knowledge on the persistence of American Indian graduate students and the unique experience in graduate school of American Indian students.

Summary
This chapter introduced the study on the influence of persistence factors on American Indian graduate students. The statement of the problem outlined the issue to be addressed and the need for this study, followed by the purpose of the study. Next, the research questions were presented along with key definitions. The delimitations and the limitations of the study were described, and the chapter concluded with the significance of the study and the summary.

Chapter Two: Review of the Related Literature
This chapter introduces the following sections of related literature to further explore the historical contexts of the current state of American Indian student success in higher education.
First, a brief history of higher education is discussed. Next, the history of American Indian education is reviewed followed by tribal colleges and universities. Attendance of American Indians in mainstream colleges and universities is also reviewed, followed by an overview of resilience and barriers in higher education for American Indian students. Additionally, persistence is explored along with influential factors. Degree completion is reviewed for both American Indian master's students and doctoral students. A synthesis of the literature is provided to guide the hypothesis for this study concerning persistence factors and degree completion. A summary concludes the chapter.

History of Higher Education
In the early 1600s, the first institutions of higher education were founded in America's thirteen original colonies. These three founding institutions were created for the sole purpose of forwarding religion. When the pilgrims came to what is now America, it was with the goal of breaking free from the British Parliament and creating a new world (Rudolph, 1990). These collegiate institutions prepared men to enter the ministry as priests (Altbach, Berdahl, & Gumport, 1999).
At the end of the 17th century, a divide began to occur in universities in America by offering not only studies for the piety but also in mathematics and philosophy (Altbach et al., 1999;Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007). In addition to this divide, universities were starting to become more accepting of many religions. This openness created the avenue for both the elite and the poor. Both gentlemen and farmers were attending college, with most still joining the ministry afterward.
The latter part of the 18th century disrupted college life in America as the War for Independence continued until the unification under the Constitution of the United States in 1788.
The founding of the United States triggered a new era in higher education that focused on republican education, including law and a new openness to enlightenment (Altbach et al., 1999).
This shift changed the face of higher education because college enrollment for political agendas exceeded that of religious pursuits. This significant change caused fluctuation in enrollment numbers along with minimal number of faculty that resulted in chaos, notably Jefferson Republicanism found at the College of William and Mary (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990).
When Thomas Jefferson was elected president, a major upset occurred at colleges. By the early 1800s, republican education had been laid to rest in America (Rudolph, 1990).
A standardizing of college education occurred in the first few decades of the 1800s.
Student riots broke out, which suggested a need to return to the traditions of college education and reintroduce the traditional languages of Latin and Greek (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990). Science and professional subjects fell short due to lack of interest by both faculty and students. This standardizing facilitated the drifting apart of professional schools and universities and the creation of professional schools along with mercenary schools (Altbach et al., 1999;Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007).
The next era of higher education in America signaled the rise of the denominational colleges (1820s-1850s). Classical colleges received criticism during this time because of the popular belief that they laid the foundation for a superior education. This type of education was geared toward "gentlemen" and the professional class. The denominational colleges focused on laborers working in the American economy (Altbach et al., 1999). The new colleges in America were responsible for well over half of all the colleges and the enrolled students during this time (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990).
The Morrill Land Grant Act of 1862 and the broadening of institutions of higher education for women and African Americans marked some of the significant events in the next few decades (Altbach et al., 1999;Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007;Rudolph, 1990). The combining of the classical curriculum with that of the sciences created a multifunctional institution (Altbach et al., 1999). The aim to create an American university, which included the purpose of graduate education and research, became the focus of many of the institutions arising across the country (Altbach et al., 1999). This precipitated the enrollment explosion that took place in the last decade of the 19th century onward.
In the beginning of the 19th century, enrollment at some colleges in America doubled or tripled. The assimilation of women into higher education contributed to this increase in enrollment (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990). More and more institutions across the country allowed women to enroll (Rudolph, 1990). Additionally, many colleges adopted the model of two years of general education and one or two years of advanced or specialized courses. The introduction of the bachelor's degree, along with graduate education and the Ph.D., was now common across the states (Altbach et al., 1999). Laurence Veysey (1965) capitalized on this standardization of higher education in America in his famous study about the effect of degree offerings on enrollment, which is the face of American higher institutions today.
In the 1920s, college education enrollment shifted from the elite to the masses (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990). Junior colleges, teachers colleges, and service-oriented colleges sprang up across the country to meet the needs of America's laborers. A hierarchy of institutions divided the higher education sector by way of three criteria: (a) collegiate ideal, (b) quality of undergraduate learning, and (c) advancing knowledge (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990).
Many Ivy League schools employed discriminatory procedures (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990). The monetary aspect of higher education was fully exposed in endowments, hiring of better faculty, selective admissions, and research for the advancement of knowledge (Altbach et al., 1999;Rudolph, 1990).
In the mid-twentieth century, public community colleges emerged, partially as a response to the masses of returning soldiers taking advantage of GI Bills (Rudolph, 1990;Tierney & Wright, 1991). This post-war era was earmarked by the shift in national priority from war to that of defense (Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007). The federal government used money to support research and education by building labs and institutions to house these efforts, which came from NSF, NASA, and NIH for example (Tierney & Wright, 1991). However, the Vietnam War and subsequent student rebellions derailed this trajectory (Altbach et al., 1999;Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007).
In the last few decades of the 20th century, a few significant events took place. The Higher Education Act (1965) was amended in 1972 for two initiatives: to provide students aid based on financial need, and governmental regulatory control over higher education and Title IX (Altbach et al., 1999). During this same time, the support for research was significantly reduced and became a competitive endeavor by private funding (Altbach et al., 1999).
Since 2000, other progressives have rose in higher education in the United States.
Mainstream institutions are shifting the focus of education to more business like endeavors with rising costs of tuition and student awareness of educational debt (Newman, Couturier, & Scurry, 2004;Howe & Strauss, 2000). These issues facing academic institutions provide new challenges for administrators to creatively troubleshoot decreasing enrollment, funding sources, and the ability to support the current work force (Newman, Couturier, & Scurry, 2004;Howe & Strauss, 2000). In addition to these significant challenges the institutions face today, considerations are needed for an aging work force with a robust retirement wave of the baby boomers, multigenerational classrooms, the advancements in access to information through the internet, and the impacts of social media (Newman, Couturier, & Scurry, 2004;Howe & Strauss, 2000).

History of American Indian Education
The beginning of education for Indians in the United States differed vastly from that of the American colleges and universities. Whereas most colleges and universities of the time dedicated their instruction to the education of men, institutions built for Indians existed to completely eradicate anything connected to Indians: culture, language, ceremonies, subsistence, and land. Housed in abandoned military and prison facilities, Indian educational institutions stood in stark contrast to the pre-established colleges and universities (Reyhner & Eder, 2004).
The U.S. Congress passed the Indian Civilization Act in 1819 (Keohane, 1999;Reyhner & Eder, 2004). This act provided incentive for individuals and religious sects to live among the Indians and educate them. To support these efforts, the government appropriated $10,000 per year to establishments dedicated to Indian education, causing a boom of missionary schools across the country (Reyhner & Eder, 2004).
This government-initiated effort became the easiest mechanism of eradicating the Indians in the United States (Keohane, 1999). These schools marked the beginning of a mass assimilation of Indian children to ultimately become civilized citizens alongside their white counterparts (Keohane, 1999;Reyhner & Eder, 2004). To guarantee success in educational programs designed for "killing the Indian" (Pratt, 1892), the United States government targeted the most vulnerable part of the Indian population: children (Adams, 1995).
The same churches and missionaries incentivized by the Indian Civilization Act of 1819 opened "day schools" on reservations. The Indian children attended school during the day and then returned to their villages in the evening to be with their families (Keohane, 1999;Reyhner & Eder, 2004). The reservation agent held overall authority of the day schools and hired all employees (Keohane, 1999;Reyhner & Eder, 2004: Juneau, 2001. Attendance at the day schools was mandatory for the Indian children from the age of six through 16. The strict rules at the day schools upheld the missionary goal to completely erase the children's Indian heritage (Juneau, 2001). Children were forbidden to speak any language other than English; English language was viewed as the superior language suitable for all races (Keohane, 1999). Though this restriction was in place, the day schools were deemed as not enough to achieve the indoctrination of Indian children into white society (Keohane, 1999).
The first boarding school in the United States was founded in 1879 in Fort Marion, Florida (Juneau, 2001). Eventually, many of the students were transferred to another early boarding school known as the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, founded in 1886, in Carlisle, Pennsylvania (Juneau, 2001;Shotten et. al., 2013). . The boarding schools provided half-day academics and half-day vocations all taught in English. The "students" at these first boarding schools were Indian prisoners serving terms and being forced into assimilation education (Keohane, 1999;Reyhner & Eder, 2004: Juneau, 2001. When the Indian prisoners arrived at the school, many measures were taken to remove any connection to their culture. Indian children were stripped of their traditional clothing and issued standard uniforms (Adams, 1995). The names of the children were changed to pronounceable English names as a step taken to remove their prior Indian identity (Keohane, 1999). One of the most controversial identity removing mechanisms consisted of cutting the Indian children's hair (Adams, 1995;Keohane, 1999, Juneau, 2001. Some of the students resisted; others conformed out of belief that it was either this or extinction (Juneau, 2001).
The staff believed that anything with order was better than the ways of the Indians (Keohane, 1999). Popular belief included structure, discipline, and uniform clothing were characteristic of the reservation school systems, established to make one culture disappear into another (Keohane, 1999). Local farmers also became involved in the education process by bringing Indian children to their homes to help with the duties during the summer months (Keohane, 1999). Not only did the Indian students work at these homes, the homes also served as educational platforms for teaching the importance of Christianity and Sunday school (Juneau, 2001).
From the onset, education provided by the government for Indians aimed to exterminate Indian identity (Adams, 1995;Keohane, 1999, Juneau, 2001. The tenure through these early educational institutions continuously exposed Indians to perceived inferiority to whites (Keohane, 1999). Many commencement ceremonies were concluded by remarks like those of Reverence A. J. Lippincott (Adams, 1995, p. 274): "the Indian is DEAD in you. Let all that is Indian within you die! You cannot become truly American citizens, industrious, intelligent, cultured, civilized until the INDIAN with in you is DEAD". Surviving through these systems did not end the reaffirmation of the government to eradicate the Indian.
In the 1920s, Indian education came under government scrutiny due to the continued poverty on Indian reservations across the United States (Adams, 1995;Keohane, 1999, Juneau, 2001. The goal of the boarding schools and other institutions charged with educating the Indians was twofold: assimilating the Indians, and teaching them a vocational trade (Juneau, 2001). The Indian children performing the labor for the schools did not enforce these goals, which resulted in the vocational activities being self-serving.  Administration, 1928). The report called for progressive education to be more child-centered and culturally appropriate. In addition to education, the report discussed information on economy, health, governance, poverty, and the continued desolate conditions on most of the reservations in the United States (Reyhner & Eder, 2004). The Meriam Report acted as a precursor for the Indian Reorganization Act (1934) with many of the report's recommendations incorporated into the new policies. The act introduced provisions for land allotments, funds for tribal loans, and the adoption of a governmental structure for tribes (Juneau, 2001;Reyhner & Eder, 2004). Although the act aimed to increase tribal self-government, many of the provisions continued past assimilation ideals (Reyhner & Eder, 2004). These underlying assimilationist purposes ultimately undermined progressive components of the Indian Reorganization Act (Juneau, 2001;Reyhner & Eder, 2004).
The Meriam Report and the Indian Reorganization Act both influenced the introduction of the Johnson-O'Malley Act of 1934 (Reyhner & Eder, 2004). This act allowed the initiation of contracts between the Secretary of Interior and states for the "education, medical attention, agricultural assistance, and social welfare, including relief of distress, of Indians in such state or territory" (Cajune, 2011, p. 10). The introduction of the act caused hundreds of Indian children to be transferred into public schools. Public schools benefitted by receiving further funding for the attendance of Indian children (Juneau, 2001). Despite this "education" of Indians, the schools did not make changes to meet the needs of the Indian students and reproduced past efforts to assimilate Indian children (Juneau, 2001).
The termination period of federal Indian policy refers to the years between 1953 and through 1975 (Cajune, 2011). The government introduced policy to terminate reservations and tribes, which ultimately intended to break all ties and responsibilities of the federal government with Indian people (Reyhner & Eder, 2004). This included trust land, federal recognition, and government provided services. Policies of the termination era assumed that if no more reservations existed, the Indians would leave and relocate themselves to cities (Cajune, 2011;Reyhner & Eder, 2004). This relocation process would then further education aimed at assimilating Indians into American society (Cajune, 2011).
Heavy opposition to the termination policies was felt across Indian Country. Out of this came the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, which corresponded with the official end of the termination period, and the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act of 1978 (Reyhner & Eder, 2004). Both acts influenced policy derived from this period to recognize the unique government-to-government relationships tribes had with the federal government.
This legislation recognized the uniqueness of American Indians and their culture was a necessary piece of education (Bill, 1990;Cajune, 2011). The experience of American Indians in education would improve with the recognition in schools of their culture and identity. The enrollment numbers increased in these schools (Cajune, 2011). Tribes now had recognition to determine themselves and receive education about themselves in public schools on reservations and extending through higher education in tribally controlled community colleges.
Tribal colleges and universities. Higher education in America has historically been a part of this country almost since Columbus's discovery (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009).
Europeans who migrated to escape the bounds of their home countries of church and state brought the model to these lands (Juneau, 2001). Higher education was traditionally for the elite and was a privileged institution that only aspiring leaders, specifically white males, had access to (Rudolph, 1990).
Though the migratory nature of the new American inhabitants was viewed as superior over other "savage" peoples, an intelligent community already existed within the land boundaries of the continent. (Rudolph, 1990). Learning and knowledge was not reserved for the elite (Rudolph, 1990) but was a gift from the creator (Deloria & Wildcat, 2001). Today, this natural classroom has become housed within the walls of the European model of higher education institutions. Tribal colleges and universities are minority-serving institutions with specific goals of opportunity and cultural preservation (AIHEC, 1999).

History of tribal colleges and universities. Tribal colleges and universities in the
United States began to appear in 1968 (Yellowman & Chenault, 1999). The southern United States was home to the Dine', "the people," or the Navajo (Cajune, 2011). The Navajo Nation, which spans across Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah, established the first tribal college in the United States (Juneau, 2001). This first tribally controlled institution, the Navajo Community College, was "by Native Americans, for Native Americans" (Cajune, 2011 These institutions face problems similar to those of other rural educational institutions: recruitment and retention of students and faculty, and curriculum issues (Reyhner & Eder, 2004).
The additional obstacles the institutions faced were lack of funding, along with minimal resources of some tribes (Cajune, 2011;AIHEC, 2012). For some Native American nations, revenues from casino gambling have aided in building educational institutions.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Reauthorization Act designated tribal colleges and universities as land grant institutions (Cajune, 2011). Across the nation, these institutions offer associate's (two-year) degrees, along with a few that offer bachelor's (four-year) degrees, and two that offer master's degrees (Cajune, 2011). Many of the tribal colleges and universities have successfully created transfer agreements with various four-year institutions (Cajune, 2011;AIHEC, 2012). This act bridged the opportunity for tribal college students to continue the pursuit of higher education degrees.
As a natural progression, the enrollment at tribal colleges and universities has increased (Cajune, 2011;Kicking Woman, 2011). In the early 1980s, approximately two thousand students were enrolled at tribal colleges and universities across the nation (Cajune, 2011). By 2003, this enrollment number had increased to 30,000 students (Cajune, 2011). These institutions are growing considerably, but with the slow growth in areas of funding and infrastructure, some colleges still struggle with low enrollment (AIHEC, 2012).
Montana is one of the richest states in the union in terms of tribal college and university count. Each of the seven reservations in the state houses an accredited institution controlled by the tribe (Juneau, 2001). Approximately 6% of the state's population is Native American (approximately 60,000 residents) and 10% of these people are enrolled in higher education.
Within the Montana University System, 78% of the Native American students are enrolled in courses at tribal colleges and universities within the state. About 60% of these students are considered full-time enrollment.

Mainstream Colleges and Universities
The landscape of higher education has changed over the years in terms of enrollment of American Indians; the number of American Indian students who enroll in higher education has increased. Increases have occurred in vocational schools, community colleges, and mainstream colleges and universities, both public and private. Although tribal colleges and universities have provided an avenue for American Indians to gain easier access to higher education, the enrollment in all types of institutions for American Indians has increased.
The overall population of American Indians in the United States has increased since the 1970s. Estimates from the 1970s calculated the American Indian population around 237,000.
In the latest census reports, the total American Indian population was approximately 5.4 million (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015). The overall population increase of American Indians has also been reflected in higher education enrollment.
In 1976, the American Indian enrollment in higher education was approximately 76,000.
By 1996, American Indian enrollment in higher education had reached over 127,000 American Indians enrolled in higher education, exceeding the initial projections of 120,000 (NCES, 1998 These changes in graduate enrollment do not reflect national trends of an overall increase in the number of students pursuing graduate education.
Other demographic information on graduate program enrollment included gender and overall enrollment. The same differences and trends based on American Indian/Alaska Native gender are indicated among graduate students. In 2010, thirty-seven percent of American Indian/Alaska Native graduate students enrolled were men, compared with 63% for women.
Despite the continued trends of higher enrollment of American Indian/Alaska Native women compared to men, the overall representation of enrolled graduate students is still at 0.06%.
In this same report, enrollment in graduate programs was explored across major fields of study including Natural Science and Engineering, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Health Sciences, Business, and Education (Gonzales et al., 2013). The American Indian/Alaska Native student trends reflected the national enrollment trends across these disciplines: Natural Science and Engineering at 27%, Social and Behavioral Sciences at 11%, Health Sciences at 12%, Business at 15%, Education at 23%, and all other fields at 27% (Gonzales et al., 2013). Overall, American Indian/Alaska Native students are more likely to enroll in social science, behavioral fields, and education compared to natural sciences and math.
The enrollment decrease was also represented in broad fields of study and the first-time enrollment of American Indian/Alaska Native students. Between 2009 and 2010, the largest drop in enrollment of American Indian/Alaska Native students was in engineering (-37.7%), followed by arts and humanities (-35%), and public administration and services (-27.8%). When considering total enrollment, these decreases are still reflected: other fields (-21.3%), biological and agricultural sciences (-17.5%), and education (-16.2%).
Overall, American Indian/Alaska Native student enrollment trends have reflected the national trends in higher education over the last few decades. The increase in American Indian/Alaska Native student enrollment in two-year and four-year institutions has increased; the number of American Indian women enrolled, compared to American Indian/Alaska Native men, has increased consistently over the past 40 years; and the number of American Indian/Alaska Native students graduating has increased as well. The only discrepancy is the decrease in American Indian/Alaska Native enrollment in graduate programs in broad fields, especially in the last 10 years.

American Indian Master and Doctoral Graduate Degree Completions
The increases in enrollment have directly impacted the graduation rates for American .

Barriers
The history of education for American Indian students is riddled with barriers, which have consistently contributed to underrepresentation in enrollment and degree completion (. One notable source of barriers is from the Senate Report in 1969 (S. Rep. 80-1, 1969), which acknowledged that language differences of American Indian students inhibited learning. Since this time, researchers have investigated other barriers of American Indian students at all levels.
This section will cover the literature on barriers of American Indians in education. A historical tour will include major barriers, along with secondary barriers for American Indian students.

The Senate Report in 1969 represented a documented introduction into the barriers for
American Indian students. This report outlined the most significant barriers as language differences, high absenteeism, and low self-esteem (S. Rep. 80-1, 1969). These three barriers were notably the most significant reasons for departure of American Indian students from education. Language differences (McNamara, 1982) contributed to high absence rates (Benjamin, Chambers, & Reiterman, 1993); the students were not able to understand what was being taught in the classrooms, which contributed to high absentee numbers. The development of low self-esteem resulted from not being able to understand English and missing a lot of school, which in turn led to American Indian students departing from school (Benjamin, Chambers, & Reiterman, 1993).
The extensive research into educational barriers for American Indian students occurred during the same time that new perspectives into student departure were emerging. A paradigm shift started to occur in the approach to investigating student departure, and studies began to emerge that focused on what was working for students to continue in academia and not drop out.
Studies examined the contributing factors to student persistence. The next section reviews the literature specific to resilience for American Indian students.

Resilience
Resilience has most recently been defined as positive adaptation despite adversity (Luther, 2006;Fleming & Ledogar, 2008). The study to understand resilience began in the field of psychology and psychiatry in the 1990's and has been expanded to other areas of mental health and now, health in general (Fleming & Ledogar, 2008). Resilience has gone through transformations of understanding the concept as well as the terminology used around this phenomenon.
Resiliency was originally conceptualized as an individual characteristic. Many variations on how to define this concept were found throughout the literature and include three general uses: good developmental outcomes despite high-risk status; sustained competence under stress; and recovery from trauma (Werner, 1995;Fleming & Ledoger, 2008). Researchers distinguish resilience from other terms for example competence, hardiness, and thriving (Fleming & Ledoger, 2008). The difference was resilience was most often present with some form of risk (Luther, 2006) and was an innate or "normal" state (Fonagy et. al. 1994).
The terms "resiliency" and "resilience" were used interchangeably in the early research in this area (Fleming & Ledoger, 2008). The further development of research in resilience determined there was a difference in the two terms: resiliency was an individual characteristic where as resilient was a process that occurred under specific circumstances (Fleming & Ledoger, 2008). Resilient is the term associated the most with student persistence and the process they go through to be successful (Fleming & Ledoger, 2008).
The concept of resilience applies to American Indian students and is also explored further in the literature as cultural resilience. This particular type of resilience is directly associated with a students culture as a resource they may draw upon in times of adversity (Fleming & Ledoger, 2008). Cultural resilience is defined as "community or cultural resilience is the capacity of a distinct community or cultural system to absorb disturbances and reorganize while undergoing change so as to retain key elements of structure and identity that preserve its distinctness (Healy, 2006). The definition alludes to the retaining of one's culture is the specific resource from which the individual can draw upon to persist through stressful situations and still be successful (Fleming & Ledoger, 2008). This is done in a manner Healy (2006) speaks to by preserving one's identity.
Cultural continuity was explored through a study conducted on youth suicide rates and measuring the six facets of self-government; land claims; education; health services; cultural facilities, and police and fire (Chandler & Lalonde, 1998). The results indicated the higher composite score of cultural continuity, the lower the suicide rate (Chandler & Lalonde, 1998). In addition to this, a language component was added to the initial 6 facets that resulted in language as a single indicator being the strongest predictor of resistance to suicide by youth (Hallett et.al, 2007). In some communities, the suicide rate dropped to almost zero where over half of the membership had a conversational knowledge of the Native language (Hallett et al, 2007).
Resilience for American Indian students began to take shape under the factors of cultural continuity, language, and cultural protective factors defined by HeavyRunner & Morris (1997).
Resilience in this context was "our innate capacity for well-being" and later "the natural human capacity to navigate life well" (HeavyRunner & Morris, 1997). HeavyRunner further explained, "It means coming to know how you think, who you are spiritually, where you come from, and where you are going. The key is learning how to utilize innate resilience, which is the birthright of every human being. It involves understanding our inner spirit and finding a sense of direction" (HeavyRunner & Marshall, 1997, p. 15). American Indian students have language, spirituality, family, elders, ceremonies, oral traditions, tribal identity, and support networks as resources to help them through challenges and be successful (HeavyRunner & Marshall, 1997).
Resilience for American Indian students is 1) the ability to adapt positively despite adversity (Luther, 2006), 2) good developmental outcomes despite high-risk status; sustained competence under stress; and recovery from trauma (Werner, 1995;Fleming & Ledoger, 2008), and 3) the innate right to draw from their unique cultures and protective factors (language, spirituality, family, elders, ceremonies, oral traditions, tribal identity, and support networks) to navigate academia and life well (HeavyRunner & Marshall, 1997). The literature on resilience provides the foundation for understanding student persistence and how American Indian students are able to be successful and complete collegiate degrees. The next section reviews the literature specific to persistence for American Indian students including a theoretical overview.

Persistence
Over the past 40 years, student persistence has been explored to try and explain why college students make progress to graduation and earn a degree. The origination of the research on persistence began with Tinto's (1972; Theory of Student Departure. This model stated that students come to college with certain background characteristics. These background characteristics, along with the quality of interactions with the institution and social systems, are related to whether a student will persist or drop out. Other research (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009;Secatero, 2009;Tierney, 1992) has expanded the exploration into persistence and what contributes to student success and degree completion. Tinto (1972) developed the model of student departure based on an adaptation of Durkheim's Theory of Suicide (1897). This theory stated student departure was a form of suicide in that students did not adapt to the institutions and the institutions themselves did not provide the necessary foundation for these students to succeed. Tinto (1972)  Student persistence was based on formal and informal integration into academic and social systems. Tinto (1999) continued studying student departure and later identified conditions for student retention, which encouraged persistence. The five conditions included the following factors: (a) environments that expect students to succeed, (b) settings that provide clear and consistent information about institutional requirements and effective advising on program of study and career goals, (c) settings that provide academic, social, and personal support, (d) settings that involve students as valued members of the institution, and (e) settings that foster learning (Tinto, 1999).
Through Tinto's research, recommendations for institutions to foster persistence have emerged and contributed to the exploration of persistence. Some of his more recent studies include recommendations for learning communities , exploring institutional conditions for student retention (Tinto, 2010), and strategies to assess student retention programs . Areas of further research include institutional action, program implementation, and promotion of success of low-income students . Despite the 40 years of research in this area, Tinto has failed to examine the uniqueness of minority students and what factors influence persistence based on these differences.
The developments in student retention have followed Tinto's research; however, many assumptions were later identified disputing the student departure model. Tierney (1999) began to question these assumptions and started to investigate student departure from a racial perspective, noting Tinto did not consider the effects of oppression and discrimination. Tinto's theory assumed that student integration into the culture of the institution was an experience that did not differ based on race (Tierney, 1999).
Other assumptions Tierney (1999) identified with Tinto's Student Departure Theory included the rights of passage from one culture to another was with a foreign culture, and students had to experience a "cultural suicide" to transition into the institution culture. Tierney (1999) recognized that Tinto's assumptions did not take into consideration the cultures and experiences of minority students including African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans.
The student departure model was based on white American students and their culture and their ability to disconnect from that culture and integrate into the academic culture at institutions of higher education (Tierney, 1999).  (1972), college students had to disassociate themselves from their own culture in order to go through a form of initiation into the academic institution. The ability of the students to commit cultural suicide and integrate themselves into the academic culture would determine their ability to be successful and persist in college (Tinto. 1972). Tierney (1999) challenged this notion by identifying that cultural adaptation for minority students was within their culture, not another culture. The example Tierney (1999) provided was Navajo rite of passage from youth to adolescence, both within the Navajo culture. It was not a rite of passage from the Navajo culture to another (Tierney, 1999). Tinto (1972) assumed the students would leave their former culture and assimilate into the culture of the institution and not bring forth anything. However, this model is not the case for minority students because of the different lived experiences in their own cultures (Tierney, 1999).
In addition to the lived experiences of minority students, Tierney (1992) began to further investigate the experience of minority students in higher education and what contributed to their success. Through this investigation, Tierney (1999) identified instances where academic institutions recognized and supported the culture of African Americans. Other studies focused on the success of Native American students whose institution had integrated the culture of Native Americans (Tierney, 1999). The students fared better than those in institutions where the culture was not recognized and valued (Tierney, 1999). Tierney (1999) further concluded that when minority students are confident in their cultural identity, their chances of graduating increases.
As the studies in persistence kept evolving, the exploration into resilience came forward.
HeavyRunner and Marshall (2003)  With the exploration by Tierney (1999) into differences in student departure when based on minority students, including Native Americans, and the identification of cultural protective factors by HeavyRunner and Marshall (2003), Tinto's (1972)  The grounded theory of tribal college student persistence significantly affected the body of knowledge in this area. First, the theory developed using a sample of American Indian students in higher education; second, the emergence of this theory was based on the stories of these American Indian students; and third, the theory developed through the appropriate cultural lens of an American Indian researcher who could understand and relate to the shared experience of an American Indian student.
HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint (2009) concluded that the integration in social and academic circles indicates strong predictors of retention and degree completion, similar to Tinto's (1993) findings. The responsibilities in these three identified circles included 17 different areas in which students were balancing. The students explained various memberships and came to understand that their cultural memberships and responsibilities helped them the most to not give up (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009) and persist.
The results of HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint's (2009) study had important implications for understanding American Indian student persistence. First, understanding indigenous ways of knowing were critical for American Indian student persistence; second, the study itself based on student experiences provided a framework for tribal colleges; and third, the study incorporated cultural context in terms of place, family, community, and sovereignty through language, history, and political status in the United States (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009). This study provided an accurate cultural lens to research and understand the experience of American Indian students.
The grounded theory of tribal college student persistence marked a turning point in understanding the American Indian undergraduate student experience in higher education. The study recognized the foundational research in student persistence (Tinto, 1993) well-being (Secatero, 2009). The model developed in the study serves as a foundational piece to understanding the Indigenous perspective and experience in graduate school.
The four major issues identified in the study by American Indian graduate students all exist simultaneously and influence persistence (Secatero, 2009). Spiritual well-being includes self-actualization, belief system, religion, ceremony, and self-acceptance. Mental well-being is described as cognitive development, intellectual growth, critical thinking, decision making, and advanced knowledge. Social well-being is based on family influence, networking, communicative modes with colleagues, literacy, and leadership. The last major issue of physical well-being includes endurance, hard work, diet, and exercise. Each issue is explained from an American Indian perspective to further understand how issues influences persistence (Secatero, 2009).
The four foundational pieces reviewed in this section set the foundation for the development of student persistence from a theoretical perspective. The focus of this study was American Indian graduate student persistence, arrived upon through the discussed research. The progression of the research is presented in the Figure 1 below. The beginning was noted with Tinto's (1972;) work on student departure; Tierney (1992; followed the exploration and introduced the minority perspective that begins to take into consideration oppression and discrimination as influential factors along with unique cultural strengths; HeavyRunner and Marshall (2003)  identifies influential factors specific to these students.

Summary
This chapter introduced the literature on American Indian graduate student persistence.
The history of higher education, American Indian education, and tribal colleges and universities was explored first. An overview of American Indians enrollment in mainstream colleges and universities, followed by a discussion on barriers in higher education were explored next. The chapter concluded with a discussion on persistence, degree completion for American Indian master and doctoral students, and a theoretical overview.

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study employed a quantitative survey method to reveal what persistence factors influence American Indian graduate students. Creswell (2009) stated that a quantitative methodology provides a numerical description of attitudes, trends, and perspectives. This study explored the perspectives of American Indian graduate students to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students. The data collected provided numerical descriptions of the attitudes held by American Indian graduate students and the persistence factors that influence degree completion.

Research Design
This study employed a survey design to generalize from a sample to a population to understand the perceptions (Creswell, 2009) of American Indian graduate students and persistence of graduate degree completion. This design collected data in an efficient manner from a large sample of American Indian graduate students from graduate institutions across the United States. The survey was cross-sectional (Creswell, 2009) as the data collected was from a single point in time. The data were collected using a web-based self-administered questionnaire (Creswell, 2009) to collect data from American Indian graduate students across the United States.

Hypothesis
The theoretical foundation along with the previous research around student persistence, specifically for American Indians, provided the parameters of the study based on known information. The theoretical foundation for persistence includes Tinto (1972), Tierney (1990), and for American Indian students HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint (2009) Indian graduate student persistence (Secatero, 2009) and the focus on understanding how students view themselves in graduate school in the four areas of physical, social, mental, and spiritual wellbeing (Secatero, 2009).
The research questions were answered by testing the following hypotheses: H1. Academic success factors affect American Indian student persistence.
H2. American Indian academic programs affect American Indian graduate student persistence.
H3. Student self-perceptions affect American Indian graduate student persistence.

Population and Sample
The population for this study consisted of American Indian graduate students. The researcher used a multi-stage sampling design to identify participants. The first stage identified and contacted individuals with large personal and professional networks of American Indians and requested assistance in disseminating the survey. The second stage utilized Facebook to post and share the Internet survey information. Upon receipt of the survey, individuals chose to participate in the study based on convenience and availability. These respondents comprised the sample for this study, based on sharing through personal and professional networks and the free will of participants to complete the survey.
The complete population was not accessible for the scope of this study, so selection was based on disseminating the survey to as many American Indian graduate students as possible.
This effort included identifying student organizations along with contacting known faculty at institutions throughout the United States to request their assistance in disseminating the survey.
This is similar to a snowball sampling method however this study used a network strategy (Nardi, 2006). The network strategy targeted know contacts with access to American Indian Graduate students and then requested this activity be continued on with whomever the secondary contacts were. The results of this study were only generalized to the selected organizations and institutions included and not the entire population of American Indian graduate students.
The original Secatero study used the qualitative questions, and had a sample size of 32 participants (Secatero, 2009). This quantitative survey (modified question of the Secatero Study) and the dissemination method utilized in this study garnered a larger response rate. An estimated sample size was calculated using a sample size calculator; however, the scope of the population was not attainable for this study. This study implemented a target of 100 collected surveys as the goal sample size.
This study is meant for the purposes of contributing to the body of knowledge on American Indian student persistence. The concept of generalizability conflicts with the worldview of many American Indians where the uniqueness of individuals and tribes is given recognition and not the "blanket" approach to drawing conclusions. Although common conclusion may emerge from this study it is not intended to explain the experience of all American Indian Graduate students.

Instrument
The instrument used for this study was from a qualitative study conducted by Secatero The survey consisted of a series of questions divided into five areas. Participants were asked two qualifying questions in order to move forward to complete the survey (Are you a graduate student? and are you American Indian?). The next section in the survey was graduate status. This section was comprised of 11 questions: financial aid, American Indian culture, graduate school experience, and self-awareness. These five areas included questions to collect information from the American Indian graduate students on persistence factors and the influence of these factors on degree completion in graduate school.

Validity and Reliability
The instrument identified for this study was originally used as a qualitative survey and did not include a discussion on validity and reliability. An American Indian (Secatero) developed the qualitative survey for the purpose of learning about American Indian graduate students; the critical reason for selecting this instrument for this study. Other persistence scales were identified however they were not validated on American Indian populations. The instrument was adapted to fit the scope of this quantitative study by producing statistical measures of the proposed persistence factors, using a series of scaled variables. Scaled variables are used to measure a theme or concept when no formal measure exists. These types of variables are applied by conducting a statistical measure using Cronbach's Alpha (Schmitt, 1996) to test how well a series of questions measures the intended concept. The Chronbach Alpha score indicates the level of inter-rater reliability of the questions, which is the relationship between the patterns of responses. The high Cronbach Alpha scores indicated a strong relationship between the variables and scaled variables were created.
This study explored the perceptions of American Indian graduate students. The study the instrument was adapted from did not address validity. The instrument was comprised of a series of questions including the scaled variables based on known persistence factors described in Chapter Two. The foundation of previous research on persistence factors of American Indian students provided the content validity (Creswell, 2009).

Variables
This study was conducted using one dependent variable and a series of independent variables. In order to operationalize the concepts for this study, scales were used to construct the variables for the success factors, American Indian programs, self-perception, and persistence.
Each of the scaled variables was calculated by first conducting a Crohnbach Alpha reliability score, included with each variable below. The questions used to address each of these variables are included in Appendix L.

Dependent Variable
The dependent variable was used to measure the effects of change from the independent variables.
Student persistence. The continued mobility of students to the next level in their educationsuch as progressing through the levels in basic skills-or staying enrolled in college from term to term or year to year (Seppanen, 2007). This scaled variable was created from questions inquiring about how many times students had stopped and started school again and how many total terms had they taken off from graduate school (Alpha = .753; see Appendix L for questions in scale).

Independent Variables
The independent variables were used to influence the change on the dependent variables Academic success. Identified factors, which contribute to Native American student persistence toward degree completion. The literature review by Demmert (2001)  Family support. This scaled variable was comprised of data from questions inquiring about the support a student receives from their family (Demmert, 2001) and if it is a high priority in social and spiritual wellbeing (Secatero, 2009). A question specifically asking if their family is supportive of their graduate education was not included in this scale due to lowering the Alpha score considerably (Alpha = .881; see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Cultural identity. This variable was comprised of questions asking about a student's cultural identity and included questions about where the student was raised in terms of on or off a reservation, community support, participation in cultural activities, language, connection with other American Indian students, and returning home. Cultural identity was not a scaled variable due to a low Alpha score when all indicators were combined. This variable was comprised of a single question inquiring if the student identified as American Indian.
Financial support. This variable included questions on financial aid, loans, research or teaching assistantships, scholarships, fellowships, work-study, service learning programs, and employment with hours worked per week (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of data from 11 questions (Alpha = .733; see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Academic skills. This variable focused on academic preparation, previous degrees earned, GPA, applying to graduate school, entrance exams, and the importance of literacy skills (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of data from 18 questions (Alpha = .751; see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Mentors. This variable was constructed from a question asking if the students had a graduate mentor. Other items were included in the assessment of the scale and were omitted due to a low Alpha score.
Supportive faculty. This variable focused on the student's perception of how supportive the faculty and the staff were during the graduate school experience. The questions asked included rating how helpful faculty were, and if the student had a mentor (Secatero, 2009). The scaled variable was comprised of data from 6 questions (Alpha = .668; see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Academic programs. This variable focused on the student's perception of how supportive student service programs were during graduate school. The questions asked included rating how helpful student service providers were and if students had a mentor (Secatero, 2009).
The scaled variable was comprised of data from 10 questions (Alpha = .789; see Self-perception. This factor was comprised of how Native American students saw themselves in terms of their self-esteem and self-efficacy and the elements of these constructs that contribute to persistence (Gloria & Robinson Kurpius, 2001). Additionally, this factor included how the students saw themselves and their abilities in terms of being students in a graduate program. The questions included physical, social, mental, and spiritual wellbeing along with the frequency of specific experiences, campus climate, and school academics (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 45 questions (Alpha = .842; see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Physical well-being. This factor addressed how much of a priority different aspects of physical well-being were to American Indian graduate students. It included questions about hard work, endurance, diet, and exercise (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 3 items (Alpha =.804, see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Social well-being. This factor addressed how much of a priority different aspects of social well-being were to American Indian graduate students. It included questions about family, communication, and leadership (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 3 items (Alpha = .718, see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Mental well-being. This factor addressed how much of a priority different aspects of mental well-being were to American Indian graduate students. It included questions about intellectual growth, critical thinking, and decision-making (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 3 items (Alpha = .906, see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Spiritual well-being. This factor addressed how much of a priority various aspects of spiritual well-being were to American Indian graduate students. It included questions about family, faith, sense of belonging, and religious activities (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 4 items (Alpha = .884, see Experience. This factor was comprised of questions asking the frequency certain experiences students may have had. These experiences included stress, depression, tiredness, social life, sickness, and other experiences (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 9 items (Alpha= .602, see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Campus climate. This factor was comprised of questions asking students to rate different aspects of campus climate. This variable included questions asking about friendliness of students, diversity, and safety (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 4 items (Alpha = .955, see Appendix L for questions in scale).
Academics. This factor was comprised of questions asking students to rate their satisfaction with academics at their institution. It included questions about courses, work, creativity, and work groups (Secatero, 2009). This scaled variable consisted of 6 items (Alpha = .822, see Appendix L for questions in scale).

Data Collection
The data for this study were collected using Survey Monkey, an online survey site. The

Data Analyses
The analysis of the data collected began with descriptive statistics presented for the sample, followed by a bivariate correlation, and concluded with a multiple linear regression.
These analyses provided the information to assess the research questions and hypotheses in this study of understanding the relationship between persistence factors and American Indian graduate student. The a priori assumptions for this study include normal distribution of the data, and homoscedasticity for equal variances. A codebook found in Appendix K describes the variable name in the data set, level of measurement, and coded answers. Each of the scaled variables is at the interval level of measurement as none of the scales have a true zero starting point necessary for a ratio level of measurement. The bivariate correlation provided the statistics on the scaled variables and to assess the strength and direction of the relationship between the dependent variable (student persistence) and the independent variables (family support, cultural identity, financial support, academic skills, mentors, supportive faculty and staff, self-perception (physical well-being, social well-being, mental well-being, spiritual well-being, experience, campus climate, and academics)). After the bivariate correlation, a multivariate linear regression was conducted with the independent variables on the dependent variable.

Summary
This chapter introduced the methodology for this study on American Indian graduate student persistence. The method, research design, and hypothesis were presented in the beginning of the chapter. Next, the population and data collection methods were discussed. The survey instrument was described along with a section addressing the validity and reliability of the instrument, followed by a presentation of the proposed variables. The chapter concluded with an overview of the data collection method and the data analysis for this study.

Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter provides the findings for this study. The response rate and sample demographics are provided in the beginning of the chapter. Next, the survey results are presented through summaries of graduate status, faculty and department support, financing graduate education, tribal ways of knowing, and self-awareness. The statement of the hypotheses, bivariate correlation, and multiple regressions comprise the next section. The chapter concludes with a summary.

Response Rate
The researcher disseminated the survey on February 1, 2017, through e-mail to professional and personal contacts, listserv distribution, and Facebook. The initial e-mails were distributed to individuals including those who provided letters of commitment to disseminate the survey link to professional and personal contacts. These selected individuals were connected with academia in various capacities including current graduate students, graduate faculty, department coordinators, program directors, departmental chairs, and collegiate deans. A total of 14 originating e-mails including the IRB approved flyer, survey description, and survey link were disseminated. In addition to the e-mails, the survey information was disseminated through four student listservs and one newsletter specifically for American Indian graduate students.
The primary dissemination method used was Facebook. Facebook is an online social media website used for social networking between its users. The initial dissemination through Facebook shares concluded the dissemination phase.
When the data collection phase concluded, the period between February 1 and February 28 generated a total of 110 responses to the online survey through Survey Monkey. Of these 110 responses, a total of 109 participants electronically signed the informed consent by checking the box indicating they had read the study description, been informed of the study risks and benefits, were provided information should they have questions or concerns, and voluntarily agreed to participate in the study. One participant indicated they either did not read or understand the description of the study and opted to not participate.
After the 109 participants agreed to voluntarily participate in the study, two qualifying questions allowed continuation through the rest of the study. The first qualifying question was if the participant was a graduate student, which they indicated either yes or no. Of the 109 participants, 72 indicated they were graduate students and 36 did not (one participant did not answer this question). The second qualifying question asked if the participants were American Indian, which participants answered either yes or no; 72 participants indicated yes.
The responses from the 72 qualified participants were reviewed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The data were exported from Survey Monkey into an SPSS file. This file is the data set used to establish the sample for this study. After reviewing the 72 qualified responses, a total of 9 cases in the data set had no responses beyond the two qualifying questions. The researcher made the decision to omit these cases from the data set, reducing the overall number of responses to 63. The sample size for this study was n = 63.

Sample Demographics
This section reviews the characteristics of the participants who completed the survey.
The characteristics included age, gender, marital status, number of children, and employment. In addition to these characteristics, other demographic information described, including tribal affiliation, tribal language and fluency, place participants were raised, and participation in tribal events with specific information.
The survey participants ranged in age from twenty-two years old to fifty-five years old (n= 54; 9 missing). The mean age of the participants was thirty-four years old. The span of ages indicated that approximately 30% of the participants were in their twenties; 45% were in their thirties; 17% were in their forties; and 8% were in their fifties. Of the 54 respondents, 42 (78%) identified as female and 9 (17%) identified as male. The remaining 5% (n=3) selected "other" for gender and reported as follows: gender fluid; non-binary/Two Spirit; and transgender, Two Spirit.
Survey participants reported a span of marital status. Of those who responded (n=54; 9 missing) to the question, 45% were single, 41% were married, 9% were divorced, and 5% selected "other" and reported common law, domestic partnership, or in partnership. Of these 54 respondents, approximately half (48%) reported having children; 19% had one child, 27% had two children, 27% had three, 19% had four, and 8% had five or more children. The final demographic question inquired about employment; 80% reported they were currently employed.
The next series of demographic questions focused on American Indian characteristics.
These characteristics include tribal affiliation, tribal language, fluency of language, location they were raised, and participation in tribal events.  The tribal languages with more than a single representation included the following: Blackfeet (n=7, 11%); Choctaw, Cree, and Navajo (n=3 each, 5%); and Cheyenne, Lakota, and Salish (n=2 each, 3%).
The survey also asked the participants about the fluency of their first tribal language and the fluency of other language. A total of 54 responses were collected about fluency of the first tribal language as follows: 60% (n=33) reported they were non fluent, 20% (n=11) reported they understood the language but did not speak it, 7% (n=4) were semi fluent, 3% (n=2) indicated they could carry on a conversation, and 5.6% (n=3) were fluent in their native tongue. A total of 29 responses were received for the other language fluency question. Of the 20 responses, 45% were non fluent, 3% understood but did not speak, 3% were semi fluent, 7% could carry on a conversation, and 3% were fluent in the other language. Across both of the fluency questions, only 8.6% were fluent in a tribal or other language.
Another important characteristic of American Indian graduate students involved the place where the students were raised. The survey asked the participants were asked about where they were raised. A total of 55 responses were received as follows: 38% reported being raised on a reservation or tribal community, 18% were raised off of a reservation, 24% were raised in an urban area, and 20% were raised in multiple areas.
Additionally, participants were asked about their involvement in tribal events. A total of 55 responses were received, of which 84% indicated they do participate in tribal events. The participants indicated the following tribal events: American Indian Society of Washington, D.C. events; annual pow wow; at-large member events; basketball; ceremonies; ceremonies and powwows; ceremonies and celebrations; ceremonies and community events; ceremonies, of tribes needs to be acknowledged as powwows, the most common answer, may differ from tribe to tribe.

Survey Results
This section explores the results of the survey. A total of five sections comprised the survey: graduate status, faculty and department support, financing graduate education, tribal ways of knowing, and self-awareness. The survey section includes descriptive statistics and the basis for the inferential statistics to test the hypotheses presented in this study.

Graduate Status
The first section in the survey was graduate status. The questions in this section inquired about the participants' current status in graduate school. The questions included the following options: registered for courses, number of consecutive semester enrollment, degree major, projected graduation date, and influential factors on major selection. The responses (n=63) indicated 43% of the participants were registered for courses next semester; 24% were not currently registered but will be; 8% were currently on a leave of absence with full intent of re-enrolling; 14% were not registered due to graduating in the current semester of completing this included a high paying job, intellectual curiosity, fulfilling career, international opportunities, prestige, and parent or community desires. The responses for a high paying job (n=61, 2 missing) were as follows: 10% indicated high priority, 23% above average priority, 41% average priority, 10% below average priority, and 16% low priority. The next factor, intellectual curiosity (n=61, 2 missing), was prioritized as such: 59% indicated high priority, 31% above average priority, and 10% average priority. The responses for fulfilling career (n=61, 2 missing) were as follows: 77% high priority, 20% above average priority, and 3% average priority. The priority for international opportunities included the following: 3% high priority, 11% above average priority, 25% average priority, 21% below average priority, and 40% low priority. The second to last factor, prestige, resulted (n=61, 2 missing) as such: 10% high priority, 20% above average priority, 36% average priority, 20% below average priority, and 14% low priority. The last factor, parent or community desires, was prioritized (n=61, 2 missing) as follows: 33% high priority, 21% above average priority, 31% average priority, 7% below average priority, and 8% low priority.
The participants indicated 23% had taken a term off during the course of their graduate program (77% reported no; n=61, 2 missing). The range of times a participant had stopped and started again during their graduate program included 3 times (2%), 2 times (5%), 1 time (15%), 0 times (15%), and one respondent selected other: "I took 10 years off" (2%). Participants were also asked the total number of terms they had taken off; the range was 0 terms up to 30 terms (terms included both semesters and quarters). The average time off reported by participants was five terms and the highest frequency of reported terms off was one or three terms.
The survey participants reported 51% would attain a master's degree upon graduation, 4% would attain a professional degree, and 46% would receive a doctorate degree. The range of expected graduation dates was from May of 2017 through May of 2022. The participants were asked if any one in their family had earned a graduate degree (n=61, 2 missing); 44% reported someone in their family had earned a graduate degree, and 53% did not.

Faculty and Department Support
In this section of the survey, participants were asked question about the support they have The survey respondents were asked to report the helpfulness of different student support providers (n=54, 9 missing). Error! Reference source not found. reflects the results. (2) 13.73% (7) 35.29% (18) 15.69% (8) 17.65% (9) 13.73% (7) The responses show participants felt the American Indian programs, academic advisor, and committee chairs were above average or extremely helpful; financial aid and the enrollment office were reported average in helpfulness; and the department chair and dean of students were the least helpful.
The responses (n=55, 8 missing) to the number of times students meet with their advisor each term varied from once per week (14%), twice per month (16%), once per month (24%), once per term (33%), and "other" responses included as needed (2%), two to three times per semester (4%), whenever they are available (2%), only via e-mail (2%), none while on leave (2%), and none (2%). In addition to meeting with an advisor, the survey respondents reported using other resources: attending graduate school workshops (42%), computer online resources (58%), tutoring (12%), off campus centers (10%), and "other" included American Indian Research Team (2%), library resources (2%), community members and tribal college instructors (2%), Native mentoring program (2%), professional development workshops outside the university (2%), U.S. government source (2%), writing center and resources (6%). The student responses indicated the highest category rated for help is meeting with their advisor once a term and using computer online resources.
Students were asked about how many credit hours they enrolled in each year of graduate school; for each of the years from the first year to the fifth year, students enrolled between seven and eleven credit hours each term. The respondents were also asked about the number of American Indian students enrolled in their graduate program. The responses indicated 82% had less than 10 American Indian students enrolled in the graduate program, 5% had between 11 and 20 American Indian students, 2% had between 21 and 30 American Indian students, 2% had over 30 American Indian graduate students, and 9% did not know the number of American Indian students enrolled in their graduate program.

Financing Graduate Education
This sections focuses on how American Indian graduate students finance graduate education. Specific areas of focus included financial aid and the types students receive during their graduate program. Questions were asked about receipt of financial aid, the types, employment, and how many hours per week the student was employed.
The survey participants reported (n=55, 8 missing) 78% received financial aid, while 22% did not receive financial aid. In terms of the type of financial aid, students reported taking out the following types of loans: 59% have taken out federal student loans, 2% state student loans, 5% private loans, and 2% American Indian Graduate Center (AIGC) loans for service. An additional category, "other," included family assistance (2%), paid by employer (2%), U.S.
Other types of financial aid participants were asked to report on involved the following: and third year of graduate school, and a majority of the students worked between 11 and 20 hours per week. In the fourth year, this commitment ranged between 21 and 30 hours per week.
In the fifth year, it ranged between 11 and 20 hours or 21 to 30 hours.

Tribal Ways Of Knowing
In this section, survey respondents were asked questions about tribal affiliation, tribal language and fluency, where they were raised, community and family support, household, and experience of loss. The questions that asked about tribal affiliation, tribal language, fluency of language, and where they were raised are included in the beginning of this chapter in the sample demographics section.
The first question in this section asked respondents if they had plans to return to their home community for work or a project after graduate school; 46% responded yes, 7% responded no, and 47% were unsure. In terms of support, 95% felt they had family support, and 75% felt they had community support.
The next set of questions focused on responsibility of others during graduate school; 58% responded they were responsible for taking care of others while in graduate school, while 42% responded no. If the respondents answered yes, they were asked to specify the relationship of the  have deadlines and I hardly see them but they understand. Many of the responses indicated finding a balance between graduate school, family, and cultural responsibilities was difficult, some did not feel as though they were balancing these three areas, and others reported planning, time management, and family support.

Self-Awareness and Perception
The self-awareness and perception section of the survey asked questions regarding how American Indian graduate students perceive themselves and how aware they are of themselves.
The questions cover physical, social, mental, and spiritual well-being along with reporting experiences during their graduate course, rating the campus climate and school's academics. The survey participants were asked how much of a priority different aspects of physical well-being were to them. The results are below in Error! Reference source not found.. The students who responded to this question indicated hard work (46.30%) had the highest priority for physical well-being, followed by endurance (40.74%) at above average, diet (35.19%) at average, and exercise (31.48%) at below average and low priority. The next category in the self-awareness section of the survey addressed social well-being.
The areas under social well-being included family, communication with people, communication with colleagues, and leadership.
reflects the results below. The students who responded to this question indicated family (72.22%) had the highest priority for social well-being, followed by leadership (40.74%) at above average, communication with colleagues (37.04%) at average, and communication with colleagues (9.26%) at below average. The next category in the self-awareness section of the survey addressed mental wellbeing. The areas under mental well-being included intellectual growth, critical thinking, decision-making, and knowledge. The results are in Error! Reference source not found..  (15) 7.41% (4) 0.00% (0) 0.00% (0) The students who responded to this question indicated critical thinking (72.22%) had the highest priority for mental well-being, followed by decision-making and knowledge (27.78%) at above average, and decision-making (9.26%) at average. The next category in the self-awareness section of the survey inquired about spiritual well-being. The areas under spiritual well-being involved family, faith, sense of belonging, religious activities, and belief system. The results are in Error! Reference source not found..  (20) 11.11% (6) 12.96% (7) Belief system 48.15% (26) 27.78% (15) 12.96% (7) 9.26% (5) 1.85% (1) The students who responded to this question indicated family (77.78%) had the highest priority for mental well-being, followed by a sense of belonging (31.48%) at above average, and religious activities (37.04%) at average, below average, and low priority.
The next section of questions in the self-awareness and perception section inquired about the frequency of certain experiences, campus climate, academics, and degree completion. The experiences students reported happening daily were family duties ( School academics asked students to rate challenging courses, values of education, preparation for work, creativity, knowledge of the world, sense of belonging, and ability to work in groups. The survey respondents reported they were satisfied across the board for all of the school academic categories as follows: challenging courses (55.56%), values of education (44.44%), preparation for work (66.67%), creativity (50.00%), knowledge of the world (56.60%), sense of belonging (56.30%), and ability to work in groups (59.26%). The last question asked students to rate how confident they were in completing the degree they were currently working on. The results were rated across a scale of one for very low confidence up to five for very high confidence: level 5 (69.81%), level 4 (18.87%), level 3 (7.55%), level 2 (1.89%), and level 1 (1.89%).

Data Analyses
This section enumerated the findings of the survey data for this study. The purpose of this study was to understand what factors influence the persistence of American Indian graduate students. First, a review of the hypotheses begins this section; the results of the bivariate correlation analysis are explored next; and the section concludes with the multi-variate regression analysis.
To understand how factors influence American Indian graduate students, the following empirically based research question was addressed: What factors contribute to American Indian graduate student persistence?
This research question was investigated through three sub-questions: a. Do academic success factors relate to American Indian graduate student persistence (Demmert, 2001)?
b. Do American Indian academic programs relate to American Indian graduate student persistence (Secatero, 2009)? c. Do student self-perceptions relate to American Indian graduate student persistence (Secatero, 2009)?
Each hypothesis postulated for each factor was tested individually as well as the combined with other factors. Each hypothesis tested if these factors influence American Indian graduate student persistence.
The hypotheses and null hypotheses for this study were as follows: H1. Academic success factors affect American Indian student persistence.
H0. Academic success factors have no affect on American Indian student persistence.
H1. American Indian academic programs affect American Indian graduate student persistence.
H0. American Indian academic programs have no affect on American Indian graduate student persistence.
H1. Student self-perceptions affect American Indian graduate student persistence.

H0. Student self-perceptions have no affect on American Indian graduate student
Using the independent variables from each hypothesis and running the multi-variate regression analysis for the dependent variable tested each of the above hypotheses. The full statistical model was tested to examine total affects on persistence of American Indian graduate students.

Bivariate Correlation
The first step in the analysis established a relationship between the variables. The dependent and independent variables were used in a correlation analysis to assess the strength of the relationship between the variables. The variables were recoded into scaled variables by computing a score for each variable by adding the responses to all of the appropriate questions and dividing by the number of questions added together.
A bivariate correlation was conducting with the following variables: persistence, family, financial, academic, faculty, programs, self, physical, social, mental, spiritual, experience, campus, and academics. The bivariate correlation was used to determine direction and strength of relationship. A table with the correlation results is found in Error! Reference source not found.. The results of the bivariate correlation show weak (Hoy, 2010;Picciano, 2006)  These correlations were also found to be statistically significant (p<.01).

Multivariate Linear Regression
The second step in the analysis for this study involved a multivariate linear regression.
This analysis allowed for the exploration in the data to account for the variability of the dependent and independent variables. This study addressed the hypotheses by understanding the amount of variance of American Indian graduate student persistence when the influence of success factors, American Indian programs, and self-perception can be measured. below.

Summary
This chapter provided the findings for this study. The response rate and sample demographics were reviewed at the beginning of the chapter. Next, the survey results were presented through summaries of graduate status, faculty and department support, financing graduate education, tribal ways of knowing, and self-awareness. The statement of the hypotheses, bivariate correlation, and multiple regression results were also explored. The chapter concludes with a summary.

Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
This chapter provides the discussion of the results for the study. The purpose of the research and the research question are provided at the beginning of the chapter. Next, the research conclusions and implications for administrators, faculty, and students are explained.
The following section reviews suggestions for future research. The chapter concludes with a summary.

Purpose of the Research and the Question
The purpose of this quantitative survey study is to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students. The underrepresentation of American Indian students continues to exist at the undergraduate and graduate levels of postsecondary education despite increases of American Indian student enrollment. The study surveyed American Indian students enrolled in graduate programs to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students.
The following empirically based research questions were addressed to identify correlations between academic factors and graduate student persistence, as well as to understand how likely graduate degree completion is based on known academic factors for American Indian students What factors contribute to American Indian graduate student persistence?
This research question was investigated through the testing of hypotheses postulated for each factor individually as well as the combined factors. Each hypothesis tested if these factors influence American Indian graduate student persistence. The full statistical model was tested to examine total effects on persistence of American Indian graduate students.

Research Conclusions
The findings from this study are found within the parameters of the previous research on student departure, student retention, cultural protective factors, American Indian student resilience, and American Indian graduate student persistence. The contributions of this study apply to both informing the current body of knowledge for future research along with student retention practitioners. A discussion of the theoretical parallels, followed by the implications, is covered in this section.
The foundations of student departure were explored through Tinto's work over a course of forty years. Tinto (1972) identified many causal factors of student departure: academic difficulty, adjustment, goals, uncertainty, commitments, finances, integration and community membership, incongruence, and isolation. Tinto's model was derived from an adaptation of Durkheim's theory of suicide (as cited in Tinto, 1972); student departure was a form of suicide where it was the inability of students to not adapt to the institution, as well as a lack of support from the institutions (1972).
Tinto further developed the Model of Institutional Departure indicating academic difficulty, failure to identify goals, and failure to integrate into the culture of the institution contributed to students leaving academia. The key assumptions in the Institutional Departure model were "cultural suicide" and adaptation of the institution culture (Tinto, 1993). The respondents in this study, current American Indian graduate students, indicated their culture remained with them through language, family, tribal activities, and considerations of returning to their home community after graduation.  prayer and self-care; and a supportive family and community. These responses addressed why graduate students need to balance these responsibilities and how they balanced these responsibilities. One respondent from this study stated, "My family is very supportive, and does not demand a lot of me so that I can focus on school. I take my community responsibilities and graduate work in equal measure, keeping in mind that my work is for my community, not for myself." The survey responses also addressed the second question from the grounded theory on tribal college student persistence (HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint, 2009). The American Indian graduate students in this study reported that balance was not easy, very difficult, challenging, and constantly feeling like they were failing. The student responses also indicated they just kept doing it, sacrifices, one day at a time, understanding it is a blessing and a curse, swinging back and forth like a pendulum, and still trying to find a balance. These responses paralleled HeavyRunner-PrettyPaint's (2009) theory as the most helpful to students not giving up.
The responses to this study also supported the model of Secatero (2009)  confirming early studies of student persistence did not account for cultural continuity and unique experiences of minority students; (b) providing further evidence of the importance of culture, relationships, and a responsibility to community as influential factors of American Indian student persistence; and (c) generating the need for further investigation into persistence for American Indian graduate student persistence. This study provided further evidence and knowledge around the unique experience of American Indian graduate students.

Implications
The implications from this study serve two key purposes: implications for institutions serving American Indian Graduate students, and implications for future research. These purposes do have areas of overlap along with unique recommendations based on the results of this study. The research conclusions informed the recommendations for each of these areas.

Implications for Institutions
Academic institutions need to specifically address the shortcomings in support and promotion of American Indian culture. This support and promotion needs to include avenues and opportunities to help American Indian students feel the acceptance of diversity, tolerance of diversity, and every opportunity other non-Native students have to feel safe within the bounds of the institution. Historically, efforts and funds have been allocated for these purposes; however, the change can only come from the American Indian students themselves.
The disconnect happens when any amount of directed effort for American Indian students is prompted by the institution and an assumption of this being a fix to the problems should happen. The key to understand this disconnect is the perspective of the institution, and not that of American Indian students themselves. Concerted efforts to improve campus climate for American Indian students need to include the American Indian students throughout the entire process.
The development of strategic plans with American Indian students involved in the planning process will ensure to capture the input of the American Indian students, from the perspective of American Indian students, and hopefully, result in efforts aligning with what works for American Indian students. The skills of the institution and the knowledge from American Indian students can work together in order to promote and support these students in an appropriate way.

Implications for Future Research
The results of this study were fruitful for future research. As the body of knowledge on American Indian student persistence continues to grow, three areas of research need direct attention in order to understand this experience, measure this experience, and transfer the knowledge of this experience of American Indian students. The three areas are (a) measuring persistence as a process and not a defined cross section of time, (b) further exploring indigenous theories and models of persistence, and (c) measuring these concepts through an American Indian lens and worldview.
The results of this study indicated the measure of persistence in this case had a weak relationship with the academic and self-awareness factors. Recommendations based on this result for future research would be to do further investigation on how to define American Indian persistence and how to operationalize this into a measureable concept. Persistence for American Indian students is an ongoing activity and not something that happens at the end when something is complete. Research into how to measure this process would contribute to understanding this process for American Indian graduate students.
The Indigenous theories and models need further investigation to develop accurate measures of subjective concepts like spirituality, culture, sense of belonging, and identity.
Further, these concepts need to be defined from an American Indian perspective in order to accurately capture this from their worldview. The saying " you cannot understand the day in the life of a man until you walk a day in his shoes" has value in this instance. In order to understand the experience of American Indian students, one must first understand what life is like from their perspective.
Research needs to be conducted through the lenses of honoring and recognizing the uniqueness of all American Indian individuals and tribes and not through the western lenses. The challenge in research is to find these parallels in concept and language and then perform the translation without losing the root of the meaning. The concepts in this study (persistence, success factors, support, and self-awareness) already have a basis in the culture of American Indian students. These concepts are defined differently, understood differently, and need to be explained from the American Indian perspective.

Summary
The opportunity for this study came from a history of researchers who first wanted to understand why students left college, only to change and shift to wanting to understand why students stayed in college. American Indian students naturally view the world as a place to stay and be grateful for. Western education was not part of this world initially, and when it did, it was a place to eradicate the American Indian identity down to the very core of their being.
Over time, a shift happened where more and more American Indian students were persisting through college and earning degrees. The initial pipeline took time to establish despite the continued underrepresentation trend. More and more American Indian students were earning undergraduate degrees, which began the process of earning graduate degrees. This growth was always overshadowed by the large underrepresentation of American Indian students in higher education despite efforts to change this reality.
American Indian graduates were able to explain pieces of the underrepresentation from their perspective. The goal shifted to understand why students persist and how to help more I am targeting 100 completed surveys from American Indian graduate students from across the country to participate in this study. My participant selection process has specific requirements and will proceed as follows: 1) Participants must be American Indian graduate students who are completing their master's or doctoral program in their respective fields of study. 2) Participants must be willing to share their personal experiences on graduate school success and must devote time to complete the online survey, which takes about 20 minutes.

PURPOSE OF STUDY
My research will focus on understanding what academic, success, and self-awareness factors have contributed to your continuation towards earning a graduate degree. Furthermore, I would like to explore the many reasons for your persistence and your success in attaining your graduate degree.

PROCEDURES AND ACTIVITIES
My methodology involves the following procedures: 1) Participants will complete and sign this consent form online, prior to completing the survey. 2) Participants will complete an online survey consisting of 54 questions about their graduate school experiences.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no potential risks, discomforts, or inconveniences involved. Your participation is voluntary and you are free to decline to answer any survey questions that makes you uncomfortable without penalty.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR SOCIETY
Your responses will inform programs who serve American Indian students at academic institutions. Your participation is strictly voluntary and no compensation will be provided. Your anticipated reward is in helping future American Indian graduate students pursue advanced degrees.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. All information will be stored in my own personal computer equipped with my own password. This computer is in a locked room when I am not present. I will also keep a hard copy of survey responses in a personal locked filing cabinet at home. Information will only be shared No, will be graduating this semester 3 No, on a leave of absence with full intentions of enrolling 4 No, but will be registering 5 Yes