Florida International University

FIU Digital Commons

FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School

6-20-2022

An Exploratory Examination of the Financial Knowledge, Attitudes,

Capabilities, and Socialization of Black College Students and their
Lived Experience of Personal Financial Management
Joycelyn C. Morris
Florida International University, jmorr090@[Link]

Follow this and additional works at: [Link]

Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons

Recommended Citation
Morris, Joycelyn C., "An Exploratory Examination of the Financial Knowledge, Attitudes, Capabilities, and
Socialization of Black College Students and their Lived Experience of Personal Financial Management"
(2022). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 5056.
[Link]

This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It
has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU
Digital Commons. For more information, please contact dcc@[Link].
 FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
Miami, Florida

AN EXPLORATORY EXAMINATION OF THE FINANCIAL KNOWLEDGE,

ATTITUDES, CAPABILITIES AND SOCIALIZATION OF BLACK COLLEGE

STUDENTS AND THEIR LIVED EXPERIENCE OF PERSONAL FINANCIAL

MANAGEMENT

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

in

CURRICULUM & INSTRUCTION

by

Joycelyn Morris

2022
To: Dean Michael R. Heithaus
College of Arts, Science and Education

This dissertation, written by Joycelyn Morris, and entitled An Exploratory Examination

of the Financial Knowledge, Attitudes, Capabilities and Socialization of Black College
Students and their Lived Experience of Personal Financial Management, having been
approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgement.

We have read this dissertation and recommend that it be approved.

___________________________________________

Keisha McIntyre-McCullough

___________________________________________
Maria Lovett

___________________________________________
Kimberly Watkins

___________________________________________
Jacqueline Lynch, Major Professor
Date of Defense: June 20, 2022

The dissertation of Joycelyn Morris is approved.

___________________________________________
Dean Michael R. Heithaus
College of Arts, Sciences and Education

___________________________________________
Andrés G. Gil
Vice President for Research and Economic Development
and Dean of the University Graduate School

Florida International University, 2022

ii
© Copyright 2022 by Joycelyn Morris

All rights reserved.

iii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this dissertation to my grandfather Leroy Moses, who always emphasized the

importance of education. Also, to my parents for their never-ending love and continued

support throughout this process and finally my Lord for giving me the strength and

endurance to complete this work.

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation has been a labor of love and a test of my patience and

perseverance. Some might argue that achieving a doctorate is not accessible for a Black

woman. Still, I am grateful to be standing on the shoulders of those who have gone before

me, boldly blazing the trail for future Black women everywhere and reminding them that

we are truly magic, and our abilities are limitless.

Dr. Lynch, thank you so much for your willingness to take a chance on me and

my project. Although slightly unconventional for the department, you have supported me

with enthusiasm which has helped me to complete this journey. My committee members,

Dr. McIntyre-McCullough and Dr. Lovett thank you for being willing to invest in my

passion and offering guidance along the way; your support and expertise have allowed

this study to be what it has become. To my friend, colleague, and committee member Dr.

Kimberly Watkins thank you so much for your unwavering support and willingness to

serve on my committee. Your presence and expertise were irreplicable, and I am forever

grateful for your help.

I am genuinely grateful for my spiritual foundation, which carried me throughout

this process even when things got difficult and frustrating. My parents, who have helped

to instill that spirituality and have also been a constant source of support throughout this

process, I thank you for everything. To my good friend Dr. Brittany Lane who traveled

this road before me, thank you for always answering my questions and lending a listening

ear when I needed to vent. And to my BBF Noir, thanks for always making me smile.

To every friend, family member, and colleague who has ever encouraged me in

this journey, who believed in the importance of my work and encouraged me along the

v
way, I thank you. Lastly, to every Black college student who participated in this study,

thank you for entrusting me with your story. I hope that you are proud of this project.

vi
 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION

AN EXPLORATORY EXAMINATION OF THE FINANCIAL KNOWLEDGE,

ATTITUDES, CAPABILITIES AND SOCIALIZATION OF BLACK COLLEGE

STUDENTS AND THEIR LIVED EXPERIENCE OF PERSONAL FINANCIAL

MANAGEMENT

by

Joycelyn Morris

Florida International University, 2022

Miami, Florida

Professor Jacqueline Lynch, Major Professor

Financial literacy and education have become hot topics in the U.S. The research

of the Black community within this field of study is limited and existing research findings

are bleak. The purpose of this study was to understand the financial knowledge,

behaviors, and socialization of Black college students. Many existing studies seek to

understand financial literacy through quantitative inquiry solely, however this study used

a concurrent mixed method research design to obtain a holistic understanding of the

research questions while minimizing biases. The quantitative portion of the study

consisted of a survey administered online and grounded in the Family Financial

Socialization Theory (FFST) where individuals’ financial literacy and practices were

assessed (n=181). Additional semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subset of

respondent (n=8) these questions were crafted using Critical Race Theory (CRT) and

explored the participants intersectionality of race and personal finance. The survey data

suggested mostly positive findings as it relates to respondents’ financial attitudes,

vii
knowledge, capabilities, behaviors, and socialization and supported the most of the FFST

model assumptions. There was a strong relationship between financial attitudes,

knowledge, and capabilities and effect on financial behaviors and well-being. Analysis of

the qualitative findings yielded eight themes and revealed additional financial knowledge

of participants not captured in the quantitative survey. This finding suggests the need for

culturally responsive survey tools. Both the quantitative and qualitative results indicate

that there is room for improvement of financial knowledge of Black college students.

Findings of the interviews show that race plays a factor in the participants belief around

wealth being personally attainable for them and that there are racist practices which has

kept the Black community from attaining wealth.

viii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ...................................................................................................................... PAGE

CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................2
Rationale for Study...........................................................................................................4
Summary of Literature .....................................................................................................5
Research Questions ..........................................................................................................6
Introduction to Conceptual Frameworks ..........................................................................7
Definitions ........................................................................................................................9
Limitations & Delimitations...........................................................................................10
Organization of Dissertation ..........................................................................................10

CHAPTER 2 ................................................................................................................................ 11
LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................... 12
Economic Inequality ......................................................................................................13
Wealth Gap .................................................................................................................18
Financial Literacy: History and Definition ....................................................................22
Financial Literacy & Black Americans ......................................................................26
Financial Education ........................................................................................................27
Post-Secondary Financial Education ..........................................................................29
Family Financial Socialization .......................................................................................32
Family Financial Socialization Theory ..........................................................................36
Critical Race Theory ......................................................................................................42
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis .................................................................46
Summary ........................................................................................................................48

CHAPTER 3 ................................................................................................................................ 51
METHODS .................................................................................................................................. 51
Research Design .............................................................................................................51
Participants .....................................................................................................................52
Data Collection ...............................................................................................................54
Instruments .....................................................................................................................56
Survey Instrument.......................................................................................................56
Interviews ...................................................................................................................61
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................64
Quantitative Analysis .................................................................................................64
Figure 1 .......................................................................................................................65
Qualitative Analysis ...................................................................................................67
Combined Data Analysis ............................................................................................69

CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................................ 70

ix
QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS .................................................................................................. 70
Descriptive Statistics ......................................................................................................70
Research Questions ........................................................................................................72
Structural Equation Model Results ................................................................................77
Figure 2 .......................................................................................................................78
Model 1 Analysis ........................................................................................................78
Figure 3 .......................................................................................................................84
Model 2 Results ..........................................................................................................84
Summary ........................................................................................................................90

CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................................... 92

QUALITATIVE FINDINGS ..................................................................................................... 92
Category 1: Perceptions of their financial knowledge ...................................................92
Direct influences on the knowledge of money ...........................................................93
Observed influences on money and financial behaviors ............................................95
Category 2: Personal engagement in financial practices ................................................97
Money-saving practices ..............................................................................................97
Engagement in investment practices ..........................................................................98
Category 3: Beliefs about money and wealth.................................................................99
Perceptions of money .................................................................................................99
Perceptions of wealth................................................................................................102
Category 4: Perceptions of the effects of race on money and wealth ..........................103
Perceived wealth gap based on race .........................................................................103
Perceived inequality based on race ...........................................................................105
Summary ......................................................................................................................106

CHAPTER SIX ......................................................................................................................... 107

DISCUSSION ...............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Overview ........................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Exploratory Findings from the Family Financial Socialization Theory ................ Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Financial knowledge ................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Financial attitudes/capabilities ................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Financial Socialization ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Financial behaviors ..................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Financial well-being ................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Summary of FFST Findings ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Discussion of Themes from Qualitative Inquiry & CRT ............. Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Category 3: Beliefs about money and wealth ............. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Category 4: Perceptions of the effects of race on money and wealth................. Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Summary of Qualitative Inquiry ................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

x
 Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Research . Error! Bookmark not defined.
Implications for Practice ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Implications for Policy ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Future Research .......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Limitations ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Conclusion...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 134

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................... 142

VITA ........................................................................................................................................... 159

xi
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1. Demographic Characteristics of the Sample………………………………………....71

2. Financial Knowledge Mean Score & Subjective Financial Knowledge……………..74

3. Financial Attitudes, Capabilities, and Behaviors Mean Score……………………….75

4. Frequency of in-home financial socialization by topic………………………………76

5. Factor Loadings for Latent Constructs Model 1……………………………………..79

6. Unstandardized Regression Weights for Model 1…………………………………...79

7. Standardized Regression Coefficients for Model 1………………………………….80

8. Covariance Matrix for Model 1……………………………………………………...81

9. Standardized Total Effects for Model 1……………………………………………...82

10. Standardized Direct Effects for Model 1…………………………………………….83

11. Standardized Indirect Effects for Model 1…………………………………………...83

12. Model Fit Indices for Model 1……………………………………………………….83

13. Unstandardized Regression Weights for Model 2…………………………………...86

14. Standardized Regression Weights for Model 2……………………………………...87

15. Covariance Matrix for Model 2……………………………………………………...87

16. Standardized Total Effects for Model 2……………………………………………...88

17. Standardized Direct effects for Model 2……………………………………………..88

18. Standardized Indirect effects for Model 2…………………………………………...89

19. Model Fit Indices Model 2…………………………………………………………..89

xii
20. Factor Loadings for Latent Constructs Model 2…………………………………….90

xiii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Examining financial literacy and financial education among Black college

students today requires an analysis of our country’s racialized history that systemically

and politically created what is known as the racial wealth gap. More than a century has

passed since freedom was claimed for the Black Americans and over 50 years since the

passing of the Civil Rights Act, which provided equal rights to Black people, and yet the

struggle of equality continues. The wealth gap, also known as wealth inequality, is often

referred to as the unequal distribution of assets among residents in the United States. A

report in 2016 on the state of wealth in the Black community indicates that if current

trends continue, "it will take the average Black family 228 years to reach the collective

level of wealth of white families today" (Asante-Muhammed et al., 2017). Many might

think that the idea of financial literacy, as we currently know it, began because of the

economic downturn and subsequent regulations enacted as means to avoid "poor financial

decision making and weak consumer protections" (Hastings, Madrian & Skimmyhorn,

2013, p. 348). However financial education has a long history that dates to the 1950s

(Hastings, Madrian, & Skimmyhorn, 2013) with many of the current initiatives around

financial literacy promotion is a direct result of the Jump$tart inaugural survey in 1997

(Jump$tart Coalition, 1997). "In 2009, government officials began to acknowledge

publicly that poor financial decision making at a minimum causes greater use of public

social safety nets" (Geddes & Steen, 2016, p. 350).

1
 Statement of the Problem

Blacks or African Americans are the third-largest race group in the U.S. However,

the median income of Black households is $24,000 less than the median White household

income (JEC, 2015). While some argue that this racial wealth divide stems from

individuals' and communities' choices, the facts tell a different story. Recent research

shows that the racial wealth divide persists across all educational attainment and family

structures (Asante-Muhammed et al., 2017).

The Black community has continued to face significant challenges since slavery,

and these challenges did not stop because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. “The effects of

the institution of slavery on American commerce were monumental— 3.2 million slaves

were worth $1.3 billion in market value, almost equal to the entire gross national

product” (Baradaran, 2017, p. 238). At 10.1 percent, Black Americans' unemployment

rate in 2015 was more than double the rate of 4.7 percent for White Americans (JEC

Congress, 2015). The 2019 Joint Economic Report notes that while this rate has

decreased, it is still well above the national average. Several injustices plague the Black

community from the inception of slavery and continue to persist. "African Americans

have historically been subjected to legal impediments, as well as institutional racism,

which has had a prolonged debilitating effect on the African American community"

(Johnson, 2005). Some of the legal impediments include the inability to vote, equal

education, redlining that prohibited home ownership and access to loans. As it relates to

access to financial resources, many Black people are hesitant to go to banking institutions

due to anticipation of racial discrimination (Prudential,2015).

2
 The fight for equality in education is a long one but one of the most notable

events is Brown v. Board of Education. This was a key event in the fight for educational

equality where Black people demanded the same education as Whites and argued that

that separate but equal was not in fact equal. Not surprisingly, growing poverty and

economic inequality are having an impact on education and the opportunities available to

children (Noguera, 2017). Some have even argued that the Black community's rising

wealth gap is attributed to the rising income inequality and changes to families'

investment patterns. Research shows a correlation between socioeconomic status and

academic achievement (Hudson et al., 2017). This may lead one to make a correlation

between the wealth gap and the achievement gap (Reardon et al., 2014), or correlate the

wealth gap to the value gap (Glaude, 2016). Glaude concludes that despite any progress

that Black communities have made regarding civil or political rights; White people

continue to be valued more than others in our country. He also suggests that the value gap

undergirds all the other racialized gaps between Whites and Blacks some of which

include income, education, and wealth (Glaude, 2016). Educating the next generation of

leaders about personal financial management is becoming an essential topic of

discussion, especially due to the fallout of the 2008 economic recession (Tschache,

2009). Hudson et al. (2017) advocates the importance of financial socialization to the

Black community as there is a lack of formal financial education which has affected the

financial socialization of Black people.

This study sought to understand the financial knowledge, behaviors, and

socialization of Black college students. It explored how these factors relate and the

intersectionality of race among the variables and the participant’s lived experience of

3
these factors. It should be noted that Black, as used for this study, included any individual

descending from African heritage irrespective of nationality as this aligns with how U.S.

Census Bureau (2017) data is derived. The implications of the research presented has the

potential to affect the children of participants, the financial outcomes of the participants,

and financial education delivered to these groups. College students were chosen as they

have some varying financial responsibility and access to financial education resources

and are just starting to make important financial choices.

Rationale for Study

This study adds to the existing literature as there is no one study that seeks to

understand both the internal (attitudes/behaviors) and external factors (institutional

injustices, lack of financial education) that contribute to Black college students’ financial

knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and socialization. Many financial literacy studies seek

understanding through quantitative data analysis solely. This study aimed to understand

the experience of the participants with money and financial management by coupling

quantitative methods with qualitative inquiry to obtain a holistic understanding while

minimizing biases.

Although it has been agreed upon that financial literacy is important for

individuals to have, there is no consensus on its definition. "Many definitions in the

literature are centered on themes of financial knowledge, satisfaction or well-being,

confidence, and/or behavior" (Kasman et al., 2018). The definition of financial literacy

used in this study is "an individual's ability to obtain, understand and evaluate the

relevant information necessary to make decisions with an awareness of the likely

financial consequences and involves making meaning within existing social structures"

4
(Pinto & Coulson, 2011, p. 57). While there are often many different definitions of

financial literacy, one thing that is agreed upon is that having a clear definition is

essential for program creation and evaluation. The terms financial literacy and financial

education are often used interchangeably even though they are quite different constructs.

For the context of this literature review, financial education should be thought of as a

method to build or increase financial literacy.

Summary of Literature

This study employed Critical Race Theory (CRT) as a theoretical framework as

defined by Ladson-Billings and Tate (1997) within the field of education. Ladson-

Billings (2015) noted that CRT scholars often subscribe to several of the original tenets

of the theory as defined by Delgado and Stefancic (2001) which are that: (1) racism is

normal; (2) interest convergence; (3) race as a social construction; (4) intersectionality or

anti essentialism; and (5) storytelling or counter narrative. This study focuses on three of

the five tenets which is that racism is endemic or normal, race as a social construction,

anti-essentialism and counternarrative. While there are many different approaches to

financial literacy, most studies tend to focus on financial knowledge, satisfaction,

confidence, or behaviors (Kasman et al., 2018). The existing research is bleak when it

comes to assessing the financial literacy of Black people and college students specifically

as the existing results show that their literacy is less than their White counterparts

(Murphy, 2005). However, there is not enough research that examines this population

specifically and none that assesses participants thorough a culturally responsive scale.

These existing scales are Eurocentric scales and research design also support the narrative

of the Black community being less literate than their White counterparts but never

5
address the social and structural systems that are in place to support these inequities. The

literature is inconclusive on the effectiveness financial education to improve literacy but

note that there is research that supports this importance. This study used the Family

Financial Socialization Theory (FFST) to test and examine the variables such as financial

knowledge, attitudes, capabilities, socialization, and behaviors of the participants. And it

examined the relationship among these variables. The themes that emerged when

reviewing the literature were economic inequality, wealth gap, financial literacy,

financial education and higher education, racial capitalism, and financial socialization.

Research Questions

To explore the research topic, the following research questions were used:

1. What is the current financial literacy among Black college students?

2. What are the financial behaviors of Black college students?

3. What is the financial socialization of Black college students?

4. Does perceived or subjective financial knowledge differ from Black college

students’ objective financial knowledge?

a. How has race affected their perception, if at all?

5. How do Black college students make meaning of personal financial management?

a. How does race influence this meaning making?

Based on these questions I hypothesized that there would be a positive

relationship between family interactions and purposive financial socialization as well as

positive association of financial socialization with financial attitudes, knowledge, and

financial capabilities. The results supported this hypothesis.

6
 Introduction to Conceptual Frameworks

Because of the complexity of this study, there was more than one theoretical

model utilized. CRT and the FFST were used to examine the research questions through

quantitative survey and to further explore the meaning making of participants experiences

with financial management in the qualitative section. CRT as mentioned previously, is a

theoretical framework based on the concept that racial inequality is a result of the

differences created by White people to maintain their elite interests and essential

dominance. Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) believed that CRT should be a tool to

examine race and its importance in education and reform being the pioneers for the use of

CRT in education. They believed that CRT was important to examining the inequalities

within the education system and how it maintains white supremacy. This research aimed

to shed light on the wealth gap, which is an issue that has long been plaguing the Black

community and to begin the conversation to change the world of this marginalized

population and the nation at large. Utilizing CRT allowed for a deeper understanding of

meanings of the students and interpret personal financial management through the lens of

the participants aligning with the principle of storytelling. On the point of race being a

social construct, this study acknowledges race and “the power of a social reality that

allows for significant disparities in the life chances of people based on the categorical

understanding of race” (Ladson-Billings, 2015, p. 39). In using CRT to explore the lived

experiences of these college students there was an understanding that the social

construction of race impacts the experiences of Black people and often disparities of

experiences and opportunities. This work converges on the two tenets of anti-essentialism

and counternarratives as the goal of the interviews were to explore the experiences and

7
stories as told by the participants with the hopes of debunking many of the stereotypes

and assumptions that all Black people see, think, and behave the same around financial

management. Essentialism is the belief that people of the same group are the same along

thinking, behaviors, and beliefs (Ladson-Billings, 2015).

FFST and the conceptual model developed by Gudmunson and Danes (2011), was

used to examine various topics, including financial behavior and attitudes, well-being,

knowledge, and capabilities. This model was essential in the research because it considers

that financial socialization occurs throughout one's lifetime. Children begin to learn and

internalize things through their observations, which includes interactions with money,

and they take these learning with them into college. This theory addresses "how often

financial knowledge proves ineffective as a predictor of financial behavior or change in

behavior" (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011, p. 662). It also addresses what is learned in the

home which is an integral part of the theory. This theory does not consider racial

differences nor account for the systematic issues that create the inequalities affecting

wealth in the Black community.

This research was explored using the concurrent triangulation mixed method

research design (Creswell & Clark, 2017). In using this design, both the quantitative and

qualitative data collection happened concurrently and respondents in the survey were

asked to participate in follow up interviews. While the two sets of data were collected

separately, the qualitative interviews were conducted simultaneously to ensure minimal

interruption in data collection. From there, additional analysis of the research questions

was through qualitative inquiry with questions developed utilizing a CRT lens along with

semi-structured interviews of a small subset of the survey population.

8
 Definitions

The following definitions will be used throughout this study:

Black: used to define individuals who identify as Black and or African American. This

definition is from the U.S. Census Bureau, which denotes any one of the Black race as

someone whose origin is from Africa. (United States Census Bureau, 2017).

Financial literacy: is defined as “the ability to use knowledge and skills to manage

financial resources effectively for a lifetime of financial well-being” (Geddes & Steen,

2016, p. 350).

Financial education: “The process by which people improve their understanding of

financial products, services, concepts, so they are empowered to make informed choices,

avoid pitfalls, know where to go for help and take other actions to improve their present

and long-term financial well-being” (Geddes & Steen, 2016, p. 350).

Family: A group of two people or more (one of whom is the householder) related by

birth, marriage, or adoption and residing together (Census Bureau, 2015).

Family Interactions and Relationships: Interaction patterns among family members that

influence financial attitude development, knowledge transfer, and financial capability

development (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011).

Financial Attitudes: A person’s subjective perception of personal finances (Joo, 2008).

Financial Behaviors: Patterns of financial outcomes that are observable such as earning,

saving, spending, and gifting, and any changes in these patterns (Gudmunson & Danes,

2011).

Financial Capability: Knowledge, competencies, and abilities to act on acquired financial

knowledge, and the opportunity to act (Johnson & Sherraden, 2010).

9
Financial Well-being: the ability to meet one’s current and future financial obligations

(Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 2015)

College Student: College-aged (18-24) and enrolled at a higher education institution

Purposive financial socialization: The intentional financial socialization through explicit

communication and practices (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011; Danes & Yang, 2014).

Racial Capitalism: “The process of deriving social and economic value from the racial

identity of another person” (Leong, 2013, p. 2152).

Wealth Gap: Known as wealth inequality, it is often referred to the unequal distribution

of assets among residents in the U.S. (Asante-Muhammed et al., 2017).

Limitations & Delimitations

There are limitations to this study, one being the small sample of respondents

(under 200) which will not be representative of the full amount of Black college students

in the United States. Another limitation of this study is that it focused on Black college

students aged 18 – 24 so the results of this study may not be generalizable to those

outside of this age range or ethnicity. The qualitative data was only a small representation

of the quantitative sample and therefore the findings may suffer from external

generalizability (Maxwell, 2013). Some potential drawbacks of utilizing the concurrent

triangulation design were that it did not allow for further exploration of any confusing

results and the potential for divergent data which is further explored in the discussion

chapter (Creswell & Clark, 2017). However, most researchers can navigate this limitation

and ensure that enough time is allotted for data collection and analysis.

Organization of Dissertation

10
 This study is organized into six chapters that include the introduction, literature

review, methodology, quantitative findings, qualitative findings, and concludes with the

discussion chapter which combines the results from both sets of findings. Chapter One

makes the argument for this study and the importance of understanding how financial

education can be applied to Black college students to generate wealth as they begin their

careers. As mentioned previously, there is limited research on financial knowledge within

the Black community and specifically college students and this is a group that has high

potential for income generation but is often underserved. Chapter Two summarizes the

existing literature on the two theories used as well as the wealth gap, financial literacy,

and family financial socialization and how these topics are interrelated. Chapter Three

further delves into the FFST as well as CRT theoretical frameworks chosen and how they

were applied to this mixed method research study including the proposed conceptual

model that was tested. Chapter Four will present the findings of the quantitative survey

along with the analysis of the results. Chapter Five will include findings and analysis of

the interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) qualitative portion of this study.

Finally, Chapter Six will conclude with the discussion which combines the quantitative

and qualitative findings, implications, and limitations along with the conclusion.

11
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

This study addresses the research gaps in the literature about Black college

students' financial literacy and family financial socialization. These concepts utilized a

critical race theoretical lens to understand the effects of race and its intersection with

economic inequality and the racial wealth gap. This literature review examines factors

contributing to racial wealth disparities. To further explore this topic, keywords searched

in ERIC, ProQuest, and Google scholar both independently and combined included:

financial education, financial literacy, African Americans, Blacks, access to financial

education, personal finance, college students, the wealth gap, and racial inequality.

Several written pieces were found in peer-reviewed and grey literature (Rothstein &

Hopewell, 2009), conducted mostly within the United States. The themes that emerged

when reviewing the literature were economic inequality, wealth gap, financial literacy,

financial education, post-secondary financial education, and family financial

socialization.

This chapter begins with historical context of inequities and situating the problem

of the study exploring economic inequality and the wealth gap. From there the chapter will

discuss the history and define financial literacy, examine the existing literature on financial

literacy among Black college students, review financial education in general and at the

collegiate level. Then family financial socialization is discussed, and the first theory used

in this study, Family Financial Socialization Theory (FFST) is examined. The chapter will

conclude reviewing the study’s second theory, which is critical race theory (CRT) and the

use of interpretative phenomenological analysis as a qualitative methodology will be

explored.

12
 Economic Inequality

It is necessary to note the relationship between America's colonial roots to

capitalism to historicize these inequalities (Rockett, 2020), specifically how colonialism

built the nation and birthed white supremacy while the other supports the system of

supremacy. Rockett (2020) asserts that capitalism requires inequality, and racism

preserves this inequality by keeping the wealth and power within the White community.

While some argue that this racial wealth divide stems from individuals' and communities'

choices like much of the post-2008 research produced by governmental agencies

(Bosshardt & Walstad, 2014; Jump$tart, 2007; NCES, 2015), the facts tell a different

story (Shapiro, 2005). Although there had been conversations about the wealth gap, the

crash of the housing market in 2008 and subsequent recession sparked increased

conversations about financial literacy as well as the wealth gap. Recent research shows

that the racial wealth divide persists across all levels of educational attainment and family

structures (Asante-Muhammed et al., 2017). These disparities support the idea that

individual contribution or accomplishment is often not enough to change the racial wealth

divide. The idea is further supported by Shapiro (2005) who noted that no amount of

earnings by Black people would be enough to eliminate the wealth gap. This statistic

further illustrates the growing wealth gap in the U.S. He also notes the stereotypes that

we all are aware of: the unfounded assumption that Black people and other minorities are

not as financially secure as Whites because they spend too much and save too little

(Shapiro, 2005). These types of assumptions and stereotypes do two things: they do not

account for the many systems of oppression that exist and perpetuates the deficit

narrative that Black people simply need to pull themselves up and out of poverty. Glaude

13
(2016) notes that this idea of individualism contributes to the narrative of poverty being

an individual issue reflective of poor choices instead of a larger systemic issue. He

further purports that Black people know that poverty reflects a system that is rigged to

benefit Whites. He observes that the argument of poverty being a result of a lack of

individual initiative and motivation, is an argument that only applies when “the face of

poverty is black” (Glaude, 2016, p. 43).

There is supporting evidence that existing systems and policies continue to

advantage the dominant parties in power, as is exampled in Shapiro's (2005) study. He

notes that "the slice of the income pie received by the top 1 percent of families is nearly

twice as large as it was 30 years ago, and their share now is about as large as the share of

the bottom 40 percent” (Shapiro, 2005, p. 207). These narratives are extremely dangerous

to communities of color and are untrue as working hard is often not a predictor of

success. "Working longer hours and more weeks per year means that middle-income

Black families worked the equivalent of 12 more weeks than White families to earn the

same money in 2000” (Shapiro, 2005, p. 275). Yet there is no shortage of these narratives

and stereotypes that exist without giving credence to the systematic injustices. "African

Americans have historically been subjected to legal impediments, as well as institutional

racism, which has had a prolonged debilitating effect on the African American

community" (Johnson, 2005). Some of these impediments include the lack of freedom,

inability to vote, own property, redlining and predatory banking practices just to name a

few (Johnson, 2005; Bates & Triplett, 2014, Taylor, 2019). There is a long history of the

injustices against the Black community and extensive literature that supports that these

issues persist today.

14
 Another area that Black people experience discrimination is within financial

institutions and this discrimination has led to a general distrust of these institutions.

"Nearly half of African Americans anticipated they will face racial discrimination in

home lending; two-thirds report they have experienced racial discrimination in financial

institutions" (Bates & Triplett, 2014). Collectively Black people are “more unbanked than

any other race 60 percent of the Black population is unbanked or underbanked, while

only 20 percent of whites are in the same category” (Baradaran, 2017, p. 204). In The

Color of Money, Baradaran (2017) explores the connection of Black banks and the racial

wealth gap. Specifically, the author explores the history of Black banks and the

relationship that banks in general have had in creating and perpetuating the wealth gap.

Here she discusses ‘Black’ institutions that were created, such as Freedman’s Bank, and

notes how it was positioned as a trustworthy institution despite some of their

discriminatory practices, which included not lending to their Black depositors. This

prevented Black families from obtaining assets such as homes which could increase their

wealth and net worth.

Capitalism in America is displayed in the lack of access to housing and what

Taylor (2019) would call the 'predatory inclusion' of Blacks for government-sponsored

mortgages that would be the beginnings of the creation of the ghettoes. Predatory

inclusion was the practice of banks to only offer mortgages in areas with subpar housing

often charging the Black borrowers a higher interest rate than Whites (Taylor, 2019). The

practice of predatory inclusion is just one example of racial capitalism. This information

is not surprising because the practice of disenfranchising the Black community from the

American dream of homeownership can be traced back to the abolition of slavery and the

15
government’s reneging on their promise of 40 acres and a mule (Shapiro, 2005).

Capitalism was born on the backs of the enslaved and continues to thrive on the

disenfranchisement of people of color. Racial capitalism is “the process of deriving social

and economic value from the racial identity of another person” (Leong, 2013, p. 2151).

And this behavior is the foundation of our country, which began with the violence and

theft against Native Americans by Christopher Columbus. This racial capitalism

continued into slavery and was supported by racist laws and practices in the financial

services industry where many prominent banks of today made money from slavery, using

slaves as a form of currency, and accepting them as collateral for loans (Whitfield, 2019).

Leong (2015) notes that for centuries whiteness has been recognized as having value and

how nonwhiteness has been commodified through practices such as slavery and property

ownership. However racial capitalism is more than just the exclusion of nonwhites of

access but also about the predatory practices inflicted upon the Black community as

Taylor (2019) explores and is discussed later in this review. But racism is recurring and

ever present in our nation and across the world and despite many efforts and policies it

does not appear that much progress has been made to truly eradicate racism and racist

practices.

Many events have led to a resurgence of national attention towards racism and

inequality. The Black Lives Matter movement is at the forefront of this resurrection and

in 2020 the nation was in uproar due to the incessant instances of recorded police

brutality. “Scholars contend that failure to directly and seriously address the striking

inequality in a society leads to a divided society with self-destructive tendencies”

(Constance-Huggins, 2012, p. 2). Our nation continues to see this divisiveness play out.

16
Although the most accessible place for blame would be on recent leadership, the more

challenging reality is that this divide has been underlying for hundreds of years as

institutional racism has not been addressed. This inequality extends to economic

inequality and systematic injustices that create and support the current wealth divide.

“The study of economic inequality turns on the question of who benefited from economic

growth during the last three decades, and how that pattern of growth differed from earlier

periods” (Marsh, 2011, p. 31). Marsh's point here draws us back to capitalism's role in the

creation of economic inequality as capitalism breeds economic exploitation, which

requires the existence of the exploiters and the exploited. One concept that sums up these

injustices is the value gap that Glaude (2016) introduced in his book, Democracy in

Black. The value gap, as defined by Glaude (2016), concludes that despite any progress

that Black communities have made regarding civil or political rights, White people

continue to be valued more than Blacks in our country. Glaude also suggests that the

value gap undergirds all the other racialized gaps between Whites and communities of

color. The experiences of slavery, racism and oppression are all responsible for the lower

incomes, educational attainment, and occupations within the Black community (Amoah,

2016). Research attributed African American’s exposure during slavery to be a

significant factor in the current lower socio-economic status today as there were many

legal and illegal ways in which this community was disenfranchised educationally,

economically, and politically (Amoah, 2016). This research illustrates the history of these

injustices and systematic inequalities that have created the income and wealth differences

in the Black community when compared to their White counterparts. While this

17
knowledge is helpful, a deeper exploration of the history of the wealth gap is essential to

understanding the challenges of today and will be explored further in this review.

Wealth Gap

The wealth gap, also known as wealth inequality, is often referred to as the

unequal distribution of assets among residents in the U.S (Asante-Muhammed et al.,

2017). Racial wealth inequality is deeply woven into our nation's cloth, and it continues

because it is structurally connected to our everyday way of life (Herring & Henderson,

2016). Many factors contribute to the wealth gap, and one of the factors often noted are

educational achievement gaps or the achievement debt as Ladson-Billings (2006) would

identify. Whereas, apart from Glaude (2016), many of these studies of gaps within the

Black community, do not take into consideration the history of institutional racism

resulting practices that continue to perpetuate a system of inequality that serves

capitalism. Darity et al. (2018) state that “on average, a Black household with a college-

educated head has less wealth than a White family whose head did not obtain a high-

school education” (p. 6). This statistic further illustrates that there is a lack of

acknowledgement of the debt due to systematic racism that perpetuates the wealth gap.

Research notes how today's disparities are a direct reflection of compounded past

inequities that can be traced back to slavery (Herring & Henderson, 2016). Much of the

research on financial literacy within the Black community often posit that “educational

gaps—in the form of financial literacy and conventional schooling—are a main factor in

contributing to income and wealth inequality because education increases an individual’s

ability to earn an income" (Fulk & White, 2018, p. 2). However, it is essential to note that

while there are some straightforward ways in which education could aid in improving

18
financial knowledge by itself, it is not able to address the inequities that exist in our

policies that have created the wealth gap and continue to ensure that the rich get richer

while the poor get poorer. “The racial wealth gap is not just a product of differences in

education, jobs, and income but rather a kind of inequality passed from one generation to

the next” (Shapiro, 2005, p. 66). This point allows for a better understanding of the root

cause of this 'gap' and that it is not simply the result of the lack or deficit of Black people,

but how the inequalities in the systems of oppression have created and enabled this gap.

There is not one consistent school of thought as to the source of the rising wealth

gap as some of the proposed causes include the rising income inequality, others attribute

it to a lack of financial education, and then there are those that situate the issue in the

context of institutional racism and capitalism (Darity et al., 2018; Glaude, 2016;

Whitfield, 2019). “These racial disparities in knowledge can also translate into financial

differences. As of 2001, the median net worth of adult White households was $121,000;

minorities had about $17,000” (Murphy, 2005, p. 484). It is important to examine the

gaps critically and how they perpetuate stereotypes. Ladson-Billings (2006) proposed that

the achievement gap is not a gap at all but an educational debt that represents the

resources that have not been invested in lower-income schools and how this

misappropriation of resources leads to a variety of issues. “The most destructive tool of

the culture of classism is deficit theory in education, we often talk about the deficit

perspective-defining students by their weaknesses rather than their strengths” (Gorski,

2008, p. 2). Gorski (2007) goes on to argue that it is this very deficit theory that

insinuates that people are poor due to their own deficiencies. This same theology can be

applied to the wealth gap and note that, instead of a gap, it is this country’s debt owed to

19
members of the Black community. It would begin by enslaving Black people and forcing

them to work for free with no rights. Their refusal to provide the resources promised to

the Black community, such as the 40 acres and a mule post slavery, was one of the first

examples of debt owed to the Black community post slavery that was not honored.

Towards the end of the civil war in 1865 the Special Field Order 15 was enacted which

set aside over 400,000 acres of confiscated confederate land to assist newly freed slaves

with survival, but it was later reversed by President Johnson and eventually became

Freedmen’s Bureau bills. This was the first systematic attempt to compensate them for

enslavement and free labor, and yet, this promise was reneged upon by the White

government. This was in line with the many institutional practices, post slavery, which

disenfranchised the Black community and reinforced the wealth differential between

Blacks and Whites. Taylor (2019) notes how once the real estate and banking industries

realized there was a way to capitalize on the growing concern for equality within the

Black community by using the government-backed loans and creating the illusion of

equality. In this practice Blacks were only allowed to purchase in certain areas often only

having access to substandard houses in areas that were poverty ridden. These predatory

practices resulted in “segregating African Americans into deteriorating urban

neighborhoods and then starving those communities of resources and other investments

greatly limited their access to better-paying jobs and well-resourced public schools, while

pushing them into substandard housing” (Taylor, 2019, p. 278). Redlining is a term often

used to describe the practice of banks refusal to lend to people of color in specific

neighborhoods, and there was often an actual map with red lines determining where

Blacks and other people of color could purchase. The practice of red lining has a long

20
history in the disenfranchisement of Blacks and has supported segregation. “Addressing

racial wealth inequality require a major redistributive effort or another major public

policy intervention” (Darrity et al., 2018, p. 4).

While there are clear effects of inequality in communities of color, financial

instability and illiteracy is a nationwide issue. “Over the past 20 years, the conversation

surrounding economic inequality has shifted among social science disciplines to include

key indicators of overall financial well-being” (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

[CFPB], 2015, as cited in West & Mottola, 2016, p. 56). West and Mottola (2016)

explore the concept of financial fragility and note that a disproportionate number of

minorities in their study reported financial fragility, citing an inability to weather a

financial shock or economic event like the recession of 2008. The economic impact of the

lack of literacy was felt during the recession of 2008. Three of the most influential factors

in wealth generation is homeownership, education and income and it is in these areas

where the racial wealth gap is most prominent (Gray, 2020). Gray (2020) highlights that

there have been efforts to ensure that these three key factors are not accessible to the

Black community. “Because of the cumulative nature of wealth and racial disparities in

wealth, we must be cognizant of past discrimination that set current-day disparities in

motion” (Herring & Henderson, 2016, p. 16). Wealth accumulation is important for

families as it allows for financial security and can be integral in allowing for additional

opportunities for future generations. However, without the accumulation of financial

wealth, then the cycle of poverty continues. Shapiro (2015) and Gray (2020)

acknowledge that homeownership is one of the most important tools in accumulating

21
wealth. As previously mentioned, racial capitalism and systematic racism keeps this from

being a reality for many within the Black community (Robinson, 2019).

Only the dismantling of systems of oppression will lead to true equality, but

progress towards this dismantling the systems of inequality only occur incrementally

(Leong, 2013). Darity et al. (2018) posit that the racial wealth gap persists despite the

level of educational attainment, income, and homeownership, making a nod to the fact

that this gap results from systematic issues that continue to plague the Black community.

This research looks to explore the use of financial education to address the racial wealth

gap for a segment of the Black community. This exploration continues with

understanding financial literacy and its origins.

Financial Literacy: History and Definition

While the origins of financial management and the ability of individuals to

manage money can be traced as far back as the 1700s, and a column written by Benjamin

Franklin (Haverty et al., 2020), its most recent resurgence in the way of education began

as early as the 1950s (Hastings, Madrian & Skimmyhorn, 2013). Many of the current

policies around financial literacy is a direct result of the Jump$tart inaugural survey in

1997 (Jump$tart Coalition, 1997), which is a national assessment of financial literacy. “In

the United States, policy initiatives to improve the quality of personal financial decision

making through financial education extend back at least to the 1950s and 1960s when

states began mandating the inclusion of personal finance, economics, and other consumer

education topics in the K-12 educational curriculum” (Hastings et al., 2013, p. 349). The

state of our nation’s citizens became a hot topic after the housing market crash. “In 2009,

government officials began to acknowledge publicly that poor financial decision making

22
at a minimum causes a greater use of public social safety nets” (Geddes & Steen, 2016, p.

350). This statement illustrates further the perpetuation of existing research to blame

systematic oppression on the individuals and not the system that upholds these inequities.

The beginnings of the financial planning industry date back to the 70s and 80s. However,

the industry has seen tremendous growth with over twenty percent increase in

employment in a 25-year timespan (Geddes & Steen, 2016). A U.S. Representative stated

that “financial literacy of our citizens... is a basic life skill that, unfortunately, many in

our country truly lack... and [is] a financial security issue” (U.S. Congress 2009, p. 4).

The trend of increasing financial illiteracy has caused researchers and government

officials' concern (Amoah, 2016). Since 2004 there has been twice a year testing of

financial literacy by the Jump$tart coalition. While many of these assertions lack the

depth of understanding necessary to fully account for capitalism's role in events such as

the economic recession of 2008, it is important to note the perpetuation of the deficit

narrative which is dominant in existing research despite contradictory research that

challenges these notions.

Many studies often use financial literacy and financial education interchangeably.

However, there is no one accepted definition of financial literacy which is undoubtedly

an issue when assessing financial literacy as there is a lack of a comprehensive definition.

Financial literacy can be defined as “knowledge of basic economic and financial

concepts, as well as the ability to use that knowledge and other financial skills to manage

financial resources effectively for a lifetime of financial well-being” (Hung et al., 2011,

p. 12). The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) defines financial literacy as

"the ability to use knowledge and skills to manage financial resources effectively for a

23
lifetime of financial well-being” (U.S. Government Accountability Office 2009, 4, as

cited in Geddes & Steen, 2016, p. 350). Pinto and Coulson (2011) have defined financial

literacy as “an individual’s ability to obtain, understand and evaluate the relevant

information necessary to make decisions with an awareness of the likely financial

consequences and involves making meaning within existing social structures” (p. 57).

Bosshardt and Walstad (2014) use this and other research to make a case for national

standards around financial literacy, which continues to be inexistent. Ben Bernanke, the

former chairman of the Federal Reserve, testified in 2011 and indicated that many of the

issues resulting from the great recession directly correlated to a lack of financial literacy

and good decision-making (Bosshardt & Walstad, 2014). However, Glaude (2016) and

Baradaran (2017) note how the economic downturn of 2008 disproportionately affected

the Black community stating that while Wall Street was hurting, the Black community

was left on life support. Glaude (2016) terms this period as the Great Black Depression of

2008 and reported that African Americans lost approximately 53% of their wealth, while

White Americans lost only 11% of their wealth. This loss practically eliminated a decade

of financial gains of Black families including retirement savings. The crash of 2008 and

the aftermath are just another example of the predatory inclusion that Taylor (2019)

discusses and how communities of color were once again exploited for the banking

industry's capitalistic gain. This recession resulted in heavy regulations and oversight of

the banking industry. As a result of these regulations, the Consumer Financial Protection

Bureau (CFPB) was created to protect consumers from the predatory practices of banks.

Also, a source of confusion is the interchangeability of financial education and

financial literacy. “Financial education is intended to increase one's human capital,

24
specifically their financial knowledge and the subsequent application of that knowledge

which constitutes financial literacy" (Britt et al., 2015, p. 174). Britt et al. (2015) purports

that financial literacy is the ability of an individual to use financial knowledge to make

financial decisions confidently. “In a culture that demands individual responsibility and

self sufficiency, financial literacy is an essential component of a successful adult life”

(Shim et al., 2010, p. 1467). This quote is a prime example of individualism theory that

White people often use to rationalize their responsibility for the systems of oppression

that prohibit marginalized communities from access to adequate and equitable resources

to allow for said self-sufficiency. “The stark wealth distortion caused by slavery and the

longevity of its effects cannot be underestimated in U.S. history when government

reformers would choose to grant political rights instead of achieving real justice by

addressing economic inequality” (Baradaran, 2017). It is imperative to understand how

the long history of inequality and focus on individual gain, instead of the wellbeing of all

humanity, has created the present wealth disparity.

This study undergirds financial literacy as a type of literacy and that financial

education is a tool by which individuals can increase their literacy of financial topics.

While there are many different definitions of financial literacy, one key component that

researchers agree upon is that having a clear definition is essential for program creation

and evaluation. The modern-day financial literacy movement and outreach efforts by

banks directly resulted from the Community Reinvestment Act requirements. These

bank-led programs typically focus on educating individuals about the bank’s products

and services they are selling for financial gain and not for general education purposes.

Most of the literature definitions have focused on financial knowledge, satisfaction,

25
confidence, or behaviors (Kasman et al., 2018). In 2003 the Financial Literacy and

Education Commission (FLEC) was tasked with the responsibility to increase Americans'

financial literacy to provide additional consumer protections (Amoah, 2016). The FLEC

(2011) has noted that the financial challenges of one individual or family can affect the

financial viability of their local communities. Beyond the FLEC, there are several other

entities created to improve Americans' financial literacy, including the President's

Advisory Council on Financial Literacy and Capability, National Endowment for

Financial Education, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, just to name a few

(Amoah, 2016).

Financial Literacy & Black Americans

Existing research results purport that African Americans are not as financially

literate as White Americans (Hudson et al., 2017; Murphy, 2005; Al-Bahrani et al.,

2019). However, in a study of the African American Financial Experience Today by

Prudential Financial (2015), they note that over 70% of African Americans, when asked

to self-assess, rated themselves highly on their financial knowledge, specifically

managing household expenses. Literature suggests that due to lower education and

income “African Americans and Hispanics alike, accumulate low financial wealth at

retirement, own low household assets such as stocks, housing, 401(k), and IRAs; and are

less likely to qualify for a mortgage than their White counterparts” (Lusardi, 2005, as

cited in Amoah, 2016, p. 67). Bahrani and Weathers (2019) found that financial literacy

scores of Black Americans were 9-16% lower than White Americans. Bahrani &

Weathers (2019) attributed this racial literacy difference to the lack of equal access,

financial education, and increased financial knowledge which can all positively correlate

26
to wealth accumulation. These findings albeit true according to their study, neglects to

address the systemic issues that create the lack of equal access. Understanding the

financial literacy gap is imperative to improving the racial wealth gap and acknowledging

that there are systematic barriers for people of color that education alone will not

eradicate. Researchers have noted:

Greater financial literacy can be valuable if an individual or household has

finances to manage. Financial literacy without finance is meaningless. There is no

magical way to transform no wealth into great wealth simply by learning more

about managing one's monetary resources. While wealth begets wealth, typically

no wealth begets no wealth, regardless of how astute a money manager the person

may be. (Darity et al., 2018)

This quote illustrates the critical issue of these studies which is that literacy is dependent

on access to money which in can manage. However, given the various inequalities

plaguing the Black community access to wealth is often limited.

Financial Education

Financial education can be defined as "the process by which people improve their

understanding of financial products, services, concepts, so they are empowered to make

informed choices, avoid pitfalls, know where to go for help and take other actions to

improve their present and long-term financial well-being" (Geddes & Steen, 2016, p.

350). Educating the next generation of leaders about personal financial management is

becoming a widespread topic of discussion, especially in the wake of the 2008 economic

recession (Tschache, 2009). “Although financial education alone does not guarantee

financial success, it is nevertheless important that all individuals and families, including

27
those of diverse and underserved populations, are aware of and have access to reliable,

clear, timely, relevant and effective financial information and educational resources”

(FLEC, 2011, p. 8). With the development of sophisticated financial instruments, the

researcher notes that African Americans lack skills to make decisions function in the

financial world although this is an over-generalization. Blanco et al. (2015) studied the

barriers to participating in the financial sector and found that access to participation was

not an issue. Instead, demand of financial information due to behavioral factors was more

important. It is important to note that despite the oppression that the Black community

has experienced, they have significantly impacted the advances of the United States and

are an integral part of this nation's history (Amoah, 2016).

Researchers agree that there is room for improvement in financial education

programs (Hudson et al., 2017; Mandell & Klein, 2009). One challenge with assessing

the effectiveness of financial education is the fact that there is no one accepted standard

to be followed. "Suggestions for making personal finance education effective for youth

include incorporating a relevant program design, ensuring effective motivation, and

providing education at an early age” (McCormick, 2009, p. 73). Some studies, such as

Mandell and Klein, have not been conclusive that financial education leads to better

literacy on the subject (McCormick, 2009). However, “several studies showed that

financial literacy is positively related to self-beneficial financial behavior” (Mandell &

Klein, 2009, p. 17). Other researchers argue the importance of social learning and that

there is a connection between the instructional method and its effectiveness. Social

learning is situated on the idea that people can learn from the observation of others’

behaviors, reactions, and attitudes (Gutter et al., 2009). This is a key concept when it

28
comes to curriculum creation for financial education courses. “Researchers studying

financial education effectiveness need to consider the role social learning may play as a

mitigating factor in the influence of formal financial education” (Gutter, Copur, &

Garrison, 2009, p. 25). However, there is support for school-based programs as it is

believed that this knowledge is essential to the students' lives and should be part of the

core curriculum versus the knowledge being something that a participant must opt into

(Hastings, Madrian, & Skimmyhorn, 2013). Financial education is needed as research

suggest that Americans lack adequate financial knowledge to successfully navigate

today’s financial markets and the health of our government and economy relies on

individual’s financial knowledge (Amoah, 2016).

Post-Secondary Financial Education

As financial literacy is becoming an increasingly discussed topic, there are more

conversations about personal finance education at the collegiate level. "The Great

Recession of the late 2000s has highlighted that the importance of individuals and

families having the information, education, and tools to help them make better sound

financial decisions in an increasingly intricate financial system” (Lindsey-Taliefero et al.,

2011, p. 74). Collegiate aged students are a source of information regarding financial

literacy interventions as in many cases “the average American college student enters

college without having ever been solely responsible for their own personal finances”

(Maurer & Lee, 2011, p. 680). Even though financial literacy is critical for college

students, there is still much work to be done in formal financial education. "Findings

suggest that college students' knowledge on personal finance is inadequate” (Chen &

Volpe, 1998, p. 112). Several factors contribute to this lack of knowledge; Chen & Volpe

29
cite the lack of personal finance curriculum in colleges and business schools as a key

factor. And the researchers make an argument for more financial education by way of

additional seminars and personal finance courses. While studies conducted with high

school students often use the Jump$tart survey to assess the financial literacy of students,

Cude et al. (2006) noted that at the time, the same survey had not been administered to

college students. Much of the research at the collegiate level (e.g., Lindsey-Taliefero et

al., 2011; Chen & Volpe, 1998; Murphy, 2005) is assessing students' credit practices or

understanding of their literacy as it relates to financial aid. However, a few studies

attempted to understand what the current financial education offerings in institutions of

higher education are and research into specific programs.

One study conducted by Geddes and Steen (2016) examined over 300 higher

education institutions to examine a financial education program and what is covered if

anything. They indicated that the two main reasons for the increased demand and interest

in financial education. The first being the increase in the debt of the average American.

The second reason was the growing amount of investment vehicles and complexity of

financial vehicles (Geddes & Steen, 2016) such as some of the mortgage-backed

securities that were popular prior to the 2008 market crash. Here the authors organized

their results by two groups of institutions the first being liberal arts colleges and the

second being Council for Christian Colleges and Universities. They found that at the over

105 liberal arts colleges, approximately 65% of these institutions do not offer any type of

personal finance course, and only 24% are offering some type of personal finance course.

In their study, personal finance course offerings are defined as personal finance, personal

30
financial planning, personal financial management, personal finance and stewardship, and

personal finance and family finance (Geddes & Steen, 2016).

Murphy (2005) conducted an exploratory financial literacy study of over 200

students attending a predominantly Black institution. The results indicated that the

literacy levels of the participants were low, with only about three out of ten questions

answered correctly. Noting that the mean scores illustrate that students have not

“internalized key information critical to maintaining their financial well-being as college

students or as future working professionals” (Murphy, 2005, p. 484). As a result, Murphy

makes a recommendation for Black institutions expose their students to financial

education. Another study by Lindsey-Taliefero et al (2011) examines the use of a

financial literacy curriculum at Howard University, which is a predominantly Black

institution. The Jump$tart survey was used to assess students’ financial knowledge after

completion of a semester long course offered in the School of Business. The results of the

Lindsey-Taliefero et al (2011) study show that their students scored higher than the

African American students in the national Jump$tart survey albeit moderately.

Empirical studies, such as that of Britt et al. (2015), have shown that the financial

literacy of students’ increase as they progress throughout college, which could be

attributed to increased exposure to managing personal finances. Findings from one study

"suggest that universities should give special attention to freshmen (i.e., those who are

transitioning to new roles and responsibilities), because all other grade levels experienced

lower financial stress than freshmen" (Britt et al., 2015, p. 183). Other studies have

explored the financial management behavior of college students, although much like

financial literacy, there is no generally accepted definition of financial behaviors.

31
However, researchers define it as "the acquisition, allocation, and use of financial

resources oriented toward some goal" (Topa et al., 2018). When exploring financial

education or literacy at the collegiate level, there are few studies that have explored race,

especially examining Black college students' financial literacy. Murphy (2005) notes

further that there is a lack of Black college students represented in financial literacy

research. However, the existing studies that involve Black students have consistently

noted that racial minority groups have lower financial literacy rates (Murphy, 2005).

Lyons (2004) attempts to look at college students deemed 'financially at risk' to identify

any consistent traits or characteristics. In this study, the researchers identify students as

at-risk based on the following four characteristics: “1) have credit card balances of $1000

or more, 2) are delinquent on their credit card payments by two months or more, 3) have

reached the limit on their credit cards, and 4) only pay off their credit card balances some

of the time or never” (Lyons, 2004, p. 61). 'At-risk' identification is problematic, as it has

implications towards the deficit narrative existing in other research on financial

knowledge and well-being. Once again, Lyons (2004) study only focuses on the

symptoms of the issue, like the financial behaviors and traits, but fails to critique the

systems of oppression created to keep marginalized communities poor.

Family Financial Socialization

One ever present term that emerged from this review was financial socialization

as a part of financial literacy. And the lack of financial education within Black

communities also affects their financial socialization. To understand financial

socialization, it is necessary to define the term, which is defined as "the process of

acquiring and developing values, attitudes, standards, norms, knowledge, and behaviors

32
that contribute to the financial viability and individual wellbeing” (Gudmunson & Danes,

2011). Within the financial literacy field, the research explores the effects of socialization

on one's financial acumen. Socialization is a multidisciplinary concept with extensive

research, especially in education, and is situated within the concept of social learning.

"Financial socialization is the process of acquiring and developing values, attitudes,

standards, norms, knowledge, and behaviors that contribute to the financial viability and

individual well-being" (Hudson et al., 2017, p. 286). Another term that emerges in the

research is racial socialization, as Brown (2008) studies the effects and impact on African

American outcomes. She defines racial socialization as "a set of behaviors,

communications, and interactions between parents and children that address how African

Americans ought to feel about their cultural heritage and how they should respond to the

racial hostility or confusion in American society” (Stevenson, Cameron, Herrero-Taylor,

& Davis, 2002, as cited in Brown, 2008, p. 33).

Studies, including the one by Hudson et al. (2017), examine how students were

socialized financially using the FFST, to see what impact their socialization would have

on their financial literacy or knowledge. The authors conducted a study that examines

how financial socialization affects African Americans as “research has found that African

Americans’ sub-optimal financial decision making and financial literacy have led to poor

financial behaviors and inadequate net worth" (Hudson et al. 2017, p. 286). This

statement supports the myths of poverty and believes that a lack of financial success

reflects poor decisions and not also of lack of opportunities. Despite the stereotypes of

poor people being lazy, Gorski (2008) debunks this by noting that 83% of low-income

families have at least one parent employed, implying that the lack of income is not a

33
result of individuals not working. This association is important to note, as there is much

debate about the effectiveness of financial education as a tool to promote literacy despite

financial socialization (Mandell & Klein, 2009; Al-Bahrani et al., 2019). While there

have been mixed results of the effects of financial education on financial literacy, the

research overwhelmingly supports the importance family financial socialization plays in

an individual's financial aptitude and behaviors (Deenanath, Danes, & Jang, 2019).

Edwards, McMillon, and Dandridge (2010) found research that supports the

positive correlation between parental involvement and children’s learning. Parent

involvement is important to a child’s learning but there are often factors that keep parents

in marginalized communities from being as involved as their counterparts, such as

underemployment and non-traditional household structures. It is important to note the

existing narratives that assume that poor parents are not interested in their children's

education when they share the same concern as wealthier parents but often lack the time

and resources to be as involved in the schools (Gorski, 2008). Activities that parents can

engage their children in are giving allowances, the ability to budget information, and

having actual money conversations (Faulk & White, 2018). However, these activities

often look different for families of lower socioeconomic status as well as different culture

as some families do not have enough money to give allowances and in other households

it is simply not a part of the culture. Fulk and White (2018) describe financial

socialization as “the process of acquiring knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs about

money, and occurs in the household when children are included in family financial

discussions and observe how parents handle financial matters” (p. 2). Both studies

highlight the mode of financial socialization as part of learnings generated in the home by

34
using what the children are exposed to by family members. Fulk and White (2018)

explore how these learnings differ by race as they studied how Black and White college

students obtain financial knowledge and skills. Their results indicated that discussions

with parents and formal financial education had the most significant influence on

participants. One unique aspect of their results assessing the transfer of financial

knowledge is the observation that parental behaviors had more impact on students'

behaviors than conversations regarding financial literacy. It is important to note that

while parental behaviors had the most impact, conversations as well as other forms of

education also impact students’ behaviors. Faulk and White (2018) also note that there

are disparities in household socialization, and therefore formal education is often thought

of to fill these socialization gaps.

In a study by Danes and Haberman (1999), they note that parents are not

providing children with adequate financial education because they lack the knowledge of

these concepts, family history, experience, and skills, beliefs and values often inform the

way individuals interact with their finances. These studies neglect to convey that some of

these activities are challenging for Black families to participate in based on the parent's

personal experience with financial socialization and those with lower or no discretionary

income for things such as an allowance or they differ from normative and conventional

activities. Cude et al. (2006), in a study of college students, noted that many of them

reported being most influenced by their parents as it relates to their financial behaviors.

“Parents need to be aware of the major role that they play in the financial socialization of

their children and that this process occurs at a very early age” (Cude et al., 2006, p. 108).

While this quote may be a bit generalizing, what is consistent and apparent is the

35
importance of family financial socialization and how that dramatically affects how a

person comes to understand and interact with financial matters.

Compton-Lilly (2003) conducted a study with inner city urban children to

understand her students’ perceptions and experiences around reading and to develop a

theoretical model to show a connection between students' interest in reading and other

external factors, such as those that are situational and cultural. She explains that

educators and researchers must question their assumptions about urban families and

reading. This sentiment can be applied when thinking of the importance of family

structure when instructing students from a household where financial socialization was

not happening. Compton-Lilly (2003) notes that mainstream narratives assume that poor

urban children’s families are not interested in their children’s education, but her research

challenges this narrative and asserts that parents do see education as important and

necessary for their children’s employment capabilities and overall advancement. This

assumption can also be applied to families and their financial socialization, however there

is a lack of research on Black families as it relates to their experiences and discourses

around financial socialization.

Family Financial Socialization Theory

The first theory used in the examination of the research questions is FFST. It is a

tool created by created by Gudmunson and Danes (2011) to understand financial

socialization. FFST "integrates family socialization theory and recent trends in financial

literacy research” (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011). This theory focuses on the role that the

family plays in financial socialization as research supports that the family is essential and

critical to literacy. The purpose of Gudmunson and Danes work was to go beyond prior

36
studies that only examined socialization as an indicator of financial outcomes but to

examine how socialization may evolve throughout one's life. “FFST specifies the key

constructs of personal and family characteristics, family relationships and interactions,

and purposive financial socialization as financial socialization processes that impact the

outcomes of financial behavior and financial well-being through the acquisition of

financial attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities” (Deenanath et al., 2019, p. 84).

Researchers have found that parents, schools, peers and even mass media are the most

significant socialization agents (Gutter et al., 2011).

FFST “is a two-stage process that examines the relationship between factors in

stage one, family socialization processes, and factors in stage two of the framework,

financial socialization outcomes” (Watkins, 2018, p. 11). The FFST’s first stage focuses

on the family financial socialization process, and the second stage examines the financial

socialization outcomes. Within the two-stage process there are a total of eight pathways

which are identified as A – H, and this study examined all the pathways.

The first construct in FFST is personal and family characteristics, which are

represented by background or demographic data often used to understand the makeup of

a population or sample. Some examples of data gathered include gender, age, education

as well as household income. This model positions the demographic variables as

predictors as opposed to control variables (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011). In this theory it

is proposed that “demographic variables are tied to financial socialization via family

socialization processes” (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011, p. 648). While background factors

of a family, such as demographics and socioeconomic status, are important in

determining outcomes, according to the conceptual model these factors influence the next

37
construct of family interaction and relationships. Another term Gudmunson and Danes

(2011) introduce is purposive financial socialization, which they define as deliberate

attempts that family members use to educate or socialize other family members around

personal finance. Parents not only affect children’s socialization via purposive instruction

but also through their daily actions which model behaviors for children, better known as

implicit socialization. Their theory hinges on the hypothesis that family interactions and

purposive financial socialization affect financial behaviors, knowledge, attitudes, and

capabilities. However, this theory and conceptual model does not account for racial

differences in family structures nor address the effects that racial capitalism has had on

the Black community’s ability to acquire financial assets that would lead to increased

financial knowledge.

Family interactions and relationships “influence financial attitude development,

knowledge transfer, and financial capability development even when financial

socialization is implicit” (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011, p. 649). This theory makes clear

that family background and history alone are not factors but that the dynamics that are in

play within that family which includes the way in which parents communicate with

children do influence financial socialization. Pathway A reflects the relationship between

family characteristics and family interactions and relationship. According to this

conceptual model, both family characteristics, family interactions, and relationships are

directly related to the purposive financial socialization. Pathway B examines the

relationship between demographic characteristics such as gender, age or socioeconomic

status and purposive financial education.

38
 Purposive financial socialization includes direct and indirect communication

around financial matters (Jorgensen et al., 2017). Pathway C (see Figure 1) is the

relationship between those family interactions and relationships to purposive financial

socialization. This refers to intentional efforts of parents and family members to socialize

their children about financial matters. “Characteristics such as gender, age, family

structure, and family relationship type highlight family roles tied to cultural values and

norms that underlie financial practices” (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011, p. 649). In FFST

purposive financial socialization is a pathway to financial knowledge, attitudes, and

capability. Opposite of purposive financial socialization is unintentional socialization,

which occurs where children observe their parents or guardians' behaviors and

conversations as it relates to financial management. Studies show that these unintentional

learnings can have an equally strong impact on financial acumen and behaviors as

purposive financial socialization.

The second stage in the FFST focuses on financial socialization outcomes as

opposed to the process of socialization in stage one. The first construct within this stage

is financial knowledge, attitudes, and capabilities. Both purposive financial socialization

(Pathway E) and family interaction and relationships (Pathway D) are pathways that

affect the financial attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities. These factors are an important

pathway in the FFST and the interaction between these constructs is key as their

relationship affects financial behaviors. This pathway focuses on individual behaviors

and is not inclusive of systemic barriers that affect the behaviors. Those that have

reported having more purposive financial socialization tend to show more positive

financial attitudes, better knowledge, and more confidence in their capabilities

39
(Gudmunson & Danes, 2011; Gudmunson et al., 2015; Shim et al., 2010). The next

pathway explored in this study is Pathway F which is the relationship between financial

attitudes, knowledge and capabilities, and financial behaviors. Gudmunson and Danes

(2011) note that this construct represents observable financial outcomes such as financial

behaviors. The model acknowledges two types of financial behaviors the first being a

pattern of actions and the second is events where financial decisions are made. What this

theory lacks is an account for racial differences and some of the systematic factors that

are in play when it comes to family background which is one of the first constructs of the

model. Some such as Baity (2020) have attempted to explore the issues of race and the

FFST but there is still a lack of extensive research that looks at the differences of family

financial socialization among Black people.

Frequent financial conversations between parent and college-aged students had a

positive impact on the students' financial behaviors (Deenanath et al., 2019). “Parents can

transfer values, norms, and attitudes about money to children via communication even

though they may not explicitly be speaking about those issues (Bakir, Rose, & Shoham,

2006; Gudmunson & Danes, 2011; as cited in Deenanath et al., 2019, p. 86). Because

family socialization can be a crucial indicator of financial knowledge, the family

financial socialization theory should be explored when attempting to understand a

population's financial knowledge. Bahrani and Weathers (2019) found that parental

financial literacy increased student participants' financial literacy scores. It is important to

note that there is still limited research on race and financial socialization. One limitation

of the FFST is that it does not directly address racial differences and existing scales are

not created for cultural responsiveness. For example often one of the questions around

40
literacy asks about mortgages and this type of question assumes that individuals were

raised in a home that was owned as opposed to rented as we know there have been

several historical barriers to homeownership for the Black community. There is an

opportunity to use this theory to assess racial differences by using culturally responsive

scales. Initial research by a recent scholar, Baity (2020) used FFST through a CRT lens

by adapting questions for the participants that are relevant to Black or African

Americans. The only existing study found to combine both FFST & CRT was by Baity

(2020). In Baity’s study she used the FFST and applied CRT to create her own scale

aligning with the FFST constructs instead of using existing scales. Her work aligns on the

CRT tenets of racism being normal and race as a social construct to understand the

financial socialization practices of Black people. Her belief was that the existing scales

were not culturally responsive. “Critical race theory contends that it is essential to

consider the influence of race, as a social construct, on all aspects of everyday life for

Black people, including family socialization and subsequent oucomes” (Baity, 2020, p.

7). This study incorporated the two tenets explored by Baity along with a third tenent of

storytelling combining FFST and CRT to explore the lived experiences of participants

through qualitative inquiry.

The last pathway explored in this study is H which looks at the relationship

between financial behaviors on financial well-being. Gudmunson and Danes (2011) note

that financial well-being contains paths from both financial behaviors as well as financial

attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities. Financial well-being per the conceptual model, is

assesses by both objective and subjective indicators and that objective indicators could

include things such as household income and or net worth (Watkins, 2018). Despite this

41
guidance, financial well-being, much like financial literacy does not cureently have one

common definition. However has been examined by assessing the level of financial stress

of an individual or household (Watkins, 2018). This study used the stress indicator to

assess for financial well-being.

Critical Race Theory

CRT, as previously mentioned, is theoretical framework based on the concept that

racial inequality is a result of the differences created by white people to maintain their

elite interests and essential dominance. It is the second theory used in this study to ground

the qualitative phase of the research. CRT works to reveal race and racism in action, the

manners in which it impacts people, and the historical and contemporary contexts in

which they occur (Bell, 1992; Harper, Patton & Wooden, 2009; Solórzano et al., 2000).

CRT began as a formal critique of racism in law and society with its origins starting at

the National Critical Legal Studies conferences at Harvard and UC Berkley in the early

1980s. A group of law professors began to question the process of adjudication in law,

which was termed Critical Legal Studies (CLS). From CLS additional scholars: Bell

(1987), Matsuda (1989), Delgado (1989), Harris (1993), and Crenshaw (1988), they

argued that CLS did not go far enough in challenging the racialized nature of law. Their

work would later become CRT. Constance-Huggins (2020) purports that the origins of

CRT consist of six tenets which are summarized below:

1. Racism is endemic and is a normal part of our nation's history, and “because it is

so enmeshed in the fabric of our social order, it appears both normal and natural

to people in this culture” (Ladson-Billings, 1998, p. 11).

42
 2. Social construction as CRT is different from typical mainstream studies where it

will employ storytelling to understand the lived experiences of oppression and

racism.

3. CRT challenges ahistoricism and insist on a contextual/historical analysis of the

law. Critical race theorists adopt a stance that presumes that racism has

contributed to all contemporary manifestations of group advantages and

disadvantages.

4. CRT insists on recognition of the experiential knowledge of people of color and

our communities of origin in analyzing law and society.

5. CRT is interdisciplinary.

6. CRT works toward eliminating racial oppression as part of the broader goal of

ending all forms of oppression (Constance-Huggins, 2020).

This study is situated in exploring the use of CRT within education and leans

heavily on scholars such as (Ladson-Billings, 1998; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; and

Solorzano, 1998). They are known for examining CRT in the K-12 space and higher

education institutions, respectively. The purpose of incorporating CRT into this study is

to acknowledge that family socialization and money management looks different than

what the existing normative assessments typically use. Also, to explore the lived

experiences of Black college students and their meaning making of personal financial

management. Understanding financial literacy requires delving into the origins of this

concept and how it may perpetuate the existing dominant assumptions regarding

intelligence and educational attainment of people of color.

43
 CRT within the legal field, has three founding principles (Ladson-Billings, 1998;

Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995), the first being that racism is normal and a daily fact of

life. The second focuses on storytelling, where scholars ground their work in the

experiences of people of color and use this to explore the effects of racism and

oppression. The third principle is rooted in the critique of liberalism, arguing that liberal

legal studies have resulted in slow change. Scholars, such as (Delgado & Stefanic, 2001)

highlight the irony that legal reform has eliminated some overt hateful experiences of

racism. But reform has “kept intact exclusionary relations of power as exemplified by the

legal conservative backlash of the courts, legislative bodies, voters, etc., against special

rights for racially marginalized groups” (Ladson-Billings, 1998). Ladson-Billings took

the foundation of CRT to apply it to the field of education with similar understandings of

prior scholars but add that the U.S. is rooted in property rights instead of human rights

and note that this “intersection of race and property creates an analytical tool for

understanding inequity” (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995, p. 48). Ladson-Billings and Tate

(1995) further explore this idea of understanding race and property, noting the

problematic nature of the Black community’s relationship with property as African

Americans were once considered property despite being unable to acquire property. And

as mentioned, property is a primary vehicle to wealth generation. Integral to this study

and understanding of the wealth gap, is to situate the research to understand race and how

it is exploited to marginalize and ensure inequity. CRT in education is often a critique of

the systems of oppression such as racism and exploitation and it examines the history of

these constructs and how race has manifested many of these issues in our society and

schools (Ledesma & Calderon, 2015). “CRT analyzes the role of race and racism in

44
perpetuating social disparities between dominant and marginalized racial groups”

(DeCuir & Dixson; Ladson-Billings; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995, as cited in Hiraldo,

2010, p. 54). The tenet of understanding the narratives of participants’ lived experience of

the effects of race and racism on their financial behaviors is an attempt to use “counter-

stories in analyzing higher education’s climate provides faculty, staff, and students of

color a voice to tell their narratives involving marginalized experiences” (Hiraldo, 2010,

p. 54).

While CRT is often associated with qualitative inquiry, there is research that

discusses CRT's use in quantitative analysis by scholars, such as Sablan (2019), however,

Covarrubias (2011) noted that numbers are unable to speak for themselves. Therefore, it

is crucial to analyze statistical data through a critical lens. Terms such as QuantCrit and

quantitative intersectionality are discovered when understanding the application of CRT

within varying research methodologies (Sablan, 2019). According to Sablan (2019), the

application of CRT in research views statistics and quantitative research to have biases

that support white supremacy and upholds dominant theologies. Some research exists of

CRT in quantitative and mixed methods, but researchers have also expressed the need for

additional mixed methods and quantitative studies in CRT (Sablan, 2019). Another

rationale for using CRT to situate the research is that CRT uses storytelling through

qualitative inquiry to ensure that those who have been oppressed and marginalized are

able to tell their own stories. CRT will be utilized with qualitative inquiry to understand

the racialized experience of the Black college students as it relates to personal financial

management.

45
 Existing literature notes the effects that poverty and lack of financial resources

have on the development of children. “CRT promotes social justice by moving students

beyond information on different cultures, to concern for social and economic injustice”

(Constance-Huggins, 2020, p. 17). Education is not exempt from being affected; as one

author notes, "children from wealthier families have more access to quality education

relative to those from poorer families" (Constance-Huggins, 2020, p. 2). While there has

been much research connecting CRT and education, there are no studies that examine the

relationship between financial education and CRT which could further highlight how

capitalism has created economic inequalities such as the wealth gap. There are numerous

scholars (Leong, 2013; Manduca, 2018; Whitfield, 2019) that address the relationship

between racism and capitalism. Hiraldo (2010) notes that incorporating critical race

theory into the implementation of everyday educational practices would help to bring

awareness of race and racial inequalities. This revelation is not surprising as the use of

CRT in education is not a new field of study, but the application of the theory in

education has become a hot topic and is expanding in scholarship. In using CRT, this

study will explore whether Black college students meaning making aligns with the

existing FFST or if it differs.

Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis

The primary focus of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) is to

understand how participants make meaning of their experiences. IPA was first developed

by psychologist Jonathan Smith in 1996 and it is a research approach that is rooted in

phenomenology, ideography, and hermeneutics (Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2012). This

phenomenological approach involves an examination of the participant’s life experiences

46
and explores their perception of an object or event instead of a specific statement of the

event or object (Smith & Osborn, 2008). The use of IPA provides a structure and

framework with “clear application guidelines that lend themselves to rigorous exploration

of meaningful topics while also allowing for ample flexibility to exhaust divergent

experiences and interpretations from participants” (Miller & Barrio Minton, 2016, p. 53).

This design allows for researchers to focus on participants specific and individualized

experiences of phenomena as opposed to generalized experiences (Miller & Barrio

Minton, 2016). IPA is considered a contemporary approach to phenomenology and while

it is rooted in this philosophy, IPA takes a different approach from traditional

phenomenology (Alase, 2017). While this methodology started in the field of psychology

it has since expanded to be used in various fields exploring human, health, and social

sciences (Noon, 2018). Because of its focus on experiences, it is a good fit for the field of

education as experience of students is important in the development of curricula and

instructional methods (Noon, 2018). One of the key features IPA is “its ability to make

sense of the ‘lived experiences’ of the research participants and truly allow the research

participants and truly allow the research study to explore the phenomenon that the

research is investigating” (Alase, 2017, p. 11). In IPA research studies samples are

selected purposively to get an understanding of the lived experiences among the

homogenous group of participants to make meaning of the phenomenon. IPA being an

interpretative and conversational method interviews allow for the development and a

relationship with the participants so that their lived experiences can be obtained and

analyzed (Alase, 2017). This methodology pairs well with critical race theory as it is a

useful methodology for those populations whose voices are often unheard (Noon, 2018).

47
Because IPA focuses on the full exploration and analysis of each participant’s account

sample sizes for these studies are typically small (Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2012). In this

study it is used to explore how participants make meaning of race and financial

knowledge, socialization, and money management.

Summary

The literature suggests that there is still a need to understand ways to minimize

the racial wealth gap. Students can benefit from an understanding of the history of the

racial wealth gap, and the exposure to professionals who have studied and worked in

finance. And this exposure can help to supplement the knowledge of teachers who may

not have formal financial training. "It certainly seems inconsistent that one of the goals of

education is to prepare youth to be employable citizens, but not to prepare them

adequately to manage the income they earn from that employment” (Danes & Haberman,

2007, p. 58).

There is also room for further development and research on financial literacy and

education as research material is still limited, particularly in relation to exploring

differences based on race and the Black community. Even with the limited research,

studies consistently indicate the importance of financial literacy and its impact on our

national economy. Inconsistencies continue to exist in research results that measure

financial education's effectiveness as there is no nationally accepted financial curriculum

within the United States. Existing curriculum in the secondary education space varies and

is an interpretation of what financial literacy means to the individual instructor or

institutional creator. Because of this deficiency, conflicting results will continue to exist

in the research making the ability to generalize results of curriculum a challenge. The

48
existing literature is consistent with the importance of socialization in preparing youth to

be literate, especially financially. However, the responsibility does not stop there as it is

not enough to mandate financial literacy in the schools. Danes et al. (1999) noted many

students brought their financial learning home to family members in addition to their

home learnings. “The financial socialization process begins in childhood and involves life

experiences, interactions with friends and family members, and formal education which

develop financial skills, attitudes and knowledge” (Hudson et al., 2017, p. 286). Danes et

al. (1999) believe that preparing financially literate students cannot be the task of schools

alone and that partnerships between public and private sectors will generate the best

results.

Additional research is needed to assess the existing financial literacy scales for

cultural bias and examine the differences of culturally responsive scales. As noted earlier,

most of the research on financial education programs is typically quantitative and as such

there are limited qualitative studies that have been done to understand students'

knowledge and experience of financial management and literacy. Most of the existing

research in this field does not focus specifically on Black college students. Lastly, this

research and its disposition towards financial education is not an attempt to ignore this

country’s history of pretending to care about the equity of Black people and their rights

instead of addressing economic inequality (Baradaran, 2017), but to see it as an

opportunity for advancement. The literature is clear that the Black community cannot

educate or work itself out of these issues of inequality, and that it is crucial to dismantle

the structure of racism and oppression. However, dismantling hundreds of years old

requires a considerable amount of time that expands beyond one lifetime. But there is

49
progress to be made by providing access to education that can aid in the creation and

retention of wealth. While financial education and wealth creation is important for all,

there is a specific opportunity for wealth creation among Black people to address the

growing wealth gap. This research examined a group of students who are on the path to

income stability through the acquisition of jobs. This population represents a high

potential group which is often underserved when it comes to access to resources.

Education about personal finances can help ensure that they can retain wealth and

hopefully pass some of the information and practices down to the next generation.

50
 CHAPTER 3

METHODS

Research Design

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between financial

socialization processes and outcomes according to the FFST of Black college students.

The study also examined how these factors affect the lived experiences of personal

financial management among participants and how race affects their financial

socialization. This research draws upon two theoretical frameworks, including critical

race theory (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995) and the Family Financial Socialization

Theory (FFST) (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011). These frameworks were be utilized to

examine the possible relationships among the variables. To examine the research

questions, the concurrent mixed method design that consisted of a quantitative survey

along with interviews using the interpretative phenomenological analysis method. The

mixed methods design was selected to understand the factors that affect the knowledge,

attitudes, capabilities, behaviors, and socialization among Black college students. Mixed

method research design minimizes the risk that the results are biased to one method and

allows the researcher to check and compare both the qualitative results to that of the

qualitative (Maxwell, 2013). The concurrent mixed method research design was chosen

as it allowed the researcher to combine the phases and expedite the data collection

process (Creswell & Clark, 2017) given some of the initial challenges in the quantitative

data collection. Because most of the research within the field of financial literacy and

education is quantitative (e.g., Danes et al., 1999; Fulk & White, 2018; Hudson et al.,

2017), it was important to examine these research questions through qualitative inquiry as

51
it provided additional context to the results that were not captured in the survey. There

are few qualitative studies using the FFST such as LeBaron et al. (2020) and Rea et al.

(2019) and one mixed-method longitudinal study was completed utilizing the FFST

(Danes et al., 2016). Despite the lack of mixed method research in this field, this study

showed that “by combining the approaches, researchers gain new knowledge that is more

than just the sum of the two parts” (Creswell & Clark, 2017), which will helped to

understand the research questions better. While the existing literature preferences

quantitative data and believes it to be without bias (Sablan, 2019), it is necessary to note

that individuals analyze the data. It is important to note that bias and manipulation could

occur, and these biases can be attributed to the scales and tools used to collect the data

and the results conveyed by researchers as well as those conducting the interviews.

However, the interviews provided insight to how the participants understand and make

meaning of financial literacy and financial management concepts in general and special

attention was given to ensure that researcher bias was minimized (Siedman, 2013).

Participants

The sample participants for this study consisted of full-time undergraduate college

student aged 18 – 24, enrolled at an accredited College or University. Originally the

population was designated from one nonprofit program, but the challenges with meeting

the minimum desired number of responses required the researcher to expand the

participant pool. This age range was selected according to the National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES) 2015 report, as traditional college students are those that

matriculated to college immediately after high school and are under the age of 24.

College students were chosen as they have varying financial responsibility as well as

52
access to financial education resources. According to NCES, 1.416 million Black

students were enrolled full-time in college, which represented approximately 13% of the

total full-time enrollees in the U.S. The surveys were be distributed to the entire

population to get a minimum of 60 and up to 200 responses. At 60 respondents the

sample would represent a 90% confidence level with a 10% margin of error, and at 200

respondents it would represent a 99% confidence level with an 8% margin of error

(Qualtrics, 2020). However, a power analysis was conducted and indicated that 160

responses would be the minimum number to properly run the SEM analysis. There was a

total of 181 viable responses from participants who met the ethnic demographic

requirement will be included in this study.

Non-probability sampling will be used as the goal of this study is to get an

understanding of a sample of students within the larger population. Participants were

recruited from the internet via social media pushes, email to nonprofit program

participants and finally through the online paid survey tool Prolific. Parameters were set

on Prolific to limit participation to the eligibility requirements stated above. Participation

in the survey was voluntary and based on purposive sampling as the initial survey will be

sent to the entire population to complete. There were a few responses that were removed

as they did not meet ethnicity requirements.

The survey contained an optional section for participants to check a box to

indicate if they would be willing to participate in a follow-up interview. This section did

not require a name but only contact information, including email and phone number. Of

the total 43 students from the qualifying pool that indicated interest in participating

interviews, eight interview participants were selected randomly. Of the eight interview

53
participants, most of them reported as female (7) and one identified as male. This gender

demographic is a close sample representation of the quantitative data collected, which

reported 86% respondents identifying as female, 13% identifying as male, and 1% as

other. Of the selected participants for interviews, 63% noted that their household income

ranged from $0-$34,999, 13% reported income ranging from $50,000-$79,999 and 25%

did not report household income. Participants ranged in classification from freshmen to

juniors as there were no seniors who participated in the interviews. The highest father

education attained among the participants was a tie between high school or less and

graduate and professional degree both at 38% respectively. The largest reported highest

educational attainment of mothers was graduate or professional degree at 50%.

Data Collection

The study began with a survey administered to the sample of individuals and

analyzed quantitatively, and then further data collection involved conducting one-on-one

semi-structured interviews with a sample of the survey participants. The interviews were

analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis methodology. This methodology

was chosen as it allows for an understanding of the participants’ lived experience as it

relates to personal financial management and is participant oriented as they narrate the

story of their experiences (Alase, 2017).

In Spring 2021, after the receipt of IRB approval, data collection began with

electronic surveys administered to all 500 nonprofit program participants using Qualtrics.

This survey included consent for participation and will be stored on the Qualtrics site

cloud storage and backed up on the researcher's cloud storage and hard drive. Any

responses not used for the study were securely discarded. Respondents’ identity was

54
protected from the survey data collected as they were not required to provide their names.

The data collection timeline was from June 2021 to October 2021, until the desired

minimum sample size of 160 survey responses was reached. Once 181 eligible responses

were collected, data collection ceased, and the surveys were disabled. The survey will

maintain the original title, College Student Financial Literacy Survey, which is the main

scale used for this survey (Jorgensen, 2007).

Eight participants who indicated interest in participating in interviews by selecting

the check box and met the selection requirements were contacted to schedule interviews

as their responses were collected. Consent for participation in these interviews was

included in the original consent with the survey. These participants were selected using

convenience sampling as they were contacted on a first indicated basis. The interviews

were minimum one hour-long semi-structured video interview conducted with each

participant online via Zoom. There were no follow up interviews needed or requested of

participants. Zoom is an online platform that allows for video conferencing. This

platform was chosen given the location restrictions of the participants who are enrolled in

colleges and universities across the U.S. It also allowed for adherence to the strict CDC

guidelines of social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic that was in place during

the study. There was a zoom password to ensure that only the designated participant and

researcher are in the room. The online interviews were recorded, and the initial

transcription of the interview was transcribed by Zoom and checked for accuracy. The

participant interviews were be labeled using a letter of the alphabet to protect the

participants’ identity (i.e., Participant A - H). Once data collection was complete and the

55
interviews were transcribed, the recorded information was deleted according to the

guidelines per interpretative phenomenological analysis methodology (Alase, 2017).

Instruments

Survey Instrument

The survey used in this study assessed the FFST conceptual model pathways A –

F and will consist of five sections. The survey is based on the work of Jorgensen (2007)

and his creation of the College Student Financial Literacy Survey (CSFLS). All five

sections of the original CSFLS scale (background info, financial knowledge, financial

attitudes & capabilities, financial behaviors, and financial socialization) were used to

assesses all five constructs examined in this study, which are personal & family

characteristics (background), objective financial knowledge (literacy) attitudes and

capabilities, financial behavior, financial socialization, and financial well-being (see

Figure 1 for model). The missing FFST construct from the survey was family interactions

and relationships, as the CSFLS neglects to assess for this construct and for subjective

financial knowledge. Family relationship is an essential element of the conceptual model

as it analyzes “interaction patterns among family members influence financial attitude

development, knowledge transfer, and financial capability development” (Gudmunson &

Danes, 2011, p. 649). As the CSFLS neglected to address this construct of the conceptual

model the five-question scale by Kim and Torquati (2020) was be added to the financial

socialization section to assess for closeness with parents and address the family

interactions and relationships construct. This scale is valid and reliable with a Cronbach

alpha of 0.86 (Kim & Torquati, 2020). Also added to the scale was a question to assess

for subjective financial knowledge in accordance with FFST conceptual model.

56
 The CSFLS was developed by Jorgensen which has been validated through its use

in multiple studies (Jorgensen, 2007; Jorgensen & Salva 2010). “CSFLS was developed

by the principal researcher in 2006 based on a review of the literature and feedback from

independent experts in personal financial literacy” (Jorgensen & Salva, 2010, p. 468).

Despite its age the survey is a useful tool for testing the FFST model. The survey

attempted to expand on existing research of Chen and Volpe (2009) as well as questions

from the Jump$tart 2004 Personal Financial Survey and addresses some limitations of

students’ perceptions of socialization. The questions of CSFLS were derived from

validated instruments. Four experts assessed the survey independently for content and

face validity, and six students assessed the clarity of the questions. “The internal

consistency of the scales from this instrument (N = 420), as indicated by Cronbach's α,

were financial knowledge α = .75; financial attitudes α = .77 ' financial behavior α = .73;

and perceived parental influence α = .70. the quality and consistency of the survey were

originally assessed using Chronbach’s Alpha” (Jorgensen & Salva, 2010, p. 469).

As financial management is the series of behaviors and decisions and financial

behaviors are informed by socialization (Topa et al., 2018), the interconnectivity of these

concepts is clear, and per FFST it is important to examine all these factors. An overview

of each section of the survey is listed below.

Section 1 Background Information

This survey used in this research included 14 of the 19 background items on the

CSFLS, which will include age, gender, class rank, ethnicity/race, major, parental

income, participant work experience, educational attainment of father and mother

respectively, occupation of father and mother respectively, financial independence, grade

57
point average (GPA), and current school. The additional questions from the original

survey were excluded as they do not apply to this study based on the scope of participants

(i.e., birth order, international student status, housing arrangement). This information

aligns with the personal and family characteristics variable, which is an input for the

FFST conceptual model. FFST proposes that sociodemographic characteristics can be

used as ‘predictors’ as research has shown that sociodemographic data are known to be

associated with how family members interact with each other (e.g., Deenanath et al.,

2019; Jorgensen, 2007; and Shim et al., 2010). Additionally, these factors are known to

affect decisions to engage in purposive financial socialization (Gudmunson & Danes,

2011; Watkins, 2018). Age consisted of multiple-choice items of the ages between 18 -

24. Gender was the only item updated to include two additional categories and will be

coded as: (1=Male; 2=Female; 3=Transgender and 4=Nonbinary). Class rank (Freshman

= 1; Sophomore = 2; Junior = 3; Senior = 4); Ethnicity/race (1=African American;

2=Asian; 3=Caucasian non-Hispanic; 4=Hispanic; 5=Multiracial; 6=Native

American/Pacific Islander; 7=Other); and Parental income (0-$34,999 = 1; $35,000 -

$49,999 = 2; $50,000 - $79,999 = 3; $80,000 or more = 4). Questions for this section can

be found in Appendix A.

Section 2 Financial Knowledge

According to the FFST financial knowledge is represented by both objective and

subjective knowledge. The entire financial knowledge section of the CSFLS will be used

for this section as it addresses objective financial knowledge. One question was added to

the financial knowledge section to assess for the participant’s perceived or subjective

financial knowledge (Shim et al., 2010) as the CSFLS only addressed objective financial

58
knowledge and not subjective. This section of the survey assessed the participant’s

objective financial knowledge with a total of 25 questions with 11 questions that assess

general financial knowledge, four questions on saving and borrowing, four questions

about investing, and six on insurance (Jorgensen & Salva, 2010) drawn directly from the

CSFLS with reliability of α=0.75. An example of a question asked the respondent to

identify the appropriate definition of net worth. The complete survey questionnaire is in

Appendix A. The responses to these questions were assessed based on the answer key of

the CSFLS. Responses were scored as (1=correct and 0=incorrect) the scores for all, and

the total correct answers were represented as a percentage of 100. To assess the

subjective financial knowledge, respondents were asked to “rate your overall

understanding of money management concepts” (Shim et al., 2010, p. 1461) on a five-

point Likert scale (1 = very low to 5 = very high). A higher score indicated that the

participant had more knowledge of financial literacy concepts.

Section 3 Financial Attitudes & Capabilities

Financial attitudes and capabilities were assessed using the 20 CSFLS questions

that assess general financial attitudes, as well as attitudes regarding savings and

borrowing, insurance and investing, and respondent’s financial capabilities. The reported

reliability for this section is α=0.77. Respondents rated their perceived importance on

questions 37, 41 & 42 using a five-point Likert-scale (from 1 = not important to 5 = very

important). A mean score was calculated for financial attitudes based on these questions.

Negative items were reversed scored so that higher scores on these scales indicated more

positive financial attitudes. An example question asked the respondent to rate their

perceived importance of spending less than the income that they generate. The other

59
questions in this section addressed general financial attitudes and were not used in

calculations.

Financial Well-Being

Embedded within this section of the survey was one question on financial well-

being which asked respondents to agree with the statement “my finances are a significant

source of worry or "hassle" for me” on a likert scale of very true to not true at all.

Although there was not a financial well-being section in the survey, this question was

identified and applied as financial well-being with the assistance of the committee and

utilized in the model as part of the SEM analysis.

Section 4 Financial Behaviors

Financial behaviors questions were taken entirely from the CSFL survey. This

section consisted of six questions with 23 items assessing participants’ financial

behaviors with α=0.73. Respondents will be asked to respond using a five-point Likert

scale: (1) “Never,” (2) “Rarely,” (3) “Sometimes,” (4) “Often,” and (5) “Very often.

Example questions included “I compare my receipts of purchases to my monthly

statements” or “I get cash advances from my credit card.” The financial behavior mean

score was calculated using questions 43, 46 & 47. Questions 43 & 47 were already listed

with the likert scale and were tallied and reverse coded. For question 46, it asked the

participant about maintaining financial records with only three choices (1 = maintain no

records; 2 = maintain minimal records; 3 = maintain very detailed records) which was

coded as follows (response 1 = 1; response 2 = 3 and response 3 =5) so that it was

consistent with the scoring for the other financial behavior questions. The results were

60
tallied and reverse coded. A higher score implicated more positive financial behaviors

according to the original survey (Jorgensen, 2010).

Section 5 Financial Socialization

This section focused on the financial socialization and the family interactions and

relationships of the respondents. The financial socialization questions were taken entirely

from the CSFLS with α=0.70. Added to this section were five questions to assess for the

participants family relationship which is an input into financial socialization according to

the conceptual model. These five questions were derived from the Kim and Torquati

(2020) study and scale. Of the five questions, four address family communication, and

the final question asks about the closeness of the participants’ relationship with their

parents, which is reported on a scale of 1 – 5 (not close at all to very close). The

Cronbach’s alpha scores for closeness with fathers and mothers respectively are α=0.86

and α=0.84 (Kim & Torquati, 2020, p. 5). A sample socialization question asked

respondents to identify to what degree they agree or disagree with the statement ‘my

parent(s) talk to me about the importance of financial security for my later life.’ The

mean score for these responses were calculated and higher scores in this section indicated

positive purposive financial socialization or a closer relationship with parents,

respectively.

Interviews

The qualitative phase of the study sought to explore the research questions while

grounding them in a critical race theoretical framework using interpretative

phenomenological analysis (IPA). Phenomenology studies allow for an understanding of

both individual and collective experiences of the phenomenon of financial literacy

61
(Henfield et al., 2013). To gain clarity around the financial literacy and lived experience

of Black college students of these topics, the participants were involved to fully capture

the nuances of the phenomenon to implement findings that can impact the communities

of the participants (Creswell & Clark, 2017).

IPA research methodology also aligns with the CRT as it endeavors to explore the

effects of financial socialization and how it correlates to financial literacy within the

Black community. This section challenged the existing dominant narratives that exist in

many of the quantitative scales and sought to explore differences in the results by using

culturally relevant questions for the interviews. It is grounded in CRT principles of anti-

essentialism and counter-narrative. Culturally relevant education extends beyond

knowing a person’s culture but acknowledges the historical context that is rooted in the

institution of White supremacy (Ledesma & Calderon, 2015). Most existing scales

including the CSFLS, are written with a normative view and does not consider the

differences of the experiences Black people have as it relates to money. The CSFLS

questions fail to capture the systematic issues and results that racial capitalism have had

preventing access to money and eventually wealth. Baity (2020) believes that Black

families hold specific beliefs about money that are a result of discrimination and

economic inequalities and as a result she used critical race theory to explore the

relationships of the FFST constructs among Black families and this study aligns with this

assertion. The interviews used open-ended questions to explore participants’ responses to

the research questions gaining insight into their experience (Siedman, 2013) while

acknowledging the historical differences and challenges of Black students by asking

culturally relevant questions. The questions addressed how participants make meaning of

62
financial knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and socialization but will do in a way that

ensures “cultural relevance to Black or African American adults” (Baity, 2020, p. 23).

Some examples of these culturally relevant questions include wording some questions

asking about ‘family role models’ instead of parents noting that not everyone has grown

up in a two-parent home but may have varying familial structures or even asking about

how often participants were given money for collection at church (Baity, 2020). The

author’s nuances in the wording of the questions are important because some normative

scale questions might ask participants about allowances which are not a norm in all

households but given the Black community’s relationship with the church this question

may have a higher likelihood of receiving a response. The qualitative section also

addressed research question five, which examined participants’ lived experiences of

personal financial management. Sample questions were created and reviewed with the

assistance of the dissertation committee and were phrased according to the literature

(Alase, 2017; Ladson-Billings, 2015; Smith & Osborn, 2008). These questions helped to

ground the conversation and allow the participant to drive the conversation in their

desired direction (Siedman, 2013). These questions were tested with a pilot group of two

Black college students to ensure that the results were credible and trustworthy.

Trustworthiness can be established when researchers address credibility, dependability,

transferability within studies and findings (Mills, 2018). Piloting the interview questions

helped to ensure that the research structure and questions are appropriate for the study.

By piloting the interviews, it alerts an investigator to any interviewing techniques that

may detract from the objectives of the study (Siedman, 2013). The pilot participants were

recruited by the researcher and from the Department of Consumer Sciences at a large

63
university located in the southeastern region of the U.S. and will be invited to participate

by one of the major professors who is also a member of this dissertation committee. The

pilot participants were selected post IRB approval and met the eligibility criteria of this

study and were independent of the study sample. All interview protocols were be

followed with this group, and at the end of the interview, participants were asked to

provide feedback on the questions including whether the questions were clear and concise

and if they have any general feedback or thoughts. Respondent validation was used to

obtain feedback on the initial conclusions from the pilot interviews (Maxwell, 2013). The

timing of the pilot interviews were be noted, and fit the desired duration of the

interviews. The pilot interviews were assessed, and the responses reviewed to ensure that

they adequately answered the interview questions and the research question (Dikko,

2016). The pilot interview feedback was used to modify interview question 10 and it was

reworded to define financial well-being for participants. See Appendix B for the list of

qualitative questions.

Data Analysis

Quantitative Analysis

The quantitative phase of this study used the FFST conceptual model to test the

pathways A-H, the relationships between financial knowledge, attitudes and capabilities,

socialization, financial behaviors, and financial well-being using SEM analysis. Paths A –

H of the framework were examined in this study according to Figure 1, which addresses

the family socialization processes and how these variables affect financial knowledge and

behaviors, as well as outcomes according to the model. The FFST is a two-part model

64
where the first part focuses on constructs related to the socialization process, and the

second part consists of the components of financial socialization outcomes.

Figure 1

Family Financial Socialization Conceptual Model

Note: This figure illustrates Gudmunson and Danes FFST conceptual model and path
analysis.
The survey responses were reviewed to check for any missing values and any

extreme outliers. There were three surveys that did not meet the study’s demographic

requirements, and they were removed from the data before analysis. Incomplete surveys

were also excluded from data analysis. The background information (Section 1) was used

as predictors, according to FFST, and descriptive analysis was conducted on this data.

Subsection 2 - financial knowledge was scored according to the CSFLS answers, and the

percentage was be reflected out of 100. Subsection 3 - financial attitudes and capabilities

was calculated for a mean score on three of the questions and the others were reverse

scored. Subsections 4 and 5 financial behavior and financial socialization were reverse

scored to calculate an overall score for each participant (Jorgensen, 2010). Each section

65
of the survey was analyzed separately and then the relationships between the constructs

were analyzed as discussed using SEM analysis. The ordinal data from each section was

presented, and analysis techniques will include analysis of the quantitative data as the

purpose of this analysis is to explore the relationship between “financial socialization and

financial behaviors of the students” (Faulk & White, 2018, p. 8). Descriptive statistics

were used to analyze all demographic variables by calculating the frequency, mean, range

and standard deviation of these items. These items were utilized to understand the

respondents background and family characteristics and their relationships with Paths A

and B.

As this study endeavored to understand the direct and implicit relationship

between the variables, SEM analysis was conducted. “SEM is a common statistical

analysis technique that is used in human development and family science, psychology,

sociology, and other social science fields” (Hox & Bechger, 2007; Tarka, 2018, as cited

in Watkins, 2018, p. 60). While one of the assumptions when utilizing SEM is that a large

sample size is needed, the power analysis was conducted to ensure that the 181-sample

size was sufficient to deliver reliable results. The quantitative portion's data analysis and

results were represented in statements and tables. According to SEM analysis, a latent

variable are the common factors or constructs of a model (Suhr, 2006). Variables in an

SEM model are categorized as exogenous or endogenous. The primary independent

(endogenous) variable for this study is financial well-being. The dependent (exogenous)

variables are personal and family characteristics, purposive financial socialization,

financial attitudes, objective and subjective financial knowledge, financial capabilities,

and financial behavior. This study will used SEM to test for correlations and covariances

66
and Figure 1 shows the proposed measurement and structure of the model as tested for

this study. From the analysis, the results were examined to determine the significance of

the association among financial knowledge and the demographics to test whether higher

socioeconomic status results in higher financial knowledge. The association between

financial knowledge and family financial socialization was also examined. To ensure that

the model was a good fit the model chi-square, root mean square error of approximation

were reported. From the quantitative results, the data was sorted and analyzed using

descriptive and inferential statistics to align with SEM and determine correlations among

the variables. This information was compared to the results of the qualitative portion of

the study by examining similar topics such as socialization items and attitudes across the

quantitative and qualitative data.

Qualitative Analysis

Interviews were transcribed in their entirety. Following the transcribed interviews,

first cycle process began with a thorough reading of the transcripts by the principal

investigator. According to interpretative phenomenological analysis, once the interviews

are fully transcribed and read, the researcher will take notes in the margin to identify

comments of interest or highlight significant responses as it relates to participants

experiences of racial capitalism, financial socialization, and financial management and

how all three are intertwined (Smith & Osborn, 2008). This initial coding process was

conducted manually according to the in-vivo coding method, which is an inductive

approach. This coding method was selected to fully capture the participants' voices

(Saldana, 2006). In-Vivo coding “help us to preserve participants’ meanings of their

views and actions in the coding itself” (Saldana, 2006, p. 76). This process allowed the

67
researcher to note any questions or points that may appear contradictory from other

accounts of the participant by analyzing the responses of the participant.

After the initial read of the first transcript, a second reading of the same transcript

was done to allow the researcher to make note of emerging themes in the second margin.

“Here the initial notes are transformed into concise phrases which aim to capture the

essential quality of what was found in the text” (Smith & Osborn, 2007, p. 68). This

process is also known as second cycle coding using the 'axial' stage, which groups the

codes thematically as axial coding connects categories to subcategories (Miles,

Huberman & Saldana, 2014; Saldana, 2006) to uncover emergent and emerging themes.

Recurring themes from the initial read of the first transcript were listed in the order in

which they occurred and then analyzed for potential connections. The process described

above was repeated for analysis of all subsequent interview transcripts.

For the second cycle coding process the constant comparative approach was used

to compare themes across all interviews. The emergent themes from the first few

participant transcripts were used to orient the coding of later transcripts, but attention was

given to any new themes that emerged (Smith & Osborn, 2007). Once all transcripts were

transcribed and coded, they were reviewed, and themes were merged to create a master

list of four main categories of themes. Using this process allowed for the respecting of

“convergences and divergences in the data – recognizing ways in which accounts from

participants are similar but also different” (Smith & Osborn, 2007, p. 73). Because this is

a phenomenological study, reviewing the convergence and divergence of the data was

where the phenom became more evident. The main theme categories were organized by

68
phenom. These phenoms were presented in a table in Appendix C, and the findings were

discussed in the qualitative findings.

Combined Data Analysis

As previously mentioned, this study aimed to understand how race affects the

financial socialization and experience of finance among Black college students. Based on

this goal of the study, results were interpreted by summarizing the major quantitative and

qualitative findings, respectively, and then a combined discussion will be completed to

examine the findings collectively. This analysis and discussion examined how the

quantitative results supported or challenged by the qualitative findings and identified

themes in the qualitative section that were not represented in the quantitative section.

This allowed for inferences and meta-inferences to be made using the data and results.

Inferences represent conclusions present in each phase of the study, and the meta

inferences expanded on that concept by looking across both phases of the study (Teddlie

& Tashakkori, 2009). The general results of the quantitative section were compared to the

qualitative findings to identify the consistent themes among both phases of the study.

Special attention was paid to the themes that related to financial knowledge, and financial

socialization will be compared with the results of these sections from the survey data.

The meta-inferences were important to explore how the qualitative results aligned with

the quantitative results, as the meta-inferences showed how the study’s results expose

inequalities and the necessity to address these through change (Creswell & Plano Clark,

2017).

69
 CHAPTER 4

QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS

The results from the data analysis are presented in this chapter. The chapter will

begin with the quantitative results and the statistical analyses by research question. In this

chapter a description of the survey sample is described, as well as descriptive statistics

for all variables, covariance matrices, confirmatory factor loadings for constructs, the

SEM analysis, and model fit results. Lastly, the effect results are described for the

indirect, direct, and total models. These results are summarized below as well as

represented in tables.

The goal of the quantitative phase of this study was to explore (1) the current

financial literacy among Black college students (2) financial attitudes, capabilities, and

behaviors among Black college students (3) the financial socialization of these students

(4) whether perceived or subjective financial knowledge differs from the objective

financial knowledge of Black college students. These items were explored using the

Family Financial Socialization Theory (FFST) model. SPSS 23 and AMOS 26 were the

two statistical analysis tools to analyze the data. The qualitative phase of this study

explored how do Black college students make meaning of personal financial management

and how does race, if at all, affects their meaning making.

Descriptive Statistics

The total valid sample in the dataset of the college student financial literacy

survey was 181 completed responses and 55 incomplete attempts. The incomplete

attempts were removed along with 3 responses that did not fit the race/ethnicity

demographic requirement. Below is a snapshot of the descriptive information for the

70
assessed variables and can be found in Table 1. Included in the results of the table are

minimum and maximum values, observations, means, frequencies, and standard

deviations of the select variables.

From the demographic data collected, most of the respondents were female at

86% and 13% were male respondents and is noted that 1% identified as ‘other’. Of the

respondents, 29% (n = 54) reported that their parents/family combined household income

exceeded $80,000, the next highest reported income was 24.9% of respondents reporting

that their combined household income is between $50,000 and $79,000. Father

educational attainment was reported as 19.9% graduate school or professional degree,

22.1% bachelor’s degree, 11% associate degree, 37.6% high school diploma, and 3.9%

less than high school diploma. Mother educational attainment was reported as 26%

graduate school or professional degree, 24.3% bachelor’s degree, 20.4% associate degree,

24.3% high school diploma, and 2.8% less than high school diploma. See the table below

for the full description of the sample.

Table 1
Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (N=181)
N %
Gender Female 156 86.2
Male 24 13.3
Unidentified 1 0.6

Academic Standing Freshman 32 17.7

Sophomore 51 28.2
Junior 56 30.9
Senior 36 19.9
Unidentified 6 3.3

Parental/Household Income <$35,000 33 18.2

$35,000-$49,999 25 13.8
$50,000-$79,999 45 24.9
>$80,000 54 29.8

71
 Don’t Know 24 13.3

College Paid Parents (100%) 43 23.8

Mostly parents (more than 50%) 47 26.0
50% self, 50% parents 22 12.2
Mostly self (more than 50%) 27 14.9
Self (100%) 42 23.2

Level of Father Education Less than High School 7 3.9

High School or Equivalent 68 37.6
Associates/community college degree 20 11.0
Bachelor's degree 40 22.1
Masters, doctorate, or professional 36 19.9
degree like medical doctor,
veterinarian, or lawyer
Other/Missing 10 5.5

Level of Mother Education Less than High School 5 2.8

High School or Equivalent 44 24.3
Associates/community college degree 37 20.4
Bachelor's degree 44 24.3
Masters, doctorate, or professional 47 26.0
degree like medical doctor,
veterinarian, or lawyer
Other/Missing 4 2.2

Research Questions

The second analysis beyond the demographic characteristics of the sample

consisted of examining the data based on research questions which used both descriptive

statistics as well as SEM analysis. Below research questions, one and four were

represented together as objective financial knowledge and financial literacy are similar

concepts. They were examined by looking at the descriptive statistics to address the

financial knowledge of respondents and how that knowledge e differs from the subjective

financial knowledge of Black college students.

Research Question 1: What is the current financial literacy among Black College

Students?

72
Research Question 4: Does perceived or subjective financial knowledge differ from the

objective financial knowledge of Black college students?

The mean score for objective financial knowledge is 48.45 with a standard

deviation of 13.60 see Table 2 below. Objective financial knowledge consisted of 25

multiple-choice questions. This represents almost half of the 26 questions being answered

correctly. Upon examination of the questions assessed, participants were mostly

challenged with topics relating to accrued interest, banking options, and taxes. However,

participants exhibited an above average understanding of topics relating to credit, credit

scores, loans, and the general purpose of insurance. There was one question assessing

subjective financial knowledge and most of the respondents rated their subjective

financial knowledge as low or very low with 119 (65.7%) responses. Financial

knowledge was assessed, and correct and incorrect responses were coded accordingly.

Results indicate that the subjective financial knowledge was more conservative than their

actual objective knowledge given that most answered half (50%) of the questions

correctly. This would indicate that their assessed knowledge is average versus the low

self-assessment of their knowledge.

73
Table 2
Financial Knowledge Mean Score & Subjective Financial Knowledge

N Min Max Mean SD

Objective Financial Knowledge 181 14.81 77.78 48.46 13.60

Cumulative
Subjective Financial Knowledge Frequency % Valid % %
Valid Very low 49 27.1 27.1 27.1
Low 70 38.7 38.7 65.7
Average 54 29.8 29.8 95.6
High 7 3.9 3.9 99.4
Very high 1 0.6 0.6 100
Total 181 100 100

Research Question 2: What are the financial behaviors, attitudes, and capabilities of

Black college students?

Financial attitudes and capabilities consisted of 20 questions based on a 5-point

scale. Three of these questions were used to calculate a mean financial attitudes and

capabilities score which was 3.34 as the other questions just addressed general financial

attitudes and capabilities. This indicates that the majority of the respondents’ attitudes

and thoughts around their financial capabilities are more on the positive end. However, it

is important to note that there is no actual threshold for assessing and the mean score is

above average. One question asked respondents to rate the importance of certain financial

activities and out of total score of 16, the mean was 13.38 indicating that respondents

found those activities important and have an overall positive attitude around financial

matters. Financial behavior consisted of six questions all assessed on a 5-point scale,

three of these questions were used to calculate a mean score to represent overall financial

behavior. Question 47 asked respondents to indicate how often they practice certain

74
behaviors (e.g., budgeting, comparative shopping, saving, etc.) and possible scores

ranged from 0 (poor financial behavior) to 64 (good financial behavior), the mean score

was 27.13 indicating poorer financial behavior. However, question 43 asked respondents

to rate themselves along the scale of very thrifty to very spending oriented, and the score

of 2.20 out of 4 indicated that participants were more neutral to savings oriented. Overall,

the mean score for financial behavior was 2.77 indicating that most of the respondents

have exhibited average financial behaviors (see Table 3).

Table 3
Financial Attitudes, Capabilities, and Behaviors Mean Score
N Min Max Mean SD
Attitudes & Capabilities Mean Score 181 2.12 4.84 3.34 0.55
Financial Behaviors Mean Score 181 1.27 4.62 2.77 0.74

Research Question 3: What is the financial socialization among Black college students?

Financial socialization was measured in various ways. Question 60 addresses

several financial topics socialized within the home which would align with family

financial socialization. Question 69 in the survey data assessed the respondent’s closeness

with parents and the majority, 58% (105) indicated they were close or very close to their

parents, which represents over half of the sample. The next group rated their closeness as

average with 21.5% (39). Question 60 asked respondents to identify financial topics

which they learned about in the home which included several items such as budgeting,

investing, taxes, credit, and wills. The highest socialized topic was budgeting with 68%

of respondents indicating they learned about it in the home and contrast, only 20.4% of

respondents indicated learning about investing in the home. The second-largest topic

socialized in the home was savings with 63.5% and topics around credit cards, loans, and

75
credit were a close third ranging from 45.9%, 35.4%, and 38.1% respectively. Table 4

below illustrates the responses to this question by individual topics and the frequencies.

Table 4
Frequency of in-home financial socialization by topic
Q60: Which of the following items did you learn about in your home while
growing up? (Check all that apply):
Frequency Percent
Q60_1. Budgeting Yes 123 68
No 58 32
Q60_2. Investing Yes 37 20.4
No 144 79.6
Q60_3. Taxes Yes 62 34.3
No 119 65.7
Q60_4. Credit Yes 69 38.1
No 112 61.9
Q60_5. Wills Yes 18 9.9
No 163 90.1
Q60_6. Life Insurance Yes 26 14.4
No 155 85.6
Q60_7. Disability Insurance Yes 5 2.8
No 176 97.2
Q60_8. Auto Insurance Yes 33 18.2
No 148 81.8
Q60_9. Renter’s/Homeowners Yes 15 8.3
Insurance
No 166 91.7
Q60_10. Loans/Debt Yes 64 35.4
No 117 64.6
Q60_11. Credit Cards Yes 83 45.9
No 98 54.1
Q60_12. Saving Yes 115 63.5
No 66 36.5
Q60_13. Giving to Charities Yes 44 24.3
No 137 75.7
Q60_14. Interest Rates Yes 25 13.8
No 156 86.2
Q60_15. Keeping Records Yes 46 25.4
No 135 74.6
Q60_16. Being Honest in all Yes 61 33.7
dealings
No 120 66.3
Q60_17. Work for what you receive Yes 91 50.3
No 90 49.7

76
 Structural Equation Model Results

To explore the relationship between the financial socialization inputs on financial

behaviors and financial well-being which are outputs according to the family financial

socialization theory (FFST) was utilized, and SEM analysis of the hypothesized

conceptual model was completed. Below is a summary of the structured equation

modeling results based on the FFST model. After examination of the survey and with the

guidance of a committee member, one question was identified that had respondents

assess their financial well-being. As a result of this finding, the financial well-being

construct was included and the full FFST model was assessed (Figure 2). Financial well-

being was added as an observed variable to see how the model might perform as there

were not enough observed variables to make it a latent construct. Confirmatory factor

analyses were conducted to ensure that the observed variables were related to their

respective latent constructs in SPSS 23 before calculating estimates for the model in

AMOS. Results for each model include (1) factor analysis results for latent constructs; (2)

total, direct and indirect effects of each SEM model; (3) covariance matrices for the

models; and (4) model fit indices.

Table 4 below shows the factor loadings for the latent variables: FIR, PFE & FAKC.

The criterion of minimum .40 was utilized as the minimum factor loading as it is an

acceptable criterion despite there being no consensus for factor loading minimum

(Matsunaga, 2010). Table 4 shows the factor loadings and each construct observed

variables met the cut-off except for PFE for the first model where the model variables

were not loading properly.

77
Figure 2

Modified Hypothesized Conceptual Model

Model 1 Analysis

Tables 4 through 11 below show the factor loadings, unstandardized regression

weights, standardized regression weights, covariance matrix, the indirect, direct, and total

effects, and lastly, the model fit indices. The first conceptual model was tested to assess

its model fit based on multiple assessments. This model's chi-square was statistically

significant with 105.21 with degrees of freedom equal to 54. Other fit indices were

utilized to assess for model fit including a CFI of 0.739 which did not meet the baseline

criterion level of ≥ .90. The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) was

0.073, which was relatively good as scores below 0.08 are acceptable (Kenny, 2020).

This model also yielded a negative variance error for E5 (-411.74) which indicated there

were some serious issues with the PFE construct. Wolf et al. (2013) indicates that models

78
with stronger factor loadings require smaller sample sizes. Below are the results for

Model 1.1

Table 5
Factor Loadings for Latent Constructs Model 1
Factor
Variables Loadings
FIR
Infl .709
IR .709
PFE
Model 1 .736
Model 2 .810
Comm .249
FAKC
FinCap .750
FinAtt .816
FinKnow .597

Note. This table demonstrates the factor loadings for the constructs based
on Model 1 specifications

Table 6

Unstandardized Regression Weights for Model

1 Estimate S.E. C.R. P
FIR <--- MEdu .132 .437 .303 .762
FIR <--- FEdu .064 .412 .156 .876
FIR <--- HHInc .663 .552 1.201 .230
FIR <--- Gender -2.304 2.111 -1.092 .275
PFE <--- MEdu -.205 .543 -.378 .705
PFE <--- FEdu .269 .473 .570 .569
PFE <--- HHInc -.529 .812 -.651 .515

1
Variable definitions: HHInc = Household or parental income; FEdu = Father’s education level; MEdu =
Mother’s education level; FIR = Family interaction and relationships; PFE = Purposive financial education;
FAKC = Financial attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities; FinAtt = Financial Attitudes; FinKnow =
objective financial knowledge; FinCap = Financial capabilities; FinBeh = Financial behaviors; Infl =
parental influence; IR = Interactions and relationships; Comm 1 – 4 = parental communication; Model=
parental modeling; FWB = Financial well-being;.

79
 Table 6

Unstandardized Regression Weights for Model

1 Estimate S.E. C.R. P
PFE <--- Gender 4.458 3.629 1.228 .219
PFE <--- FIR 1.228 1.128 1.088 .277
FAKC <--- FIR .469 .332 1.413 .158
FAKC <--- PFE -.017 .352 -.048 .962
FinBeh <--- FAKC .096 .026 3.700 ***
Infl <--- FIR 1.000
IR <--- FIR .084 .024 3.491 ***
Comm <--- PFE 1.000
Model <--- PFE .000 .004 -.048 .962
FinAtt <--- FAKC 1.000
FinKnow <--- FAKC 1.123 .438 2.563 .010
FinCap <--- FAKC .901 .197 4.565 ***
FWB <--- FAKC .163 .046 3.518 ***
FWB <--- FinBeh -.180 .134 -1.335 .182

As shown in Table 7, financial attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities (FAKC) had

the greatest direct association with financial behaviors (FinBeh) and financial well-being

(FWB). For each one standard deviation increase in FAKC financial behaviors (FinBeh),

increased by .377 standard deviations and FWB would increase by .396 standard

deviations. All direct effects for the observed and latent variables were significant except

gender, mother’s education, and variables related to PFE latent variable. This aligns with

the negative error term on that construct. Also insignificant was financial behavior on

financial well-being. These findings suggest a positive correlation between FAKC (input)

to financial outcomes of FinBeh and FWB.

Table 7
Standardized Regression Coefficients for Model 1
Estimate
FIR <--- MEdu .045
FIR <--- FEdu .024
FIR <--- HHInc .207
FIR <--- Gender -.215

80
 Estimate
PFE <--- MEdu -.012
PFE <--- FEdu .018
PFE <--- HHInc -.029
PFE <--- Gender .074
PFE <--- FIR .218
FAKC <--- FIR .591
FAKC <--- PFE -.120
FinBeh <--- FAKC .377
Infl <--- FIR .279
IR <--- FIR .253
Comm <--- PFE 6.130
Model <--- PFE -.003
FinAtt <--- FAKC .549
FinKnow <--- FAKC .240
FinCap <--- FAKC .770
FWB <--- FAKC .396
FWB <--- FinBeh -.111

Table 8 below is the covariance matrix for model 1 which indicates that the

observed variables for family characteristics were associated.

Table 8
Covariance Matrix for Model 1
Estimate S.E. C.R. P
MEdu <--> HHInc .391 .116 3.370 ***
FEdu <--> HHInc .292 .127 2.299 .022
MEdu <--> FEdu .682 .138 4.956 ***

Table 9 below shows the total effects which is an illustration of the combined

direct and indirect effect of a variable in the model with a focus on the pathways, so it

excludes observed variables associated with a latent construct. For example, gender only

had a direct hypothesized effect with purposive financial education (PFE) with an effect

of 0.027. The tested effect was indirect through FIR, FAKC, FinBeh, and FWB. In the

case of gender, the total effect was negative (-.028). The total effect of father education

(FEdu) on financial behaviors and financial well-being was insignificant at .004.

81
However, mothers’ education did have a significant effect on FIR although PFE was

insignificant. Communication but otherwise was found insignificant. Mothers’ education

was also found to be insignificant in terms of the effect on FWB and FinBeh. Household

income (HHInc) had the greatest total effect on FIR with .207 and the effect on FWB and

FinBeh were .043 and .045, respectively. Family interactions and relationships had

positive and significant effects on PFE (.218) FAKC (.565) FinBeh (.213) and FWB

(.200). FAKC had a significant effect on FinBeh (.377) and FWB (.354). These findings

suggest that FIR has a positive impact on a student’s financial attitudes, knowledge, and

capabilities. Also, as expected the FAKC of respondents has a positive effect on their

financial behaviors and well-being both findings support the FFST.

Table 9
Standardized Total Effects for Model 1
Gender HHInc FEdu MEdu FIR PFE FAKC FinBeh
FIR -.215 .207 .024 .045 .000 .000 .000 .000
PFE .027 .016 .023 -.003 .218 .000 .000 .000
FAKC -.130 .120 .012 .027 .565 -.120 .000 .000
FinBeh -.049 .045 .004 .010 .213 -.045 .377 .000
FWB -.046 .043 .004 .009 .200 -.042 .354 -.111

Table 10 shows the direct effects of between variables in the model. Financial

behaviors (FinBeh) had the largest direct effect on FWB. The direct effect of FinBeh on

FWB was .405. FAKC had a direct effect of .396 on FWB. Household income had the

greatest effect on financial interactions and relationships (.207). Both FAKC with 0.591

and PFE of 0.218 were found to be positively and significantly associated with FIR. It is

important to note that Gender, HHInc, FEdu, MEdu, FIR, and PFE were not hypothesized

to have a direct effect on FWB.

82
Table 10
Standardized Direct Effects for Model 1
Gender HHInc FEdu MEdu FIR PFE FAKC FinBeh
FIR -.215 .207 .024 .045 .000 .000 .000 .000
PFE .074 -.029 .018 -.012 .218 .000 .000 .000
FAKC .000 .000 .000 .000 .591 -.120 .000 .000
FinBeh .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .377 .000
FWB .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .396 -.111

Table 11 illustrates the indirect effects of the variables to one another. FinBeh has

a negative indirect relationship with gender, and the other variables were deemed

insignificant except for FIR of 0.213. Father's education and mother's education were not

significant in the model.

Table 11
Standardized Indirect Effects for Model 1
Gender HHInc FEdu MEdu FIR PFE FAKC FinBeh
FIR .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
PFE -.047 .045 .005 .010 .000 .000 .000 .000
FAKC -.130 .120 .012 .027 -.026 .000 .000 .000
FinBeh -.049 .045 .004 .010 .213 -.045 .000 .000
FWB -.046 .043 .004 .009 .200 -.042 -.042 .000

Table 12 shows the model fit indices of Model 1. The statistic was found to be

significant, which was not unexpected given the sample size. RMSEA was below

benchmark criterion values (< .08), and the CFI was below the .90 criterion level.

Table 12
Model Fit Indices for Model 1
Chi-square (df) 105.21 (54), p = 0.000
CFI 0.739
RMSEA 0.073

83
 The Figure 3 below shows the updates made to the Model 1 to improve the

overall fit indices of the model. The specific updates and changes are discussed below.

Figure 3

Revised Conceptual Model 2

Model 2 Results

After a review of the fit issues of model 2, the factor loadings were reviewed.

Upon further examination of the multiple factor analyses for model 1, the factor loading

for the parental modeling (Model) and communication (Comm) for the PFE latent

variable was not meeting the desired threshold. Because of this, updated confirmatory

factor analysis was conducted with the four individual communication variables as

observed variables for the PFE construct. This analysis showed high factor loadings for

the PFE latent construct. As a result, a third model was created that listed the individual

observed communication variables loading to the PFE construct, and the two model

84
variables were removed due to low factor loading. Model 2 was updated to only include

the four observed variables for communication and the model variables were removed

due to low factor loading. This model's chi-square was statistically significant with

144.63 and degrees of freedom equal to 79 and a probability level of 0.000. Updating the

PFE construct caused the CFI goodness-of-fit measure improved from 0.739 to 0.81

although close it still does not quite meet the baseline criterion level of ≥ .90. The Root

Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) also improved from .073 to 0.068,

which was relatively good as scores below 0.08 are acceptable. As another method to

assess for fit, the chi-square was divided by the degrees of freedom which were 1.83 and

meets the threshold of being <5 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Given that this model also yielded

a negative variance error for E8 (-2.97) which indicated there were some issues with the

PFE construct, but the error decreased significantly. While the model is slightly under the

ideal fit for CFI this is aligned with a smaller sample size (less than 200) and most of the

ideal fit indices for SEM analysis do not factor in sample size. This also yielded a

negative error term for the PFE construct which indicates that the construct was not doing

a great job of explaining purposive financial education. Kolenikov and Bollen (2012)

note that negative variance errors are common with SEM analysis and latent variables.

Noting that sample size and missing data can be a cause of these errors. However,

Jorgensen et al. (2017) noted that fixing a negative error variance has very little to no

impact on fit indices and noted a negative error on the same construct in his study. CFI

and RMSEA were used as they both tend to be less sensitive to sample size (Fan,

Thompson, & Wang, 1999). These fit challenges are attributed to the smaller sample size

and align with the study being exploratory.

85
 Tables 13 through 20 show the (1) unstandardized regression weights; (2)

standardized regression weights; (3) covariance matrix; (4) total, direct, and indirect

effects; (5) the model fit indices; and (6) updated factor loadings for Model 2. Financial

behaviors (FinBeh) continued to have the largest direct effect on financial well-being.

FinBeh was significant at the p < .001 significance level.

Table 13
Unstandardized Regression Weights for Model 2
Estimate S.E. C.R. P
FIR <--- MEdu .136 .541 .250 .802
FIR <--- FEdu -.056 .473 -.119 .905
FIR <--- HHInc 1.084 .616 1.759 .079
FIR <--- Gender -1.780 1.786 -.997 .319
PFE <--- MEdu -.140 .627 -.223 .824
PFE <--- FEdu .131 .477 .274 .784
PFE <--- HHInc -.983 2.923 -.336 .737
PFE <--- Gender 2.269 5.013 .453 .651
PFE <--- FIR 1.006 2.661 .378 .705
FAKC <--- FIR -.054 .087 -.622 .534
FAKC <--- PFE .396 .526 .753 .452
FinBeh <--- FAKC .096 .027 3.564 ***
Infl <--- FIR 1.000
IR <--- FIR .120 .035 3.410 ***
Comm 4 <--- PFE 1.000
Comm 3 <--- PFE 1.078 .146 7.376 ***
FinAtt <--- FAKC 1.000
FinKnow <--- FAKC 1.171 .461 2.540 .011
FinCap <--- FAKC 1.027 .257 3.992 ***
FWB <--- FAKC .173 .048 3.586 ***
FWB <--- FinBeh -.162 .134 -1.216 .224
Comm 2 <--- PFE .578 .105 5.498 ***
Comm 1 <--- PFE .863 .130 6.635 ***

86
 Table 14 illustrates the standardized regression weights for Model 2 which also

supports the findings of Model 1 in that HHInc has the greatest positive correlation with

FIR and FAKC has the greatest positive relationship with FinBeh and FWB.

Table 14
Standardized Regression Weights for Model 2
Estimate
FIR <--- MEdu .071
FIR <--- FEdu -.033
FIR <--- HHInc .524
FIR <--- Gender -.257
PFE <--- MEdu -.210
PFE <--- FEdu .219
PFE <--- HHInc -1.359
PFE <--- Gender .936
PFE <--- FIR 2.874
FAKC <--- FIR -.047
FAKC <--- PFE .121
FinBeh <--- FAKC .354
Infl <--- FIR .180
IR <--- FIR .233
Comm 4 <--- PFE .700
Comm 3 <--- PFE .717
FinAtt <--- FAKC .513
FinKnow <--- FAKC .234
FinCap <--- FAKC .820
FWB <--- FAKC .392
FWB <--- FinBeh -.101
Comm 2 <--- PFE .498
Comm 1 <--- PFE .610

As shown in Table 15, each of the covariances in the model was statistically

significant. This implies that the participant reported family characteristic variables were

associated.

87
Table 15
Covariance Matrix for Model 2
Estimate S.E. C.R. P
MEdu <--> HHInc .385 .116 3.322 ***
FEdu <--> HHInc .293 .127 2.302 .021
MEdu <--> FEdu .681 .137 4.952 ***

Table 16 illustrates the total effects table that displays the combined direct and

indirect effect of a variable in the model. Based on the results mother education did not

have a direct effect on family interaction and relationships as well as purposive financial

education. Also, the only significant effect gender had was on PFE (.197). FAKC had the

most significant total effect on FIR, which was .299. HHInc was mostly only positively

correlated with FIR (.524) and PFE (.148), which would imply that income levels

positively affected the family interactions and relationships as well as the purposive

financial education within the family. The theory is supported by the strong relationship

between PFE and FIR with a total effect of 2.874.

Table 16
Standardized Total Effects for Model 2
Gender HHInc FEdu MEdu FIR PFE FAKC FinBeh
FIR -.257 .524 -.033 .071 .000 .000 .000 .000
PFE .197 .148 .124 -.005 2.874 .000 .000 .000
FAKC .036 -.007 .017 -.004 .299 .121 .000 .000
FinBeh .013 -.002 .006 -.001 .106 .043 .354 .000
FWB .013 -.002 .006 -.001 .107 .043 .356 -.101

Table 17 below displays the direct effects between constructs and variables in

Model 2 and highlights the strong relationship between HHInc and FIR as well as FAKC

on FinBeh and FWB.

88
Table 17

Standardized Direct effects for Model 2

Gender HHInc FEdu MEdu FIR PFE FAKC FinBeh
FIR -.257 .524 -.033 .071 .000 .000 .000 .000
PFE .936 -1.359 .219 -.210 2.874 .000 .000 .000
FAKC .000 .000 .000 .000 -.047 .121 .000 .000
FinBeh .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .354 .000
FWB .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .392 -.101

Table 18 illustrates the indirect effects of Model 2 these findings indicate some

indirect relationships between a respondent’s household income and their purposive

financial socialization (PFE). It also implies a positive, although indirect relationship

between family interactions (FIR) to the financial attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities

(FAKC) of participants. The other correlations are mostly insignificant, but it is worth

noting that the mother’s education has a small but positive effect on the financial

socialization.

Table 18

Standardized Indirect effects for Model 2

Gender HHInc FEdu MEdu FIR PFE FAKC FinBeh
FIR .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
PFE -.739 1.507 -.095 .205 .000 .000 .000 .000
FAKC .036 -.007 .017 -.004 .347 .000 .000 .000
FinBeh .013 -.002 .006 -.001 .106 .043 .000 .000
FWB .013 -.002 .006 -.001 .107 .043 -.036 .000

The model fit indices assessed for Model 2 are listed below and notes

improvement in both indices with the adjustments to the model discussed above.

89
Table 19
Model Fit Indices Model 2
Chi-square (df) 144.63 (79), p = 0.000
CFI 0.808
RMSEA 0.068

The table below are updated factor loadings based on the revised Model and show

that the variables are loading to their respective constructs.

Table 20
Factor Loadings for Latent Constructs Model 2
Variables Factor
Loadings
FIR
Infl .709
IR .709
PFE
Comm 1 .771
Comm 2 .672
Comm 3 .766
Comm 4 .765
FAKC
FinCap .750
FinAtt .816
FinKnow .597

Summary

This chapter addressed the results of the quantitative findings. These results

demonstrate that some financial knowledge and family financial socialization is

occurring, which has a direct effect on the financial behaviors of the participants. Results

of the SEM analysis show that there is a significant relationship between family

interactions and relationships to both the purposive financial education, through

socialization, as well as financial knowledge. The family financial socialization theory

(FFST) was supported as results show that there is a positive and significant relationship

90
between financial behaviors and financial knowledge, attitudes, and capabilities (FAKC).

The findings support that the higher the individual’s FAKC, the more positive financial

behaviors were exhibited. While there were not many points of assessment for financial

well-being, results indicate that it was most positively affected by FAKC and was

negatively correlated to financial behaviors. This negative correlation implies that

positive financial behaviors were not an indicator of higher assessed financial well-being

and research has indicated mixed results of the effects of FinBeh on FWB (Gudmunson

& Danes, 2011). There were some indirect relationships reported between household

income (HHInc) and the purposive financial education which is known as their

socialization. This finding would indicate that the higher the household income there

would be more financial socialization in the home. These results were expounded upon in

the qualitative findings where participants further explained and demonstrated their

financial knowledge, behaviors, and socialization. Further analysis of the findings will be

explored in the discussion chapter.

91
 CHAPTER FIVE

QUALITATIVE FINDINGS

This chapter presents qualitative findings that utilized an inductive analysis

approach (Smith & Osborn, 2008) through a critical race theory lens. The chapter is

divided into four categories that include eight themes found during the inductive analysis

of the data. The categories are 1) perceptions of their financial knowledge, 2) personal

engagement in financial practices, 3) participants' beliefs about money and wealth, and 4)

participants' perceptions of race and the acquisition of money and wealth. The transcripts

were coded based on themes, and the themes were condensed into four overarching

categories. The following are the themes associated with the categories. Support for these

themes and categories are then discussed. The themes and their recurrence among

participants are summarized in a table in Appendix C.

Interview participants were selected from the list of those who specified interest

in participating in follow-up interviews and were contacted first. Self-identified

individuals were contacted in the order in which they expressed interest to maximize the

momentum, which aligned with the concurrent mixed-method research design. An

overview of the demographic data for the participants can be found in Appendix D.

Category 1: Perceptions of their financial knowledge

This category encompasses the participants' financial knowledge and how they

have obtained this knowledge. Specifically, it is composed of the following themes:

knowledge of money and indirect influences.

This category addresses research question 1, which sought to understand the

financial literacy among Black college students, and provides insight into research

92
question 3, which addresses the financial socialization of participants. Participants noted

multiple ways of socialization about money, including family/parents and within a

school. This category would align with financial knowledge and purposive financial

socialization constructs within the FFST model. Captured within this category were two

themes which were (1) the direct influences on the knowledge of money, (2) indirect

influences on the knowledge of money. The financial topics most discussed were savings,

budgeting, and investing in order of frequency of recurrence. Most participants' family

financial knowledge was often obtained indirectly through observations and passing

conversations. It is important to note that some participants lacked detailed knowledge

about their family's financial practices, and some often noted a lack of transparency about

savings practices. Participant D commented that "my father is not really known to like

share stuff like that." There were not enough instances of money transparency to create a

different theme, but it will be further explored in the discussion.

Direct influences on the knowledge of money

Many participants noted experiences where they were directly (explicitly), taught,

or instructed about financial concepts and practices, such as savings, investing, and

budgeting. Saving was a financial concept that often surfaced in conversations with the

participants and often related to the family's observed and direct influence on the

participant. Participants C & H noted a lot of self-instruction around investments and

reviewing online content such as YouTube videos. Participants noted that after family,

schools, peers, and self-instruction are the other financial socialization modes.

Participants A, B, mentioned learning some money basics in school. “The math problems

that we have you like if Jimmy save this much money and spend this much money, how

93
much we have left” (Participant A). Participant F noted learning about money and

investing through observations of their friend’s practices.

Direct instruction or influence around investing was always reported as

information obtained outside of the family and usually within a school course or

organization-based workshop. As anticipated, self-instruction or personal experience was

the most reported way participants noted learning about money, as Participant H noted

doing their research to better learn about financial concepts. "I was just self-taught I

started watching YouTube videos" (Participant H). Participants B & E indicated that they

learned directly about budgeting via in-school course(s), Participant D mentioned also

reviewing YouTube videos about the topic, and another participant mentioned using an

app on their phone, noting that “this is really showing me how to budget I guess”

(Participant G). One participant mentioned being in a magnet program that focused on

law and finance, learning different topics, and participating in an investment game

(Participant B).

The second most noted way participants reported direct learning about money was

from parents or family. Interview question 10 specifically asked participants to identify

the most meaningful way that they learned about money, and Participant G indicated their

parents in the quote below:

So, my parents really taught me like the true value of money and how it’s to be

used and how important, how important money can be and how like how you

were supposed to use it, how you're supposed to save it (Participant G).

When asked about her parent’s socialization, Participant B commented that "they didn't

exactly have at that time the resources to do the same as her, but they did instill in us like

94
just the importance of like investing our money in things" and overall being responsible

with their money and not to spend it frivolously. Another participant commented:

I learned about savings when from my parents when I was about 13 because I

really wanted to go to a movie, and my parents said well, you'll have to save your

money up for that, and that's when I started learning about how to save my money

(Participant G).

The timing of these interactions ranged from elementary-aged to high school, with

Participant A recalling their mom facilitating exercises around counting coins and having

to be able to recall the coin name and value when they were elementary-aged. However,

most of the interactions appeared to happen during high school. Alternatively, another

participant noted first familial conversations as a teenager, stating that “it was talking

about money was when I first had my debit card when I was around 16 years”

(Participant C).

Participant C had an interesting take on financial socialization, commenting that it

"feels like it there's, there's like some reason why, like people aren't being taught this."

Here the participant implies that there seems to be a reason schools and other institutions

do not teach financial literacy and implies that it is intentional as they believe that with a

better knowledge of money, people would be happier. Those who learned financial topics

in school were often limited to stock simulations. Participant D noted the direct influence

of participation in Junior Achievement; a global nonprofit organization focused on

educating youth about financial literacy, economics, and work readiness topics.

95
Observed influences on money and financial behaviors

Observed influences (implicit) on money and financial behaviors capture all the

observations of participants and how the observed behavior affected their knowledge of

money and financial management. Participants acknowledged observing practices and

behaviors within the home and some observations from external sources such as peers.

“Well, we never really sat down to have a conversation like that but, I was just, I was

watching her [mother], so I already knew." Participant A comments about observing their

mom working more than one job. This observation translated into the participant

prioritizing the idea of working multiple jobs to create wealth. Participant B discusses

observing their grandmother owning various rental properties and how these observations

influenced her beliefs about wealth, commenting:

I was able to kind of go around with her to some of the rental properties that she

has that she's been able to like accumulate, so that was like a big example and like

indicator for me. (Participant B)

The participant continues to discuss indirect influences from their parents, including

examples of savings and investing for their parents in comparison to their grandmother.

Participant H noted that their environment directly influenced some of their desires

around money and savings, commenting:

Oh uh, well, I grew up really poor, and so you're growing up really poor like I

guess anyone who's growing up like you know, in a really bad environment as

probably understands like saving. (Participant H)

Participant F noted some indirect observations from their best friend around their money

management and investing practices, commenting, "...I kind of was like observe what he

does". There were sometimes conflicting observations as one participant noted, "so I

96
guess when it comes to money and like what I saw I guess to sum up, it would just be like

either not spending it well, [or not] not spending it at all” (Participant E). These

observations affected the participant regarding how to interact with money appropriately

and they are learning how to have a balanced relationship with money.

Category 2: Personal engagement in financial practices

One consistent thread throughout the participants’ responses was the engagement

in financial or money management practices. These practices frequently included savings

as their priority and investing as a second practice. These practices were often the result

of the financial knowledge obtained by the participants and connected with exhibited

financial behaviors as listed by the FFST (Gudmunson & Danes, 2011). As mentioned,

savings was one of the top direct socialization topics, so it was also the most observed

financial behavior. Participants B & G noted the use of piggy banks as their first

introduction to saving. In contrast, others mentioned receiving money for special

occasions such as birthdays and wanting to save the money. Each participant had a strong

sense and understanding of the importance of saving as a financial practice, often

emphasized by their parental figures, and that theme surfaced throughout the interviews.

While there was not often direct or explicit socialization around saving, participants

noted many observations and indirect influences around saving from family members.

Money-saving practices

When examining participants' existing practices and financial behaviors, the most

noted practice was saving money. Participant C indicated a heavy emphasis on the

importance of saving within the home and learning how to invest, believing that doing

both will better situate them financially. "…saving money still lingers the thoughts of just

97
putting it in the Bank, but now I am trying to figure out other ways of doing it since I'm

just now learning how little that can actually help oneself in the long term" (Participant

C). In addition to savings practices, budgeting was also a financial practice that

participants mentioned. Participant C referenced employing a 50/20/30 rule for their

budgeting, commenting that "50% put in the bank like 30% into long term solutions like

10% into just weird investments stuff they like to experiment on," and they did not

address the remaining 10% of their budget.

Regarding savings, one participant commented, "so I guess it started then like I

just separated the money and just like watched it grow and I guess I kind of liked that, so

I kept doing it" (Participant D). Participant F noted that “I always had this idea of like

every time I get a check to like put like $200, $300 set aside for it just in case” when

discussing their savings practices. Participant E commented that their savings practice

consists of “50-60% of my paycheck I put in my savings and then about like 60 to 70% of

what my mother sends me I also put in savings.”

Budgeting was mentioned by seven (88%) out of the eight total participants and

was always referenced with savings practices, and it was not identified as a separate

theme.

Engagement in investment practices

Another financial practice participants engaged in was investing money.

Participants noted part of their saving practices was to be able to invest the money saved.

Those participants engaging in investment practices noted that it was something they

were doing on their own or learned about outside of the home. Five (50%) of the

participants (Participants A, B, C, H, and F) mentioned actively participating in

98
investment practices. Of the remaining participants, two (25%) listed investing as a

financial topic they would want to learn more about, and only one participant did not

mention investing. There was a noticeable difference among participants regarding their

understanding and comfortability of investing, with a few of them noting wanting to learn

more. Participant B noted wanting to do more investing in stocks with their savings

commenting that “I want to re-direct the money that I’ve saved to go towards in

investments.” They also mentioned wanting to purchase a house with their parents that

would serve to generate rental income in their college town, along with a Roth IRA

account that their father had created for them. Participant H commented:

I will just scroll through Twitter watching YouTube and I would just be in the

cryptocurrency, and I like investment circles, and I would just try to learn as much

as I could from that (Participant H).

Category 3: Beliefs about money and wealth

This theme addresses perceptions that came up as part of the interviews with

participants. It connects to research question 5, which seeks to understand how Black

college students make meaning of personal financial management and their lived

experience around money. Within this theme were two subthemes: the perceptions of

money for the use and attainment of wealth and perceptions of wealth and the attainment

of wealth.

Perceptions of money

This theme showcased participants' overall thoughts about money and how they

value money. Perceptions about money ranged from working to generate income to the

ideas to multiple sources of income to obtain additional money. When asked about first

99
memories of money and its use, many participants would recall a time during their

elementary school years with instances from getting their first piggybank, as Participant

B mentioned, to receiving money for good grades (Participant E). Participant B

commented about multiple streams of income, noting "I just like having that freedom of it

or just being able to be like oh if I really don't want to, I really didn't want to do whatever

job I'm doing." There were recurring sentiments of multiple streams of income equating

to freedom of choice around a job or career one might want and the freedom to live life

on one's terms. With one participant commenting “I would put that just freedom in a lot

of ways I, as a person I just I don't like being held down to expectations are just different

like societal standards” (Participant B), along with it being a way to hedge against the

risk of losing an income source. Money also came up as a source of security for the entire

family as Participant A commented, "so I learned that like uh, if you don't make a lot of

money, it can affect your family, like down the line." Participant A indicates that the lack

of money can multi-generational affects which is a nod to the idea of the poverty cycle.

Another thing that emerged was motivation about money. Participant H commented, "I

guess like jealousy like some jealousy with other people like seeing other people have

like you know really cool stuff that you want and that you can't afford.”

When discussing the importance of money management, a few comments

connected the importance to family and the ability to have or support the family.

Participant B noted having "to cover someone's tuition back in Nigeria or someone living

situation back in Nigeria.”

100
Participant F commented:

Especially right now, I will have a cousin who is in a situation like her mom’s

homeless she's five. So, I try and move so she can stay with me. I need to be in a

good space, so I can see her but also be in a good space to be mentally in a good

space and financially in a good space so I can like deal with all the situations I’ll

have to deal with being the main guardian and all of that. (Participant F)

Participant B commented that “unfortunately, the world operates off of money and your

ability to kind of just possess it and use it” when discussing the importance of

understanding money.

An additional item noted here was their perception of their financial well-being,

which connects to their ability to manage their money. The definition used for financial

well-being was the participant's ability to meet current and future financial obligations

(Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 2015). Participants were asked to rate their

financial well-being according to the above definition on a scale of 1 to 10. The average

self-assessment was 5.3, indicating that participants' perceived well-being is average.

This discovery is not surprising given that participants are college students, and some are

not entirely responsible for all their expenses. Some participants noted that they do not

have full adult financial responsibility when discussing their well-being. There were

outliers as Participant C rated themselves a 1 out of 10, noting that they were not

financially independent or working full-time. Participant B rated themselves a 9 out of

10, indicating that financial well-being was vital to them as it determines many of the

financial "decisions that I make honestly." All the participants agreed that financial well-

being was essential to them.

101
Perceptions of wealth

Perceptions about wealth were mostly positive but ranged from curiosity to

pessimism around the possibility of personal wealth. First, participants were asked to

define wealth, and the definitions ranged from Participant G stating, "so when I think

about wealth, I guess, I just think about like rich people. And um yeah when I think about

money and just think about like who really has it." Participant B believes that wealth

extends beyond monetary attainment, commenting that "…it doesn't always have to relate

to money per se," implying that being wealthy was a state of mind and a reflection of

overall wellness. Participant D noted that in terms of attaining wealth, "um so my goal in

life is to create a lot of wealth but it's not really like for selfish reasons it's more like

helping the environment, like people around me” indicating that she wants to use her

wealth to help others. Participant G commented, "I remember going to their houses when

I was younger and I just thought they were like these extremely rich people, and that was

just based off the size of their houses." There was even a connection between wealth and

entrepreneurship as Participant D stated: "that's what I like about entrepreneurship but

exploring different ways and like finding different ways to create wealth." The participant

conveyed seeing entrepreneurship as an opportunity to gain wealth as they learned about

entrepreneurship through their participation in Junior Achievement. The participant

implies that being wealthy requires finding multiple ways to generate income. Still, she

notes that entrepreneurship provides the freedom to create wealth and make an impact.

Another topic discussed by participants was generational wealth. One participant

commented:

102
 It's definitely something I would love to obtain especially, you know, with the

whole everyone's talking about generational wealth and things like that now, and

that's something I definitely would love for those coming after me (Participant E).

Category 4: Perceptions of the effects of race on money and wealth

This category attempts to answer research question 5a to understand how race

influences participants' meaning making around personal financial management. In

alignment with CRT, this category assumes that race is a part of the participants' lived

experiences and that race impacts how one views and approaches financial management.

The themes that emerged were the perceived wealth gap based on race and perceived

inequality based on race and are explored below.

Perceived wealth gap based on race

There was a general sense of lack as it related to participants view of wealth

within their families and the Black community at large, in that Blacks had less access to

wealth than their White counterparts. When asked about wealth in their families, all

participants indicated that there was none or that it could be better. They were all aware

of the concept of wealth, but most felt that they were not personally impacted as it was

not available to them within the context of their personal experiences. Participant E noted

that the idea of having wealth personally felt unattainable, commenting that:

if you dug deeper there's probably like those societal factors, you know of like

who you see being wealthy you don't see being wealthy or things like that, but it's

just something that I never thought was actually attainable (Participant E).

103
This quote alludes to the idea that external factors, like systematic racism, create a lack of

representation of wealth among Black people. This lack of representation keeps wealth

feeling unattainable.

Participant A observes the wealth gap commenting "like more black people live in

apartments than houses" connecting housing and wealth attainment. Similarly, another

participant discusses redlining practices as one example of injustices against the Black

community that has affected the ability to own a home and create wealth, noting:

It's like racism has a lot to that a lot of other things like buying a house like

communities like don't want like diversity in certain neighborhoods (Participant

D).

While redlining, or the practice of determining where borrowers of color were

allowed to purchase, is not as prominent today the new issue facing communities of color

is gentrification. Gentrification or redevelopment often displaces people of color out of

their homes to make way for new commercial and residential spaces under the premise of

improving the neighborhood (Taylor, 2019). Participant B expressed pessimism around

minimizing the wealth gap, noting "if the gap between like just white people and black

people will, will ever close per se, just because it's, it's just been so deeply rooted for such

a long time.” Participant H expressed emotions around racial wealth, commenting: “I

guess it was like it was a mixture that it was a mixture of jealousy by looking at the

people who were born into wealth.” Overall, some participants believed that the ability to

be wealthy was unattainable because they did not see examples of wealth in their

communities or neighborhoods (Participant C& B). When comparing the difference in

wealth in the Black versus White community, Participant C stated, “the difference, I like

104
to say is one had more time for it to accumulate generational wise and the other is that

they're actively learning." This participant seems to suggest that the Black community has

not had the same amount of time to create generational wealth and are just now starting to

make strides as a community towards wealth. After, the participant noted the injustices

that prevented the Black community from generating wealth despite earnest attempts. As

mentioned, most participants acknowledge wealth, but several seemed to believe wealth

was outside of their realm of personal attainment and that the injustices have created

greater barriers to the attainment of wealth in the Black community.

Perceived inequality based on race

Several comments from income inequalities to racism and other prejudices

uncovered perceived inequalities based on race. This theme highlights the integration of

CRT into this study by placing race as the focal point of the participants’ experience of

inequities and injustices within the U.S. Participant F notes seeing “that you could

literally have the same as someone and they can get paid more than you." There were also

frustrations noted when thinking about racial inequalities as Participant G commented

that "sometimes, just to know that you know just that, because someone is white that

they'll get more opportunities to have this wealth over me and someone I know,” or “I

just like it just irritates me that some people are in the position that they're in and don't

have to work for it when like everyone, and everyone that most people I know we're all

really, really, really working for what we have” (Participant G). There were even

instances of recognition of a history of racism and Participant E noted that “a perfect

example that I recently learned about I believe it was Tulsa, the…what happened in Tulsa

all those years ago the massacre.” The tenet of CRT where racism is endemic to our

105
society was realized and supported by participants’ experiences. Participant C

commented “there’s still like underlying prejudice and turns of many higher up areas in

terms of accepting Black communities for like wealth growth.” In the interview the

participant expanded stating that the prejudice has gone back several generations and

gave examples of income disparities, access to jobs and homeownership. Participant C

commented: “I am not sure how much of it is done all propaganda to make the situation

seem a whole lot worse than it is” implying that what is often shown about wealth or the

lack thereof in Black communities feels intentional. Participant C seemed to believe that

the differences between wealth of Blacks and Whites was perpetuated. Her quote is in

relation to the systematic injustices that continue to plague the Black community.

Summary

The qualitative findings support that there is financial knowledge, behaviors, and

socialization among Black college students. Participants acknowledge that there are

several areas were additional knowledge of financial topics could exist. This portion of

the study compared the knowledge and socialization of the participants in qualitative

form, but the primary purpose was to understand the lived experiences of these

participants. A better understanding of the lived experiences of the participants and how

they make sense of wealth and money revealed that there is an awareness and strong

desire to obtain both. However, when contextualizing race against their lived experiences,

the possibility of obtaining wealth was often viewed as unobtainable. The quotes above

highlight participants skepticism around personal wealth attainment but also how they

have internalized racism and systematic injustices. Both playing an integral part in their

belief that they too may have wealth one day.

106
 CHAPTER SIX

DISCUSSION

Overview

This study aimed to advance the literature on financial literacy and socialization

within the Black community and explore racial differences in their experience of money

management. Research shows that the racial wealth gap persists despite socioeconomic

status and education (Asante-Muhammed et al., 2017). And while existing research

continues to emphasize that Black people are less financially literate than their White

counterparts, this study took a deeper dive into the literacy of Black college students and

their racialized experiences of money. Danes et al. (1999) noted that teens are entering

adulthood ill-prepared financially. With this information, college students were chosen

for this study because college is an intersection between childhood and adulthood. This

study was an exploratory attempt to understand the existing financial knowledge,

attitudes, capabilities, behaviors, and well-being of Black college students and how they

are socialized around these topics. It also explored the lived experiences of these students

around financial management and how they make meaning of these experiences. The

study was guided by the Family Financial Socialization Theory (FFST) through

quantitative inquiry and Critical Race Theory (CRT) through the examination of the lived

experiences of a subset of these college students by qualitative inquiry. This chapter

examines the connections between the quantitative and qualitative data and discusses the

results and implications of the data. It also presents the study's limitations and

implications for future research. Specifically, this chapter will advise how this research

can inform policy and future research.

107
 Exploratory Findings from the Family Financial Socialization Theory

The quantitative survey utilized the Family Financial Socialization Theory (FFST)

model, and some interview questions assessed the same constructs of the model for

comparison. This section will combine the findings from the quantitative and qualitative

exploration of FFST. Overall, the study's results supported a significant relationship

among the majority pathways of the FFST. There was no strong connection between

pathways B and H, representing demographic information and purposive financial

socialization (Pathway B), and between financial behaviors and financial well-being

(Pathway H). There is more work to be done to the model to improve the fit, as

previously mentioned. The FFST constructs studied as part of the research are financial

knowledge, attitudes and capabilities, socialization, financial behaviors, and financial

well-being. The CSFL survey itself is not culturally responsive, which is one of the

reasons these same concepts were explored through qualitative inquiry using a CRT lens.

Financial knowledge

While financial literacy and knowledge are often used interchangeably, for this study,

financial literacy is defined as one's ability to use financial knowledge to make financial

decisions (Britt et al., 2015). Murphy's (2005) study of college students at a

predominantly Black institution noted that the level of financial literacy was at about

30% versus 48% of the current study. Although the knowledge of this study is higher

than Murphy's average, the findings of this study identify there is still room for

improvement in financial literacy as defined by the CSFLS among Black college

students. Existing research suggests that African Americans are not as financially literate

as their White counterparts (Hudson et al., 2017). Bahrani and Weathers (2019) research

108
revealed literacy scores of Black Americans to be 9-16% lower than Whites. And while

this study did not seek to compare the financial knowledge of Blacks versus Whites, the

results from the quantitative data would appear to support that there is undoubtedly a lack

of financial knowledge among Black college students according to existing survey scales.

This finding is supported by previous literature in Chapter 2, which concluded that

college students' financial knowledge is inadequate across racial lines (Chen & Volpe,

1998).

This study's results noted that objective financial knowledge from the survey was

slightly below average at 48% out of 100%. Participants' subjective knowledge was three

out of ten from the interviews, which is lower than the average subjective financial

knowledge survey, where 34% rated themselves as average or above. Also important was

the difference between the respondent's self-identified or subjective financial knowledge,

and the assessed objective financial knowledge, as it shows that participants were less

confident about their financial knowledge. Of the respondents, 67% ranked themselves as

low or very low in their financial knowledge. In contrast, the mean financial knowledge

score was 48%, suggesting that the respondents' financial knowledge is slightly below

average. These findings oppose the Prudential Financial (2015) report, which noted that

self-reported financial knowledge among Black people was high. This lack of self-

efficacy around financial knowledge could be a point of future exploration. Research has

shown that women typically have lower self-efficacy around money (Fulk & White,

2018). While this study did not explore gender differences, most respondents, over 80%,

were female. However, prior research (Murphy, 2005; Jorgensen, 2007) has shown that

109
gender was not a significant factor in financial knowledge, and the quantitative results of

this study support that finding.

In the interviews, it was clear that participants were often very well socialized around

financial topics of saving and budgeting. This finding supported the quantitative results

where respondents were asked to indicate what topics they learned at home. The top two

responses were savings and budgeting, with over 60% of respondents indicating they

learned about both. Prudential Financial (2015) also found that African Americans often

focus more on saving than investing. Interview results supported this finding, as

participants often noted a lack of knowledge or socialization about investing and credit.

Several participants wished they knew more about credit, loans, and investing in the

stock market (e.g., Participants A, C, E).

Financial attitudes/capabilities

Financial attitudes and capabilities were explicitly explored in the quantitative survey.

The results from that data indicate that respondents overall had a positive attitude around

financial knowledge and their financial capability, which is notable as it dispels existing

misconceptions and is an essential input into financial behaviors and well-being. Within

the qualitative interviews, questions about the participants' attitudes were asked, although

capabilities were not explicitly assessed. The qualitative theme around perceptions and

beliefs about money relates to and can inform their financial attitudes and capabilities in

that it incorporates their attitudes towards money which was largely positive. All

participants indicated that money and money management are integral to them, and they

see it as important in their daily lives. Baity (2020) noted that respondents' attitudes were

110
typically at the midpoint, which aligns with the mean score of 3.34 for financial attitudes

and capabilities of this study.

From the qualitative inquiry, what mostly aligned with the financial attitudes variable

was the exploration of the participant's beliefs about money and what comes to mind

when they often think about money. Each participant approached answering the question

with interest and openness and appeared to enjoy speaking about the subject. At no point

did any participant appear visibly uncomfortable in expressing their thoughts about

money or wealth. Participant B noted that learning about money early on sparked her

curiosity in the subject and made her want to learn more. One additional concept from the

interviews was that money was often a very private matter. And while the participants

would receive guidance at home, most of their socialization around money matters was

through observations. This finding led to some gender-related beliefs about money

management and how pride was a source of conflict for males. Fulk and White (2018)

found that 43% of Black students versus 32% of White college students rarely discussed

money in their households. As mentioned, capabilities were not explicitly assessed;

however, participants expressed strong capability around saving money as this was a

topic all participants were comfortable with executing. Another question asked

participants about personal financial struggles; only two participants (G and H) indicated

that they struggled with money management. The remaining participants indicated

feeling capable in their current money management practices but indicated room for

improvement in their financial situation, mostly around additional income generation

post-college.

111
Financial Socialization

The financial socialization of participants was explored both through the survey and

interviews. According to the survey, respondents expressed strong relationships with their

families, which positively impacts the family financial socialization according to the

FFST model. The results supported most of the model's assumptions, including the

importance of family interactions and relationships on purposive financial education

(PFE), which is the deliberate and explicit financial socialization by parental figures to

their children. It also supported that PFE impacts the participants' financial knowledge,

attitudes, and capabilities (FAKC). Results showed a positive correlation between PFE

and FAKC, supporting the construct's positive effect. Within the survey itself, family

closeness was assessed and how often respondents discussed specific financial topics

within their homes. The results of the frequency statistic for this question are shown in

Table 4. As expected, the most frequently expressed socialization method was from

family members. Research supports this finding, stating that children learn through

observation, purposive instruction, and practice, influencing their beliefs and attitudes

about money (Danes, 1994). The school was second when asked in interviews about

other modes that participants think are most useful for socialization. These findings

support Fulk and White's (2018) study, which indicated that parents were of most

significance to participants' financial socialization. A few participants even noted their

peers as ways in which they have learned about money management, which may connect

to school socialization as multiple participants (e.g., Participants A, B, E) noted learning

some basic concepts in school. Those that learned from peers indicated that these were

friends from school.

112
 Question 58 of the financial socialization section asked respondents to identify how

much they learned about money from various sources. The highest response among

interpersonal connections was by parents, with about 75% of respondents indicating they

have learned from their parents. The next most crucial mode of socialization among

respondents was via media and the internet at 65% and 77%, respectively. The use of

social media and the internet is not surprising. Jorgensen (2007) notes prior research

suggests that the media often socialize children that parents bring into the home or expose

them to television, radio, internet, etc. These results support the idea that social learning

is an essential instructional method (Gutter et al., 2009).

The question from the interviews that most addresses financial socialization was

question 10. This question prompted participants to identify the most influential way they

learned about money management. Hudson et al.'s (2017) study of primary and secondary

data sources identified that primary socialization agents were parents, noting the second

agent being life experiences, which was fully supported by the findings of this study.

About 50% of the participants indicated that learning from their family was the most

influential way they learned about money, supporting the quantitative findings. However,

38% of the participants indicated trial and error, making it the second most influential

way participants learned about money.

From the interviews, one subtheme that emerged was that some participants did not

have open conversations with their parents about their parents' actual financial situation.

Many participants noted not being fully aware of their parents' or guardians' financials

and never speaking explicitly about their money. Participant D commented that "my

father is not really known to like share stuff like that with me." Some participants (e.g.,

113
C, D, G) noted that while their parents would discuss or model certain financial concepts

such as saving, they were never told explicitly about their parent's financial situation. One

participant noted that "I didn't really see I don't really my parents aren't to[o] open about

our financial situations like I don't get to see a whole lot of it" (Participant G). Most

respondents could only make assumptions about their family's financial status based on

living arrangements and experiences. Participant A commented, "yeah…I grew up in

Section 8 housing, so there was like a time, like…where we would get these late notices

mailed to our houses," indicating that they made conclusions about the family's financial

situation based on observations of their housing challenges and need to move frequently.

Financial behaviors

In the participants ' interviews, saving and budgeting were the most exhibited

financial behaviors. Investing was one topic in which some participants engaged, but

most of the participants had not participated in investing activities. The quantitative

results supported the marginal engagement in financial behaviors as respondents had a

mean financial behavior score of 2.77 out of 5. Jorgensen (2007) noted a positive

correlation between financial knowledge and attitudes on financial behaviors. This

finding was corroborated with the results of this study, as FAKC was shown to have the

most significant positive effect on financial behaviors (.377). Based on the survey, the

most frequent financial behaviors exhibited were budgeting, tracking spending, and

contributing to a savings account. This finding was further supported through qualitative

inquiry, where most participants noted participating in savings and investing practices,

with 88% participating in savings. Budgeting also came up but was often associated with

savings practices.

114
 However, when asked about contributing to an investment account, only 29%

indicated doing so via the survey. The qualitative findings corroborated the lack of

engagement in investing activities, as only 38% indicated engagement in investing. These

results are not surprising as savings and budgeting are often heavily stressed in

households of color. Hudson et al. (2017) found that among African American

respondents, 17.1% noted exposure to the topic of investing as opposed to 46.9% that

reported exposure to budgeting. Investing is often an area in which many participants

lack experience, given the lack of disposable income to invest in the stock market and

limited to no understanding of stocks (Hamilton & Darity, 2017). The barriers to entry for

investing have lessened with apps such as Robinhood, which allows anyone to invest as

little as needed. One participant noted: "What I do is, I check on my stock and I put $1 in

more" (Participant A). The three participants who noted investing did so via an

application, while one noted interest in investing in rental real estate with their family.

Those students who mentioned saving and budgeting noted learning about these concepts

from their parents, suggesting a correlation between family financial socialization and

financial behaviors even though the quantitative analysis did not show a clear connection

between the two variables.

Financial well-being

The quantitative and qualitative inquiries both assessed financial well-being. One

question from the survey assessed the participants' financial well-being, and 65%

identified with the statement that their finances are a source of worry for them. This

supported the results from the interviews, as the mean financial well-being score was 5.4

out of 10, which would indicate that many participants see their financial well-being as

115
average at best—only three out of the eight interview participants (38%) rated themselves

a seven or higher. Most of the responses from participants indicated that their rating for

financial well-being was attributed mainly to the fact that they are not 100% financially

independent as college students. It would be interesting to see how this score might

change after the same individuals have worked for a few years. These results are like the

findings of Baity's (2020) study, also of Black individuals, as she found that participants'

financial well-being was slightly below the middle point, suggesting a less than average

financial well-being. Financial well-being among Black individuals has been represented

as low due to the correlation between financial literacy and financial well-being.

Financial well-being had the most significant correlation with the FAKC construct,

supported by the FFST theory. Financial attitudes, knowledge, and capabilities were the

respondents' strongest predictors of financial well-being. At the same time, there was a

negative association between financial well-being and financial behaviors, which

indicates that financial behaviors are not a predictor of financial well-being.

Summary of FFST Findings

Overall, the analysis of the FFST model showed some positive results related to the

respondents' financial attitudes, knowledge, capabilities, and financial behaviors. The

findings supported most of the model assumptions, including the relationship between

FIR, PFE, FAKC, and FinBeh. There was no strong correlation between demographic

variables and PFE or purposive financial socialization. This finding was in line with

Jorgensen's (2007) study, which found no differences in financial knowledge based on

the same demographic factors. Still, he noted surprise that household income levels did

not affect financial knowledge. He suggests that those of lower-income households

116
potentially have learned to be more frugal (Jorgensen, 2007). This finding may align with

the participants' results and would explain why saving is an amplified financial behavior

in Black households. That is, there was a clear connection between the family

interactions and relationships (FIR) and purposive financial education (PFE). The results

did not strongly support pathway B, which is the relationship between demographics and

PFE, as most demographic variables did not have a strong correlation to PFE. The only

demographic variable that had a direct relationship with PFE was household income, as

there was a positive correlation between the two. The results indicated limited effects of

the demographic information on financial socialization or family interactions and

relationships (FIR). As mentioned, gender, nor educational attainment, had a solid

relationship to the other constructs. This finding aligns with prior research as Murphy

(2020) noted that while there have been historical differences in gender and financial

knowledge, gender was still not a significant variable in determining socialization.

However, there was a strong positive connection between household income to FIR,

which is supported by prior research (Watkins, 2018). One explanation for this finding

could be that with higher household income, there is an improvement in family

interaction and relationships, which suggests that with less financial strain, parents have

more time to spend with and socialize with their children.

Discussion of Themes from Qualitative Inquiry & CRT

Overall, the following eight themes emerged from the inductive analysis process:

direct influences on the knowledge of money, observed influences on money and

financial behaviors, money-saving practices, engagement in investment practices,

perceptions of money, perceptions of wealth, perceived wealth gap based on race, and

117
perceived inequality based on race. These themes were later combined into what could be

considered four categories based on the nature of the themes. The first two categories,

perceptions of their financial knowledge and personal engagement in financial practices,

were discussed above as part of the FFST analysis of financial knowledge and financial

behaviors. The last two categories, (1) beliefs about money and wealth and (2)

perceptions of the effects of race on money and wealth, were connected to CRT. Both

categories align on racism as endemic and race as a social construct that would affect the

experiences and thus the perceptions of the participants. It also captures the varying

perceptions of participants promoting anti-essentialism. These categories include the

perceptions of money, perceptions of wealth, perceived wealth gap on race, and

perceived inequality based on race and are discussed in the categories below.

Category 3: Beliefs about money and wealth

Participants' perceptions about money and wealth were largely positive as they were

comfortable discussing the topics. Many expressed their desire to have wealth and the

importance of money and wealth towards financial freedom. Comments around multiple

sources of income surfaced in the interviews, and participants often connected it to

generating wealth.

Generational wealth is also another term that emerged from the qualitative inquiry.

Many participants noted the importance of generational wealth and how those before

them were not necessarily able to transfer wealth to them but are thinking of ways to

ensure they can transfer wealth to their future families. This idea did not differ based on

household income or SES background. Participant A defined it as leaving something of

value behind and noted, "[I] want to be able to give my kids something." These

118
perceptions are in direct contrast with the implications of the deficit theory. Gorski

(2008) discusses the constant portrayal of the poor as being due to a lack of intellect or

desire to make sound decisions which is the exact stereotype that this study sought to

disprove, grounding the work in the anti-essentialism tenet of CRT. Hudson et al. (2017)

also noted that several studies reinforce the disadvantage of the economic well-being of

the Black community and that few implicate a positive future. This representation

directly connects to racial capitalism as it benefits those in power to represent others as

powerless (Leong, 2013; Robinson, 2019). However, Participant C noted very eloquently

that there is a desire to portray the Black community this way and a deliberate attempt not

to show representations of wealth within the Black community. This points to

stereotyping and essentialism which this study dispels using CRT. Much of the existing

literature and rhetoric would have one believe that Black families are not socializing their

children around money and that these families do not prioritize the importance of money

management, which is not aligned with the findings of this study despite participants

being of varying SES backgrounds. This study aligns with prior research, which suggests

that the wealth gap is not reflective of individual issues but systematic issues such as

racism (Glaude, 2016; Shapiro, 2005). As mentioned, there is a lack of recognition of the

debt due to the Black community due to systematic racism. Ladson-Billings (2006) refers

to the idea of debt versus a gap when discussing the differences in achievement and this

concept also applies to the wealth gap as there are resources that have been a lack of

resources invested in the Black community, which and the deficit has led to an increase in

gaps among the Black community versus the White community. Each interview

participant strongly believed in the importance of financial knowledge and managing

119
their money. One participant even noted that their father started Roth IRAs for them and

their siblings. They mostly noted the importance of these topics when thinking of family

planning and the comfortability and freedom that financial security offers. This finding

would lead to the need to examine the wealth gap beyond socialization and acknowledge

the impact of racism and race as a social construct on Black people's experiences. It

continues to stifle the economic mobility of the Black community, thus reinforcing the

growing wealth gap. However, there is still a stigma around talking about money.

Participant C noted that "it's still not fully socially acceptable to really talk about money

so openly," which impacts the community's ability to share knowledge and improve

collective literacy.

Category 4: Perceptions of the effects of race on money and wealth

This study was grounded in understanding how financial education might aid in the

minimization of the racial wealth gap. The wealth gap is again defined as the unequal

distribution of wealth and assets among residents in the U.S. (Asante-Muhammed et al.,

2017). Participants' perceptions about the wealth gap and inequalities were examined

during the interviews, and many noted seeing wealth gaps, explicitly identifying the

differences in majority Black versus majority-White neighborhoods. Multiple participants

mentioned realizing wealth differences between the Black and White communities

because there were often well-kept houses and neighborhoods in the White communities.

Participant B commented on this contrast in neighborhoods noting that "things would

change right when you cross that line, the road start[s] getting bumpy you know how [it

starts] looking kind of different and more rundown." They were contrasting this to their

experiences of seeing fewer homes and more apartments, and these houses and

120
complexes not being as well kept in the Black community (Participants A & B). This

difference in wealth is rooted in the racial wealth gap and discriminatory practices, such

as redlining, which created 'ghettos' and essentially segregated communities of color and

ensured that funding would be difficult for these neighborhoods (Taylor, 2019). As

previously mentioned, Bates and Triplett (2014) reported that almost half of Black

Americans anticipated enduring race-related discrimination in the home lending process.

These practices result from racial capitalism, where lending companies benefit from

exploiting neighborhoods of color (Robinson, 2019). Murphy Gray (2020) notes that

income, homeownership, and education are critical to long-term wealth generation. Her

study purports racial segregation in America's largest cities, resulting in unequal

resources for households of color, further perpetuating the racial wealth gap (Murphy

Gray, 2020).

The participants acknowledged the racial wealth gap, and some believed it to be

something that would always exist for them, which is a nod to the first tenet of CRT that

acknowledges racism as normal in America and is deeply woven in America's cloth

(Ladson-Billings, 1998). "I don't know if we will If the gap between like just White

people and Black people will ever close per se, just because it's, it's just been so deeply

rooted for such a long time" (Participant B). Statements like this are why research needs

to acknowledge systematic racism, as education alone cannot address these challenges

and barriers. The dismantling of racist practices and systems is the only way real change

will happen related to wealth generation within the Black community.

One participant noted there are many national stories where the Black community has

tried to make advancements in wealth and independence to only be destroyed by external

121
means (Participant C). One notable example of this was the Tulsa massacre, where an

entire Black neighborhood, also known as Black Wall Street, was destroyed, which

Participant E noted. These homes and businesses burned down during the Tulsa massacre

of 1921 (Darity et al., 2018). Things like housing instability were also discussed, which is

one of the main ways to generate wealth. Still, the Black community has experienced

housing discrimination for years, from the inability to own homes to redlining and

predatory lending practices (Baradaran, 2017). One participant mentioned that they knew

more Black people living in apartments than White people living in houses (Participant,

A). "You know, with the way you know capitalism and whatnot like a huge part of our

world is money" (Participant E). While the participant notes the existence of financial

capitalism, this is also a nod to the effects of racial capitalism that Leong (2013)

discusses, where race and the power assigned to 'Whiteness' have become capital itself

and create disadvantages for anyone not White. This is the intersection of our nation's

economic structure and the inevitable history of racism and atrocities against any

nonwhites in our society.

Summary of Qualitative Inquiry

The main goal of the qualitative interviews was to explore the meaning-making of the

personal finance of the participants. Therefore, their financial knowledge, behaviors, and

socialization were also explored. Race, as related to meaning-making, was explored

concerning the participants' perceptions of wealth and money management. Results

showed that participants saw and felt that race affected wealth, often noting racial

differences in perceived wealth. Participants often recognized and exhibited an

understanding of wealth and its importance. However, they lacked to acknowledge

122
wealth as something within their reach in terms of attainment. The lack of representation

could be why participants do not see wealth as something personally attainable, as many

noted not seeing examples of wealth in their homes or communities. Participant C stated

that it almost feels intentional that Black people are represented as less than opposed to

their White counterparts regarding wealth and other things. This statement alludes to the

systematic injustices that keep the Black community from advancing, which is precisely

how racial capitalism continues to inhibit progress toward true racial equity.

Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Research

The research within this study can be used by policymakers, financial planners,

educators, and financial literacy researchers who use education as an intervention for the

wealth gap. The research of this study is particularly timely as financial literacy within

schools has become a popular topic. In 2021, 38 of the 50 states in the U.S. have some

financial literacy legislation enacted (Morton, 2021). Research showed that high school

students with a state financial literacy requirement were almost twice as likely to have

learned financial literacy concepts than students without the mandate (Kasman et al.,

2018).

Implications for Practice

This study is well-timed as the new bill requiring a financial literacy course as a

requirement for high school graduation in Florida was recently passed. In March 2022,

Governor DeSantis signed into effect Senate Bill 1054, titled the Dorothy L. Hukill

Financial Literacy Act, which requires high school students to take a financial literacy

course for graduation. The passing of this bill emphasizes that a school is a good place

for one to learn foundational concepts regarding money. However, the bill only requires a

123
student to have one semester of financial education before high school graduation.

Existing research supports that one semester is not enough time to affect financial

behaviors. In their study, Mandell and Klein (2009) found that students who took a high

school course were no more financially literate than those who did not take the course,

noting that the duration of the intervention should be extended. It should also be noted

that all participants believed that learning about money as early as possible would have

been helpful. Participant A believed that financial literacy should be introduced earlier

than high school, noting that she would be better off financially if she had learned about

money management earlier. Experiential learning was also mentioned and seems like the

most desired form of instruction supported by literature (Mandell & Klein, 2009). It is not

just enough to offer financial knowledge; there needs to be a real investment in the

curriculum. Otherwise, the efforts will fall short.

The curriculum must be culturally relevant for students to understand the concepts

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). "Critical race theory sees the official school curriculum as a

culturally specific artifact designed to maintain a White supremacist master script"

(Ladson-Billings, 1998, p. 18). Participant C noted that "school itself is very strange in

terms of like getting stuff curriculum wise because it always feels like it's very shallow

and not many teachers get an opportunity to go in-depth about various topics." This

observation should be considered when schools implement financial literacy mandates

and develop curricula that will deviate from the existing curriculum to promote inclusion

and equity. Educators must prioritize the importance of different learning styles, as it is

the only way sustainable change will be accomplished (Capper, 2015). Research supports

that a culturally responsive curriculum could increase the effectiveness of financial

124
education (Hudson et al., 2017). Participants also noted interactive instructional methods

as most effective for those socialized at school, which should be considered when

thinking of instructional methods. Given the lack of research tools and financial curricula

that is culturally responsive, this is a vast area of opportunity for educators and

curriculum designers to implement.

In addition to implementation, interview participants noted several financial concepts

that they would want to learn. The most mentioned financial concept that participants

expressed wanting to learn more about was taxes. It was mentioned among five of the

participants as an additional financial concept that they would want to learn. Participant

G commented: "I would love for there to be some sort of actual financial literacy class in

high school but is required for students to take because I still really don't know how to

file taxes." While most participants expressed some knowledge of investing, learning

more about investing was the second most mentioned financial concept with three (38%)

out of the eight participants. Chen and Volpe (1998) also noted that students often have

less experience and knowledge of investment topics. As a result, high schools should

consider a curriculum that teaches some basics of financial management, including

budgeting, investing, and credit (Mandell, 2008).

Two participants wanted to learn more about the financial implications of obtaining

housing. This included wanting to know about purchasing a home, as cited by Participant

A and E, and securing an apartment, as mentioned by Participant F. Participant A

expressed an interest in learning more about the loan process for purchasing a home,

commenting: "I want to learn more about mortgages like purchasing houses." Additional

topics ranged from learning more about budgeting to the banking system and

125
understanding credit. These findings can inform community-based programs, such as

Junior Achievement and public programs offered by local cities and community

redevelopment agencies. It could also inform employer-based resources for employees

that want to offer financial literacy training for their employees. There is a need for more

community-based resources as most of the training provided by banks is geared to selling

their products or those looking to purchase homes, often excluding individuals looking to

improve their financial situation.

Implications for Policy

This research is important for policymakers as state and federal standards and

requirements for financial education could increase literacy and improve financial well-

being (Kasman et al., 2018). Policymakers should consider implementing financial

literacy into lessons as early as elementary school. The results support existing literature

(Gudmunson & Danes, 2011; Fulk & White, 2018; Watkins, 2018) and the effect

financial socialization has on financial well-being and positive behaviors. All interview

participants agreed that this is important information and would have wanted to start

learning concepts around financial management earlier, which has implications for

schools. Bosshardt and Walstad (2014) suggest that topics such as earning money,

purchasing, and saving are topics that should be taught at the fourth-grade level.

This research is critical for policymakers who want to minimize the racial wealth gap

through financial literacy education (Bahrani & Weathers, 2019). "CRT argues that

inequality in school funding is a function of institutional and structural racism" (Ladson-

Billings, 1998, p. 20). Therefore, policymakers should consider funding more programs

to provide free financial education for Black communities. Although, financial education

126
has shown to have a more significant effect on Whites than on Blacks, and as a result, the

curriculum of financial education should be considered (Bahrani & Patel, 2018). Because

of this differential, "policymakers should examine the content of their financial literacy

programs and the sources of financial literacy education to identify if there is a systemic

bias in the provision of financial literacy education" (Bahrani & Patel, 2018, p. 23).

Ensuring that free financial education is provided to the Black community helps protect

against systematic biases. Having mandates and standards around financial literacy

curricula will also help ensure the intervention's consistency and effectiveness. As

mentioned, the State of Florida has recently passed a financial literacy mandate for

incoming first-year students, and the results of this study could have implications for

implementing that mandate.

Policymakers should also consider requiring public colleges and institutions of higher

education to require some type of financial literacy course, specifically as part of first-

year orientation. This is often the first time many students have had financial

responsibilities (Chen & Volpe, 1999). Many students go off to school either with student

loans or access to their first credit card. Murphy (2005) suggests that colleges could

require credit card companies that solicit on-campuses to provide financial education

resources. With the ever-increasing student loan debt, which Murphy Gray (2020) noted,

there is over $1trillion of student loan debt in the U.S. The rising debt makes it

imperative that students understand what they sign up for when they take out student

loans, and this is where policymakers could make a difference. Researchers have

suggested that Black and Latinx students are 2x more likely to take out student loans than

their White counterparts to attend college, which is also related to financial distress

127
(Murphy Gray, 2020). With the consequential effects financial education has on financial

literacy; there is a consensus that financial literacy is improved with access to financial

education (Bahrani & Weathers, 2019). Prior research, such as Skimmyhorn (2016),

supports a positive effect of financial education on financial behaviors. This assumption

is supported by this study's findings that the FAKC construct positively affected financial

behaviors. Also, when interviewing the participants, those who noted having access to

formal financial education, such as a webinar, class, or workshop, tended to engage in

more positive financial behaviors, such as savings and budgeting.

Future Research

Replications of this study should increase their sample size would be necessary for

running the FFST model and SEM analysis. With SEM analysis, larger sample sizes,

typically over 200, are better (Wolf et al., 2013), and given the constructs of the FFST

model, the model fit would likely perform better with 200+ responses. The larger sample

size would ultimately increase the model fit and strengthen the quantitative results. For

the qualitative phase of the study, additional interviews could also be conducted to

increase the sample size, along with follow-up interviews or observations to explore the

lived experience of the participants further.

Also, future focus on the gender distribution of this study is warranted to see if there

are significant differences based on gender, as this study had a disproportionate number

of female participants to males. Also, gender differences in wealth generation and money

management were a topic that came out of the qualitative data. This finding aligned with

the CRT tenet of intersectionality, which acknowledges that race and sex are both

individual factors often at play and affect experiences and should not be examined

128
independently (Ladson-Billings, 2015). Given that most of the respondents were female

when examining wealth differences, many of them noted gender differences as they

related to pay. There were differences between mother and father educational attainment

where graduate attainment for fathers was 19.9% versus 26% for mothers, and the

attainment of bachelor's degrees was also higher for mothers. There may be some

correlation between the educational attainment of males to females that could be explored

in future research. These items were not further explored due to the limited scope of this

research. Still, it is an area for future research especially given the national gender

changes in the workforce, as a recent job report indicates women hold more jobs than

men (Kelly, 2021). This is important as this shift in the gender workforce has real

implications on future wealth if inequalities are unaddressed.

Also, it might be helpful to explore students in secondary education or older adults

with varying educational attainment and backgrounds to see if that makes a difference in

the reported financial knowledge. This is important as more life experiences could lead to

better financial knowledge, and research supports that this knowledge often increases

with the age of individuals (Chen & Volpe, 1998). The examination of self-efficacy and

how that affects financial behaviors, attitudes, and capabilities in this study did not

address this issue.

Limitations

There are limitations to this exploratory study. One limitation was related to the

primary data collection, and as a result, this affected the sample size for the quantitative

phase of the study. As mentioned in the results chapter, there were some limitations to

this study's SEM model fit tests due to the sample size. While the model fit test results

129
met the designated criteria on one test, they were below the general CFI threshold.

However, there is support stating that while this is not an excellent fit, it is only slightly

less than good and is acceptable (Kim et al., 2016).

There were also two fundamental tenets to the FFST model, subjective financial

knowledge and family interactions and relationships, which were not reflected in the

original CSFLS. The survey was modified to add these questions. The survey tool used is

a preexisting survey with nonculturally responsive questions. There is a threat to the

validity of these results, given that the entire sample were individuals who identified

racially as Black. Although these questions were tested by the original creators and found

reliable, there could have been effects on the results based on the modified survey tool.

Additional limitations to this study include the participants only being college

students, which may impact and influence the results, especially financial knowledge and

well-being. Future researchers may want to study the differences of both variables among

different age groups and educational levels. Baity (2020) noted that there was merit to

having participants from varying academic backgrounds.

In his study, Jorgensen (2007) noted that there were limitations due to the study being

conducted online and the data being collected at one point. There were also no

observations of the participants in their day-to-day lives, so the results of this study rely

on the participants' self-reporting, and research has noted that this can result in inaccurate

reporting (Creswell & Clark, 2017). Thus, generalizations should be limited to the

population and sample of the study alone.

130
 Conclusion

Despite the limitations noted earlier, this study adds to the literature as it combines

quantitative findings of the FFST and qualitative findings, which were grounded in CRT.

It is also one of the first studies to use a mixed-method approach, with the frameworks

above, to understand the Black lived experience of money management. It also explored

the effects of race, both explicit and implicit, acknowledging the history and effects of

institutional racism on this population and how the intersection of money, wealth, and

race influences their experiences. While the Baity (2020) study, to the researcher's

knowledge, is the first to explore FFST theory through a CRT lens, it does so solely

through quantitative exploration and only focuses on two of the five tenets.

"Inattentiveness to cultural issues in assessment often ends up pathologizing Black

families, which likely does more harm than good" (Baity, 2020, p. 54). The Baity (2020)

study included age ranges from 22 to 42, examining those who are younger working

professionals, whereas this study examines college students exclusively. This study adds

to the literature by examining younger Black individuals who are still learning and

looking at college students and those in higher education institutions. Along the lines of

CRT work, this study expounds on Baity's study. In addition to acknowledging racism as

endemic and race as a social construct, this study also focuses on counter-narratives and

anti-essentialism principles. As Murphy (2005) surmised, there is a lack of Black college

students represented in existing financial literacy studies, and this study expands the

literature on this point. But improving the financial literacy of Black students requires the

collaborative efforts of individuals, families, educators, and policy makers (Amoah,

2016; Austin & Arnott-Hill, 2014).

131
 At the same time, this study expounds upon the normative assessment tool to hear

from the participants amplifying their race and how it affects their lived experience. This

was done using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). This qualitative inquiry

was used to give the participants agency and further explore their lived experience, the

intersectionality of financial knowledge, and the effects of race on their experience

(Alase, 2017). The questions specifically examined their perceptions of race related to

money and wealth. It also examined the difference in results from the quantitative survey

versus the qualitative questionnaire. The findings uncovered additional knowledge about

money and wealth that was not assessed in the survey, such as generational wealth and

multiple streams of income. These findings would imply that at least existing survey tools

are not a complete representation of an individual's financial knowledge, especially of

Black college students. More qualitative research is needed in financial literacy and

education to truly understand the knowledge of marginalized communities as the existing

normative written tools do not account for varying cultural experiences. Therefore, they

will never fully capture the knowledge of individuals in the Black community. Also, the

existing scales used to assess financial literacy do not fully account for a person's

financial acumen and practices. The findings from the qualitative section of this study

support that there is often additional knowledge not assessed in these surveys. Given that

there is no one definition of financial literacy, there is no consistency among existing

scales, leading to inconsistent data that should not be generalized, especially to

populations of color (Baity, 2020).

This study refuses to ignore the effects of racism on the lived experiences of Black

people and therefore allows for a better understanding of their financial experience. This

132
research also centers on one of the main tenets of CRT, which is that racism is endemic to

this country, and there is no way to understand any lived experience of a marginalized

group without exploring how race and racism intersect with that experience (Ladson-

Billings, 2015). While we have a long way to go, there have been some strides towards

progress, and Participant E said it best when asked about wealth in the Black community

"I do think a lot of people are making them, taking the steps and making the moves to get

there."

133
 REFERENCES

Alase, A. (2017). The interpretative phenomenological analysis (interpretative

phenomenological analysis): A guide to a good qualitative research approach.
International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 5(2), 9–19.
[Link]

Al-Bahrani, A., Weathers, J., & Patel, D. (2019). Racial differences in the returns to
financial literacy education. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 53(2), 572–599.
[Link]

Amoah, R. A. (2016). Assessing the level and impact of financial literacy on African
Americans [Doctoral Dissertation, Walden University] Scholar Works.
[Link]
ations

Asante-Muhammad, D., Collins, C., Hoxie, J., & Nieves, E. (2017). The road to zero
wealth. Institute for Policy Studies. [Link]

Austin, P., & Arnott-Hill, E. (2014). Financial Literacy Interventions: Evaluating the
Impact and Scope of Financial Literacy Programs on Savings, Retirement, and
Investment. The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies, 39(3), 290.

Baity, C. (2020). Family Financial Socialization in Black Families: An Exploratory Study

[Doctoral Dissertation, Florida State University] ProQuest.

Baradaran, M. (2017). The color of money: Black banks and the racial wealth gap. The
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Bates, L. K. and Triplett, S. (2014). Getting your house in order: A model for African
American financial education (Paper 82). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty
Publications and Presentations. [Link]

Bazeley, P. (2007). Integrating data analyses in mixed methods research. Journal of

Mixed Methods Research, 3(3), 203-207.
[Link]

Blanco, L.R., Ponce, M., Gongora, A., Duru, O.K. (2015). A qualitative analysis of the
use of financial services and saving behavior among older African Americans and
Latinos in the Los Angeles area. SAGE Open, 5(1), 1-14.
[Link]

Bosshardt, W., & Walstad, W. B. (2014). National standards for financial literacy:
Rationale and content. Journal of Economic Education, 45(1), 63–70.
[Link]

134
Britt, S. L., Canale, A., Fernatt, F., Stutz, K., & Tibbetts, R. (2015). Financial stress and
financial counseling: Helping college students. Journal of Financial Counseling
and Planning, 26(2), 172–186. [Link]

Brown, D. L. (2008). African American resiliency: Examining racial socialization and

social support as protective factors. Journal of Black Psychology, 34(1), 32–48.
[Link]

Capper, C. A. (2015). The 20th-year anniversary of critical race theory in education.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(5), 791–833.
[Link]

Chamber, U. S. (2015). A guide to young professionals programs developed for and with
the support of local chambers of commerce. [Link]
content/uploads/2015/08/YPProgramHow_USCC.pdf

Compton-Lilly, C. (2003). Reading families: The literate lives of urban children.

Teachers College Press.

Constance-Huggins, M. (2012). Critical race theory in social work education: A

framework for addressing racial disparities. Critical Social Work, 13(2), 1-16.
[Link]

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. (2015, January). Financial well-being: The goal
of Financial Education. Retrieved January 4, 2022, from
[Link]

Covarrubias, A. (2011). Quantitative intersectionality: A critical race analysis of the

Chicana/o educational pipeline. Journal of Latinos and Education, 10(2), 86–105.
[Link]

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V.L.P (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research (3rd digital ed). SAGE Publications.

Cude, B., Lawrence, F., Lyons, A., Metzger, K., LeJeune, E., Marks, L., & Machtmes, K.
(2006). College students and financial literacy: What they know and what we
need to learn. Paper presented at the Eastern Family Economics and Resource
Management Association Conference, USA.
[Link]

Danes, S. M., Huddleson-Casas, C. & Boyce, L. (1999). Financial planning curriculum

for teens: Impact evaluation. Financial Counseling & Planning, 10(1), 26-39.
[Link]
ulum_for_Teens_Impact_Evaluation

135
Darity, W., Hamilton, D., Paul, M., Aja, A., Price, A., Moore, A., & Chiopris, C. (2018).
What we get wrong about closing the racial wealth gap.
[Link]
images/FINAL%20COMPLETE%20REPORT_.pdf

Deenanath, V., Danes, S. M., & Jang, J. (2019). Purposive and unintentional family
financial socialization, subjective financial knowledge, and financial behavior of
high school students. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 30(1), 83–
96. [Link]

Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York
University Press.

Dikko, M. (2016). Establishing construct validity and reliability: Pilot testing of a

qualitative interview for research in Takaful (Islamic Insurance). The Qualitative
Report, 21(3), 521-528. [Link]

Edwards, P., McMillon, G., & Danridge, J. (2010). Change is gonna come: Transforming
literacy education for African American students. Teachers College Press.

Freeman, S. (2018). The manuscript dissertation: A means of increasing competitive edge

for tenure-track faculty positions. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13,
273–292. [Link]

Fulk, M., & White, K. J. (2018). Exploring racial differences in financial socialization
and related financial behaviors among Ohio college students. Cogent Social
Sciences, 4(1), 1-16. [Link]

Geddes, S., & Steen, T. (2016). The argument for teaching financial literacy at
higher-education institutions. Michigan Academician, 43(3), 349–365.
[Link]

Glaude, E. S. (2016). Democracy in black: How race still enslaves the American soul.
Broadway Books.

Gorski, P. (2008). The myth of the “culture of poverty.” Educational Leadership, 65(7),
32–36.

Gudmunson, C. G., & Danes, S. M. (2011). Family financial socialization: Theory and
critical review. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 32(4), 644-667.
[Link]

Hamilton, D., & Darity, W. A. (2017). The Political Economy of Education, Financial
Literacy, and the Racial Wealth Gap. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review,
99(1), 59–76. [Link]

136
Hastings, J., Madrian, B., & Skimmyhorn, W. (2013). Financial literacy, financial
education and economic outcomes. Annual Review of Economics, 5, 347–373.
[Link]

Herring, C., & Henderson, L. (2016). Wealth inequality in black and white: Cultural and
structural sources of the racial wealth gap. Race and Social Problems, 8(1), 4–17.
[Link]

Hiraldo, P. (2010). The role of critical race theory in higher education. The Vermont
Connection, 31(7), 53–59.
[Link]
7

Hudson, C., Young, J., Anong, S., Hudson, E., & Davis, E. (2017). African American
financial socialization. The Review of Black Political Economy, 44, 285–302.

Hung, A., Parker, A. M., & Yoong, J. (2011). Defining and measuring financial literacy.
SSRN Electronic Journal. [Link]

Johnson, E., & Sherraden, M. (2007). From financial literacy to financial capability
among youth. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 34(3), 119-145.
[Link]

Johnson, R., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm
whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
[Link]

Joint Economic Committee (JEC). (2019). The 2019 joint economic report. Joint
Economic Committee Congress of the United States.
[Link]
report

Joo, S. (2008). Personal financial wellness. In J. J. Xiao (Ed.), Handbook of Consumer

Finance Research. (pp. 21–34). Springer.

Jorgensen, B. L. (2007). Financial literacy of college students: Parental and peer

influences [Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech] VTechWorks.
[Link]

Jorgensen, B. L., & Savla, J. (2010). Financial literacy of young adults: The importance
of parental socialization. Family Relations, 59(4), 465–478.
[Link]

Jump$tart (2007). National standards in K-12 personal finance education. Jump$tart

Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy.

137
 [Link]
[Link]

Kasman, M., Heuberger, B., & Hammond, R. (2018). A Review of large-scale youth
financial literacy education policies and programs. The Brookings Institution.

Kelly, J. (2021, December 10). Women now hold more jobs than men in the U.S.
workforce. Forbes. Retrieved March 25, 2022, from
[Link]
than-men/?sh=650d919b8f8a

Ladson-Billings, G. & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education.

Teachers College Record. 97, 47-68.
[Link]
heory_of_Education

Ladson-Billings, G. (2015). Critical race theory—What it is not! In M. Lynn & A.

Dixson (Eds.), Handbook of Critical Race Theory in Education (pp. 34–47).
Routledge. [Link]

LeBaron, A. B., Marks, L. D., Rosa, C. M., & Hill, E. J. (2020). Can we talk about
money? Financial socialization through parent–child financial discussion. Emerging
Adulthood, 8(6), 453–463. [Link]

Ledesma, M. C., & Calderón, D. (2015). Critical race theory in education: A review of
past literature and a look to the future. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(3), 206–222.
[Link]

Leong, N. (2013). Racial capitalism. Harvard Law Review, 126(8), 2151–2226.

[Link]

Lindsey-Taliefero, D., Kelly, L., Brent, W., & Price, R. (2011). A Review Of Howard
University’s Financial Literacy Curriculum. American Journal of Business
Education, 4(10), 73–84. [Link]

Lucey, T.A., (2005). Assessing the reliability and validity of the Jump$tart survey of
financial literacy. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 26(2), 283-294.
[Link]

Mandell, L. (2008). The financial literacy of young American adults: Results of the 2008
national Jump$tart Coalition survey of high school seniors and college students.
Jump$tart Coalition. [Link] JumpStart Financial
Literacy [Link]

138
Mandell, L. & Klein, L. S. (2009). The impact of financial literacy education on
subsequent financial behavior. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning,
20(1), 15-24. [Link]

Manduca, R. (2018). Income inequality and the persistence of racial economic disparities.
Sociological Science, 5, 182-205. [Link]

Marsh, J. (2011). Class dismissed: Why we cannot teach or learn our way out of
inequality. NYU Press. [Link]

Maurer, T. W., & Lee, S. A. (2011). Financial education with college students:
Comparing peer-led and traditional classroom instruction. Journal of Family and
Economic Issues, 32(4), 680–689. [Link]

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).

SAGE.

McCormick, M.H. (2009). The effectiveness of youth financial education: A review of

the literature. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 20(1), 70-83.
[Link]

Miller, R.M., Barrio Minton, C.A. (2016). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: A

contemporary phenomenological approach. Journal of Mental Health Counseling.
38(1), 47-61. [Link]

Mills, G. E. (2018). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Pearson.

Murphy, A. J. (2005). Money, money, money: An exploratory study on the financial

literacy of black college students. College Student Journal, 39(3), 478–488.

Murphy Gray, S. E. (2020). Deferred but not denied: The impact of student debt on
homeownership and the U.S. racial wealth gap (Publication No. 27736680)
[Doctoral dissertation, Brandeis University, 2020]. ProQuest.
[Link]
df?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

National Center for Education Statistics, NCES (2015). The Condition of Education 2015
(NCES 2015-144). U.S. Department of Education.
[Link]

Noguera, P.A. (2017). Introduction to racial inequality and education: Patterns and
prospects for the future. The Educational Forum, 81(2), 129-135.
[Link]

139
Noon, E.J. (2018). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: An appropriate
methodology for educational research? Journal of Perspectives in Applied
Academic Practice, 6(1), 75-83. [Link]

Pietkiewicz, I. A. & Smith, J. A. (2012). A practical guide to using interpretative

phenomenological analysis in qualitative research psychology. Psychological
Journal, 18(2), 361–369. [Link]

Pinto, L. & Coulson, E. (2011). Social justice and the gender politics of financial literacy
education. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 9(2), 54–
85. [Link]

President's Advisory Council on Financial Literacy, (2008). 2008 annual report to the
President. U.S. Department of the Treasury.
[Link]
Finance/Documents/PACFL_Draft-[Link]

Qualtrics. (n.d). Sample size calculator (Use in 60 Seconds). Qualtrics. Retrieved

December 2, 2020, from [Link]

Rea, J.K., Danes, S.M., Serido, J., Borden, L.M., Shim, S. (2019). “Being able to support
yourself”: Young adults’ meaning of financial well-being through family financial
socialization. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 40, 250–268.
[Link]

Reardon, S.F., Robinson-Cimpian, J.P, Weathers, E.S. (2014). Patterns and trends in
racial/ethnic and socioeconomic academic achievement gaps. In H.F. Ladd &
M.E. Goertz (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy,
(2ed., pp. 409-509). Routledge.

Robinson, C. J., & T., Q. H. L. (2019). Cedric J. Robinson. on racial capitalism, black
internationalism, and cultures of resistance. Pluto Press.

Rockett, C. (2020, September 10). Capitalism is the crisis. Boulder Weekly.

[Link]

Rothstein, H. R., & Hopewell, S. (2009). Grey literature. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, &
J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis,
(pp. 103–125). Russell Sage Foundation.

Sablan, J. R. (2019). Can you really measure that? Combining critical race theory and
quantitative methods. American Educational Research Journal, 56(1), 178–203.
[Link]

Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE.

140
Shapiro, T. M. (2005). The hidden cost of being African American: How wealth
perpetuates inequality. Oxford University Press.

Shim, S., Barber, B. L., Card, N. A., Xiao, J. J., & Serido, J. (2010). Financial
socialization of first-year college students: The roles of parents, work, and
education. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(12), 1457–1470.
[Link]
Siedman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in
education and the social sciences (4th ed.). Teachers College Press.

Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A.

Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods (2nd ed.,
pp. 53–80). SAGE. [Link]

Sweetman, D., Badiee, M. & Creswell, J. (2010). Use of the transformative framework in
mixed methods studies. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 441-454.
[Link]

Taylor, K. (2019). Race for profit: How banks and the real estate industry undermined
black homeownership. University of North Carolina Press.

Tschache, C.A. (2009). Importance of financial literacy and financial literacy content in
curriculum [Master’s Thesis, Montana State University]. ScholarWorks.
[Link]
.pdf?sequence=1

U.S. Census Bureau. (2017). Race & ethnicity. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved
October 10, 2020, from [Link]
[Link]

West, S., & Mottola, G. (2016). A population on the brink: American renters, emergency
savings, and financial fragility. Poverty and Public Policy, 8(1), 56–71.
[Link]

Whitfield, D. (2019, September 05). We must put a stop to racial capitalism, making
money off Black and brown bodies. The Olympian.
[Link]

141
 APPENDIX A

College Student Financial Literacy Survey

Section 1: Background Information

Choose the following that best represents your answer:

1. Age – select the value below:
a. 18
b. 19
c. 20
d. 21
e. 22
f. 23
g. 24
2. Gender – I best identify as the following:
a. Female
b. Male
c. Transgender
d. Nonbinary
3. What is your academic standing?
a. First-year (Freshman)
b. Sophomore
c. Junior
d. Senior
4. What is your race/ethnicity? (select all that apply)
a. African American/not Hispanic
b. Asian
c. Caucasian/White-not Hispanic
d. Hispanic
e. Multiracial
f. Native American/Pacific Islander
g. other
5. What is your major field of study?
a. Business
b. Agriculture and Life Sciences
c. Education
d. Liberal Arts
e. Human Sciences
f. Science
g. Engineering
h. Medicine

142
 i. Law
j. other: (comment box for text)
6. Which best describes your parent's income last year?
a. 0-$34,999
b. $35,000-$49,999
c. $50,000-$79,999
d. $80,000 or more
e. Don't Know
7. How many years of working experience do you have? (Include full or part-
time experience,
a. internships, co-ops, summer jobs, etc.)
b. None
c. Less than 2 years
d. Two to less than 4 years
e. Four to less than 6 years
f. Six years or more
8. My father’s primary occupation is:
9. My mother’s primary occupation is:
10. What is the highest level of schooling your father has completed?
a. Less than high school
b. High school or equivalent
c. Associates/community college degree
d. Bachelor's degree
e. Masters, doctorate, or professional degree like medical doctor,
veterinarian, or lawyer
f. other
11. What is the highest level of schooling your mother has completed?
a. Less than high school
b. High school or equivalent
c. Associates/community college degree
d. Bachelor's degree
e. Masters, doctorate, or professional degree like medical doctor,
veterinarian, or lawyer
f. other
12. My college education is paid by (including who will payoff student loans if
applicable)
a. Self (100%)
b. Parents (100%)
c. Mostly self (more than 50%)
d. Mostly parents (more than 50%)
e. 50% self, 50% parents
13. What is your overall GPA?

143
 14. Where do you attend school (optional)?
Section 2: Financial Knowledge

15. Net worth is:

a. The difference between expenditures and income
b. The difference between liabilities and assets
c. The difference between cash inflow and outflow
d. The difference between borrowings and savings
e. Cs. None of the above
16. In which year after a car is bought does it lose its value the fastest?
a. First Year
b. Second year
c. Fourth year
d. Seventh year
17. Which account usually pays the MOST interest?
a. Certificate of deposit (CD)
b. Savings account
c. Checking account
d. Money Market account
18. When a check bounces, who, if anyone, is usually charged a fee?
a. The check writer only
b. The person to whom the check is written only
c. Neither the check writer nor the person to whom the check is written
d. Both the check writer and the person to whom the check is written
15. Rob and Molly are the same age. At age 25 Rob began saving $2,000 a year
for 10 years and then stopped at age 35. At age 35, Molly realized that she needed
money for retirement and started saving $2,000 per year for 30 years and then
stopped at age 65. Now they are both 65 years old. Who has the most money in
his or her retirement account (assume both investments had the same interest
rate)?
1. Molly, because she saved more money overall
2. Rob, because his money has grown for longer period of time
3. They would each have about the same amount
4. Unable to determine with information provided
16. If you signed a 12-month lease for $300 /month but never occupied the
apartment, you legally owe the landlord:
a. Your security deposit
b. Your first month's rent of $300
c. Your twelve month's rent of $3600
d. Nothing
e. Whatever the landlord wants
17. The MOST important factors that lender use when deciding whether to
approve a loan are:
a. Marital status and number of children

144
 b. Education and occupation
c. Age and gender
d. Bill-paying record and income
18. If you co-sign a loan for a friend, then you
a. Become eligible to receive part of the loan principal
b. Vouch for the friend's reliability but have no legal obligation for the loan
c. Are responsible for repaying the loan if the friend defaults
d. Are in a better position to get a personal loan
19. If a consumer fails to pay personal debts, a creditor is allowed to do all of the
following EXCEPT:
a. Discuss the consumer's debts with his or her employer
b. Bring suit against the consumer
c. Tell a credit bureau that the account is delinquent
d. Turn the account over to a professional debt collector
20. All of the following are TRUE of bankruptcies except:
a. It is more difficult to get a low interest rate loan
b. It will stay on your credit for ten years
c. Any loan you receive will have a higher interest rate due to the bankruptcy
d. For all types of bankruptcies you are released from all your debt
21. What does a credit bureau do?
a. 1. Approves applications for credit
b. 2. Informs applicants of the reasons for denial of credit
c. 3. Extends credit to qualified applicants
d. 4. Provides creditors with reports of consumers' bill-paying records
22. The owner of a credit card that is lost or stolen is legally responsible for
a. Any unauthorized charges
b. Any unauthorized charges until the loss or theft is reported
c. Only the first $50 of any unauthorized charges
d. Only the first $500 of any unauthorized charges
e. No unauthorized charges
23. If a credit card account has a balance carried over from the previous month,
when will
interest charges usually begin on a new credit purchase?
a. On the day of the purchase
b. One month after the date of the purchase
c. After a 2-week grace period
d. After a 2-month grace period
24. Your take home pay for your job is less than the total amount you earn. Which
of the
following best describes what is taken out of your total pay?
a. Federal income tax, property tax, and Medicare and social security
contributions
b. Social security and Medicare contributions
c. Federal income tax, social security and Medicare contributions
d. Federal income tax, sales tax, and social security contribution

145
 e. Federal income tax, social security, Medicare contributions, state and local
taxes
25. Is a $500 tax credit or a $500 tax deduction more valuable to you?
a. A $500 tax credit
b. A $500 tax deduction
c. They are the same
d. Depends on your tax bracket
26. Assume you are in your early twenties and you would like to build up your
nest egg for a secure retirement in 30 years. Which of the following approaches
would best meet your needs?
a. Start to build up your savings account gradually in an insured bank
b. Save money in certificate of deposit accounts
c. Put monthly savings in a diversified growth mutual fund
d. Invest in long-term Treasury bonds
e. Accumulate money in a safe-box rented from a local bank
27. Which of the following combination of investments is most risky?
a. A mutual fund containing 80% stocks and 20% bonds
b. A mutual fund containing 80% bonds and 20% stocks
c. An index fund (like the S&P 500)
d. Stock in a single company
28. Hector and Maria just had a baby. They received money as baby gifts and
want to put it away for the baby's education. Which of the following tends to have
the highest growth over periods of time as long as 18 years?
a. A U.S. Government savings bond
b. Stocks and mutual funds
c. A savings account
d. A money market account
29. Many people put aside money to take care of unexpected expenses. If Susan
and Joe have money put aside for emergencies, in which of the following forms
would it be of LEAST benefit to them if they needed it right away?
a. Savings account
b. A house
c. Stocks
d. Checking account
30. If an auto insurance policy has bodily injury limits of $100,000/$300,000, the
insured
person is covered for:
a. Up to $100,000 for each accident but no more than $300,000 for the life of
the policy
b. Up to $100,000 for medical bills but no more than $300,000 for hospital
costs
c. Up to $100,000 for each person injured but no more than $300,000 for
each accident
d. Up to $100,000 for people in the insured auto but no more than $300,000
for people outside the insured auto

146
 31. Choose the type of insurance coverage (l. liability, 2. comprehensive, 3.
collision, 4.
uninsured motorist) that pays for the following:
a. The replacement of a stolen car
1. liability 2. comprehensive 3. collision 4. uninsured motorist
b. A loss resulting from a lawsuit
1. liability 2. comprehensive 3. collision 4. uninsured motorist
c. Damage to our own car from an accident caused by you
1. liability 2. comprehensive 3. collision C4. uninsured motorist
32. The main reason to purchase insurance is to
a. Protect you from a loss recently incurred
b. Provide you with excellent investment returns
c. Protect you from sustaining a catastrophic loss
d. Protect your from small incidental losses
e. Improve your standard of living by filing fraudulent claims
33. Assume you are in your twenties, don't have a lot of money, are married and
have one
child. Assuming you already have disability insurance through your employment,
which of the following would you do regarding your life insurance?
a. You would buy a term insurance policy
b. You probably do not need to buy any life insurance policy
c. You would buy flight insurance each time you travel by air
d. You would buy a cash value insurance policy
34. The owner of a bank debit card that is lost or stolen is legally responsible for
a. Any unauthorized charges
b. Any unauthorized charges until the loss or theft is reported
c. Only the first $50 of any unauthorized charges
d. Only the first $500 of any unauthorized charges
e. No unauthorized charges
35. Which of the following cannot legally access your credit report?
1. Creditors
2. Employers
3. Apartment rental agencies
4. Insurance companies
5. All of the above can access your credit report
36. Rate your overall understanding of money management concepts on the
following scale: 1 = very low to 5 = very high

Section 3: Financial Attitudes & Capabilities

37. How sure do you feel about your ability to manage your own finances?
a. Not sure at all - I wish I knew a lot more about money management
b. Not too sure - I wish I knew more about money management
c. Somewhat sure - I understand most of what I'll need to know
d. Very sure - I understand money management very well

147
38. How interested are you in increasing your financial knowledge? Why?
a. Very uninterested
b. Somewhat uninterested
c. Not sure
d. Somewhat interested
e. Very interested
f. Why? (text box)
39. Would you take a personal finance course as an elective if offered?
a. yes
b. no
c. Why or why not? (text box)
40. Which topics would be of interest to you? (Check all that apply)
a. Budgeting
b. Investing
c. Taxes
d. Credit
e. Wills
f. Life Insurance
g. Auto Insurance
h. Loans/debt
i. Credit cards
j. Saving
k. Interest rates
l. other: (text box)
41. Using the scale given below, please rate the importance of items to you (1. not
important, 2. somewhat unimportant, 3. not sure, 4. somewhat important, 5.
very important)
a. Maintain adequate financial records
b. Spending less than your income
c. Maintain adequate insurance coverage
d. Planning and implementing a regular savings/investment program
42. Rate the following items on a scale of 1-5 (1 =not at all true of me and 5
=very true of me)
a. I feel in control of my financial situation
b. I feel capable of using my future income to achieve my financial goals
c. My finances are a significant source of worry or "hassle" for me
d. I am uncertain about where my money is spent
e. I feel credit cards are safe and risk free
f. Purchasing things is very important to my happiness
g. I feel capable of handling my financial future (e.g. buying insurance or
investments)
h. I am afraid of credit and credit cards
i. I feel the cost of using a credit card is too high
j. I feel putting away money each month for savings or investments is
important

148
 k. I feel having life insurance is an important way to protect loved ones
l. I feel it is important to understand apartment leases and loan agreements
before I sign
m. I enjoy thinking about and have interest in reading about money
management
n. I enjoy talking to my peers about money management issues (i.e. taxes,
investing, credit cards)
o. I am comfortable with not paying my credit card bills in full each month
as long as I make the minimum payment
p. I feel disability insurance is less important than life insurance
q. I feel being covered by homeowner's or renter's insurance is important

Section 4: Financial Behaviors

43. Some people tend to be very thrifty, saving money whenever they have the
chance while others are spending-oriented, buying whenever they can and even
borrowing to consume more. How would you classify yourself?
a. Very thrifty, saving money whenever I can
b. Somewhat thrifty, often saving money
c. Neither thrifty nor spending oriented
d. Somewhat spending-oriented, seldom saving money
e. Very spending-oriented, hardly ever saving money
44. What kind of financial accounts do you have? (Check all that apply)
Savings, checking, money market, certificate of deposit (CD), stocks,
bonds
mutual funds IRA other:
a. 38. How much do you estimate you owe on all debts including credit
cards, student loans and other debts? (Do not include mortgage)1. $0
b. 2. $1 - 4999
c. $5000-$9999
d. $10,000 - $19,999
e. $20,000 - $39,999
f. $40,000 or more
g. 7. Don't know
45. Respond to the following questions on credit cards: (if you have no credit
cards skip to question 45)
a. How many credit cards do you have? (free text)
b. What is the combined total balance owed on your credit cards?
1. $0 - $99
2. $100 - $499
3. $500 - $1999
4. $2000 - $4999
5. $5000 or more
6. Don't know
c. How do you usually pay your monthly credit card bills?

149
 1. I pay the minimum
2. I pay between the minimum and full amount
3. I pay credit bills in full
4. My parents pay my credit card bill
46. In what manner do you maintain financial records?
a. Maintain no records
b. Maintain minimal records
c. Maintain very detailed records
47. Indicate how often you have engaged in the following activities within the
past six months using the following scale: (1) “Never,” (2) “Rarely,” (3)
“Sometimes,” (4) “Often,” and (5) “Very often.
a. I budget and track spending.
b. I compare my receipts of purchases to my monthly statement.
c. I use credit cards to make purchases that I can't afford and I don't have the
money in the bank to pay the bill.
d. I get cash advances from my credit card.
e. I have my parents "bail me out" of credit card debt.
f. I work extra hours (in excess of 20 hours a week) to meet bills and
expenses.
g. I miss class to work extra hours to meet bills and expenses.
h. I contribute to a savings account regularly.
i. I find legal ways to lower my taxes.
j. I compare prices when shopping for purchases.
k. I have a life insurance policy.
l. I read to increase my financial knowledge.
m. I read over and understand apartment leases and loan agreements before I
sign them.
n. I contribute to an investment account.
o. I have a disability insurance policy.
p. I am covered by a homeowner's or renter's insurance policy

Section 5: Financial Socialization/Influences

48. Rate the following influences on a scale of 1-5 (1 =none, 2 = not much, 3
= not applicable, 4 =some, 5 =a lot). How much did you learn about
managing your money from the following:
a. Parents
b. Friends
c. School
d. Books
e. Media
f. Job
g. Life Experiences
h. Internet

150
 i. Informal public seminar or class
j. Financial planner or counselor (professional)
49. Rate the following on a scale of 1-5 (1 = never, 2 = once per year, 3
=every few months, 4 =twice per month, 5 = weekly). How often were
you influenced by or did you discuss finances with the following:
a. Friends
b. School
c. Books
d. Media
e. Job
f. Life Experiences
g. Internet
h. Informal public seminar or class
50. Which of the following items did you learn about in your home while
growing up? (Check all that apply): Budgeting, Investing, Taxes, Credit,
Wills, Life Insurance, Disability Insurance, Auto Insurance,
Renter’s/Homeowners Insurance, Loans/Debt, Credit Cards, Saving,
giving to charities, Interest Rates, Keeping records, Being honest in all
dealings, Work for what you receive
51. Which of the following classes have you had? (check all that apply)
a. An entire course in money management or personal finance
b. A portion of a course where at least a week was focused on money
management or personal finance
c. An entire course in economics
d. A portion of a course where at least a week was focused on economics
e. Other
52. Where do you expect to learn/increase your financial knowledge? (check
all that apply)
1. Parents
2. Friends
3. School
4. Books
5. Media
6. Job
7. Life Experiences
8. Internet
9. Informal public seminar or class
10. Financial planner or counselor (professional)
11. Other
53. How would you describe how finances were handled in your family?
(check all that apply)
1. My parents usually argued about the finances

151
 2. Within the family we openly discussed our finances
3. My parents explicitly taught me about finances (e.g., credit
cards, debt, budgeting, savings)
4. We didn't' talk much about finances but I learned from their
examples
5. My parents included me in various financial decisions
54. Comparing yourself to your parents would you say that you are:
1. Much more likely to save
2. Somewhat more likely to save
3. About as likely to save/spend
4. Somewhat more likely to spend
5. Much more likely to spend
55. How often do you and your father(mother) / stepfather(stepmother) / other
father(mother) figures talk about future job plans? Rate on the following
scale: (1) “Never,” (2) “Rarely,” (3) “Sometimes,” (4) “Often,” and (5)
“Very often”
56. How often do you and your father(mother) / stepfather(stepmother) /
other father(mother) figures talk about future education plans? Rate on the
following scale: (1) “Never,” (2) “Rarely,” (3) “Sometimes,” (4) “Often,”
and (5) “Very often”
57. How often do you and your father(mother) / stepfather(stepmother) /
other father(mother) figures talk about future family plans? Rate on the
following scale: (1) “Never,” (2) “Rarely,” (3) “Sometimes,” (4) “Often,”
and (5) “Very often”
58. How often do you and your father(mother) / stepfather(stepmother) / other
father(mother) figures talk about family and work responsibilities? Rate
on the following scale: (1) “Never,” (2) “Rarely,” (3) “Sometimes,” (4)
“Often,” and (5) “Very often”
59. How close do you feel to your father and mother, including biological
parent/ stepparent/ adoptive parent/ other parental figure? Rate closeness
on a scale from 1 (not close at all) – 5 (very close)

152
 APPENDIX B

Interview Questions

1. What were your first memories of money and its use?

2. What are your feelings about wealth and money?

a. What does wealth mean to you? What did you learn about wealth, if anything,

growing up?

3. What are your thoughts about wealth in your family? In the Black community?

a. Where did you get these perceptions of wealth?

4. Do you think there are any racial differences in wealth generation? Why or why not?

a. Example: housing ownership, income disparities

b. Did your family role models (parents, grandparents, aunts, or uncles) own

their home? Did they experience any challenges in homeownership?

5. What are your thoughts about Black [women/men] and money? What has society

taught you about Black [men/women] and money?

6. Have you noticed any gender or cultural differences in relation to wealth or money

management? If so, please tell me about this situation or time.

a. What are your thoughts about white people and money?

b. How has this impacted you?

7. Please share some of your current practices for managing money.

8. Have you had a time where you had to struggle with money?

a. If so, tell me about that time

b. If not, what do you think has helped you not struggle with money?

9. When you think about saving money, what comes up for you?

153
 a. Do you save money?

b. Tell me about your family’s relationship with saving money? What did they

do?

c. Have you ever learned about saving money?

i. If you haven’t learned, how do you think things would be different if

you had learned about it?

10. What would you consider to be the most influential way you have learned about

money management to date?

a. Family, Formal Education, Friends, Trial & error?

b. Why has this been most influential?

11. Do you believe it is important to learn about money management? Why or why not?

a. Do you feel comfortable in your knowledge of money? If so, please share an

examples specific area you are comfortable or uncomfortable in related to

money?

12. Financial wellbeing is a term that can be defined as a state of being where a person

can current and financial obligations. With this definition in mind, on a scale of 1-10,

10 being the highest, how would you rate your financial wellbeing?

a. How important is financial wellbeing to you?

13. Have you taken a course in school and/or outside of school about money

management?

a. If so, please tell me about what you’ve learned [try to prompt them to examine

anything they may have taken earlier in school]

b. If not, what would you like to have learned and when? Why?

154
 c. In your opinion, what might be an important way to help others learn about

money [parents, high school teachers etc.]?

14. In reflection on the survey [items on financial knowledge, give examples], did you

feel the survey captured important points about your financial knowledge and

practices?

a. If so please share, if not please explain?

b. Are there ways you feel the survey can be improved upon? [how so,

suggestions for items to add/remove, or wording]

c. Did you find the questions clear? What feelings came up when you were

completing the survey?

155
 APPENDIX C

Qualitative Themes and Frequencies

Themes # of participants Total # of

referenced instances
Direct influences about the knowledge of 8 133
money
Indirect influences about the knowledge of 8 85
money
Areas for new/additional knowledge 6 20
Engagement in savings practices 7 17
Engagement in investment practices 3 12
Perceptions about money & wealth 8 83
Perceived wealth gap based on race 7 34
Perceived inequality based on race 7 33

156
 APPENDIX D

Demographic Summary of Interview Participants

Parent's Highest Education Highest education

Participant Age Gender Classification Major Income of Father of Mother GPA
$50,000- High school or High school or
Participant A 20 Female Junior Business $79,999 equivalent equivalent 3.3

Masters, doctorate, Masters, doctorate,

or professional or professional
degree like medical degree like medical
doctor, doctor,
veterinarian, or veterinarian, or
Participant B 20 Female Junior Other 0-$34,999 lawyer lawyer 3.52

Masters, doctorate, Masters, doctorate,

or professional or professional
degree like medical degree like medical
doctor, doctor,
veterinarian, or veterinarian, or
Participant C 20 Male Junior Engineering Unknown lawyer lawyer 3.47
Less than high High school or
Participant D 18 Female Freshman Science 0-$34,999 school equivalent 2
Associates/commu Associates/commun
Participant E 20 Female Junior Human Scienes
0-$34,999 nity college degree ity college degree 3.3
Masters, doctorate,
or professional
degree like medical
doctor,
High school or veterinarian, or
Participant F 19 Female Sophomore Other 0-$34,999 equivalent lawyer 2.1
Masters, doctorate,
or professional
degree like medical
doctor,
veterinarian, or
Participant G 19 Female Freshman Education Unknown Bachelor's degree lawyer 3.2

Masters, doctorate,
or professional
degree like medical
doctor,
veterinarian, or High school or
Participant H 20 Female Sophomore Liberal Arts 0-$34,999 lawyer equivalent 3.5

157
 APPENDIX E

IRB APPROVAL

158
 VITA

JOYCELYN MORRIS

Born, West Palm Beach, Florida

2002 – 2005 B.S., Business Administration

Florida A&M University
Tallahassee, FL

2005 – 2007 M.B.A., Business Administration

Florida A&M University
Tallahassee, FL

2020 – 2022 Doctoral Candidate

Florida International University
Miami, FL

2018 - 2022 Graduate Student Assistant

Florida International University
Miami, FL

PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

White, K., Park, N., Watkins, K., McCoy, M., and Morris, J. (2021). The relationship
between objective financial knowledge, financial management, and financial self-efficacy
among African American students. Financial Services Review, 29(3), pp 169 – 185.

Morris, J. (February, 2019). Historical Examination of the Wealth Gap in the Black
Community. Paper presented at the meeting of Southeast Philosophy of Education
Society, Decatur, Georgia.

159