BLACK STEM ASPIRANTS AND THE OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURE Association for Institutional Research Denver, Colorado May 28, 2015 Tanya Figueroa, Ashlee Wilkins Sylvia Hurtado UCLA
Dec 31, 2015
BLACK STEM ASPIRANTS AND THE OPPORTUNITY
STRUCTURE
Association for Institutional ResearchDenver, Colorado
May 28, 2015
Tanya Figueroa, Ashlee WilkinsSylvia Hurtado
UCLA
Introduction
Too few Black students graduate with STEM degrees
Black students face multiple challenges in STEM majors
A number of experiences and activities mitigate the effect of these barriers – the “opportunity structure” in STEM programs
Purpose of Study
Purpose: Investigate the factors that are predictive of Black students’ participation within two components of the opportunity structure: Supplemental instruction Faculty mentorship and support
Supplemental Instruction
Targets “at-risk courses” as opposed to “at-risk students”
Peer-facilitated sessions focused on problem solving and enhancing course material
Voluntary; not remedial Supplemental instruction has been shown
to improve academic performance and term-to-term retention rates in single-institution studies
Faculty Mentoring
Intentional support, as opposed to happenstance faculty-student interactions
Consists of professional and personal support
Faculty mentoring also improves academic performance and retention
Methods
Data source and sample: 2004 CIRP Freshman Survey (TFS) 2008 CIRP College Senior Survey (CSS) Institutional data from IPEDS
Sample: 792 Black STEM aspirants and a random sample of 792 White students across 175 institutions
Analysis Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) 4 models
Methods (Cont.)
Student-Level Variables• Demographic Characteristics (6)• High School Preparation, Achievement, and Experiences
(8)• Campus Climate (4)• College Experiences (12)• STEM Area of Focus (6)
Institutional-Level Variables• Institutional Characteristics (e.g. size, selectivity, type) (11)
Findings Black Students: Supplemental Instruction
Student-Level Years of Biology in High School (-) HPW Talking to Teachers Outside Class (+) Joined a Club or Organization Related to Major
(+) Receipt of Faculty Mentorship (+)
Institutional-Level Undergraduate Full-Time Enrollment (-) Proportion of STEM Undergraduate Majors (-) Research/Doctoral Granting Institution (+)
Findings White Students: Supplemental Instruction
Student-Level High Income (-) Years of Biology (-) Positive Cross-Racial Interactions (+) Studied with Other Students (+) Faculty Interested in Students' Academic
Problems (+) Receipt of Faculty Mentorship (+)
Institutional-Level Undergraduate Full-Time Enrollment (+)
Comparing Significant Coefficients from the Black STEM Model 7 to the Coefficients from the White STEM Model 7 for Supplemental Instruction
Black STEM students n=792
White STEM students n=792
Variables b S.E. b S.E. Z-Score MeaningInstitutional Variables
Undergraduate full-time enrollment (10,000)
-0.11
*
0.00
0.14
*
0.00
***
Affect is more
pronounced for White students
Research/Doctoral granting institution (vs. master comprehensive)
0.26***
0.07
0.05
0.07
Only affects Black
students
Proportion of STEM undergraduate majors
-0.46*
0.19
0.13
0.16
Only affects Black
studentsPre-college preparation, achievement and experiences (Responses taken from TFS)
Years of biological science in H.S. -0.05 * 0.02 -0.05 * 0.02 n.s. Similar effect
Hours per week: Talking with high school teachers outside class
0.06**
0.02 -0.01 0.03 Only affects Black students
College Behaviors (Responses taken from the CSS)
Joined a club or organization related to major
0.11*
0.05 -0.01 0.05 Only affects Black students
STEM Environment
Receipt of faculty mentorship 0.01 *** 0.00 0.01 ** 0.00 n.s. Similar effect
Findings Black Students: Receipt of Faculty Mentorship
Student-Level Felt Intimidated by your Professors(-) High Middle Income (100K-199K) (+) Positive cross-racial Interactions(+) Sense of Belonging (+) Participated in a Program to Prepare for Graduate School (+) Overall College GPA (+) Met With an Advisor/Counselor About Your Career Plans (+) Participated in an Internship Program (+) Had Instruction that Supplemented Coursework (+) Faculty Here are Interested in Students’ Academic Problems (+)Institutional-Level HBCU (+) Proportion of Undergraduate White Students (+)
Findings White Students: Receipt of Faculty Mentorship
Student-Level High School GPA (-) SAT composite score (-) HPW Talking to High School Teachers (+) Sense of Belonging (+) Participated in a program to prepare for graduate (+) Overall college GPA (+) Met with an advisor/counselor about your career (+) Studied with other students (+) Joined a club or organization related to major (+) Had instruction that supplemented course work (+) Faculty here are interested in students' academic (+) Academic self-concept (+) Engineering aspirants are less likely than biology aspirants (-)
Comparing Significant Coefficients from the Black STEM Model 6 to the Coefficients from the White STEM Model 6 for Faculty Mentoring and Support
Black STEM students n=792
White STEM students n=792
Variables b S.E. b S.E. Z-Score MeaningDemographic Characteristics
High middle income ($100K-$199,999) 2.22*
0.95 -0.90 0.69Only affects Black
students
Campus Climate (responses take from the CSS)
Felt intimidated by your professors
-1.33*
*
0.49
-0.19
0.49 Only affects
Black studentsPositive cross-racial interactions 0.10*
0.04
0.05
0.03
Only affects Black students
Sense of belonging 0.16
***
0.04
0.14 **
0.04 n.s. Similar effect
College Experiences (responses taken from the CSS)Behaviors
Participated in a program to prepare for graduate school
2.89***
0.87 2.07**
0.76n.s. Similar effect
Overall college GPA 0.60 ** 0.23 0.73 ** 0.22 n.s. Similar effectMet with an advisor/counselor about your career plans
2.70***
0.51 2.97***
0.51n.s. Similar effect
Participated in an internship program1.87
**0.66 -0.36 0.59
Only affects Black students
Had instruction that supplemented course work
2.52***
0.53 1.41**
0.44n.s. Similar effect
Perceptions/Attitudes
Faculty here are interested in students' academic problems
3.98***
0.48 4.56***
0.46n.s. Similar effect
Discussion and Conclusion
Institutional context matters! May be reflective of the opportunities
available to students which vary by institution.
Or some institutions may be more intentional in targeting services
Institutions can learn from each other Campus Climate matters! - for both
White and Black students
Implications
Students should not be expected to volunteer for activities Institutional Agents foster engagement Dialogue with students about needs Tailor services for the unique needs of Black
students
Need for qualitative research to get at nuances of Black student experiences at various types of institutions
16
Contact Info
Faculty/Co-PIs:Sylvia HurtadoKevin Eagan Ashlee Wilkins
Tanya FigueroaBryce Hughes
Administrative Staff:
Dominique Harrison
Graduate Research
Assistants:
Website: www.heri.ucla.eduE-mail: [email protected]
Post-Bacc Research Analyst:
Robert Paul
This study was made possible by the support of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH Grant Numbers 1 R01 GMO71968-01 and R01 GMO71968-05, the National Science Foundation, NSF Grant Number 0757076, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 through the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH Grant 1RC1GM090776-01. This independent research and the views expressed here do not indicate endorsement by the sponsors.
References Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bandura, A. (1986) Social foundations of acion: A social-cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barlow, A. , & Villarejo, M. (2004). Making a difference for minorities: Evaluation of an educational enrichment program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(9), 861-881
Bauer, K. W. (1998). Editor’s notes. In New Directions for Institutional Research (No. 98, pp. 1–5). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bohlscheid J., & Clark, S. (2012). Career preparedness survey outcomes of food science graduates – A follow-up assessment. Journal of Food Science Education, 11, 8-15.
Hu, S., Scheuch, K., Schwartz, R., Gayles, J., & Li, S. (2008). Reinventing undergraduate education: Engaging college students in research and creative activities. ashe higher education report, volume 33, number 4. ASHE Higher Education Report, 33(4), 1-103.
Perna L.W., Gasman M., Gary, S. Lundy-Wagner V., & Drezner, N. D. (2010). Identifying strategies for increasing degree attainment in STEM: Lessons from minority-serving institutions. New Directions For Institutional Research, (148), 41-51.
Seymour, R., Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S., & DeAntoni, T. “Establishing the Benefits of Research Experiences for Undergraduates: First Findings from a Three-year Study.” Science Education, 2004, 88(4), 493–594.
Solórzano, D. G., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 60–73.
Strayhorn, T. L., & Terrell, M. C. (2007). Mentoring and satisfaction with college for Black students.” Negro Educational Review, 58(1-2), 69–83.
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271-286
Literature
In general the opportunity structure: Increases students’ confidence and skills (Bauer
& Bennett, 2003; Seymour et al., 2004; Strayhorn & Terrell, 2007)
Facilitates the development of curiosity and inner motivation via collective learning (Olstedt,
2005)
Socializes students into STEM (Lopatto, 2004)
Improves retention and persistence in STEM (Hu, Scheuch, Schwartz, Gayles & Li, 2008)
Propels students into careers in STEM (Bohlscheid & Clark,
2012)
Limitations
Only includes the responses of Black students who persisted to the fourth year of college
CSS had a relatively low longitudinal response rate (23%)
Cannot assume a causal relationship between the dependent variables and those independent variables
Descriptive Statistics: Black Students
Variable
Sex 68% Female
Had never utilized Supplemental Instruction by 4th yr in college
11.6%
Faculty Mentorship (mean score) 49.11
Institutional Selectivity 1133 (avg. SAT score of incoming class)
Proportion of White students in the student body
0% at HBCUs to 93% at PWIs (range)54.75% (Average)
Descriptive Statistics: White Students
Variable
Sex 48% Female
Had never utilized Supplemental Instruction by 4th yr in college
14.8%
Faculty Mentorship (mean score) 48.92
Institutional Selectivity 1162 (avg. SAT score of incoming class)
Proportion of White students in the student body
18% to 93% (range)64.47% (average)
Conceptual Framework
Critical Perspectives
• Microaggressions
(Sue et al., 2007)
• Campus Climate (Solórzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2000
Social Factors
• Faculty (Hoffman & Oreopoulos, 2007)
• Peers (Harper & Quaye, 2007; Museus, 2008)
The Institutional Context
• Designation (Toldson,2013)
• Selectivity (Chang et al, 2008)