Transcript BLACK STEM ASPIRANTS AND THE OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURE Tanya Figueroa, Ashlee Wilkins Sylvia Hurtado UCLA Association for Institutional Research Denver, Colorado May 28, 2015

BLACK STEM ASPIRANTS
AND THE OPPORTUNITY
STRUCTURE
Tanya Figueroa,
Ashlee Wilkins
Sylvia Hurtado
UCLA
Association for Institutional Research
Denver, Colorado
May 28, 2015
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
4
models
Linear Modeling (HLM)
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
Variables
Institutional Variables
Black STEM
students n=792
b
S.E.
Undergraduate full-time enrollment -0.11 0.00
(10,000)
*
Research/Doctoral granting
*
0.26 * 0.07
institution (vs. master
comprehensive)
*
Proportion of STEM undergraduate
-0.46 0.19
majors
*
Pre-college preparation, achievement and experiences (Responses taken from TFS)
-0.05 *
0.02
Years of biological science in H.S.
Hours per week: Talking with high school teachers 0.06
0.02
outside class
**
College Behaviors (Responses taken from the CSS)
Joined a club or organization related to major
STEM Environment
Receipt of faculty mentorship
0.11
*
0.05
0.01 *** 0.00
White STEM
students n=792
b
S.E.
0.14
Z-Score
Meaning
***
Affect is more
pronounced for
White students
0.00
*
0.05
0.07
0.13
0.16
-0.05 *
0.02
-0.01
0.03
-0.01
0.05
0.01 ** 0.00
Only affects
Black students
Only affects
Black students
n.s.
Similar effect
Only affects Black
students
Only affects Black
students
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
Variables
Demographic Characteristics
High middle income ($100K-$199,999)
Black STEM
students n=792
b
S.E.
2.22 *
White STEM
students n=792
b
S.E.
0.95
-0.90
0.69
0.49
-0.19
0.49
0.04
*
**
0.16
0.04
*
0.05
0.03
Z-Score
Meaning
Only affects Black students
Campus Climate (responses take from the
CSS)
Felt intimidated by your professors
Positive cross-racial interactions
Sense of belonging
College Experiences (responses taken from the CSS)
Behaviors
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 course work
Perceptions/Attitudes
Faculty here are interested in students' academic
problems
-1.33
**
0.10
2.89
0.60
2.70
1.87
2.52
3.98
**
*
**
**
*
**
**
*
0.87
0.14
**
2.07
0.23
**
0.73 **
0.51
2.97
0.66
-0.36
0.53
1.41
**
0.48
*
4.56
***
0.04
0.76
0.22
0.51
Only affects Black
students
Only affects Black
students
n.s.
Similar effect
n.s.
n.s.
Similar effect
Similar effect
n.s.
Similar effect
Only affects Black students
n.s.
Similar effect
n.s.
Similar effect
0.59
**
***
0.44
0.46
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
Contact Info
Faculty/Co-PIs:
Sylvia Hurtado
Kevin Eagan
Graduate Research
Assistants:
Ashlee Wilkins
Tanya Figueroa
Bryce Hughes
Administrative Staff:
Dominique Harrison
Post-Bacc Research
Analyst:
Robert Paul
Website: www.heri.ucla.edu
E-mail: [email protected]
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.
16
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
 Propels students into careers in STEM
(Hu, Scheuch, Schwartz, Gayles & Li, 2008)
(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 0% at HBCUs to 93% at PWIs (range)
body
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 18% to 93% (range)
body
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)