sylvia hurtado, minh tran, kevin eagan, christopher newman, & paolo velasco university of...
Post on 21-Jan-2016
224 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Sylvia Hurtado, Minh Tran, Kevin Eagan, Christopher Newman, & Paolo Velasco
University of California, Los Angeles
Association for Institutional Research Annual ForumAtlanta, Georgia – June 1, 2009
“We Do Science Here”: Underrepresented
Students in Difference College Contexts
Promoting Diversity: Access and Engagement in Biomedical and Behavioral Science Research Preparation UCLA Higher Education Research Institute A national study sponsored by the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF)
Purpose: to examine underrepresented student access to resources and forms of engagement that result in outcomes (skills, dispositions, and behaviors) necessary for a research career in the biomedical and behavioral sciences.
Introduction
BackgroundPrevious ResearchConceptual FrameworkMethodsResultsDiscussion Implications
Overview
In 2002, only 17% of scientists and engineers in the United States were people of color with only 6% of this population comprising underrepresented minorities (NSF, 2002)
URM students’ STEM completion rate: 26%
White/Asian American STEM completion rate: 46%
Priority: develop, recruit, and retain top STEM students to maintain U.S. global economic competitiveness (National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, 2007)
Background
Benefits of student-faculty interaction (Astin, 1993; Pascarelle & Terenzini, 2005)
Student background factors – not all types of students have frequent faculty interactions (Cole, 2007; Kuh & Hu, 2001)
College experiences that influence interaction include difference by major, year in school, academic performance, accessibility cues, and types of institution (HBCUs & HSI) (Cole, 2007)
Department practices and values that discourage students at PWIs (Johnson, 2007)
STEM degree attainments at HBCUs/HSIs may be largely due to faculty interaction (Nelson Laird et al., 2007; Allen, 1992)
Previous Research
Performance
Recognition
Competence
Science Identity
Social performances of relevant scientific
practices
Recognizing oneself and getting recognized
by others as a “science person”
Knowledge and understanding of science
content
Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Identities
(Carlone & Johnson, 2007)
Conceptual Framework
Science Identification (Carlone and Johnson, 2007)
Academic Tribes and Culture (Becher, 1989)
Culture of Science as a source of “disruption”▪ Folklore, myths, and legends▪ Socialization▪ Normalization – “This is how science is
done!”
Conceptual Framework
Mixed Methods Sequential (Creswell, 2003)
Phase 1: quantitative longitudinal study of students from over 115 higher education institutions
Phase 2: qualitative five-campus case study Advantages
Provides broader perspectives and more detail to examine and interpret quantitative results
Methods
Data & Sample 5 campuses: 1 HBCU, 2 HSIs, & 2 PWIs Semi-structured interview protocol 17 faculty & staff interviews Focus group participants: 71 students,
purposefully recruited from undergraduate research programs 60% female/40% male 56% Latina/o, 18% Black, 13% Asian American, 8%
multiracial, 2.5% American Indian, & 2.5% White 70% were biology, biochemistry, or chemistry
majors
Qualitative Methods
Qualitative Analysis Coded transcriptions using NVivo®
software to identify emergent themes (Bazely, 2007)
Acceptable inter-coder reliability levels
between 75%-85% (Miles & Huberman, 1994) Cross-case analyses to tease out the
contextual differences (Miles & Huberman, 1994)
Qualitative Methods
Data and sample2004 Freshman Survey and 2005
Your First College Year (YFCY) SurveyFinal analytic sample: 3,003 students
across 117 institutions
Quantitative Methods
Variables DV: Faculty interactions: frequency of interaction
with faculty during office hours; interaction with faculty outside of class or office hours; getting advice about their educational program; received emotional support from faculty (alpha = 0.68)
IVs: Demographic characteristics (race, gender, SES) Prior academic preparation (HS GPA, summer
research program) College experiences (e.g., research participation,
feeling intimidated by faculty, participation in academic clubs)
Institutional characteristics (size, selectivity, normative contexts)
Quantitative Methods
AnalysisPrincipal axis factoring (factor
analysis)Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM)LimitationsNot a representative sampleLow survey response rateAnalysis of secondary dataPurposeful sampling for focus groupsData were collected at different time
points in students’ undergraduate career
Quantitative Methods
Effect of being Black/African American (-) HBCU (+) Selectivity (+) Size (+)
Effect of participation in academic club (+) Aggregated science commitment (+) Aggregated feeling that faculty treat students
like numbers (+) Research expenditures (-)
Work on a professor’s research project (+) Research expenditures (+)
Results: Predicting Interactions with Faculty Outside of Class
(Quantitative)
Institutional effects Selectivity (-) Size (-) Feeling that faculty treat students like numbers
(-) Individual effects
Opinion: faculty interested in students’ personal/academic problems (+)
Frequency: Received negative feedback on academic work (+)
Participated in academic enrichment program for minority students (+)
Success at managing the academic environment (+)
Results: Predicting Interactions with Faculty Outside of Class (Quantitative)
Themes Faculty Support
Large impersonal science environments Lack of institutional reward structures
Competitive Environments Cutthroat competition facilitated in part by
faculty and gatekeeper courses Faculty Approachability
Reluctance to approach faculty and faculty cues denoting inaccessibility
Underrepresentation of minority faculty
Results: Cross Case Comparison of Student Experiences (Qualitative)
Faculty Support Student A (PWI): That seems to happen when
you have really good professors that are doing other things besides teaching, like doing world-renowned research. They tend to not care about the other responsibilities that come along with that.
Student B (HSI): They treat you as a whole person rather than just what you have to offer academically, and that made a big difference for me, just knowing that they’re real people too and you can go to them outside of academics, and then that in turn, the advice that they give you, benefits you academically because, you know, they push in the right direction.
Results: Cross Case Comparison of Student Experiences (Qualitative)
Faculty Support Faculty Director A (PWI): It’s a challenge to
bring more new faculty on and because there are no tenure perk points. It’s “I’ve got to publish and I’ve got to do other things, I gotta serve on this committee, I don’t get any points if I [help you], so no.”
Faculty Director B (HSI): I haven’t wanted to run one of these big programs because nationally all my friends who got into this, their scientific careers went down the tubes … I mean, they don’t get papers now… they can’t focus on things because it’s too much, so I really was reluctant to do this.”
Results: Cross Case Comparison of Student Experiences (Qualitative)
Competitive/Collaborative Environments Student D (HSI): I think one way [my professor] seeks
to motivate us is to kind of be like, “Don’t you want to be better than so-and-so.”
Student E (PWI): It’s not in your nature to learn like that I don’t think. It puts too much pressure on your when you’re not trying to understand the material because you like it, you’re trying just to ace the class, so it’s not that desire to learn, but the desire to get a better grade.
Student F (HBCU): It’s not a competition in the sense, “Oh, I need to outdo you,” but ... I see my friends constantly studying, and let’s just say if I see them make a higher grade than I made on my test and I knew I could have studied more, then I’m like, “OK, I need to get my stuff together.”
Results: Cross Case Comparison of Student Experiences (Qualitative)
Faculty Approachability Student G (PWI): I think it’s hard to ask for help ... all
my professors are either White or Asian and it’s kind of hard for me sometimes, but just recently I started to talking to a few of my professors when I didn’t understand something, but it took me two years to finally do it. It’s intimidating.
Student H (HBCU): I was able to see professors that were African American, bio-chemistry Ph.D. professors, people that look like me, which motivated me to say, “OK, I can do this.”
Student I (PWI): Once you get past that reluctance they are like definitely willing to help. It’s just that hurdle you have to get over of being afraid to really ask.
Student J (HBCU): If [faculty] hear you say you want to grad school, that’s when they really start pushing and really want you to do well and really give you all the resources that you need to do well.
Results: Cross Case Comparison of Student Experiences (Qualitative)
Frequency of student-faculty interactions affected by 2 main factors: Structural characteristics of institutions Peer normative contexts
Institutional differences related to faculty interactions for Black students
Discussion
Structural characteristics of institutions Size: Undergraduates have to contend with
their peers and graduate students for faculty time
Selectivity: More competitive environments facilitated by science faculty
Sense of competition felt among students and encouraged by faculty corresponds to theory on students’ development of science identity (Carlone and Johnson, 2007) as well as disciplinary culture perpetuated by tradition and socialization (Becher, 1989)
Discussion
Peer normative contexts Students’ sense that faculty treat
them like numbers in a book significantly depressed faculty interaction.
Findings may be due to… Faculty cues signifying level of
approachability Overall ethic of caring for both students’
personal and academic lives
Discussion
Black Students & HBCUs Tended to interact with faculty
significantly less frequently than their White peers at PWIs
Students enrolled at an HBCU felt more confident in themselves and in their interactions with faculty because professors looked like them.
Finding supports prior work that concluded HBCUs promote stronger connections between Black students and faculty (Allen, 1992; Laird et al., 2007).
Discussion
Provide opportunities and resources that facilitate meaningful connections between students and faculty to counteract large, impersonal environments.
Lack of tangible incentives in institutional reward structures for faculty participation and administration of undergraduate research programs.
Provosts/Deans need to find ways to recognize the work of faculty who devote time and effort to undergraduate research programs
Conclusions and Implications
QuestionsFaculty and Co-PIs:Sylvia HurtadoMitchell Chang
Graduate Research Assistants:Kevin EaganLorelle EspinsoaChristopher Newman
Jessica SharknessMinh TranPaolo Velasco
Administrative Staff:Aaron Pearl
Acknowledgments: 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 as well as the National Science Foundation, NSF Grant Number 0757076. This independent research and the views expressed here do not indicate
endorsement by the sponsors.
Papers and reports are available for download
from project website:
http://heri.ucla.edu/nihProject e-mail: herinih@ucla.edu
top related