skip to main content


Title: “Overview of Policies and Programs for Black Students in Engineering.”
In this work in progress, we use Lee and Matusovich’s model of co-curricular support (MCCS) and the recruitment aspect of the Building Engineering and Science Talent (BEST) framework to investigate the policies, programs, and activities for, and recruitment and retention of, underrepresented students at four institutions. These four colleges of engineering are in the top 15 nationally in engineering bachelors’ degrees conferred on Black students. This information will provide background for a mixed-methods study on the choice, persistence, and attrition of Black students in computer, electrical, and mechanical engineering and is a critical first step to contextualize the student experiences to be revealed in individual interviews. We use publicly available information from web-based and other resources as well as interviews with key informants on each campus to ascertain the programs that are available on each campus and categorize them using the MCCS and BEST frameworks. This study lays the groundwork for future institutional data analysis and interviews with Black students currently or formerly enrolled in computer, electrical or mechanical engineering to uncover what causes them to enroll and persist in or leave these majors. Keywords: Race/ethnicity, undergraduate programs, support programs, MIDFIELD  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1734347
NSF-PAR ID:
10131049
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Introduction and Theoretical Frameworks Our study draws upon several theoretical foundations to investigate and explain the educational experiences of Black students majoring in ME, CpE, and EE: intersectionality, critical race theory, and community cultural wealth theory. Intersectionality explains how gender operates together with race, not independently, to produce multiple, overlapping forms of discrimination and social inequality (Crenshaw, 1989; Collins, 2013). Critical race theory recognizes the unique experiences of marginalized groups and strives to identify the micro- and macro-institutional sources of discrimination and prejudice (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). Community cultural wealth integrates an asset-based perspective to our analysis of engineering education to assist in the identification of factors that contribute to the success of engineering students (Yosso, 2005). These three theoretical frameworks are buttressed by our use of Racial Identity Theory, which expands understanding about the significance and meaning associated with students’ sense of group membership. Sellers and colleagues (1997) introduced the Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity (MMRI), in which they indicated that racial identity refers to the “significance and meaning that African Americans place on race in defining themselves” (p. 19). The development of this model was based on the reality that individuals vary greatly in the extent to which they attach meaning to being a member of the Black racial group. Sellers et al. (1997) posited that there are four components of racial identity: 1. Racial salience: “the extent to which one’s race is a relevant part of one’s self-concept at a particular moment or in a particular situation” (p. 24). 2. Racial centrality: “the extent to which a person normatively defines himself or herself with regard to race” (p. 25). 3. Racial regard: “a person’s affective or evaluative judgment of his or her race in terms of positive-negative valence” (p. 26). This element consists of public regard and private regard. 4. Racial ideology: “composed of the individual’s beliefs, opinions and attitudes with respect to the way he or she feels that the members of the race should act” (p. 27). The resulting 56-item inventory, the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (MIBI), provides a robust measure of Black identity that can be used across multiple contexts. Research Questions Our 3-year, mixed-method study of Black students in computer (CpE), electrical (EE) and mechanical engineering (ME) aims to identify institutional policies and practices that contribute to the retention and attrition of Black students in electrical, computer, and mechanical engineering. Our four study institutions include historically Black institutions as well as predominantly white institutions, all of which are in the top 15 nationally in the number of Black engineering graduates. We are using a transformative mixed-methods design to answer the following overarching research questions: 1. Why do Black men and women choose and persist in, or leave, EE, CpE, and ME? 2. What are the academic trajectories of Black men and women in EE, CpE, and ME? 3. In what way do these pathways vary by gender or institution? 4. What institutional policies and practices promote greater retention of Black engineering students? Methods This study of Black students in CpE, EE, and ME reports initial results from in-depth interviews at one HBCU and one PWI. We asked students about a variety of topics, including their sense of belonging on campus and in the major, experiences with discrimination, the impact of race on their experiences, and experiences with microaggressions. For this paper, we draw on two methodological approaches that allowed us to move beyond a traditional, linear approach to in-depth interviews, allowing for more diverse experiences and narratives to emerge. First, we used an identity circle to gain a better understanding of the relative importance to the participants of racial identity, as compared to other identities. The identity circle is a series of three concentric circles, surrounding an “inner core” representing one’s “core self.” Participants were asked to place various identities from a provided list that included demographic, family-related, and school-related identities on the identity circle to reflect the relative importance of the different identities to participants’ current engineering education experiences. Second, participants were asked to complete an 8-item survey which measured the “centrality” of racial identity as defined by Sellers et al. (1997). Following Enders’ (2018) reflection on the MMRI and Nigrescence Theory, we chose to use the measure of racial centrality as it is generally more stable across situations and best “describes the place race holds in the hierarchy of identities an individual possesses and answers the question ‘How important is race to me in my life?’” (p. 518). Participants completed the MIBI items at the end of the interview to allow us to learn more about the participants’ identification with their racial group, to avoid biasing their responses to the Identity Circle, and to avoid potentially creating a stereotype threat at the beginning of the interview. This paper focuses on the results of the MIBI survey and the identity circles to investigate whether these measures were correlated. Recognizing that Blackness (race) is not monolithic, we were interested in knowing the extent to which the participants considered their Black identity as central to their engineering education experiences. Combined with discussion about the identity circles, this approach allowed us to learn more about how other elements of identity may shape the participants’ educational experiences and outcomes and revealed possible differences in how participants may enact various points of their identity. Findings For this paper, we focus on the results for five HBCU students and 27 PWI students who completed the MIBI and identity circle. The overall MIBI average for HBCU students was 43 (out of a possible 56) and the overall MIBI scores ranged from 36-51; the overall MIBI average for the PWI students was 40; the overall MIBI scores for the PWI students ranged from 24-51. Twenty-one students placed race in the inner circle, indicating that race was central to their identity. Five placed race on the second, middle circle; three placed race on the third, outer circle. Three students did not place race on their identity circle. For our cross-case qualitative analysis, we will choose cases across the two institutions that represent low, medium and high MIBI scores and different ranges of centrality of race to identity, as expressed in the identity circles. Our final analysis will include descriptive quotes from these in-depth interviews to further elucidate the significance of race to the participants’ identities and engineering education experiences. The results will provide context for our larger study of a total of 60 Black students in engineering at our four study institutions. Theoretically, our study represents a new application of Racial Identity Theory and will provide a unique opportunity to apply the theories of intersectionality, critical race theory, and community cultural wealth theory. Methodologically, our findings provide insights into the utility of combining our two qualitative research tools, the MIBI centrality scale and the identity circle, to better understand the influence of race on the education experiences of Black students in engineering. 
    more » « less
  2. In this Work-in-Progress paper, we report on the challenges and successes of a large-scale First- Year Engineering and Computer Science Program at an urban comprehensive university, using quantitative and qualitative assessment results. Large-scale intervention programs are especially relevant to comprehensive minority serving institutions (MSIs) that serve a high percentage of first-generation college students who often face academic and socioeconomic barriers. Our program was piloted in 2015 with 30 engineering students, currently enrolls 60 engineering and computer science students, and is expected to grow to over 200 students by Fall 2020. The firstyear program interventions include: (i) block schedules for each cohort in the first year; (ii) redesigned project-based introduction to engineering and introduction to computer science courses; (iii) an introduction to mechanics course, which provides students with the foundation needed to succeed in the traditional physics sequence; and (iv) peer-led supplemental instruction (SI) workshops for Calculus, Physics and Chemistry. A faculty mentorship program was implemented to provide additional support to students, but was phased out after the first year. Challenges encountered in the process of expanding the program include administrative, such as scheduling and training faculty and SI leaders; barriers to improvement of math and science instruction; and more holistic concerns such as creating a sense of community and identity for the program. Quantitative data on academic performance includes metrics such as STEM GPA and persistence, along with the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) for physics. Qualitative assessments of the program have used student and instructor surveys, focus groups, and individual interviews to measure relationships among factors associated with college student support and to extract student perspectives on what works best for them. Four years of data tell a mixed story, in which the qualitative effect of the interventions on student confidence and identity is strong, while academic performance is not yet significantly different than that of comparison groups. One of the most significant results of the program is the development of a FYrE Professional Learning Community which includes faculty (both tenure-track and adjunct), department chairs, staff, and administrators from across the campus. 
    more » « less
  3. This research paper is a study of the support needs of nontraditional students in engineering (NTSE). Nontraditional students in engineering are one segment of the student body that has traditionally not been a part of the conversation in engineering education– those students who do not go through a typical four-year college degree largely at a residential campus. It is only by better understanding the range of issues that NTSE face that we will be able to design interventions and support systems that can assist them. Recent work in engineering education particularly argues that co-curricular support is a critical factor in student success as it effects curricular progress but there has been no work looking specifically at co-curricular support for NTSE and their retention and persistence. The population of NTSE is increasing across campuses as more students take on jobs to support their education and as those in the workforce return to complete their education. It is imperative that higher educational systems understand how to serve the needs of these students better. Although there are a range of ways in which nontraditional students (NTS) are defined, the NCES has proposed a comprehensive definition that includes enrollment criteria, financial and family status, and high school graduation status. Overall, the seven characteristics specifically associated with NTS are: (1) Delayed enrollment by a year or more after high school, (2) attended part-time, (3) having dependents, (4) being a single parent, (5) working full time while enrolled, (6) being financially independent from parents, and (7) did not receive a standard high school diploma. We ground our research in the Model of Co-Curricular Support (MCCS) which suggests it is the role of the institution to provide the necessary support for integration. If students are aware and have access to resources, which lead to their success, then they will integrate into the university environment at higher rates than those students who are not aware and have access to those resources. This research study focuses on answering one research question: How do NTSE engage with co-curricular supports as they progress through their degree programs? To answer this question, we recruited 11 NTSE with a range of nontraditional characteristics to complete prompted reflective journaling assignments five times throughout the Fall 2021 semester. Qualitative results showcase the nuanced lives of NTSE as they pursue their engineering degrees. In particular, results indicate students interact with faculty, classmates, and friends/peers the most, and only interact with advising when required. Students rarely reach out to larger student support for help or are involved with campus or other events happening. Classmate and friend/peer interactions are the most positive, while interactions with faculty had the largest negative outcomes. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract This S_STEM project is designed to support the retention and graduation of high-achieving, low income students with demonstrated financial need at Baylor University. Over its five-year duration, this project will fund four-year scholarships to 22 students who are pursuing Bachelor degrees in Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science. Engineering and Computer Science (ECS) Scholars will participate in activities which include an orientation, a monthly seminar series and required faculty mentoring. Support services and activities for ECS Scholars build upon existing activities at Baylor and feature peer mentoring, study abroad opportunities, alumni mentoring, support and training for undergraduate research, professional development workshops, and tutoring support from the ECS Learning Resource Center. A distinguishing feature of the project is the use of EAB’s Navigate, a web-based software platform for tracking student progress, coordinating student care and employing predictive analytics. The expertise generated using a student dashboard capable of predictive analytics will have the broad impact of informing the STEM community of best practices for timely interventions, and improving retention and graduation rates. The Navigate platform is used for predictive analytics and to track and document ECS Scholar progress toward achieving benchmark goals in the areas of retention, graduation rates, internships, undergraduate research experiences, and job placement. The use of predictive analytics has significant potential for helping students arrive at successful outcomes. However, it is an assumption of this project that the successful use of predictive analytics should take into consideration not simply the accuracy in identifying students who are struggling but in the social attributions of success and perceptions of a “big data” tool that might be received alternatively with enthusiasm or suspicion. The focus of this paper will be to give an overview of our first-year results from the project. We were successful in recruiting the full first cohort that began in the Fall of 2020. For the first year, many of the engagement sessions with the students pivoted to a virtual experience, however, we were able to manage several events that fostered a sense of community among the ECS scholars. Our research partners from the Baylor School of Education were successful in conducting baseline qualitative research using detailed interviews with an initial focus on community fit, academic fit and faculty relationships. The paper will also summarize our use of the Navigate platform and the lessons learned in the areas of data capture and interventions. 
    more » « less
  5. Our transformative mixed-methods project, funded by the Division of Engineering Education and Centers, responds to calls for more cross-institutional qualitative and longitudinal studies of minorities in engineering education. We seek to identify the factors that promote persistence and graduation as well as attrition for Black students in Electrical Engineering (EE), Computer Engineering (CpE), and Mechanical Engineering (ME). Our work combines quantitative exploration and qualitative interviews to better understand the nuanced and complex nature of retention and attrition in these fields. We are investigating the following overarching research questions: 1. Why do Black men and women choose and persist in, or leave, EE, CpE, and ME? 2. What are the academic trajectories of Black men and women in EE, CpE, and ME? 3. In what ways do these pathways vary by gender or institution? 4. What institutional policies and practices promote greater retention of Black engineering students? In this paper, we report on the results from 79 in-depth interviews with students at Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs) and a Historically Black University (HBCU [or HBU]). We describe emergent findings during Year 3 of our project, with a focus on four papers-in-progress: • Paper # 1: Our project utilized several innovative strategies for collecting narratives from our 79 interviewees. In particular, we developed a card-sorting activity to learn more about students’ reasons for choosing their engineering major. We have explored a variety of ways to analyze the data that illustrate the value of this type of data collection strategy and which will be of value to other researchers interested in decision making where there is a potentially complex set of factors, such as those found in deciding on a major. • Paper # 2: We summarized student responses to a pre-interview climate survey about three domains – Teaching and Learning, Faculty and Peer Interactions, and Belonging and Commitment. We investigated two questions: Are there differences between persisters and switchers? And, are there differences by study major? Results indicate substantial differences between persisters and switchers and some differences between ME and ECE students. • Paper # 3: Preliminary analysis of interviews of 10 HBCU Black students and 10 PWI Black students revealed that students enact several different types of community cultural wealth, particularly family, navigational, aspirational, social and resistant capital. Early results suggest that the HBCU students enacted a different form of family capital that resided in their “HBCU family” and the opportunities that their college-based networks afforded them to succeed in the major. PWI students described various forms of navigational capital and assets that were enacted in order to succeed at their study institutions. Our paper concludes with implications for university policies and practices aimed toward underrepresented students. 
    more » « less