Wright College, an urban open-access community college, independently accredited within a larger community college system, is a federally recognized Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) with the largest community college enrollment of Hispanic students in its state. In 2018, Wright College received an inaugural National Science Foundation-Hispanic Serving Institution (NSF:HSI) research project grant “Building Capacity: Building Bridges into Engineering and Computer Science”.
The project's overall goals are to increase underrepresented students pursuing an associate degree (AES) in engineering and computer science and streamline two transitions: high school to community college and 2-year to 4-year institutions. Through the grant, Wright College created a holistic and programmatic framework that examines and correlates engineering students' self-efficacy (the belief that students will succeed as engineers) and a sense of belonging with student success. The project focuses on Near-STEM ready students (students who need up to four semesters of math remediation before moving into Calculus 1). The project assesses qualitative and quantitative outcomes through surveys and case study interviews supplemented with retention, persistence, transfer, associate and bachelor's degree completion rates, and time for degree completion. The key research approach is to correlate student success data with self-efficacy and belonging measures.
Outcomes and Impacts
Three years into the project, Wright College Engineering and Computer Science Program was able to:
• Develop and implement the Contextualized Summer Bridge with a total of 132 Near-STEM participants. One hundred twenty-seven (127) completed; 100% who completed the Bridge eliminated up to two years of math remediation, and 54% were directly placed in Calculus 1. All successful participants were placed in different engineering pathways, and 11 students completed Associate in Engineering Science (AES) and transferred after two years from the Bridge.
• Increase enrollment by 940% (25 to 235 students)
• Retain 93% of first-year students (Fall to fall retention). Seventy-five percent (75%) transferred after two years from initial enrollment.
• Develop a holistic and programmatic approach for transfer model, thus increasing partnerships with 4-year transfer institutions resulting in the expansion of guaranteed/dual admissions programs with scholarships, paid research experience, dual advising, and students transferring as juniors.
• Increase diversity at Wright College by bridging the academic gap for Near-STEM ready students.
• Increase self-efficacy and belonging among all Program participants.
• Increase institutionalized collaborations responsible for Wright College's new designation as the Center of Excellence for Engineering and Computer Science.
• Increase enrollment, retention, and transfer of Hispanic students instrumental for Wright College Seal of Excelencia recognition.
Lessons Learned
The framework established during the first year of the grant overwhelmingly increased belonging and self-efficacy correlated with robust outcomes. However, the COVID-19 pandemic provided new challenges and opportunities in the second and third years of the grant. While adaptations were made to compensate for the negative impact of the pandemic, the face-to-face interactions were critical to support students’ entry into pathways and persistence within the Program.
more »
« less
Continued STEM Commitment in Light of 2020 Events: A Perspective From the Illinois Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation
We evaluated the impact of the current COVID-19 pandemic and systemic racism on Underrepresented Minority (URM) students pursuing higher education in the STEM fields. Given the ongoing pandemic and the wave of protests in response to a series of police brutalities and systemic racism, URM students were thrown into uncharted territory. We reached out to a group of Black and Latino students who were already engaged in STEM. We began surveys and interviews by asking participants how they were and how their family and communities were doing. Next, participants answered questions about academic progress, challenges, and what support would be helpful. Our framework was based on a mixed-methods approach that draws on the work of Michael Patton (Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice, 2014) and Veronica Thomas (American Journal of Evaluation, 2016, 38 (1), 7–28). Qualitative data from interviews were collected to capture perceptions, experiences, and recommendations of the study participants. Survey data were collected to reach as many students as possible and to provide numerical self-assessments of student experience, progression, and obstacles. All qualitative data were coded thematically using Atlas. ti, with the goal of illuminating emerging themes, and quantitative data were reviewed using descriptive statistics. Themes emerging from both data sets were compared, contrasted, and integrated in order to develop consistent findings that would enhance URM student perseverance and persistence in the face of confounding adversities. This study shows that ILSAMP COVID-19 Study participants maintained a commitment to pursuing a career in STEM. The findings of this study also indicate that the participants are stressed by their immediate circumstances and by the ongoing racism of U.S. society. These students ask for additional financial, academic, and networking support during the disruptions caused by the pandemic. More specifically, students request continued advising and connection with STEM professionals who can help them envision and enact a pathway to their own careers in STEM during this tumultuous period. The study validates the importance of key elements of the national LSAMP model as reported by Clewell et al. (Revitalizing the Nation’s Talent Pool in STEM, 2006). These are: academic integration, social integration, and professional integration. In addition, it identifies several other factors that are key to student success, including interventions that directly address racial trauma and economic hardship.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1911341
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10344471
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in Education
- Volume:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 2504-284X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) received funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) for a Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) project in 1991 as one of the six initial awardees. As part of these efforts and upon reaching eligibility, the TAMUS LSAMP applied for and received additional funding to support a Bridge to the Doctorate (BTD) program. BTD programming provides financial, educational, and social support to incoming STEM master’s degree and PhD students for the first two years of their graduate study. BTD cohorts consist of up to 12 fellows who participate in a program of academic and professional development seminars and workshops. In project evaluation, annual interviews were conducted with the TAMUS BTD participants, the vast majority of whom were underrepresented minorities (92%). During the interviews, the BTD students were asked to discuss ten topics some of which addressed concerns specific to the implementation of the BTD project. This report considers answers provided in the five topic areas which have broader applicability: 1) the learning achieved by participants through participation in BTD, 2) the personal impact of participation in BTD, 3) the influence of BTD on informants’ educational goals, 4) the influence of BTD on informants’ career goals, and 5) barriers the BTD participants perceived to pursuing a PhD. Eighty project participants responded to the questions between 2009 and 2018. They were from eight distinct cohorts of BTD students and represented 32 different areas of STEM specialization. Qualitative analysis of their responses confirmed that students perceived the elements of the TAMUS BTD project to be efficacious and that there was a set of nine seminars from which participants consistently reported benefit. Additional findings were eight key areas in which learning was reported by participants, four areas in which the programming had personal impact, five influences on educational goals, nine impacts on career goals, and a detailed list of barriers graduate students who are underrepresented minorities (URM) perceive to pursuing a doctoral degree. The proven and easily replicated pattern of support programming, the demonstrated results of this programming, and insight into barriers URMs perceive to pursuing a STEM doctorate are immediately applicable to URM graduate student support at many institutions of higher education.more » « less
-
Background: Even though Historically Black College and Universities (HBCUs) make up only 3% of higher education's institutions, they play a pivotal role in producing Black scientists by virtue of the fact that many received either their undergraduate or doctorate degree from a HBCU. HBCUs are credited with providing a more supportive and nurturing environment that thrives on communal mindsets and practices, emphasizing the importance of relationships, offering opportunities for Black students to "see themselves" as part of the academic and social milieu whereas Historically White Institutions (HWIS) are characterized as being hostile and discriminatory. Mentoring is said to be pivotal in the attainment of the PhD. Mentorships have an inherent gatekeeping mechanism, better positioning those who receive effective mentorships while disadvantaging those who do not. It has potential to harm and marginalize when not engaged with deliberate care and a culturally liberative mindset. Mentoring, when not under the thumb of colonizing mindsets, can contribute to more equitable experiences and outcomes for students who hail from AGEP population groups. Literature has indicated that Black students are less likely to have a mentor or be engaged in effective mentorships. The HBCU narrative of supportive environment is consistently told but has scant empirical validation for Black students pursuing STEM doctoral degrees. In fact, the lure of having faculty and peers who look like you is something of an enigma given that even at HBCUs there are limited numbers of Black faculty in STEM. How are same race, same gender mentorships attained when, not unlike their HWIS counterparts, HBCU STEM faculties have a large number of White and Asian men? If the environment is indeed different at HBCUs, is it different for Black STEM doctoral students? Is STEM doctoral mentoring at HBCUs emblematic of anti-Blackness or is it yet another tool used to oppress marginalized students? Theoretical Framework: Anti-black racism and critical capital theory serve as critical theoretical frameworks and were selected because they highlight the ways violence is enacted through taken for granted colonized practices such as mentoring. Fanon understood that thoughts and mindsets are the progenitors of violence and dehumanization is the process through which violence is enacted. Anti-black racism and critical capital theory can be useful in unearthing the structural inequalities that uphold the current system in place for STEM doctoral learning. Research Design: An embedded multiple qualitative case study research project sought to understand the nature and quality of STEM doctoral mentorships at an HBCU. The analysis on the HBCU subcase asked, how are STEM doctoral mentorships understood by Black STEM doctoral students at HBCUs? Black STEM HBCU students were interviewed and completed a mentoring competency assessment survey. In addition STEM doctoral students from three universities also completed the survey. The qualitative data was analyzed using narrative analysis and the survey data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. This project is part of a larger NSF AGEP sponsored research study. Research findings: The findings from this study expose that Black STEM doctoral students at HBCUs have not reached the proverbial Promise Land. In spite of being in a space that is more diverse, they manage to simultaneously be invisible and hypervisible. An unmerited sense of assumed cultural belonging was highlighted with students reporting a lack of selfethnic reflectors in their programs. In many ways the systemic and institutional structures on HBCUs with respect to STEM doctoral programming mirrored the colonial structures more often associated with HWIS. Their culture and cultural-based experiences as domestic students as well as their academic strengths were often not recognized by mentors while that of international students were. Three themes were supported by the data: Conspicuous Absence, Race Still Matters, and Invisibilized Hypervisibility. Implications: Better understanding how STEM doctoral mentoring is facilitated at HBCUs holds the promise of informing a mentoring practice that supports cultural liberation instead of cultural degradation and suppression. It becomes one avenue as the “The Call'' suggests to "confront our own complicity in the colonial enterprise" by holding STEM doctoral mentors and the institutions they represent accountable for socially just mentoring practices. Greater intentionality as well as mandated training informed by the study's results are recommended. HBCU faculty doctoral mentors are challenged to be scholar activists who engage mentoring from an advocacy and accomplice framework. The development of STEM scholar activists is the aspiration of more culturally liberative STEM doctoral mentorships. Black students need mentors who are willing and equipped to be advocates and accomplices in their success.more » « less
-
In March 2020, the global COVID-19 pandemic forced universities across the United States to immediately stop face-to-face activities and transition to virtual instruction. While this transition was not easy for anyone, the shift to online learning was especially difficult for STEM courses, particularly engineering, which has a strong practical/laboratory component. Additionally, underrepresented students (URMs) in engineering experienced a range of difficulties during this transition. The purpose of this paper is to highlight underrepresented engineering students’ experiences as a result of COVID-19. In particular, we aim to highlight stories shared by participants who indicated a desire to share their experience with their instructor. In order to better understand these experiences, research participants were asked to share a story, using the novel data collection platform SenseMaker, based on the following prompt: Imagine you are chatting with a friend or family member about the evolving COVID-19 crisis. Tell them about something you have experienced recently as an engineering student. Conducting a SenseMaker study involves four iterative steps: 1) Initiation is the process of designing signifiers, testing, and deploying the instrument; 2) Story Collection is the process of collecting data through narratives; 3) Sense-making is the process of exploring and analyzing patterns of the collection of narratives; and 4) Response is the process of amplifying positive stories and dampening negative stories to nudge the system to an adjacent possible (Van der Merwe et al. 2019). Unlike traditional surveys or other qualitative data collection methods, SenseMaker encourages participants to think more critically about the stories they share by inviting them to make sense of their story using a series of triads and dyads. After completing their narrative, participants were asked a series of triadic, dyadic, and sentiment-based multiple-choice questions (MCQ) relevant to their story. For one MCQ, in particular, participants were required to answer was “If you could do so without fear of judgment or retaliation, who would you share this story with?” and were given the following options: 1) Family 2) Instructor 3) Peers 4) Prefer not to answer 5) Other. A third of the participants indicated that they would share their story with their instructor. Therefore, we further explored this particular question. Additionally, this paper aims to highlight this subset of students whose primary motivation for their actions were based on Necessity. High-level qualitative findings from the data show that students valued Grit and Perseverance, recent experiences influenced their Sense of Purpose, and their decisions were majorly made based on Intuition. Chi-squared tests showed that there were not any significant differences between race and the desire to share with their instructor, however, there were significant differences when factoring in gender suggesting that gender has a large impact on the complexity of navigating school during this time. Lastly, ~50% of participants reported feeling negative or extremely negative about their experiences, ~30% reported feeling neutral, and ~20% reported feeling positive or extremely positive about their experiences. In the study, a total of 500 micro-narratives from underrepresented engineering students were collected from June – July 2020. Undergraduate and graduate students were recruited for participation through the researchers’ personal networks, social media, and through organizations like NSBE. Participants had the option to indicate who is able to read their stories 1) Everyone 2) Researchers Only, or 3) No one. This work presents qualitative stories of those who granted permission for everyone to read.more » « less
-
Background: Structural racism is a root cause of health inequality . R esponding to structural racism requires interventions to address systemic inequalit ies that structure poor health , particularly for people with intersecting Black , Latinx , and LGBTQ+ identities . However, l ittl e is known about successful strategies to combat structural racism . Using in - depth , qualitative, community - based participatory research methods, we describe two community interventions in Central Florida that responded to structural racism during the Summ er of 2020. Methods: Findings draw from ongoing qualitative , community - based research that began in 2016 . Data collected include in - depth interviews with leaders and members of community - based organization s that advance intersectional racial and gender justice (n= 54); state legislators (n=2); and clinical service providers (n=4). During the summer of 2020 , community organization leaders created two efforts to combat systemic racism : the “LGBTQ+ Relief Fund” and the “All Black Lives Fund.” The LGBTQ+ Reli ef Fund responded to economic inequality structuring high rates of COVID - 19 among Black and Latinx LGBTQ+ identifying people, and the All Black Lives Fund responded to political and economic disparities in funding Black - led LGBTQ+ organizations. Results: C ommunity interventions resulted in over 800 LGBTQ+ individuals receiving financial assistance during the COVID - 19 pandemic, including LGBTQ+ people who were excluded from statewide interventions such as undocumented immigrants . The All Black Lives Fund d istributed $100,000 to three Black - led LGBTQ+ social movement organizations. Discussion : The se efforts provide examples of community - based approaches to respond to systemic racism as a root cause of poor health. Findings also demonstrate the importance of intersectionality and in - depth qualitative research in public healthmore » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.681027
