Expanding the K–16 Pool of Potential STEM Graduates

National Science Foundation Model Institutions for Excellence

Expanding the K–16 Pool of Potential STEM Graduates

Final Report

January 2007

Prepared for the Model Institutions for Excellence Program

National Science Foundation

January 2007

Project Director:Carlos Rodriguez

Project Manager:Lauren Banks Amos

Project Staff:Nrupa JaniJosh KingChad Duhon

Co-Principal Investigators:Floretta Dukes McKenzieCarmen Arroyo

Authors:Lauren Banks AmosNrupa Jani

TThhiiss rreeppoorrtt wwaass mmaaddee ppoossssiibbllee bbyy aa ggrraanntt ffuunnddeedd bbyy tthhee NNaattiioonnaall SScciieenncceeFFoouunnddaattiioonn aanndd tthhee NNaattiioonnaall AAeerroonnaauuttiiccss aanndd SSppaaccee AAddmmiinniissttrraattiioonn.. QQuueessttiioonnss

rreeggaarrddiinngg tthhiiss rreeppoorrtt aanndd tthhee MMooddeell IInnssttiittuuttiioonnss ffoorr EExxcceelllleennccee sshhoouulldd bbee ddiirreecctteedd ttooDDaavviidd LL.. TTeemmppllee,, JJrr..,, PPrrooggrraamm DDiirreeccttoorr..

NNSSFF EEdduuccaattiioonn aanndd HHuummaann RReessoouurrcceess DDiirreeccttoorraatteeDDaavviidd LL.. TTeemmppllee,, JJrr..

NNAASSAA UUnniivveerrssiittyy PPrrooggrraammss SSppeecciiaalliissttCCaarrll PPeerrssoonn

ContentsOOvveerrvviieeww ooff tthhee EExxppaannddiinngg tthhee KK––1166 PPooooll PPrroojjeecctt .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..11

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Psychosocial Barriers to Improved Minority Male Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Institutional Barriers to Improved Minority Male Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Low Expectations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Access to College Preparatory Coursework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Underqualified Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Home–School Disconnect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Lack of Role Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

The Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Bowie State University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Oglala Lakota College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Spelman College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Universidad Metropolitana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

The University of Texas at El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Xavier University of Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

The MIE Value-Add . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

TTeecchhnniiccaall AAssssiissttaannccee AAccttiivviittiieess .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..1155

Theory of Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Accomplishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Activity 2: Develop a Series of Research-Based Discussion Papers . . . . . . . . . . .16

Activity 4: Convene Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Activity 5: Prepare Post-Workshop Discussion and Concept Papers . . . . . . . . .17

iii


iv National Science Foundation Model Institutions for Excellence

OOuuttccoommeess .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..1199

Bowie State University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Oglala Lakota College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Spelman College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Universidad Metropolitana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

The University of Texas at El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Xavier University of Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Lessons Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

Successes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Future Work Planned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Oglala Lakota College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Spelman College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Universidad Metropolitana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

The University of Texas at El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

Xavier University of Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

EEvvaalluuaattiioonn ooff TTeecchhnniiccaall AAssssiissttaannccee AAccttiivviittiieess .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..2277

Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Incentives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Local MIE Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Current MIE Focus on Underrepresented Minority Males . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Successes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Capacity Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

Expanded Scope of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

RReeccoommmmeennddaattiioonnss ffoorr FFuuttuurree WWoorrkk .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..3311

Provide Onsite and Virtual Technical Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

Develop a Resource Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

Develop and Implement an Expanding the K–16 Pool Communication Strategy . . .31

Develop and Launch an Expanding the K–16 Pool Web Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

v


Convene Follow-Up Expanding the K–16 Pool National Workshops . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Identify and Establish a National Advisory Committee on Minority Male Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Convene a National Dissemination Conference on the Expanding the K–16 Pool Model and Minority Male Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Leverage NSF PAEMST and PAESMEM Programs as Resources for Partnership Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

AAppppeennddiixx AA .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..3355

Figures Figure 1. URM Postsecondary Enrollment by Gender, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Figure 2. National 2005 SAT Reasoning Test Takers: Math Mean Scores by Gender . . .3

Figure 3. Number of Computer Science and Engineering Degrees Awarded to Minority Students by Gender, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Figure 4. URM Undergraduate Enrollment by Gender, 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Figure 5. URM Students Taking an AP Exam by Gender, 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Figure 6. Percentage of U.S. High Schools Offering AP Courses by Subject, 2004 . . . . .6

Figure 7. Percentage of Qualified Middle School Mathematics and Science Teachers,1999–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Figure 8. Percentage of Qualified High School Mathematics and Science Teachers,1999–2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Figure 9. Percentage of Out-of-Field Public School Teachers in Mathematics and Science by Poverty Enrollment, 1993–1994 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Figure 10. STEM Bachelor Degrees Conferred (change from AY 1994–95 to AY 2003–04) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Figure 11. Undergraduate Total and STEM Enrollment (change from AY 1994–95 to AY 2003–04) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

IInnttrroodduuccttiioonn

The Model Institutions for Excellence(MIE) program, initiated in 1994, is ajoint venture between the National

Science Foundation (NSF) and the NationalAeronautics and Space Administration(NASA). The program was designed toincrease the number of underrepresentedminorities in science, technology, engineering,and mathematics (STEM) through funding to aselect group of minority-serving institutions.The MIE program’s success has been notewor-thy. The STEM infrastructure to support under-represented minority engagement and successis solidly built at each MIE program site. As aresult, the number of STEM bachelor’s degreesconferred by each MIE has increased steadilysince the program’s inception, outpacing thenational average of STEM degrees awarded tounderrepresented minority students.

However, the pipeline of underrepresentedminority students who are successfully pre-pared to pursue STEM degrees by highschool graduation is not as impressive.Research has shown that the pipeline toSTEM is particularly narrow for AfricanAmerican, Hispanic American, and AmericanIndian males because they:

■ Under-enroll in college preparatory cours-es in high school despite outperformingtheir female counterparts on mathematicsand science achievement tests;

■ Face unique psychosocial barriers to academic achievement; and

Overview of the Expanding the K–16 PoolProject

■ Disproportionately confront institutionalbarriers to improved academic outcomesin their schools.

While these are separate challenges notaddressed by the current MIE program, theyare a natural extension of the MIE program’swork to ensure an expanded pool of potentialSTEM matriculates at each higher educationinstitution. Therefore, recognizing these chal-lenges as strategic imperatives, from fall2004 through fall 2006, the AmericanInstitutes for Research® (AIR®) worked withthe NSF MIE grantees to expand its distin-guished STEM training and recruitmentefforts to the K–12 arena by providing tech-nical assistance for the establishment ofcommunity-based K–16 partnerships led bythe MIE.

Formally named “Expanding the K–16 Poolof Potential STEM Graduates,” the projectsought to be a capacity-building initiative andcatalyst for a national dialogue on underrep-resented minority male achievement. Thegoal was to develop school, community, andbusiness partnerships to broaden the enroll-ment of minority students, especially minori-ty males, in STEM at the postsecondary leveland to create a partnership model for strategicand sustainable change.

Building K–16 partnerships between ModelInstitutions for Excellence and K–12 schoolsystems is a natural opportunity to leveragethe substantial NSF and NASA investmentsin these institutions. By developing partner-ships, a greater yield or return to these

1


investments can be obtained by extending themomentum of success that the MIEs havegenerated for underrepresented minorities inSTEM.

In this report, we begin by sharing data andresearch on the problem of minority maleachievement and the narrow pipeline toSTEM. We discuss the MIE Program andwhy it is ideally poised to lead the Expandingthe K–16 Pool effort. In the second section ofthe report, we discuss AIR’s technical assis-tance approach and partnership developmentactivities over the course of the grant. In thethird section, we discuss overall and MIEsite-specific program outcomes including thelessons learned by the MIE sites throughout

the process of planning aK–16 partnership. In thefourth section, we sharethe challenges and suc-cesses faced by AIR asthe technical assistanceprovider. In the final sec-tion, we offer recommen-dations for future workshould NSF choose tocontinue its support of theExpanding the K–16 Poolinitiative.

BBaacckkggrroouunndd

The Problem

Underrepresented minority (i.e., AfricanAmerican, Hispanic American, and AmericanIndian) males are leaking from the pipeline toSTEM fields in higher education and beyond.The national trends are unmistakable. Under-represented minority males take fewer college

preparatory courses that prepare them to suc-cessfully pursue STEM fields—geometry,algebra II, calculus, biology, chemistry, andphysics—than minority females. Even whenminority males take a college preparatorycourse such as an Advanced Placement (AP)course, they are less likely to take the corre-sponding AP exam.1 Further, minority malesare less likely than their female counterpartsto graduate from high school,2 and a lowerpercentage of minority males take theScholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) than minorityfemales.3 As a result, underrepresentedminority men pursue higher education inlower numbers than minority women, eventhough they represent a larger percentage ofthe college-age resident population, as seen inthe graph below:

The national trends areunmistakable. Under-represented minoritymales take fewer collegepreparatory courses—geometry, algebra II, calculus, biology, chem-istry, and physics— thatprepare them to success-fully pursue STEM fieldsthan minority females.

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

First-YearEnrollment

UndergraduateEnrollment

College AgeResident

FemaleMale

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

229,

924

307,

730 1,23

8,92

0

1,81

3,16

6

4,74

2,73

0

4,33

0,65

7

FFiigguurree 11.. URM Postsecondary Enrollment byGender, 2000

Source: National Science Foundation, Division of ScienceResources Statistics, special tabulations of U.S. Departmentof Education, National Center for Education Statistics,Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, FallEnrollment Survey, 1994–2000.

2 National Science Foundation Model Institutions for Excellence

Conversely, nationally as well as in each ofthe U.S. states and one territory in which anMIE was established in 1994—Georgia,Maryland, Louisiana, South Dakota, Texas,and Puerto Rico—the minority males who dotake the SAT generally outperform minorityfemales on mathematics measures on the SATreasoning test:

Minority males who pursue higher educationare awarded more associate’s and bachelor’sdegrees in STEM fields than their femalecounterparts overall.4 Minority males are par-ticularly successful in pursuing computer science and engineering degrees:5

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

AmericanIndian

Black Mexicanor MexicanAmerican

PuertoRican

OtherHispanic

FemaleMale

510

479

424 447

443

453

442 48

3

476

490

FFiigguurree 22.. National 2005 SAT Reasoning TestTakers: Math Mean Scores by Gender

Source: http://www.collegeboard.com/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2005/reports.html

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Computer Science

Num

ber

of B

ache

lor’s

Deg

rees

Engineering

FemaleMale

4,12

3

2,79

3

5,10

4

2,05

2

FFiigguurree 33.. Number of Computer Science andEngineering Degrees Awarded to MinorityStudents by Gender, 2001


3


the work that has been completed focuses onthe teaching and learning of minority studentsas a whole or is theoretical in nature.Furthermore, many explanations for theSTEM achievement gap in the United Stateshave rested on controversial student deficitmodels6 pointing to such factors as visibleminority status, socioeconomic status, learn-ing ability, and self-concept. Racism is pri-mary among these explanatory models. Forinstance, minorities marked by visible char-acteristics such as skin color, dress, and hairtype that do not closely resemble the domi-nant culture are not received as well by society and the educational system.7

Self-concept is another popular factor cited inthe research. Both empirical studies and theo-retical works have argued that sociologicalfactors specific to U.S. society preventminorities from recognizing their potential asstudents, therefore devaluing the role thatacademics can play in their lives. For exam-ple, psychologist Jason Osborne claims that“disidentification” with school can cause orcontribute to poor academic outcomes anddecreased motivation to succeed academical-ly. Disidentification reveals itself in a numberof ways. Even though any student can experi-ence anxiety in school situations such as con-cern over appearing unintelligent for giving awrong answer in class, the burden is particu-larly great for members of underrepresentedminority groups for which negative groupstereotypes concerning academic ability pre-vail. For these individuals, a wrong answer isnot only personally damaging, but also con-firms the negative group stereotype amongtheir white peers. Osborne claims thatAfrican American boys are most likely tobecome disidentified with academics as theymove from one grade level to the next, more

These trends suggest that minority males arenot incapable or disinterested in attaining andachieving at high levels in STEM fields.Instead, the Expanding the K–16 Pool initia-tive recognized a number of psychosocial andinstitutional barriers to improved minoritymale academic outcomes across the K–16continuum.

Psychosocial Barriers to ImprovedMinority Male Achievement

There is a paucity of empirical research ondiscreet gender, racial, or ethnic disparities inthe mathematics and science fields. Much of

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

AfricanAmerican

Hispanic Asian/Pacific

Islander

AmericanIndian/Alaska

Native

Num

ber

of S

tude

nts

FemaleMale

642,

200

1,12

1,60

0

649,

200

435,

400

60,3

00

91,4

00

884,

100

492,

000

FFiigguurree 44.. URM Undergraduate Enrollment byGender, 2000


This is the case even though across all racialand ethnic groups, minority men enroll incollege in lower numbers than minoritywomen:


so than any other subgroup.8 Similarly, otherresearchers have argued that minority malesare less likely to achieve in school thanminority females because of marketplaceforces and the socialized expectation thatthey be the breadwinners:

Who we are is what you buy, display,and consume… The successful linkingof icons of male-centered culture—sports and sport figures in particular—tomarketed items for identity—sportshoes, jerseys, etc.—is a major innova-tion. Further, car culture and technologyculture (cell phones, computer games,etc.) have also greatly extended thecommercialization of what have beenhistorically masculine traits… Maleearning power is greater than that offemales immediately after high schooland thus may exert a disproportionatepull into the labor force for them.9

In U.S. society, white and minority malesalike are idealized and socialized to be bread-winners. The typical male role is character-ized by competitive and aggressive behavior,as well as expectations of economic andsocial superiority or privilege with strongramifications for the decisions males makeabout school and career.

Institutional Barriers to ImprovedMinority Male Achievement

Whatever merit such explanations may have,there is much more compelling evidence tosuggest that institutional factors must be atwork when underrepresented minority malesmake decisions about what courses to take inhigh school and what education and careersto pursue after graduation. Of these factors,the most actionable ones that influence the

STEM pipeline include: (a) low expectations,(b) access to college preparatory work,(c) underqualified teachers, (d) the home–school disconnect, and (e) a lack of role models.

Low Expectations

One of the most striking findings of theMetropolitan Life Survey of the AmericanTeacher 2000: Are We Preparing Students forthe 21st Century? was that teachers’ expecta-tions for their students’ postsecondary aspira-tions were vastly lower than the goals stated bythe students themselves. In fact, 71 percent ofhigh school student respondents reported theirintentions to attend a four-year college, whileteacher respondents believed that only 33 per-cent of their students planned to attend a four-year college.

Teachers’ expectations of their students arehighly influential.10 Minority students aremost likely to experience biasing effects ofteacher expectations.11 Poor teacher expecta-tions have a detrimental effect on studentmotivation and achievement.

School guidance counselors have been heldresponsible for perpetuating low expectationsin high schools, as they often are the gate-keepers to the college preparatory track.These counseling issues have been shown topersist in higher education where careercounselors have been found to dissuademinority students from pursuing challengingfields.12 There is a growing division withinthe school counseling community regardingthe appropriate focus of its programs—men-tal health or academic guidance. Historically,such programs have adhered more closely tothe mental health model, but increasingachievement gaps between low-income and

5


minority students and their more advantagedpeers signaled a need for guidance counselorsto take on the role as academic advocate andadvisor for all students.13 This call for a shiftin focus runs counter to the role that schoolcounselors have played traditionally in thelives of minority, low-income, and femalestudents, but the fact remains that guidancecounselors can play an important role inreducing biases by ensuring that all studentshave access to appropriate mathematicspreparation and timely career guidance andexploration.14

Access to College PreparatoryCoursework

Rigorous course-taking in high school is oneof the most reliable predictors of participationand success in higher education.15 However,the average high school graduate has notbeen adequately prepared to pursue highereducation without the need for remediation.16

Over time, underrepresented minority stu-dents have consistently taken fewer collegepreparatory mathematics courses than theirwhite and Asian peers. A smaller percentageof underrepresented minority students takegeometry, algebra II, or calculus by gradua-tion than Asian and white students.

Underrepresented minority participation incollege preparatory science courses is simi-larly disconcerting, particularly given theevidence that performance in collegepreparatory courses is the most influentialfactor in college admissions decisions.17

Fewer underrepresented minority studentstake AP examinations in biology, chemistry,and calculus.18 Of the minority students whotake AP examinations, women participate ingreater numbers:

This is largely because of access inequalities.Many high schools do not offer AP courses:

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

Black Hispanic AmericanIndian

Num

ber

of T

est

Take

rs

FemaleMale

30,2

90

46,0

44

3,52

9

56,5

08

68,9

64

4,22

9

FFiigguurree 55.. URM Students Taking an AP Examby Gender, 2004

Source: The College Board, AP 2004 National SummaryReports. http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/exgrd_sum/2004.html.

0

10%0% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Biology

Calculus AB

Calculus BC

Chemistry

Computer Science A

Computer Science AB

Environmental Science

Physics B

65.5%

10.4%

16.3%

7.5%

5.1%

9.1%

25.4%

17.5%

47.8%

32.1%

Physics C

Total High Schools

FFiigguurree 66.. Percentage of U.S. High SchoolsOffering AP Courses by Subject, 2004

Source: The College Board, Exam Data: 2004,http:www.apcentral.collegeboard.com


Underqualified Teachers

Underrepresented minority students prepara-tion in STEM fields is also hampered by theirdisproportionate assignment to underqualifiedteachers. Although the majority of middleschool mathematics and science teachers arecertified, roughly half of middle school math-ematics and science teachers did not major orminor in their main assignment field:

At the high school level, there is a particularshortage of chemistry and physics teacherswho majored or minored in the subjects theyteach. Although high school teachers are bet-ter qualified to teach mathematics and the lifesciences than middle school teachers, withmore receiving bachelor’s degrees in their

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Mathematics Science

Major/Minor in Field

48.6

%

19.7

%

18.7

%

51.5

%

40.0

%

60.0

%

80.3

%

81.3

%

Certified in Main Assignment Field

No Major/Minor in Field Not Certified in Main Assignment Field

FFiigguurree 77.. Percentage of Qualified MiddleSchool Mathematics and Science Teachers,1999–2000

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center forEducation Statistics. (2004). Qualifications of the publicschool teacher workforce: Prevalence of out-of-field teach-ing, 1987–88 to 1999–2000, NCES 2002–603 Revised by M. McMillen Seastrom, K. J. Gruber, R. Henke, D. J. McGrath,& B. A. Cohen. Washington, DC.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Mathematics Biology/Life Science

Chemistry Physics

Major/Minor in Field

85.5

%14

.5%

89.2

%10

.8%

72.3

%27

.7%

88.9

%11

.1%

62.3

%

58.1

%

37.7

%

88.4

%11

.6%

41.9

%

89.3

%10

.7%

Certified in Main Assignment Field

No Major/Minor in Field Not Certified in Main Assignment Field

FFiigguurree 88.. Percentage of Qualified High SchoolMathematics and Science Teachers,1999–2000

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center forEducation Statistics. (2004). Qualifications of the publicschool teacher workforce: Prevalence of out-of-field teach-ing, 1987–88 to 1999–2000, NCES 2002–603 Revised by M.McMillen Seastrom, K. J. Gruber, R. Henke, D. J. McGrath, &B. A. Cohen. Washington, DC.

main assignment field, roughly half of allphysical science teachers did not major orminor in the subjects they teach:

These out-of-field teachers work dispropor-tionately in high-poverty schools.19 In fact,classes in high-poverty secondary schools are77 percent more likely to be assigned an out-of-field or inexperienced teacher than areclasses in low-poverty schools.20 The problemis especially acute in the physical scienceswhere the majority of teachers in low- andhigh-poverty schools alike are underqualified:21

7


school and teachers. Asstated previously, disiden-tification with academicsreveals itself in variousways. Prominent amongthese is the “cool pose”—a ritualized approach tomasculinity that allowsAfrican American malesto cope with a difficult orunpleasant environment.Cool pose is characterizedas an outward show offearlessness and detach-ment to counter ill-feelingssuch as damaged pride anddiminished self-confidence.

The absence of Latino teachers in schools isalso problematic. Latino males are more like-ly than Latino females to be tracked intoremedial courses and, consequently, are morelikely to take on an adversarial stance towardteachers.25 Latinos are three times more likelyto be suspended from school than Latinas,more likely to be referred for special educa-tion than Latinas, and erroneously viewed asgang members by teachers and counselorsthan Latinas.26 Such disproportionate discipli-nary action frequently becomes cause for suspension and expulsion, increasing the like-lihood that an underrepresented minoritymale’s academic career will be cut short. As aresult, Latino males participate in smallernumbers in college preparatory courses. Infact, “African American males are expelledfrom school at twice the rate of white stu-dents, and although African Americans are 13 percent of all monthly drug users, they are55 percent of those convicted of drug posses-sion, and 74 percent of those sentenced toprison for possession. Students convicted of a

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Math Life Science PhysicalScience

High PovertyLow Poverty

37.6

39.4

68.4

27.5

28.9

50.6

FFiigguurree 99.. Percentage of Out-of-Field PublicSchool Teachers in Mathematics and Scienceby Poverty Enrollment, 1993–1994

Home–School Disconnect

Cultural differences influence academicachievement in school.22 Therefore, traditionalcurricula may hurt students more than not byfurther highlighting the separateness and dif-ferences of people of color.23 Moreover, tradi-tional school curricula promote white, middle-class ideals rather than embracing the idealsof the country’s various cultures. Lack ofparental involvement in school and curricu-lum design further perpetuates thehome–school disconnect.24

Lack of Role Models

While the previously mentioned factors affectunderrepresented minority students as awhole, other factors may explain variations inachievement among males and females. Inaddition, high school student retention isstrongly influenced by disciplinary action,which is taken out disproportionately on cer-tain groups of students, such as those whodemonstrate an adversarial attitude toward

Traditional school curricula neglect the contributions of people of color, encouragingstereotypes about theabsence of minorities inacademia and specificcareers. The multiculturalcurricula typically imple-mented in schools areinadequate because theyexamine the contribu-tions of disadvantagedgroups separately fromthe primary curriculum(e.g., Hispanic HistoryMonth).


drug offense have been made either temporar-ily, or permanently, ineligible for federal col-lege loans and grants by the Drug FreeStudent Loans Act of 1998. For those inprison, access to Pell Grants was terminatedby law in 1994.” 27

Factors such as these—inexperienced teach-ers, lack of culturally relevant curricula, andaccess to the college preparatory track affectall underrepresented minority students. Asstated previously, there is insufficient empiri-cal research on the gender-by-race achieve-ment gap in STEM fields. However, what lit-tle we do know about why underrepresentedminority males are less prepared than under-represented minority females to pursue STEMcareers is clear. Not only do minority males

face the aforementionedhurdles, but they are alsomore likely to drop out ofhigh school and/or notenroll in college becausethey face the followingpsychosocial and institu-tional challenges:

■ Lack of male rolemodels in schools andbusiness;

■ Disproportionate dis-ciplinary action includingsuspension and expulsion;

■ Disproportionate pull of the labor force;

■ Lower teacher expectations of underrep-resented minority male achievement evidenced by the consistent awarding oflower grades, more criticism, less praise,and less attention;

■ Stronger peer pressure to disassociatewith school and studying; and

■ Disproportionate assignment to specialeducation classes.28

The Proposal

To address the problem of the narrowpipeline to STEM, in fall 2004, TheMcKenzie Group (now merged with AIR)received funding to help leverage the experi-ence and expertise of the MIE program. TheMIE program, initiated in 1994, is a jointventure between NSF and NASA. The pro-gram was designed to increase the number ofunderrepresented minorities in STEMthrough funding to a select group of minori-ty-serving institutions. Four NSF-funded andtwo NASA-funded MIE sites received long-term funding for infrastructure developmentin STEM education and individual support torecruit and retain minority STEM students.The six MIE programs include: (1) BowieState University, Maryland (2) the OyateConsortium (composed of Oglala LakotaCollege, Sitting Bull College, and Sisseton-Wahpeton College located in South and NorthDakota); (3) Spelman College, Georgia; (4)Universidad Metropolitana, Puerto Rico; (5)University of Texas at El Paso; and (6) XavierUniversity of Louisiana.*

Bowie State University

Bowie State University is the oldestHistorically Black College/University(HBCU) in Maryland. Founded in 1865 asthe Baltimore Normal School, it progressedinto a four-year program and migrated intothe University of Maryland system in 1988.

Whereas AfricanAmerican females haveplentiful role models inschools, higher education,and the workplace tolook to for guidance andsupport, lack of under-represented minoritymale role models, particularly as teachers,is one of the most compelling barriers toacademic achievementfor adolescent minoritymales.

* The following descriptions of each MIE were adapted from the “Creating and Maintaining Excellence: The Model Institutions for Excellence Program” report.

9


As a public university, Bowie admits about50 percent of its applicants. The majority of students at Bowie State are nontraditionalstudents who have not conventionally beenknown to pursue STEM majors or careers.Rather, local students who are interested inpursuing such careers have traditionallyattended one of the two area research univer-sities in the University of Maryland system.29

Appropriately so, Bowie has focused its MIEprogram on the enrollment and preservationof STEM students.

Bowie is funded by NASA and is directed byDr. Elaine Davis. Student enrollment is morethan 5,000 and consists primarily of nontradi-tional commuter students from PrinceGeorge’s County, Maryland. During the early1990s, before MIE funding was initiated, thenumber of students enrolled in STEM majorshad essentially leveled off. Bowie’s STEMfaculty have nearly doubled in the past 11 years. Currently, Bowie State comes in asthe number one university in the productionof African Americans with master’s degreesin computer science and information scienceswith 19 undergraduate degree programs.

Oglala Lakota College

The Oyate Consortium is an associationamong three tribal colleges in South and NorthDakota (Oglala Lakota College, Sitting BullCollege, and Sisseton-Wahpeton College). Allof the colleges within the consortium werefounded during the 1970s. The colleges serv-ice Native American students from the PineRidge, Standing Rock, and Lake Traverse(Sisseton) reservations as well as non-Native

Americans from the surrounding area. PineRidge is the second-largest Indian reservationin the country. Due to this large geographicarea, there are 12 remote education centersmaking Oglala Lakota College a decentralizedcampus.30

The average student age in the consortium is29, the majority of whom are female withchildren. A vast majority of students receivesome sort of financial aid. A large number ofstudents score 30–40 percent below the stateaverage on standardized tests in mathematicsand science, which triggered the need to cre-ate college-level and developmental coursesthat would prepare entering freshmen stu-dents for the demands of mainstream,college-level courses.

At the inception of the MIE program in 1995,the consortium had a dearth of experiencedstaff to teach STEM courses at the collegelevel. Furthermore, none of the colleges inthe consortium supported STEM degree programs. The straightforward goal of theMIE program was to “create an opportunityfor science, engineering and mathematicseducation,” which then did not exist.31 Thethree schools put together educate nearly2,000 students, many of whom attend on apart-time basis. The Oyate Consortium, fund-ed by NSF and directed by Stacy Phelps,offers onsite and distance education.

Spelman College

Spelman College has been nationally recog-nized for its strong science programs even


prior to receiving MIE funding. Approximatelyone third of its students were pursuing STEMfields at the start of MIE funding. Spelmanhas a long history of receiving financial sup-port from foundations, private donors, andgovernment agencies. As such, Spelman’sapplication for MIE funding explicitly statedthat it wanted to focus on enhancing itsSTEM program facilities and methods toretaining students instead of focusing on itsalready outstanding recruitment strategies ofSTEM students. Founded in 1881, SpelmanCollege has established a national and inter-national reputation as an elite institutionamong private liberal arts colleges. Spelmanis one of only two HBCUs exclusively forwomen.32

Student support is the primary strength ofSpelman’s MIE program, as evidenced by itsparticularly student-centered curriculum.Spelman is renowned for its academic pro-grams and the leaders it graduates. As a mem-ber of the Atlanta University Center (thelargest consortium of HBCUs), Spelmanboasts more than 25 possible majors as wellas coursework in prelaw and premedicinesequences. Spelman College is funded byNASA, directed by Dr. Albert Thompson, andmanaged by Jermaine S. Duffie.

Universidad Metropolitana

Universidad Metropolitana (UMET) is a pri-vate university in San Juan, Puerto Rico.Established in 1980, UMET is one of fourinstitutions in the Ana G. Mendez UniversitySystem. The university serves primarilyPuerto Rican female students; the female-to-male student ratio is more than two to one. Agreat number of UMET students yield fromlow-income households and are first-generation

college students. UMET is largely a com-muter school, and more than 90 percent ofstudents receive some form of financial aid.The majority of the students at UMET arefirst-generation college students who have notgiven serious thought to pursing careers asengineers and scientists. The UMET MIE isfunded by NSF and Dr. Jaun Arratia is thedirector and principle investigator. The MIEprogram at UMET emphasizes undergraduateresearch and curriculum development. A prin-cipal initiative that exemplifies this aim is an8-week summer internship that affords under-graduate students the opportunity to workwith world-class scholars at major researchinstitutions worldwide.33

The University of Texas at El Paso

The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP)was founded in 1914 as the Texas StateSchool of Mines and Metallurgy. Since then,more than 76,200 students have graduatedthrough the School of Mines and Metallurgyat UETP. Now a public doctoral grantinginstitution, UTEP has nearly 19,000 studentswith the college of engineering comprisingnearly 13 percent of the student population,and the college of science accounting for 8 percent of the student body.

UTEP is located along the Texas-Mexico bor-der. A vast majority of students are com-muters, more than 80 percent of studentshave financial responsibilities, and most stu-dents are working to pay their way throughcollege. More than half of UTEP studentsreceive need-based financial support. Moststudents are first-generation college students,meaning they often are unsatisfactorilyequipped for college. Consequently, the MIEprogram was designed to help science and

11


engineering students thrive academically, fos-ter learning within and across disciplines, andengage students in undergraduate research.UTEP is the second-largest Hispanic majorityuniversity and the largest Mexican-AmericanUniversity in this country. Primarily a com-muter school, a vast majority of students(82.3 percent) are natives of El Paso County.The remaining are mostly from other parts ofTexas, Southern New Mexico, and northernMexico. Seventy-one percent of UTEP stu-dents are Hispanics of U.S. origin and theremainder are international students, themajority of whom live in Ciudad Juárez.34

According to data collected in the 1990s,although the university’s first-year retentionrates in the Colleges of Engineering andScience (approximately 70 percent) werehigher then the general university’s retentionrate (approximately 66 percent), the six-yeargraduation rate has been lower than the university-wide rate. To boost graduationrates, UTEP decided to focus on STEM student retention by increasing the per-yearretention rate of this demographic by 10 per-cent and, in effect, increasing by twofold thenumber of STEM degree recipients.35 UTEPis funded by NSF with Dr. Ben Flores as theMIE director.

Xavier University of Louisiana

Xavier University in New Orleans, Louisiana,is the only U.S. university that boasts both ahistorically Black and Catholic tradition. In2004, the University hosted approximately4,100 students, 35 percent of whom were fromin-state, with the remaining students hailingfrom more than 40 states and 20 foreign countries.36

Xavier aimed to expand on an already accom-plished program by targeting recruitment, stu-dent retention, and transition activities. MIEfunds were used mainly to boost the number offreshmen students pursuing STEM majors andto recruit current students who had yet toembark on graduate study. Funds were alsoallocated to increase the rate of retention, grad-uation, and graduate school placement oremployment in STEM fields. A primary empha-sis of Xavier’s MIE program rests on studentsupport. In August 2005, Xavier University suf-fered severe infrastructural damage to its facili-ties in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Sincethen, the leadership of the MIE program hasshifted as students, faculty, and staff worktogether to regain solidarity and rebuild campuslife activities. Currently directed by Dr. TanyaMcKinney, Xavier University’s MIE funds areallocated by NASA.

TThhee MMIIEE VVaalluuee--AAdddd

In its original proposal to support these insti-tutions, AIR received funding to complete sixactivities:

■ Activity 1: Identify up to 30 participantsfrom around the country representing theMIE as well as the K–16 STEMresearch, policy, and practitioner com-munities to participate in a nationalworkshop.

■ Activity 2: Develop a series of research-based workshop discussion papers.

■ Activity 3: Develop an agenda for anational workshop.

■ Activity 4: Convene a national workshopduring which participants define chal-lenges in recruitment of high school


students prepared and motivated to pur-sue STEM fields; learn about exemplaryminority-serving, pre-college programsand models; develop a strategic plan forimplementing STEM partnershipsbetween MIE, local secondary schools,and community colleges; and completean assessment of the resources needed toimplement such an initiative.

■ Activity 5: Prepare postworkshop discus-sion and concept papers.

■ Activity 6: Provide implementation sup-port to four MIE sites and one non-MIEsite to pilot the strategies developed dur-ing the national workshop.

The MIE is well-suited to lead this effort.Compared to large universities, minority-serving institutions have more effectively narrowed the gaps related to underrepresentedminority and female student participation andpersistence in STEM majors. One possibleexplanation for these institutions’ success istheir tendency to adopt an apprenticeshipmodel of education whereby they enableclose interaction between faculty and stu-dents.37 Tribal colleges have been especiallysuccessful with American Indian studentslargely because they are community-oriented;they embrace and incorporate tribal traditionsand values into the curriculum.38 With roughly50 percent of all minority college studentsattending a community college, tribal college,or HBCU,39 it is understandable why K–16partnerships that have strong working rela-tions with these types of institutions havemade impressive gains. Indeed, the MIE program’s success has been noteworthy.

The number of STEM bachelor’s degreesconferred by MIE has increased steadilysince the program’s inception—outpacing thenational average of STEM degrees awardedto underrepresented minority students.

Furthermore, components of MIE’s model forsuccess can be reasonably extended to theK–12 arena. According to a review of MIEprograms conducted by AIR, there are sevenshared characteristic program components:(1) recruitment and transition initiatives,(2) student support, (3) undergraduateresearch, (4) faculty development, (5) curricu-lum development, (6) physical infrastructure,and (7) graduate and science career initiatives.40

13


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

All URM AfricanAmerican

Hispanic

2003–041994–95

691

837

571

703

356 43

3

203 24

8

FFiigguurree 1100.. STEM Bachelor Degrees Conferredat MIE Sites (change from AY 1994–95 to AY 2003–04)

Source: Kim, J. J., Crasco, L. M., & Leavitt, D. J. (2005,December). MIE Fact Book 2004. Systemic Research, Inc.

The most relevant and scalable of these com-ponents are the MIE’s pre-college initiatives.Recruitment and transition services preparematriculating students to succeed in collegeand introduce students to STEM disciplinesand careers. Training aids elementary, middle,and high school teachers in improving theircontent knowledge and teaching ability; intro-duces young students to the STEM worldthrough hands-on activities (e.g., science fairs,Geographic Information Systems (GIS) map-ping); and bridges the transition from highschool or community college into college oruniversity (e.g., summer orientation programs).

The AIR technical assistance team and MIEprogram directors also believe that aspects ofother MIE model components can serve as a

replicable framework for improving studentaccess and preparation for STEM careersprior to high school graduation. Theseimitable components include:

■ Student support, which refers to social,financial, and academic assistance toSTEM students such as peer mentoring,tutoring, and scheduling “cohort” pro-grams in which a small group of studentsmay take some or all core subjectstogether;

■ Undergraduate research, which providesopportunities for students to becomedirectly involved in STEM-relatedresearch;

■ Faculty development, which seeks toimprove the recruitment, retention, andprofessional development of STEM fac-ulty;

■ Curriculum development, which involvesefforts to align curriculum with acceptedcontent standards and the development ofcourses that are relevant to the market-place, the community, and the studentpopulation;

■ Physical infrastructure, which refers toupgrading and maintaining facilities andequipment; and

■ Graduate and science career initiatives,which include activities designed to facil-itate admission and retention in STEMgraduate programs and/or careers.


0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

Total STEM URM STEM TotalEnrollment

2003–041994–95

5,54

3

6,95

1

4,60

9

5,92

6

29,7

79 34,8

10

FFiigguurree 1111.. Undergraduate Total and STEMEnrollment at MIE Sites (change from AY1994–95 to AY 2003–04)

Source: Kim, J. J., Crasco, L. M., & Leavitt, D. J. (2005,December). MIE Fact Book 2004. Systemic Research, Inc.

Technical Assistance Activities

Aligned with the project’s three strategicimperatives, AIR and the MIE program envi-sion the establishment of sustainable K–16partnerships that are: (1) driven by empiricalresearch on teaching and learning in STEMand on the instructional needs of minoritystudent populations; (2) motivated by work-force needs; (3) built on community support,values, resources, and expertise; (4) mindfulof the traditionally differential treatment,experiences, and needs of male and femalestudents in schools; and (5) grounded in cul-turally relevant learning environment designprinciples.

TThheeoorryy ooff AAccttiioonn

In light of the aforementioned research ongender disparities within racial and ethnicgroups, the Expanding the K–16 Pool ini-

tiative recognized three strategic imperatives:

■ Reverse underrepresented minority maleunder-enrollment in college preparatorycourses,

■ Eliminate the unique psychosocialbarriers to underrepresented minoritymale academic achievement, and

■ Remove the disproportionate institutional barriers to improved under-represented minority male academic outcomes in schools.

This project sought to strategically addresseach barrier through the development of targeted K–16 partnerships led by each MIEsite. Fundamentally, K–16 partnerships are

voluntary collaborations, often characterizedas networks between K–12 school systems andpostsecondary institutions established toimprove student achievement with supportfrom parents, industry, and community members.

15


AAccccoommpplliisshhmmeennttss

Since the grant start date in 2004, AIR com-pleted all but the proposed implementationsupport activities. Highlights include theactivities discussed in the following section.

Activity 2: Develop a Series ofResearch-Based Discussion Papers

AIR developed and distributed two conceptpapers at the April 2005 NSF-MIE planningworkshop. The first, The Pipeline to STEM:Expanding Possibilities for Minority Males, isa literature review of the research on gender-by-race disparities in STEM achievement andattainment. The second paper, EffectivePartnerships and Programs for URM Males:Expanding the K–16 Pool of Potential STEMGraduates, discusses the key features ofexemplary STEM partnerships and programswith minority male foci.

Based on feedback from MIE principal inves-tigators and project directors, we revised theApril concept papers into a K–16 PartnershipResource Guide to serve as a framework forthe implementation support phase of the proj-ect. The guide explores implications for eachMIE site as it continues its work promotingdiversity in STEM disciplines at the K–12level by offering a research-based framework,adaptations of proven templates and work-sheets (see sample graphic below), research,resources, and models of effective approachesfor tackling each of the aforementioned stages.The guide is organized around ten essentialsteps for establishing a sustainable programas evidenced by exemplary K–16 partnershipsin the research literature: (1) articulate part-nership mission, vision, and values; (2) iden-tify partnership stakeholders; (3) assessneeds; (4) establish mutual goals; (5) manageuncertainty and change; (6) build support; (7)develop a strategic action plan; (8) define thepartnership; (9) implement the plan; and (10)evaluate, reflect, and refine the partnership.


Reverse URM male under-enrollment in college preparatory courses

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

1.

2.

3.

Eliminate the unique psycho-social barriers to URM male academic

achievement

Remove the disproportionate institutional barriers to improved URM male academic outcomes in schools

NNeeeeddss AAsssseessssmmeenntt aanndd GGaappSSttrraatteeggiicc IImmppeerraattiivveess AAnnaallyyssiiss OOuuttccoommeess TTaarrggeett GGooaallss

GGooaallss aanndd OObbjjeeccttiivveess WWoorrkksshheeeett

Activity 4: Convene Workshop

In April 2005, AIR and a group of MIE proj-ect directors convened a two-day planningworkshop with local and national experts onminority student achievement, STEM educa-tion, and K–16 partnerships. During thismeeting, participants: (a) discussed the disap-pointing state of K–16 minority student edu-cation overall with a focus on factors thatinhibit rigorous course-taking in the mathe-matics and sciences necessary for STEMenrollment in college among minority malestudents; (b) shared strategies used by theMIE and other national initiatives to strength-en K–12 preparation and increase collegeenrollment in STEM fields; and (c) developedan action plan for the format and substance ofa follow-up meeting designed to provide MIEprograms with the opportunity to developK–16 partnership strategies to expand thepool of STEM graduates.

In October 2005, AIR convened a secondnational workshop hosting 80 individuals.This follow-up meeting, the Expanding theK–16 Pool National Workshop, broughttogether teams of MIE project directors andselect stakeholders. The objectives of thisnational workshop were for each MIE teamto: (a) apply lessons learned from exemplarygender-specific and minority-specific STEMpartnerships and programs to the design ofK–16 partnerships targeting minority maleachievement in STEM; (b) develop a strategicaction plan to be enacted over the 2005–2006academic year; (c) identify immediate nextsteps to establish the proposed K–16 partner-ship; and (d) identify and share implementationsupport needs with the NSF MIE programdirector and AIR technical assistance team.

Activity 5: Prepare Post-WorkshopDiscussion and Concept Papers

AIR prepared and distributed proceedingsfrom the October 2005 NSF MIE Expandingthe K–16 Pool Workshop. The proceedingsprovided panel session summations (see sam-ple graphic below); bulleted highlights fromevery presentation; and the PowerPointslides, presentation hand-outs, supplementarymaterials, and readings provided by speakers.

17


We also developed Making the Case, a seriesof research briefs and data round-ups writtento compel a national dialogue on minoritymale achievement across the K–16 continu-um. Completed issue briefs include Why AreMinority Males Leaking From the Pipeline toSTEM? Research on Gender Disparities anda Way Out of the Wilderness: The Promise ofK–16 Partnerships. Completed data round-ups include Are Minority Males MeasuringUp to Minority Females on the Pipeline toSTEM?


Outcomes

** Ethonomathematics is the study of matematics that considers the culture in which mathematics arises. The goal of ethnomathematics is to contribute both to the understanding of culture and the understanding of mathematics, but mainlyto the relationship between the two.

I n conjunction with the aforementionedtechnical assistance activities, each MIEsite took considerable steps toward estab-

lishing meaningful partnerships with theirlocal school systems. The outcomes describedhere were derived from responses to the MIEProject Director Questionnaire (see AppendixA) administered during summer 2006. Thequestionnaire asked each MIE ProjectDirector to describe and assess the activitiesthat resulted from MIE engagement withK–12 partnerships during the 2005–2006 academic year.

BBoowwiiee SSttaattee UUnniivveerrssiittyy

Bowie State is engaged to a certain capacitywith secondary teacher training and with sen-ior-level students anticipating collegeentrance. Bowie also has identified the BSUSummer Bridge Program as a potential part-nership to improve student learning.

OOggllaallaa LLaakkoottaa CCoolllleeggee

Oglala Lakota College (OLC) has developedseveral initiatives focused on K–16 partner-ship building. The first is a teacher training inSTEM fields. Two training programs wereimplemented in summer 2006, the first ofwhich focused on developing school-widescience fairs, ethnomathematics,** and anenvironmental science curriculum. The sec-ond training program was aimed at imple-menting a NASA-based curriculum entitledSEMAA (Science, Engineering, Math,Aerospace Academy) and a robotics curriculumset. The second partnership is a collaboration

between the state of South Dakota and theOceti Sakowin Education Consortium in con-junction with 24 elementary and secondaryschools across the state. The program is titledGaining Early Awareness & Readiness forUndergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). Thefocus of South Dakota GEAR UP is to workwith Native American students and their fam-ilies starting in the seventh grade to preparethem for college academic rigor.

Oglala also has been able to take advantageof other programs and opportunities toexpand its offerings to their K–12 students. Inparticular, there are teacher training opportu-nities in STEM areas, grades 7–12 student-focused programs for college readiness,STEM curriculum enrichment, and informaleducation outreach efforts focused on STEM-related areas. Oglala is targeting fiscal effortsdirectly to partner schools, providing STEMcurriculum and training efforts. There will besustained efforts to continue expanding thepartnership with target schools in lieu ofshort-term training efforts that have generallyyielded short-term results.

SSppeellmmaann CCoolllleeggee

The MIE partnership with Dr. Lisa Egbuonu-Davis and the Pfizer’s Women’s Health/HealthInitiative has created the Spelman CollegePeer-to-Peer Initiative. The Peer-to-PeerInitiative was designed to provide a develop-mental program for certain groups of Spelmanstudents (and others in the Atlanta UniversityCenter (AUC)). The program offers communi-ty outreach to K–12 students and makes

19


science a fun and exciting topic to learn forstudents who are at a vital developmentalstage. Currently at the local level, this pilotplans to eventually develop into a regionalprogram.

AUC students serving as minority role mod-els contribute to advancing academic opportu-

nities for underrepresent-ed minority students.Peer-to-Peer internshipstudents introduce com-munity youth to thediversity of career optionsafforded to STEM degreeseekers. Interns also gaina competitive edge ongraduate school applica-tions by being distin-guished from applicantswith less communityservice. Peer interns alsoare available to providestudents with supplemen-tal instruction in certainacademic areas vital tostudent growth and devel-

opment, such as core basic skills in mathe-matics, reading comprehension, and writing,and an emphasis on the importance of self-discipline and respect for authority.

In order to ensure partnership-building suc-cess in the K–16 arena, Spelman has movedits post-pilot program for additional fundingfrom Pfizer to the nearby Kennedy MiddleSchool. Pfizer will now be working withSpelman to further develop and implementthis initiative.

UUnniivveerrssiiddaadd MMeettrrooppoolliittaannaa

The partnership with the Department ofEducation has afforded UMET the opportunityto bid on proposals toinstitutionalize the pre-col-lege program at UMETand its sister institutions,Universidad del Este andTurabo University. Othernational and internationalresearch institution part-ners include Santa ClaraUniversity, CarnegieMellon University,Consejo Superior deInvestigaciones Científicas(CSIC) in Spain,Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology, RensselaerPolytechnic Institute, andthe Nanyang TechnicalUniversity in Singapore.Additionally, the NASAJet Propulsion Laboratoryallowed UMET to send78 students to its facilityfor summer researchinternships in 2006.

The MIE program has been essential in build-ing partnerships with new institutions, espe-cially those interested in producing thepipeline to graduate school for students seek-ing STEM degrees. UMET has secured rela-tions with Baylor College, Arizona StateUniversity, and RPI to open a pathway forunderrepresented minorities from Puerto Ricoto attend graduate school.


Spelman College has beenexpounding on otherpartnership projects inthe K–16 system throughthe activities of theirChemistry Club. TheChemistry Club providesup to 20 additionaltutors on a volunteerbasis. Staff from the new Kennedy MiddleSchool are convening topool together resourcesfor its successful implementation.

— S. Jermaine Duffie, Project Manager

UniversidadMetropolitana (UMET)has succeeded in establishing partnershipswith the Department of Education of theCommonwealth of PuertoRico through the Alliancefor Education Office andhigh schools of theMetropolitan Area of SanJuan, Puerto Rico. Withthese partnerships, UMEThas consolidated our pre-college program, theSaturday Academy andthe Summer AdventureTraining impacting over450 grades 10, 11, and12 high school studentssince October 2005.

— Dr. Juan Arratia, UMETDirector and Principal

Investigator

TThhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff TTeexxaass aatt EEll PPaassoo

Dr. Ben Flores has closely participated withthe faculty from the Department ofEducation, UTEP School of Public Health,and administrators and teachers from eightlocal school districts in partnership-buildingefforts. He also has been working closelywith the American Association of UniversityWomen to promote equity in education forgirls and women. The MIE program at UTEPis active in outreach to minority students inits Women in Science and Engineering(WiSE) program, which participates in proj-ects involving K–12 outreach. The coordina-tor and members hosted the Expanding YourHorizons™ conference for area middleschool girls to encourage the pursuit ofSTEM careers.

Dr. Flores, along with the college of educationdean, department of education faculty, andCanutillo Independent School District adminis-trators, has put forth a proposal to the NSFunder the Graduate Fellows K–12 Program.This program will promote and utilize comput-er science and computer and electrical engi-neering concepts in the K–12 classroomsfacilitated by graduate students in thesefields. Staff also actively participate in theMother/Daughter—Father/Son Conference toencourage the pursuit of higher education toarea middle school students and their parents.Members also give Think College Now pre-sentations to area middle and high school stu-dents through budgeting exercises.

Another proposal submitted by Dr. Flores andthe college of education dean and faculty pro-poses to introduce an alternative teaching cer-tification option for students in engineeringwho wish to pursue teaching certification

alongside their engineering degree. A similareffort already exists in the College ofScience.

In order to strengthen partnership building inthe K–16 arena in a synergistic fashion, theMIE program at UTEP has built a strongrelationship with the department of educationand has expounded on current extant relationswith various local K–12 school districts andthe local community.

XXaavviieerr UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff LLoouuiissiiaannaa

In the aftereffects ofHurricane Katrina, thelevee system aroundOrleans Parish was rup-tured, causing LakePonchartrain to flood thecity. Xavier Universitywas engulfed in morethan nine feet of water,which damaged the MIEoffices located in theNorman C. FrancisScience Building Annex.Much vital MIE docu-mentation and equipmentwas lost, however somenotes on previous MIEcommunication withK–16 schools were recov-ered and will serve as thefoundation for future MIEpreparation.

Due to this system-wide disaster, mostOrleans Parish Public Schools (OPPS) weretaken over by the State of Louisiana Board ofSecondary Education (BESE), which is nowoperating 20 public schools. The original

21


“This academic year hasbeen very difficult notonly for MIE but for otherXavier University K–16programs. For example,the Summer ScienceAcademies were limitedthis summer, while someK–16 programs such asthe EpsAR Summer BridgeProgram… was forced tocancel operations due toa lack of public schoolpersonnel in the area. Itis hoped that these pro-grams will be linkedtogether with Xavier assoon as possible.”

— Dr. Tanya McKinney,Xavier MIE Director

OPPS system has been able to preserve six ofthese schools. Both the BESE and OPPS sys-tems also empowered many independently-run charter schools. Many of these schoolsare loosely partnered, while others are inde-pendently governed. Other charter schoolswere managed by local universities such asTulane and the University of New Orleans,which are now governed as lab schools.Orleans Parish parochial and private schoolswere also devastated by the hurricane andmany still have not been able to reopen.Currently, New Orleans has more than 12 dis-crete school systems that require a solidifiedplan for interaction. Given the nature of thecatastrophe, the schools understandably expe-rienced a severe lack of personnel, faculty,and staff in preparation for the opening of theAugust 2006 school year.

As a result of the aforementioned incidences,Xavier has been unable to pursue partnership-building endeavors in this academic year andis revising its program design for the upcom-ing year. The unfortunate series of events ofthe 2006 school year have not allowed for thecoordination with local area schools either;however, plans are being stabilized for theupcoming year. In spite of the recent state ofaffairs, Xavier University is dedicated to theMIE program and hopes to restore the neces-sary components of the program at its earliestconvenience.

LLeessssoonnss LLeeaarrnneedd

Challenges

In discussing the activities and outcomes ofeach MIE site since the October 2005Expanding the K–16 Pool NationalWorkshop, it is evident that each MIE site has

encountered a series of obstacles and tri-umphs in its respective partnership-buildingefforts. Many of the challenges that the insti-tutions face are generalizable and expected,whereas others are unique to the specificinfrastructure and geography of each MIE.

The issue of minority student recruitment andretention (particularly that of male students)is an underlying challenge that many of theinstitutions have been grappling with sincethe MIE’s inception. UTEP’s college of engi-neering continues to struggle with this issue,in addition to challenges with female recruit-ment. The MIE staff at Spelman take a slight-ly different approach on the issue of studentretention in that they believe that providing acombination of both male and female inter-vention is most effective. Since the workforce is multigendered and multicultural, acombination of the two interventionapproaches will expose younger males toyoung females, working together in a profes-sional manner. Younger males also tend todisplay more maturity around the femaletutors, which allows them to be even morereceptive to the males as they do not want theolder male tutors to appear more mature. Asimilar stumbling block that UMET foreseesis establishing an additional pipeline effort toimpact minority males given that their institu-tion, comparable to Spelman, is predominant-ly female. In order to focus in on the issue ofboys, UMET’s male student population alsoneeds to be made aware at an early age of theopportunities and challenges available inSTEM fields at the university. UMET alsorealizes that in order to change the genderequation, the issues of minorities in STEMmust be tackled at the middle and high schoollevels.


Another apparent challenge of forging sus-tainable K–12 partnerships with school districts is that UTEP’S colleges of scienceand engineering must delve beyond simplyutilizing K–12 outreach activities to recruitstudents into the department. Some of theadministrative challenges Spelman Collegehas been dealing with include aligning stu-dent schedules with curriculum developmentgiven the intense course load experienced bySTEM students (e.g., coursework, labs,research, etc.). A stronger working relationbetween these two bodies must be developedin order to ensure a vested interest in sus-tained partnership building. Likewise, inorder to broaden the sustained partnershipsthat have been fostered in STEM fields toother areas of the institution, UMET is cur-rently identifying key leaders committed tosupporting student successes.

MIE programs also must secure funding foradditional resources. The MIE initiative atBowie has worked with the public school sys-tems and STEM faculty of neighboring coun-ties for several years, however it is anticipatedthat once a firm plan has been formulated andapproved by the administration, additionalresources may be required. Similarly, staff atUMET have requested additional resources inthe area of proposal writing to secure funds toadvance the strategic partnerships that haveformed since the October 2005 conference.

Overcoming logistical burdens has beenanother challenge with many of the MIE pro-grams. Some of Spelman’s administrativeissues include the general alignment of sched-ules and curriculum development due to theintense course load encountered by STEMstudents (e.g., courses, labs, research, etc.).

Spelman College also has identified the needfor a stronger support system for teachers toaccount for staffing changeovers and to elimi-nate communication lapses that occur as aresult of the rigors and responsibilities of theschool day. A vast majority of the schoolsthat Oglala has targeted for partnership build-ing have experienced many restructuringproblems based on the No Child Left Behind(NCLB) legislation. Since many of thesepotential partner schools have been classifiedas not meeting adequate yearly progress(AYP), this has added to partnership-buildingconstraints for Oglala. Given that theresources and attention of their partnerschools are focused on very specific areas,Oglala also is required to design programsthat address these priorities. While initiallychallenging, this also ensures that Oglala isengaged in dialogue with its partner schools,which will eventually lead to stronger part-nership as the schools are able to see theirinterests as genuinely vested.

One of the unique challenges specific to theMIE program at Oglala is its large geograph-ic and rural area. Most of Oglala’s targetschools operate as independent school dis-tricts so agreements and programs must benegotiated with each individual institution,which can be difficult given the large distancebetween schools. Engaging in a dialogue withthe schools to determine what will meet theirneeds and the needs of their students isanother crucial step to effective partnershipbuilding for the Oglala MIE program staff. Itis imperative that higher education institu-tions engage in a dialogue in order to gain afull understanding of what can be done andwhat is needed. This presents a challenge forhigher education institutions but has the

23


potential to lead to a sustained partnership asit fosters a sense of honesty and credibilityamong the partnership district schools.Comparable to some of the challenges thatOglala has been experiencing in implement-ing its MIE program, UMET has also facedsimilar obstacles in ensuring the availabilityof resource information and sustained dia-logue among students and faculty members.

Given the unique situation surroundingXavier University as a result of HurricaneKatrina, it is not surprising that the largestchallenges Xavier faces are infrastructureredevelopment and personnel recruitment,much like the vast majority of the public,private, and parochial schools in the NewOrleans area. As such, Xavier is unable tofully participate in extracurricular outreach atpresent. In order to resume partnership-build-ing efforts with the local K–12 school system,

Xavier University will first need to reassessits role in the rebuilding process once localinfrastructure has been restored.

Successes

Amidst the various challenges each MIE program has confronted in its partnershipbuilding endeavors, each institution, with theunderstandable exception of Xavier, also hasexperienced promising successes that encour-age future and further growth in minority student recruitment in STEM fields at theK–16 level.

Expansion of the partnership-building modelinto the K–12 arena has been a great successamong many of the MIE programs. BowieState is planning a mathematics academy toassist elementary, middle, and secondarylevel students. It is hoped that this will


MMaattrriixx ooff MMIIEE IInnssttiittuuttiioonnaall SSuucccceesssseess

MMIIEE SSiitteess SSuucccceesssseess

Bowie StateUniversity

■ Mathematics Academy■ BSU Summer Bridge Program

UTEP

■ Activities to introduce engineering into the K–12 arena■ Inclusion of large and small El Paso districts in partnership building efforts■ Successful partnerships with the American Association of University Women and Women in Science

and Engineering (WiSE) program in retaining female students in science fields■ Mother/Daughter—Father/Son Conference encourages the pursuit of higher education

Oglala

■ Teacher training in STEM fields■ Training to implement NASA-based curriculum entitled SEMAA (Science, Engineering, Math, Aerospace

Academy)■ Robotics curriculum set■ South Dakota GEAR UP grant

UMET■ Pre-college program at UMET and sister institutions■ UMET Summer 2006 Research Interns sent to NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory■ Secured partnerships with Baylor College, Arizona State University, and RPI for UMET graduate students

Spelman■ The Spelman College Peer-to-Peer Initiative■ Post-Pilot Program with Kennedy Middle School funded by Pfizer

greatly enhance the mathematics performanceof students overall, and for those entering col-lege. Additionally, the program will be usedto assist students already enrolled at Bowie.Similarly, UTEP is developing activities thatintroduce the college of engineering princi-ples into the K–12 arena. Another successUTEP boasts is its inclusion of a variety oflarge and small rural districts in El PasoCounty in its partnership.

Minority retention and recruitment within theSTEM education fields has been one of theoriginal aims of the MIE since its inception.As a vital component of any partnership-building effort, UMET takes pride in its suc-cessful partnerships that have impacted andbeen proven to retain females in the field ofscience.

FFuuttuurree WWoorrkk PPllaannnneedd

Amidst the various challenges and successesexperienced by each MIE institution, five ofthe six MIE project directors outlined a seriesof anticipated partnership-building activitiesthat they sought to accomplish. A majority ofthe MIE programs also requested specificassistance from the AIR staff in implementingthese planned activities. The activitiesdescribed below are derived from MIE proj-ect director responses to the Expanding theK–16 Pool Questionnaire (see Appendix A).

Oglala Lakota College

Oglala Lakota College has expressed interestin applying for additional resources to aidwith their support of the K–16 partnership-building model. Oglala has requested assis-tance from AIR in creating a link with specific

organizations that may provide future fundingand partnership opportunities.

Spelman College

Faculty/administration at Spelman haveexpressed interest in applying for additionalresources to aid with implementation support.If granted, this funding would be used tosecure more tutors and faculty liaisons as anincentive for tenured faculty to assist scienceteachers in developing science-related activi-ties. Additional funding would be distributedamong the co-directors for Outreach and PublicRelations and toward the development of atracking/scholarship program, which wouldcreate incentives for prospective students.

Future STEM work at Spelman Collegewould give Peer-to-Peer interns access toadditional career preparation services, whichare currently provided by MIE and the Officeof Science, Engineering, and TechnicalCareers (OSETC). In addition to stipend sup-port services, it is hoped that OSETC willsponsor training workshops and other enrich-ment activities and developmental programsin several scientific disciplines to promote thecritical thinking skills necessary for higherlevel administration positions among theintellectual and scientific communities.

Additional STEM work would revolvearound boosting parent involvement and student interventions at the elementary andpreschool levels as research has shown thatparental commitment in the early develop-mental stages of the child’s life (zero–fiveyears) may promote strong learning behaviors.

As partnership-building activities flourish atSpelman College, AIR staff will continue to

25


provide suggestions for best strategies forimplementation, as needed. In the interim,Spelman desires to gain support from theNSF in sustaining and expanding its currentpartnership with Kennedy Middle School.

Universidad Metropolitana

UMET has requested resources in the domainof proposal writing in order to secure funds toenhance the partnerships it has fostered sincethe October 2005 national workshop.

Pending sufficient funding, UMET has pro-posed that the MIE program be institutional-ized at Sistema Universitario Ana G. Méndez(SUAGM). The partnership building para-digm would eventually be consolidated andexpanded at the pre-college, college, andgraduate school level at SUAGM, which com-prises UMET’s two sister institutions,Universidad del Este and Universidad delTurabo. UMET hopes to partner with federalagencies and obtain state support in order tosustain the expansion activities of the MIEmodel at SUAGM.

The University of Texas at El Paso

UTEP has requested that AIR staff provideongoing advice regarding the advancement ofSTEM activities in the K–12 arena, particu-larly because UTEP would like to focus oncreating a STEM-oriented curriculum alignedwith existing K–12 activities. While UTEPhas already made attempts to secure moniesto implement some MIE program and collegeof education activities, additional funding isbeing sought to foster future partnership-building efforts with the K–12 system.

Xavier University of Louisiana

Given the unique circumstances surroundingXavier, its MIE staff will better be able toassess Xavier’s specific technical assistanceneeds after program goals are revised toreflect the changing school system and needs.In terms of future STEM work at Xavier, theuniversity is in the process of launching theBIO 2010 initiative, which will encourage aninterdisciplinary approach toward teachingSTEM disciplines. BIO 2010 aims to empha-size MIE-associated principles such as inter-disciplinary teaching, faculty development,and student research opportunities. Fundingfor this endeavor will be sought from bothpublic and private agencies.


Evaluation of Technical Assistance Activities

CChhaalllleennggeess

Throughout the course of work with the MIEsites, the AIR team experienced a number ofchallenges to providing technical assistanceefforts. While these challenges did not neces-sarily diminish the quality of the assistanceoffered, they did serve to impede its natureand efficiency. The following section outlinesa few of the main logistical and structuralchallenges that hindered the progress of tech-nical assistance to the MIE’s programs.

Incentives

Overall, it was often difficult to elicit activeparticipation from the MIE programs due tothe absence of a concrete incentive for theinstitutions. Partnership building was per-ceived as a burden on the MIE programssince there was a lack of extrinsic motivation;none of the institutions received any addition-al funding for their cooperation. It was alsodifficult to obtain buy-in from senior staff anddecision-makers at some of the MIE sites,which contributed to a lack of a sharedvision. Inconsistent leadership hindered thesites’ potential for building and maintainingeffective partnerships.41

Another challenge was acknowledging thetime it takes to establish mutually trustingrelationships between the institution and theintended partner organizations. Undoubtedly,strong partnerships require a serious timecommitment in order to effect meaningful

results.42 At the time this report was written, itwas too premature in the partnership-buildingstage to determine whether the MIE siteswere able to cultivate such meaningful part-nerships with their intended institutions.

Additionally, providing technical assistancewas not a service that was directly delineatedin the original grant with NSF. It was laterlisted as an activity in the proposal, and thuswas carried out accordingly by the AIR teamon a somewhat ad hoc basis.

Dissemination

Although the MIE sites received funds fordissemination activities, these funds hadalready been designated for carrying outacknowledged work in the original proposal.Consequently, partnership-building activitieswere outside the scope of designated work.

Local MIE Infrastructure

AIR staff also encountered difficulties indealing with the local infrastructure of theindividual MIE sites which, for the most part,served to impede active participation in theprogram. For example, response time wasoften quite lenghthy despite repeated contactefforts by AIR staff. It is speculated that thislapse in communication and response time isa direct result of the above mentioned percep-tion of burden carried by the MIE projectdirectors.

27


Current MIE Focus onUnderrepresented Minority Males

The challenge of boosting underrepresentedminority male participation and graduationrates in STEM is not a new concern. Rather,the challenge lies in scaling up the existingefforts of the MIE sites in the face of dwin-dling funding. In some of the MIE sites,existing partnerships could align with existingprograms that already focus on assistingunderrepresented minority males. For exam-ple, Bowie State University has expressedinterest in creating a mathematics academy toassist elementary, middle, and secondary levelstudents. This K–12 partnership activity pro-vides an excellent venue for Bowie to upscaleits efforts to hone in on the issue of underrep-resented minority males within the K–12pipeline to STEM. As Oglala currently hostsa majority female student population, thedearth of male students could present anexcellent opportunity to work toward securinga GEAR UP grant, which would ensure fund-ing for future work focusing on increasedmale student enrollment. Demographically,UMET shares a similar student make-up toOglala and could also benefit from additionalfunding to focus on underrepresented minori-ty males.

In other cases, a partnership focusing specifi-cally on underrepresented minority malescould spur new work for that particular MIEinstitution. For Spelman College, this couldentail forming a partnership with its brotherinstitution, Morehouse College, in a collabo-rative effort to target underrepresented minor-ity males. Additionally, if funding for

Spelman’s anticipated tracking/scholarshipprogram was granted, this would create theopportunity to provide a monetary incentivefor minority male students interested in pur-suing STEM careers.

Although partnership-building efforts atXavier are currently undergoing rebuildingefforts, a future area of underrepresentedminority focus on STEM lies in the potentialpartnership of launching the BIO 2010 initia-tive with an emphasis on MIE-associatedprinciples, such as student research opportu-nities targeted especially toward low-income,minority male students.

Additional general concerns surround theappropriateness of focusing partnership build-ing solely on minority male achievement,making it difficult to secure federal fundingfor a cause so specific and gender based.

SSuucccceesssseess

During their tenure as technical assistanceproviders, the AIR staff also experienced anumber of successes in terms of furtheringthe MIE’s partnership-building endeavors.These milestones are a testament to the com-mitment and sincerity of the efforts of theAIR team and the MIE institutions.

Capacity Building

The October 2005 Expanding the K–16 PoolNational Workshop encouraged the MIE sitesto reexamine the notion of male achievementand capacity building and gear their partner-ship efforts accordingly.


Expanded Scope of Work

Throughout the course of work with the fiveMIE sites, AIR staff have provided servicesthat reach above and beyond what was out-lined in the original proposal of technicalassistance activities.

Perhaps the largest success that the AIR teamexperienced was in the outstanding imple-mentation of a second NSF MIE Expandingthe K–16 Pool National Workshop in October2005, which hosted more than 75 individuals.As an activity that went beyond the scope ofthe original proposal outline, the conferencewas noteworthy in its ability to assist the MIEteams in thinking about and addressing theissues of male achievement and capacitybuilding.43

The evaluation feedback regarding theExpanding the K–16 Pool NationalConference was encouraging and indicatedthat the participants were generally pleasedwith the content of the team sessions, the sup-port provided by the AIR staff, and the avail-ability and resourcefulness of the facilitators.An additional Workshop Proceedings docu-ment was created, which contained presenta-tion highlights from all of the attendingspeakers and their corresponding partnership-building materials from the NSF MIE

Expanding the K–16 Pool Workshop. TheProceedings contained panel session summa-tions, PowerPoint presentations, workshophandouts, and supplementary readings. Thisdocument was distributed to all attendingMIE team members and to those staff not inattendance of the October 2005 workshop.

In addition to the convening of the nationalworkshop, another noteworthy success wasthe production and dissemination of addition-al resource materials containing STEMachievement and attainment data to betterserve the MIE project directors. Two issuebriefs—A Way Out of the Wilderness: ThePromise of K–16 Partnerships, and Why AreMinority Males Leaking From the Pipeline toSTEM? Research on Gender Disparities—were widely distributed during the NSF JointAnnual Meeting in March 2006.

Other additional activities completed by theAIR team include a presentation at the NSFDivision of Human Resource Development,Joint Annual Meeting in March 2006, outlin-ing the accomplishments of each MIE team.The team also served as facilitator for theUTEP MIE Pathways to Success in STEMEducation Planning Workshop in March2006. In response to feedback on the conceptpapers prepared for the April 2005 PlanningWorkshop, the AIR team developed a K–16Partnership Resource Guide.

29


Recommendations for Future Work

Should the NSF choose to continue orexpand the programmatic activities ini-tiated during the Expanding the K–16

Pool project period, AIR recommends the following activities:

PPrroovviiddee OOnnssiittee aanndd VViirrttuuaall TTeecchhnniiccaallAAssssiissttaannccee

On the basis of implementation support needsidentified by each team at the 2005 nationalworkshop, conversations with each MIEteam’s facilitator after the workshop, as wellas ongoing conversations with the MIE teamleaders, we recommend that the Expandingthe K–16 Pool partnerships be provided withthe following implementation support foreach team as needed for a period of two tothree years: facilitate onsite meetings or Webconferences concerning the identification ofstakeholders; aid in revision of mission andvision statements, needs analyses, communi-cation plans, and actionable strategies formanaging uncertainty and change; providestrategic action planning; draft funding pro-posals; identify support staff; and monitorprogram design.

DDeevveelloopp aa RReessoouurrccee DDaattaabbaassee

We recommend the development of a Web-accessible Expanding the K–16 Pool resourcedatabase to support grant writing and pro-gram design. The database would include:

■ Exemplary gender-specific and minority-serving STEM partnerships and programs

■ Effective partnership models

■ Effective STEM teaching and learningpractices, curricula, resources, andexperts

■ STEM achievement and attainment data,charts, and PowerPoint slides

■ Funding opportunities

DDeevveelloopp aanndd IImmpplleemmeenntt aannEExxppaannddiinngg tthhee KK––1166 PPoooollCCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn SSttrraatteeggyy

As stated above, one of the goals of theExpanding the K–16 Pool initiative is to“serve as a catalyst for a national dialogue onminority male achievement across the K–16continuum.” However, no formal plan foraccomplishing this goal was defined or exe-cuted either in the original proposal or sincethe program’s inception. We recommend thatshould support for the initiative continue,that the MIE programs receive support todevelop and implement a communicationstrategy to publicize the Expanding the K–16Pool initiative both locally and nationally.Communication activities may include sub-mitting articles on the link between minoritymale achievement in STEM and K–16 part-nerships to academic journals such as theAmerican Educational Research Journal andtrade magazines such as Education Week.Other activities may include presentingExpanding the K–16 Pool partnership work atlocal and national conferences such as theannual meeting of the National Council of

31


Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) and con-vening biannual Web conferences, open to thepublic on such topics as principles of cultur-ally relevant curriculum development andsuccessful, gender-specific STEM programs.Growing support among the nonprofit, busi-ness, and foundation communities will be akey feature of this strategy to assist the MIEteams in their efforts to fund their respectiveExpanding the K–16 Pool partnerships.

DDeevveelloopp aanndd LLaauunncchh aann EExxppaannddiinnggtthhee KK––1166 PPooooll WWeebb SSiittee

To assist with the aforementioned technicalassistance and communication efforts, we rec-ommend the development of an Expandingthe K–16 Pool Web site. The site should high-light both public and private sectors.

The public sector sectionmight include information onthe (a) MIE program; (b) theExpanding the K–16 Pool ini-tiative and evolving partner-ship model; (c) news andevents; (d) research briefs,data charts, and graphs onsuch topics as K–16 partner-ships and the minoritypipeline to STEM; (e) publi-cations such as the AIR eval-uation of the MIE program;(f) tools such as the K–16Partnership Resource Guideproduced by AIR; and (g) links to additionalresources produced by partnerorganizations such as the SERV DiversityCenter, Institute for Higher Education Policy,and Systemic Research.

The private sector section would only beaccessible to participating institutions andpartner organizations via password protec-tion. It might feature: (a) a calendar of MIEteam events such as leadership team meet-ings, onsite technical assistance visits, andgrant deadlines; (b) a discussion board tofacilitate communication and knowledgesharing between MIE teams; (c) a Web con-ference launch pad; and (d) collaborativeworkspace for each participating institutionwhere site-specific information would beposted, such as a team’s mission statement,strategic action plan, contact information, andmeeting notes.

The following graphic is provided to illus-trate how the home page of this Web sitemight look:


CCoonnvveennee FFoollllooww--UUpp EExxppaannddiinngg tthheeKK––1166 PPooooll NNaattiioonnaall WWoorrkksshhooppss

AIR has received numerous requests fromMIE team members to reconvene theExpanding the K–16 Pool National Workshopheld in October 2005 so that teams may sharetheir progress and lessons learned. This work-shop could serve as an opportunity for teamsto learn from experts on research-based, cul-turally relevant, community-based curriculumdevelopment as well as effective K–12 teach-ing and learning practices in STEM.

IIddeennttiiffyy aanndd EEssttaabblliisshh aa NNaattiioonnaallAAddvviissoorryy CCoommmmiitttteeee oonn MMiinnoorriittyy MMaalleeAAcchhiieevveemmeenntt

In consultation with the NSF program officerand project consultant, A. Wade Boykin, werecommend that a National AdvisoryCommittee on Minority Male Achievement beestablished to lend credibility and provide guid-ance for Expanding the K–16 Pool partner-ships. AIR suggests that the MIE teams identifyeight individuals to sit on a national advisorycommittee on minority male achievement. Suchnoteworthy individuals might include professorand activist Pedro Noguera and SchottFoundation President Rosa Smith. The commit-tee would meet several times a year and serveas a resource to the Expanding the K–16 Poolpartnership teams throughout the implementa-tion period and help shape workshop agendas.

CCoonnvveennee aa NNaattiioonnaall DDiisssseemmiinnaattiioonnCCoonnffeerreennccee oonn tthhee EExxppaannddiinngg tthheeKK––1166 PPooooll MMooddeell aanndd MMiinnoorriittyy MMaalleeAAcchhiieevveemmeenntt

To encourage the development of moreExpanding the K–16 Pool partnerships and

further encourage a national dialogue onminority male achievement across the K–16continuum, AIR recommends that the pro-gram convene a national dissemination con-ference on the Expanding the K–16 Poolmodel and minority male achievement inOctober 2008. This conference would beopen to the public.

LLeevveerraaggee NNSSFF PPAAEEMMSSTT aanndd PPAAEESSMMEEMM PPrrooggrraammss aass RReessoouurrcceess ffoorrPPaarrttnneerrsshhiipp BBuuiillddiinngg

The NSF’s Presidential Awards forExcellence in Mathematics and ScienceTeaching (PAEMST) program recognizesexemplary, highly qualified K–12 teachers ofmathematics and science for their contribu-tions in the classroom and to their profes-sion. NSF’s Presidential Award forExcellence in Science, Mathematics, andEngineering Mentoring (PAESMEM) honorsindividuals and institutions that haveincreased and/or broadened the participationrates of underrepresented minorities, women,and people with disabilities in STEM acrossthe K–16 continuum. The awardees of theseprograms represent a growing network ofexceptional mentors. AIR recommends thatthe Expanding the K–16 Pool initiativeestablish formal communication channelswith PAEMST and PAESMEM awardees sothat they might serve as resources for theproject directors of Expanding the K–16Pool partnerships. PAEMST awardees might,for instance, serve as consultants workingone-on-one with partnership staff to designafter-school STEM enrichment curricula andsummer institute professional developmentprogram content.

33


EExxppaannddiinngg tthhee KK--1166 PPooooll ooff SSTTEEMM GGrraadduuaatteessMMIIEE FFiinnaall RReeppoorrtt QQuueessttiioonnnnaaiirree

Institution Name:__________________________________________________________________

1.) Please describe the activities you have initiated to build a partnership with a K–16 school system since the National Workshop in October 2005.

2.) How has your MIE work been able to build upon or link with other partnership projects at yourinstitution or in the K–16 system?

3.) What measures has your MIE and/or your institution taken to ensure partnership-buildingendeavors in the K–16 arena?

4.) Please describe the challenges and successes your MIE initiative and your institution face surrounding partnership building, STEM, and minority male achievement?

35


Appendix A

5.) Through this MIE K–16 partnership-building endeavor, what are some of the lessons learnedthat can be passed on to other institutions wishing to expand their STEM programs to their(male) minority students?

6.) What technical assistance do you need to assist your institution in implementing the goals yourteam set at the October 2005 meeting?

KK––1166 CChhaalllleennggeess//OObbssttaacclleess

1.) What specific challenges and obstacles prevent building K–16 partnerships at your institution?

2.) Would you be interested in applying for additional resources to aid with implementation support?

2a.) What would the nature of any future STEM work look like for your MIE program? How do you propose organizing funding/collaboration?


Endnotes1 The College Board. (2000). AP 2000 National

Summary Reports. Retrieved November 6, 2006, fromhttp://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/exgrd_sum/2000.html

2 This measure counts only students receiving regularhigh school diplomas as graduates. This definition of agraduate is consistent with the provisions of the NoChild Left Behind Act. The law clearly stipulates thatfor purposes of federal accountability, the recipients ofa regular standards-based state diploma are counted asgraduates while those who obtain other state-issuedcredentials (e.g., certificates of attendance) or theGED are not to be considered graduates. SOURCE:Swanson, D. P., Cunningham, M., & Spencer, M. B.(2003). Black males’ structural conditions, achieve-ment patterns, normative needs, and opportunities.Urban Education, 38(5), 608–633.

3 The College Board. (2005). College Bound Seniors2005 National and State Reports. RetrievedNovember 6, 2006, from http://www.collegeboard.com/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2005/reports.html

4 Analysis includes the biological sciences, computersciences, mathematics, physical sciences, and engi-neering, but excludes all other major or minor scienceand engineering fields such as agricultural sciences,psychology, and political science. National ScienceFoundation. (2004). Women, minorities, and personswith disabilities in science and engineering: 2004.Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

5 Ibid.

6 Reyhner, J., & Davison, D. (1993). Improving mathand science instruction for LEP middle and highschool students through language activities. InProceedings of the 3rd National Research Symposiumon Limited English Proficient Student Issues (Vol. II,pp. 549–578). Washington DC: United StatesDepartment of Education, OBEMLA.

7 Schmid, C. L. (2001). Educational achievement, lan-guage-minority students, and the new second genera-tion. Sociology of Education, Supplement: Currents ofThought: Sociology of Education at the Dawn of the21st Century, pp. 71–87. Retrieved April 4, 2002,from ProQuest database.

8 Osborne, J. W. (1999). Unraveling underachievementamong African American boys from an identificationwith academics perspective. Journal of NegroEducation, 68(4), 555–565.

9 Clayton, O., Hewitt, C., & Gaffney, E. (2004).Reflecting on reconnecting males to higher education.New Directions for Student Services, 2004(107),9–22.

10 Entwisle, D. R., & Webster Jr., M. (1974).Expectations in mixed racial groups. Sociology ofEducation, 47, 301–318.

11 Jussim, L., & Eccles, J. (1992). Teacher expectations:II. Construction and reflection of student achievement.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(3),947–961.

12 Perrone K. M., Sedlacek, W. E., & Alexander, C. M.(2001). Gender and ethnic differences in career goalattainment. Career Development Quarterly, 50,168–178.

13 Alexander, C., Kruczek, T., Zagelbaum, A., &Ramirez, M. C. (2003, October). A review of theschool counseling literature for themes evolving fromthe Education Trust initiative. Professional SchoolCounseling.

14 Shoffner, M. F., & Vacc, N. N. (1999). Careers in themathematical sciences: The role of the school coun-selor. Washington, DC: ERIC Counseling and StudentServices Clearinghouse (ED435950).

15 Carnevale, A., & Desrochers, D. M. (2002). The miss-ing middle: Aligning education and the knowledgeeconomy. Washington, DC: Office of Vocational andAdult Education, U.S. Department of Education.

16 American Diploma Project. (2004). Ready or not:Creating a high school diploma that counts.Washington, DC: Achieve, Inc.

17 Hawkins, D. A. (2004). The state of college admis-sion, 2003–2004. Alexandria, VA: NationalAssociation for College Admission Counseling.

18 College Board. (2004). The College Board, AP 2004National Summary Reports. Retrieved November 8,2006, from http://www.collegeboard.com/student/test-ing/ap/exgrd_sum/2004.html.

19 “Low poverty” refers to schools with 15 percent orfewer students qualifying for free and reduced-pricelunch (FRLP). “High poverty” refers to schools with80 percent or more students qualifying for FRLP.“Life Sciences” includes biology. “Physical Sciences”include physics, chemistry, space science, and geolo-gy. All other noncore sciences such as agricultural sci-ence are excluded. Source: Ingersoll, R. M. (2002).Out-of-field teaching, educational inequality, and theorganization of schools: An exploratory analysis.Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching andPolicy, University of Washington.

37


20 Ingersoll, R. M. (2002). Out-of-field teaching, educa-tional inequality, and the organization of schools: Anexploratory analysis. Seattle, WA: Center for theStudy of Teaching and Policy.

21 “Underqualified” refers to teachers in selected fieldswithout a major or minor and/or certification in thatfield. These data refer only to teachers without amajor or minor in their main assignment field. Datarefer to departmental teachers of grades 7–12.

22 Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life,and work in communities and classrooms. New York:Cambridge University Press; Heath, S. B. (1986).Sociocultural contexts of language development. InBeyond language: Social and cultural factors inschooling language minority students (pp. 143–186).Sacramento, CA: California State Department ofEducation, Sacramento, Bilingual Education Office.[ED 304 241]; Ogbu, J. U. (1985). Research currents:Cultural-ecological influences on minority schoollearning. Language Arts, 62(8), 60–69; Purcell-Gates,V. (1995). Other people’s words: The cycle of low lit-eracy. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press;Noguera, P. A. (2003). The trouble with black boys:The role and influence of environmental and culturalfactors on the academic performance of AfricanAmerican males. Urban Education, 38(4), 431–459;Wong-Fillmore, L. (1983). The language learner as anindividual: Implications of research on individual dif-ferences for ESL teacher. In J. Lindfors (Ed.), Paperpresented at the Annual Convention of Teachers ofEnglish to Speakers of Other Languages. HI,Honolulu. [ED 228 893]; Wong-Fillmore, L. (1989).Bridges or barriers? The role of schools in culturallydiverse societies. In D. Philips (Ed.), The impact ofAmerican ideas on New Zealand’s educational policy,practices, and thinking (pp. 103–120). Wellington,New Zealand: New Zealand Council for EducationResearch. [ED 338 517]; Nasir, N. (2000). Identity,goals, and mathematical meaning: Learning in prac-tice for African-American students. Presented at theMath Equity Group Meeting, Evanston, IL:Northwestern University; Valdés, G. (1996). Conrespeto: Bridging the distances between culturallydiverse families and schools. New York: TeachersCollege Press.

23 Osborne, 1999.

24 Ginorio, A.B., & Huston, M. (2001). !Si, se puede!Latinas in schools. Washington, D.C.: AmericanAssociation of University Women.

25 Schmid, C. L. (2001). Educational achievement, lan-guage-minority students, and the new second genera-tion. Sociology of Education, Supplement: Currents ofThought: Sociology of Education at the Dawn of the21st Century, pp. 71-87. Retrieved April 4, 2002, fromProQuest database.

26 Ginorio, A.B., & Huston, M. (2001). !Si, se puede!Latinas in schools. Washington, DC: AmericanAssociation of University Women.

27 Clayton, O., Hewitt, C., & Gaffney, E. (2004).Reflecting on reconnecting males to higher education.New Directions for Student Services, 2004(107),14–15.

28 Washington, V., & Newman, J. (1991). Setting ourown agenda: Exploring the meaning of gender dispar-ities among Blacks in higher education. Journal ofNegro Education, 60, 19–35.

29 These are the University of Maryland, BaltimoreCounty (UMBC) and the University of MarylandCollege Park (UMCP).

30 Rodriguez, C., Kirshstein, R., & Hale, M. (2005).Creating and maintaining excellence: The model insti-tutions for excellence program. Washington, DC:American Institutes for Research.

31 Oglala Lakota College Program Proposal (ID # HRD-9550533) to the National Science Foundation (p. 1).

32 The second is Bennett College in North Carolina.



35 Flores, B. C., Della-Piana, C. K., Brady, T., Swift, A.,Knaust, H., & Jana Renner Martinez, J. R. (2002).Proceedings of the 2002 American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference &Exposition. American Society for EngineeringEducation.



37 Huang, G., Taddese, N., & Walter, E. (2000). Entryand persistence of women and minorities in collegescience and engineering education. NCES 2000-601.Washington, DC: National Center for EducationStatistics.

38 Pavel, D. M., & Colby, A. Y. (1992). American Indiansin higher education: The community college experi-ence. Los Angeles, CA: ERIC Clearinghouse forJunior Colleges. (ED351047)

39 Ibid; Quimbita, G. (1991). Preparing women andminorities for careers in math and science: The role ofcommunity colleges. Los Angeles, CA: ERICClearinghouse for Junior Colleges. (ED333943);Huang, G., Taddese, N., & Walter, E. (2000). Entryand persistence of women and minorities in collegescience and engineering education. NCES 2000-601.Washington, DC: National Center for EducationStatistics.

40 Rodriguez, C., Kirshstein, R., & Hale, M. (2005).Creating and maintaining excellence: The ModelInstitutions for Excellence Program. Washington, DC:American Institutes for Research.

41 The PHPE Evaluation Final Report—Lessons fromthe PHPE Partnership Models—Executive Summary.

42 Ibid.

43 American Institutes for Research.

39


Expanding the K–16 Pool of Potential STEM Graduates

Documents

Transcript of Expanding the K–16 Pool of Potential STEM Graduates