IN PURSUIT OF A DIVERSE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,...

I N P U R S U I T O F A D I V E R S E

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,

ENGINEERING, AND

M AT H E M AT I C S

RECOMMENDED RESEARCH

PRIORITIES TO ENHANCE

PA RT I C I PATION BY

UNDERREPRESENTED MINORITIES

NSF GRANT NUMBER HRD-9817536, A002

A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s

The Directorate for Education and Human Resources Programs (EHR) of the American Association for the

Advancement of Science (AAAS) is grateful to the National Science Foundation (NSF), Alliances for Graduate

Education and the Professoriate Program (AGEP) for its generous support of this research project. We especially

appreciate the support of the NSF staff, including Norman Fortenberry, Division of Undergraduate Education;

Roosevelt Johnson, Human Resources and Development; and Bernice Anderson, Division of Research,

Evaluation and Communications.

We particularly appreciate thework of study group leaders andr e c o r d e r s :

Nathan Bell, AAAS

Suzanne Brainard, University ofWashington, Seattle

Patricia Campbell, Campbell-Kibler Associates, Inc.

Marguerite Coomes, HowardU n i v e r s i t y

Edward Derrick, AAAS

Manuel Gomez, Universidad dePuerto Rico

Eric Jolly, Education DevelopmentC e n t e r, Inc.

Joyce Justus, University ofCalifornia, Santa Cruz

Frank Krar, formerly with AAAS

Catherine Millet, University ofMichigan, Ann Arbor

Maresi Nerad, University ofWashington, Seattle

Willie Pearson, Georgia Instituteof Te c h n o l o g y

We extend a special thank you tothe following individuals forprioritizing the report’srecommended new researcha r e a s :

William F. and Marian E. Brazziel,Marian Brazziel Associates

Patricia Campbell, Campbell-Kibler Associates, Inc.

Daryl E. Chubin, National ActionCouncil for Minorities inE n g i n e e r i n g

Manuel Gomez, Universidad dePuerto Rico

Anne MacLachlan, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley

Kenneth Maton, University ofMaryland, Baltimore

Susan Millar, University ofWisconsin, Madison

Maresi Nerad, University ofWashington, Seattle

Willie Pearson, Georgia Instituteof Te c h n o l o g y

Anne Swanson, Sonoma StateU n i v e r s i t y, California, Retired

Our appreciation to SenaytAssefa, Betty Calinger and JoleneJesse at AAAS who helped editthe report.

And a thank you to the editorialand design team at PotomacCommunications Group, Inc.Washington, DC

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 2

Introduction 4

What We Know from the Existing Research 7

Gaps in Current Research 10

Improve Methodology in Research on URM in STEM 12

Improve Research Linkages and CommunityBuilding Among Researchers 14

Explore New Research Areas 15

End Notes 20

Appendix A: List of Participants 23

Appendix B: Study Group Discussion Questions 24

About AAAS 25

I n P u r s u i t o f a D i v e r s e S c i e n c e , Te c h n o l o g y, E n g i n e e r i n g ,

a n d M a t h e m a t i c s Wo r k f o r c e :Recommended Research Priorities to Enhance P a rticipation by Underre p resented Minorities

American Association National Science Foundationfor the Advancement of Science

NSF Grant Number HRD 9817536, A002ISBN 0-87168-680-5

Produced byYolanda S. George, David S. Neale, Virginia Van Horne, and Shirley M. Malcom

American Association for the Advancement of ScienceWashington, DC

December 2001

T oday the United States is the world leader inthe global science, technology, engineeringand, mathematics (STEM) enterprise, but other

countries stand ready to challenge this economicstrength. One of the main reasons is a shortage ofU.S. workers to fill STEM jobs. Technically skilledworkers on H-1B Visas (guest workers) are nowmaking up for the U.S. worker shortfall. This supplyof talent could dwindle in the near future as othernations take steps to increase their own STEMp r o d u c t i v i t y. Another reason is that the majority ofthe current STEM workforce, White, non-Hispanicmen, is shrinking. In 1995, the projected percentageof White men in the overall workforce was 36%. By2050 White males are projected to be 26% of theoverall workforce, while in 1997 they representednearly 70% of the STEM workforce.1

In our efforts to sustain U.S. productivity andeconomic strength, underrepresented minorities(URM) (for the purpose of this paper defined aspersons of African American, Hispanic American,and Native American racial/ethnic descent), providean untapped reservoir of talent that could be used tofill technical jobs. Over the past 25 years, educationaldiversity programs have encouraged and supportedURM pursuing STEM degrees. Yet, theirrepresentation in STEM still lags far behind that of White, non-Hispanic men.

To understand the reasons why this is occuring, theAmerican Association for the Advancement ofScience Directorate for Education and HumanResources Programs convened a study groupmeeting in September 2000 of 70 leading educatorsand researchers in the STEM fields. We examinedover 150 research efforts related to choice of collegemajors, retention in STEM college majors, academicmentoring at both the pre-college and highereducation levels, and pursuit of a STEM doctorate, aswell as faculty positions. At the study group meeting,we discussed key research, identified gaps, anddeveloped a research agenda for the future. Particularattention was paid to the transition process from onelevel of academic achievement to the next.

We identified three research priorities for URM in STEM from the high school years to theprofessoriate:

1 . I m p rove methodology. While a substantialbody of research is underway on URM in STEM,many of the studies focus on patterns ofunderrepresentation in STEM or groupdifferences. Also, many studies are small andrepresent the perceptions of one group ofstakeholders in the system, in this case, students,f a c u l t y, or program staff. We recommend morecomprehensive studies that take into account theinteractions of all key players in the system, aswell as studies that follow cohorts of students asthey move through the higher education yearsinto faculty positions.

2 . I m p rove re s e a rch linkages. Many of theresearch studies previously conducted are notcomparable for a number of reasons, includingdifferences in definitions of terms or datacollection practices. For example, in many cases,researchers define URM in different ways. Interms of practices, researchers collected retentionrates and graduation rates at different times.

To improve research linkages, we recommenddeveloping data collection guidelines anddefinitions, using common research methods anddeveloping models that will permit cross-comparison of findings in a wide range ofstudies. We also recommend establishing aresearch consortium.

In addition, we encourage organizations like theNational Science Foundation, and othergovernment agencies to foster STEM educationresearch coordination. We also recommend thatthese organizations maintain and build databasesto provide information about the education andworkforce experiences of URM, women, andpersons with disabilities in STEM.

2

Executive Summary

I n P u r s u i t o f a D i v e r s e S T E M W o r k f o r c e 3

3. E x p l o re new re s e a rch are a s. Our analysissuggests that STEM education research to date issomewhat limited. Part of our assessmentfocused on factors that facilitate progression ofURM into STEM higher education studies andthe professoriate. These include taking high-intensity and high-quality advanced mathematicsand science courses during high school, pre-college programs that boost STEM skills, andhigher education academic support programs incore mathematics and science. Factors that limitprogress include community college STEMcurricula that do not adequately prepare studentsfor a baccalaureate program, lack ofundergraduate faculty mentoring toward STEMdoctoral programs, and low intensity of STEMcurriculum at the undergraduate level.

Developing a better understanding of the factors thatfacilitate or limit URM STEM progress requires:

Continued collection of critical data. Researchers need to continually collect data from highereducation enrollment, STEM course taking, andgraduation for different groups, as well as data fromdifferent types of colleges and universities.Curriculum alignment between community and f o u r-year colleges also should be monitored. Specificattention should be given to monitoring the impact of changes in higher education admissions, retention, and graduation policies at both the state and national levels.

Additional research to better understand factors thatfacilitate or limit student progression towards doctoraldegrees and faculty positions in STEM. We need tostudy the reasons why able and high achieving URMdo not enter STEM college majors or, if they enter,search for the reasons why they do not completeSTEM higher education degrees or go on in highereducation to pursue doctoral careers in academe.Suggestions for further research include:

• Studies concerning teaching and mentoringURM at the high school, college, and graduateschool levels.

• Studies addressing how to create a nurturinginstitutional and STEM departmental culture thatvalues the knowledge URM bring to thisenterprise.

• Studies determining why URM, particularly thosewith high ability, do not pursue doctoral careersin STEM.

Members of our study group meeting hope thatthese suggestions will provide guidance, andstrategies for policymakers, researchers, educators,and public and private foundation staff who want tobuild and sustain STEM education research on URM.The better the quality of information we have onwhat facilitates and what limits URM’s progresstowards STEM doctorates, the better equipped wewill be to create educational policies and programs toaddress them.

In our eff o rts to sustain U.S. productivity and economics t rength, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, andNative Americans provide an untapped re s e rvoir oftalent that could be used to fill technical jobs.

4

These worldwide education andworkforce policy trends can havea negative effect on the nation’seconomy, particularly if enoughguest workers are not technicallytrained.

Traditionally, STEM workers havebeen White, non-Hispanic men. In1997, the general STEMworkforce was comprised ofnearly 70% White men.3 Theirnumbers, however, as apercentage of the U.S. populationare declining. The Census Bureaureports that the population ofWhite, non-Hispanic men isexpected to decrease by 11% bythe middle of this century.4 Thiscould leave an enormous gap inthe American workforce that mustbe filled. (See Chart left.)

The United States has anuntapped reservoir of talent thatcould be developed to filltechnical jobs. Underrepresentedminorities (URM) in STEM (for thepurpose of this paper defined aspersons of African American,Hispanic American, and NativeAmerican racial/ethnic descent),

should be encouraged to pursueSTEM education from high schoolto the doctoral level. In 1997, URMcomprised just over 6% of thegeneral STEM workforce.5 URMaccounted for only 4.6% of theSTEM workforce with doctoraldegrees, compared to nearly 80%for White men.6 (See Sidebars onpages 5 and 6.)

Over the past 25 years,educational diversity programs inSTEM have made a difference inbringing URM, women, andpersons with disabilities into thesedisciplines. But new restrictionson these programs, andreluctance on the part of URM topursue higher education in STEMfields, have kept the percentage ofthese workers within STEM low.

If a strong U.S. STEM workforceis to be ensured, it is imperativethat this nation understand howto encourage and develop theSTEM talent of all U.S. citizens,including all racial/ethnic groups,men and women, and personswith disabilities.

Population Projection for White,Non-Hispanic Males in the United States

Source: Day, J. (1996). Populationprojections of the United States by age,sex, race and Hispanic origin: 1995 to2050. Arlington, VA: U.S. Census Bureau.

Introduction

Building a diverse workforce in science, technology,engineering and mathematics (STEM) is increasingly importantto sustaining the nation’s productivity and economic strength.Evidence already exists that the lack of United States citizens inthe STEM workforce is limiting economic growth, and businesshas looked to H-1B Visas (guest workers) as a way to fill thisgap. However, recognizing the connection between sustainedeconomic growth and a technically trained workforce, othernations are aggressively restructuring higher education andworkforce policies to keep their nationals at home.2


To address this critical problem,the American Association for theAdvancement of Science (AAAS)Directorate for Education andHuman Resources Programsconvened a study group meetingin September 2000 to discusscurrent and future research onURM in STEM from the highschool years into theprofessoriate. Seventy educatorsand researchers from leadinguniversities, representatives of theNational Science Foundation, andother leaders in the STEM fieldsattended. (See Appendix A, for acomplete list of participants.)

The study group met forseventeen hours, and participantsconsidered a variety of questionsbased on current STEM research.The goals of the study group wereto review current research onSTEM education, identify gaps,and recommend researchpriorities for future studies.

Research Methodology

As preparation for the studygroup meeting, AAAS staffidentified and reviewed over 150

research studies related to STEMstudent and faculty diversity.These studies were grouped intosix categories based on possibleeducational paths to a STEMdoctorate and into theprofessoriate. Particular attentionwas given to the transitionprocess from one level ofacademic achievement to the next.The six categories were:

1. The process STEMundergraduates go through toselect these disciplines,especially determining whichhigh school courses mayinfluence their decision topursue a STEM major.

2. Undergraduate academicachievement and progress inSTEM at the associate andbaccalaureate levels, includingtransition from associate tobaccalaureate degreeprograms.

3. Transition to master’sprograms in engineering andcomputer science, withconsideration of professionalor terminal master’sprograms.

Racial/Ethnic Distribution of U.S.STEM Workforce in 1997

*Native American participation was less than 1%.

Source: Commission on the Advancementof Women and Minorities in Science,Engineering and Technology Development.(2000). Land of plenty: Diversity asAmerica’s competitive edge in science,engineering and technology. Arlington, VA:National Science Foundation.

Over the past 25 years, educationaldiversity programs in STEM havemade a difference in bringing URM,women, and persons with disabilitiesinto these disciplines.

6

4. Transition to STEM doctoraldegree programs, includingtransition from undergraduateprograms, as well as master’sto doctoral bridge programsat Research Extensive andResearch Intensiveuniversities.

5. Graduate school academicachievement and progress in STEM.

6. Transition from STEMdoctoral to postdoctoralpositions, transition to tenuretrack and non-tenure trackfaculty positions, and issuesaround promotion and tenure.

Each of the six categories wasassigned to an individual studygroup. The groups examined aselection of key research paperswithin their assigned categories,that focused on the STEMexperiences of URM, women, andpersons with disabilities from highschool to the professoriate. Theyalso answered questions developedto stimulate discussion andreviewed bibliographies of currentresearch. (See Appendix B for acomplete list of discussionquestions.) Each study group hadan assigned leader who wasresponsible for producing a writtenreport by the end of the meeting.

The meeting produced severalinsights into areas of STEMresearch that call for furtherexploration as well as threespecific research priorities. Theserecommended research priorities,with regard to URM in STEMfrom the high school years intothe professoriate are:

• Improve methodology.• Improve research linkages,

often referred to ascommunity building.

• Explore new research areas.

In addition to summarizing thefindings, this paper first outlines:

• What we know about theexisting research.

• Gaps in current research onURM in STEM.

We hope that it will provideguidance to researchers aboutmethodology, areas of study, andthe most effective ways to shareinformation. In addition, we hopethese suggestions will provideguidance and strategies forpolicymakers, educational leaders,and public and private foundationstaff who want to build andsustain STEM education researchon URM.

The STEM Workforce withDoctoral Degrees in 1997

*Native American participation was less than 1%.

Source: Women, minorities, and personswith disabilities in science and engineering.(2000). Arlington, VA: National ScienceFoundation.


The following is an assessment ofwhat we know from the existingresearch on URM in STEM for thehigh school, undergraduate, andgraduate years, as well as theprofessoriate. With input from thestudy group participants, over 300quantitative and qualitativestudies were identified, includingongoing data reporting andstudies done by the U.S.Department of Education, theNational Science Foundation,private testing groups, and STEMprofessional associations org r o u p s .

These findings are drawn fromlarge data collection efforts, aswell as smaller studies aboutperceptions of students, faculty, orspecial program staff. Theyprovide information about URMstudents as they progress fromhigh school to professional STEMcareers. They explain the variablesthat contribute to successfulcompletion of STEM degrees, thebarriers to degree attainment,and, when understood, thereasons for attrition from highereducation, as well as barriers tothe professoriate. The findings arenot necessarily ranked in order ofi m p o r t a n c e .

Findings for the High School Ye a r s

• The three most importantvariables that contribute tob a c h e l o r ’s degree completionare intensity and quality of thesecondary school curriculum,test scores, and classrank/grade point average.7

• National and state schooleducational policies may limitresources for K-12 schools,particularly in science.8

• Taking mathematics coursesbeyond Algebra II, such astrigonometry or pre-calculus,is particularly key for AfricanAmerican and HispanicAmerican students.9

• Factors that are associatedwith racial/ethnic differenceson standardized and collegeadmissions tests, as well asentry into STEM majorsi n c l u d e :■ The number of advanced

mathematics and sciencecourses taken by studentsand offered by highschools.

■ Teacher effectiveness. ■ School resources.

What We Know from theExisting Research

National and state school educationalpolicies may limit re s o u rces for K-12schools, particularly in science.8

8

■ Parental income, wealth,and education.

■ O u t - o f - s c h o o lo p p o r t u n i t i e s .1 0

• African American andHispanic college studentswith high grade pointaverages and SAT scoresabove 600 typically do notpursue STEM college majorsfor reasons including poorteaching in STEM courses,lack of encouragement fromteachers or parents, and self-perception of their owninability to be successful inSTEM majors.1 1

• Pre-college programs forURM are shown to increasecollege and universityenrollment of students inSTEM majors.1 2

Findings for the U n d e rgraduate Ye a r s

• URM are more likely to dropout of college for a variety ofreasons, including financialdifficulties, poor high schoolpreparation, poor collegeteaching, low facultyexpectations, and an inflexiblec u r r i c u l u m .1 3

• Examples exist of college anduniversity STEM academicsupport services andprograms that, ifimplemented with clearlearning objectives andappropriate studentparticipation, can increaseretention of URM.1 4

• Data from the 1980s H i g hSchool and Beyond s t u d i e sindicate that 58% ofb a c h e l o r ’s degree recipientsattended more than oneinstitution, with dramaticincreases in the proportion ofstudents attending more thantwo institutions. Studentsstarting in highly selectivef o u r-year colleges and in opendoor institutions have thehighest multi-institutionalattendance for differentr e a s o n s .1 5

Findings for the Graduate School Ye a r s

• Bans on use of affirmativeaction for graduateadmissions had an adverseimpact on first-year graduateschool enrollments inResearch I universities.Enrollments droppedprecipitously during the 1997-1998 school year andrebounded in 1998-1999;h o w e v e r, these rates still didnot match the 1996 rates.1 6

• Negative variables forprogression to graduateschool include loans, debtburden, and age; while anegative barrier that affectsprimarily women is havingdependent children.1 7

• Positive variables forprogression to graduateschool include strong collegegrade point averages, ab a c h e l o r ’s degree from ahighly selective school, a


b a c h e l o r ’s degree from aschool with large numbers ofgraduate students intent to goto graduate school, andparents with a high level ofe d u c a t i o n .1 8

• STEM pre-graduate schoolbridges and undergraduateresearch programs forminorities and womenincreased STEM graduateschool enrollment.1 9

• The choice of a doctoralcareer in science (as opposedto careers in medicine, law,and business) may be affectedby the burden of educationaldebt, the opportunity cost ofrequired graduate education,expected remuneration ratesin the career, and benefitaccumulations, particularly forURM students.2 0

• Positive factors that affectpersistence and completion ofdoctoral degrees in STEMinclude intellectual capital,financial aid, interactions withf a c u l t y, peer support, andminority role models.2 1

Findings for the Faculty Ye a r s

Barriers to advancement andretention of URM in post-doctoraland tenure track faculty positionsi n c l u d e :

• Fewer interactions withfaculty peers.

• A belief that they were hiredbecause of affirmative actionand not for their capability todo science.

• Lack of an influential mentoror sponsor.

• Difficulty with securinggrants, even with a trackrecord for high-qualityr e s e a r c h .2 2

U n d e rre p resented minorities arem o re likely to drop out of college fora variety of reasons, includingfinancial difficulties, poor high schoolp reparation, poor college teaching,low faculty expectations, and aninflexible curr i c u l u m .13

10

These current research findingsprovide a snapshot, albeit anincomplete one, of students,f a c u l t y, or special program staffwithin the STEM disciplines. Thefollowing is a summary of thefactors that f a c i l i t a t e or l i m i tprogress of URM students withinSTEM. These factors present anoverview of current research andcan be used to identify gaps andnew areas of study.

Factors that f a c i l i t a t e p r o g r e s s i o nof URM into STEM post-secondary studies include:

• Taking high-intensity andhigh-quality advancedmathematics and sciencecourses.

• STEM pre-college programsthat include enhanced STEMhigh school curricula,admissions test preparation,and early introduction toSTEM careers.

• Post-secondary STEMsupport programs,particularly in calculus,c h e m i s t r y, and physics, thatincrease undergraduater e t e n t i o n .

• Financial aid packages thatreduce debt burden.

• STEM pre-graduate schoolbridge programs that increaseenrollment in Ph.D. programs.

Factors that l i m i t the progressionof URM students into STEM post-secondary studies and professorialpositions include:

• Emerging state policies thatimpede K-12 reform or bansagainst use of affirmativeaction in post-secondarya d m i s s i o n s .

• High school STEM teachingthat lacks rigor, as well asmentoring toward doctoralSTEM careers.

• Community colleges’ STEMcurricula that may not bealigned with bachelor ofscience degree-grantingcolleges and universities.

• College and university STEMteaching that often does nottake into account students’different learning styles.

• Lack of undergraduate facultymentoring towards doctoralSTEM careers.

• Low intensity and quality ofSTEM curricula at theundergraduate level.

• Undergraduate STEMcurricula that may not bealigned with graduate schoolSTEM curricula.

• The mistaken belief that raceor ethnicity, rather thanc a p a b i l i t y, plays a major rolein selection or employment inthe higher education sector.

Given the limiting factors toprogression of URM in STEM,there is a need to:

• Continually collect data onaccess of African American,Hispanic American, andNative American high schoolstudents to mathematics andscience courses needed forpost-secondary majors inSTEM. Data also should becollected on student access tocertified science andmathematics high schoolteachers and high-qualitymathematics and sciencecourses in high school.

Gaps in Current Research


• Monitor the annual collegeand university enrollment anddegree attainment of URM inSTEM at all educational levels,given evolving state highereducational policies related tobans on use of affirmativea c t i o n .

• Monitor how communitycolleges are aligning theirSTEM curricula with collegesand universities to whichstudents usually transfer.

• Monitor state policies relatedto STEM curricula alignmentbetween community collegesand bachelor of sciencedegree-granting colleges andu n i v e r s i t i e s .

Also there are a number of areaslimiting student progression thatwe need to better understand.They include:

• The teaching/mentoring andlearning interactions betweenhigh school science andmathematics teachers andAfrican American, HispanicAmerican, and NativeAmerican students, as well asstudents from differentsocioeconomic groups.

• The teaching/mentoring andlearning interactions betweencollege and university facultyand URM students in STEM.

• How to create an institutionaland STEM departmentalculture that will nurture anddevelop the talents of URMs t u d e n t s .

• How to create a scientificresearch culture that willrecognize and value theknowledge and perspectivesthat URM bring to thee n t e r p r i s e .

• How to interest AfricanAmerican, HispanicAmerican, and NativeAmerican students in doctoralcareers in STEM, especiallythose with high ability.

We need to better

understand how to interest

African American, Hispanic

American, and Native

American students in

doctoral careers in

STEM, especially those

with high ability.

12

The current research baseprovides limited potential forthorough analysis for severalreasons. First, there are noestablished data collectionguidelines for researchers whostudy URM in STEM. In otherwords, most of the data in thisresearch base is not comparabledue to differences in methods,definitions of terms (e.g.,retention, URM), and otherfactors. Also, many of the studieson URM in STEM are samplesurveys with differing degrees ofvalidity and reliability.

The studies conducted areparticularly limited in terms ofdisaggregated information aboutdifferent racial/ethnic groups, aswell as different STEMdisciplines. As a result, it is hardto discern which factors aregeneric to all STEM students orf a c u l t y, and which are group ordiscipline specific.

In many studies, information onAfrican Americans and HispanicAmericans is included; however,information on Native Americansor on gender within racial/ethnicgroups is not reported. Thisoccurs primarily because the cellsize of these populations is toosmall to report statisticallymeaningful data. Further, nostudies were found on minoritystudents with disabilities inS T E M .

The studies also do not examinethe full spectrum of colleges anduniversities. For example, manyof the studies are conducted at

Research Extensive and ResearchIntensive universities, with fewlooking at community colleges,Historically Black Colleges andUniversities, institutions servingconcentrations of HispanicAmericans, tribal colleges,w o m e n ’s colleges, or colleges anduniversities that target or servepersons with disabilities.

Much of the research has focusedon patterns of group differencesor underrepresentation. However,very few of these studies focus on the complexity of theundergraduate or graduateeducational experience of URM in STEM.2 4

Recommendations for I m p roving Methodology

In terms of methodology, theresearch designed to investigateand explain differences must takeinto account the complexity of theSTEM disciplines. That is, theresearch should be multivariateand multi-leveled (e.g., path-analysis, structural equations).Researchers should ensure thattheir attempts to reduce thenumber of variables andinteractions do not oversimplifyimportant research questions.

The research also must becomprehensive, incorporatingecological models that include acomplementary set of individualand systemic approaches.Strategies such as cohortingshould be used and, ideally,information should be collectedfrom all involved in the

Improve Methodology inResearch on URM in STEM

A 1999 College Board

report states that few of

the numerous programs

to improve academic

outcomes of URM have

undergone extensive

external evaluation.2 3


educational process, includingstudents, universityadministrators, departmentfaculty and staff, and STEMintervention program staff.

Specific recommendations forimproving methodology include:

• Research studies shouldinclude data that islongitudinal, retrospective,small-scale, institutional-based, critical event, or a c t i o n - o r i e n t e d .

• Data should be disaggregatedby race/ethnicity, gender anddisability within race/ethnicity,college and university types,STEM disciplines, studentachievement levels, collegepersisters and non-persisters,age, and socioeconomicstatus, where appropriate.

• Comparative studies areneeded at the post-secondarylevel between the differentgroups of students and facultyso that it can be discernedwhich problems in STEM aregeneric, and which are groupspecific, including gender anddisability within racial/ethnicg r o u p s .

• Given the open admissionsmodel in community colleges,a different way of looking atthe transfer rate is needed,since all students do not go tocommunity colleges with thegoal of transferring to a four-year institution.

• Given the degree of institutionand field switching bystudents, new ways of lookingat retention and graduationrates are needed.

• More sophisticated outcomeevaluations of federal andnon-federal interventionprograms are needed,including requirements forinclusion of comparisonsamples, and the use of state-of-the-art social scienceevaluation models beyondmere tracking.

• Alternatives to the pipelinemetaphor to analyze currentdata are needed to account for“stepping-out” or interruptionof post-secondary educationdegree attainment. Thesemodels must account foruniversity and field switching.

14

One of the biggest problemsidentified was the lack of datacollection guidelines forresearchers who are studyinghuman resources in STEM. Also,more opportunities are neededfor early communication andinformation sharing amongSTEM researchers. Although dataare shared in a number of venuesupon completion, researchers donot communicate as often duringthe study development, collectionof data and analysis of resultsphases. Researchers need tocommunicate more effectivelywith each other at all stages of theresearch process so they canshare methodology and findings.

Building a community ofresearchers who confer regularlymay help to improve methodol-ogy and bring us closer tounderstanding factors that limitthe STEM talent pool. To this end,recommendations for communitybuilding include:

• Establish a consortium ofresearchers studying theSTEM experiences andachievements of URM fromthe high school years toa c a d e m e .

• Develop guidelines forcoordinating bothquantitative and qualitativehigh school and post-secondary school research onURM in STEM to allow cross-research or cross-institutionalcomparisons. Theseguidelines should include

developing commondefinitions of enrollment,community college transferrates, attrition, and types ofd i s a b i l i t y, as well asdefinitions of who should orshould not be counted as ascientist or engineer (e.g.,someone with a master’s inbusiness practicing in a hightech company, physicians,patent lawyers, etc.). Theyalso should include commonsets of data collectionprotocols across STEMintervention program areas asneeded to allow for cross-program analysis.

• Encourage granting agenciesto foster researchcoordination through synergyand to smooth the path fordata release from collegesand universities that are theirgrant recipients.

• Maintain and build NationalScience Foundation databaseson minorities, women, andpersons with disabilities thatproduce disaggregated STEMdata by gender, race, andd i s a b i l i t y, as well as maintainand build the databases of theU.S. Department ofE d u c a t i o n ’s National Centerfor Education Statistics.

Improve Research Linkagesand Community BuildingAmong Researchers


Tables One to Four provideinformation on addressing thegaps in STEM research. Theyrecommend areas of new andcontinuing research on the STEMexperiences and achievements ofURM from the high school yearsinto the professoriate. While allresearch topics mentioned areimportant, several study groupparticipants recommended sevenspecific areas as having thehighest priority for funding.

These areas are:

1 . The need to understandSTEM talent spotting anddevelopment in colleges andu n i v e r s i t i e s .

Specific data collection activitiesand research needed in this areai n c l u d e :

• Study institutional anddepartmental admissionscriteria and processes. Moreneeds to be known aboutundergraduate and graduateschool admissions criteria,including the predictive valueof admissions tests and gradepoint averages. Also, we needto better understandeducational institutions andSTEM departments that haveadopted a talent developmentapproach to doctoralrecruitment and training. To omany STEM programs arestill wedded to a Darwinianconcept of doctoral training.

• Collect departmental data byr a c e / e t h n i c i t y, gender, andd i s a b i l i t y. Institutions shouldprovide systematicinformation by department,including information abouttheir student recruits,enrollees, and degreerecipients, including post-degree positions. In addition,data needs to be collected onSTEM post-doctoralresearchers and facultyrecruitment, promotion, andtenure within departments.

• Study departmental policies,programs, and practices. It isat the department level thatpolicies, interventionprograms, teaching, andlearning take place. Thereforethe way departmentalorganization and culturefoster and impede theadvancement of URM inSTEM fields must beu n d e r s t o o d .

• Study STEM faculty teachingand mentoring. Studies areneeded to examine the impactof STEM faculty teaching andmentoring on students’persistence and STEM degreeattainment at both theundergraduate and graduatelevels. This includes the extentto which there is facultyunderstanding, knowledge,and practice of racial/ethnicd i v e r s i t y. Faculty are, perhaps,the single most importantinfluence on students, and

Explore New Research Areas

16

much more needs to beunderstood about factorsrelated to their impact ons t u d e n t s .

2 . The need to better understandSTEM community colleget r a n s f e r s .

Since many URM and studentswith disabilities begin theircollege careers in the communitycollege system, we need to betterunderstand the community

college transfer process, includingSTEM-related policies, practices,and courses that are needed tosuccessfully transfer to bachelorof science degree-grantingcolleges and universities.

3 . The need to study STEMcurricula and instruction atdifferent types of colleges anduniversities.

Better understanding of thequality of instruction and

Education Policy

Te a c h i n gE ff e c t i v e n e s s

• STEM education policyre g a rding equity of re s o u rc e s ,a ff i rmative action, and executive ord e r s .

• High school course-taking anda c h i e v e m e n t .

• Factors that affect students’decisions to take STEM coursesin high school and college,include: ■ Courses off e re d .■ Intensity and quality of

courses taken.■ Attitudes and expectations

of teachers and parents inre g a rds to STEM.

■ Students’ aspirations andp e rceptions of their abilities.

R e s e a rch Exists On New or Continuing Research is Needed On

Table 1 – High School Level

• New and emerging education policies thatlimit the size of the STEM pool in post-s e c o n d a ry education, including admissions,financial aid, legislation, and judicial ord e r s .

• D i ff e rential access to technology and itsa ffect on student achievement in post-s e c o n d a ry education and career choice.

• Equity of STEM re s o u rces available to allstudents from diff e rent racial/ethnic andsocio-economic gro u p s .

• Systemic education re f o rm, with part i c u l a rattention to: ■ High school course-taking and

achievement, as related to coursesneeded to major in STEM.

■ How diff e rent types of science andmathematics courses off e red by highschools impact URM students’ decisions totake STEM courses in college.

• Continue existing re s e a rch. • How high school teaching and mentoring

a ffect minority students’ entry, persistence,and bachelor’s degree attainment in STEM.

• How teacher in-service and pre - s e rv i c ep rograms impact achievement of URM inscience and mathematics.

• Identify pre - s e rvice programs that pro d u c eteachers who are effective with studentsf rom all racial/ethnic and socio-economicg ro u p s .

• How to best influence high school studentsto pursue STEM, including high-abilityminority students, and those in lowp e rf o rming schools.

To p i c


R e s e a rch Exists On New or Continuing Research is Needed OnTo p i c

• How aff i rmative action bans aff e c te n rollments of and financial aid for URM in STEM.

• How new and emerging underg r a d u a t eadmissions policies affect URMachievement and undergraduate degre eattainment in STEM.

• Identifying factors that promote or inhibite ffective transition in STEM majors fro mcommunity colleges to bachelor of science degree-granting colleges andu n i v e r s i t i e s .

• How STEM faculty teaching and mentoringa ffects undergraduate persistence andd e g ree attainment, and entry of URM intodoctoral pro g r a m s .

• How STEM undergraduate facultyunderstanding, knowledge, and practicesof diversity (as related to URM, women,and students with disabilities) aff e c tpersistence and degree attainment.

• How technology affects teaching andl e a rn i n g .

• Continue existing re s e a rc h .• Identifying what aspects of underg r a d u a t e

STEM interventions increase entry,persistence, and degree attainment.

• The extent to which underg r a d u a t eeducation support services and pro g r a m scontribute to the pro g ress andachievement of URM in STEM.

• U n d e rgraduate re c ruitment andadmissions policies andp r a c t i c e s .

• Factors that aff e c tu n d e rgraduate and graduateadmission test score s .

• Factors that aff e c tu n d e rgraduate re t e n t i o n ,including instruction, culture ,academic support services, andsocial climate.

• Data collection by colleges anduniversities of how STEMi n t e rvention programs aff e c tu n d e rgraduate re t e n t i o n ,graduation rates, and graduateschool admissions.

• E ffective practices in STEMi n t e rvention pro g r a m s .

R e c ruitment and A d m i s s i o n s

Institutional andD e p a rtmental Culture

STEM Interv e n t i o nand Support Serv i c e s

Table 2 – U n d e rgraduate Level

curriculum at different types ofinstitutions is needed. Studiesshould be conducted atcommunity colleges, HistoricallyBlack Colleges and Universities,institutions serving aconcentration of HispanicAmericans, tribal colleges,w o m e n ’s colleges, and collegesand universities that target orserve significant populations ofdisabled students. In addition, theintegration of technology intoSTEM curricula should beexamined.

4 . The need to examine thechanging culture, structure,and economics of collegesand universities on STEM.

We need a better understandingof the present and future contextwithin academia if URM are tosucceed in STEM, including thetheory that “multicontextuality”can improve teaching andlearning, particularly for HispanicAmericans and other URM.2 5

Another topic to be explored inthis area includes how hiringURM part-time instructors,

18

R e s e a rch Exists On New or Continuing Research is Needed OnTo p i c

Table 3 – Graduate Level

• Factors that affect bachelor’sd e g ree recipients’ decisions onwhether or not to enroll ingraduate school.

• How anti-aff i rmative actioninitiatives affect first yeargraduate school enro l l m e n t s .

• How financial aid aff e c t spersistence in graduatep ro g r a m s .

• Debt owed by doctoralre c i p i e n t s .

• The characteristics andexperiences of URM in graduateschool in STEM disciplines, withp a rticular attention to doctoralre c i p i e n t s .

Pursuit of GraduateD e g re e s

F i n a n c e s

Characteristics and Experiences

• Continue existing re s e a rc h .• How aff i rmative action bans aff e c t

e n rollments of and financial assistance forURM in STEM.

• E ffectiveness of graduate school re c ru i t m e n tstrategies and pro g r a m s .

• Graduate school and depart m e n t a ladmissions policies and practices re g a rd i n gURM, including: ■ Use of admissions tests.■ Expectations and attitudes of faculty. ■ Centralization or decentralization of

a d m i s s i o n s .■ F o reign student admissions.■ Not using ethnic self-identification.

• The predictive value of graduate schoolentrance examinations and underg r a d u a t egrade point averages.

• How the information technology and thebiotechnology revolutions have aff e c t e dstudents' pro g ression to graduate school.

• Continue existing re s e a rc h .• How differing forms of financial aid aff e c t

e n t ry, persistence, and degree attainment. • How debt affects entry and completion of

STEM doctorates.

• How undergraduate STEM pre p a r a t i o na ffects graduate school achievement anddoctoral attainment, including pre p a r a t i o nat minority serving institutions.

• How STEM departmental organization andc u l t u re affects URM persistence andgraduate school degree attainment

• The mentoring practices of STEM graduateschool faculty, including cro s s - c u l t u r a lm e n t o r i n g .

• URM decisions to pursue STEM graduatestudies.

• The pathways of URM to STEM doctorates.• How institutional re s t ructuring of STEM

graduate education affects the number,type, and fields of degrees earned by URMin STEM disciplines, with particular attentionto master’s certificates, terminal master’s ,and new fields.


R e s e a rch Exists OnTo p i c

Table 4 – Faculty Level

adjunct faculty, and researchassociates affects recruitment andretention into tenured facultypositions in STEM departments.

5 . The need to understand theSTEM teaching/mentoringand student learninginteractions during the highschool years.

Since having high-intensity andhigh-quality advancedmathematics and scienceinstruction is a key factor tosuccessful completion of ab a c h e l o r ’s degree, STEMteaching/mentoring and studentlearning interactions must bestudied and understood. We needto determine if and how STEMteaching/mentoring and studentlearning interactions vary withdifferent groups of students. Also,we need to better understand theimpact on students of havingmathematics and science teacherswith strong content backgrounds.

It is most important to understandthe impact of high school scienceand mathematics teachers onAfrican American, HispanicAmerican, and Native Americanstudents, including high-abilitystudents and those in low-performing schools.

6 . The need to monitor collegeand university STEM pre-service teacher preparationprograms for production ofteachers who are effectivewith students from allracial/ethnic andsocioeconomic groups.

Pre-service teacher educationrepresents a set of institutionaland classroom practices that haveintergenerational effects onstudents of all race/ethnic andsocioeconomic groups. We mustdocument which institutions areproducing teachers of allrace/ethnic groups that areculturally and habitually effectivein teaching STEM courses andwith getting URM into STEMmajors and careers.

7 . The need to understand thedecisions of URM to pursuedoctoral work in STEM andhow to best influence thesed e c i s i o n s .

We know very little about whyURM with doctoral degrees inSTEM decided to pursue Ph.Ds.We need to understand what rolesparents or family, as well as K-12and college and universityeducators and peers, play in theircareer choice, if any. Also, it isimportant to determine whatmakes different STEM disciplinesinteresting to URM. In addition,we need to better understand therole of industries on influencingdoctoral career paths for URM in STEM.

New or Continuing Research is Needed On

Commitment toSTEM AcademicC a re e r s

• Continue existing re s e a rc h .• How the changing policies, practices,

c u l t u re, stru c t u re, and economics ofre s e a rch universities and industry aff e c tURM and women in STEM academe,i n c l u d i n g :■ Family and dual career couple issues.■ Class backgro u n d s .■ Te c h n o l o g y.■ F o rmation of networks.■ R e s e a rch intere s t s .

• How the “multicontextuality” appro a c ha ffects teaching and learn i n g .

• The experiences that lead tenured URMand women to drop out of STEM doctoralp ro g r a m s .

• Postdoctoral durations.• R e c ruitment of URM and women

into academe in STEMd i s c i p l i n e s .

• University tenure policies andp r a c t i c e s .

• Critical mass of women in STEM in academe.

20

End Notes

1D a y, J. (1996). Population pro j e c t i o n sof the United States by age, sex, raceand Hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050.Arlington, VA: U.S. Census Bure a u .

2U.S. Office of Science and Te c h n o l o g yP o l i c y. National Science andTechnology Council. (2000). Ensuring as t rong U.S. scientific, technical, andengineering workforce in the 21stc e n t u ry. Washington, DC.

Women, minorities, and personswith disabilities in science ande n g i n e e r i n g. (2000). Arlington, VA :National Science Foundation.

3Commission on the Advancement ofWomen and Minorities in Science,Engineering and Te c h n o l o g yDevelopment. (2000). Land of plenty:Diversity as America’s competitiveedge in science, engineering andt e c h n o l o g y. Arlington, VA: NationalScience Foundation.

4D a y, J. (1996). Population pro j e c t i o n sof the United States by age, sex, raceand Hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050.Arlington, VA: U.S. Census Bure a u .



7Adelman, Cliff o rd. (1999). Answers inthe tool box: Academic intensity,attendance patterns, and bachelor'sd e g ree attainment. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education, Off i c eof Educational Research andI m p ro v e m e n t .

8Malcom, Shirley M., George, Yo l a n d aS., & Van Horne, Vi rginia V. (Eds.).(1996). The effect of the changingpolicy climate on science,mathematics, and engineeringd i v e r s i t y. Washington, DC: AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science.

Commission on the Advancement ofWomen and Minorities in Science,Engineering and Te c h n o l o g yDevelopment. (2000). Land ofplenty: Diversity as America’scompetitive edge in science,engineering and technology.Arlington, VA: National ScienceF o u n d a t i o n .

9Adelman, Cliff o rd. (1999). Answers inthe tool box: Academic intensity,attendance patterns, and bachelor'sd e g ree attainment. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education, Off i c eof Educational Research andI m p ro v e m e n t .

1 0Adelman, Cliff o rd. (1998). Wo m e nand men of the engineering path: Amodel for analyses of underg r a d u a t ec a re e r s . Washington, DC: U.S.D e p a rtment of Education & TheNational Institute for ScienceE d u c a t i o n .

Camara, Wayne J. & Schimdt, AmyE. (1999). G roup diff e rences ins t a n d a rdized testing and socials t r a t i f i c a t i o n. New York: CollegeB o a rd .

Clewell, Beatriz C., Anderson,B e rnice T., & Thorpe, Marg a ret E.(1992). B reaking the barr i e r s :Helping female and minoritystudents succeed in mathematicsand science. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Finn, Jeremy D. (1999, Spring).O p p o rtunity off e red – opport u n i t ytaken: Course-taking in Americanhigh school. ETS Policy Notes, 9.

Huang, Gary, Taddese, Nebiyu, &Wa l t e r, Elizabeth. (2000). E n t ry andpersistence of women and minoritiesin college science and engineeringe d u c a t i o n (NCES Publication No.2000-601). Washington, DC: U.S.D e p a rtment of Education. Office ofEducational Research andI m p rovement.

M c L u re, Gail T. & McLure, John W.(2000). Science course-taking, out-of-class science accomplishments,and achievements in the high schoolgraduating class of 1998. Iowa City, IA: ACT.

Women, minorities, and personswith disabilities in science ande n g i n e e r i n g. (1994, 1996, 1998, &2000). Arlington, VA: NationalScience Foundation.

1 1B rown, Shirley V. & Clewell, BeatrizChu. (1998, January). P roject talentflow: The non-SEM field choices ofBlack and Latino undergraduates withthe aptitude for science, engineeringand mathematics care e r s. Reportp resented to the Alfred P. SloanF o u n d a t i o n .

1 2Anderson, Bernice T., Bru s c h i e ,Barbara, A. & Pearson, Jr., Wi l l i e .(1994). Minority females andp recollege mathematics and science:Academic preparation and care e ri n t e rests. Equity and Excellence inE d u c a t i o n, 27, 62-70.

Campbell, Jr., George, Denes,Ronni, & Morrison, Catherine (Eds.).(2000). Access denied: Race,e t h n i c i t y, and the scientifice n t e r p r i s e. New York: OxfordUniversity Pre s s .

Denes, Ronni & Highsmith, Robert J.(1998). Keeping score: Acomparative perf o rmance ofengineering institutions in cre a t i n gaccess, 1997-98. NACME Researc hL e t t e r, 8 .

Maton, Kenneth I., Hrabowski III,F reeman A., & Schmitt, Carol L.(2000). African American collegestudents excelling in the sciences:College and postcollege outcomesin the Meyerh o ff Scholars Pro g r a m s .J o u rnal of Research in ScienceTe a c h i n g, 37, 629-654.

Matyas, Marsha Lakes & Malcom,Shirley (Eds). (1991). Investing inhuman potential: Science andengineering at the cro s s ro a d s.Washington, DC: AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science.

Treisman, Uri with Asera, Rose.(1995). Routes to mathematics forAfrican-American, Latino and NativeAmerican students in the 1990s: Theeducational trajectories of summermathematics institute participants. InN. Fisher, H. Keynes, & P. Wa g re i c h(Eds.), Changing the culture :Mathematics in the re s e a rc hc o m m u n i t y. American MathematicalSociety with the MathematicalAssociation of America.


Treisman, Uri with Fullilove, III, R. E.(1990, Summer). Mathematicsachievement among AfricanAmerican undergraduates at theUniversity of California, Berkeley: Anevaluation of the mathematicsworkshop program. J o u rnal ofN e g ro Education, 5, 463-478.

Trent, William & Hill, John. (1994).The contributions of historically Blackcolleges and universities to thep roduction of African Americanscientists and engineers. In W.Pearson & A. Fechter (Eds.), W h owill do science?: Educating the nextg e n e r a t i o n. Baltimore: John HopkinsUniversity Pre s s .


1 3Campbell, Jr., George, Denes, Ronni,& Morrison, Catherine (Eds.), A c c e s sdenied: Race, ethnicity, and thescientific enterprise (chap. 4). NewYork: Oxford University Pre s s .

S e y m o u r, Elaine & Hewitt, Nancy, M.(1997). Talking about leaving: Whyu n d e rgraduates leave the sciences.B o u l d e r, CO: Westview Pre s s .

Tinto, Vincent. (1993). L e a v i n gcollege: Rethinking the causes andc u res of student attrition. Chicago:University of Chicago Pre s s .

McAfee, M. B. (1997). F rom theirvoices: American Indians in highereducation and the phenomenon ofstepping out. New York: Alfred P.S l o a n .

1 4Anderson, Bernice T., Bru s c h i e ,Barbara, A. & Pearson, Jr., Wi l l i e .(1994). Minority females and pre -college mathematics and science:Academic preparation and care e ri n t e rests. Equity and Excellence inE d u c a t i o n, 27, 62-70.

Campbell, Jr., George, Denes,Ronni, & Morrison, Catherine (Eds.).(2000). Access denied: Race,e t h n i c i t y, and the scientifice n t e r p r i s e. New York: OxfordUniversity Pre s s .

Denes, Ronni & Highsmith, Robert J.(1998). Keeping score: Acomparative perf o rmance ofengineering institutions in cre a t i n gaccess, 1997-98. NACME Researc hL e t t e r, 8 .

Maton, Kenneth I., Hrabowski III,F reeman A., & Schmitt, Carol L.(2000). African American collegestudents excelling in the sciences:College and postcollege outcomesin the Meyerh o ff Scholars Pro g r a m s .J o u rnal of Research in ScienceTe a c h i n g, 37, 629-654.

Matyas, Marsha Lakes & Malcom,Shirley (Eds). (1991). Investing inhuman potential: Science andengineering at the cro s s ro a d s.Washington, DC: AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science.

Treisman, Uri with Asera, Rose.(1995). Routes to mathematics forAfrican-American, Latino and NativeAmerican students in the 1990s: Theeducational trajectories of summermathematics institute participants. InN. Fisher, H. Keynes, & P. Wa g re i c h(Eds.), Changing the culture :Mathematics in the re s e a rc hc o m m u n i t y. American MathematicalSociety with the MathematicalAssociation of America.


Trent, William & Hill, John. (1994).The contributions of historically Blackcolleges and universities to thep roduction of African Americanscientists and engineers. In W.Pearson & A. Fechter (Eds.), W h owill do science?: Educating the nextg e n e r a t i o n. Baltimore: John HopkinsUniversity Pre s s .


1 5Adelman, Cliff o rd. (1999). Answers inthe tool box: Academic intensity,attendance patterns, and bachelor'sd e g ree attainment. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education, Off i c eof Educational Research andI m p ro v e m e n t .

1 6Malcom, Shirley, Van Horne, Vi rg i n i a ,G e o rge, Yolanda, & Gaddy, Catherine.(1998). Losing ground: Science andengineering graduate education ofBlack and Hispanic Americans.Washington, DC: American Associationfor the Advancement of Science.

G e o rge, Yolanda, Van Horn e ,Vi rginia, & Malcom, Shirley. (2001).Making strides? Graduate enro l l m e n tof underre p resented minorities inscience and engineering. In Dary lChubin & Willie Pearson (Eds.),Scientists and engineers for the newmillennium: Renewing the humanre s o u rc e. Washington, DC:Commission on Professionals inScience and Te c h n o l o g y.

O rfield, Gary and Kurlaender,Michael. (2001). D i v e r s i t yc h a l l e n g e d. Cambridge, MA: TheH a rv a rd Education Publishing Gro u p .

1 7Tsapogas, John & Cahalan, Marg a re t .(1996, May). Incidence of and factorsrelated to pro g ression to graduateschool among recent science andengineering bachelor’s degre erecipients: Results from a nationals t u d y. Paper pre p a red for meeting ofthe American Institutes for Researc h ,A l b u q u e rque, NM.

National Science Foundation,Division of Science Resourc e sStudies. (2000). Modes of financials u p p o rt in the graduate education ofscience and engineering doctoratere c i p i e n t s. Arlington, VA: NationalScience Foundation.


22

R a p o p o rt, Alan I. (1999, April 16).Does the educational debt burd e nof science and engineeringdoctorates differ by race/ethnicityand sex? National ScienceFoundation. Av a i l a b l e :h t t p : / / w w w. n s f . g o v / s b e / s r s /i s s u e b rf / s i b 9 9 3 4 1 . h t m .

1 8Tsapogas, John & Cahalan, Marg a re t .(1996, May). Incidence of and factorsrelated to pro g ression to graduateschool among recent science andengineering bachelor’s degre erecipients: Results from a nationals t u d y. Paper pre p a red for meeting ofthe American Institutes for Researc h ,A l b u q u e rque, NM.

1 9Matyas, Marsha Lakes & Malcom,Shirley (Eds). (1991). Investing inhuman potential: Science andengineering at the cro s s ro a d s.Washington, DC: American Associationfor the Advancement of Science.

National Institute of General MedicalSciences and the Office of Researc hon Minority Health. (1999). P l a n n i n gand priorities of the bridges to thef u t u re pro g r a m. Bethesda, MD:National Institutes of Health.

2 0Teitelbaum, Michael. (2001). How we(unintentionally) make science care e r sunattractive. In Daryl Chubin & Wi l l i ePearson (Eds.), Scientists andengineers for the new millennium:Renewing the human re s o u rc e.Washington, DC: Commission onP rofessionals in Science andTe c h n o l o g y.

Marian Brazziel Associates. (2000).Factors in decisions ofu n d e rre p resented minorities tof o rego science and engineeringdoctoral study. Mansfield Center, CT.

R a p o p o rt, Alan I. (1999, April 16).Does the educational debt burd e nof science and engineeringdoctorates differ by race/ethnicityand sex? National ScienceFoundation. Av a i l a b l e :h t t p : / / w w w. n s f . g o v /s b e / s r s / i s s u e b rf / s i b 9 9 3 4 1 . h t m .

2 1MacLachlan, Anne. (2000). G r a d u a t eeducation: The experience of womenand minorities at University ofC a l i f o rnia, Berkeley, 1980-1989.Ongoing study. Washington, DC:National Association of Graduate-P rofessional Students.

Davis, Geoff & Fiske, Peter. (1999).Results of the 1999 PhDs.orggraduate school surv e y. PhDs.org .Available: http://www. P h D s . o rg /s u rv e y / re s u l t s .

Nettles, Michael & Millett, Catherine.(1999, July). The human capitalliabilities of underre p re s e n t e dminorities in pursuit of science,mathematics and engineeringdoctoral degrees. Making Strides, 1.

Clewell, Beatriz Chu & Ti n t o ,Vincent. (1999). Study of doctoralp e r s i s t e n c e. Funded by the NationalScience Foundation. Arlington, VA :National Science Foundation.

2 2Nerad, M. & Cern y, J. (1999,September). Postdoctoral pattern s ,c a reer advancement, and pro b l e m s .S c i e n c e, 285, 1533-1535.

Baldwin, Roger & Chro n i s t e r, Jay.(2001). Teaching without tenure :Policies and practices for a new era.B a l t i m o re: Johns Hopkins University Pre s s .


I b a rra, Robert. (2000). B e y o n da ff i rmative action: Reframing thecontext of higher education.Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Pre s s .

R o s s e r, Sue V. and Bieseniss,M i reille.(2000). Career diff e re n c e sbetween women scientists andengineers: Report on FY' 97 POWREa w a rdees. J o u rnal of Women andMinorities in Science andE n g i n e e r i n g, 6, 1-20.

Smith, Daryl G. with Wolf, Lisa, E., &B u s e n b e rg, Bonnie, E. (2000).Achieving faculty diversity:debunking the myths. Washington, DC: Association of AmericanColleges and Universities.

Tang, Joyce. (2000). D o i n gengineering: The career attainmentand mobility of Caucasian, Black,and Asian-American engineers.Lanham, MD: Rowman and LittlefieldPublishers, Inc.

Tu rn e r, C.S. (2000). Defining success:P romotion and tenure – Planning forearly career stage and beyond. In M.G a rcia (Ed.), Succeeding in anacademic career: A guide for facultyof color. We s t p o rt, CT: Gre e n w o o dPublishing Group, Inc.

Tu rn e r, C.S. (2000,September/October). New faces,new knowledge. A c a d e m e, 86, 3 4 - 3 7 .

Tu rn e r, C.S. (1999, May.) Minorityfaculty re c ruitment and re t e n t i o n :C reating supportive enviro n m e n t s .Black Issues in Higher Education,16., 36.

Tu rn e r, Caroline, Sotello, Vi e rnes, &Myers Jr., Samuel L. (2000). F a c u l t yof color in academe: Bittersweets u c c e s s. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tu rn e r, C.S., Myers, Jr., S.L., &C reswell, J.W. (1999,J a n u a ry / F e b ru a ry). Exploringu n d e rre p resentation: The case offaculty of color in the Midwest. T h eJ o u rnal of Higher Education, 70, 2 7 - 5 9 .

2 3Gándara, Patricia with Maxwell-Jolly,Julie. (1999). Priming the pump:Strategies for increasing theachievement of underre p re s e n t e dminority underg r a d u a t e s. CollegeB o a rd .

2 4Tinto, Vincent. (2000). Reflections onthe state of re s e a rch: what next? InG e o rge Campbell, Jr., Ronni Denes, &Catherine Morrison (Eds.), A c c e s sdenied: Race, ethnicity, and thescientific enterprise (chap. 4). NewYork: Oxford University Pre s s .

2 5I b a rra, Robert. (2000). B e y o n da ff i rmative action: Reframing thecontext of higher education. Madison,WI: University of Wisconsin Press.


B e rnice AndersonNational Science FoundationEleanor BabcoCommission on Professionals inScience and Te c h n o l o g yNathan BellAmerican Association for theAdvancement of ScienceSuzanne BrainardUniversity of Washington, SeattleMarian BrazzielMarian Brazziel AssociatesSheila Bro w n eMount Holyoke CollegeJoan Burre l l iNational Science FoundationPatricia CampbellCampbell-Kibler Associates, Inc.Jay Chro n i s t e rUniversity of Vi rg i n i aD a ryl ChubinNational Action Council for Minoritiesin EngineeringBeatriz Chu ClewellThe Urban InstituteM a rguerite W. CoomesH o w a rd UniversityRoman CzujkoAmerican Insititute of PhysicsE d w a rd Derr i c kAmerican Association for theAdvancement of ScienceHelen DoyleThe David and Lucile PackardF o u n d a t i o nJudith DunckerNational Action Council for Minoritiesin EngineeringC a rol DwyerEducational Testing Serv i c eTim EatmanUniversity of Illinois, UrbanaI rene EckstrandNational Institutes of HealthH e n ry EtzkowitzState University of New York, P u rchase CollegeAdam FagenNational Association of Graduate-P rofessional Students

Miriam FeldblumC a l i f o rnia Institute of Te c h n o l o g yN o rman Fort e n b e rryNational Science FoundationM a ry Frank FoxG e o rgia Institute of Te c h n o l o g yM a ry rose FrankoH o w a rd Hughes Medical InstituteH e n ry FriersonUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel HillR i c h a rd FryEducational Testing Serv i c eManuel GomezUniversidad de Puerto RicoEric HamiltonNational Science FoundationSusan HillNational Science FoundationR o b e rt Ibarra University of Wisconsin, MadisonRoosevelt JohnsonNational Science FoundationSaundra JohnsonNational Consortium for GraduateD e g rees for Minorities in Engineering& SciencesEric JollyEducation Development Center, Inc.Joyce JustusUniversity of California, Santa Cru zFrank KrarAmerican Association for theAdvancement for ScienceCharlotte KuhNational Research CouncilC h e ryl LeggonWake Forest UniversityAnne MacLachlanUniversity of California, BerkeleyPatricia MarinAmerican Council on EducationKenneth MatonUniversity of Maryland, BaltimoreC o u n t yM.B. McAfee University of Colorado, BoulderShirley McBayQuality Education for MinoritiesN e t w o r k

Susan MillarUniversity of Wisconsin, MadisonTe rrence MillarUniversity of Wisconsin, MadisonCatherine MillettUniversity of Michigan, Ann ArborM a resi NeradUniversity of Washington, SeattleG a ry Orf i e l dH a rv a rd UniversityColette PattUniversity of California, BerkeleyWillie Pearson, Jr.G e o rgia Institute of Te c h n o l o g yC l i ff PoodryNational Institutes of HealthMaricel Quintana BakerNational Science FoundationPaula RaymanR a d c l i ffe UniversityCarlos RodriguezAmerican Institutes for Researc hSue RosserG e o rgia Institute of Te c h n o l o g yEric SheppardNational Science FoundationChris SimmonsAssociation of American UniversitiesT h e resa SmithUniversity of Oklahoma, Norm a nJames StithAmerican Institute of PhysicsAnne SwansonSonoma State University, Retire dPeter SyversonCouncil of Graduate SchoolsVincent Tinto Syracuse UniversityWilliam Tre n tUniversity of Illinois, UrbanaJohn Ts a p o g a sNational Science FoundationC a roline Tu rn e rArizona State University, Main CampusElizabeth Vander PuttenNational Science FoundationCynthia Wi n s t o nB rown University

Appendix A: List of Part i c i p a n t s

24

Appendix B: Study Group Discussion Questions

1. What key research reports or studies are missing?

2 . What is the quality of the existing research?

3 . How reliable is the existing research?

4. Are research studies linked to performance indicators or degree attainment? [Note: To enter graduateschool or to obtain financial aid, most colleges and universities require applicants to possess, at minimum, a3.3 grade point average (on a 4-point scale). ]

5 . What are strategies to increase data comparability and linkages?

6 . What type of research is best conducted by the National Science Foundation’s Division of ScienceResources Studies?

7 . What type of research is best conducted by colleges and universities?

8 . What type of research is best conducted by external researchers/evaluators?

9 . In addition, participants were asked to identify additional gaps in the research area, direction, and/or theabove questions, with consideration for:

• How do questions relate to different racial/ethnic groups, with consideration for gender and disabilityd i f f e r e n c e s ?

• How do questions relate to different STEM disciplines?• Are questions related to specific types of colleges and universities?

F ounded in 1848, theAmerican Association forthe Advancement of Science

(AAAS) is the world’s largestfederation of scientific andengineering societies, with over270 affiliated organizations. AAASmembers include more than138,000 scientists, engineers,science educators, policymakers,and interested citizens. TheA s s o c i a t i o n ’s goals include:

• Furthering the work ofscientists and facilitatingcooperation among them.

• Fostering scientific freedomand responsibility.

• Improving the effectiveness ofscience in the promotion ofhuman welfare.

• Advancing education ins c i e n c e .

• Increasing the publicunderstanding andappreciation for theimportance of the methods ofscience in human progress.

AAAS also is the publisher ofS c i e n c e m a g a z i n e .

The Directorate for Education andHuman Resources (EHR) seeks to:

• Improve education in science,t e c h n o l o g y, engineering, andm a t h e m a t i c s .

• Foster equal access to thesefields for racial/ethnicminorities, women, andpersons with disabilities.

• Enhance the publicunderstanding of science andt e c h n o l o g y.

Its many initiatives and projectsi n c l u d e :

• School reform in science,mathematics, and technology.

• Educational research onschools, colleges, universities,and human resources.

• Informal science andmathematics education withc o m m u n i t y - b a s e dorganizations.

• Libraries, science museums,and technology centers.

EHR projects and activitiesinclude a children’s science andmathematics cyber club, sciencemedia fellowships, science andtechnology summer internships ingovernment and business forstudents with disabilities, and ascience radio show.

Any interpretations andconclusions contained in thisreport are those of the authorsand do not represent the views ofthe AAAS Board of Directors, theCouncil of AAAS, its membership,or the National ScienceF o u n d a t i o n .

About AAAS

1200 New York Avenue, NW • Wa sh ing ton, DC 20005202-326-66 70 • ww w. a a a s . o rg

For addit ional copies o f th is re p o r t v i si t h t tp : // ehrw e b . a a a s . o rg / m g e lFor more in for mat ion or to o ffe r feedba ck , contact Yo land a George at ygeorg e @ a a a s . o rg

IN PURSUIT OF A DIVERSE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,...

Documents

Transcript of IN PURSUIT OF A DIVERSE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,...