kevin eagan & jessica sharkness higher education research institute, ucla
DESCRIPTION
A Strong Start in the Sciences: Factors Influencing Minority Students’ Academic and Social Engagement. Kevin Eagan & Jessica Sharkness Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA 28 th Annual Conference on the First Year Experience Orlando, FL February 2009. Background. Demographic shifts: - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
A Strong Start in the Sciences:Factors Influencing Minority Students’ Academic and Social Engagement
Kevin Eagan & Jessica SharknessHigher Education Research Institute, UCLA
28th Annual Conference on the First Year ExperienceOrlando, FL
February 2009
Background
Demographic shifts: Increasing numbers of underrepresented minority (URM)
students entering college Improved representation of URM students entering science,
technology, engineering, and math fields as first-year students (Astin & Astin, 1993; Seymour & Hewitt, 1997)
National call for increased number of research scientists - Rising Above the Gathering Storm (2005); America Competes Act (2007)
New focus on undergraduate scientific training Undergraduate research programs Emphasis on more engaging pedagogy in science
classrooms
Issues & Challenges
URMs remain severely underrepresented in STEM fields ‘Leaky’ STEM pipeline – more likely to leave STEM fields
compared to White/Asian American peers (Seymour & Hewitt, 1997; NSF, 2003).
Black, Latino, and Native American students’ representation in STEM fields is significantly lower than their share of the US population and college-going population
Goal of this project: Identify factors that facilitate and/or hinder URM students’ progression toward research careers in STEM fields.
Previous Project Research Findings
Differences in student support structures across and within institutions
Sources of student support have different implications for student success
Key linkage during first year between academic adjustment and sense of belonging
URM science students have unique adjustment processes over the first year of college
Current Study
What are the nature, quality, and context for engagement of URM biomedical and behavioral science (BBS) students with peers and faculty?
How are engagement and access to resources linked with participation in campus programs (e.g., undergraduate research, living-learning communities, first-year seminars)?
How similar are the patterns of academic and social engagement across racial groups?
Why study the development of student and faculty support networks?
Faculty support networks Alleviate URM students’ sense of isolation Improve academic achievement (Cole, 2008; Cole & Espinoza,
2008; Cole & Jackson, 2005)
Lead to higher levels of satisfaction with academics and overall campus environment (Cole & Jackson, 2005; Endo & Harpel, 1982)
Student support networks Contribute to students’ sense of social integration, which
is tied to persistence/degree completion (Bean, 1980; Tinto, 1993)
Enhance satisfaction with college environment (Cole & Jackson, 2005)
Theoretical frameworks on support networks and social support
Perception of respect, esteem, and network membership (Cobb, 1976)
Fulfillment of social needs/desires through interaction (Kaplan, Cassel, Gore, 1977)
Social capital as derived from information-sharing networks and relationships based on trust and reciprocity (Coleman, 1988)
Conceptual model
BackgroundCharacteristics
(demographics)
HSAcademics
HSSocial activities
CollegeAcademics
College SocialActivities
Participationin first-year programs
Faculty andstudent support
networks
CollegeCharacteristics
Pre-collegecharacteristics
(controls)
InstitutionalCharacteristics
CollegeExperiences
SupportNetworks
Data & Sample
Data source: HERI’s 2004 Cooperative Institutional
Research Program’s (CIRP) Freshman Survey Your First College Year (YFCY) administered
at the end of the freshman year (Spring 2005) Missing values imputed Sample:
3,218 students in 160 institutions broken into two groups:
URM science majors (1,796 cases) White/ Asian science majors (1,422 cases)
Analysis Plan
Descriptive Statistics Creation composite variables (factors)
representing student support networks and faculty support networks
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to control for the sequential nature of students’ development of support networks and identify indirect effects
Student Support Networks Factor
Student Support Networks measured by a composite variable composed of: Frequency of interaction with close college
friends Self-assessment of success at developing
close friendships with students Frequency with which students study with other
students Frequency with which students receive advice
from juniors or seniors Frequency with which students received advice
from other freshmen
Faculty Support Networks
Faculty Support Networks measured by a composite variable composed of: Frequency of interaction with faculty during
office hours Frequency of interaction with faculty outside of
class or office hours Frequency of receiving advice from faculty
about students’ educational program Frequency of receiving emotional support and
encouragement from a professor
Descriptive findings
White and Asian American BBS students had higher levels of faculty support, lower levels of student support and lower levels of cross-racial interactions when compared to URM BBS peers
Students attending MSIs (White/Asian American and URM) reported significantly higher levels of faculty and student support than students at PWIs
Students from both samples reported stronger faculty and student support networks at private institutions compared to peers at public institutions
Significant factors directly promoting student support networks
Order of importance White/Asian students URM students
1Hours per week spent socializing with friends
Discussing course content with students outside class
2Discussing course content with students outside class
Hours per week spent socializing with friends
3Hours per week spent in student clubs/groups
Cross-racial interactions
4 Cross-racial interactionsHours per week spent in student clubs/groups
5Interacting with academic advisors
Attending an MSI
6Taking first-year seminar course
Agreement that faculty are interested in students' personal problems
Significant factors Indirectly promoting student support networks
Order of importance White/Asian students URM students
1HPW Socializing with friends in HS
HPW Socializing with friends in HS
2Asking teacher for advice after class in HS
Asking teacher for advice after class in HS
3 Attending a private college Attending a private college
Notable non-significant effects
White/Asian students URM students
Belief that faculty take an interest in students’ personal problems
Interacting with academic advisors
Current GPA Current GPA
Gender Gender
Significant factors directly promoting faculty support networks
Order of
importance
White/Asian students URM students
1 Interacting w/ academic advisors Interacting w/ academic advisors
2Faculty are interested in students’ personal problems
Faculty are interested in students’ personal problems
3Faculty are interested in students’ academic problems
Faculty are interested in students’ academic problems
4Worked with an academic advisor to select courses
Worked on a professor’s research project
5Joined pre-professional or departmental club
Received negative feedback about academic work
6Received negative feedback about academic work
Worked with an academic advisor to select courses
7 Worked on prof’s research proj.
8 Took FYS
9 HPW Studying
10 Selectivity (Negative)
Significant factors Indirectly promoting faculty support networks
Order of importance White/Asian students URM students
1 Attending a private college Attending a private college
2Institutional Selectivity (negative)
Institutional Selectivity (negative)
Notable non-significant effects
White/Asian students URM students
College GPA College GPA
Participation in FYS
Selectivity
Discussion of findings
Positive effect of cross-racial interactions on development of student support networks indicates potential increase in level of trust and respect
Frequently socializing with friends helps meet need for meaningful interactions with significant others (Kaplan, Cassell, & Gore, 1997)
Attending Minority-Serving Institution provides better opportunity for URM students to connect with “own-group” peers (Seymour & Hewitt, 1997)
Discussion of findings
Positive relationship between negative feedback and development of faculty support networks parallels earlier research (Cohen, Steele, & Ross, 1999; Lundberg & Schreiner, 2004).
Interacting regularly with faculty (through advising, research, and/or mentoring) augments students’ sense of support from faculty (Kuh & Hu, 2001)
Conducting research signifies since of trust passed from faculty to student, which appears to contribute to stronger support network, particularly for URM students (Coleman, 1988)
Implications and Conclusions
Importance of trust and reciprocity in developing support networks
Student and faculty support networks as intermediate outcomes Strong social networks may lead to increased
persistence likelihood (Tinto, 1993) Connecting with faculty and peers positively linked to
improved satisfaction (Cole & Jackson, 2005; Endo & Harpel, 1982)
High satisfaction and sense of support connected with academic achievement (Cole, 2008; Cole & Espinoza, 2008)
Higher levels of achievement, increased satisfaction, and commitment to degree help prevent “leaks” from the science pipeline (Seymour & Hewitt, 1997)
Questions and Discussion
What opportunities, resources, and structures are in place on your campuses to facilitate the development of faculty support networks?
What formal programs do your campuses offer to encourage the development of strong peer support networks?
Contact Information
Kevin Eagan – [email protected] Jessica Sharkness – [email protected] Project web site:
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri/nih Acknowledgments: This study was made possible by the
support of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH Grant Number 1 RO1 GMO71968-01. This independent research and the views expressed here do not indicate endorsement by the sponsor.