| Presentation:
The demographics of the United States are changing. The Caucasian majority is estimated to become the minority in the next 50 years, with the number of Asian, Black and Hispanic individuals, known presently as the minority, steadily increasing to become the majority. Unfortunately, in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), most minorities are poorly represented. In 2005, underrepresented minorities (URMs) consisted of 35.5 percent of the population in grades K-12, but only 5.6 percent of these individuals are receiving doctorates in the STEM fields (Anthony DePass’s presentation and National Science Foundation (NSF) WebCASPAR). Closer observations of these statistics show that the percentage of URMs receiving secondary and terminal degrees in STEM fields is despairingly low, with a range of 5.9 to 13.1 percent. The loss of underrepresented minorities does not stop there. The Nelson diversity survey of 2007 showed that the population of tenured or tenure track faculty in the top 50 departments of the nation is even less diverse, ranging from a low of .01% American Indian to a high of 2.6% Hispanic. Blacks represent 1.6% of tenured or tenure track faculty in this group. As clearly shown by the data, there is a significant loss of URMs in the STEM fields from grade school to grad school and on to the professoriate. These findings were published by the National Academy of Sciences in Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. This publication focused on the loss of URMs in STEM fields, but more important, on how the lack of diversity could lead to a crisis in the workforce. The challenge is to increase engagement and progression of minorities in STEM fields. How can this be accomplished?
Dr. Michael Gaines, the leader of the session, is currently addressing the problem of the loss of URMs to science with a group of synergistic programs at the University of Miami (UM). As a private research institution, UM is very diverse, with a student population consisting of 53% White, 28% Hispanic, 12% Black, and 7% Asian/Pacific Islander. Dr. Gaines has employed Eric Jolly et al.’s (2004) model of Engagement, Capacity, and Continuity (the ECC trilogy). Engagement is motivating and creating interest in STEM fields; capacity is assuring that students possess the skills and knowledge to advance in the sciences; and continuity is providing a students with continued academic enrichment as they progress towards the baccalaureate degree.
Engagement
In order to engage students, Dr. Gaines has modified traditional features of STEM education. First, the classroom is transformed from a teaching-centered environment to a learning-centered environment. Students actively learn through discovery rather than passive learning by listening to lectures. Students must take ownership of their learning. Finally, students are encouraged to collaborate rather than compete. At UM some key examples of engagement are the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) Labs and Peer Led Team Learning (PLTL). In the HHMI labs, instruction is provided by a three-person team rather than one professor. This team consists of a faculty member, a graduate teaching assistant, and an undergraduate peer facilitator. The students work in small groups of six on their own research project related to the faculty member’s interest. This structure stresses collaboration. PLTL is a group problem solving workshop that enhances the lecture material. Students are divided into groups of 6-8 students and are guided by a peer leader. Another approach that is widely used in large lecture sections is individual response systems (clickers). However, clickers are only as good as the questions that are posed to the class to answer.
Capacity
Capacity is how students learn and retain the information presented to them. To increase the capacity of URMs and all students, educators must move from factual regurgitation to understanding and application of concepts and ideas. Also, curricula should be more interdisciplinary rather than narrowly focused. Debra Allen, University of Delaware, and Pat Marstellar, Emory University, have catalogued online problem-based learning activities that emphasize application of knowledge. UM also is working on a new integrative curriculum called Program in Integrative Science and Math (PRISM). PRISM ties science and mathematics together in a communal environment for the students. The first-year students are block scheduled into biology, chemistry, and calculus in a learning community. The second-year students are block scheduled into biophysics, computer science, organic chemistry, and biochemistry.
Continuity
In order to provide continuity, the institution provides several levels of support to assure that those students who are engaged and have the capacity also have the means to continue pursuing degrees in STEM fields. At UM there are several programs that support students from grade school through graduate school. These programs include the HHMI Research in Ecology, NSF Science Made Sensible, HHMI Summer High School Research Program, National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Bridge to the Baccalaureate Program, HHMI Undergraduate Research Program, and Initiative to Maximize Student Diversity (IMSD) Graduate Student Fellowship Program. The HHMI Research in Ecology Program is a six-week summer research experience for middle school students who work in groups on a research project. In the NSF Science Made Sensible Program, graduate students partner with middle school teachers as resident scientists. In the NIGMS Bridge to the Baccalaureate Program Miami Dade College, students receive academic enrichment and research experiences as they progress towards an associate’s degree. In the HHMI Undergraduate Research Program, UM undergraduates conduct research during their junior and senior years. The IMSD Graduate Student Fellowship Program is a training program for first and second-year graduate students.
Dr. Gaines emphasized that the ECC model is necessary but may not be sufficient. There must be a strong support system in place, including financial support through scholarships, psycho-social support through peer collaboration, and family support. One method to provide family support that UM employs is Family Science Sundays. This involves students and their families coming to the university and participating in research activities. Through this experience, families gain an understanding of a potential research career for their children.
In concluding his presentation, Dr. Gaines stressed the importance of both formative and summative evaluation.
Discussion:
One issue that was raised is the tendency for most URMs to pursue careers in clinical medicine as opposed to the PhD. Many granting agencies define success in career pathways as the PhD degree. For example, The Division of Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) in NIGMS is mandated by Congress to increase the number of URMs in PhD programs. There needs to be more flexibility in what constitutes success in these programs. Different ways of promoting collaborative learning were discussed. These included workshops in chemistry and math and other forms of supplemental instruction.
Another talking point was the need for institutional support. Institutions are more likely to support these programs if they are broad enough to attract the entire student body rather than just URMs. The most effective way to gain institutional support is through effective formative and summative evaluation of programs. The higher administration needs to be convinced that the program is making a difference in student retention and progression towards a baccalaureate degree. Some discussion centered on the strategy of leveraging of funds to maximize the impact of different programs. The ideal approach is to have several programs working synergistically at an institution to increase URMs in STEM fields. Concerns were raised that federal agencies such as NSF will only support education programs for one funding cycle without the option for renewal.
Recommendations:
- There needs to be a shift from passive learning to active learning through research experiences, individual response systems, and problem based learning through case studies. Taken together these approaches will facilitate student engagement
- Integrative science curricula are an effective way of building the capacity of undergraduates.
- Institutional support is critical for the sustainability and continuity of programs designed to increase URMs in STEM fields.
- Evaluation should be an essential component of all programs.
Resources/References:
Publications
- Hrabowski, F., Kenneth I Maton, and Geoffrey L. Greif. (1998). Beating the Odds: Raising Academically Successful African American Males. Oxford University Press, 1998.
- Jolly, E., Patricia B. Campbell, and Lesley Perlman. (2004). Engagement, Capacity and Continuity: A Trilogy for Student Success. GE Foundation.
- Maton, K.I., Freeman Hrabowski, Metin Ozlemir, and Harriette Wimms (2008). Enhancing Representation, Retention, and Achievement of Minority Students in Higher Education: A Social Transformation Theory of Change. Pgs. 115-132. In Toward Positive Youth Development: Transforming Schools and Community Programs. Edited by M. Shinn and H Yoshikawa. Oxford University Press. 387 pgs.
- National Academy of Sciences. (2007). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. The National Academies Press, 2007.
- National Research Council of National Academy of Sciences. (2007). Understanding Interventions that Encourage Minorities to Pursue Research Careers. The National Academies Press, 2007.
|
