STEM Research_DenhamE

2015
Research Paper
FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCESS, RETENTION, AND
GRADUATION OF BLACK, HISPANIC, AND FEMALE
STUDENTS IN STEM FIELDS
ELANA GUERRA DENHAM

Elana Denham Research Paper 6397
1

Introduction
It was estimated that approximately two million new professionals were needed to enter
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics-related (STEM) fields by 2010 to replace the
baby boomers retiring from the STEM workforce (Malcom, 2010). STEM is an acronym for
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. For the purposes of this paper it will be
referred to as “STEM”. Ever since the “boom” of STEM careers within the United States, there
has been a growing interest in the pursuit of STEM degrees. STEM careers have typically been
dominated by White males, however in the last two decades there has been an increase of women
and minorities within the field. The purpose of this research paper is to explore the various
factors affecting the access, retention, and graduation of women and minorities in STEM fields
so that secondary and postsecondary institutions may better address the needs of these students.
Since there are several categories of minority students, as well as (students who identify as
multiple races or ethnicities, this paper will focus solely on those students and persons who
identify as “Black students” or “Hispanic students/Latino(a) students”.
Research
Black students represent a unique minority group within the STEM fields. Research by
Landivar (2013) states that Black students represent only about 6% of the STEM workforce
population, even though their employment rate is relatively equal to that of all other working
groups (except American Indian who rated below average). This indicates that Black students are
facing some form of obstacle(s), barrier(s), or lack of encouragement when it comes to entering
the STEM field. A study done by Chen (2009) found that even though Black students were
equally as likely to enroll into a STEM program as Whites, they are half as likely to attain a
degree in the field (this statistic is similar for the Hispanic student population). However, they

2

were more likely than White students and Hispanic students to change majors, and more likely
than all ethnicities to leave postsecondary education without a degree or certificate at all (Chen,
2009).
This indicates that there are certain barriers affecting the retention of Black students at a
higher rate than other ethnic groups. Chang, Eagan and Hurtado (2010) came to the conclusion
that gatekeeper courses and faculty involvement had a large impact on the retention of minorities
within the STEM field. Selectivity was another factor affecting retention. It is theorized that
“enrollment at highly selective institutions predicted an increased likelihood of degree
completion, higher future earnings, enhanced leadership outcomes, and improved satisfaction
with the college experience” (Chang, Eagan & Hurtado, 2010, p.7). Data from the study showed
a highly increased STEM graduation percentage (almost 13%) at historically Black colleges and
universities (HBCUs) as opposed to primarily White universities.
Other factors affecting the retention of Black students were also found:
“…Several significant predictors for Black students [did emerge]. Those
attending institutions that offer formal health science research opportunities
to first-year students were more than four times more likely to participate in
research than were Black students at institutions without such programs.
Other significant predictors of participation in science research in the first
year of college were Black students’ reliance on peer networks (advice from
juniors and seniors and participation in a learning community)” (Chang,
Hurtado, Newman, & Tran, 2010)
This research was reaffirmed by a paper written by Eagan, Hurtado, and Chang following the
previous study. This confirms the theory that Black students fare better while enrolled in college

3

when given the opportunity to be involved within the STEM field early in their higher education
experience. The conclusion can also be made that Black students are more likely to persist and
succeed if they are able to form an “identity” within the college. If students are able to connect
with other peers Black students, as well as identify themselves as a “participant” they are more
likely to be able to visualize the end goal. This highlights the importance for many different
opportunities for student involvement, including research opportunities.
When considering pre-college factors, a study by Chang, Eagan, and Hurtado (2010)
states that “lower enrollment rates among Black students in advanced placement (AP) biology,
chemistry, physics, and calculus courses significantly and negatively predicted to Black students’
likelihood to earn a STEM degree” (p. 4). Advanced STEM courses in high school directly affect
the concept of “college-readiness”. This indicates that an increased participation in those courses
should mean students are more likely to succeed in a STEM degree. However, the study also
found that Black students and other minority groups were underrepresented in STEM fields even
after accounting for pre-college characteristics, indicating the problem was primarily the
retention of minority students at the college level.
Hispanic students make up only 3%-7% of the STEM workforce within the United States
(Borman, Hanson, Lee & Tyson, 2007). This percentage is similar to the percentage of Black
students within the STEM field, Black students, however the number is more significant for the
Hispanic student population because their participation in the workforce between 1970 and 2011
has increased by 12% as compared to Black students whose workforce participation increased by
only 2% (Landivar, 2013). This shows that an increasing workforce presence within the Hispanic
student population is not being reflected within the STEM field.

4

The ethnic make-up of undergraduate populations at colleges and universities is changing
quickly, there are more minorities represented than ever before, and Hispanic students are on
track to be one of the fastest growing populations among college students (Suarez, 2003; Alon,
Domina & Tienda, 2010). Due to this trend, a large amount of research is being conducted to
study the conundrum of Hispanic students falling behind in their STEM degree achievement. It
should be noted that according to some literature, there has been a lack of “theoretically sound
empirical work” (p. 926) as well as a lack of research on factors affecting degree attainment by
Hispanic students within the STEM field (Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009). However, research
theorizes that both pre-college factors and factors whilst enrolled in a college or university affect
the selection of a STEM degree as well as the completion of such a degree by Hispanic students
differently than they affect non-Hispanic students (Suarez, 2003). These factors can be
institutional, personal, or academic.
Several studies ascertain that for the Hispanic student population “precollege variables
were more salient in predicting bachelor degree attainment for students who started in two-year
colleges, while college-related variables were more salient for students who started in four-year
colleges” (Arbona & Nora, 2007). Some of the pre-college variables are linked to the availability
of more in-depth and higher-level science and math classes in secondary education. “Science and
mathematics course-taking is a key component on the pathway toward STEM career” (Borman,
Hanson, Lee & Tyson, p. 246, 2007). New research indicates that the rigor and content of the
courses matter more so than the number of math or science courses taken prior to entering
college (Borman, Hanson, Lee & Tyson, 2007). A study in 2007 also reported that rigorous
academic coursework in high school was a strong predictor for college enrollment (Arbona &
Nora, 2007). The literature supports the supposition that it is necessary to study both high school

5

and college factors when analyzing the attainment of STEM degrees by the Hispanic student
population.
One study that sought to resolve the problem of a lack of “theoretically sounds empirical
work was done in 2009, this study sought to assist with that issue by reviewing “the
demographic, pre-college, environmental, and college factors that impact students’ interest in
and decision to earn a degree in STEM among undergraduate students attending an HSI” (Crisp,
Nora, & Taggart, 2009). An HSI is a Hispanic-Serving Institution, normally a non-profit college
whose enrollment is at least 25% Hispanic students (such as the University of Houston). The
study was built around a previous study done in 2003 by Nora which focused on the factors
affecting the relationships between a student, their chosen major, and the institution (Crisp, Nora,
& Taggart, 2009). The results indicated females being less likely to achieve or enroll into a
STEM degree, as well as math aptitude and high school achievement to affect degree attainment
(Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009). These results were also reflected in a study done in 2014 which
explored the lack of STEM enrollment by minorities and women (Borman, Hanson, Lee &
Tyson, 2014). This data is a surprising contrast to the data found for Black students attending
HBCUs, since the graduation increase was significant as opposed to students attending HSIs
which indicated little to no increase as compared to enrollment at primarily white institutions
(Chang, Eagan & Hurtado, 2010).
Contrary to other research, transfer status had little effect on whether a Hispanic student
would enroll into or graduate with a STEM degree (Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009). This
supposition is supported by research done in 2003 that maintained that transfer students did just
as well as 4-yr students, rather, it was the actual act of transferring which caused a drop in
Hispanic students’ enrollment (Suarez, 2003). In direct contrast to the section on Black students,

6

research by Malcom found that Hispanic students did better when attending non-selective
schools:
“Analyses revealed that Latina/o STEM bachelor’s degree holders
who earned an associate degree also tended to earn the B.S. from
less selective, public, nonresearch institutions. Among associate
degree holders, pathways to highly selective, private institutions and
research universities were particularly narrow compared to Latina/o
STEM baccalaureates who did not earn an associate degree…”
(Malcom, 2010)
This is important for two reasons, one is that it shows that Hispanic students are more likely to
succeed when attaining an associates from a community college, which is in contrast to every
other ethnic group whose graduation rate drops when they attend community college. Secondly,
it draws attention to problem areas within the private, selective institutions that create obstacles
for the Hispanic student’s population when obtaining a STEM degree.
Other factors affecting students include parental achievement. Research done in 2010
theorized that parental education and achievement was a predictor of student success in college.
(Alon, Domina & Tienda, 2010). This theory can be supported with research by Malcom (2010)
who found that parental achievement was indicative of whether a student enrolled in a
community college or a four-year university; however, it was not necessarily indicative of
graduation. It was also found that enrollment status and Pell grant support did not affect degree
completion (Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009). The authors recommended that further research also
be done concerning “gatekeeper” courses such as Biology I and Algebra I, as they affected
STEM degree attainment when done in the first semester; developmental and college-prep

7

courses also need to be studied further as they affect Hispanic students differently than White
students (Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009).
The study also recognized data limitations and the exclusion of an important variable,
self-efficacy, which can have a great impact on the achievement of STEM degrees (Crisp, Nora,
& Taggart, 2009). However, other studies did include efficacy in their research. A study done in
2007 placed self-efficacy as a strong predictor of student success. It theorized that students as
early as high school sophomores who expected and committed to obtain a bachelor’s degree and
who planned to enroll in college following graduation were more likely to enroll in a four-year
college than their peers who did not report such plans (Arbona & Nora, 2007). Another study in
2006 said a factor which affected Hispanic students versus non-Hispanic students differently was
grade expectation and could have an effect on the student’s efficacy. Hispanic students were
more negatively affected by the receipt of a lower grade than what they had hoped to receive
(even if both grades were passing) (Nora, 2006). It also theorized that these plans were bolstered
by peers with similar plans, who most likely grouped together through similar academic courses
(another strong predictor as mentioned earlier).It should be mentioned that the 2007 study by
Arbona and Nora, as well as the 2010 study by Alon, Domina, and Tienda, was done not with
STEM degree attainment by Hispanic students in mind, but simply degree attainment by
Hispanic students; however, it is still important since the concepts that affect college enrollment,
high school to college transitioning, and degree attainment are applicable to those who
specifically seek STEM degrees.
Although this paper has strived to separate the differing factors affecting Black students
and Hispanic students, since the two are so often lumped into the same category, it is important
to note that there are factors which affect both. The largest factor which uniquely affects Black

8

students and Hispanic students is the cultural and economic factor. While other ethnic groups are
also affected by this, it is most largely felt by Black students and Hispanic students.
Socioeconomic factors are constantly affecting the STEM achievement of Black students and
Hispanic students. A study done in 2010 compared educational attainment to a financial market
as a “differential asset conversion” which means:
“A process by which the economic, social and cultural assets that influence
educational attainment of one group do not operate in similar ways for other
groups…Social stratification may influence the rate of asset conversion, as
it does in financial markets, where small savers receive lower returns than
do large savers. Thus, members of disadvantaged groups may lack equal
access to certain markets or may pay higher prices in the same market.”
(Alon, Domina & Tienda, 2010)
The “rate of return” which in this case is a college education, is divided and distributed unequally
between ethnic groups. Those who are able to finance and attend college are going to get the most
out of it (prestige, networks, etc.) whereas those who face difficulties attending will not receive
the same benefits whether due to employments needs, family responsibilities, or a lack of
perceived acceptance.
Other cultural factors have been found to affect both Black students and Hispanic
students in the access, retention, and graduation in the STEM field. A longitudinal study which
followed undergraduate STEM majors at UCLA for seven years, noticed this important finding:
“URM (underrepresented racial minorities) students often leave the
sciences due to the perceived lack of social value or relevance to improving
conditions for their communities… [and] hostile racial climate seemed to

9

hinder the academic success only of URMs… Finally, URM science
students seemed particularly affected by concerns about their ability to
ﬁnance college, which inhibited both their academic and social adjustment.
In fact, ﬁnancial concerns affected science students from all racial groups
more than did their nonscience counterparts.” (Chang, Hurtado, Newman,
& Tran, 2010)
Essentially, this indicates two things, one is that URMs are most likely seeking college education
which could either service their communities or has importance within their communities. This
indicates that STEM fields have little value for minority communities. While this is somewhat
untrue since STEM fields affect societies as a whole (medical, engineering, etc.), it is reasonable
to assume that minorities are seeking majors and jobs which have a more immediate and noticeable
impact on their community (social education, management, etc.). Secondly, the issue of financing
a higher education still remains more of a challenge and obstacle for minorities (especially Black
and Hispanic students) than for other groups.
A negative academic climate may also hinder the success of Black students and Hispanic
students within STEM fields, particularly in “gatekeeper” courses. The study by Chang, Eagan,
and Hurtado (2010) advises faculty to remain aware of the problem with URMs and the
perceived negativity present in introductory STEM courses. If students, particularly URMs, are
subject to a negative educational environment, they are more likely to withdraw or transfer from
those courses. A personal factor that was previously noted, and which we may expand on now
was the characteristic of “self-efficacy”:
“…Students across all campuses reported a variety of experiences
with the social stigma associated with being a racial minority in

10

science. Although some internalized the misperception that non-
URMs had of their unearned access to the institution, other
participants with seemingly higher degrees of self efﬁcacy rejected
this stigma.” (Chang, Hurtado, Newman & Tran, 2010)
Simply stated, students with confidence and/or motivation pertaining to their abilities were more
likely to not be encumbered by perceived racial or ethnic stigmas or negative attitudes.
Further institutional factors could also be at work. As mentioned in the section regarding
Black students, research opportunities and peer environment have a significant influence on the
participation of URMs (Chang, Hurtado, Newman, & Tran, 2010). This relates back to the theory
that minorities need to be able to identify with a network, faculty, or peer group which is
reflective of their personal identity. The research opportunity would serve as a gateway to
minorities seeing the STEM field as being relevant or important to their community.
However, even after socioeconomic, academic, and financial factors are taken into account,
the study by Chang, Eagan and Hurtado (2010) found that:
“The effect of identifying with particular underrepresented racial
groups in STEM negatively predicted students’ likelihood of
earning an undergraduate STEM degree. Black students, Latino, and
Native American students had significantly lower probabilities of
earning a STEM degree in five years compared to their White
classmates.”
Unfortunately, this is a hurdle that seems nearly impossible to overcome. After all, you cannot
truly expect a student to not identify themselves as belonging to a certain race or ethnicity.

11

Unfortunately, it seems the stereotypes and judgments against minorities permeate our society,
and the minds of students. However, faculty and society can be made more aware of this issue and
persist in creating welcoming and accepting environments, complete with early retention efforts
and increased peer networking.
Women are an interesting group within the STEM field. They are a fast-growing group,
yet are still found to be underrepresented in both college and the workforce, especially at higher
levels (Adams, Blodorn, Garcia, Hammer & O’Brien, 2014). There are various factors which affect
their access, retention, and graduation in the STEM field based on different socioeconomic factors,
race/ethnicity, and familial obligations; however, for the sake of this paper, we will focus on issues
which affect the majority of women in STEM.
Postsecondary students who are women enroll at a rate of 14% (compared to men at 33%)
into STEM majors (Chen, 2009). They account for almost half of the general workforce, but only
make up about 26% of the STEM workforce (Landivar, 2013). A theory for this, and one that
echoes throughout most of the factors regarding women’s involvement in STEM, is the
masculinity commonly associated with STEM fields (Adams et al., 2014). This contributes in
many ways to the lack of women participants in the STEM fields. It can influence faculty to give
recommendations for men over women. It also has negative effects on women’s test courses (and
positive effects on men’s). Finally, and probably most importantly, is the expectations and values
associated with the STEM field for women. Expectations are not as high for women when it comes
to the success or graduation with a STEM degree. There also is not as much value or interest placed
on women regarding the STEM field. However, although this section is based on a “generalized”
view of factors affecting STEM women, it is important to note that several studies have shown
that Black students women enroll and graduate from STEM fields at a higher rate than other

12

women, partly because they tend to hold a less “gender stereotyped” view of STEM fields (Adams
et al., 2014; Chang, Eagan & Hurtado, 2010).
An interesting side note: The rate of enrollment of women into computer-related fields
have decreased consistently since the 1980’s (Landivar, 2013). One cannot help but wonder if
this is due to the fact that typing was once “woman’s work”. History shows us that women have
a long history working with computers (usually as secretaries or assistants for male bosses). It’s
plausible to surmise that this decline might actually be from women not feeling obligated to
work with computers, and could be more accurately representing the women who want to work
with computers by choice rather than history. However, another theory is that computer sciences
are often seen as a “solitary” type of job, which is typically seen as a masculine trait (CTE,
2013). This can be offset; however, by female role models and engaging curriculum geared
towards women.
The only other field where women show declining enrollment and employment is the
field of engineering. A study done by Fouad and Singh in 2011 explored why women left
engineering, did not enter engineering after graduation, or remained in engineering. Since this
paper is focused on issues related to higher education, we will relay the information found for
women who did not enter engineering after graduation. The key findings were as follows:
“A third said it was because of their perceptions of engineering as being
inflexible or the engineering workplace culture as being non-supportive of
women. Thirty percent said they did not pursue engineering after graduation
because they were no longer interested in engineering or were interested in
another field. Many said they are using the knowledge and skills gained in
their education in a number of other fields.” (Fouad & Singh, 2011)

13

This shows that either engineering firms are not actively recruiting or persuading graduating
women to join, or female students are unable to see themselves as being successful or integrated
in the field. The study also found that interventions focused on the human-value characteristics
of engineering, self-efficacy in engineering, increased math/science involvement, parental
involvement in those classes, and focusing on outcomes will increase the number of women who
graduate and remain in engineering fields (Fouad & Singh, 2011). Another interesting fact is that
the women do not necessarily fare better in all-women universities or colleges (Forbes, 2010).
This is surprising since one would assume that colleges which focus exclusively on women
would stimulate or engage women in STEM fields at greater rates than co-ed schools.
Conclusion
The original goal of this research paper was to find a large number of common factors
associated with all these groups so that they could be comprehensively or cohesively addressed
at either the secondary level or the postsecondary level. Conversely, it appears that the factors
are too wavering between the groups to be able to form a well-rounded, postsecondary plan for
addressing the concerns.
However, this does not mean that there are not identical factors in each group. At the
secondary level, it appears that increased (whether in amount or rigor) participation in math and
science courses are important for all groups. This is for several reasons, but the most primary
reasons are both for college-readiness, as well as immersion, engagement, and experience within
STEM fields prior to entering college.
Another factor which was reflected in all the groups is the “personal” factor. This
includes how a student personally perceives the academic environment around them. A negative
environment, or one which encourages, or neglects to address, negative stereotypes and

14

judgments is one which will lead to the disengagement of a student. This is true for all students,
not just women and minorities. Additionally, faculty needs to make efforts to interact more with
their students. Increased opportunities and engagement will have a positive effect on retention
and graduation outcomes for these particular students.
Perhaps most importantly was the factor of self-efficacy. This could be increased in these
groups in a variety of ways, whether through encouragement or increased involvement by
parents, faculty, and peers. This lends to another identical factor: identifying with others. All
groups showed increased interest in STEM majors and careers when they were able to identify
with faculty, peers, or potential colleagues/employers. It should be noted that this identification
is specific to race and gender. A Black student will not necessarily identify with a Hispanic
student, even though they are both minorities, and a female Hispanic student will still have a
hard time identifying with a male Hispanic student, even though their race is the same. It is
important that there is increased, identifiable diversity in the STEM fields, both for role-model
purposes and for workforce purposes. However, it is important to note that the “identifying”
factor is not necessarily related to schools as a whole. While Black students tend to fare better in
STEM fields at HBCUs, the same is not true for women at women’s colleges, or Hispanic
students attending HSIs.
These identical factors can be tied into most student success programs with some effort
between faculty and employers. However, it is important to realize that even though there are
shared traits, one cannot surmise to address all factors amongst these groups in the same way.
Each race, ethnicity, and gender have their own unique obstacles and must be helped and assisted
accordingly.

15

References
Alon, S., Domina, T., & Tienda, M. (2010). Stymied Mobility or Temporary Lull? The Puzzle of
Lagging Hispanic College Degree Attainment. Social Forces, 88(4), 1807-1832.
Arbona, C., & Nora, A. (2007). The Influence of Academic and Environmental Factors on
Hispanic College Degree Attainment. The Review of Higher Education, 30(3), 247-269.
Change the Equation. (2013). Half Empty. Vital Signs. Retrieved May 15, 2015, from
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/12/f6/Change the Equation Vital Signs Report
December 2013.pdf
Chen, X. (2009). Students Who Study Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
(STEM) in Postsecondary Education. Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009161.pdf
Crisp, G., Nora, A., & Taggart, A. (2009). Student Characteristics, Pre-College, College, and
Environmental Factors as Predictors of Majoring in and Earning a STEM Degree: An
Analysis of Students Attending a Hispanic Serving Institution. American Educational
Research Journal, 46(4) Retrieved from:
http://aer.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.uh.edu/content/46/4/924.full.pdf+html
Doss, N. (2010). Best Colleges for Women and Minorities in STEM. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/10/best-colleges-minorities-women-science-lifestyle-
education-stem.html
Eagan, M., Hurtado, S., & Chang, M. (2010). What Matters in STEM: Institutional Contexts
That Influence STEM Bachelor’s Degree Completion Rates. Retrieved from
http://www.heri.ucla.edu/nih/downloads/ASHE 2010 - Eagan, Hurtado, Chang - What
matters for STEM Completion.pdf
Fouad, N., & Singh, R. (2011). Stemming the Tide: Why Women Leave Engineering.
Hurtado, S., Newman, C., Tran, M., & Chang, M. (2010). Improving the rate of success for
underrepresented racial minorities in STEM fields: Insights from a national project. New
Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 5-15.
Landivar, L. (2013). Disparities in STEM Employment by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin.

16

American Community Survey Reports.
Malcom, L. (2010). Charting the pathways to STEM for Latina/o students: The role of
community colleges. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 29-40.
Nora, A. (2006). The Nora Student Engagement Model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the Computing Alliance of Hispanic-Serving Institutions, San Antonio, TX.
O’Brien, L., Blodorn, A., Adams, G., Garcia, D., & Hammer, E. (2014). Ethnic variation in
gender-STEM stereotypes and STEM participation: An intersectional approach. Cultural
Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(2), 169-180. Retrieved from
http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/cdp-a0037944.pdf
Suarez, A. L. (2003). Forward Transfer: Strengthening the Educational Pipeline for Latino
Community College Students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice,
27(2), 95-117.
Tyson, W., Lee, R., Borman, K., & Hanson, M. (2007). Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Pathways: High School Science and Math Coursework and
Postsecondary Degree Attainment. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk
(JESPAR), 243-270.

STEM Research_DenhamE

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to STEM Research_DenhamE

Similar to STEM Research_DenhamE (20)

STEM Research_DenhamE