2...
. oi.

.
3:4. .
4.“.3

bi»:
uu}

L

a .. .
A...” .5“?

saw?” 2
, s .e
5:... ..

. z

713.:
3:51.
3 :x!
..

”1311: “'2“

.HI.
. 0 :

 

 

 

 

a»! ivy. .‘yv u I.

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

A QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF GIFTED MINORITY
STUDENTS' PROGRESSION IN THE PHYSICAL
SCIENCES AND MATHEMATICS AT A LARGE

RESEARCH UNIVCF SITY
presente y

Dorothy Ann Stallworth Reed

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

 

 

Ph. D. degree in Education Administration
a 76580?

Date 6/11102

MS U 1': an Affirmatiw Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

599.12%“

 

S
M- r
A

‘9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 CIICIRCJDItODtnpeb-DJS

A QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF GIFTED MINORITY STUDENTS’
PROGRESSION IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES AND MATHEMATICS AT A
LARGE RESEARCH UNIVERSITY
BY

Dorothy Ann Stallworth Reed

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Education Administration

2002

ABSTRACT

A QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF GIFTED MINORITY STUDENTS’
PROGRESSION IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES AND MATHEMATICS AT A
LARGE RESEARH UNIVERSITY
By
Dorothy Ann Stallworth Reed

The changing demographics of the United States will demand that more
ethnic minorities be used in the science, medical, and engineering workforce. In
order for ethnic minorities to gain access to these careers, they must first receive
a degree in the sciences. Making it through an institution of higher learning has
proven problematic for most ethnic minority students. Oftentimes, the higher the
educational level, the fewer the number of ethnic minorities present. Many
minority students find, that when they arrive at the university, they have less
exposure to high order mathematics and science activities than their White peers
do (Campbell, Wahl, Slayer, Moeller, Harouna, & Light, 1998).

The study reported in this dissertation examines the progress of students
who have participated in a science enrichment program early in their academic
careers at the university campus, the Charles Drew Science Enrichment Program
at Michigan State University. The program was created in an effort to provide
ethnic minority students the opportunity to perform successfully in the core
science and math courses, and increase the number of ethnic minority students

who complete degrees in the biological sciences, physical sciences, and

mathematics.

Using data from ethnic minority students who entered fall of 1993 to fall of
1998, and participated in the Charles Drew Science Enrichment Program at
Michigan State University, this quantitative longitudinal study examined the
impact of a student assistance and academic support program that provides
ethnic minority students the opportunity to perform successfully in core science
and mathematics courses. A random sample of ethnic minority students who
entered the college of natural science, but who did not participate in the program
served as a control group. A random sample of White students with a major in
the natural science, during the same time periods, was drawn as the second
control group.

Data indicated that the controlled groups did not perform as well as the
students who participated in the Charles Drew Science Enrichment program. The
current study analyzed the relationships between degrees granted in the
sciences; the relationship between first semester grade point average versus
predicted grade point average; the relationship of grades in chemistry, math, and
biology; to students’ participation in the program. The study examined the
percentage of science degrees earned, the graduation rate, as well as the final
grade point average upon graduation.

Statistical analysis of the data indicated that the program played an
important role in the matriculation of students in science and mathematics
majors. The program enabled a higher percentage of students to receive a

degree in the sciences and graduate with a high grade point average.

Copyright by
Dorothy Ann Stallworth Reed
2002

To my parents Lonnie (LJ) and Nettie Stallworth who sacrificed so much
that my eight sisters and I might have the opportunities that we may have
otherwise been denied.

To my eight sisters, Cynthia, Gloria, Janet, Brenda, Patricia, Lesia, Tracy
and Jacqueline, the wind beneath my wings.

To my husband Willie, my rock, and my daughter, Kimberly, and my son,
Brandon, who are my sources of inspiration, whose love, patience and

understanding made it possible.

Acknowledgements

I am indebted to many of the faculty members of Michigan State University
and the Charles Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory, but especially to Dr. Anna
Ortiz who willingly accepted the role of major professor. Her guidance in this
study and in the preparation of this thesis is greatly appreciated. I am also
indebted to the other members of my committee, Dr. Gloria Smith, Dr. Marilyn
Amey, and Dr. Marylee Davis for their support, encouragement and suggestions
in the planning and execution of this study. Without the patience and
understanding of all four women the chances of my completing this study would
have not been possible.

For the support that I have received over the years in my effort to
complete this degree I would like to thank Dr. Willie M. Reed for his patience and
financial support. I would like to thank Charles Roberts and Sharon Griffin who
worked as directors of the Drew Mathematics Program; to Marcia Ewers, the
Biology Program director; David Flores, assistant to the director; Patte Wolf, the
Program Secretary; the chemistry department and the college of natural science
dean’s office. Your encouragement and support made a big difference.

Finally, I would like to thank all the students who participated in the Drew
Program over the six-year period, the Drew Crew. This dissertation was
completed as a tribute to the great students you all were. Your contributions will

enable educators to further the prospects for quality education in mathematic and

vi

science for minority students at large research universities, and to increase the
numbers of ethnic minorities who participate in the science and technology

workforce.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
The Problem ................................................ 1
The Study ................................................... 6
Preview of the Dissertation ................................ 8

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Underrepresentation of Minorities in Science and
Mathematics ................................................ 1 O
Barriers to Minority Students Progression in the
Physical Sciences‘and Mathematics ................... 13
Programs that Promote Retention and
Achievements of Minorities in the

Physical Sciences and Mathematics ..................... 18
Identification of Gifted Minority Students ............... 22
The Needs of Gifted Minority Students .................. 24
Gifted Minority Students Development in
Mathematics and Physical Sciences .................... 27
Conceptual Framework ........................... ' ......... 29
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN
Introduction .................................................... 34
General University Environment ......................... 34
The Charles Drew Science Enrichment
Laboratory ...................................................... 36
The Design of the Study .................................... 37
The Population and Sample ............................... 38
Data Collection ................................................ 39
Data Analysis ............................................. 40
Research Questions and Hypothesis ............ 42
Advantages and Limitation .............................. 44
CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS
and ANALYSIS OF RESULTS .................................. 46

viii

Results ......................................................... 46

Study Variables ............................................... 47
Summary of Results ........................................ 56
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION ............................................................... 62
Summary of Findings ........................................ 70
Implications for Theory Development .................. 71
Recommendation for Practice ............................ 72
Implications for Practice for the Drew
Program ........................................................ 75
Summary ...................................................... 79
REFERENCES ............................................. ' ............... 8O
INDEX TABLES ........... 87

Chapter 1

Introduction

The Problem

A current issue in higher education is the under representation of ethnic
minority students studying the physical sciences and mathematics in
undergraduate and graduate institutions in the United States (Matthews, 1990).
African Americans, Hispanics and American Indians are underrepresented, as a
proportion of the national population, because of lower high school graduation
and lower college attendance rates. This disparity is further amplified by the fact
that minority students complete their degrees at rates lower than White students
(Smith 1995).

There is a lack of minority students in advanced mathematics classes in
the nation’s high schools. On average, African Americans students make up ten
to thirty percent of the enrollment in US. high schools, but seldom is there more
than one African American student enrolled in the typical advanced mathematics
course (Rowser and Koontz, 1995). At the pre-college level, data have
suggested that minorities take fewer years of science and mathematics
coursework, including advanced studies, than White students (Matthews, 1990).
Tate (1995) reported that African American students were more likely to be
tracked into remedial mathematics classes than White students. In addition, the
number of minority students in a high school increased, the proportion of college
preparation mathematics sections decreased (Tate, 1995).

Seymour and Hewitt (1994) suggested that a large portion of minority

students on predominately White campuses came from minority communities
where they were outstanding students. Often they were valedictorians of their
graduating classes. They found that students who excelled in substandard or
even average high schools faced an uphill battle in the competitive environment
of a research university (Seymour and Hewitt, 1994). These students and their
parents soon discovered that they had over estimated their academic ability
based on their limited academic background in more extensive math and science
courses compared to the preparation of students who attended predominately
White high schools (Seymour and Hewitt, 1994). Minority students, often
overconfident in their academic ability, were at a loss to comprehend why they
were not succeeding at the university (Seymour and Hewitt, 1994).

Minority students who enter college frequently have disparities in their
preparation level for academic work. Matthews (1990) attributes this to a deficient
exposure to and interaction with people who intended or planned to attend
college and because of this they lacked the understanding of the value of a
college degree (Matthews, 1990). Carmichael and Sevenair (1991) from Xavier
University (the nation’s top producer of minorities in mainstream health-
professional schools) felt that the answer to increasing the number of minorities
in the sciences was to strengthen the pipeline, “To begin to identify promising
students as early as junior high school, and provide various means of support
until they gain entry into health-professional schools” (Carmichael and Sevenair,
1991, p.55). Poor preparation in science and mathematics limited the appeal of

and access to science for ethnic minorities who elected to study the sciences

at the university level.

Ethnic minority students become socialized through their families and
educational system about what to value. This can produce various behavioral
outcomes. Those who entered the sciences found it necessary to change their
values. These included the obligation to serve the community, to act as a role
model, the conflict between the student and family role, the educational goals
defined by the parents, encouragement to be self assertive and autonomous
(Seymour and Hewitt, 1994)). Those who were unable to discard particular
values abandoned the idea of a science major. Everyone acquires a social
identity that defines who they are and how they relate to other people. An
internalized negative stereotype can cause students to seriously doubt their
ability to succeed academically (Ford and Harris, 1996). When there were few
numbers of ethnic minority students on a campus, they were culturally isolated
and hard pressed to form a peer group. Isolation for minority students studying
the sciences caused them to change their majors and heighten their perception
of isolation (Fries-Britt, 1998).

Minority students in the sciences have found few, if any, campus wide
minority programs that were effective in serving science, math, and engineering
majors, or any type of academic assistance at the department level. The need for
assistance was evident among minority students. Every minority student who
stayed in a science major reported receiving some type of program assistance
that was critical to his or her persistence (Seymour and Hewitt, 1994).

Gifted minority students faced issues such as social-emotional

adjustment, self-concept and acceptance by their peers (Fries-Britt, 1995). The
literature has suggested that issues of race and culture are factors to be
considered in the experience of minorities who achieve academically. Ford
(1996) suggested that it may be difficult for minority students to integrate their
giftedness because of perceived conflict of having a minority status and high
academic achievement, which were associated with the majority culture (Ford,
1996). A balance of racial identity and cultural pride were essential for all gifted
students. High ability minority students benefited when they established
successful connections with other minority students who excel academically
(Fries-Britt, 1998).

Ford (1994) reported that gifted minority students’ academic success and
retention were influenced more by the “person- environment transaction” and
related socio-cultural influences than by intellectual and academic factors. These
factors, such as positive self-concept, an understanding of racism, and the
existence of support systems were better predictors of minority students’
retention than academic ability (Ford, Webb, & Sandidge, 1994). Other
researchers have noted that non-intellectual, psychosocial, and contextual
factors, such as low test scores and grades, low parental educational level, living
in a single parent household, low socioeconomic status, English as a second
language and racial minority status are predictors of negative educational
outcomes for minority students (Ford et al., 1994; Fries-Britt, 1998; Tate, 1995)

Seymour and Hewitt (1994) found that minority students left the university

or changed their science majors when they experienced one or more of the

following difficulties: differences in cultural values and socialization from their
white counterparts, internalization of negative stereotypes held about them by
their professors and classmates, isolation from their family and friends and
perception of racism toward them, and inadequate minority support systems
(Seymour and Hewitt, 1994). Grades were also found to affect the student’s
decision to change from a science or mathematics major. Often times, gifted
minority students received a shock to the ego when their grades in the gateway
courses were lower than those that they received in high school (Seymour and
Hewitt, 1994).

Carmichael and Sevenair (1991) reported that the Educational Testing
Service found that only twenty-four percent of “high ability” African Americans
(defined as the top two percent of ACT or SAT) scorers who entered four year
colleges completed a degree program and gained entry into any graduate or A
professional school. The fact remains that minorities were entering colleges and
universities in increasing numbers and that the retention of these students
presented a significant challenge to higher education and society at large. The
National Science Foundation reported that for all students, nationally, the attrition
rate for science, engineering, and mathematics majors was sixty (60) percent
with the rate of loss estimated to be thirty-five (35) percent between freshman
year and sophomore year. Therefore, the freshman year experience was critical
in the retention of science, engineering, and mathematics graduates (National
Research Council, 1991).

Minority students on White college campuses found themselves adjusting

to academic and social conditions on campus. The institutions found themselves
adjusting to the growth of the minority student population, as well as retaining
these students (Ford, 1991 ). Common concerns for first year minority students,
were feelings of loneliness and isolation, racial/ethnic identity development, racial
hostility in the form of harassment, alienation, and not belonging (Ford, 1991;

Fries-Britt 1995).

The Study

The focus to retaining minority students in the sciences and mathematics
must be targeted toward enrichment not remediation. Similar to findings of
Seymour and Hewitt (1994), my observations have been that many minority
students at Michigan State University came from predominately minority
communities where they were outstanding or gifted students. They excelled in
average or less than average high schools. Many of them and their families
overestimated their capabilities based on their limited knowledge of the more
extensive mathematics and science background of competing students who
attended predominately White schools in better school districts. From these
students’ perspectives, they were at a lost to comprehend why they did not
achieve in the university’s environment. They deflected their academic and social
issues to external causes. With this in mind, intervention for these students in the
Drew program, was packaged as enrichment in order to preserve their pride and
self -esteem and allowed them to take advantage of the resources that were

made available to them. Furthermore, if aspects of the college environment can

be linked to minority students persistence in the sciences, perhaps
institutions of higher learning can gain an understanding of how educational
programs, peer group interactions and student involvement may impact the
career goals of ethnic minority students who are interested in the sciences.

There may be several factors that explain the low retention of minority
students in the physical sciences and mathematics. The question I investigated
was, “do intervention programs during the freshman and sophomore year, such
as the Charles Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory, for gifted minority students
with an intention to major in the natural sciences or mathematics at a large
research institution, have a positive effect on them remaining in the sciences and
receiving a degree?” I hypothesized that the findings of the research would
demonstrate that intervention programs during the freshman and sophomore
years had a positive effect on gifted minority students remaining at the institution
and obtaining degrees in the sciences.

This study explored the factors related to persistence toward science
degrees for ethnic minority students, who as freshmen and sophomores, planned
on pursing careers in the sciences. Specifically, the study explored the students’
background, characteristics, and their college experiences, and their persistence
toward degrees in the sciences. I

For the purpose of this study, ethnic minority students were defined as
African American, Hispanic and/or Latino, and Native American racial groups.
Science majors were defined as the natural or physical sciences, nursing,

engineering, and mathematics. The study reviewed the progress minority

students made in their attempt to study the physical sciences and mathematics.
All participants in the research sample were at one time involved in the Charles
Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory to assist them with their academic
development. The laboratory sought to remove institutional barriers, such as
perception of racism, lack of advising, and created a supportive environment.
Michigan State University was the site for the study, which draws a large minority
population from urban Detroit, Saginaw, and Flint, Michigan. Michigan State has
an undergraduate population of approximately 34,000 and offers large lecture
style classes in the introductory physical sciences and mathematics.

The variables in the study included: the students’ standardized test scores
(ACT or SAT); the students’ high school grade point average (GPA); the
students’ semester grades in mathematics, chemistry, and biology; the students’
MSU predicted grade point average at the end of first semester; and the
students’ actual grade point average at the end of first semester, as well as the

field of study and degrees awarded by the university.

Overview of the Dissertation
Chapter 2 presents an extensive review of the literature addressing issues and
concerns of gifted minority students as related to the problem of being gifted and
pursing the natural sciences and mathematics. The literature review begins with
the broader concept of the lack of minorities pursuing science careers and
professions. This follows with a description of the specific barriers minorities face

in the sciences, such as, what are the barriers for minority students from K to 12

and beyond? The chapters move into the topic of the retention and achievements
of minorities in the physical sciences and mathematics and addresses past
successes and intervention programs. The identification of gifted minority
students was addressed as well as the specific needs of minority students. The
literature review concludes with a discussion of gifted minority students’
development in the physical sciences and mathematics. Chapter 3 previews the
methodology and research design. The methods included secondary analysis of
institutional data of six cohorts of students who began in fall 1993 and graduated
by 2001. Analysis of variances compared the performance of Drew students to a
representative sample of non Drew minority students and White students all with
the intent as freshmen to pursue majors in the sciences. Correlation analyses
were used to measure the strength of relationship between input, intermediate,
and outcome variables. Chapter 4 presents the results for all cohorts included in
the study. Chapter 5 discusses the interpretation of these results and implications
relevant to the need and operation of intervention programs. The analysis of the
data supports the hypothesis that program participation is associated with a
higher frequency of retention and science degrees granted to minorities. This
study provides one of the most thorough analyses of institutional data available
on programs that aid minority student’s retention in the sciences at a large

research institution.

Chapter 2

Review of the Literature

l/Underrepresentation of Ethnic Minorities in
Mathematics and the Physical Sciences

The ethnic diversity of the United States population has been increasing,
but not the diversity of the science, medical, and engineering workforce. Over
the past 25 years there has been a variety of educational efforts to address this.
Theseefforts have been met with some success, but there remains a great deal
of work to be done. The higher the educational level, ethnic minorities are
underrepresented (NSF, 99-320, 1999: NSF, NRC, 1993). The 1999 report of the
National Science Foundation cited that ethnic minority participation in higher
education has grown, but their involvement is not equal to their representation in
the US. population of 18 to 30 year olds (NSF, 1999). In 1995, African
Americans were 14 percent of the US. residents; Hispanics were 13 percent;
and American Indians were 0.8 percent (NSF, 1999). However, in that same
year, 7 percent of science and engineering bachelor’s degrees were awarded to
African Americans; 6 percent to Hispanics, and 0.6 percent to American Indians
(NSF, 1999). The proportion of science and engineering doctorates earned by
these groups were even smaller, 3 percent earned by African Americans, 3
percent by Hispanics, and 0.4 percent by American Indians (NSF, 1999).

Underrepresentation of minorities in the sciences becomes obvious in high

schOol. Minority high school students are less likely to earn high school credit in

10

science courses including chemistry, physics and calculus (Campbell, et.al.,
1993). In addition, they earn lower scores than whites on the math and verbal
portions of achievement tests (Campbell, et. al, 1993). Then by the junior years
of college, 65 percent of the minorities who enter a science or mathematics major
switched, as compared to 37 percent of white students (Seymour and Hewitt,
1994)

NSF reported that in 1994 African Americans made up 11 percent of the total
undergraduate enrollment at all institutions; Hispanics were 9 percent; and
American Indians were up 0.9 percent (NSF, 1999). Black and Hispanics were
most underrepresented at four-year colleges and universities (NSF, 1999).
Undergraduate education does not fare well for ethnic minorities who want to
study science and engineering, but there are signs of improvement. Given this,
the report further cited that between 1980 and 1995, bachelors’ degrees in
science and engineering increased by 62 percent, from 31,950 to 51,844 for
ethnic minorities (NSF, 1999). Graduate education, between 1985 and -1 995
showed some improvement as well. Despite the increase, African Americans
accounted for less than 6 percent of science and engineering graduate school
enrollment, Hispanics accounted for slightly over 4 percent, and Native
Americans for 0.5 percent (NSF, 1999). Status reports on minorities in sciences
and mathematics indicate that minorities are still underrepresented in sciences
and engineering, both in employment and training (Clark, 1999; Derlin and
McShannon, 1996; NSF, NRC, 1993). The changing demographics have a great

impact on the technological workforce. By the year 2030 the total elementary

ll

school age cohort of the United States could be equally divided between Whites
and all other ethnic groups combined (Clark, 1999). In the future, minority
students will be the growing population from where a highly skilled workforce will
be drawn. This is critical because minorities are underpresented in mathematics
and physical sciences from elementary school to graduate school (Derlin and
McShannon, 1996). The theory is that as the nation’s economic base shifts
increasingly toward technology, participation and achievement in the physical
sciences and mathematics by minorities is critical. As Clark (1999) emphasized,
“If minority students do not study the sciences they are depriving themselves of
many critical career choices, as well as access to White male dominated, high
salary occupations” (p.1). Adequate preparation in sciences and mathematics
enables students to develop intellectually and socially and participate fully in a
technology society as informed citizens (Tomlinson, 1995).

Demographics. predicts that 85 (eighty-five) percent of new entrants to the
workforce in the United States will be females and members of minority groups
(Clark, 1999; Derlin and McShannon, 1996). Based on this percentage, both
groups should be represented in the scientific and technology professions in’
proportion to their presence in the population as a whole. Several factors
contribute to unequal participation of minorities in the physical sciences and
mathematics. One significant factor is understaffed schools where access to
quality teachers is low. Here, judgments about abilities are made and tracking is
likely to occur. Under-equipped schools are most often located in minority

communities. The number of quality sciences and mathematics courses offered

12

are minimal and the curriculum emphasis is inadequate for college preparation.
There is a lack of financial resources, as well as inequities in under— equipped

schools (Williams and Haynes, 1993).

j/garriers‘tol Minority Students Progression in the
Physical Sciences and Mathematics

The National Academy of Sciences and the National Research Council
(1993) report that at every junction in the pipeline more minorities and females
drop out of mathematics and sciences education than do white males. Even
though this report is ten years old, it provides insight into the problem that is
relevant today. Currently, jobs requiring mathematical skills are growing double
the rate of over all employment. Women and minorities must fill these workforce
gaps or the United States will be unable to compete with technologically
advanced countries in global markets (NAS, NRC, 1993). The report found that
the ten (10) largest school districts in the nation were seventy (70) percent
African American and Hispanic and that of the twenty-five (25) largest city school
districts in the nation, twenty-two (22) were composed of predominately minority
students. The minority enrollments in the K-12 classrooms of 33 states were at
least 20 percent (NAS, NRC, 1993). This enrollment has likely grown since the
time of the report.

The report further cites that only six (6) states have a minority student

enrollment greater than fifteen (15) percent in their math and science teacher

education schools, and colleges and programs nationally (NAS, NRC, 1993).

13

Out of every four hundred (400) students enrolled in teacher education programs
nationally, there were twenty-two African - American (5.5 percent), seven
Hispanics (1.75 percent), and American Indians (0.5 percent). The report found
that students were turned off to mathematics and science in elementary school,
and that teachers often lacked adequate preparation, support, and delivery
mechanisms (NAS, NRC, 1993).

The mathematics achievements of the United States high school students lag

behind that of other industrialized countries (Hagedom, 1997). Despite the

 

University of California system’s policy of accepting only stude_nts_l‘romthe upper
12.5% oftheir graduating class, over half of the entering freshmen were
unprepared for college level mathematics (Hagedom, 1997). Hagedorn’s study
indicated that less than 20 percent of US. high school seniors performed
mathematics at an advanced level and less than 3 percent exhibited what can be
termed superior mathematics performance. This would explain why over 40
percent of US. first year college and university students failed calculus. Poor
mathematics performance of students leaves them without skills necessary to
function in the workplace, such as problem solving and analytical aptitude causes
serious deficit among present and future workers (Hagedom, 1997).

Participation in science and mathematics courses at the high school level
is directly related to educational opportunity. Minority students who take algebra
and geometry are more likely to go on to college (Campbell, et al., 1998).
Research shows that students who lack access to advanced math and science

courses, to teachers qualified to teach those courses, and to laboratory

14

equipment do less well on measures of achievement and accomplishments than
those who have access to) these resources (Campbell, et al., 1998). Minority
students in urban schools are especially affected by this lack of resources
(Campbell, et al., 1998)

The inadequacies in mathematics and science achievement are one of the
main barriers to professional and medical careers for minorities (Hagedom, et al.,
1997). Minority students, when they arrive at the university, have been found to
have had less exposure to higher order mathematics and science activities than

their white peers do (Campbell, et. al. 1998). Other factors cited are inadequate

 

mathematics preparation from high school, ineffective advising, and
nonsupportive faculty as reasons manyminority students fall short of their goals
(Hagedom, et. al. 1997). If minorities are to succeed they must be mentored and
encouraged to form proper study habits, better test-taking skills, and overall
improvement of mathematics performance. Additional factors that lead to
success for these students are sound financial aid programs, and quality
teaching (NSF, NRC, 1993).

Other pre-college student characteristics and experiences lead to the well-
documented low participation of minorities in higher education. We do not
understand all of the variables that are related to this problem, but those that
have been identified were: being a first generation college student, coming from
a low income home, attending a segregated public school, having a lack of
knowledge about college, possessing low academic self-confidence, and

experiencing a disconnect between the attainment of a college degree and

15

future success (Matthews, 1990).

Remediation of students matriculating to college is a major problem for the
university’s administration. Remedial math courses are defined as any course
below calculus level. About 46 percent of U. S. College students who have
earned more than 10 credits have enrolled in at least one remedial course
(Hagedom, et. al., 1997). The failure rate in college remedial courses is highest
among female and minority students (Seymour and Hewitt, 1997).

While minority students have been entering our universities in increasing
numbers, student retention has become a persistent problem for American higher
education (Derlin and McShannon, 1996). Alexander (1997) suggests that
minority students are lost in the mathematics and sciences courses freshmen
and sophomore years. This is related to students’ enrollment into gateway
courses such as calculus 1. Many factors may influence a university student’s
decision to remain or leave a particular field of study. One factor considered
relevant to minority students is what they perceive as an Openly hostile
atmosphere where they encounter racism and discrimination (Derlin and
McShannon, 1996). While most professors do not consciously treat students
unfairly, differential treatment such as an unconscious pattern of differential
interaction among faculty and their students do occur (Matthews, 1990).

The field of science in higher education attempts to reward meritocracy
with rights and opportunity (Seymour and Hewitt, 1994). This would mean that
the student who excels academically is rewarded with scholarship and research

opportunity. The literature suggests that there is a disparity between minorities

16

and whites in studying the sciences. Minority students are not always provided
with mentors and as a result are not provided equal exposure in the sciences.
For minority students who want to progress in the sciences, there is not equal
access to graduate education, receipt of research funds, access to outstanding
research collaborators and mentoring to do publications (Seymour and Hewitt,
1994)

Hagedom (1997) stated that even though the mathematics performances gap
between non-minority students and African-American and Hispanics students
have recently narrowed, substantial differences still remain. The low
mathematics performance of minority students is due to a lack of opportunity and
differential attitude practices by teachers. As Hagedom (1997) reported, “The
effect of the absence of perceived racial prejudice had a significantly larger effect
on the math gains of minorities”.

The National Science Foundation found that a lack of self-esteem and self-
confidence eroded student's interest, and that inadequate early preparation
prevented students in high school and college from taking advanced
mathematics courses (NAS, NRC, 1993). There is a lack of minority role models,
as well as subconscious tracking of students as underachievers, which erodes
their mathematics and sciences aspirations. The report recommended. that
administrators insist upon developmental activities aimed at understanding the
factors that influence minority achievement and nurture the expectations that all
students can and must be given the opportunities to learn mathematics (NAS,

NRC, 1993). Teachers can develop positive and productive school climates that

17

facilitate students’ learning of mathematics and provide opportunities for students
to improve their self- esteem (Hartley, 1987).

The National Academy of Science report (1993) recommended that higher
education learn to identify and recruit potential mathematics and science majors
among minority students in secondary schools and in the workforce to increase
the numbers of minority students who graduate with mathematics and science
majors. Institutions are encouraged to provide finanCial'ificentives to encourage
minorities to pursue mathematics-based majors, including teaching. Universities
ought to consider establishing appropriate support to attract and retain minority
students who want to study mathematics and sciences, especially during the
freshman year. They should also recruit minority faculty members and provide
opportunities for them to assume leadership role in the faculty. Institutions can
also work with local school systems to ensure the institutional barriers to
advanced education are eliminated (NAC, NRS, 1993).

The absence of minority academic advisors and minority role models at
predominately white institutions contributes to the high attrition rate of minority
students (Matthews, 1990). Minority role models help to create a supportive
climate and provide academic tutoring that have been shown to ensure high
retention and graduation rates among African Americans and Hispanics

(Seymour and Hewitt, 1994).

I’ll/Programs that Promote Retention and Achievements

of Minorities in the Physical Sciences and Mathematics

18

Over the past several years, the National Science Foundation and the
National Institutes of Health have spent billions of dollars to increase the
numbers of minorities in the mathematics and the physical sciences (Seymour
and Hewitt, 1994). In terms of recruitment, the numbers of minorities in
mathematics and the sciences have increased. However, the numbers who
remain in mathematics and the sciences is discouraging. Over one half of the
African American and Hispanic students who begin college with the intention of
studying the sciences abandon their science major by the end of sophomore year
(Seymour and Hewitt, 1994).

Science and mathematics education in the 1990’s has focused on equity for
all students and the application of systemic education reform as a national
strategy. Since 1991, the National Science Foundation’s Statewide Systemic
Initiative programs have been the national response to inequities in science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology education (Heck, 1998). Systemic
education reform addresses the following: (a) ambition — in that it establishes
new learning standards for all students; (b) comprehensive - in that it targets
many pieces of the educational system for change toward a common goal; and
(c) coherent - in that it supports mutually reinforcing practices and policies that
send a strong, consistent message to students, educators, and society about
what is important in education. Systematic education reform is a proactive
approach to seek solutions to problems beyond those that can be addressed
through current educational policy, practice, expectations and norms (Heck,

1998). NSF’s conception of systemic reform is that it always views equity as a

19

goal. The two goals of the system reform is increasing knowledge of science and
mathematics by all students and assuring that women, minorities, and the
disabled have the opportunity to engage in and learn science at all levels of the
educational system (Heck, 1998).

Fredericksen (1998) has found success in “cluster experiences” with minority
students at the University of Texas at El Paso by instituting a collaborative
learning program sponsored by the National Science Foundation. He linked
courses in English composition with both science and mathematics or
engineering and mathematics. Clusters of 25 students each travel from class to
class as a group. All courses use learning communities and collaborative
projects. Most clusters include writing across the curriculum. Fredericksen
(1998) reports that since the projects’ inception, cluster students have done
surprisingly well in completing precalculus mathematics courses, which
determines if they are able to continue in science or engineering majors. There
is now a 75 to 80 percent pass rate and students credit their success to the
cluster program and its encouragement of gleaming communities} Fredericksen
found that students developed strong friendships, the desire to use study teams
and a high degree of self-confidence. Other findings were that collaborative
activity is amenable to minority learners rather than a competitive structure. It
also affords minority students the chance to gain confidence and to learn to
accept and like each other (Fredricksen, 1998).

A program at Xavier University identifies students as early as junior high and

provides various means of support until they gain entry into health-professional

20

schools. In this program, 59 percent of the pre-medical students gain entry into
medical school. The authors emphasize that this portion is greater than the
national rate of 24 percent of “high-ability” African-Americans who complete four- -
year degrees and gain entry into health-profession schools (Carmichael and
Sevenair, 1991 ). Black Issues in Higher Education cites that Xavier was the # 1
university that granted degrees to African American students in the life sciences,
during the 1999-2000 academic year (2001 ). It graduated 60 students in the
physical sciences, and according to Xavier administrators, 93 percent of its pre-
medical students that entered medical school graduate (Stewart, 2001 ).
Treisman (1990) investigated why African-American students were failing
calculus at a higher rate than Chinese American students were. He found that
Chinese American students integrated their social and academic lives by
completing homework assignments and studying for exams together. By
contrast, he found that most African American students studied in isolation and
had little social interaction with their calculus peers outside of the classroom
(Treisman, 1990). In response, Treisman founded the Emerging Scholars
programs”. This program consisted of smaller classrooms and more interactions
with the instructor. The process of doing math was student-centered and
collaborative. The Emerging Scholars program was unique in that it assist
underrepresented minority students and emphasized the student’s strengths
rather weaknesses. At some universities these programs are known as honors

programs (Alexander, et al., 1992)

21

Identification of Gifted Minority Students

Educators have identified giftedness as the top 1 percent in general
intelligence as measured by the Stanford Binet Intelligence Test (Ford and
Harris, 1991). This definition of giftedness does not take into account that many
capable minority learners do no perform well on standardized norm-referenced
instruments. Therefore, some teachers, parents, and minority educators who
recognize that students learn differently challenge the definition of giftedness.
The literature suggests that the definition of giftedness is ubiquitous and that
many minorities are underrepresented in gifted programs because of the reliance
on standardized tests as a means of identifying potentially gifted students
(Hartley, 1987). This would suggest that standardized intelligence instruments
take into consideration the ethnic background of capable minority learners who
have different learning styles. Ford (1997) suggests that the problem lies in the
fact that some classroom teachers view minority students as a group rather than
individuals. The ability of teachers to work effectively with and identify gifted
racially and culturally diverse students depends heavily on staff development
efforts and teacher education program (Ford, Baytop, and Harmon, 1997).

There is a critical need to identify gifted African Americans students early
in the pipeline. Researchers need to know how these students perform at higher
levels of education as well. As colleges and universities struggle to retain
minority students, who enter with high GPAs and Standardized Test Scores, it is

necessary to understand the experiences of these students (Fries-Britt, 1995).

22

Williams and Haynes (1993) report that the United States has lagged in
seeking out and identifying gifted and talented students, finding them early in the
academic process, and individualizing their educational experience. They feel
that an injustice has been served to minority students by teacher apathy toward
certain minorities and economically disadvantaged students and that neglect of
the gifted is an increasing universal problem (Williams and Haynes, 1993).

Minority students who manage to be identified as gifted and who fail to reach
their academic potential have perplexed educators for years. Being gifted makes
these students more sensitive to psychological, social, or academic difficulties
(Ford and Harris, 1994). These students are likely to feel alienated, which brings
about a sense of impotence, isolation, refusal to accept prevailing norms, and a
lack of meaning found in school (Ford and Harris, 1994). This may lead some
gifted minority students to display poor attitudes toward school, such as cutting
class, hostile behavior, dropping out, and other forms of passive resistance (Ford
and Harris, 1994). These factors play a critical role in the development of
underachievement in gifted minority students (Ford and Harris 1994; Fries-Britt,
1997).

Because schools and programs fail to identify and serve gifted minority
students they are less likely to receive adequate educational and vocational
guidance as compared to majority gifted students (OIszewski-Kubilius and Scott
1992). Only 20 percent of students enrolled in gifted programs are minority and
there is a lack of services for the gifted minority students, because they are

perceived as self-sufficient, not in need of assistance, and able to reach

23

their full potential (Williams and Haynes, .1993; Ford, Baytops, and Harmon,
1987)

Like the K —12 educational system there is concern about the
underrepresentation of culturally diverse students in gifted programs at the
college level. Ford, Baytops, and Harmon (1997) recommend that educational
agencies should adopt a culturally sensitive definition of giftedness and
intelligence. Schools should consider subgroup norms when assessing
individual students and then comparing the scores of one group of students with
others (Ford, Baytop, and Harmon, 1997). When culturally sensitive definitions
are adopted, then possibly culturally sensitive assessments will be adopted.
Currently there is much criticism regarding the inability of tests to assess the
strengths of culturally and linguistically diverse students (Williams and Haynes,
1993). Multiple types and sources of information need to be gathered. No one
piece of information is sufficient in identifying students’ strength, weaknesses and

educational needs (Hartley, 1987; Rhodes. 1992).

The Needs of Gifted Minority Students in College
Some minority students, from lower social economic backgrounds have
limited access to the academic resources than their more privileged counterparts.
These disadvantaged students have undeveloped potential that remains
neglected. When members of this group attend poorer schools, neglect often
leads to low grade point averages and low standardized tests (Welch, Hodges,

and Payne, 1996). This group is further disadvantaged by their low socio-

24

economic status that prohibits them from taking advantage of expensive
supplementary programs and materials to improve their skills such as the Sylvan
Learning Center (Welch, Hodges, and Payne, 1996). Welch et al., (1996)
asserted that “These students are forced into higher institution environments, in
which they are constantly expected to achieve but which they experience
infrequent success and commonplace assaults on their competence” (p. 2).
They agreed that for these students to achieve, they must develop an academic
identity that fosters and sustains academic achievement in spite of factors that
impede their progress (Welch, Hodges, and Payne, 1996).

Gifted minority students can receive discouragement from their peers about
their giftedness. Because they want to be accepted by these peers, their sense
of belonging is challenged in school. Some African Americans see school as a
symbol of the dominant culture, which communicates to students that to succeed
they must become “unblack” (Ford, 1994; Fordham, 1991). In order to become a
member of the “black community, some gifted African American may sabotage
any chance they have of succeeding outside of the African American community”
(Ford, 1994, p.212). Gifted African American students may purposely
underachieve, drop out, and otherwise fail to achieve their academic potential in
school (Fries-Britt, 1997). This may be especially evident when gifted African
American students attend predominately white schools. During this time they
may become even more confused about which culture to support (Olzewski-
Kubilius and Scott, 1992).

Gifted African American students may find it difficult to seek out other

25

students who share their interest and level of ambition. For African American
men, athletic ability has been reinforced as a positive characteristic, but not
academics. Once gifted African American students have formed friendships with
students who are not high achievers like themselves they have expressed
concerns about leaving their non-gifted friends behind (Fries-Britt, 1997).

Ford (1994) asserts that gifted African American students have unique
counseling needs as they confront issues of social and psychological barriers to
achievement, including peer pressure to underachieve, perfectionism, test
anxiety, fear of failure, and social isolation. The literature also suggested that
gifted ethnic minority students were more likely to come from middle income
families and that low income ethnic minorities were motivated to go to college but
less prepared. They faced issues such as parental pressures, peer pressures,
financial difficulties, lack of knowledge about college, lack of role models, lack of
confidence, and the assumption that college would be frightening or lonely (Ford,
1994; Tomlinson, 1995). Therefore, African American students expressed a
greater need for personal counseling, support services, and special academic
programs that would enhance their chances for both success and a rich college
experience (Ford, Webb and Sandidge, 1994; Fries-Britt, 1997). Counseling can
help them cope with peer pressures, isolation, economic difficulties, poor study
habits, test anxiety, underachievement, lack of motivation, as well as competing
priorities and interests. In addition, gifted African American college students may
need assistance with racial identity development to resolve values that conflict

with their home, community, school, and peer pressures to underachieve (Ford,

26

Webb and Sandidge, 1994). Racial identity for these students will mean a sense
of belonging for mental health that represents a cultural symbol of collective
identity, ethnic consolidation. And mental interdependence (Ford, et. al., 1993)
Nelson (1994) found that academically talented minority students, who
persist, seek out and express a desire for support services that enhances their
success. These services include study skills workshops, personal counseling,
special academic courses, and financial aid. Minority students who are at risk

tend not to use support services.

Gifted Minority Students
in the Physical Sciences and Mathematics

Gifted African American college students face unique challenges, which
suggest that support programs that provide academic enhancement, connections
to other gifted students and the opportunity to explore endeavors are important.
Honors programs, in general, on predominately White college campuses have
not been attractive to gifted African American students because of the external
perception that African Americans are less intelligent. Additionally their minority
peers’ often have the impression that these programs are activities for Whites- or
those acting White (Fries-Britt, 1997). The literature finds that the number of
gifted students participating in honors programs at historically black colleges is
increasing. The findings show minority students feel comfortable displaying their
academic talents in a comfortable environment where minority peers have similar

aspirations (Fries-Britt, 1997).

27

Self-esteem also plays a role in minority student retention. Minority students,
particularly African Americans, with a sense of ethnic identity have a strong self-
concept and motivation to excel academically. They are best prepared to face
the challenge of developing a “collegiate” or “professional” self (Welch, Hodges,
and Payne, 1996). Low self-concept is a concern in working with gifted minority
students at the college level because many conditions contribute to the low self-
concept of these students. As they move beyond their high school environment
where they compared themselves with persons of the same background, they
find it unrealistic to maintain such a confined self-concept and must function
outside their immediate environment, interacting with the dominant culture or
White culture in college and /or job situations (Williams and Hayes, 1993). It is
here that their self-esteem becomes threatened. The competitive setting of the
integrated classroom, with white students, provides an environment in which
minority students’ self-concepts are likely to become depressed (Williams and
Hayes, 1993).

The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) described earlier uses a
collaborative learning program to help minorities’ progression in the sciences.
Clusters of 25 students travel from class to class as a group. Since the program
beginning in 1995, 75 to 80 percent of these students have passed calculus, and
have been successful in all courses attempted. Students credit their success to
the cluster program and its encouragement of learning communities; they
experience strong friendship bonds, the desire and ability to use study teams and

a high degree of self-confidence (Fredericksen, 1998). The literature suggests

28

that minority students are particularly receptive to collaborative learning, or
learning in groups. They favor a more cooperative goal structure than a more
competitive one (Frederickson 1998; Hiemenz and Hudspeth, 1993,Tinto 1993).
The Academic Excellence Workshop program at California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona, has an academic support program designed for minorities in
mathematics based curriculum. The objective of the program is to apply
collaborative Ieaming, good study habits and communication skills as well as
mastery of foundation courses. The results indicated that workshop participants
outperformed their counterparts who did not participate in the workshop and
outperformed them as a whole in chemistry and physics. The discipline showing

the most success was mathematics (Hiemenz and Hudspeth, 1993).

Conceptual Framework

The literature review suggests the concept that the retention and progression
of ethnic minority students studying the physical sciences or mathematics at a
large research institution has been dismal. Ethnic minority students have the
highest rate of attrition than any group of students at universities. Thus, drawing
upon intervention programs as the conceptual framework for this study is
supported by Seymour and Hewitt (1994). The effectiveness of an intervention
program during the freshmen and sophomore years of college for gifted minority
students with an intent to study the sciences or mathematics at a large research
university will be addressed by assessment and evaluation of an early

intervention program.

29

The conceptual framework for the study centers on the pipeline that
carries students from K-12 to a degree in the science. By the time students
reach high school, those from urban areas are affected by lack of resources
(Campbell, 1998). Minority students arrive on the college campus with less
exposure to higher order mathematics and science activities than their white
peers (Hagedom, 1977).

Inadequate mathematics preparation will not allow students to pass the
gateway courses of calculus and chemistry. Minority students often fail the
mathematics and science freshmen and sophomore years (Alexander, 1991).
These correspond to the gateway courses. Gifted minority students oftentimes
fail to reach their potential without the appropriate psychological, social, or
academic support system (Harris et al.,1994). The students may feel alienated,
isolated, and most often refuse to accept prevailing norms. Therefore it is
appropriate to investigate the effectiveness of an intervention program during the
freshmen and sophomore years for gifted minority students with an intention to
major in the physical sciences or mathematics at a large research university.

Figure 1. illustrates what the pipeline is like for ethnic minority students
who chose to study the sciences. The percentages are hypothetical proportions
for explanatory purposes. The figure illustrates the progression of ethnic minority
students’ progression in the science and mathematics from high school to
college. It must be noted that many minority students are lost in the pipeline
before they enter high school. The figure suggests that 100% of the minority

students in high school are enrolled in below average courses.

3O

Figure 1.Conceptual Model of a pipeline of cumulative effects.

High School
I

100%

Average or below average courses
Peer influence
Under funding of schools

Poor teachers
Lack of role models

 

College Prep

50%

College Prep courses lacking
Teacher lack skills to teach
Lack of access to lab equipment
Lack of self— confidence
Lack of role models

 

Early College
25%

Remedial courses
Challenges to ethnic identity
Peer pressures
Non- supportive faculty
Lack of role models

 

Science and Math Progression

10%

Gateway courses
Challenges to potential
Feelings of isolation
Lack of role models

 

Graduation in the Sciences and Mathematics

5%
Completion of Requirements for the
Degree

Adequate mentors
Access to graduate work

Access to research collaborators

 

31

These courses would not include AP or advanced courses. These students are
often distracted by peers, and their schools lack’ of funding. These schools often
have inadequate numbers of teachers who may lack training and the students
lack scientific role models. Hypothetically, 50 percent of ethnic minorities who
are enrolled in college prep courses in high schools are taught by teachers who
may lack the skills to teach advanced courses. These students may not have
access to advanced lab equipment, may experience a lack of confidence and few
role models. Hypothetically, 25 percent of these students will enroll in an
institution of higher learning where they may be enrolled in remedial courses.
Their co-ethnic peers may challenge their ethnic identity and their non-minority
peers may question their academic ability. They may experience the non-
supportive faculty‘who may doubt their ability to succeed. This is likely
compounded by the lack of ethnic minority scientific role models. Hypothetically,
10 percent of these students will experience success in the gateway courses of
math, chemistry, and biology. Many of them will have their academic potential
challenged for the first time. They may begin to experience feelings of isolation.
There is still a lack of ethnic minority scientific role models. The 5 percent that
will make it to graduation and complete a degree in the sciences will have
experienced adequate mentors, who may not be members of an ethnic minority
group. They may have access to graduate school, research careers, or
profession health careers.

The conceptual framework for this study is directly linked to the goals of

the Charles Drew Science Enrichment program. The program is designed to

32

intervene in the early college years by providing a supportive academic
environment of their peers, lessening feelings of isolation, and minimalizing peer
pressure for minority students intending to major in the sciences. Through the
longitudinal study of students who participated in the program, the following over
aching research question can be answered: Does participation in a program like

Drew help to keep minority students in the sciences?

33

Chapter 3

Methodology and Research Design

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to investigate and explore the
achievements and graduation rates of gifted ethnic minority students (African
American, Native American, Hispanic and Latinos ethnic groups) who had
declared intent to study the sciences at a large research university. The program
that was evaluated was the Charles Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory, in the
College of Natural Sciences at Michigan State University. The study focused on
ethnic minority students who entered the university from fall 1993 to fall 1998. To
obtain graduation rates, data were collected only from entering classes that had

the standard 6 year period to complete an undergraduate degree.

General University Environment

Michigan State University was founded in 1855 as the nation’s pioneer land-
grant institution. The university is a comprehensive research institution with
4,244 faculty and academic staff, 33,966 undergraduates, 7,732 graduate
students, and 1,340 professional students. In 2000, the total enrollment of
43,038 is the largest single campus student body of any Michigan university and
among the largest in the country.

Michigan State University places great emphasis on service to the state, the
nation, and the world. This is central to its land grant mission. Public service

and extension missions are fulfilled by long standing commitments to

34

international development and education and an extensive lifelong education
effort throughout the state. Michigan State University attracts faculty, staff, and
students from around the world. The university seeks excellence in all that it
does, this creating an atmosphere of challenge for high achievement.

The university has fourteen degree granting colleges. The Office of
Admissions admits freshmen to the university. However, students may be
admitted into a particular college if they have selected a major. Students who
have not selected a major are placed in the undergraduate university division
(UUD).

The university offers special programs for minority or disadvantaged students
through the Office of Supportive Services. These programs provide services to
the students such as counseling, tutoring, study sessions, workshops, and
seminars that are designed to increase their retention rate. The university also
provides other support services for the retention of ethnic minority students.
These programs are administered through the College of Engineering, the
College of Business, and the residence halls’ minority aids (to assist students in
their living and learning concerns).

The College of Natural Science enrolls students who wish to pursue a degree
in one of the academic disciplines of biological sciences, physical sciences, or
mathematics. The college has pre-professional advisors who provide guidance
and assistance to students who wish to pursue plans of study that lead to
admission to professional schools. Another option for students enrolling in the

college of natural sciences is to pursue enrollment in the Lyman Briggs College,

35

a residential program, that provides academic courses, advisors, professors, and

operates as an independent unit within the college.

The Charles Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory

The Charles Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory is an academic assistance
and support program for undergraduate students in the College of Natural
Science. The program was created in an effort to provide ethnic minority
students the opportunity to perform successfully in the core science and
mathematics courses, and to increase the number of ethnic minority students
who complete degrees in the biological sciences, physical sciences, and
mathematics. The program also promotes the students” preparation for post-
graduate work and a future professional career in the sciences.

The program began in 1976 as part of the effort to increase diversity in the
College of Natural Science. In the beginning, the program was structured around
the precalculus and calculus courses. Today the program has expanded
academic support structure to include the core introductory chemistry, biology
courses, and a freshman seminar course. There is also a comprehensive
counseling and advising component integrated throughout the program. The
laboratory is grounded in the premise that working with the “total student”
maximizes the program’s ability to assist students with the development of a
sound academic foundation for success in studying science and mathematics.
The following goals have been established in supporting retention through this

program:

36

1) Guide and support students in making a successful transition from high
school to college;

2) Assist students with the development of sound student management skills
needed for the successful negotiation of the campus environment and overall
success within the academic system;

3) Assist students in gaining a solid foundation in the basic core disciplines of
mathematics, chemistry, biology, and physics, including the development of
critical thinking skills and abilities;

4) Provide a supportive environment for personal growth, including provisions for
intervention on behalf of students, if needed;

5) Support students as they matriculate through the university and help them
reach their goals in the academic and social environment of the university;

6) Guide and support students in preparing and gaining entry into postgraduate

programs, and provide help in identifying appropriate career paths.

The Design of the Study
The purpose of this study, as stated previously, was to investigate and
explore the achievements and graduation rates of gifted ethnic minority students
(African American, Native American, Hispanic, and Latino ethnic groups) who
had declared intent to study the sciences at a large research university. The
program that was evaluated was the Charles Drew Science Enrichment
Laboratory, in the College of Natural Science at Michigan State University. The

research explored institutional data that covered students who entered the

37

university between the academic years of 1993 to 1998. lnforrnation was
gathered from this population sample by selecting measurable variables
available in the institutional database. The ANOVA by class is included in the
index.

Students in the study were identified as Drew students by their enrollment in
the problem solving seminar class list (NSC 201 ), required of all participants in
the Drew science program. The study sought to determine if participation in the
laboratory had a positive relationship on students graduating from the university
'with a degree in the natural sciences. The purpose of this research was to study
a sample population (ethnic minority students) in comparison to a larger

population so that inferences can be made to the larger population in regards to

the characteristics, aptitude and behaviors (Astin, 1993).

The Population and Sample

The target population for the study was the ethnic minority student
populations who attended a large research university with the intent of pursuing a
degree in the sciences. The decision was made to target students who were
enrolled in the Charles Drew Science Enrichment laboratory at Michigan State
University, because of the sizable number of ethnic minority students enrolled in
the sciences who have participated in the Charles Drew Science enrichment
Laboratory. Approximately 348 Drew students were included in the study.
This sample population was selected because they all participated in a core

number of courses, which included mathematics, chemistry, biology, and

38

freshmen problem solving. In addition, all students participated in structured
study sessions during the freshmen and sophomore year. A random sample of
minority students who entered the university’s College of Natural Science, with
intent to study the sciences, from 1993 to 1998, but who did not participate in the
Drew program, approximately 1071, served as a control group from which the
data collected were compared. In addition, a random sample of majority (White)
students, approximately 941, with a major in the sciences was drawn to serve as
the second control group. This yielded a total sample population of 2360

students.

Data Collection

In this research project, data were collected from two sources, the university’s
Student Information System (SIS), and the attendance records of Drew program
directors or coordinators in mathematics, chemistry, and biology. Prior to
collecting the data, an application was submitted to the University Committee on
Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS). Approval was granted in the
summer of 2001. The SIS database included the following independent
variables: ethnicity; high school grade point average; standardized verbal;
mathematics, and science reasoning scores; the standardized comprehensive
score; the university’s predicted grade point average at the end of the student’s
first semester; the student’s achieved grade point average at the end of first
semester, the first semester grades in chemistry, math and biology; the

graduation data of science degrees awarded; graduation rates; and final GPA.

39

The following chart illustrates the variables used in the study.

 

 

 

Table 1. Table 2. Table 3.

Input Variables Intermediate Variables Output Variables
High school GPA Semester GPA Science degree
ACT verbal Chemistry Grade Non science degree
ACT math Math Grade Graduation rate
ACT science score Biology grade Final GPA

ACT comp score

Predicted GPA

Data Analysis

Use of institutional data drawn from cohorts of students who had sufficient
time to graduate from the university allowed for a longitudinal design. The
longitudinal study was determined to be the best way to study this group. The
investigator found that it was best to study retention efforts over a number of
years from entry point until exit point from the university, as well as type of
degree obtained. By virtue of her position at the university the author had access
to data and could form a profile of the Drew students over a period of time.

Statistical analyses were performed to test the hypotheses of this study using

the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and the Statistical
Analysis System (SAS). Cross Tabular analysis was used to generate
descriptive data from the 3 comparison groups and variables included in the

study. ANOVA (analysis of variances) was used to determine if the statistically

4O

significant differences occurred between the three groups. Pearson coefficients
correlation analysis was used to determine strength of relationship between Drew
input, intermediate, and outcome variables. For the purposes of correlation
analysis, each group was analyzed separately. To gain a sense of the overall
strength of the program’s relationship to the input variables, all cohort groups for
each year were combined into one sample. The cohort analysis by year is
included in the appendix.

This type of assessment can be addressed appropriately by using
longitudinal data. Astin (1993) asserts that longitudinal assessment can be used
to enhance the educational and research functions of colleges and universities
by promoting talent development among both students and faculty members.
Assessment can contribute to talent development among students through
examining the direct effects on the learners and indirectly by enlightening the
educator (Astin, p. 14). Most importantly assessment promotes talent
development when it informs the educator about the effectiveness of various
policies and practices. Astin’s conceptual model of assessment is that any
educational assessment model is incomplete unless it includes data on student
input, student environment, and student outcomes (the l-E-O Model). Astin
defined student input as pre- enrollment variables, student environment refers to
the students’ actual experiences during the educational process, and students”
outcomes refers to the types of talents we are trying to develop at our institution.
In this study, the input was measured in terms of students’ pre- enrollment

variables (see table 1). The students’ environment was measured by their

41

participation in the supplemental instruction sessions. The lnterrnediate
outcomes were also recommended by Astin as a means to evaluate intervention
programs. The intermediate outcomes were a part of the study (see table 2).
The students’ output will be measured in terms of their graduation rates and final
grades in the science and mathematics courses the first semester (see table 3).
The groups will be compared to a controlled group who has not had the
supplemental instruction. The comparative judgment is a decision to change
something, implying that the new environment is expected to produce a better
outcome than the current environment. When the decision is not to change
anything, the current environment is judged to be equal to or better than all

possible alternative environments (Astin, 1993).

Research Questions and Hypothesis
The overall research question for the study was to explore the
effectiveness of the Drew program in retaining minority students in the sciences
thereby mediating the effects of input or pre-collegiate variables that have been

shown to negatively affect achievement in the sciences.

Research Question 1: Are there differences between Drew, non Drew minority
students, and White students on the following input variables: high school GPA;
ACT verbal; ACT math; ACT science score; ACT comp score; and predicted

GPA?

42

There will be no differences between the Drew and non Drew input
Variables, but the input variables for Whites will be higher than Drew and

non Drew.

Research Question 2: Are there differences between Drew, non Drew, and White
students on the following intermediate variables: semester GPA; chemistry
grade; math grade; and biology grade?

There will be higher grades in chemistry, math, biology, and semester

GPA for Drew program participants than non Drew or Whites.

Research Question 3: Are there differences between Drew, non Drew, and White
students on the outcome variables; science degree; non science degree;
graduation rate; and final GPA?
There will a higher graduation rate in the sciences for Drew program
participants than non Drew and Whites, and they will achieve a higher

final GPA.

Research Question 4: How strongly correlated are the input measures of high
school GPA; ACT verbal; ACT math; ACT science score; ACT comp, and
predicted GPA to the intermediate measures of semester GPA?
There will be a lower correlation between predicted GPA and first
semester GPA for Drew program participants when compared to the other

groups.

43

Research Question 5: How strongly correlated are the intermediate variables of
semester GPA, chemistry grade, math grade, and biology grade to the outcome
variables?

There will be a strong correlation between the intermediate variables

and outcome variables for Drew program participants than the other

groups.

Research Question 6: How strongly correlated are the input variables of high
school GPA, ACT verbal, ACT math, ACT science score, ACT comp score and
predicted GPA to the output variables of receiving a science degree, receiving a
non science degree, graduating, and the final GPA for the Drew program
participants?

There will be a less strong correlation between the input variables to

the output for the Drew program participants than the other groups.

Advantages and Limitations
A database was constructed in Microsoft Access from queries of MSU’s
SIS INFO records. The SIS INFO database at the time queries were made (in
2001) contained records for all students who were enrolled at Michigan State
University as of summer term 1995. Identification of Drew students was based on
in house records of all students enrolled in NSC 201 between 1993 and 1998.

Hence, Drew students who enrolled in the fall of 1993 but left the university

44

before the summer of 1995 were included in this analysis. However, selection of
the control cohorts for the classes of 1993 and 1994 are presumably biased
towards the better students since SIS INFO, at the time of the initial queries, did
not include students who left Michigan State University before the summer of
1995. In addition, data on participation in study sessions is available only for the
Drew cohort. It is assumed that students from the control groups did not
participate in significant organized study sessions. Multiple regression
analyses were not used to compare the three cohorts over the six year
period but rather was used for comparisons of the three student groups for
each year studied. Although these problems weaken the statistical
significance of these findings, the data show a striking impact of the Drew
program students’ success in the sciences. This study was concerned with
one enrichment program at a particular institution and thus the findings can
not be generalized to all institutions of higher learning or all ethnic minority

students.

45

Chapter 4

Presentation of Findings and Analysis of Results

Results

The purpose of this research was to investigate and explore the
achievements and graduation rate of gifted ethnic minority students who have
declared the intent to study the sciences at a large research university. The
program evaluated was the Charles Drew Science Enrichment Laboratory, in the
College of Natural Sciences, at Michigan State University. The study focused on
ethnic minority students who entered the university beginning fall 1993 to fall
1998. The data were derived from 2360 students of which 348 participated in the
Drew program. The population under study consisted of 998 African Americans,
332 Hispanic/Latino, 89 Native Americans, and 941 whites; 836 of this group
were males and 1524 were females.

As referred to in Chapter 3, Astin’s assessment model is ideal for studying
the impact of educational intervention on minority students’ achievement in
mathematics and science (Astin, 1993). Attention can be focused on defining
and measuring outcomes that are relevant to the goals of the program. The
assessment of the program with this model can be used to improve current
educational practices as they relate to minority students enrolled at large
institutions who wish to pursue a degree in the sciences or mathematics.

Data between the three cohort groups were compared using analysis

included analysis of variances, cross tabulation and correlation. In this chapter,

46

results of the data analysis are presented, beginning with descriptive findings
related to the research hypothesis. The 6 questions and hypothesis stated

below were listed in the study.

Study Variables

Results from analysis of variances of each of the variables that were
measured in the research study are presented below. A concise description of
the measured values of the research is presented in the following tables. The
Drew and non Drew students had significantly lower input variables than the
White cohort. The Drew cohort input variables were slightly higher than non
Drew.

Table 1 compares the combined input variables for Drew and non Drew
minority students in the cohort that matriculated at Michigan State University
between the fall of 1993 to fall 1998. Analysis of variance showed that there
were statistically significant differences (p<. 01) between Drew students and a
random sample of non Drew minority students in their high school GPA, ACT
Verbal score, ACT math, ACT combined scores, and predicted GPA. However
there was no significant difference between their science scores. This would
indicate that students had an equal background in their knowledge of scientific
concepts. The Drew students’ scores on the input variables were only slightly
higher, though statistically significant than the Non Drew cohort, except for the
predicted GPA, which was significantly higher.

Table 2 compares the combined input variables for Drew and White students

47

Table 1.

Drew Versus non Drew Input Variables

 

 

 

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew

N=348 N=1071

Mean Mean F Sig.
High school GPA 3.28 3.08 42.631 .000
ACT verbal 20.90 19.72 14.316 .000
ACT math 20.79 19.88 10.384 .001
ACT science score 21.22 20.69 3.494 .062
ACT comp score 21.34 20.47 10.404 .001
Predicted GPA 2.47 2.35 19.685 .001

Table 2.
Drew Versus Whites Input Variables

Variables Drew White

N=348 N=941

Mean Mean F Sig.
High school GPA 3.28 3.58 187.844 .000
ACT verbal 20.90 24.26 156.088 .000
ACT math 20.79 24.89 250.943 .000
ACT science score 21.22 25.47 334.649 .000
ACT comp score I 21.34 25.23 324.514 .000
Predicted GPA 2.47 2.85 156.088 .000

 

in the cohort that matriculated at Michigan State University in the fall of 1993 to
fall 1998. The table illustrates that the White cohort achieved much higher
scores on all the input variables, thus leading to a higher predicted GPA than the
Drew cohort. The F values observed that the mean scores were equal for high
school GPA, ACT verbal, and predicted GPA. Analysis of variances showed that
there were significant differences (p<. 01) between Drew students and a random
sample of White students in high school GPA, ACT verbal, ACT math, ACT
science reasoning score, ACT comp and predicted GPA.

Table 3.

Drew versus Non Drew Intermediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew

N=348 N=1071

Mean Mean F Sig
Semester GPA 2.65 2.20 62.796 .000
Chemistry grade 2.36 2.28 .421 .517
Math grade 2.56 2.01 38.280 .000
Biology grade 2.55 1.89 19.254 .000

 

Table 3 summarizes the combined intermediate variables for Drew and non
Drew minority students in the cohort that matriculated at Michigan State
University in the fall of 1993 to fall 1998. Analysis of variance showed that there
were statistical significant differences (p<. 01) between Drew students and a
random sample of non Drew minority students in the achieved GPA, math grade,

and biology grade. However, there were no significant differences between the

49

chemistry grades. The table illustrates that the means for the Drew cohort were
much higher for semester GPA, math grade, and the Biology than the non Drew
cohort. The F value 12.285 would indicate that there are equal means for the
chemistry but unequal means for the math and biology grades.

Table 4.

Drew versus Whites Intermediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Whites

N=348 N=941

Mean Mean F Sig.
Semester GPA 2.65 2.97 12.385 .000
Chemistry grade 2.36 2.97 22.028 .000
Math grade 2.56 2.50 .449 .503
Biology Grade 2.55 2.81 4.110 .043

 

Table 4 summarized the combined intermediate variables for Drew and White
students in the cohort that matriculated at Michigan State University in the fall of
1993 to fall 1998. Analysis of variances showed that there were statistical
significant differences (p < .01) between Drew students and a random sample of
White students in their semester GPA, and chemistry grade. However, there
were no significant differences between their math grade and their biology grade.
The Drew cohort semester GPA was lower than that for the White cohort, but the
F value (12.385) indicates that more of the means were unequal. This table
illustrates that the Drew cohort outperformed the White cohort on the mean math

grade. The biology grade was lower for the Drew cohort when compared to the

50

Whites students but the F value indicates that there were more matches on the
means and the differences were not statistically significant.
Table 5.

Drew Versus Non Drew Output Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew

N=348 N=1071

Mean Mean F Sig.
Science degree 48% 31% 10.145 .002
Graduation rate 40% 42% 28.780 .000
Final GPA 2.91 2.86 .899 .344

 

Table 5 depicts the combined output variables for the Drew and non Drew
minority students in the cohort that matriculated at Michigan State in the fall of
1993 to fall 1998. The data demonstrated that the Drew students received a
higher percentage of science degrees as compared to a random sample of non
Drew minority students. However, the non Drew students achieved a higher
graduation rate than the Drew students. Analysis of variance showed that there
was no statistical difference in the final GPAs of the group. ANOVAs were not
performed on the non science variable because it is essentially opposite the
science degree variable making the ANOVA unnecessary. The final GPA mean
was close for the two groups, although the Drew cohort achieved a slightly higher
GPA.

Table 6 depicts the combined output variables for Drew and White students in

the cohort that matriculated at Michigan State University in the fall of 1993 to fall

51

Table 6.

Drew Versus Whites Output Variable

 

 

Variable Drew Whites

N=348 N=941

Mean Mean F Sig.
Science degree 48% 52% 1.517 .219
Graduation rate 40% 51% .637 .425
Final GPA 2.91 3.28 48.457 .000

 

1998. The data demonstrated that the Drew students received a lower
percentage of science degrees as compared to a random sample of White
students, as well as a lower graduation rate. Analysis of variances showed that
there were statistical differences (p< .01) between the final GPAs, which were
higher for the White cohort. The graduation rate of 40 percent is significantly
below the white cohort at 51 percent. The percent of science degrees granted
for both groups was similar but slightly higher for Whites.

Table 7 depicts the correlation analysis between the semester GPA and the
input, intermediate, and output variables for Drew, non Drew and Whites. The
ACT verbal input variable had the weaker correlation to the achieved GPA for
the Drew cohort (.186). All input variables were weaker correlated to the Drew
versus non Drew and White controlled groups. The high school GPA correlation
for Drew is .317, for non Drew it is .394, for White it is .495.

The ACT math correlation is .282 for Drew, .365 for non Drew, and, 355 for

White. The ACT science is correlated at .220 for Drew, .365 for non Drew, and

52

Table 7.

Correlation of input Variables and Semester GPA

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew White All combined
N=348 N=1071 N=941 N=2360
Pearson Product- Moment Coefficients
High school GPA .317“ .394“ .495" .500"
ACT verbal .186“ .339“ .307“ .407**
ACT math .282" .365“ .355” .448“
ACT science score .220” .365“ .260“ .413"
ACT comp score .268". .393“ .351“ .460“
Predicted GPA .423“ .450** .468" .531**

 

** Correlation is significant at p< .01

.260 for Whites. The ACT comp is correlated for Drew at .268, for non Drew at
.393, for Whites at .351. The predicted GPA correlation to Drew is .423, for non
Drew .450, and for Whites at .468.

Table 8 shows the correlation analysis between science degrees awarded
and the input, intermediate, and output variables. The ACT verbal scores have
the weaker relation to achieving the science degree for the Drew cohort (.001).
Higher correlations were found with the non Drew (.232), and the White cohort
(.203). All correlations for the input and intermediate variables were lower for
Drew than the other cohorts, with the exception of the biology grade, which is
strongly correlated for the Drew than non Drew, but lower than Whites. The high

school GPA is correlated at .178 for Drew, .342 for non Drew, and .306 for

53

Table 8.

Correlation of Variables and Science Degree

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew White All combined
N=348 N=1071 N=941 N=2360
Pearson Product Moment Coefficients
High School GPA .178** .342“ .306** .342“
ACT verbal .001 .232“ .203“ .244“
ACT math .161 .331 ** .297“ .‘336**
ACT science Score .209* .310“ .273“ .319“
ACT comp score .108 .301 ** .298“ .321“
Predicted GPA .171 .320“ .229“ 309"”Ir
Semester GPA .280“ .296“ .308“ .330"
Chemistry grade .157 .161 .381 ** .278**
Math grade .254" .285“ .202“ .265“
Biology grade .329“ .299“ .550“ .389“

 

*"' Correlation is significant at < .01

Whites. The ACT math is correlated for Drew at .161, for non Drew the

correlation is .331, for Whites the correlation is.297. The ACT science for Drew

is correlated at .209, for non Drew at .310, for Whites at .273. The ACT comp is

correlated for Drew at .108, for non Drew .310, and for Whites at .321. The

predicted GPA is correlated for Drew at .171, for non Drew at .320, and for
Table 9.

Correlation of Variables and Final GPA

 

54

 

Variable Drew Non Drew White All combined
N=348 N=1071 N=941 N=2360
' Pearson coefficients
High school GPA .448“ .463" .406" .530“
ACT verbal .218* .519“ .326“ .491 **
ACT math .170 .481 ** .304“ .472“
ACT science score .119 .464" .276“ .458**
ACT comp score .195* .530“ .353“ .519**
Predicted GPA .343“ .556“ .351“ .542“
Semester GPA .454“ .590“ .526“ .578“
Chemistry grade .420“ .532“ .436" .483“
Math grade .306“ .418“ .395" .403**
Biology grade .532“ .572** .654“ .581 **

 

“Correlation is significant at < .01

Whites at .229. The correlation for semester GPA is .280 for Drew, .296 for non
Drew and .308 for Whites. The correlation for the chemistry grade is .157 for
Drew, .161 for non Drew and .381 for Whites. The correlation for the math grade
is .254 for Drew, .285 for non Drew and .202 for Whites. The correlation for the
biology grade is .329 for Drew, .299 for non Drew, and, 550 for Whites.

Table 9 shows the correlation analysis between the final GPAs and the
input and intermediate variables. All the variables, with the exception of the high
school GPAs were weaker correlated to the final GPAs than the other cohorts.

The final GPAs were less strongly correlated for the White cohort, than the Drew

55

and the non Drew cohorts. The ACT math scores for the Drew cohort, ACT
comp scores, and the ACT science scores demonstrated that the correlation is
not significant. The ACT comp scores for the non Drew cohort were correlated at
.530, the ACT math scores at .481, and the ACT science scores at .464. The
ACT math scores for the White cohort correlated at .304, the ACT comps were
correlated at .353, and for the ACT science scores at .276. The ACT verbal
scores were strongly correlated for the non Drew, than the Drew or White cohort.
The predicted GPAs were correlated for Drew at .343, for non Drew at .556,and
for the White cohort at .351. The semester GPAs were correlated for Drew at
.454, for non Drew at .590, for Whites at .526.‘ The chemistry grades were
correlated at .420, for non Drew at .532, and for Whites at .436. The math
grades were correlated for Drew at .306, for non Drew at .418, and for Whites at
.395. The biology grades correlated for Drew at .532, for non Drew at .572, and

for Whites at .654.

Summary of Results
A summary of the analysis concludes the results section and is organized by
research question for reinforcement.
Research Question #1: Input variables
Are there differences between Drew, non Drew minority students,
and White students on the following input variables: high school
GPA; ACT verbal; ACT math; ACT science score; ACT comp score;

and predicted GPA?

56

The statistical analysis showed differences between the input variables of the
Drew, non Drew, and the Whites cohorts. Overall, the Drew students had a high
school GPA and ACT scores that were significantly below White students, but
higher than the non Drew cohort. But their high school grades would indicate
that they did experience success in high school. For example, the high school
GPA for Drew was a 3.28 compared to 3.58 for Whites and the ACT math scores
for Drew were 20.79 compared to 24.89 for Whites. Based on these input
variables the White cohort was predicted to have a significantly higher semester
GPA than the Drew or non Drew minority students. These input variables are
thought to be good predictors of student success in the university curriculum.
Furthermore, since the Drew and non Drew cohorts had similar input variables,
(although Drew was slightly higher), it would be logical to predict that these two
groups will have similar levels of success at the university.

Research Question #2: Intermediate Variables

 

Are there differences between Drew, non Drew, and White students
on the following intermediate variables: semester GPA, chemistry
grade; math grade; and biology grade?
The analysis of variances showed significant differences in the intermediate
variables between the cohorts. The Drew students outperformed the non Drew
students on all the intermediate variables measures, except for the chemistry
grades, which showed no significant differences.
For example, the semester GPA of the Drew cohort was significantly

higher than the predicted GPA. The non Drew semester GPA was actually lower

57

'—

than predicted. The differences between these two groups would imply that the
experience of the Drew program resulted in higher grades. Obviously, both
groups’ predicted GPAs indicate that they would need some assistance at the
university. When compared to the Whites, Drew outperformed them only in
math grades. The intervention of the math component of the program
presumably was responsible for higher grades. The Whites cohort, however
outperformed the Draw students on the other intermediate variables. The
semester GPAs for Whites were almost exactly as the predicted GPA, indicating
that the university’s predictors of success were accurate for these students.
However, the semester GPA for the minority cohort was much lower than
predicted for the non Drew cohort. This would suggest that the university’s’
factors for predicting the semester GPA were not accurate for these students.
Considering the disparities in the input variables between the two groups, the
Drew students performed well both in relations to the minority students and the
majority students.
Research Question #3: Outcome Variables

Are there differences between Drew, non Drew, and White students

on the outcome variables: science degree; non science degree;

graduation rate; and final GPA?
The analysis of variances showed differences between the three cohorts and the
output variables. The Drew students received a higher percentage of degrees in
the sciences relative to the non Drew cohort (48 percent of the Drew received a

science degree as compared to 31 percent of the non Drew). However, the non

58

Drew overall graduation rate was slightly higher (42 percent as compared to
Drew at 40 percent). The Drew cohort received a slightly higher final GPA upon
graduation than the non Drew cohort. The Drew to White comparison on the
output variables would indicate that Drew students were closer to Whites in
degrees awarded in the sciences. The Drew students had a 48 percent rate of
receiving a degree in the sciences, whereas, the White cohort received a science
degree at a rate of 51 percent. In addition the White cohort earned slightly higher
GPAs than the Drew cohort upon graduation. However, given the disparities
between the input variables, one would expect greater differences between the
output variables of the White cohort when compared to the two minority cohorts.
Research Question # 4: Input variables, Intermediate variables and

Semester GPA

 

How strongly correlated are the input measures high school GPA;

ACT verbal; ACT math; ACT science score; ACT comp score and

predicted GPA to the intermediate measures of semester GPA?
The Correlations Pearson Product Moments Coefficients provided quantitative
indicators for the relationship between the input measures to the semester GPA.
The input variables indicated a weaker relationship to the semester GPA for the
Drew cohort than the non Drew or the White cohorts. This supports the
hypothesis that the program mediated the input variables for Drew allowing Drew
students to achieve a significantly higher GPA than predicted. For example the
comparison of the Drew high school GPA to semester GPA was .317, for the non

Drew the comparison was .394, and .495 for Whites. Drew had a weak

59

comparison between the high school GPA and the semester grade, however for
the Whites the comparison was strong. The non Drew high school GPA had a
weak comparison to the semester GPA than Whites, however on the other input
variables, the non Drew has a strong comparison to the semester GPA than
Drew or Whites. This finding were significant in that it supports the hypothesis
that the input variables compared to the semester GPA can be mediated through
intervention.

Research Question #5 lnterrnediate Variables to Outcome Variables

 

How strongly correlated are the intermediate variables of semester

GPA, chemistry grade, math grade, and biology grade to the

outcome variables?
The intermediate variables of semester GPA and chemistry grade were a weaker
comparison to the outcome variable of receiving a degree for Drew students than
the other cohorts. However, the non Drew and Whites intermediate variables
had a strong comparison to receiving the science degree. For example the
predicted GPA correlated for Drew was .171, for non Drew the correlation was
.320, and for Whites the correlation was .229. These results indicated that non-
program participants did not experience success in the introductory courses,
however many of them did not remain in the sciences. The comparison of Drew
with non Drew students indicates that for minorities, in particular, success in the
beginning courses was a factor for them persisting toward the science degree.
Success in the math courses was a strong indicator of success for minority

students.

60

Research Question # 6 Inpyt variables to Outcome Variables
How strongly correlated are the input variables of high school GPA,
ACT verbal, ACT math, ACT science score, ACT comp score and
predicted GPA to the output variables of receiving 'a science degree,
receiving a non science degree, graduating, and the final GPA for the
Drew program participants?
The input variables of high school GPA, ACT verbal, ACT math, ACT science
score, ACT comp score, and predicted GPA were weakly compared to the
outcome variable of receiving a science degree for Drew. The high school GPA
was compared weakly for Drew at .178, and strongly for non Drew at .342, and
for Whites at .306. For the Drew cohort the program mediated the input
variables, suggesting that minority students can progress toward a degree in the
sciences, but intervention constitutes a major factor for success. The data also
indicate that White students’ input variables as well, are strongly compared to
their success in receiving a degree in the sciences. This may have implications
for the way teaching is managed in the introductory courses on the university

campus for all students at the undergraduate level.

61

Chapter 5

Discussion

This study investigated and explored the achievements and graduation
rates of gifted ethnic minority students (African American, Native American,
Hispanic and Latino ethnic groups) who have declared intent to study the
sciences at a large research university. The study focused on ethnic minority
students who entered the university beginning fall 1993 to fall 1998. Using a
sample of 2360 students, of which 998 were African Americans, 332 were
Hispanic/Latino, 89 were Native Americans, and 941 were White. The sample
were comprised of 836 males and 1524 females. There were 348 Drew students
used in the study. Six research questions were explored. Data analyses
included analysis of variances and correlation analysis. The input variables used
in the study were high school GPA, ACT verbal scores, ACT math scores, ACT
science reasoning score, comprehensive score, and the predicted GPA of the
first semester assigned by the university. The intermediate variables used were
the students’ achieved GPA from the first semester, chemistry grades, the math
grades, and the biology grades. The output variables used were the percent of
science degrees received and the final GPA upon graduation. The students who
participated in the program (Drew) were compared to a random sample of ethnic
minority students who declared a science major and did not participate in the
program (non Drew). The students who participated in the program were then

compared to a random sample of White students who were enrolled in the

62

College of Natural Science.

The program evaluated was the Charles Drew Science Enrichment
Program, College of Natural Science, at Michigan State University. The
program is a student assistance and academic support program that was created
in an effort to provide ethnic minority students the opportunity to perform
successfully in the core sciences and mathematics courses, and to increase the
number of ethnic minority students who complete degrees in the biological
sciences, physical sciences and mathematics. The program also promotes
student preparation for post-graduate work and professional careers in the
sciences.

The program has academic support structure such as supplemental
instruction, mandatory concept review and attendance requirements in
mathematics courses, chemistry courses, biology courses, and the freshmen
seminar course. There is also a comprehensive counseling and advising
component integrated throughout the program. The laboratory is grounded in the
premise that working with the “total student” maximizes the program’s ability to
assist the students with development of a sound academic foundation for

success in studying sciences and mathematics.

Discussion of Results
The discussion of the results of the study was organized around the six
research questions. The results of this study were principally derived with the

assistance of data analysis through analysis of variances and correlation.

63

The conclusions were based on statistical analysis.

The discussion addresses the relationship between degrees granted in the
sciences and the student participation in the program. This will be followed by
the discussion of the relationship between the predicted GPA at the end of first
semester and the student’s participation in the program. The relationship of
grades in chemistry, math, and biology and student participation in the program
will be discussed. The chapter will further explore implications for theory and
provide recommendations for practice as it relates to students in higher

education and participants in the Drew program.

Relationship between Degrees Granted in Science and Student Participation

The Drew program has been in existence for over twenty years at
Michigan State University. The directors of mathematics and biology complete
statistical evaluation of the intermediate variables for each semester, however
this is the first study that has studied the input, intermediate, and output variables
as they relate to the graduation data for five cohorts of students Drew who
entered from 1993 to 1997 and graduated by 2001. The study further validates
the program’s effectiveness by comparing the minority students who participated
in the program to minority students who did not participate in the program and to
the White students in the College of Natural Science.

The analysis of the data supported the hypothesis that program
participation is associated with a higher frequency of degrees granted in the

sciences to minority students at a large predominately White research institution.

64

Review of the data suggests that the program is graduating ethnic minorities
students at higher rates than occurs in the minority student science population
that did not participate in the Drew program. Forty-eight percent of the Drew
participants received a degree in the sciences compared to 31 percent of the non
Drew minority cohort. This is a significant finding in that the results indicate that
the program is graduating 17 percent more minorities with a science degree.
The Drew graduates are closer to the White cohort graduation rate of 52 percent.
This suggests that the Drew program participants experienced success in a
learning environment that supported them academically.

The comparison of input variables with the science degree further
indicates that ACT scores and high school GPA were less of a factor for the
Drew participants as it related to them receiving a degree in the sciences. The
predicted GPA suggested a weaker relationship to the graduation rate for the
Drew cohort than the non Drew cohort. The correlation analysis is the strongest
statistical proof that the program works for the participants. The Drew program
was able to mediate all of the input variables for these ethnic minority students.
For non Drew participants the input variables were strongly related to this group
receiving a degree in the sciences, more so than the White cohort. This supports
the theory that participation in the Drew program intervened with pre-collegiate
measures that are conventionally considered to inhibit achievement in college
such as lower ACT scores and high school GPA.

The comparison to the intermediate variables to receiving the science

degree indicates that the first semester GPA had a strong relationship for the non

65

Drew and Whites than for the Drew. The first semester math grade for the White
cohort did not have a relationship to these students receiving a degree in the
sciences. The math grade was a weaker relationship to receiving a science
degree for the Drew (.254), than non Drew (.285), but White cohort (.202) had an
even weaker relationship than the Drew cohort. The first semester grades of
chemistry and biology had a weaker relationship to the Drew and non Drew
receiving a science degree. The chemistry grade had a weaker relationship for
Drew (.157) and non Drew (.161), but stronger than Whites (.381). The biology
grade was a weaker relationship for non Drew (.299) than the Drew cohort (.329).
The White cohort (.550) correlated to the biology grade stronger than the other
two cohorts. The stronger relationship for the non Drew (.285) in the math grade
to receiving a science degree indicates that for these students math was the
course that may have caused these students to change from a science major.
One factor that may explain why first semester grades were not a deterrent for
ethnic minority students is that Michigan State University has a repeat credit
policy that allows students to take a course again if they receive less than a 2.0
in the course. Drew students were advised to repeat the science or math course,
if they received less than a 2.0 in the course the preceding semester, particularly,
if they wish to receive a degree in the sciences. This study supports Seymour
and Hewitt’s (1994) findings that students who experience success in the
gateway courses will remain in the sciences. The presence of a minority advisor
and minority role models in the Drew courses of mathematics, biology, chemistry,

and the freshmen seminar contributed to the students remaining in the sciences

66

(Seymour and Hewitt, 1994). The Drew program created a supportive climate,
provided academic tutoring, support, and encouraged all of the students to

become involved in campus life.

Relationship between First Semester grades, Predicted Versus Achieved
GPA at the End of the First semester and Student Participation

The findings from this study support the hypothesis that the semester GPA
will be higher than the predicted GPA for the Drew program participants. The
intermediate variables of achieved versus predicted GPA found that Drew
students consistently outperformed their predicted GPA. However, for the non
Drew cohort, the findings were that they consistently scored lower than their
predicted GPA at the end of the first semester at the university. The analysis of
variances indicated that there were statistical differences between Drew
and non Drew predicted versus achieved GPAs for all the years 93 to 98, but no
statistical differences when Drew students are compared to the White students.
The test of significance for White students indicated that there were no statistical
differences between their predicted and achieved GPA after the end of the first
semester at the institution.

The correlation analysis further supported the hypothesis. There were
stronger relationships between the non Drew participants and White cohorts’
predicted and achieved GPA, although the non Drew cohort achieved a much
lower GPA than expected. This finding is important in that it indicates that the

lack of intervention for ethnic minority students can lead to poor academic

67

performance.

The input variables used to predict college performance the first semester for
Drew students were weakly related to the Drew students’ performance. This
supports the theory that intervention by the program mediated the prediction of
low performance for the Drew cohort. For a point of comparison, when looking at
the non Drew cohort, the students performed even lower than the first semester
prediction. This supports the theory that ethnic minority students on large
research campuses need intervention to overcome input variables in order to
achieve a degree in the sciences.

The higher score for the Drew cohort may be due to the more rigid structure
of the program that addresses the “total” student. This rigid structure stresses
mandatory and consistent attendance in classes, concept review, study sessions,
and the comprehensive advising component that is integrated throughout the
program. The program is grounded in the premise that working with the “total”
student maximizes the program’s ability to assist students with the development
of a sound academic foundation for success in studying the sciences and
mathematics. Drew students were supported in making the transition from high
school to college. Drew students were also assisted with management skills that
are needed for successful negotiation of the campus environment and overall
success within the academic system. The students were supported as they
progressed through the university to help them reach their goals in the academic
and social environment of the university. The program provided a supportive

environment for personal growth, including intervention on behalf of the student.

68

Students were further assisted in the development of their critical thinking skills.
Therefore, the first semester grades and the input variables for the Drew

students were deemed less relevant and had a weak correlation.

Relationship of Grades in Chemistry, Mathematics, and Biology
and Student Participatidn
After a review of the combined cohort data for the intermediate variables
for the Drew students, the data analysis supported and contradicted the
relationship between participation in the program and obtaining higher grades in
mathematics, biology and chemistry for the Drew cohort. The Drew students
achieved a higher grade in mathematics, Biology, and Chemistry than non Drew.
There were statistical differences between the math and biology grades.
However, there were statistical differences between the chemistry grades of the
three cohorts of students. Although the Drew cohort did achieve a level of
success in passing the course, they were not comparable to the White cohort.
The math grade achieved by the Drew students indicated that they outperformed
the White cohort, although statistically there was no difference between the
grades of the two groups. There was no statistical difference between the Drew
and Whites grades in biology as well, although, the biology grades of the Drew
students were lower than the White cohort. The Drew students achieved a 2.55
GPA as compared to the White cohort that achieved a GPA of 2.81.
The correlation of the variables further clarified the relationship of the Drew

program to grades received in math, chemistry, and biology. The data suggest

69

that program participants were more likely to receive higher grades in these core
science courses, which enabled them to persist toward a degree. The correlation
of semester grades and final GPA had a weaker relationship for the Drew
students than the other cohorts. This indicates that having a high GPA the first
semester was not a good predictor for having a high final GPA.

The data demonstrate consistently higher scores in mathematics and biology
for the Drew participants when compared to the non Drew cohort. This is due in
large part to the way these courses are structured. The mathematics and biology
Drew components have “Directors”, whose sole responsibility is to build, develop,
and implement the mathematics and biology instruction for students in the
program. They have terminal degrees in these disciplines and are involved in
their respective disciplines on a professional level. Therefore, they also serve as
minority scientific role models. The chemistry Drew component does not have a
director. The program is assigned graduate teaching assistants by the chemistry
department on a year to year basis. While the chemistry study sessions are
mandatory, they do not receive the same attention as the mathematics and
biology courses. Although the Drew students performed well, the scores for
Drew were lower than non Drew in the years 1993, 1994, and 1996 (see

appendix A).

Summary of Findings

The relationship of the analysis of variances (ANOVA) and correlation

analysis of the input and intermediate variables demonstrated that the Drew

70

program was able to provide intervention that led to higher performance for the
participants. It appears that participation in the program led to higher retention
rates for the Drew students which led to higher percentages of them receiving
degrees in the sciences. The Drew students graduated with a higher grade point
average as well. Participation in the Drew program totally eliminates the
predictive ability of the ACT scores and high school GPA. The Drew students’
successes were not statistically related to the intermediate and input variables.

The results of the current study indicates that the Drew program
participants performed much better academically than the non Drew minority
cohort, and in the case of math, higher than the White cohort. This supports the
hypothesis that the Drew program had a significant impact on science degrees
awarded to ethnic minority students in the sciences at a large research
university.

This study supports the fact that ethnic minority students who do make it
though the pipeline to our universities require intervention programs that can
insure that they remain at the university long enough to receive a science

degree.

Implications for Theory Development
Tinto (1993) theorized that having students participate in a collaborative
group enables them to develop a small supportive community of peers that bind
them to a broader social community of the college, as well as engaging them

more fully in the academic life of the institution. This is born out by this study.

71

The collaborative learning environment created by the Drew program supported
the students in and out of the classroom. These collaborative Ieaming settings
allowed these students to bridge their academic and social lives, which may not
always be possible for gifted minority students on a large campus.

Overall, findings from this study strongly support Tinto’s (1993) theory.
His research found that student involvement was correlated to student
attainment. The Drew Program altered the institutional setting for these gifted
minority students by focusing on constructing an educational setting where all

students were involved and responsible for the education process.

Recommendation for Practice

A significant finding of this study is that minority students came to a large
research university with high GPAs from high school and a lot of pride but lower
entrance test scores (ACT) than Whites. Universities must recognize this and
implement support structures that will equalize these students’ experiences.
Incoming students and their families need to be made aware, early in the
process, what the institution, faculty and staff expects of them. This may take the
form of extensive orientation for the parents and the students to inform them of
the academic rigors of the university. Parents need to be encouraged to support
their students when they experience self-doubt, and to advise them to take
advantage of the academic resources available to them. Parents should also
discourage extensive and/or too frequent weekend visits from their students.

Weekends are critical study times for college students, particularly students

72

in the sciences.

Students need to learn how to study consistently and form good study
habits, as well as time management skills. Many gifted minority students arrive
on the university campus with poor study habits. Many of them had good
reputations in high school as “smart" students and were given the benefit of the
doubt in producing quality work by well meaning teachers. This was a bad habit
that was detrimental to their success for some of them. Time management is a
challenge for these students as their parents and the school previously had
planned their time. Many of these students were at a lost as to how to effectively
use the hours in the day when they were not in class. Institutions of higher
learning must recognize that gifted minority students need guidance in
developing these skills.

Students need to be motivated when the subject matter becomes
challenging. This may be the first time they experience doubt about their
academic ability. Minority role models and advisors are critical at this point.
They can serve as mentors and motivators. Students need to be reminded that
this is not the time to give up. They need to be encouraged to seek additional
tutoring, if needed and to spend more time with the subject matter, much more
than they did in high school. Students must be reminded of their dream to
become a scientist, but it will come at a great sacrifice of study time and
persistence.

Building the student's self esteem is critical to adjustment to the

university’s’ environment and expectations. A retention program based on a

73

community of support can provide educationally disadvantaged students with the
tools they need in order to be successful in the sciences at a large research
institution.

Recommendations for practice are to focused on factors that affect the
progress of gifted minority students at a research institution. Continued
examination of their perception of the environment is warranted as retention
issues are discussed. There needs to be continued evaluation on the quality of
assistance given to minority students. Many universities offer support programs
to some degree for all students, but these programs’ effectiveness for the
retention of ethnic minority students needs to be examined.

There are many factors that lead to success for these students that go
beyond academics, including the presence of mentors, supportive parents, or
academic peer groups. A recommendation for practice is to continue to identify
key factors that lead to success in the sciences. Other factors that affect the
progression of minority students need to be examined as well.

Socio— economic status can affect a student’s progression at a university.
The money available through financial support programs for students is at an all
time low. Many minority students form lower socio-economics backgrounds are
awarded work-study and loans to complete their financial aid packages.
Therefore, these students are working more hours a week and this lessens the
time that they have to study their science and math courses. How does this
impact their grades and retention rate at the university?

The perception of family support is a factor. Many students feel

74

that they need to continue to be actively involved and take care of the problems
at home. This may be in the form of financial assistance or moral support.
Research needs to be done to determine how these factors affect the
progression of ethnic minority students in higher education. Counseling will
become an integral part of the program to help students deal with guilt for
“abandoning” the family.

Identifying and clarifying factors associated with the progression of gifted
minority students in the sciences at a large research institution is worthwhile to
consider for future research. The data herein also illustrate that the progression
for White students in the sciences is dismally low. A 50 percent graduation rate
warrants a closer look at White students’ experiences as well in the sciences at a
large research university.

Finally, a recommendation for program directors, deans, and researchers
is that on a regular basis a study of longitudinal, cohort analysis, and periodically
combine cohort needs to be done to establish the effectiveness of the program,
as well as Multiple Regression Analysis. This will speak to what, if any, changes
need to be made as it addresses strengthening the academic requirements of the
program.

Implications for Practice for the Drew Program

The implication for practice that supports collaborative Ieaming
environments, as well as the need for a pre-college level program where minority
students are trained to be problem solvers and independent thinkers, who are

capable of solving and guiding their academic progress toward graduation. The

75

analysis of the input variables is evidence of this as it is correlated to science
degrees received.

The Drew participants’ performance in the introductory chemistry courses
should be a matter of concern, because the science curriculum requires two
years of (chemistry. Many minority students at the university may find the large
chemistry lectures a challenge. If students experience success in the first year of
chemistry they will progress on to the second year. Another factor for the Drew
program is that teaching assistants are assigned on a year-by-year basis. There
is no consistency for the students or the program. Training for the teaching
assistants is done through the chemistry department. Training needs to be
consistence with the training of the teaching assistants in math and biology. that
have program directors. Improved performance in chemistry may lead to a
higher graduation rate in the sciences for program participants. The program
might consider having a director in chemistry so that performances in biology and
math can be duplicated in chemistry as well.

Provision needs to be made to integrate the Drew students. experience into
the mainstream university. The Program directors are isolated from the
academic departments and this has lead to students being caught in the middle
of disagreements, between Drew directors and university program advisors in the
college. Oftentimes students will receive conflicting advice about which course to
take and are left confused as to what to do. Many advisors and faculty feel that a
support program for minorities separating the minority students from the larger

population and gives them preferential treatment and thus have adversarial

76

feelings toward the program. This can be remedied if the message comes from
the Dean’s office that this program is an integral part of the college and begin to
education chairs and faculty in the College of Natural Science about the benefits
of having such a program that will leads to higher numbers of minorities
graduating. Further, the program is person dependent, and this can be
detrimental to the effectiveness of the program if one of the directors decides to
leave.

This study confirms the literature and the theory about minority students’
retention in the sciences thus far. This study contributes to the current literature
that demonstrates lower entrance scores and performance in high school does
not have to inhibit success in college. This study further confirms that ACT
scores and predicted GPAs should not be used as criteria for admission if
minority students have academic support like the Drew program. The academic
support that the Drew Program offers is a Ieaming culture where expectations of
academic success are high and every student’s career goal is taken seriously.
Students in the program have shared experiences of values and behaviors and
they hold each other accountable for their academic progress. Students will
report the lack of attendance or loss of faith of a fellow Drew peer to the director
or advisors. Study sessions are often held on the weekend so that students are
discouraged from going home. The advising component of the program consists
of mandatory counseling sessions for each student throughout the freshmen
year. Intervention is done as needed by the advisor as needed in the from of

coaching or mentoring. The freshmen seminar course is taught both fall and

77

spring semester. This course consists of freshmen survival skills, introduction to
university resources and key personnel. But most importantly the course
introduces the students to the history of science participation for ethnic minorities
and what is means to be a culturally competent scientist. The students are
introduced to this concept through reading the book “Bad Blood, The Tuskegee
Syphilis Experiment” by James H. Jones. The findings from the non Drew cohort
confirm the relationship between the input variables and performances and the
lack of support. This has major policy implications for Michigan State University
and nationally.

Recommendations for future research of the program should be focused
on the cultural component of the program that leads to a sense of community for
the program participants. This can also be compared to the minority students
who did not participate in the program. Research needs to be done that will
address program participants’ experiences at the university during the third and
fourth year. We may find that intervention in the upper level courses is
warranted. This may lead to a higher graduation GPA and entry into medical or
professional school for these students. An alumni data base needs to be created
to track where the graduates go upon receiving a science degree. Further study
is needed to determine why Drew participants leave the university if they do not
receive a degree in the sciences.

Summary
A study of this type can be a tool to begin conversations on college and

universities campuses on how to address the disparity in the educational process

78

for minority students. It is evident from this study that the problem exists early in
the pipeline. Outreach programs are urgently needed in the public schools that
are predominately minority school systems. These schools must better prepare
minority students to attend large universities that have rigorous curriculum and
high expectations for achievement. Mechanisms must be put in place to address
inequities before these students reach the college campus. There needs to be a
recognition on the part of the faculty in the sciences and mathematics that some
minority students may not have the necessary science and math background
required to be successful in their courses, but with mentoring and an academic
and moral support structure, they can succeed. It is hoped that this study will
initiate discussions and conversations on college campuses on how to implement
programs or Ieaming communities that will lead to graduation of more ethnic
minority students with degrees in the sciences who are prepared for professional

schools or postgraduate programs.

79

REFERENCES

80

REFERENCES

Astin, A. W. (1993). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of
assessment and evaluation in higher education. Phoenix, AZ: Onyx Press.

 

Alexander, B. B., Burda, A. C. & Miller, S. B. (1997). A community approach to
learning calculus: fostering success for underrepresented ethnic minorities
in an emerging scholars program. Journal of Women and Minorities in
Science and Engineering _3, 145-159.

Bruschi, B. A. & Anderson, B. T. (1994). Racial/ethnic and gender differences in
science achievement of nine-, thirteen-, and seventeen —year old
students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering.
1, 221-236.

Butler, N. H. (1989). A comparison of the attitude of black and white students
toward academically gifted programs. Curry School of Education,
University of Virginia.

Campbell, P.B., Wahl, E., Slater, M, ller, E., Moeller, B., Harouna, B. and Light,
D. (1998). Paths to success: an evaluation of the gateway to higher
education program. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and
Engineering, vol.4. pp. 297-308.

 

Carmichael, Jr., J. W. & Sevenair J. P. (1991). Preparing minorities for science
careers. Issues in Science technology. 7,3, 55-66.

 

Carroll, R. G. & Lee-Tyson, G. (1994). Evaluation of a summer enrichment
physiology course for matriculating medical students. Advances in
Physiology Education. 1: 1.887 —894.

 

Clark, J. V. (1999) Minorities in science and math. Office of Educational
Research and Improvement. Washington, DC.

 

 

Clarke, Marianne (1994) Achieving equity in mathematics, science, and
engineering education. In Brief. (national governors’ associations series,
economic development and commerce policy studies). National
Governors’ Association, Hall of the States. 444 North Capitol Street,
Washington, DC 20001-5300.

 

Derlin, R. & McShannon, J. (1996). Action Research Team: A means to.
transform teaching and empower underrepresented students in the
university classroom. Paper presented at the National Conference on
Race and Ethnicity in American Higher Education (San Antonio, TX).

81

Ford, D. Y. (1996). Reversing underachievement among gifted black students.
Teachers College, Columbia UniversitL New York and London.

Ford, D. Y., Schuerger, J. M., 8: Harris, 111, J. J. (1991). Meeting the
psychological needs of gifted black students: a cultural perspective.
Journal of Counseling and Development. 69,577-580.

Ford, D. Y., Harris, lll, J. J. 8. Schuerger, J. M. (1993). Racial identity
development among gifted black students: counseling issues and
concerns. Journal of Counseling & Development. 7_1. 409-417.

Ford, D. Y. and Harris, Ill, J. J. (1994). Promoting achievement among gifted
black students, the efficacy of new definition and identification practices.
Urban Education. 29 (2), 202-229.

Ford, D.Y., Webb, K. S, Sandidge, R. F. (1994). When gifted kids grow up.
Gifted Child Today. May/June. 34- 42.

Ford, D. Y. & Harris, Ill, J. J. (1996). Perceptions and attitudes of black students
toward school, achievement, and other educational variables. Child
Development. fl, 1141-1152.

 

Ford, D. Y., Baytops, J. L. 8 Harmon, D. A. (1997). Helping gifted minority
students reach their potential: recommendations for change. Peabody
Journal of Education. 72(3 84) 201-216.

 

Ford, D. Y., and Thomas, A. (1997). Underachievement among gifted minority
students: problems and promises. Eric Digest, Office of Educational
Research and improvement. Washington, DC.

 

Fordham, S. (1991). Peer-proofing academic competition among black
adolescents: Acting White” Black American style. In C. Sleeter(Ed.,)
Empowerment through multicultural education. Albany, NY: State
university of New York.

Fredericksen, E. (1998). Minority Students and the Learning Community
Experience: a cluster experience. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting
of the Conference on College Composition and Communication (49"‘,
Chicago, IL,

 

Fries-Britt, S. (1998). Moving beyond black achiever isolation. The Journal of
Higher Education. Q, (September/October).

Fries- Britt, S. (1997). Identifying and supporting gifted african american men.
New Directions for Student Services. @. Jossey-Bass Publishers.

82

Fries-Britt, S. (1995) Voices of gifted black students. ASHE annual meeting
paper. 22p paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for
the Study of Higher Education.

 

Grandy, J. (1997). Gender and ethnic differences in the experiences,
achievements, and expectations of science and engineering majors.
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. 3, 119-143.

Hagedom, L., S., Siadat, M. V., Nora, A., 8 Pascarella, E. T. (1997). Factors
leading to gains in mathematics during the first year of college: an analysis
by gender and ethnicity. Journal of Minorities in Science and
Engineering. 3, 185-202.

 

Hagedom, L.S., Diadat, M.V., Fogel, S.F., Nora, A., and Pascarella, ET. (1997).
Success in College mathematics: comparison between remedial and non-
remedial first year college students. Paper presented at the 1997 Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, ILL.

Hartley, E. (1987) How can we meet all their needs? incorporating education for
the gifted and talented into the multilingual classroom. Research and
Application: Selected papers from the Annual Meeting of the National
Association for Bilingual Education (16’h DenvegColorado, March 30-
April 3, 1987).

 

Heck, D. (1998). Evaluating equity in statewide systemic initiatives: asking the
right questions. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and

Engineering. 4_, 161-181.

Hiemenz, P. C. 8 Hudspeth, M. C. (1993). Academic excellence workshops for
underrepresented students at cal poly, pomona. JCST. 3842.

Howell, R. F. (1992). Thinking in the morning, thinking in the evening, thinking at
suppertime...Phi Delta Kappan. November, pp. 223-225.

e—7Matthews, C. M. (1990) Underrepresented minorities and women in science,
mathematics, and engineering: problems and issues for the 19903. QS
report for congress. Library of Congress, Washington, DC,
Congressional Research Service.

. McBay, S. M. 8 Davidson, L. L. (1993). Achieving quality education for minorities
in mathematics, science, and engineering. Journal of Science Education
and Technolog, 2(3) 487-96.

 

Murphy, T. J., Stafford, K. L. and McCreary, P. (1998). Subsequent course and
degree paths of students in a triesman-style workshop calculus program.

83

Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. Vol. 4, pp.
381-396.

National Academy of Sciences — National Research Council, Washington, DC.
Mathematical Sciences Education Board. (1993). Making mathematics

work for minorities: framework for a national action plan National Acadermr
PressL2101 Constitution Ave., NW. Washington, DC 20418 (

I454 ,‘It 135,)»; ; 1,”.
:5 2.33; ’72. m, “up I
National Science Foundation. (1992) Quality Education for Minorities Network,
Together we can make it work. A national agenda to provide quality

education for minorities in mathematics, science and engineering. .

Washington, DC.

National Science Foundation. (1999) Despite Increases, Women and Minorities

Still Underpresented in the Undergraduate and Graduate 88E Education.
Washington, DC. NSF 99-320, January 15, 1999.

Nelson, W. L. (1994). Receptivity to Institutional Assistance: an important
variable for African-American and Mexican-American student
achievement. Journal of College Student Development.

3_5, 378-383.

Nocera, D. 6., Harrison, J. F., Reed, D.A., Roberts, C. H. (1996) Enhanced

Performance in Chemistry by Minorities at the University level. Journal of
Chemical EducatiorL 73. 1131-1137, December 1996.

Olszewski-Kubilius, P. M. and Scott, J. M. (1992) An investigation of the college

and career counseling needs of economically disadvantaged, minority
gifted students. Roeper Review. March, 141-148.

Rhodes, L. (1992). Focusing attention on the individual in identification of gifted
Black students. Roeper Review. March. PP. 108-110.

Rodriquez, A. J. (1998). Busting open the meritocracy myth: rethinking equity

and student achievement in science education. Journal of Women and
Minorities in Science and Engineering. 4, 195-216.

Rouse, L. P. (1995). Women and minorities in a social statistics course. Journal
of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. 2, 181-192.

Rowser, J. F. and Koontz, T. Y. (1995). Inclusion of African American students in

mathematic classroom: issues of styles, curriculum, and expectations.
Mathematics Teacher: 88(6) 448-53.

Sax, L. J. (1994). Retaining tomorrow’s scientist: exploring the factors that keep

84

male and female college students interested in science careers. Journal of
Women and Minorities in science and engineering. 1., 45-61.

Science and Engineering Indicators, (1996), National Science Foundation.
Seymour E, 8 Hewitt, N. M. (1994). Talking about leaving. Ethnograpmr and

Assessment Research Bureau of Sociological Research, Bureau of
Sociological research. University of Colorado. Boulder, Colorado.

 

Smith, T.Y. (1995). The retention status of underrepresented minority students:
analysis of survey results from sixty-seven US. colleges and universities.
Paper presented at the Annual forum of the Association for Institutional
research (35”‘, Boston, MA, May28-31).

Stern, J. H. (1995). Gifted minorities overlooked. Hispanic Outlook. November
24. Pp. 9-10.

Stewart, P. (2001). Why Xavier Remain No. 1. Black Issues in Higher Education.
July 19. Pp.22-26.

Supovitz, J. A. (1998). Gender and Racial/ethnic differences on alternative
science assessments. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and
Engineering. 4,. 129-140.

 

Tate, W. F. (1995). Returning to the root: a culturally Relevant approach to
mathematics pedagogy. Theog/ Into Practice;34 (3) 166-173

Tinto, Vincent. (1993). Leaving College, rethinking the causes and cures of
student attrition. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILL 60637.

Tomlinson, L. M. (1995). From high technology to vocational technology:
preparing African-American for 2000 and beyond. Presented to: the New
York State Insurance Fund Executive Department.

Triesman, P.U. (1990) A study of the mathematics performance of black students
at the University of California, Berkley. Mathematicians and education
reform, Proceeding of the July 6-8, 1988 Workshop. Conference Board of
the Mathematical Sciences, American Mathematical Society in
cooperation with the Mathematical Association of America, 33-46.

Webb, N. L. (1998). Conditional Equity Metrics as Tools for Evaluating Equity in
Schools and Education Systems. Journal of Women and Minorities in
Science and Engineering. 5 141-160,

 

Welch, O. M., Hodges, C. R. 8 Payne, L. T. (1996). Project excel: developing

85

scholars identity within a community of respect. Pfler presented at the
American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New York.
April 8-12.

Williams, J. H. and Haynes, N. (1993). A university-bases psychoeducational
model for identifying minority gifted students. Educational HORIZONS.
Summer. 209- 216.

 

86

Appendixes
1993 -TABLES 1a.

 

 

 

 

 

Input Variables

Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=50 N=191 F Sig.
ANOVAS

High school GPA 3.32 3.03 11.482 .001
ACT verbal score 22.22 20.05 7.193 .008
ACT math score 21.68 19.99 6.116 .014
ACT science score 21.70 20.64 2.042 .155
ACT comp score 22.38 20.58 6.777 .010
Predicted GPA 2.43 2.31 2.007 .158

Input Variables
Variable Drew White

N=50 N=170 F Sig.
ANOVAS

High School GPA 3.32 3.48 8.747 .003
ACT verbal score 22.22 23.18 2.051 .154
ACT math score 21.68 23.94 12.058 .001
ACT science score 21.70 24.35 18.661 .000
ACT comp score 22.38 24.21 11.876 .001
Predicted GPA 2.42 2.80 48.404 .000

 

87

1993 Tables 1b.

lntennediate Variables

 

 

 

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N= 50 N=191 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.55 2.16 5.107 .0259
Chemistry grade 2.07 2.26 .009 .923
Math grade 2.42 1.97 5.744 .018
Biology grade 2.05 2.38 .007 .934
Intermediate Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=50 N=170 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.55 2.79 3.306 .070
Chemistry grade 2.07 2.75 2.649 .107
Math Grade 2.42 2.39 .062 .804
Biology grade 2.05 3.03 9.848 .003

 

88

1993 -Tables 1c.

 

 

 

 

 

Output Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=50 N=191 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 31% 40% 1.574 .212
Non Science 68% 60% NA NA
Graduation rate 64% 44% 3.914 .049
Final GPA 3.11 2.74 2.662 .115
Output Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=50 N=170 F Sig.
Science degree 31% 32% 2.843 .096
Non Science 68% 68% NA NA
Graduation rate 64% 82% 4.487 .035
Final GPA 3.11 3.38 1.806 .191

 

89

1994- Tables 2a.

 

 

 

 

 

Input Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=54 N=171 F Sig.
ANOVAS
High school GPA 3.31 2.99 20.825 .000
ACT verbal score 20.36 19.05 3.467 .064
ACT math score 20.58 19.01 6.486 .012
ACT science score 21.23 21.28 2.535 .113
ACT comp score 21.06 19.74 4.669 .032
Predicted GPA 2.49 2.28 11.420 .001
Input Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=54 N-149 F Sig,
ANOVAS
High School GPA 3.31 3.55 21.551 .000
ACT verbal score 20.35 24.27 41.715 .000
ACT math score 20.58 25.07 61.069 .000
ACT science score 21.23 25.71 68.326 .000
ACT comp score 21.06 25.71 77.935 .000
Predicted GPA 2.49 2.83 54.319 .000

 

90

1994-Tables 2b.

Intermediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew

Minorities

N=54 N=171 F Sig.
ANOVAS

Semester GPA 2.81 2.09 31 .199 .000
Chemistry grade 2.47 2.84 .341 .565
Math grade 2.61 2.18 3.160 .079
Biology grade 2.75 1.50 10.458 .005

 

lntennediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Whites
N=54 N=149 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.81 2.89 .552 .458
Chemistry grade 2.47 3.01 4.960 .032
Math Grade 2.61 2.53 .017 .898
Biology grade 2.75 2.41 .011 .916

 

91

1994 -Tables 2c.

 

 

 

 

 

Output Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=54 N=149 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 44% 26% 2.843 .096
Non science 55.2% 74% NA NA
Graduation Rate 54% 29% 13.974 .000
Final GPA 2.89 2.69 1.782 .187
Output Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=54 N=149 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 44% 61.1% 3.343 .072
Non Science degree 55.2% 31% NA NA
Graduation rate 54% 37% 8.579 .004
Final GPA 2.89 3.22 4.577 .036

 

92

1995 -Tables 3a.

 

 

 

 

 

Input Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=58 N=146 F Sig.
ANOVAS
High school GPA 3.23 3.06 4.594 .033
ACT verbal score 21.34 19.29 5.537 .020
ACT math 21.02 19.65 4.170 .043
ACT science score 21.96 20.88 2.653 .105
ACT comp score 21.83 20.46 4.043 .046
Predicted GPA 2.45 2.33 3.499 .063
Input Variables

Variable Drew Whites

N=58 N=138 F Sig.

ANOVAS

High school GPA 3.23 3.55 36.003 .000
ACT verbal score 21.34 24.71 21.747 .000
ACT math score 21.02 24.71 35.161 .000
ACT science score 21.96 25.46 41.654 .000
ACT comp score 21.83 25.17 34.592 .000
Predicted GPA 2.45 2.87 53.821 .000

 

93

1995 - Tables 3b.

lntennediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew

Minorities
N=58 N=146 F Sig.

ANOVAS

Semester GPA 2.65 2.20 12.301 .001
Chemistry grade 2.47 2.31 .499 .484
Math grade 2.53 2.03 6.466 .012
Biology grade 2.20 1.79 1.038 .315

 

Intermediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Whites
N=58 N=138 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.65 2.90 4.635 .033
Chemistry grade 2.47 3.02 3.156 .080
Math grade 2.53 2.51 .009 .925
Biology grade 2.20 2.59 1.354 .249

 

94

1995- Tables 3c.

 

 

 

 

 

Output Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=58 N=146 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 52% 32% 3.883 .052
Non Science degree 48% 68% NA NA
Graduation rate 50% 52% 2.150 .144
Final GPA 2.739 2.736 .001 .981
Output Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=58 N=138 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 52% 51 % .024 .876
Non Science degree 48% 49% NA NA
Graduation Rate 50% 81% .889 .347
Final GPA 2.74 3.28 29.223 .000

 

95

1996 — Tables 4a.

 

 

 

 

 

Input Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=67 N=204 Sig.
ANOVAS
High school GPA 3.38 3.11 10.179 .002
ACT verbal score 21.78 19.55 7.696 .005
ACT math score 21.60 19.73 6.147 .014
ACT science score 20.98 20.79 .064 .801
ACT comp score 21.73 20.36 3.878 .050
Predicted GPA 2.53 2.36 5.030 .026
Input Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=67 N=170 Sig.
ANOVAS
High School GPA 3.38 3.61 17.914 .000
ACT verbal score 21.78 24.59 20.270 .000
ACT math score 21.60 24.58 18.844 .000
ACT science score 20.98 25.81 65.588 .000
ACT comp score 21.73 25.43 46.340 .000
Predicted GPA 2.53 2.83 28.441 .000

 

1996 —Tables 4b.

Intermediate Variables

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew

Minorities
N=58 N=146 F Sig.

ANOVAS

Semester GPA 2.67 2.32 4.053 .045
Chemistry grade 2.70 2.87 .502 .481
Math grade 2.85 2.31 4.660 .032
Biology grade 2.95 1.75 12.028 .001

 

lntennediate Variables

 

 

Variables Drew Whites
N=58 N=138 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.67 2.74 .860 .355
Chemistry grade 2.70 2.98 3.645 .059
Math grade 2.85 2.63 .249 .619
Biology grade 2.95 2.87 .027 .871

 

97

1996- Tables 4c.

 

 

 

 

 

Output Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=67 N=204 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 52% 23 8.182 .005
Non science 48% 77% NA NA
Graduation rate 37% 46% 2.57 .1 13
Final GPA 3.04 2.91 1.370 .244
Output Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=67 N=159 F Sig.
Science degree 52% 60.7% .559 .456
Non science 48% 39.3% NA NA
Graduation rate 37% 74% 2.059 .153
Final GPA 3.04 3.26 4.644 .033

 

98

1997 - Tables 5a.

 

 

 

 

 

Input Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=62 N=187 F Sig.
ANOVA
High school GPA 3.27 3.13 3.740 .054
ACT verbal score 19.93 20.75 1.468 .227
ACT math score 19.71 20.76 2.504 .115
ACT science score 20.86 21.17 .222 .638
ACT comp score 20.52 21.26 1.510 .220
Predicted GPA 2.49 2.41 1.508 .221
Input Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=62 N=170 F Sig.
ANOVAS
High School GPA 3.27 3.62 57.982 .000
ACT verbal score 19.93 24.51 52.908 .000
ACT math score 19.71 25.12 80.750 .000
ACT science score 20.86 25.71 86.750 .000
ACT comp score 20.52 25.52 106.738 .000
Predicted GPA 2.49 2.88 81.596 .000

 

99

1997- Tables 5b.

Intermediate Variables

 

 

 

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=62 N=187 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.65 2.17 12.373 .001
Chemistry grade 3.19 2.90 .002 .969
Math grade 2.58 2.15 6.983 .009
Biology grade 2.44 1 .97 3.617 .062
Intermediate Variables
Variable Drew White
N=62 N=170 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.65 2.84 2.564 .1 11
Chemistry grade 3.19 3.19 2.711 .103
Math grade 2.58 2.57 .012 .911
Biology grade 2.44 2.64 1.1 17 .294

 

100

1997 -Tables 5c.

 

 

 

 

 

Output Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=62 N=187 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 59% 32% 4.613 .036
Non science 41% 68% NA NA
Graduation Rate 35% 51 % 4.576 .033
Final GPA 2.93 3.16 3.968 .051
Output Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=62 N=170 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Science degree 59% 55% .145 .705
Non science 41% 36% NA NA
Graduation Rate 35% 51% 3.884 .050

Final GPA 2.93 3.31 13.206 .000

 

 

101

1998 -Tables 6c.

 

 

 

 

 

Input Variables
Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=57 N=172 F Sig.
ANOVAS
High school GPA 3.20 3.13 1.044 .308
ACT verbal score 20.55 19.47 1.669 .198
ACT math score 20.74 19.94 1.080 .300
ACT science score 20.63 20.47 .044 .834
ACT comp score 20.97 20.35 .793 .374
Predicted GPA 2.44 2.38 .843 .359
Input Variables

Variables Drew Whites

N=57 N=155 F Sig.

ANOVAS

High School GPA 3.20 3.60 69.629 .000
ACT verbal score 20.55 24.21 33.256 .000
ACT math score 20.74 24.21 65.763 .000
ACT comp score 20.97 25.52 75.468 .000
Predicted GPA 2.44 2.87 85.388 .000

 

1998-Tables 6b.

Intermediate Variables

 

 

 

 

 

Variable Drew Non Drew
Minorities
N=57 N=172 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.79 2.26 9.486 .002
Chemistry grade 3.19 2.34 5.585 .020
Math grade 2.77 1.96 13.467 .000
Biology grade 2.71 1.94 4.125 .047
Intermediate Variables
Variable Drew Whites
N=57 N=155 F Sig.
ANOVAS
Semester GPA 2.79 2.81 2.499 .116
Chemistry grade 3.19 3.15 2.369 .127
Math grade 2.77 2.57 .770 .382
Biology grade 2.71 2.82 .001 .969

 

103

VITA

The author was born in Jackson, Alabama to Lonnie (LJ) and Nettie
Armstead Stallworth. She was the second of nine daughters born to the couple.
She attended public schools in Mobile County and graduated from Citronelle
High School in 1974.

She entered Tuskegee Institute (University) in August 1974 and was
granted the Bachelor of Science degree in May 1978. She attended Purdue
University and completed her Master of Science in 1981. The author entered
Michigan State University graduate school while serving as the director of the
Charles Drew Science Enrichment Program in the College of Natural Science.
She was granted the doctor of philosophy degree in the summer of 2002.

The author is married to Willie M. Reed, DVM, PhD and they have two
children, a daughter, Kimberly age 23 (BA, MA. Hampton University), and a

son, Brandon, age 18 (freshmen at Georgia Institute of Technology).