Supporting Success of Low Income Undergraduates in STEM Knowledge Center Exchange Session 1 Julie P. Martin, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Engineering & Science Education Clemson University

National Leader in Diversity & Professional Orgs AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow BPE Researcher Teacher, Administrator 2

T ODAY ’ S G UIDING Q UESTION 3 What are key lessons learned, supported by research-based evidence and evidence-based practice, about effective strategies to support the success of talented, low-income students in STEM?

Acknowledge multiple motivations & factors Identify some things that work within the current “institution” of STEM education Evidence-based examples Provide in-depth example of 1 research-based framework for interventions (my NSF CAREER research) There is much more to be done to change the current structure of STEM higher education to be more accessible, affordable and inclusive  we must move beyond what has been already done 4 T ODAY ’ S D ISCUSSION

S-STEM S OLICITATION Recognize that financial aid alone cannot increase retention and graduation in STEM We need effective evidence-based curricular and co-curricular activities that support recruitment, retention, transfer, student success, academic/career pathways, and graduation in STEM. 5

I NEXTRICABLY INTERTWINED FACTORS 6 Economic status Preparedness Access Affordability Race/ ethnicity Social class/economi c status “A student’s socioeconomic status is not only a factor in the ability to pay for education, it is also a factor in the student’s preparation to pursue engineering. In general, more affluent school districts provide better preparation for students, and affluent families often have personal experience with higher education” – ASEE Executive Working Group on Access & Affordability

Institutional Factors Individual Factors Working within the system Existing structural constraints Financial Aid Admissions criteria Advising Curriculum Co-Curricular offerings Easy to fall into mindset of “fixing the students” & deficit perspectives Move towards thinking about providing opportunities and resources “Leveling the playing field”

Flexiblecurricula W ORKING W ITHIN THE S YSTEM 8 Summer bridge programs Financial assistance Scholarships Scholarships Jobs on campus Jobs on campus Family support Faculty & administrative involvement Academic & social supports Study groups Study groups Structured mentoring Structured mentoring Co-curricular activities Professional societies Professional societies Ethnic specific organizations Ethnic specific organizations Living learning communities Personalized advising & counseling

L ET ’ S E XPLORE P RACTICES FROM 1 P ARTICULAR R ESEARCH - BASED F RAMEWORK 9 “Resources gained from relationships” Lin, 2001 “An additional pool of resources embedded in the social networks of individuals, which can help to achieve individual goals…” Van der Gaag, 2005 “Whereas economic capital is in people’s bank accounts and human capital is inside their heads, social capital inheres in the structure of relationships” Portes, 1998 “ Social relations from which an individual is potentially able to derive various types of institutional resources and support.” - Stanton-Salazar & Dornbush

Social Capital Framework Social capital has been linked to many educational benefits (Brown, Flick, & Fiez, 2009) Retention Academic achievement Academic performance Engineering identity Beyond the undergraduate experience, social capital helps engineering graduates integrate into the professional workplace (Ingram, Friesen, & Ens, 2013) 10

Network Theory of Social Capital 11 Ease of access to resources depends on quality of relationships & frequency of interaction (“strength of ties”) 2.Access Pool of resources available in one’s social network, such as economic, cultural, or human capital 1. Availability Purposive mobilization or use of the resources 3.Activation (revisit)

I NEQUALITIES IN S OCIAL C APITAL 12 Differential access to social resources Differential activation of social resources Homogenous network characteristics (Lin, 2000) Family educational background (Pascarella et. al., 2004) Gender (Moore, 1990) Ethnicity (Marsden, 1998; Ream, 2003) Socioeconomic Status (Lin, 2000)

D ESIRABLE N ETWORK C HARACTERISTICS Larger networks – more opportunities for resources Heterogeneous networks are advantageous because they provide more variety and quantity of resources. Redundancy One single person can fill a “hole” Strength of ties Though strong ties (i.e. a close relationship) typically lead to more sharing of resources, the resources available through such ties are likely to be more homogeneous. Weaker ties considered to be advantageous because they can provide “bridges” to different social circles and resources that an individual may not otherwise have. 13

NSF CAREER F INDINGS : “I NVISIBLE H AND ” OF S OCIAL C APITAL Programs / practices can create resource-rich networks through pro-active involvement and ready availability People involved in STEM programs are particularly important to students choosing engineering as a major and their persistence once enrolled Does not require that students knowingly mobilizing resources Students receive information and resources in routine exchanges. Supports the need for continued proactive outreach, educational and support systems

W ORKING W ITHIN THE S YSTEM “Resources gained from relationships” 15 Summer bridge programs Faculty & Administrative Involvement Academic & social supports Study groups Study groups Structured mentoring Structured mentoring Co-curricular activities Professional societies Professional societies Ethnic specific organizations Ethnic specific organizations

W ORKING TO CHANGE THE S YSTEM Working to acculturate students into the existing system permits us to ignore the need to change the system It is (well past) time to critically examine the system(s) that influence affordability and access Admissions criteria, financial aid, state funding of higher education, K-12 preparation

Questions, Comments, Ideas? 17