University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Retaining racially minoritized students in community college STEM programs

(USC Thesis Other)

Retaining racially minoritized students in community college STEM programs

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Retaining Racially Minoritized Students in Community College STEM Programs

Melissa Lee Carpenter

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2023

© Copyright by Melissa Lee Carpenter 2023
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Melissa Lee Carpenter certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Kimberly Hirabayashi
Angela Hasan
Nicole Maccalla, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2023

iv

Abstract
This qualitative study employed the concepts of validating and institutional agents to explore the
roles that community college practitioners play in the retention of racially minoritized students in
STEM programs. Grounded in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, the conceptual
framework was used to identify affirming practices leveraged by those who were closest to
students in the higher education microsystem – STEM faculty and advisors – and the actions
they took to remove financial and other barriers to promote STEM retention. Fifteen interviews
were conducted with employees at a large urban community college in the Southwest to collect
information about the views of faculty and advisors on the retention of racially minoritized
students. The findings were based on the self-reported perceptions of faculty and advisors. The
semi-structured interviews revealed several strategies that promote belonging and affirmation
with themes centering on encouragement, employee availability, and diversity and inclusion.
Additionally, faculty and advisors also served as institutional agents by minimizing financial
barriers, offering extended learning opportunities, and influencing or adjusting instructional,
departmental, or institutional policies and practices that detract from STEM student retention.
Participants described activities that facilitate career exploration and development for racially
minoritized students in STEM. Finally, faculty and advisors expressed the desire to collaborate
with each other, provide more robust advising services, and utilize early alert tools to improve
student retention. The study concluded with six recommendations for policy and practice that
community college educators may want to consider as they enhance their efforts to retain racially
minoritized students who are pursuing STEM degrees, thus contributing to efforts to diversify
the STEM workforce within the United States.

v

Dedication
To my husband, William, who had to step up in so many ways during the last three years to keep
our family and our household running. Your acceptance and patience helped all of us survive this
experience. Thank you for making it possible for me to fulfill this dream.

To my children, for giving up parts of their mother so I could focus on a personal and career
goal. It was not easy for you and while I missed out on some of your events and activities, I now
appreciate each moment I have with you.

To my parents, for being my constant cheerleaders throughout each endeavor I have undertaken
in my life.

To my extended family and friends who did not judge me when I could not participate in social
events or communicate as often as I would have liked to. Know that I have been thinking about
you even though we did not spend much time together over the last three years. You are forever
friends.

To my dear friend, Dr. Ashley Stich. Ashley, we lost you too soon. You are one who inspired me
to take this leap. Your life was cut short, but your impact lives on through your family and your
legacy in higher education. You taught me not to take anything for granted and to cherish the
time we have now.

vi

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my dissertation committee chair, Dr. Nicole Maccalla, for caring so
much and teaching me how to design an interview protocol, how to organize findings, and how
to optimize the research experience to benefit current and future STEM and retention
practitioners. Thank you for your astute feedback and encouragement. I would also like to thank
my other dissertation committee members, Dr. Kimberly Hirabayashi and Dr. Angela Hasan, for
your insightful comments and for challenging me to do my best work. Your time and
contributions were a valuable part of the process of completing my dissertation. It was an honor
to have you serve on my committee.
I would like to give thanks to the USC Organizational Change and Leadership (OCL)
faculty who guided me throughout the process of becoming a researcher and writing a
dissertation. You asked us to trust the process and you were right. The process is designed to get
the best results. Your knowledge and wisdom were absorbed and have made me a more
competent scholar. Dr. Doug Lynch provided opportunities to attend educational technology
events (both virtual and in-person) to expand my career network and become involved in
education through a different lens. Dr. Carey Regur, who is a teacher’s teacher, always modeled
quality instruction and pushed me to be a better writer and thinker.
I would like to express my gratitude to my OCL peers who are incredible individuals.
Your willingness to serve as sounding boards, to provide feedback, and to share experiences has
made all the difference. You are all talented, generous, thoughtful, and accepting. I enjoyed all
our team projects, our Zoom discussions, and our writing groups. Thanks to all of you who
organized meetings, shared tips and resources, and made the journey lighter. Just knowing you
were traveling this road with me made me want to finish.

vii

Finally, I would like to thank my colleagues at work who graciously gave me time and
space for my doctoral studies. A special thanks goes out to the supervisors and co-workers who
provided letters of recommendations for the doctoral program application, scholarships, and paid
educational leave. Each of you deserves credit for contributing to this effort. You were an
important piece of getting into the program, finding financial assistance, and receiving dedicated
time to complete my dissertation and doctoral coursework. I would also like to thank my
colleagues who provided advice before I started my doctoral studies. You did it first and you
gave me the courage to try.

viii

Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .................................................................. 8
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 9
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................. 10
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 12
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 14
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................. 16
STEM Success .................................................................................................................. 17
Barriers Faced by Racially Minoritized Students ............................................................. 21
The Role of STEM Faculty ............................................................................................... 29
Institutional Support.......................................................................................................... 35
The Diversity Imperative .................................................................................................. 41
Conclusion and Connection to the Study .......................................................................... 42
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 43
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 51
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 52
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 52
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 53

ix

Research Setting................................................................................................................ 54
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 54
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 57
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 58
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 60
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 61
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 64
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 65
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 67
Advisor and Faculty Roles in the Retention Process ........................................................ 70
Validating Actions ............................................................................................................ 86
Institutional Agency ........................................................................................................ 112
Summary of Findings ...................................................................................................... 133
Chapter Five: Recommendations ................................................................................................ 135
Discussion of Findings .................................................................................................... 136
Recommendations for Practice ....................................................................................... 144
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 164
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 165
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 167
References ................................................................................................................................... 171
Appendix A: Faculty Recruitment Letter ................................................................................... 193
Appendix B: Advisor Recruitment Letter ................................................................................... 195
Appendix C: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 197

x

List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Gender and Racial/Ethnic Identities 56
Table 2: Participant Tenure at the College 57
Table 3: Major Findings by Research Question 68
Table 4: Participant Dispositions Toward Recommended Actions 146

xi

List of Figures
Figure 1: Illustration of Ecological Systems Theory with Nested Model 44
Figure 2: Illustration of Ecological Systems Theory with Networked Model 46
Figure 3: Faculty and Advisor Roles in the Retention Process 71
Figure 4: Validating Actions of Faculty and Advisors 88
Figure 5: Institutional Agency Employed by Faculty and Advisors 113

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The retention of racially minoritized students in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) programs of study in community colleges has been a persistent problem in
the United States (U.S.). Racial minorities in STEM are often referred to as underrepresented
minorities (URMs) and include individuals from Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine,
American Indian, Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander descent
(Alkhasawneh & Hargraves, 2014; Chen, 2013; National Science Foundation, 2019; National
Science Board, 2020). Data have consistently shown that racially minoritized students in STEM
are not experiencing the same rates of success as their White and Asian counterparts. In a
statistical analysis of college students in the U.S., Chen (2013) found that among those pursuing
an associate’s degree in STEM, retention within the major was highest for Asian and White
students, while racially minoritized students who entered community colleges were more likely
to switch to non-STEM majors. Furthermore, Chen’s analysis showed that 42% of Black or
African American and 40% of Hispanic/Latine STEM associate-degree seeking students left
higher education without earning a degree or certificate in any field versus 36% of White and
26% of Asian students. From a social justice standpoint, institutions of higher education should
work toward more equitable educational outcomes in STEM as a means to promote social justice
and to counter poverty in America (Garibay, 2018). Importantly, STEM programs can be training
grounds for social responsibility by infusing social agency and research opportunities that benefit
marginalized communities into the undergraduate student experience (Garibay, 2018). Equity
goals for STEM are often followed by workforce goals related to economic stability and national
competitiveness.
2

Job growth projections in the U.S. signal the increasing demand for qualified workers in
STEM. In their analysis of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics employment projections, the Pew
Research Center estimated that 1.6 million new jobs would be created in the healthcare and
computer sectors between 2019 and 2029 (Fry et al., 2021). To deal with increasingly high labor
demands, the U.S. has relied on foreign-born workers to fill 30% of the positions in science and
engineering (National Science Board, 2020). Over a decade ago, a seminal report from the
President’s Council of the Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) estimated that if
graduation rates for STEM fields did not rise, the U.S. would need to fill 1,000,000 additional
STEM jobs by 2022 (2012). The timeframe referenced in the PCAST report has come and gone,
but as noted in the above Pew Research Center estimates, the need for STEM workers has
continued to grow. To fill this workforce void, PCAST identified retention of STEM majors as
the most impactful strategy the U.S. could implement: “Retaining more students in STEM
majors is the lowest-cost, fastest policy option to providing the STEM professionals that the
nation needs for economic and societal well-being” (2012, p. i). Additionally, PCAST asserted
that the first two years of college were the most fundamental for retention efforts. If students
spend their first two years (or more) at a community college, then the retention work must
happen in that educational setting as it cannot wait until students transfer to a four-year
institution.
Context and Background of the Problem
The background of the STEM diversity problem has traditionally been explained by using
the metaphor of the leaky educational pipeline, which points to the loss of potential credentialed
professionals at various points from Pre-K to PhD programs and beyond (Allen-Ramdial &
Campbell, 2014; Barr et al., 2008; Martinez Ortiz & Sriraman, 2015). According to many
3

researchers, racially minoritized students – along with other aspiring STEM professionals –
travel through a “leaky pipeline” whereby STEM students leave college before completing a
degree (Allen-Ramdial & Campbell, 2014; Bahr et al., 2017; Barr et al., 2008; Estrada et al.,
2016; Hinton et al., 2020). Of particular concern among researchers has been the condition of the
academic pipeline for racially minoritized students, which is said to be weaker than that of White
and Asian students in STEM (Estrada et al., 2016). Many of the studies on the STEM pipeline
depict the end-goal as generating more STEM PhDs, especially among those from racially
minoritized backgrounds. This aligns with the interests of academia since one of its goals is to
produce more STEM faculty and researchers. However, many students prepare for STEM careers
through technical training, educational certificates, and undergraduate degrees, thus signaling a
flaw in the pipeline metaphor.
For those who dispute the utility of the STEM pipeline metaphor, their criticisms have
often centered on an oversimplification of the problem (Cannady et al., 2014). The pipeline does
not offer a full picture of the phenomenon that leads to fewer racial minorities and women
ultimately entering the STEM workforce, nor has it adequately informed policy makers because
it emphasizes the need to “patch the leaks” and it relies on an assumption that STEM pathways
are linear (Cannady et al., 2014). The pipeline metaphor is also limiting in that it assumes that
the pipeline is generally shut off from the influence of those who stay and those who leave
(Tajmel, 2019). Additionally, there is a sense that a leak in the pipeline should be viewed as a
loss or a deficit instead of an opportunity (Tajmel, 2019). However, students often have
legitimate reasons for leaving a STEM program that have nothing to do with the quality of the
so-called academic pipeline (Cannady et al., 2014). These concerns have led researchers to adopt
4

a metaphor that enhances the discussion around STEM education and career preparation while
avoiding some of the limitations of visualizing this phenomenon as a pipeline.
Some researchers have advocated for the term STEM pathways because it accounts for
the countless ways and reasons that students move in and out of STEM (Cannady et al., 2014;
Wu & Uttal, 2020). Pathways carry more nuance for how students select/change their majors,
explore careers, gain knowledge and skills, update their goals based on new information and
interests, and pursue employment. Pathways do not constrain students. They encourage
movement, help students traverse both familiar and unfamiliar terrain, and can be altered or
influenced by people, the environment, and other factors (Tajmel, 2019). According to Tajmel’s
analysis, “The leaky pipeline metaphor highlights structural features, which cannot be influenced
by the individual, whereas the pathway metaphor highlights agency and situated knowledge”
(2019, p. 1112). Due to the aforementioned features of pathways, the metaphor has become more
prevalent in the current literature. The term STEM pathways will be used for the remainder of
this study to describe the multidirectional trajectories of college students who have journeyed
into or out of STEM programs of study.
STEM pathways for racially minoritized undergraduates often include studying at
community colleges. Data have shown that racially minoritized high school graduates with high
interest in STEM (those who want to pursue a STEM major/job and those who scored high on a
science and technology interest inventory) are less likely to meet college readiness benchmarks
(American College Testing, 2015). Disproportionate gaps in academic preparation for racially
minoritized students during the high school years mean that community colleges have important
equity work to do in STEM programs. Community college enrollment data, especially the
student demographic data, further demonstrates why two-year institutions are a critical part of
5

the STEM pathway. In terms of overall student population, 34% percent of all undergraduates in
the U.S. were enrolled at two-year institutions in fall 2019 (Irwin et al., 2021). Community
colleges have the potential to produce a more diverse set of STEM graduates because they serve
a high proportion of Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine, American Indian, Alaskan
Native, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander students (Fink et al., 2021). For example, in a
representative sample of U.S. postsecondary institutions, two-year public colleges were the
starting point for nearly half of Black or African American and Hispanic/Latine students who
began college in 2010 (Shapiro et al., 2017). Because community colleges serve so many first-
generation, low income, returning adult, and/or racially minoritized students, they are poised to
pave the way for a more diverse STEM workforce.
Community colleges have been a primary engine in workforce preparation through the
awarding of associate’s degrees and certificates as well as providing STEM transfer pathways to
four-year schools (National Science Board, 2020; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine [NASEM], 2016). In 2017, the U.S. awarded 93,000 associate’s degrees in science
and engineering (S&E) programs and an additional 133,000 associate’s degrees in science and
engineering technologies (National Science Board, 2020). Community colleges have played a
strong role in bachelor’s degree attainment in science and engineering with 47% of science and
engineering bachelor’s degree recipients from 2010 to 2017 having taken classes at a community
college. Furthermore, 18% of those S&E bachelor’s degree recipients earned an associate’s
degree first (National Science Board, 2020). Longitudinal data on earlier college cohorts (those
graduating with an S&E bachelor’s or master’s degree between the academic years 2001 and
2007) has shown that community college attendance rates were high. Over 50% of American
Indian/Alaskan Native, Black/African American, and Hispanic/Latine students who majored in
6

science, engineering, and health attended a community college at some point (Mooney & Foley,
2011). In this same report, Native Hawaiians/Other Pacific Islanders were included in a category
called “Other race,” which also consisted of biracial students who were non-Hispanic. This
group had a community college attendance rate of over 50% for academic years 2001, 2002,
2006, and 2007 and a rate of 48% for graduates from academic years 2003-2005. Accumulating
credits that would count toward a bachelor’s degree was the most common reason for taking
classes at a community college among 2006 and 2007 college graduates (Mooney & Foley,
2011).
Previous efforts to address poor retention rates in STEM have included holistic support
programs that offer scholarships, tutoring, peer study groups, and workshops (Chang et al.,
2016). Other studies have emphasized the development of a STEM identity through
undergraduate research (UR) and STEM clubs/organizations (Chang et al., 2014; Espinosa,
2011). Another set of strategies has focused on improving course design, instruction, and
expectancy-value for STEM students. For example, problem-based learning and inquiry-based
teaching have been known to promote individual interest by using problems unique to science or
other STEM fields (Harackiewicz & Knogler, 2018). Furthermore, when faculty demonstrate the
relevance of science to the communities to which students belong, they can leverage the desire
that some racially minoritized students in STEM have to “give back” to their communities by
pursuing communal goals (Rendón et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2014). Another way to demonstrate
the value of course content is through utility-value interventions (UVIs), which make it possible
for students to discover the value and significance of academic activities and have shown
positive signs of narrowing performance gaps among racially minoritized students taking college
biology classes (Harackiewicz & Knogler, 2018).
7

A majority of the research examining STEM retention has been conducted at four-year
colleges and universities where resources tend to be more robust than those available at
community colleges. Many quantitative and mixed methods studies on this problem of practice
have investigated student characteristics, student preparation, course enrollment patterns, and
academic performance/GPA (Alkhasawneh & Hargraves, 2014; American College Testing,
2015; Cohen & Kelly, 2019; and Whitcomb & Singh, 2021). In qualitative studies, the student
perspective has been taken into account, especially when the studies have taken place at four-
year colleges or universities (see Rendón et al., 2019).
Current research does not sufficiently address how community college practitioners view
their roles and act upon those views to retain diverse STEM majors at their institutions. Tovar
(2015) looked at the role of community college faculty and advisors from the perspective of
Latine students. One gap in the STEM retention literature on racially minoritized students is
research that examines the perspectives of both STEM faculty and advisors at large urban
community colleges. STEM faculty have direct contact with students in the classroom, during
office hours, and through activities such as UR, clubs, and mentoring programs. Advisors
interact with students throughout their academic careers through the onboarding process and
first-semester advising, individualized educational planning, academic progress, graduation
checks, etc. The opportunities that these two employee groups have to frequently interact with
students means they carry substantial influence over students and possess first-hand knowledge
and insights about their roles in STEM success. This study focused on how community colleges
in the U.S. can retain racially minoritized students so they can earn their STEM associate’s
degree and move through a STEM pathway to pursue their career interests. Specifically, the
study examined the role of validating and institutional agents through the perspectives of STEM
8

faculty and academic advisors with the goal of informing community colleges and policy makers
about promising practices.
This qualitative study used a purposeful sample of STEM faculty and a census sample of
academic advisors to investigate the use of validating actions and institutional agency to retain
racially minoritized students within the context of a large urban community college. The study
took place at an open-access college with two full-service campuses and one additional location
for Career and Technical Education. The college, located in the Southwestern region of the
United States, is referred to as Southwest Community College (SWCC, a pseudonym)
throughout this study. SWCC transfers many of its graduates to a nearby large public research
university and is part of a multi-college system.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of community college faculty
and academic advisors as it relates to the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM
programs. The study sought to understand the roles faculty and advisors within a large urban
community college believe they play in STEM student retention, the types of affirming actions
they employ to promote student success, and the use of institutional agency to provide
institutional resources and/or to remove barriers faced by students.
Research Questions
1. How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college view
their role in the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM?
2. What validating actions are faculty and academic advisors within a large urban
community college engaging in to affirm racially minoritized students in STEM?
9

3. How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college use their
agency to provide institutional resources and/or remove barriers for racially minoritized
students in STEM?
Importance of the Study
Retaining racially minoritized community college STEM majors contributes to more
equitable educational outcomes and provides economic stability, both of which align with social
justice values. The findings of this qualitative study may have implications for community
college practice or policy and may be of interest to community college leaders and practitioners.
Learning about affirming practices and strategies for retaining racially minoritized students may
be useful for faculty and staff charged with supporting minoritized STEM students.
Improving the retention of STEM majors who are racially minoritized leads to more
equitable educational outcomes. Recent figures have shown that the share of Hispanic/Latine,
Black or African American, and American Indian or Alaskan Native groups with a bachelor’s
degree in science and engineering (S&E) is lower than these groups’ representation in the
general population (National Science Board, 2022). While the share of Hispanic/Latine students
earning an associate’s degree improved dramatically between 2000 and 2017, it remained
unchanged for Black or African American students and actually decreased for American Indian
and Alaskan Native students (National Science Board, 2019). Research has demonstrated that
Black or African American and Hispanic/Latine students are more likely than Asian and White
students to switch to a non-STEM major or to leave college without earning a credential (Chen,
2013).
Retention and degree completion in STEM influences the economic well-being of
students and the nation. A U.S. Department of Commerce report stated that those with a STEM
10

degree earn more than those with a non-STEM degree – even if the STEM-degree worker is
employed in a non-STEM industry – creating an “earnings premium” for those with a STEM
education (Noonan, 2017). The labor outlook for STEM jobs continues to highlight the growth of
this sector. A recent report from the National Science Board (2022) showed that STEM labor
demands in the U.S. continue to expand with 23% of the workforce in STEM. As predictions of
America’s STEM industries continue to forecast high demand, higher education has been cited as
a key means to support this national interest (PCAST, 2012).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (EST) initially posited that the environment
impacts individual development through four systems that interact with one another to shape the
person (1981). The theory was originally applied to child development (Bronfenbrenner, 1981)
and since that time the work of Bronfenbrenner has been widely cited and applied to a variety of
contexts. Bronfenbrenner (1981) asserted that the core of each individual starts with unique
backgrounds and characteristics, followed by their immediate settings (or microsystem) which
are surrounded by more distant settings related to institutions, policies, ideologies, and cultures.
When two or more settings in which the individual participates come into contact, a mesosystem
is created. For example, there is often an interaction between the individual’s family and their
school. An exosystem is a setting that does not directly come into contact with the individual, but
it has an impact on that individual nonetheless. For example, the actions of a governing board for
a college will influence a student who attends said college. A macrosystem is like a blueprint for
a culture that creates consistencies in the aforementioned systems. It encompasses beliefs and
ideologies that drive cultural blueprints for families, schools, places of work, and governmental
institutions. Eventually, another system – the chronosystem – was added to EST to take into
11

consideration the role of time (for example, rites of passage or local and global events that
change a person) (Bronfenbrenner, 1986).
The traditional conceptualizations of EST described the systems as being nested within
one another much like a Russian doll set with each doll housing a smaller doll until arriving at
the core individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1981). Bronfenbrenner (1981) also believed that there was
less variation in settings within the same culture or subculture and more variation when
comparing settings across cultures. Neal and Neal (2013) reimagined EST and asserted that their
concept of networked systems accounts for the complexity of interactions among
Bronfenbrenner’s four major systems (microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem).
Neal and Neal (2013) argued that the traditional conceptualization of EST has not revealed the
true nature of the relationship between each system and proposed that EST, when paired with the
interactivity of the social world, can be configured into a networked model with commingling
structures that possess direct and/or indirect influences on each other. In this study, an ecological
lens will be applied to the problem of practice to identify who and what within students’
educational microsystem can break down systemic barriers that inhibit STEM success for
racially minoritized community college students. The additive idea of networks introduced by
Neal and Neal (2013) was also factored into the present study to discover how social interactions
within ecological systems may influence STEM retention.
This study utilized qualitative methods which shed light on how people make sense of
their own experiences and the actions of themselves and others (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Qualitative methods can reveal how individuals and groups construct and interpret the meaning
of phenomena. This method places the researcher in the position of being the conduit for data
collection and the performer of the data analysis (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The primary data
12

collection method for this study was semi-structured individual interviews with STEM faculty
and academic advisors. The interviews allowed faculty and academic advisors to describe actions
that affirm racially minoritized students and/or actions that eliminate barriers for racially
minoritized students and share views about their roles in retaining students within a large urban
community college setting. STEM faculty and advisors have recent and historical knowledge of
what steps have been taken to mitigate the effects of known obstacles for racially minoritized
students. An essential part of the college microsystem, they also have direct contact with
students.
Definition of Terms
The following section defines terms that are central to understanding the research topic,
design, and approach.
Persistence is the rate at which students continue their college enrollment through to
completion at their first or a subsequent institution (Tinto, 2012). Unlike retention, it emphasizes
the individual student’s enrollment and completion behaviors instead of the institution’s role in
promoting the re-enrollment and graduation of its students.
Retention is the rate at which an institution keeps its students enrolled and graduates
students who started college at that institution (Tinto, 2012). Retention is often expressed in
terms of the percentage of students still enrolled from the first fall semester to the second fall
semester (American College Testing, 2018; Alkhasawneh & Hargraves, 2014).
STEM includes the disciplines/professions of science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics and is inclusive of computer science (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). In
addition to physical and life sciences, some agencies and researchers also include social sciences,
13

health sciences, and even STEM education in their list of STEM occupations (Noonan, 2017);
however, the U.S. Department of Education’s definition was used in this study.
STEM pathways can be used to visualize the academic journey of STEM students as they
join, navigate, and/or select new directions within STEM educational and career fields. A
strength of the STEM pathways metaphor is that it is open to the influence of outside forces
including humans and the natural world (Tajmel, 2019) and it does not assume that success is
measured by reaching one pre-determined destination. This metaphor is less constraining than
the STEM pipeline metaphor which points to a common-end goal (a PhD credential) and is
depicted as having many leaks within its structure.
Underrepresentation in STEM is a phenomenon that occurs when the characteristics
(e.g., race/ethnicity and gender identity) of individuals in STEM occur at notably lower rates
than the distribution of those characteristics in the population.
Underrepresented groups (URGs) in science and engineering include women, people
with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities such as Black or African American,
Hispanic/Latine, American Indian or Alaskan Native (National Science Foundation, 2019).
While women are on par with men in terms of bachelor’s degree attainment, they are
underrepresented in science and engineering occupations (National Science Foundation, 2019).
First-generation college students are yet another URG in STEM (Premraj et al., 2021).
Underrepresented minorities (URMs) in STEM are of Black or African American,
Hispanic/Latine, American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific
Islander descent (Alkhasawneh & Hargraves, 2014; Chen, 2013; Kerr et al., 2018; National
Science Foundation, 2019).
14

Racially minoritized students include people of Black or African American, Hispanic/
Latine, American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
descent (Ajayi et al., 2021; Bottia et al., 2021). While Asians are generally considered to be
racially minoritized, students with Pacific Rim provenance are not underrepresented in STEM
(Bottia et al., 2021). In this study, racially minoritized students is the preferred term; however,
references to URM are included in the literature review when that is the terminology used by the
researchers.
An institutional agent is a person who holds a position of power within an institution,
organization, or society at large and who leverages their “human, cultural, and social capital” to
bestow institutional support to another person (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). It can also be someone
who is familiar with oppression and “use[s] their knowledge to support minoritized student
success” (Bensimon et al., 2019, pp. 1691–1692).
Validating agents in higher education – including faculty, staff, and administrators – are
those who intentionally engage in validating and affirming practices to give students a sense of
belonging and to improve their opportunities to learn and thrive (Rendón, 1994).
Validation “is an enabling, confirming and supportive process” led by in-class or out-of-
class validating agents who build students academically and interpersonally. It lets students
know they are valued and recognizes them as competent learners (Rendón, 1994, p. 44).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation contains five chapters. Chapter One provided an overview of the
problem of practice, discussed the significance of the study, and identified the theoretical
framework that guided the study. Chapter One also included the research questions, study
methods, and terminology. Chapter Two reviews the extant literature on retention of racially
15

minoritized students in STEM programs of study through several categories that make up the
research base on this topic. Chapter Three explains the methodology used, the reason for its
selection, and the data collection procedures. It also details the validity/reliability of the
instruments, ethical considerations, and study limitations. Chapter Four outlines the findings of
each of the research questions. Chapter Five makes recommendations for community college
leaders and practitioners and identifies areas for future research.

16

Chapter Two: Literature Review
The problem of practice this literature review addresses is the retention of racially
minoritized students in STEM programs of study. Retention is typically desirable until a student
has graduated or, in the case of community colleges, has successfully transferred to a bachelor’s
degree-granting institution. Racially minoritized students who have selected to major in a STEM
field have not been graduating at the same rate as other groups who tend to be overrepresented in
STEM such as White and Asian students (Fry et al., 2021). These racially minoritized students
include people of Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine, American Indian or Alaskan
Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander descent (Alkhasawneh & Hargraves,
2014; Chen, 2013; Kerr et al., 2018; National Science Foundation, 2019).
Practitioners and researchers have continued to examine how to retain STEM students so
they can earn a college degree (Hinton Jr. et al., 2020; Bahr et al., 2017; Estrada et al., 2016;
Allen-Ramdial & Campbell, 2014; Barr et al., 2008). The demand for STEM workers has
remained high with STEM occupations anticipated to grow at more than twice the rate of all
occupations during the decade between 2019 and 2029 (Zilberman & Ice, 2021). Increases in
computer occupations due to the ubiquity of technology (Zilberman & Ice, 2021) and health
occupations, especially in light of the global COVID-19 pandemic, have been predicted to drive
the growth in STEM. The Pew Research Center calculated that about 1,000,000 new jobs are
needed for the healthcare sector and approximately 600,000 new jobs are needed for the
computer sector between 2019 and 2029 (Fry et al., 2021). The availability of credentialed
STEM professionals is essential to keeping up with this demand.
The literature on STEM education and outcomes is vast and the topic continues to inspire
further study due to the ongoing issues around student success and workforce demands. Racially
17

minoritized students can play a key role in contributing to STEM research, innovation, and the
labor force. This chapter contains a literature review of seminal and current studies which have
increased researcher and practitioner understanding of minoritized student retention in STEM.
This chapter focuses on the literature pertaining to higher education with an emphasis on STEM
success, barriers for racially minoritized students, the role of STEM faculty, and institutional
support. It also includes literature on diversity in the STEM workforce and its importance to a
socially just society. Finally, this chapter outlines the ecological influences of validating and
institutional agents and how they contribute to the conceptual framework for this study.
STEM Success
Postsecondary institutions have a variety of ways to measure success in STEM.
Institutions often look at success factors such as the momentum students gain in their STEM
academic pathway by tracking STEM course enrollment intensity, completion of first-year math
and science coursework, and grade point average (GPA). Another early success indicator is the
degree to which students form a STEM identity. Furthermore, community colleges also monitor
STEM success via associate’s degree and certificate attainment and transfer to bachelor’s-degree
granting institutions.
STEM Momentum
Academic momentum is a phenomenon that contributes to the eventual success of STEM
students. Wang (2015) described STEM momentum as “academic behaviors and efforts students
exhibit in early STEM coursework that propel them forward toward persistence and success in
STEM fields of study” (p. 377). Wang (2015) measured STEM success by examining STEM
momentum metrics and found that the number of STEM credit hours taken in the first term and
the successful completion of that coursework in the first term were success factors for students in
18

a STEM major who desired to obtain a bachelor’s degree. In a study of three states, Fink et al.
(2021) found that early STEM momentum for community college students includes completing
calculus or a science, technology, and engineering (STE) pathway course (a course required in a
transfer agreement with the state) during the first year. In fact, among the 270,000 student
records used for the study, this metric was the best predictor for the completion of a bachelor’s
degree in STEM. Other predictors included the completion of 24 credits in the first year or
success in college-level English (Fink et al., 2021). These momentum metrics held true for Black
or African American and Hispanic/Latine students.
Completion of First-Year Math and Science Courses
One key indicator of STEM success is the completion of advanced math classes and core
(non-introductory) science classes. Fink et al. (2021) found that community college students who
completed higher-level math classes like calculus or even pre-calculus or who completed a
science, technology, or engineering course on a state-based transfer plan had higher rates of
transfer and STEM bachelor’s degree attainment. When broken down by demographics, this
trend was also accurate for racially minoritized students (Fink et al., 2021). Cohen and Kelly
(2019) found that community college students who performed well in introductory chemistry
courses were more likely to persist while those who withdrew or did not pass the course were
likely to change to a non-STEM major. In a study of the California Community College system,
historically disadvantaged students (defined as Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine, and
American Indian, or Alaskan Native students) had lower rates of passing their math class on their
first attempt at a math class than historically advantaged students (White and Asian) (Bahr et al.,
2017). If students started in a core physics class (one designed for science and engineering
majors) they were more likely to advance in their program than students who started in an
19

introductory physics course that fulfilled only the General Education requirement for a
bachelor’s degree (Bahr et al., 2017). In addition to math and science course completion, another
traditional measure of STEM success has been GPA.
GPA
Studies have also examined the correlation between race/ethnicity, GPAs, and overall
STEM success. For example, in a study that reviewed ten years of data for over 18,000 students
at a research university in the U.S., STEM degree completers were shown to have higher STEM
GPAs and overall GPAs in their first year than non-degree completers (Whitcomb & Singh,
2021), demonstrating that grades are predictive of future educational attainment. The study data
revealed that URM students earned lower grades than their non-URM peers. Among degree
completers, URMs had .2 to .3 grade points lower than their non-URM counterparts (Whitcomb
& Singh, 2021). GPA can also influence underrepresented students’ perceptions of their science
identity with a higher GPA leading to an improved self-appraisal of their science identity (Stets
et al., 2017). The concept of a science identity will be discussed in more detail in the next
section.
Developing a Science Identity
Science identity in the educational setting has been described as the degree to which
learners see themselves as science students (Stets et al., 2017). Location, context, resources,
limitations, and the influence of others contribute to the development of a student’s science
identity (Carlone & Johnson, 2007). Vincent-Ruz and Schunn (2018) articulated that “identity is
built from internalization from our experiences and socially constructed with others in a
particular context” (pp. 1–2). Science identity formation and its impacts have been studied with
several different populations front and center. A study by Carlone and Johnson (2007) took an
20

intersectional approach by outlining three areas of science identity for women of color:
competence (knowledge and understanding), performance (making competence visible to
others), and recognition (credibility with STEM faculty or professionals). In their study, Carlone
and Johnson (2007) discovered that a science identity was formed as the result of recognition and
acceptance by those whose opinion counts with the individual, not merely on the performance
and competence of the said individual. This approach to science identity has remained a relevant
framework for more current studies relating to faculty mentorship and UR (Atkins, et al., 2020;
Espinosa & Nellum, 2015; Espinosa, 2011). The development of a science identity for students
who are underrepresented in STEM has been known to positively predict the choice of a STEM
career or the pursuit of a graduate degree after college graduation (Estrada et al., 2018; Stets et
al., 2017). A parallel finding from Estrada et al., (2018) was that the development of a science
identity also meant that students were less likely to leave career pathways in STEM and medical
professions.
Science identity can be influenced by the actions others take toward aspiring STEM
students. Microaffirmations are small or subtle acts that could be verbal or nonverbal in nature
and are performed to help others find success (Estrada et al., 2019; Rowe, 2008).
Microaffirmations also demonstrate to their recipients that they possess value, status, and a sense
of belonging (Delston, 2021). Estrada et al. (2019) found that microaffirmation kindness cues for
historically underrepresented students (Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine, American
Indian, Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander) in science programs had
a positive effect on intentions to persist. This was true when the kindness cues led to integration
into the scientific community as measured via increased self-efficacy in science and identity
development. However, the researchers felt that the California-based urban university they
21

studied was an outlier and that its unique characteristics did not make the study results
conclusive. They recommended further investigating interpretations of ethnicity and culture due
to responses to their Microaffirmations Scale (Estrada et al., 2019). While developing a science
identity may create improved learning conditions for racially minoritized students, there are two
major milestones that institutions and researchers continue to fall back on when evaluating
STEM success: namely, graduation and transfer.
Earning an Associate’s Degree and/or Transferring
Graduation is a popular measure of success in education even though those rates do not
tell the whole story (NASEM, 2016). The report from PCAST focused on meeting economic
demands by helping one million more students graduate with a STEM degree (2012). Transfer
into a STEM bachelor’s degree program has also been a marker of success. Community college
students who transferred to a four-year college were just as likely to earn a bachelor’s degree as
juniors who had exclusively attended a four-year institution (Melguizo et al., 2011). Dowd
(2011) asserted that transfer was particularly vital in improving the participation of Latine
students in STEM. Recent research has pushed back on these traditional success markers by
expanding success to include the extent to which STEM programs helped students embrace
democratic values such as civic-mindedness and social responsibility (Garibay, 2018). In this
initial section of the literature review, research described both traditional and newer markers of
STEM success and the corresponding findings for racially minoritized students. In the next
section, the focus will be on the primary obstacles for racially minoritized students in STEM.
Barriers Faced by Racially Minoritized Students
Community college students face numerous barriers to achieving their academic goals,
especially if they plan to earn a bachelor’s degree. In particular, undergraduate course placement
22

policies, the financing of a college education and navigation of financial aid systems, and
transfer pathways to bachelor’s degree-granting institutions have been obstacles for racially
minoritized students. This section discusses the historical ramifications of these barriers as well
as promising shifts in the policies and programs involved in each of the aforementioned areas.
Research about how these issues affect racially minoritized students in STEM is reviewed.
Course Placement
Historically, community college placement policies have kept students out of college-
level coursework, extending the time to graduation by first requiring non-transferable
coursework (stand-alone developmental education classes) (Bailey et al., 2015). In the past, a
majority of community colleges relied on single measures of placement such as the
ACCUPLACER tests (Bickerstaff et al., 2021) and the Compass placement test which ACT
began phasing out in 2015 (Fain, 2015) and which was formally discontinued in 2016 (Hodges et
al., 2020). Many scholars have cited remedial education policies as a structural barrier to
completion and transfer of community college students (Bailey et al., 2015; Dowd, 2011; Jaggars
& Bickerstaff, 2018; NASEM, 2016). Community college students have been placed into
developmental courses at higher rates than students at four-year institutions (Dowd, 2011). In a
profile report on students enrolled at American public and private institutions in 2015-2016, data
showed that 56% of students in two-year public colleges had taken at least one remedial course
compared to 30% at four-year public institutions (National Center for Education Statistics,
[NCES], 2019). In an earlier report from NCES, which followed college students who had first
enrolled in 2003, about 68% of students at two-year public colleges had taken at least one
developmental course over a six-year period with the average number of developmental courses
taken reported as 2.9 (2016). Furthermore, URM students were the most likely to enroll in
23

developmental courses. In a sample of 5,000 students at two-year public colleges, 78% of Black
or African American and 75% of Hispanic/Latine students had taken developmental education
courses (NCES, 2016). Data analysis of 2,780 City University of New York community college
students below the age of 24 showed that enrolling in developmental English and/or math classes
decreased the likelihood that students would transfer to a four-year institution within six years
(Crisp & Delgado, 2013).
Because placement policies determine which courses a student begins with, they have a
huge effect on the length of the academic pathway. They also impact the price of college with
prerequisite and developmental coursework adding more credit hours and/or semesters to
students’ educational pathway. Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine, and American
Indian, or Alaskan Native students have been historically under placed with many beginning in
developmental math or introductory courses such as algebra (Bahr et al., 2017). Bahr et al.
(2017) showed that students who start in mid-level courses (trigonometry, precalculus) have a
much better chance of being retained within the course sequence. This was true in chemistry,
math, and physics. An analysis of STEM majors at 70 different community colleges in three
states found that most students began in prerequisite foundation STEM courses (which prepare
students for the STEM courses in the transfer pathway) instead of placing directly into calculus
or the STEM pathway course (Fink et al., 2021). This delay in taking the first STEM pathway
course makes it less likely that students can complete a pathway course in their first year.
Many institutions and states have begun to expand placement policies through the use of
multiple measures (High School GPA, ACT/SAT/GED scores, EdReady scores, etc.) instead of
relying on a high-stakes placement test such as ACCUPLACER (Jaggars & Bickerstaff, 2018;
Lane et al., 2020). In some cases, these college placement reforms have been implemented at the
24

state or system level with legislatures and other governing bodies mandating change (Duffy et
al., 2014; Ganga & Mazzariello, 2019; Hu et al., 2019). A recent study found that more than 50%
of community colleges employed multiple measures for English and math course placement
(something beyond a conventional placement test) and these policies have allowed more students
to bypass developmental coursework in favor of college-level courses (Ganga & Mazzariello,
2019). In most cases, these updated policies have led to more equitable outcomes for racially
minoritized students. In Florida – where a statewide reform that took effect in 2014 allows
students with a diploma from a Florida public high school and active-duty military personnel to
skip developmental coursework altogether – student outcomes for racialized minorities were on
par with White students (Hu et al., 2019). For example, in a report on the impact of the reform on
first-time-in-college students in the Florida College System, Hispanic/Latine students had
slightly better completion rates in introductory college-level courses than White students and the
Hispanic/Latine students had nearly as many credits accumulated at the end of their first year of
college as White students (Hu et al., 2019). Although their outcomes were not as high as
Hispanic/Latine or White students, Black or African American students had better results in
terms of completion rates and credit accumulation compared to the years preceding the reform
(Hu et al., 2019). In this subsection, the research demonstrated the manner in which course
placement policies in community colleges have disadvantaged students. The literature also
showed how placement reform has improved some outcomes for racially minoritized students in
at least one state. In the next subsection, the financial implications of enrolling in college and the
ways in which paying for college can be a burden for racially minoritized students in STEM is
discussed.
25

Financial Barriers
In the late aughts and early teens of this century, the price of undergraduate education
rose dramatically and outpaced both inflation and increases in family income with tuition being
the main cause of the increased cost (NASEM, 2016; National Science Board, 2022). More
recently, the global COVID-19 pandemic has had a mediating effect on tuition rates, but that has
primarily been a reflection of the American economy (Ma & Pender, 2021) and is not an
indication that college is becoming more affordable. For racially minoritized students, the net
cost of a college education (actual cost after financial aid) is less than it is for other students due
in large part to their choice of institutions (lower cost) and their family’s need, which can qualify
them for more financial aid; however, even with aid earmarked for these students to cover their
educational expenses, living and personal expenses are usually not fully covered. For example, at
public two-year colleges, students who were first-time full-time had approximately $14,370 in
other expenses such as housing, transportation, food, books, and materials that were not covered
by their aid package for the academic year 2021-2022 (Ma & Pender, 2021). Of course, the size
of aid packages does not matter if students are not completing the Free Application for Federal
Student Aid (FAFSA).
Access to and acceptance of financial aid are determined by numerous factors. In terms
of federal aid, reasons racially minoritized and/or low-income students may not turn in the
FAFSA include difficulties in obtaining parental tax records, reduced rates of broadband access
at home, and limited access to counselors and advisors (Siddiqi & Mikolowsky, 2020). Earlier in
this century, increases in college prices led to more borrowing on the part of students (NASEM,
2016) although the amount of undergraduate student borrowing has been declining since 2010-
2011 (Ma & Pender, 2021). Many community college students are wary of taking out student
26

loans and work 20-plus hours per week (LaSota & Zumeta, 2016), which may be a strategy to
avoid borrowing money to attend college. While the above discussion has outlined financial
barriers for college students more broadly, there are some additional areas of concern for those
majoring in STEM.
Another financial consideration for STEM is that institutions spend more on delivering
STEM degree programs than they do on non-STEM degree programs and part of that cost may
be passed on to students. Many public research universities and doctoral degree-granting public
universities have employed differential pricing and this move has been justified due to the higher
costs of offering certain types of degrees including STEM degrees (NASEM, 2016). In addition,
the price of a STEM degree can be higher for students due to degree requirements related to
prerequisites, a higher number of required courses vs. elective courses, and a lengthier math
sequence (NASEM, 2016). However, colleges are not powerless to address the amount of time it
takes to earn a STEM degree.
Increased prices for students could lead to more borrowing with research showing that
debt continues to be an issue for racially minoritized STEM graduates of bachelor’s degree
programs. According to one study, these students were more likely to graduate with over
$30,000 in debt compared to other populations (NASEM, 2016). Some states and municipalities
have tried to reduce out-of-pocket expenses for students by guaranteeing free college for the first
two years.
The college promise movement has gained traction in many municipalities and states as a
way to provide two or more years of tuition-free community college for low-income students
(NASEM, 2016; Siddiqi & Mikolowsky, 2020; Taylor & Lepper, 2018). Many institutions have
partnered with government locales to take this socially just approach to funding a college
27

education for students who belong to marginalized communities (Jones et al., 2020). In addition
to covering tuition and fees, some promise programs also include modest stipends for books and
transportation. Perhaps the most robust program in the nation is the City University of New
York’s Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) model which provides a monthly
metro pass for program participants and extends financial support for up to three years to address
the additional semesters that some students need to complete their associate’s degrees (Miller &
Weiss, 2022). In recent years, ASAP has undergone a significant expansion that has included an
emphasis on STEM programs of study (Kolenovic & Strumbos, 2020).
Another reform movement that impacts the cost of college attendance is the creation of
open educational resources (OERs). The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization defined OERs as “learning, teaching and research materials in any format and
medium that reside in the public domain or are under copyright that have been released under an
open license, that permit no-cost access, re-use, re-purpose, adaptation and redistribution by
others.” Benefits of OERs include free access to course materials for college students. Diaz
Eaton et al. (2022) framed this as a “zero-cost promise to students” (p. 1). Every year community
college students have saved millions of dollars when participating in OER courses that alleviate
the need to purchase a textbook (Griffiths et al., 2018). When groups of STEM faculty have
banded together to create professional OER communities of practice or networks, they have been
ensuring the future of OERs by creating sustainable models to develop and share these resources
with each other and non-participating STEM educators (Diaz Eaton, 2022; Kleinschmit et al.,
2023).
28

Transfer Pathways
Nationally, transfer rates have been as low as 20% even though a large number of
students declare their intent to transfer when admitted to a two-year institution/community
college (Xu et al., 2018). If transfer rates improved by five percentage points, colleges would
produce approximately 42,000 more bachelor’s degree recipients annually (Xu et al., 2018).
Structural barriers for STEM transfer students include poor articulation agreements between two-
year and four-year institutions and insufficient transfer advising (Dowd, 2011; NASEM, 2016).
Institutions must strive to create a culture of support around transfer (Dowd, 2011) and four-year
institutions should do a better job of welcoming transfer students and easing their transition from
a community college (Xu et al., 2018).
There have been some promising findings on efforts to increase transfer to four-year
institutions. From 2001 to 2010, six states developed transfer policies, six additional states
generated cooperative agreements, and nine additional states published articulation guides
(LaSota & Zumeta, 2016). In a study of Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, and Washington, crucial
aspects of state or system-level transfer policies included common general education curriculum,
common 100- and 200-level pre-major and major pathways, emphasis on credit applicability
(how to count courses toward bachelor’s degree requirements), and the granting of junior
standing to those who completed an associate’s degree (Kisker et al., 2014). Before the launch of
the Maricopa to ASU Pathways Program (MAPP) in Arizona, a work group tasked with looking
at transfer data found that nearly 90% of students who had completed the Arizona General
Education Curriculum and earned an associate’s degree also earned a bachelor’s degree (Bailey
et al., 2015). In a literature review of STEM transfer from two-year to four-year institutions,
seven studies – including six studies on STEM students – pointed to articulation agreements for
29

coursework and transfer guides as promoting the success of Hispanic/Latine students (Winterer
et al., 2020). LaSota and Zumeta (2016) also found a positive effect on transfer when statewide
transfer guides existed. Effective transfer partnerships between community colleges that are large
feeders and top transfer destinations for those community colleges have yielded baccalaureate
graduation rates of 54% (Xu et al., 2018).
This section examined three barriers that affect the retention of racially minoritized
STEM students including course placement policies, financial considerations, and transfer
pathways. The literature mapped out historical barriers in these three areas and what efforts have
been made to minimize these barriers in recent decades. In the upcoming section, the literature
on STEM faculty and their impact on racially minoritized students is reviewed.
The Role of STEM Faculty
STEM faculty play a critical role in the educational experiences of racially minoritized
students. They can make themselves available for meaningful interactions outside of class, serve
as formal and informal mentors, boost student confidence when they share a social identity,
provide culturally relevant content and methodologies, and enhance the utility or task value of
STEM coursework. This section discussed the function and impact of STEM faculty in their
various roles, especially as it pertains to community college students who are underrepresented
in STEM.
Accessibility
While the role that faculty play as instructors is fundamental, their genuine desire to
interact with students outside of class time is also crucial for racially minoritized students.
Faculty can use class time to signal their availability to students. The notion of accessibility cues
was studied by Wilson et al. (1974) who confirmed that both teaching practices and faculty
30

attitudes serve as accessibility cues to students. The researchers found that “the importance
which a faculty member attaches to personal interaction with students is probably a more
important component of [their] accessibility than is sheer physical availability” (p. 82).
Furthermore, students have often rated faculty approachability by what faculty say and do during
class (Hurtado et al., 2011). In the Hurtado et al. (2011) study of URM students hoping to
become future scientists, the researchers observed that the way office hours are handled is an
important accessibility cue. If the posted office hours were minimal, students were unclear about
whether faculty wanted to interact with them outside of class time. In a qualitative study of
community college students at a southeastern college, students appreciated faculty who got out
of the office, who were approachable, and who checked in with students when they were
struggling (Edenfield & McBrayer, 2021).
Mentoring
Through both informal and formal mechanisms, faculty have the opportunity to serve as
mentors to college students. Some institutions have formal mentoring programs by which faculty
and students are connected for a specified time period. Informal mentoring opportunities also
exist where faculty and students create mentoring relationships without the benefit of a formal
program structure. Mentoring is important because qualitative research has shown that quality
mentorship is predictive of “science self-efficacy, identity, and values” (Estrada et al., 2018, p.
10). For example, participation in mentorship led to social integration into professional STEM
communities (Estrada et al., 2018) and contributed to the development of a stronger scientific
identity for both URM and non-URM students (Atkins et al., 2020). Faculty mentors have been
deemed more impactful in shaping scientific identity than graduate students and postdoctoral
31

researchers who serve in that capacity (Aikens et al., 2016). Another way that faculty can
influence students is through social identities that they have in common.
Shared Social Identities
When the faculty make-up does not reflect the student population, racially minoritized
students can be discouraged from pursuing or persisting in a STEM degree program. In a
qualitative study of 38 high achieving Black or African American and Hispanic/Latine students,
McGee (2016) found that even among colleges that were known to be “culturally and racially
affirming,” STEM departments seemed to fall short in the eyes of study participants (p. 1648).
Black or African American and Hispanic/Latine students at Minority Serving Institutions and
Historically White Institutions said they wanted to take courses with faculty who had the same
racial or ethnic identity, and this was challenging due to the relative absence of these faculty at
their institutions (McGee, 2016).
When minoritized students enroll in courses taught by a professor with a shared racial
identity, student outcomes are notably improved. Fairlie et al. (2014) documented the positive
effects of URM community college students taking courses taught by URM faculty including
higher pass rates and lower dropout rates. Atkins et al. (2020) found that for some STEM
students, mentoring relationships were more robust when the faculty mentor and the mentee had
common identities and values. Price (2010) discovered that after their first year, Black or African
American students who take STEM courses taught by Black or African American faculty
members have higher persistence rates in STEM. In addition to social identities held by STEM
faculty, another factor to consider is the cultural responsiveness of the teaching methodologies
adopted by these faculty.
32

Culturally Responsive Teaching
Culturally responsive teaching (CRT) has been known to improve educational outcomes
for racially minoritized students in STEM (Gay, 2018; Hutchison & McAlister-Shields, 2020).
These practices can be culturally validating for minoritized students. Gay (2018) defined CRT
“as using the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames of reference, and performance styles
of ethnically diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant to and effective for
them” (p. 36). Gay (2018) went on to explain that “teaching is most effective when ecological
factors, such as prior experiences, community settings, cultural backgrounds, and ethnic
identities of teachers and students, are included in its implementation” (p. 28). Gay (2013)
emphasized helping diverse students connect what they learn to their lives outside of school,
establishing a sense of community among diverse students, and building “agency, efficacy, and
empowerment” (p. 49). Historically, CRT has also included highlighting the contributions and
experiences of racial/ethnic groups within a given field (Gay, 2013). Additionally, connecting
with peers socially and engaging in dialogues has been shown to help the learning of Black or
African American and Latine students (Hutchison & McAlister-Shields, 2020).
Symboling is one of the strategies Gay (2018) illustrated as an exemplary CRT practice
because it moves beyond the theory into the educational experience. Gay (2018) summarized
what was observed in a classroom steeped in CRT practices:
[The] students are inundated with positive images of and interactions with ethnic and
cultural diversity. They learn about and celebrate their own and one another’s identities
and abilities, while simultaneously being invited to extend the boundaries of their
knowledge and skills. All of this occurs in a warm, supportive, affirming, and
33

illuminating classroom climate, in which the use of culturally diverse referents in
teaching and learning is habitual. (p. 52)
Through this and other examples, Gay (2018) posited that environments rich in
cultural/racial/ethnic symbols lead to various forms of academic achievement across diverse
student populations. While Gay’s examples came from K–12, the practices can be implemented
with an age-appropriate lens in institutions of higher education.
One CRT practice that is particularly relevant to STEM includes connecting learning to
students’ communities and values. The idea of “giving back” has been documented in qualitative
research on Native students (Native Hawaiian, Native American, and/or Alaska Native) and
Hispanic/Latine students in STEM who valued their education knowing they could use it to
improve their local communities (Salis Reyes, 2019; Smith et al., 2014; Rendón et al., 2019). In
a study of Native college graduates, Salis Reyes (2019) found that goals around giving back were
intertwined with students’ reasons for seeking higher education:
Because giving back was a central value to them, they were driven by it. …This
perspective extended into every aspect of their lives, including their education. Thus,
their journeys through education, for the most part, were not about whether they should
give back. Instead, through their journeys, they hoped to discover what paths they should
take toward giving back. (p. 618)
A related concept to giving back is communal goal orientation which Smith et al. (2014)
described as being centered “on connecting with and caring for others, working with people, and
working to benefit one’s community specifically or humanity in general” (p. 414–415). Faculty
can leverage the community orientation of their students when designing a pedagogical
approach:
34

You've got to identify the kinds of topics that the students would want to engage in.
Where they're going to say, I'm not just doing this to get a degree and get a good job, I'm
doing this because this is going to give me the opportunity to put something back into my
community to make a difference. To discover something that's going to be revolutionary
and change the world. (L. R. Rendón, personal communication, October 21, 2020)
Another way of conceptualizing this aspect of CRT is through the lens of creativity. A
recommendation by the Joint Working Group on Improving URM Persistence in STEM – a
group convened by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences and the Howard Hughes
Medical Institute – is to “fire the creative juices” (Estrada et al., 2016, p. 4). The work group
stressed that this can be accomplished by connecting how the type of work done in STEM fields
leads to outcomes that are aligned with students’ individual and community values (Estrada et
al., 2016). According to the literature reviewed in this subsection, CRT has a lot to offer students
and is an effective tool for learning. With these ideas in mind, this review now turns to what the
literature has said about student perceptions of the utility value of their coursework.
Utility Value
The research on motivation points to utility value – when a task helps a student reach a
specific goal – as having a positive effect on students (Wigfield et al., 2018). According to one
study, utility-value interventions (UVIs), which make it possible for students to discover the
value and significance of academic activities, have shown positive signs of narrowing
performance gaps among URM and first-generation students taking college biology classes
(Harackiewicz & Knogler, 2018). Faculty can increase the perceived value of the course by using
relevant materials and assignments and by emphasizing how the content is useful (Pintrich, 2003;
Ambrose et al., 2010). When students see the importance of a major-related course, it can propel
35

them to select additional courses that will meet their educational and career goals. Estrada et al.
(2016) also recommended that URM students may find task value by engaging with topics
related to national and worldwide issues such as climate change and clean energy. In addition to
UVIs, other strategies such as problem-based learning and inquiry-based teaching can generate
individual interest by using problems unique to science or other STEM fields (Harackiewicz &
Knogler, 2018). Finally, faculty should create a supportive learning environment for students
who have high self-efficacy and high-value perceptions to retain them within STEM majors.
Without these levers, student motivation can weaken (Ambrose et al., 2010), which may cause
grades to suffer and lead to poor outcomes overall. In this section, the literature delineated ways
in which faculty can influence the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM. The next
section shifts from the role of faculty members to the role of the institution as a whole by
focusing on the types of institutional support that impact STEM retention.
Institutional Support
Retention of STEM undergraduates depends on the level of institutional support students
receive, especially during their first year of college. Key forms of support consist of an inclusive
climate or culture, academic advising, academic support services such as tutoring, and the
provision of undergraduate research opportunities. This section will outline some of the primary
issues surrounding institutional support for racially minoritized students in STEM programs and
also highlight the types of holistic programs that have been shown to create an inclusive and
positive environment to achieve stronger retention outcomes.
Institutional Climate
The inclusiveness of colleges and their academic departments influences students’ sense
of belonging. In a qualitative study of two public universities (one Predominantly White
36

Institution, PWI, and one Historically Black College or University, HBCU) in the same Mid-
Atlantic state, Winkle-Wagner and McCoy (2018) found that the STEM faculty and students
they surveyed believed the campus climate was responsible for their feelings of inclusion or
exclusion. Furthermore, the same study indicated that those at the PWI were more likely to be
influenced by the overall college climate, while those at the HBCU were more influenced by the
culture and climate of their specific department or discipline. In addition to institutional climate,
STEM majors need access to student services such as academic advising to help them navigate
their STEM pathways.
Access to Quality Advising
Providing advising assistance to racially minoritized students who are moving through a
STEM pathway is essential for institutions. The absence of advising or insufficient advising has
been shown to slow down the momentum community college students need to be successful
(Bailey et al., 2015; Packard et al., 2012; Wang, 2017). Advising ratios at community colleges
have been high with some student-to-advisor ratios sitting at 1,000 to 1 (Packard & Jeffers,
2013). Guided pathways that include clear milestones, consistent advising, and case management
tools have been known to positively contribute to graduation and transfer (Bailey et al. 2015).
Solid advising, especially for the mathematics sequence which often serves as a gatekeeper for
entry into other STEM majors such as physics or chemistry, has served institutions well (Bahr,
2008; Bahr et al., 2017).
The function of advisors and the format of information shared with students through
advising interactions is critical. In a qualitative study of community college students in
Massachusetts, students benefited from advisors who passed along knowledge of transfer
requirements, gave emotional support when needed, and modeled resourcefulness (Packard &
37

Jeffers, 2013). The study also concluded that faculty advising can be a powerful antidote to poor
student-to-advisor ratios. In terms of best practices for STEM advising, colleges should include
visual models of their STEM course sequences, and information about the STEM sequences
should be available in multiple modalities (Bahr et al., 2017). Similar to the need for quality
advising is the access students have to academic support services.
Academic Support
Higher education institutions offer many forms of academic support including drop-in
and appointment-based tutoring, virtual and online tutoring, academic preparation boot camps,
embedded tutoring, supplemental instruction, and facilitated study groups with tutoring often
being the most prominent form of support. Institutions often use a combination of tutors
including peer tutors, professional tutors, and faculty tutors. Peer tutoring in STEM coursework
has been shown to have a positive effect on course outcomes for racially minoritized students
(Kisbaugh et al., 2018; Made et al., 2019). In addition to the benefits to tutees, the peer tutors
themselves, including URM students and first-generation students, have reported benefits such as
tutor training, faculty connections, and engagement with other peer tutors (Kisbaugh et al.,
2018).
Some research points to the importance of the timing of academic support for STEM.
Bahr et al. (2017) suggested that what is needed is a concerted institutional effort to help
students, especially if they are not successful the first time they take a given STEM course. To
improve success, institutions should direct resources to the first course in the sequence (college
algebra, introduction to chemistry) because those courses tend to have more Black or African
American, Hispanic/Latine, and American Indian, or Alaskan Native students than the second
course in the sequence (Bahr et al., 2017). In addition to providing tutoring and other academic
38

support, opportunities to conduct research should also be built into the STEM student
experience.
Undergraduate Research Experiences
According to the American Association of Colleges and Universities (2023), UR is a
high-impact practice and is advocated by the National Science Foundation. The Council on
Undergraduate Research defined it as “a mentored investigation or creative inquiry conducted by
undergraduates that seeks to make a scholarly or artistic contribution to knowledge” (2021). UR
can take on many forms and includes course-based undergraduate research (CURE), honors and
capstone projects, independent study, summer research, and internships and co-ops (paid
educational/work experiences) (Rosas Alquicira et al., 2022; NASEM, 2017).
Research has shown that UR is effective for racially minoritized students. Chang et al.
(2014) ascertained that students who participated in undergraduate research experiences were
more likely to be retained. Those who did research increased their STEM persistence by 17.4
percentage points over those who did not participate. Hinton Jr. et al., (2020) pointed out the
need for Persons Excluded from science because of Ethnicity and Race (P.E.E.R.) to have UR
opportunities at their home institution, instead of relying solely on summer externships away
from college.
One particular form of UR mentioned above that is becoming more prevalent is course-
based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs). This format of UR happens when students
enrolled in the same course or course sequence “participate in a discovery-based project
designed to engage them in the use of STEM practices, discovery, collaboration, iteration, and
pursuit of broadly relevant or important work” (NASEM, 2017, p. 13). A recent expansion of
CUREs has been attributed to the desire to provide more students with UR experiences and the
39

support networks and professional development now available to institutions and their faculty
(NASEM, 2017).
There are several advantages to participating in UR in STEM. For example, Estrada et al.
(2018), found that two semesters of research opportunities predicted “science self-efficacy,
identity, and values” (p. 10). Additionally, participation in UR has led to social integration into
professional STEM communities (Estrada et al., 2018). Furthermore, engaging in social change
research or research that will help underserved communities helped STEM bachelor’s degree
recipients embrace democratic values around civic engagement and sociopolitical activity
(Garibay, 2018).
Thus far in this section the research has shown that institutional support by way of a
welcoming college climate, excellent advising, academic support, and UR are all worthwhile
investments for institutions to make to ensure racially minoritized students experience STEM
success. Institutions that have packaged multiple services and practices into one program have
obtained synergistic effects through their holistic approach to success, a topic that will be
discussed in the next subsection.
Comprehensive STEM Success Programs
Many STEM success programs focus on racially minoritized students and other
underrepresented groups such as first-generation students or women. Most of these programs
integrate support and often include financial incentives for participants. Chang et al. (2016)
conducted a study of a National Science Foundation Scholarship program at a western state
institution and found that this program improved URM graduation rates in physical sciences and
mathematics. Significantly, 50% of URMs in the program graduated as compared to 20% of
URMs in the College of Natural Science and Mathematics. For beginning students, required
40

activities included participating in peer study groups or peer tutoring and attending academic
events, including workshops (Chang et al., 2016). The scholarship program provided economic
stability through financial support while also addressing academic and interpersonal needs.
While many exemplary programs take a comprehensive approach, the majority tend to take place
in four-year institutions.
In an essay by the Joint Working Group on Improving URM Persistence in STEM, all of
the model program examples were hosted at universities, many elite and/or private, leaving little
for community colleges to think about due to the difference in resources, student demographics,
and academic goals (Estrada et al., 2016). While some models were linked to national networks,
community colleges did not ever receive mention by the authors. The Joint Working Group
stated that institutions can adjust the successful models to fit their organizational context, their
funding allocations, and where they are in the change process (Estrada et al, 2016); however,
community colleges will be stretched to build robust programs using models better suited for
four-year institutions.
One higher education system that includes community colleges is City University of New
York. As previously mentioned, the system hosts the ASAP program, which includes
comprehensive support for students including those in STEM. Personalized advising is used with
advisors assigned to a caseload of students. The program has required frequent meetings with
students’ academic advisors (Miller & Weiss, 2022). A recent study of ASAP students pursuing
STEM degrees showed their retention rates were higher than a comparative sample of non-ASAP
students in STEM programs. For the fall 2015 ASAP STEM cohort, of which over 71% of
students were identified as racially minoritized in STEM, 69% of the original cohort had been
retained for their fourth semester versus 54% of the comparison group being retained (Kolenovic
41

& Strumbos, 2020). In fact, Kolenovic and Strumbos (2020) calculated that across the entire
ASAP cohort (STEM and non-STEM) the rate of retention for third and fourth semester was 15
percentage points higher than that of the non-ASAP student sample.
In this section, we outlined key forms of institutional support with a short subsection on
college climate followed by four areas where institutions can invest time and resources to
improve the retention of STEM students. The provision of high-quality advising, academic
support, UR opportunities, and comprehensive success programs have all been shown to
positively impact racially minoritized students in STEM programs. The final section of this
literature review includes a discussion of the benefits of diversity in scientific professions and
how diversity in STEM is both a social justice issue and a societal need.
The Diversity Imperative
The racial/ethnic diversity of the American workforce impacts scientific innovation and
problem-solving in complex ways. For example, in the world of artificial intelligence, errors in
facial recognition have major ethical implications and can lead to a decrease in security and an
increase in false positives. Buolamwini and Gebru (2018) found that lighter-skinned men and
women were overrepresented in the data sets used by facial recognition technologies and
therefore, the technologies did not recognize people with darker skin (especially women) to the
same level of accuracy that they did for people with lighter skin. Most of the engineers involved
in the development of the technology were White men.
By helping more racially minoritized students earn a college credential so they can
prepare for a STEM occupation, science will benefit from the cultural awareness and
perspectives of a more diverse workforce. Studies have also shown that identity diversity in work
teams produces better outcomes in terms of problem-solving (Hong & Page, 2004). Hofstra et al.
42

(2020) found that underrepresented groups (URGs) such as women and racialized minorities had
better rates of scientific innovation than majority populations. Espinosa (2011) argued for the
need for diverse points of view and experiences to solve “global health-care, environmental, and
infrastructure challenges” (p. 211). Fry et al. (2021) asserted that the diversification of the STEM
labor force is connected to higher education institutions, while Packard and Jeffers (2013)
singled out community colleges as a primary place to promote diversity in the STEM workforce
due to their history of enrolling high numbers of students who are considered the “most
underrepresented in STEM fields” (p. 65).
Conclusion and Connection to the Study
Thus far this chapter has covered several pertinent areas to this problem of practice.
STEM success has been defined and explored, common barriers for racially minoritized students
have been identified and explained, the role of faculty has been articulated, and the types of
institutional support that are fundamental to graduation and transfer have been outlined.
Additionally, the importance of diversity in STEM was touched upon. Two important groups
who have a close connection to students throughout their academic journey are STEM faculty
and advisors who are uniquely positioned within colleges to act on behalf of students to validate
them and remove the cultural, financial, institutional, and structural barriers they face. Research
on validating agents and institutional agents has been conducted to understand their impacts on a
variety of student populations. While qualitative studies have captured racially minoritized
students’ perspectives on validation/institutional agents at universities (Museus & Neville, 2012;
Rendón et al., 2018; Rendón et al., 2019) and community colleges (Dowd et al., 2013; Museus &
Neville, 2012; Tovar, 2015), less is known about how community college faculty and advisors
view their role in retaining STEM students through the use of their agency. The study by
43

Bensimon et al. (2019) included interviews with four Latine STEM faculty at two universities,
bringing the faculty viewpoint to the forefront in determining how university faculty use their
agency to support Latine students. Similarly, Garcia and Ramirez (2018) used a sample of four
leaders at an HSI to review the role of institutional agents. Bensimon et al. (2019) laid the
groundwork for this line of research as it pertains to Hispanic/Latine students that can be
expanded to examine similar themes within two-year institutions and across additional
underrepresented populations such as Black or African American, American Indian, Alaskan
Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander students.
A lot of the extant literature has been performed on the West Coast in California where
colleges and universities are resourced differently and where the equity agenda permeates the
state’s culture, policies, and laws (see Bahr et al., 2017; Estrada et al., 2019; Tovar, 2015). Less
attention has been paid to community colleges in non-coastal Southwestern states. Wang (2015)
asserted that due to the low cost of attendance, community colleges are positioned to increase
diversity among baccalaureate degree earners, making the setting of this study prime ground for
improving STEM educational pathways. The theoretical framework that underpins this study is
Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (EST). The educational microsystem for STEM
students creates an environment where interactions can be both frequent and personalized.
STEM faculty and advisors inhabit the microsystem of STEM students and can provide
perspectives on their roles and the community college’s role in retaining racially minoritized
students.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework for this study centers on the beliefs and actions of employees
who make up the immediate educational environment of racially minoritized students in STEM.
44

The traditional view of EST uses the concept of nesting to describe and visualize the micro-and
macro-influences on an individual (see Figure 1); however, a newer approach is to conceptualize
the interaction between those in the various systems as networked (Neal & Neal, 2013). This
study will focus on the roles and perceptions of college employees (namely, STEM faculty and
academic advisors) in the higher education microsystem.

Figure 1

Illustration of Ecological Systems Theory with Nested Model (Traditional Visualization)

45

New ways of visualizing EST can increase the usefulness of the theory in understanding
ecological influences on individuals. Bronfenbrenner’s original idea of nesting presumed that
someone within the individual’s microsystem is also part of a more overarching system like
higher education or the U.S. Department of Education when in reality these people are not
embedded within a broader set of institutions (e.g., the mesosystem is not a subset of the
exosystem). Rather, as articulated in Neal and Neal (2013), each system or entity within a system
is networked to the other through social interactions. By focusing not only on a place but on the
social interactions of humans occupying shared physical or virtual spaces, the relationship
among structures becomes more evident. By emphasizing patterns of interaction within a setting,
Neal and Neal (2013) illustrated that social relationships and influences can be visualized more
like a Venn diagram with each system forming an oval and a segment of the overlapping ovals
housing the focal individual. These networked relationships are visualized in Figure 2.

46

Figure 2
Illustration of Ecological Systems Theory with Networked Model

Note. This figure was adapted from Neal and Neal (2013).
Figure 2 demonstrates the myriad of connections between individuals within the college
microsystem. For example, the bottom oval encompassing the student, STEM advisors, and
STEM faculty shows that a microsystemic interaction can occur between advisors and faculty.
While each of these employee types inhabits a different division within the college (student
affairs and academic affairs), they are likely to encounter one another and can interact with each
other to advocate for students. Within the college, an exosystem could be the leaders who report
47

directly to the president (President’s Cabinet) and interact with deans and employees in the
student’s microsystem. Typically, the cabinet members would not directly interact with most
students, but their beliefs and decisions have an impact on students. For the purposes of this
study, EST is accompanied by two major concepts – validating agents and institutional agents.
Validating agents (faculty, staff, and administrators) foster a validating environment
through their teaching, behavior, words, and interactions with students (Rendón, 1994).
Validation theory was designed to affirm students so they recognized themselves as contributing
to the knowledge base and developed a sense of belonging to the college community of learners
(Rendón & Muñoz, 2011). Caring for and supporting students is an important aspect of
validation. The theory was also designed to help students blend in socially and to develop as
college students. Validation occurs both inside and outside of the classroom and is a precursor
and essential ingredient for the involvement of non-traditional college students (Rendón, 1994).
In-class validating agents include faculty, peers, lab assistants, and teaching assistants. Out-of-
class validating agents can be administrators, mentors, advisors, tutors, coaches, and even faculty
(Rendón, 1994). Family members, peers, and friends can also be out-of-class agents.
Validation theory emerged inductively during a study on the transition to college that
emphasized Astin’s (1985) involvement theory (Rendón, 1994). As a result of research on the
Transition to College Project which included a purposeful sampling of first-year students from
four institutions across various regions of the U.S., a new theory was developed. The study found
that non-traditional students struggled with college involvement in their first year, but that they
could be “transformed into powerful learners” through the acts of validating agents (Rendón,
1994, p. 37). The study revealed that community college students and Hispanic/Latine and Black
or African American students hoped to eliminate their self-doubt about their abilities to learn.
48

Additionally, community college students desired more structure as they entered community
colleges and had the most need to be validated academically. Instead of crediting themselves for
getting involved in college, these nontraditional students (first generation, low income, and/or
returning adults) who developed a belief that they were “college material” attributed this change
to people within (faculty, staff, advisors, etc.) and outside of the college (family and friends) who
helped them see they could be contributing members of the college community of learners
(Rendón & Muñoz, 2011). For the nontraditional student, validation preceded student
development and should be prioritized so that it occurs early in the student experience.
Rendón and Muñoz (2011) reiterated that validation theory was designed to affirm
students so they recognized themselves as contributing to the knowledge base and developed a
sense of belonging to the college community of learners. In some ways, validation theory is a
reaction to the entrenched banking model of education described by Freire (1970/1996) where
learners are seen as inferior and where learning is a transaction instead of an inquiry process.
Freire decried the narrative educational process in which teachers tell students facts and students
passively listen and absorb them. He compared students in the traditional educational model to
“receptacles” into which teachers deposited knowledge with teachers having the goal of filling
each student with as much knowledge as possible and good students being willing to receive this
knowledge (p. 53). Building on the work of Freire, Rendón and Muñoz (2011) positioned
students as knowledge creators and articulated a novel form of pedagogy:
A liberatory pedagogy honors diverse ways of knowing, invites all to participate in
knowledge production, allows both teachers and students to be holders and beneficiaries
of knowledge, promotes an ethic of care, helps students find voice and self-worth, and
49

works with a curriculum that is democratic, inclusive, and reflective of student
backgrounds. (p. 22)
Validation is a way to counter the imposter syndrome that is common among some students who
initially struggle with their sense of belonging in STEM. It also frees students from former
invalidating experiences. Validation theory focuses on a proactive orientation for agents who
attempt to reach out to students instead of waiting for students to make the first move (Rendón &
Muñoz, 2011).
In this study, validation theory enhances the theoretical framework of EST by examining
employees in the students’ microsystem as well as the culture of higher education and the
subculture of community colleges. The faculty and advisors in the educational microsystem have
a direct influence on STEM students’ self-efficacy. Interview participants were asked to reflect
on the setting of the college learning environment both in the classroom and outside of it and
they were asked to share thoughts about how affirming gestures and interactions help racially
minoritized students.
A parallel concept to validating agents is that of institutional agents. Bensimon et al.
(2019) described institutional agents as those who are aware of oppression within the academy
and work toward the success of minoritized students. Stanton-Salazar (1997) introduced
institutional agents in the context of minority youths with working-class backgrounds. Using
social capital theory as the basis for his approach, Stanton-Salazar researched the obstacles for
these youth in accessing traditional networks in schools and communities and the challenges in
building relationships with agents outside of their family groups. Institutional agents were
originally described as people who could provide or negotiate the provision of “institutional
resources and opportunities” (Stanton-Salazar, 1997, p. 6). Stanton-Salazar (2011) revisited the
50

social capital framework to illustrate how high-status individuals (who are nonparental adults)
with authority empower low-status youth by giving support and conveying resources. The
emphasis was on developing youths socially and helping them with educational achievement.
Stanton-Salazar’s thinking evolved to include the idea of empowerment agents who go beyond
the role of an institutional agent by giving youth access to the networks and resources they need
“to transform themselves, their communities, and society as a whole” (2011, p. 1068).
Bensimon et al. (2019) built on the work of Stanton-Salazar with low-status youth by
looking at how institutional agents within higher education transmit knowledge and resources to
Latine college students. In a case study on Latine STEM success, Bensimon et al. (2019) focused
on the role of faculty in helping students develop into scientists including trying to modify the
STEM department culture which was influenced by White ways of knowing and doing. Dowd et
al. (2013) interviewed ten low-status students (those with a non-dominant racial/ethnic
background and a low socioeconomic status) who had successfully transferred from a
community college to a selective four-year institution. The study found that institutional agents
were key to democratizing education (allowing access to all) because they helped students obtain
a college student identity and they validated this identity more than protective agents, such as
family members and peers, did. These agents also offered a psychological and physical “secure
base” for student development which helped mediate the self-doubt that these students
periodically experienced (Dowd et al., 2013, p. 22). Furthermore, these agents could also reverse
the effects of adverse educational experiences from the past that had hindered students’
development of a college identity.
Understanding the role of validating and institutional agents contributes to the overall
goal of improving retention among racially minoritized students majoring in STEM at an urban
51

community college. Furthermore, this study reveals important insights into how networked
relationships among STEM faculty and advisors could contribute to student retention. It also
identifies recommendations for policy and practice to increase the frequency and quality of
validating experiences and to eliminate barriers to STEM success.
Summary
This chapter has highlighted current research on racially minoritized college students in
STEM programs of study. STEM momentum is a critical concept within the student success
literature. Several measures of success have been identified through extensive research. Despite
major investments in STEM education, barriers to student retention have remained and include
course placement policies, the price of college, and weak transfer pathways. STEM faculty have
continued to play a huge role in STEM retention due to their mentoring, individual identities, and
teaching practices. Institutions can improve student retention by cultivating an inclusive climate,
ramping up advising and tutoring services, incorporating UR into the student experience, and
developing holistic support programs for racially minoritized students. The need for belonging
and affirmation, coupled with the provision of resources and removal of institutional barriers to
success may point to a powerful approach by which faculty and academic advisors can promote
student retention through their agency.
52

Chapter Three: Methodology
Chapter Three provides a roadmap for the study methodology and how its design
supports the achievement of the study’s purpose. The purpose of this study was to explore the
perceptions of community college faculty and academic advisors as it relates to the retention of
racially minoritized students in STEM programs. The study sought to understand the roles
faculty and advisors within a large urban community college believe they play in STEM student
retention, the types of affirming actions they employ to promote student success, and the use of
institutional agency to provide institutional resources and/or to remove barriers faced by
students. The chapter includes the research questions, a discussion of the study design with its
method, and a description of the study setting and the researcher. Data sources for the research
method, including the sample study populations and recruitment activities, and the data
collection instrument and procedures are outlined. The chapter also covers the study’s validity
and reliability and ethical considerations.
Research Questions
This study encompassed three research questions related to student retention, student
affirmation, and institutional agency. The research questions guiding this study were the
following:
1. How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college view
their role in the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM?
2. What validating actions are faculty and academic advisors within a large urban
community college engaging in to affirm racially minoritized students in STEM?
53

3. How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college use their
agency to provide institutional resources and/or remove barriers for racially minoritized
students in STEM?
The overall design of the study provided an opportunity to gain insights into each of these
questions.
Overview of Design
This study used a qualitative approach to research and consisted of interviews with
STEM faculty and interviews with academic advisors assigned to work with students majoring in
STEM fields. Interviews are a way to identify common attitudes, beliefs, and experiences about
the research topic. Interviews were preferential to focus groups in this context because they
allowed for in-depth exploration of each topic by the individual. Focus groups sometimes result
in group talk which influences the responses of group members (Crawford & Lynn, 2020), so
this method was avoided in the present study. In terms of the interview format, semi-structured
interviews are good for ensuring the researcher is collecting comparable data from the
participants (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). The interview protocol (shown in Appendix C) included a
core set of questions and probes to assist in response elaboration when necessary. There was a
plan to cover questions in a certain order, but depending on the responses and direction of the
conversation, the order was sometimes adjusted to create a natural flow between topics.
Participants included ten STEM faculty members and five academic advisors.
The paradigm of inquiry for this study is social constructivism, a worldview that is often
paired with qualitative research. By using open-ended questions, a constructivist researcher
becomes privy to complex perspectives among the participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
This worldview also takes into account how the research setting is influenced by history and
54

culture, which in turn allows the researcher to “address the processes of interaction among
individuals” (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 8). The constructivist worldview is pertinent to this
study because the participants in the study generated meaning by considering which educational
practices were affirming and which uses of institutional agency were or could be associated with
improved student retention.
Research Setting
Southwest Community College (SWCC) is located in a non-coastal state in the Southwest
region of the United States and offers transfer and non-transfer associate’s degrees as well as
certificates. The college belongs to a large urban community college district with a publicly-
elected governing board. The purpose of the organization is to meet the learning needs of the
local community including degree and certificate attainment, preparation for university transfer,
and lifelong learning. SWCC is a guided pathways college, which is a college that designs clear
paths and structures to better assist students in meeting their educational and career goals (Bailey
et al., 2015). The college also achieved the status of a Hispanic Serving Institution in the last
decade and has received two Title V (Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program) grants
to improve services and outcomes for Hispanic/Latine students. The Hispanic/Latine student
population at SWCC is over 30%.
Participants
This study consisted of 15 interviews with STEM faculty and academic advisors. These
two employee types were selected because they have a lot of direct contact with students and
have observed and/or participated in practices that contribute to retention in STEM courses and
programs. This study included five interviews with faculty from the Math and Computer Science
department and five interviews with faculty from the Physical Science department. For the Math
55

and Computer Science faculty, purposeful sampling was used to gain the best understanding of
the research topics (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For faculty who teach math, the participant pool
only included those who teach math courses in STEM pathways such as college algebra,
precalculus, calculus, differential equations, and discrete mathematics. For physical science,
those who teach physics and chemistry courses were invited to participate. Potential candidates
were informed of the inclusion criteria (STEM faculty, employed full time at the college) and the
exclusion criterion (less than one full semester of teaching at the college). Using inclusion and
exclusion criteria ensures that the study participants have the desired characteristics for the study
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
The second set of participants was academic advisors who work with STEM students.
SWCC has a guided pathways approach to advising which means that full-time advisors are
assigned to work with students based on their meta-major, or cluster of majors “that provide
students with a clear pathway to graduation, and help them make connections between their
studies and different career tracks” (EAB, 2016). The advisors in this study included those who
work with students in multiple STEM disciplines such as astronomy, biology, chemistry,
computer science, engineering, geology, math, physics, and technology-based fields such as
computer information systems and computer science. These advisors do not work with nursing
students. The goal was to use a census sample due to the smaller number of advisors dedicated to
STEM; however, not all advisors in this category were able to participate. Five advisors who
work with STEM students participated in the study. Some of the advisors in this study are
assigned to work with specialized populations that include a majority of racially minoritized
students and they typically work with cohorts. Those who do not work with a specialized
56

population have a larger number of STEM students to serve, and they may not have as many
interactions with their STEM students.
Of the 15 participants, eight identified as men and seven identified as women (see Table
1 for demographic characteristics including race and ethnicity). Table 2 includes the average
years of service and the range of years by employee role. Notably, the tenure for faculty
participants was much higher than that of the advisors with the participating faculty average of
12.4 years and the advisor average of 2.3 years of full-time service in advising at the college.
Participants worked at one or more of the SWCC’s two full-service campuses. Five participants
identified as holding a leadership role at their primary campus.
Table 1

Participant Gender and Racial/Ethnic Identities, n=15

Demographic Characteristics n %

Gender

Men 8 53

Women 7 47

Race/Ethnicity

Asian 1 7

Black/African American 2 13

Hispanic/Latine 3 20

White 9 60

Note. Participants verbally self-identified in response to open-ended questions.

57

Table 2

Participant Tenure at the College, n=15

Employee type n Average in years Range in years
Academic Advisors 5 2.3 1-5
Faculty 10 12.4 4-21

Note. Participants self-reported the years they had served as full-time employees at the college.

The Researcher
As a leader in higher education, I have multiple identities and experiences that inform my
practice. I am a White woman who has been educated at private universities (for my bachelor’s
degree and my doctoral studies) and a major public research university (for my master’s degree).
I am a continuing-generation college student from an upper-middle-class background. I work in
higher education as a program director where I have the privilege of working with first-year and
first-generation college students. I am familiar with some of the faculty and advisors who
participated in the study. I have studied Spanish at the graduate level and have lived in Central
America. I have an affinity for the Hispanic/Latine community including people who are
undocumented or have Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status.
I was raised to believe in a system of meritocracy wherein society rewards effort. In the
past, my White privilege made it possible to ignore prejudice, internalized oppression, and
systemic racism (Tatum, 2001a), factors that continue to operate in institutions of higher
education and that influence student behaviors and outcomes. To keep these factors in check, the
interview questions used in the study did not focus on what outcomes students or employees
deserve based on their efforts; rather, the questions emphasized what employees say and do to
improve retention outcomes for a specific student population.
58

My status as a non-faculty/non-advisor meant that I had to intentionally build rapport
with the study participants. I am also not a subject matter expert in any STEM field. Trust
between the researcher and study participants had to be earned, so I attempted to create an
environment where participants felt their identity and responses would be treated as confidential
and that the information would only be used for the stated purposes as outlined in the study
information sheet and recruitment communications. I did this by reiterating the voluntary nature
of the study and emphasizing the protections afforded to study participants.
Data Sources
This study contained one method, that of individual interviews, which were used with
STEM faculty members and academic advisors assigned to work with STEM students. One
interview protocol was employed, with certain questions applying to advisors and others to
faculty when the phrasing needed to be altered to account for the employee type being
interviewed. Data collection occurred during October and November of 2022 and data analysis
took place primarily in early 2023.
Semi-Structured Interviews
Interviews are employed in qualitative studies when the information researchers seek
cannot be observed (Patton, 2002). Due to limitations to the researcher’s time, it was not feasible
to observe all the interactions and practices between faculty and students and advisors and
students; therefore, interviews were a realistic way to capture a significant amount of data. As
asserted by Patton (2002), “Qualitative interviewing begins with the assumption that the
perspective of others is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made explicit” (p. 341). The
interview prompts were designed to bring the observations, ideas, and interpretations of
participants to the surface.
59

Instrumentation
Individual interviews were employed for this study. The topics of interest were the use of
affirming practices and institutional agency to positively impact the retention of racially
minoritized students in STEM. Faculty and advisors possess knowledge of their interactions and
behaviors toward students as well as those of their colleagues. The interview format that was
selected was semi-structured because it is a middle ground between highly structured interviews
and unstructured interviews, which are conversational and used for gathering more information
before developing questions for a more structured interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
According to Bogdan and Biklen (2007), the semi-structured interview format ensures that the
researcher gathers comparable data from the participants. Crawford and Lynn (2020)
recommended the semi-structured interview format for researchers new to interviewing. When
time permitted, each participant was asked all the items from the interview protocol (although
the order of questions was altered when needed). In cases where respondents gave lengthy
answers, a set of essential questions from the protocol was used while others were skipped to
honor participants’ time. When additional information was desired from a participant, probes
were used on an as-needed basis to delve further into a response (Crawford & Lynn, 2020). The
use of open-ended questions allows interviewees to respond by using their own expressions and
understandings. Doing so preserves the researcher’s commitment “to capture how those being
interviewed view their world, to learn their terminology and judgments, and to capture the
complexities of their individual perceptions and experiences” (Patton, 2002, p. 348). This
question format helped remove some of the researcher subjectivity by centering the words of the
participants.
60

There were 21 questions in the interview protocol. There were three research questions in
this study and each one was explored through multiple items in the protocol. The main sections
of the protocol were participant background; belonging, inclusion, and validation; institutional
agency; retention; and wrap up. In addition to asking background questions, other question types
used were knowledge, opinion/values, and experience/behavior. Most of the questions were
aimed at determining what STEM faculty and advisors think about validating and empowering
students and which behaviors they have engaged in or seen others engage in. There were also a
couple of questions asking participants to share ideas about how faculty and advisors could
create a more validating and empowering environment. Some, but not all, of the questions
specifically called out racially minoritized students to remind faculty that the study’s purpose
was to find ways to improve retention for these students. This interview protocol can be found in
Appendix C.
Data Collection Procedures
The interview data was collected during SWCC’s fall 2022 semester. Data collection was
concurrent across both stakeholder groups (faculty and advisors). There were more faculty
interviews than advisor interviews, so the faculty interviews occurred over a greater span of
time; however, interviews with each group were conducted concurrently based on the best set of
dates for each employee group. For example, advisors generally have less student traffic in
October than they do in November and December, so there was a priority to conduct those
interviews early in the semester. Recruitment began with an email invitation based on a list
collected from SWCC’s public website that contains class schedules, faculty contact pages, and
advising contacts by meta-major. A copy of the email invitations to participants can be found in
Appendix A and Appendix B. In addition to email messages, phone calls were made to follow up
61

with faculty and advisors. The snowball method was also employed by asking the interviewees
who initially came forward to identify colleagues as potential participants.
Interviews were scheduled via email or phone call and most interviews lasted between 45
and 60 minutes. Participants were invited to attend the interview in person as this modality is
conducive to building rapport with the interviewees for the study; however, three interviewees
participated in a synchronous interview over Zoom. When possible, interviews were conducted
at the campus each employee was assigned to so that participation for faculty and advisors was
more convenient.
Consent to record the interview sessions was sought by including a statement
recommended by Patton (2002) which begins with “I'd like to… record what you say so I don't
miss any of it. I don't want to take the chance of relying on my notes and maybe missing
something that you say or inadvertently changing your words somehow” (p. 381). Interviews
were recorded with a mechanical handheld device. In addition, if an interview was conducted
over Zoom, the interview was also recorded within the platform as a back-up recording. The data
was stored on a password protected laptop and in a Google Drive folder via the University of
Southern California’s (USC) Google Workspace suite. Google is considered secure because it
uses encryption when transferring and storing data. Additionally, USC uses two-factor
authentication to ensure files are not accessed by unauthorized parties. The data was also backed
up on a USB flash drive which was locked up when not in use.
Data Analysis
The data analysis for this study mainly occurred after the data collection was completed.
However, hand-written annotations were added in the margins of the interview notes during and
after each interview. Also, comments and phrases that aligned with emerging themes were
62

highlighted. To prepare the first transcript, an interview transcript was generated by using the
dictation function in Microsoft Word. However, the dictation process in Word was cumbersome
and not as accurate as hoped for, so the remaining fourteen recordings were uploaded to an
online transcription tool, Otter.ai, to produce a verbatim transcript of what was said. Each of the
recordings was then replayed so the transcriptions could be updated to account for inaccuracies.
Replaying the audio recording to compare it to the digital transcription allowed for a clean
transcription of what was shared during each interview.
Toward the beginning of data collection, notes from the first few interviews were
reviewed and emerging themes were identified. Conducting a partial analysis during data
collection is a best practice for qualitative research because it makes the final data analysis more
manageable (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). An open coding approach
was used by identifying units of data that could contribute to the study findings (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Codes included a word or phrase and were grouped into larger categories or
themes. After comparing the codes to one another and observing their frequency in the
codebook, eight themes were selected. Theme and sub-theme labels were derived from the words
the participants said during their interviews, as well as the extant literature on the research topics
and frameworks (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
A comparison of themes identified across employee types was completed to see if there
were categories that were shared. To conduct the comparison, two spreadsheets with topics and
themes were created, one for faculty and another for advisors. Corresponding cells were marked
when an interviewee referenced a specific topic. In addition to providing an overview of the
themes, this technique facilitated an examination of themes that emerged that were unique to
faculty or advisors or that were emphasized more frequently by faculty or advisors. As explained
63

by Merriam and Tisdell (2016), categories should be representative of multiple examples from
the data. Additional criteria for categories are that they are “responsive to the purpose of the
research,” “exhaustive,” “mutually exclusive,” “sensitizing” [helping to explain what the
substance of the content is], and “conceptually congruent” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, pp. 212–
213). While reviewing each transcript, statements that specifically answered each of the three
research questions were also collected in Google documents. Those were later referenced when
deciding which quotations to include in Chapter Four.
The next step in the analysis process was to construct descriptions based on the themes
and look for connections between themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Once the initial list of
themes and sub-themes was outlined, a draft of the findings was produced. Then, as part of the
iterative process of data analysis, quasi-statistics were compiled to demonstrate the number of
participants who provided data on a given theme or sub-theme. According to Maxwell (2010),
the use of numbers in qualitative research contributes to understanding the internal
generalizability of findings in the study context. Maxwell (2010) argued that this form of
generalization is useful in “establishing that the themes or findings identified are in fact
characteristic of this setting or set of individuals as a whole” (p. 478). The quasi-statistics were
shared during the discussion of research findings. The use of quasi-statistics helped keep
researcher bias in check by letting the frequency of themes and sub-themes verify or challenge
the import that had been placed on certain findings in the initial write-up. At that point, some of
the findings were reorganized to reflect the degree to which they had been substantiated by
participants. This analysis activity was paramount to reprioritizing the findings based on their
weight in the data set.
64

In the interpretation phase, a data summary, a comparison of the data to the literature, and
thematic insights were produced. A table and three figures were generated to describe or
illustrate the findings that corresponded with each of the three research questions. The
recommendations section was infused with relevant literature to show how and why the practices
could improve the retention of racially minoritized STEM students.
Validity and Reliability
To ensure the study achieves internal validity, triangulation – which is seen as a credible
strategy by the research community – was employed (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Specifically, there was one research method with multiple perspectives of study
participants. Two academic departments were solicited: the Math and Computer Science
department and the Physical Science department. Full-time faculty who teach STEM-track math,
computer science, chemistry, and physics courses were included in the interview pool. By
utilizing faculty from multiple STEM disciplines, the responses were compared to see which
themes were common across disciplines and whether any of the themes were unique to a specific
discipline. The faculty provided observations and beliefs about in-class and out-of-class
instances of validation and identified uses of institutional agency from the perspective of
academic affairs. Interviewing academic advisors also shed light on validating practices and
institutional agency; thus, providing insights into out-of-class practices and institutional agents in
the student services area.
Strategies that promote the reliability of this qualitative study were employed. The
interview protocol for STEM faculty was piloted, as part of graduate program coursework,
during the Spring 2022 semester with two SWCC math faculty (who did not participate in this
study) to discover if the questions and probes were adequately aligned with the research
65

questions. Immediately following each interview, the interviewees were asked if there were
specific questions that were problematic or unclear for them or if any questions were missing.
This exercise helped to refine the interview protocol before data collection began. Additionally,
the interview protocol went through peer review under the direction of the dissertation chair.
Another strategy is to maintain tight definitions of the interview codes so that the meanings do
not change during the process (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In alignment with this practice, the
codes and their descriptions were periodically reviewed to make sure the organization and
interpretation of the data were consistent.
Ethics
This study followed ethical procedures and methods including obtaining permission from
USC’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) to conduct Human Subjects Research and from the
local site where the research was conducted, which included both a site authorization form and
IRB approval. While this study was deemed exempt for IRB purposes, prospective participants
received a written notification informing them of the purpose of the study and its minimal risks.
The written statement reminded employees that their participation was voluntary and that they
could withdraw from the study at any time. The information was sent through an email invitation
and a hard copy was provided at any in-person interviews. At the beginning of each interview,
participants were read a statement requesting that they allow the researcher to record the
interview to ensure accuracy in data collection. The responses of the faculty and advisors were
treated with confidentiality and personally identifiable information was not shared in the study
findings. Audio and/or video files, interview transcripts, and researcher notes from the interviews
are being stored on a password-protected laptop and backed up in the cloud. Hand-written
66

interview notes have been locked up in a secure location. Codenames were assigned to each
participant and were used when sharing quoted or paraphrased material.
Both the interests of community colleges and their students are served through this
research. Colleges can benefit because they are better able to fulfill their mission to educate
members of the community and provide them with a pathway to graduate and/or transfer. Other
less altruistic yet important institutional outcomes are the increase in revenue through tuition and
other funding sources when students are retained and an improved reputation when more
students transfer or graduate with STEM degrees. Increased retention among racially minoritized
students also helps meet diversity, equity, and inclusion goals. Faculty and staff can benefit when
they learn of the strategies and behaviors of practitioners who are validating STEM students,
providing valuable resources, and removing barriers for them. Students stand to gain if colleges
and their employees engage in more affirming practices and remove institutional barriers for
racially minoritized students in the future. The values informing this study included equity,
inclusion, and respect. Crotty (1998) asserted that constructivism “suggests that each one’s way
of making sense of the world is as valid and worthy of respect as any other” (p. 58). Therefore,
the individual experiences of the participants and their way of doing sense-making about
complex topics was treated with sensitivity and respect. The study results were disseminated to
participants by sharing an abstract with them, which is a gesture that honors the time that
participants took to share their perspectives.
67

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
This chapter includes findings related to each of the three research questions for this
study, including an exploration of the most prominent themes and sub-themes that arose during
data analysis. The themes are reported in order of their salience and are organized under their
corresponding research question. A high-level label has been attached to each of the three
questions: advisor and faculty roles in the retention process (research question one); validating
actions (research question two), and institutional agency (research question three). Table 3 shows
the findings/themes for each research question. A figure also accompanies each research
question to illustrate themes and sub-themes. Throughout the chapter, findings are reported
within and across the three employee groups when group responses elicit a unique pattern. The
three groups are math and computer science faculty, physical science faculty, and advisors who
work with STEM students, with each group consisting of five participants for a total of 15.
As the findings are reported, it may be helpful to consider the number of students being
served by the participants. Based on SWCC’s publicly available class schedule, I estimated that
most faculty in this study would be teaching between 96 and 120 students per semester or 192 to
240 per year. The range exists due to variation in the number of classes taught (usually at least
four per semester) and assumes the classes are at capacity. Thus, the STEM faculty in this study
can impact approximately 2,000 students annually. Based on information obtained from SWCC’s
website and from figures reported by the advisors, it appears that together the five advisors serve
at least 1,800 students per year. While it is not known what percentage of these STEM students
come from racially minoritized backgrounds, about half of SWCC students identify as something
other than White. Thus, the examples of validating actions and institutional agency shared in this
chapter could be influencing several hundred racially minoritized students each year.
68

Table 3
Major Findings by Research Question
Research question Conceptual
framework
Finding
number
Theme
Research question 1
How do faculty and academic
advisors within a large urban
Community college view their role in
the retention of racially minoritized
students in STEM?
Validation
theory and
institutional
agency
Finding 1

Finding 2
Support for navigating career and major pathways

Collaborative models for STEM student retention

Research question 2
What validating actions are faculty
and academic advisors within a large
urban community college engaging in
to affirm racially minoritized students
in STEM?
Validation
theory
Finding 3

Finding 4

Finding 5
Direct communication that affirms and encourages
students
Strategies that positively impact perceptions of
employee availability
Infusing elements of diversity in STEM instruction and
workspaces
Research question 3
How do faculty and academic
advisors within a large urban
community college use their agency
to provide institutional resources
and/or remove barriers for racially
minoritized students in STEM?
Institutional
agency
Finding 6

Finding 7

Finding 8
Extending learning opportunities for STEM students

Removing financial barriers to make STEM education
affordable
Using agency to change individual and collective
policies and practices

69

To contextualize these findings, it is important to point out that race consciousness often
plays a role in participant responses; however, the level of race consciousness among the
participants was not reported on. Among educators, there is a continuum of awareness with race
consciousness on one end and colorblindness on the opposite end (Arthur, 2023; Ullucci, 2010).
Ullucci (2010) viewed race consciousness among educators in light of three qualities: “(1)
teachers understand that racism impacts schools; (2) they acknowledge and draw on the racial
and cultural backgrounds of their students; and (3) they understand the value of culturally
relevant pedagogies” (p. 138). On the other hand, colorblindness has been articulated as “the
inability or unwillingness to see or talk about race and its implications” (Brayboy et al., 2007, p.
174).
The STEM faculty and advisors in this study appeared to be at different points along the
race consciousness continuum with some signaling their awareness of race and their own social
identities quite often while others had only sparse mention of race/social identities. Some quotes
that revealed race consciousness were not included in this chapter to protect participants’
identities. This was a small sample and so the data was not analyzed based on the racial/ethnic
identities of the participants. The level of implementation of validating and affirming strategies
by the participants was not within the scope of this research and the study results are based solely
on self-reporting. Responses to interview questions did not always include references to
students’ race or ethnicity. This could be due to an assumption that since the term racially
minoritized students was used in the interview prompt, it did not need to be repeated. Some
participants defaulted to sharing broader inclusion strategies that support both racially
minoritized students, other marginalized populations, and non-minoritized students. The
70

intersectionality of student identities was also present in the responses with several references to
women in STEM and first-generation college students.
Advisor and Faculty Roles in the Retention Process
As discussed in Chapter Two, retaining racially minoritized students is paramount to
preparing a more diverse STEM workforce. The first research question that directed this study
was: How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college view their
role in the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM? Questions revolved around
participant’s roles and the roles of their employee counterparts (either advisors or faculty),
supportive (or harmful) practices, and future actions that could contribute to an increase in
student retention. The research results showed that faculty and advisors have specific ways they
go about retention work depending on how they view their role or the role of others in the
retention process. There were two major findings for this initial research question. One finding
hinged on career and major preparation and had two primary sub-themes: career
exploration/development and faculty advising. The next finding was based on what faculty and
advisors could be doing in their roles to improve retention given the right data, collaborative
tools, and models. Figure 3 depicts the themes and sub-themes for this research question.
Succeeding the figure is a presentation of data that supports the findings for this section. To
improve the readability and flow of quoted materials, words such as the following were deleted
from direct quotations: you know, like, right, okay, I guess, I mean, kind of, sort of, and um. In
addition, words that were unnecessarily repeated due to natural thinking and speech patterns
were removed. Finally, proper nouns were removed to protect the identities of the participants,
their colleagues, and their institution.

71

Figure 3
Faculty and Advisor Roles in the Retention Process

Support for Navigating Career and Major Pathways
All the advisors and two of the 10 faculty (or 20%) believed their role in retaining
racially minoritized students in STEM consists of preparing students for the workforce, transfer,
and/or professional/graduate school. They often saw themselves as connectors whereby they help
72

students navigate the academic requirements of their field; pursue their academic and career
interests; and build up their social networks. Two sub-themes arose as the most salient points for
this finding. The first sub-theme emphasized the ways in which advisors and faculty craft career
exploration and development activities to solidify major selection and career pathways. The
second focused on the role that faculty can play in advising students as they strive to meet their
academic and career goals.
Career Exploration and Development
All five academic advisors (or 100%) saw career exploration and development as
fundamental to guiding a student and retaining them at the college. While referrals to the Career
Services office are made, advisors also take it upon themselves to give suggestions and coach
students along their way to refining their career pathway and developing knowledge and skills
that will prepare them for the additional schooling their chosen career requires. Some advisors
recommend that their students conduct informational interviews and related activities with
people in their desired field to get a better sense of what they do and what it takes to get into the
field. Advisor 2 suggests students reach out to professionals to refine their career pathway. She
explained:
I will often encourage either if they can [do] an internship or a job shadow, or even an
informational interview, to learn about the realities of the direction they want to go. Or if
they're exploring, talk to someone about [the] realities of different types of jobs that are
potentially interesting to see if that really is the direction they want to go.
Advisor 2 wants students to get exposure to potential occupations while they are still at the
community college so they can confirm their career goals sooner rather than later.
The idea of an informational interview also came up in another interview.
73

Advisor 4 explained:
A lot of times when students would come to me, especially those that might be
undecided, or especially if they're like I've got two or three different ones, I would say,
interview someone who's doing what you want to do. And try to interview two to three
different people that are doing what you want to do so that you can see the ins and outs.
And look at their pathways as far as how they got there because everyone's path is
different. And ask them what education they needed to get to...this position, this career,
what's the best part about the job, and what's the worst part about the job? Because I said
you've got to know the worst part. People forget about that.
Advisor 4 shared several instances where she had connected African American students to staff
or community members who also identified as African American so they could receive
mentorship and guidance about their career interests and goals. She gave an example of
connecting a student to a career professional with a shared social identity:
I had another student who was African American. He was interested in being a dentist.
Now I have a good friend who's a dentist. It's my husband's fraternity brother. [I asked
my friend], “Could you talk to him?” And he said, "Sure." And he talked to him, and he
invited him down to his office and let him shadow him…. I know he did follow up, and
he said he was very appreciative of it.
In addition to the above example, Advisor 4 had a few other examples of building students’
social networks so they would be able to connect with people in their preferred profession.
Advisors were also proactive in putting together panels, webinars, tours of professional
schools, and other events to help students explore career options and to learn about
graduate/professional school. Advisor 1 spoke of a panel offered in fall 2022:
74

What we did is we had a panel of individuals that currently work in some sort of
computer or technology field….It was very interesting, because then I felt like the
students were able to get information from people in the industry or the professionals that
coming from an advisor might not be as authentic, because I'm not a technology or a
STEM person myself.
For this panel, there was some thought put into inviting panelists who represented diverse
backgrounds to make them relatable for students. Advisor 3, who also helped plan the panel,
believed that “this past event that we had, we purposely targeted a diverse panel. So we included
women...we tried to represent every group in our search for a panel, and I think we did very
well.”
Advisors also gave evidence of other career development events that are regularly
planned for STEM students. Advisor 4, in conjunction with a biology faculty, organizes tours of
medical schools, lines up guest speakers, and plans webinars on applying to professional schools.
She actively lines up the professional school webinars with admissions officers and students. She
explained the substance of these webinars:
They have current students and [the] admissions officer that will tell them ‘This is the
type of candidate that we're looking for.’ Then the students that can say, ‘This is what we
went through to get here, and this is what life is like as a student.’ So I've done about five
or six of those, and they've been really well received. The students and the faculty seem
to like it. They're appreciative that I do it. And I will say, each one we've had about
anywhere from 15 to 25 students.
Advisor 4, who works with many pre-med and pre-dental students, provides students with ideas
on how to prepare for the professional school application process. These hints give students the
75

tools early on so that they are not behind their peers who start at a four-year institution. She
described her recommendations:
I talk to them about the journey of what it's going to take to become a doctor, everything
from your personal statement, how important that is, letters of recommendation,
community service, clinicals, and trying to get those…. I really try to get them to start
thinking of their application now. And carrying a journal with them. And I said whenever
you get a chance and you display some type of characteristic that you think will get you
into medical school, dental school, jot it down, because when you go to write that
personal statement, then you have a plethora of information.
Giving the students a head start on their personal statement plants the seeds of retention across
the community college and the transfer-institution.
Assisting students with industry-specific job opportunities is also a way advisors
contribute to career preparation. Advisors say they frequently point students toward jobs that will
make them better candidates for positions after they finish their education. Advisor 1 spoke of
her non-transfer bound students:
Sometimes, if they're not university track, and they want to try and get an associate’s and
try and enter the workforce after graduation, we really stress that a degree or certificate
alone is not going to help you get a job right away. A lot of times you need to have a foot
in the door, get some experience either as a job or an internship.
Advisor 5 explained that he also wants to assist students to cultivate a clear career pathway:
So I give them options. So I give them the internship opportunities, I give them how to
grow within that field. …So a lot of the careers that I see is like in engineering, nursing,
dental hygiene, because [SWCC’s] program is really strong within those fields. So, I
76

think it's just like more so than exploration, I think it is nurturing that career path of their
choice.
These examples show how advisors act as both guides and connectors for STEM students who
can benefit from the knowledge of community college professionals.
In addition to the ideas shared by advisors, two out of five (or 40%) of math and
computer science faculty were excited about their role in developing student interest in STEM
subjects beyond what is happening in the classroom. Faculty 1 was enthusiastic about bringing a
practice from a former institution to SWCC. He said his department could use the Math Club “as
a vehicle to seek out minorities in STEM to talk about interesting things…maybe career
focused.” He elaborated on the events held during an annual Math Awareness Month at a
previous community college he had worked for:
We had some guest speakers from different fields come in and talk about how they use
math in their job, and how important math was to finishing their degree, and getting their
current job and stuff like that. …And we tried to seek out African Americans…because
our population there was almost 40% African American at the campus I was [at]. But you
know here being HSI we could try to get some Hispanic individuals with STEM careers. I
think that could be a powerful thing that our department could do.
Faculty 4 tries to develop students professionally so they can be ready for upper-level
coursework or graduate school. If he has an honors student, he will have them go through the
steps of what it would be like to prepare a paper for publication. He explained:
And then do it as if you are publishing in a journal. And that way I'm slowly teaching you
how to do research and…sometimes I even require that they use a mathematical software
that's used in publishing papers…called LaTeX. The reason being you learn how to write
77

papers. The reason is, when you go to grad school or undergrad, somebody might make
you do something that you have to publish. It has to be done in LaTeX.
While only a couple of faculty contributed to this sub-theme, the ideas shared above could be
pivotal to developing career pathways for racially minoritized students in STEM programs of
study.
In conclusion, this segment explained that to help narrow students’ career choices,
prepare them for transfer or graduate school, and assist them in acquiring knowledge or skills in
a STEM occupation, advisors provide and encourage participation in several student
development activities. These activities include engaging with working professionals; attending
webinars on careers, transfer, and graduate school; and learning about career pathways and
qualifications. Advisors promote student self-awareness, networking, and job skills which help
racially minoritized students pursue their academic and occupational goals. The study showed
that faculty can also contribute to these efforts, but they may not have as much time to devote to
career exploration and development as their colleagues in advising. The next sub-theme
examines the vision participants shared for faculty involvement in STEM retention.
The Potential of Faculty Advising
Seven participants (two advisors and five faculty) discussed the role of faculty as it
relates to advising functions. Most notable was the math and computer science faculty with four
of five (or 80%) discussing faculty advising and faculty advising models. These faculty had all
engaged in informal advising activities throughout their careers, and most of them brought up
more formal faculty advising models they are familiar with that might serve STEM students
well. In his reflection on the potential of faculty advising, Faculty 1 stated:
78

I've never worked at a place that uses that model, but I really think that could make a
positive impact in terms of retaining STEM students that say, “I want to do STEM,”
getting them through the finish line. I think having a STEM faculty advisor could help
with that.
Another faculty admires the advising efforts of a math faculty he knows at one of the state’s
public universities. He described what the faculty does to reach out and connect with minoritized
students in an advising capacity:
He reaches out to every declared STEM major at [the university] who are minority,
underrepresented students. He reaches out to all of them, and he invites them to meet
with him. And he will meet with every single one of them if they say yes. And he just has
a conversation about what are their goals. He works in math, because he'll say, you know,
well if you're a electrical engineers, you know, maybe a minor in math will actually help
you quite a bit. You’ll learn this and this and he has developed a strong cohort of
undergraduate math majors and minors from underrepresented groups. Just personal force
of will and making the effort and making a connection. ’Cause these students will meet
with him and say, "Wow, that guy's like, that guy looks like me. He's a math professor
here.” …It changes people's minds.
Faculty 3 feels that faculty advising is even more effective when students share a social identity
with the faculty.
Faculty 9 believes that subject matter expertise is a reason that faculty should offer
advising support to STEM students. He stated:
I think a chemistry person would be the best person to help a student be successful in
chemistry or an engineering faculty would be the best person to help a student be
79

successful in an engineering program, because they took all those classes, they know
what it took for them to be successful. And they know things that they did wrong, that
didn't help them very much. And they can open up to their students about that. So I would
like to see a different model of advising where the content experts do advise students in
that content area, and then link up with transfer specialists, as well.
In addition to the expertise possessed by faculty, another factor is the span of time over which
faculty can interact with students. Advisor 2 makes a connection between the time faculty get to
spend with students and retention. She believes that this time can be leveraged to solidify
students’ pathways in STEM. She said:
I think faculty really need to talk to students more about the career direction, get them
invested in the STEM field. …In my mind, a lot of the retention happens on the academic
side because they're the ones that are with them for potentially four months at a time.
Whereas in advising, sometimes we see them after the problem has already gotten so bad,
they're ready to give up. If we see them at all. ...There's plenty of students who don't even
attempt to see advising. So while I do think we play a role in retention, I think the biggest
aspect of retention comes from the academic side.
According to Advisor 2, the consistent contact between faculty and students makes faculty an
ideal part of the retention team for students.
In this finding, career exploration and development were explored as a critical factor in
retention with advisors being the most likely participants to report their actions to support
students to navigate career and academic pathways. Additionally, views about how faculty can
serve as advisors were discussed with some participants explicitly advocating for a faculty
80

advising model. In the next section, ideas about collaboration between faculty and advisors are
shared.
Collaborative Models for STEM Student Retention
During the interviews, understaffing in STEM advising and lack of time to spend with
students were two major concerns expressed by both faculty and advisors. Several participants
had ideas about what they would do to retain students if they had more time. Nine out of 15
participants (or 60%) commented on collaborative models involving multiple stakeholders. The
most common language used to describe this approach revolved around teams and case
management so that cohorts of students could receive more intentional outreach and follow-up.
Additionally, participants were interested in using data and early alert tools to enhance retention
efforts in STEM at SWCC. Eleven of 15 interviewees (or 73%) touched on student data and
early alert software.
Teamwork and the Case Management Advising Approach
When sharing their perspectives on the roles that faculty and advisors play in the
retention of racially minoritized students, many participants advocated for a team approach to
retention with several pointing to a formal case management advising model as being
advantageous. In terms of teamwork, Advisor 2 would like to see more collaboration and would
like to further develop the STEM community at SWCC. She stated: “The new population is
growing. But we just keep losing [existing] students and we don't really know why. I think there
needs to be more of a bridge between student services and the academic side.” Advisor 1 sees
benefit in future collaborations between advising and faculty as well. She stated:
One thing I'd also think would be important is to incorporate the faculty and advising in
the same conversation. Because I think when you kind of separate those kinds of
81

conversations, there might be a disconnect of the support services from both either
student support versus faculty support.
Advisor 1 also shared that faculty give advisors tips about specific classes so they know how to
prepare students for challenging courses. She described one experience with this type of
communication:
So for example, in the past, we've had some great communication with our Biology
department. And they did have a session in which they came to us and just addressed
what each biology course covers. And typically what they would recommend a student
would have passed or have experience with before entering the course to ensure that
they're most successful.
From the advising standpoint, this type of back and forth is seen as a promising avenue for future
retention team models.
Faculty have similar ideas about what they should be doing to improve the retention of
STEM students. Faculty 6 opined, “We need to work together because we know we don't have
enough advisors. And the advisors don't know what's going on if the faculty don’t let them
know.” Faculty 7 also had a lot to say about teamwork. She explained her vision as such:
So the role should be the [advisors] and the instructors need to work closer hand in hand.
…We have specific STEM advisors. But I think in an ideal world, they would work more
directly with the faculty to talk about students, maybe on a weekly or every other week
basis, have a little one-hour meeting with the STEM advisor and say, “Okay, this student
might need some resources, that student might need some resources. What can we do to
help this student?” And sort of see it more as a case management sort of approach instead
82

of just I'm teaching the class, you're telling them how to register for next semester, which
I feel like it's more transactional.
Faculty 6 and 7 are united in their endorsement of collaboration with advising with Faculty 7
specifically naming case management as the preferred approach.
Among the participants who brought up these issues, there was a consensus that some
form of case management is an optimal component of a coordinated STEM retention effort. Four
of five (or 80%) advisors specifically mentioned case management as an effective retention
model; however, depending on their role or their campus, their student caseload varied. A few
advisors were actively working with a strictly defined cohort; one was assigned to a STEM meta-
major, but also had to serve a general population of students; and another had recently been
shifted from a STEM cohort to do general advising for all students including those in STEM. At
SWCC, the distinction came down to the funding source with the grant-funded advisors devoted
to STEM engaging in some form of case management advising and the college-funded advisors
needing to work with a larger segment of the student population. According to the college-
funded advisors, the volume of students needed to be seen by them precluded them from doing
intensive follow-up with students.
Two of the advisors shared how they have worked with their assigned student cohorts in
a case management model. Speaking of her experience at SWCC, Advisor 3 stated:
And so what my colleague…and I did was target specific minority groups that are fairly
new to college, and we included them to be in our cohort. So that way, we can actively
target them with reminders, activities that we do throughout the year. So that we are able
to see if we could help retain those students. …We've targeted Hispanic, Latinx, Native
83

American, black, or who identified as African American. And then I think there was an
Asian ethnicity as well.
Advisor 3 also emphasized the benefits of working with a specific cohort including interpersonal
connections. Advisor 3 said, “And I feel like that has allowed me to be able to build relationships
with my students, because I have a limit to who I see, and when I see them, and how I reach out
to them.”
Advisor 4 had been a part of a case management team at a prior institution. She worked
with various enrollment services personnel to monitor and support her caseload. She stated that
access to data also played a role in how she conducted her retention activities. She explained:
I could sort through them [the students] and say, Okay, I'm going to look at people that
have been absent from school, or they're on the verge of being dropped. I could sift
through that and call them and see what's going on. (Advisor 4)
Advisor 4 feels that SWCC is close to instituting a true case management advising model across
the college. She thinks that grouping students into cohorts around more discrete majors and
pathways would be more effective than the way they are organized now. Instead of jumbling
them into a large bucket like STEM, they could be broken down into future veterinarians or
future doctors and physician assistants. This type of cohorting would facilitate case management
by making group communication possible while still maintaining accuracy and specificity to
meet the needs of those academic pathways. This sub-theme emphasized the approaches that can
be leveraged so that advisors and faculty cooperate to ensure higher retention rates are achieved
with the racially minoritized student population. The next sub-theme looks at data and an early
alert tool that can further facilitate increases in retention.

84

Data and an Early Alert Tool that Could Improve Retention

Another sub-theme revolving around collaborative models pertains to the access and use
of student data including the information generated by an early alert tool. Viewpoints on access
to data were mixed. Most participants had impressions about STEM success rates at SWCC and
nationally, but only a couple of them had specific statistics at the ready. A couple of participants
were frustrated because data has to be formally requested or it has been limited in the past. Many
participants mentioned having presentations and discussions about student data within their
departments, but they did not think these conversations around data occurred consistently.
Faculty 3 lamented that information about math majors had not been available for most of his
career at SWCC, but he was happy that the data is now accessible. He said:
And it was never possible, my understanding is until just the past few years. …If I
wanted to know who here declared themselves in the math major, that was a question
mark, nobody could answer, or even a STEM major, nobody could answer and I guess
that's different now, which is good.
Faculty 7 said that the physics faculty have engaged in discussions about course-level
data such as pass rates and that she thinks “it’s very important” for faculty to know about the
success rates. She explained, “We're here to teach not just to talk to walls. And if we're not
successful in both carrying forward knowledge and retaining interest in the subject matter, then
we're not really useful.” Two faculty mentioned discussing student-level data with their faculty
mentor to gain insights on how to retain the students. Faculty 6 wants to use previous
performance data to inform how faculty guide students when they are retaking classes. He said:
When I put students in groups, I look at their [student progress] and it's not uncommon to
see 5, 6 attempts at a math class before they get through and same with a chemistry class
85

or something, but I think…we unfortunately don't have personnel to do this, but we really
need to in order to address it, I think the first time a student gets a W or a D or an F we
need to have them sit down with someone and kind of figure out so what was the thing
that caused this, how do we work together to put you in a situation to be more successful
the next time around?
Lack of time to review data and lack of personnel to follow up with students was brought up by
both faculty and advisors.
One solution to improving access to student-level data and STEM-based retention efforts
is to broaden the use of early alert tools. Two advisors and two faculty talked about a specific
early alert tool being used at SWCC to address academic performance. The tool they all referred
to is Dropout Detective. Advisors 1 and 3 feel that the real-time data and communication
accessed through the tool allow for timely student interventions. They especially like the
collaborative nature of the tool. Advisor 3 described the functionality of the tool as such:
So it sends a direct message to somebody. So if the faculty member says, “Student's
missing 12 assignments,” then I reach out. They can tag tutoring, but I also get alerted...if
I'm assigned to them. So I get to see that okay, the…next time they come, I'm going to
make sure it's a talking point like “Hey, how's this biology class going for you?”
According to Advisor 3, use of Dropout Detective is optional for faculty, and that can be a
barrier to optimizing retention efforts in STEM.
Advisor 1 likes the communication features within the tool that make it clear to those
supporting the student what has been done and what comes next. She said:
And that can help with retention in that if a student is struggling, a lot of times faculty
members can create documentation or alerts for particular areas. So whether that's a math
86

retention specialist, or a reading retention specialist or an academic advisor, there is an
easy way for referrals to be made. But I also think it also helps with communication. So
that way, if there's a support team, everyone's on the same page of what kind of resources
have been provided to the student and what the next steps are, and things like that.
According to what the advisors shared, widespread adoption of collaborative communication and
alert tools could be a key component of a team approach to retaining STEM students at SWCC.
In conclusion, evidence shared in this section addressed the first research question about
the perceptions faculty and advisors have with respect to their specific role in the retention of
racially minoritized students. Data from the interviews illustrated how all participant groups
(STEM advisors, math and computer science faculty, and physical science faculty) believe they
play a critical role in the retention of STEM students. Two themes that were the most prominent
were career and major navigation and collaboration. In terms of the first theme, advisors invest
substantial time and effort into helping students explore and develop their career interests and
goals. Participants also think that faculty can play a larger role in this area by instituting a faculty
advising model. For the second theme on collaboration, many participants advocated for a team
approach to retention with more interaction between faculty and advisors. Some even suggested
that case management advising become standardized so that STEM students receive more
individualized attention. Finally, participants advocated for more access to student-level data and
a broader user base for early alert software.
Validating Actions
The second research question that guided this study was the following: What validating
actions are faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college engaging in to
affirm racially minoritized students in STEM? Grounded in the conceptual framework of
87

validation theory, the second question focused on ways in which faculty and advisors act as
validating agents for racially minoritized students in STEM. The questions in the interview
protocol were centered on belonging and inclusion and spanned a variety of settings (inside the
classroom, outside the classroom) and activities (teaching practices, advising practices). The
questions gave participants a chance to describe their own affirming practices or those of their
colleagues/department. Three themes have been identified to demonstrate how faculty and
advisors validate racially minoritized students. The first theme centered on the affirming words
faculty and advisors use to validate students’ identities, boost students’ beliefs in their
capabilities, and help them overcome any academic setbacks that appear in their paths. The next
theme focused on the language and practices faculty and advisors employ to signal their
availability to students outside of class time or advising appointments. The final theme around
validating actions consisted of the ways in which faculty and advisors infuse elements of
diversity in STEM into their instruction and their workspaces. Figure 4 includes a visual
representation of the themes and sub-themes for the second research question.

88

Figure 4
Validating Actions of Faculty and Advisors

89

Direct Communication that Affirms and Encourages STEM Students
Faculty and advisors communicate with inclusive language, encouraging words, and
advice on dealing with hardships to convey belonging and retain students. Faculty can also listen
attentively and provide valuable messaging around their belief in the student. All study
participants (15 or 100%) reported engaging in this type of verbal affirmation and
encouragement. The two sub-themes for this finding pertained to messaging on student identity
and capability and recommendations for dealing with failure or obstacles.
Inclusive Language Practices around Identity and Capability
Faculty and advisors identified key practices related to their choice of language because
of how it signals inclusiveness. Some of the affirming language is used to validate students’
identities and some is used to validate their capabilities and future success. Overall, this type of
communication was employed by eight faculty (or 80%) and three advisors (or 60%). For one,
employees reported being sensitive to students’ preferred pronouns, names, and pronunciations
of names.
Advisor 2 explained her efforts to use more generic plural pronouns when she interacts
with students:
Well, when I meet with students, even when I'm taking notes after, I try not to use
pronouns. I try to use they/them unless I know specifically. One thing I struggle with is
introducing myself with my own pronouns. Like I haven't gotten to where that feels
comfortable yet, but I do make a concerted effort not to assign pronouns to students, and
we do notes in the advising center after every advising session. And I'd say 97% of the
time I use "they/them" or "the student" and not "he/she."
90

Faculty 5 tries to use plural pronouns as well and has students introduce themselves via video so
she knows how to correctly pronounce their names. She explained:
I don't use the term he or she; I use they...knowing their names so what I do is you know,
they introduce themselves. I have them actually create a video of themselves, a Flipgrid
video, introducing themselves so that's how I kind of know how to pronounce their names
and stuff so that I don't call them with incorrect names.
Faculty 6 also concedes that addressing students properly is essential for building relationships
with his students. He said, “I think that trying to make sure that you address individuals by the
name they prefer in the manner in which they prefer is hugely important.” By being deliberate in
how they refer to students, advisors and faculty demonstrate their sensitivity and respect for
differences in social identities like race and gender.
Just as important as how students are addressed, are the words advisors and faculty use to
affirm racially minoritized students who may have doubts about being in college. Messages of
encouragement also constituted a validating practice among STEM faculty and advisors at
SWCC. Advisor 1 admired a colleague who validates her students through her upbeat language.
Advisor 1 explained that she sometimes hears what her colleague says to students due to the
proximity of their workspaces and she has learned from this example. Advisor 1 described what
happens:
And one thing that I love that she does is if it comes up that the student's a first-
generation student, she does a lot of praise of this is a very big accomplishment for you.
She does acknowledge that sometimes it's going to be hard, but this is going to be a great
goal for you. And just a lot of encouragement, but also praise for some of the little
victories.
91

Praise and enthusiasm were common sub-themes among the STEM advisors. Advisor 5 shared
his approach to positive language:
I constantly tell students that they're bright. And there's a reason why you're in the
program. Because they're capable, and yeah, I just reinforce a lot of that "you got this"
notion because I feel like I didn't really get that when I was in high school. I got it more
when I was older, but that's because I was part of those TRIO programs.
Advisor 5 also shared that he thinks verbal messages are important in countering the imposter
syndrome felt by many students.
On the faculty side, an expression of belief in the student was emphasized. Faculty 6 feels
that using encouraging language helps students when they face challenges with their studies. He
stated:
I say that one of the things that an instructor, especially in physics, has to do is they have
to believe for the students that they can be successful until the student starts believing it
for themselves. And I do believe that if you keep encouraging a student [by] telling them
that they can do it that it makes a difference. Let them know that everyone struggles as
they go through this material. That it’s not uncommon and that unfortunately being
uncomfortable is a part of learning. That’s when we actually do the most learning is when
we're uncomfortable.
This faculty conveys his belief in students’ abilities to learn physics. He also helps students
understand that STEM classes are inherently challenging and that the struggle is part of the
learning process.
92

The use of explicit language to reassure students that their faculty are convinced that they
can be successful came through in other interviews. For example, Faculty 9 encourages students
in a similar way. He shared:
And there again, comes my belief that, hey, if you don't give up on yourself, I'm not
gonna give up on you. That's an incredibly strong message that needs to be sent to so
many students, not just from an individual person like me, but from the entire campus.
This faculty observation that the messaging must be consistent in all parts of the college suggests
that there may be an opportunity for campus-wide dialogues about how employees should speak
to students.
Another theme was that community college STEM faculty do not want students to feel as
if they are being weeded out. Faculty 1 shared his strategy for encouraging students early in the
semester:
I definitely try to set a positive tone from the beginning. I'm not going in there saying,
“Look to your left, look to your right, you know, all three of you are going to fail.” I'm
not doing that. But I try to convince them that I'm on their side. I'm here to help you and
so my job [is] to help you be successful. So if you feel like you're not getting what you
need, then let's talk about it. I don't know that I do a good job of keeping that up
throughout the semester, but I definitely try to start the semester in that way. And then, as
the semester goes along, I try to encourage those that are doing good to keep up the good
work and those that aren't I try to encourage them to come talk to me and let's strategize
how we can do better.
Instead of creating a competitive environment where only the top students will move on, Faculty
1 tells students his function is to help each of them find success. Similarly, Faculty 4 likes to
93

build students up with a speech about effort and that it is ok if you have to work hard. He
explained:
The first two weeks I post a lot of stuff about myself and almost like a pep talk of a coach
saying, “Okay, there are two types of people as far as math is concerned, those who are
very gifted” (and I'm not one of them. And those who are gifted usually cannot open an
unlocked door – to stereotype). But then I say, “Most of my students and myself are not
gifted, but we learn it. There's a price to pay to get there. But if you are willing to make
the effort that I've made, you can go this far.”
In summary, referring to students by their preferred pronouns and taking care to learn
names and pronunciations are strategies that faculty and advisors use to affirm racially
minoritized students at SWCC. Other examples in this segment showed that direct
communication with students about employees’ faith in them establishes a culture of belonging
in STEM. The next sub-theme is related to academic mindsets and failure.
Advice on Managing Failure and Growing from It
Advisors and faculty are eager to give advice to STEM students when they face
difficulties in their studies due to the rigor of the coursework and the length of the math and
science sequences. Four advisors (or 80%) and seven faculty (or 70%) shared what they do and
say when students experience academic setbacks When students encounter academic obstacles,
advisors tend to address setbacks by creatively redoing academic plans and trying to minimize
the impact on students’ graduation timelines. This includes offering summer school or winter
intersession classes when students need to retake a class and giving suggestions on how to carve
out more time for studying. For example, Advisor 3 said:
94

Our science or STEM students have a lot of science and math so if they do not pass one,
it can really prolong...the order of the science and other math class that ties in. So one
way that I help ease or relieve them is there are summer options, okay? During summer, I
suggest you cut down your work hours because instead of having four/five months to do
your math class, now you're looking at only two months. So helping them adjust their
schedule, encouraging them, and reassuring them that it can be done. It's just…can we cut
down on your hours for work? Are you able to find childcare? So we look at the other
things surrounding their lives to be able to adjust, and then just hopefully continue so that
they can jump back in and continue with the planned graduation date.
Through the reworking of an academic plan to include a summer or winter session, the advisor
provides hope to students who may feel off track. This allows students to adapt their mindset to
understand that one or two undesirable outcomes does not have to derail their goals in STEM.
Talking about missteps openly with students helps them recognize that failure is common and
that a person can learn from any missteps they make. Advisor 5 talked about how making
mistakes is a natural part of the educational process, especially for younger students. He
described his approach:
You kind of modify the belonging by just letting them know they can make mistakes. A
lot of students are very hard on themselves. I myself was very hard on myself. So even if
the first semester, it's not how they planned it to be, or maybe they're not used to the time
management, the organization skills that as a high school student, you can get away
with...procrastinating, which you can't really do here. So having space to make mistakes,
to let them be themselves, to get them involved, right? To let them know that they have a
place here too, that they're bright.
95

Through their talking points with students who encounter challenges in their coursework, the
advisors minimize the stigma around making mistakes and also open up opportunities to retake
classes.
Faculty are in a unique position because they can observe students before, during, and
after they experience an academic challenge. What faculty say to students can have an impact on
how students view their performance on individual assignments and exams. Faculty 3 attempts to
normalize failure by helping students see the rigor of what they have chosen to do and the
sacrifice that it takes to complete a STEM program. He stated:
Sometimes you have to manage failure for good students, because bright students, and
even hard-working students will fail…in the STEM field because they've chosen to do a
hard thing, right? It's like if you want to go play football in the NFL, by the time you get
to the NFL, you have lost a lot, right? Like you haven't won your whole life. You've lost
a lot to get there. And the same thing will happen with our students.
Faculty 3 shared that he was planning to meet with one of his students who had recently
performed poorly on an exam. He was going to tell her that the exam grade was not a reflection
of how she would do in the class overall. He was going to remind her of how hard the material in
the class was and that no one should lose their confidence just because they might struggle with
some of the course content.
Faculty also sometimes persuade students to remain in a class by explaining that they will
likely do better on future assignments. Faculty 10 recommends students stick with his class a bit
longer even if they have had a poor exam score. He explained:
So I do try and get them to stay a little bit longer, perhaps something will go better.
Especially in that [Physics] 131. There is a third exam, usually electricity. And that's a
96

test that usually goes pretty well. My average on that test this semester was an 88 for a
pretty challenging exam.
By telling students to postpone any decisions about dropping out of his class, Faculty 10 gives
more of them a chance to experience success on an exam so they will feel a desire to persist with
the remainder of the course.
Faculty 2 tries to foster a growth mindset in her classroom so students recognize that
learning takes struggle and that this is a normal part of the process. She stated, “We talk about
learning is messy. It takes tenacity, it takes repetition to build fluency. And that's going to take
time.” By mediating student expectations about what success looks like, Faculty 2 increases the
likelihood that students will persist in challenging mathematics courses. She also helps students
separate performance on an exam from their self-esteem. She shared:
And so trying to teach students you know, your grade is not determining your future.
Your grade is not determining your self-worth. We talk a lot about that in class. And so
trying to separate the two and understanding that a letter grade on a test again, that was
just on that particular day, that's not necessarily a fully accurate depiction of how much
you really understand and know.
Through their inclusive language strategies and encouraging words, faculty and advisors
bolster students’ sense of belonging and confidence. They also provide reassurance when the
challenges of being in a STEM program of study become a reality for students. In the next
section, views of employee availability are discussed, including the way office hours are
positioned to show a desire to assist students and the use of accessibility cues for informal
interactions.
97

Strategies that Positively Impact Perceptions of Employee Availability
Through data analysis, two sub-themes emerged around the theme of employee
availability. First and foremost, faculty and advisors promote the use of office hours by
clarifying their purpose and scheduling office hours with both flexible modalities and locations.
Faculty and advisors also cultivate belonging and inclusiveness by emphasizing their availability
and instituting open-door policies to improve retention. They do so by implementing a variety of
accessibility cues when they are with students. In all, 14 out of 15 participants (or 93%) touted
their availability to students by talking about at least one of the sub-themes.
Language and Practices that Promote Office Hours
A key finding of this study was that faculty and advisors make an effort to retain STEM
students through the way they speak about office hours. Many students do not feel comfortable
seeking out their professors during office hours or are unsure if faculty really want to interact
with them during their posted office hours. Aware of these student perceptions, Faculty 6 spoke
about his efforts to address this issue:
There's so much of that “us versus them” out there that I think that one of the reasons
students don't come to office hours is that they're afraid that if I ask questions that's gonna
give up a weakness and that's going to be exploited on [an] exam or something. I also
think that there must be places where there's kind of the game that’s played. “So, I'm
gonna talk about my office hours now, but we both know that I don't really want you to
come to my office hour.” And I have the darnedest time getting students past that. I think
we need to explain to certainly first-generation students what office hours are. We call
them office hours, but what does that mean? It’s a place where you can come in and get
help, you can ask questions, we can work on the course material together.
98

Another participant, Faculty 7, also confirmed that the effort to demystify office hours is aided
by explicitly explaining their purpose. Faculty 7 described how she makes sure students
understand the function of office hours:
I put a huge emphasis on office hours and coming to office hours. And I know that
sounds like something everyone probably says. But a lot of times our students, especially
from racial minorities, don't understand what office hours are. And so if you just say the
first day of class office hours are these hours each week and leave it at that it doesn't do
anything to help them. But if you go out of your way to talk about the office hours and
encourage specific students to come for specific reasons, and make it clear that it's, in my
case, I treat my office hours more like a study hall would be in an old high school.
In addition to faculty comments about how they frame office hours, three of five advisors (or
60%) also stressed the importance of office hours to students by talking about the purpose of
attending them. Once the concept of office hours has been clarified, faculty go out of their way
to make office hours as accessible as possible.
During their interviews, nine out of 10 faculty (or 90%) shared their scheduling methods,
methods they feel are optimal for students. Many have been able to increase their interactions
with students via flexible office hour practices. For example, five faculty members regularly hold
office hours in the tutoring centers to be more accessible to students and to serve more of them.
Four faculty members take advantage of empty classrooms and schedule office hours in a room,
a practice they say is more convenient for students who can come early to class or stay after class
to work with the professor and classmates on homework, get feedback on how they are
approaching assignments, and receive advice. According to faculty, the familiar setting makes
students feel more comfortable and less intimidated by the term “office hours.” Faculty 6 stated:
99

So one of the things that we've tried to do in the physics discipline where room usage will
allow is that we hold our office hours in the classrooms rather than in our office because
we feel that students feel more comfortable if they're in a group or if they don't have to
come in specifically. We try to do it either before the class or right after the class so that
if the student doesn’t have another class that they're there and they can get help. I think
the more that students can interact with their faculty outside of the classroom to see them
as a person as well as an instructor is useful.
This scheduling trend is also evident with some math and computer science faculty. Faculty 5
shared:
When I'm in person, I offer them…in a classroom because students feel it's more
accessible, instead of coming to the office. It's a small space and things like that. So I like
to do it in a classroom so that students feel comfortable.
Faculty also indicated that part of the reason for moving into a classroom was spurred by the
COVID-19 pandemic. Faculty adapted their office hours location so that more students could
participate without having to worry about being in close proximity to others.
Another benefit of locating office hours in a classroom is that it opens up opportunities
for students to participate virtually when the room is equipped with the right technology. HyFlex
(short for Hybrid-Flexible) classrooms allow faculty to work with both in-person and virtual
audiences at the same time. Faculty 3 shared:
But then this semester, I'm doing it in the classroom between my two classes, my two in-
person classes. And that's helped too. It's a nice…HyFlex room. So I can do in person
with virtual students at the same time. And it happens.
100

Other faculty like the idea of helping students who may not have childcare or who may only be
available in the evenings. Faculty 1 conducts office hours in a HyFlex format to accommodate
multiple modalities. He explained:
I have my in-person office hours scheduled, but…I'm in a Google Meet at the same time,
so I could have one student in my office and one student on my computer. Some of the
students they can't come on a day they don't have class because they'd have to get a
babysitter and all that kind of stuff. So I make my office hours flexible, where we can do
virtual or in person. I don't have set evening office hours, but I do have appointment slots
I open up. So if a student…can only meet with me at night, they can make an
appointment, and I'll get on a Google Meet with them.
Based on the statements shared by faculty, it appears that lessons from the pandemic about using
flexible modalities continue to be leveraged to some degree by SWCC faculty.
One faculty identified advantages to providing office hours outside of her office. Faculty
2 commented on the benefit of helping students become familiar with tutoring services and
specific tutors who can help them out in the future. She specifically felt this was an effective
practice for her Hispanic students who were sometimes reluctant to seek out help, but who were
very receptive once a faculty member made an invitation. Faculty 2 asserted:
Holding my office hour once a week in the tutoring center is a great way to encourage all
students to come to the tutoring center. And then once they're introduced to the [tutoring
center], they're more apt to return. They've had that initial positive experience when they
met me there. Perhaps they have met with a tutor, or at least I've introduced them to some
tutors. They're more apt to come back. So it's that encouragement from me. But not just
101

telling them, here's the tutoring opportunities, you should take advantage of them, but
walking them to the tutoring center.
Taking the time to approach individual students who are struggling and guiding them through
support services from office hours to tutoring to everything in between is an approach that many
participants ascribed to. The next segment covers how messaging around faculty and advisor
availability outside of class and formal visits is deemed essential to retaining racially minoritized
students.
Accessibility Cues that Encourage Interactions with Students
As discussed in the literature review, research has shown that perceptions of availability
and the frequency of faculty-student interactions are often mediated through accessibility cues.
In the present study, employees reported verbally telling students during class or meetings that
they have an open-door policy to assist with both academic and personal concerns. For example,
Faculty 4 expressed his willingness to answer questions about any topic:
The most important thing that I think I can do, and I always do, is say, “I'm available.
Come to me, and we could talk about anything. You can ask me anything that you want
to ask.” And sometimes some of them do go into deep questioning of things that
happened to them in their lives and ask if I have gone through that, like student loan or
these other issues. Yeah, I can answer the question. If I can be of any help in having you
figure out your own life, I will do it.
In addition to what happens during class, some faculty believe the time they spend on
campus at public activities and events also signals a willingness to interact with students. One
faculty indicates his openness to STEM students by being visible on campus. By participating in
clubs and other activities, this faculty member has established a reputation of being someone
102

willing to connect with students outside of class to support them with their interests. Faculty 3
described how this works:
Faculty have to do things on campus to be part of campus life. And then students will
find you. I joke around with this with some [of] my colleagues, like, random students just
show up at my office door. I mean, sometimes wonderful, sometimes all kinds of crazy.
And it's just because somehow I've just been out there enough that they just find me.
Even students I don't know, like, maybe a friend of a friend told them, oh, you should talk
to [Faculty 3]. He's really into 3D printing or whatever, right? Just have to be involved on
campus in a lot of ways so that you just have a presence, and students will come find you
and then be open to it.
Faculty 4 also mentioned that he makes presentations at some of the club meetings and that he
readily shares his contact information with students he meets at the club even though they have
never been in one of his classes. He described the connections that can be made in this setting:
Make a presentation where you meet up with students who have never been your students
who somehow feel so interested in what you are doing…that they want to have your
contact [information]. They have never been your students, but they somehow keep
sending you questions about things. I am not shy talking about my story. And I feel like
anyone who can grab one piece of it and make it their own, great, wonderful.
Both of these faculty, members of the Math and Computer Science department, find ways to get
involved at the college so they can become an available resource to STEM students who are not
enrolled in their classes.
Others faculty tell students that thanks to technology, they are available on demand.
Faculty 6 lets his students know he is available via email after hours. He does this because he
103

wants students to use him as a resource when they have difficulties with the course content. He
explained:
One of the things that all students and I’m guessing that minority students feel this
probably even more so because of either cultural or experiential things. They seem to
always start emails, “I'm sorry to bother you.” And I'm like, “Bother me.” I said, “If I
don't wanna read my e-mail I promise I won't read my e-mail, but if you have a question
send it.” I make big points about… I always check my e-mail nights and weekends
because I understand that there are limited resources for you to consult as you’re
progressing through this course and if you're stuck, you're stuck and you’re not making
progress and I'd like to help you get unstuck as soon as I can. (Faculty 6)
By responding to student questions about their homework around the clock, Faculty 10
shows that he cares about his students’ learning and that he does not reserve class time as the
only time to interact with students academically. Faculty 10 said:
Just reaching out to my students outside of class know that I'm available to them pretty
much 24/7. But I hold my office hours down in the tutoring centers so I see them there.
They are constantly emailing me. We have an online system now where they can actually
just click a button on every question [that] is assigned and send me questions about them.
And I find that students are doing that often.
Advisors also take advantage of accessibility cues by encouraging informal contact with
students. One advisor tells his students to stop by for a casual visit even if they do not have an
academic concern to share. He said the students can simply talk about how they are doing and
share any news they have. This type of contact allows students to build rapport with employees
even if they do not have an immediate academic need and can lead to further contact down the
104

road when help is actually required for a student to be retained at their institution. Advisor 5
described how he presents this opportunity to students:
I always tell students, ..."Hey, you can come visit me, even if it's not a need, just come
say hello." I think that makes a difference because they know that I'm there. I want to see
them because I want to see them, not because I'm helping them with, like, if there's a
reason why their financial aid is not working properly, or whatever the reason is. So I let
them know, "Hey, come visit. Come say hi."
Advisor 1 also sends a message to students about being a resource whenever something is
needed. She said she lets “them know that they have an outlet of someone to ask a question, no
matter how simple or complex the question might be.” Advisor 3 also indicated her willingness
to meet up with students for both professional and personal concerns. She said:
I encourage students to meet with me, like I mentioned before, not only just to
know...what classes to take...next semester, but to check in with me personally and share
any other good news, bad news, any other updates, so I welcome that.
Open-door policies around student-employee interactions such as the ones documented
above let students know that employees care about their well-being and can provide holistic
support when students experience challenges that could impact their persistence. Notably, almost
all interviewees expressed a desire to have more time to spend with their students. The final sub-
theme for this section hinges on ways that diversity is incorporated into coursework and the
physical environment.
Infusing Elements of Diversity in STEM Instruction and Workspaces
The study produced numerous examples of how faculty and advisors take deliberate
measures to highlight diversity in STEM. This is often accomplished through examples and
105

images of diversity in course lectures and course materials. Faculty also leverage culturally
relevant science topics and projects to demonstrate the ways in which STEM can be of interest to
racially minoritized students and help solve community problems. Another vehicle for
communicating that diversity is valued is through visual images and symbols found in
workspaces and buildings.
Validation and Engagement through Course Lectures and Content
The present study found that faculty are intentionally infusing discussions and images of
scientists from a variety of backgrounds so that their curriculum includes evidence that racialized
minorities have contributed positively to STEM. For example, some faculty integrate the stories
of diverse scientists into class lectures as an affirming practice. This helps demonstrate the role
that racially minoritized professionals have contributed to scientific discoveries and applications.
Faculty 8 described how that concept has been applied in chemistry:
So over the last couple of years, there's been a push to try and include people of different
ethnicities and the contributions they've had to chemistry. …While they didn't contribute
major laws, they did contribute major advances forward in things like pharmaceuticals
and material sciences. So…highlighting the accomplishments that were made, even
though they don't correspond to any sort of fundamental level, they certainly had a big
impact on our society.
Speaking of how he approaches the first day of class, Faculty 4 shares examples of diverse
scientists to provide racially minoritized students with opportunities to identify with someone
who may have a similar social identity. He said:
I usually bring a poster of someone. The poster of the person I usually bring is this lady.
…Her name is Gladys West. Gladys West is a 90-year-old African American lady who
106

was born in a farm, grew up in there, had difficulties going to school. …And she ended
up going, having a lifetime of hardship, extreme, extreme hardship, and yet somehow
ended up being a math teacher. [She] went into an HBCU university, got a master's
degree, taught, and then get hired by the US military in a naval base. Why do I bring her?
Because the lady's picture looks like she could be my grandma. She's in her 90s. Now,
but anybody who is Hispanic, Black, or even actually [a] woman can just identify as
somebody who could be their own grandma. …And I show my students you see, this lady
here has actually something to do with your phone, something to do with your car, when
you try to find [the college], or wherever you go. Whatever you do with GPS, she is
actually mainly responsible for it.
Faculty 4 made it clear that setting the tone on the first day is a priority and that he thinks sharing
several examples of diverse scientists is an important way to spend class time instead of just
going over his syllabus or his attendance policy. Another faculty likes to talk about examples of
diverse scientists before beginning in-class assignments and demonstrations. Faculty 5
explained:
I have...the female computer scientist and some other scientists or computer scientists
from other minority groups so I sometimes talk about those. …I actually talk about it
when I discuss the assignment. ...And sometimes during the demo also, when I do a
coding demo, I use these names from different minority groups and then just put them in
there and then ask them, "Do you know who they are?" and sometimes they know and
most of the time they don't.
The faculty who incorporated diverse scientists into their course content acknowledged that it is
a practice they would like to continue or even enhance.
107

Another instructional element touched on by most faculty in this study is organizing
students into groups. Faculty believe that groups which represent a variety of skills or
backgrounds enrich STEM education. In fact, group work came up in nine out of 10 faculty
interviews. Faculty 4 asserted that in the ideal classroom, students would see “un poco de todo”
[a little bit of everything] and that they would learn the importance of working together. He went
on to elaborate his vision:
I want for them to see women. I want to see Black people. I want to see Hispanics. I want
to see people of different genders. I want to have them see people wearing hijabs. Now, I
can't control who enrolls in my class. But, if I could, I would have all of those so that
they can. And I want them to actually interact to the point of doing projects together to
understand that scientific discoveries, why are Nobel prizes given to two or three people
at a time? Because they work either in groups or sometimes with things that complement
each other.
Based on the emphasis that faculty placed on the role of group work, professional development
on appropriate groupings may further students’ own appreciation of diversity in STEM.
Another important way to expose students to diversity is to use images in the materials
that complement class lectures. One advisor reported that the Life Science department was
working on obtaining inclusive materials for some new lab manuals. Advisor 2 shared the nature
of changes to the lab manuals:
I do know that our Life Sciences department is looking to redo some of their bio, I think
it's their lab manuals, and they're looking for more diversity within their pictures and
whatnot. And they reached out for assistance on that. So…I know they are actively
working on inclusivity.
108

Choices faculty make around course content also lead to diversity-rich instruction.
Faculty believe that science comes alive for racially minoritized students when they select topics
that resonate with students because they are a part of everyday life or when they are related to
issues within minoritized communities. This is a key facet of CRT as discussed in Chapter Two.
An example of CRT science instruction came from Faculty 7 who gave an example of how one
subject area she teaches lends itself to an examination of cultural labels for scientific objects. She
described what happens in her astronomy classes:
In astronomy, we talk about constellations, and how constellations come about, and
constellations are basically just a region of sky that people see a pattern to. And the ones
we've sort of settled on and talk about today are not the same ones that every group of
people in history have agreed upon. And so I find that as a fun opportunity to bring in,
well, we call this the Big Dipper, but the Native Americans called it this and the Middle
Easterns called it this, and all these different groups of people have different stories to tell
about what they saw in the pattern of the sky, and what they thought the constellations
should be and what they represent. And so stories and information about how different
cultures have contributed to the science is really important.
Faculty 7’s example of sharing cultural perspectives and explanations of scientific concepts
showed an explicit way to honor and affirm diverse cultures and ways of knowing.
Another approach to CRT is for faculty to choose content that connects to issues that
students are familiar with and that they can help solve. Faculty 9 described one instance that
occurred in one of his chemistry classes:
I had a student here in a [Chem]130 class. She lived on one of the area reservations and
her dream was to become a chemical engineer so that she could learn how to provide
109

decent potable water on her reservation and area reservations. So I made sure that the
chemistry I talked about focused on things needed to make dirty water, clean water.
When we talked about different types of chemical reactions, or what chemists call
equilibriums or physical properties, various chemical properties.
This example showed how caring STEM faculty can customize the classroom experience to meet
the needs of racially minoritized students. As mentioned in Chapter One and Chapter Two, the
idea of “giving back” has been documented as a concept that appeals to different racial and
ethnic groups. The example above is a case where a faculty member was empowering a student
to do something for her American Indian community.
In one interview there was evidence that awareness of CRT has spread to the STEM
advisors. An advisor who had recently attended some professional development was excited
about the practice of having faculty incorporate local issues into their curriculum. Advisor 3
explained:
In our conference that I recently went to, which is a HSI conference, [the presenter]
shared that to be relevant to what was going on in [our state], which is…the water crisis,
that we're…eventually going to run out of water. So she made it a point to be, that'd be a
project or an assignment or a course discussion in her class. So...looking at what's going
on in [our state], or maybe in different ethnicity groups for it to either be a talking point
or be more relevant in class, there's just some way so students can see, “Oh, this is really
happening in my neighborhood or this is a possible way we can fix this.”
CRT practices evidenced by the participants demonstrated that intentionally offering
opportunities for students to engage with topics that have real-life applications and are related to
issues faced by minoritized communities is an affirming action.
110

The examples described in this segment revealed some of what was shared by faculty and
advisors when they considered what they do to signal inclusion. Participants discussed the
intersectionality of race and first-generation college student status. They sometimes also
mentioned how women were minoritized in STEM. As demonstrated by some of the examples
shared in this segment, thinking about intersectionality allowed for creativity in how faculty and
advisors validated these students.
The Use of Visuals to Create an Affirming Environment
Outside of the classroom, employees sometimes make use of images and symbols to
create an affirming environment. One advisor ensures her workspace feels welcoming by
including a variety of visuals that signal inclusiveness. According to Advisor 2:
I have set up my area to be inclusive. I have a gay pride flag. And not only is it the
rainbow flag, it also has a black and brown stripe, which I know some of them don't
always have that. And I have "I'm a first-generation student" thing right there and so I
have it visible for students to see that you know, I am also a first-generation student. I
support inclusivity in what they can do.
By using several different wall hangings, this advisor has created a space where different student
populations might see something of themselves.
One faculty also pointed to the use of posters in one of the science buildings. She said,
“We have a series of posters downstairs in this building of famous scientists, women scientists,
and some of those are specifically minority women. So you can see that minority women
contribute to science” (Faculty 7). This practice may be something that community colleges want
to leverage to validate racially minoritized STEM students.
111

Faculty 2 discussed how images incorporated into supplemental resources are also part of
affirming students. Specifically, she was cognizant of the importance of selecting videos that
depict people from a variety of backgrounds. Faculty 2 said:
I think when you share resources, like videos, then we would be aware of the types of
videos that we're sharing. Are those videos of all White men? Then trying to make sure
we have diversity reflected in the videos that we share.
Overall, those who incorporate diversity into their curriculum seemed enthusiastic about
the practice. Similarly, those who reported using visuals and symbols believe that they foster a
sense of belonging for racially minoritized students and other marginalized communities.
However, the use of visuals and symbols outside of the classroom as reported by study
participants was not as prevalent as what was reported on related to race conscious curriculum
and instructional strategies.
In conclusion, the second research question for this study focused on the validating words
and actions of STEM faculty and advisors. Results of the study pointed to three critical findings
that affirm racially minoritized students in a community college setting. The first finding was
that faculty and advisors use their communication skills to cultivate a sense of belonging and to
help students manage academic challenges. The second finding was that faculty and advisors
make themselves accessible to students and frequently promote their availability in class and
around campus. The third finding was that diversity in STEM has to be made visible to students.
In at least two cases, employees mentioned that they got the idea to use an affirming practice
through a professional development activity such as a conference or workshop series, suggesting
that additional professional development for STEM educators in the community college could
increase the frequency of validating actions toward racially minoritized students.
112

Institutional Agency
The third research question for this study centered on the use of institutional agency. The
question was: How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college
use their agency to provide institutional resources and/or remove barriers for racially minoritized
students in STEM? As discussed in Chapter Two, the conceptual framework for this study
included the idea of institutional agents, employees who choose to use their position and
authority to assist racially minoritized students. The interview protocol asked participants to
think about economic, academic, cultural, and structural barriers that impact racially minoritized
students in STEM. Participants were then asked questions about how they have reduced the
impact of these barriers and the types of resources they have offered to struggling and high-
performing students. The three core findings for this research question were institutional agents
invest time stewarding students into learning experiences which deepen students’ connection to
STEM; institutional agents attempt to minimize the financial burdens placed on racially
minoritized students; and they exercise discretion in the application of policies and/or stand up to
policies which disproportionately impose consequences on racially minoritized students. Figure
5 details the themes and sub-themes for this research question.

113

Figure 5
Institutional Agency Employed by Faculty and Advisors

114

Extending Learning Opportunities for STEM Students
One finding was that institutional agents connect students to academic activities that
extend learning opportunities and help students become more invested in their STEM program.
The most common examples of extended learning opportunities from faculty came in the form of
co-curricular activities. These activities dovetailed into coursework and included undergraduate
research (UR), honors projects, and service learning. In one case, it also encompassed
independent study. Seven of 10 faculty (or 70%) described the purpose and benefits of extended
learning opportunities related to coursework. Another frequently mentioned extended learning
opportunity came through the promotion of student clubs, most of which are based on a STEM
discipline or groups with shared social identities. This practice of referring students to clubs was
common across advisors and faculty, with some of the employees serving as club advisors and/or
planning club activities and events. Eleven of 15 participants (or 73%) contributed information to
this sub-theme.
Co-Curricular Activities that Deepen Ties to STEM
The Higher Learning Commission, a regional accrediting body for U.S. colleges and
universities, defined co-curricular as “learning activities, programs and experiences that reinforce
the institution’s mission and values and complement the formal curriculum” (n.d.). Faculty in
both the Math and Computer Science department and the Physical Science department utilize co-
curricular activities in the form of honors projects, service learning, independent study, and UR
to deepen students’ knowledge and skills in STEM. Seven faculty (or 70%) identified an
individual or departmental practice of honors projects, service learning, and research. One
advisor also expressed an awareness of UR on campus.
115

Common opportunities to engage with the curriculum outside of class time at SWCC
include participating in honors projects. Oftentimes, these projects connect to students’ personal
interests. For example, Faculty 7 described an approach to topic selection this way:
And so my students that do the honors project, they have to do an experiment that they
design, that they run, that they collect data on, that they analyze, and rather than
assigning them an experiment, my first question out of my mouth to them is well what
are your interests? What do you do outside of class? What is it you like to do on the
weekends? And connecting with the students on something that's not my agenda, but
rather their agenda.
She followed up by expounding on how using individual interests is a benefit for racially
minoritized students. Faculty 7 concluded:
And I think that goes a long way in reaching out to minority students who may not see
the applicability of STEM classes to their real lives where they leave the campus and it's
a whole different world than what they experience here.
According to these statements from Faculty 7, the relevance of the topic is paramount to
connecting a student’s experience in academics with their personal lives.
Similar to Faculty 7, Faculty 4 connects his students’ honors projects to real-world
applications. He stated:
Because to me teaching math should not be high and dry. So the projects that I give are
real-life projects, and it's almost like research undergrad on their own. They do not make
the connection between the concept of calculus and how it is used in predicting the
weather, or how it is used in studying some phenomena that is natural, let's say tornadoes,
or hurricanes. They don't understand that act is actually Calculus 3. So these are projects
116

that they are graded on, that I give them for several days. And then we work through it
together.
Giving students a chance to work with the faculty on their project allows students to develop
relationships with STEM faculty and to benefit from going through a research process in
partnership with a faculty who serves as an expert in the field.
In addition to offering honors projects, Faculty 3 also recommends an independent study
option to racially minoritized students who are excelling. They can sign up for a special topics
course and study something of interest such as 3D printing or a particular mathematical theory.
He recounted an experience with a Hispanic student who eventually transferred to one of the
state universities:
About two years ago, I had a student math major. My classes were easy for him. Like, I
don't think I ever challenged him. I said, "Hey, we should do [an independent study]
course. Can learn a 400-level math class. We'll do it together." And he was all on board
and is a math major. Actually, he's a Hispanic student at [a state university], and…he's
doing very well there now.
Service learning also came up as a co-curricular opportunity offered to STEM students.
Two of 10 faculty (or 20%) discussed their use of service learning with STEM students. Service
learning allows students to leave the campus to put their learning into action. Before the
pandemic, Faculty 2 offered service learning so that calculus students could tutor students at a
neighboring high school or at a local children’s home. She said, “That was just an opportunity I
offered all students, because that helped them solidify their own understanding, since they were
going to be teaching the content to others, and then help them get involved in the community.”
117

Faculty 7 also has her students volunteer to teach science lessons at a local elementary school.
She explained the impact of service learning:
And for students who think they don't know enough science to go into an elementary
school, and realize how much more they know than a second or third grader. And to be
able to explain simple science things in a fun hands-on activity, builds confidence, gives
them the vocabulary to talk science, lets them feel like they are the science teacher for a
change, the authority on science, and I think [it] goes a long way to helping them
consider, "Oh, maybe I can be a STEM person because here I am being the STEM leader
to these kids, and I can manage it. So yeah, I could build up my skills and be in that role."
Faculty believe that having students share their newly acquired knowledge with younger students
and community members reinforces their knowledge and skills and helps students see themselves
as capable.
Another co-curricular activity that came up in the interviews was UR, which seems to be
more established in the Physical Science department than in the Math and Computer Science
department. Faculty 6, from the Physical Science department, asserted:
We have a fairly strong undergraduate research component in the department. One of our
faculty members is actually chair of the undergraduate research committee. I would say
that chemistry probably has the most organized undergraduate research program in the
department. Though others will involve students in undergraduate research if they choose
to do honors projects.
Opportunities to expand the use of UR were also identified. Faculty 4, from the Math and
Computer Science department, believes there is a need for his department to leverage UR
because he has a chemistry colleague who is doing so. He explained:
118

But I think that is an opportunity that we have not exploited yet because either we have
not really thought it through to get to something that is palpable, or that we are so caught
up in our daily things that we have not, but I think it is possible, but it has not been done
yet.
Expanding UR experiences across the STEM curriculum may be a significant way for STEM
faculty to exercise their institutional agency to retain more racially minoritized students on their
way to earning a degree and/or transferring to a four-year institution.
Regardless of the format for co-curricular learning, faculty believe there is value in
engaging racially minoritized students in an exploration of a STEM topic or in teaching/tutoring
others. Through multiple examples of honors projects, independent study, service learning, and
UR experiences, faculty built a case for how these extended learning opportunities contribute to
STEM retention. The next sub-theme explores the ways in which faculty and advisors promote
clubs to foster student involvement.
Student Clubs that Lead to Engagement Outside of Class
Student clubs can also play a supplemental role in STEM education. As reviewed in the
prior literature, clubs can help with the formation of a science identity. Across the three
participant groups, the math and computer science faculty were the most consistent with 100% of
participants discussing clubs at SWCC including two faculty who had taken a very active role in
STEM-based clubs. Each of the other two groups had three of five (or 60%) of participants
pointing out how they are engaged with or make referrals to student clubs.
Faculty 3 started one of the STEM-related clubs on campus and it has been running
continuously for two decades. He often looks for students to serve as club officers to develop
their leadership skills and he says that the club maintained an active presence during the
119

pandemic. He has three co-faculty advisors now and says the club is well-supported by the
department chair and his colleagues. He was excited about the work they had done during the
pandemic. He said:
And even during the shutdown, we were virtual. And it was wonderful. It worked out
really well. We could get speakers that we wouldn't normally have gotten. We had like
40, 50 students on there. It made it easier for them.
Another faculty, Faculty 5, is an advisor for the Computer Science Club. In addition to regular
meetings, the club has created a Computer Science Club Discord which has “tons of students” on
it. Other clubs that were mentioned during the interviews were the Astronomy Club; the STEAM
Club, which is inclusive of science, technology, engineering, arts and math; and the Pre-Med
Club.
Those who do not advise clubs are still active in referring students to clubs. Faculty 2
makes sure to connect students with a club aligned to their interests. She explained:
So you know if they're a computer science major, but they had no idea that we have a
computer science club, then I'm going to send them a message and remind them
specifically about that club meeting and try to encourage them to get involved.
Advisor 3 makes it a point to connect students with a club to spur additional engagement with
their education. She shared:
I also invite all students to participate in some sort of club and organization, just to help
them keep engaged, and I tell them the value of being an active member of the college
system because that would encourage them to continue on with their education. So I
show them Student Life and just really quick the listing of the clubs, and if they want to
120

do something with their major, there's clubs for that, or they can do other clubs that they
may identify [with].
Advisor 4 invests a substantial amount of time in planning activities for the Pre-Med
Club. She does this in collaboration with a biology instructor who serves as the club advisor.
Advisor 4 has organized several webinars and tours of medical schools. In addition to her work
with the Pre-Med Club, Advisor 4 also makes referrals to affinity clubs such as the club
organized around the goal of male empowerment.
In this segment, employees shared their efforts to support or refer students to clubs. In
most cases, these efforts were focused on STEM-based clubs that are academically enriching
while still connecting students to peers with similar interests. In the next section, financial
barriers and strategies to eliminate them are covered.
Removing Financial Barriers to Make STEM Education Affordable
Most participants in this study demonstrate consistent concern for the financial barriers
that racially minoritized students face and the majority use their time and energy to reduce the
financial burdens on students. All five academic advisors (or 100%) and eight of the faculty (or
80%) shared their awareness of the financial struggles of racially minoritized students.
According to the participants in this study, financial barriers – or obstacles that students face to
pay for college and living expenses – include the need to work part time or full time. Faculty 5
explained that “the jobs are…a barrier towards their learning and I think they couldn't do without
a job.” This need to work to support themselves and their families creates time management
issues which place an inordinate amount of pressure on racially minoritized individuals and
communities. Barriers can also consist of issues such as financial literacy and financial aid
eligibility/navigation. Advisor 4 lamented:
121

Financial aid needs to be better explained. I wish we had financial aid advisors that would
actually meet with the students. Because the way that we do it now is unfortunate. And if
students don't know how to get financial aid, how to keep financial aid, that you have to
pay it back unless you get a grant, you will lose it if you get too many [withdrawals], if
you know what I mean, they don't know that till afterwards, and then you're stuck with
now a balance that you may have to pay, and you haven't put yourself in a better position
to repay that balance. So it's a vicious cycle of poverty to me. And I think that is,
unfortunately, financial literacy. I don't think that a lot of minorities have as much
financial literacy as others.
This awareness of economic issues tied to student retention spurred faculty and advisors into
action to reduce the cost of attending school through the development of free course materials or
open educational resources (OER) and making connections to scholarship opportunities.
Developing Open Educational Resources
On the faculty side, the creation of OER was top of mind with five of ten faculty
identifying OER as a substantial institutional resource they were striving to provide to students to
make their courses as low cost as possible. Faculty 1, a math faculty, had spent the last seven to
eight years working on OER content and was committed to reducing the cost of his course:
I feel strongly about...using OER resources, because I just think the more expensive your
course is, the less inclusive it is. …There are some barriers I think we can do something
about. And my cost is a real simple one. Like, it's really easy to make your course cost
less. I make my courses cost nothing except the tuition they pay.
Faculty 1 continued to reiterate this point throughout his interview. He described his role in
bringing other faculty on board with using free course materials:
122

And I also do a lot of work on getting my colleagues to get on board with that as well.
Which is a slow process, but I've had some success. And I think my first semester here,
we had 7% of our course sections used free course materials, and we're up to about 50%.
Which is still a long ways to go.
Faculty 1 is dedicated to controlling costs for students by continuing the push to make the math
materials free of charge for students.
Another math faculty member, Faculty 3, was using the OER route to provide free review
courses for students who may need to brush up on some math skills. He lamented that the faculty
had “watered-down” some STEM-track courses and that this was a disservice to STEM students.
He was excited about creating OER courses for students who want to build up their math skills
so they can stay on track with their math course sequence. He had already completed one free
review course and was working on the entire sequence:
So…it sounds crazy, but I'm creating [an OER] course. I'm creating prep and review
assignments to make up for the inadequacies in our sequence. Because nothing burns me
more than when I get a student who is willing, able, and if I say jump, they jump, who
comes to Calc 2 or a calculus class and they're not prepared. And they'll ask me after they
realize that they're a week into the course or like, "What can I do to review all this stuff?"
And, you know, the classic is, “Well, I can give you a textbook and just go read this.”
Well, I'm making a course and assignments for them to review, because at the very least,
those students could help themselves, right? If I just give them the right resources.
The two math and computer science faculty cited in this segment are committed to expanding the
reach of their OER courses.
123

Similarly, the faculty teaching in physical science courses had invested a lot of time into
OER materials. The physics faculty are designing homework questions so that students will not
need to purchase a homework service. Faculty 10 discussed how he had spent all summer 2022
creating materials and that he had put off retirement because he thought he was making a
significant impact by developing OER materials for multiple courses in his department. He
shared:
I'm holding on because I am feeling like I am doing good things with developing this
[OER] curriculum. …I'm probably working as hard as I ever have trying to get that up
and running so that after I leave, it will stick around for years to come.
He also pointed out how this project addressed some of the financial barriers that students faced
and that they were ready to spread the OER across the entire community college district:
But you know money is a barrier, a lot of students are having to work really hard. And
they're working full time. And so I feel like anything I can do to help them along that
way, I am highly motivated to do that. And with the [OER] thing, I feel like I'm not only
helping my own students, but all the students taking physics. We're trying to get going
districtwide now even.
Faculty 10 was also pleased that other costs that had been eliminated included lab manuals and
lecture manuals, which were being produced in-house so that many physics sections had no
added costs at all for course materials.
Faculty 7 was also proud of the work the physics faculty had done around OER, noting
that the five faculty had been developing a free homework service:
But we now have an online homework service for all of our physics classes, literally in
one six-month period, that now gives free homework service to every physics student
124

here on campus. One of our faculty, [Faculty 10], is just doing a fantastic job on creating
little tools that work in there like drawing force diagrams and doing graphical things. And
he's really, really good at it.
She also noted that there had been 100% adoption by the full-time faculty except in the
introductory physics class, and that they were getting ready to train adjunct faculty and faculty at
sister colleges on the use of the OER.
Another faculty, Faculty 8, stated that the general chemistry classes were using free
textbooks as well and that they were hoping to add OER for the introductory chemistry course
and the organic chemistry courses (considered second-year courses) in the near future. He was
also aware of other costs that had been held down for students such as the chemistry lab fees,
which he believed had been held flat for about 15 years with no plans to increase the costs.
Overall, the five faculty who brought up the topic of OER spoke with conviction about their
department’s creation of OER materials with most of them having dedicated a substantial
amount of effort and time to produce multiple OER for student use. They each saw this as a
significant means to reduce economic barriers for racially minoritized students in STEM
programs. The next sub-theme specifies how advisors and faculty leverage student scholarships
to lessen the financial burden of attending college.
Referring Students to Scholarships
One way that advisors find that they can tackle financial barriers for students is by
helping them find scholarships. Four out of five advisors (or 80%) discussed their role in
connecting students to these funding opportunities. For example, Advisor 1 shared. “A lot of
times in my role, usually if it's financial, we talk about scholarships.” Advisor 1 discussed
assisting DACA students with financial resources, referring them to both internal and external
125

scholarships to pay for their tuition. Other advisors touted their commitment to conduct
scholarship research on behalf of their students by telling them about institutional scholarships or
major-based scholarships. Advisor 5 conducts targeted searches for the STEM majors he is
working with. He recounted a specific example of helping a student in the cybersecurity
program:
She was struggling financially. And…we got her connected to a scholarship. And literally
no one had applied, and I told her about it. She has a really good GPA. 3.7. And she
applied and the next day, she got it because no one had applied for that scholarship. And
she was so grateful.
Advisor 5 appeared to put a lot of thought into figuring out how a student can go about getting
more funding for school.
Some advisors believe that scholarships provide an economic means for students to
further advance in their studies. Advisor 3 thought that searching for scholarships was significant
because it allows her students to take classes in the summer:
So that's one thing that I've also helped students with, because they're taking so many
classes and a lot of them want to take at least one in the summer and financial aid or the
President's honors [scholarship] doesn't cover summer. So scholarship search has been
something that I find myself doing a lot for students or helping them with because that
helps ease their stress when it comes to summer payment.
The advisors in this study took a lot of pride in their efforts to minimize college costs by
connecting students to scholarships and jobs. Other scholarships they described are sponsored by
the local community college foundation, corporations like PepsiCo, and organizations that
support DACA students. While faculty did not spend as much time talking about scholarships,
126

70% explicitly mentioned scholarships and grants as a resource for students. An additional
faculty member mentioned allowing students to take his classes as Honors classes, and while he
did not discuss the scholarship component, taking Honors classes does qualify some students for
institutional scholarships.
In conclusion, each employee type had aspects of student finances that were within their
sphere of influence, and they were intentional about dedicating time to provide these financial
resources and opportunities to students. OER courses and student scholarships both played a
significant role in minimizing the financial barriers inherent in academic pursuits at SWCC. The
next theme deals with the ways in which policies and practices are adjusted or challenged to
retain racially minoritized students.
Using Agency to Change Individual and Collective Policies and Practices
Data from this study showed that faculty and advisors demonstrate flexibility within their
own policies and practices while also taking a stand when they believe that institutional policies
are not serving students well. These actions have led to practices and policies that are more
favorable for racially minoritized students. The sub-themes for this section dealt with
instructional policies and practices and departmental/institutional policies and practices. Each
sub-theme demonstrates how employees use their agency to remove barriers for racially
minoritized students so they can find success and be retained.
Adapting Instructional Policies and Practices
Faculty often set their own classroom policies and include that information in their
syllabus. Whether the issue is related to attendance, grading, or testing, faculty create policies
that allow students chances to meet the spirit of a rule or policy or to improve their grades. Half
(or 50%) of faculty described instances of adapting policies and practices that were not
127

supportive of racially minoritized students while at SWCC. An additional faculty member
recounted an example from a former institution. Faculty 3 detailed the way in which he sets up
his classes to favor students who may need to boost their grades:
But my classes are set up to give you chances if you are improving as a student and in
your knowledge to give you chances to make up for past mistakes. So for example, I
replace the lowest exam score with their final exam score. So their final exam already
counts as kind of two tests weight wise. So if you do a good job, by the end of the
semester, if you've dug out of this hole, you have figured out how to be successful as a
student, that final exam is potentially worth three exam scores and just changes your
course grade.
This policy gives students an opportunity to raise their grades when they put in effort and show
improvement. It creates conditions where a student may choose to finish the course instead of
withdrawing.
Strict due dates sometimes penalize underrepresented students who have more work
responsibilities or family duties. Faculty 5 offers extensions to students who make a request
ahead of time. She explained:
It's in my syllabus, and I mention that if you need more time, just go ahead and email me
whatever the reason you have, and then I will waive the penalty. So usually, my
assignments [are] open. So every day it's a drop of 10%. So every day they don't submit,
it's a 10% drop. So what I say [is] that if they communicate with me, they tell me what's
going on, what happened, and then why they are unable to submit the assignment on
time. So I'm not going to penalize them.
128

In addition to flexing due dates and calculating grades in a way that rewards effort, one faculty
has modified his attendance policy to allow for some tardies. He explained:
I do understand that there are times when there is an exception that students have a reason
they aren't getting to class on time. So this semester, I am giving them three tardies where
I try to encourage them to come to class on time by having something I grade in the very
beginning of class. That's why I give them up to three times of three excuses where they
can come in late and still get credit for that. (Faculty 10)
These examples illustrated that faculty sometimes consider how certain instructional/grading
policies affect students and make changes that will be more beneficial for students who
encounter challenges during the semester. The next sub-theme consists of situations where
employees use their agency to advocate change at a departmental or college level.
Challenging Departmental or Institutional Policies and Practices
Advisors and faculty can also use their agency to question a departmental or institutional
policy or practice that may be harmful to racially minoritized students. Five participants (or
33%) shared examples of times when they had questioned a policy or practice that they felt was
unfavorable to STEM students at SWCC. An additional participant provided an example of
changing institutional policies at other institutions.
In terms of departmental policies, Advisor 4 discussed how she and her colleagues
elevated concerns to a manager who was then able to change a rule about the length of advising
appointments so that students could receive more personalized guidance:
We could run it to him, and we knew that he was gonna fight for it. One example would
be 45-minute appointments. Upper management, and I know this sounds small, but upper
management was like, no, they have to be 20-minute appointments, and you need to have
129

such and such. And he was like, if you guys are trying to do this whole [guided
pathways] model, where you're...forming relationships with students, we can't do it in 30
minutes (not to mention, trying to write the notes and document everything so that if
something gets escalated, that we can go back and see what happened). So he fought for
it, and we ended up getting our 45-minute appointments and keeping them. And that's
big. It's just an extra 15 minutes, but in that 15 minutes, I can hear if someone is
struggling.
The pressure put on leaders was enough to change a structural barrier for students; however, the
advisors were concerned that they might be seeing fewer students as a result. Overall, the
advisors wished for more colleagues so that more students could be seen.
On the faculty side, they tend to speak up during department meetings when they feel like
a policy is unfair. Faculty 1 was concerned about policies around mandating camera usage for
students in synchronous classes during the pandemic. He thought that his colleagues were going
to require all math and computer science faculty to adopt a stringent policy. He explained:
Well, yeah, I spoke on the side against some of those policies. And we did opt for more.
…We basically ended up not having real strict policies. We kind of had some flexibility
there. So for folks that felt some of these things were really important, they were able to
do that, but they weren't forced on the whole department. You know, because there
[were] a lot of people calling for, oh, cameras must be on or they're absent. (Faculty 1)
Faculty 1 reported that by the end of the meeting, the department decided that faculty would
have the autonomy to decide on their own policies. Given that racially minoritized students
experienced adverse impacts from the pandemic, flexibility in determining who was attending or
participating in class was a way to relieve some of this burden. Faculty 1 was proud of the
130

educational technology he used to gauge student participation while not requiring students to be
on camera to prove they were present. He used Desmos Activity Builder and said that he “could
tell who was actively engaged, even if some of them didn’t have their camera on.”
Another faculty voiced a strong opinion about a prerequisite policy his department had
adopted. He was adamant that the policy was not aligned with prominent universities and could
not be justified:
But the issue was that, to get into a class, you should have taken the prerequisites no
longer than two years [earlier]. We used to call it the two-year rule. We applied it in this
department, and I said, I'm against it. I'm vehemently against it. And we don't have to
agree. We can disagree if there's a majority because I follow the majority. But I disagree
totally because if you take all these major universities, Princeton, Yale, and I listed all of
them, prerequisites sometimes go as far as seven years. (Faculty 4)
Faculty 4 was disappointed that his department did not eliminate the two-year rule at that time
because he felt that some students who did a quick review could be ready to take calculus even if
they had taken the prerequisite course several years earlier. Ironically, he said that when
enrollments in the department went down two years later, they removed the two-year rule.
Another example is that faculty have also altered their testing format to meet the needs of
diverse students. Faculty 7 shared an example of how she changed the way she assessed a
student so that the student could demonstrate what they had learned. While Faculty 7 believed
this was not an officially sanctioned adaptation of an assessment, she thought the action was
justified. She stated:
So I can think of an example of a student I had who was less comfortable with reading
than perhaps they should have been. And so rather than taking exams on paper, where
131

they were required to read the questions themselves, and then answer them, I changed it
to oral exams, and just interviewed the student one on one. …And it was like a world of
difference by just talking to the student, I was able to get them to perform much better.
And it wasn't that I was giving away anything, I was just encouraging them to show me
what they learned in physics, instead of focusing on what they didn't know in reading or
reading comfort. (Faculty 7)
This example shows how changing an assessment modality improved the testing conditions for a
student and allowed the student to prove what they had learned without the burden of engaging
in a literacy task that would have gotten in the way of their exam performance.
Finally, one faculty provided an account of how he had challenged the timing of a policy
change and when the change was being communicated to students. Faculty 3 recounted that the
instructional body over math at the community college district had deemed the cut scores for
course placement in math to be inaccurate. The district had agreed to change the scores for the
next academic year, but he and his colleagues were concerned that students would be impacted
during the current academic year, and they wanted to at least inform students that they might
struggle if they enrolled in the course they had officially placed into. He ended up going to battle
with a high-ranking district leader to win the right to tell students about future changes so they
could use the information to determine their placement even if the change had not officially
taken effect. He described the situation as such:
And some faculty in my department are like, well, that's just wrong. Because right now,
there's a student sitting with an advisor being told to take this class that we know they're
not going to be successful in. And it's not just about the money or the time, but especially
for our underrepresented groups, it's just if you fail that class, maybe you just say, “I'm
132

not good enough”...and you quit. So we said, students should be told this anyway. Even if
we're waiting a year or whatever to implement it, we should be communicating this now.
And it's [the] beauty of the tenure system because she was not in agreement on that. So
we did it anyway. Had a bunch of faculty who signed a letter, we sent it to her, we're like,
we're going to tell students about this.
After some back and forth communication, Faculty 3 said that the district leader capitulated and
endorsed the plan to inform students ahead of the scheduled placement policy update. This
example of influencing the rollout of a policy change at the system level was the only one given
during the interviews. This was somewhat surprising on the faculty side, since the average tenure
of the faculty in this study was over 12 years and many faculty have some political capital to
spend and cannot be easily removed from their posts.
Given that only 33% of participants (10 of 15) mentioned that they have questioned or
changed a policy or practice at the department or college-level in their current role at SWCC,
there appears to be room for additional student advocacy. STEM faculty may want to consider
ways to expand their influence as institutional agents by taking on policies they deem harmful to
racially minoritized students. While administrators often address these kinds of issues, faculty
have a unique role due to their close ties with students and therefore their use of agency may
come with some clout. While the STEM advisors had less experience at SWCC, they all had
experience at other institutions. Advisors may want to share the policies they utilized at their
former institutions that were supportive of racially minoritized students with their supervisors
and division leaders to break down persistent barriers.
As mentioned at the beginning of this section, research question three set out to
determine how faculty and advisors use their agency to give students valuable institutional
133

resources or eliminate barriers for racially minoritized STEM students. This study identified
three sub-themes to demonstrate how institutional agency manifests itself at SWCC. First,
faculty and advisors encouraged students to get involved in co-curricular activities or student
clubs to extend their learning. Faculty did so by giving students a chance to master course
content or pursue a topic of interest through honors projects, independent study, service learning,
or UR. Faculty and advisors also invested time in and promoted clubs, especially STEM clubs.
Second, faculty and advisors proactively found ways to ease the financial burdens racially
minoritized students often grapple with. Most often this was accomplished through the provision
of free course materials (textbooks, lab manuals, and homework services). It also came in the
form of scholarship opportunities for STEM students. Third, a portion of faculty and advisors
adjusted their own policies and practices or stuck up for students at the departmental or
institutional level to bring about change. However, just over half of participants (or 53%)
reported doing so at SWCC, suggesting that optimizing agency in this area could be important to
improve retention efforts for racially minoritized STEM students.
Summary of Findings
This chapter reviewed eight major findings for the three research questions posed by this
study. A qualitative study with fifteen interviews was conducted to illuminate how faculty and
advisors at a large urban community college act as validating and institutional agents when
working with racially minoritized students in STEM. The interviews shed light on views about
faculty and advisor roles in the retention process. STEM faculty and advisors shared ideas of
how the retention of racially minoritized students could be improved through new or enhanced
models of advising (faculty advising and case management). They hoped for a time when
existing and new resources would be pooled together to provide more coordinated retention
134

efforts. In their minds, this would be accomplished through timely access to student data,
widespread adoption of an early alert system, and a sufficient allocation of time and personnel to
follow up with students. While participants shared numerous examples of how they foster
belonging and inclusion, they also recognized opportunities to increase the frequency and impact
of these affirming practices. Faculty and advisors were eager to connect students to resources
and sometimes used their institutional agency to remove barriers for students. However, there
was room to expand the use of agency to provide stronger advocacy for racially minoritized
students at the departmental and institutional levels. In the next chapter, the findings of this study
are related back to the conceptual framework and the existing literature. Recommendations for
policy and practice are also elaborated on.

135

Chapter Five: Recommendations
The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of community college faculty
and academic advisors as it relates to the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM
programs. The study sought to understand the roles faculty and advisors within a large urban
community college believe they play in STEM student retention, the types of affirming actions
they employ to promote student success, and the use of institutional agency to provide
institutional resources and/or to remove barriers faced by students. The qualitative study
included 15 individual interviews with community college STEM faculty and advisors. The
conceptual framework for this study centered on validating and institutional agents and what can
be done to improve STEM retention. The following research questions guided the study:
1. How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college view
their role in the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM?
2. What validating actions are faculty and academic advisors within a large urban
community college engaging in to affirm racially minoritized students in STEM?
3. How do faculty and academic advisors within a large urban community college use their
agency to provide institutional resources and/or remove barriers for racially minoritized
students in STEM?
This chapter discusses how the findings in this study relate to the literature reviewed in Chapter
Two and shows the alignment with the theoretical and conceptual frameworks, which were also
described in Chapter Two. Recommendations for how large urban community colleges can
improve the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM are outlined and elaborated upon.
The chapter also outlines the limitations and delimitations of the research and identifies topics
for future research.
136

Discussion of Findings
The first part of this chapter discusses the findings from Chapter Four and how they align
with the literature on STEM retention for racially minoritized students. Elements of the
theoretical and conceptual frameworks including ecological systems, faculty and advisor roles in
STEM retention, validation theory, and institutional agents are reviewed. The theoretical
framework for this study was Bronfenbrenner’s EST which emphasizes the influence that
surrounding systems have on individual development. The microsystem is the most immediate
system, and the participants in this study form part of the educational microsystem of racially
minoritized students in a community college setting. The conceptual frameworks included
validation theory and institutional agents which will be amplified in the following discussion of
findings.
Advisor and Faculty Roles in the Retention Process
When faculty and advisors act as validating and/or institutional agents, it can have a
measurable effect on racially minoritized community college STEM students. The first research
question for this study captured beliefs about the roles faculty and advisors play in STEM
student retention. Based on the findings in this study, it appears that faculty and advisors can
simultaneously serve as validating and institutional agents with the boundaries between the two
roles sometimes blurring. For example, offering an institutional resource to a racially minoritized
student may also be viewed as a validating action since it signals that the student is a valued part
of the college community and is worthy of resources such as time, experiences, and money. In
this segment, the findings for the first research question are compared to the literature.

137

Advisor and Faculty Support for Navigating Career and Major Pathways
All advisors in this study were invested in their role of assisting students with career
exploration and career development. According to Packard and Jeffers (2013), “Advisors in
community colleges are an important source of social capital because they possess key
information about requirements and steps in the transfer process” (p. 66). Within the current
study, advisors helped students gain knowledge about requirements for transfer to four-year
institutions and graduate/professional schools. They also helped students with early navigation
activities including selecting or refining their choice of major and learning about career pathways
and preparation. Faculty also expressed an interest in complementing existing advising services
by serving in a faculty advisor role. Packard and Jeffers (2013) offered faculty advising as a way
to reduce the poor student to advisor ratios present in most community colleges. Faculty often
saw themselves as informal mentors and sought out opportunities to engage with students
through meaningful interactions outside of class time. This is significant because faculty
mentoring can lead to a stronger science identity for racially minoritized students (Atkins et al.,
2020; Estrada et al., 2018; Aikens et al., 2016).
Collaborative Models for STEM Student Retention

Participants in the study mentioned their desire to work as a team and to engage in case
management advising. Returning to the theoretical framework, the ecological system appears to
be in play at SWCC. In Neal and Neal’s (2013) networked model of Bronfenbrenner’s EST,
social interactions occur between people (or institutional agents) who belong to distinct settings
and have direct contact with the individual subject. Stanton-Salazar (2011) described institutional
agents as effective when they have a “network orientation,” meaning that they understand that by
engaging with their social networks, they can solve problems with a team of practitioners and
138

empower the individuals they seek to assist (p. 1094). In the case of the present study, the subject
is a racially minoritized community college student in STEM. The individuals inhabiting
different settings within the college in this study are the STEM faculty and advisors. Figure 2
illustrated a higher education network where a microsystemic interaction could occur between a
STEM advisor and faculty. In this study, reports of social interactions between faculty and
advisors in support of the racially minoritized STEM students were not abundant. Some
examples were forthcoming, such as Advisor 4’s frequent references to a biology faculty
member she worked with (in addition to two faculty from other disciplines that she mentioned by
name). Still, the sharing of specific instances of partnerships was limited, with many occurring in
group settings such as an advisor attending a department meeting to discuss topics of interest like
upcoming events, course placement, and course requirements. What was common in the
interviews was a desire to collaborate across settings in the future. Most participants agreed that
social interactions should increase so that STEM students could benefit from the collaborative
efforts of the individuals that worked closest with students during their academic careers.
Access to data, effective data usage, and adoption of an early alert tool were areas of
concern generated from the first research question. Essentially, employees felt they could
enhance their retention activities by leveraging these three elements. Most faculty and advisors
did not know specific data on course success or retention of racially minoritized students at
SWCC, but they knew that in general, the retention rates were poor and needed to be improved
upon. The literature reviewed in Chapter Two did not directly address these topics; however, the
second recommendation in this chapter attempts to cover the most salient aspects of these
considerations.
139

Validating Actions
Validation theory is based on the role of validating agents who can provide student
affirmation. Validation formed the basis for the second research question for this study with
respect to the affirmation of racially minoritized STEM students. As described in Rendón (1994)
and Rendón and Muñoz (2011), validation shapes student beliefs about their ability to learn and
to become a source of knowledge. Research has also shown that for non-traditional students,
validation must occur before true student development can begin (Rendón & Muñoz, 2011);
therefore, it must be frontloaded into the student experience. Typically, faculty serve as in-class
agents and advisors as out-of-class agents; however, the findings in this study also characterized
the ways in which faculty can serve as out-of-class agents, especially since most of them
leveraged office hours to build belonging and inclusion.
Direct Communication that Affirms and Encourages STEM Students
The first finding around direct communication aligned with the conceptual framework of
validation because of the purposeful use of validating language (Rendón, 1994). Both faculty and
advisors reported using affirming messages to contribute to a student’s sense of belonging. They
used affirming language to validate students as individuals, conveyed that students had the
abilities needed to be successful, and gave verbal support when students faced an academic
setback. Faculty especially revealed their belief that students could become “powerful learners”
(Rendón, 1994, p. 37) within STEM fields. Additionally, the phenomena reported on in Chapter
Four are similar to the findings in Packard and Jeffers (2013) whereby students appreciated it
when advisors engaged in active listening and shared messages of encouragement after an
academic or personal setback. This was a practice demonstrated by all the academic advisors
interviewed for this study.
140

Strategies that Positively Impact Perceptions of Employee Availability
A key finding of this study was that faculty make an effort to retain STEM students
through the way they speak about office hours, which is important because research on URM
students hoping to become future scientists has revealed a common perception among students
about office hours. Hurtado et al. (2011) explained, “Students see office hours as limiting
interaction rather than evidence that faculty are willing to accommodate their needs for course
assistance, academic and career advising” (p. 571). During the interviews, 90% of faculty were
intentional about how they advertised office hours and/or had office hours practices that were
accommodating to a variety of student needs (including location, modality, and time of day).
Overall, faculty and advisors believed that student perceptions of their availability were
important. This notion is supported by Edenfield & McBrayer (2021), whose qualitative study of
community college students found that “students also appreciated open-door policies and feeling
as if they were not bothering an employee with a question” (p. 729). The participants in this
study shared several examples of how they let students know that they were accessible, including
through unscheduled, informal contact.
Infusing Elements of Diversity in STEM Instruction and Workspaces
In this study, faculty reported how they infused culturally diverse scientists and culturally
relevant concepts into their teaching. Gay (2013) reported that part of CRT is to draw attention to
contributions of various racial and ethnic groups. Similarly, faculty in this study deliberately
shared information about racially minoritized scientists and their achievements in the
development of scientific knowledge. This practice was evident in chemistry, computer science,
and mathematics. Gay (2013) also asserted that CRT allows students to connect to issues and
ideas relevant to their personal lives and their communities. As discussed in Chapter Two, this
141

approach may increase the utility value of the learning task. In this study, faculty shared
examples of infusing real-life issues into lessons and collaborated with students on choosing
topics of interest for class lectures, honors projects, and independent study. Furthermore, the use
of culturally diverse posters and other visual symbols was also a practice that some participants
mentioned. The examples shared by participants align with Gay’s (2018) description of
symboling whereby visual referents contribute to establishing a learning environment where
students from culturally diverse backgrounds can learn and achieve.
Institutional Agents
The second part of this study’s conceptual framework centered on institutional agents.
The third research question sought to identify the actions of institutional agents with regard to
racially minoritized student populations in STEM fields. Through their intentional words and
behaviors, institutional agents can give institutional support to racially minoritized students to
promote their retention in STEM. According to Bensimon et al. (2019), “institutional support
comes in the form of highly valued resources, opportunities, privileges, and services” (p. 1695).
These forms of support are often required to minimize the effects of barriers on student retention.
These barriers can be categorized as economic, academic, cultural, and structural. Bringing in the
ecological systems lens, barriers to retention are often produced at the mesosystemic,
exosystemic, and macrosystemic levels (see Figure 1). They can also be the result of
microsystemic reactions to pressures brought on by the aforementioned ecological systems. The
following segment examines the findings around what institutional agents do to retain students in
relation to the existing literature.

142

Extending Learning Opportunities for STEM Students
The STEM faculty in this study were eager to offer co-curricular learning opportunities to
their students with 70% discussing their use of undergraduate research experiences, honors
projects, service learning, and independent study. The literature reviewed in Chapter Two
suggested that undergraduate research experiences help form scientific identity and self-efficacy
and can positively impact integration into professional STEM communities (Estrada et al., 2018).
Furthermore, Chang et al. (2014) found that STEM students who engaged in undergraduate
research experiences had significantly higher persistence rates.
According to study results, student clubs and organizations are promoted as beneficial
activities that extend beyond the classroom. In this study, 73% of participants discussed how
they encouraged students to get involved in a club and how they sometimes supported the club
by serving as an advisor and/or planning club events and activities. In the literature previously
reviewed, joining a STEM-related club was associated with building a sense of community and a
scientific identity (Espinosa, 2011) and positively contributed to student persistence (Chang et al,
2014). Chang et al. (2014) attributed the effect of major-related clubs or organizations as giving
their “targeted membership…a wide range of academically enriching experiences, which
promote socially and academically supportive networks” (p. 569).
Removing Financial Barriers to Make STEM Education Affordable
During the interviews, 87% of participants identified financial barriers as a huge issue
facing racially minoritized students. As cited in LaSota and Zumeta (2016), community college
students try to avoid taking out student loans and they tend to work at least 20 hours per week.
This suggests that grants and scholarships do not cover the full cost of an education, especially
when living expenses are factored in. On the faculty side, the creation of OERs was a prominent
143

sub-theme of this study. In their role as institutional agents, faculty are providing valuable
resources to students for free. Those who are spearheading efforts in their department to expand
the number of OERs available and the number of faculty who use OERs feel called to do so.
They have a personal conviction that they are making a difference in the lives of students by
removing a financial barrier via free course content and materials. Indeed, they are contributing
to the capacity building within their college and district by opening up collaborations with
colleagues. This is similar to the emphasis recent literature has placed on creating communities
of practice for OERS (Diaz Eaton, 2022; Kleinschmit et al., 2023). Diaz Eaton (2022) called for
the establishment of an OER ecosystem so that discipline-centered communities can support
“OER adoption and implementation” (p. 4). SWCC faculty can continue building an
infrastructure around STEM OERs to ensure their preservation, quality, and iteration.
Many of the interviewees devoted time to helping students access financial resources
such as scholarships and grants. These efforts alleviate some of the burdens of paying for college
by providing funds to cover other expenses such as those outlined by Ma and Pender (2021) like
housing, transportation, and food. Scholarships may help STEM students who face robust degree
requirements. NASEM pinpointed prerequisites, degree requirements, remedial education, and
longer course sequences as increasing the time to completion of a STEM degree, thereby
increasing the cost of obtaining that degree (2016).
Using Agency to Change Individual and Collective Policies and Practices
In the study, half of faculty gave examples of adapting their own policies and practices to
support the success of racially minoritized students. These were things they could bring about at
the instructional level. In terms of collective policies and practices, only 33% of participants
could share an example of how they had been involved in some kind of change effort. In the
144

literature review, NASEM (2016) was cited to describe one of the barriers to STEM degree
completion. The report showed how major requirements, prerequisites, and lengthy course
sequences increase the time to degree completion in STEM. NASEM (2016) documented the
case of Colby College where faculty, staff, and leaders undertook a concerted effort to limit the
number of major course credits required for graduation, redesign courses so they could meet
graduation requirements related to “areas of knowledge” outside of the major, and reorganize
certain requirements within the major (2016). Colby College is an example of how institutional
agents can use their positions to streamline the curriculum in such a way that the pathway to
completing a degree is more efficient. Similarly, in this study, 60% of math and computer
science faculty shared examples of using their position to influence a policy or practice that was
harmful to racially minoritized students. In one case, a mathematics faculty described how he
had partnered with numerous faculty to recommend a policy update related to course placement
and how he was able to speed up the timeline for informing students about the changes, even if
the information had to be initially conveyed through informal channels. Because the policy
change occurred at the district level, it impacted the majority of students.
Recommendations for Practice
In response to the findings of this study, six recommendations have been identified to
enhance or transform retention efforts at large urban community colleges seeking to support their
racially minoritized STEM students. The recommendations were inspired by the study
participants and reflect some of their ideas, along with my own assessment of which
interventions could have a high impact on student retention. The recommendations have been
ordered by their relative impact and feasibility. Recommendations that could be implemented
quickly and/or at scale come first. The anticipated cost of implementation was a factor in
145

determining whether a recommendation could be scaled. Each recommendation comes with a
description of the intervention or service, examples from the literature, and suggestions or
resources for the planning and implementation phases of a roll out. Recommendations can be
adopted individually or simultaneously depending on the capacity of the institution. Table 4
includes direct quotations from study participants that represent the dispositions of faculty and
advisors toward each of the six recommendations. These selections help illustrate the potential
support for the recommendations at SWCC and possibly similar institutions.
146

Table 4
Participant Dispositions Toward Recommended Actions
Recommendation Faculty participant disposition Advisor participant disposition
1. Ensure all STEM
faculty participate in a
professional development
program on CRT
practices and race
consciousness
I kind of picked a couple of things and I
implemented them, but I feel that I should be
probably doing more. And then about laxing the
deadline. This is also something I learned during
my [professional development]. (Faculty 5)
In our conference that I recently went
to…[the presenter] shared that to be relevant to
what was going on in [our state], which is…the
water crisis, that we're…eventually going to run
out of water. So she made it a point to be, that'd
be a project or an assignment or a course
discussion in her class. (Advisor 3)
2. Organize professional
learning communities
(PLCs) with integrated
teams of STEM faculty
and advisors
It would be nice to have some more
communication, so [the advisors] knew a little bit
more about what I was expecting, and I had more
of an understanding of what they're doing as well.
So I would think that would be a good thing to
have more communication there. (Faculty 10)
Because one thing I'd also think would be
important is to incorporate the faculty and
advising in the same conversation. Because I
think when you kind of separate those kinds of
conversations, there might be a disconnect of the
support services from either student support
versus faculty support. (Advisor 1)
3. Design and fund
CUREs that specifically
address the needs of
racially minoritized
students
We have the Undergraduate Research Lab
here, but to my knowledge, we haven't in recent
years had opportunities available for students. So
that's something I know that we're discussing that
we have the space, and we need to start that again.
(Faculty 2)
Student internships and student research
opportunities [are] not one of our strong points as
a community college. (Advisor 2)
4. Implement a robust
case management
advising system with
campus-wide adoption of
early alert tools

In an ideal world, [advisors] would work
more directly with faculty to talk about students,
maybe …have a little one-hour meeting with the
STEM advisor and say, “Okay, this student might
need some resources, that student might need some
resources. What can we do to help this student?”
(Faculty 7)
Now at least, we're moving in the
direction so that we can be more specialized in
our area. But we still get pulled back too often to
do advising outside of our [meta-major]. (Advisor
4)

147

Recommendation Faculty participant disposition Advisor participant disposition
5. Adopt a faculty
advising model to
complement the advising
performed by professional
staff

If the focus is STEM retention, I really
think [the] faculty advising model makes a lot of
sense. And I don't know that that'll ever happen
here. But I know that's something I would be
happy to do. (Faculty 1)
I think faculty really need to talk to
students more about the career direction, get them
invested in the STEM field. ...A lot of the
retention happens on the academic side because
they're the ones that are with them for potentially
four months at a time. (Advisor 2)
6. Work with STEM
industry partners to create
paid internships that
target diverse student
populations

So there's some great internships actually
available for engineering students. So again, if I
have a struggling student in an engineering class,
I'll try and connect them with something where
they can get some money outside of class by
working, but also something that is within the
STEM field to hopefully retain them and to help
them see the benefits of sticking with the degree.
(Faculty 7)
To me it's really important to have that
internship relationship with Career Services and
let [students] know…there's paid internships too.
… Sometimes students are afraid of getting those
internships because they have a family to feed,
they have bills to pay. So, I think the idea of more
and more paid internships and getting that access
to experience in that field/workforce, such as
engineering, nursing, pre-med, all of those things
are really important to me. (Advisor 5)

148

Recommendation 1: Ensure all STEM faculty participate in a professional development
program on culturally responsive teaching (CRT) practices and race consciousness
Engaging large cohorts of STEM faculty in a CRT professional development program
increases the likelihood of scaling practices that benefit racially minoritized students. The study
participants described several instances of how they used race conscious curriculum. Expanding
the use of race conscious curriculum and instructional practices across all STEM faculty could
buoy the retention outcomes for racially minoritized students by ensuring that race consciousness
does not exist in pockets. Programs should encourage faculty to confront their own and their
students’ social identities, grapple with internalized bias and oppression, and learn from other
faculty who have experience with designing and/or implementing race-conscious curriculum and
CRT. Tatum (2001b) described the work of creating a “race-conscious society” and the time
commitment this work entails:
The development of a positive sense of racial/ethnic identity not based on assumed
superiority or inferiority is an important task for both white people and people of color.
The development of this positive identity is a lifelong process that often requires
unlearning the misinformation and stereotypes we have internalized not only about
others, but also about ourselves. (p. 53)
Due to the level of effort needed to unlearn attitudes, shift racial paradigms, and adjust behaviors
that have a foundation on entrenched societal values and norms, professional development is a
way for institutions to invest in elevating the race consciousness of faculty.
A professional development program could focus on what Gay (2018) identified as the
“four foundational pillars of practice–teacher attitudes and expectations, cultural communication
in the classroom, culturally diverse content in the curriculum, and culturally congruent
149

instructional strategies” (p. 53). Several models of CRT professional development exist in the
literature. Tatum (2001b) evaluated a graduate-level course on anti-racist practices for educators
and found that the initial results were promising based on reflection papers written by White
educators. For colleges wanting to provide faculty in-service training, less time intensive models
should be considered. One that stands out is O’Leary et al. (2020), which evaluated a university
professional development program (referred to as the Inclusive Excellence Workshop in the
study) over a three-year period. The workshops were delivered as an off-campus retreat across
parts of three days. Deans extended invitations to participate in the professional development and
sponsored follow-up luncheons to conduct program evaluation. The participants included over
100 life science and physical science faculty and six staff members (O’Leary et al., 2020). The
goals of the program were to open up participant awareness of social identities especially
pertaining to race/ethnicity, increase familiarity with barriers to learning/student success,
improve faculty attitudes toward students, and provide instructional strategies with the intention
of catalyzing implementation of these practices in STEM classrooms. Barriers discussed
included “faculty attitudes, stereotype threat, microaggressions, and fixed mindset” (O’Leary et
al., 2020, p. 3). Faculty were asked to develop action plans and the program was assessed
through pre- and post-surveys and through a six-month follow-up assessment using a small
group format. At the end of the study, the researchers concluded:
We learned that critical elements to the workshops include promoting self-awareness of
one’s own social identities and implicit biases, engaging in meaningful dialogue about
barriers to learning as disproportionately experienced by underrepresented and
disadvantaged students, and providing strategic solutions that improve classroom climate
and create an asset-driven perspective of diversity in STEM. (O’Leary et al., 2020, p. 13)
150

The professional development format shared above is one way to build the knowledge and skills
of STEM faculty in the areas of CRT and race consciousness. Whatever form of training is
offered, colleges should ensure that their program includes assessment activities that not only
gauge the type of learning that has occurred, but also serve to capture the extent to which faculty
have incorporated CRT practices and race consciousness into their curriculum and instruction.
Finally, one culminating activity that could be woven into a professional development
program is a written description of faculty’s CRT/race conscious teaching approach. Giving
faculty time to draft an individual or departmental policy statement to explain their views of
“cultural diversity and equity in education” (Gay, 2018, p. 54) could solidify the faculty
investment in implementing new strategies in their classrooms. For examples of policy
statements, refer to Gay’s (2018) section on Practice Possibilities.
Recommendation 2: Organize professional learning communities (PLCs) with integrated
teams of STEM faculty and advisors to empower them as validating and institutional
agents
Professional Learning Communities (or PLCs) are widely used in K–12 schools as a way
to improve student learning and results, and they also have utility in higher education. A PLC is a
group of “educators committed to working collaboratively in ongoing processes of collective
inquiry and action research to achieve better results for the students they serve” (DuFour et al.,
2012, p. 14). PLCs generally focus on curriculum, assessment, and instruction, but also
incorporate teacher development and leadership, with the latter examining how to coordinate
efforts at a particular school (Marzano et al., 2016). While often configured as teacher teams, the
PLC model could be used to organize integrated teams of STEM faculty and advisors focused on
specific STEM programs of study or on meta-majors. Participants often mentioned that they
151

were unaware of the details of the college’s STEM data. They had a global sense of retention
rates in STEM courses, but they could not pinpoint outcomes disaggregated by race/ethnicity or
by major.
The PLC model would provide an avenue for the intentional communication and
collaboration that the participants in this study desired. Support for PLCs also demonstrates that
the institution sees value in letting faculty and advisors come together to solve intractable
problems such as student retention. Members of the PLCs would need access to institutional data
such as retention, course success, and program completion rates. The flow of ideas and
information would happen organically through the scheduled interactions between faculty and
advisors during PLC meetings.
The coordinated activities of the PLCs would support the goal of improving STEM
retention, with an emphasis on helping racially minoritized students. Leaders would need to
create time and space for PLCs so they are job embedded and do not require time outside of
normal work hours, especially for employees who are paid hourly. The PLCs would need a mix
of faculty and advisors with some experience in recognizing and enacting their roles as
validating and institutional agents and those who have little to no experience doing so. For those
with less experience, they will gain knowledge, skills, and a conceptual understanding of their
roles. For those with more experience in these areas, they will reinforce what they have already
learned, expand their network of equity-minded practitioners, and serve as models within the
PLC.
PLC participants could engage in action research and share validating practices they have
engaged in or observed in others. They could agree upon a set of shared readings in which to
ground their PLC discussions. They could try out specific validating actions; collect feedback
152

from students through surveys, formative assessments, or conversations; and review student data
related to their learning and academic progress. Reflective practice could include reviewing
specific cases of students who were supported to be successful and others who did not receive
the needed support. Many faculty and advisors have not been empowered to become validating
and institutional agents. This professional network of support would assist in helping them view
their enhanced roles as not just teachers and advisors, but as powerful agents who understand
how to engage in affirming practices and how to use their social and political capital to offer
institutional resources to racially minoritized students. According to Killpack and Melón (2016),
STEM inclusive excellence and practitioner reflection efforts should include opportunities to
investigate privilege between employees and students, develop an awareness of implicit biases,
and consider how to alleviate stereotype threat. Finally, in addition to the aforementioned
approaches, PLCs could examine ways to remove structural and institutional barriers that exist in
STEM pathways. Faculty and advisors could then report back to college leadership and
concurrently-run PLCs with the purpose of establishing goals and timelines for removing barriers
that are within the organization's purview.
There are plenty of resources available to educators to make the PLCs worthwhile.
Leaders may want to consult Marzano et al. (2016) for the chapter on transformative leadership
to learn how they can demonstrate the leadership behaviors that will support effective PLCs and
ultimately, school improvement. PLC members may want to make use of the free reproducibles
from Marzano Resources (2023). This can be done by signing up for a free account, which will
allow the download of many PLC resources. For example, Figure 2.1: Survey for Assessing
Perceptions About Equality asks practitioners to rank five areas including monitoring student
achievement data; course offerings and academic programs; student engagement data; and school
153

environment/learning material. The fifth area focuses on the role of parents so that section could
be removed or adjusted to align with the higher education setting. Even though equality appears
in the title of the document, the term equity is used throughout. This tool could be used as a pre-
and post-assessment for PLCs. STEM faculty may want to consult Table 1. Guide for
considering faculty roles in increasing inclusive excellence in STEM classrooms in Killpack and
Mellon (2016, see p. 7). For colleges with employees who have a remote work schedule, models
for virtual PLCs with asynchronous and synchronous components also exist (Bedford & Rossow,
2017).
This recommendation is similar to the first recommendation in that it can be considered a
professional development activity; however, it is distinct in that it assembles teams of STEM
faculty and advisors whereas the first recommendation was primarily for STEM faculty.
Additionally, the PLCs would review data and develop strategies to respond to STEM-specific
data sets, which was not a feature of the first recommendation.
Recommendation 3: Design and fund course-based undergraduate research experiences
(CUREs) that specifically address the needs of racially minoritized students
The interview data consistently showed that faculty and advisors connect students to
academic activities that extend learning opportunities and help students become more invested in
their STEM programs. Community colleges offer fertile ground for expanding UR to students,
especially students who are racially minoritized. According to Bell et al. (2017), “Since half of
all college students enroll at a community college, it is critical to include these institutions in
efforts to broaden student access to research experiences” (p. 9). By designing CUREs as part of
scheduled lab times, students can follow a scientific process instead of following a prescribed
step-by-step lab experiment where the outcome is already known (Buchanan & Fisher, 2022).
154

Through well-designed CUREs, such as those based on the National Research Council
framework, students can engage in cognitive processes that are germane to scientific
investigations and get a chance to experience science practices such as coming up with a
research question, building a study methodology, conducting a literature review, and sharing
results (Buchanan & Fisher, 2022).
CUREs are ideal for students attending community colleges because they remove some
of the barriers to participation. For one, these students tend to commute to campus (residential
life is often not an option with few community colleges offering on-campus housing); have
significant work/life commitments; and may not have a typical summer break like some of their
peers at four-year institutions. By embedding undergraduate research into the classroom,
community college educators are ensuring that all students receive the opportunity to pursue
topics of interest, develop research skills, and conduct an experiment, research task, or scientific
exploration. Secondly, CUREs can eliminate participation barriers tied to funding (not enough
paid undergraduate research slots), time commitments (most of the work will be completed
during class and lab times), and imposter syndrome (the institution is allowing all students to
participate instead of just a lucky few and sending the message that everyone deserves to be
included). Indeed, since financial barriers (including the need to work) have been documented as
one reason that students do not participate in UR (Pierszalowski et al., 2021), colleges can in a
way sidestep the issue by leveraging class time to engage all students. Doing UR during weekly
labs, when sufficient time is allocated for complex tasks, would be a practical solution for many
institutions.
The literature shows that CUREs possess many benefits for students. They have five key
elements including “use of scientific practices, discovery, relevance, collaboration, and iteration”
155

(Buchanan & Fisher, 2022, p. 8). Collaboration, or the practice of having students form groups as
they engage in CUREs, has benefits related to how students view themselves. According to
Buchanan & Fisher (2022), “collaboration is linked to short-term outcomes, such as an increased
sense of belonging, and long-term outcomes, such as increased tolerance for obstacles, enhanced
science identity, and persistence in science” (p. 13). In their sample of 242 publications on
CUREs between 2000 and 2020, 96.7% of CUREs included collaboration (Buchanan & Fisher,
2022). Additionally, STEM faculty implementing CUREs at community colleges found that
semester-long research experiences were more meaningful than shorter research experiences
(Rosas Alquicira et al., 2022). Finally, a study of five years’ worth of data for university students
showed that taking a BioCURE lab course after completing a chemistry course or co-enrolling in
the course led to a 7% increase in the retention of bioscience majors by their third year of college
(Waynant et al., 2022).
Since 2000, the types of CUREs have expanded from primarily biology-based CUREs to
other STEM disciplines such as biochemistry, chemistry, engineering, and geosciences and even
physics, astronomy, and computer science (Buchanan & Fisher, 2022). And while CUREs often
target higher-level courses, they are now being incorporated into entry-level and introductory
courses at higher rates (Buchanan & Fisher, 2022; Waynant et al., 2022), suggesting that
community college faculty will have some models to follow for their 100- and 200-level courses.
The novelty of CUREs in computer science, mathematics, and physical science means there is
also room for innovation and creativity in the design and delivery of new CUREs.
Tools for institutions who want to begin or grow their CUREs are becoming more
abundant. For example, community colleges could use the “Questions about the Costs of
Expanding Undergraduate Research Opportunities” worksheet provided by NASEM to develop a
156

budget and plan for expansion (2017, see Appendix B, pp. 237-238). In an editorial about
Biochemistry CUREs, Bell et al. (2017) included a brief roadmap for colleges who would like to
institutionalize a CURE. Colleges will need to invest in compensation mechanisms to get faculty
involved in CUREs. This can include funding for faculty who redesign courses with the research
component integrated into it and it can also include incorporating the time to plan and deliver
CUREs into faculty load calculations (Pierszalowski et al., 2021).
By developing CUREs, community colleges remove the need to find funding to
compensate students for participating. The research will be embedded into their course, of which
they have presumably already allocated some time in their schedules to attend class and complete
assignments. If departments and divisions incorporate the development and utilization of CUREs
into their strategic plans, full-time faculty buy-in can grow. Institutions should also find ways to
compensate adjunct faculty who want to be involved in CUREs since they often serve non-
traditional students, especially those who take classes early in the morning or in the evenings.
Recommendation 4: Implement a robust case management advising system with campus-
wide adoption of early alert tools to empower STEM advisors as institutional agents
The advisors in this study indicated that most advisors at SWCC had been assigned to a
specific meta-major; however, not all advisors at SWCC are allowed to work with a clearly
defined cohort of students. To take the advising services to the level needed by racially
minoritized students, community colleges should organize their advising staff in such a way that
they are allocated time to manage a caseload and treat their students as a cohort. In addition,
retention tools such as early alert systems should be utilized by all STEM faculty, advisors, and
other support staff to ensure timely communication about student progress and student needs.
Empowering advisors with an effective early alert system that is being used college-wide will
157

assist them in their role as institutional agents who can provide just-in time resources and
referrals so that students feel they have options to stay enrolled instead of withdrawing due to
lack of support or choices. To balance caseloads, colleges may need to hire more advisors or
reallocate existing personnel so that some or all of their duties include academic advising.
Colleges should study a variety of case management advising models to inform their
approach. Georgia State University, part of the University Innovation Alliance, had positive
results with their Monitoring Advising Analytics to Promote Success (MAAPS), which is
described as “technology-enhanced, proactive advisement” (Alamuddin et al., 2019, p. 4).
Georgia State served as the project lead and showed improved student outcomes for students in
the first and second years of the program in a randomized-controlled trial (Alamuddin et al.,
2019). The model included degree planning (with updates at least semesterly, and at least one
discussion with the student per year); early alerts generated in real time based on class
performance (including a review of eligibility for financial aid based on course withdrawals and
a review of the upcoming semester’s coursework); and finally, targeted or just-in-time advising
interventions based on student progress as documented from early alerts (Alamuddin et al.,
2019). While the other universities represented in the study did not experience the same results
within the first two-and-a-half years of the project, colleges may learn about pitfalls to be
avoided in their own implementation by reviewing the recommendations of Alamuddin et al.
(2019).
MDRC, a nonprofit organization that researches educational and social policies,
published a brief documenting two decades worth of best practices on enhanced advising.
Known to improve student retention, enhanced advising can generate some revenue through
tuition payments from the continuous enrollment of students who would have otherwise stopped
158

attending (Vasquez & Scrivener, 2020). One recommendation from the brief that contributes to a
case management advising model includes frequent and holistic advising, which is said to go a
long way in supporting students who encounter a wide range of obstacles, including many that
are non-academic in nature. Another suggestion from the brief is that caseloads should be small
so regular advising visits are feasible and so advisor-student relationships become stronger. The
researchers asserted that “assigning caseloads can ultimately help staff members deliver a higher
level of holistic advising and form meaningful connections with students” (Vasquez & Scrivener,
2020, p. 4). The authors explained that if more students need to be served, cohorts of students
can be organized so advisors can conduct group advising sessions and activities while still
maintaining a superior level of quality as compared to traditional advising services. When
advising staffing levels are too low, a specific target population – in this case racially minoritized
students – can be the recipients of the new advising approach. Another recommendation from the
brief is to ensure advisors have access to data including student engagement and performance
data (Vasquez & Scrivener, 2020), some of which can be accessed through early alert software.
A tool for the implementation and planning of enhanced advising services at community colleges
includes a Lessons and Recommendation checklist (Vasquez & Scrivener, 2020). Furthermore,
to ease the transition from traditional advising to case management advising, a consultant can be
hired to assist with the process of disrupting current advising practices which may be well
entrenched in the educational ecosystem.
The second part of this recommendation is to get the college to use early alert tools across
the board. At the time the study was conducted, a specific software program was in use, but not
all employees were using it. To create more buy-in for early alert systems and processes, Delmas
and Childs (2021) asserted that faculty already accustomed to submitting alerts should encourage
159

their colleagues to follow suit when they are worried about students in their classes. Faculty in
the study also asked for an app to make alert submissions feasible on a smartphone. Another tip
was to have current faculty share their experiences with the early alert system with their peers
who have yet to use it. Finally, the researchers warned that leaders should make sure their
institution has enough personnel in place to respond to alerts and provide resources to students
(Delmas & Childs, 2021).
Recommendation 5: Adopt a faculty advising model to complement the advising performed
by professional advising staff so that more STEM students receive personalized advising
services
It is not uncommon for student-to-advisor ratios to be high in the community college
setting. To offset staffing shortages in academic advising, community colleges should embrace
the role of faculty to provide STEM-based academic and career guidance and networking. Many
colleges have implemented a faculty advising model to take advantage of the expertise and social
networks of faculty. As mentioned in the literature review, Packard and Jeffers (2013) saw
faculty advising as a way to alleviate some of the pressure on staff advisors who have a high
volume of appointments with poor advisor-to-student ratios being the norm. In their study of
community college students in Massachusetts, Packard and Jeffers (2013) outlined perceived
strengths of faculty advisors such as giving emotional support and serving as coaches. According
to Packard and Jeffers (2013), “Because of the positive role that the community college faculty
can play in the advising experiences of students, community colleges could encourage stronger
partnerships between the faculty and advising units, including the transfer office” (p. 74). They
suggested that faculty could even weave lessons about transfer to a four-year institution into their
curriculum in introductory courses, thus reaching a large number of students.
160

Similarly, Petrucci and Rivera-Figueroa (2022) investigated the mentoring and advising
program at East Los Angeles College, a Hispanic Serving Institution with 80% of students
identifying as Latine. The program gave release time to faculty for four or six student mentees.
The focus of the program was on Latine students as well as those belonging to other
underrepresented groups. An important mechanism for program participation was the use of
release time as a form of compensation to faculty. According to Petrucci and Rivera-Figueroa
(2022), “Faculty release time can lower this barrier while also sending a clear message from the
institution that faculty mentoring is prioritized” (p. 14). The release time was used for student
contact hours, administrative tasks, and training time. Indeed, professional development is a
hallmark of the program. East Los Angeles College’s program is based on an intrusive advising
model, requiring students to meet with their assigned advisor twice each semester. Advising
activities that students appreciated from their assigned faculty included receiving direction and
information about their majors, learning about their career trajectory, and receiving “motivation,
encouragement, and moral support” (Petrucci and Rivera-Figueroa, 2022, p. 13). In another
study of a two-year college, this one situated in the Northeast, the faculty led an effort to conduct
intrusive advising with at-risk students (as determined by a Student Expectations Survey) (Smith
et al., 2007). As part of the initiative, faculty reached out at the beginning of the semester; talked
about the survey results for problematic areas; found support services for students;
communicated regularly during the school year; and kept records of advising meetings (Smith et
al., 2007).
When selecting a model to guide the development of a faculty advising program, colleges
would do well to consult with other institutions about logistics and challenges. Compensation
mechanisms, whether through contract pay or faculty load, should also be identified or
161

participation will be limited or wane over time. Clear expectations for faculty advisors should be
communicated, and an advising contact from student services should be available for questions
and referrals when faculty lack information to properly advise students. The roles of faculty and
staff advisors should be delineated to avoid confusion about responsibilities, and they should be
communicated to students during orientation and reinforced during initial advising visits. The
use of visual aids may help students understand who to reach out to and when. Finally, the name
of the assigned faculty advisor should appear in the student information system for easy retrieval.
Recommendation 6: Work with STEM industry partners to create paid internships that
target diverse student populations
Paid internships are a mechanism to further develop STEM students’ academic and career
trajectories. Internships have been defined as “structured and career-relevant work experiences
obtained by students prior to graduation from an academic program” (Taylor, 1988, p. 393).
However, Maertz et al. (2014) pointed out that some internships may be relatively unstructured
or may occur after graduation. Paid internships bridge the divide between students with the
economic means to participate in an unpaid internship and students who due to economic
necessities must work instead of pursuing unpaid internships. Paying interns also helps avoid
some of the pitfalls associated with unpaid internships. For example, Rogers et al. (2021)
asserted “that unpaid internships have poorer job design than paid ones, and that this leads to
lower job satisfaction and career development among unpaid interns” (p. 2).
Benefits of internships include experiential learning, job/career-related benefits, and
networking (Maertz et al., 2014). Internships give students the chance to apply what they have
learned in their courses to the workplace and to further clarify career interests and preferences
for the type of work they like to perform (Maertz et al., 2014). For these reasons, students who
162

participate in an internship may have an edge over their peers in terms of “job fit” (Maertz et al.,
2014, p. 126) and satisfaction in their first job (Taylor, 1988). Soft skills are also part of the
internship experience with students learning how to interact with co-workers and how to
navigate workplace norms. These soft skills may eventually lead to a smoother transition into the
workforce after graduation.
In addition to the career-related boost students receive through internships, research has
also emerged on the academic benefits of internships. Binder et al. (2015) found that internships
provide academic benefits across disciplines and student groups (both disadvantaged and
advantaged students reaped rewards). The authors of the longitudinal study at a large university
in the United Kingdom concluded that “explorations of different student scenarios showed that in
spite of some variability, a positive effect for internships was maintained for all combinations of
gender, ethnicity and level of prior academic achievement” (Binder et al., 2015, p. 81). Even if
students had not been high achievers prior to an internship, the effects of the internship
experience were positive. In a study of first-year students from underrepresented backgrounds in
a two-year geosciences program, internships were found to assist students in applying their
classroom learning into an authentic workplace experience (Stofer et al., 2021). The program the
researchers evaluated consisted of four components, and students across multiple cohorts
consistently pointed to the full-time summer internship as the most valuable aspect of the
program. Overall, students reported gaining a more expansive understanding of the subject
matter, life skills, and self-confidence. Through this research, it appears that internships reinforce
and expand upon academic knowledge gained through coursework.
On the implementation side, when undertaking the creation of new STEM internships,
establishing partnerships with local businesses and global firms with a community presence is
163

recommended. The strengths and needs of established and emerging STEM-based and STEM-
supportive industries can drive the types of internships a college seeks at the outset. It is also
advisable that colleges designate a faculty or staff coordinator to set expectations with employers
and students, match students with appropriate internships, and evaluate internship efficacy to
address internship program improvement. For a look at internship benefits, costs, and logistics
from the view of multiple stakeholder groups (interns, employers, and schools), Maertz Jr. et al.
(2014) offers a comprehensive literature review with a synthesis of benefits and pitfalls and a
summary of recommendations for well-designed internship experiences. When orienting students
to their internships, Stofer et al. (2021) suggested that “when setting expectations, be sure to
stress how these expectations will lead to positive outcomes from the program, especially in
terms of developing skills that employers value” (p. 474). Stofer et al. (2021) also said that
considerations to making the internship experience feasible for students include support for
students with family care duties and transportation needs. These items may need to be factored
into the potential costs of running internship programs, especially for students from cultures with
strong family values or those from low socioeconomic status families. The COVID-19 pandemic
highlighted the fact that many students, whether traditionally aged or not, had childcare or adult
care duties for family members. Strategies for students with these types of responsibilities should
be part of the planning process. Also, cultural awareness around travel and work patterns for
some racially minoritized students and families will contribute to a better understanding of
potential participation barriers. For example, offering academic-year internships might be more
practical for students who travel with family to visit relatives for extended stays in other states or
countries or who assist with a family-run business over the summer.
164

This section discussed a set of six recommendations designed to retain more racially
minoritized community college students in STEM programs. Recommendations can be rolled out
individually or in tandem with one another. Any change initiative requires adequate personnel,
resources, and stamina. Colleges should be mindful of not overburdening faculty and advisors
who may be tasked with overseeing the implementation of one of these initiatives as many are
still dealing with the effects of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Employee well-being is an
important consideration when determining the bandwidth of an organization to implement
change. Colleges with grant funding may find ways to launch two or more retention initiatives at
the same time. Others may choose to stagger initiatives to ensure that they meet quality
standards. Organizations should also have an evaluation plan in mind when they launch a
retention initiative.
Limitations and Delimitations
One limitation of the study was that SWCC is a newer HSI so its employees may not
have the benefit of working within a more inclusive institutional climate and culture that has
been cultivated over time like what one might find at a more established HSI. Another limitation
is the lack of a full-time engineering faculty among the participating faculty members due to a
vacancy in that discipline. Additionally, some STEM advisors were unable to participate in the
study due to scheduling conflicts. During the interviews, the participants differed in the extent to
which they talked about race so sometimes it was unclear if they were speaking about racially
minoritized students or about the general student population. Furthermore, this was a voluntary
study with a call going out to all full-time faculty teaching chemistry, physics, and STEM
pathway math courses. Since faculty self-selected into the study, what they reported may be an
overrepresentation of what is happening in their departments. A delimitation of the study was
165

that sometimes semi-structured interviews do not allow the researcher to find out how the
participants would frame the topic because the wording is more or less set (Bogdan & Biklen,
2007). Another delimitation was that not all STEM faculty were interviewed due to limits in the
study timeline so there may be some perspectives missing such as those of faculty who teach
biology and geology. Additionally, the findings for this study were not independently evaluated.
The validation strategies and actions of institutional agents were self-reported and were not
substantiated through observations or student feedback. Finally, the academic and student affairs
deans and vice presidents were not interviewed so the opinions of senior leadership were not
taken into account.
Recommendations for Future Research
While this study demonstrated internal generalizability, participants all came from the
same large, urban community college in the Southwest. Further research could be conducted
across multiple community colleges; across two-year HSIs, HBCUs, or tribal colleges; or across
different regions of the country. Similarly, because SWCC is a large urban community college,
research that includes smaller colleges or colleges in a rural setting could also be conducted. By
including a broader group of participants, researchers could verify whether the findings are
transferable in other settings, which is also known as “transferability” (Maxwell, 2010, p. 478).
Since the data in this study came from a single source, employee interviews, researchers could
triangulate the data by conducting observations of teaching and advising interactions and/or
using a student survey or focus groups to obtain the student perspective on the types and
frequency of validating actions and the provision of resources by faculty and advisors. These
additional research activities could shed light on the degree to which the self-reported data from
166

STEM faculty and advisors aligns with or differs from what can be observed by an independent
researcher and by racially minoritized students in STEM programs of study.
To further investigate one of the study findings, future research could examine racially
minoritized student perspectives on lessons about diverse scientists and the presence of diversity
in course lectures and materials, learning spaces, and offices. In terms of items that came up in
the recommendations section of this study, researchers could explore funding models to maintain
CUREs when grant funding is not an option. Another area of future research would be to
investigate the role of professional development in preparing faculty and advisors to serve
racially minoritized students in STEM. In the interviews, there was some evidence that
participants had attended training or were at least familiar with national trends on diversity,
equity, and inclusion. Future studies could explore the effects of justice, diversity, equity, and
inclusion-based professional development programs on community college educators who serve
racially minoritized community college students. Research could seek to understand the impact
of a workshop series packaged over an extended period of time or the impact of PLCs that run
throughout an academic year. This type of study could determine whether community college
practitioners are more likely to implement and enhance teaching and advising practices that
support racially minoritized students after participating in college-sponsored professional
development with a research question such as: Does training amplify the frequency in which
faculty and advisors serve in the role of validating and/or institutional agents? Similarly, the
impact of having an entire department or division go through a training program together with
their leadership could be explored. Another avenue of investigation would be to find out what
senior leaders are doing to empower STEM faculty and advisors to become validating and/or
institutional agents.
167

Conclusion
The problem of practice addressed by this study was poor retention rates for racially
minoritized STEM students in U.S. community colleges. As noted in Chapter One, the
proportion of individuals of Black or African American, Hispanic/Latine, American Indian,
Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander descent receiving bachelor’s
degree in science and engineering is below their representation in the general population
(National Science Board, 2022). Not only is the U.S. facing a steep demand for more employees
to fill STEM positions (Fry et al.; PCAST, 2012), research shows that diverse groups of
scientists actually improve the quality of scientific innovations (Hofstra et al., 2020; Espinosa,
2011). Because community colleges in the U.S. enroll a large number of racialized minorities,
they are seen as being at the forefront of educating a diverse population of future STEM workers
(Fink et al., 2021; Shapiro et al., 2017; Packard & Jeffers, 2013). An associate’s degree or
certificate in a STEM program can lead to direct placement in the workforce or transfer to a
bachelor-degree granting institution.
This study set out to understand the practices of community college educators and how
they might enhance retention efforts and lead to increases in retention rates of racially
minoritized students. Retention is critical because it leads to equitable educational outcomes in
terms of graduation and transfer, creates a viable path to economic stability through high-wage
jobs, and is a socially just response to historical and systemic racism. Through 15 interviews
with STEM faculty and advisors at a large urban community college, this study explored the
views of STEM faculty and advisors when it comes to their roles in retaining racially minoritized
students. It revealed the kinds of validating actions that are being taken to affirm racially
minoritized students. It also documented the ways in which faculty and advisors provided
168

institutional resources and removed barriers for racially minoritized students. EST was used to
frame the nature of educational systems, the influences of individuals within these systems, and
the possible interactions between individuals who impact racially minoritized STEM students.
While the interviews substantiated aspects of the existing literature, they also demonstrated
practices that could be optimized in service of the goal of improving retention among racially
minoritized students in STEM programs of study.
Validation theory as described in Rendón, (1994) and Rendón & Muñoz (2011) served as
the first conceptual framework for this study. Three findings in this study related to the
validating actions performed to affirm racially minoritized STEM students at SWCC. Many of
these actions are simple and are performed on a micro-level; however, when applied consistently
over time, they form the basis for validating students who may be experiencing imposter
syndrome, who feel culturally separate from the higher education system, or who need
recognition. In this study, validation was often offered in the form of encouragement through
direct communication, signals of employee availability to students, and infusing cultural, racial,
and ethnically diverse elements into classes and workspaces. Due to their frequent contact with
STEM students, all STEM faculty and advisors should take ownership of their roles in retaining
racially minoritized community college students and leverage their power to create an
educational climate that is conducive to the success of racially minoritized students.
Institutional agents, or educators who help students access valuable college resources and
who can help minimize the effects of barriers, were the foundation for the second conceptual
framework in this research. According to Stanton-Salazar (2011), institutional agents use their
social capital to help students tap into networks of support, convey resources that meet the needs
of minoritized students, and build relationships with non-family members. Just as Bensimon et
169

al. (2019) suggested, the actions of institutional agents reported in this study led to the
transmission of knowledge and support that racially minoritized students could lean on to
overcome challenges and maintain their status at the college and within their major. Participants
shared the ways in which they directed students to co-curricular activities, scholarships, and free
course materials. College leaders should promote the idea that all STEM faculty and advisors are
institutional agents; however, faculty and advisors do not need to wait for an administrative
champion. Faculty and advisors can exercise influence on the system to ensure that institutional
resources are intentionally designed for and directed toward racially minoritized students.
The study also documented the ways in which faculty and advisors adapted policies and
practices to make conditions more favorable for their students. Faculty and advisors sometimes
led the way for transformational change within their institution; however, this was an area of
influence that was not deployed often enough. If individual agents make up the system of higher
education, then it stands to reason that they have some power to align the practices of the
institution with the needs of racially minoritized students. Exercising political and social capital
can lead to incremental changes and can even open the door for transformational change. By
creating a network of institutional agents, institutional policies and practices are more likely to
be fashioned in a favorable way. STEM faculty and advisors need to recognize that they can
legitimately identify the approaches and solutions to improve retention. If they are unsure of how
to effect change, they should ask their institutions to provide professional development
opportunities.
Building on the idea of a network of validating and institutional agents, this study found
that more collaboration is needed on the part of faculty and advisors. These are individuals
within the college microsystem who have the most contact with students. By taking a networked
170

approach, retention efforts can work together synergistically on behalf of racially minoritized
STEM students. The potential gains from implementing a highly coordinated retention effort in
STEM are not to be underestimated. Community colleges can maximize existing relationships
and structures such as collaborations within student clubs and organizations, meta-majors, and
transfer partnerships to strengthen the networks of support for racially minoritized students. The
recommendations in this chapter highlighted the opportunities community colleges have to take
their retention efforts to a higher level. While all students may benefit from the ideas shared here,
strategic planning and implementation teams must be clear about the goals of new retention
initiatives. The hopes, goals, and needs of racially minoritized students must become the driving
force in a comprehensive retention plan for STEM. By design, community colleges are the ideal
settings in which to address issues related to educational outcomes, workforce needs, and social
justice. Students, families, and communities deserve the best that community colleges can offer
because of the public’s trust and financial investment. The difficult work has begun and will
continue. Faculty, advisors, and their leaders have power and resources or can gain access to
power and resources to further the mission of retaining racially minoritized students.

171

References
Aikens, M. L., Sadselia, S., Watkins, K., Evans, M., Eby, L. T., & Dolan, E. L. (2016). A
social capital perspective on the mentoring of undergraduate life science
researchers: An empirical study of undergraduate-postgraduate-faculty triads.
CBE–Life Sciences Education, 15(2): Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-10-0208
Ajayi, A. A., Mitchell, L. L., Nelson, S. C., Fish, J., Peissig, L. H., Causadias, J. M., & Syed, M.
(2021). Person–environment fit and retention of racially minoritized college students:
recommendations for faculty, support staff, and administrators. Education Sciences,
11(6), 271. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060271
Alamuddin, R., Rossman, D., & Kurzweil, M. (2019). Interim findings report from the MAAPS
advising experiment. Ithaka S+R.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1a43/95fad1d278eaf62a2de650302560f48cbce4.pdf
Alkhasawneh, R., & Hargraves, R. H. (2014). Developing a hybrid model to predict student first
year retention in STEM disciplines using machine learning techniques. Journal of STEM
Education: Innovations and Research, 15(3), 35–42.
https://www.jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/1805
Allen-Ramdial, S., & Campbell, A. (2014). Reimagining the pipeline: Advancing STEM
diversity, persistence, and success. Bioscience, 64(7), 612–618.
https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu076
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). What
factors motivate students to learn? How learning works. Jossey-Bass. 66–90.
https://firstliteracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/How-Learning-Works.pdf
The American Association of Colleges and Universities. (2023). High-Impact Practices.
172

Retrieved February 19, 2023, from https://www.aacu.org/trending-topics/high-impact
American College Testing. (2015). The condition of STEM 2015: National. Washington, DC.
https://www.act.org/stemcondition
American College Testing. (2018). National Collegiate Retention and Persistence-to-Degree
Rates, 2018. [Data set]. https://www.act.org/content/act/en/research/pdfs/MS2807rev1-
retention-persistence-2018-07.html
Arthur, R. (2023). ‘Conscious' learning development: Towards a pedagogy of race-
consciousness. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (26).
https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi26.928
Atkins, K., Dougan, B. M., Dromgold-Sermen, M. S., Potter, H., Sathy, V., & Panter, A. T.
(2020). “Looking at myself in the future”: How mentoring shapes scientific identity for
STEM students from underrepresented groups. International Journal of STEM
Education, 7, Article 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00242-3
Bahr, P. R. (2008). Cooling out in the community college: What is the effect of academic
advising on students’ chances of success? Research in Higher Education, 49(8), 704–
732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9100-0
Bahr, P. R., Jackson, G., McNaughtan, J., Oster, M., & Gross, J. (2017) Unrealized potential:
Community college pathways to STEM baccalaureate degrees. The Journal of Higher
Education, 88(3), 430–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2016.1257313
Bailey, T. R., Jaggars, S. S., & Jenkins, D. (2015). Redesigning America’s Community Colleges:
A Clearer Path to Student Success. Harvard University Press.
Barr, D. A., Gonzalez, M. E., & Wanat, S. F. (2008). The leaky pipeline: Factors associated with
early decline in interest in premedical studies among underrepresented minority
173

undergraduate students. Academic Medicine, 83(5), 503–511.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31816bda16
Bedford, L. A., & Rossow, K. A. (2017). Facilitating professional learning communities among
higher education faculty: The Walden Junto model. Online Journal of Distance Learning
Administration, 20(2), 1–12.
Bell, J. K., Eckdahl, T. T., Hecht, D. A., Killion, P. J., Latzer, J., Mans, T. L., Provost, J. J.,
Rakus, J. F., Siebrasse, E. A. & Ellis Bell, J. (2017). CUREs in biochemistry–where we
are and where we should go. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 45(1): 7–
12. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20989
Bensimon, E. M., Dowd, A. C., Stanton-Salazar, R., & Dávila, B. A. (2019). The role of
institutional agents in providing institutional support to Latinx Students in STEM. Review
of Higher Education, 42(4), 1689–1721. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0080
Bickerstaff, S. E., Kopko, E. M., Lewy, E. B., Raufman, J., & Rutschow, E. Z. (2021).
Implementing and scaling multiple measures assessment in the context of COVID-19.
Research Brief. Center for the Analysis of Postsecondary Readiness.
Binder, J. F., Baguley, T., Crook, C., & Miller, F. (2015). The academic value of internships:
Benefits across disciplines and student backgrounds. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 41, 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.12.001
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to
Theories and Methods (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Bottia, M. C., Mickelson, R. A., Jamil, C., Moniz, K., & Barry, L. (2021). Factors associated
with college STEM participation of racially minoritized students: A synthesis of research.
Review of Educational Research, 91(4), 614–648.
174

https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211012751
Brayboy, B. M. J., Castagno, A. E., & Maughan, E. (2007). Equality and Justice for All?
Examining Race in Education Scholarship. Review of Research in Education, 31, 159–
194. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07300045
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1981). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and
Design. Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research
perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723–742. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.22.6.723
Buolamwini, J. & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in
Commercial Gender Classification. Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness,
Accountability and Transparency. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81, 77–
91.
Cannady, M. A., Greenwald, E., & Harris, K. N. (2014). Problematizing the STEM pipeline
metaphor: Is the STEM pipeline metaphor serving our students and the STEM
workforce? Science Education, 98(3), 443–460. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21108
Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful
women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 44(8), 1187–1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20237
Chang, M., Sharkness, J., Hurtado, S., & Newman, C. (2014). What matters in college for
retaining aspiring scientists and engineers from underrepresented racial groups. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 555–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21146
175

Chang, J., Chuhee, K., Stevens, L., & Buonora, P. (2016). Strategies to recruit and retain
students in physical sciences and mathematics on a diverse college campus. Journal of
College Science Teaching, 45(3), 14–22. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10018903
Chen, X. (2013). STEM Attrition: College Students’ Paths into and out of STEM Fields.
Statistical Analysis Report. (NCES 2014-001). National Center for Education
Statistics. http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2014001rev
Cohen, R., & Kelly, A. M. (2019). Community college chemistry coursetaking and STEM
academic persistence. Journal of Chemical Engineering, 96, 3–11.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00586
Council on Undergraduate Research. (2021). Council on Undergraduate Research Issues
Updates Definition of Undergraduate Research. Retrieved February 19, 2023, from
https://www.cur.org/council_on_undergraduate_research_issues_updated_definition_of_
undergraduate_research/
Crawford, L. M., & Lynn, L. K. (2020). Interviewing essentials for new researchers. In
Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (Eds.), Research
Design and Methods: An Applied Guide for the Scholar-Practitioner (pp. 147–159). Sage
Publications.
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Crisp, G., & Delgado, C. (2013). The impact of developmental education on community
college persistence and vertical transfer. Community College Review, 42(2), 99–117.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552113516488
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the
176

Research Process. Sage Publications.
https://uosc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01USC_INST/273cgt/cdi_askewsholts_
vlebooks_9781446283134
Delmas, P. M., and Childs, T. N. (2021). Increasing faculty engagement in the early alert
process. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58(3), 283–293.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1740102
Delston, J. B. (2021). The ethics and politics of microaffirmations. Philosophy of Management,
20(4), 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-021-00169-x
Diaz Eaton, C., Bonner, K., Cangialosi, K., Dewsbury, B., Diamond-Stanic, M., Douma, J.,
Smith, M., Taylor, R., Wojdak, J., & Wilfong, K. (2022). Sustainability and justice:
Challenges and opportunities for an open STEM education. CBE—Life Sciences
Education, 21(3), Essay 4. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-08-0180
Dowd, A. C. (2011). Developing supportive STEM community college to four-year college and
university transfer ecosystems. In S. Olson & J. B. Labov (Eds.), Community colleges in
the evolving STEM education landscape (pp. 107–134). The National Academies Press.
Dowd, A., Pak, J., & Bensimon, E. (2013). The role of institutional agents in promoting transfer
access. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(15), 1–40.
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1187
Duffy, M., Schott, A., Beaver, J. K., & Park, E. (2014). Tracing the development of multiple
measures for college placement across states and systems. Research for Action.
http://www.researchforaction.org/research-resources/tracing-the-development-of-
multiple-measures-for-college-placement-across-states-and-systems/
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2012). Revisiting Professional Learning Communities at
177

Work: New Insights for Improving Schools. Solution Tree.
EAB. (2016, July 26). How meta-majors guide students toward on-time graduation: Meta-
majors help students make smarter choices. https://eab.com/insights/daily-
briefing/student-success/how-meta-majors-guide-students-toward-on-time-graduation/
Edenfield, C., & McBrayer, J. S. (2021). Institutional conditions that matter to community
college students’ success. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45(10),
718–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2020.1785353
Espinosa, L. (2011). Pipelines and pathways: Women of color in undergraduate STEM majors
and the college experiences that contribute to persistence. Harvard Educational Review,
81(2), 209–241. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.92315ww157656k3u
Espinosa, L. L., & Nellum, C. J. (2015). Five things student affairs professionals can do to
support diverse students in STEM. NASPA Research and Policy Institute.
https://naspa.org/book/five-things-student-affairs-professionals-can-do-to-support-diverse-
students-in-stem
Estrada, M., Burnett, M., Campbell, A. G., Campbell, P. B., Denetclaw, W. F., Gutiérrez, C. G.,
Hurtado, S., John, G. H., Matsui, J., McGee, R., Okpodu, C. M., Robinson, T. J.,
Summers, M. F., Werner-Washburne, M., & Zavala, M. E. (2016). Improving
underrepresented minority student persistence in STEM. CBE—Life Sciences Education,
15(3), Essay 5. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-003
Estrada, M., Hernandez, P. R., & Schultz, P. W. (2018). A longitudinal study of how quality
mentorship and research experience integrate underrepresented minorities into STEM
careers. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(1), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-
04-0066
178

Estrada, M., Young, G. R., Nagy, J., Goldstein, E. J., Ben-Zeev, A., Márquez-Magaña, L., &
Eroy-Reveles, A. (2019). The influence of microaffirmations on undergraduate
persistence in science career pathways. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(3), Article 40.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-01-0012
Fain, Paul. (2015, June 18). Finding a new Compass. Inside Higher Ed.
https://www.insidehighered.com/
Fairlie, R. W., Hoffmann, F., & Oreopoulos, P. (2014). A community college instructor like me:
Race and ethnicity interactions in the classroom. The American Economic Review,
104(8), 2567–2591. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.8.2567
Fink, J., Myers, T., Sparks, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2021). Measuring STEM momentum: Early
indicators of STEM transfer success for community college students. Research brief.
Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Penguin Books. (Original
work published 1970)
Fry, R., Kennedy, B., & Funk, C. (2021). STEM Jobs See Uneven Progress in Increasing
Gender, Racial and Ethnic diversity. Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-
increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/
Ganga, E., & Mazzariello, A. (2019). Modernizing college course placement by using multiple
measures. Education Commission of the States.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED594092.pdf
Garcia, G. A., & Ramirez, J. J. (2018). Institutional agents at a Hispanic Serving Institution:
Using social capital to empower students. Urban Education, (53)3, 355–381.
179

10.1177/0042085915623341
Garibay, J. C. (2018). Beyond traditional measures of STEM success: Long-term predictors of
social agency and conducting research for social change. Research in Higher Education,
59(3), 349–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9470-2
Gay, G. (2013). Teaching to and through cultural diversity. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(1), 48–70.
https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12002
Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.).
Teachers College Press.
Griffiths, R., Gardner, S., Lundh, P., Shear, L., Ball, A., Mislevy, J., Wang, S., Desrochers, D.,
Staisloff, R. (2018). Participant Experiences and Financial Impacts: Findings from Year 2
of Achieving the Dream’s OER Degree Initiative. SRI International.
https://www.sri.com/category/publication/
Harackiewicz, J. M. & Knogler, M. (2018). Interest: Theory and application. In A. J. Elliot, C. S.
Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (2
nd
ed., pp.
334–352). Guilford Press.
Higher Learning Commission. (n.d.). Core Component 4.B: What does HLC mean by
cocurricular? Retrieved February 14, 2023, from
https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/core-component-4-b-what-does-hlc-mean-by-
cocurricular.html
Hinton, A. O., Jr., Termini, C. M., Spencer, E. C., Rutaganira, F. U., Chery, D., Roby, R., Vue,
Z., Pack, A. D., Brady, L. J., Garza-Lopez, E., Marshall, A. G., Lewis, S. C., Shuler, H.
D., Taylor, B. L., McReynolds, M. R., & Palavicino-Maggio, C. B. (2020). Patching the
180

leaks: Revitalizing and reimagining the STEM pipeline. Cell, 183(3), 568–575.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.029
Hodges, R., Miller Payne, E., McConnell, M. C., Lollar, J., Guckert, D. A., Owens, S., Gonzales,
C., Hoff, M. A., O’Donnell Lussier, K., Wu, N., & Shinn, H. B. (2020). Developmental
education policy and reforms: A 50-state snapshot. Journal of Developmental Education,
44 (1), 2–17. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1320569
Hofstra, B., Kulkarni, V. V., Galvez, S. M. N., He, B., Jurafsky, D., & McFarland, D. A. (2020).
The diversity–innovation paradox in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 117(17), 9284–9291. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915378117
Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of
high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS,
101(46), 16385–16389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403723101
Hu, S., Park, T., Mokher, C., Spencer, H., Hu, X., & Bertrand Jones, T. (2019). Increasing
momentum for student success: Developmental education redesign and student progress
in Florida. Center for Postsecondary Success.
https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:640590/datastream/PDF/view
Hurtado, S., Eagan, M. K., Tran, M. C., Newman, C. B., Chang, M. J., & Velasco, P. (2011).
“We do science here”: Underrepresented students’ interactions with faculty in different
college contexts. Journal of social issues, 67(3), 553–579. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
4560.2011.01714.x
Hutchison, L., & McAlister-Shields, L. (2020). Culturally responsive teaching: Its application in
higher education environments. Education Sciences, 10(5), Article 124.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10050124
181

Irwin, V., Zhang, J., Wang, X., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., York, C., Barmer, A., Bullock
Mann, F., Dilig, R. Parker, S., Nachazel, T., Barnett, M. & Purcell, S. (2021). Report on
the Condition of Education 2021. NCES 2021-144. National Center for Education
Statistics. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED612942
Jaggars, S. S., & Bickerstaff, S. (2018). Developmental education: The evolution of research and
reform. In M. B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research,
33. pp. 469–503. Springer.
Jones, T., Ramirez-Mendoza, J., & Jackson, V. (2020). A Promise Worth Keeping: An Updated
Equity-Drive Framework for Free College Programs. The Education Trust.
https://edtrust.org/resource/a-promise-worth-keeping/
Kerr, J. Q., Hess, D. J., Smith, C. M., & Hadfield, M. G. (2018). Recognizing and reducing
barriers to science and math education and STEM careers for Native Hawaiians and
Pacific Islanders. CBE life sciences education, 17(4), Meeting Report 1.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.18-06-0091
Kishbaugh, T. L., Cessna, S., Leaman, L., & Showalter, D. (2018). Seeking To Improve
Retention through Teaching Strategies and Peer Tutoring. In Retention of Under-
Represented Students in STEM through Affective and Cognitive Interventions (pp. 109–
130). American Chemical Society. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/bk-2018-
1301.ch007
Kisker, C. B. Wagoner, R. L., & Cohen, A. M. (2014). Elements of effective transfer associate
degrees. In Cohen, A. M., Brawer, F. B., & Kisker, C. B. (Eds.), The American
Community College (6th ed.). (pp. 5–11). Jossey-Bass.
Kleinschmit, A. J., Rosenwald, A., Ryder, E. F., Donovan, S., Murdoch, B., Grandgenett, N. F.,
182

Pauley, M., Triplett, E., Tapprich, W., & Morgan, W. (2023). Accelerating STEM
education reform: Linked communities of practice promote creation of open educational
resources and sustainable professional development. International Journal of STEM
Education, 10, Article 16. https://doi. org/10.1186/s40594-023-00405-y
Kolenovic, Z., & Strumbos, D. (2020). ASAP students in STEM majors: Results from the fall
2015 cohort. CUNY. http://www1.cuny.edu/sites/asap/wp-
content/uploads/sites/8/2020/04/30099_CUNY_ASAP_STEM_Brief_2019_WEB_m2.-
1.9MBpdf.pdf
Lane, C., Schrynemakers, I., & Kim, M. (2020). Examining the academic effects of
developmental education reform: Faculty perceptions from a large, public, urban
university. The Community College Enterprise, 26(1), 27–57.
https://uosc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01USC_INST/273cgt/cdi_proquest_jour
nals_2423052313
LaSota, R. R., & Zumeta, W. (2016). What matters in increasing community college students’
upward transfer to the baccalaureate degree: Findings from the beginning postsecondary
study 2003–2009. Research in Higher Education, 57(2), 152–189.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9381-z
Ma, J., & Pender, M. (2021). Trends in College Pricing and Student Aid 2021. College Board.
https://research.collegeboard.org/trends
Made, A. F., Hasan, A., Burgess, S., Tuttle, D., & Soetaert, N. (2019). The effect of peer tutoring
in reducing achievement gaps: A success story. Journal of Computing Sciences in
Colleges, 35(1), 57–65.
https://www.ccsc.org/publications/journals/NW2019.pdf#page=57
183

Maertz, C. P., Jr., Stoeberl, P. A., & Marks, J. (2014). Building successful internships: Lessons
from the research for interns, schools, and employers. Career Development International,
19(1), 123–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-03-2013-0025
Martinez Ortiz, A., & Sriraman, V. (2015). Exploring faculty insights into why undergraduate
college students leave STEM fields of study-A three-part organizational self-study.
American Journal of Engineering Education, 6(1), 43–60.
https://doi.org/10.19030/ajee.v6i1.9251
Marzano Resources. (2023). Professional learning communities at work and high reliability
schools. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from
https://www.marzanoresources.com/reproducibles/plc-hrs
Marzano, R. J., & Heflebower, T., Hoegh, J. K., Warrick, P. B., & Grift, G. (2016).
Collaborative teams that transform schools: The next step in PLCs. Marzano Resources.
Maxwell, J. (2010). Using numbers in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 475–482.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410364740
McGee, E. O. (2016). Devalued black and latino racial identities: A by-product of STEM college
culture? American Educational Research Journal, 53(6), 1626–1662.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216676572
Melguizo, T., Kienzl, G. S., & Alfonso, M. (2011). Comparing the educational attainment of
community college transfer students and four-year college rising juniors using propensity
score matching methods. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(3), 265–291.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2011.11777202
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4
th
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
184

Miller, C., & Weiss, M. J. (2022). Increasing community college graduation rates: A synthesis of
findings on the ASAP model from six colleges across two states. Educational Evaluation
and Policy Analysis, 44(2), 210–233. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737211036726
Mooney, G. M., & Foley, D. J. (2011). Community Colleges: Playing an Important Role in the
Education of Science, Engineering, and Health Graduates (Info Brief NSF 11-317).
https://wayback.archiveit.org/5902/20150628150455/http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrie
f/nsf11317/nsf11317.pdf
Museus, S. D., & Neville, K. M. (2012). Delineating the ways that key institutional agents
provide racial minority students with access to social capital in college. Journal of
College Student Development, 53(3), 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2012.0042
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Barriers and Opportunities
for 2-Year and 4-Year STEM Degrees: Systemic Change to Support Students' Diverse
Pathways. Eds. Shirley Malcom & Michael Feder. The National Academies Press.
https://doi.org/10.17226/21739
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Undergraduate Research
Experiences for STEM Students: Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities. The National
Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24622.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2016). Remedial Coursetaking at U.S. Public 2- and 4-
Year Institutions: Scope, Experiences, and Outcomes. (NCES 2016-405).
https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2016405
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Profile of Undergraduate Students: Attendance,
Distance and Remedial Education, Degree Program and Field of Study, Demographics,
185

Financial Aid, Financial Literacy, Employment, and Military Status: 2015-16. (NCES
2019-467). https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2019467
National Science Board. National Science Foundation. (2019). Higher Education in Science and
Engineering. Science and Engineering Indicators 2020. NSB-2019-7. Alexandria, VA.
https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20197/
National Science Board. National Science Foundation. (2020). Science and Engineering
Indicators 2020: The State of U.S. Science and Engineering. NSB-2020-1. Alexandria,
VA. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201
National Science Board. National Science Foundation. (2022). Science and Engineering
Indicators 2022: The State of U.S. Science and Engineering. NSB-2022-1. Alexandria,
VA. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20221
National Science Foundation. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019).
Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering. NSF.
Special report no. 19-304. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19304/
Neal, J. W., & Neal, Z. P. (2013). Nested or networked?: Future directions for ecological
systems theory. Social Development, 22 (4), 722–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12018
Noonan, Ryan. (2017). STEM Jobs: 2017 Update. US Department of Commerce.
https://www.commerce.gov/news/reports/2017/03/stem-jobs-2017-update
O’Leary, E. S., Shapiro, C., Toma, S., Sayson, H. W., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., Johnson, T., & Sork,
V. L. (2020). Creating inclusive classrooms by engaging STEM faculty in culturally
responsive teaching workshops. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(32), 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00230-7
Packard, B. W., Gagnon, J. L., & Senas, A. J. (2012). Navigating community college transfer in
186

science, technical, engineering, and mathematics fields. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 36(9), 670–683. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2010.495570
Packard, B. W., & Jeffers, K. C. (2013). Advising and progress in the community college STEM
Transfer Pathway. NACADA Journal, 33(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.12930/NACADA-
13-015
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95 (4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Premraj, D., Thompson, R., Hughes, L., & Adams, J. (2021). Key factors influencing retention
rates among historically underrepresented students groups in STEM fields. Journal of
College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 23(2), 457–478.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025119848763
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2012). Engage to Excel:
Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast/news
Price, J. A. (2010). Essays on the economics of education and health [Unpublished doctoral
dissertation]. Cornell University.
Rendón, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33–51.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191156
187

Rendón, L. I., & Muñoz, S. M. (2011). Revisiting validation theory: Theoretical foundations,
applications, and extensions. Enrollment Management Journal, 5(2), 12–33.
Rendón, L.I., Nora, A., Ray, J.M. & Cabrales, J. (2018). Latinx Students in STEM Policy &
Practice Brief. Realizing the PROMISE© of Success for Latinx STEM Students. Laredo
Community College. 2018.
Rendón, L., Nora, A., Bledsoe, R., & Kanagala, V. (2019). Científicos latinxs: The untold story
of underserved student success in STEM fields of study. San Antonio, Texas: Center for
research and Policy in Education, The University of Texas at San Antonio.
http://education.utsa.edu/center_research_policy_education/
Rogers, S. E., Miller, C. D., Flinchbaugh, C., Giddarie, M., & Barker, B. (2021). All internships
are not created equal: Job design, satisfaction, and vocational development in paid and
unpaid internships. Human Resource Management Review, 31(1), 100723.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100723
Rosas Alquicira, E.F., Guertin, L., Tvelia, S., Berquist, P. J., & Cole, M. W. (2022).
Undergraduate research at community colleges: A pathway to achieve student, faculty,
and institutional success. New Directions for Community Colleges, (199), 63–75.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20524
Rowe, M. (2008). Micro-affirmations and micro-inequities. Journal of the International
Ombudsman Association, 1(1), 45–48. https://diversity.uiowa.edu/rowe-m-2008-micro-
affirmations
-and-micro-inequities-journal-international-ombudsman-association

188

Salis Reyes, N. A. (2019). “What am I doing to be a good ancestor?”: An Indigenized
phenomenology of giving back among Native college graduates. American Educational
Research Journal, 56(3), 603–637. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218807180
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P., Yuan, X., Nathan, A & Hwang, Y., A.
(2017). A National View of Student Attainment Rates by Race and Ethnicity – Fall 2010
Cohort (Signature Report No. 12b). National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.
https://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport12-supplement-2/signature12-raceethnicity/
Siddiqi, J. E., & Mikolowsky, J. (2020). Boosting FAFSA Completion to Increase Student
Success. [Policy brief]. Education Commission of the States.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED607344
Smith, J. L., Cech, E., Metz, A., Huntoon, M., & Moyer, C. (2014). Giving back or giving up:
Native American student experiences in science and engineering. Cultural Diversity and
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20(3), 413–429. 10.1037/a0036945
Smith, J. S. (2007). Using data to inform decisions: Intrusive faculty advising at a community
college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 31, 813–831.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920701375918
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of
racial minority children and youths. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1–39.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.1.140676g74018u73k
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2011). A social capital framework for the study of institutional
agents and their role in the empowerment of low-status students and youth. Youth &
Society, 43(3), 1066–1109. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X10382877
189

Stets, J. E., Brenner, P. S., Burke, P. J., & Serpe, R. T. (2017). The science identity and entering
a science occupation. Social Science Research, 64, 1–14.
https://https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.10.016
Stofer, K. A., Chandler, J. W., Insalaco, S., Matyas, C., Lannon, H. J., Judge, J., Lanman, B.,
Hom, B., & Norton, H. (2021). Two-Year College Students Report Multiple Benefits
from Participation in an Integrated Geoscience Research, Coursework, and Outreach
Internship Program. Community College Review, 49(4), 457–482.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00915521211026682
Tajmel, T. (2019). Pathways, intersections and leaky pipelines: The cognitive function of
metaphors for research on STEM careers. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 14,
1105–1113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-018-9893-x
Tatum, B. D. (2001a). Defining racism: “Can we talk?” In P. S. Rothenberg (Ed.), Race, class,
and gender in the United States: An integrated study (pp. 100-107). Macmillan.
Tatum, B. D. (2001b). Professional development: An important partner in antiracist teacher
education. In S. H. King & L. A. Castanell (Eds.), Racism and racial inequality:
Implications for teacher education, (pp. 51–58). American Association of Colleges for
Teacher Education.
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Professional+development%3a+An+important+partner+in+antiraci
st+teacher+education&id=ED469954
Taylor, M. S. (1988). Effects of college internships on individual participants. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 73(3), 393–401. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.393
190

Taylor, J. L., & Lepper, C. W. (2018). Designing the promise: The Salt Lake Community
College Promise program. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 42(11).
770–777. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2018.1443046
Tinto, Vincent. (2012). Completing College: Rethinking Institutional Action. The University of
Chicago Press.
Tovar, E. (2015). The role of faculty, counselors, and support programs on Latino/a community
college students’ success and intent to persist. Community College Review, 43(1), 46–71.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114553788
Ullucci, K. (2010). What works in race-conscious teacher education? Reflections from educators
in the field. Teacher Education Quarterly, 37(2), 137–156.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Open Educational
Resources. Retrieved February 25, 2022, from https://www.unesco.org/en/open-
educational-resources
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math, including
Computer Science. https://www.ed.gov/stem
Vasquez, A., & Scrivener, S. (2020). How to design and implement advising services in
community colleges: Lessons from two decades of research and technical assistance.
MDRC. https://www.mdrc.org/publication/how-design-and-implement-advising-services-
community-colleges
Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of science identity and its role as the driver
of student choices. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(48), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0140-5
191

Wang, X. (2015). Pathway to a baccalaureate in STEM Fields: Are community colleges a viable
route and does early STEM momentum matter? Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 37(3), 376–393. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373714552561
Wang, X. (2017). Toward a holistic theoretical model of momentum for community college
student success. In M.B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and
Research (pp. 259–308). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48983-4_6
Waynant, K. V., George, A., & Hartzell, P. L. (2022). Benefits of a prerequisite majors’(general)
chemistry course in STEM retention and graduation rates as measured through success in
a biology CURE course. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(4), 1612–1619.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00997
Whitcomb, K. M., & Singh, C. (2021). Underrepresented minority students receive lower grades
and have higher rates of attrition across STEM disciplines: A sign of inequity?
International Journal of Science Education, 43(7), 1054–1089.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1900623
Wigfield, A., Rosenzweig, E. Q., & Eccles, J. S. (2018). Achievement values: Interactions,
interventions, and future directions. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.),
Handbook of competence and motivation (2
nd
ed., pp. 334–352). Guilford Press.
Wilson, R. C., Woods, L., & Gaff, J. G. (1974). Social-psychological accessibility and faculty-
student interaction beyond the classroom. Sociology of Education, 47(1), 74–92.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2112167
Winkle-Wagner, R., & McCoy, D. L. (2018) Feeling like an “Alien” or “Family”? Comparing
students and faculty experiences of diversity in STEM disciplines at a PWI and an
192

HBCU. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 21(5), pp. 593–606.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1248835
Winterer, E. R., Froyd, J. E., Borrego, M., Martin, J. P., Foster, M. (2020). Factors influencing
the academic success of Latinx students matriculating at 2-year and transferring to 4-year
US institutions–implications for STEM majors: A systematic review of the literature.
International Journal of STEM Education, 7(34). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-
00215-6
Wu, J., & Uttal, D. (2020). Beyond the leaky pipeline: Developmental pathways that lead college
students to join or return to STEM majors. Journal of Research in STEM Education, 6(2),
64–90. https://doi.org/10.51355/jstem.2020.80
Xu, D., Ran, F. X., Fink, J., Jenkins, D., & Dundar A. (2018). Collaboratively clearing the path
to a baccalaureate degree: Identifying effective 2- to 4-year college transfer partnerships.
Community College Review, 46(3):231–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552118772649
Zilberman, A., & Ice, L. (2021). Why computer occupations are behind strong STEM
employment growth in the 2019–29 decade. Beyond the Numbers: Employment and
Unemployment, 10(1). U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-10/why-computer-occupations-are-behind-strong-
stem-employment-growth.htm
193

Appendix A: Faculty Recruitment Letter
Dear X,
I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California in the Organizational
Change and Leadership program. I will be conducting a study at [SWCC] as part of my doctoral
studies. The purpose of the study is to explore the perceptions of community college advisors
and faculty as it relates to the retention of Black or African American, Hispanic or Latina/o/x,
American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander students in
STEM programs of study.
You have been identified as a full-time faculty member who works with STEM students
in [chemistry, computer science, engineering, math, and/or physics]. To be eligible for the study,
you must have taught at SWCC for at least one full semester. If you meet this requirement, I
invite you to participate in an interview that will last approximately 45-60 minutes. [For math
faculty, I am looking for those who teach college algebra, precalculus, and higher-level courses
such as calculus, differential equations, and discrete mathematics.] The interview will be
conducted in a room at your preferred campus. If you prefer a virtual interview, that can also be
arranged through Zoom. The interview will be scheduled at a time that is convenient to you.
For the purposes of this study, your identity will be confidential, and there are no inherent
risks associated with this study. Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to
participate in the study, there will be no penalty, and it will not affect your employment status at
[SWCC]. By responding to this invitation by email or phone, you are agreeing to participate in
this study. You may reply directly to this email or call me on my cell phone (number included
below) to schedule an interview.
194

If you have any questions or comments regarding your participation in this study, please
contact Melissa Carpenter at mlc55452@usc.edu or (480) 586-4455. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
Melissa Carpenter

195

Appendix B: Advisor Recruitment Letter
Dear X,
I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California in the Organizational
Change and Leadership program. I will be conducting a study at [SWCC] as part of my doctoral
studies. The purpose of the study is to explore the perceptions of community college advisors
and faculty as it relates to the retention of Black or African American, Hispanic or Latina/o/x,
American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander students in
STEM programs of study.
You have been identified as an academic advisor who works with students in STEM
disciplines such as astronomy, biology, chemistry, computer science, engineering, geology,
math, physics, and technology-based fields. To be eligible for the study, you must be employed
as a full-time advisor at [SWCC]. If you meet this requirement, I invite you to participate in an
interview that will last approximately 45-60 minutes. The interview will be conducted in a room
at your preferred campus. If you prefer a virtual interview, that can also be arranged through
Zoom. The interview may be scheduled outside of work hours or during work hours, depending
on your preference. If you choose to participate in this study, you or I can work with your
supervisor to coordinate a time when you could be available.
For the purposes of this study, your identity will be confidential, and there are no inherent
risks associated with this study. Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to
participate in the study, there will be no penalty, and it will not affect your employment status at
[SWCC]. By responding to this invitation by email or phone, you are agreeing to participate in
this study. You may reply directly to this email or call me on my cell phone (number included
below) to schedule an interview.
196

If you have any questions or comments regarding your participation in this study, please
contact Melissa Carpenter at mlc55452@usc.edu or (480) 586-4455. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
Melissa Carpenter

197

Appendix C: Interview Protocol
Introduction
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this interview. We will spend approximately 45
to 60 minutes during this session. Do you still have the whole hour available? As I explained in
my email invitation to you, this study is about the retention of racially minoritized students in
STEM programs at community colleges including technology-based fields. [X] Community
College has been designated as a Hispanic Serving Institution and 32% of students identify as
Hispanic. Other minority populations include Black (5%); Asian and Pacific Islander (5%),
Muli-racial (5%), and American Indian (3%). In fall 2021, half of the college’s students
identified as non-White. At the national level, Asian and White students are generally
overrepresented in STEM while other populations tend to be racially minoritized. As a
researcher, I am particularly interested in learning about your perspective on the roles that
advisors and faculty play in retaining racially minoritized students in STEM programs of study.
We will discuss several topics so that I can learn about your experiences and opinions. Do I have
your consent to proceed with the interview? Thank you.
I would like to record what you say so I do not miss any of it. I do not want to take the
chance of relying on my notes and maybe missing something that you say or inadvertently
changing your words somehow. I would like to record this interview to ensure I accurately
capture your responses. May I record this session? Thank you. For quoted interview material that
will be used in this study, would it be ok to identify the material as being shared by someone of
your gender? Thank you. Let’s begin.

198

Background
1. Please start by sharing your name and role at [X] Community College, what department
you work in, and how long you have been in that department. Have you always been full
time? If not, how long have you been working full time at the college?
2. Tell me about what brought you to becoming an instructor [advisor] at [X] Community
College.
3. To what extent are you familiar with the college’s success rates in STEM? What stands
out to you? Is this something you talk about in department meetings? How do you get
your information? Is it important for employees to have this information? Why or why
not?
Now I am going to ask you some questions about belonging and inclusion.
Faculty Questions: Belonging, Inclusion, and Validation
4. What can STEM faculty do inside of the classroom or within the Learning Management
System to show racially minoritized STEM students that they belong and are a valuable
part of the college community? Where did you get these ideas?
a. Is there anything in your syllabus that demonstrates belonging and inclusion?
b. Do you do anything during the first week of classes?
c. Do you do anything specific when you are trying to learn students’ names and
personal identifiers?
d. Do you have specific rapport-building activities or group work to help with this?
e. Does your course content such as readings or assignments reflect belonging or
inclusion? How so?
199

5. What can STEM faculty members do outside of the classroom to show racially
minoritized STEM students that they belong and are a valuable part of the college
community?
a. Do you do anything specific when students attend your office hours? Do you ever
hold office hours during weekends or evenings? Virtually?
b. Do you host any study sessions, clubs, or other co-curricular activities?
c. Do you seek out particular students to participate in undergraduate research?
d. Do you connect students with faculty at their transfer institution?
e. Do you help students with scholarship or internship opportunities?
6. How do you help STEM students see themselves as successful learners? Walk me
through an example. Maybe a challenging student comes to mind?
7. In your opinion, what would one see in a fully inclusive STEM classroom?
a. Images of diverse scientists/mathematicians
b. Diverse groupings of students
c. Culturally relevant teaching and class discussions
d. Problem-based learning or inquiry-based teaching
e. Student engagement and well-being
Are any of these things evident in your classroom? How close or far are we from the
ideal at [X] Community College? How do you know that?
8. Can you recall a time in the classroom when your words or actions were signaling
inclusion? If so, please describe what was said or done.
9. Have you observed advisors or faculty using affirming actions toward STEM students at
[X] Community College? What was the nature of these actions and where did they occur?
200

Advisor Questions: Belonging, Inclusion, and Validation
4. What have you done to help racially minoritized STEM students adjust to college life?
a. Transitioning from high school to college
b. Transitioning from the workforce
c. Have you helped build students’ college knowledge and understanding of higher
education terminology?
d. Have you involved students’ families or friends in the onboarding process?
5. What have you done to help racially minoritized STEM students with personal
development? Where did you get these ideas?
a. Have you referred students to personal or career counselors?
b. Have you guided students through the career exploration process? How do you
help students discover their career interests and employment options?
c. Have you referred students to services that build life skills or student success
strategies?
d. Do your academic planning sessions include goal setting? What does that look
like?
e. Do you help students identify their cultural assets and strengths? How?
6. What do you do differently when you are working with a student who is majoring in
STEM vs. other majors? What does academic planning specifically look like for these
students?
7. In your opinion, which advising practices promote a sense of inclusion and belonging
for STEM majors who are racially minoritized?
a. What do you do during your first advising session with a STEM student?
201

b. Do you ever hold group advising sessions so peers can interact? If so, what do
those sessions look like?
c. Do you introduce students to others who can serve as professional role models
or near peers?
8. Can you recall a time in an advising session when your words or actions were signaling
inclusion? If so, please describe what was said or done.
9. Have you observed advisors or faculty using affirming actions toward STEM students
at [X] Community College? What was the nature of these actions and where did they
occur?
Next, we will discuss ways in which faculty [advisors] provide institutional resources and help to
break down barriers to STEM student success.
Institutional Agency
10. What types of barriers are impacting racially minoritized students in STEM at [X]
Community College and why?
a. Economic barriers (college costs, socioeconomic status, work schedules)
b. Academic barriers (instructional delivery and homework systems, access to
tutoring, learning loss during the pandemic)
c. Cultural barriers (classroom and college norms, lack of diversity, English only
communication and services, lack of activities for families to participate in)
d. Structural barriers (course placement policies, financial aid systems, statewide
tuition inequity for DACA/undocumented students, class scheduling, institutional
regulations)
202

11. Which barriers, if any, have you been able to minimize or eliminate so racially
minoritized students can be successful in STEM courses and programs?
12. What types of institutional resources do you try to provide to STEM students when they
are struggling? What about when they are successful?
a. Tutoring/learning support
b. Workshops
c. Basic needs such as food, housing, or transportation
d. Career or personal counseling
e. Disability services
f. Mentoring
g. Financial resources (grants, scholarships, jobs)
h. Multicultural services/Affinity groups/Clubs
i. Transfer specialists/industry partners
13. Has there ever been a time when you used your position and/or agency to change a rule
or policy that was negatively affecting racially minoritized students in a STEM program?
Tell me more about that.
14. What do you do, if anything, when you think a student majoring in STEM might
withdraw from a class you are teaching [drop out of college or change their major]?
We are nearing the end of the interview and I would like to conclude with some specific
questions about STEM student retention.
Retention
15. What role should STEM faculty and advisors play in promoting STEM student retention?
203

16. If you could adjust one thing within your current teaching [advising] practice to make it
more supportive of racially minoritized students, what would it be?
17. How does your department or the college support racially minoritized students who are
majoring in STEM? What kinds of programs are in place to support them?
18. How does your department or the college hinder racially minoritized students who are
majoring in STEM? What practices or policies might be barriers to success?
19. Name one or two things you and your colleagues could do over the next two to three
years to improve the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM.
a. Develop student networks/cohorts
b. Redesign curriculum, lab experiences, and/or assessments
c. Host academic or social activities for students in different STEM programs (field
trips, career nights, guest speakers, STEM competitions)
d. Leverage technology/software to monitor student progress and conduct outreach
e. Create STEM support programs
Wrap Up
20. For sample description purposes, and if you feel comfortable, please share your gender
identity and racial or ethnic identity.
21. Is there something that I did not ask you about that you think the college should have on
its radar in terms of STEM retention?
Thank you again for taking the time to participate in this interview. As a reminder, your
responses to the questions will remain confidential. I plan to share an abstract with you once the
study has been completed. If I come across any items that need clarification or responses that
could be expanded upon, is it okay if I contact you in the future? What is the best way to follow
204

up with you? Are there any other STEM faculty [advisors] whom you think I should interview as
part of this study?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative study employed the concepts of validating and institutional agents to explore the roles that community college practitioners play in the retention of racially minoritized students in STEM programs. Grounded in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, the conceptual framework was used to identify affirming practices leveraged by those who were closest to students in the higher education microsystem – STEM faculty and advisors – and the actions they took to remove financial and other barriers to promote STEM retention. Fifteen interviews were conducted with employees at a large urban community college in the Southwest to collect information about the views of faculty and advisors on the retention of racially minoritized students. The findings were based on the self-reported perceptions of faculty and advisors. The semi-structured interviews revealed several strategies that promote belonging and affirmation with themes centering on encouragement, employee availability, and diversity and inclusion.
Additionally, faculty and advisors also served as institutional agents by minimizing financial barriers, offering extended learning opportunities, and influencing or adjusting instructional, departmental, or institutional policies and practices that detract from STEM student retention. Participants described activities that facilitate career exploration and development for racially minoritized students in STEM. Finally, faculty and advisors expressed the desire to collaborate with each other, provide more robust advising services, and utilize early alert tools to improve student retention. The study concluded with six recommendations for policy and practice that community college educators may want to consider as they enhance their efforts to retain racially minoritized students who are pursuing STEM degrees, thus contributing to efforts to diversify the STEM workforce within the United States.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

(Re)Imagining STEM instruction: an examination of culturally relevant andragogical practices to eradicate STEM inequities among racially minoritized students in community colleges

PDF

Honorary mention: the untold stories of minoritized community college honors students

PDF

African-American/Black students’ experience and achievement in asynchronous online learning environments at a community college

PDF

“Mismatched”: matching Latino/as from API 1-2 high schools to an elite public university

PDF

Influence of mentorship on career development for underrepresented minoritized students in STEM undergraduate research experiences

PDF

A curriculum for faculty implementation of culturally relevant instruction in a community college classroom

PDF

Building capital: supporting students of color in STEM degree attainment

PDF

Why I can't see myself in school? Hiring and retaining ethnically diverse leadership in public schools

PDF

Success in the sticky: exploring the professional learning and instructional practices that are sticky for distinguished secondary STEM educators of students historically…

PDF

Food insecurity and the impact on community college students

PDF

Discovering implicit academic science norms through the experience of historically underrepresented STEM faculty

PDF

Math teachers and growth mindset

PDF

“Black” workplace belonging: an examination of the lived experiences of Black faculty sense of belonging factors in community colleges

PDF

Promising practices of California community college mathematics instructors teaching AB 705 accessible courses

PDF

Faculty as institutional agents for low-income Latino students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields at a Hispanic-serving institution

PDF

Preparing critically conscious counseling instructional faculty in the California community college

PDF

Capacity building for STEM faculty and leaders: supporting university students with ADHD in earning STEM degrees

PDF

Black male experience on a community college campus: a study on sense of belonging

PDF

Academic advisement practices and policies in support of Black community college students with the goal of transfer

PDF

Environmental influences on the diversity of professional sports executive leadership

Asset Metadata

Creator Carpenter, Melissa Lee (author)

Core Title Retaining racially minoritized students in community college STEM programs

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-05

Publication Date 04/24/2024

Defense Date 03/27/2023

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag belonging,community college,ecological systems theory,inclusion,institutional agent,OAI-PMH Harvest,racially minoritized students,retention,STEM,validation

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Maccalla, Nicole (committee chair), Hasan, Angela (committee member), Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee member)

Creator Email mbcarpenter@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113077998

Unique identifier UC113077998

Identifier etd-CarpenterM-11698.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-CarpenterM-11698

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Carpenter, Melissa Lee

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230425-usctheses-batch-1030 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu