University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Ph.D. as a contested intellectual site: a critical race analysis of the personal and institutional factors that influence the persistence and retention of academically successful Black doctor...

(USC Thesis Other)

The Ph.D. as a contested intellectual site: a critical race analysis of the personal and institutional factors that influence the persistence and retention of academically successful Black doctor...

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 1

The Ph.D. as a Contested Intellectual Site: A Critical Race Analysis of the Personal and
Institutional Factors that Influence the Persistence and Retention of
Academically Successful Black Doctoral Students

By

Sharoni Denise Little

A Doctoral Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements of the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2014

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 2

Dedicated to my loving sons
Jared Deon Savage and Jaren Leon Savage

Pursue your dreams and goals; do not follow or chase others’.

I thank God for giving me the desire, courage, and strength to pursue and complete this
study. His eternal mercy, grace, and favor fortified me throughout this arduous quest.
I also thank my Mother, Bonnie Jean Riley for all of her love and support.

Psalm 30:5
For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: Weeping may endure for a
night, but joy cometh in the morning.

Matthew 5:15
Neither do women light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it
giveth light unto all that are in the house.

© 2014

Sharoni Denise Little

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 3

Abstract
The decline of U.S. students who are pursuing and completing higher education,
especially those who have been historically underrepresented, has lessened America’s
global and economic competitiveness. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(2012), occupations requiring some level of postsecondary education are expected to
have “slightly higher rates of growth.” Specifically, those in “the master’s degree
category are projected to grow the fastest, about 22 percent; occupations in the bachelor’s
and associate’s degree categories are anticipated to grow by about 17 percent and 18
percent, respectively, and occupations in the doctoral or professional degree category are
expected to grow by about 20 percent” (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2012).

While Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos, and Native Americans represent 12.8%, 25%, and 1.1%
of the American population respectively, they were awarded college degrees at
exceedingly lower rates than their majority counterparts. In 2010, Black students earned
10.3% of Bachelor’s, 12.5% of Master’s, and 7.4% of doctoral degrees, with Black males
earning only 29-35% of the total degrees obtained (NCES 2012-045). With the number of
historically underrepresented Americans projected to reach 50% by 2050, American
higher education must address the perpetually lower admission, retention, and graduation
rates of students of color, especially those pursuing graduate education (Bennett &
Okinaka, 1990; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pederson, & Allen, 1998).

The purpose of this study was to ascertain what personal and institutional factors
academically successful Black doctoral students identified as promoting or impeding
their persistence, retention, and educational attainment. The three guiding research
questions asked:

1. What personal factors academically successful Black doctoral students identified
as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
2. What institutional factors academically successful Black doctoral students
identified as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
3. To what extent, if at all, did race and perceived or actual racism impact their
educational experience, and subsequent success?

Using core critical race theoretical tenets, including, the endurance of American racism,
the critique of liberalism (notions of objectivity, color-blindness, meritocracy and
neutrality), the notion of whiteness as property, the notion of interest convergence, and
the essential use of counter storytelling, this study examined what role, if any, race and/or
racism impacted Black doctoral students’ educational journey. Finally, it explored
whether the pursuit of a Ph.D. was a contested intellectual site for Black students due to
historical racism in higher education, reified, hegemonic intellectual deficiency discourse,
and systemic knowledge, resource, and access barriers that that serve as “moats,”
designed to guard the Ivory Tower, especially its pinnacle, the Ph.D.

Using a purposeful sampling strategy, twelve students, representing various academic
programs, were recruited via email and selected from the 51 Black doctoral students at
the focal institution, an urban, private, predominantly white research institution
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 4

comprised of 33,000 students. After soliciting participation for two months, twelve,
academically successful, Black doctoral students, representing various stages of the
doctoral process (ranging from the second semester of their first year to the dissertation
defense stage) were chosen. Their academic majors included liberal arts, humanities,
engineering, and education. The gender distribution was two males and ten females
ranging in age from 22 to 42 years old. Some of the students were local residents, while
others came from various states throughout the U.S. The sample included first-generation
college students, as well as those who were third and fourth generation collegians.
Personally, students were at various stages of life, with some being parents, spouses, and
others primarily on their own with little to no familial support. The qualitative data
collection included in-depth, open-ended interviews, direct observation, and written
documents.

This study revealed that a strategic, holistic and multifaceted approach is needed to
enhance the recruitment, persistence and retention of Black Ph.D. students.
Foundationally, we must confront the profound dearth and systemic exclusion of Black
students pursuing the Ph.D. due to hegemonic, racist intellectual constructions prevalent
in many predominantly White institutions of higher education. Historically, the pursuit of
higher education, and especially the doctorate, has functioned as a form of white status
property which has promulgated the dual myths of “white objective merit,” and “Black
inherent inferiority,” (Little, 2005). Such notions intimate that Blacks, and other people
of color, can neither be originators or disseminators of knowledge.

The study found that academically successful Black doctoral students identified the
following personal and institutional factors as those which promoted their persistence and
retention: Early academic preparation, consistent familial expectations, a spiritual
purpose, student motivation (which includes self-efficacy and self-regulation), early
academic research programs (McNair), faculty and peer mentorship, faculty of color
interaction and representation, a welcoming and inclusive institutional climate and
culture, and financial support (funding). Personal and institutional factors that impeded
students’ persistence and retention, included, the low representation of faculty and
students of color, the lack of academic mentoring and guidance, scarcity of financial aid,
and a non-inclusive or welcoming academic environment.

Students’ narratives revealed that at times during their doctoral experience, the academy
was perceived as a hostile or paternalistic environment that reified the notion that the
Ph.D. was an exclusive domain of whiteness. Perceived exceptionalism, coupled with a
paradoxical sense of hypervisibility and invisibility were often use to explicate Black
students’ presence in the academy, especially at the doctoral level. The reality of
institutional racism and reified notions of Black intellectual deficiency shaped the
contestation of the Ph.D. Another major finding of the study was that the paucity of
faculty of color in academia reified the “domain of whiteness,” often reflected at the focal
institution. In that at the doctoral level, faculty are essential to student’s socialization and
acceptance, it is imperative that students of color see and interact with faculty who not
only share cultural, racial, and ethnic similarities, but whose presence affirms and makes
tangible their intellectual pursuit.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 5

Table of Contents
List of Tables
Table 1: Degree attainment by level of degree, sex, and race/ethnicity, 2012
Table 2: Tinto’s Student Integration Model
Abstract 3

Chapter
1. Introduction
Statement of Problem 7
Purpose of the Study 9
Significance of the Study 11
Limitations of the Study 12
Definition of Terms 12
Theoretical Framework 13
Organization of the Study 20

2. Literature Review
Racism and American Higher Education 21
Persistence, Retention and Attrition Theories 27
Persistence, Retention, Attrition, and Students of color 31
Personal and Pre-Entry Attributes 31
Faculty Interaction, Perceptions, and Composition 35
Campus Climate and Alienation 37
Racism, Inferiority, and Persistence 44

3. Methodological Framework
Qualitative Research Methodology 49
Research Questions 51
Data Collection 51
Sample and Site Selection 52
Data Analysis 53

4. Research Findings
Personal Factors Promoting or Impeding Persistence and Retention 54
Institutional Factors Promoting or Impeding Persistence and Retention 66
Race, Racism, Persistence, and Retention 76

5. Research Recommendations and Conclusions
Recommendations and Persistence and Retention Strategies 85
Future Research 93

References 95
Appendix 109

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 6

Chapter One: Introduction
The decline of U.S. students, especially students of color (Black
i
,
Hispanics/Latinos, Native Americans, and women), who are entering and completing
higher education, has a direct impact on America’s weakening global and economic
competitiveness. One of the most alarming realities is the looming shortage of qualified
students and future workers, especially those in STEM (science, technology, engineering
and math) fields. While Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos, and Native Americans represent
12.8%, 20%, and 1.1% of the American population respectively, they were awarded
college degrees at exceedingly lower rates than their majority counterparts as
demonstrated in Table 1.
Table 1: Degree attainment by level of degree, sex, and race/ethnicity, 2012
Number of degrees conferred to U.S. residents by degree-granting institutions, percentage distribution of
degrees conferred, and percentage of degrees conferred to females, by level of degree and race/ethnicity:
Academic years 1999–2000 and 2009–10
Level of degree and
race/ethnicity
Number
Percentage
distribution
Percent conferred to
females
1999–2000 2009–10
1999–
2000 2009–10
1999–
2000 2009–10
Bachelor's 1,198,809 1,602,480 100.0 100.0 57.5 57.4
White 929,106 1,167,499 77.5 72.9 56.6 56.0
Black 108,013 164,844 9.0 10.3 65.7 65.9
Hispanic 75,059 140,316 6.3 8.8 59.6 60.7
Asian/Pacific Islander 77,912 117,422 6.5 7.3 54.0 54.5
American Indian/Alaska
Native 8,719 12,399 0.7 0.8 60.3 60.7
Master's 406,761 611,693 100.0 100.0 60.0 62.6
White 324,981 445,038 79.9 72.8 59.6 61.8
Black 36,595 76,458 9.0 12.5 68.2 71.1
Hispanic 19,384 43,535 4.8 7.1 60.1 64.3
Asian/Pacific Islander 23,538 42,072 5.8 7.0 52.0 54.3
American Indian/Alaska
Native 2,263 3,960 0.6 0.6 62.7 64.3
Doctor's
1
106,494 140,505 100.0 100.0 47.0 53.3
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 7

White 82,984 104,426 77.9 74.3 45.4 51.4
Black 7,080 10,417 6.6 7.4 61.0 65.2
Hispanic 5,039 8,085 4.7 5.8 48.4 55.0
Asian/Pacific Islander 10,684 16,625 10.0 11.8 48.8 56.5
American Indian/Alaska
Native 707 952 0.7 0.7 52.9 54.8
1
Includes Ph.D., Ed.D., and comparable degrees at the doctoral level. Includes most degrees
formerly classified as first-professional, such as M.D., D.D.S., and law degrees. SOURCE: U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The Condition of Education
2012 (NCES 2012-045)

If the U.S. is to keep pace in the global marketplace, both technologically and
economically throughout the 21
st
Century, they must address and remedy these glaring
disparities. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2012), occupations requiring
some level of postsecondary education are expected to have “slightly higher rates of
growth.” Specifically, those in “the master’s degree category are projected to grow the
fastest, about 22 percent; occupations in the bachelor’s and associate’s degree categories
are anticipated to grow by about 17 percent and 18 percent, respectively, and occupations
in the doctoral or professional degree category are expected to grow by about 20 percent”
(Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2012).
Statement of Problem
With the population of historically underrepresented Americans projected to reach
50% by 2050, and with the educationally related labor statistics previously mentioned,
American higher education must address the perpetually lower admission, retention, and
graduation rates of students of color, especially those pursuing graduate education
(Bennett & Okinaka, 1990; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pederson, & Allen, 1998).
Exacerbating existing disparities is the detrimental effect of national affirmative action
bans, especially in “Texas, California, Washington, and Florida” (Garces, 2012, 4). As
Garces (2012) documented in her study titled the “Impact of Affirmative Action Bans in
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 8

Graduate Education,” these bans have led to a drastic decline in the number of students of
color pursuing graduate education. She noted, “In engineering, the bans have led to about
a 26-percent reduction in the mean proportion of all enrolled graduate students who are
students of color; a 19-percent in the natural sciences; a 15.7% percent drop in the social
sciences; and a 11.8-percent drop in the humanities. Bans have also led to about a13-
percent decline in education” (4).
While Black students earned 7.4% of all Ph.D.s in 2012 (NCES 2012-045), a

comprehensive study conducted by the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (2006),

documented severe gaps in major disciplines, especially in the natural and physical

sciences. They found that:
The very large racial Ph.D. gap in the natural sciences is striking when we
examine Black Ph.D. awards in specific disciplines. For example, not a
single African American earned a Ph.D. in astronomy or astrophysics in
2004. . . . African Americans earned only 10 doctorates in mathematics.
This was only 0.9 percent of all doctorates awarded in the field. . . . Blacks
earned 13, or about 1 percent, of the nearly 1,200 doctorates in physics. In
computer science, Blacks won 0.7 percent of all Ph.D. awards. In the
atmospheric sciences, less than 1 percent of all doctorates went to Blacks.
In chemistry, only 2.3 percent of Ph.D.s went to Blacks. In the earth
sciences such as geology, oceanography, and the atmospheric sciences,
Blacks were 1.3 percent of all doctoral recipients. . . . In the ocean and
marine sciences, only one of the 190 Ph.D.s in the discipline was awarded
to an African American. In 2004, 148 African Americans were awarded a
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 9

Ph.D. in the biological sciences. . . . only 2.5 percent of all doctorates
awarded in the discipline. In 2004 Blacks earned a mere 1.6 percent of all
engineering Ph.D.s. The huge shortfall in engineering is serious because
engineering is a field in which hundreds of thousands of Americans
achieve high-income status and middle to upper social status.1
The cumulative effect of all of these statistics demonstrate an alarming reality regarding
social justice and racism, and the marginalization and exclusion of Black students, and
other students of color in higher education, especially in the pursuit of a Ph.D.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study was to ascertain what personal and institutional factors
academically successful Black doctoral students identified as promoting or impeding
their persistence, retention, and educational attainment. Three guiding research questions
were asked:
1. What personal factors academically successful Black doctoral students identified
as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?

1 The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education study also found that when examining several STEM
disciplines, Blacks did not receive any Ph.D.s which has economic, social and personal consequences for
students and educational institutions. They noted: “A strong indicator of the fact that African Americans
as a group continue to avoid most of the natural sciences appears in the statistics for specific
disciplines. In 2004, 2,100 doctorates were awarded by universities in the United States in the fields of
mathematical statistics, botany, optics physics, human and animal pathology, zoology, astrophysics,
geometry, geophysics and seismology, general mathematics, nuclear physics, astronomy, marine
sciences, nuclear engineering, polymer and plastics engineering, veterinary medicine, topology,
hydrology and water resources, animal nutrition, wildlife/range management, number theory, fisheries
science and management, atmospheric dynamics, engineering physics, paleontology, plant physiology,
general atmospheric science, mathematical operations research, endocrinology, metallurgical
engineering, meteorology, ocean engineering, poultry science, stratigraphy and sedimentation, wood
science, polymer physics, acoustics, mineralogy and petrology, bacteriology, logic, ceramics science
engineering, animal breeding and genetics, computing theory and practice, and mining and mineral
engineering. Not one of these 2,100 doctoral degrees went to an African American.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 10

2. What institutional factors academically successful Black doctoral students
identified as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
3. To what extent, if at all, did race and/or perceived or actual racism impact their
educational experience, and subsequent success?
Using core critical race theoretical tenets, including, the endurance of American racism,
the critique of liberalism (notions of objectivity, color-blindness, meritocracy and
neutrality), the notion of whiteness as property, the notion of interest convergence, and
the essential use of counter storytelling, this study examined what role, if any, the notions
of race and racism impacted Black doctoral students’ educational pursuit. Finally, it
explored whether the pursuit of a Ph.D. was a contested intellectual site for Black
students influenced by reified, hegemonic intellectual deficiency discourse.
Several variables have been attributed to the exclusion and marginalization of
historically students of color, including faculty perceptions, involvement, and
composition (Maton and Hrabowski, 2004; Reichert, 2006; Hurtado, 1994; Nelson,
2007), academic preparation (Hernandez and Lopez, 2004; Nettles, Gosman, Thoeny &
Dandridge, 1985), social integration (Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993; Berger, 1997), student
involvement (Astin, 1984; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991), campus climate and alienation
(Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pederson, & Allen, 1998; Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini,
Pascarella, & Hagedorn, 1999; Loo & Rolinson, 1986), self-concept and identity
development (Cross, 1971; Atkinson, Morten & Sue, 1983; Howard-Hamilton, 1997;
D’Augelli & Hershberger, 1993; Blackwell, 1983, 1985; Fleming, 1984; Tracey &
Sedlacek, 1984), financial aid (Braunstein, McGrath, & Pescatrice, 2000; Cabrera,
Castaneda, Nora, Hengster, 1992), and institutional racism (Bell, 1999; Crenshaw, 1988;
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 11

Delgado, 1987, Carter & Goodwin, 1984; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995, Nettles, 1998,
Feagin, 2001, Sparks and Phillips, 1997). While the previous scholarship identified
relevant variables, additional research was needed to garner an emic view of students’
perceptions regarding the factors that enhance or impede their persistence and retention
(Stanton-Salazar, 2001).
This study looked for emerging themes to determine how they cohered into
interpretive patterns explicating Black doctoral students’ perspectives on the factors
relevant to their academic success. Employing open-ended, semi-structured interviews,
academically successful Black doctoral students representing disparate majors identified
those variables that either aided or hindered their persistence and retention. The sample
was selected from the 51 Black doctoral students at the focal institution.
Significance of the Study
Much of the previous research on the persistence, retention, and attrition of
students of color has used a “deficit” or “inferiority” paradigm that attributed educational
disparities to students’ personal, intellectual, and/or cultural deficiencies. Primarily using
quantitative measures to focus on non-persisters, many of these studies failed to gain
academically successful students’ perspectives regarding those salient factors that were
essential to their persistence, engagement, and academic success.
This study will augment the existing persistence and retention literature by
expanding the understanding of the personal, familial, social, institutional, and academic
factors that inform and shape Black doctoral students’ expectations, self-efficacy, and
overall academic success. It will also inform educational policy and practices that can be
specifically tailored to meet the needs of students of color, and to exhort administrators
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 12

and faculty to perceive low student retention and success rates as a reflection on their
institutional practices instead of the result of student deficiency.
Limitations of the Study
The primary limitation of this study was the small sample size. While relatively
low numbers of Black doctoral students is endemic to higher education, consistent with
the tenets of qualitative research, I understand that “the only reality is that constructed by
the individuals involved in the research situation” (Creswell, 1994, p.4). Another
limitation is that this study was conducted at one, private, predominantly white research
institution. Given the methodological approach and sample size, the findings will not be
generalizable to other institutions, however, they can provide keen insights regarding the
similarities and differences of Black doctoral students’ educational experiences with their
peers at this and other institutions, and can confront hegemonic practices that serve to
“moat,” the Ivory Tower, especially its pinnacle, the Ph.D.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, I contend that students persist and institutions
retain. Specifically, persistence refers to a student’s continuance of their academic
studies from one semester to the next until they achieve their educational goals. This
involves the student-centered factors, such as self-efficacy, study habits, self-identity, and
familial ties influencing their academic success. Retention refers to institutional factors,
such as faculty perceptions, involvement, and composition, campus climate and
alienation, financial aid, and institutional racism affecting a student’s educational journey
from the beginning until graduation. Conversely, attrition refers to a student’s decision to
leave the educational institution, before graduating.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 13

Theoretical Framework
Critical Race Theory, which addresses pervasive racism in American legal, social,
economic, political, and educational institutions, was the theoretical framework used to
guide this study. An outgrowth of Critical Legal Studies, Critical Race Theory confronts
hegemonic ideological notions which rhetorically constructs people of color as inferior
“Others,” and relegate them to the economic, social, political, and educational
peripheries. Critical Race Theory’s five basic tenets include:
1. The endurance of American racism,
2. The critique of liberalism (notions of objectivity, color-blindness, meritocracy,
and neutrality),
3. The notion of whiteness as property,
4. The notion of interest convergence, and
5. The essential use of Counter-Storytelling (Bell, 1992; Crenshaw, 1988, Delgado,
1989; Matsuda, 1995; Harris, 1995; Lawrence, 1995).
Critical race theorists seek to expose the reification of dominant control by challenging
those institutions, such as higher education which have historically excluded people of
color to maintain the status quo.
Recognizing that race is a “central ideological and political pillar upholding
existing social conditions,” researchers must challenge racist rationalizations by
advancing the counter-narratives of those who have been historically oppressed, and in
this case—academically successful Black doctoral students (Crenshaw, 1998, p. 1335).
Solorzano (1998) argued that, “A Critical Race Theory in education challenges
ahistoricism and the unidisciplinary focus of most analyses, and insists on analyzing race
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 14

and racism in education by placing them in both a historical and contemporary context
using interdisciplinary methods” (123.) When educational, economic, and social
disparities in America are examined with a lens undergirded by institutional racism, it
will reveal the systemic practices reifying hegemony. Manning Marable (1993)
documented this reality in higher education and maintained that:
The vast majority of Black and Hispanic students continue to function under a
kind of educational apartheid, more than a generation after the passage of the
1964 Civil Rights Act. . . . Graduate and professional schools are the primary
institutions for the reproduction of America’s intelligentsia. . . . The overall
percentages of African Americans employed in faculty, administrative, and
professional managerial positions remain minuscule. . . . The higher up the
academic hierarchy one goes, the whiter the institution or scholarly society
becomes. (p. 113)
Marable’s (1993) “apartheid” referent exemplified Harris’ (1993) contention regarding
“white status property” and how higher education is constructed as a contested site of
struggle. Harris (1993) contended that “status” and “modern” property are the two forms
of whiteness that “share a common premise—a conceptual nucleus—of a right to
exclude. . . .But exclusivity is predicated not on any intrinsic characteristic, but on the
existence of the symbolic ‘Other’” (1714, 1789). This notion of “whiteness as property,”
serves to reify the dominant structure and demarcate the symbolic and material space of
the marginalized “Other.” As a result of this intentional exclusion, higher education
becomes a contested site of political, social, educational and economic struggle.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 15

Adapting Critical Race Theory to education, McCarthy and Crichlow (1993)
maintained that, “The subject of racial domination has, to say the least, been treated
problematically in modern educational and social theories” (p. xvii). Specifically
applying the “whiteness as property” tenet of Critical Race Theory to educational theory,
policy and praxis, Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) asserted that “more pernicious and
long lasting than the victimization of people of color is the construction of whiteness as
the ultimate property” (p. 58). I contend that higher education, and especially the
doctorate has functioned as a form of white status property which has resulted in the
exclusion of Blacks and other marginalized groups and has precluded them from being
perceived as originators and disseminators of knowledge. Buoyed by inferiority and
cultural deficit claims, the academy, and more specifically certain dominant educational
theories have systemically moated and excluded constructed “Others” from the Ivory
Tower.
Challenging the historical mythos that Blacks are “intellectually incapable or
deficient” is the long history of those brilliant men and women who, despite pervasive
racism and sexism, successfully pursued higher education dating back to Edward
Alexander Bouchet in 1876.2 Completing his Ph.D. in physics in only two years at Yale,
he became the first Black to earn a Ph.D. from an American university. Despite this great
achievement, Bouchet was denied both a research and/or teaching position due to
entrenched, historical racial views and practices. Notwithstanding pervasive racial
segregation and overt racism, from 1876 to the 1940s and 1950s, over 550 Black men and

2 While the actual number of Black men and women pursuing and attaining Ph.D.s seems minimal in
comparison their historical demographics, we must remember the atrocities of slavery and the subsequent,
Jim Crow murderous and oppressive era. Despite these horrific challenges, Black Americans pursued the
highest academic degree in all disciplines, representing the countless numbers of Blacks who could not
pursue their educational interests due to pervasive racism.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 16

women earned Ph.D.s from prestigious American institutions including the University of
Chicago, Harvard University, Columbia University, the University of Michigan, and the
University of Pennsylvania. These educational pioneers exemplified educational
excellence, personal determination, fortitude, and resilience.
Another key tenet of Critical Race Theory essential to examining the disparities in
higher education is the critique of liberalism, or the challenge to the prevailing notions of
meritocracy, color-blindness, and objectivity. Throughout American history, false claims
of an American meritocracy have been promulgated to disavow the reality of institutional
racism. From slavery, to Jim Crow, Plessy v. Ferguson which resulted in the “separate-
but-equal” doctrine, to the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education, to present concerns
regarding access and equity, the notion of meritocracy has attempted to efface the
systemic alienation of Blacks. Harris (1993) argued that the “reductive assessment of
merit obscures the reality that merit is a constructed idea, not an objective fact” (1771).
To address the dearth of Black doctoral students, we must examine the dual myths of
“white objective merit,” and “Black inherent inferiority” (Little, 2005). Such deficit
theories perpetuate racial and educational disparities and seek to explain Black students’
lack of, or lessened student engagement and academic success by focusing on “barriers to
persistence and success,” instead of allowing them to “name the persons, resources,
experiences, and opportunities to which they attribute their achievements” (Harper,
2010).
Equally as pernicious as meritocracy, is its co-conspirator—the myth of a color-
blind America. Designed to imply that race is not a prevailing, pervasive construct that
informs all social interactions, the notion of a color-blind society portends that each
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 17

person is viewed as an individual unmarked by the stigma associated with racial, class
and gender distinctions. Harris (1993) argued that the “reductive assessment of merit
obscures the reality that merit is a constructed idea, not an objective fact” (1771). A
primary example of the legal hypocrisy of a color-blind America is Supreme Court
Justice Harlan’s dissent in the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) decision. Serving as the lone
dissenter positioned to challenge the “separate-but-equal” doctrine, Harlan asserted that:
The white race deems itself to be the dominant race in this country. And so it is,
in prestige, in achievements, in education, in wealth, and in power. So, I doubt
not, it will continue to be for all time, if it remains true to its great heritage, and
holds fast to the principles of constitutional liberty. But in view of the
constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant,
ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind.
(163 U.S. 537 1896)
Before espousing the “color-blind” constitutional claim, Harlan’s essentialist declaration
of the “factual” superiority of Whites indicated the engrained institutional racism
prevalent in American jurisprudence and legislation. Whereas Harlan suggested that the
“law” was the great equalizer, it was clear that in legislative enactment and enforcement,
the material reality of Blacks and other marginalized groups greatly differed from his
“rose-colored” color-blind society.
Illustrating how a false assertion of meritocratic ideals functioned to systemically
exclude faculty of color in predominantly White institutions, Anderson (1993) provided a
historical study of the American professoriate. He indicated that not until 1941, when Dr.
Allison Davis was appointed a professor of education at the University of Chicago, was
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 18

there a full-time Black faculty member at a predominantly white American educational
institution. Addressing early attempts to integrate the faculty in American higher
education, Anderson (1993) discussed the efforts in 1945 of Fred G. Wale, the Director
of Education of the Julius Rosenwald Fund. Wale beseeched many presidents of
predominantly White institutions to hire prominent Black scholars, arguing that:
Negroes have been denied admission to college faculties for about the same
reason that many Jewish scholars have been, or that Japanese and Chinese
Americans and occasionally Catholics have been. Too often, the college
administrator, like many restaurant keepers, real estate agents, and hospital
trustees, has accepted the unchallenged way of our past. Consciously or
unconsciously, he has never seriously considered a Negro as eligible for a faculty.
(as quoted in Anderson, p. 156)
As indicated earlier, there was a viable pool of Black Ph.D.s to hire from, and while their
numbers reflected a infinitesimal percent of the Black population, their continued
marginalization made it increasingly apparent that something other than “qualifications”
resulted in their exclusion. After numerous univeristy presidents proffered Wale weak
“color-blind” meritocratic excuses (allegedly not related to race), it was clear that Black
scholars were not wanted in the academy. Exposing this practice, Anderson (1993)
explained that:
Usually meritocracy is viewed as the antithesis of racism, ethnic and religious
prejudice, and related forms of exclusion and discrimination. The beliefs and
behavior of the overwhelming majority of northern white college and university
presidents, however, tell a radically different story about the relationship between
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 19

race and meritocracy as it evolved in the American academy during the post-
World War II era. The practice of proclaiming one’s devotion to meritocratic
principles, while actually perpetuating traditional patterns of ethnic discrimination
and exclusion, transformed theoretical enemies (i.e., racism vs. meritocracy) into
pragmatic friends. Meritocracy became the fragile bridge across the intolerable
contradictions between equality and racism. (p. 174)
Consistent with the tenets of Critical Race Theory, Anderson’s (1993) exemplar verified
how Blacks have systemically been excluded from academe’s “inner sanctum” under the
auspices of “meritocracy.” Dominant meritocratic claims intimate that historically
marginalized students’ “aptitude” and/or “ability” (or lack thereof) elucidate their scarcity
in the academy, and seeks to promote an ideology of exceptionalism or tokenism.
Mercer (1990), addressed marginalizing conceptions regarding the perceived
absence of Black intellectuals and artists in dominant culture contended that, “ a certain
racism depends on the regulation of the visibility of the black presence in the public
sphere. . . . In a situation where racism rations access to resources, questions of structure
are displaced by a voluntaristic emphasis on individual agency” (240). Mercer (1990)
challenged disparate hegemonic systems, such as academe, which often times seek to
explain, and in some cases justify the dearth of students of color using deficiency and
other marginalizing claims that obfuscate institutional practices that reify their exclusion.
Placing the onus on those students who are “chosen” to participate, places what Mercer
(1990) describes as a “burden of representation,” where “in such a political economy of
racial representation where the part stands in for the whole, the visibility of a few token
black public figures serves to legitimate, and reproduce, the invisibility, and lack of
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 20

access to public discourse, of the community as a whole” (230). This paradoxical
material reality can often cause Black students in the academy to simultaneously navigate
hypervisibility and invisibility.
Critical Race Theory provided a lens by which institutional racism, and the
notions of whiteness as property, meritocracy, and a color-blind America reify
hegemonic practices that serve to “moat,” the Ivory Tower, especially its pinnacle, the
Ph.D. It provides the theoretical framework to confront the dual myths of “white
objective merit,” and “Black inherent inferiority,” and how, if at all, racism influences the
persistence, retention, and attrition of students of color in higher education.
Organization of the Study
Chapter one provides an introduction, a background, the purpose, the significance
and the limitations of the study. It also includes a statement of the problem, the definition
of key terms, and a discussion of the theoretical framework. Chapter two includes a
history of race and racism in American higher education, a discussion of student
persistence and retention theories, and an in-depth literature review of students of color
persistence and retention scholarship. Chapter three discusses the methodology,
population, institution, and instrument that will be used in the study. Chapter four
provides a rich description of the research findings which are categorized according to
emerging themes and variables regarding student persistence and retention. Chapter five
interprets and theorizes from the findings those factors that promote or hinder
academically successful Black doctoral students, and recommendations for future
research and educational policies.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 21

Chapter Two
Review of the Literature: Persistence, Retention, and Race

America’s Racialized History and American Higher Education

In the Souls of Black Folk (1903), W. E. B. Du Bois stated that for America, the
problem of the 20
th
century would be the problem of the color line (p. 1). From her
founding, to the present, the “color line” has persisted as an American enigma. To secure
control and the maintenance of wealth and resources, certain paternalistic Europeans
rationalized the dehumanization and enslavement of Blacks by espousing religious and
political ideologies that asserted their inferiority and warned of their barbaric and savage
propensities (Little, 2005). Throughout American history, the treatment of persons of
color has been vituperative, at best. In many cases, for nearly four centuries, the “land of
the free and home of the brave” has disregarded her ideals of liberty and equality for her
citizens of color.
Discussing America’s paradoxical hypocrisy, sociologist Gunnar Myrdal (1944)
maintained that, “The subordinate position of Negroes is perhaps the most glaring
conflict in the American conscience and the greatest unsolved task for American
democracy” (p. 21). This pervasive American conflict has deeply entrenched roots as
noted by race scholars Sparks and Phillips (1997):
Racism in the United States originated in the developing capitalism and European
colonial expansion of the 15
th
century and, more specifically, in the formation and
evolution of capitalism in American society. . . . In the United States, the
colonization and robbing of flourishing Native American civilization, the
importation of Africans as slaves, the expropriation of the land of Mexicans in the
Southwest, and the exploitation of Asian labor in the building of railroads and
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 22

mining of gold combined to lay the economic, political, and ideological
foundation for the present structural relationships of racism. (p. 13)
The “self-evident truths” regarding equality and civil rights have, in many ways, yet to be
fulfilled for numerous Americans. Nolen (1967) substantiated the historical perpetuation
of the alleged inferiority of Blacks, maintaining that, “The image of the Negro as an
inferior to be held in subjection by the lordly Caucasian, constructed from scientific,
scriptural, and historical materials, constituted the basic element in Negro-white relations
from the Civil War until 1900 and beyond” (p. 50).
Much of the formal origins of racial differences can be traced to the 17
th
and 18
th

centuries and Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus although earlier religious referents
abounded. Philosopher and race scholar Cornel West (1984) declared that, “the initial
basis for the idea of white supremacy is to be found in the classificatory categories and
the descriptive, representational, order-imposing aims of natural history” (p. 55). In
1774, Jamaican physician Edward Long, acknowledged as the “originator” of biological
racism, asserted that “Negroes were a lower order of humanity than whites” (as qtd. in
Frederickson, p. 142). This prevailing rhetorical construct gained legitimacy in a
hegemonic culture which sought to maintain dominant control.
During the Enlightenment, scholars such as Montesquieu, Blumenbach, Voltaire,
Hume, Jefferson, and Kant promoted the “intellectual” legitimacy of white supremacy. In
his essay, Of National Character, Philosopher David Hume (1753) declared that:
I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all other species of men (for there
are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never
was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 23

individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufacturers
amongst them, no arts, no sciences (p. 108).
Philosopher Immanuel Kant, in Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and the
Sublime (1764) advanced similar racist sentiments, when he maintained that:
So fundamental is the difference between these two races of man, and it appears
to be as great in regard to mental capacities as in color. (pp. 110-111)
Voltaire, another Enlightenment scholar argued that, “The negro race is a species
of men as different from ours . . . as the breed of spaniels is from that of greyhounds . . .
If their understanding is not of a different nature from ours . . . it is at least greatly
inferior. They are not capable of any great application or association of ideas, and seem
formed neither for the advantages nor the abuses of philosophy” (1965, p. 45). These
essentialist attitudes epitomized Enlightenment thinking, which was purportedly aimed at
eradicating prejudice and oppressive authority through the process of critical reasoning.
Instead, the insidious arguments perpetuated a racist ideology designed to construct
Blacks as a distinct, inferior “Other,” incapable of intellectual achievement.
Racism is defined as “an institutionalized system of power. It encompasses a web
of economic, political, social, and cultural structures, actions, and beliefs that systemize
and ensure an unequal distribution of privilege, resources, and power in favor of the
dominant racial group and at the expense of all other racial groups” (Sparks and Phillips,
1997, p. 9). Similarly, race theorist David Theo Goldberg (1990) contended that, “where
race is a set of conceptions, racisms are sets of conditions [. . .]. Racism excludes racially
defined others, or promotes, or secures, or sustains such exclusion” (pp. 98 &101).
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 24

Agreeing with this notion, legal scholar Kimberle Crenshaw defined race as a
“central ideological and political pillar upholding existing social conditions” (p. 1335).
To sustain economic and political control, the dominant group must create a rhetorical
environment that perpetuates their superiority and the subordinate group’s inferiority.
Hegemony seeks to naturalize the marginalization of subordinate groups while
simultaneously reinforcing domination. Legal scholar Derrick Bell, arguing that
dominant racism is hegemonic, noted that, “All our institutions of education and
information—political and civic, religious and creative—either knowingly or
unknowingly ‘provide the public rationale to justify, explain, legitimize, or tolerate
racism’” (p. 156).
One of the primary forms of institutional racism grew out of legislative measures
and Black codes which outlawed educating slaves (Williams, 1883). Additional measures
to exclude Blacks from formal education include the 1896 Plessy v Ferguson and Jim
Crow laws which prevailed until the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education outlawed Plessy.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 established additional laws prohibiting the educational
discrimination of Blacks. Despite these legislative efforts, educational disparities persist
in American higher education.
Other rhetors who influenced public thought also espoused similar racist views. In
his Notes on Virginia (1781), President Thomas Jefferson, in a lengthy statement
discussing the “natural” differences between Blacks and whites, claimed that:
Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it
appears to me that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much
inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 25

comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they
are dull, tasteless, and anomalous [. . .]. But never yet could I find that a
Black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never saw
even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. (p. 261)
Jefferson’s statement lauding the inferiority of Blacks exemplified an American racist
culture that placed them at the economic, political, social, and educational periphery.
As one of the most prominent voices in Blacks’ struggle for equality, W. E. B.
Du Bois (1903) addressed the various racist connotations associated with different skin
tones:
This theory of human culture and its aims has worked itself through warp
and woof of our daily thought with a thoroughness that few realize.
Everything great, good, efficient, fair, and honorable is ‘white’; everything
mean, bad, blundering, cheating, and dishonorable is ‘yellow’; a bad taste
is ‘brown’; and the devil is ‘Black.’ (p. 194)
Du Bois’ sentiments typified the rhetorical construction of “good” and “evil” notions
through the practice of polemical discourse. Such depictions result in a caste system
designed to further relegate those intentionally ostracized from society (Little, 2005).
Discussing the judicial complicity in maintaining a racist system of control, legal
scholar Richard Delgado (1989) distinguished between “substantive” and “procedural”
racism:
By substantive racism I mean that which treats Blacks and other nonwhite
persons as though they were actually inferior to whites. Attitudes and
treatment taking this form have flourished at different points in our
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 26

history; to its shame, the law also fully embraced and accommodated them
through such means as sterilization statues, Jim Crow laws, the separate
but equal doctrine, anti-miscegenation statues, and racist immigration laws
and policies [. . .]. At other times, racism takes on what I call a procedural
cast. In these periods, there are fewer images, stories, and laws conveying
the ideal of Black inferiority. That idea is banished, put underground.
Instead, we promulgate narratives and rules that invalidate or handicap
Black claims. (p. 104)
Delgado’s contention illustrated how both overt and subtle discourse and actions have
historically informed and shaped American race relations.
With the continued pervasiveness of cultural and institutional racism, the material
and symbolic effects are still evident economically, socially, politically, and
educationally. As sociologist Joe Feagin (2001) argued:
Acts of oppression are not just immediately harmful; they often carry
long-term effects [. . .]. If the members of a group suffer serious bars to
securing the resources necessary for achievement and mobility, this not
only restricts their own achievements but also can shape the opportunities
of descendants for generations to come. (pp. 27-28)
The ramifications of centuries of systemic racism must be considered in current
discussions of the educational disparities evident today.
Reliant on essentialist and other deeply engrained historical narratives, false
claims of an American meritocracy have been promulgated to disavow the existence of
systemic racism. Harris (1993) argued that the “reductive assessment of merit obscures
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 27

the reality that merit is a constructed idea, not an objective fact” (p. 1771). Dominant
meritocratic claims intimate that historically marginalized students’ “aptitude” and/or
“ability” (or “lack thereof”) explain their scarcity in all levels of academe, and seek to
promote an ideology of exclusion, exceptionalism and/or tokenism. Mercer (1990) noted
that, “a certain racism depends on the regulation of the visibility of the [B]lack presence
in the public sphere. . . In such a political economy of racial representation where the part
stands in for the whole, the visibility of a few token [B]lack public figures serves to
legitimate, and reproduce, the invisibility, and lack of access to public discourse, of the
community as a whole” (pp. 62, 240).
Noting the oppressive racial segregation and historical educational exclusion of
Blacks, Byrd-Chichester (2000), noted that, “Nowhere is it more clear than in the field of
education that the separation was intended to provide Whites with a quality education and
a sense of superiority while denying Blacks education and self-esteem in order to keep
them “in their place’”(15). This material reality necessitates a powerful counter narrative
based on research on academically successful Black students to challenge the pervasive
ideology that has historically promulgated Black inferiority.
Persistence, Retention, and Attrition Theories

The most commonly applied student persistence and retention models include
Astin’s (1984) Student Involvement Theory, Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) Student
Integration Theory, and Bean’s (1980, 1982, 1985) Student Attrition Theory. Astin’s
(1984) Student Involvement Theory derived from a longitudinal study examining
persistence factors and levels of student involvement. Defined as “the amount of physical
and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience,” Astin
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 28

perceived involvement “not so much what the individual thinks or feels, but what the
individual does, how she or he behaves” (pp. 297-298). Astin (1984) contended that
students who actively get involved enhance their learning and personal development.
Additional studies have substantiated Astin’s view that positive student involvement
improves student academic experiences (Pascarelli & Terenzini, 1991; Cooper, Healy, &
Simpson, 1994).
Tinto’s (1975) Student Integration Model asserted that student withdrawal
increases when integration into the college environment is lessened. Variables
comprising the model including, pre-college elements, goals and commitment,
institutional commitment, social integration, and academic integration, bridge both the
academic and social systems Tinto (1975, 1987) argued are integral to student
integration.
Table 2: Tinto’s Student Integration Model
Student Integration Variables Indicators
Pre-College Elements Race/ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic
status (SES), SAT scores and class rank
Goals and commitment Educational and goal commitment (degree
attainment
Institutional commitment Level of commitment to a student’s
educational institution and the extent to
which they are committed to achieving
their academic goal at this institution.
Social integration Social relationships and involvement,
including extracurricular activities.
Academic Integration Course and academic success and faculty
involvement and perceptions.
Tinto (1975, 1987)
He concluded that the integration process includes three major stages—separation,
transition, and incorporation. While each of these variables impacted integration, Tinto
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 29

(1975, 1987) found that pre-college elements, especially academic preparedness most
significantly influenced students of color’ persistence.
To better understand this integration process, Tinto revised his model
emphasizing a sense of belonging. As Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) noted:
A sense of belonging reinforced and enhanced both, commitment to the institution
and to the goal of completing college. Negative interactions and experiences tend
to reduce integration and to distance the individual from the academic and social
communities of the institution, promoting the individual’s marginality, and
ultimately, withdrawal. (p. 53)
Tinto’s (1987) revision suggested that institutional commitment and goal completion
must be explored to determine if students who feel marginalized persist. He identified
four situations that lead to institutional departure: adjustment (to new social and academic
experiences), difficulty (academic study and interpersonal relations), incongruence (lack
of identification with the institution), and isolation (limited interactions). While each of
these have an effect on academic and social integration and commitment, few studies
have focused on incongruence and isolation and the persistence of students of color. As
Gibbs (1988) argued “a major barrier to Black student retention is the perception by
Black students that they are ‘outsiders’ in the academic world, aliens in a hostile
environment” (p. 353).
Another tension that Tinto’s (1987) integration theory creates is that the factors
used to indicate persistence often efface race and culture and can be interpreted as
assimilation. Olneck (1990) challenged the integration model, arguing, “the language of
integration is the voice of white middle-class education professionals speaking about a
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 30

‘problem’ group and about the solutions to the problems posed by diversity” (p. 163).
Concurring, Tierney (1992) noted that for students of color, social integration can be
understood and experienced as assimilation whereby they are expected to conform to
dominant perceptions at the expense of their own self-identity. He asserted that research
reifying such dominant findings “hold potentially harmful consequences for racial and
ethnic minorities” (Tierney, 1992, p. 603).
Bean’s (1980, 1982, 1985) Student Attrition Theory examined how personal,
social and institutional factors influence a student’s decision to persist or leave an
institution. Built primarily upon March and Simmons (1958) organizational attrition and
Bentler and Speckart (1979) behavioral models, Bean compared students’ decision to
leave an institution with that of an organizational member’s to depart. Bean (1980, 1982,
1985) contended institutional quality, social relationships, attitudinal, and familial
support intersected to create a level of institutional commitment effecting student
persistence and attrition. Bean (1985) extended his theory with a “dropout syndrome”
model that suggested that a student’s level of institutional socialization involved a cycle
of intent to leave, expression of the intent, and actual attrition. Bean and Metzner (1985)
found that a student’s intent to leave an institution significantly predicted attrition. Each
of these theories has informed the literature on the personal, social, academic, and
institutional factors influencing student persistence and retention, however because they
primarily relied on majority students, there remains a glaring gap regarding the
educational experiences of students of color.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 31

Persistence, Retention, Attrition, and Students of color
In response to the lack of comprehensive research on Black student retention,
Flowers (2004) conducted a literature review of existing studies and identified important
retention factors essential to improving their educational experiences and institutional
policy. Investigating research studies from 1982-2002, Flowers (2004) evaluated primary
aspects of Tinto’s (1987) student departure model including, pre-entry attributes, goals
and commitments, institutional experiences, and personal integration. His overall findings
substantiated previous research (Astin, 1993; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991) and found
that students’ pre-college experiences, goal commitment, and perceptions of the academic
environment are significant predictors of Black student retention. Flowers (2004) also
noted that the “campus environment, faculty, university administrators, and student
affairs professionals” also impacted their retention (p. 31).
My study addressed this research gap and contributed to scholarship regarding
students of color persistence and retention. The review of the literature is organized using
the following categories based on variables identified in earlier research: Personal and
Pre-Entry Attributes (High school grade point average, SAT scores, class rank, SES,
parental educational attainment, familial support, religion, self-concept and goal
commitment) and Institutional Variables (Faculty interaction, perceptions and
composition, campus climate and alienation, and racism, inferiority, and financial aid).
Personal and Pre-Entry Attributes
Several studies have examined the pre-collegiate variables that may impact
student persistence and retention. These include high school grade point average, SAT
scores, and class rank as key indicators of academic success. In their study of engineering
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 32

students, Zhang, Anderson, Ohland, Carter and Thorndyke (1998) examined pre-existing
factors using graduation and current enrollment as quantitative variables to assess
retention. Employing a multiple logistic regression model to “test for and estimate the
predictive relationships between these measures of success and a set of six background
variables that represent students’ pre-existing demographic and academic characteristics
(gender, ethnicity, high school GPA, SAT math score, SAT verbal score, and citizenship
status)” (Zhang et al, p. 1). After surveying nearly 38,000 students, the authors concluded
that retention of engineering students is significantly related to high school GPA and
math SAT scores.
Acknowledging the tendency of research on the retention of students of color to
focus on “non-persisters,” Padilla et al (1994) studied academically successful students to
uncover the strategies they “employ to overcome barriers to academic success” (p. 2).
Using an unfolding matrix qualitative methodology, Padilla et al (1994) studied three
groups of five to ten students of color and found that “the continuity between high school
and college, prejudice, and lack of resources,” functioned as barriers to their academic
success (p. 2). While challenges existed, Padilla et al (1994) noted that a supportive
campus and/or biological family, “participating in ethnic activities, seeking out nurturing
persons, and using institutional resources” helped students overcome academic and
institutional barriers (p. 18).
In their analysis of the retention of Latino/a students, Hernandez and Lopez
(2004), found that personal, environmental, and socio-cultural experiences were
important persistence and retention variables. Critical retention variables included
academic self-concept, familial ties, financial security, racial climate, presence of an
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 33

ethnic community, faculty-student interaction, mentorship, participation in student
organizations, immigrant status, ethnic identity development, gender roles, community
orientation, and religion. The most salient and influential factors were family,
participation in student organizations, and religion.
Using a grounded theory approach to determine persistence factors of minority
students in professional programs, Hendricks, Smith, Caplow, and Donaldson (1996)
used a purposive sample of 18 minority students who identified family support, service to
community and determination as essential to their academic success. Designed to
construct a theory “grounded in the views and experiences of the participants in the
study,” Hendricks et al (1996) chose their population based on level in professional
program, gender, and ethnic/racial group (p. 115). The 18 students represented
engineering, business, education, and law and consisted of eight African Americans, five
Hispanics, and five Native Americans.
Designed to gain students’ perspectives on their retention, Hendricks et al (1996)
conducted interviews which focused on the following five categories: “1) program
choice, 2) professional goals, 3) personal support, 4) impediments to success, and 5)
reflections on the ideal program” (p. 117). The research findings challenged some of the
common perceptions regarding retention, specifically Tinto’s (1987) theoretical
framework that contended that academic and social integration are integral to persistence.
This sample identified familial ties and personal determination as the dominant factors
influencing retention. A key result was that “none of these students discussed the areas
which have typically been the targets of institutions and governments—financial aid and
remedial services,” (Hendricks et al, 1996, p. 117) which I believe challenges the deficit
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 34

narrative that is commonly used to rationalize a “non-existent” STEM pipeline. These
findings suggested the need for further research investigating those factors academically
successful students recognize as integral to their persistence. Additionally, while these
undergraduate student retention studies are insightful, scholarship regarding graduate
student experiences is needed.
Advancing specific strategies for educational institutions that seek to recruit,
retain and graduate doctoral students of color, Brazziel and Brazziel (1997) identified
organizational traits and characteristics of successful institutions. After visiting the top
ten Ph.D. granting academic institutions for Native American, Hispanic, and African
American students, they found that most of the institutions shared similar practices which
included establishing an early pipeline and exposure to the field, strong university
support, focused recruitment and admissions policies, a welcoming organizational and
academic climate, dedicated professors, role models and mentoring, and community
building (Brazziel & Brazziel, 1997).
In a study conducted for the American Council on Education to increase the
number of minority Ph.D.s, Wagener (1991) evaluated six universities (Berkeley,
Michigan, Texas, CUNY, Florida, and Brown) and the McKnight Fellows Program to
determine the initiatives that a made a difference in recruitment and retention. After in-
depth interviews with administrators and students, Wagener (1991) concluded that
effective recruitment, emotional support, academic guidance, faculty mentoring, and
comprehensive financial aid are integral to increasing the number of minority Ph.D.
students. In addition to the personal and pre-entry attributes that impact student
persistence and retention, research discussing institutional factors is also needed.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 35

The Role of Faculty Interaction, Perceptions, and Composition on Graduate Student
Persistence and Retention
Unlike many studies that focus on student attributes affecting persistence, Golde’s
(2000) study examined those often forgotten students who comprise the 50% attrition
rate. In a thought-provoking article that chronicled student descriptions of the doctoral
attrition process, Golde (2000) conducted in-depth interviews with a sample of ten former
doctoral students. Each of the self-identified non-persisters identified key factors
affecting the completion of their degree. Using Tinto’s (1975) retention model, Golde
(2000) found that for doctoral students “the primary agents of socialization and
integration are faculty” (p. 201). His findings support the notion that researchers must
move beyond convenient student deficit explanations of doctoral student attrition and
focus on the academic climate surrounding this educational pursuit.
While Golde (2000) asserted that one’s relationship with a faculty member
matters in the retention of doctoral students of color, other research adds that the presence
of, and involvement with faculty of color can matter as well. Blackwell (1983, 1985)
found that the most significant predictor of the enrollment, retention, and matriculation of
Black graduate students is the presence of Black faculty. Nelson (2007), discussing the
overall paucity of faculty of color in academia argued that many students of color can
attend numerous American educational institutions to receive either an undergraduate or
graduate degree without ever having a professor of color. On the contrary, majority
students have an overrepresentation of faculty in STEM fields, as Nelson (2007)
concluded:
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 36

[T]here is a disproportionate number of White male professors as role
models for White male students. For example, in 2005, 16.7% of the
students graduating with a B.S. in chemistry were URMs, but in 2007,
only 3.9% of faculty at the top 100 chemistry departments were URMs.
For females, those data are 51.7% and 13.7%, respectively. In contrast, the
corresponding percentages for White males are 37.4% and 74.2%,
respectively. While the percentages of women and of URMs in science
and engineering Ph.D. attainment have increased in recent years, the
White men still dominate the corresponding faculties. (p. 1)
Nelson’s (2007) study shows the cyclical nature of the historical marginalization and
exclusion of students of color in academia, especially in STEM fields.
An important corollary to understanding graduate student retention and success is
“time-to-degree” rates. To examine the departmental factors that affect “time-to-degree
and completion rates,” Ferrer de Valero (2001) conducted 40 semi-structured open-ended
interviews with 24 students and 16 faculty. Focusing only on students who were working
on their dissertation (arguing that they had experienced various aspects of the program),
Ferrer de Valero (2001) found that the median time-to-degree was 4.6 years and the
median completion rate was 57.1% (p. 353). Concerning the perceived factors
influencing student academic success, Ferrer de Valero’s (2001) findings were disturbing,
yet promising. She noted that:
A higher percentage of the faculty (75%) mentioned ‘student motivation’ as a
major determinant of student success as compared to the percentage of students
(42%) [. . .]. In general, professors tended to give more importance to student
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 37

characteristics and graduate students considered departmental factors more crucial
to earn a doctoral degree in a relative short time (p. 362).
This key finding suggested that many faculty hold students solely responsible for their
persistence and academic success. However, unless faculty and administrators
acknowledge the problems inherent in such essentialist thinking, many students will not
garner success and will be excluded from higher education.
Similarly, in their study of sixty African American students’ perceptions of key
retention factors, Gardner, Keller, and Piotrowski (1996) argued that more faculty and
staff of color improved overall faculty and student interaction. They also found that an
increased presence of faculty of color shaped the institutional climate resulting in student
support programs and inclusion training which challenged historical stereotypes
regarding students of color. (p. 21).
Campus Climate, Alienation, and Coping Mechanisms
In addition to the importance of faculty interaction, perceptions and composition,
campus climate and alienation also impact student persistence and retention. In their
seminal study on campus climate and diversity, Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen and
Allen (1998) advanced a theoretical conception of institutional climate:
An institution’s historical legacy of inclusion or exclusion of various
racial/ethnic groups, its structural diversity in terms of numerical
representation of various racial/ethnic groups, the psychological climate of
perceptions and attitudes between and among groups, and the behavioral
climate dimension, characterized by intergroup relations on campus. (p.
281)
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 38

While an institution’s legacy of inclusion and exclusion, its institutional diversity, and the
learning climate give insight into the broader educational environment, it is vital to
understand “individuals’ views of group relations, institutional responses to diversity,
perceptions of discrimination or racial conflict, and attitudes toward those from other
racial/ethnic backgrounds than one’s own,” to reveal additional academic performance
and persistence factors (Hurtado et al., 1998, p. 289). Hurtado (1992), acknowledging the
difficulty of fully understanding the impact of campus racial climate, noted that, “part of
the problem is that we need a better understanding of what constitutes a racially tense
interpersonal environment before considering how these climates are related to student
development” (p. 540). Hurtado (1992) called for new research that can shed light how
campus climate and racism effect the educational experience of students of color. It
suggests that further studies are needed to understand the complexity and intersection of a
host of identity factors, including race, class, gender, and religion.
In their study on Latino students’ sense of academic belonging, Hurtado and
Carter (1997) distinguished between a sense of belonging and social and academic
integration. Challenging the narrow application of Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) persistence
models, they contended that there is a not a clear distinction between the psychological
and behavioral aspects of student integration. They argued that, “studying a sense of
belonging allows researchers to assess which forms of social interaction (academic and
social) further enhance students’ affiliation and identity with their colleges” (Hurtado &
Carter, 1997, p. 328). This distinction, “between a subjective sense of integration
(psychological measures) and other measures that reflect students’ participation in, and
interaction with the academic and social systems of college,” will assist educational
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 39

administrators in creating policies that increase minority students’ sense of belonging
(Hurtado & Carter, 1997, p. 328).
Although Hurtado and Carter’s (1997) study focused on undergraduate students,
their conclusions can inform broader institutional policies. These findings should
motivate educational leaders to examine the relationship between limited student social
interaction and participation, and the overall institutional culture, and to ask themselves,
“what about our environment might cause students of color to self-isolate as a result of a
pervasive feeling of alienation?” (Hurtado & Carter, 1997, p. 329). While self-isolation
might be perceived as withdrawal or self-segregation, researchers need to determine if it
might actually be a coping mechanism to help students persist despite the circumstances.
Those academic institutions genuinely interested in creating an inclusive educational
environment for all students will conduct a thorough self-assessment to improve its
organizational practices.
In a qualitative study examining pipeline and retention issues among Latino/a
students, Hernandez (2002) used a purposeful sample of ten students who participated in
a mentoring program on a large, predominantly White institution. The five female and
five male students aged 18-20 identified academic and social adjustment, family support
and encouragement, involvement opportunities, and ethnic and cultural identity as key
factors influencing their retention. Hernandez (2002) found that students characterized
their educational experiences as a “series of challenges” which required “adjustment”
strategies (p. 77). This implied that indeed the students perceived the institution as a
somewhat hostile environment that presented both academic and social challenges.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 40

Weighing in on the discussion regarding the importance of holistic student
institutional support and a welcoming academic climate, Credle and Dean (1991)
examined the relationship between Black student persistence and institutional
commitment to a diverse student body. They proposed a strategy to improve Black
student retention which included: 1) Assess the institution’s mission, 2) Evaluate existing
student practices, 3) Determine student preparedness, 4) Build an accessible academic
community, 5) Provide personal, academic and professional mentoring, and 6) Help
students navigate their educational journey (p. 160). While students’ personal
responsibility and self-efficacy is equally important, any perception of a hostile academic
environment can have dire effects on student retention.
Olson (1988), in an article discussing a systems approach to recruiting and
retaining graduate students of color, identified key institutional initiatives that seek to
create an inviting and supportive educational climate. Some of the strategies included
early identification programs geared to middle and high school students, systematic
recruitment and wholistic admission policies, and various retention programs aimed at
academic and social integration. While Olson’s (1988), and similar studies provide sound
recruitment and retention strategies for doctoral students of color, individual institutions
must examine their own culture, policies, and climate to develop a specific, focused plan.
Examining the coping strategies of students of color, Stanton-Salazar and Spina
(2000) found that those students of color who exhibited help-seeking behaviors in
dominant institutions were more academically resilient. They contended that, “The
greater the ecological risks associated with racial and class segregation, the greater the
need for a supportive web of socialization agents across institutional sites that can foster
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 41

the development of resilient attributes and effective coping strategies” (Stanton-Salazar &
Spina, 2000, p. 237). While resilience is an important personal virtue, we must ask, how
much resilience do Black and other students of color need to cultivate at the expense of a
supportive, affirming, and engaged academic experience?
In their alienation and persistence study of 163 majority and minority undergraduate
students, Loo and Rolinson (1986) advanced four important conclusions:
At predominately White Institutions, sociocultural alienation is greater for
minority students compared to white students.
At predominantly White institutions, minority students can experience
academic satisfaction while still experiencing social-cultural alienation.
At predominantly White institutions, many Black and Chicano students
experienced academic alienation due to inadequate academic preparation and
“culture shock” resulting from class and culture distinctions.
At predominantly White institutions, specific institutional factors, including
increased student and faculty ethnic representation and strong student
services, can combat sociocultural alienation and improve academic success
(pp. 71-72).
These conclusions suggested that concerted institutional efforts to ensure undergraduate
students are fully integrated into the academic community can improve their overall
educational experience. For graduate students of color, it is integral to understand how
academic integration impacts their academic experiences which are greatly reliant on
faculty and peer interaction. This study will address this notion by seeking student
insights on its importance.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 42

Comparing the different perceptions of campus climate between 7,347
undergraduate White and students of color, Rankin and Reason (2005) found that
“students of color experienced harassment, defined as any offensive, hostile, or
intimidating behavior that interferes with learning, at higher rates that White students,”
and that “a positive campus racial climate that encourages ongoing, cross-racial
interaction, when coupled with a diverse student population, improves educational
experiences for all students”(pp. 43, 47). This study suggests that future research should
examine what academic and social experiences differ between White students and
students of color, and how those differences impact overall student success, motivation,
and persistence. Topics of comparison can include, faculty and student interaction (both
inside and outside of the classroom), validation of academic and writing abilities, and
student perceptions regarding intellectual expectations and perceptions. Such studies can
expound on prior research that has shown that whether actual or perceived, students of
color tend to have a drastically different academic experience at predominantly White
institutions than their White counterparts.
To gain understanding about White students and students of color perceived
differences around institutional climate and culture, research comparing the campus
climate at predominantly White institutions to Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (HBCUs) can provide a lens into such differences. Allen (1992), who
conducted a quantitative study examining the differing college experiences of Black
undergraduate students who attended both predominantly White institutions and HBCUs,
sought to understand the impact of students’ background and the campus environment on
college success. Using a multivariate approach to “investigate relationships between
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 43

student outcomes of academic achievement, social involvement [. . .] and personal
adjustment to college and the college environment,” Allen (1992) found that strong
educational goals and positive faculty relationships enhanced Black students’ academic
achievement (pp. 32, 35). Another key finding of the study, indicated that Black students
who attended HBCUs had higher academic achievement rates than those students who
attended predominantly White institutions. Allen’s (1992) findings suggest that a
familiar, affirming, and supportive educational environment, directly correlates with
overall academic success.
Similarly, in her seminal study on the educational experiences of Black students
at eight HBCUs and seven predominantly White institutions, Fleming (1984), concluded
that those students who attended HBCUs were more socially adjusted and confident and
exhibited strong self-efficacy and identity traits. She concluded that Black students who
attended HBCUs demonstrated, “stronger personal attachment to faculty. . . .[and] greater
satisfaction with the academic lives” (Fleming, 1984, p. 166). Conversely, Black students
who attended predominantly White institutions experienced “strained relationships with
incompetent instructors and classroom favoritism. . . . dissatisfaction with academic life. .
. . [and] no net in academic performance” (Fleming, 1984, p. 167). Fleming’s disturbing
findings suggested that Black students attending predominantly White institutions faced
disparate challenges often emanating from marginalizing, entrenched deficiency theories,
scarce representation of faculty and students of color, and racist, stereotypical
perceptions. Analyzing the impact of institutional racism on the persistence and retention
of Black students attending predominantly White institutions, is integral to improving
their academic participation, success, persistence, and graduation rates.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 44

Racism, Inferiority, and Persistence
Investigating the relationship between cultural hegemony, institutional racism and
the graduate student of color pipeline, Pruitt and Isaac (1985) scrutinized traditional
recruitment and admission procedures which are overly reliant on objective or
quantitative measures such as SAT scores and student grade point averages. They
contended that using a strict quantitative evaluation system might narrow the scope of
academic success indicators and hinder students who might succeed in graduate school.
Additionally, Pruitt and Isaac (1985) argued that the “subjective” screening process,
which often uses majority student attributes as the norm, can shape the perception of who
constitutes a qualified student. They suggested that academic institutions evaluate and
assess their admission policies, organizational culture, and climate to ensure that they are
not re-constructing a discriminatory and segregated educational environment that results
in the alienation and exclusion of graduate students of color.
Essential to creating an institutional environment conducive for students of color
academic success is effective leadership. In his article discussing strategies for recruiting
and retaining doctoral students of color in Biomedical Engineering, Reichert (2006)
challenged engrained academic beliefs regarding what students are considered more
intellectually inclined and suggested that some faculty must question such beliefs before
real change can occur. He contended that:
All graduate training eventually boils down to individual faculty members
committing to individual students and vice versa [. . .]. There are various
ways to succeed in recruiting and retaining URM doctoral students but key
to them all is the creation of real student-faculty relationships, which
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 45

demonstrate by example that diversity and excellence can and should
coexist. (p. 55)
As a former dean of graduate studies, Reichert (2006) argued that the primary
responsibility for recruiting and retaining doctoral students of color was that of
administrators and faculty. Institutional leaders, including faculty and administration
must acknowledge the role that deficit discourse and entrenched, stereotypical intellectual
narratives have, and continue to play in reifying the dearth of students of color in higher
education and the existence of an academic culture that maintains the status quo.
In a similar study, D’Augelli and Hershberger (1993) researched 146
undergraduate majority and minority students to examine Black students’ experiences at
a predominantly White institution to determine what role, if any, “racism plays in
influencing students’ collegiate experience” (p. 69). After distributing several instruments
including a background questionnaire, the General Well-being Schedule, and a
modification of Norbeck’s Social Support Questionnaire, D’Augelli and Hershberger
(1993) found that “African American students’ experiences . . . reflect the aspects of their
personal backgrounds that differ from those of Whites more than they reflect differences
in academic backgrounds” (p. 76). This conclusion suggested that cultural differences
inform the lens by which students interpret their academic experiences ultimately
influencing their persistence and retention. Another pivotal finding was that while many
Black students acknowledged a disturbing institutional climate, there was no direct
evidence that it “interfere[d] with academic pursuits” (p. 77). Substantiating Cabrera and
Nora’s (1996) findings, D’Augelli concluded that while adverse social and racial climates
might impact academic and social interactions, it may not overly affect persistence. This
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 46

suggests that despite institutional barriers, students of color are resilient and have the
coping mechanisms that ultimately propel them to academic success. Research
identifying these persistence qualities and strategies is needed to shed light on how
academically successful students achieve their goals.
While many studies focus primarily on undergraduate students, little research has
been conducted on the relationship between minority graduate students, perceived
discrimination and persistence. In his study on doctoral programs, Nettles (1990)
examined the disparate educational experiences of minority and White students. After
distributing the Doctoral Student Survey to 1,286 students, Nettles found that “Black and
Hispanic doctoral students perceive more feelings of racial discrimination than do white
doctoral students” (p. 494). While an adverse racial climate existed, Nettles (1990)
concluded that, “Given the research literature that describes Black graduate students in
predominately white institutions as being alienated and relatively dissatisfied with their
graduate institutions, it was somewhat surprising to find that both minority groups were
more satisfied with their doctoral programs than white students” (p. 517). Nettles’
discovery reveals that despite existing institutional culture and climate obstacles, doctoral
students of color paradoxically persist and excel academically. Harper (2006) suggested
that, “Graduate students have specific needs and face developmental challenges that may
differ from, but are as important as, those experienced by undergraduates. While many
academic departments provide some support for graduate students, they often suffer from
a building-bound silo effect that isolates them from the larger university. It is imperative
that educational institutions strategically establish graduate student engagement policies
and practices that address their specific needs and programs.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 47

In a seminal article challenging deficit or inferiority discourse, Maton and
Hrabowski (2004) proposed a strengths-based approach to increasing the number of
Black Ph.D.s in Science and Engineering. In discussing the University of Maryland,
Baltimore Campus’ Meyerhoff Program, designed to build the graduate pipeline, Maton
and Hrabowski (2004) identified factors that aid in the persistence and retention of Black
Ph.D. STEM students. The four factors associated with academic success included:
academic and social integration, knowledge and skill development, support and
motivation, and monitoring and advising. While the Meyerhoff program provides
directives for enhancing graduate students of color retention, we must inquire, how
doctoral students of color persist without similar interventions? This study sought to
provide such insights.
In a later article, Summers and Hrabowski (2006) addressed additional factors that
can impact students of color persistence and retention, especially those who are
academically successful. They noted that:
Factors other than school preparation, science aptitude, and interest must
be responsible for the low achievement and low persistence in these
subgroups of undergraduate and graduate S&E students. . . . Factors that
keep URMs from persisting with science include academic and cultural
isolation, motivation and performance vulnerability in the face of low
expectations, peers who are not supportive of academic success, and
discrimination, whether perceived or actual. These factors can have a
stronger effect at institutions with predominantly majority populations.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 48

Such institutions award about 75% of all bachelor's degrees earned by
African Americans. (p. 1871)
Summers and Hrabowski (2006) found that with many students of color who seek to
study science and engineering, and fail to persist, researchers must look beyond
traditional explanations and focus on critical factors identified by students.
Although previous research has adapted and applied Tinto’s (1975, 1987),
Astin’s (1984), and Bean’s retention and attrition theories, this literature review has
revealed glaring disparities involving the dearth of students of color at all levels of
higher education, and the impact of racism and discrimination on their persistence and
retention. Traditionally, quantitative measures, such as standardized tests, grade point
averages, admission, and graduation rates have been used to explicate students of color
persistence and retention. While these variables provide some insight, they do not offer a
holistic, in-depth understanding of the disparate personal and institutional factors that
influence students of color persistence and retention, particularly from their perspective.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 49

Chapter Three
Methodology

Consistent with Critical Race Theory, this study gave agency and voice to Black
graduate students whose counter-narratives identified the personal and institutional
factors that promoted or impeded their persistence, retention, and overall academic
success. As noted by Solorzano (1998), Critical Race Theory recognizes that the
experiential knowledge of women and men of color is legitimate, appropriate, and critical
to understanding, analyzing, and teaching about racial subordination in the field of
education” (122.) This chapter includes a discussion of the qualitative research method
and design, the guiding research questions, the sample and site selection, the research
instrument, and the data collection and analysis process.
Qualitative Research Methodology
Qualitative research methodologies examine phenomena through an inductive,
holistic approach rather than a deductive, causal quantitative approach. As identified by
Patton (2001), qualitative research is naturalistic, inductive, holistic and empathic. This
dynamic approach is also characterized by the use of “thick” description, personal
contact, unique case selection, context sensitivity, and a flexible design. The use of
qualitative research is essential to determining what Black doctoral students identify as
the personal and institutional factors that promote or impede their persistence and
retention because it allows their narratives to shape the theoretical understanding of
students of color academic experiences instead of hegemonic, reified constructs. By
focusing on the rich stories shared in the interviews, it can improve the educational
experience of students of color.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 50

Using a purposeful sampling strategy, twelve students, representing various
academic programs, were recruited via email and selected from the 51 Black doctoral
students at the focal institution, an urban, private, predominantly white research
institution comprised of 33,000 students. After soliciting participation for two months,
twelve, academically successful, Black doctoral students, representing various stages of
the doctoral process (ranging from the second semester of their first year to the
dissertation defense stage) were chosen. Their academic majors included liberal arts,
humanities, engineering, and education. The gender distribution was two males and ten
females ranging in age from 22 to 42 years old. Some of the students were local residents,
while others came from various states throughout the U.S. The sample included first-
generation college students, as well as those who were third and fourth generation
collegians. Personally, students were at various stages of life, with some being parents,
spouses, and others primarily on their own with little to no familial support.
Each interview took place in the interviewer’s office for thirty to forty-five
minutes. Using the designed interview protocol, interviewees were asked a series of
questions with some follow-up prompts. After each of the interviews were transcribed,
they were reviewed and organized into specific themes. In examining the various
personal and institutional factors affecting their persistence and retention, I identified
these key themes surrounding early preparation, financial aid, self-efficacy, motivation,
mentoring, and institutional culture and climate. Additionally some new variations on
knowledge and preparation regarding exposure to the Ph.D. degree via education and
targeted programs such as the McNair scholars program also became apparent.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 51

To analyze the findings I constructed a coding schema and organized the findings
into two general categories: Personal (Persistence) and Institutional (Retention) factors.
From a broad and comprehensive range of variables (Appendix), within both the personal
and institutional categories, disparate themes emerged.
Research Questions
The research questions guiding this study asked:
1. What personal factors academically successful Black doctoral students identified
as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
2. What institutional factors academically successful Black doctoral students
identified as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
3. To what extent, if at all, did race and perceived or actual racism impact their

educational experience, and subsequent success?

Data Collection

The primary forms of qualitative data collection included in-depth, open-ended
interviews, direct observation, and written documents which resulted in rich data in the
form of quotations, descriptions, and excerpts. Interviews used open-ended questions to
elicit in-depth insight “about people’s experiences, perceptions, opinions, feelings, and
knowledge” (Patton, 2003, 2). Observations included “fieldwork descriptions of
activities, behaviors, actions, interpersonal interactions, organizational or community
processes, or any other aspect of observable human experience” (Patton, 2003, 2).
Documents consisted of “written materials and other documents from organizational,
clinical, or program records, memoranda and correspondence; official publications and
reports” (Patton, 2003, 2). In this study, I conducted one hour semi-structured interviews
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 52

asking open-ended questions guided by an interview protocol (Appendix A) designed
from variables identified in previous research. Utilizing prior persistence and retention
assessments, the interview instrument focused on personal and institutional factors to
allow for a broad spectrum of responses. While these guiding themes were useful, a semi-
structured interview approach allowed for culturally relevant insights from participants
regarding existing variables and the emergence of new factors. Each interview was audio
taped and transcribed to create a permanent record.
To strengthen the study’s findings, I triangulated the results by analyzing
institutional artifacts, including mission and diversity statements as well as recruitment
and orientation materials. I systematically assessed the data by coding common themes
into persistence and retention categories determined both by previous scholarship and
those which emerged from each interview. Specifically, I sought what Black doctoral
students identified as those experiences that influenced their decision to pursue and
continue their educational pursuits. I also sought to understand what institutional factors
they attributed to their academic success or challenges.
Sample and Site Selection
Using a purposeful sampling strategy, participants were recruited and selected
from the population of 51 Black doctoral students at the focal institution. This sampling
strategy does not seek the generalization or random selection characteristics of
quantitative research. Students received an email briefly describing the study to solicit
their participation. Once they agreed to join the study, participants received a reference
code to maintain anonymity. All interviews took place in the researcher’s office to serve
as a neutral site. The focal institution is an urban, private, predominantly white research
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 53

institution comprised of 33,000 students. The institution’s graduate demographics were
49.75 % male, 50.25% female, 21.51% Asian, 33.89% White, 8.60% Hispanic, 4.42%
Black, .38% Native American, and 26.19% International.
Data Analysis
After the data were collected, specific units of analysis were organized based on
recurring themes that cohered into a prevailing pattern of interpretation of the factors that
either promoted or impeded Black doctoral students’ persistence and retention. To
initially organize the research findings, I used the unfolding matrix display technique
(Padilla, 1994; Miles & Huberman, 1994) which uses data vectors including barriers,
frequency, knowledge, actions, changes, and problems (Padilla, 1994). These vectors
provide a logical concept model that informs the analysis. I coded the recurring themes
and categorized them based upon their frequency and commonalities.
This study elicited the personal stories of Black doctoral students regarding the
factors that promoted or impeded their persistence and retention. These findings, using a
Critical Race theoretical framework will address the dearth of students of color in higher
education, and confront the material reality that where the pursuit of the Ph.D. becomes a
contested intellectual site.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 54

Chapter Four
Research Findings

The purpose of this study was to ascertain what personal and institutional factors
academically successful Black doctoral students identified as promoting or impeding
their persistence, retention, and educational attainment. The three guiding research
questions asked:
1. What personal factors academically successful Black doctoral students identified
as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
2. What institutional factors academically successful Black doctoral students
identified as promoting and/or impeding their persistence and retention?
3. To what extent, if at all, did race and/or perceived or actual racism impact their
educational experience, and subsequent success?
The personal narratives of Black doctoral students provide an emic perspective of student
motivation, academic success, and persistence.
Personal Factors Promoting and/or Impeding Student Persistence and Retention
The four primary personal factors that academically successful Black Ph.D.
students cited as promoting their pursuit, persistence and retention were familial
expectations, student motivation and self-efficacy, early academic programs, and a social
and spiritual purpose.
Familial expectations
Several of the participants indicated that a key factor influencing both their
pursuit of, and persistence in their doctoral programs was early familial expectations. As
indicated by several participants, an early message regarding the importance of pursuing
a higher education was cultivated and nurtured by their parents and/or extended family
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 55

which shaped their higher education educational expectations. This finding supported
Trusty’s (2002) contention regarding the educational development of African American
adolescents. He noted that, “specific to African Americans, researchers have generally
found that parents’ encouragement of, support of, and high expectations for their children
positively influence students’ educational goals and attainment” (3). Supporting Trusty’s
(2002) findings, participant one, discussing the role of parent encouragement and
expectation, noted that, “Well, my parents are very strong on education. I’m the youngest
of four, and so all my siblings went to college. . . . so I guess at a young age I saw college
as, “Oh, I want to go.” Similarly, participant two stated, “My mom always encouraged
education. I mean, we kind of had a rough road, just me and her for awhile, and then she
kind of put that in me, the hard work ethic and the diligence and definitely the value of an
education.” For many of the participants, academic success and educational achievement
was one of their earliest thoughts as indicated by the descriptors, “always” and “never a
question.” Other participants also indicated that familial and parental expectations were
integral to their persistence. Participant six noted that, "Oh, that was never a question.
There’s no way…I don’t think there’s any way that my mother would not have had me go
to college.” Participant eight shared:
In my family, that was just the expectation, so I remember a time in
kindergarten…I was in a predominantly African American school and in
kindergarten I remember they brought in a guest speaker and they said, “How
many of you want to go to college?” and I remember my friend and I looked at
each other and we said, “Doesn’t everybody go to college?” I mean, that was
just…that was the way we were raised, is that was the expectations, is college
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 56

after high school. It didn’t work for every member of my family, but that was an
expectation.
Participant eight’s kindergarten memory illustrated how an early educational message can
permeate a child’s collective memory and can serve as motivation to achieve personal
and academic goals. The early definitive message expressed in the familial discourse
shaped and informed these students’ future educational endeavors and perseverance.
These insights indicate that such messages are essential when seeking to build a “college-
going” culture among future graduate students, especially students of color.
While early messages regarding educational achievement was common among
several participants, some first generation students shared how their socioeconomic status
and their family’s unfamiliarity with higher education impacted, and in some cases
delayed their collegiate decision. Participant three noted:
And then with family, it was…like I actually didn’t have any real thoughts
about going to college until junior year of high school. It never really
crossed my mind because honestly I didn’t think that I could go because
my parents didn’t have the money or I just assumed that I wasn’t going
because we couldn’t afford it, but luckily a couple of teachers there helped
me with some scholarships…applying for scholarships and loans and stuff
and they were like, “You can go. You just need to know what resources
are available.
Participant three’s experience exemplified a common reality that discourages many
students from pursing higher education—limited financial resources and/or the access to
essential knowledge and support services. As participant three indicated, the assistance
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 57

from her teachers, not only regarding the requisite financial aid information, but the
affirming message that “yes, you can go to college” became a pivotal juncture in their
educational journey.
Likewise, participant four, stated:
Oh, that’s more complicated. Well, because I went back for my undergrad
when I was 27. I had originally planned to go to college straight out of
high school, but interestingly enough I got accepted to [. . .] and turned in
all my FASFA stuff and through a clerical error, I got no money.…You
know, I’m the first person in my family to graduate from college. I was 17
when I graduated [from high school] and my whole family’s like, “You’re
not going to move out of that house,” because that just seemed really
scary. It was really hard for me at 17 to explain to them like, “No, it’s
going to be OK. Everybody does this.
Each of these participants’ responses revealed how one’s socioeconomic status can
influence student’s expectations of attending college, supporting previous research that
found that a student’s SES can adversely impact their pursuit of, and completion of
higher education. In participant’s four case, while personal finances functioned as a
temporary obstacle, her fortitude and strong educational desire propelled her into the
academy despite these limitations. This finding provides strategies for allaying some
students’ genuine concern around pursuing and attending higher education by ensuring
that financial aid and scholarship information and tangible resources are easily, clearly,
and readily accessible.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 58

Early Academic Programs: McNair Scholars Program
While early academic expectations can be instrumental in fomenting future
educational goals, participants noted the importance of undergraduate research programs
as an integral foundation to future graduate education and scholarship. Several
participants identified the McNair Scholars Program, which partners undergraduate
students of color with research faculty on an actual research project in the hopes of
motivating them to pursue a Ph.D., as key to their decision to pursue a graduate degree.
Through participating in such research programs, students gain a broader understanding
of the research and publication process, while cultivating integral relationships with
faculty—both key indicators in graduate student persistence and retention. Participant
seven discussed how participating in the McNair program provided them the opportunity
to work with, and be mentored by multiple faculty across disparate disciplines which
helped them to build their own intellectual self-efficacy and confidence, while building
their professional network:
I did it actually my sophomore year and then again after my junior year,
and so it was really great because I actually worked with three different
faculty, a faculty mentor in [. . .] my first year, and then my second year I
had two historians working with me, and…so you know, I got to make
these great connections.
Participant eleven shared similar sentiments, noting that:
I did the McNair program the summer of…I guess…it was right before my
senior year, and so after doing the McNair program….that was my first
experience doing research…research of my own, and so I enjoyed it and
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 59

so they were talking about graduate school and a Master’s program, a
doctorate program, and how you should choose if you’re ready for either
one, and so for me, I was kind of was interested in going to graduate
school.
Both of the participant’s experiences demonstrated how such early research programs can
expose students to the realities of graduate school, thereby increasing their understanding
of higher education, and inspiring their future interest.
Emphasizing the influence of institutional advocates such as academic and career
counselors, participant eight discussed how they were informed about a McNair-like
undergraduate program and its impact on their decision to pursue a Ph.D.:
It was the seed. I would never have even thought about this type of a
career otherwise. I never would have considered it…I was a teacher. You
know, Ph.D.s, they don’t know anything, they’re not in the classroom.
That was my perspective. I envisioned myself spending 30, 40 years in the
classroom teaching. I didn’t envision myself as a researcher. I had no idea
what professors did or engaged in until I was an undergrad and
participated in a program for under-represented students similar to the
McNair Scholars program where I participated on a research project and at
the completion of the program, I was hired as a research associate for an
additional year on that same project, and so that’s when I realized that
research could make a difference.
This participant articulated how faculty engagement enhanced their undergraduate
experience, informed their understanding of the academy and research, and resulted in a
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 60

research assistantship. They also discussed how they came to realize that their individual
research could have a greater societal impact, which relates to a key motivation factor—
that of doing a greater good and giving back to one’s community.
Finally, participant one indicated how such academic research programs provided
the role models and resources needed to consider and make a decision to pursue a Ph.D.
She noted:
I had the faculty from the McNair program and the staff from that program
and my mentor from the McNair program, and then also like a lot of other
Black faculty who I could talk to who had Ph.D.s already, so I could talk
to them about their experience and what they went through and make sure
I was ready to do it before I applied.
This student substantiated the importance of faculty mentors, especially Black faculty
mentors, and discussed how this experience served as a foray into graduate studies and
the professoriate.
Student motivation, self-efficacy, and higher spiritual and social purpose
Clark and Estes (2002) contend that motivation is the result of mental effort,
choice, and persistence. Central to a student’s intrinsic motivation are two aspects of their
self-perceptions regarding their academic ability—self-efficacy and self-determination.
Self-efficacy, or one’s perception about their ability to demonstrate certain behaviors or
attain certain goals, and self-determination provide insight into a student’s level of
confidence in, and sense of independence in achieving certain educational tasks. Students
who have a higher sense of self-efficacy and self-determination are more motivated to
accomplish educational tasks (Ormrod, 2002). Consistent with a higher sense of self-
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 61

efficacy, or belief that they can achieve certain educational goals, students with high
realistic expectations are more likely to be successful. Additionally, those students who
value or believe there are tangible benefits to particular tasks and/or goals will be more
motivated to engage in the behavior that leads to the achievement of those tasks (Ormrod,
2002). Many of the participants noted ways their intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy
played a deciding role in their overall persistence.
Articulating a common sentiment that one must “finish what they start,”
participant two shared thoughts regarding their motivational drive to persist:
I mean, personally I don’t like to start something and then quit it, and I
think that’s probably one of the main reasons. . . . and I don’t know, I kind
of think I still want that distinction [of receiving a Ph.D.]. Like it’d
be…it’s always going to be one of those things where I’m going to want
it, no matter how long I work in trying to get it out of the way before I
start working, get comfortable.
Participant two demonstrated Ormrod’s (2002) notion that self-determination or
confidence coupled with perceived tangible benefits—achieving a Ph.D. which results in
social, cultural, and professional capital—can motivate and influence behavior that leads
to the achievement of a desired goal. The prestige and power often associated with
attaining a Ph.D., can strategically be used to cultivate and enhance motivation.
Whereas prestige and power can drive student motivation, participant one spoke
of how a “higher social and spiritual purpose” can enhance their self-efficacy and self-
determination:
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 62

Well, first of all, I had to convince myself that I was…that the Ph.D. was
the right thing and that’s not an easy choice because the rewards are not
necessarily proportional to the amount of work you put in, so that led to
something of a personal inferiority complex. Not inferior to other people,
but inferior in my own mind because I couldn’t convince myself
objectively that that’s the right thing to do, in order to do, so I started
setting high goals for myself, almost every time failing… I was just like,
“I can’t do this,” but I made it through one day at a time, so…I guess for
me, I’m the kind of person, once I start something I don’t like to stop, and
so I was like, I started this and I guess the thing is like God brought me
here for a purpose, and so I’m not going…I’m here for a reason, I’m not
by myself, and so I was like I’m here for a reason and I’m going to stay
and fulfill my purpose and not leave before I finish everything I’m
supposed to be doing here.
Despite participant one’s recurring struggle with issues of self-worth and efficacy, their
faith and sense of purpose outweighed those doubts and buoyed them toward task
completion. Consistent with the commitment of “finishing what was started,” was a deep
and compelling sense that the educational pursuit served a larger social and spiritual
purpose, one that would often serve as a reminder as to why they should, and must
persist.
Participant eight also exemplified the personal and academic intersection of
student persistence, motivation, and a higher spiritual and/or social purpose when asked if
they ever felt like leaving their program:
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 63

Oh, constantly. When the professor says things like, “This is a great job
for people who love to read and write.” I’m like, “OK, those are the two
things I hate to do.” I do question, but no, ultimately, like I say, I’m a
spiritual person and I’ve always known that I was going to be a teacher
and I feel really, really lucky that God provided me that kind of insight
and I never doubted my choice, I never felt like I made…you know, this is
not what I’m supposed to be doing. I want to make a difference with the
middle-class achievement gap, look at it…mostly I would like to work
within communities, to do research and sharing the facts with the African
American community and working to inspire and motivate some changes
in terms of cultural practices that might give us a better chance
collectively to have more success in education, and then on the other hand,
I also would like to have an impact on the way in which success is judged
by society because I don’t think the indicators used are necessarily
representative of the achievement and success of African Americans, so
it’s two-pronged.
Participant eight’s motivation was clearly linked to a sense of a “life purpose” related to
teaching, and serving as an exemplar of educational achievement, juxtaposing
marginalizing stereotypes of Black, and other students of color.
A corollary issue raised by several of the participants related to their persistence
and retention, and a possible explanation of why fewer Black students pursue a doctoral
degree, were the remunerative benefits. Participant eight, discussing a philosophical
value of education and compensation associated with obtaining a Ph.D., contended that:
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 64

I think there’s a lack of interest because of a lack of knowledge about what Ph.D.s
actually do. If you look at African Americans in education in general it’s low
because it’s not something that is looked at as having high material rewards and I
find a lot of African Americans judge their status based on materialistic things
rather than the impact on society in general, and so it doesn’t surprise me that the
number is low. It’s a lot of work to get a Ph.D. and if you think about the benefits
monetarily, there’s a lot of things that…if I had gone into an Ed.D. program with
my experience, I would have made a lot more money a lot faster than I will have
the opportunity to do through a Ph.D. program, but that’s not my purpose. I want
to make some money, but that’s not the primary goal.
Participant eight explicated an interesting potential dichotomy—that of economic
prosperity versus a higher social purpose.
When asked to explain the paucity of Black students in the academy, especially
graduate school, participant three argued that:
I don’t think that higher education is emphasized very much in the African
American community. I think it’s all money-related. Like honestly, it’s too
expensive and a lot of families can’t afford it and I think that a lot of young
people learn that it’s just easier to get a job and start working and make their
money however they can, and you don’t just need money for school, you need
money to live, you need money for transportation, you need for books, and it’s…I
think it’s overwhelming for a lot of African American communities.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 65

Similar to participant eight, participant three associated the lower representation of Black
doctoral students to economic concerns and motivations, with some concerning thoughts
regarding a lack of knowledge and understanding of academia.
Sharing equally compelling perspectives, participants six and two discussed the
relationship between social class, familial responsibilities, financial compensation and the
decision to pursue and complete a Ph.D. Participant six noted that:
I mean, it is a very expensive process and without very much remunerative value
later. You know, believe me, a million times I thought, “Why didn’t I go to law
school? I’m putting in this work, why couldn’t I get a job where I’m actually
going to make some money,” and I do think that that’s a decision that a lot of
people of color and working class people make because the return on your
economic investment isn’t necessarily that great.
Similarly, participant two discussed their “only” Black student departmental status and its
possible financial explanation:
As far as I know, in my program, there’s one other African American and he
might claim international because…yeah, I don’t know, but the numbers aren’t
there. . . . Now when you get to the graduate level, I think there’s another kind of
a pull that’s taking minority graduate students and that….well, there’s the job
now. I mean, the companies are trying to fill their diversity objectives and all that
and throwing money at people, which is also a reason why I’m weighing whatever
it is I’m doing…especially when, you know, you’ve been poor for a long time.
Each of the participants voiced a similar dilemma faced by many graduate students of
color, especially those who have economic challenges—pursuing a graduate degree while
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 66

acknowledging the material reality that it may not be as financially lucrative as other
professional pursuits.
Institutional Factors Promoting and/or Impeding Student Persistence and Retention
In addition to discussing the personal factors identified as promoting or impeding
their persistence and retention, Black Ph.D. students discussed institutional factors such
as academic culture, climate and support, faculty mentoring and interaction, Black faculty
and graduate student representation, and funding. The following interview questions were
asked to garner responses regarding how, if at all, these factors impacted the participants
persistence and retention:
How, if at all, did the academic culture and climate promote or impede your
persistence and retention?

How, if at all did the number of Black faculty and students in your program
promote or impede your persistence and retention?

How, if at all, did faculty expectations, mentoring and interaction promote or
impede your persistence and retention?
Academic culture, climate and support

Each of the participants was asked to describe their departmental culture and
climate and how that learning environment influenced, if at all, their persistence and
retention. Students were also asked to discuss any support programs or activities related
to their academic success, with varying responses across participants and disciplines.
Participant seven discussed the academic culture and climate of their department
and related it to their persistence and retention:
Well, our DGS is great. We have a great director of graduate studies who is very
much into keeping us focused and checking our progress and giving us ideas on
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 67

how to proceed. I think that the [Department] is so supportive in terms of
students. I talk to my friends in other graduate programs here and in other places
and I’m kind of like mind-blown at the amount of support that we have in relation
to other programs. Our faculty is like super present for us. Our graduate student
organization is really supportive of incoming students. Of course we’re all
assigned a mentor, a student mentor, so we have another student who can provide
us insight and somebody to talk to. Your mentor takes you out to lunch every two
weeks and…you know, somebody to just check in with you and, yeah, it’s a really
close-knit department and everybody hangs out together. Socially, it’s really
wonderful and it’s just all that, the faculty too.
Participant seven’s feeling of academic and personal support was clearly tied to the
administrative, faculty, and student involvement both formally in the role of a Director of
Graduate Studies and peer mentors, as well as informally during social activities. They
also discussed the importance of faculty commitment to broader community and civic
engagement, noting that:
And this is another thing that really attracted me to this program, so much of the
faculty are engaged in activism and community activism, as well as the
intellectual work and so…which gives me hope that we don’t just get lost in the
ivory tower and write books that all the other people in the tower can read, but
that there’s a way to engage the community at-large and so…and that’s really
meaningful for me.
It was evident that participant seven felt that their departmental and faculty experiences
were integral to their feeling of belonging, community, self-efficacy, and common
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 68

interest. The department’s interpersonal and academic efforts including mentors, a
graduate student organization, and shared professional and philanthropic interests,
created a welcoming and thriving learning environment. Participant seven acknowledged
that their experience was somewhat antithetical to some of their graduate students of
color counterparts in other departments.
Similarly, participant one shared how their departmental culture and student

support program effected their educational experience:

I never felt isolated. It’s a very good program. It’s very small, so maybe that’s
why it’s such a welcoming environment, but it’s a good program. They’re very
welcoming, they’re very open. I guess that’s another reason why they admitted
me; they’re into new cutting-edge research. They just revamped the whole Ph.D.
program, so I’m one of the first students in the first class that they have, and so
academically they have a lot of professors who are really good in their respective
fields in [department], so they have very good academic resources and the faculty
and the staff and are always available and if you need anything you just ask.
They’re really making sure we’re taken care of. They check in on me if I don’t
come back every once in awhile, “We haven’t seen you in a few weeks. Are you
OK?” So they really try to make sure that we’re all surviving and we’re balanced
and not just all books, we’re also taking care of ourselves.
Participant one’s experience demonstrated how an intentional and sustained student
engagement strategy resulted in a genuine sense of community and concern with faculty
and staff. Participant eight shared similar culture and climate sentiments, noting:
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 69

It’s extremely supportive and inclusive. They wine-and-dine us a lot before we
even get into the program, and so we’re on a first-name basis with most of our
professors before class even starts. The line is drawn that they are the professor,
but we don’t…there’s really very little intimidation factor in terms of having
conversations with them. They’re really trying to help to train us as best as they
can and be supportive in that area.
Both of these participants’ experience exemplify how a welcoming academic culture and
climate, focused graduate programs, and sustained faculty interaction shapes students’
perception and thereby their persistence, motivation and retention.
Sharing how their departmental culture, climate and support aided in their
academic success and persistence, participant six indicated how their experience differed
from some of their peers:
Well . . . like I at least know about different kinds of academic cultures, and I felt
the culture in our department was fantastic. Like I’ve seen places that have been
really fractious, that are not supportive of graduate students, where you know the
faculty are sort of fighting and that seeps down to the graduate students and it
becomes impossible to put a committee together. So I always have felt that my
department was fantastic in terms of…you know, it’s very easy to put a
committee together and most of the faculty get along. You kind of know one or
two, but I’ve seen…and I’ve had a really good experience and I’ve seen other of
my friends…people who have had bad experiences, but generally people seem to
have good experiences in terms of finding someone who will sign off on their
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 70

project, people who want to be their advisor, and then help them choose
people…so in that way, I feel really fortunate.
Participant six associated academic culture and climate with faculty relations and the
ability to form a productive research committee that could work together to ensure the
student’s success. This participant also highlighted an issue that is far too prevalent in
some graduate programs—the institutional in-fighting and divisive politics—which is
often enacted at the expense of student’s engagement, support, and success.
Participant six continued by discussing an institutional strategy offered by another
department that was designed to guide students through the many facets of the graduate
experience, and specifically the dissertation process.
Let’s see. Well, [a department at the University] did a dissertation workshop. That
was fantastic because that was like meeting with other grad students across the
discipline and it was like for two months over the summer, or maybe six weeks.
We came up for a month and then we broke and then we came together in that,
and it was really about getting us to get our dissertation proposals together and it
was nice because he…[The Director of Graduate Studies] ran it, and he would
bring in…you know, he knows all kinds of people…he would bring in people
from all across the country to sort of read over our proposals and talk to us about
our proposals, but then to also just talk to us about the process…the process
issues. Yeah, so that was great. That was super helpful. And then…boy, I mean, I
think structurally that’s kind of the only thing. Oh, no, I should also say that two
grad students who were in my department, worked with a few other grad students
and they came up with sort of an article workshop to help us…to have a short
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 71

workshop to help people get an article…yeah, how to get an article published.
There were a number of professors that were involved too and there were about
eight of us I think, students, and so that was enormously helpful too. So those are
kind of the two things where I’ve gotten just some official support.
From participant six’s perspective, the dissertation workshop provided the graduate
students with both an academic framework for success, and much needed institutional
support that greatly impacted their acclimation to the doctoral research and dissertation
process which directly aided their persistence and retention.
Commenting on one of the biggest obstacles that can impact graduate student
retention, participant six discussed support for their research and the overall dissertation
experience. When asked if they had faculty support for their research, they noted:
I was like, “Yeah, maybe they’re not going to be really happy with my idea.” I
was in a class of his [their advisor] and I was talking about something and then
later on he approached me and he was like, “That would be a really good
dissertation topic.” It was just super nice, so…and then several other people, you
know, in taking classes with them, were very interested in what I was doing.
The faculty advisor’s encouragement and validation of the research increased participant
six’s confidence and validated their intellectual interest. While they felt support for their
dissertation topic and research, participant six elaborated on the lack of institutional and
faculty assistance during the actual dissertation process:
I was in a dissertation group for a little while. A couple of girls ended up
finishing. It’s been really informal. Several of my friends are going to be finishing
this year and then right after this, I’m going to meet one at the library, because we
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 72

now get together at least three times a week just to make sure we’re at the library
and doing something. I talk on the phone with people, with my friends in the
program, and we complain and commiserate. It’s been much more informal. I
mean, I’d have to say that my department really does not do a good job of helping
people in that last stage.
After I asked if they felt they were on their own, participant six indicated, “Yes.”
Participant six’s overall experience suggests that while an academic department can have
a welcoming environment, there is also a need for strategically focused graduate support
program that includes faculty involvement to enhance student motivation, persistence and
retention.
Participant three, shared a similar reflection regarding how faculty involvement
and academic support programs influenced their perception of the department’s culture
and climate. Discussing whether the department was welcoming, they noted:
I think that it wants to be and I think some of the faculty are and I think most of
the faculty try to be, but I don’t know that everyone comes off that way, and I
know that we’ve had…at least this past semester we’ve had some issues where a
lot of us incoming first-years didn’t feel comfortable and as welcomed as we were
told that we would and were expecting to feel [This student indicated that there
was some expectation of a cohort orientation or program]. So I don’t know if
that’s just a fluke of this year or something that the program struggles with.
Personally, I have a good rapport with a couple of faculty members so far, so I’ve
made it a point to speak with them whenever I have an issue, and I think that as a
whole, my cohort has really gelled together and we’re all kind of each other’s
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 73

saving grace really because I know a lot of us were frustrated with the way last
semester kind of played out, [referring to the previously mentioned sense that the
first year students were “on their own”] but we all stuck together and I think that
helped a lot.
Participant three attributed their first year persistence primarily to their connectedness
with their cohort, indicating that many of the students felt lost and confused. Continuing
on regarding academic support in the form of an advisor, mentor, or programs, participant
three noted:
Well, there’s supposed to be an advisor. Since we haven’t selected our main
advisor and our board of advisors, there’s an advisor for all the first-years, and
that’s supposed to be the person…our support whenever we have questions or
concerns, but there was a lapse in confidentiality unfortunately earlier this
semester, so it’s made it kind of hard for most of us, including myself, to trust this
advisor. So personally, I’ve…like I said, I’ve made it a point to just speak with
the couple of faculty members that I feel I can trust, and these are faculty people
that I met during recruitment and since then have been in contact with and spoken
with them often.
Participant three’s perception seems to suggest that faculty serve an important role in
creating a welcoming and conducive learning environment integral to their persistence
and retention. While they didn’t feel there were many faculty that they could rely on, the
early bond that they established with two faculty members during their recruitment
served as sufficient support to continue.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 74

Institutional Funding
Another salient issue related to students’ persistence and retention was funding.
Several participants discussed how fellowships and scholarships influenced their decision
to pursue their doctoral degrees and their continued matriculation. Participant seven noted
that:
Well, they were really generous with funding. I got the . . . doctoral fellowship
which…and that was the first year it was awarded and so it included summer
funding, which was important to me because I have kids, and…so yeah, it was
definitely the most generous offer, and also the faculty that I met [were] really
wonderful. [A Black faculty member] from the first day I met [them] they were
really excited about my project and had some really great ideas, and I think there
are a lot of similarities in the direction of our work and our interests.
Expressing similar thoughts, participant one discussed how funding was considered in
their decision regarding their choice of a specific department and program:
I looked at the program that I wanted to go into first, so I looked at the faculty and
what they had to offer. I looked at the financial aid they offered, fellowships and
how they’re going to compensate my finances because my parents are like, “We
can’t pay for it. We gave you the undergraduate degree, now this is yours.” So I
just mainly looked at the department. I didn’t look too much at the school. I
looked at the health insurance plan.
The lack of financial support for graduate school became a prevailing theme, as many
participants indicated that their parents had funded their undergraduate degrees, and
could not incur additional debt for graduate school.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 75

Participant three expressed the importance of their graduate fellowship and its
role in their decision to pursue, and to actually attend graduate school. They noted:
Yes. I think that moving down here…I relocated from Northern California, so the
move down here was difficult and expensive. I had to get a car, which was
difficult for me, and still my parents don’t help me with anything, so that was
hard, but as far as everything else goes, luckily the program pays the tuition and a
stipend, which honestly was another big factor for me considering going to
graduate school, because I took out loans during undergrad and I really don’t want
to take out more loans for school, for graduate school, so that was a big factor, the
tuition payment and the stipend. If that wasn’t offered, then I wouldn’t be here.
While participant three reiterated the importance of funding, they also indicated that their
personal desire and sense of purpose seemed to mitigate financial concerns:
I think just wanting to complete this. I guess I’ve always liked challenges,
especially academic challenges, so I think that wanting to complete this has really
kind of overridden the financial burden. . . . I’m pretty realistic now that even
after graduating here from the doctoral program, I’m not going to be like that
financially well-off either, but I know that at least I’ll be able to do something that
I want to do.
In addition to discussing how academic support programs and funding influenced their
graduate school pursuit, persistence, and retention, participants shared their thoughts
about perceived racism, and the representation of Black Ph.D. students and faculty in
their programs and departments.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 76

Role of Race and Racism and the Persistence and Retention of Black Ph.D. Students
Many of the students’ perspectives regarding the personal and institutional factors
influencing their persistence and retention such as self-efficacy, academic support, and
funding, could be representative of, and applicable to most doctoral students. While
participants shared some common graduate experiences, the study also sought to explore
issues related to race and/or perceived racism, including stereotype threat, where students
may fear being judged by or living down to a pervasive stereotype, that can alter or
negatively impact one’s performance (Ogbu, 1992). The study also addressed Mercer’s
(1990) earlier notion of the “burden of representation,” or the expectation to perform or
excel to dispel and confront essentialist and limiting perceptions of intelligence, along
with whether the pursuit of the Ph.D. is a contested intellectual site where the question of
who can and should be generators and disseminators of knowledge was confronted.
Seeking to determine students’ thoughts about what role, if any, race and/or
perceived racism might play in their persistence and retention, each was asked specific
questions regarding: 1) The representation of Black doctoral students and faculty in their
programs and whether it impacted their educational experience; 2) Coping mechanisms
or strategies used to persist; and 3) Thoughts about a 2004 graduate degree attainment
study that indicated that Black students earned only 5% of all Ph.D. degrees received.
To address the historically low representation of Black Ph.D. students and faculty,
each student was asked how many Black students and faculty were in their respective
programs, and how, if at all, it impacted their persistence and retention. Several of the
students shared similar experiences of relatively low numbers of Blacks and other
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 77

students of color in their programs, and the lack of faculty interaction. Participant four
noted that:
I think that there are two or three [out of 90], so there’s some with the big
program and most of the Black students are in their later years, so they’re not
really around campus, so I’m not even sure, but I can name two and I can
visualize one who’s name I don’t know because she’s a fifth-year, and there might
be another fifth-year lurking around that I’ve never seen.
Also discussing the representation of Black students and faculty, and its influence,
if any, on their persistence and retention, participant three noted that:
I don’t believe…in the entire program, I don’t think there’s another African
American student, and definitely not…I’m the only one in my year. . . . I don’t
think that it has really any influence on my experience. I think that…well, I’ve
always grown up in communities where there are very few African American
people, so I think…and I’ve also been raised not to really…I don’t know, see
people for their races or whatever, so it hasn’t really affected me. There are a lot
of Indian people in our program, so it’s a nice mix in a sense, but that I’m the only
person my year that’s African American makes me sad I think, of all things, but
even in undergrad, in the sciences, there weren’t very many African American
people at my school and I just kind of feel like there could be and there should be,
you know, more African American people in higher education in general, but
specifically in science.
Elaborating on the representation of Black faculty in their program and discipline,
participant two stated: “I think that’s definitely a problem, not only in this school, but
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 78

throughout the country, and I think that’s…I mean, it’s probably directly related to the
lack of minority doctoral students.” When asked to discuss how, it at all, the low
representation of Black students and faculty has personally impacted them, they shared:
Coming up from all the classes I’ve taken, I usually have to get past the stereotype
placed on me by some of the teachers. If they see me…you know, I wear the
baggy sweats and the Echo shirts and it’s been made very clear to me in a couple
of courses that the teachers aren’t really trying to listen to what…you know, when
I have a question or when I’m saying the answer, and I’ve given it much thought
and it takes maybe mid-semester for them to like, “OK, this [person] is serious.”
You know, kind of take me seriously. I’m not saying that wouldn’t happen with
maybe minority faculty, but I don’t know, maybe they understand the situation a
little bit better for what I’m trying to do. . . . Personally, I think higher numbers
would help my experience because…I don’t know, like I said, the comfort level is
important to me, and if I see people with that similar struggle…I’m just assuming
that most minorities usually…I don’t want to say…I don’t want to stereotype or
characterize, but generally all my friends who are minorities didn’t really have
much and kind of making it on their own really and seeing other people in that
similar situation would definitely help out my cause and my purpose. . . . That
would help, someone going through what I’m going through.
Consistent with their sentiment regarding the importance of a faculty or peer mentor,
participant two shared a personal story to reiterate its importance. They noted that:
I was at Northrop Grumman and I met this Black Ph.D., this young [person], and
it was really good to see someone who maybe…who understood exactly what I
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 79

was going through, weighing my options. It was really a breath of fresh air to see
[them] being successful and in fact [them] motivating me, “You know, you can do
it. I know it’s hard, but I’m on the top of the mountain right now,” that kind of
thing, so I think that would be really helpful.
Participant two provided keen insights into the need for, and importance of both students
and faculty of color in graduate programs.
Participant six shared a poignant response regarding Black student and faculty
representation, and the relationship between notions of race and a student’s research
agenda. They argued that:
I mean, certainly there are not a lot of Black people generally in my department. I
mean, in different departments I know that it can be extremely isolating, and I
absolutely do think it’s important to have people who are like you, both as
students and then as faculty members, and it can be incredibly hard to figure out
where you fit in if you don’t have people that are like you around you. . . . I
certainly saw people who were struggling to get their department to recognize that
they’re interests in race and ethnicity were valuable, so I think that could be an
issue for a lot of graduate students of color who have an interest in a particular
topic, but things aren’t really structured in their discipline to pursue that. I mean,
that’s one thing that’s nice about my department is people are very interested in
cultural studies and race and ethnicity. . . . I mean, in my discipline, and I would
think a lot of humanities disciplines, there’s a value of difference in terms of
working on projects that deal with race and ethnicity or gender or sexuality.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 80

Elaborating on the academic culture, and the role of race and gender impacting students’
persistence and retention, participant six maintained that:
In terms of the actual academic culture…and even in class issues as well… in
terms of the culture or the way that academia is structured, I think it’s still
structured around this kind of fantasy ’50s white guy with a wife and kids, that
can take care of things for you emotionally. I mean, I just feel like it’s still
structurally set up for people…you know, for the sort of traditional kind of
student just in terms of the way that services are organized on campus. It’s like
you have to…you know, it’s 9-5. You…I really do feel like that people who
have…I mean, it sounds terrible, but people who have kind of a wife at home
have that sort of emotional support and sort of like the people…you know,
someone making dinner or doing your laundry or whatever. And God knows, I
know there aren’t a lot of women who actually do that, but surprisingly, I know a
lot of women who do that and I just think it helps. Like it really…the kind of
student that has that kind of support, it just gives them a leg up, you know. What’s
the answer for that, I don’t know, but I just think things are still structured for the
traditional student, but…yeah, I don’t know what it’s like in other…well, that’s
not true.
Participant six identified the departmental academic culture, the respect for a diverse
research agenda, and an increased representation of Black students and faculty as key
factors influencing student persistence and retention.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 81

Sharing a somewhat anomalous experience, participant seven discussed the
importance of studying in a department that had a higher representation of Black faculty
and graduate students. They noted that:
There are somewhere between like five and seven. . . . I did my undergrad at the
University of [ ], and so the last two years I was there, I had mentor who was the
only Black faculty on campus and so I was really impressed when I came here
that there were a lot of faculty of color, and they are in the middle of recruiting
more faculty of color and really prominent faculty of color, and so I was really
excited about the people that I would get to work with if I went here. I feel like
it’s really important for me to have faculty of color because so much of my
project is really in considering… the racism that underlies the policy change
and…and I guess that…I mean, I could get that with white faculty, but in terms of
what I’ve found here, it’s mostly faculty of color that is really addressing those
issues or race which I think are really important to what I’m interesting in doing.
Participant seven reiterated the importance of faculty and departmental validation, as well
as research support for continued student motivation and persistence.
Additionally, participant one discussed how pursuing their Ph.D. would address the
dearth of Black faculty in the academy, and to provide an often excluded, alternative
scholarly voice in the academy:
I guess to me, there’s not a lot of Black scholars in [major]. Just going to
some conferences here and even looking at my department, most people
are…most of them are white males or Asians or Asian Americans, and so
there’s very few research concerning the view of African Americans [. . .],
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 82

and so I’m just interested in this other…that aspect that hasn’t been
explored really.
Participant three echoed the importance of pursing a Ph.D. and joining the academy to
represent divergent perspectives as well as those who don’t readily have access to higher
education:
I want to teach and I want to go into academia…the things is, is that
faculty positions are hard to come by these days now especially, and
everybody here, since being here, it’s like, you know, “If you want to go
to a four-year university and have your own lab and be successful with
researching and teaching, then it’s going to be really hard because there
aren’t that many teaching positions available,” but honestly, I think that I
would much rather be at a smaller university, maybe even a junior college,
because then…like I think that I’d much rather teach than do research.
Like I do enjoy research, but I think that I’d be more happy teaching and
especially to people who can’t afford to go to a private university or
people who have some interest in the sciences, but don’t really know what
it’s about.
Participant three’s rationale for pursuing and completing their doctoral degree addressed
some of the previous issues facing many students of color—lack of knowledge and
funding. It is apparent that they view not only their academic pursuit, but their subsequent
career as a necessary service to their community.
Arguing that Black Ph.D.’s are needed to impact the professoriate and higher
education, and to challenge historical intellectual stereotypes, participant seven offered a
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 83

personal story that greatly influenced their decision to pursue and obtain a doctoral
degree:
I feel like there’s a lot lacking in higher ed…I mean, we’re talking about
race …and me thinking in a useful way about poor people in this nation,
and especially poor people of color. . . . And social change. I really feel
like…one of the things that motivated me in part… one of the things that
motivated me to want to become a professor was sitting in undergrad
classes and just having these frustrating conversations with other students,
with faculty who weren’t really skilled at responding to really stupid
things that students said. . . . I’d have these conversations with…usually
middle-class white women after class, they’re like, “You know, you’re so
articulate and I’m just like so impressed with you and you’re so
exceptional,” and it was like, “Yeah.” I mean, this is why I think faculty of
color are so important because so many people in college are white and
they can go through their entire lives without ever seeing in their face a
person of color and power. Like they see Condi and they see Colin and
whatever, but really seeing a person…and also understanding that people
can have very sort of modest beginning and that doesn’t mean anything
about who they are and their inherent goodness and their inherent ability,
so yeah.
Recognizing the dearth of Black faculty in the academy and the power inherent in the
Ph.D., many of the participants recognized that access to higher education in general, and
a doctoral degree in particular is still in many ways a contested site of struggle grounded
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 84

in historical perceptions of “Black intellectual inferiority,” and racism. Participant seven
directly confronted the “exceptionalism” label that is too often placed upon Black
intellectuals as a way to marginalize the larger group and to minimize the academic
accomplishment of the individual.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 85

Chapter Five
Recommendations and Conclusion

The continued dearth of students of color pursuing and completing Ph.D.s
remains an alarming concern for higher education. Despite numerous efforts to increase
the number of Black students pursuing their Ph.D.s, the material reality remains a
troubling dilemma and serves as an exigency for change. Adding to the limited
knowledge of the personal and institutional factors of academically successful students, is
the common tendency to focus research studies on non-persisters or those students who
are academically challenged. Essential personal and institutional factors that influence
the persistence and retention of Black doctoral students include: Early exposure to, and,
understanding of higher education, improved student motivation (which includes self-
efficacy and self-regulation), familial expectations, early academic programs, faculty and
peer mentorship, faculty interaction and representation, an inclusive institutional climate,
culture, and financial support (funding).
This study revealed that a strategic, holistic and multifaceted approach is needed
to enhance the recruitment, persistence and retention of Black Ph.D. students.
Foundationally, we must confront the profound dearth and systemic exclusion of Black
students pursuing the Ph.D. due to hegemonic, racist intellectual constructions prevalent
in many predominantly White institutions of higher education. Historically, the pursuit of
higher education, and especially the doctorate, has functioned as a form of white status
property which has promulgated the dual myths of “white objective merit,” and “Black
inherent inferiority,” (Little, 2005). Such notions intimate that Blacks, and other
historically marginalized groups can neither be originators or disseminators of
knowledge.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 86

The study found that academically successful Black doctoral students identified
early academic preparation and exposure, consistent familial expectations, a spiritual
purpose, self-efficacy, motivation, mentoring, financial aid, and a welcoming and
inclusive institutional culture and climate as those personal and institutional factors that
promoted their persistence and retention. Personal and institutional factors that impeded
students’ persistence and retention, included, the low representation of faculty and
students of color, the lack of academic mentoring and guidance, scarcity of financial aid,
and a non-inclusive or welcoming academic environment.
Students’ narratives revealed that at times during their doctoral experience, the
academy was perceived as a hostile or paternalistic environment that reified the notion
that the Ph.D. was an exclusive domain of whiteness. Perceived exceptionalism, coupled
with a paradoxical sense of hypervisibility and invisibility were often use to explicate
Black students’ presence in the academy, especially at the doctoral level. The reality of
institutional racism and reified notions of Black intellectual deficiency shaped the
contestation of the Ph.D.
It is clear that a holistic and multifaceted approach is needed to increase the
number of Black Ph.D. students and to enhance their persistence and retention. Critical
academic pursuit, persistence and retention factors included students’ motivation (which
included self-efficacy and self-regulation), familial expectations, early academic
programs, faculty and peer mentorship, faculty interaction and representation,
institutional climate, culture, and support (funding).

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 87

Early Academic Messages and Expectations
The research found that one of the most salient factors students identified is the
need for earlier exposure to, and, understanding of higher education in general, and
graduate studies specifically. Through educational and research programs in middle and
high school, students can gain practical knowledge and experience regarding higher
education and research that will be foundational to future study. Additionally,
undergraduate programs such as the McNair scholars program should be extended
throughout a student’s academic tenure, and instituted to ensure greater participation of
students of color. Currently, a small number of students volunteer or are recommended
by a professor for the program, however, many students who might benefit or succeed are
unaware of this opportunity or are not prompted to participate. This study has shown
positive outcomes of such programs and its direct correlation with students’ pursuit of
graduate education. As participant one noted, “I know that’s one thing that I really
appreciate about the McNair experience, where they really encourage African American
and minority students in general not to just go for a Master’s, but also you try for a
Ph.D.”
Programs such as the UMBC Meyerhoff and the NSF Advance programs which
provide clear recruitment and retention initiatives can also enhance the pool of excellent
Black doctoral students, and aid in their academic success. Such efforts would include
both faculty and student mentorship, as well as, competitive financial aid packages that
would make graduate school a realistic, economically sound choice. Institutions should
also implement an orientation and advisement model that would guide students
throughout their academic tenure. This could include a designated Director of Graduate
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 88

Studies, a cohort system, core thematic curricula, and summer workshops that discuss
research, publishing and the doctoral process which can all aid in year to year retention.
College pipeline programs can incorporate this strategy to increase interest and influence
future student motivation.
Doctoral Recruitment and Admissions Process
To increase the number of doctoral students of color, doctoral programs should
identify and implement strategic initiatives designed to broaden traditional recruitment
processes that generally rely primarily on quantitative measures to determine admittance.
A more holistic approach that encompasses a variety of strategies including outreach to
Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Traditionally Hispanic Serving
Institutions would increase the pool of qualified applicants. Program and admission
directors must challenge historical “deficit” discourse and resist the tendency to bemoan
the notion of a “non-existent” pipeline. While in fact the student of color pipeline may be
limited in size, it is not limited in talent. As indicated in Critical Race Theory, this study
implores institutions to engage in a “critique of liberalism,” that would reify a
meritocracy or dominant system that perpetuates the exclusion of many potential Black
doctoral students.
Educational institutions must challenge the “exceptionalism” label and other
dominant racist narratives that cohere to form a prevailing mythos that I contend is a
primary reason for the historical and continued exclusion of large numbers of Black
scholars in the academy. We must challenge any perceptions that the genesis and
dissemination of knowledge is a contested site designed to exclude disparate intellectual
beliefs and perspectives. Inherent in maintaining a hegemonic educational system, a
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 89

power elite must construct and promote a particular gender or racial group that serves to
represent the norm, while positioning most others as unqualified, caricatures.
Organizational Culture and Institutional Support
In that increasing the number of students and faculty of color will enhance the
overall academic culture and experience, educational institutions must continually assess
its organizational mission and stance as it relates to diversity. There must be specific
directives and practices valuing diversity along with complete institutional buy-in from
all constituents. The consistent message regarding the Institution’s commitment to
diversity must be exemplified in disparate ways including its artifacts, policies, and
programs. To convey institutional support for the increase of doctoral students and
faculty of color, the School must provide consistent and substantial financial assistance as
well as support organizations such as a minority graduate association. Additionally,
students indicated that cohort and orientation programs, as well as a common curriculum
are institutional measures that can aid in their persistence and retention.
These strategic and targeted initiatives need to be promoted and sustained, despite
recent federal budget cuts that are limiting graduate school access, especially to those
who are least represented in the academy. As reported in Inside Higher Education (2013),
in addition to cutting off federal subsidies for graduate student loans, the Javits
Fellowship, a grant program for financially eligible students will also be eliminated.
Institutions who are committed to increasing the recruitment and retention of graduate
students of color must develop and implement sustainable programs that demonstrate
their resolve.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 90

Faculty Perceptions and Interaction
As noted earlier, faculty perceptions and interaction are one of the most integral
factors affecting graduate student retention. A fundamental commitment to view doctoral
students of color as having the intellectual acumen to conduct rigorous and significant
research is essential for organizational success. Consistent with the interest convergence
tenet of Critical Race Theory, educational institutions must also acknowledge that often,
majority professors contemplate the costs and benefits associated with students of color
and must focus on the academic and professional gains that can be attributed to working
with and mentoring such brilliant students (Delgado and Stefancic, 2001). Delgado
(1995) indicated that in many cases involving a majority power elite, they “will tolerate
or encourage racial advances for Blacks only when they also promote white self-
interests” (xiv). While one would hope that this would not always be the case, as Bell
(2000) argued, “we cannot ignore and should learn from and try to recognize situations
when there is a convergence of interests” (9).
Additionally, ensuring a critical mass of both faculty and students of color can aid in
creating a welcoming and inclusive environment, and a supportive educational
foundation. Faculty role models are integral in ensuring an academic climate and culture
that genuinely values and respects student and intellectual diversity. This is needed in all
aspects of the educational experience including opportunities to serve as graduate
teaching assistants. The Journal of Black in Higher Education (2004) notes that, “About
18 percent of white Americans who earned doctorates in 2004 served as college teaching
assistants during their doctoral study. Only 8.7 percent of Black doctoral students served
as teaching assistants.” This early professional development and direct mentoring from
seasoned faculty enhances student persistence and retention. Lovitts (2001) substantiates
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 91

the outcome of both teaching and research assistantships, demonstrating that students
with teaching assistantships were twice as likely, and those with research assistantships
were nearly three times as likely to persist until they complete and obtain their degrees.
With the average attrition rate among all doctoral students at 50%, it becomes
even more imperative for educational institutions to assess their recruitment and retention
efforts of all students, especially students of color. At the graduate level, for example,
several factors have been associated with persistence including the academic climate,
faculty interaction, mentoring, financial support, and student self-efficacy. A common
theme associated with graduate student persistence is faculty interaction. Unlike
undergraduate and Master’s students, doctoral students’ socialization and educational
experience rely heavily on their research relationship with faculty. A faculty mentoring
program would serve a dual role, both as a personal and professional support system, but
a validation of students’ research interests.
Participants noted that the complex and unique culture of a doctoral program did
not necessarily promote community. Different from undergraduate and Master’s students,
doctoral students’ academic experience relies heavily on their research with a faculty
member. Consistent with earlier research findings, faculty support and interaction was
essential at the doctoral level. They understood the simple, yet profound reality that the
increase of students of color pursuing a Ph.D. has a direct correlation to the pool of
qualified faculty in the classroom. This cyclical interdependence also impacts future
recruitment of prospective students as many will seek an educational institution that has
some representation of faculty similar to themselves.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 92

While each of the students agreed that the overall academic climate was generally
welcoming, they each expressed concern regarding the low number of students of color in
the program, especially the doctoral program. The students also discussed the need for
faculty mentoring, both from faculty of color, as well as white professors, who are both
integral to their academic success and professional development. While both Black men
and women Ph.D. students express the desire for faculty mentors, as Blackwell’s (1983)
seminal mentoring scholarship indicated, Black women are less likely to find a mentor,
especially their more preferred African American female mentors (Jackson, Kite, and
Branscombe, 1996). Hughes (1988), discussing the role mentors play in leadership
development, noted the paucity of available mentors for Black women, stating, “Minority
women students have the most limited access to ethnic role models and mentors like
themselves” (p.65). We cannot underestimate the integral role Black faculty and faculty
of color play in modeling the academic and professional possibilities for students who
might not otherwise believe it is attainable. Institutional measures to expose all students,
especially those of color to such programs can directly improve the current paucity of
Black and other scholars of color.
While academic institutions need to be responsive to the need of increased faculty
of color, they must not essentialize and oversimplify this concern with mere
representation. Specifically, they must recognize the complexity of race and ethnicity and
not fall prey to “ethnic absolutism,” by reifying a culturally homogeneous notion that
simply adding faculty of color will be an authentic and strategic response for all students
of color (Mercer, 1990). Overall, each of the participants shared how the presence, and/or
lack thereof, of a purposeful student engagement and success program, as well as
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 93

authentic faculty interest and involvement can either positively or negatively influence
their persistence and retention.
Future Research

A longitudinal study chronicling a doctoral student of color from the application
process through graduation could create a lens by which the various factors influencing
their retention can be analyzed. The most recurring themes included: program culture and
the role of mentoring in navigating that culture, self-efficacy, academic preparation,
academic specialization, cultural isolation, and diversity among students, faculty, and
staff. Such studies should use an anti-deficit framework, and as Harper and Kuykendall
(2012), contend, “institutional stakeholders should better understand the conditions and
institutionalize the factors that enable current achievers to thrive” (27). Institutions should
evaluate their organizational practices to determine how they can provide programs and
engagement practices that focuses on their accountability instead of seeking to determine
what “problems or deficiencies” students purportedly have (Harper, 2009). Both students
and the educational institutions they attend will greatly benefit from strategies and
programs that are informed by and specifically geared to academically successful
students.
Additionally, a comparative analysis of junior faculty of color and graduate
doctoral students of color, could provide insight to any similarities or differences between
student versus professional experiences, which might reveal, if, there are substantial
differences. A gender study on the experiences of African American women and their
graduate and professional experiences is needed to examine the intersection of gender
and race, and how they function personally, socially, and institutionally.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 94

While the realities, more so now than ever, reify this material reality, it is
incumbent upon educators and the academy to provide an alternative narrative that seeks
to associate academic success with personal motivation and ability at an early age,
especially for Black Ph.D. students.
Finally, research examining the role of intellectual deficiency theories, historical
racism, and the intentional reification of the Ph.D. as white status property or the sole
domain of the dominant group is needed to confront the contestation of the intellectual
and academic space. Ultimately, predominantly White institutions must acknowledge and
confront the perpetual paradox of hypervisibility and invisibility faced by Black doctoral
students of color designed to create a sense of exclusion, where “Others” are perceived as
outsiders or “exceptional” anomalies who emulate the dominant norm.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 95

References

Allen, W. R. (1992). The color of success: African-American college student outcomes at
predominately white and historically Black public colleges and universities.
Harvard Educational Review, 62(1), 26-44.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
The Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.
Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529.
Astin, A. W. (1999). Student Involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529.
Atkinson, D., Morten, G., & Sue, D.W. (1983). Counseling American minorities.
Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown Company.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Banks, J. A. (1995). Multicultural education and curriculum transformation. The Journal
of Negro Education, 64(4), 390-400.
Beaudoin, D. L., & Ollis, D. F. (1995). A product and process engineering laboratory for
freshman. Journal of Engineering Education, 279-284.
Bean, J. P. (1982). Student attrition, intention, and confidence: Interaction effects in a
path model. Research in Higher Education, 12, 155-187.
Bell, D.A. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. New
York: Basic Books.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 96

Bell, D. A. (2000). Brown v. Board of Education: Forty-five years after the fact. Ohio
Northern Law Review, 26, 1-171.
Bennett, C., & Okinake, A. M. (1990). Factors related to persistence among Asian, Black,
Hispanic, and White undergraduates at a predominately White university:
Comparison between first and fourth year cohorts. The Urban Review, 22(1), 33-
60.
Blackwell, J. E. (1983). Networking and Mentoring: A Study of Cross-Generational
Experiences of Black Graduate and Professional Schools. Atlanta: Southern
Education Foundation.
Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and Science Careers: Leaky Pipeline or Gender Filter?
Gender and Education, 17(4), 369-386.
Brace, C. (1999). Racialism, racism, and the bigot brigade. Psycoloquy, 10(62).
Retrieved from http://psycprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00000697/.
Brawner, C. E., & Serow, R. C. (1998). Growing Pains: An Evaluation of the SUCCEED
Coalition. International Conference on Engineering Education, August, 1-5.
Brazziel, W. F., & Brazziel, M. E. (1997) Distinctives of high producers of minority
science and engineering doctoral starts. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 6(2).
Bruce, P. A. (1889). The Plantation Negro as a freeman: Observations on his character,
condition, and prospects in Virginia. New York: G.P. Putnams’ Sons.
Byrd-Chichester, J. (2000). The Federal Courts and Claims of Racial Discrimination in
Higer Education. The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 69, No. ½. Knocking at
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 97

Freedom’s Door: Race, Equity, and Affirmative Action in U.S. Higher Education,
pp. 12-26.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., Terenzini, P. T., Pascarelli, E. T., & Hagedorn, L. S. (1999).
Campus racial climate and adjustment of students to college. Journal of College
Student Development, 70, 134-160.
Carroll, D. R. (1997). Bridge engineering for the elementary Grades. Journal of
Engineering Education, 221-226.
Carter, R. T., & Goodwin, A. L. (1994). Racial identity and education. In L. Darling-
Hammond (ed.), Review of research in education, 20, 291-336. Washington, DC:
American Educational Research Association.
Crenshaw, K. (1988). Race, reform, and retrenchment: Transformation and legitimation
in antidiscrimination law. Harvard Law Review, 101, 1331-1387.
Cross, S. E., & Vick, N. V. (2001). The Interdependent Self-Construal and Social
Support: The Case of Persistence in Engineering. Society for Personality and
Social Psychology, Inc., 27(7), 820-832.
Cuny, J., & Aspray, W. (2002). Recruitment and Retention of Women Graduate Students
in Computer Science and Engineering: Results of a Workshop Organized by the
Computing Research Association. SIGCSE Bulletin, 34(2), 168-173.
D’Augelli, A. R., & Hershberger, S. L. (1993). African American undergraduates on a
predominately White campus: Academic factors, social networks, and campus
climate. Journal of Negro Education, 62(1), 67-81.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 98

Daempfle, P. A., (2003). An analysis of the high attrition rates among first year college
science, math, and engineering majors. Journal of College Student Retention,
5(1), 37-52.
DeCuir, J. T., & Dixson, A. D. (2004). “So when it comes out, they aren’t that surprised
that it is there”: Using Critical Race Theory as a tool of analysis of race and
racism in education. Educational Researcher, pp. 26-31.
Delgado, R. (1990). Mindset and metaphor. Harvard Law Review, 103, 1872.
Delgado, R. 91995). Critical race theory: The cutting edge. Philadelphia, PA: Temple
University Press.
Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York:
New York University Press.
Derman-Sparks, L., & Phillips, C. B. (1997). Teaching/learning anti-racism: A
developmental approach. New York: Teachers College Press.
DesJardins, S. L., Kim, D., & Rzonca, C. S. (2003). A nested analysis of factors affecting
bachelor’s degree completion. J. College Student Retention, 4(4), 407-435.
Doob, C. B. (1999). Racism: An American cauldron. New York: Longman.
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1940). Dusk of dawn: An essay toward an autobiography of a race
concept. New York : Harcourt, Brace, and Co.
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1908, 2003). The souls of Black folk. New York: Modern Library.
Elmers, M. T., & Pike, G. R. (1997). Minority and nonminority adjustment to college:
Differences or similarities? Research in Higher Education, 38(1), 77-97.
Epps, E. G. (1995). Race, class, and educational opportunity: Trends in the sociology of
education. Sociological Forum, 10(4), 593-608.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 99

Feagin, J.R. (2000). Racist America: Roots, Current Realities, and Future Reparations.
New York: Routledge.
Ferrer de Valero, Yaritza. “Departmental Factors Affecting Time-to-Degree and
Completion Rates of Doctoral Students at One Land-Grant Research Institution.”
The Journal of Higher Education. Vol. 72 No. 3. (May – Jun., 2001).
Fleming, J. (1984). Blacks in college: A comparative study of students' success in Black
and in White institutions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Frederickson, G. M. (2002). Racism: A short history. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Frederickson, G. M. (1987). The Black image in the white mind: The debate on Afro-
American character and destiny, 1817-1914. Hanover, NH: Wesleyan University
Press.
Garces, L. M. (2012). The Impact of Affirmative Action Bans in Graduate Education.
The Civil Rights Project, July.
Gibbs, J. T. (1988). Lack students/White university: Different expectations. Personnel
and Guidance Journal, 51(7), 436-469.
Goetz, J.P., & LeCompte, M.D. (1984).
Golde, C. M. (2000). Should I stay or should I go? Student descriptions of the doctoral
attrition process. Review of Higher Education, 23(2).
Gosman, E., Dandridge, B., Nettles, M., & Thoeny, R. (1983). Predicting student
progression: The influence of race and other students and institutional
characteristics on college student performance. Research in Higher Education,
18(2), 209-236.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 100

Gould, S. J. (1994, November 28). Curveball. New Yorker, 139-149.
Harper, S. R. (2009). Race Conscious Student Engagement Practices and the Equitable
Distribution of Enriching Educational Experiences. Liberal Education, Fall.
Harper, S. R. (2010). An Anti-Deficit Achievement Framework for Research on Students
of Color in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, no. 148, Winter.
Harper, S. R. & Kuykendall, J. A, (2012). Institutional Efforts to Improve Black Male
Student Achievement: A Standards-Based Approach. Change, March/April
Hernandez, J. C. (2000). Understanding the retention of Latino college students. Journal
of College Student Development, 41(6), 575-588.
Hernandez, J. C. (2002). A qualitative exploration of the first-year experience of Latino
college students. NASPA Journal, 40(1), 69-84.
Hernandez, J. C., & Lopez, M. A. (2004). Leaking pipeline: Issues impacting Latino/a
college student retention. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 37-60.
Hettles, M., Thoeny, A., & Gosman, E. (1986). Comparative and predictive analyses of
Black and White students’ college achievement and experiences. Journal of
Higher Education, 57(3), 289-318. Retrieved October 19, 2007 from JSTOR
database.
Howard-Hamilton, M. F. (1997). Theory to practice: Applying developmental theories
relevant to African American men. In M. J. Cuyjet (Ed.), Helping African
American men succeed in college. New directions for student services 80: 17-30.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 101

Hughes, M.S. (1988). Developing Leadership Potential in Minority Women. In M.D.
Sagaria (ed.), Empowering Women: Leadership Development Strategies on
Campus. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Context of conflict. The Journal of
Higher Education, 63, 539-569.
Hurtado, S. (1994). Graduate school racial climates and academic self-concept among
minority graduate students in the 1970s. American Journal of Higher Education,
102(3), 330-351.
Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the
campus climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of
Education, 70, 324-345.
Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayton-Pederson, A. R., & Allen, W. R. (1998). Enhancing
campus climate for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The
Review of Higher Education, 21 (3), 279-302.
Jackson, C. H., Kite, M. E., and Branscombe, N.R. (1996). African-American Women’s
Mentoring Experiences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario.
Jensen, A. (2000). IQ tests: Psychometric and chronometric G, and achievement.
Psycoloqy, 11(14). Retrieved from
http://psycprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00000014/.
Jorion, P. (1999). Intelligence and race: The house of cards. Psycoloquy, 10(64).
Retrieved from http://psycprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/archive/00000699/.
The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. (2006). Doctoral Degree Awards to African
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 102

Americans Reach Another All-Time High.
Kant, I. (1764). Of national characteristics, so far as they depend upon the distinct feeling
of the beautiful and sublime. Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and the
Sublime.
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education.
Teachers College Record, 97, 47-68.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999a). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice
filed like education? In L. Parker, D. Deyhle, and S Villenas (eds.), Race is . . .
Race isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies in education, 7-30.
Boulder, CO: Westview.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999b). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A
critical race theory perspective. In A. Iran-Nejad and P. Pearson (eds.), Review of
Research in Education, vol. 24, 221-247. Washington D.C.: American
Educational Research Association.
Loo, C. M., & Rolison, G. (1986). Alienation of ethnic minority students at a
predominately white university. The Journal of Higher Education, 57(1), 58-77.
Lopez, G. R. (2003). The (racially neutral) politics of education: A critical race theory
perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(1), 68-94.
Lopez, I. F. H. (1994). The social construction of race. Massachusetts: Harvard C.R.
Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the Ivory Tower: The Causes and Consequences of
Departure from Doctoral Study. Lanford, Md.: Rowan & Littlefield.
Lovitts, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). The hidden crisis in graduate education: Attrition
from Ph.D. programs. Academe, 86(6), 44-50.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 103

Lynn, M. (1999). Toward a critical race pedagogy: A research note. Urban Education,
33, 606-626.
Marable, M. (2003). Defining Black higher education for the twenty-first century. The
Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 39, 109-115.
Marable, M. (1983). How capitalism underdeveloped Black America. Boston: South End
Press.
Maton, K. I. And Hrabowsi III, F. A. (2004). Increasing the number of African American
Ph.D.s in the sciences and engineering: A strengths-based approach.” American
Psychologist, 59(6), 547-556.
Matsuda, M. J. (1989). Public response to racist speech: Considering the victim’s story.
Michigan Law Review, 87, 2320-2381.
Mayo, J. R., Murguia, E.. & Padilla, R. V. (1995). Social integration and academic
performance among minority university students. Journal of College Student
Development, 36(6), 542–52.
Mercer, K. (1990). Editor. Black Art and the Burden of Representation. Third Text, 4:10,
61-78.
Morris, R. (1997). Educating savages. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83, 152-171.
Murray, C. A. (1839). Travels in America. R. Bentley London.
Myrdal, G. (1944). An American dilemma: The Negro problem and modern democracy.
New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Nettles, M. T. (1990). Success in doctoral programs: Experiences of minority and White
students. American Journal of Education, 98(4), 494-522.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 104

Nettles, M. T., Thoeny, A. R., & Gosman, E. J. (1986). Comparative and predictive
analyses of Black and White students’ college achievement and experiences.
Journal of Higher Education, 57(3), 289-318.
Newby, I. A. (1965). Jim Crow’s defense: Anti-Negro thought in America, 1900-1930.
Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.
Nolen, C. H. (1967). The Negro’s image in the South: The anatomy of white supremacy.
Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
Nora, A., & Cabrera, A. F. (1996). The role of perceptions of prejudice and
discrimination on the adjustment of minority students to college. Journal of
Higher Education, 67(2), 119-148.
Oakes, J. (1990a). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students
in science and mathematics. Review of Research in Education, 16, 153-222.
Oakes, J. (1990b). The underparticipation of women, minorities, and disabled persons in
science. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Oakes, J., Wells, A. S., Jones, M., & Datnow, A. (1997). Detracking: The social
construction of ability, cultural politics, and resistance to reform. Teachers
College Record, 98(3), 482-510.
Ogbu, J. U. (1979). Social stratification and the socialization of competence.
Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 10(1), 3-20.
Ogbu, J. U. (1992). Adaptation to minority status and impact on school success. Theory
into Practice, 31(4), 287-295.
Olmstead, A. P. (1998). Words are acts: Critical race theory as a rhetorical construct. The
Howard Journal of Communications, 9, 323-331.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 105

Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the U. S.: From the 1960s to
the 1990s. 2
nd
Edition. New York: Routledge
Packer, M. J., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of
learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), pp.
227-241.
Padilla, A. M., & Lindholm, K. J. (1995). Quantitative educational research with ethnic
minorities. In J.A. Backs & C.A. McGee Banks (eds.), Handbook of research on
multicultural education, 97-113. New York: Macmillan.
Padilla, R., Trevino, J., Gonzalez, K., & Trevino, J. (1997). Developing local models of
minority student success in college. Journal of College Student Development,
38(2), 125–135.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational
Research, 66(4), 543-578.
Parker, L. (1998). “Race is race ain’t”: An exploration of the utility of critical race theory
in qualitative research in education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies
in Education, 11(1), 43-55.
Parker, L., & Lynn, M. (2002). What’s race got to do with it? Critical race theory’s
conflicts with and connections to qualitative research methodology and
epistemology. Qualitative Inquiry, 8,7-22.
Pascarella, E. T. and Terenzini, P. T. (1980). Predicting freshman persistence and
voluntary dropout decisions from a theoretical Model.” The Journal of Higher
Education, 51(1).
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1998). How college affects students. San Francisco:
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 106

Jossey-Bass.
Ranking, S. R., & Reason, R. D. (2005).Differing perceptions: How students of color and
White students perceive campus climate for underrepresented groups. Journal of
College Student Development, 46(1), 43-61.
Reichert, W. M. (2006) A success story: Recruiting and retaining underrepresented
minority doctoral students in biomedical engineering. Liberal Education, 92(3),
52-55.
Reichert, M., & Absher, M. (1997). Taking another look at educating African American
engineers: The importance of undergraduate retention. Journal of Engineering
Education, 241-253.
Richards, L. G., Gorman, M., Scherer, W. T., & Landel, R. D. (1995). Promoting active
learning with cases and instructional modules. Journal of Engineering Education,
375-381.
Rowser, J. F. (1997). Do African American students’ perceptions of their needs have
implications for retention? Journal of Black Studies, 27(5), 718-726.
Smith-Maddox, R., & Solano, D. G. (2002). Using critical race theory, Paulo Freire’s
problem-posing method, and case study research to confront race and racism in
education. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 66-84.
Solorzano, D. G. (1998). Critical race theory, racial and gender microaggressions, and the
experiences of Chicana and Chicano scholars. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education, 11, 121-136.
Solorzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. (2002). Critical Race Methodology: Counter-Storytelling
as an Analytical Framework for Education Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8:23-44.
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 107

Solorzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2001). From racial stereotyping and deficit discourse
toward a critical race theory in teacher education. Multicultural Education, 9(1),
2-8.
Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2001). Critical race theory, racial
microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African
American college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69, 60-73.
Spady, W. G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and
synthesis. Interchange, 1, 64-85.
Tanaka, G. (2002). Higher education’s self-reflexive turn: Toward an intercultural theory
of student development. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(2), 263-296.
Tate, W. (1997). Critical race theory and education: History, theory, and implications. In
M. Apple (ed.), Review of Research in Education, 22, 195-247. Itasca, IL: F. E.
Peacock.
Taylor, E. (1998). A primer on critical race theory. The Journal of Black in Higher
Education, 19, 122-124.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent
research. Review of Education Research, 45, 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition.
(1st ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, Vincent. (1998). Colleges as Communities: “Taking Research on Student
Persistence Seriously.” Review of Higher Education, 21(2).
THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 108

Tracey, T. J., & Sedlacek, W. A comparison of White and Black student academic
success using noncognitive variable: A LISREL analysis. Research in Higher
Education, 27(4), 333-348.
Voltaire. In Gossett, T. F. (1965). Race: The history of an idea in America. New York:
Schocken Books, 45.
Weinberg, M. (1977). Minority students: A research appraisal. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
West, Cornel. (1982). Prophesy deliverance: An Afro-American revolutionary
Christianity. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.
Who Was the First African American to Earn a Ph.D.? | eHow.com
http://www.ehow.com/about_4705002_first-african-american-earn-
Ph.D..html#ixzz2AB8YWZaX
Winter, S. L. (1989). The cognitive dimension of the agon between legal power and
narrative meaning. Michigan Law Review, 87(8), 2225-2279.
Wright, Richard. (1945) Black boy: A record of childhood and youth. New York: Harper
and Brothers.
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of
community cultural wealth. Race, ethnicity and education, 8(1), 69-92.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for
academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting.
American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676.

THE Ph.D. AS A CONTESTED INTELLECTUAL SITE 109

Appendix

Appendix A: Interview Protocol

A. How would you define retention?
B. How would you define persistence?
C. What primary factors influenced your decision to pursue higher
education, in general, and a doctoral degree specifically?
D. What role, if any, did your family play in this decision?
E. What barriers, if any, have impeded or hindered your academic
pursuit?
F. What factors have contributed to your retention?
G. What academic activities have influenced your retention?
H. What social activities have influenced your retention?
I. What faculty experiences have aided your retention?
J. What faculty experiences, if any have hindered your retention?
K. How is your personal relationship with faculty?
L. How important is faculty interaction to your academic success?
M. How would you describe the academic climate?
N. How supportive has your department/school been?
O. Describe and discuss the times you’ve felt alienated

i
Throughout this dissertation, the term “Black” will refer to those students who are of African American,
African, Black Caribbean, and other Afro-ethnic descent.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The decline of U.S. students who are pursuing and completing higher education, especially those who have been historically underrepresented, has lessened America’s global and economic competitiveness. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2012), occupations requiring some level of postsecondary education are expected to have “slightly higher rates of growth.” Specifically, those in “the master’s degree category are projected to grow the fastest, about 22 percent

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Unlocking the potential: improving persistence and graduation of Black female students at select historically Black colleges and universities: a case study

PDF

Increasing institutional retention: a gap analysis

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Factors influencing the academic persistence of college students with ADHD

PDF

Understanding the influences on academic performance of African American students in Black Greek letter organizations

PDF

The influence of the historically Black church on the academic achievement of African American students in public schools

PDF

Beyond deficit thinking: highlighting the strengths and resilience of Black indigenous and people of color students thriving in higher education

PDF

Authors of our story: Black female students' experience during their first year at a predominantly White institution through a syncretic lens of critical race feminism and Afro-pessimism

PDF

The racialized experiences of Black students in online master’s degree programs at a Predominately White Institution

PDF

Beyond persistence and graduation rates: examining the career exploration processes of first-generation college students

PDF

The moderating effects of racial identity and cultural mistrust on the relationship between student-faculty interaction and persistence for Black community college students

PDF

The impact of work study on the integration and retention of undergraduate students at the University of California

PDF

Analysis of faculty professional identity upon culturally responsive practices and pursuit of critical thinking

PDF

Institutional diversity policy improvement through the lens of Black alumni stakeholder leadership: a gap analysis

PDF

Factors impacting retention rates amongst underrepresented students: an evaluation study

PDF

Pursuing the educational dream—the second-year Latino community college experience: students’ perceptions of the social, cultural, academic and internal experiences that influence persistence

PDF

A critical worldview: understanding identity and sense of belonging of underrepresented students' participation in study abroad

PDF

Equitable access to learning opportunities when the minorities have become the majority

PDF

Leveraging relationships with Black male students to increase academic success

PDF

Analyzing effects of institutional design on student success outcomes between 2-year and 4-year institutions

Asset Metadata

Creator Little, Sharoni Denise (author)

Core Title The Ph.D. as a contested intellectual site: a critical race analysis of the personal and institutional factors that influence the persistence and retention of academically successful Black doctor...

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 05/07/2014

Defense Date 05/07/2014

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

Tag academic success,critical race theory,higher education leadership,institutional racism,OAI-PMH Harvest,student persistence and retention

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Sundt, Melora A. (committee chair), Maddox, Anthony B. (committee member), Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee member)

Creator Email slittle@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-412481

Unique identifier UC11295231

Identifier etd-LittleShar-2502.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-412481 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LittleShar-2502-1.pdf

Dmrecord 412481

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Little, Sharoni Denise

Type texts

Source 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 a...

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