Access of Ethnic Minorities to Higher Education

CSHE > Research > Issues of Science and Technology Policy > Access of Ethnic Minorities to Higher Education

A Longitudinal Study of Minority Ph.D.'s from 1980 to 1990: Progress and Outcomes in Science and Engineering at UC During Graduate School and Professional Life

Principal Investigator: Anne J. MacLachlan

Background

Twenty-five years after significant national, state, and university efforts to increase the participation of minorities in graduate school and the professoriate, the numbers receiving Ph.D.s in science and engineering have grown only very slowly. Minorities still constitute a small number of Ph.D. recipients and university faculty. In 1980, when the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act was passed, underrepresented minorities, African Americans, American Indians, Chicanos and Hispanics were 2% of U.S. doctorates granted in physical science, 2.5% in engineering. In 1990 the percentages were 3.4% and 3.6% respectively (Survey of Earned Doctorates, 1995). More alarming now is that although the overall numbers have increased in the last three years, the most recent data show a pronounced drop in Black and Hispanic graduate student enrollment in 1997 (AAAS, "Losing Ground"). Although many programs have enhanced medical and law school participation, this is a disappointing result for some well constructed programs both within U.C. and at the national level.

In California, the most ethnically diverse state in the nation, the public higher education system, particularly the University of California, is engaged in a great social experiment creating equality of access, equal chances for academic success, and the credentials for entry into the scientific and technological workforce of the state and the nation for all. Now challenged by the abolition of affirmative action, the higher educational institutions of the state, including the University of California, are earnestly attempting to find solutions for maintaining an inclusive educational environment. Inequality has deep structural roots: social, economic, historical and cultural, as well as a political legacy of a neglected K-12 system and the political polarization which has neutralized efforts at amelioration. However, for its efforts to be successful, the University needs more knowledge of why and how the students it admits succeed, especially at the graduate level where little research has been done on the successful minority recipients of Ph.D.s. Income, professional opportunity and, indeed, "life chances" for participation in middle class American life are intimately related not only to access, but also to success in higher education.

The basic problem remains that the numbers of certain minority students who attend college in relation to their percentage of the overall population is small and the numbers of those who elect Science, Math and Engineering (SME) majors even smaller. A further drop occurs as the number who choose to attend graduate school is even smaller still, as is the number who complete Ph.D.s. Since graduate schools have little direct effect on the pool of qualified students, the issue at this level is how graduate schools can improve the retention and degree completion rate of those entering their programs. It is this point of intersection between specific graduate programs and individual students that the amount of available information is limited. Yet it is ultimately in the confines of a particular department that a student will succeed or fail. Deeper, qualitative knowledge of the experience of minorities pursuing Ph.D.s such as this study undertakes is necessary to understand how individuals interact with their programs and faculty, and how they utilize resources made available to them. In short why do students succeed and how do they do it?

This study builds on a great number of earlier studies conducted by the AAAS, the CGS, the Sloan and Spencer Foundations, NSF, NRC, ACE, many professional associations, particularly ACS and NACME, and individual scholars. One result of all this work is a growing body of information about minorities in graduate education in SME fields. It is now known where they are, which undergraduate institutions they came from, and what are the general characteristics and duration of their graduate study. It is also known where minority Ph.D.s are first employed, how this differs among ethnic groups, and even what kind of salary differential they may experience. (NSF "Women, Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering," 1996). However, very few studies have examined in detail how individuals from poor and possibly educationally limited backgrounds succeeded in obtaining terminal professional degrees. (Solorzano, "Role Models, Mentors, and the Experiences of Chicana and Chicano Ph.D. Scientists,"1998; Gandara, "Over the Ivy Walls,"1995). Overall, what is not much known is what facilitates the successful transition of minority undergraduate students in SME majors into graduate programs, through graduate school and into academic and other professional SME positions.

In particular there are very few studies which ask about what combination of individual and institutional factors are involved in making students successful in graduate programs. Issues such as department climate, the impact on individuals of university policies, practices and support services and the intangibles of mentoring can only be assessed through extensive direct questioning of the individuals involved. For the proposed study here, an earlier U.C. study (MacLachlan, "The Graduate Experience of Women and Minorities at U.C. Berkeley," 1992) on which involved 338 interviews provides a basis for evaluating what questions need to be asked to determine the sources of individual success, and permit participant evaluation.

As with the internal functioning of graduate education, with the exception of Daryl Smith's "Diversity Works," there are very few qualitative studies of minority career paths. Another study by MacLachlan (1992) on the placement of all Berkeley Ph.D. recipients granted between 1980-89 provides further context for the present study. First positions were identified for 76% of the 6,375 Ph.D.s granted in these years, the results grouped by discipline (NRC categories were employed), gender, ethnicity, location, employment sector, etc. The emergent patterns allow for a comparison with placement information for the current study population.

Specific Aims

In order to understand how the number of minorities can be increased in the scientific workforce, the study is framed around two large central questions:

1. How and why did underrepresented minority students in science and engineering disciplines from all nine University of California campuses succeed in earning their Ph.D.s?
2. Did their careers correspond to their training and aspirations?

To answer these very complicated questions the study is undertaking the following:

• Conducting a long term follow-up of 415 underrepresented minority Ph.D.s granted from the University of California between 1980 and 1990 in science and engineering.
• To learn about factors which promoted an initial interest in graduate education, going back to early childhood, family background and entire academic preparation, including undergraduate education in detail.
• Through extensive interviews to understand and identify factors which promote minority participation and attainment in graduate education and professional employment.
• To document the impact on individual success of all programs and initiatives developed in departments, by the campuses or national public and private agencies.
• To analyze these in relation to individual success and evaluate them for "best practices."
• To document the accomplishment of those who finished a Ph.D.
• To examine career outcomes longitudinally for up to 20 years.

Issue: With a population whose characteristics will only be known after the research is completed, finding an actual control group is next to impossible. For this reason as part of our initial structure of the project we will assemble a "matched" group of white and Asian Ph.D.s from the same departments.

• To compare the experiences of the "matched" group with that of primary group. Total number of target respondents comes to approximately 800.
• For the largest producer of minority Ph.D.s in the system, U.C. Berkeley, to trace and interview those minority students who enrolled, but did not complete their degrees.

Summary:

When completed this study will have gathered and publicized analysis and information valuable for increasing the number of minority SME Ph.D.s completing Ph..D.s. It is of use to the University of California in the first instance, but it is valuable nation-wide. Moreover, since the study is being conducted in conjunction with AAAS, the opportunities for access to national databases and for very broad dissemination have been expanded.

The audience for these results include policy makers at both the state and national levels, professional association, university administrators and faculty. However, the audience is also the participants who are eager to be informed of the results, current students, and graduate student organizations (Blacks in Physics, AWIS, for example), as well as a broad scholarly and general public.