There is well-documented research and data that echo the concern for the future of United States’ ability to globally compete in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) innovation and to fulfill the shortage in talent that exists within this field of study. This concern compels us to seek more impactful and long-term solutions to the issues surrounding motivation and retention of underrepresented students in STEM disciplines. It is imperative that we increase our capability to effectively identify, recruit, and retain underrepresented students within the STEM pipeline. Focusing on identity development as the first of these critical capacities, a case study was conducted to determine if any central characteristics exist that shape the STEM self-concept and identity of four gifted, Black male students who were recent graduates from a predominantly Black, Title 1 high school within a southern, rural region of America. Two 90-min, audio-recorded interviews were conducted with a follow-up focus group discussion a year later. Their experiences were told in retrospect, narrated using their perspectives as they related to their “life” and “STEM” stories. The data revealed STEM identity development very much connected to race, cultural values, and contextual STEM environment. Exploring the dynamics of development surrounding motivation, this article highlights their STEM success to better understand how their STEM talent was developed. Their stories, common themes, and implications for educators are discussed followed by a call for further research.
AgrawalR.StevensonM.GlosterC. (2016, June). Understanding the reasons for low representation of ethnic minority students in STEM fields [Paper presentation]. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, New Orleans, LA, United States. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.27105
AkomA. (2011). Eco-apartheid: Linking environmental health to educational outcomes. Teachers College Record, 113, 831–859.
4.
Baxter MagoldaM. B.KingP. M. (2007). Interview strategies for assessing self-authorship: Constructing conversations to assess meaning making. Journal of College Student Development, 48(5), 491–508.
BettsG. T. (1985). The autonomous learner model: For the gifted and talented. ALPS Publishing.
7.
BettsG. T.KercherJ. K. (1999). The autonomous learner model: Optimizing ability. ALPS Publishing.
8.
BettsG. T.KercherJ. K. (2009). The autonomous learner model for the gifted and talented. In RenzulliJ. S.GubbinsE. J.McMillenK. S.EckertR. D.LittleC. A. (Eds.), Systems & models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (2nd ed., pp. 49–103). Creative Learning Press.
9.
BoalerJ.DweckC. S. (2016). Mathematical mindset: Unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages, and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass.
10.
BrownB. A.BodaP.LemmiC.MonroeX. (2019). Moving culturally relevant pedagogy from theory to practice: Exploring teachers’ application of culturally relevant education in science and mathematics. Urban Education, 54(6), 775–803. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918794802
11.
ChavousT. M.BernatD. H.Schmeelk-ConeK.CaldwellC. H.Kohn-WoodL.ZimmermanM. A. (2003). Racial identity and academic attainment among African American adolescents. Child Development, 74, 1076–1090.
12.
CollinsK. H. (2009). 3R curriculum framework: Research, reading, and rigor for gifted and highly talented students [Unpublished Program Planning Guide designed for a school-within-a-school magnet school program]. Academy of Liberal Arts, ALANHS.
13.
CollinsK. H. (2015). Measuring Black parent engagement in STEM: Validation for a multidimensional assessment instrument for parenting practices, style and culture [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. The University of Georgia.
14.
CollinsK. H. (2018). Confronting colorblind STEM talent development: Toward a contextual model for Black student STEM identity. Journal of Advanced Academics, 9, 143–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X18757958
15.
CollinsK. H.JosephN.FordD. Y. (2019). Missing in action: Gifted, Black girls in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Gifted Child Today, 43(1), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217519880593
16.
DennisonA.CollinsK. H.OrtizA. (n.d.). Teaching program evaluation and building capacity building: Lesson learned from a meta-evaluation of a university-school-community partnership [under review].
17.
EcclesJ. S.AdlerT. F.FuttermanR.GoffS. B.KaczalaC. M.MeeceJ. L.MidgleyC. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In SpenceJ. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). Freeman.
18.
EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132.
FordD. Y.GranthamT. C.WhitingG. W. (2008). Another look at the achievement gap: Learning from the experiences of gifted Black students. Urban Education, 43(2), 216–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085907312344
21.
GayG. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
22.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine De Gruyer.
23.
HattB. (2012). Smartness as a cultural practice in schools. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 438–460.
HullemanC. S.HarackiewiczJ. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326(5958), 1410–1412.
26.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
27.
LynchS. J.BurtonE. P.BehrendT.HouseA.FordM.SpillaneN.MeansB. (2018). Understanding inclusive STEM high schools as opportunity structures for underrepresented students: Critical components. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(5), 712–748. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21437
28.
MajorsR.BillsonJ. M. (1992). Cool pose: The dilemmas of Black manhood in America. Lexington Books.
29.
MalteseA. V.TaiR. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among US students. Science Education, 95(5), 877–907.
30.
McGeeE. O.PearmanF. A.II. (2014). Risk and protective factors in mathematically talented Black male students: Snapshots from kindergarten through eighth grade. Urban Education, 49(4), 363–393.
National Science Board. (2003). The science and engineering workforce: Realizing America’s potential (NSB 03-69).
33.
National Science Board & National Science Foundation. (2020). Science and engineering indicators 2020: The state of U.S. science and engineering (NSB-2020-1). https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201/
National Science Foundation & National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2019 (Special Report NSF 19-304). https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd
OlitskyS. (2015). Beyond “acting White”: Affirming academic identities by establishing symbolic boundaries through talk. Urban Education, 50(8), 961–988. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914536999
38.
OysermanD.GantL.AgerJ. (1995). A socially contextualized model of African American identity: School persistence and possible selves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1216–1232.
39.
RobertsJ. L. (2014). Developing STEM talent among diverse learners. NCSSSMST Journal, 19(1), 18–19.
40.
SeidmanI. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social science (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.
41.
Steenbergen-HuS.Olszewski-KubiliusP. (2017). Factors that contributed to gifted students’ success on STEM pathways: The role of race, personal interests, and aspects of high school experience. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 40(2), 99–134.
42.
SubotnikR. F.KolarC.Olszewski-KubiliusP.CrossT. L. (2010). Specialized science high schools: Exploring contributions of the model to adolescent talent development. Roeper Review, 32(1), 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190903388849
43.
ThomasV. G.ParsonsB. A. (2017). Culturally responsive evaluation meets systems-oriented evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 38(1), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016644069
WhitingG. W. (2006). From risk to promise: Developing scholar identities among Black males. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(4), 222–229.
46.
WhittE. J. (1991). Artful science: A primer on qualitative research methods. Journal of College Student Development, 32(5), 406–415.
47.
YarbroughD. B.ShulhaL. M.HopsonR. K.CaruthersF. A. (2011). The program evaluation standards: A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ed.). Sage.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
