Moving Latino/a Students Into STEM Majors in College

Abstract

Spanish

We argue that Latino/a students are more likely to major in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) in college if they were educated in high schools where they studied with satisfied teachers who worked in collaborative professional communities. Quantitative results demonstrate that collaborative professional communities in high school are important for Latino/a students’ choice of major in college. Results from qualitative interviews clarify how Latino/a students’ perceptions of precollege educational environments shape their decisions to major in STEM.

Keywords

higher education STEM Latino quantitative qualitative

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Council on Education. (2007). Increasing the success of minority students in science and technology. Washington, DC: Author.

Arredondo

Castillo

L. G.

(2011). Latina/o student achievement: A collaborative mission of professional associations of higher education. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 10, 6-17.

Banerjee

Stearns

Moller

Mickelson

R. A.

(2011). A multilevel analysis of teacher satisfaction and student achievement in the elementary grades (Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 21). Charlotte: Sociology of Education and Evaluation Research Center, University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Bottia

M. C.

Stearns

Mickelson

R. A.

Moller

Parker

A. D.

(2013). Do inspiration/reinforcement and preparation during high school increase the likelihood of pursuing a STEM degree? (Roots of STEM Working Paper Series, WP 101). Retreived from: http://clas-pages.uncc.edu/rootsofstem/home/working-papers.

Bottia

M. C.

Valentino

Moller

Mickelson

R. A.

Stearns

(2012). Teacher collaboration and Latinos/as’ mathematics achievement trajectories. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association, Denver, CO, August.

Bryman

(2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6, 97-113.

Conchas

G. Q.

(2001). Structuring failure and success: Understanding the variability in Latino school engagement. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 475-505.

Crisp

Nora

Taggart

(2009). Student characteristics, pre-college, college, and environmental factors as predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: An analysis of students attending a Hispanic Serving Institution. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 924-942.

Crosswell

L. J.

Elliott

R. G.

(2004). Committed teachers, passionate teachers: The dimension of passion associated with teacher commitment and engagement. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/968/1/cro04237.pdf.

10.

Ellis

N. E.

(1984). The work-life experience of teachers and orientation toward professional growth and development (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED258937).

11.

Gamoran

Hannigan

E. C.

(2000). Algebra for everyone? Benefits of college-preparatory mathematics for students with diverse abilities in early secondary school. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 241-254.

12.

Gándara

(2006). Strengthening the academic pipeline leading to careers in math, science, and technology for Latino students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 5, 222-237.

13.

García

E. E.

Scribner

Cuéllar

(2009). Latinos and early education: Immigrant generational differences and family involvement. In Grigorenko

E.L.

Takanishi

(Eds.), Immigration, diversity, and education (pp. 95-111). New York, NY: Routledge.

14.

Greene

J. C.

(2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry (Vol. 9). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.

15.

Griffith

(2004). Relation of principal transformational leadership to school staff job satisfaction, staff turnover, and school performance. Journal of Educational Administration, 42, 333-356.

16.

Grigorenko

E. L.

Takanishi

(2010). Immigration, diversity, and education. New York: Routledge.

17.

Han

(2009). The gender difference of peer influence in higher education. Economics of Education Review, 28, 129-134.

18.

Jacobs

J. A.

(2005). Multiple methods in ASR. Footnotes: Newsletter of The American Sociological Review, Footnotes 33 (December): 9).

19.

Johnson

R. B.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

(2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.

20.

Johnson

S. M.

Kraft

M. A.

Papay

J. P.

(2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 114(10), 1-39.

21.

Kushman

J. W.

(1992). The organizational dynamics of teacher workplace commitment: A study of urban elementary and middle schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28, 5-42.

22.

Lee

V. E.

Smith

J. B.

(1995). Effects of high-school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociology of Education, 68, 241-270.

23.

Lee

V. E.

Smith

J. B.

(1996). Collective responsibility for learning and its effects on gains in achievement for early secondary school students. American Journal of Education, 104, 103-147.

24.

Legewie

DiPrete

T. A.

(2012). School context and the gender gap in educational achievement. American Sociological Review, 77, 463-485. doi:10.1177/0003122412440802

25.

Litow

(2008, July 21). A silent crisis: The underrepresentation of Latinos in STEM careers. Education Week. Downloaded July 2014 from http://publicagendaarchives.org/files/pdf/asilentcrisis.pdf.

26.

Little

J. W.

(1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 325-340.

27.

Louis

K. S.

Marks

H. M.

(1998). Does professional community affect the classroom? Teachers’ work and student experiences in restructuring schools. American Journal of Education, 106, 532-575.

28.

Lucas

S. R.

(1999). Tracking inequality: Stratification and mobility in American high schools (Sociology of Education Series). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

29.

Maehr

M. L.

Fyans

L. J.

(1990). School culture, motivation, and achievement. US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center..

30.

Maltese

A. V.

Tai

R. H.

(2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among US students. Science Education, 95, 877-907.

31.

McLaughlin

M. W.

Talbert

J. E.

(2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

32.

McLaughlin

M. W.

Talbert

J. E.

(2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

33.

Moller

Mickelson

R. A.

Stearns

Banerjee

Bottia

(2013). Collective pedagogical teacher culture and mathematics achievement: Differences by race, ethnicity and socio-economic status. Sociology of Education, 86, 174-194.

34.

Moller

Stearns

Mickelson

Bottia

(August 2011). Collective pedagogical school culture and academic engagement: Differences by race/ethnicity. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association, Las Vegas, NV.

35.

Nicolau

Ramos

C. L.

(1990). Together is better: Building strong relationships between schools and Hispanic parents. Retreived from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED325543.pdf.

36.

Ost

(2010). The role of peers and grades in determining major persistence in the sciences. Economics of Education review, 29, 923-934.

37.

Ostroff

(1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance: An organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 963-974.

38.

Park

(2005). Teacher commitment and its effects on student achievement in American high schools [Reports–Research]. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11, 461-485.

39.

Passel

Cohn

D. V.

Lopez

M. H.

(2011). Hispanics account for more than half of nation’s growth in past decade. Washington, DC: PEW Research Hispanic Center.

40.

Patchen

(2004). Making our schools more effective: What matters and what works. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

41.

Perie

Baker

D. P.

(1997). Job satisfaction among America’s teachers: Effects of workplace conditions, background characteristics, and teacher compensation (Statistical Analysis Report). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics.

42.

Perrachione

B. A.

Rosser

V. J.

Petersen

G. J.

(2008). Why do they stay? Elementary teachers’ perceptions of job satisfaction and retention. The Professional Educator, 32(2), 25-41.

43.

Perreira

Kiang

Potochnick

(2013). Ethnic discrimination: Identifying and intervening in its effects on the education of immigrant children. In Grigorenko

E. L.

(Ed.), U S immigration, and education: Cultural and policy issues across the lifespan (pp. 137-161). New York, NY: Springer.

44.

Rask

(2010). Attrition in STEM fields at a liberal arts college: The importance of grades and pre-collegiate preferences. Economics of Education review, 29, 892-900.

45.

Reardon

S. F.

Galindo

(2009). The Hispanic-White achievement gap in math and reading in the elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 853-891.

46.

Renzulli

L. A.

Parrott

H. M.

Beattie

I. R.

(2011). Racial mismatch and school type teacher satisfaction and retention in charter and traditional public schools. Sociology of Education, 84, 23-48.

47.

Riegle-Crumb

King

Grodsky

Muller

(2012). The more things change, the more they stay the same? Prior achievement fails to explain gender inequality in entry into STEM College majors over time. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 1048-1073.

48.

Riehl

(2001). Bridges to the future: The contributions of qualitative research to the sociology of education. Sociology of Education, 74, 115-134.

49.

SAS Institute. (2013). SAS® Text Miner 12.3: Reference help. Cary, NC: Author.

50.

Seymour

Hewitt

N. M.

(1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

51.

Shann

M. H.

(1998). Professional commitment and satisfaction among teachers in urban middle schools. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 67-73.

52.

Sherblom

S. A.

Marshall

Sherblom

(2006). The relationship between school climate and math and reading achievement. Journal of Research in Character Education, 4(1-2), 19-32.

53.

Small

M. L.

(2011). How to conduct a mixed methods study: Recent trends in a rapidly growing literature. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 57-86.

54.

Smey-Richman

(1991). School climate and restructuring for low-achieving students. Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools.

55.

Smith

Stern

Shatrova

(2008). Factors inhibiting Hispanic parents’ school involvement. Rural Educator, 29(2), 8-13.

56.

Somech

Bogler

(2002). Antecedents and consequences of teacher organizational and professional commitment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 555-577.

57.

Stearns

Banerjee

Moller

Mickelson

R. A.

(2011). Collective pedagogical teacher culture and teacher satisfaction (Working Paper Series). Charlotte: Sociology of Education and Evaluation Research Center, University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

58.

Stearns

Bottia

M. C.

Mickelson

R. A.

Moller

Valentino

(2013). Expanding the concept of opportunities to learn: Same-sex math and science teachers and girls’ success in STEM (Roots of STEM Working Paper Series, WP 100). Available at http://clas-pages.uncc.edu/rootsofstem/home/working-papers.

59.

Stearns

Mickelson

Moller

Bottia

Giersch

(2013). ROOTS of STEM: A dataset on students who attended North Carolina public schools, grades 6 through 16. Charlotte, NC: University of North Carolina.

60.

Suárez-Orozco

M. M.

Todorova

(2009). Learning a new land: Immigrant students in American society. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

61.

Suro

Singer

(2003). Changing patterns of Latino growth in metropolitan America. In Katz

Berube

Lang

(Eds.), Redefining urban and suburban America (Vol. 1, pp. 181-210).

62.

Swail

W. S.

Cabrera

A. F.

Lee

Center

P. H.

(2004). Latino youth and the pathway to college. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

63.

Taningco

M. T. V.

(2008). Latinos in STEM professions: Understanding challenges and opportunities for next steps. A qualitative study using stakeholder interviews. Los Angeles, CA: Tomas Rivera Policy Institute.

64.

Taningco

M. T. V.

Mathew

A. B.

Pachon

H. P.

(2008). STEM professions: Opportunities and challenges for Latinos in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. A review of literature. Los Angeles, CA: Tomas Rivera Policy Institute.

65.

Teranishi

Allen

Solorzano

(2004). Opportunity at the crossroads: Racial inequality, school segregation, and higher education in California. Teachers College Record, 106, 2224-2245.

66.

The University of North Carolina System. (2013). The University of North Carolina System facts and figures. Retrieved from http://www.northcarolina.edu/about/facts.htm

67.

Valenzuela

(1999). Subtractive schooling: US-Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

68.

Vescio

Ross

Adams

(2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 80-91.

69.

Woolley

C. M.

(2009). Meeting the mixed methods challenge of integration in a sociological study of structure and agency. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3, 7-25.

70.

Woolley

M. E.

Kol

K. L.

Bowen

G. L.

(2009). The social context of school success for Latino middle school students direct and indirect influences of teachers, family, and friends. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 43-70.

71.

Yasumoto

J. Y.

Uekawa

Bidwell

C. E.

(2001). The collegial focus and high school students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 74, 181-209.