Abstract
Despite ongoing efforts to increase the representation of Black students in engineering, participation among Black students remains low. While past research on Black students in engineering has highlighted the challenges they experience in higher educational institutions, a growing number seek to use asset-based perspectives to highlight their experiences. Also, despite minority-serving institutions (MSIs) producing significant portions of Black engineers, there remains a dearth of literature that has explored Black engineering students’ experiences at MSIs. Through the analytical perspective of community cultural wealth, we explored how five Black engineering undergraduate students built and used their cultural capital. We used a qualitative approach that included semi-structured interviews. The interviews were analyzed using an iterative inductive and deductive coding process. We developed two themes: Relationships as the Bedrock for Success and Intersections of Cultural Capital in Overcoming Challenges. Relationships were essential for building, maintaining, and supporting the cultural capital of participants. These students employed combinations, layers, and multidirectional aspects of their cultural capital to persist and succeed in engineering. Our study emphasizes the need for research that acknowledges differences in Black students’ experiences at HSIs and HBCUs, and the importance of diversifying faculty and their approaches to student engagement.
Introduction
The underrepresentation of Black students in engineering undergraduate programs is well-documented and acknowledged (Barbara et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2018; Roy, 2019). Black engineering students, earning about 4.6% of engineering bachelor’s degrees annually, are the least represented among Hispanic, Asian American, and White students (NCSES, 2023). The percentages of Asian American, White, and Hispanic engineering students are steadily increasing each year, while the percentage of Black students is declining (Roy, 2019). This decline demands immediate attention, especially considering research highlighting the lack of diversity in engineering and its dehumanizing effects on minoritized students (Holly, 2021; Holly and Lee, 2024; Nicole, 2022).
Furthermore, extant literature is filled with examples of how Black engineering students experience marginalization, racial bias, and hostile educational environments (Brown et al., 2024; Williams et al., 2025; Malone and Barabino, 2009; McGee, 2016; McGee and Martin, 2011; Ortiz et al., 2019). As a result, students may struggle to see how and where their identities, beliefs, and cultural practices are centered in engineering education, thus rendering them less likely to develop a sense of belonging or identity in engineering (Henderson et al., 2024; McGee, 2020; McGee and Martin, 2011).
There is also a growing body of assets-based research that has sought to understand the successes of Black engineering students. However, this work is limited in several ways. First, most of the published scholarship is in the context of Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs), though HBCUs produce approximately 40% of all Black engineering graduates (Fletcher et al., 2019; Merisotis and McCarthy, 2005; NCSES, 2023), limiting the applicability of findings for minoritized students at MSIs (Espinosa et al., 2019). Second, in the context of HSIs, studies that focus on the experiences of underrepresented students often overlook the unique experiences of Black students at HSIs (Garcia, 2019; Núñez et al., 2016). Finally, the broader body of work often groups engineering students’ experiences with those of students in other STEM fields (Priddie, 2020). The research question guiding this qualitative inquiry is: How do Black engineering students build and use their cultural capital?
Relevant literature
Cultural capital among Black engineering students
Black engineering students possess tools and experiences that they bring into higher education institutional settings, which allows them to thrive and earn degrees (Henderson et al., 2023; Brooms, 2023; Moore et al., 2003; Parnell et al., 2023; Williams et al., 2025; Willis et al., 2019). Their myriad experiences and networks of people (e.g., capital) shape their behaviors, attitudes, and reactions to the challenges they face. Parental and other familial relationships are a significant source of cultural capital for Black engineering students and are crucial to their success (Brown et al., 2024; Flowers, 2015; Tolbert Smith, 2022). Familial support often manifests as emotional check-ins, academic advice, and financial support (Puccia et al., 2021; Sellers et al., 2022). For example, Puccia et al. (2021) found that parents play a crucial role in providing social capital by connecting their children to college resources and relationships and equipping them with the skillset to seek out and establish their own social networks. In addition, positive engagement between peers through student organizations such as the National Society of Black Engineers (Ash et al., 2023; Henderson et al., 2023; Dickerson and Zephirin, 2017; Ross and McGrade, 2016) and engagement with faculty through student–faculty mentoring relationships (Cole and Espinoza, 2013) have proved crucial for Black student belonging and success.
Black STEM students at MSIs
HBCUs
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have made significant contributions to STEM achievement among Black undergraduate students. Despite representing only 3% of all higher education institutions in the United States and enrolling about 9% of Black undergraduates, these institutions conferred bachelor’s degrees in science and engineering to 14.9% of Black students (NCSES, 2021; Owens et al., 2012). As a result, HBCUs have become essential hubs for broadening participation. For example, Johnson and Jackson (2024) found that Black students experience an extension of a familial unit at HBCUs. Faculty and staff interacted with students like family, providing encouragement that cultivated a sense of familiarity and trust within the educational institutions. They also pointed out that compared to students at PWIs, those at HBCUs were not negotiating their academic identities due to institutional or systemic challenges but instead found the space to affirm their identities, which led to their success. In the same study, a Black male student described strong faculty support. In contrast, the Black female student in the study did not report similar experiences, underscoring, as other researchers have suggested, the intersectional challenges Black women uniquely face in engineering (Campbell-Montalvo et al., 2022; Halkiyo and Haiku, 2023; Richardson et al., 2019).
Literature also suggests that because of the diverse communities on HBCU campuses, Black students are less likely to experience barriers in faculty support compared to those at PWIs (Hurtado et al., 2011). In fact, at HBCUs, students are more likely to find faculty mentors who look like them (Stanley, 2006; Venegas et al., 2021). Williams and colleagues (2021) found in their study of 16 faculty members and administrators at HBCUs that these individuals affirmed students’ racial identities, leading to stronger overall connections. In addition, McGee and Colleagues (2022), in a study with 39 Black engineering faculty members across a total of 14 PWIs and HBCUs, found that Black faculty members were more likely to adopt an anti-deficit lens compared to their non-Black counterparts, and lacked implicit biases when they encountered students who struggled with engineering coursework. Faculty relationships are especially important in engineering, as several gatekeeper or “weed-out” courses exist that students may need extra help navigating. One HBCU professor in this study rallied to teach such a course because, as McGee et al. (2022: 715) noted, “they are gatekeeper courses, which often push certain marginalized students out of STEM.”
HSIs
The designation of colleges as HSIs is based on having a Hispanic student enrollment of 25% or more of the total student body (Garcia, 2019). Unlike HBCUs, HSIs are designated by enrollment and not by legislation. As a result, HSI designations may change frequently (Contreras et al., 2008), and resources allocated may be affected by several factors, including location or access to Title V funding (Vargas, 2018).
Research has highlighted the promise of HSIs as pacers for enhancing students’ sense of belonging and opportunity (Henderson et al., 2023; Mendez et al., 2015; Serrano, 2022). For example, Brown and Colleagues (2024), in their study of the cultural capital of a Black male engineering student (Barry), demonstrated that parents and other family members supported him through “expressive social capital” (Puccia et al., 2021) and instilled core values such as a love for learning. His (Barry's) social network (including peers and professors) empowered him to persist.
In our previous work, we have also demonstrated that Black students at HSIs sought out relationships with peers whose goals aligned with theirs and established networks of supporters, including faculty, student organizations, and campus resources (Henderson et al., 2023). In this example, these “circles of success” (p. 410) provided the social, aspirational, and navigational capital Black students needed to thrive.
Despite research highlighting the promise of HSIs, a growing amount of research has suggested that this might not always be the case for Black students at HSIs (Williams et al., 2025; Brooms, 2023; Brown et al., 2024; Serrano, 2022). For example, in a study of six Black women attending an HSI in a large urban area, with a disproportionately low number of Black students, Willis and Colleagues (2019) demonstrated that those women experienced isolation and microaggressions while navigating their HSI. The study does not compare Black women with other groups, but their narratives illuminate that their recurring feelings of isolation were rooted in an intersection of racism and sexism.
Despite these challenges, research has also uncovered the resilience of students in similar situations at the six women in Willis’ 2019 study, in that they are enacting their resistant capital and agency by acknowledging their Blackness (Brooms, 2023), leaning into peer relationships and navigational capital (Brown et al., 2024; Willis et al., 2019) and emphasizing their academic performance as essential to their success—a means to “prove them wrong” (Brooms, 2023; Brown et al., 2024; Moore et al., 2003).
Theoretical framework
Descriptions of Yosso’s (2005) forms of capital.
In engineering education research, scholars have found CCW to be a helpful framework for shedding light on the assets of Black students (Brown et al., 2024; Sellers et al., 2022; Tolbert Smith, 2022).
These six forms of capital provided the research team with “experience near” (Geertz, 1974) descriptions to articulate the cultural assets of study participants. This served as a point of pragmatic validation (Walther et al., 2013) for the research team, which consisted of team members with varying levels of experience. Further, CCW also helped us focus on external barriers rather than on how to “fix” students (McGee, 2020; McGee et al., 2022).
The study
Method
As part of a summer research experience for undergraduate students (REU), this study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) at the fourth author's institution. Students provided consent before participation. We selected a general qualitative inquiry approach, as it provided the research team with flexibility without being bound to the theoretical underpinnings of any specific method (Caelli et al., 2003). Instead, this approach allowed us to “simply seek to discover and understand a phenomenon, and the perspectives and worldviews” (Merriam, 1998: 11) of Black engineering participants.
Protocol development
Before conducting interviews, research team members not involved in the study provided feedback on the protocol. Specifically, undergraduate engineering students and faculty provided suggestions for improving clarity and reducing the protocol length to accommodate a 60-minute interview schedule. The final protocol included 12 questions centered on participants’ journeys. For instance, to understand how they became engineering majors, participants were asked, “Could you tell us about your engineering journey and what made you decide to do engineering as a major?” Similarly, we asked participants to describe their successes and challenges in engineering by asking: “What are some barriers or challenges you experienced in engineering?” The protocol was informed by literature related to community cultural wealth, broadening participation, and Black students in engineering (Henderson et al., 2022; Slack et al., 2024).
Recruitment and participants
Using convenience sampling, we conducted the study with students from a HSI and HBCU. According to recent institutional data recorded for the 2023–2024 academic year, the HSI in this study had a student body of 34% Hispanic and 11.9% Black students. This is consistent with the median percentage of Black students at an HSI, which is 10.9% (Vargas, 2018). The selected HBCU had an enrollment of approximately 67% Black students.
Participant pseudonyms and selected demographics.
Two participants were second-year students, and three were third-year students. Two participants identified as first-generation college students. One participant identified as a woman.
Data collection
Before their interview, participants completed a pre-survey in which they shared their race/ethnic identity, engineering major, classification, and gender identity. Each student participated in a single, semi-structured interview conducted by the third author, which lasted approximately 60 minutes via Zoom. Within the interview protocol, we did not mention “community cultural wealth” or “capital” to ensure participants described their cultural wealth without our provided terminology serving as a prompt. Participants were eager to talk, which allowed researchers to build rapport, making the interaction feel like a conversation. Several participants thanked us for creating an opportunity for them to share their experiences. We posed follow-up questions as needed to elicit thorough and thoughtful responses (Breakwell, 1995). The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim by an external transcription service. Participants received a $25 electronic gift card after completing their interview. After the first and second interviews, as a form of process reliability, the third author employed the Interview Quality Reflection Tool (IQRT; Brooks and Huff, 2023; Huff and Brooks, 2024) to enhance their interview skills and ensure that subsequent interviews were consistent with the first two.
Data analysis
We took a team approach to data analysis. The first step of the analysis was conducted by author 1, who labeled participant experiences to identify connections and bridge the different interviews. This inductive process (Strauss and Corbin, 1998) involved identifying the kinds of experiences that participants mentioned. Next, we employed a deductive approach, considering how participants’ responses aligned with the CCW framework. The six forms of capital (Yosso, 2005) served as a priori codes for deductive analysis (Patton, 2002). As a form of process reliability, author 1 engaged author 2 and several team members who served as auditors to discuss findings. We call these time[s] of calibration (Henderson et al., 2022). During an initial data analysis session led by authors 1 and 2, several team members analyzed the first transcript by coding for the types of capital. The process was iterative, as members discussed codes until a consensus was reached. Following deductive coding, author 1 proceeded to analyze the remaining transcripts, first inductively and then deductively, alone. We documented data analysis using an Excel file (i.e., codebook), which helped manage data analysis processes.
Limitations
As with other studies, some aspects of our study’s design, execution, and applicability may be limited and require further investigation. For example, although we gained a deep understanding of participants’ experiences, we recognize that these experiences do not reflect the broad range of student experiences offered at all minority-serving institutions. Given time and resource constraints, we were able to recruit only five participants. Rather than focusing on the number of participants, we sought to elicit rich, detailed responses (Geertz, 1974) by building rapport and developing a thorough interview protocol. Of particular interest, only one woman participated in this study. While we did not specifically seek gender balance in this study, the 20% participation rate among women reflects engineering and remains a persistent challenge to representation (Schaefer and Henderson, 2024). Lastly, since the researchers destroyed the interview audio files in accordance with our custodial plan for data approved by the IRB after transcription, there is a possibility that some nuances of the participants’ experiences may have been lost. Although the first author did not have access to the audio files, team members involved in the original data collection provided context when needed.
Quality
To ensure quality throughout this project, we engaged tenets of Walther et al.’s (2013) Qualifying Qualitative Research Quality (Q3). Adherence to this framework is a standard measure of quality in engineering education research; it not only emphasizes the importance of quality but also provides researchers with practical ways of making and handling data. Guided by this framework, we focused on procedural, communicative, pragmatic, ethical validation, and process reliability (Walther et al., 2013, 2015).
In making data, we implemented several steps. For instance, one team member conducted all interviews for consistency in participants’ responsiveness. After the first two interviews, the study team member reflected on interview quality using the Interview Quality Reflection Tool (IQRT) to improve future interviews (Brooks and Huff, 2023; Huff and Brooks, 2024). This team member also consulted with other team members to debrief interviews. As described above, we focused on building rapport with participants as a means of relational validity (Tuck and McKenzie, 2015).
In handling data, we used a professional transcription service to transcribe the audio recordings of the interviews verbatim. Author 4 updated interview transcriptions to remove apparent mistakes (process reliability). The team also spent considerable time with the data. For example, the first author conducted several rounds of analysis of each interview before moving on to the next. The first author also engaged other team members in “time[s] of calibration” (Henderson et al., 2022). These group discussions served two purposes: first, to ensure that findings were grounded in the social reality under investigation (Walther et al., 2013: 635) and, second, to consistently align findings with the theoretical underpinnings of CCW.
Positionality
As researchers’ identities and positionalities are important considerations (Jones et al., 2014), we promote transparency by providing insight into the intersection of our research and personal identities. The first author is a Black female Chemical Engineering student of Nigerian descent, and was an undergraduate student and researcher at the time of this writing. She also attends an HSI. Her experience as a Black woman and first-generation student gives her insider knowledge about the experiences described by participants. She led data analysis and team discussions on the study’s findings.
The second author identifies as a Black male and is an engineering research assistant professor. He holds an undergraduate and graduate degree in History and a doctorate in Higher Education Administration. His work as a university faculty and researcher whose scholarly and service interests center on Black male excellence, and his identity as a Black male and college degree holder contribute to his insider status. Being a non-engineering major and from a non-engineering background gives him outsider status. These insider and outsider experiences assisted in his contribution to the project.
The third author is a Black female undergraduate student of Caribbean descent who conducted the original interviews as a part of an REU project. The fourth author is an assistant professor in engineering and identifies as a Black man. His work focuses on the experiences of Black men in engineering, aiming to enhance their degree completion rates and representation. His approach to research study design centers humanizing participants and lessening power dynamics.
Lastly, as a team of all self-identified Black researchers, we align with research that suggests that who we are determines the types of questions we ask and how we answer them, reflecting the core idea that a researcher’s social location and identity influence their perspectives, shaping research questions and interpretations of data. Collectively, we view this as an asset (Misra et al., 2020).
Findings
To answer our research question, how do Black engineering students build and use their cultural capital, we developed two themes: Relationships as the Bedrock for Success and Overcoming Challenges and Supporting Others.
Relationships as the bedrock for success
When participants described how they built their cultural capital, it was usually evident through early interests in engineering fueled by relationships with parents, peers, and pre-college teachers. We saw evidence of familial, social, aspirational, and navigational capital in their explanations of how they build their cultural capital.
Familial capital manifested in various ways for students. Interestingly, most participants were inspired by family members with engineering experience. Early exposure to engineering through relationships inspired students to pursue their degrees, regardless of the challenges they may have faced. For example, Cam, a student attending an HSI, discussed how his brother inspired him to consider an engineering career, despite his prior contrasting interests in basketball. He said: I started off kind of like getting into engineering when my brother started engineering. Back in middle school, my brother was in the engineering program at his school, and I noticed that what he was doing was really cool and like technology.
Cam’s use of the word “cool” to describe his brother’s engineering pathway shows an admiration for what his brother was doing. His brother, in a way, was illuminating a possible path or aspiration for Cam; all he had to do was notice.
Further, Alex described his love for Math and Science as an early motivation for pursuing a STEM major. He said, “For me, I feel like it goes back to when I was younger. I feel like I always like to solve problems and face challenges.” The bedrock of his academic success was constant check-ins from his mother. He said: My mom always tries and makes sure I’m taken care of, cooked meals… She would always text me “did you eat?” or “do you need lunch?” so I think that’s really good. Also, additionally, I think it’s a support because I know that I’m always going to have somewhere to stay. My room is always there.
Alex’s mother proved to be a source of familial capital that supported the development of other forms of capital (e.g., aspirational) that he used in college.
Familial capital was not only instrumental in shaping participants’ initial interests in engineering, but it also sustained them throughout their journey and fueled their engineering aspirations. For example, August said, “I decided to go into engineering because both of my parents were engineers. They were electrical engineers. I always found the thought approach of engineering fascinating.” August was not only drawn to the career, but he also identified with what he describes as the “thought approach.” He was likely referring to the commonly cited problem-solving abilities and mindsets that characterize the engineering profession.
When there was a familial connection to engineering, some students found they could navigate their majors more easily. August, in particular, modeled his college decision process after his parents’ by seeking out a cohort-like experience similar to a scholarship program his parents had been a part of in college, which is the same HBCU he attends. More importantly, the scholarship program promoted diversity, so he felt as though he needed that while in college: They had a scholarship program similar to my parents’. So, my scholarship program is about promoting diversity amongst PhD researchers in STEM field. So, all of us were going out to seek our PhD, everybody in the scholarship program, right. So, amongst the scholarship program, there’s—we work together. We study together. They’re upperclassmen who can tell us tips and advice on how to do well [in] these classes, how to do well with these teachers. There’s support in a lot of ways.
Knowledge from his family ultimately empowered him with the navigational capital to understand how to approach his academics.
Participants who did not have engineers in their families were still encouraged by their families to pursue engineering. For example, Bea said, “Nobody else in my family ever majored in STEM. Nobody else is an engineer. It’s pretty much just me paving the way.” Bea’s resolve to pave the way was likely inspired by her move, which encouraged her to pursue engineering. Bea recalls her mother’s encouragement to participate in a STEM club during middle school: When she moved me to another district, she encouraged me to join this program called Project Lead The Way, where they had a class... So, they’re really big on the STEM initiative there. So, after I joined that class and I learned the possibilities are very endless for engineering, I think I just kind of fell in love with it, because I’ve always had a creative mind.
A simple push helped instill aspirational capital in Bea for the unknown. The results of this push included learning about the possibilities for engineering, and as Bea describes it, she “fell in love.” This language demonstrates the power of exposure to engineering.
Students who did not specifically discuss familial relationships described social relationships they sought out as the reason for their success, and also highlighted the importance of initiating and sustaining these relationships to achieve success. For example, Abbas, an international student at an HSI, emphasized that his peers helped him build his institutional navigational capital. He said: I talk a lot to my friends or my classmates. Like, “Hey, how are you doing, guys, with this class? How are you navigating the system?” When they send me—like they explained to me that they are going through the same challenge as I’m doing, it gave me some sort of relief. Like it is not only me. Everybody else is facing the same challenge.
As an international student, he found that his school lacked sufficient resources to help him settle into his major, but relationships with his classmates proved important for his success.
Students also emphasized the importance of social networks that they found through student organizations. Peers supported their navigational capital by helping them understand how to navigate their institutions and majors. For example, three participants (two from the HSI and one from the HBCU) spoke about the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) and how they established a support system on campus through the organization. For example, Alex, an HSI student, said: I feel like I was able to get a second support system on the campus, which was NSBE. That’s kind of like a community of people that you feel like look like you and maybe come from similar backgrounds, and they’re able to give you that comfort and give you guidance.
Alex’s use of the term “second” points to the multiple layers of support and capital necessary for student success. Alex’s desire for representation shines through in this. He associates his community and comfort with fostering relationships with people who “look like him,” especially in a major where he feels underrepresented. This provides a layer of familiarity or intimacy that he may not find with another community of people.
Cam had similar sentiments. He said, “Yes. Really, I started off with NSBE. So, NSBE was one of the biggest changes that really helped me grow professionally as an engineer, like in everything.” Cam’s friend introduced NSBE to him as a “family that wanted to see you win.” He acknowledged that he was more drawn to this group because he felt the members were similar to him in their struggles with engineering. He also mentioned another group, “Black Males in Engineering.” In regard to his participation and connection to these groups, he offered, it was “like a family for real.” Being in these groups influenced Cam’s aspirational capital and supported his navigational capital at his institution. He said: Being able to be a part of a group, it really inspired me into seeing people who are at that senior level, who are already graduates, who are like, just helping and mentoring, like it gave me a lot of hope. It really inspired me and motivated me. A lot of people on NSBE really motivated me the most. Some of them even motivated me to work—to get to the point where I am today.
In other words, Cam’s social capital was instrumental in supporting the development of his aspirational and navigational capital.
Lastly, Bea provided an example of how peers supported her success. She said, “I would definitely say relying on my peers, with just knowing that you’re not going through this alone.” Bea described her peers as helping her fight against isolation, which is often described as a barrier for students, especially students of color.
The findings presented here highlight the importance of foundational relationships for Black students in engineering. Participants discussed, using various examples, how vital relationships and familial capital were in helping them feel connected to others in the field and in providing further purpose and motivation to succeed. They built their cultural capital through their familial and social networks that either taught or inspired navigational and aspirational capital. Next, we discuss how participants used their community cultural wealth.
Overcoming challenges and supporting others
In this section, we describe how participants used their cultural capital. When advocating for more assets-based research, scholars often leave out student challenges. In highlighting the challenges that participants in this study faced, our intent is not to focus on the challenges themselves but rather on how they used their cultural capital to overcome those academic challenges that threatened their aspirations. Strikingly, the use of cultural capital lay at the intersection of multiple forms of capital.
First, two HSI students described friction with faculty that caused them to question their decisions to pursue engineering. Abbas said, “Can I be very honest about this?” Shortly after, he described a negative experience with a professor. I told him I have some illiteracy with the computer, because I started using them after I came to USA, right? So, he sent me an email telling me, well, if I’m not good with MATLAB, it might be good saying that this might not be the right track for me, or I might not be able to finish my degree.
Abbas was met by a professor who took what we call a “default-to-deficit” approach to educating him at that moment. This encounter caused Abbas some turmoil. He said, “It was devastating to me, ma’am, to be honest with you because I know I have it.” His aspirational capital shone through because he reassured himself that he had what it took to succeed. In his response to the professor’s comments, he drew from his different forms of capital, namely, navigational, linguistic, and resistant, which he had. Furthermore, his resistant capital was exemplified when he decided to avoid sending an email to defend himself against the professor. He said: I wanted to send him an email back telling him, “No, I got this. I can do this. I have the potential. I have the determination. I have the persistence to be able to do it and to excel on this,” but then I said, no, just let me keep my mouth shut and say nothing, but yes, this was the most negative experience I have ever come across.
The decision to send an initial email about why he had trouble with the class, but not the second email, reflects an overlap among Abbas’s resistant, navigational, and linguistic capital. Rather than attempt to convince his professor, he decided to expand his capital to focus on what he could control (i.e., persisting in his major and passing the class). Abbas used his capital to overcome that situation; he also used his capital to outline how to support future students. He said: I believe when underrepresented people get into the college, it might be very helpful if there is a committee or a group of people to give you [a] heads up on what to expect or how to navigate the system, because it might seem, initially, overwhelming.
Abbas, at the intersection of being underrepresented at his institution in several ways (e.g., being Black and an international student), suggests that having a community of support (e.g., social capital) might be vital in helping future students navigate. He uses the term “system,” likely because he understands that there is more at play than individual interactions that warrant understanding how to navigate.
Like Abbas, Cam experienced a default-to-deficit interaction with a professor. Cam’s expression of frustration at his inability to understand Dynamics Course material was understandable, as it is a core class for Mechanical Engineering majors. However, this expression of frustration was not received well by the professor during an office hours session. He said: He was like, “If you don’t really want to do this, you can . . . .” He said like, “This is not for everybody, da-da-da-da-da.” I said, “No, it’s okay. I’m just frustrated that I can’t really get it right. It’s not that I’m like angry at how you’re doing or how you’re going about doing it,” stuff like that.
At that moment, Cam was taken aback by the professor’s dismissal of his ability to get through the class. Cam reassured the professor and, by proxy, himself that he could do it, but he felt a wave of frustration about not understanding the material. Cam later explained that he understood why the professor reacted that way. He said, “But it goes to show that, at the end of the day, how we express ourselves might be different from how others express themselves.” Cam described himself as an expressive person. The professor’s misinterpretation of his ways of expression (linguistic capital) and display of emotions led to a hostile exchange. The professor’s implication that Cam might not be good in the major demonstrated a lack of awareness. Despite the professor’s reaction, Cam demonstrated navigational, linguistic, and resistant capital. This interaction also calls into question whose ways of expression and communication get validated and whose get misinterpreted (Williams et al., 2025).
In further describing his understanding of why the professor responded the way he did, Cam said: Sometimes, at the end of the day, it’s the same thing with the corporate world, too; even at the company that I am at now, you have to relax your emotions and relax how you are. You don’t want to come off as the angry Black man, stuff like that. You have to be calm in a way. It’s not that you have to be calm, but it’s the mindset that I had to develop that I have to be calm, and I can’t be too expressive, or people would perceive me in an incorrect way, or the way that I don’t want to be perceived.
Unfortunately, Cam has learned that to exist in engineering spaces, he feels he cannot be authentically himself because he does not want to be perceived as an “angry Black man.” But instead, he is to be perceived as “calm.” It is dehumanizing, to say the least, to live in environments where you cannot bring all of your identities.
Despite the challenges that participants described, their cultural capital was illuminated. They used their navigational, resistant, and linguistic capital in a manner that influenced their persistence toward completing their degree.
Discussion
As the findings section largely reflect our interpretations of participants’ experiences, here we point to how our work is in conversation with community cultural wealth literature as well as engineering education broadly. Here, we also draw attention to the manifestations and overlap of cultural capital within participants’ experiences.
Manifestations of cultural capital
Students’ cultural capital enabled them to overcome challenges and persist in engineering. In several ways, our work affirms the research we drew on regarding familial support in engineering. For example, for several participants, we found that the family serves as the first point of contact for aspirational and navigational capital (Sellers et al., 2022; Tolbert Smith, 2022). Whether through enrolling them in STEM programs or providing emotional support, the involvement of parents in their children’s engineering interests was crucial for their eventual success in college (Kundu et al., 2024; Puccia et al., 2021). This support, often reflected in families’ cultural values such as hard work and achievement, must be highlighted as important and necessary. Our findings further emphasize that parents are crucial sources of early encouragement for students who wish to pursue engineering, regardless of whether they have an engineering background or not. Familial capital sparked an early interest in engineering, which manifested in aspirational and navigational capital that students employed to develop their own unique paths to pursuing engineering degrees, while also being inspired by the Black engineers around them.
Next, in this work, as in other studies, participants relied on social networks to support their success. For example, all the students in this study reported the reality of isolation in studying engineering, and all the students at HSIs emphasized the need for peer support in combating these feelings. This finding is consistent with the literature, which shows that peer support is critical for Black engineering students’ success (Henderson et al., 2023; Manning et al., 2023). Participants in this study sought support from their peers both in class and through professional organizations such as NSBE and a gender-based mentoring program for Black men in engineering.
In addition to peer support, faculty relationships were also crucial for students’ success. Students who mentioned strong peer support also appreciated when faculty positively influenced their engineering journeys. One HBCU student and one HSI student described faculty relationships as a significant contributor to their success in engineering. In this study, we observed negative interactions Black students had with engineering faculty at an HSI, providing a nuanced look at how these students skillfully used their navigational, aspirational, linguistic, and resistant capital to overcome those challenges. The intersection of aspirational and resistant capital came into play when students recognized they could continue in engineering regardless of discouraging words from their professors. In our study, students’ resistant capital manifested as a type of “prove them wrong” (Moore et al., 2003; Williams et al., 2025) defense mechanism.
Overlap of cultural capital
As previous research has highlighted, an overlap of familial, navigational, and aspirational capital of Black students (Brown et al., 2024; Tolbert Smith, 2022), we also saw that when students face challenges, they leaned into two or more kinds of capital to overcome or manage a potential challenge. For example, we observed overlaps between familial, social, aspirational, and navigational capital, with one informing the other in several ways. In instances where participants had negative encounters with professors, they displayed an overlap of their navigational and resistant capital. This overlap between resistant and navigational capital mirrors McGee and Martin’s (2011) concept of stereotype management, as well as the forms of conformist and self-defeating resistance (Solorzano and Bernal, 2001; Knaphus-Soran et al., 2021b). Aspirational and navigational capital were also deeply intertwined, as participants highlighted high-priority goals as the primary driving force for the need to succeed in engineering. For example, Abbas’ self-belief guided his decisions after a hostile encounter, and he was able to move on after taking the class. This aligns with research on the ability of international students to navigate hurdles in college without encountering significant resistance to the system they find themselves in (Matters et al., 2022). This overlap of navigational and aspirational capital was also evident in Bea, who had mentioned feelings of impostor syndrome as a challenge in her academic career. This aligns with literature highlighting that aspirational and navigational capital are interlinked, as they support each other throughout students’ academic careers while fueling their motivation to complete their degrees (Samuelson and Litzler, 2016; Sausner et al., 2024).
Research on linguistic capital frequently references code-switching (Allen, 2020; Harley, 2022), which Black students may employ to navigate environments. In this study, however, it became apparent that participants were skilled at frame switching, using social cues that differed from their native ones, and could adjust their behavior in repsonse to the situation (Luna et al., 2008). This was especially true for participants from the HSI.
Implications for future research
Upon carrying out this work, several research extensions emerged. First, as Black students are not a monolith, disaggregating and analyzing their experiences based on intersectional identities (e.g., Black, first-generation, international women) would significantly enhance the CCW literature base. In addition, Black women in engineering are understudied as a group (Ro and Loya, 2015); even in this study, we were able to recruit only one Black woman. More research centering the cultural capital of Black women pursuing engineering degrees in various institutional contexts would advance the CCW literature base.
Next, work that focuses explicitly on faculty and their understanding of assets-based versus deficit-based teaching and learning might not only enhance our knowledge of faculty but also inform ways to promote student success.
Lastly, in this study, though we observed an overlap between certain forms of capital that students used to overcome challenges, as others have also described (Denton et al., 2020). Additional research is needed to more fully interrogate how these forms of capital interact, rather than simply cataloging their presence.
Implications for practice
Several of the participants’ experiences serve as the impetus for the implications for practice described here. First, early involvement in STEM is important as it fosters initial social connections to engineering and aids in the development of aspirational capital toward a future in engineering. Programs targeted at elementary and middle school students are crucial for building capital. Programs such as the NSBE Summer Engineering Experiences for Kids (SEEK) and other informal STEM learning programs (Lightner et al., 2021) are examples that offer roadmaps for engaging Black children in STEM at an early age. These programs offer students opportunities to engage with STEM concepts in smaller group sizes, with instructional flexibility, and lower stakes (Allen et al., 2019; Dabney et al., 2012; Maltese and Tai, 2010) compared to traditional classrooms.
Further, several participants in this study highlighted a common and often institutional-level systemic challenge, navigating their transitions to 4-year institutions. There is a need to implement programs that support the needs of transfer, first-generation, and/or international students. By providing these institutional resources and systemic support, institutions can support the development of their students’ navigational capital, enabling them to gain access to resources that are gatekept behind word-of-mouth. One example, the Meyerhoff Scholars Program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (Matters et al., 2022), is an example of a program that has supported the success of Black students in STEM, which could be broadly implemented across the country. Specifically, this work addresses and challenges HSIs to consider implementing measures to support the needs of their Black students. Although several researchers have also noted this, there is a dearth of published literature describing programs that support Black students at HSIs (Sims et al., 2024). Additionally, establishing institutionalized support for NSBE chapters and similar organizations is essential to student success. Unfortunately, these organizations are often left to fundraise independently and lack institutional-level support (Knaphus-Soran et al., 2021b). However, they play a vital role in creating a supportive community while enhancing the educational experience for Black students in engineering (Henderson et al., 2023).
Conclusion
While literature surrounding Black students’ cultural capital is steadily growing, our work contributes to this body of knowledge, and it addresses a specific gap by highlighting how Black students build and utilize their cultural wealth in MSI settings. The relationships they had helped build their cultural capital; in fact, relationships were the backbone of their cultural capital. Family members served as initial propellers of aspirational and navigational capital. Peer support, especially in college, enabled Black engineering students to develop the skills necessary for academic success.
We also observed that Black students in this study relied on multiple forms of capital, which overlapped, to support their ability to overcome academic challenges. Our research also showed that encounters with faculty, whether positive or negative, had a significant impact on student confidence and how they used their capital to respond. The negative experiences of HSI students mirrored those of Black students at PWIs (Yosso and Lopez, 2010; Knaphus-Soran et al., 2021b), suggesting that the experiences of Black engineering students at HSIs might not be significantly different from those of their counterparts at PWIs.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We want to acknowledge Selena Douglas, who provided editorial services for this manuscript, and Henderson Research Group members, who read and provided feedback. Lastly, we extend our gratitude to the participants in this study who shared their lived experiences with us.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This material is based upon work supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 2225246.
Ethical approval
The University of Houston Institutional Review Board approved our interviews (STUDY00003795) on August 01, 2022.
Informed consent
Respondents gave written consent for review and signature before starting interviews.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.