Inside this issue:

An Interview with 
Dr. Carlos Castillo-Chavez

A Profile of an 
MGE Institution: University of
Michigan

The Human Capital Liabilities of Underepresented Minorities in Pursuit of Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Doctoral Degrees

From the Editors

Hot Topic Question

Managing Editor: Yolanda S. George Editor: 
Virginia Van Horne
Art Director:
Ann Williams
Online Editor:
Maria Sosa

Making Strides is a quarterly (April, July, October, and January) research newsletter published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Directorate for Education and Human Resources Program. Its purpose is to share information about minority graduate education (MGE) in the fields of science, mathematics, and engineering. It is available in print and electronic format. Inquiries, information related to MGE, and all correspondence should be sent to the editor.

By Michael T. Nettles, Ph.D. and Catherine M. Millett, Ph.D., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Introduction    Research Design and Methods   Findings   Conclusion

I. Introduction

Throughout their lifetimes, students accumulate assets in the form of knowledge, cultural and social experiences that when taken altogether becomes their human capital. Their social-class standing and quality of schooling and quality of their non-school related activities during childhood and adolescence contribute to their asset accumulation by providing access to knowledge and opportunities for social and cultural involvement in society. As students progress through successive stages of life and education they build more capital for use in future stages of life and education. The higher one's social-class status and their quality of schooling, the more human capital they develop and accumulate and the greater access they gain to high quality colleges and universities and doctoral programs, and the better prepared they are to succeed in doctoral programs. 
 

Human capital development may be a critical element in the race group differences that we observe in higher education and in the workforce. The extent to which the important components of human capital and the racial differences can be identified, the greater the likelihood that colleges and universities will be able to attack them as barriers to equality in access, performance and achievement.

This paper presents some of the findings from a national study of doctoral students sponsored by the Spencer Foundation , in which many components of human capital and their effect upon student experiences and achievement were examined. The research was aimed toward assessing the backgrounds, finances, experiences, progress and performance of doctoral students, and the relationship of their backgrounds and finances to the quality of their experiences and performance in doctoral programs. The research was also structured to identify race, sex, social class and other demographic distinctions among doctoral students on a broad array of variables and to show how these differences relate to differences in their progress and performance.

The study grew out of the need to fill the void of data and information about human capital assets of doctoral students such as their current and past family and personal characteristics and educational processes and experiences. The needed data and information also include the types of support they have received, their satisfaction, performance and their opinions and behaviors while pursuing their doctoral degrees. Much is known about people who seek to enter graduate programs through the Graduate Record Examinations Board's Background Information Questionnaire (BIQ) which accompanies the Graduate Record Examination (GRE). Even more is known about students when they successfully complete doctoral programs through The National Research Council's (NRC) Survey of Earned Doctorates and later on in their careers through the NRC Survey of Doctoral Recipients. Very little is known, however, about doctoral students while they are in the process of pursuing their doctoral degrees. The GRE/BIQ is limited because no effort is ever devoted to following up the examinees to identify if they apply, where they apply, where they are accepted, whether they go on to graduate school and if so, where they go. The two NRC surveys include only those students who successfully complete their doctoral programs, and even for those not much is asked about their pre-collegiate and collegiate experiences, or their experiences during their doctoral programs. 

The low representation of African Americans and Hispanics enrolled in U.S. graduate programs and receiving doctoral degrees is very well documented. African American and Hispanic doctoral students are underrepresented in every field, and they are most severely underrepresented in science, mathematics and engineering, and among the nation's highest quality doctoral degree programs. Increasing their representation, however, is only part of the challenge that the nation's leading graduate schools are facing. 

Beyond being underrepresented, the African American and Hispanic students who are enrolled in doctoral programs may also be lagging behind their majority and Asian contemporaries on human capital in such areas as their background characteristics as well as their academic and social preparation. They may also be lagging behind in funding support, quality of experiences in doctoral programs, and their rates of progress and performance in doctoral programs. It is very important for graduate school leaders to identify the areas of African American and Hispanic underrepresentation in doctoral programs and to develop strategies to increase the number and the representation. But, equally important is the need to identify gaps in progress, performance and the quality of training and experiences and to seek ways to eliminate the gaps. One strategy may be to eliminate or compensate for the deficits in human capital that African American and Hispanic students reveal. The first challenge is to identify these gaps. Then educators, policymakers and others will know where to aim their efforts toward improvement.

Introduction    Research Design and Methods   Findings   Conclusion

II. Research Design and Method

This research was conducted to measure a myriad of factors including many that are believed to be related to student progress and performance generally, and critical for the success of underrepresented minorities in both science and non-science oriented doctoral programs. This involved collecting information on the personal, family, social and academic backgrounds, experiences and performance of doctoral students prior to, during and since undergraduate school. Among the most important performance emphases of the research were upon ascertaining the extent to which students are acquiring teaching and research skills, developing skills and experience of scholarly inquiry, publishing both independently and in collaboration with professors, and being socialized to succeed in a chosen profession after graduating. 

The research has been conducted in collaboration with the Graduate Deans and researchers at a variety of (twenty-one) of the nation's most prestigious doctoral granting universities. The universities are presented in Table 1. The research involved administering a survey to a diverse and representative sample of 13,160 doctoral students, spread among the 21 universities. To be selected as a participant in the study, students had to have completed at least one year of their doctoral program and be registered for at least six credit hours in the fall of 1996. Students also had to be enrolled in one of the following eleven fields of study: biological sciences, economics, education, engineering, English, history, mathematics, physical sciences , political science psychology and sociology. The sample was designed to select all of the African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans, three hundred whites (randomly selected) and one-half of the international students (randomly selected) enrolled in these eleven fields.

Table 1: Participating Institutions in the Study Assessing Underrepresented Minority Student Experiences and Success in Doctoral Programs
 

Each of the 13,160 students received in the mail the Survey of Doctoral Student Finances, Experiences, and Achievements (SDSFEA), which was developed by Nettles and Millett expressly for this study. The SDSFEA is a twenty eight page survey instrument that asks students to provide a plethora of data and information about their backgrounds, current status and activities, academic progress and performance, attitudes and behavior. The SDSFEA also invites students to provide commentary in various places on the instrument. Many students even provided extensive prose on enclosures to accompany their survey responses. The SDSFEA also requested the students to give the researchers permission to retrieve their GRE files from the Educational Testing Service, which includes their score reports and their responses on the BIQ. The overall response rate was 70%, yielding 9,040 usable surveys for the analyses.
 

The results and findings reported in this paper are limited to the students in the survey who were identified by their institution and who identified themselves on the SDSFEA as pursuing their doctorates in one of the biological or physical sciences, or in mathematics or engineering. Because the emphasis of this paper is upon underrepresented minorities in science, mathematics and engineering in the United States, the U.S. citizen component of the sample is the focus and international students are not included in the analyses. For the three field grouping (science, math and engineering) of U.S. citizens the sample size is 1,891. The race distribution overall is 114 (6%) African Americans, 382 (20%) Asians, 94 (5%) Hispanics and 1,301 (69%) Whites.
The analyses for this paper are descriptive. The data are presented with narrative that describes the data for the four race groups of students showing how they compare with each other on a variety of characteristics, experiences and performance within and across the major fields. Approached in this way of working sequentially to assess and contrast groups on numerous variables, a puzzle emerges, which, when completed, reveals a profile of typical doctoral students from each of the four race groups and their accumulation of human capital and performance. When these profiles are contrasted, the reader should have a visual image of how students of different racial groups are alike and different from one another. The reader might then proceed to the next step of imagining what actions could or should be taken to eliminate or compensate for the deficits in performance and progress that are identified among underrepresented minorities. The principal questions to be addressed in the analyses are the following two: 
 

Introduction    Research Design and Methods   Findings   Conclusion

III. Findings

This section presents the findings by describing the personal and academic backgrounds, the academic preparation and undergraduate experiences, the transitions from college to the doctoral programs, and the doctoral program experiences and performance of the science/mathematics and engineering doctoral students. For these analyses biological science, physical science and mathematics doctoral students are combined to comprise one group called science/mathematics and the other group is engineers. In addition to contrasting science/mathematics students against engineers, overall, the analyses center upon racial group comparisons both within and across the two major fields.

Background Characteristics

The background characteristics collected by the SDSFEA include the age, race and sex of the doctoral students and the educational and occupational status of their parents. The focus in this paper is upon the socio-economic background distinctions across the four race groups and two field groups. Parents' educational and occupational status are the indicators of the socio-economic status background at least prior to entering college, but for most it covers their college years, and for some it even represents their graduate school social class. Socio-economic status measured in this way is a very important reflection of the exposure they have had to higher levels of education throughout their lives, and is perhaps a good indication of their own educational expectations and aspirations. 

Parental Educational Attainment

Mother's Education: In both science/math and engineering, the mothers of Asians and Whites are more likely to have at least a bachelor's degree than both African Americans and Hispanics. In both fields around 60% of the mothers of Asian and White doctoral students had completed at least a bachelor's degree. In science/mathematics, 46% and 45% of the mothers of African Americans and Hispanics, respectively, had received at least a bachelor's degree. The difference between Asian/Whites and African Americans/Hispanics is smaller in the engineering field because of the higher attainment of the mothers of African American and Hispanic engineering doctoral students compared to their counterparts in science/mathematics. Approximately 56% of the mothers of Hispanic engineering doctoral students had completed a bachelor's degree as had 52% of the mothers of African Americans. It is interesting that about 30% of the mothers of both White and Asian doctoral students in science/mathematics and in engineering had completed either a graduate or professional degree, compared to 26% of the mothers of Hispanics but only 20% of the mothers of African Americans (See Table 1A and Table 1B).

Father's Education: With the exception of African Americans in both major field groupings and Hispanics in engineering, the fathers appear to have higher educational attainment than the mothers, but the patterns remain the same as with mothers. As with doctoral students' mothers, the Hispanic and Black doctoral students are less likely than their Asian and White peers to have a father that has completed at least a Bachelor's degree. The difference is especially striking with respect to the fathers of African Americans compared to Asians and Whites. The fathers of Asian and White doctoral students in the science/math field grouping are more than twice as likely to have a father with at least a bachelor's degree relative to Black doctoral students in science/math. Over 70% of the fathers of Asian and White doctoral students in science/mathematics and over 77% in engineering have completed at least a bachelor's degree. Over 46% of the fathers of Asians and 50% of the fathers of White doctoral students in science/mathematics, and over 49% of each in engineering had completed a graduate or professional degree. About sixty percent of the fathers of Hispanic sciences and mathematics doctoral students and 57% in engineering had completed at least a bachelor's degree. Around 42% of the fathers of Hispanic doctoral students in sciences and mathematics and 31% in engineering have completed a graduate or professional degree. Thirty five percent of the fathers of African American science/mathematics doctoral students and 49% in engineering had completed at least a bachelor's degree. Only 17% of the fathers of African American doctoral students in science/mathematics and 33% in engineering had completed graduate or professional degrees (See Table 2A and Table 2B).

It is reasonably clear from these data that the engineering doctoral students are more likely to have parents with higher degrees than their peers science/mathematics. It is also clear that African Americans are least likely among the four race groups to have parents with the highest degrees. 

Parental occupational status

Parents' occupation was measured using seven categories arranged in a hierarchical structure that is associated with both income and status. Examples of types of occupation in the seven categories are 1) homemaker, 2) laborer etc., 3) truck driver etc., 4) electrician etc., 5) small business owner, 6) mid-level business person etc., and 7) business executive etc.. 

Mother's Occupation: African Americans lead the four race/ethnic groups in mothers' occupation. The mothers of African American science/mathematics and in engineering doctoral students are more likely to be employed in the two highest employment categories-53% of the mothers of science/mathematics students and 50% of the mothers of engineering students. The mothers of Asian doctoral students are most likely to be in the highest category-15% of the mothers of science/mathematics students and 17% of the mothers of engineering doctoral students. Fifty-two percent of the mothers of Asian science/mathematics doctoral students and 43% in engineering fall into the highest two employment categories, compared to 46% of White science/mathematics and 45% of White engineering students and 42% of the mothers of Hispanic science/mathematics students and 39% of Hispanic engineering students.

At the other extreme, with the exception of African Americans, the mothers of engineering doctoral students are more likely than their science/mathematics peers to have mothers who were homemakers. Forty-eight percent of the mothers of Hispanic engineering doctoral students were homemakers followed by 34% of the Asians, 31% of the Whites and only 6% of the African Americans. Among mothers of science/mathematics doctoral students, 24% of the mothers of Hispanic students, 26% of the mothers of White students, 22% of the mothers of Asians and 17% of the mothers of African American students were homemakers (See Table 3A and Table 3B).

Father's Occupation: Among fathers of science/mathematics and engineering doctoral students, the fathers of Asian and White doctoral students are more likely to have the highest occupational categories followed by the fathers of Hispanics and then African Americans. Among science/mathematics doctoral students, 72% of the fathers of Asian students, 68% of the fathers of White students, 60% of the fathers of Hispanic students and only 38% of the fathers of African American students fall within the highest two occupational categories. Similarly, among engineering doctoral students, 73% of the fathers of Asian students, 71% of the fathers of White students, 59% of the fathers of Hispanic students and 46% of the fathers of African American students are employed in the top two occupational categories (See Table 4A and Table 4B).

Undergraduate performance and experiences

Undergraduate education is considered to be the place where students build the foundation and the academic and even social preparation for their doctoral program experiences. This study includes a variety of measures of students' undergraduate educational experiences that try to capture the quality of their experience, the match between their undergraduate preparation and their doctoral program, their academic performance, and their financial condition resulting from their undergraduate experience. At this juncture the focus is upon the selectivity of undergraduate institution and grade point average. Together these two measures provide a general indication of the quality of undergraduate preparation for doctoral students. The major field of study will be analyzed later in the paper.

Undergraduate Selectivity: Undergraduate selectivity of undergraduate institution is measured by the average SAT/ACT, the high school GPA and class rank of the entering class of first-time full-time freshmen as calculated by the Baron's Guide. Across the four race groups, engineering students attended more selective undergraduate colleges and universities than science/mathematics students. In general, Asian and White doctoral students attended more selective undergraduate colleges than Hispanics and, especially, African Americans. A higher percentage of Asian engineering doctoral students (64%) attended the most competitive colleges and universities (SAT range* from 625 to 800), followed by Asian science/mathematics students (57%), White engineering students (55%), White science/mathematics students (52%). A larger share of Hispanic students attended the most selective colleges and universities than African Americans. Over 47% of Hispanic engineering students, 40% of Hispanic science/mathematics students, 33% of African American engineering students and 17% of African American science/mathematics students received their baccalaureate degrees from the nation's most selective colleges and universities. In addition, African American doctoral students are much more likely to have graduated from the least selective colleges and universities than the other three racial groups. Over 25% of African American science and math doctoral students and 24% of the engineering doctoral students attended the least selective undergraduate colleges and universities. Across both fields, no more than six percent of any other race attended a Non and Less Competitive undergraduate institution (See Table 5A and Table 5B).

Undergraduate Grade Point Average: Undergraduate cumulative grade point averages (GPA) are reported on the typical four-point scale for all courses taken in college combined. Somewhat similar to selectivity, engineering doctoral students overall report having a higher cumulative GPA than science/mathematics doctoral students. The exception is among African Americans where science/mathematics students report a slightly higher GPA (3.4) than the engineering students (3.3). Among engineering doctoral students the average undergraduate GPA for Hispanics was 3.76 followed by Whites at 3.72, Asians at 3.69 and African Americans at 3.30. Among science/mathematics doctoral students the White and Asian doctoral students have the highest undergraduate GPA at 3.64 and 3.63, respectively, followed by the Hispanics at 3.54 and the African Americans at 3.40. As with other background and undergraduate measures, African Americans have the lowest scores, but there seems not to be much difference between Hispanics and the Asians and Whites on undergraduate GPA in either field (See Table 6).

Preparation and Transition to Doctoral Programs

Three important measures of doctoral students' preparation and transition into graduate school are their GRE scores, the amount of time between their baccalaureate and entering a doctoral program, and the extent to which their undergraduate and graduate major fields match. 

GRE Scores: Students in the sample reported their GRE Analytical, Verbal and Quantitative scores on the SDSEPA. The analyses in this paper focus upon the race group average scores for the combined GRE Verbal and Quantitative components. The engineering students reported higher scores than their science/mathematics peers for each of the four race groups. In both fields, Whites report the highest scores (1382 in engineering and 1367 in science/mathematics), followed by Asians (1358 in engineering and 1331 in science/mathematics), Hispanics (1265 in engineering and 1278 in science/mathematics), and African Americans (1252 in engineering and 1131 in science/mathematics). Looking at the Quantitative section of the GRE in isolation, a slightly different pattern emerges. In both fields, Asians have the highest average test scores (740 in Science and Math and 753 in Engineering) instead of Whites (724 and 749, respectively). Hispanics (687 and 716, respectively) and African Americans (598 and 675, respectively) follow these two groups (See Table 7A and Table 7B). 

Time Off: Students in the science/mathematics disciplines appear to be more likely to enter their doctoral programs closer to the time that they complete their bachelor's degree than their engineering counterparts. Among the four race/ethnic groups in both science/mathematics and engineering, Hispanics take the shortest time after completing their baccalaureate degree to enter their doctoral programs. A higher percentage of Hispanic and White science/mathematics doctoral students (both 64%) go immediately into their doctoral programs, followed by Asians (60%) and African Americans (55%). Hispanics are most likely to enter a doctoral program within 4 years after obtaining their Bachelor's degree (96%), followed closely by Whites (90%) and Asians (89%). African Americans are least likely to enter within 4 years (80%). The average amount of time off for Hispanic science/mathematics doctoral students is 1.5 years, 1.7 years for Whites, 1.88 years for Asians and 3.92 years for African Americans (See Table 8A, Table 8B and Table 8D).

Experience as an employee in the workforce before entering a doctoral program may be valued more in the field of engineering than in science/mathematics among doctoral students. The percentage of students who enter immediately following undergraduate programs is lower among engineers. A higher percentage of Hispanic engineering doctoral students (46%) go immediately into their doctoral programs after completing their bachelor's degrees, followed by Whites (36%), African Americans (36%) and Asians (25%). Around 96% of Hispanic engineering doctoral students enter their doctoral programs within four years of completing their bachelor's degrees, compared to 78% of Asians, 77% of Whites and 71% of African Americans. The average time off for Hispanic engineering doctoral students was 1.5 years, 2.82 years for Asians, 2.85 years for African Americans and 2.89 years for Whites (See Table 8A, Table 8C and Table 8D).

Undergraduate and Graduate Major Field: By contrasting the undergraduate major with the graduate major fields one gains a sense of the degree to which students' undergraduate experiences prepared them for their graduate programs. The vast majority of the students in both science/mathematics and engineering indicated having the same major fields at both levels and there appears little difference among the four race groups. Ninety three percent of the Asian and Hispanic science doctoral students, 90% of the Whites and 86% of the African Americans have the same fields at both the undergraduate and doctoral levels. Similarly, 96% of Hispanics, 92% of Asians, and 85% of African Americans and White engineering doctoral students have the same majors in their undergraduate and doctoral programs (See Table 9).

Doctoral Program Outcomes

While there are many measures included in the SDSFEA that may be used to assess the performance of doctoral students, the focus in this paper is on two general ones: 1) doctoral grade point average, and 2) research activities undertaken as a doctoral student. The former is important since grade point average is a common measure of how well a student has learned discipline-specific course information. Presumably, this information will be drawn upon as the student completes the dissertation as well as later in the career. The latter measures whether a student has completed three specific research activities that are intended to closely match the type of work that the student will perform in their future career.

Doctoral Grade Point Average: The differences in doctoral GPA are relatively small across fields and race groups. Doctoral grade point averages, however, are uniformly higher in engineering vis-à-vis science and math, across all racial groups. Further, in both fields, African Americans report the lowest grade point average, though differences in absolute GPA seem relatively small. In science/mathematics, Hispanics have the highest GPA at 3.65, followed by Asians (3.48), Whites (3.45) and African Americans (3.41). In engineering, a similar pattern obtains as Hispanics have the highest GPA at 3.78; Asians (3.76), Whites (3.75) and African Americans (3.61) follow (See Table 10). 
 

Doctoral Student Research Activities: With respect to research related activities undertaken as a doctoral student, large racial differences exist with respect to African Americans, but these racial differences, while quite large in the science and math field, are much smaller in engineering. One potentially important activity for doctoral students to partake in is presenting a research paper at a professional conference. In science/mathematics, a smaller percentage of African American and Hispanic doctoral students (21 percent and 16 percent, respectively) report having presented a research paper at a professional conference than Asian and White students (33 percent and 29 percent, respectively). In engineering, the differences are much smaller. Around 48 percent of Hispanics and 52 percent of African Americans compared to 53 percent of Asians and 59 percent of Whites have presented a research paper at a professional conference. While the White and Asian percentages remain higher than the Hispanic and African American percentages, the differences are much smaller than those in science and math, as reported above (See Table 11A and Table 11B). 
 

Another important research activity is the publishing of academic papers. The first stage in publishing papers is submission to relevant journals. In the science and math field, there are substantial racial differences in who has submitted at least one research article for publication in a professional journal. Hispanics (49%), Asians (57%) and Whites (54%) are all more than twice as likely as African Americans (24%) to have submitted an article. This suggests that African Americans are not receiving the opportunity to actually publish articles in professional journals, relative to the other races. The differences in engineering are much smaller and nearly non-existent. Whites lead the way with 73 percent reporting that they have submitted an article for publication, they are followed closely by African Americans (71%) and Asians (68%). Hispanic engineers are the least likely to have submitted an article at 60.9 percent. With respect to actually publishing academic papers, the large racial differences in submission seen in science and math persist. As with science/mathematics Hispanics (42%), Whites (46%) and Asians (48%) are all more than twice as likely to have published a research article in a professional journal than African Americans (18%). Engineering shows a much different picture with Hispanics at 52%, African Americans and Whites at 47%, and Asians at 45%. (See Table 11A and Table 11B).

Introduction    Research Design and Methods   Findings   Conclusion

IV. Conclusion

The analyses presented in this paper are an important first step toward identifying the gaps in both human capital and performance between under-represented science/mathematics and engineering doctoral students and among four race groups of doctoral students. What emerges thus far is a rather strong impression that there are clearly human capital differences between the major fields and among the race groups. Engineering doctoral students have more human capital than their science/mathematics counterparts. As a group, engineering doctoral students have parents with a higher level of education and occupation, have attended the most selective colleges or universities, have a higher college grade point average, have higher GRE scores, and are more likely to have worked at a job between the time that they graduated from college and entered their doctoral programs than science/mathematics students. Engineering doctoral students in each of the four race/ethnic groups have amassed a greater amount of human capital and research productivity than their science/mathematics counterparts. 

Among the four race/ethnic groups, a human capital status hierarchy emerges in which White and Asian doctoral students possess the greatest amount of human capital and research productivity followed by Hispanics, and then African Americans. With the exception of mothers' occupational status, African American doctoral students present the lowest human capital and research productivity among the four race groups in each of the two major field groups. Doctoral grade point averages appear to be of little use for discriminating by major field or by race. The doctoral grade point average data presented in this paper suggest that both science/mathematics and engineering doctoral students are performing at a high level in their courses-work. Research productivity may be a more important performance indicator for doctoral students than grades because they reflect the extent to which students are acquiring the research skills they need to progress in their careers. In contrast to doctoral grade point average, research productivity yields greater discrimination and African Americans in science/mathematics are half as likely to publish research during their doctoral programs as their peers of other race groups and are half as likely to submit papers for publication. It is important to note that nearly three-quarters of African American doctoral students in engineering are submitting papers for publication and a higher percent are succeeding in publishing. 

The actions that colleges and universities and African American science/mathematics doctoral students may take to address the lower success of African American students may be in part identified by examining more closely the African American engineering students and the factors that are of benefit to them. Another approach would be to address their deficits in human capital. Regression analyses in which numbers of papers published is the dependent variable, fathers' occupation emerges as the most important contributor to publishing. The higher fathers' occupation the higher the publication rate. Colleges and universities may target students whose fathers have lower occupations for encouragement and support for publishing. Both sex and race also emerge to be significant predictors of publishing with women and African Americans being significantly less likely. Even after controlling for human capital assets, African Americans and women need greater encouragement and support toward publishing in order to achieve equality of performance with their male and White, Asian and Hispanic contemporaries. Thus, while Human capital is very important for doctoral student performance, focusing upon the components of human capital alone is not sufficient. Colleges and universities will likely yield greater benefit from focusing upon improving the performance of women and African Americans. 

*Range refers to the average of the median verbal reasoning and median mathematics reasoning non-recentered test scores on the SAT I.