Effective Strategies to Increase Diversity in STEM Fields: A Review of the Research Literature

This literature review presents the research evidence that exists for ten intervention strategies commonly adopted by programmatic efforts striving to increase diversity in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Also presented is empirical support for three model intervention programs: The Meyerhoff Program, Minority Engineering Program (MEP), and the Mathematics Workshop. The article concludes with a discussion of recommendations for future action and research in this area. INTRODUCTION Since 1983, more than 500 reports have been published addressing the problems of science and mathematics education (Laws, 1999). These reports are so similar in their calls for reform that they can be easily summarized as including the following principles: learn science and mathematics actively by doing them in collaboration with peers and instructors; engage in extended research projects with faculty mentors; explore fewer topics in more depth; achieve scientific literacy by being able to ask and answer questions such as 'How do we know . ' and 'What is the evidence for . '; relate scientific and mathematical understandings to contemporary social issues; and develop written and oral communication skills. (Laws, 1999, pp. 218-219) The bases of the reports suggest that there is much agreement on what should be done to improve science and mathematics education. But it is dangerous to assume that what is recommended for the general STEM student body is necessarily what works best for those who are underrepresented in that population. To avoid impending shortfalls of scientists and engineers, the U.S. needs to shore up its native talents by increasing the recruitment and retention of those who continue to be underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics-women, as well as, underrepresented minorities. While some of the same barriers are faced by both women and underrepresented minorities, there are also notable differences. Therefore, these two underrepresented groups have received considerable research attention of their own (see Clewell & Campbell, 2002 for a review that addresses White women and minority women's progress in STEM). As the fastest growing portion of the school-age population, minority students represent a great potential pool of future entrants into STEM fields. In comparison to their White peers, underrepresented minority freshmen are just as likely if not more likely to enroll in science and engineering studies (Anderson & Kim, 2006; Elliott, Strenta, Adair, Matier, & Scott, 1996; U. S. Department of Education, 2000). However, underrepresented minorities are more likely to switch to non-science majors and are less likely to complete a science, mathematics, and engineering degree (Chubin & Babeo, 2003; Culotta, 1992; Elliott et al., 1996; Georges, 1999; Morrison & Williams, 1993; U.S. Department of Education, 2000). While approximately one-third of the school-age population consists of African American, Latino, and Native American students, these minority groups currently comprise only 11% of those in STEM occupations (Chubin, May, & Babeo, 2005). The disproportionately low participation of African Americans, Native Americans, and Latinos in STEM fields is attributable to a number of factors, including barriers that are of a cultural (social expectations for different groups), structural (historical laws and regulations that barred the entry of minorities into education and employment), and institutional nature (discriminatory policies and practices). While societal transformations have reduced formal and legally sanctioned barriers, the lineage of accumulated deficit opportunities within a socially stratified society continues to exert its negative impact. For instance, student achievement in STEM is enhanced by educational advantages such as a rigorous mathematics and science high school curriculum, teachers with superior mathematics knowledge, access to equipment, and lab activities work (Campbell, Jolly, Hoey, & Perlman, 2002). …