22

RACE-RELATED FACTORS
IN STEM
A Review of Research on Educational Experiences
and Outcomes for Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Cindy Jong, Christen Priddie, Thomas Roberts and Samuel D. Museus

Introduction
In 2009, Neil deGrasse Tyson, a world-renowned astrophysicist, commented on all the barriers
he faced at every turn on his path to becoming a scientist. He shared that, after his first visit to a
planetarium at age nine, he knew he wanted to be a scientist and that this choice “was hands down
the path of most resistance through the forces of society” because he is Black. Tyson’s comments
underscore the harsh reality that racial and ethnic minority (REM) populations experience school
differently and do not have the same opportunities as their White counterparts in science, technol-
ogy, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
In fact, while progress in efforts to increase success among these populations has been made,
REMs continue to face disparities in STEM. For example, while non-White populations accounted
for approximately 38% of the total U.S. population in 2015 (Anderson, 2015), they comprised 32%
of the science and engineering workforce (NSF, 2017). Moreover, Blacks and Hispanics were among
the most underrepresented, comprising 30% of the U.S. population (Anderson, 2015) and only
11% of the science and engineering workforce during this same year (National Science Foundation
[NSF], 2017).
Within education, REMs are less likely to persist and graduate within six years of initial matricu-
lation compared to their White peers (Whalen & Shelley, 2010). Black and Latinx students enter
STEM fields and complete degrees in these areas at lower rates than White counterparts (Rincón &
Lane, 2017). While Asian Americans have the highest rates of success in the aggregate, more com-
plex analyses demonstrate that some Asian American ethnic subgroups exhibit relatively high rates
of success and others face some of the most significant racial and ethnic disparities in educational
attainment (Museus, 2014). However, analysis of national data on students who are U.S. citizens
shows that all REMs face disparities in degree completion in engineering and biomedical/biologi-
cal sciences, demonstrating that international students can skew attainment numbers (Byrd, Dika, &
Ramlal, 2013). Moreover, REMs report having negative experiences in STEM that move them away
from these fields. We discuss this point more thoroughly in the following sections.
There are several urgent reasons to increase success for REMs in STEM (Museus, Palmer, Davis, &
Maramba, 2011). Such efforts are imperative for higher education to ensure the financial and social
well-being of people of color, leverage the diverse talent pool to maintain a society that consists of
diverse and global communities, and fulfill its moral and ethical obligation to help eradicate harmful

278
 Race-Related Factors in STEM

inequities (p. 5). To do so requires efforts to remove economic, racial, and structural barriers to their
experiences.
In this chapter, we review the most recent decade of literature on REMs in STEM education,
from 2008 to 2018. For purposes of this analysis, we defined REMs in the United States as Asian
Americans, Blacks, Latinx, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders. The articles we reviewed with
international perspectives primarily discuss access and equity in STEM for indigenous groups or eth-
nic minorities who are not part of a country’s majority group, which might not necessarily be White;
however, we attempt to uncover such nuances and distinctions throughout. In total, we reviewed 58
empirical studies, conceptual articles, book chapters, syntheses, or reports that examined race within
STEM. While we aimed to find research on integrated STEM, we had to expand our search to dis-
ciplines across and within STEM to capture more perspectives on and from REMs.
Critical race theory (CRT) was our guiding analytical framework for the review. While different
authors have proposed or delineated varying sets of “core” tenets of CRT (e.g., Delgado & Stefancic,
2017; Ladson-Billings, 1998; Solórzano, 1998), principles of CRT that are most relevant to the cur-
rent analysis include the following:

• Racism is normal: racism is a pervasive aspect of U.S. society;

• Race is a social construction: race and racial categories are not biological but are socially constructed;
• Interest convergence: the conditions of people of color are advanced only as long as they also serve
the interests of Whites;
• Differential racialization: different individuals and groups are racialized by the White majority for
the latter’s benefit;
• Intersectionality: systems of oppression intersect to mutually shape people’s experiences in com-
plex and unique ways;
• Centrality of marginalized voices: the voices of people of color can be centered through storytelling
and counter narrative to challenge dominant hegemonic narratives.

We present findings from our review as factors that have the potential to influence success among
REMs across both PreK-12 and higher education settings in STEM. While many barriers exist,
several factors can promote success in STEM for REMs, including: (1) parents, role models, and
mentors; (2) access to rigorous curricula; (3) applied content; (4) culturally relevant pedagogy; and
(5) affirming experiences and environments. Among these factors that are catalysts of success, we
address challenges that arise. Then, we conclude with a section of implications for research, policy,
and practice based on a CRT perspective and the findings of our review.

Parents, Role Models, and Mentors

Parental support is associated with greater likelihood of REMs’ success in STEM. Parents having
high expectations for their children and building a strong link between school and home also pro-
mote success (Berry, Thunder, & McClain, 2011). In addition, for Black students, effective parental
support in mathematics includes encouraging students to persevere through challenges, building self-
efficacy in students, and serving as role models of people who successfully completed mathematics
courses (McGee & Spencer, 2015).
Role models beyond parents are also important. Non-White and non-male persons are often
invisible among STEM professionals, making it difficult for those who are not represented to
see themselves succeeding in such careers (Morton & Smith-Mutegi, 2018). Representation also
ties in to the benefits, as having more STEM women faculty can lead to better persistence of
female students (Griffith, 2010). Access to diverse and relatable role models help students identify
with the subjects and see themselves as able to participate as a member of the STEM community

279
 Cindy Jong et al.

(Coxon, Dohrman, & Nadler, 2018). The influence of role models extends to teachers. When stu-

dents have a teacher of the same race, they are more likely to do well in school (Gershenson, Jac-
knowitz, & Brannegan, 2017).
Mentorship also tends to be a crucial factor in minority students’ motivations in the STEM
field (Kendricks, Nedunuri, & Arment, 2013). Faculty members who are invested in REM stu-
dents’ personal and academic achievements can positively shape their experience (Foltz, Gannon, &
Kirschmann, 2014; Hernandez, Estrada, Woodcock, & Schultz, 2017). Rodríguez Amaya, Betan-
court, Collins, Hinojosa, and Corona (2018) examined undergraduate student research experiences
with mentors and found that such experiences fostered more positive attitudes toward their majors.
In addition, mentoring relationships are a source of motivation for REMs. For example, Black stu-
dents are motivated to get doctoral degrees to be able to reach out and provide mentorship to stu-
dents of similar backgrounds who come after them (McGee et al., 2016).

Access to Rigorous Curricula

For aspirations to be nurtured, however, students must have access to advanced STEM content. Tak-
ing advanced mathematics and science courses in high school is a significant factor for students who
intend to major in STEM programs in college (Wang, 2013). Hispanic students’ persistence in STEM
at the higher education level is impacted by their pre-college preparation, particularly by taking more
advanced mathematics and science courses (Crisp, Nora, & Taggart, 2009). Access to the advanced
courses is necessary but not sufficient. Achievement in advanced courses is just as critical for REMs.
Twelfth-grade mathematics achievement is a significant factor in REMs’ decisions to pursue STEM
degrees (Wang, 2013).
Unfortunately, one pervasive and systematic means of limiting access to rigorous STEM cur-
ricula is tracking. Tracking is prominently associated with mathematics and, as such, is one rea-
son mathematics is often described as a gatekeeper to advanced STEM study (Crisp et al., 2009;
Martin, Gholson, & Leonard, 2010; McGee & Spencer, 2015; Coxon et al., 2018). The dominant
discourse takes a deficit perspective with an emphasis on Black and Latinx students’ failures in
mathematics (McGee & Spencer, 2015), often in the forms of “discourses of deficiency and
rejection” (Stinson, 2008). This perspective blames the students for not being smart or interested
enough in STEM subjects instead of analyzing the systemic barriers that prevent them from
participating. Moreover, students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds—such
as Black, Latinx, and Native American—are systematically excluded from gifted and talented
programs as teachers are less likely to recommend them for these opportunities (Elhoweris, 2008;
Ford, Grantham, & Whiting, 2008).
The inequitable access to rigorous STEM curricula and high-quality teachers is a global problem
that contribute to the increasing opportunity gaps between dominant and minority groups not only
in the United States, but in Canada, England, Singapore, China, and South Africa (Clark, 2014). Even
when efforts are made to change the system, reforms are often futile. The experiments in creating
inclusive STEM schools in Denver and Buffalo serve as examples (Weis et al., 2015). When these
reforms were planned, the inclusive STEM schools were going to offer more advanced courses
in mathematics and science. However, due to pressures to meet policy demands around account-
ability, graduation rates, and standardized testing, the plans failed to materialize (Weis et al., 2015).
Ultimately, the schools’ failures to offer the advanced mathematics and science courses served as yet
another example of gatekeeping that prevents many REMs from accessing opportunities to pursue
future STEM coursework (Weis et al., 2015). However, some reform efforts in STEM have been
made to make mathematics and science content more accessible and relatable to students by making
STEM more integrative and focusing on “complex, authentic, or real-world problems within STEM”
(Moore, Johnston, & Glancy, 2020, p. 17). In Turkey, for example, curricula have been shifting to be

280
 Race-Related Factors in STEM

more constructivist and student-centered by focusing on developing a variety of strategies to solve

problems that are more applicable (Topcu, 2013). This is consistent with Moore et al.’s (2020) finding
of the importance of implementing integrated STEM through student-centered strategies.

Applied Content and Curricula

Having the opportunity to apply STEM content to real-world issues is critical for REM success and
is central to integrative STEM (Moore et al., 2020). For example, Coxon et al. (2018) used diverse
characters in a narrative to set a context for an integrated STEM unit that applied mathematics to
robotics. The focus of the unit was exploring fraction word problems in the context of science, while
using the engineering design loop to design a variety of robots to solve the problems. This activity
allowed the students to visualize the fractions and see how they could be used in real-world contexts.
Students who used this unit diversified their conceptions of who can be a scientist and demonstrated
significant mathematics gains. Scholars have argued that the opportunity to participate in hands-on
investigations of integrated STEM content allows students to see how the content was applied in
diverse contexts, from robotics to DNA extraction (Roberts et al., 2018).
Making STEM learning relevant to REM students’ respective communities can also facilitate suc-
cess. Calabrese and Tan (2018) highlight the importance of informal settings such as makerspaces to
apply engineering design as empowering STEM learning opportunities for historically marginalized
youths. Working with others in their community and collaborating in the process of making allowed
for students to access knowledge their community possessed, reorganized power hierarchies, and
increased the opportunity for the students to be recognized (Calabrese & Tan, 2018). Informal learn-
ing environments are one mechanism through which community-based opportunities can increase
minority students’ interest and future engagement in STEM (King & Pringle, 2018). For example,
Morton and Smith-Mutegi (2018) describe the Girls’ STEM Institute, a four-week interdisciplinary
camp for girls of color, in which they prioritized community engagement to foster positive identi-
ties by integrating STEM content relevant to their lives through a focus on real-world problems in
integrated STEM. They argue that such community engagement is needed for “critical systemic and
long-term change to occur” (p. 32).
Meaningful community engagement can occur in specific school and classroom projects as well.
Suh et al. (2018) detail an elementary school project where students investigated food insecurity
in their community and used mathematical models to plan and provide meals for local families in
need. This increased enjoyment of the topics leads to aspirations of pursuing the subject matter
further (Riegle-Crumb, Moore, & Ramos-Wada, 2011). The nature of students’ early exposure
to STEM education is imperative for students (De Jarnette, 2012; Bagiati, Yoon, Evangelou, &
Ngambeki, 2010). In fact, before entering eighth grade, many students develop a passion for STEM
or decide that these subjects are too difficult, boring, or uninteresting (PCAST, 2010). Therefore,
such early assessments can discourage these students from pursuing STEM courses and activities at
the college level.

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

Culturally relevant pedagogy is one way in which educators make teaching relevant to students’ lives,
while taking societal power dynamics into account. Teachers who use culturally relevant teaching
practice are cognizant of the ways in which mainstream pedagogy and curricula often excludes and
discourages REMs, and construct curricula in ways that are intended to center their cultures, com-
munities, and voices to empower these students. Such practices have a positive impact on REM
students’ success in STEM (King & Pringle, 2018; Savage et al., 2011; Vincent-Ruz & Schunn, 2018).
One example of culturally relevant pedagogy and its impact is the Northwest Indian College’s use

281
 Cindy Jong et al.

of Native and Tribal knowledge in the mathematics courses (Bunton, Cook, & Tamburini, 2018).
The college integrates algebraic patterns related to beading and geometric concepts from natural
resources into curricula to rehumanize mathematics and “combats the notion that only topics that
have emerged from a colonialist society are inherently mathematical or worthy of inclusion in a
mathematics classroom” (p. 111). When culturally relevant teaching is effectively integrated, students
feel more valued in the classroom and perform better academically (Savage et al., 2011).
A major barrier to culturally relevant teaching practices are deficit perspectives, which center the
perceived inadequacy of the cultures, abilities, and traits of non-White children and de-emphasize
the powerful role of context in explaining racial disparities in educational outcomes (Stinson, 2008;
Basile & Lopez, 2015). Such perspectives perpetuate a blame the victim way of thinking about students
of color (Valencia & Solórzano, 1997). Deficit perspectives exist in and are communicated through
various contexts. For example, there are times when students face “unproductive beliefs” (National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2014; Sandholtz & Ringstaff, 2014) about their abilities to fully
engage in STEM disciplines. Unproductive beliefs are evident when teachers do not take students’
culture and native language into consideration. Zavala (2014) suggested recent Latinx immigrants to
the United States could have greater access to the academic language of mathematics when taught in
Spanish. Similarly, Māori children in New Zealand are often classified as underachieving while being
expected to participate in a European New Zealand education system (Savage et al., 2011). In this
system, the Māori children sometimes face racism, such as when teachers are more likely to call on
European students instead of Māori students and when schools implement rules that forbid Māori
cultural artifacts (Savage et al., 2011).

Affirming Environments and Identities

Research has shown that affirming environments promote REMs’ success in STEM. Positive and
influential peer networks was a common theme in why minority students persevere through adver-
sity in their STEM experiences (Espinosa, 2011; Palmer, Maramba, & Dancy, 2011). REM students
rely on each other to maintain interest in pursuing a STEM education, whether it be with the larger
STEM academic community or with peers who share similar racial and ethnic identities (Espinosa,
2011; Hurtado, Newman, Tran, & Chang, 2010; Meador, 2018). Similarly, scholars have noted that
international students feel that peers are more helpful than faculty when it comes to their STEM
success (Burrell, Fleming, Fredericks, & Moore, 2015). The significance of maintaining healthy rela-
tionships with others does not stop at PreK-12 or undergraduate education, as STEM graduate stu-
dents also benefit from positive peer pressure and peer modeling through cohort-type departmental
structures (Charleston & Leon, 2016).
Counterspaces are critical spaces within which students connect with people who share their
experiences and construct supportive environments. King and Pringle (2018) argue that counter-
spaces, where teachers can create affirming learning experiences by listening to students’ stories and
validating their narratives, can provide a buffer from the larger, more hostile environment of educa-
tional institutions.
Hostile environments can hinder REM students’ ability to see themselves as mathematicians or
scientists, impair their sense of belonging and empowerment, and contribute to their experiencing
lower achievement and persistence rates (Coxon et al., 2018; Hurtado et al., 2010; Vincent-Ruz &
Schunn, 2018). This hostility can be compounded by the competitive nature of the culture of siloed
STEM fields. Integrative STEM often emphasizes collaboration and teamwork (Moore et al., 2020),
which has potential to alleviate the negative effects of the competitive culture.
A major challenge to constructing more affirming environments for REMs is the pervasiveness
of colorblind ideologies, which are racial belief systems that perpetuate perspectives that the best
way to eradicate racism and racial inequities is to view and treat people as individuals without regard

282
 Race-Related Factors in STEM

to their race, culture, and identity (Bonilla-Silva, 2006). Colorblind ideologies can be used by the
White majority to absolve themselves of responsibility for systemic inequities and avoid focusing
on race-conscious solutions to racial inequities in STEM education. For example, Basile and Lopez
(2015) reviewed 17 policy documents related to STEM education. They found that most STEM
policies discuss race in broad terms, minimize shared racialized experiences, and focus primarily on
economic arguments for broadening participation in STEM to benefit the “owners and operators of
the STEM enterprise” (Basile & Lopez, 2015, p. 540). Similarly, Gutstein (2009) argued that, while
many mathematics education policies are written to serve all students, only wealthy students benefit
while the needs of urban schools (i.e., those predominantly attended by Latinx and Black students)
remain unaddressed.
People often adopt systemic racialized beliefs and internalize colorblind ideologies simultane-
ously. For example, Zavala (2014) noted that many Latinx high school students adopted the pervasive
model minority stereotype and racialized Asian Americans as exceptionally hard-working, studi-
ous pupils who are good at math to explain their relative success in mathematics. However, when
describing their own success, many of the same students took a colorblind approach and attributed
their achievements to their individual motivation and commitment to education. The ways in which
colorblind ideologies induce a focus on individual determinants of student outcomes can contribute
to deficit perspectives, which can lead to people blaming students of color for the disparities that
they face.
Another important component in minority student persistence in STEM majors is their psycho-
logical processes as they relate to their development of STEM identities. Motivation played a role in
maintained interest in the STEM major, as well as sustained efforts to obtain graduate degrees (Hur-
tado et al., 2010; McGee et al., 2016). Confidence, or self-efficacy, in academic ability was influential
in research production and peer comparison (Charleston & Leon, 2016; Grineski et al., 2018; Litzler,
Samuelson, & Lorah, 2014). There are some disparities in STEM confidence between racial and
ethnic groups. Similar to PreK-12 students, all racial and ethnic groups had lower STEM confidence
than White men; Hispanic women, in particular, struggled to develop science identities (Hazari,
Sadler, & Sonnert, 2013; Litzler et al., 2014). When controlling for concepts such as peer compari-
son, good professors, and prior experience, Black and Hispanic men have higher STEM confidence,
while Black and Hispanic women have similar STEM confidence to White men. In addition, there
is some evidence that students with multiple intersecting minority identities—such as people of
color who are also from low socioeconomic status backgrounds or who are women—had lower
academic performance than their counterparts with a single minority identity (MacPhee, Farro, &
Canetto, 2013). For example, STEM majors continue to be dominated by men, which further nega-
tively impacts women of color (Charleston & Leon, 2016), as women of color often feel isolated and
ignored by peers in their field ( Johnson et al., 2017) and perceive themselves as academically inferior
compared to men in these fields (MacPhee et al., 2013).

Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice in STEM Education

There are several implications for research based on the literature we reviewed and the gaps that
exist, such as the voices of REMs that were missing. There needs to be more counter narratives
and intersectional work that center on the experiences of REMs. A comparative framework was
often used when the experiences of REMs are explored. This comparison continues to use White
students’ experiences as normalized and REMs as “others.” Implicit and sometimes explicit in this
work is that the REM experience should be equivalent to the White student experience, and if it
is not, then action needs to be taken to fix this. Tying this back to endemic racism, REMs are not
receiving the equitable resources that White students receive, meaning that there is an equivalency
measure that REMs may never reach. Researchers addressing this in their work on REMs in STEM

283
 Cindy Jong et al.

can catalyze different conversations on how to improve their participation while recognizing the
systemic inequities that are always present. More recent literature, especially in mathematics educa-
tion, has become more inclusive of REMs’ experiences and voices (cf. Goffney, Gutierrez, & Boston,
2018). As a whole, unfortunately, STEM education and its related fields need greater emphasis on the
experiences, stories, and voices of REMs, especially at the PreK-12 levels.
We also suggest that quantitative research use disaggregated data in an effort to examine the
experiences of REM groups. Twelve of the higher education articles specifically focused on REMs’
experiences in STEM fields, while other articles examined how race and ethnic identity influ-
enced specific experiences. Of the 12 articles, seven used disaggregated information to report on
the experiences of REMs in STEM, and six of those articles used an intersectional approach by
combining respondent identities, such as race/ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status, to analyze
their results. Both the disaggregated and intersectional approaches researchers used were crucial to
examine the specific groups and their very different experiences. This practice ensures that efforts
are being made to not treat racial and ethnic groups as a monolith. In addition to the use of disag-
gregated information and intersectional approaches, nine articles used either a qualitative or mixed-
methods approach to discuss REMs’ experiences in STEM fields. The use of qualitative methods ties
into the CRT notion of counterstorytelling and why it is important to center the voices of REMs
when examining factors that promote and inhibit their success in the STEM fields.
A myriad of policy implications can be gleaned from the literature to promote systematic factors
that have an influence on the success of REMs. These policies include: anti-tracking, honoring the
use of native languages, increased funding for programs that support and supplement STEM learn-
ing, and a more transparent use of high-stakes test scores. In the PreK-12 literature examined, only
the more recent pieces critically discussed the systemic racism REMs face in STEM education. Most
often, this appeared in discussions of how the systemic practice of tracking disproportionately limits
opportunities for REMs to take advanced mathematics courses, which often serve as the gatekeeper
to more advanced STEM courses. Only four of the articles specifically addressed this issue in terms
of race, which speaks to the dominance of researchers using economic preparedness arguments as a
reason to diversify the STEM community. This reifies the interest convergence tenet in CRT as the
needs and desires of REMs are overwhelmingly ignored in the interest of maintaining policies that
benefit and serve interests of the dominant group.
This was similar to the higher education literature, where the majority of the researchers exam-
ined how providing more adequate resources and minority faculty representation can play a vital
role in increasing the participation of REMs in STEM. However, only five articles mentioned how
systemic inequities can contribute to the lack of participation. The failure to mention the endemic
nature of racism ties into the interest convergence tenet of CRT and the tendency of researchers to
name national and global competitiveness as a primary reason for diversifying the STEM fields while
disregarding other reasons why REMs participate in STEM fields, some of which involve giving
back to their own communities. Discussions related to resources rarely included analyses on funding
disparities that exist at a global level, which only exacerbate the disparities related to rigorous cur-
ricula and high-quality teachers.
In regard to practice, several implications are interrelated to policies and research findings in
which more integrative approaches to STEM are effective. Teaching with culturally relevant peda-
gogy and making meaningful connections with communities are practices that can have a lasting
impression on REMs. Earlier exposure of students to integrated STEM practices, where the content
is applied to their lives through complex, authentic, or real-world problems (Moore et al., 2020), will
aid in the development of interest in STEM. Anti-deficit perspectives, where REMs’ backgrounds
are valued and drawn upon to enhance the learning experiences, are important to students as well. It
is also clear that relationships are critical to the success of REMs in STEM. Thus, engaging parents in

284
 Race-Related Factors in STEM

STEM initiatives, increasing representation of educators and allies to serve as mentors, and creating
counterspaces for REMs will provide more opportunities for them to thrive.
Racial and ethnic minorities face many barriers to success in STEM education. Many of these
barriers are the result of a system that dehumanizes and marginalizes non-White students (Gholson,
2016; Gutierrez, 2018; Joseph, 2017; Morton & Smith-Mutegi, 2018). Until recently, this marginali-
zation has occurred in the research literature, too, as the dominant discourses are those of “deficiency
and rejection” (Stinson, 2008), with voices of people of color having little to no presence. Many of
the strategies for success rely on systemic disruptions (Morton & Smith-Mutegi, 2018). Increasing
opportunities for racial and ethnic minorities to access integrative STEM experiences to have a
more diverse workforce requires less tracking and greater access to advanced STEM courses. A more
diverse workforce could lead to the availability of a more diverse set of role models. Co-curricular
and informal learning opportunities that allow students to explore integrated applications of STEM
content through authentic problems require funding and staff that are not provided to most schools
in the current system. Even when districts have attempted to create STEM academies with the
goals of offering more advanced courses in mathematics and science courses, they have failed due to
policy constraints that maintain the status quo (Weis et al., 2015) and often ignore issues relevant to
students of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds (Berry, Pinter, & McClain, 2013). Valuing diverse
forms of community knowledge, such as how students participate in making in their community
(Calabrese & Tan, 2018), and connecting that knowledge to the classroom require teachers who do
not marginalize differences but embrace students’ backgrounds. In short, students need good teach-
ing, but, as Ladson-Billings (1995) noted nearly a quarter century ago, all students do not consistently
receive good teaching. Without significant disruptions to the current system, the same inequities will
persist.

References
Anderson, M. (2015). The race gap in science knowledge. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/09/15/the-race-gap-in-science-knowledge/
Bagiati, A., Yoon, S. Y., Evangelou, D., & Ngambeki, I. (2010). Engineering curricula in early education:
Describing the landscape of open resources. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 12(2), n2.
Basile, V., & Lopez, E. (2015). And still I see no changes: Enduring views of students of color in science and
mathematics education policy reports. Science Education, 99(3), 519–548. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21156
Berry, R. Q. III, Pinter, H. H., & McClain, O. L. (2013). A critical review of American K-12 mathematics edu-
cation, 1900-present: Implications for the experiences and achievement of Black children. In J. Leonard &
D. B. Martin (Eds.), The brilliance of black children in mathematics: Beyond the numbers and toward new discourse
(pp. 22–53). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Berry, R. Q. III, Thunder, K., & McClain, O. L. (2011). Counter narratives: Examining the mathematics and
racial identities of black boys who are successful with school mathematics. Journal of African American Males
in Education, 2, 10–23.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). The central frames of color-blind racism. Racism Without Racists, 25–52.
Bunton, Z., Cook, C., & Tamburini, M. (2018). Centering students’ mathematical agency at Northwest
Indian College. In I. Goffney., R. Gutierrez, & M. Boston (Eds.), Annual perspectives in mathematics education
2018: Rehumanizing mathematics for black, indigenous, and Latinx students (pp. 107–120). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Burrell, J. O., Fleming, L., Fredericks, A. C., & Moore, I. (2015). Domestic and international student matters:
The college experiences of black males majoring in engineering at an HBCU. The Journal of Negro Education,
84(1), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.84.1.040
Byrd, W. C., Dika, S. L., & Ramlal, L. T. (2013). Who’s in STEM? An exploration of race, ethnicity, and citizen-
ship reporting in a federal education dataset. Equity & Excellence in Education, 46(4), 484–501. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10665684.2013.838485
Calabrese, B. A., & Tan, E. (2018). A longitudinal study of equity-oriented STEM-rich making among youth
from historically marginalized communities. American Educational Research Journal, 55(4), 761–800. https://
doi.org/10.3102/0002831218758668

285
 Cindy Jong et al.

Charleston, L., & Leon, R. (2016). Constructing self-efficacy in STEM graduate education. Journal for Multicul-
tural Education, 10(2), 152–166. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-12-2015-0048
Clark, J. V. (Ed.). (2014). Closing the achievement gap from an international perspective: Transforming STEM for effective
education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Coxon, S. V., Dohrman, R. L., & Nadler, D. R. (2018). Children using robotics for engineering, science, tech-
nology, and math (CREST-M): The development and evaluation of an engaging math curriculum. Roeper
Review, 40(2), 86. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2018.1434711
Crisp, G., Nora, A., & Taggart, A. (2009). Student characteristics, pre-college, college, and environmental fac-
tors as predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: An analysis of students attending a His-
panic serving institution. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 924–942. https://doi.org/10.3102/
0002831209349460
De Jarnette, N. (2012). America’s children: Providing early exposure to STEM (science, technology, engineering
and math) initiatives. Education, 133(1), 77–84.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction. NYU Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.
ctt1ggjjn3
Elhoweris, H. (2008). Teacher judgment in identifying gifted/talented students. Multicultural Education, 15(3),
35–38.
Espinosa, L. (2011). Pipelines and pathways: Women of color in undergraduate STEM majors and the col-
lege experiences that contribute to persistence. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 209–241. https://doi.
org/10.17763/haer.81.2.92315ww157656k3u
Foltz, L. G., Gannon, S., & Kirschmann, S. L. (2014). Factors that contribute to the persistence of minority stu-
dents in STEM Fields. Planning for Higher Education, 42(4), 1–13.
Ford, D. Y., Grantham, T. C., & Whiting, G. W. (2008). Culturally and linguistically diverse students in
gifted education: Recruitment and retention issues. Exceptional Children, 74(3), 289–306. https://doi.org/
10.1177/001440290807400302
Gershenson, S., Jacknowitz, A., & Brannegan, A. (2017). Are student absences worth the worry in US primary
schools? Education Finance and Policy, 12(2), 137–165. https://doi.org/10.1162/EDFP_a_00207
Gholson, M. L. (2016). Clean corners and algebra: A critical examination of the constructed invisibility of black
girls and women in mathematics. The Journal of Negro Education, 85(3), 290–301. https://doi.org/10.7709/
jnegroeducation.85.3.0290
Goffney, I., Gutierrez, R., & Boston, M. (Eds.). (2018). Annual perspectives in mathematics education 2018: Rehuman-
izing mathematics for black, indigenous, and latinx students. Reston, VA: NCTM.
Griffith, A. L. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that mat-
ters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 911–922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.06.010
Grineski, S., Daniels, H., Collins, T., Morales, D. X., Frederick, A., & Garcia, M. (2018). The conundrum of
social class: Disparities in publishing among STEM students in undergraduate research programs at a His-
panic majority institution. Science Education, 102(2), 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21330
Gutierrez, R. (2018). Introduction: The need to rehumanize mathematics. In I. Goffney, R. Gutierrez, &
M. Boston (Eds.), Annual perspectives in mathematics education 2018: Rehumanizing mathematics for black, indig-
enous, and latinx students (pp. 1–12). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Gutstein, E. (2009). The politics of mathematics education in the US: Dominant and counter agendas. In
B. Greer, S. Mukhopadyay, A. Powell, & S. Nelson-Barber (Eds.), Culturally responsive mathematics education
(pp. 137–164). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hazari, Z., Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2013). The science identity of college students: Exploring the intersec-
tion of gender, race, and ethnicity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 82–91.
Hernandez, P. R., Estrada, M., Woodcock, A., & Schultz, P. W. (2017). Protégé perceptions of high mentorship
quality depend on shared values more than on demographic match. The Journal of Experimental Education,
85(3), 450–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1246405
Hurtado, S., Newman, C. B., Tran, M. C., & Chang, M. J. (2010). Improving the rate of success for under-
represented racial minorities in STEM fields: Insights from a national project. New Directions for Institutional
Research, 2010(148), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.357
Johnson, A., Ong, M., Ko, L. T., Smith, J., & Hodari, A. (2017). Common challenges faced by women of
color in physics, and actions faculty can take to minimize those challenges. The Physics Teacher, 55(6), 356–
360. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4999731
Joseph, N. M., Hailu, M., & Boston, D. (2017). Black women’s and girls’ persistence in the P–20 mathematics
pipeline: Two decades of children, youth, and adult education research. Review of Research in Education, 41(1),
203–227. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16689045

286
 Race-Related Factors in STEM

Kendricks, K. D., Nedunuri, K. V., & Arment, A. R. (2013). Minority student perceptions of the impact of
mentoring to enhance academic performance in STEM disciplines. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations
and Research, 14(2), 38.
King, N. S., & Pringle, R. M. (2018). Black girls speak STEM: Counterstories of informal and formal learning
experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21513
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field like education? Inter-
national Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/095183998236863
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(1),
47–68.
Litzler, E., Samuelson, C. C., & Lorah, J. A. (2014). Breaking it down: Engineering student STEM confidence
at the intersection of race/ethnicity and gender. Research in Higher Education, 55(8), 810–832. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11162-014-9333-z
MacPhee, D., Farro, S., & Canetto, S. S. (2013). Academic self-efficacy and performance of underrepresented
STEM majors: Gender, ethnic, and social class patterns. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 347–
369. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12033
Martin, D. B., Gholson, M. L., & Leonard, J. (2010). Mathematics as gatekeeper: Power and privilege in the
production of knowledge. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 3(2), 12–24.
McGee, E., & Spencer, M. B. (2015). Black parents as advocates, motivators, and teachers of mathematics. The
Journal of Negro Education, 84(3), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.84.3.0473
McGee, E. O., White, D. T., Jenkins, A. T., Houston, S., Bentley, L. C., Smith, W. J., & Robinson, W. H. (2016).
Black engineering students’ motivation for PhD attainment: Passion plus purpose. Journal for Multicultural
Education, 10(2), 167–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-01-2016-0007
Meador, A. (2018). Examining recruitment and retention factors for minority STEM majors through a stereo-
type threat lens. School Science and Mathematics, 118(1–2), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12260
Moore, T. J., Johnston, A. C., & Glancy, A. W. (2020). STEM integration: A synthesis of conceptual frameworks
and definitions. In C. C. Johnson, M. Mohr-Schroeder, T. J. Moore, & English (Eds.), Handbook of research on
STEM education. London: Routledge.
Morton, C. H., & Smith-Mutegi, D. (2018). Girls STEM institute: Transforming and empowering black girls
in mathematics through STEM. In I. Goffney, R. Gutierrez, & M. Boston (Eds.), Annual perspectives in math-
ematics education 2018: Rehumanizing mathematics for black, indigenous, and latinx students (pp. 23–38). Reston,
VA: NCTM.
Museus, S. D. (2014). Asian American students in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Museus, S. D., Palmer, R. T., Davis, R. J., & Maramba, D. C. (2011). Special issue: Racial and ethnic minority
students’ success in STEM education. ASHE Higher Education Report, 36(6), 1–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/
aehe.v36.6
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all.
Reston, VA: NCTM.
National Science Foundation. (2017). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering.
Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17310/static/downloads/nsf17310-digest.pdf
Palmer, R. T., Maramba, D. C., & Dancy, T. E. (2011). A qualitative investigation of factors promoting the reten-
tion and persistence of students of color in STEM. The Journal of Negro Education, 491–504.
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2010). Prepare and inspire: K-12
education in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for America’s future. Executive Office of the Presi-
dent of the U.S.A. Retrieved from https://nsf.gov/attachments/117803/public/2a—Prepare_and_Inspire—
PCAST.pdf
Riegle-Crumb, C., Moore, C., & Ramos-Wada, A. (2011). Who wants to have a career in science or math?
Exploring adolescents’ future aspirations by gender and race/ethnicity. Science Education, 95(3), 458–476.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20431
Rincón, B. E., & Lane, T. B. (2017). Latin@ s in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) at
the intersections. Equity & Excellence in Education, 50(2), 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.201
7.1301838
Roberts, T., Jackson, C., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Bush, S. B., Maiorca, C., Cavalcanti, M., . . . Cremeans, C.
(2018). Students’ perceptions of STEM learning after participating in a summer informal learning experi-
ence. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0133-4
Rodríguez Amaya, L., Betancourt, T., Collins, K. H., Hinojosa, O., & Corona, C. (2018). Undergraduate research
experiences: Mentoring, awareness, and perceptions—a case study at a Hispanic-serving institution. Interna-
tional Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0105-8

287
 Cindy Jong et al.

Sandholtz, J. H., & Ringstaff, C. (2014). Inspiring instructional change in elementary school science: The
relationship between enhanced self-efficacy and teacher practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(6),
729–751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9393-0
Savage, C., Hindle, R., Meyer, L. H., Hynds, A., Penetito, W., & Sleeter, C. E. (2011). Culturally responsive peda-
gogies in the classroom: Indigenous student experiences across the curriculum. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 39(3), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2011.588311
Solórzano, D. G. (1998). Critical race theory, race and gender microaggressions, and the experience of Chicana
and Chicano scholars. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 121–136. https://doi.
org/10.1080/095183998236926
Stinson, D. W. (2008). Negotiating sociocultural discourses: The counter-storytelling of academically (and
mathematically) successful African American male students. American Educational Research Journal, 45(4), 975–
1010. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208319723
Suh, J., Britton, L., Burke, K., Matson, K., Ferguson, L., Jamieson, S., & Seshaiyer, P. (2018). Every penny counts:
Promoting community engagement to engage students in mathematical modeling. In I. Goffney, R. Gutier-
rez, & M. Boston (Eds.), Annual perspectives in mathematics education 2018: Rehumanizing mathematics for black,
indigenous, and Latinx students (pp. 63–78). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Topcu, M. S. (2013). The achievement gap in science and mathematics: A Turkish perspective. In J. V. Clark
(Ed.),  Closing the achievement gap from an international perspective: Transforming STEM for effective educa-
tion (pp. 193–213). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4357-1_9
Valencia, R. R., & Solórzano, D. G. (1997). Contemporary deficit thinking. The Evolution of Deficit Thinking:
Educational Thought and Practice, 160–210.
Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of science identity and its role as the driver of student
choices. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0140-5
Wang, X. (2013). Why students choose STEM majors: Motivation, high school learning, and postsecond-
ary context of support. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1081–1121. https://doi.org/10.3102/
0002831213488622
Weis, L., Eisenhart, M., Cipollone, K., Stich, A. E., Nikischer, A. B., Hanson, J., . . . Dominguez, R. (2015). In the
guise of STEM education reform: Opportunity structures and outcomes in inclusive STEM-focused high
schools. American Educational Research Journal, 52(6), 1024–1059. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215604045
Whalen, D. F., & Shelley, M. C. II. (2010). Academic success for STEM and non-STEM majors. Journal of STEM
Education: Innovations and Research, 11(1/2), 45.
Zavala, M. D. R. (2014). Latina/o youth’s perspectives on race, language, and learning mathematics. Journal of
Urban Mathematics Education, 7(1), 55–87.

288