Inclusive STEM High Schools in Practice: Outcomes and Opportunity Structures for Low-Income Underrepresented Minorities

• In Event: Comparing Studies of Inclusive STEM High Schools: Three Approaches With Different Findings and Policy Implications

Abstract

The recent National Research Council publication, “Successful K-12 STEM Education,” reports that little research has been done on STEM-focused schools (NRC, 2011). Yet, as the NRC notes, STEM-focused schools “are often viewed as the best route to achieve desired STEM outcomes” (p. 6), such as increased numbers of students pursuing advanced degrees in STEM and more students “STEM-capable” of becoming STEM teachers/medical assistants/ computer technicians. Others take note of the growing number of STEM-focused schools across the country and the varying forms that these schools take (Means, 2008; Scott, 2012). However, as the NRC concludes: “It is challenging to identify the schools and programs that are most successful in the STEM disciplines because success is defined in many ways and can occur in many different types of schools and settings, with many different populations of students” (2011, p.8).

In spite of the noted relatively weak research base, a cacophony of voices favors markedly increasing STEM education as a way to augment US competitiveness and simultaneously provide increased opportunities for low-income students with an eye towards closing the intensifying achievement gap (Reardon, 2011). Funding agencies, such as NSF, prioritize STEM-based programs and research that serve low-income populations, and school boards and charter schools have similarly embraced STEM-related initiatives. The question must be asked, however, what happens when broadly supported initiatives such as Inclusive-STEM schools for low-income students of color “hit the ground” of actual practice in urban districts? To what extent do such schools offer “real” opportunities and maximized outcomes for STEM?

This paper reports findings from a three-year comparative and longitudinal ethnographic study (2010-2013) of 4 urban public high schools in Buffalo—2 STEM-focused and 2 comprehensive. Approximately 12 focal students at each school (majority minority; 77% FRL) who were in the top 20% of their class based on math/science state test scores at the end of Grade 9 were followed through 3 full years of high school. Data are comprised of district and school documents, interviews conducted during 2010-2013, and observations in schools, classrooms, and homes. School documents include published 9th-12th grade course offerings, sequences, prerequisites, and strands/tracks; counseling materials; technology availability and use; and extracurricular options. At each school, we conducted bi-yearly interviews with focal students and one yearly interview with focal students’ parents or guardians, school counselors, science and math teachers, and the building principal (or designee). Interviews focused on available STEM related school opportunities and experiences, envisioned/enacted college majors and destinations, and future plans. Data were transcribed, coded, and analyzed in accordance with overarching guiding principles: sufficiency of warrants and transparency of reporting process.
The proposed paper zeros in on the following: 1) available STEM course offerings over time, 2) progression of focal students through courses and other opportunities for STEM, and 3) college matriculation/intended major at the end of high school. Detailed participant-observation data and actions/words of focal students over 3 years comprise the presentation. Based on these data, authors will reflect upon the potential of Inclusive STEM schools to turbo-charge low-income students in STEM.

Authors

• Lois Weis, University at Buffalo - SUNY

• Kristin Cipollone, Buffalo State College - SUNY

• Amy Elizabeth Stich, Northern Illinois University