Minority/Multicultural Engineering Program Impact: A Student Perspective of Co-Curricular Support

Abstract

Minority/Multicultural Engineering Programs (MEPs) are popular approaches to supporting underrepresented students in engineering colleges, and are commonly found at large, 4-year, public, research-intensive universities. Despite the widespread adoption of MEPs, research has not yet fully examined the function of these units. While many researchers have investigated MEPs with regard to academic impact (i.e., change in GPA and graduation rates), we know comparatively little about how such centers directly influence the institutional experiences of undergraduate students. The purpose of this paper is to highlight a student perspective of MEPs. In particular, our overarching research question asks: From the student perspective, what impact does an MEP have on the undergraduate experiences of engineering students from underrepresented populations? While students did report primarily positive impacts, they also reported some negative impacts. The combination of these positive and negative perspectives revealed pertinent lessons with regard to the impact an MEP can have on the student experience. Our findings will assist engineering colleges with offering student interventions that positively influence the undergraduate experience while mitigating unintended negative impacts. This study is a step towards better understanding the use of MEPs to provide underrepresented students with co-curricular support. Introduction In the late 1970s, recently desegregated universities began housing Engineering Student Support Centers (ESSCs) in the category of Minority Engineering Programs (MEPs) . An MEP is a “student support center focused on race/ethnicity (as demonstrated by the federal guidelines) with less focus on gender while aiming to address the factors for underrepresentation of certain populations in engineering, specifically domestic students that are African-American, Hispanic, and Native American” . The general purpose of MEPs is to recruit and improve the retention of students from underrepresented populations. Overtime, MEPs became more common and now exist at various institutions. Today, MEPs are popular approaches to supporting underrepresented minority (URM) students in engineering colleges and are commonly found at large, 4-year, public, research-intensive universities throughout the nation . However, there are gaps in our knowledge about these support systems as a whole given their relatively short history. Despite the widespread adoption of MEPs, research has not yet fully examined how MEPs function alongside engineering curricula to influence the institutional experience of underrepresented students from the student perspective. The purpose of this paper is to highlight a student perspective on MEPs as a source of co-curricular support. This analysis contributes to our understanding of how students perceive MEPs by examining the perspectives of students who are involved with an MEP at two different institutions. With our overarching research question we ask: From the student perspective, what impact does an MEP have on the undergraduate experiences of engineering students from underrepresented populations? This paper is part of a larger study [2] that used Tinto’s Model of Institutional Departure [3] as a theoretical lens and a case study research approach [4, 5] to explore the particulars of several ESSCs from the administrator (those who provide support) and student (those who receive support) perspectives. The study involved open-ended surveys, document artifacts, individual interviews, and focus groups to examine six ESSCs from three different ESSC classifications: Multicultural or Minority Engineering Programs (MEP), Women in Engineering Programs (WEP), and Diversity in Engineering Programs (DEP). To focus on the student perspective with regard to MEPs, the current analysis relies on the focus group data from each MEP (see Figure 1), henceforth referred to as MEP2 and MEP3. Note that each of the ESSCs included in the larger study was located at one of four different universities, indicated by the numbers included in Figure 1. For example, MEP2 and WEP2 are located at the same instituion–University 2. Figure 1 Cases Selected We begin with a brief overview of Tinto’s Model of Institutional Departure. Next, the methods used to collect and analyze the focus group data are discussed. We then present thematic descriptions that summarize the student perspectives from each MEP. Lastly, we discuss the impact that an MEP can have on the undergraduate experience of engineering students from underrepresented groups, and offer advice for practitioners who coordinate or direct MEPs. Theoretical Framework Tinto’s Model of Institutional Departure [3] focuses on institutional action and emphasizes the process of student departure as it occurs. More specifically, Tinto’s Model posits that a student’s interactions with the academic and social systems within an institution influence his or her persistence. According to the model, the academic system consists of Academic Performances and Faculty/Staff Interactions while the social system consists of Extracurricular Activities and Peer-Group Interactions. Moreover, Tinto’s Model suggests that students who have positive experiences in these areas will achieve integration into the academic and social systems of a university, which will lead to intentions, goals, and commitments that support remaining at an institution. As previously stated, Tinto’s Model guided the larger study in which the current analysis is situated and informed the overall research design and implementation . In this paper, the framework was primarily used to interpret the student perspective with regard to the cocurricular support.