Preparing Underrepresented Students of Color for Doctoral Success: The Role of Undergraduate Institutions

Abstract

Introduction Numerous education stakeholders have acknowledged the absence of minority faculty within the academy (Knowles & Harleston, 1997; Moody, 2004; Myers & Turner, 2004; Tierney & Sallee, 2008), an observation that has often been publicly attributed to the small number of doctoral degree recipients of color. Significantly, the number of doctoral degree recipients from American universities has increased by approximately 3.5 percent since 1958, when the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED) first began collecting data (Hoffer et al., 2006). Commensurate with this overall growth are increases in the number of doctoral degrees conferred upon underrepresented minority (1) students (URM): according to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System [IPEDS] (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2009), the number of doctorates attained by Asian/Pacific Islanders, African Americans, Latina/os, and American Indian/Alaskan Natives doubled between the 1980s and 2005 (Schmitt, 2005). In this article, we explore the role of undergraduate institutions in preparing URM students for doctoral success and describe the baccalaureate origins of doctoral degree recipients of color in the United States. Aggregate descriptive data provide evidence that racial/ethnic diversification of the professoriate is in progress; however, gains by group vary considerably. In the past twenty years the increases in doctoral degree attainment for Asian/Pacific Islanders (2), Latina/os, African Americans, and Native American/American Indians between 1986 and 2006 were 194, 140, 101, and 19 percent, respectively (Hoffer, Hess, Welch, & Williams, 2007). Thus, while the overall gains seem favorable, it is important to note that certain minority populations are not gaining as quickly as others. Additionally, there remains a substantial gap between the number of URM and White doctoral degree recipients (Hoffer et al., 2007). In fact, although White doctoral degree attainment only increased by three percent between 1986 and 2006 (from 20,640 to 21,280), Whites still represent approximately 80 percent of all doctoral degrees conferred in the United States (Hoffer et al., 2007). Of note is the reality that the vast majority of doctoral degrees for all racial/ethnic groups are produced at a relatively small number of institutions. Although 417 institutions conferred at least one doctoral degree in 2006, the top ten institutions produced 47 percent of the 45,596 doctoral degree conferred that year (Hoffer et al., 2007). A similar trend exists for URM doctoral degree recipients. Between 2002 and 2006, 30 percent of all doctorates awarded to Asians/Pacific Islanders, 24 percent of doctorates awarded to all Native Americans/American Indians, 21 percent of doctorates awarded to Latina/os, and 18 percent of doctorates awarded to African Americans were granted by just 10 institutions, per ethnic/racial group relatively few (Hoffer et al., 2007). Along these lines, the gap in doctoral degree attainment between students of color and Whites attending highly selective doctoral degree-granting institutions is particularly wide (Brazziel & Brazziel, 1997; Hood & Freeman, 1995). For example, in 2007, African Americans and Latina/os each made up only three percent of doctoral degree recipients at Ivy League universities; Asian/Pacific Islanders comprised only six percent (NCES, 2009). This is especially important because research suggests that individuals attending highly selective graduate programs may be more likely to enter academe (Eide, Brewer, & Ehrenberg, 1998). In sum, the data suggest that the increase in URMs receiving doctoral degrees has improved the academy's opportunities to diversify, making more URMs eligible for faculty positions than ever before. Yet despite the consistent, albeit small, progress in the number of URMs receiving doctoral degrees, challenges remain in converting those URM doctoral degree recipients into faculty members, which has implications for education as well as public policy. …