Reviewed by: Black Men in College: Implications for HBCUs and Beyond ed. by Robert T. Palmer, J. Luke Wood Demond T. Hargrove and Eunyoung Kim Robert T. Palmer and J. Luke Wood (Eds.).Black Men in College: Implications for HBCUs and Beyond. New York: Routledge, 2011. 212 pp. Paper: $42.95. ISBN: 978-0-415-89384-8. In 2009–2010, U.S. degree-granting institutions awarded approximately 1.6 million bachelor degrees. Only about 3% (56,000) of those degrees were earned by Black men, accounting for the second lowest rate among all races/ethnicities (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). Despite the historical importance of HBCUs and the positive impact these institutions have had on the academic, economic, and intellectual growth of Black students, Black men still struggle to graduate. In 2011, the six-year graduation rate for Black men attending HBCUs was 29%, compared with the overall rate for Black men of 33% (Harper, 2012). Despite the implementation of a number of public policy initiatives, and institutional or grassroots community programs to increase the educational attainment of Black men attending HBCUs, the diverse backgrounds, experiences, abilities, and challenges unique to this population are often underexamined, inaccurately understood, and monolithically portrayed. In the edited volume Black Men in College: Implications for HBCUs and Beyond, Robert T. Palmer and J. Luke Wood recognize the heterogeneity that exists among Black male collegians and the need to study the various educational experiences of Black male subgroups in college. The text provides a fresh look at “within group differences among Black men enrolled at HBCUs” (p. 10). In the book’s introductory chapter, the editors provide readers with a brief historical overview of HBCUs, including institutional roles, enrollment trends, campus climate, and student engagement. The introduction begins with a review of literature on Black men at HBCUs, examining disengagement factors, the impact of social capital on Black male success, and the influence of familial support. It concludes with the contention that there is a lack of literature on the experiences of Black males. In Chapter 2, Marybeth Gasman and Dorsey Spencer Jr. analyze Palmer and Strayhorn’s (2008) study on noncognitive factors associated with the success of Black men at HBCUs, as well as Palmer and Gasman’s (2008) study on the role of social capital in the academic success of Black male students. Gasman and Spencer suggest that the successes of high-achieving Black men at HBCUs result from a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors (p. 19). Intrinsic motivators are organized into four themes: personal responsibility, focus and direction, management of time, and fervor for major. High-achieving Black males are characterized as self-driven, highly engaged, adept at time management, and passionate about their respective areas of study. With regard to extrinsic factors, high achievers are seen as students who make the personal connections necessary for success and feel a high level of confidence associated with the HBCU environment. The chapter concludes by recommending the implementation of a large-scale qualitative and/or quantitative longitudinal study of HBCU Black male students. In the next chapter, Terrell L. Strayhorn and Jameel A. Scott examine the experiences of Black gay men at HBCUs—specifically, the challenges this group confronts both internally (marginalization by the heterosexual population) and externally (lack of family support). The authors identify four major themes in their qualitative study: encounters with homophobia, invisibility and marginalization, lack of family support, and issues of identification. In other contexts throughout the book, the HBCU campus is seen as an environment that welcomes and nurtures Black males, providing ample opportunity for these students to develop relationships with faculty. However, according to Strayhorn and Scott, Black gay men at HBCUs often view the college environment as unwelcoming and feel that the historical religious foundation of such institutions creates a conservative campus environment. The authors offer implications for practice and policy, suggesting the revision of gay identity development theories and calling for the inclusion of “sexual orientation as a protected class” by law-makers (p. 37). Chapters 4 and 5 discuss the retention of two particularly disadvantaged Black male student subgroups: academically underprepared and low-income Black males. In Chapter 4, Tiffany A. Fountaine and...
Read full abstract
Aug 26, 2013
Anita Alves Pena 
Open Access