Abstract
Using a case study approach, we explored the science and math classroom experiences of urban high school students. Our purposeful sample included 11 high-achieving students (mostly minoritized students) who graduated from the same school and participated in an out-of-school science and medicine/health program. Using 35 semistructured interviews collected over 3 years, we focused on understanding the multiple contextual factors that contributed to the restructuring of students’ science experiences and reshaping of their science identity formation during high school. We expanded on Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) science identity model to propose an updated model for understanding students’ experiences within science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine/health contexts. Our findings suggested that an integration of supports, resources, and opportunities lies at the core of what influences students’ science identities, which they revealed are inclusive of their science interest/passion, knowledge, participation, and achievements. Our study’s contribution is a unique perspective of the cultivation and sustainability of students’ science identities at the secondary level.
The “at-risk” descriptor, though believed to be archaic in education discourse, continues to be overly used by researchers when addressing issues related to educational attainment among minoritized students (Marsh & Noguera, 2018). “At-risk” is often associated with individual life conditions and identifies “risk factors” like racism and economic stratification, for example, as characteristics influencing educational success. The use of the label blames students for educational failures they experience, which is predicated on deficit thinking (Valencia, 2002). Although there are social and economic conditions that affect students’ educational outcomes (Covarrubias, 2019), sociocultural scholars have rejected “at-risk” conceptualizations by recognizing “human vulnerability” as central to student outcomes (Lee, 2009; Spencer, 2006). The cultural and ecological contexts in which one lives provide risks, resources, and benefits that contribute to educational achievements. In science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine/health (STEM-M)-related pathways, research has shown that Black and Latinx students are historically underrepresented (Riegle-Crumb et al., 2019), partially based on exclusionary cultural and ecological contexts within broader STEM-M environments. This study joins the efforts to produce antideficit narratives within gifted and talented education research, particularly centered on urban minoritized students who achieve above-average performances in their math and science courses, but whose STEM-M experiences, aspirations, and perspectives remain bounded by broader narratives of exclusion.
There continues to be a significant underrepresentation of minoritized groups in the field of gifted and talented education (Peters & Engerrand, 2016). The voices of students’ STEM-M experiences, specifically, are limited in the literature, leaving them absent in this area of research. In the context of this study, this research team studied experiences of minoritized students in a highly ranked school; minoritized students historically have also been underrepresented in competitive schools (Quick, 2016). Understanding the experiences of high-achieving minoritized high school students is important yet often overlooked in gifted, talented, and STEM-M education. Here, high-achieving could be synonymous with giftedness, as students in this study “perform at higher levels” compared with their peers across the school district (National Association for Gifted Children, 2019).
As gifted education currently stands, research does not reflect the gifted and talented youth of all cultural and economic groups (Ford et al., 2018). Thus, this study contributes to research on giftedness through our examination of minoritized students’ high-achieving academic in-school and out-of-school experiences. We offer critical insight on giftedness at the secondary level among urban youth interested in pursuing STEM-M pathways. Here, urban is used to indicate the context of the participating high school in a large urban city in the United States, or what Milner (2012) would classify as “urban intensive.”
Research supports the need to nourish the potential of minoritized youth for STEM-M careers (Nasir & Vakil, 2017). We aim to contribute to this area by addressing this research question: How do minoritized students’ high school experiences influence their science identity formation processes? In this article, we focus on understanding the multiple contextual factors that contribute to the restructuring of students’ science experiences and reshaping of their science identity formation during high school.
Relevant Literature
Out-of-School Time Opportunities: Strategic Promotion of Equity in Gifted Education
The STEM-M field has continually grown in popularity across the United States, in an increasingly competitive and globalized 21st century economy. Nonetheless, efforts that have aimed to increase diversity within STEM-M fields concerning women, first-generation college, and low-income students have not yet achieved their promise. For example, women comprise only 8% of the STEM workforce, whereas men are at nearly 73% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019), while most workers are White (69%), followed by Asian (13%), Black (9%), and Latinx (7%) people (Funk & Parker, 2018). The representation and access into these fields for women, Black, and Latinx people are referred to as a “leaky pipeline,” which has not shown significant improvements despite decades of educational research and efforts (Kahn & Ginther, 2017). Scholars have advocated for the use of culturally relevant out-of-school enrichment opportunities in supporting minoritized students into STEM (Young et al., 2019; Young et al., 2017).
There is empirical evidence that demonstrates how culturally relevant STEM out-of-school time (OST) activities can help close both the achievement gap (Young et al., 2019) and the opportunity gap (Rocha et al., 2022a). Culturally responsive activities are an effective strategy in gifted program advocacy efforts that promote excellence and equity for minoritized students in STEM-M, especially among women of color (Young et al., 2019). However, as noted in The Bill of Rights for Gifted Students of Color, change must be centered on both equity and cultural responsiveness (see Ford et al., 2018), where “gifted students of color must have their gifts and talents recognized, affirmed, and developed” (p. 125, emphasis added) across recruitment and retention efforts in gifted education. OST activities can dismantle barriers gifted students of color face, and these activities can also be an effective intervention to develop STEM capacity among gifted minoritized students, especially for women of color who remain largely absent in these fields (Young et al., 2019).
Out-of-school programs can supplement, extend, and enhance talent development for secondary students (Olszewski-Kubilius et al., 2017). Institutional supports provide a means to identify, affirm, and enhance students’ talents and provide a platform for them to continue to grow and meet their potential, often facilitated by institutional agents (Stanton-Salazar, 2011). Through out-of-school opportunities, this platform can play a key role in the empowerment of minoritized students. For example, Rocha et al. (2021) advocated for more strategic alliance partnerships as “an innovative solution toward combating the educational inequalities presented in K-12 education for marginalized youth interested in STEM-M professions” (p. 1). In addition, Young et al. (2017) found that OST has a positive effect on student interest in STEM. Moreover, scholars like Gholson (2016) and Leyva (2021) emphasized counter-stories of successful Black girls and women in STEM. Our study thus aims to contribute to the field of gifted education with minoritized students by expanding our understanding of their science identity development.
Minoritized Students’ Science Identity
For decades, Erikson’s (1950, 1968) theory of psychosocial development has helped scholars understand identity development during adolescence, a time period when young adults begin to engage with questions about who they are and who they aspire to become. According to Erikson (1968), during this identity development process, young adults begin to explore their identity in interactions with various levels of society. Hence, young adults are making sense of who they are in comparison with and in relation to peers, family, community, and society. Erikson’s theory provided a lens to understand how students might shift or change in response to societal and cultural pressures over time. Thus, to understand the multiple contextual factors that contributed to students’ science identity formation, the current longitudinal study focuses on the science experiences of 11 successful minoritized students over the course of their high school careers. Focusing on students’ science efficacy, or one’s belief of their capabilities to perform and demonstrate scientific knowledge (Bandura, 1994; Britner & Pajares, 2006), helps us understand how high school students made sense of the multiple identities that include their minoritized selves and science identities, in relation to their process of becoming scientists or STEM-M professionals.
Here, science identity is the perception of oneself as well as recognition by others as a science person (Carlone & Johnson, 2007). Students’ grades and standardized test scores can signal their competence (Olitsky et al., 2010) while engaging in science-related activities, where what Carlone and Johnson (2007) would conceptualize as the “performance of scientific practices” can lead to the recognition of students as STEM-M persons. Specifically, students recognizing themselves as scientists, or seeing themselves as being the kind of person who is associated with science, can contribute to their science identity formation (Carlone and Johnson, 2007; Rodriguez et al., 2017; Vincent-Ruz & Schunn, 2018). Recognition by others has been well documented in the form of mentorship, teacher recognition (Paul et al., 2020), and familial recognition (Rodriguez et al., 2017).
Further, Vincent-Ruz and Schunn (2018) highlighted the importance of students’ social contexts and development, where middle school and early high school experiences contribute to the construction of students’ science identity. Similarly aligned, Zhang and Barnett (2015) provided a sociocultural in-depth examination where students themselves shared personal visions of their STEM careers. They suggested a potential relationship between students’ knowledge expertise and STEM-M career choices as being influential to persistence in these fields. Building on these studies, more sociocultural research is needed on how students’ science and math experiences are influenced by their participation in diverse educational settings.
Interlocking Factors Influencing Minoritized Students’ Science Identity
The process of becoming a science person or developing a science identity among minoritized students involves an array of interlocking factors. Recent research has recognized various attributes that influence students’ ongoing determination in pursuing STEM-M careers, attributes which include robust mentorship (Ma et al., 2020), research opportunities (Estrada et al., 2018), and participation in enrichment programs (Rocha et al., 2021). Nonetheless, minoritized students are at an increased disadvantage due to structural barriers in accessing institutional supports, opportunities, and resources that contribute to successfully navigating STEM-related careers in academia and the workforce (Estrada et al., 2018). Previous research has underlined the importance of pipeline programs in fostering growth and character for minoritized students who exhibit passion and interest to work in STEM-M fields (Barr, 2014; Rocha et al., 2022b). In agreement with Hidi and Renninger (2006), “the learning environment can facilitate the development and deepening of well-developed individual interest” (p. 115). According to these scholars, a student who exhibits a well-developed individual interest demonstrates three characteristics: (a) positive feelings when engaging in the area of interest, (b) curiosity to explore the area of interest, and (c) recognition of the value of opting-in to opportunities relating to the area of interest.
In high school, students perceive academic and nonacademic supports like teachers and family as positively influencing their science experiences. Students recognized their high school teacher as influencing their choices in whether or not they pursued a STEM career (Li & Jiang, 2016; Mullet et al., 2018). In addition, familial recognition created robust STEM identities among minoritized students (Rodriguez et al., 2017; Zhang & Barnett, 2015). Moreover, with supportive families, students projected more certainty about a future career in STEM (Zhang & Barnett, 2015). However, we note that examination of institutional recognition among minoritized high school students from a longitudinal standpoint remains limited in the literature.
Minoritized Students’ Intersectional Identities and Social Justice Perspectives
Scholars have previously engaged with the complexities of minoritized students’ intersectional identities (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, and class) and their interaction with institutional opportunities (e.g., pipeline programs) and barriers (e.g., STEM culture; Calabrese Barton & Tan, 2018). Moreover, multiple identities—such as ones based on race, gender, and class, for example—must not only be understood independently from one another, but should be analyzed through the points where they intersect and reinforce one another to produce marginalizing experiences. Through this approach, individual characteristics like race, ethnicity, gender, and class are socially constructed categories that relate to historical forms of inequity (see Crenshaw, 1991). Efforts to understand how student experience and intersectionality play out in STEM-M contexts while providing quality supports, opportunities, and resources are warranted to improve students’ educational experiences and STEM-M trajectories (Rocha et al., 2022a).
While research on science identity and intersectionality remains scant, there are notable efforts aimed at using intersectional frameworks in STEM (Metcalf et al., 2018; Tan & Calabrese Barton, 2018). Metcalf et al. (2018) recommended using an intersectional framework when researchers seek to understand the ways in which we can broaden participation in science, particularly when “understanding, contextualizing, and addressing complex barriers to STEM inclusion” (p. 580). Tan and Calabrese Barton (2018) utilized the theory of intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991) to understand how youth can be supported in their STEM experiences “in ways that acknowledge their social histories” (p. 50). Other research has addressed the intersection of race and gender as identities that influence students’ feelings of isolation, which is a major challenge experienced by minoritized students in STEM fields and especially by women (Banda, 2020). Research showed that women are less likely to visualize themselves participating in STEM pathways, and if they do enter the field, they are less likely to pursue faculty and research positions (Tao, 2018). One potential barrier for minoritized students in STEM is the Westernized STEM culture prevalent in the academy and workforce (Sharkawy, 2015). Thus, this may serve as a demotivating factor for students regarding their continuation in a STEM pathway, as their sociocultural knowledge from home or other educational contexts clashes with existing modes of Western STEM culture that value scientific ways of knowing (Bang & Marin, 2015). Consequently, educational scholars understand the non-Westernized or justice-oriented perspectives and ways of being that minoritized students bring as essentially a mismatch with current conditions of STEM culture; this hinders the opportunity to diversify STEM fields and to provide students with robust STEM-M opportunities (Calabrese Tan et al., 2018).
Theoretical Framework: Science Identity Model
Carlone and Johnson’s model (2007) defined a science identity as composed of three interrelated categories: competence, performance, and recognition (Figure 1). They described their longitudinal study focused on the science experiences of 15 successful women of color over the course of their undergraduate and graduate studies in science and science-related careers:
Carlone & Johnson’s (2007) Science Identity Model.
Individuals need to be competent or able to demonstrate skills and science knowledge and they are motivated to understand the world scientifically. This competence is delivered through their performance in varying contexts (e.g., uses of scientific tools, fluency with all forms of scientific talk and ways of acting, and interacting in various formal and informal scientific settings). And finally, this performance needs to be recognized as a science person by meaningful others and self. (p. 1190)
Various scholars have applied Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) science identity model across the elementary (Vincent-Ruz, & Schunn, 2018), secondary (Johnson, 2016), and collegiate (Rahm & Moore, 2016) school contexts. More research on how the relationship between the classroom environment and the intersection of social characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity and class or gender) can influence the science identity formation of students is needed (Means et al., 2017). Our study aims to address this area.
Methods
Case Study
Our study’s primary goal was to explore in depth, talented high school students’ science identity. To achieve this, we chose an exploratory qualitative case study as our research design, examining the science experiences of 11 participants within a selective high school to answer the “how” and “why” questions that yield robust perspectives on multifaceted processes (Yin, 2003). A case study is an “intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single entity” (Merriam, 1998, p. 27). Our study’s “single entity” was the 11 participants, all of whom shared the same settings (high school and extramural program) and similar minoritized backgrounds, thus making our case study a “bounded system” (Stake, 2005, p. 444) of inquiry within which to study these individuals’ science identity formation.
Positionalities
Our roles in the larger research project and the high school program, known as Health Science Teaching Excellence Program (HSTEP, pronounced as H-STEP), are unique, including our identities as minoritized scholars working in or adjacent to STEM-M contexts. The lead author of this study (Rocha) is a child of Mexican immigrants and a first-generation college student, now serving as the researcher and evaluator for HSTEP. Her own experiences inform her commitment to using asset-based approaches to study marginalization across educational contexts. Two of the coauthors (Chen and Rodriguez) are recent college graduates, one who identifies as Asian and who studied chemistry and history in college, and the other who identifies as Latino and who studied computer science. Both have differing and ongoing commitments to first-generation, low-income minoritized youth that led them to serve as tutors for various STEM subjects. Another author (Cabral) is a former STEM-M aspirant who partially studied chemistry in college, but was institutionally pushed out of that track and is now working in education finding ways to re-imagine other possibilities for youth interested in STEM-M. For each of us, our cultural intuition—or our personal, academic, and professional experiences—guided our analytical approach and framing of the present study (Bernal, 1998).
Partnership High School
We refer to the partnered high school as Metro College Prep (MCP) 1 , which has collaborated with an Academic Medical Center composed of a School of Medicine and Hospital for over 10 years. MCP is in an under-resourced neighborhood within a large Midwestern metropolitan city. MCP serves predominantly a minoritized population (e.g., Black and Latinx students and low-income students) and has built an impressive academic reputation. For example, MCP’s academic successes led them to be rated as one of the top 35 best high schools in the state by US News and World Report.
Selection Criteria for HSTEP Candidates
The HSTEP program is offered for those interested in medicine/health and science careers. Students are recruited into HSTEP their freshmen year and remain in the program until they graduate. The selection process considers both quantitative and qualitative metrics, such as first-semester high school grades, standardized test scores, extracurricular activities, letters of recommendation, and short essay responses. In addition, program administrators consider students’ family background (e.g., parents’ occupation and education level), and prioritize low-income students and students whose parents have not obtained a college degree. Short-listed students are invited to individual and joint parent/guardian interviews. Based on staff and resource availability and feasibility (e.g., funding), only six to seven students are accepted into the program each year (out of roughly 30 applicants), to ensure they receive personalized support, guidance, and mentorship. Enrollment in the program is free of cost for participants. 2
The HSTEP Contexts
HSTEP provides MCP students the opportunity to strengthen diverse skills needed to compete in a college-level environment, which include critical and analytical skills, writing skills, communication skills, and other college readiness-appropriate skillsets (see Rocha et al., 2021). HSTEP aims to nurture both cognitive and personal developments, including transformative academic attitudes and behaviors. HSTEP students engage in interactive learning experiences, one-on-one mentorship with medical students and faculty, a rigorous college prep curriculum, Kaplan-led Scholastic Aptitude Test/American College Testing (SAT/ACT) prep courses, an annual summer intensive program, and year-round activities that include community grand rounds 3 and anatomy lab visits. Since 2011, a different medical specialty is chosen each summer, based on student interest (e.g., cardiology, emergency medicine, and oncology).
Participants
We used purposive sampling to select “knowledgeable people” or those who had in-depth knowledge about navigating rigorous science courses and diverse science experiences in high school. Our sample of students attended a high school with a selective enrollment admission. MCP provides academically advanced students with an accelerated program and a challenging college preparatory experience. In the city locale, only a few selective enrollment high schools are available, and enrollment criteria are determined by the school district; students’ eligibility consists of their seventh-grade final grades, NWEA MAP scores (Northwest Evaluation Association Measures of Academic Progress), and an entry exam. 4 If eligible, applicants also submit additional requirements like essays and letters of recommendation.
Overall, admittance to a selective enrollment high school is competitive (20% acceptance rate) and represents the respective city’s top student population. Our purposeful sample, then, includes longitudinal data from MCP and HSTEP for each participant, offering unique insight into the factors contributing to their science identity development processes. Our participants ranged in age between 13 and 18 years old. During the first year in HSTEP, students and parents were invited to participate in the larger research project. All participants’ parents or guardians granted permission to participate via a consent form, and each student agreed to participate by giving written assent. The study had both Institutional Review Board approval and Research Review Board approval from the university and from the city’s public school system, respectively.
As Table 1 shows, most participants in our sample identified as female (n = 8). Most self-identified as Black or Latino (n = 10), though Latinx students were over-represented in the sample (n = 2 for Black; n = 8 for Latinx). We had a self-identified Asian student from a low-socio-economic status (SES) household. The majority were first in their families to attend college (n = 10) and qualified for free or reduced-priced lunch at MCP (n = 10).
Overview of Participants’ Characteristics.
Due to the small sample, race and ethnicity (i.e., Black and Latinx backgrounds) were combined to protect the anonymity of participants.
Data Collection and Analysis
Our study’s interviews took place after the end of the HSTEP summer program every year, beginning from the time students were rising sophomores until they were rising seniors (i.e., three interviews per student across 3 years). Each student interview was conducted by graduate students and was also used by program administrators to learn about students’ experiences in HSTEP for the summer. The interview protocol was designed to capture students’ previous academic highlights and challenges in science and math courses, and to identify future highlights and challenges (see Table 2 for multiple data collection points for two student cohorts in HSTEP). The cohorts of students in our study participated during the 2016 to 2019 academic years; the first cohort consisted of five students and the second included six students.
Overview of Longitudinal-Interview Data From Two Cohorts of Students.
Altogether we analyzed 35 interviews as the primary data source for our study, collected across multiple years for each student (e.g., three summers). All interviews were conducted at the University or Hospital campuses, in a private room to ensure privacy and confidentiality. Interviews were audio recorded and manually transcribed. The length of the interviews ranged between 18 and 100 min with an average of 45 min. We examined questions from the protocol that related to students’ perceptions and experiences on their math and science courses at MCP. For example, we used the same questions annually, since students would enroll in different courses each year and documenting their math and science trajectories was important. Selected interview questions included but were not limited to: “How did you feel about your math class(es) last semester? This coming semester?” and “How did you feel about your science class(es) last semester? This coming semester?” Students were also asked to reflect on how they engage and learn about math and science outside of the classroom, if at all.
Our analytical approach was a hybrid of inductive and deductive analysis (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006). First, we conducted an in-depth, line-by-line reading of the entire data set using tentative codes that emerged from the literature (e.g., challenges, supports); subcategories for challenges included academic struggles (e.g., study habits), for example. Then, our analyses involved grounded theory, a data-driven inductive approach allowing for the inclusion of codes not part of the initial codebook (e.g., navigational strategies), which brought us to identify thematic categories related to students’ in-school and out-of-school math and science experiences (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). Our coding scheme and emergent themes were co-validated through peer debriefing between the primary investigator and the research assistants/coauthors. The research team collectively reached agreement on major themes that commonly showed up across interviews. Based on the work of Carlone and Johnson (2007), we agreed on major factors—knowledge (i.e., competence), participation (i.e., performance), achievements (i.e., recognition), and passion/interest—that occurred frequently across the data. We focused on categories related to math and science perceptions and experiences and analyzed them in greater depth. Research team members repeatedly brainstormed, reviewed, and reconfirmed major findings.
Findings
We revised Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) science identity model (Figure 1) to explore HSTEP students’ identity formation processes. This expanded model (Figure 2) illuminated competence, performance, and recognition, in addition to passion/interest. For HSTEP participants, their expressed passion for science and career interests in STEM-M built on the original model, which posited that science identities are formed through access to unique opportunities, resources, and supports. In part due to these factors, students achieved a passion for science and identified themselves as future STEM-M professionals. This revised and expanded model considers students’ lived experiences within broader social and institutional structures at the secondary level. We provide counter-narratives illuminating positive science experiences of minoritized students from their perspectives.
Expanding on Carlone & Johnson’s (2007) Science Identity Model.
Passion/Interest and Motivation
The 11 participants acknowledged their passion for the natural sciences. A bidirectional relationship between motivation and passion/interest for science helps explain students’ identity formation processes. All students generally held positive attitudes toward high school science classes, partially evidenced by their selection of science as one of their favorite subjects, with chemistry being the most popular. John expressed this: “I am really passionate about Chemistry, and [the class] was super fun. I was always interested, and the work went by fast. I loved the experiments” (Individual interview, August 14, 2017). Fredricks et al. (2010) argued that students become passionate about a subject when there is persistent participation in content-related activities, and they will at times go beyond what is expected of them in class because they have identified the activities as part of their “sense of self” or identity.
Ashley was an exemplar of how students held a genuine willingness to engage with science-related activity and classes because they are both enjoyable and needed for STEM-M careers: Science is really hard for me . . . But I do like science. Because I’m doing pre-med[icine in college], I know I’m gonna have to take science courses and understand it. So, for the last semester, I was working really close with my science teacher and working hard to study for the final . . . I enjoyed taking the time to learn. (Individual interview, August 2, 2019)
Mullet et al. (2018) found that negative teacher–student interactions can influence students to feel less motivated and to have a sense of futility when learning in STEM classes. Conversely, the current study supports how positive interactions, as noted by the student, motivated Ashley to work with her science teacher in preparation for the final. In addition, Ashley “enjoyed taking the time to learn.” Even when faced with adversity, she showed dedication to learning in her science classes, in part with the help of her teacher, but also because she was influenced by her passion and interests in the sciences. She also informed us about her aspiration to “do pre-med[icine in college].” Ruiz-Alfonso and León (2016) would describe Ashley’s passion as showing dedication, persistence, and identification with and love for the respective activity. Scholars have described passion as a core factor in fostering students’ science identity and their STEM interest (Paul et al., 2020).
Students’ passion for science and a tentative career in STEM-M, such as becoming a doctor, developed outside the classroom. Max described: I’ve been around medicine my whole life. My grandmother had pancreatic cancer, my father had triple by-pass surgery and is diabetic, and one of my aunties passed away from cancer—medicine is just so high in my family, so it’s like I’ve always been around medicine, it just gave me that interest in medicine. (Individual interview, August 16, 2017)
Max attributed his interest in medicine to his experiences with family members’ health struggles. Research provides support for Max and others’ similar claims, noting that exposure to familial illnesses or other health concerns are influential on students’ decisions to pursue medicine/health-related careers (Murphy & Halgin, 1995). In fact, more than half of our participants recognized their familial-related exposure to either health complications/issues or the health profession (n = 8; Emily, Nola, Bella, Jack, Liz, Kelly, Lexi, and Max). Moreover, participants also expressed social justice commitments to address health disparities. In this study, familial influences provide additional context to students’ motivation related to their persistence in navigating high school STEM courses. Jackson et al. (2016) suggested the importance of culturally connected career motives; students who believed that science can be used to help their communities were more likely to identify as scientists. Leveraging high school students’ interests can provide an opportunity to affirm and nurture their aspirational capital or what they aspire to become in the future (Rocha et al., 2022b).
Competence in High School
We contend that in the high school context, the three factors of competence—academic excellence in science, science efficacy or self-confidence in their ability to understand science content, and the application of science across contexts (see Figure 3)—illustrate and expand on the “skills and science knowledge” needed to achieve a science identity (Carlone & Johnson, 2007).
High School Students Demonstrated Competence Through (a) Academic Excellence, (b) Science Efficacy, and (c) Application
Competence Nurtured Through Conventional School Performance
Demonstrated competence and perceived competence along with comprehension of scientific material were central to participant responses. Competence was evidenced through conventional forms of school performance, such as grade point averages (GPAs). For example, earning high grades in science classes was considered a positive academic experience that participants suggested supported their self-confidence in science while in high school. Such conventional school performance was necessary to attain competitive academic credentials at the high school level. Moreover, academic achievement was experienced by the participants, tied to the broader school culture at MCP, which nurtured their decision to pursue a STEM-M career. MCP strongly emphasized conventional school performance or academic excellence through grades, which validated students’ science learning and science subject competence (Carlone & Johnson, 2007).
Aside from demonstrated competence vis-à-vis competitive grades: however, class rank and standardized test scores were other relevant indicators of participant in-school success. The participants’ cumulative unweighted GPA was 3.77, whereas the average unweighted and weighted science GPA was 3.64 and 4.97, respectively. 5 Moreover, eight students (out of the 11) were in the top 5% of their graduating class and more than half of the students’ SAT score landed in the 89th percentile, or they scored better than 89% of people who took the SAT test (average = 1,242). 6 For our sample, conventional school performance was central to the construction of their plans for and access into college, which meant that they had to strategize to attain merit-based scholarships to finance their college education.
Further, in describing their in-school science experiences, participants brought to our attention their final grades in their science classes. Traditionally, students’ comprehension of course material in high school is assessed through various homework assignments. Although quizzes and exams are incorporated, all grades are compiled and weighted based on homework assignments, which is a process dependent on the instructor. For example, a student’s final grade can be influenced by the teacher’s decision to offer extra-credit assignments and/or give students opportunity to retake exams. As one example, Emily exemplified the divergent outcome between her chemistry class and the Advanced Placement (AP) chemistry exam: I did good in the [AP chem] class. Well, it was bad. It was kinda confusing . . . especially if I didn’t do my homework. [B]ut I passed the class with a good grade [an A], but that AP exam, I did not pass. I remember getting the AP Exam [and thinking], I have no idea what is going on. Like the free responses, those were weird. Then the multiple choice was even harder than the free responses. I did not pass that exam. (Individual interview, August 2, 2019)
Although Emily acknowledged some confusion as a result of not completing her homework, she fared well in her AP chemistry class, earning an “A” grade overall. But she noted that when it came to the AP chemistry exam toward the end of the school year, she did not pass with a score of 4 or higher, which is the metric that MCP and other district schools tell students is the benchmark that affords them credit hours at most competitive colleges/universities. The “A” grade Emily earned in the class presumes that she understood the content taught in the class; if she had not, she likely would not have earned that grade. Emily’s overall grades showcase her competence in science courses—she graduated from MCP with a cumulative and science unweighted GPA higher than 3.5, and scored higher than 77% of students who took the SAT exam her junior year. Chowdhury (2018) would identify grade inflation as a relevant concern in this situation, where “students are given higher marks without demonstrating higher levels of mastery” (p. 86); such inflation may “mislead students regarding their actual degree of academic performance” (p. 88). Nonetheless, the disparity in quality of experiences in the AP classroom depends upon “the quality of teacher preparation, school resources, and previous knowledge of the students” (Hallett & Venegas, 2011, p. 469).
Competence Cultivated Through Confidence
Building from Bandura’s (1977, 1982) construct of self-efficacy, which refers to a person’s subjective evaluation of their ability to perform well in a particular domain, we focus on students’ perceived science self-efficacy based on their experiences. In doing so, we offer some factors that contribute to their persistence in STEM-M course-pathways in a selective high school. Students reported an array of factors that contributed positively to their learning experiences and informed their science efficacy and continued interest in STEM-M pathways (Table 3).
Factors Contributing to Students’ Science Efficacy and Positive Experiences.
Conventional School Performance
As mentioned previously, reflective of MCP’s school culture, academic achievement and school performance are key factors in students’ in-school experiences. Conventional school performance also influences students’ persistence in STEM-M pathways and their confidence within them. Students’ confidence was understood analytically based on adjectives they use to describe their overall experiences in science classrooms at MCP. It is important to note that some of the students who described their experiences positively also used the less positive adjectives. For example, most described their course experiences positively using adjectives like “love,” “easy,” “enjoyable,” and “fun.” But they also described their classes with the following adjectives: “hard,” “hate,” “difficult,” and “rough.” This breadth of adjectives suggests that while students enjoyed their science classes and often scored high grades in them, they also struggled and incurred challenges, which they recognized as rigorous hurdles when navigating their AP science courses. By persevering through tough times, students transition from adversity with a stronger sense of efficacy or the belief that they can persevere despite obstacles to achieve their goals (Bandura, 1982). Kelly reflected: [AP chemistry] was challenging because I thought it was going to be like honors chemistry . . . so easy; like I could just do [the work] in class . . . I would study, but I don’t have to study that hard. I thought it was going to be that easy. Then, I realized like, “Oh no, what is this?” You are giving me all these packets, all these labs . . . the labs were fun, but the questions, the way they worded it, was like, “What?” (Individual interview, August 9, 2018)
Students’ ongoing navigation of difficult science classes indicated their persistence, and as noted earlier, students’ passion for and interest in pursuing a STEM-M-related career likely also contributed to their ability to persevere in these science classes. Coleman (2016) found that minoritized students’ passion in STEM proved to be a critical factor influencing their motivation, enjoyment, and participation in STEM. In terms consistent with this finding, Bella passionately responded: [AP Chemistry] was hard but I love my teacher and I love chemistry. Sophomore year . . . [it] was one of my favorite classrooms to go to . . . [it] was on steroids for high school. (Individual interview, August 1, 2019)
Although AP chemistry was “hard” for Bella, she was able to persevere with the “love” (Stake, 2005, p. 444) she had for her teacher and for chemistry. Bella’s expressed “love” for chemistry reeled us into one of the factors that contribute to this love for the subject matter: teachers.
Instructor Importance
Participants recognized their science teachers as contributors to their positive experiences. Students described them as caring, willing to help, and as experienced instructors. For example, Liz attributed a science teacher’s expertise to teaching quality: There are two teachers for [AP biology]. I know that one is better than the other. I hope I get the one I had my freshman year. She was able to explain things better than the other teacher. She keeps the class in control. I think it’s because she has a lot more experience. She’s been a teacher longer than the other one has. I think that plays a role in how the class is taught. (Individual interview, August 8, 2018)
This student associated her science teacher’s abilities to “explain things better” and “control” the class with more years of experience than the other teacher. Podolsky et al. (2019) associated teaching experience with teacher effectiveness. According to Fauth et al. (2019), moreover, classroom management is a dimension of teaching quality that mediates the actual teacher–student interactions in the classroom. Like others, Kelly’s teacher’s willingness to help in AP chemistry contributed to Kelly’s positive perception of the class: I had to go to the teacher for help, for AP chemistry tests. I would go after school, if I needed help, she would help me. I think this was my best class because my teacher was always there for us. She was always on it. If we finished a test, like two periods after class, she would put it in the grade book. She was productive and everything . . . a cool . . . nice teacher, too. (Individual interview, August 9, 2018)
Kelly identified her AP chemistry as her “best class” because the teacher was perceived as caring, where the teacher would stay after school to help her. Other participants also attributed their positive science experiences to their teachers. Research in science education supports the importance of iterative teacher interactions and relevant pedagogy that facilitates students’ positive experiences in science classrooms (Gallivan, 2017). In other words, positive student–teacher relationships can help create supportive classroom climates (Bae & Lai, 2020) and improve students’ confidence in their science experiences (MacPhee et al., 2013).
Class Design
Participants highlighted the differing science classroom designs. For example, students’ chemistry and biology courses were described positively compared with physics. As Emily described, “Overall, [biology] was a good class. I was able to learn a better way because it was a lot of hands-on . . . that is the way I learn, by doing” (Individual interview, August 3, 2017). Emily expressed having enjoyed hands-on learning and, like others, identified the activities in lab as a productive classroom design that complemented her preferred learning style. Science education research has identified high school chemistry and biology courses as more engaging because of their lab components’ hands-on activities, as opposed to physics, which is more conceptual and based on simulations (Garg, 2019; Münkel-Jiménez et al., 2019).
Academic Support Services
Students discussed readily available academic services at MCP, such after-school tutoring services, which Jack found helpful: I would also go to what they call SAS [Sophomore Academic Support] at my school. I would ask my teacher questions about the specific lab, and she would give me information, but it wasn’t everything . . . I still had to solve it on my own. I found that to be pretty useful as well. (Individual interview, August 24, 2018)
Jack found after-school support useful and emphasized that he still needed to solve the problem on his own. Because Jack and other students utilized the academic supports made available to them, such resources contributed to their expressed positive experiences in science. MCP is a well-resourced, selective high school. After-school support like tutoring was offered to each grade level and participants recognized such extra assistance as beneficial. In addition, community partners like corporations and universities have teamed up with MCP provide their students with out-of-classroom academic supports, career exposure, college credit, or leadership development. Research shows that participation in such opportunities is especially critical for persistence in STEM-M pathways (Young et al., 2019). Summer programs provide other out-of-school contexts, designs, and services that can support students’ STEM-M career interests (Kitchen et al., 2018). Altogether, active learning opportunities have been shown to enhance students’ self-efficacy across K-16 grade levels (Julià & Antolí, 2019).
Refined Competence Through Application
Math-Ability Application
Participant responses regarding their positive science experiences also highlighted perceived math ability as an influence on their persistence. Seven participants explicitly attributed their math abilities as partially influential to their in-school science success. In fact, all held positive math attitudes and enjoyed their math courses. We do not suggest that the other four participants did not have math efficacy. Instead, we distinguish the seven as recognizing that their math abilities offer benefits for their learning experiences in science courses. Consider Jack as one example: I am going to be ready for my chemistry class because I have been in [one] before, and it involves more math. I am good in math, not the best but okay. I think I will do well in that class. (Individual interview, August 14, 2017)
Students suggested that their math abilities are related to their academic success in science courses. As discussed earlier, our participants hold competitive high school grade records. Table 4 illustrates how their math achievement mirrors science academic success. For example, the average science unweighted GPA is 3.64 compared with 3.7 for math unweighted GPA.
Science and Math Competence.
Note. GPA = grade point average.
Further, students acknowledged other students’ perceptions of math use in science. Ashley said: “Physics. People say it is fun. They said that if you like math you are going to do good” (Individual interview, August 8, 2018). Similarly, Max shared: “My [peers] said that physics is like another math class, and I love math” (Individual interview, August 7, 2018). Thus, students’ actual math ability proved beneficial as a valuable skill for their physics and chemistry classes. Emily also corroborated this: Last semester I took chemistry. I liked that class because [it] was more like math, and I like math. I got a pretty good grade in that class . . . over 100% . . . that class, I could say was challenging in a way, because learning the topics was kind of challenging, but once I knew it, it got easy. (Individual interview, August 8, 2018)
Emily talked about her enjoyment of math because of her ability in that subject, as did the other students who identified their math ability as a contributor to science success (e.g., the application of math in science). Emily recognized that she “likes math,” and though she referred to chemistry class as challenging, she used her mathematical prowess to help navigate the rigor of her science courses. The findings here respond to Gholson’s (2016) “call for the creation, occupation, and sharing of positive, socio-epistemic spaces that allow for the visibility of Black girls and women in mathematics” (p. 290). Relatedly, high school teachers have been identified as fueling minoritized students’ interests, specifically women of color in the sciences (Nguyen et al., 2021). Our evidence creates a counter-story to the historical absence and invisibility of women of color in mathematics: our women demonstrate confidence in their math ability while navigating rigorous science classes, thus challenging the racialized and gendered culture of mathematics across subject areas (Leyva, 2021).
Real-World Application
Students highlighted the ability to connect previous experiential knowledge to scientific class contexts. Jack, for example, applied past real-world knowledge to chemistry during group work: It was chemistry. I loved that class . . . because it was hands-on. There were a variety of different things we learned that I can connect to . . . my overall life in a way . . . in terms of what I learned in the past, and actually now understanding it because of this class . . . My favorite part about [it] was the various labs we did. Because we [had] to find solutions to what the problem was, the scenario. (Individual interview, August 24, 2018)
Jack was able to “connect to” the content they learned in chemistry with his “overall life.” As he explained it, he can “actually now understand it because of this class.” Jack is describing the ability to recognize the real-world application of course content. Morra (2018) suggested encouraging students to connect course concepts with real-world applications to engage them with the course material in a meaningful way would improve the overall learning process at the college level.
Other students also acknowledged the inverse, the application of scientific content to real-world scenarios, which is an essential part of learning in science contexts. However, learning to do that application was something they had to be taught. Lexi stated her frustration on having to apply “critical thinking skills” during analysis processes of science experiments in class: It’s just that I can’t wrap my brain around it still; like analyzing data and results and all that. I am fine with conducting experiments and writing down the results, but . . . the discussion, when you prove your point, that is when I need to work on that. (Individual interview, n.d, 2016)
While her statement shows Lexi understands the need to prove her point and discuss the reasons for results in a chemistry experiment, she does not know how to do it. MCP nurtured a culture of high achievement that challenged students to shift from simply jotting down numbers from experiment protocols to actually applying more abstract responses and rationales in their lab reports. Lexi illustrated the need for critical thinking to be taught explicitly in these classes. Students may misinterpret the contribution of their experiences in high school to their college science experiences, because in high school students often rely on memorization for test preparation compared with knowing how to navigate abstract responses for college exams. Jackson et al. (2021) promoted critical thinking skills as essential for students to develop strong STEM literacy at the secondary level. Relatedly, Schwartz et al. (2008) identified math proficiency as a factor that influences college science success.
Nola further described her enjoyment with the application of math in science: I liked [chemistry] a lot. I love integrating math and science together . . . I enjoyed it, especially the labs we did because they were group projects and . . . it was really fun that they made you think about it [critically]. (Individual interview, August 8, 2018)
For Nola, she “loves integrating math and science” and she found the labs “fun” due to the group projects (i.e., labs). According to Nola, the labs “make you think about it.” In other words, participation in science questions was no longer a “yes or no” response, but required more scientific thinking. This is consistent with other studies that have suggested high school and collegiate science classes require students to think beyond simple arithmetic or annotations, and instead place salience on the rigorous applicability and use of “critical thinking skills” (Allen et al., 2019) in scientific learning environments.
Supplementary Science-Related Activities and School Performance
Underrepresented racially minoritized youth are less likely to “perform relevant scientific practices” (Carlone & Johnson, 2007) in urban school contexts. For example, research opportunities at the high school or college level are traditionally not a common activity available or afforded to them (Salto et al., 2014). Our participants, however, did “perform relevant scientific practices” through in-school and out-of-classroom science activities that they expressed enhanced their broader science participation in high school. Table 5 lists examples of the different types of relevant scientific practices students were involved in during high school. For example, required classroom-related activities, which are common for well-resourced urban schools, included conducting labs, whereas out-of-the classroom unrequired science activities, or opt-in activities that are nonmandatory, included participation in HSTEP, the science fair, and student-led organizations (e.g., math club).
Example of High School Level Science-Related Performance/Activities.
Note. The activities centered above are activities that students engaged in to also nurture their science/math interests during their leisure time.
Participants sought leisure opportunities while in high school that enhanced their science knowledge, participation, and interest/passion. Like Lexi, participants revealed their excitement about science beyond the classroom: “I know this sounds really lame, but sometimes for fun, I would just watch Crash Course with John Green on YouTube. I would watch a lot of that in my free time” (Individual interview, August 18, 2017). Research reveals the potential of online videos as an educational tool for fostering students’ learning and improving critical thinking skills (see e.g., June et al., 2014). In addition, Nancy also shared her use of supplemental material to enhance her understanding across science and math courses: I went to YouTube. I looked up [Stoq] geometry and I was a master in [Stoq] geometry, and I loved it. At first, I hate[d] chemistry, then I watched the video and understood it and said, I love this. Whenever I need help . . . [or] not understanding something in class, I look up [YouTube] videos or go to Khan Academy. (Individual interview, August 14, 2017)
Similar to the other students, Nancy exemplified ownership of her learning by seeking resources that would enhance her learning environment when she accessed online educational tools like videos from YouTube and Khan Academy. Vosniadou (2020) would identify Nancy’s capabilities including her independence, self-directed learning, and self-regulated learning, as skills that will be critical in her transition to higher education.
John also demonstrated ownership when he explained being encouraged to take an anatomy course at MCP because of his participation at a university’s anatomy lab hosted by HSTEP: We went to the Anatomy lab during April of this year [with HSTEP] and that was amazing. We touched the human heart and opened-up a diaphragm, and saw everything in the human body, which was so cool, and it inspired me to learn more about the body and how it functions. (Individual interview, August 8, 2018)
The inspiration from John’s participation in anatomy through HSTEP led him to enroll in MCP’s anatomy course via their medical-track program, which afforded him the opportunity to widen his knowledge and sustain his interest in the human body. HSTEP, a partnership program, has been found to support students’ STEM-M interests and passions, with unique supplementary opportunities that strengthen their self-efficacy (see Rocha et al., 2022a).
In-School Recognition
Our science identity model expanded on the original notion of recognition (e.g., interpersonal interactions; Carlone & Johnson, 2007) to also include institutional recognition. For example, students were presented with opportunities—like acceptance to a selective high school and a STEM-M program—that affirmed their intellectual prowess for a given task or subject matter. Thus, by virtue of being enrolled at MCP, a selective school whose enrollment is based on high test scores, students are institutionally affirmed as demonstrating merit as recognized by their presence at the school. MCP offers a medical-track curriculum that students must apply for, and which two of our participants successfully enrolled in, providing a unique and stringent in-school STEM-M trajectory and opportunity. Further, all participants were accepted into the competitive partnered program HSTEP, which recruited and selected students via merit-based standards and participants’ expressed aspirations in exploring an eventual STEM-M career (Rocha et al., 2022a).
MCP enacted classroom and school-wide practices that affirmed and recognized students’ achievements vis-à-vis science, practices that are also done at other urban public schools. For example, the “Hydrogen Award” celebrates students who rank first in their chemistry class. Students are also funneled into honors and AP courses in science subjects through teacher recommendations, as well as via college-level math courses like AP Calculus. The distinction between other students at MCP and those in our study, which we have highlighted previously, is our sample’s participation in the HSTEP program. These students applied to HSTEP during their first year at MCP and remained in it during their sophomore to senior years. Thus, we note that our sample includes students who have already been identified as “promising” and positioned as “achieving” in a college preparatory school, which offers a college-level track (Ochoa, 2013). Their participation in HSTEP extends the forms of recognition students receive at MCP and elsewhere; HSTEP administrators claim these forms of recognition were intended to enhance students’ science/STEM-M identity.
HSTEP nurtured students’ forms of capital (e.g., cultural, social, and aspirational), strengthening their self-efficacy (Rocha et al., 2022a). The program supports students’ aspirations, or aspirational capital, in their science identity and pursuit of a STEM-M career; the support is provided by actors involved in the program, such as physicians, researchers, graduate and college students, community leaders, and hospital executives. Exposure and expansion of students’ social capital, compounded with iterative acts of affirmation and recognition, allow students to connect with various diverse populations and solidify their own science identities. Rocha et al. (2022b) expanded on these meaningful relationships and connected them to the intentional programming and community of practice enacted in HSTEP. Thus, HSTEP offered meaningful opportunities to develop relationships between individuals who share unique passions in science-related subjects and provided programmatic structures and practices that fostered students’ ability to see themselves as STEM-M professionals.
Students in our sample at MCP, also part of HSTEP, expressed positive interpretations of the diverse science-related experiences they had in the program, which they flagged as influencing their future identification as STEM-M professionals and well-rounded people. Nola mentioned: I felt challenged [this summer], but I also knew I was able to do this because I was picked for a reason. You guys instilled that in us that we have a purpose for being here [in HSTEP]. And that was really helpful. The summer was intensive, but it wasn’t impossible for us to do . . . One of the lectures we had, “How to be a Rock Star Doctor,” that was really insightful, because it didn’t just apply to the doctor life, but a regular life, basically how to be a good person. Really, this program can instill someone to become a better person to who they started off as. (Individual interview, August 9, 2017)
Nola understood that she was “picked for a reason” and such confidence, instilled by HSTEP, allowed her to stay resilient when she felt challenged. The program instilled in the students the desire to become a better person. According to Bandura (2018), educators must understand how “to better people’s lives by strengthening belief in their individual and collective capabilities” (p. 135). Out-of-school contexts can leverage youth’s cultural wealth and strengthen their self-efficacy and participation in STEM-M pathways (see Rocha et al., 2022a). Moreover, such enrichment programs can provide unique opportunities that foster students’ self-confidence (Jen et al., 2017) and motivation (Dai et al., 2015) in STEM-M pathways.
Jack also provided exceptional analysis of his participation in HSTEP. He shared: “[HSTEP] exposed me to medicine, but like I said before, it’s helping shape me as an individual . . . [HSTEP] shows me that I have the capability of being successful in life” (Individual interview, August 2, 2019). The year prior, he reflected on his growth and development: HSTEP has helped alleviate my fear, overall. Both summer intensives [2018 and 2017], I learned that it is okay to make mistakes, it’s okay to participate, it’s okay to put yourself out there. I think this motivated me to actually want to do more, and it has shown me that there are things bigger than myself, in that I have to try hard so that I can be a meaningful contribution to society. Because it is not just about me, but it is about others who are out there as well, who may need help.
Through HSTEP, Nola and Jack alluded to recognition of themselves as eventual STEM-M professionals, likely attributed to their participation in the program where they experienced ongoing recognition for their interests in STEM-M subjects and careers. Young et al. (2017) showed that out-of-school time (OST; e.g., enrichment programs) devoted to students’ STEM interests has a positive effect. Our qualitative findings support this, suggesting that students’ recruitment into HSTEP and MCP sustained and ignited their interests in math and science, pointing them toward a potential career in it. Other existing research supports this positive association between OST activities and experiences with educational outcomes that include academic achievement (Young & Young, 2018), student success (Richmond et al., 2018), and STEM-M career interest (Dabney et al., 2012; Rocha et al., 2022b).
Discussion: Learning Environments Must Provide Opportunities, Resources, and Supports to Achieve Equity and Excellence in STEM-M Education
Carlone and Johnson’s model (2007) provided foundational knowledge about competence, performance, and recognition as relevant and necessary pillars of students’ science identities. We proposed an updated model to understand students’ experiences within STEM-M contexts. We extended this model by emphasizing the role that passion and interest in science play in the process of developing a science identity. Further, we contend that at the center of these tenets—competence, performance, recognition, and passion/interest—lies the learning environment and context that provide opportunities, resources, and supports (Rocha et al., 2022b; Hidi & Renninger, 2006), which in turn reenact, reconstitute, and reshape students’ science identity over time.
In this study, we found that preexisting passions and interests in science-related matters in students’ lives were derived from personal experiences with family as well as from their prior schooling. These facilitated their motivation to seek STEM-M activities and to consider, during high school, the possibility of a STEM-M career. This point has important implications as it suggests that students who enter high school with a strong foundation of scientific knowledge or science identity—and where the STEM environment is responsive to their funds of knowledge (Denton & Borrego, 2021)—are more likely to progress through their schooling with more positive experiences. We noted that early exposure to health-related concerns in their communities, hands-on activities in science classes, and science-related opportunities within and outside of school contexts influenced and enhanced students’ ability to see themselves as scientists or STEM-M professionals. Considering that participants expressed social justice commitments to address health disparities, we contend that familial influences provide additional context to students’ motivation related to their persistence in navigating high school STEM-M pathways. Research has found students’ motivation rooted in these commitments plays a key role in developing interest in STEM-M, including their aspirations to enter a career to address health disparities in society (Chittum et al., 2017).
We focused on scientific competence at the secondary level, noting that students in our sample are high achieving when assessed through conventional school performance (see Rop, 1999). However, we highlighted that to sustain scientific competence, self-efficacy and the ability to apply scientific knowledge to other classes and the real world were central to students’ science identity formation. This was of importance because students are more likely to study science in college when their high school experiences involved enrolling in science AP courses, engaging with hands-on activities (i.e., laboratory experiments), making real-world connections, and having exposure to science careers (Hutchinson-Anderson et al., 2015). Student self-efficacy and scientific competence through applicability are sustained through various social factors that included their teachers, classroom structures, and supplemental academic services. This finding relates to other research that has emphasized the importance of teachers, curriculum, and critical pedagogy as mechanisms that make science a relevant subject matter for students (Burt & Johnson, 2018; Lynch et al., 2018; Margot & Kettler, 2019; Mullet et al., 2018).
Research signals the need to improve students’ critical thinking skills, which contribute considerably to students’ persistence in STEM pathways at the secondary (Allen et al., 2019; Jackson et al., 2021) and postsecondary levels (June et al., 2014). This study contributes to the existing literature by promoting critical thinking across high school contexts (e.g., courses). Designed programs like HSTEP are essential to helping students like Emily, who indicated how she had received an “A” grade in her chemistry class but could neither pass nor understand the AP exam. Rocha et al. (2022a) discussed strategies that help enhance students’ critical thinking abilities. For example, HSTEP implemented various assignments like “research projects, literature reviews, case studies” and assessments that included “critical journal reflections and exams” (Rocha et al., 2022a, p.18). High school student engagement with research-related projects has been found to “develop diverse skills and knowledge for students to compete in a college-level environment” (Rocha et al., 2022a, p. 18). Moreover, higher AP exam scores attainment is correlated with a higher probability of students to major in the respective exam subject (5–30% increase; Avery et al., 2018). According to Smith et al. (2017), students who earned the highest score (i.e., 5) on an AP exam were 64% more likely to major in the respective subject of the AP exam than students who attained a score of 4 on the exam. Our findings suggest the need to support minoritized students in attaining competitive AP exam scores to capitalize upon the advantages of AP enrollment, especially in STEM-related courses. The College Board (2014) would argue that the challenge of navigating an AP course is itself a benefit for students because it builds college-level study skills and provides opportunities for academic rigor. Thus, it may be automatically assumed that classroom rigor is being achieved through students’ participation in AP courses. In other words, classroom rigor is part of the AP course experience, and enough to prepare students for college-level science. Future research should examine more in-depth the factors that contribute to the outcome discrepancies between students’ AP courses and the AP exam across student populations.
In our study, performance remained within the context of MCP. Our student’s high achievement in science and math suggests that there may be a relationship between the two that sustains their interest in science-related careers. In this study, students’ perceived math abilities may have enhanced their science efficacy and led to persistence in the science subject matter and the ability to merge connections between science and out-of-classroom contexts. Li and Jiang (2016) affirmed the association between performance/self-efficacy in math and interest/persistence in science for high school students. Relatedly, according to Hazari et al. (2010), “an individual’s motivational orientation serves as a drive to action and can influence their career success” (p. 1). The students’ source of motivation was their career aspirations, which led them to be active in their participation across in-school and outside-of-school science-related activities. These actions were important in nurturing their interests as they were motivated to engage or perform in science activities. Science performance took form in their participation in STEM-M-related classes, city-wide science fairs, and student organizations, for example. Further, the HSTEP program served as both an in-school and an out-of-school space where science performance was employed, assessed, and sustained. In sum, it was imperative that students were provided with opportunities and support that allowed them to engage in scientific knowledge and reaffirmed their performance in STEM-M activities. Future research should continue to examine strategic programming and services that promote equity and excellence in urban settings for gifted and talented minoritized youth interested in STEM-M careers.
Finally, we found recognition to be an impactful factor for students’ sense of self vis-à-vis science. We note that because our students were high achievers given their enrollment at MCP and HSTEP, there are multiple and simultaneous sources of recognition for them. Science courses like chemistry give awards to recognize students’ performance and content knowledge. Further, the HSTEP program, while not directly an institutional mechanism of MCP itself, provided additional avenues for student recognition. Recognition from HSTEP came from diverse professionals (e.g., doctors and doctoral students), which facilitated the restructuring of their science experiences 7 and reshaping of their science identity, among other aspects of their lives that lead to transformative outcomes (Rocha et al., 2022b).
Conclusion
We captured, crystalized, and expanded Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) science identity model by examining high-achieving minoritized youth’s science identities, based on their perspectives and educational experiences. Our expanded model, and the intricacies within, contributes to the conversations taking place regarding the cultivation and sustained self-perceptions of youth regarding science and scientific knowledge at the secondary level. However, to address the underrepresentation of minoritized student groups in STEM-M education, Renzulli and Reis (2020) encouraged educators to focus on “developing gifted behaviors through students’ individual interests, talents, motivations, and executive function skills in areas where there is performance-based evidence of high potential” (see Estrada et al., 2016 for a STEM context). Further, Renzulli and Reis emphasized “creativity, innovation and task commitment [as] more valuable than high scores on standardized tests” (para. 6). Strategically, identifying high-achieving minoritized students and nurturing their multiple identities can serve as a more expedited solution toward the diversification of the STEM-M workforce. Creative and innovative pedagogies that can nurture students’ development can be seen in Emdin’s (2010) work, where he successfully implemented hip-hop and popular culture into urban science classrooms, embracing students’ culture and the traditional science curriculum.
This longitudinal study pointed to the potential benefit of building strategic alliance partnerships where students are the central beneficiaries. This study illuminated how 11 students’ science identities were nurtured within the context and culture of their high school, the various pedagogical strategies and supports in STEM classes, and the presence of a partnered out-of-school health science program between their high school and a medical academic center. As suggested by Rocha et al. (2021), colleges, universities, and medical complexes can help ensure that opportunities, resources, and supports directly address larger systemic and institutional inequities for underserved, first-generation minoritized college students. We note that while providing these opportunities for high-achieving minoritized students is necessary to engage in educational excellence, equity, and justice, we cannot continue to overlook those who are traditionally viewed as “low-performing.” The expanded science identity model has the potential to inform diverse students’ science identity through provision of proper structures, resources, and supports. Investment in the science identity processes of diverse student populations is needed and can be incorporated by developing and sustaining science identity models across all school and learning contexts. Thus, we—including diverse stakeholders in-school and out-of-school contexts—must understand how power, privilege, and wealth play a key role in minoritized students’ educational pathways that impact broader educational access, resources, and opportunities (Ladson-Billings, 2006; Rocha et al., 2021).
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Open Science Disclosure
The data analyzed in this study are not available for purposes of reproducing the results. No code was used to generate the findings reported in the article. The newly created, unique materials used to conduct the research reported in this article are not available for purposes of reproducing the results or replicating the study.
