Content uploaded by Brian A. Burt
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Brian A. Burt on Aug 02, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Into the Storm: Ecological and Sociological
Impediments to Black Males’ Persistence in
Engineering Graduate Programs
Brian A. Burt
Iowa State University
Krystal L. Williams
University of Alabama
William A. Smith
University of Utah
While much is known about how Black students negotiate and navigate
undergraduate studies, there is a dearth of research on what happens
when these students enter graduate school. This article presents the results
of a study of 21 Black male graduate students in engineering from one
highly ranked research-intensive institution. This article provides evidence
of structurally racialized policies within the engineering college (e.g., admis-
sions) and racialized and gendered interactions with peers and advisors
that threaten Black males’ persistence in engineering. We argue for taking
an anti-deficit approach to understanding Black males’ persistence in engi-
neering. We conclude with implications for policy, practice, and research
BRIAN A. BURT, PhD, is assistant professor of higher education in the School of
Education at Iowa State University, 2625 Lagomarcino Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011;
e-mail: burt@iastate.edu. He studies the experiences of graduate students in STEM
and the institutional policies and practices that influence students’ educational and
workforce pathways. A National Academy of Education/Spencer Postdoctoral
Fellow and National Science Foundation Early CAREER Award recipient, he also
investigates participation in research experiences (i.e., the science of team science).
KRYSTAL L. WILLIAMS, PhD, is assistant professor of higher education in the Educational
Leadership, Policy and Technology Studies Department of The University of Alabama
College of Education. Her research explores the use of public policies to promote
college success for underrepresented students, with an emphasis on the interplay
between policy initiatives and students’ various psychosocial factors.
WILLIAM A. SMITH, PhD, is department chair and professor in the Department of
Education, Culture & Society at the University of Utah. He also holds a joint appoint-
ment in the Ethnic Studies Program as a professor in the African American Studies
division. His work primarily focuses on his theoretical contribution of racial battle
fatigue, which is the cumulative emotional, psychological, physiological, and behav-
ioral effects that racial microaggressions have on people of color.
American Educational Research Journal
October 2018, Vol. 55, No. 5, pp. 965–1006
DOI: 10.3102/0002831218763587
Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions
Ó2018 AERA. http://aerj.aera.net
that could further improve the scholarship and experiences of Black males in
engineering graduate programs.
KEYWORDS: Black males, broadening participation, engineering, graduate
education, persistence
It is not just [my] advisor, but also the department, the school, and the
social scene. I think all of those things. If you don’t feel like you have
a positive or supportive environment in any of those, they could all
be reasons that you wouldn’t want to stick around here for a long
time.
—Paul (fourth-year doctoral candidate in electrical engineering)
The topic of persistence for high-achieving Black male collegians, espe-
cially those attending predominantly White institutions, has gained con-
siderable attention for more than two decades (W. R. Allen, 1992; Bonner,
2000; Cuyjet, 1997; Fries-Britt, 1998; Fries-Britt & Griffin, 2007; Griffin,
2006; Harper, 2005; McGee & Martin, 2011a). This corpus of scholarship
tends to promote a strengths-based approach to uncover the myriad ways
undergraduate students successfully navigate educational spaces in the
face of obstacles such as racism, isolation, and tokenism (Harper, 2010,
2015; McGee & Martin, 2011b). This work underscores how Black males’
persistence relates to their connections to the institution vis-a
`-vis nurturing
relationships with faculty, administrators, and staff. It also points to the ben-
efit of Black males’ identification and interactions with other high-achieving
Black males.
The emphasis on high-achieving Black males at the undergraduate level
begs the question: What happens to those high-achieving Black males after
they complete their undergraduate studies? Some of them, like Paul, who is
quoted previously, decide to attend graduate school (McCallum, 2016;
McCoy & Winkle-Wagner, 2015; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016), where
they may have equally tumultuous academic experiences due to gendered
racism throughout the educational environment (Harper & Palmer, 2016;
Ingram, 2007). Essed (1991) coined the term gendered racism to describe
the specific dilemmas Black women face. She believed that racism and sex-
ism ‘‘narrowly intertwine and combine under certain conditions into one,
hybrid phenomenon’’ (p. 31) and pointed out that ‘‘Black men are [also] con-
fronted with racism structured by racist constructions of gender roles, nota-
ble examples being the absent father stereotype or the myth of the Black
rapist’’ (p. 31). Similarly, Smith and colleagues (Smith, 2010; Smith, Allen,
& Danley, 2007; Smith, Yosso, & Solo
´rzano, 2007) differentiated between
the comparable experiences of racism that both Black men (and boys)
and women (and girls) faced and those that were of a specific form of
Burt et al.
966
anti-Black misandry, defined as an ‘‘exaggerated pathological aversion
toward Black men created and reinforced in societal, institutional, and indi-
vidual ideologies, practices, and behaviors’’ (Smith, Allen, et al., 2007,
p. 563). In short, Black males have been subjected to gender-specific stereo-
typing, subordination, repression, and oppression. Yet when high-achieving
Black males who learned how to successfully navigate predominantly White
spaces as undergraduates continue to experience challenges on the graduate
level, assumptions are often made that their challenges are individualized,
which places the onus of academic difficulties on the shoulders of Black
males themselves. This perspective not only represents a deficit approach,
it removes all accountability for students’ success from college and university
communities.
Black males’ success (and that of other underrepresented populations)
in engineering communities is vital to addressing persistent calls for broad-
ening participation in engineering (Brazziel & Brazziel, 2001; Chubin, May,
& Babco, 2005; Maton & Hrabowski, 2004; Moore, 2006; National Action
Council for Minorities in Engineering [NACME], 2014; National Academy of
Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, 1995).
Yet the number of Black males in engineering remains startlingly low.
Recent statistics highlight the gross underrepresentation of Black males in
the field. According to Yoder (2015), 11,702 doctoral degrees in engineering
were awarded in 2015. Of those, Black males only made up 1% (or 112) of
earned engineering doctorates; these data include Black males who attended
Historically Black Colleges and Universities but not those with ‘‘foreign
national’’ status. While these statistics are not new or surprising, they should
no longer be ignored. What are the implications for national security, infra-
structure, technological advancement, and innovation if engineers who may
see problems from different vantage points are excluded? Expanding the
representation of Black male engineers will expand the talent pool contrib-
uting to solving the problems of the nation and world.
This article presents the results of a six-year study of 21 Black male grad-
uate students in engineering from one highly ranked research-intensive insti-
tution. These participants represent the critical mass of Black males in their
entire college of engineering. The article illuminates the challenges and bar-
riers they faced with regard to navigating and negotiating gendered racial-
ized experiences within the college. In this study, we interchangeably
refer to the participants’ persistent challenges as gendered racism and gen-
dered racialized experience to emphasize the inability to disentangle inter-
sections between race and gender. While we understand the unique roles
that gender performance and masculinities may play in how others view
Black males (Q. Allen, 2015), our operationalization of gendered racialized
experiences refers exclusively to participants’ biological beings: They were
born Black and male, and people see them as Black males. Therefore, gen-
dered racism and gendered racialized experiences refer to occurrences
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
967
related to gender and race. They could, for example, refer to interactions
with others, observations of injustice, administrative policies and practices,
and symbolic representations on college campuses that trigger gendered,
racial, and ethnic identity awareness for students of color relative to others.
These gendered racialized experiences represent ‘‘the storm’’ referred to
in the title of this paper. Black male participants in this study were well into
the storm of their graduate programs at the time data were collected.
Fortunately, at the time of this writing, more than half have made it through
the storm by successfully earning engineering doctorates. While we applaud
their collective accomplishments, this article does not serve as a ‘‘how to’’
guide for Black male students traversing dangerous engineering educational
contexts. That is not our purpose here. Instead, we argue that Black males’
low representation, persistence, and success in engineering are functions of
gendered racialized structures within colleges of engineering. It is these gen-
dered racialized structures that raise barriers to broadening participation.
Thus, this article, based on empirical evidence, holds up a mirror to engi-
neering colleges and the community members within them to reveal the gen-
dered racialized storms systematically maintained in graduate engineering
education. Investigating the college-specific experiences that engage stu-
dents or turn them away from the science and engineering workforce can
provide new understandings of the complexity of science and engineering
participation.
Students of Color in Graduate School
and Their Racialized Experiences
Relative to scholarship on the experiences of Black collegians in under-
graduate studies, the literature on Black students in graduate education
remains limited (DeFour & Hirsch, 1990; Harper & Palmer, 2016; Howard-
Hamilton, Morelon-Quainoo, Johnson, Winkle-Wagner, & Santiague, 2009;
Johnson-Bailey, Valentine, Cervero, & Bowles, 2009). Therefore, to frame
the experiences of Black male engineers in graduate school, we include lit-
erature from the broader corpus of scholarship on students of color in grad-
uate school, including but not limited to those in STEM fields. In the
following sections, we describe students’ graduate experiences in terms of
ecological and sociological factors.
Ecological Factors: Racialized Experiences Within and Outside the Academy
A number of ecological factors influence Black males’ graduate experi-
ences. To begin, underrepresentation in STEM is a barrier to students’ persis-
tence. Between 1994 and 2014, the number of Black students pursuing
graduate STEM degrees increased by 70% (National Science Foundation,
1994, 2014). In the aggregate, this increase is promising because it suggests
Burt et al.
968
that more Black students are poised to earn advanced degrees in key subject
areas where they have been historically underrepresented. However, it is
important to note that the number of Black students—and Black males in
particular—remains low despite increases over the past few decades. For
Black males who are U.S. citizens and permanent residents, there appears
to have been tremendous growth between 2003 and 2013. The number of
Black males who earned doctorates in science and engineering increased
by 25% during this time span. On the one hand, this looks like growth.
On the other hand, the absolute numbers hardly increased at all. In 2003,
631 of 13,921 doctoral recipients were Black males; in 2013, the numbers
were 798 of 16,542. This means that Black male representation has stayed
basically flat, only growing from 4.5% to 4.8% of all science and engineering
doctoral degree holders between 2003 and 2013 (Bidwell, 2015). While
progress has been undeniable for these students, these numbers suggest
that most STEM graduate programs still suffer from a lack of racial/ethnic
diversity, especially regarding Black male student enrollment.
Establishing the landscape of higher education at the graduate level is
important because even after decades of race-related educational research,
students of color continue to report experiences similar to those from prior
decades (DeFour & Hirsch, 1990). Most germane to this study are students’
racialized experiences. Bonilla-Silva (2001) provides an understanding of
how people and systems are racialized:
Economic, political, social, and ideological [hierarchies] are partially
structured by the placement of actors in racial categories. . . . The
race placed in the superior position tends to receive greater economic
remuneration and access to better occupations and prospects in the
labor market, occupies a primary position in the political system, is
granted higher social estimation . . . often has the license to draw phys-
ical (segregation) as well as social (racial etiquette) boundaries . . . and
receives what W.E.B. DuBois called a ‘‘psychological wage.’’ (p. 37)
Racialized incidents experienced by students of color on predominantly
White campuses have been well-documented (Felder & Barker, 2013;
George Mwangi, Fries-Britt, Peralta, & Daoud, 2016; Gildersleeve, Croom,
& Vasquez, 2011). These experiences are not rare. They are commonplace
in the everyday experiences of students of color. In fact, racialized incidents
are so ingrained in the college campus experience that scholars regularly
investigate the coping and resiliency strategies students of color employ to
navigate these offenses. For instance, Truong and Museus’s (2012) study
of 26 doctoral students of color illustrates the racialized experiences faced
by students of color on predominantly White campuses and their effects.
Truong and Museus identified 12 forms of racialized experiences such as
onlyness, isolation, low expectations, high standards, and violations of insti-
tutional and federal policies. They also identified 17 strategies for coping
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
969
with racial trauma, categorized into internal responses, controlled responses,
and external responses. Similarly, McGee and Martin (2011b) argue that
STEM students of color develop strategies to manage the stereotypes they
face on their campuses. While these authors highlight patterns of resilience
demonstrated by students, most significant to the current study are the inci-
dents experienced by participants that led them to need strategies to manage
the hostile campus.
Racialized experiences have deleterious effects on students’ health and
overall wellness and negatively influence students’ sense of belonging on
campus and their persistence (Johnson-Bailey et al., 2009; McGee & Stovall,
2015; Truong & Museus, 2012; Uqdah, Tyler, & DeLoach, 2009). When stu-
dents of color face racialized experiences, they describe feeling isolated,
unsupported, and on the margins on campus and within their academic
departments (DeFour & Hirsch, 1990; Gay, 2004; Herzig, 2004; Johnson-
Bailey et al., 2009; Milner, 2004; M. R. Williams, Brewley, Reed, White, &
Davis-Haley, 2005). It is clear from the extant literature that students of color
continue describing feelings of isolation because they are often the only stu-
dents of color in their classrooms or constitute a small proportion on campus.
Being the ‘‘only one’’ or ‘‘token [person of color]’’ expected to represent a race
is exhausting and further promotes the trauma and stereotype management
mentioned previously. Furthermore, scholars have shown that when students
of color experience isolation, they also feel obligated to prove they are smart
enough and belong at their institution and in their graduate program (Fries-
Britt & Turner, 2005; McGee, 2016) and are not there due to affirmative action
decisions to increase diversity (McGee & Martin, 2011b). Isolation for graduate
students does not take place only on one’s own campus. Students of color are
often also marginalized within their broader field of study, as is the case in
engineering, where out of 156,857 students enrolled in engineering graduate
programs at both the master’s and doctoral levels, Black males make up only
1% (or 1,574) of enrolled students (Yoder, 2015). It can be imagined that to
feel isolated at all levels (field of study, institution, college, department,
research group) can make Black males, and underrepresented students of
color broadly, desire to escape to other majors or fields of study where there
are more people who look like them.
Sociological Factors: Racialized Experiences Within Critical Relationships
In addition to ecological factors, several sociological factors also influ-
ence Black males’ graduate experiences. The academic advisor, for instance,
is widely considered to be the primary agent of student socialization during
graduate school (Barker, 2011, 2016; Felder, Stevenson, & Gasman, 2014;
Gardner, 2007; Graham, 2013; Nettles & Millett, 2006; Tinto, 1993; Twale,
Weidman, & Bethea, 2016; Weidman & Stein, 2003; Weidman, Twale, &
Stein, 2001). Not surprisingly, then, the faculty advisor ‘‘can make or break
Burt et al.
970
a Ph.D. student’’ (Lee, 2008, p. 1). The relationship with one’s advisor is cen-
tral to doctoral students’ progress and completion in part because advisors
work intensely with students to help them develop a research agenda
(e.g., dissertation); this research agenda is often a necessary component to
demonstrate students’ capacity to produce independent scholarship.
Advisors also help integrate students into the campus, department, and field
of study. Integration within these intellectual communities is necessary for
academic and professional growth as well as critical to helping students
feel connected to their field of study.
The advising relationship can become strained for a host of reasons.
Most common in the experiences of graduate students of color are racial
microaggressions. Sue et al. (2007) define racial microaggressions as ‘‘brief
and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities,
whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory,
or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color’’ (p. 271). As
described by Harper and Palmer (2016), racial microaggressions are like
‘‘death by a thousand cuts—an individual one stings, but the cumulative
sum of them is quite injurious’’ (p. 150). The effects of racial microaggres-
sions make individuals feel ‘‘othered’’ and often cause psychological stress
(Burt, McKen, Burkhart, Hormell, & Knight, 2016; Pierce, 1970; Smith,
Yosso, et al., 2007).
Issues with advising are often exacerbated in fields where one’s advisor
also serves as one’s research supervisor, as in science and engineering
(Graham, 2013). In these fields, the advisor’s role is heightened because stu-
dents tend to be involved in their advisor’s research group and the work that
they do in the research lab often becomes their dissertation work (Burt,
2014). In this regard, one’s capacity to demonstrate research growth is tied
to work done in the research lab. In these circumstances, the line between
receiving advising and receiving feedback on one’s research performance
can become blurred. If an advisor commits microaggressions against a stu-
dent, the student likely will not discern the offense as coming from either
the advisor or research supervisor but rather from the faculty member hold-
ing both roles. Such experiences can leave students feeling inadequate about
their academic progress and growth (Felder & Barker, 2013).
While much emphasis has been placed on the myriad ways faculty advi-
sors mediate students’ experiences, peers also shape students’ overall doc-
toral experience. A relatively small body of literature shows that students
learn through interactions with their peers (Fries-Britt, Burt, & Franklin,
2012; Gasman, Hirschfeld, & Vultaggio, 2008; Gatson-Gayles & Kelly, 2004;
Holmes & Rivera, 2004; Marbley, Bonner, & McKisick, 2004; Patton, 2009).
For instance, when it comes to research experiences, some newcomers
turn to their peers for help (Baker & Pifer, 2011). Some feel more comfort-
able asking questions of their peers than of their advisors; with peers, there
is a feeling of safety instead of shame if the student does not know
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
971
something the advisor thinks they should know (Fries-Britt et al., 2012). As
evidenced in this body of scholarship, peers play an important role in the
retention of students in graduate school. However, peers can and often do
tend to be sources of stress and trauma for students of color in graduate
school. In the classroom, peers tend to be co-conspirators with faculty in
asking students of color to speak for their entire race or ethnicity, making
students of color feel isolated and othered (Harper & Palmer, 2016).
Racialized experiences are especially harmful when the offense makes stu-
dents of color question whether an incident is racially motivated or not
and when it forces students to psychologically manage the harm (McGee,
2016; McGee & Martin, 2011b). For instance, Fries-Britt, George Mwangi,
and Peralta (2014) explored the racialized experiences of Black graduate
and undergraduate students in physics. In one example, they describe the
experiences of Manuel, who upon entering class found a copy of the
book The Bell Curve, which offers a perspective that people of color are
inherently intellectually inferior to White individuals, on his desk. Upon see-
ing the book, Manuel went to the college dean, who suggested that the inci-
dent was not a big deal and likely a ‘‘mistake.’’ While the article specifically
focused on experiences of foreign-born students of color, the experiences
described by Manuel and others are not uncommon for students of color
in general. Not only do students of color have to navigate hostile institutions
and consistently prove their intellectual capacity, when they report racialized
experiences or seek help, they are often told these experiences are just in
their heads.
The literature on students of color in graduate education is scant relative
to that on students of color at the undergraduate level. Yet across that extant
literature, there appear to be patterns in the types of racialized experiences
these students face. However, more nuanced examinations of students’
experiences are needed. This study adds richness to the higher education
and STEM education literature bases due to its focus on Black males in engi-
neering graduate programs at one institution. This approach within a partic-
ular field of study is important, especially for a field like engineering, where
the field is committed to broadening the participation of underrepresented
populations but where most scholarship focuses on undergraduate students
and where there is a dearth of research on Black males at the graduate level.
Conceptual Model
While some research has employed an anti-deficit approach that focuses
on Black males who defied the odds and the enablers of their success
(Harper, 2010), it is also important to better understand the underlying struc-
tural processes and experiences that make success a challenge. The
Bowman role strain and adaptation model (BRSAM) emphasizes the social
and psychological (i.e., psychosocial) resources that individuals often
Burt et al.
972
draw from to succeed, including community and family support as well as
individual or personal attributes such as resilience and self-efficacy
(Bowman, 2006). Applied to Black individuals and other marginalized pop-
ulations in various contexts such as education, family life, and health
(Bowman, 1989; D. M. Griffith, Gunter, & Allen, 2011; Rowley & Bowman,
2009; K. L. Williams, 2014a, 2014b), the BRSAM underscores the importance
of understanding these attributes in the context of the actual challenges indi-
viduals encounter. The aspect of the model most germane to this study is its
emphasis on explicating the challenges students encounter due to structural
gendered racism.
A key concept within the BRSAM is role strain. Role strain is defined as
the challenges individuals face in highly valued life roles and their responses
to such difficulties (Bowman, 2006). As applied to students in this study, stu-
dent role strain represents the challenges and barriers individuals encounter
in their roles as gendered and racialized students (K. L. Williams, 2014b;
K. L. Williams, Burt, & Hilton, 2016). The BRSAM acknowledges that student
role strain can result due to normative and non-normative obstacles. Some
forms of role strain may be a function of the normative challenges that all
students are likely to experience. For example, graduate students may expe-
rience strain because of the psychological stress of transitioning from under-
graduate-level to more rigorous graduate-level coursework, cognitive
difficulties with learning how to conduct research, or challenges navigating
departmental social norms and expectations (Austin & McDaniels, 2006; V. L.
Baker & Pifer, 2011; Burt, 2017; Gardner, 2007). While all students may con-
front strain-inducing challenges of some sort, Black males in graduate school
must also tackle non-normative obstacles related specifically to their race
and gender. Examples of such obstacles for Black male graduate students
might include the psychological stress of feeling obligated to represent other
Black students in courses, feeling isolated because of their underrepresenta-
tion on a given campus, or perceptions that professors have lower expecta-
tions of them because of their race (Barker, 2011; Felder & Barker, 2013;
Felder et al., 2014; McGee & Martin, 2011b).
In addition to normative and non-normative obstacles, the BRSAM sug-
gests that student role strain can also manifest because of structured inequal-
ities due to race and/or gender. These inequalities can promote ecological
barriers, social stressors, and personal stress—all of which have the potential
to hinder student success. It is essential that research explore difficulties due
to structural inequalities that many Black males experience in their pursuit of
graduate STEM degrees. The difficulties described previously serve as a con-
textual backdrop for understanding how these students employ strengths to
overcome anti-Black obstacles (i.e., policies and practices that are counter-
productive to Black males’ progress and achievement) (Dumas & Ross,
2016). From this vantage point, the BRSAM offers a lens that acknowledges
the role of structural and institutional barriers in students’ experiences, as
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
973
opposed to suggesting that students’ social and psychological challenges are
internally initiated. Hence, this model suggests that the ‘‘deficit’’ lies in the
inequitable dynamics of the environment, not the students. Accordingly,
our use of the BRSAM expands existing research by critiquing the structural
inequalities that create strain-inducing environments and can obstruct suc-
cessful outcomes for students from marginalized groups. By acknowledging
the structurally rooted challenges that students encounter, we can more fully
appreciate the resilience required to be successful in a particular context.
Considering the gendered racism that Black male graduate students in
engineering experience at the social and institutional levels, the following
research questions guide this study:
Research Question 1: What ecological and sociological barriers within a college of
engineering promote non-normative student role strain for Black male students
pursuing graduate engineering degrees?
Research Question 2: How do these ecological and sociological barriers influence
Black males’ persistence in engineering graduate programs?
Methods
This article derives from a larger exploratory study of the experiences of
32 Black males in engineering graduate studies across three predominantly
White institutions during the 2010–2016 academic years. The participants
in this study represent the critical mass of Black males in their respective
engineering graduate programs. Questions in the broader study attended
to pre–graduate school background and early formative experiences in
STEM, reasons for pursuing and staying in graduate school, learning and
professional development experiences in graduate school, critical contexts
and interactions in graduate school, and being a Black male in an engineer-
ing graduate program. This article focuses on 21 Black males at one
institution to highlight participants’ experiences within their college of engi-
neering, specifically focusing on the contextual factors within the college
and the critical relationships that served as barriers to their persistence. By
focusing on participants at one institution, we were able to identify
college-specific policies, practices, and interactions affecting students’ expe-
riences in engineering, an opportunity that may be lost when comparing stu-
dents across fields of study that do not enable a domain-specific account.
Further, it was assumed that focusing this study on one population within
the same cultural and political context, studying Black males in a college
of engineering versus studying Black males across the STEM spectrum,
would reduce the number of potential explanatory factors.
Burt et al.
974
Research Site
The 21 study participants were graduate students (master’s and doctoral)
at a prestigious university. In fact, the College of Engineering at ‘‘Midwestern
University’’ (pseudonym for the institution) was home to top engineering
majors at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, warranting respect
as a leader in the preparation of engineers. Tables 1 and 2 show graduate
enrollment university-wide at the time of data collection. Of note, Black
male enrollment at the graduate level remained under 2% (1.4% in 2010
and 1.5% in 2016) for the duration of data collection. These figures represent
graduate enrollment across all of Midwestern University (not including
enrollment in professional schools); the numbers of Black males in engineer-
ing graduate programs, thus, are miniscule. The engineering-specific enroll-
ment numbers are not presented in this article to maintain the anonymity of
the institution and the participants in this study.
Meet the Participants
The profiles of the participants in this study provide some information
about the educational experiences and caliber of students included in the
study, the kinds of high-achieving Black males attending Midwestern
University’s College of Engineering. See Table 3 for participants’ demo-
graphic information. A majority of the participants self-reported coming
Table 1
Graduate Enrollment by Race and Gender at Midwestern
University (Academic Year 2009–2010)
White Asian Black (%) Hispanic
Male 2,810 531 169 (1.4) 198
Female 2,800 503 325 195
Note. Total enrollment was approximately 11,800 (including international students but not
including graduate students from professional schools like medicine, dentistry, business, etc.).
Table 2
Graduate Enrollment by Race and Gender at Midwestern
University (Academic Year 2016–2017)
White Asian Black (%) Hispanic
Male 2,712 489 199 (1.5) 333
Female 2,725 493 317 359
Note. Total enrollment was approximately 13,000 (including international students but not
including graduate students from professional schools like medicine, dentistry, business, etc.).
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
975
from middle-class families (1 participant described coming from a poor and
working-class family) and two-parent homes (4 participants described being
raised primarily by their mothers). Of the 21 participants, 16 had mothers
with postsecondary education, including 4 who held doctorates. Similarly,
18 had fathers with postsecondary education, including 3 who held
doctorates.
Most participants (19) attended public high schools; 2 attended private
high schools. Eight attended high schools described as majority White, 7
attended high schools where a majority of the students were classified as
Black, and 6 attended high schools with racially and ethnically mixed pop-
ulations. Collectively, their high school grade point average (GPA) was
Table 3
Demographic Data for Study Participants
Pseudonyma
Class
Level
Engineering
Specialization Ethnicity
Citizenship
Status
Under-
graduate
Origin
Postgraduate
Career
Intention
AlphonsoaFifth Electrical AA FB PWI Industry
ChrisaFifth Chemical Nigerian NB PWI Industry
Christian Third Civil AA NB PWI Faculty
Daniel First Industrial Nigerian FB PWI Unsure
David First Design AA NB PWI Unsure
JacksonaThird Mechanical AA NB PWI Unsure
Jacob Third Chemical AA NB PWI Policy
JadenaSecond Electrical AA NB HBCU Industry
Jalen First Mechanical Jamaican FB PWI Faculty
JamesaFourth Biomedical West African FB PWI Faculty
Jesse Fifth Electrical AA NB PWI Faculty
Joseph Fourth Material AA NB PWI Unsure
MarcusaThird Mechanical Caribbean FB PWI Unsure
PaulaFourth Electrical Ethiopian FB PWI Unsure
QuentinaFifth Electrical Nigerian FB PWI Unsure
Shawn Fourth Material AA NB HBCU Industry
TerrenceaSecond Material Ghanaian FB International Unsure
Titus Second Civil AA NB PWI Unsure
TraiaFourth Mechanical AA NB PWI Industry
Tristan First Aerospace AA NB PWI Unsure
VictoraFifth Chemical AA NB PWI Industry
Note. Class level refers to the number of years a student has been in graduate school.
Citizenship status refers to students who are foreign born (FB) or native born (NB).
Undergraduate origin refers to the designation of students’ undergraduate institution:
Predominantly White Institution (PWI), Historically Black College or University (HBCU),
or an international institution. AA = African American.
aDenotes that a student has graduated since data collection.
Burt et al.
976
approximately 3.66. Participants’ collective GPA at the collegiate level was
equally impressive at 3.58. Most participants (19) had attended Predominantly
White Institutions (PWIs); 2 had attended a Historically Black College or
University (HBCU).
In their engineering graduate studies, participants’ specializations var-
ied: electrical (5), mechanical (4), material (3), chemical (3), civil (2), aero-
space (1), biomedical (1), design (1), and industrial (1). They also ranged
in class level, their year in school during the time of data collection: first
year (4), second year (3), third year (4), fourth year (5), fifth year (5). At
the time of this writing, 11 of the 21 participants in this study have earned
their doctorates from Midwestern University (this information was ascer-
tained through personal contact, a benefit of the rapport building that will
be described more in the following). It is important to note that in this article,
Black is not synonymous with African American. Rather, we use Black to
denote the more global diaspora of race. Thus, eight foreign-born students
considered themselves Black but not necessarily African American. Some
students considered themselves Nigerian, West African, Caribbean,
Ethiopian, and Ghanaian. Finally, at the time of data collection, 6 students
were interested in obtaining industry positions upon graduating, 4 were
interested in a faculty career, 1 was interested in a policy career, and 10
were unsure of their postgraduate plans.
Both their high school and their college GPAs suggest that these students
had historically been academically strong. As reflected in these demographic
data, almost all of the participants in this study had experience interacting
with and thriving in postsecondary academic spaces where they were not
in the racial majority. Participants’ family backgrounds, grades, involvement,
and proven records of performing at high levels over extended periods of
time indicate that these Black males had profiles of individuals likely to suc-
ceed in graduate school. Thus, it is reasonable to hypothesize that academic
troubles they confronted were caused by institutional factors and not aca-
demic deficiencies (as existing scholarship on underrepresented students
in STEM might suggest).
Data Collection
During the first wave of data collection (2010), a student leader in a
student-run organization that caters to students of color in STEM fields,
Really Intelligent Student Engineers (RISE), provided names of Black males
in engineering who met the study’s criteria: Black male master’s or doctoral
students in engineering. This assistance led to the initial 5 participants. After
each interview concluded, participants were asked to provide names of
other Black males enrolled in an engineering doctoral program at
Midwestern University. This snowball sampling procedure (allowing partic-
ipants who met the study criteria to help identify other potential participants
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
977
who also met the criteria) (Merriam & Tisdell, 2013) helped identify 6 addi-
tional participants. For the second wave of data collection (2016), an engi-
neering administrator contacted eligible participants, which yielded 10
additional participants. To maintain consistency, the interview processes
during both waves of data collection were nearly the same. Specifically, after
granting consent, participants completed an eight-item demographic form.
Then, one-on-one, semi-structured interviews were conducted (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2013), guided by an interview protocol that allowed participants to
describe their collegiate backgrounds, graduate school experiences, and
identification with and intentions to remain in engineering (interview proto-
cols were nearly the same across both waves of data collection except that
questions that elicited redundancy were removed). Because the interviews
were semi-structured, follow-up questions were asked to clarify or gain
deeper understandings. Although participants were only asked for one
hour of their time, several interviews approached two hours. Many of the
participants acknowledged the interview as the first time they had been
asked to reflect on their experiences in graduate school. As such, they felt
the need to share their stories. In addition, many felt as though their partic-
ipation in this study was necessary to make the experiences of future Black
males in engineering better than their own.
Data Analysis
Adapted techniques from grounded theory were utilized to analyze data.
Data analysis included two waves (2010 and 2016) and multiple rounds and
was conducted by the principal investigator, the first author. In the first wave
and first round of data analysis (2010), an inductive approach was used.
Small segments of interview text were selected (coded) and defined in
a codebook when they shed light on students’ graduate experiences at
Midwestern University, experiences that led them to graduate school, and/
or experiences while in graduate school (Merriam & Tisdell, 2013). This pro-
cess of coding was completed for each of the 11 transcripts in the initial
wave of data collection. The goal was to be open to all possible accounts.
Codes were constantly scrutinized to make sure their properties were dis-
tinct from other codes (i.e., constant comparison) (Corbin & Strauss,
2008). This process was iterative and ongoing. When one code could not
be easily distinguished from another, it was reanalyzed and assigned
a more appropriate label and definition. Confidence that saturation had
been reached occurred when no new codes were identified. After the coding
process, like codes were combined into categories. Examples of categories
and their codes include: journey to the PhD (influence of others, personal
aspirations, family expectations and encouragement, cultural pressure),
pushing past obstacles (transitioning to graduate school, advisor relation-
ships, experiences with qualifying exams, research experiences), and
Burt et al.
978
sources of support (family, peers, undergraduate advisor/mentors, campus
student organization, university).
A second round of data analysis specifically focused on participants’ per-
spectives on being Black and male in an engineering graduate program. The
aim of this intersectional analysis was to ensure that participants’ racialized
and gendered experiences were accounted for. Codes were emergent in
that no preexisting codes based on a priori findings were used to generate
the codes in this study. This does not suggest that the literature did not
inform the process of analysis. For example, we were familiar with concepts
such as racial microaggressions, racial battle fatigue, stereotype manage-
ment, and resilience prior to analysis. However, those concepts and others
served as sensitizing concepts; we were not searching for confirmatory
data to validate hunches. Rather, we used the data, the voices of student par-
ticipants, to determine the patterns of gendered racialized experiences they
were reporting. To this end, we coded all instances where students
described experiences based on their Black and/or Black and male identi-
ties. Examples of categories and their codes include dealing with tokenism
(perceptions of prejudice, Black achiever isolation), unwavering optimism
about completing the PhD (understanding the magnitude of undertaking
the PhD as a Black man, committing to completing the PhD, excelling in
small academic tasks), and rationales for and agency in engineering persis-
tence (individual responsibility, opportunity to impact the engineering path-
ways for future generations of Black students).
During the final round of data analysis in the first wave, a deductive
approach was used to consider the ecology, or contexts, in which participants’
experiences were nested (e.g., college of engineering, department, research
group); sociological interactions with various actors who mediated students’
experiences within the college of engineering (e.g., advisors, research super-
visors, non-Black peers, Black peers); and ways in which students communi-
cated identification with engineering and long-term persistence in engineering
(e.g., excitement to remain in academe or engineering industry after graduat-
ing, pursuing professional opportunities that do not relate to one’s engineer-
ing training, dropping out of the PhD program). We remained attuned to the
ways in which participants’ experiences were gendered and racialized in
efforts to help make sense of their nested contexts.
In the second wave of data collection (2016), a selective coding process
was used for the additional 10 participants. The purpose of selective coding
is to focus on particular codes to help with hypothesis testing (Corbin &
Strauss, 2008; Merriam & Tisdell, 2013). For example, in the first wave of
analysis, we identified a relationship between students’ persistence and
four factors: gendered racialized experiences in engineering, contexts in
which participants’ experiences were nested, who mediated students’ expe-
riences, and communication of engineering persistence. We tested these
core categories through analyses of participant data in the second wave of
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
979
data collection. Constant comparison was also used to make sure that codes
from the second wave of participants fit with the initial coding criteria in the
codebook.
Because of the adapted grounded theory techniques employed (Corbin
& Strauss, 2008), we did not begin analysis with a theoretical model to guide
our analyses. Rather, after data collection and multiple rounds of analyses
(both inductive and deductive), we drew on the BRSAM to offer a theoreti-
cally based interpretation of participants’ experiences. That is, we main-
tained the core categories identified in previous analyses (i.e., gendered
racialized experiences in engineering, contexts in which participants’ expe-
riences were nested, who mediated students’ experiences, and communica-
tion of engineering persistence) but then turned to the BRSAM for
conceptual guidance concerning participants’ gendered and racialized expe-
riences and how those experiences demonstrated non-normative student
role strain in their nested contexts.
Role of the Researchers
In qualitative research, a practice of reflexivity encourages researchers to
be aware of how their positionalities and worldviews shape all aspects of
a study (Green, Creswell, Shope, & Clark, 2007; Merriam & Tisdell, 2013;
Milner, 2007; Peshkin, 1988). We were reflexive with regard to how potential
biases may have affected our interpretations of data (Bernal, 1998; Cooper,
Jackson, Azmita, & Lopez, 1998; Warren & Vincent, 2001). Specifically, the
principal investigator is a Black man who at the time of the first wave of
data collection was a doctoral student in the social sciences (not engineer-
ing) and a faculty member during the second wave of data collection.
Being a Black male doctoral student was beneficial in building rapport
with participants in the first wave of data collection; participants felt as if
they were sharing valuable information with a peer. The ease with which
participants openly shared their experiences with the principal investigator
was likely due to the researcher’s social identity as a Black man, regardless
of differences in academic fields of study. This ease of communication
became apparent through the exchange of culture-specific terminology
and nonverbal cues (e.g., head nods, fist bumps, Black-diaspora slang).
Reflecting on his new professional positionality as a faculty member during
data collection in the second wave, the principal investigator proactively
considered strategies to make participants feel at ease candidly sharing their
experiences with a faculty member who would not report their responses
back to administrators and their faculty advisor. One such strategy included
dressing casually in jeans and a college t-shirt like most participants and
intentionally not dressing ‘‘like a professor’’ in a blazer or business casual
attire. The second author, a Black woman, has an undergraduate back-
ground in STEM but holds a doctorate in a social science field. The third
Burt et al.
980
author, a Black man, holds degrees in psychology and counseling. They too
are professors. In whole, our intersecting identities, ideologies, and perspec-
tives shape who we are as researchers, the nature of the interview protocol
and research design, interactions with participants (including but not limited
to how they interacted with the principal investigator, thus influencing the
quality of the data collected), and the ways in which the data were inter-
preted (Bernal, 1998). Collectively, based on our aligned research interests
and bodies of scholarly work, we agreed that Black male students (and
underrepresented students in whole) hold unique and nuanced experiences.
We also agreed that Black males’ experiences vary based on a host of factors
(e.g., ethnicity, socioeconomic status, family influences, perspectives on
education). While we were careful not to assume that being Black (and/or
male) made us experts on our participants’ experience, we believe that
our racial (and for the first and third authors, our racial and gender intersec-
tional) identities are strengths in this study as we shared some similar expe-
riences as our study’s participants. Sharing these multiple identities with
participants allowed for more nuanced cultural interpretations of the inter-
view data that might be lost on researchers with different identities
(Bernal, 1998; Green et al., 2007; Warren & Vincent, 2001).
Limitations
Several limitations to this study should be considered. First, the sample
of 21 Black males in engineering graduate programs is not, nor should it be,
considered representative of all Black males in engineering graduate pro-
grams as this study’s goal was not to generalize to a broader population.
Rather, the focus on 21 participants who were all Black males in engineering
at the same institution provides more depth for understanding participants’
lived experiences. Focusing on these 21 students allowed for consideration
of their unique contextual (institutional and departmental) experiences,
which might be lost or overlooked in a larger sample that included students
across academic disciplines or institutions.
Second, the two times at which data were collected should be consid-
ered. It is possible that the two time contexts in which participants navigated
Midwestern University were qualitatively different. However, the researchers
remain confident that the lived experiences participants described mirror
one another, irrespective of the years in which the data were collected.
For example, several participants across waves of data collection referenced
similar faculty advisors, administrators, College of Engineering policies and
practices, and patterns related to peers. This gives us confidence that even
though the years in which data were collected differ, the experiences had
by Black males in engineering at Midwestern University between 2010 and
2016 remained relatively unchanged.
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
981
Third, the initial participants in the first wave of data collection were
identified through their involvement and/or connection to other student
leaders in RISE. However, participation in RISE was not a criterion for partic-
ipation in this study. The goal of this exploratory study was to gain an initial
understanding of the full range of experiences had by Black males in engi-
neering doctoral programs. Because of the small number of Black males
who met the study’s criteria, access to any and all Black males was
most important. Use of students who participated in RISE was merely conve-
nient. Nonetheless, it is possible that the nature of the RISE student organi-
zation, an affinity group with the goal of discussing challenges and
overcoming obstacles in STEM, might have encouraged certain types of stu-
dent leaders—those who are outspoken about these kinds of social justice
issues—to agree to participate in this study.
Finally, the social identities and individual experiences of most of the
participants should be considered. Specifically, most participants came
from U.S., White-dominated or mixed-race educational environments and
self-reported middle-income families in which most parents had postsecond-
ary education, and most participants were student leaders during their
undergraduate years. It is possible that the participants in this study were
specific types of students who were attracted to and/or recruited by the insti-
tutional prestige of Midwestern University. As such, their motivations for
attending, surviving, and thriving at Midwestern University could have over-
shadowed how they made sense of their racialized experiences in engineer-
ing. In other words, because of being successful based on their background
characteristics and perhaps family expectations, some may have felt the need
to underplay their challenges during the interview, a learned behavior
among students of color in STEM for coping with isolation and racial hostility
(McGee, 2016; Truong & Museus, 2012).
Ensuring Quality
The trustworthiness and credibility of the findings were enhanced by
a number of steps. First, even though data were collected in two separate
waves six years apart, the same interview protocol was used, and it elicited
similar results. This suggests that despite the difference in the years data
were collected, the cultural context of the College of Engineering at
Midwestern University remained relatively unchanged. It also suggests that
the interview protocol is not time-specific and can be a valuable instrument
in the future. Second, the principal investigator intentionally aimed to build
trust and rapport. To establish feelings of trust, the interview protocol was
purposefully designed to be general at first before probing into deeper,
more sensitive questions related to graduate experience within the College
of Engineering. This strategy allowed participants to ease into sharing their
experiences and view the exchange as a conversation (rather than an
Burt et al.
982
interview). The conversational nature of the interviews resulted in interviews
that were longer and data that were more descriptively rich than anticipated.
Because interviews were not abruptly concluded at the end of one hour, as
per participants’ requests, rapport was built, which allowed for an ample
number of clarifying and probing questions. Third, actively searching for evi-
dence that challenged the emerging findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2013) pro-
vided depth to the understanding of Black males’ experiences in engineering
doctoral programs. Further, the principal investigator allowed himself to be
vulnerable and answer personal questions at the conclusion of the interview
about his doctoral experience, what he was preliminarily learning from other
conversations with Black males in engineering, and future uses of the
research study (Dunbar, 2008). While these informal conversations were
not a part of the planned interview protocol, almost all participants asked
these broader questions to ascertain how they fit into the larger scope of
the project. Engaging in these conversations built trust between the
researcher and participants.
Fourth, qualitatively trained colleagues were consulted throughout the
entire research study, from research design to data collection to analysis
(Creswell, 2012; Merriam & Tisdell, 2013). Additionally, the second and third
authors further scrutinized the data in a final round of peer debriefing. All
researchers engaged in conversation until reaching consensus that student
quotations were accurately analyzed and explained. Engaging in a process
of peer debriefing during the development of interview questions helped
focus the interview questions on the engineering context. During data anal-
ysis, peer debriefing provided checks to early and ongoing interpretations of
the data. The second author’s background in STEM and social science also
provided valuable peer review of the data. Fifth, after transcripts were
checked against the audio recordings to ensure accuracy, all transcripts
were sent to participants to ensure that what they said was captured in
the ways they intended; no participants responded with comments.
Finally, throughout the research process, memo-ing allowed for tracking
of procedural decisions and potential relationships between the interviews,
research questions, and prior research to arise. Discrepant evidence was
noted whenever participants articulated disparate experiences. This audit
trail helps make the study procedures transparent (Merriam & Tisdell,
2013). It also allows for replication of this research; researchers can learn
from the decisions made in this study and bypass any mistakes.
Findings
Despite the resilience displayed by each of the Black males participating
in this study, analyses revealed several ecological and social barriers
that induced student role strain. These impediments, along with the non-
normative student role strain shared by Black males in this study, describe
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
983
the storm and turbulence they were forced to navigate during their graduate
work in engineering. We cluster these barriers based according to where the
offense originated, centering on policies and practices within the College of
Engineering. Furthermore, we then discuss the primary populations who
commit offenses that threaten participants’ persistence. In the following sec-
tions, we discuss Black male participants’ racialized interactions with White
and Asian engineering peers and their perceived hostile interactions with
faculty advisors as sources of student role strain.
The Ecological Impediments of Underrepresentation:
Institutional Practices, Non-Normative Student Role Strain,
and Challenges to Black Males’ Persistence
The underrepresentation of Black males within the College of
Engineering was a source of non-normative student role strain for many
of these students. Changes in institutional practices created an environment
in which Black male students felt isolated and lacked the support needed to
promote persistence, an ecology detrimental to student success. Throughout
data collection, the institution was testing out new recruitment strategies
while simultaneously adapting to federal policies to avoid further attacks
on affirmative action. As indicated by M. R. Williams et al. (2005), the
impacts of the ongoing affirmative action discourse on Black graduate stu-
dents had yet to be fully realized. Still, they provided evidence that stereo-
types and perceptions of affirmative action policies negatively contributed
to some students’ identity and psychological well-being, a finding similar
to that of McGee and Martin (2011b). The challenges to students’ identity
and the reduction of their well-being represent forms of non-normative stu-
dent role strain that students of color had to combat in hostile and racially
charged academic environments.
Several other environmental factors influenced the non-normative edu-
cational challenges or strains Black males experienced. Changes in student
recruitment led to lower Black male enrollment, which had impacts on the
educational experiences of the Black male participants in this study. For
example, the advanced students in this study, the third-, fourth-, and fifth-
year students witnessed the impacts of changing recruitment policies. Of
most concern to them was the College of Engineering’s inability to explicitly
recruit students of color via targeted recruitment weekends and other race-
and ethnicity-focused strategies. In fact, several advanced students shared
that they had chosen Midwestern University in part because of the efforts
made to recruit them and other students who looked like them. These insti-
tutional efforts were an attempt to address structural racism (Bonilla-Silva,
1997) that exists within higher education and consistently creates barriers
to opportunities for students of color in engineering fields. During the period
in which such recruitment efforts ceased, older Black peers graduated,
Burt et al.
984
leaving current students feeling isolated. Several participants noted the
changing cultural climate of the College of Engineering that created barriers
to their success. Trai, a fourth-year candidate in mechanical engineering,
shared how the racial isolation he experienced resulted in increased non-
normative student role strain: ‘‘I’m here ’cause I care about my craft. But it
still makes it tough when you don’t have a face that’s familiar in a class.’’
He further explained that before affirmative action legislation was passed,
minority students had been specifically recruited for graduate studies in
STEM fields, which made him feel empowered and understood:
Seeing some of the people that were there . . . kind of powers me
through. ...Italso helps you vocalize any other issues, that, you
know, ‘‘Oh, professor x here looked at me kind of weird today,’’
and kind of, you get the impression that a professor, he or she, might
be treating you a little differently because you’re Black or this and
that. Another Black male can relate to that. A White male cannot.
As hard as he may try, they can’t. So that’s very helpful I think
when you are going through that kind of experience.
Marcus, a third-year candidate also in mechanical engineering, offered sim-
ilar sentiments regarding the non-normative student role strain he experi-
enced because of the low number of Black males in the College of
Engineering:
I would ideally love for there to be more African American men in my
classes, for me. People are naturally going to want to be around peo-
ple who look like them. I look at the Asians and when they come
here, they have their own niche right away. Even though they are
[from] a foreign country, they are completely comfortable. . . . As
a Black man in engineering, I don’t have that camaraderie. So, I am
forced to immediately look outside of my comfort zone in order to
find people who I can study with, talk with, and have overall
support. . . . There is not that support there for me to succeed.
Marcus’s comments reflect the non-normative challenges that many Black
males report on predominantly White campuses. Black males cannot assume
that other students will be free of gendered-racial stereotypes that their pres-
ence will not be a source of discomfort for non-Black students. This environ-
mental context can potentially increase the strains that Black males develop
because of the racial biases they are forced to navigate. It was risky for
Marcus to step outside of his racial ‘‘comfort zone’’ and participate in
cross-racial study groups. Because of the limited number of Black males
(and females) in the College of Engineering, being in a racially homogenous
study group was not an opportunity afforded to Marcus and his limited num-
ber of Black male peers. Marcus’s apprehension is consistent with Fries-Britt
and Griffin’s (2007) findings that high-achieving Black students, described as
‘‘the best and the brightest,’’ were judged based on the larger society’s social
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
985
stereotypes regarding the academic abilities of Black students. These pres-
sures made Black students respond with self-protective measures (i.e., cop-
ing strategies).
Earlier, Marcus referenced Asian students as having an easier adjustment
to campus, especially when it comes to the ecological and social advantages
of having a critical mass of Asian peers for support. Marcus was not the only
participant to acknowledge the presence of Asian students in the College of
Engineering. Quentin, a fifth-year doctoral candidate in electrical engineer-
ing, noted an increase in the numbers of Asian students in his lab and across
the college:
With my professor, I think I’m his first Black student. At least from the
names of his students from the past, most of them are Asian or
Chinese. So, he usually recruits Indians and Chinese. So, that’s some-
thing he does consciously, and I am guessing other professors do that
too. So, maybe it’s Midwestern University some sort of predisposed
preference that they [faculty] have coming in, and that’s something
that is seen in grad school.
Here, Quentin and other Black male students were trying to make sense of
the racial composition of those in the College of Engineering. One way to
make sense of the lack of presence of other Black males is to assume that
the—predominantly White and Asian—professors prefer Asian students.
Not only did Quentin assume that his advisor and other professors through-
out the college actively recruited Asian students, he also suggested that
embedded within the practices of recruiting students, faculty had precon-
ceived biases regarding students and students’ abilities based on their racial
identity. Although Asian students outnumber Black students in the College
of Engineering (specific numbers are masked to maintain institutional ano-
nymity), we are not suggesting that Asian students are free from the burdens
of racial stereotypes. For example, existing research reports on how Asian
students—across a wide diaspora—deal with the ‘‘model minority’’ stereo-
type (Poon et al., 2016). Yet it is this same stereotype about Asian students
that influences their participation and acceptance in STEM spaces.
Similarly, the Black males in engineering experienced a particular form of
non-normative student role strain unique to their racial identity and due to
their limited representation. However, their gendered racialized stereotypes
did not hold the same positive connotations as those of their Asian peers.
As evidenced by some of the quotations shared in this section, Black
male students report non-normative role strain due to low representation
of other Black male engineering students, being unsure that they are valued
by their professors, and being unconvinced that there is a true commitment
to their academic, social, and personal success. Feeling uncertain, lacking
a perceived genuine interpersonal commitment to one’s success, and miss-
ing a social/racial sense of belonging are conditions that lead to racial battle
Burt et al.
986
fatigue (Smith, Mustaffa, Jones, Curry, & Allen, 2016). Still, Black males con-
stantly debate why there are not more males who look like them on their
campuses and in their academic majors. Alphonso, a fifth-year doctoral can-
didate in electrical engineering, shared the following insights about the lack
of cultural representation and the resulting non-normative strain that he and
his Black male peers encountered:
You have to be comfortable with, I guess, being in the minority
role—you know what I mean—in terms of the people here. Like if
you’re used to, like growing up, and let’s say everyone you talk to,
everyone in your school, is Black. And you go to, you know, college,
and everyone you know, everyone you’re used to dealing with, is
Black. The environment is kind of set up to that culture, and promot-
ing [and] building up that culture. And then you come to some place
like [Midwestern University]. There’s like White and Asian . . . grad
students and professors. . . . There’s definitely a lack of like Black
professors and Black colleagues. So, if you’re not used to that envi-
ronment, not comfortable working in that environment, interacting
with people in that environment, it’s going to be tough for you to
be at [Midwestern University] and to be successful.
In the previous quotation, Alphonso expressed arguments representative of
those of his Black male peers in the study. First, embedded within
Alphonso’s quotation is the commentary that Asian students were not under-
represented at Midwestern’s engineering college—nor in the field of
engineering. Second, he argued that certain types of Black students are likely
to survive the predominantly White environment of Midwestern University:
those who have previous experiences being racially minoritized. This notion
that only those accustomed to predominantly White environments can
weather the storm is troubling and provides a glimpse into the challenges
with recruitment efforts to deal with the underrepresentation of Black males.
If current students are not having positive academic experiences because
they feel undervalued due to their race, they may be unlikely to promote
the graduate program to talented prospective students who could add to
the diversity of the program. As evidenced in the previous quotation and
throughout this section as a whole, the structural racism within the institu-
tion and the engineering college resulted in unfair treatment, unwelcoming
environments, and racially induced non-normative student role strain.
Peer Prejudice as a Social Impediment: Gendered Racialized Experiences,
Non-Normative Student Role Strain, and Barriers to Black Males’ Persistence
The negative racialized social interactions that Black males had with
their non-Black peers created non-normative strains that challenged their
persistence. McGee (2016) reported that Black and Latinx STEM students
often face ‘‘negative assumptions, biases, and derogatory, often toxic, stereo-
types and microaggressions about their intellectual aptitude and STEM
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
987
identity’’ (p.1652) from their non-Black and non-Latinx peers (and faculty).
In the current study, prejudiced attitudes among non-Black peers often led
to discriminatory practices of exclusion, which many of the Black males
noted, particularly in the context of academic interactions such as study
groups. Several participants discussed the importance of study groups in
the College of Engineering. Study groups appeared to serve not only as aca-
demic support but also as structures to aid the transition into doctoral-level
work and acclimation to the engineering community. In fact, joining study
groups was described as an essential activity for survival; participants sug-
gested that their White and international Asian peers were successful in clas-
ses in large part due to the study groups they formed. Despite the value of
study groups and the positive peer interactions that they can foster, Black
male doctoral students in engineering described the non-normative student
role strain they experienced because of racial biases from other students
and within their departments. This strain often manifested as a feeling of
isolation. Chris, a fifth-year doctoral candidate in chemical engineering,
remarked:
Asians, you know, they have a study group, they have a purpose
coming here. They get together, they have support networks, such
as these tests that they pass down. Whereas, a Black man . . . there’s
very, very few African-Americans in these different departments. For
example, my department, I might be the only one. I’m the only one in
my department. . . . So, the experiences to me are very, very much
different. I’m looked at differently. I think I’m scrutinized even a little
bit more.
In study groups, students learn course material from each other, perhaps in
ways they might not otherwise learn it if studying on their own. One’s
attempts to join a study group are an indication of the desire to participate
in the practices of that community (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 2010;
Wertsch, del Rio, & Alvarez, 1995). Harper (2015) reports that high-achieving
Black males are not afforded the opportunities to benefit from a critical mass
of Black male students in their respective majors. As Harper explains, and
according to the assessment of students in this study, study groups—like
those formed by the international Asian students they observed—provide
mutually supportive learning environments, produce empathy among fellow
learners, diminish social isolation, and create a social support network that
provides a sense of belonging. As a result of the incredibly small numbers
of Black males, Black male study groups are almost unheard of for most aca-
demic majors, including engineering. Instead, most Black males rely on
community-based organizations, fraternities, and mentoring groups. As
Chris reports, when non-Black study groups base their participation on
whom they feel comfortable with and around or scrutinize membership
based on a person’s race, it is hard for Black males to break through artificial
Burt et al.
988
racial barriers to join these knowledge-sharing networks. Because of the
aforementioned reasons, Black affinity groups, like Midwestern’s RISE,
then become a necessary space for racial and gendered affirmation for
Black males in STEM.
Such barriers perpetuate structural educational inequalities that can
exacerbate the normative strain of graduate studies and present non-
normative challenges for Black male doctoral students in engineering.
Despite knowing that they should be in a study group and having an interest
in joining one, the Black males who participated in this study found it diffi-
cult to gain access to the study groups dominated by their White and inter-
national Asian peers. Alphonso, for example, said, ‘‘Especially with the grad
students [at Midwestern University] there’s a lot of Asian students and they
work together. It’s not—you can’t always get into that group.’’ For these
Black males, the isolation that they experienced was a form of student
role strain that that was not only non-normative but also unnatural. While
expressing his frustration with having to study alone, Trai indicated, ‘‘I’m sit-
ting here trying to be superman [and] do it [study by] myself.’’ The challenge
with joining study groups, at least for the participants in this study, was that
they were not invited and in some cases were rejected. Participants felt as
though they had to aggressively seek the validation of their peers to gain
access to study groups, and several never secured consistent study groups.
Although the culture of competition within the College of Engineering
fueled participants’ desires to prove their intelligence to others, they per-
ceived their race and the stereotypes associated with being Black males as
the reason why they did not participate in study groups with colleagues.
These racial biases created barriers to Black males’ success; although they
were thriving by persisting, they were excluded from fully participating in
engineering learning communities. Also worthy of note are the stereotypes
that the Black male participants in this study held of their Asian and White
peers. Because of their underrepresentation within the College of
Engineering, they likely assumed that all Asian and White students partici-
pated in study groups. Black males’ generalizations of and comparisons to
their peers were non-normative forms of strain. Furthermore, this finding
suggests that even while experiencing barriers caused by race, Black males
too can hold stereotypes of other students.
Other research on high-achieving Black collegians further supports the
racially motivated non-normative student role strain articulated by the partic-
ipants in this study (Fries-Britt, 1998; Fries-Britt & Griffin, 2007; McGee &
Stovall, 2015; Tuitt, 2012). Specifically, they describe how the structural bar-
riers and social isolation Black students experience at predominantly White
institutions cause individuals to feel the need to prove themselves. This
‘‘proving process’’ is unhealthy because it is never-ending. In the present
study, not being invited into study groups was a microscopic example of
a larger narrative of feeling unaccepted in science and engineering. At times,
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
989
participants were made to feel as if they had been admitted to meet quotas.
Victor, a fifth-year doctoral candidate in chemical engineering, asked, ‘‘Am I
just here for numbers’ sake, or am I here for what I can offer to this depart-
ment?’’ As articulated by Paul, a fourth-year doctoral candidate in electrical
engineering, the non-normative strains induced by challenges at the institu-
tional and social levels make leaving an easier option than perseverance:
It is not just [my] advisor but also the department, the school, and the
social scene. I think all of those things. If you don’t feel like you have
a positive or supportive environment in any of those, they could all
be reasons that you wouldn’t want to stick around here for a long
time.
Chris, a fifth-year doctoral candidate in chemical engineering, expressed
a similar sentiment, suggesting some might consider a different life course:
Well, instead of going through this prejudice in my school [and] in my
department, I can go and get a job with my master’s degree and make
good money, and maybe work my way up. The plan changes, but
you . . . [you] get away from the negativity that is in their department.
Both Paul and Chris suggested that the non-normative strains caused by
their educational contexts (school, department, and the broader city envi-
ronment in which Midwestern University was situated) threatened their per-
sistence in engineering. They expressed a desire to fully participate in
engineering, yet they also considered leaving engineering to avoid dealing
with the ‘‘negativity’’ they faced in their attempts.
Faculty Biases as Social Impediments: Feelings of Otherness, Non-Normative
Student Role Strain, and Threats to Black Males’ Persistence
The roles of faculty advisors are extensive and vary by field of study and
in some cases by department. Despite the nuanced differences in advisor
roles, existing literature suggests that advisors should serve as sources of
information, liaisons to the department, dissertation supervisors, agents of
socialization, role models, mentors, and career coaches (Antony & Taylor,
2001; Austin & McDaniels, 2006; Barnes & Austin, 2009). Jackson, a third-
year doctoral student in mechanical engineering, discussed the importance
of his relationship with his advisor this way:
Some people liken the advisor relationship to a marriage and that you
are likely to be together four, five, six, seven years depending on how
long you are here. Being able to come in and foster that relationship
is important.
Most students understood the important role that advisors played prior to
becoming engineering students. They knew that advisors had the
Burt et al.
990
responsibility to help them learn content knowledge, transition into graduate
school, and learn and prepare for a range of postgraduate careers. These
typical roles are forms of mediation whereby advisors and students interact
and as a result, graduate students become better able to participate within
the graduate community and field of study (Burt, 2014).
Most of the participants in this study perceived their advisors as threats
to their success in engineering and saw no organic opportunity to establish
stronger relationships with them. In addition to isolation from peers, this
form of academic isolation from advisors also has the potential to deter per-
sistence given the critical role of advisors in a graduate program. When arriv-
ing at Midwestern University to start a doctoral program, participants
expected to be welcomed and guided by their advisor. Alphonso, for
instance, described his need for an academic advisor who would validate
his academic progress:
You know, you’re looking for [advisors] who are in their positions of
academic success or support. So, you’re looking for your academic
validation. They’re the ones grading you and your reports. So, you’re
looking for them for your academic validation in a way.
Not only were participants denied the academic validation and encourage-
ment they sought, many described receiving explicitly discouraging mes-
sages from their advisor that ranged from passive-aggressive to explicit
challenges regarding their ability to do doctoral-level work. James,
a fourth-year candidate in biomedical engineering, shared examples of
how his advisor communicated:
My advisor—he’s—when he tells you stuff, it’s kind of—so if you
approach him, and he asks you questions, and it was like some fun-
damentals you don’t know, or you were never taught it as far as soft-
ware stuff—I don’t want to say he belittles you, but he’ll kind of be
like ‘‘yeah, you learned this as a junior in undergrad, and the sopho-
mores here are doing it.’’ And I’m like, ‘‘ok.’’
James hesitated to name his advisor’s racial microaggressions as belittling,
but when James’s advisor compared his engineering knowledge to that of
Midwestern University sophomores, the implicit message was that James
did not have basic, foundational knowledge needed to complete the work
of engineers. Racial microaggressions are often described as subtle negative
comments or behaviors that are either brief or ongoing (Burt et al., 2016;
Pierce, 1970; Smith, Yosso, et al., 2007; Sue et al., 2007). It could be argued
that James’s advisor meant no harm and that his comment was not related to
race at all. Regardless of his advisor’s intent, the effects of the comments
were harmful to James. Comparing James’s ability to that of Midwestern
University sophomores, almost all of whom were White, carried a racial
implication that was not lost on James.
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
991
Other participants reported similar negative interactions with faculty that
resulted in non-normative student role strain. Jaden, a third-year electrical
engineering doctoral student, for example, described his first interaction
with his advisor:
When I did my initial grad search I only found a few advisors who I
considered working with. Um. A lot of them wouldn’t respond to
email and I thought, ‘‘this won’t go well.’’ The one who did, I went
to his office and he gave me this bizarre look. I’m not sure if he
expected me to be Black honestly, that’s what I think it was.
Here, Jaden explained how his initial interactions—or lack thereof—with
potential engineering advisors caused him trepidation regarding his graduate
experience to come with professors who would be too busy, unresponsive,
and inattentive. The lack of response from faculty members can be consid-
ered normative role strain in that it is not specific to the Black male students
in this study. However, Jaden’s cumulative interactions with this particular
faculty member prompted him to wonder if race played a role in the
‘‘bizarre’’ interactions, an example of non-normative role strain. For instance,
the quizzical look Jaden described on the professor’s face should not be
ignored. From Jaden’s perspective, the look was prompted because he
was Black in an engineering context where the majority of graduate students
seeking advisors are White and Asian. As time went on, Jaden observed sim-
ilar instances where communication between him and his advisor was min-
imal. Reflecting back on his first interaction with his advisor, including the
‘‘bizarre look,’’ made Jaden question himself: ‘‘Is my advisor not talking to
me because I am Black?’’ It could be argued that what Jaden—and his
Black male peers—experienced was bad advising. While that too might be
true, these participants attributed their experiences to race based on their
perspectives in the engineering context at Midwestern University. In
Jaden’s example, non-normative role strain was exhibited by the cognitive
load it took for Jaden to consider whether his experiences were typical or
racialized. That extra burden of wondering if gendered racism is the culprit
or if one’s experiences are somehow a mental fabrication is an added unnec-
essary stressor (i.e., strain) for underrepresented students of color attending
PWIs (Bowman, 2006; Bowman & Howard, 1985).
Paul, an electrical engineering doctoral student, described interactions
with his advisor that threatened his motivation to persist. Paul reported, ‘‘I
don’t know why, I still don’t know why he, he basically said, you know,
‘why don’t you go out and work first for a few years,’ that was his opinion.’’
It remained unclear to Paul what his advisor was trying to communicate and
whether his advisor was attempting to be helpful or was being condescend-
ing. To Paul, his advisor’s comment appeared to be the latter. Why would
Paul’s advisor encourage him to leave the doctoral program—before earning
his degree—and immediately get a job in an industry career, other than to
Burt et al.
992
suggest that he was not meeting expectations? Paul did ultimately meet
expectations by earning his doctorate from Midwestern’s engineering col-
lege. This memory of Paul’s was significant, however, because it signaled
one instance where he could have dropped out based on the encourage-
ment of his advisor. This quotation also represents a common experience
across this study’s participants: a crossroads experience where they felt chal-
lenged about their status as graduate students and their potential as future
engineers.
Chris also described not only demoralizing interactions with his faculty
advisor but also the weight of the resulting non-normative student role strain
as it relates to dropping out:
I think dropout rates [of Black men at the doctoral level] are definitely
influenced by the departments [and] by the interaction with your pro-
fessor. Now, when those get uncomfortable for the Black male, and
especially the advisor relationship gets uncomfortable, coupled
with the prejudice people have with you being a minority male, in
a field dominated by White men, the pressures can get to you.
[You start to] see the fact that you can’t do it, and realize that there’s
another good option—get out with my M.S. [master’s of science] and
work.
Like Chris, Jackson too shared how he believed his experiences in engineer-
ing resulted from his underrepresented status as a Black male. Jackson com-
mented, ‘‘And, I guess my feeling is that maybe I’m subject to other
judgments that if I were in the majority I wouldn’t be necessarily subject
to.’’ Jackson’s comment advances his belief that underrepresented students
at Midwestern University’s engineering college have different experiences,
in his case, that he received more scrutiny and judgment than his majority
peers (i.e., those from White and Asian backgrounds). Both Chris and
Paul’s quotations provide examples of how racial misandry and gendered
racism shape their experiences as Black male graduate students.
Specifically, they both explained how their experiences are different than
those of the ‘‘majority’’; in a field dominated by males, they—as Black
males—do not benefit from being males because they are minoritized males
(Mutua, 2013). As a result, they are excluded from White male privileges in
‘‘a field dominated by White men,’’ as expressed by Chris. Also important to
recognize is how matter-of-fact Jackson is about his assessment, which
almost appears to suggest that his unequal experience in graduate school
is part of the normal hidden curriculum for Black males in engineering grad-
uate programs.
The result of receiving discouraging messages from an advisor was that
students did not feel comfortable communicating with advisors when they
needed help. Accordingly, the students’ negative interactions with faculty
not only elevated their non-normative student role strain, it also fostered
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
993
coping strategies of self-preservation. This finding about students’ self-
preservation relates to McGee and Martin’s (2011b) work on stereotype man-
agement. Although the advisor should be the person who assists students
when they are having academic trouble, according to some of the participants
in this study, acknowledging one’s limitations was equivalent to conceding
what they were fighting against: the perception that they did not really belong
in the engineering doctoral program at the prestigious Midwestern University.
This finding relates to the work of Smith and colleagues (Smith et al., 2016;
Smith, Yosso, et al., 2007), who discuss the racial battle fatigue of Black males
at predominantly (and historically) White institutions. The authors argue that
racial microaggressions sometimes come in the form of subtle comments or
behaviors that add psychological stress to the recipient. A consequence of
racial battle fatigue, according to the authors, is that Black males become
exhausted from developing coping strategies to navigate these hostile envi-
ronments. It can be assumed, then, that if a student no longer wanted to
deal with the non-normative student role strain resulting from what was per-
ceived to be a hostile environment, he would drop out. Or equally troubling,
the student would choose to no longer participate in engineering.
Discussion and Implications
The Black males in this study pursued graduate education because they
enjoyed STEM, thrived academically as undergraduate students, and wanted
to continue pursuing their goals in engineering. Many chose Midwestern
University because of its stellar reputation in the field of engineering.
They all described being excited to start graduate school and having high
expectations of what they could achieve during graduate school. Yet the
21 Black males in this study encountered non-normative student role strain
resulting from ecological and social barriers within the College of
Engineering, including isolating institutional practices, discrimination from
non-Black peers, and raced-based faculty biases. These challenges served
as reminders of being a gendered racialized ‘‘other.’’
Institutional and social barriers create environments that are counterpro-
ductive to successful outcomes for Black males specifically and students of
color more generally. Based on the findings from this study, the non-
normative student role strain caused by underrepresentation of students of
color in STEM poses unique challenges for Black males. It limits opportuni-
ties for students to establish community with others from similar back-
grounds and fosters self-doubt by perpetuating the belief that people of
color lack the intellectual aptitude necessary to succeed in STEM fields.
This example of student non-normative role strain is inextricably connected
to negative racial biases about people of color within STEM fields and
broader racialized social stratification that maintains the underrepresentation
of people of color in STEM fields.
Burt et al.
994
In addition to their underrepresentation, the Black males in this study
exerted more than considerable energy trying to identify, judge, predict,
and discard racially motivated microaggressions (Profit, Mino, & Pierce,
2000). The majority of the gendered racial microaggressions they faced
were automatic, indirect, stunning, or seemingly innocuous messages that
were both verbal and nonverbal, resulting in a perception that they were
both devalued and unwanted (Smith, Yosso, et al., 2007). In totality, racial
microaggressions are inescapable and are cumulative expressions of racist
views, (dys)conscious ideologies, and institutionalized practices toward peo-
ple of color (King, 1991). According to King (1991), ‘‘dysconsciousness is an
uncritical habit of mind (including perceptions, attitudes, assumptions, and
beliefs) that justifies inequity and exploitation by accepting the existing
order of things as given’’ (p. 135). Such ideologies are the social psycho-
pollutants that disrupt the lives of Black males and other people of color
while at the same time privileging most White individuals (Smith, Hung, &
Franklin, 2011). These disruptions are why the cumulative effects of frequent
racial microaggressions and racial battle fatigue are important subjects for
continued research if we are to understand their impact on the success of
Black male graduate students.
Implications for Policy and Practice
The focus of this article was not on the resiliency of Black males.
Instead, we discussed the ecological and social factors that were detrimental
to their success and made resilience a necessity. Faculty, administrators, and
staff who are in positions to inform policy and practice might start by inves-
tigating existing policies and practices. No matter how well intentioned, pol-
icies such as changing recruitment strategies may have unintended
consequences for smaller populations, like Black males, negatively influenc-
ing the context needed for these students to thrive academically. Regarding
practice, several participants in this study noted the non-normative student
role strain they encountered because of negative advising experiences.
This highlights an area ripe for much needed institutional investment. An
appropriate advisor-advisee match may be critical to students’ academic
experiences. Faculty advisors are important to students’ persistence; this is
not a novel revelation. But this study’s targeted focus on Black males offers
a deeper understanding of the nature of the relationship between Black male
students and their advisors. Faculty need to invest in students by helping
shape how they view themselves as individuals, members of the graduate
community, and within engineering. Some of this can be done through
the research experience. Taking more time to help students work through
challenges in research and reaffirming students’ belief in their abilities and
potential contributions to engineering would be beneficial for students’
progress.
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
995
In addition to creating the infrastructure to support Black males once
they have been admitted into a doctoral program, through appropriate
advisor-advisee matches for example, attention should be aimed at increas-
ing their representation at all levels (i.e., faculty, administration, students) to
help reduce the non-normative student role strain reflected by their feeling
that they are anomalies in the college of engineering context. This may be
a challenge, especially as affirmative action policies are being attacked
and reduced. However, if broadening participation in engineering is truly
a goal, creative efforts to achieve diversity must include a committed strate-
gic plan that is inclusive and involves other university partners. Institutional
policymakers could establish a task force, hire a college-level diversity offi-
cer, and/or hire diversity recruitment specialists in each department who are
tasked with developing partnerships and creating other strategies that might
help with recruitment. Such efforts would require appropriate funding to
succeed. It is necessary to acknowledge that having a full-time individual
or team designated to tackle diversity should not excuse faculty serving as
advisors from understanding the significance of their roles in facilitating
the progress of Black males. There also must be an internal change that wel-
comes diverse students, especially Black males. This structural change and
commitment must include the dean of the college, department chairs, and
faculty. Failure to address this important factor will render meaningless
any attempt to foster diversity.
Black males would also benefit from institutionalized support programs
that connect them across engineering fields. Implementing programmatic
efforts or establishing graduate organizations like Midwestern University’s
RISE, where Black males can interact with other academically talented peers
in science and engineering, would aid in students’ persistence. This type of
intentional support structure would strengthen students’ academic sense of
self and help to buffer, at least in part, the non-normative strains fostered
by isolating (and oftentimes hostile) engineering educational environments.
However, if this strategy is chosen, it needs to be supported by the institution
financially and have support from administrators. While such a student orga-
nization can be helpful, creating an organization cannot and will not, alone,
fix or alleviate an unhealthy college climate.
Implications for Future Research and Theory
This study illuminates several opportunities for future research. First,
there are alternative sampling strategies that could either more narrowly
or widely scale the sample. Both strategies would extend the existing knowl-
edge base concerning the experiences of Black males in engineering gradu-
ate studies. For example, the participants in this study represented various
departments within the engineering college. As a result, there may have
been differences in policies (e.g., how students acquire advisors), funding
Burt et al.
996
structures, and recruitment strategies by department and thus different stu-
dent experiences. To limit the potential variation caused by participants’
engineering specializations, participants were asked general questions about
their experiences to elicit broader information about being a Black man in an
engineering doctoral program. Researchers interested in more narrowly
investigating students’ experiences by specialization could pursue a more
nuanced exploration.
Second, while this paper suggests the importance of a domain-specific
focus, there is merit to examining students from various fields of study across
an institution; there could be contextual factors related to institutional poli-
cies and practices that shape students’ experiences. Future research investi-
gating students’ experiences at both field-specific and institution-wide levels
may help identify systematic structures and policies influencing students’
experiences. Additionally, future research that includes participants’ experi-
ences from an array of institutions and institution types would help further
characterize the prevalence of Black males’ experiences in engineering, illu-
minating whether their issues are institution-specific or more broadly related
to counterproductive legacies and traditions of STEM. Additionally, by
widely exploring the experiences of Black males in engineering, the educa-
tional scholarship on Black males will become rich with suggestions for
negotiation and navigation strategies for Black males successfully persisting
in engineering graduate education.
Third, this article utilized the BRSAM, a framework that provides a useful
analytic tool for understanding how ecological and sociological barriers can
create challenging circumstances or strains for Black males in graduate engi-
neering programs. In addition to noting the strains that Black males experi-
ence, which may be similar to those of other students (i.e., normative), the
model allows an examination of non-normative strains reflective of racial-
ized and structured inequalities. It should be noted that by using the
BRSAM, we employed a different approach for thinking about anti-deficit
research. Specifically, our analysis centered on the ecological and sociolog-
ical factors that served as barriers for students. With this different approach,
our analysis shifted the focus from students’ deficits to the deficient systems
and structures that served as barriers to students’ success. This shift of focus
was possible because the BRSAM contextualizes students’ challenges and
acknowledges how their challenges are rooted in race-based and gender-
based structural inequalities.
The BRSAM was not without its limitations. Although the model
acknowledges structural inequalities of marginalized populations in general,
it was not designed to explicate the experiences of high-achieving students
who are also racially underrepresented. A conceptual framework that specif-
ically focuses on high-achieving students of color would capture the unique
experiences of students who have excelled academically yet have to navi-
gate gendered and racially motivated biases despite their records of
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
997
exceptional scholastic performance and potential. In addition, the BRSAM
was not designed to specifically address students’ experiences in STEM.
Given that different disciplines often have different norms, expectations,
and socialization processes, it is feasible that a model specific to these fields
may unearth some of the unique experiences of marginalized students
therein. Future research should create new models that speak to the experien-
ces of students who are marginalized, high achieving, and in STEM fields,
including intersections of these categories. Future research that captures these
intersections, while also identifying the structural barriers to succeeding in
STEM, would help address calls for broadening participation in these fields.
Also with regard to theory, this study illuminates a need for more theo-
retical insights about the unique gendered racism and microaggressions that
Black males experience in engineering. Existing STEM research concerning
gender focuses, primarily, on the experiences of women in these fields
(Cohen & Deterding, 2009). Existing research also notes that Black males
often face stereotypes, subordination, and oppression as a result of their
race and gender (Curry, 2016; Essed, 1991). Accordingly, future studies
should seek to better understand and theorize the complexities of these
intersections for Black males within the context of engineering fields (e.g.,
a theory on ‘‘Black male gendered racism in engineering’’). This is especially
pertinent as Black males battle challenges of underrepresentation (despite
the male-dominated nature of STEM fields).
Finally, despite the odds stacked against them, at the time of this writing,
more than half of the 21 participants in this study have earned their doctor-
ates from Midwestern University; those remaining continue persisting in
their efforts to earn a PhD. This statistic is offered only to suggest that these
high-achieving Black males are accustomed to overcoming barriers in sci-
ence and engineering. Their realities are consistent with existing research
that suggests academically successful Black students implement race-related
socialization practices shared across generations for dealing with racism and
surviving and thriving in a ‘‘White world’’ (Bowman & Howard, 1985).
Understanding the important roles of race, gender, and other social identities
in students’ development is a strength of newer conceptualizations of grad-
uate student socialization (Barker, 2011, 2016; Felder et al., 2014; Twale et
al., 2016). Further examinations of graduate students of color utilizing these
newer models of graduate student socialization will provide clues to the
wide range of race- and gender-specific socialization practices needed for
successful navigation in the academy.
Concluding Thoughts
Focused scholarship on underrepresented groups, for example Black
males in engineering graduate programs, is limited. This study adds to the
existing STEM education research by identifying pervasive challenges of
Burt et al.
998
Black males pursuing graduate-level engineering degrees. As such, this arti-
cle was not intended to be a fairy tale with a rosy ending. Rather, this article
intends to highlight the often unheard voices of Black males in graduate
education, namely, graduate engineering education. The voices of Black
males in this study highlight students trying to strive and survive in the tur-
bulent conditions of graduate engineering education. Their stories illuminate
a hidden curriculum of traversing the storms of academia and succeeding in
science; to succeed, one must be prepared to negotiate and navigate a
field—and the people within the field—that makes them feel unwanted
and unqualified. Their stories provide further clues to the kinds of barriers
some students must overcome to successfully persist in engineering as
well as clues to how students’ perceptions of engineering pathways are
formed and solidified. This article also serves as a call to action for those
in positions of power genuinely committed to improving the educational
experiences of current Black males in graduate engineering programs and
helping to forge a path for broadening participation in STEM for future gen-
erations of Black males in engineering. Based on the findings in this article
on the gendered racialized experiences of Black males in graduate engineer-
ing studies, persistence in engineering at the graduate level may begin to be
better understood. Using this new knowledge, institutions of higher educa-
tion can better address calls to recruit and retain more Black males to grad-
uate programs in engineering.
Consistent calls to action for the broadening of participation in engineer-
ing pathways have been extended over the years. However, the policies,
practices, and activities of institutions still have the potential to threaten stu-
dents’ progress. The additional non-normative strain this places on Black
male students then becomes a deterrent to their success and leads adminis-
trators and faculty members to make the excuse that Black males are not
equipped to successfully complete a rigorous program. We should be asking
how institutions create the barriers that force students to unnecessarily have
to cope and survive. When responsibility for students’ negative experiences
is placed on institutions rather than students, we can then more productively
ask how institutions can help alleviate these barriers for students.
While it is clear that institutions need to be more accountable for the
practices and other campus environmental factors that pose a threat to
Black males’ educational success, we also recognize that the delicate intrica-
cies of structural racism may obstruct progress toward inclusion. As Carter G.
Woodson (1933) articulated,
The same educational process which inspires and stimulates the
oppressor with the thought that he [and she] is everything and has
accomplished everything worthwhile, depresses and crushes at the
same time the spark of genius in the Negro by making him [and
her] feel that his [and her] race does not amount to much and never
will measure up to the standards of other people. (p. xiii)
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
999
The oppressive nature of these institutions for Black males is what helps
maintain the status quo and the nature of elitism within competitive colleges
and universities as well as highly prized STEM fields like engineering. It
would be misguided to overlook this connection and passively wait for insti-
tutions to change their course of action. Neither Black males nor the Black
community writ large can wait for institutions to address their race-related
issues. We cannot afford to allow another Black man or woman’s genius
get depressed or crushed. Accordingly, future research must also tap into
the race-related socialization and adaptive role strain practices that have
helped Black students to be successful despite institutions’ preservation of
learning conditions that are oppressive for these students. These problems
are not new; this is old wine packaged in new bottles. Yet there is enough
brilliance within Black communities that the existence of efforts to nurture
and bolster Black boys’ and girls’ ‘‘spark of genius’’ should never be in ques-
tion. It is our goal to address these efforts in our future studies.
Note
This work was supported by the National Academy of Education/Spencer
Postdoctoral Fellowship Program and the National Science Foundation-Iowa EPSCOR
(under grant EPS-1101284).
References
Allen, Q. (2015). ‘‘Tell your own story’’: Manhood, masculinity and racial socialization
among black fathers and their sons. Ethnic and Racial Studies,39(10), 1831–
1848. doi:10.1080/01419870.2015.1110608
Allen, W. R. (1992). The color of success: African-American college student outcomes
at predominantly White and historically Black public colleges and universities.
Harvard Educational Review,62(1), 26–44.
Antony, J. S., & Taylor, E. (2001). Graduate student socialization and its implications
for the recruitment of African American education faculty. In W. G. Tierney
(Ed.), Faculty work in schools of education: Rethinking roles and rewards for
the twenty-first century (pp. 189–209). Albany, NY: State University of New
York Press.
Austin, A. E., & McDaniels, M. (2006). Preparing the professoriate of the future:
Graduate student socialization for faculty roles. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher edu-
cation: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 21, pp. 397–456). Dordrecht, the
Netherlands: Springer.
Baker, V. L., & Pifer, M. J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral
student to independent scholar. Studies in Continuing Education,33(1), 5–17.
Barker, M. J. (2011). Racial context, currency and connections: Black doctoral student
and white advisor perspectives on cross-race advising. Innovations in Education
and Teaching International,48(4), 387–400.
Barker, M. J. (2016). The doctorate in Black and White: Exploring the engagement of
Black doctoral students in cross race advising relationships with White faculty.
The Western Journal of Black Studies,40(2), 126–140.
Burt et al.
1000
Barnes, B. J., & Austin, A. E. (2009). The role of doctoral advisors: A look at advising
from the advisor’s perspective. Innovative Higher Education,33(5), 297–315.
Bernal, D. D. (1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in educational research.
Harvard Educational Review,68(4), 555–583.
Bidwell, A. (2015, May 7). African-American men: The other STEM minority. U.S.
News & World Report. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/news/stem-sol
utions/articles/2015/05/07/african-american-men-the-other-stem-minority
Bonilla-Silva, E. (1997). Rethinking racism: Toward a structural interpretation.
American Sociological Review,62(3), 465–480.
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2001). White supremacy and racism in the post-civil rights era.
Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Bonner, F. A., II. (2000). African American giftedness: Our nation’s deferred dream.
Journal of Black Studies,30(5), 643–663.
Bowman, P. J. (1989). Research perspectives on Black men: Role strain and adapta-
tion across the Black adult male life cycle. In R. Jones (Ed.), Black adult devel-
opment and aging, (pp. 117–150). Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry.
Bowman, P. J. (2006). Role strain and adaptation issues in the strength-based model:
Diversity, multilevel, and life-span considerations. The Counseling Psychologist,
34(1), 118–133. doi:10.1177/0011000005282374
Bowman, P. J., & Howard, C. (1985). Race-related socialization, motivation, and aca-
demic achievement: A study of Black youths in three-generation families.
Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry,24(2), 134–141.
Brazziel, M. E., & Brazziel, W. F. (2001). Factors in decisions of underrepresented
minorities to forego science and engineering doctoral study: A pilot study.
Journal of Science Education and Technology,10(3), 272–281.
Burt, B. A. (2014). The influence of doctoral research experiences on the pursuit of the
engineering professoriate (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Michigan.
Burt, B. A. (2017). Learning competencies through engineering research group expe-
riences. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education,8(1), 48–64.
Burt, B. A., McKen, A., Burkhart, J., Hormell, J., & Knight, A. (2016). Racial microag-
gressions within the advisor-advisee relationship: Implications for engineering
research, policy, and practice. Presented at the American Society for
Engineering Education Conference.
Chubin, D. E., May, G. S., & Babco, E. L. (2005). Diversifying the engineering work-
force. Journal of Engineering Education,94(1), 73–86.
Cohen, C. C. D., & Deterding, N. (2009). Widening the net: National estimates of gen-
der disparities in engineering. Journal of Engineering Education,98(3), 211–
226.
Cooper, C. R., Jackson, J. F., Azmita, M., & Lopez, E. (1998). Multiple selves, multiple
worlds: Three useful strategies for research with ethnic minority youth on iden-
tity, relationships, and opportunity structures. In V. C. McLoyd & L. Steinberg
(Eds.), Studying minority adolescents: Conceptual, methodological, and theoret-
ical issues (pp. 111–125). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and proce-
dures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
traditions. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Curry, T. J. (2017). The man-not: Race, class, genre, and the dilemmas of black man-
hood. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Cuyjet, M. J. (1997). African American men on college campuses: Their needs and
their perceptions. In M. J. Cuyjet (Ed.), Helping African American men succeed
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
1001
in college. New Directions for Student Services (No. 80, pp. 5–16). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
DeFour, D. C., & Hirsch, B. J. (1990). The adaptation of Black graduate students: A
social network approach. American Journal of Community Psychology,18(3),
487–503.
Dumas, M. J., & Ross, K. M. (2016). ‘‘Be real Black for me’’: Imagining BlackCrit in
education. Urban Education,51(4), 415–442. doi:10.1177/0042085916628611
Dunbar, C. (2008). Critical race theory and indigenous methodologies. In N. Denzin,
Y. Lincoln, & L. Tuhiwai Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and Indigenous
methodologies (pp. 85–99). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Essed, P. (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory (Vol.
2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Felder, P. P., & Barker, M. J. (2013). Extending Bell’s concept of interest convergence:
A framework for understanding the African American doctoral student experi-
ence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies,8, 1–20.
Felder, P. P., Stevenson, H. C., & Gasman, M. (2014). Understanding race in doctoral
student socialization. International Journal of Doctoral Studies,9, 21–42.
Fries-Britt, S. L. (1998). Moving beyond Black achiever isolation: Experiences of
gifted Black collegians. Journal of Higher Education,69(5), 556–576.
Fries-Britt, S. L., Burt, B. A., & Franklin, K. (2012). Establishing critical relationships:
How Black males persist in physics at HBCUs. In R. T. Palmer & J. L. Wood
(Eds.), Black men in Black Colleges: Implications for diversity, recruitment, sup-
port, and retention (pp. 71–88). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fries-Britt, S. L., George Mwangi, C. A., & Peralta, A. M. (2014). Learning race in a U.S.
context: An emerging framework on the perceptions of race among foreign-born
student of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education,7(1), 1–13.
doi:10.1037/a0035636
Fries-Britt, S. L., & Griffin, K. (2007). The black box: How high achieving Blacks resist
stereotypes about Black Americans. Journal of College Student Development,
48(5), 509–524.
Fries-Britt, S. L., & Turner, B. T. (2005). Retaining each other: Narratives of two
African American women in the academy. Urban Review,37(3), 221–242.
Gardner, S. K. (2007). ‘‘I heard it through the grapevine’’: Doctoral student socializa-
tion in chemistry and history. Higher Education,54(5), 723–740.
Gasman, M., Hirschfeld, A., & Vultaggio, J. (2008). ‘‘Difficult yet rewarding’’: The
experiences of African American graduate students in education at an ivy league
institution. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education,1(2), 126–138.
Gatson-Gayles, J., & Kelly, B. T. (2004). Preparing the next generation of African
American scholars: Mentoring and professional development experiences.
NASAP Journal,7(1), 46–62.
Gay, G. (2004). Navigating marginality en route to the professoriate: Graduate stu-
dents of color learning and living in academia. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education,17(2), 265–287.
George Mwangi, C. A., Fries-Britt, S., Peralta, A. M., & Daoud, N. (2016). Examining
intraracial dynamics and engagement between native-born and foreign-born
Black collegians in STEM. Journal of Black Studies,47(7), 1–22.
Gildersleeve, R. E., Croom, N. N., & Vasquez, P. L. (2011). ‘‘Am I going crazy?!’’: A crit-
ical race analysis of doctoral education. Equity & Excellence in Education,44(1),
93–114. doi:10.1080/10665684.2011.539472
Graham, E. (2013). The experiences of minority doctoral students at elite research
institutions. New Directions for Higher Education,163, 77–87.
Burt et al.
1002
Green, D. O., Creswell, J. W., Shope, R. J., & Clark, V. L. P. (2007). Grounded theory
and racial/ethnic diversity. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE hand-
book of grounded theory (pp. 472–492). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Griffin, K. A. (2006). Striving for success: A qualitative exploration of competing the-
ories of high-achieving Black college students’ academic motivation. Journal of
College Student Development,47(4), 384–399.
Griffith, D. M., Gunter, K., & Allen, J. O. (2011). Male gender role strain as a barrier to
African American men’s physical activity. Health Education & Behavior,38(5),
482–491.
Harper, S. R. (2005). Leading the way: Inside the experiences of high-achieving
African American male students. About Campus,10(1), 8–15.
Harper, S. R. (2010). An anti-deficit achievement framework for research on students
of color in STEM. In S. R. Harper & C. B. Newman (Eds.), Students of color in
STEM (pp. 63–74). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Harper, S. R. (2015). Black male college achievers and resistant responses to racist
stereotypes at predominantly White colleges and universities. Harvard
Educational Review,85(4), 646–674.
Harper, S. R., & Palmer, R. T. (2016). Improving attainment, experiences, and career
outcomes among Black male students in doctoral degree programs. In
S. R. Harper & L. T. Wood (Eds.), Advancing Black male student success from
preschool through Ph.D. (pp. 141–163). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Herzig, A. H. (2004). Becoming mathematicians: Women and students of color choos-
ing and leaving doctoral mathematics. Review of Educational Research,74(2),
171–214.
Holmes, S. L., & Rivera, M. (2004). Co-conspirators (peer mentors) in the sacred
grove: Reflections from the lives of female graduate students. NASAP Journal,
7(1), 11–30.
Howard-Hamilton, M. F., Morelon-Quainoo, C. L., Johnson, S. D., Winkle-Wagner, R.,
& Santiague, L. (2009). Standing on the outside looking in: Underrepresented stu-
dents’ experiences in advanced degree programs. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Ingram, T. N. (2007). From challenged to triumphant: Factors contributing to African
American male doctoral students’ persistence at predominantly White institu-
tions (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington.
Johnson-Bailey, J., Valentine, T., Cervero, R. M., & Bowles, T. A. (2009). Rooted in the
soil: The social experiences of Black graduate students at a southern research
university. The Journal of Higher Education,80(2), 178–203.
King, J. (1991). Dysconscious racism: Ideology, identity, and the miseducation of
teachers. Journal of Negro Education,60(2), 133–146.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, A. (2008). How are doctoral students supervised? Concepts of doctoral research
supervision. Studies in Higher Education,33(3), 267–281.
Marbley, A. F., Bonner, F. A., II, & McKisick, S. (2004). From graduate school to ten-
ure: Peer mentors of color uplifting each other in predominantly White institu-
tions. NASAP Journal,7(1), 79–92.
Maton, K. I., & Hrabowski, F. A., III. (2004). Increasing the number of African
American PhDs in the sciences and engineering. American Psychologist,59(6),
547–556.
McCallum, C. M. (2016). ‘‘Mom made me do it’’: The role of family in African
Americans’ decisions to enroll in doctoral education. Journal of Diversity in
Higher Education,9(1), 50–63.
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
1003
McCoy, D. L., & Winkle-Wagner, R. (2015). Bridging the divide: Developing a schol-
arly habitus for aspiring graduate students through summer bridge programs
participation. Journal of College Student Development,56(5), 423–439.
McGee, E. O. (2016). Devalued Black and Latino racial identities: A by-product of
STEM college culture? American Educational Research Journal,53, 1626–
1662. doi:10.3102/0002831216676572
McGee, E. O., & Martin, D. B. (2011a). From the hood to being hooded: Case study of
a Black male PhD. Journal of African American Males in Education,2(1), 46–
65.
McGee, E. O., & Martin, D. B. (2011b). ‘‘You would not believe what I have to go
through to prove my intellectual value!’’: Stereotype management among aca-
demically successful Black mathematics and engineering students. American
Educational Research Journal,48, 1347–1389. doi:10.3102/0002831211423972
McGee, E. O., & Stovall, D. (2015). Reimagining critical race theory in education:
Mental health, healing, and the pathway to liberatory praxis. Educational
Theory,65(5), 491–511.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2013). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Milner, H. R. (2004). African American graduate students’ experiences: A critical anal-
ysis of recent research. In D. Cleveland (Ed.), Long way to go: Conversations
about race by African American faculty (pp. 19–31). New York, NY: Peter
Lang Publishing.
Milner, H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through
dangers seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher,36(7), 388–400.
Moore, J. L. (2006). A qualitative investigation of African American males’ career tra-
jectory in engineering: Implications for teachers, school counselors, and parents.
Teachers College Record,108(2), 246–266.
Mutua, A. D. (2013). Multidimensionality is to masculinities what intersectionality is
to feminism. Nevada Law Journal,13(2), 341–367.
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of
Medicine. (1995). Reshaping the graduate education of scientists and engineers.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering. (2014). Research & policy brief
(Vol. 4). White Plains, NY: Author.
National Science Foundation. (1994). Division of Science Resources Statistics, Survey
of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering.
Washington, DC: Author.
National Science Foundation. (2014). National Center for Science and Engineering
Statistics, Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and
Engineering. Washington, DC: Author.
Nettles, M. T., & Millett, C. M. (2006). Three magic letters: Getting to Ph.D. Baltimore,
MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Patton, L. D. (2009). My sister’s keeper: A qualitative examination of mentoring expe-
riences among African American women in graduate and professional schools.
Journal of Higher Education,80(5), 510–537.
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity. One’s own. Educational Researcher,
17(7), 17–21.
Pierce, C. M. (1970). Offensive mechanisms: The vehicle for micro-aggression. In
F. B. Barbour (Ed.), The Black 70s (pp. 265–282). Boston, MA: Porter Sargent
Publications.
Poon, O., Squire, D., Kodama, C., Byrd, A., Chan, J., Manzano, L., Furr, S., &
Bishundat, D. (2016). A critical review of the model minority myth in selected
Burt et al.
1004
literature on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in higher education. Review
of Educational Research,86(2), 469–502.
Profit, W. E., Mino, I., & Pierce, C. M. (2000). Stress in Blacks. In G. Fink (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of stress (pp. 324–330). London: Academic Press.
Rowley, L. L., & Bowman, P. J. (2009). Risk, protection, and achievement disparities
among African American males: Cross-generation theory, research, and compre-
hensive intervention. The Journal of Negro Education,78(3), 305–320.
Smith, W. A. (2010). Toward an understanding of misandric microaggressions and
racial battle fatigue among African Americans in historically White institutions.
In E. M. Zamani-Gallaher & V. C. Polite (Eds.), The state of the African
American male (pp. 265–277). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
Smith, W. A., Allen, W. R., & Danley, L. L. (2007). ‘‘Assume the position . . . you fit the
description’’: Psychosocial experiences and racial battle fatigue among African
American male college students. American Behavioral Scientist,51, 551–578.
Smith, W. A., Hung, M., & Franklin, J. D. (2011). Racial battle fatigue and the mised-
ucation of Black men: Racial microaggressions, societal problems, and environ-
mental stress. Journal of Negro Education,80(1), 63–82.
Smith, W. A., Mustaffa, J. B., Jones, C. M, Curry, T. J., & Allen, W. R. (2016). ‘‘You
make me wanna holler and throw up both my hands!’’: Campus culture, Black
misandric microaggressions, and racial battle fatigue. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education,29(9), 1189–1209.
Smith, W. A., Yosso, T. J., & Solo
´rzano, D. G. (2007). Racial primes and Black misan-
dry on historically White campuses: Toward critical race accountability in educa-
tional administration. Educational Administration Quarterly,43(5), 559–585.
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A., Nadal, K. L., &
Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for
clinical practice. American Psychologist,62(4), 271–286.
Tinto, V. (1993) Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition
(2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Truong, K. A., & Museus, S. D. (2012). Responding to racism and racial trauma in doc-
toral study: An inventory for coping and mediating relationships. Harvard
Educational Review,82(2), 226–254.
Tuitt, F. (2012). Black like me: Graduate students’ perceptions of their pedagogical
experiences in classes taught by Black faculty in a predominantly White institu-
tion. Journal of Black Studies,43(2), 186–206. doi:10.1177/0021934711413271
Twale, D. J., Weidman, J. C., & Bethea, K. (2016). Conceptualizing socialization of
graduate students of color: Revisiting the Weidman-Twale-Stein framework.
The Western Journal of Black Studies,40(2), 80–94.
Uqdah, A. L., Tyler, K. M., & DeLoach, C. (2009). Academic attitudes and psycholog-
ical well-being of Black American psychology graduate students. The Negro
Educational Review,60(1–4), 23–38.
Warren, S., & Vincent, C. (2001). ‘‘This won’t take long . . . ’’: Interviewing, ethics and
diversity. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,14(1), 39–
53.
Weidman, J. C., & Stein, E. L. (2003). Socialization of graduate students to academic
norm. Research in Higher Education,44(6), 641–656.
Weidman, J. C., Twale, D. J., & Stein, E. L. (2001). Socialization of graduate and pro-
fessional students in higher education: A perilous passage? San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of
a concept. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of
practice (pp. 179–198). London: Springer Verlag and the Open University.
Black Males’ Persistence in Graduate Engineering
1005
Wertsch, J. V., del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: History, action,
and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural
studies of mind (pp. 1–34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, K. L. (2014a) Financial impediments, academic challenges and pipeline
intervention efficacy: A role strain and adaptation approach to successful
STEM outcomes for underrepresented students (Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion). University of Michigan.
Williams, K. L. (2014b). Strains, strengths, and intervention outcomes: A critical exam-
ination of intervention efficacy for underrepresented groups. New Directions for
Institutional Research,2013(158), 9–22.
Williams, K. L., Burt, B. A., & Hilton, A. (2016). Math achievement: A strain and adap-
tive strengths approach. Journal for Multicultural Education,10(3), 368–383.
Williams, M. R., Brewley, D. N., Reed, R. J., White, D. Y., & Davis-Haley, R. T. (2005).
Learning to read each other: Black female graduate students share their experi-
ences at a White research 1 institution. The Urban Review,37(3), 181–199.
Winkle-Wagner, R., & McCoy, D. L. (2016). Entering the (postgraduate) field:
Underrepresented students’ acquisition of cultural and social capital in graduate
school preparation programs. Journal of Higher Education,87(2), 178–205.
doi:10.1080/00221546.2016.11777399
Woodson, C. G. (1933). The miseducation of the Negro. Washington, DC: Associated
Publishers.
Yoder, B. L. (2015). Engineering by the numbers. Retrieved from https://www
.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/college-profiles
Manuscript received August 31, 2015
Final revision received January 11, 2018
Accepted January 12, 2018
Burt et al.
1006
