Posted on 09/28/2022 5:33:33 AM PDT by devane617
A new paper in PNAS Nexus, published by Oxford University Press, indicates that minority students who earn low grades in introductory science, technology, engineering, and math classes are less likely to earn degrees in these subjects than similar white students.
There is a persistent disparity in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education outcomes in the United States. In 2018, women earned 58% of bachelor's degrees, but only 36% of STEM bachelor's degrees. In 2017, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous people comprised 30% of the U.S. population, and 34% of STEM-intending incoming college students, yet they earned only 18% of actual undergraduate STEM degrees. This has implications for the diversity of STEM professions as well as for the range of research and innovation in such fields.
Students interested in such subjects typically take introductory courses like calculus or general chemistry during their first semester. Colleges may offer such courses in part with the goal of sending a message to students who receive low grades that they should pursue other fields of study. Previous research has established an association between low performance in these courses and a decreased probability of obtaining a STEM degree. However, this association may not be neutral regarding gender and race. Being assigned a low grade in introductory STEM courses might have a greater negative impact on women and racial/ethnic minorities.
Researchers examined records from 109,070 students from six large, public, research-intensive universities between 2005 and 2012, to assess whether low grades in these introductory courses disproportionately impact underrepresented minority students. The investigators studied the records of student performance in introductory courses in physical sciences, life sciences, mathematical and computational sciences, and engineering to discern the likelihood of students earning degrees in these subjects.
(Excerpt) Read more at phys.org ...
Let me put it this way, if somebody can only get 75% in chemistry but they still want a chemistry, they need to figure what chemistry type jobs they could do with a 75% average
It doesn’t mean they can’t have a chemistry career of some kind. Just not the one they might want but needs a higher grade.
“... In 2018, women earned 58% of bachelor’s degrees...”
Disagree with your last statement.
At least, in mechanical engineering.
They want to hustle minorities into STEM even if they are not smart enough. HOW COME white people are not allowed to be professors in Black Studies departments. I promise you there are plenty of liberal white women who would like these jobs.
Also how come there is no affirmative action for whites in the NBA and NFL?
I guess it never occurred to the author that you are not ASSIGNED a grade, you EARN a low grade. The grade simply places a number on the amount of information learned in the course. It may have escaped the mind of the author, but the low grade simply shows that the student didn't learn what is necessary to get the degree.
This lack of knowledge may be caused by a number of reasons, including motivation, time spent, amount of encouragement, home background, basic intelligence, and more. It nevertheless is a good clue about the likelihood of learning enough to EARN the degree.
Actually, today most STEM professors in CS, EE, ME and Physics are probably non-White, Asian. In biology and chemistry, you will also find lots of White women teaching.
It has that reputation - but only chemists and medical types have to take it. :-)
It has been my experience that minorities are STEM challenged, they want the pay but not the work. Government handouts are easier and need to come to an end!
In civil engineering, the two “weeder” courses were taken in sequence in the second year: Engineering Mechanics and Structural Design I.
Yes, it’s just that in my colleges, at least half the professors/teachers were non-white (and non-black; can’t think of a single black professor over 6 years for me, not even in electives like psychology or recreation or music).
It is. I did quite well in Introductory Chemistry though.
You got it.
Not to mention sexist.
They discourage everyone. Students who got straight A’s in high school get C’s in their college science classes and immediately head towards the humanities and and social science classes. It does a lot to keep those departments in business, whether or not that is a good thing.
“I always thought ORGANIC CHEMISTRY was the DESTROYER of DREAMS.”
Organic chem was rough but Physical Chemistry pushed me to the limit. Mainly because I had little interest in either.
Yes, interesting that they cannot do well in the introductory courses but can crush the much more advanced courses. Who would have thought.
However, it is historically typical in college for the introductory courses to weed out the ones who cannot handle the advanced courses.
My favorite class.
As a mechanical engineer, my upper level classes were definitely harder than the introductory classes, especially if one had not fully comprehended the introductory math classes.
Those that grasped the necessary math did much better, even if it took them longer to get through those intro courses initially.
Actually, “curving” is a problem.
Some do it by dropping the worst test, etc.
I wonder when the curves started. 30 years ago it was rampant and it always seemed like a cave to me to let more people pass. An early form of “let’s be nice and make everyone feel good”.
EE. 1977-1980. We all had to get through Chemistry, Physics, and Calculus as well as getting slammed in our majors during the first 2 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.