Interventions supporting baccalaureate achievement of Latinx STEM students matriculating at 2-year institutions: A systematic review
Academic Article
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
Other
View All
Overview
abstract
AbstractNumerous national reports have identified the importance of significantly improving pathways that begin with Latinx students enrolling in 2year institutions and ultimately completing baccalaureate degrees in STEM fields at 4year institutions. Many programs using multiple interventions have been designed, implemented, and studied to achieve this goal. To synthesize what has been learned from studies of these programs, this article presents a systematic review of published studies of programs designed to support Latinx student success in 2year institutions and successful transfer to 4year institutions, particularly for STEM majors. A total of 49 quantitative, 9 qualitative, and 16 mixedmethods studies published as reports, articles, or dissertations since 1980 were identified that met the criteria for the review. Studies covered a wide range of interventions, including mentoring, counseling, advising, study groups, tutoring, scholarships, orientations, career services, undergraduate research, articulation agreements, and transfer programs. Individually, these studies report positive influences on student success outcomes, including 2 and 4year graduation, transfer to a 4year institution, retention, and success in individual courses. However, the number of qualifying studies was surprisingly small, considering the importance of improving success of Latinx students and the length of time during which the problem has been repeatedly emphasized. Few interventions have been undertaken from explicitly assetsbased perspectives or theoretical frameworks. The lack of explicit frameworks underlying interventionscombined with a sole/primary focus on studentssuggests many interventions were approached from a deficitbased perspective. Further, the study found no pattern of replication studies that might confirm effectiveness of potentially promising interventions. Based on our analysis of evaluations presented in the studies, it does not appear that the research community has developed agreedupon methods to evaluate commonly agreedupon outcomes. Finally, no intervention has been sufficiently supported that widespread implementation could be recommended.
