The Structural Relationship Between Out-of-School Time Enrichment and Black Student Participation in Advanced Science

Abstract

The researchers tested a model of the structural relationship between Black student engagement in out-of-school time (OST) science enrichment and participation in advanced science courses in high school. The participants in the sample were Black students (N = 3,173) who participated in the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009/2012. The student participants were in the ninth grade and ranged in age from 14 to 16 years. The results suggested that the model adequately fit the data, and that a direct relationship existed between OST enrichment and Black student participation in advanced science. In addition, Black female students participated statistically significantly more in advanced science than their male peers. Socioeconomic status also was a statistically significant indicator of advanced science course participation. Engagement in OST was not statistically significantly influenced by gender or socioeconomic status. This research extends the implications of informal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to support the diversification of advanced high school science courses and STEM participation by providing distinct estimates of the effects of OST on Black students.

High school students' out‐of‐school science participation: A latent class analysis and unique associations with science aspirations and achievement

“…In-school participation is also positively associated with students' science aspirations (Ainley et al, 2008;Aschbacher et al, 2010) and achievement (Martin et al, 2021;Saçkes et al, 2011). Similarly, researchers have previously shown positive associations between in-school and out-of-school science participation (Vedder-Weiss & Fortus, 2013;Young & Young, 2018). This notwithstanding, a critical limitation of the research described thus far is that the benefits of out-of-school science participation have largely been unaccounted for while considering the effects of in-school participation.…”

“…In line with prior research on structured out-school-activities (e.g., Chan et al, 2020;Dabney et al, 2012;Godwin et al, 2016;Simpkins et al, 2005;Young & Young, 2018; see also , to place the focus on non-participation and participation in each of these activities, the index was recoded to be dichotomous, with values of one being recoded as 0 (do not participate) and values of two to four being recorded as 1 (participate). This approach was also necessitated from a methodological perspective.…”

Deeper than Wordplay: A Systematic Review of Critical Quantitative Approaches in Education Research (2007–2021)

“…Positivist researchers often racialized educational crises using data from local, state, and federal agencies to model and test deficit theories and produce deficit interpretations (i.e., fixed capabilities, low performers, below average) about students of color. Those engaged in critical approaches to quantitative inquiry have named this as gap-gazing research (Gutiérrez, 2008;Young et al, 2018aYoung et al, , 2018b that is used to frame the discourse through a deficit lens and undervalue the educational aspirations and attainment among underrepresented and marginalized groups, particularly in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) (Van Dusen & Nissen, 2020;Metcalf, 2011;Young & Young, 2018;Young et al, 2018b). Scholars engaged in critical approaches to quantitative inquiry redirected the racialization of crises toward the racist policies, practices, and discourses that reproduce inequities (Gillborn et al, 2018;Kendi, 2019;Zuberi, 2001).…”

Connecting QuantCrit to Gifted Education Research: An Introduction

“…Some gifted education articles acknowledged race as a social construct and are worth highlighting. Young and Young (2018) utilized a national database to understand students’ participation in advanced coursework using a critical quantitative analysis. Their study focused exclusively on Black students becauseanalyzing differences between groups does not provide researchers, teachers, or parents information that can be translated into programs and services that can serve Black students.…”