EFFECTS OF MATH IDENTITY AND LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES ON RACIAL DIFFERENCES IN MATH ENGAGEMENT, ADVANCED COURSE-TAKING, AND STEM ASPIRATION

Abstract

Increasing the number of students of color in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) fields is critical for America’s economic, technological and scientific advancement, yet many are less likely to enter or persist. National efforts to decrease racial differences in STEM have been ongoing but their outcomes have not markedly broadened participation. Under-examined is the role of students’ STEM-specific identities, such as their math identity, on their STEM outcomes. Qualitative findings suggest learning mathematics is a racialized form of experience where students’ math identities and educational opportunities are shaped by race-based narratives of math ability. However, this hypothesis has not been tested with rigorous empirical evidence. Moreover, the role of students’ learning opportunities on actual outcomes is unclear. Using data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS: 09), this study examines the role of math identity and other math attitudes in racial differences in four STEM-related outcomes: advanced math course enrollment, math behavioral and emotional engagement, and STEM career aspiration. Guided by a sociological perspective, I also examine the degree to which students’ school-contexts effect their outcomes and experiences. Lastly, drawing from intersectionality theory, I offer insight into how the inclusion of race and gender interactions change model results. The findings suggest that there are racial differences in mathematics identity, behavioral and emotional engagement, and school characteristics. However, math identity was not a significant predictor of math course enrollment and had little impact on the other outcome variables when student background and school characteristics are considered. The findings also illustrate how learning opportunities are allocated in ways that mirror the race-based hierarchy of math ability. I conclude by describing the study’s implications for policy and future research.