Latinx High School Students’ Reflections about a University Summer Research Program Support the Use of Asset Bundles in Designing Programs for Broadening STEM Pipelines

Abstract

Latinx individuals are under-represented in STEM and biomedical fields. Research by Johnson and Bozeman has shown that the asset bundle framework can be used to help minoritized individuals succeed in STEM and professional schools. This model has been widely applied to college students, but little work has been done with high school students. A formalized summer research program to allow students to participate in university research was implemented that is geared toward underrepresented high school students at predominantly Latinx high schools in the Southwest using the asset bundle framework. Over the last two years, 10 students have participated in a 4 to 5-week summer research program. Seven of these ten students were interviewed about their experiences in the program. Data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Themes from the asset bundles framework emerged in these interviews that were indicative of student interest in biomedical pursuits, suggesting that asset bundles can be used to promote biomedical careers among Latinx high school students.

Despite the recent increase in the number of Latinx in STEM fields, this group continues to be grossly underrepresented in careers in biomedical fields. While the Latinx population increased by 243% (Sanchez et al., 2015), the number of Latinx doctors declined by 22% over the past 30 years. Only 5.2% of NIH R01 PIs are Latinx (Lauer et al., 2023), only 5.4% of the nation’s registered nurses are Latinx (Cheshire et al., 2020), and 7.6% of Ph.D. recipients in 2021 were Latinx (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, 2022).

According to the 2020 census (US Census Bureau, 2023), Latinx of any race make up 19.1% of the U.S. population. A 2023 report by the U.S. Census Bureau (2023) indicates that in 2021, Latinx of any race made up only 5.1% of the STEM workforce. Moreover, the 2022 Progress Report on the Implementation of the Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Strategic Plan stresses the need to ‘develop and enrich strategic partnerships; engage students where disciplines converge; build computational literacy; and operate with transparency and accountability’ to expand the STEM workforce by including well-prepared individuals from diverse backgrounds (White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, 2023). There is much evidence to support the notion that creating diverse teams in the workplace is associated with positive outcomes. Diverse teams bring multiple perspectives to problem-solving tasks and reduce the effects of groupthink in group decision-making tasks (Freeman & Huang, 2015; Gomez & Bernet, 2019; Herring, 2009; Levine et al., 2014; Sommers, 2006).

One way to increase interest in biomedical fields among historically and economically disadvantaged backgrounds is through the teaching of active learning principles through instruction in research. Research participation involves having knowledge of the content area, developing a research question, formulating hypotheses to answer those questions, designing a study to test the hypothesis, analyzing data to test the results, and communicating the research findings so that the content area is moved forward (Schmitz & Havholm, 2015). These skills are all critical skills that employers seek.

A study at our university shows that active involvement in undergraduate research is associated with enhanced academic performance relative to students who are not involved in research (Daniels et al., 2016). The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine (2017) also note the importance of research experiences for undergraduate students. Some studies have extended this concept to research experiences for high school teachers. A qualitative examination of the National Science Foundation’s Research Experience for Teachers program by Klein-Gardner et al. (2012) shows that high school students were able to apply lessons learned through their teachers’ research experiences in their course while the course maintained state and federal standards of learning.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework that underlies the proposed study is the “asset bundles” framework, which articulates five components that underrepresented students need in terms of additional support to pursue biomedical careers (Johnson & Bozeman, 2012). The interaction or synergistic relationship between the needed assets that will ensure success in the training of students from under-represented backgrounds are: educational endowments; science socialization; network development; family expectations; and material resources.

The first asset bundle, educational endowments, reflects the knowledge, skills, and abilities that students possess prior to participating in the program. The second bundle is science socialization, which seeks to create an environment in which students begin to envision themselves as biomedical scientists and researchers. The third asset bundle, network development, consists of the creation of scientific contacts within the biomedical community. Family expectations, the fourth asset bundle, consists of acknowledging the important role that parents and family play in the development of their children while also providing parents the information about biomedical careers to support their children’s choice to become a biomedical scientist. Finally, material resources involve the actual tools and financial support needed in a rigorous training program.

The Johnson and Bozman (2012) asset bundles model is constructed surrounding issues at the critical bridge between high school and undergraduate studies, but the concept has been mostly applied to undergraduate and graduate students. While there are a few studies that have applied the asset bundle framework to high school students, McCollum et al. (2023) used the Asset Bundle Model to understand the social support assets and needs of underrepresented high school minorities as well as undergraduate and graduate students. Their study focused on social support assets and needs of underrepresented students in health science pathways programs.

The results of the authors’ environmental scan showed that undergraduate and graduate students benefited more than high school students in their academic endeavors after having participated in Health Sciences Pathways Programs in Alabama. McCollum et al. (2023) concluded that pathway programs should provide social support for high school students, in particular, to enhance persistence through education and as they move into the workforce. For the purpose of enhancing diversity among medicine and STEM professionals, Johnson and Bozeman (2012) make a strong case for addressing the social identities of minority high school and college students in the scientific pipeline. The authors suggested that providing high school and college students with resources such as study materials, lectures and access to study groups and tutors, may mitigate potential deficits in the material resources bundle.

Over the past two summers, we invited students from three under-served high schools in the El Paso, TX area to participate in four to five weeks of summer research at the University of Texas at El Paso. Activities that were part of the summer research program included: (a) an orientation where students (and their parents) attended workshops on lab safety training, IRB and IACUC training, and responsible conduct of research, (b) workshops on submitting an abstract and making a research poster presentation, (c) participating in mentored research, and (d) presenting their research at a local summer research conference. Students received a $2,000 stipend to participate in summer research. High school students were accompanied by their teachers, who also received a $4,000 stipend and were provided funds to update their high school laboratories. After the summer research experience, participating students were interviewed and we sought to examine how the summer research experience coincided with the asset bundle framework in these interviews. We expected the following outcomes:

Outcome 1: Participants in the summer research would speak to their existing experiences, which will highlight educational endowments.

Outcome 2: Participants in the summer research will speak to science socialization as a result of participating in mentored research.

Outcome 3: Due to the brevity of the research program and the encouragement to present at a local conference, we hypothesize that network development will not be highlighted in the interviews.

Outcome 4: While the research program invited family members to the orientation, the brevity of the program did not allow for additional family experiences. We hypothesize that family expectations will not be heavily highlighted in the interviews.

Outcome 5: We hypothesize that students will speak to material resources available to them through their work in the summer research program.

Methods

Using semi-structured interviews, the research team explored the academic and social experiences of seven high school students from three local high schools who engaged in a four to five week Summer Research Program (SRP) at a Latinx -Serving Institution (HSI) on the U.S.-Mexico border. The SRP aims to increase the pipeline of qualified college students pursuing biomedical-related majors by fostering interest in biomedical sciences and promoting college preparedness at the high school level. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for this study was obtained from the University of Texas at El Paso (protocol number 1669141-10). Informed consent and assent forms were available in both English and Spanish and all forms were completed in English. Consent was obtained from participants’ parents and child assent was obtained. Students from Cohorts 1 and 2 participated in a post-program qualitative interview.

Setting

The SRP is designed to immerse high school students in biomedical research alongside faculty mentors and their research teams. The high school students conducted biomedical research over the course of 4 or 5 weeks during the summer and attended research-related and professional development workshops. Furthermore, the high school students had the opportunity to present their research findings through a research poster at a local symposium hosted by the HSI. Lastly, students’ parents were encouraged to attend informational sessions such as the program orientation, and events like the poster symposium.

Participants

Cohort one students (n = 3) participated in the SRP during summer 2022 and Cohort two students (n = 7) participated during summer 2023. Each of the participating high schools, described below, developed their own mechanism for student to apply to the summer research program and the various schools forwarded the names of selected students to the program. Both cohorts were invited through email to participate in the interviews after completing the SRP. Students were told that this interview would be used to assess the impact of the summer research experience on their personal and professional development. Two of the three students from Cohort 1 assented to be interviewed and their parents provided consent. Six of the seven students from Cohort 2 assented to be interviewed and their parents provided consent. One of these six students in Cohort 2 participated in the program both summers and was interviewed twice as being part of Cohort 1 and 2. The questions were slightly modified for this student to capture any changes from Year 1 with respect to the program and their experiences.

The respondents were seven students from three participating high schools and were interviewed after participating in the Summer Research Program. Table 1 shows the demographics which includes information on students’ sex, age, ethnicity, and grade level. The respondents were a homogenous group of seven Latinx students. Two students were male and five were female. All were less than 18 years old, sophomores, rising juniors, juniors and rising seniors and planning on attending college after graduating from high school.

Table 1.

Students Demographics of Combined Cohorts Participating in SRP

Item	Frequency	Percent
Sex
Male	2	29.0
Female	5	71.0
Age
<18	7	100.0
18 +	-	-
Ethnicity
Latinx	7	100.0
Non-Latinx	-	-
Grade Level
Sophomore/rising Junior	3	42.0
Junior/rising senior	2	29.0
Senior	2	29.0
Do you plan to attend college?
Yes	7	100.0
No	-	-

High School #1.

High School #1 is a public high school in Texas in Suburban El Paso. It is a demanding four-year educational platform where students are provided with the opportunity to explore career pathways while engaging in superior academic instruction through 21st-century learning skills in our constantly evolving world. This High School’s goal is to develop lifelong learners, who will think critically to solve complex problems and help educate while assisting their fellow peers/co-workers in using science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Ultimately, its goal is to produce highly motivated students who will exhibit leadership, scholarship, and self-support in addition to demonstrating social maturity throughout their educational career.

At their STEM Academy, there are 881 At-Risk students, which is 57.54% of the student population. The school has 1,062 Economically Disadvantaged students which is 69.37% of the student population and 319 Limited English Proficient students which is 20.84% of the student population. There are currently 141 SPED students or 9.21% of the high school population. Limited resources do not allow students to have many of the same opportunities as the other surrounding schools in El Paso. The student environment is lacking in the support and stimulation that allows students to learn some of the basic knowledge they need to succeed in school, particularly in the science content area. Overall, the students at this STEM Academy are minority and low socioeconomic students.

High School #2.

High School #2 is a public school in urban El Paso, TX. The school opened in August 1987 and is located in proximity to the Mexican border, where the population is mostly Mexican-American. The school has received state authorization to implement new, rigorous T-STEM academies aimed at increasing the number of students who study and enter careers in STEM fields. Career academies include STEM, health care, automotive technology, culinary/hospitality, cosmetology, business, robotics, law enforcement, environmental science, and others. Upon graduation, many students are either certified in their chosen field and can go straight into the workplace, or have college credit hours.

While this school is noted as a Texas Education Agency recognized school, greatschools.org rates this school with a 3 out of 10 for college readiness and is indicated as a “worrisome sign” as the school was below average on a variety of indicators of college preparedness. The high school has a 4-year graduation rate that is higher than the state average, but average SAT and ACT scores are below the state average. The number of advanced courses that students at this school can take is close to the state average. For STEM coursework, greatschools.org rates the school as a 4 out of 10.

High School #3.

High School #3 is a rural public high school in Southern New Mexico and has been serving students since 1928. Its campus has been undergoing rebuilding and remodeling of all of its buildings since 2011 and a complete overhaul of the campus was completed in 2019. The entire facility has internet access and interactive boards and projectors in all classrooms and public spaces. There are 11 science labs available. The campus implements ESL and Special Education program models that support these student populations and provide them with access to all opportunities afforded to students who are not in these programs. All core instruction teachers are required to have a Bilingual or TESOL endorsement and they are implementing a Co-Teaching Model within their Special Education Inclusion classrooms. Their four-year graduation rate is 88.63%. Of the 1,500 students, 42% live in households below the poverty index, 99% are Latinx, 100% are on free/reduced meals, and 23% are English Learners.

Data Collection

All interviews were conducted virtually through Zoom and lasted approximately twenty-five minutes. The interviews were conducted by the first two authors who are bilingual and have a master’s in sociology and in psychology and work as research scientists at the university. The two interviewers were female. Several of the authors are trained in qualitative research. The first author has taken coursework in qualitative research and uses mixed methods approaches in her work. The second author is an evaluator that regularly uses mixed methods research. The third author regularly publishes qualitative research. The last author has also published mixed methods research and attended trainings on qualitative research.

During the interview, only the student and the research interviewer were present. The interviews were audio recorded on independent recorders and transcribed. All audio interview recordings were transcribed using Word’s transcribe feature and were quality checked by researchers. Transcribed interviews were kept in password protected computers and only viewed by researchers. A total of seven students participated in the interview, all seven students self-identifying as Latinx, with five students self-identifying as female. The semi-structured interview questions were designed specifically for this study and focused on exploring the high school student’s future goals and their experiences in high school science courses, as well as the program’s SRP experience.

Qualitative Analysis

The study design used a grounded theory approach, grounded in systematically collected and analyzed data through the phases of coding, category development, and theme development (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1994). Specifically, the interviews were analyzed using Saldaña’s (2016) cyclical process where the research team used both open and focused coding to look for codes, categories, and themes in the data. Any discrepancies in the coding were discussed and resolved by the research team during meetings.

Researcher Team and Researcher Bias

All authors work as researchers at the university where the study was conducted. Three out of the five authors in this study self-identify as female. Four of the authors identify as Latinx/a/o and identify as being the first in their family to attend college in the United States. To control for researcher bias, semi-structure questions were developed to ensure consistency and thus to reduce variability that may be introduced by biases. Additionally, interviewers were trained to recognize and manage bias, maintain neutrality, and avoid leading questions throughout the interview process.

Findings

Educational Endowments

The first asset bundle, educational endowments, reflects the knowledge, skills, and abilities that students possess prior to participating in programs focused on increasing the STEM pipeline. Participating students were selected by their teachers for the SRP and in one school, there was a formal application process to select students for the SRP. This selection process ensured that students arrived at the program with some educational endowments.

Moreover, the program also provided needed improvements to the laboratories in the schools and provided teachers with professional development workshops to help their students with the application process for competitive scholarship programs at the local university. The asset bundles model also proposes to develop minority students’ educational endowments by providing students with additional experiences such as a rigorous college preparatory, advanced placement courses, and hands-on laboratory experiences (Johnson & Bozeman, 2012; Burkam et al., 1997). Thus, offering students a rigorous college preparatory setting in high school that includes an excellent math and science curriculum and outstanding teachers have the potential to mitigate minority students’ educational deficits.

Prior interests in attending college, and existing interest in science-related activities, courses and careers is considered an educational endowment. When asked what motivated students to go college and to talk about their experiences in science courses one students responded with:

… it’s also a dream, a goal of myself, I wanted to do. (Student 7)

Two other students expressed an interest in science from an early age and as they enrolled in science courses in elementary and middle school. When asked if they enjoyed science and the science courses in high school, and what it is that they enjoyed from the science courses, two different students said:

Yeah, I enjoyed my science courses. I’ve always loved science when I was very little. That’s always been my favorite subject in school. So learning new stuff in biology and chemistry, it really helped me develop my love for science more because I was able to understand more things about everything around us … it’s just very interesting to me. (Student 4)

Yes, these are my top favorite classes. I’ve been more involved into those classes than any other... I like these classes a lot more than any other class because I could have more of a hands-on experience than having to read and write what I’m learning. (Student 6)

Another student was highly motivated to pursue a major in biochemistry or related fields. When asked who motivated summer research participants to pursue a major in biochemistry, one student stated that he himself was highly motivated to pursue such a career and explicitly expressed knowledge about what it would take to pass the MCAT and said:

I would kind of say, myself, because what I want to do in the future. I want to be a trauma surgeon so I kind of did a lot of research into what is the best major to take in order to have a high percentage chance of passing the MCAT to get into medical school and I read that biochemistry is one of the best and highest percentages that people get into medical school with. So that is why I went to biochemistry. (Student 3)

Science Socialization

The second bundle is science socialization which seeks to create an environment in which students begin to form a personal identity and envision themselves as biomedical scientists and researchers. Ideally students should receive support needed to develop an identity as scientists which is gained through relationships with mentors, teachers, and peers who are also interested in being scientists. Thus students who have not yet developed such an identity should be provided with encouragement and resources “to adopt norms, values, behaviors, and social skills applicable to careers in science and medicine” (Johnson & Bozeman, 2012, p. 8).

For the most part, students participating in the program felt that they received the support needed to develop an identity as scientists. They expressed how their experiences in the SRP translated into developing identities as scientists. When asked if they felt like scientists during their participation in the program activities, one student had this to say:

Yes, I really did [feel like a scientist.]. It was pretty cool … putting on a lab coat and coming home and being able to explain what I was doing…. Everything was really awesome … to be an important part of the research. So I really felt important and I felt like a scientist, yes. (Student 3)

Another student, who participated in the program for a second time, expressed very positive experiences in the university laboratory. This particular student wound up presenting their research at an annual conference in this field and was recognized as a Top 10 high school student who submitted their summer research to this conference:

I can say I felt like a scientist. It was really fun. I feel like this year I felt more [like a scientist], I got to do like some more stuff, like independently. And I feel this year I did more of … a different type of research, like I got to research about something new and now that I’ve already created a poster then my abstract, this year I’m doing more…I got to see more into the scientist part of creating graphs and tables and doing your images and coming to conclusions and things like that. (Student 1b)

Network Development

The third asset bundle, network development, consists of the creation of scientific contacts within the biomedical community. Mentoring relationships with scientists, in and outside their cultural communities, participation in extracurricular activities, and peer influence are critical in expanding student’s networks. Thus, an intended benefit of the SRP was for students to build social capital with mentors and peers.

Network development was limited due to program brevity and restricted to developing networks in the laboratory, but conference attendance also contributed to network development. In their interviews, high school students discussed opportunities to expand networks through their SRP experience. Students participating in the project for the most part felt that they received the support needed to develop an identity as scientists which was gained mostly through their relationships with mentors in their labs at the university. Interview data show how those relationships with the professors, mentors, and peers in the lab catalyzed personal identities as scientists.

The high school students discussed how the summer research experiences surrounded by mentors made them feel like a scientist. When asked to discuss the mentoring and research guidance that students received at the university research setting and to discuss how often they met with their university mentors, students had this to say:

I would meet with them almost every single day. I would get there at a specific time, and then they would explain to me what we were going to do today. It was good communication and to meet with them for almost five days a week. (Student 6)

High school students were generally satisfied with the mentoring and the research guidance they received. Specifically, one student mentioned that their mentor’s PhD student was understanding and helpful:

Yes, my UTEP mentor was [graduate student]. It was very nice to be very, I guess say, connected with her because she was easy to talk to, she was easy to ask questions. Sometimes I think when there’s people above you it’s very hard, you know, it’s nerve wracking to be like, ‘I don’t understand this’. With her it was very easy to say like, ‘what are we doing this for again?’ or you know, because I have a hard time sometimes understanding what part of the research we’re doing and why we’re doing it, so it’s really nice to have that open space to ask her questions. (Student 3)

Family Expectations

Family expectations, the fourth asset bundle, consists of acknowledging the important role that parents and family play in the development of their children while also providing parents the information about biomedical careers to support their children’s choice to become a biomedical scientist. Parents play a key role in encouraging and/or influencing their children to pursue a college education and to pursue various careers including biomedical careers. Families can encourage or discourage their children from pursuing college and science related careers. Thus, engaging families in workshops focused on supporting their children’s interest in science careers are critical.

Interview data from our study show that students, overall, felt encouraged and supported by their family, encouraged to attend college and are mostly supportive of their academic pursuits. While parents were not active in the program’s orientations, when asked who or what motivated them to attend college, students generally felt encouraged and supported by parents and other family members. One student shared how they had been inspired by family members:

My parents really motivated me to pursue that [attend college] since it was not much available to them growing up. (Student 6)

Another program participant also felt that their parents played a critical role in inspiring them to attend college:

My parents are the ones who’ve always pushed college onto my life. They’ve always kind of emphasized how important it was not only to have a good education, but so that way I can have a good lifestyle, it’s very hard to have a great lifestyle without having too much education. So, my parents are definitely my motivators and that helped me to become as ambitious and as driven as I am. (Student 3)

Another student echoes the importance of family in their desire to go to college:

I think my family, they really encourage me to, like, work hard in school so I can go on college and then I think also myself, like I, I really want to find a good job…. (Student 1a )

When asked what or who motivated them to pursue careers in science or specifically on biomedical careers, one student felt motivated and inspired by their family background on science careers:

Well, a lot of my family has background in that kind of area (forensic science). My uncle is a police officer and then my aunt works in the lab. I think she is a pharmacist … and I found forensics and I really like it because it connected me with what my family sort of does in a way. It was because of that. (Student 4)

Material Resources

Finally, material resources involve the actual tools and financial support needed in a rigorous training program. For economically disadvantaged and minority students, financial support, such as grants and scholarships can be highly effective in increasing the scientific pipeline. Financial preparations for their children’s college preparation are critical so students can focus on their studies and participating in extracurricular activities “which is vital to developing social capital” (Johnson & Bozeman, 2012, p. 10).

When asked what kind of lab equipment program participants learned to use during the SRP at the university, two students responded:

So there was a lot in the lab that I didn’t know, like I had no ideas what any of it was. So it was really nice to see and to learn what each did in the functionary thing… And also learned about the incubator … and about the confocal, which is a microscope that we used, and it was really awesome to see how it took such tiny cell and it made them so visible to the eye, like stuff that we can’t see, and it was really awesome to see the technology, how advanced it is…(Student 3)

….inside the lab I learned how to be really precise with the measurement tools, because I wasn’t that skillful, but now I learn how to move and putting a bunch of stuff. Also, I learned how to create gel to see if there’s DNA and the ones that, and that’s like that’s actually really quick process, it was pretty cool. And then we also learned how to do PCR. Which is just when you do like super, that was more like intense because it’s in this chamber that is very sterile, so you have to be really careful in that area. And then also this soil extraction kit, that’s the things that I really learned. (Student 5)

Another student described the experience of working in a university lab and being part of a university environment.

Yes, I think I wouldn’t be able to get that experience alone. I think only (university redacted) could have done that for me and also because I was going into my senior year and I had never stepped foot on an actual university, so even that was an experience for me. Even that was mind opening, and like a shocking experience because I was actually stepping foot on a university lab. (Student 2).

Discussion

Increasing the number of minority students in STEM related careers and specifically in biomedical careers requires the implementation of systematic approaches to retain high school students as they move through the scientific pipeline. Such an approach should focus on addressing a number of interrelated challenges that minority students face. The asset bundles model targets critical areas where students of color need support to initiate and continue careers in science. One way to initiate interest in careers in science is through active participation in research.

Through the summer research experience, the high school students developed social networks within the biomedical community as they were mentored by faculty, postdocs and graduate students. Most university research labs use a peer or near-peer mentoring approach with their students. A peer or near-peer mentoring approach is one in which students are mentored to some degree by a graduate student who is mentored and advised (i.e., on research and on how to mentor the undergraduate students) by a faculty mentor. Peer or near-peer mentors can have similar backgrounds or resemble students in age, status, skills, and/or interest.

The peer or near-peer model was used with the high school students in the summer research experience. Research has shown that seeing individuals similar to themselves perform successfully raises self-efficacy in the observer (Bandura, 1977) and when students perceive their mentors as more relatable it is associated with higher gains in self-efficacy and intrinsic interest (Clarke-Midura et al., 2018). The high school students’ narratives showed that working closely with their near-peer mentors not only helped develop their social networks but also developed their sense of belonging in the science community. The high school students received the support needed to develop their identities as scientists which were gained through relationships with peer or near-peer mentors in the labs.

Recent research has also recently examined the use of the asset bundle framework with Latinx high school students. Hurtado et al. (2020), analyzes data from the 2009–2016 High School Longitudinal Study and focuses on Latinx high school students in their paper. Using proxies for the asset bundles, Hurtado et al. (2020), found that models containing these proxies, social identities (e.g., income, gender, English language learner status (ELL)) and high school location (e..g, suburban, town, city, rural) explained 32% of the variability in the number of college applications submitted and also explained 47% of the variability in the selectivity of the college attended. Moreover, at least one proxy for the asset bundles was statistically related to the outcome variables.

While the asset bundles did a good job at explaining variability in these two outcome variables, the authors also noted that the asset bundles did not explain disparities in social identities due to English Language Learner (ELL) status or gender. For example, while gender was not correlated with the number of applications submitted, inclusion of all independent variables in the model resulted in gender being negatively correlated with both outcome variables, suggesting that women were less likely to apply to a larger number of colleges and were also less likely to apply to selective universities. While the authors attributed this finding to a suppressor effect, the authors also did not examine the moderating role that these variables could play in the relationship between the asset bundles and their outcome variables.

While the Hurtado et al. (2020), is one of the first papers to examine the asset bundle framework among Latinx high school students, no work to our knowledge has examined the effect of using some of the asset bundles to prepare Latinx high school students for college. The four to five-week summer research program was brief but quotes above indicate that the students’ science coursework was an educational endowment that they brought to the summer program. Students also brought in family expectations to the summer research program, as our quotes reflect the important role that parents and family members play in providing the background to pursue a college degree. The research program and working with a near-peer mentor in the research lab of a college professor enhanced science socialization and the close work with a faculty member, postdoctoral fellow, or graduate student enhanced network development.

While we did not specifically interview graduate students and postdoctoral fellows for this study, it should be noted that the overwhelming majority of postdoctoral fellows and graduate students mentoring the high school students were also Latinx scholars. This is a critical feature of our program, as many Latinx Serving Institutions meet the needed threshold to be considered Latinx serving among undergraduates, but graduate school enrollment does not reflect that diversity.

While we did not specifically ask about the use of the Spanish language during these interviews, one of the co-authors mentored multiple students and notes that members of the lab did interact with high school students in Spanish. This co-author also notes that interactions would take place in both English and Spanish in the lab. Another co-author who is Lead Principal Investigator of the program also notes that the program manager of the program often spoke in Spanish with the students. A future study should further investigate the reinforcing effects of Spanish language use on science identity by Latinx high school students that are involved in a summer research program.

Finally, material resources were also captured by the program, as students were paid to participate in the program. They were also exposed to laboratory materials that can only be found at universities that are research intensive. Additionally, quotes from the students discuss these resources and the experience of being on a university campus for the first time.

Conclusion

Ginther et al. (2011), research shed a light on predictors of being a recipient of a R01 grant from the National Institutes of Health. These authors found that after controlling publication record, institutional characteristics, prior funding history, educational background, training and country of origin, these authors found that African-American, Latinx, and Asian-American applicants were less likely to receive a R01 grant compared to White applicants. The National Institutes of Health have taken steps to address these disparities. For example, the Common Fund provided funding to ten institutions with sizable percentages of students who are eligible for Pell grants to train undergraduates to become research scientists. While these efforts are commendable, efforts to target students earlier in their academic careers are also needed to inspire a diverse STEM workforce.

Johnson and Bozeman (2012) proposed an asset bundle model that identifies several assets that need to be addressed to inspire minoritized students to pursue STEM careers. While much of this work has focused on undergraduate training, we used this model to develop a program to address underserved high school students. As part of this program, high school students and their teachers were able to participate in a summer research program and we documented here interviews with seven Latinx students of the program.

These interviews suggest that the summer research program contributed to the student’s science identity and motivation to enter a STEM field. These interviews also suggest the important role that family plays in their child’s educational pursuits. Moreover, these students demonstrated educational endowments, as all of our interviewed students indicated an interest in science coursework.

There are several limitations to this study. First, the program was a four or a five week summer research program. The program length was a function of a school districts’ academic calendars and a requirement of the program that a high school teacher be paired with their high school students for safety concerns. As school districts in this part of the country finish their school years in June with teachers returning in late July for required professional development training prior to the start of the following academic school year, the development of assets like professional development were limited to interactions within the laboratory and a local university summer research conference. That said, two of these seven students presented their research at discipline-specific conferences.

Another limitation of the program may also involve self-selection. Students who participated in the summer research program had to apply for the program at their local schools and the judges were science teachers. Naturally, selected students were going to show a predisposition for pursuing a science-related career. Promoting summer research programs to at-risk Latinx high school students is a logical and important next step for expanding the community of professionals in STEM fields. Given that prior research by Daniels et al., (2016) shows that undergraduates who participate in research perform better academically than students whwo do not participate in research, it is imperative that at-risk high school students be provided with these research opportunities. Finally, we interviewed seven students and there may be concerns about needed sample size. That said, many of the same themes were raised by several students, which suggests that interviewing additional students would have resulted in these themes being expressed by others.

In summary, this study suggests that the asset bundle framework can be used to assist underserved high school students to become engaged in scientific pursuits. The students report entering the program with an interest in science, an important educational endowment. The summer research program provided science socialization, as high school students spent one month in a university research laboratory and presented their research. Through their research in the lab, the students expanded their network to include university professors, graduate students, and post-doctoral fellows. Students also unanimously reported an intent to go to college with their parents and aunts and uncles serving as role models for their educational pursuits. Finally, the program provided material resources with respect to providing payment for one month of summer research. All told, the asset bundle framework and participating in summer research can help minoritized students enhance interest in biomedical careers.

Data availability statement:

The qualitative interviews can be found at https://osf.io/t9kxa/