Greetings! My name is Adrian Neely. I am a Research Associate at the HBCU STEM US Center at Morehouse College. The mission of our center is to promote undergraduate success and retention of students majoring in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) disciplines. Our center includes STEM programs and interventions to support undergraduate student success in STEM majors. During the AEA conference in New Orleans this past November, I participated in a panel presentation to help evaluators understand why an asset-based approach to evaluating programs at HBCUs is not only appropriate but critical. For example, data tracking of outputs often overshadows the amount of work and effort needed to produce intended outcomes. Instead, an evaluator can use observations and interviews to examine the nature of relationships and how individuals at HBCUs leverage networks and relationships to achieve outcomes. To take an asset-based approach to evaluation means to move away from traditional, colonized practices of evaluation, which are limited and often fail to provide a holistic picture.
It is widely known and documented that Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) produce more Black STEM professionals than predominately white institutions (PWIs). The million-dollar question is: “How do HBCUs do it?” Or put another way, “What’s the secret sauce that makes HBCUs so effective?” I am a Black female graduate, and former employee, of predominately white and minority-serving institutions. My current position gives me a front-row seat to the HBCU experience I’ve often wondered about and secretly yearned. My experiences in research and evaluation within and across different institutional contexts gives me an opportunity to view inequitable funding practices and understand why HBCUs, which are not monoliths, are successful with less in comparison to PWIs.
Here are a few hot tips for evaluators of HBCU programs and interventions:
- Before conducting the evaluation, evaluators must understand the social, political, and historical context that shapes an HBCU. Understanding the context of institutions we evaluate is paramount, especially for HBCUs that have endured a long history of systemic racism and limited external funding. And yet, the Black Excellence emerging from HBCUs is a demonstration of resilience. Context matters and relationships do too. This brings me to my next tip.
- For the duration of the evaluation, evaluators must be aware of disparate conditions between HBCUs and PWIs. In comparison to PWIs, faculty and staff at HBCUs wear multiple hats and juggle responsibilities beyond their job titles, taking “going above and beyond” to another level. HBCUs, and individuals within them, innately know how to “turn lemons into lemonade,” “make mountains of out molehills,” and simply, “make do” with limited resources. It’s important for evaluators to know the stressors that HBCUs, and the individuals working within an HBCU, experience. It’s important for evaluators to know the challenges, and more importantly, the gaps between the challenges and supports necessary to mitigate them. Focusing on assets, you want to know how individuals thrive, despite the challenges.
- After the evaluation, evaluators must report the findings by emphasizing programmatic achievements at HBCUs. Because HBCUs can achieve much with little, miracle expectations can become the norm. It’s important to convey the story with details so that grant funders and institutions can “right size” the effort in future funding opportunities. It’s good practice in promoting equity for under-resourced schools expected to meet the same demands of well-endowed private and public universities.
Understanding the effectiveness of interventions at HBCUs is an exercise of understanding resilience. While HBCUs continue to educate Black students mostly from low socioeconomic backgrounds with rations from inequitable federal and state funding policies, evaluators can focus on contextual factors that lead to achievements.
The American Evaluation Association is hosting University–Based Centers (UBC) TIG week. All posts this week are contributed by members of the UBC Topical Interest Group. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this AEA365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the AEA365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an AEA365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to AEA365@eval.org. AEA365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.