Resize Text: 
T he National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education and the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning are pleased to announce that Freeman A. Hrabowski, III, has been awarded the 2009 Virginia B. Smith Innovative Leadership Award, which recognizes individuals whose leadership in higher education has resulted in better ways to educate people to participate in and improve an open and inclusive democratic society. The award is named for and honors Virginia B. Smith, who has made extraordinary contributions in advancing innovative strategies to improve opportunity and excellence in higher education throughout her career as college president, educator, foundation director, and public policy scholar.
Freeman Hrabowski has served as president of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), since 1992. He is co-author of Beating the Odds: Raising Academically Successful African American Males (1998) and Overcoming the Odds: Raising Academically Successful African American Young Women (2001). Under Hrabowski’s leadership, the Meyerhoff Program at UMBC has successfully educated hundreds of minority scholars in mathematics, science, and engineering. It serves as a national model for educational innovation.
Joni Finney is vice president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education and professor of practice at the Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania. Here she interviews Freeman Hrabowski on his work.
Finney: Tell me how you got into the work of motivating young black and minority scholars to pursue studies in math, science and engineering.
Hrabowski: I noticed, even as a child, that most kids didn’t like math, even though I always got goose bumps doing math problems. The question for me was—how could I help more kids become as excited as I was about it? And I didn’t necessarily find teachers convinced that all children could do the work—even when we were in a predominately black setting.
When I enrolled at the University of Illinois for graduate work—after having been at Hampton University for undergraduate study, where again a lot of students didn’t like math—unfortunately there were very, very few African-Americans in math, science, and engineering. I was usually the only black in my math classes. I had no faculty members who were black, and there was only one woman in the entire department. So my question was—what did I need to do to attract more students who looked like me into these disciplines? And it became clear that I needed to think about both minority students and women.
Those experiences from the elementary years through graduate school motivated me to figure out how to increase the number of underrepresented people in these fields.
Low Expectations, Great Potential
Finney: Do you think we still have a low expectation of math achievement for some students?
Hrabowski: I think we do in this country. In general, we are not accustomed to seeing large numbers of students excelling in math. When I ask audiences, regardless of race, how many of them love mathematics, usually people laugh. When I ask how many love reading, even if some people don’t love to read, many raise their hands. They’d be embarrassed not to do so.
But Americans are quite comfortable saying that they don’t like math, because in most cases, teachers have not focused on a love of mathematics. If you ask American audiences how many people knew by the time they were in the 12th grade that they were either a math-and-science type or a history-English-and-arts type, most people raise their hands. Then if you ask them why, people typically say they weren’t good at math and science, or they really enjoyed history, English, or art. But the fact is that we have not trained math and science teachers to encourage children to believe that they can excel in math and science. Unfortunately, the general feeling is that if students don’t “get it” immediately, then math and science are not for them.
Finney: How have you been able to identify talent in higher education—the students who can succeed in math, science, and engineering programs?
Hrabowski: Beyond looking at test scores and grades, which are important of course, we look at attitude and motivation as we interview candidates for the Meyerhoff Scholarship Program.We find that students who are resilient, who understand that they may not do well all the time but can bounce back, students who are willing to take advice and who show passion for the work usually do well academically. We look for a quality we call “fire in the belly” – the genuine excitement students have for the work.
Although test scores and grades reveal some things about preparation and the possibilities for the future, we find that attitude and motivation are in some ways as important.
Finney: How do you assess student motivation and attitude?
Hrabowski: We have developed a number of questions that we ask students to get a sense of their willingness to take advice. For example, most of the students who come to UMBC with an interest in science will have earned a 5 on AP chemistry, AP mathematics (calculus), and AP civics. And we will encourage those students to consider taking Calculus I, or Physics I, or Chemistry I. The students who listen to us and think about it carefully have a much better chance of succeeding, even if they decide to go into Cal II or to Chem II. But the students who are overly confident and think “I know what I need, and I’m going on to the next course” tend to do much less well. We also have questions about the importance of working in groups, what they fear about the work, and what excites them. From students’ responses to these questions, we learn about their willingness to work with us in being effective.
Finney: How can we create more excitement about math and science education in the high schools?
Hrabowski: I’m convinced that group work can be very helpful at any level—from elementary, to middle, to high school. And getting students to help each other, including students who are slightly older helping younger students, can motivate everyone. Younger students are inspired by, and look up to, older students. And especially when you find some “cool” kids who can work with some younger kids, the younger kids become more excited about the work. When they see that a basketball player who’s making an “A” in Cal II is interested, it’s amazing how that makes a difference in motivating children. I do think that kids can motivate each other if we create an environment in which being smart is “cool.”
Our students are also encouraged to be involved in tutoring their peers—in Chemistry II, for example—which is viewed as very prestigious. Tutors’ names appear on the wall, and people know that they are the very best.
Finney: Could you talk a little bit about how you nurture talent at the university?
Hrabowski: We’ve worked very hard to provide incentives for students to want to participate in these highly selective programs, from the Meyerhoff Scholars Program to the Artist Scholars Program. All these programs are designed to help young people feel very positive about being smart and to get them thinking about ideas. We also encourage conversations about the work, whether it’s in biochemistry or theater. And we have an “Intellectual Sports Council” because we have many teams and clubs—like debate and chess—that focus on intellectual activities and competition.
We also provide opportunities for undergraduate research, which encourages curiosity and connects students with faculty mentors. The results of their research are often published in refereed journals, and the students frequently present their research at conferences.
The students are expected to excel in their work. We have a Council of Majors that, again, is prestigious and allows students to think about careers from medicine and law to teaching. And we get them thinking about themselves as leaders in their disciplines.
Engaging Faculty
Finney: How do these students interact differently
Finney: How do these students interact differently with faculty at your university than they would at another college or university?
Hrabowski: One of our strengths, as I said, is that we have research faculty who work closely with undergraduates, pulling the students into their labs or into their writing, and many of our students are actually publishing as co-authors with faculty members and traveling to present their research at conferences. And we have several major student publications here—for example, a literary publication called Bartleby and our Journal of Undergraduate Research— and several editorial boards consisting of faculty and students who judge the work of students. I can tell you that it’s prestigious on our campus to have many of our top faculty working on their research with undergraduates from all races, men and women, in their labs and on publications.
Finney: How do you get the faculty at a university to focus so intensely on undergraduate education?
Hrabowski: The good news is that our best undergraduate students have always done well and worked closely with faculty. The difference today is that the quality of students has improved substantially, and the culture is such that it’s not simply a matter of working only with the top undergraduates and graduate students—many more students in science now are connected to faculty.
Finney: But most faculty members don’t go to a research institution to spend a lot of time teaching undergraduates.
Hrabowski: We’ve been able to show that serious undergraduates can do really fine substantive work, so our very best researchers have undergraduates in their labs. For example, one of our faculty members who is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator (one of only two at public universities in Maryland) has at least a dozen undergraduates working in his lab at any given time. And there are many other examples—from physics to biology to the humanities—where undergraduates work with faculty on their research.
Engaging Students
Finney: I understand that the program in math and science—the Meyerhoff Program—has a “boot camp” for students. Could you tell me about this?
Hrabowski: New students have a summer experience before they begin classes at the university, and that experience involves a course in math, science, and culture—in this case, African-American culture. The students are from all races and learn how to work together, how to support each other. They come to know that they can’t expect to be able to solve math problems in ten minutes, like they often can in high school. If you look at the SAT and the math AP exams, the problems can be solved in 15-to-20 minutes. But real problems aren’t like that.
So they spend the summer being frustrated in some ways and learning that they can accomplish much more by working together and asking good questions. They’re also learning in a positive way that they’re not the smartest people in the world, even if they have perfect math scores. All of that’s very humbling. But in the final analysis, they’re much closer as a group, they’re more disciplined. By the end of the summer, they understand the rigor of college work and are accustomed to not being distracted by all of the external factors that get in the way of hard work.
Finney: Do you lose students during the boot camp?
Hrabowski: No. It’s very interesting. We really don’t because we’ve worked so hard to prepare them and to make expectations clear. Also, those who enter the Meyerhoff Program understand not only that the program is for people who want to think independently but also that success comes from working in groups.
Finney: Could you tell me a little about how faculty engage students in this kind of work and what is required in different disciplines?
Hrabowski: In our specialized scholars programs—from the Sondheim Public Affairs Scholars Program to the Meyerhoff Scholars Program—research is a requirement for participation in the program. So we have an infrastructure in place that connects students with faculty on the campus, or with faculty at Hopkins and other universities throughout the country, and with scientists at a number of national agencies. We begin by working with our students in the middle of their freshman year on research opportunities for the next summer; meanwhile, faculty members regularly talk about research opportunities in classes. Also, our Undergraduate Research and Creative Achievement Day is the culmination of year-long activities by large numbers of students who have successfully competed for grants for faculty-student research projects.
Results
Finney: How does faculty involvement affect student success?
Hrabowski: What’s so clear from our data analysis is that the more closely students are connected to faculty mentors and research—and to each other—in their academic work, the greater the probability that they’ll excel, regardless of the field. It’s amazing how the group dynamic helps, how close faculty and student interaction yields much more success. What we’ve also shown is that this undergraduate success leads to higher retention and graduation rates, greater respect from the state legislature, and more excitement on the part of the public and young people coming to UMBC.
Finney: I’ve read about the Chemistry Discovery Program. Could you tell me more about it and why it was initiated?
Hrabowski: Our chemistry department began this special program because it wanted to increase substantially the number of students in chemistry who were earning A's and B's. Many of chemistry students had A's in high school or took AP chemistry, but they were not excelling in our chemistry classes.
In the Chemistry Discovery Center—which is lab-based, augmented by instruction—we not only encourage but require group participation. Students are assigned to groups of four people, and each has a particular role to play—from the project manager to the technologist or researcher, to the writer or scribe, to the data analyst. Students know that their individual grades depend on the performance of the entire group, and there is an emphasis on helping students discover for themselves what normally would be given to them in a fairly passive way through a lecture. And the Chemistry Discovery Center is a paperless center. Everything is done using computers or working together at the board within a group.
The results have been phenomenal in terms of the numbers of students who not only are earning C’s (who likely would have earned D’s or failed previously) but also in many cases are getting A’s and B’s. And the chemistry department has a chart on the wall for everybody to see showing the performance of students over a number of semesters.
Finney: And how do the retention and graduation results look at UMBC?
Hrabowski: They continue to improve. We are now up to about 88 percent of the students retained freshman to sophomore year. Our graduation rates are above our peers’, which mean we’re at about 60 percent. You might ask why it would only be approximately 60 percent after five years. Unfortunately, because we do not offer certain majors, some students transfer. And that makes a difference. A number of our students come with an interest in health professions, for example, and after two years on our campus they transfer to the medical school for certain majors that don’t require a bachelor’s degree.
Funding
Finney: You’ve been very successful in raising money for your programs. How important are external dollars for your work?
Hrabowski: It’s essential to have funding. A lot of it comes from outside sources. The Linehan Artist Scholars Program, for example, is endowed by the Linehan family, and our Dresher Humanities Scholars Program, Sondheim Public Affairs Scholars Program, and Sherman Teachers Scholars Program are all endowed to give students support for scholarships and in their work and research. Since funding is so important, we have also reallocated funds to support some of these initiatives. Any activity on the campus that is considered important will have a certain amount of funding associated with it.
Finney: You also have NSF [National Science Foundation] funding, correct?
Hrabowski: NSF funds come to the university to support students in their research and educational costs, because it’s very difficult for students to pursue math and science degrees if they’re working 20 hours on the outside. I often tell my students they have to “marry” the work—they’ve got to be there every night after dinner focusing on their work. They can’t let it go for two or three days and expect to succeed in science and engineering.
Finney: So students are not encouraged to work outside the classroom?
Hrabowski: We do give a number of students opportunities to work when it’s related to the major. Students in the humanities may work with cultural institutions, for example.
Finney: What about state funding?
Hrabowski: I do think that states will begin to put more money into producing math and science teachers. And I think we should be promoting public-private partnerships, where federal and state governments work together to provide certain amounts of money while also encouraging institutions to do fund raising in these areas. Our Sherman Scholars Program for very smart prospective teachers in math and science in challenging schools is funded by the Sherman family, for instance.
Replication
Finney: What can be learned from your work that is useful in thinking about scaling up these types of innovations?
Hrabowski: We are very honored that a number of universities have decided to replicate our model. From Cornell, to the University of Michigan, to Louisiana State University, to Morehouse College, we see programs that have been designed on the Meyerhoff model. And we’ve been working with colleagues at Williams College and a variety of other places that are thinking about implementing some of the things that we’re doing. I think there’s much more that could be done to develop models that others can adapt to their culture and circumstances.
Finney: Do these programs at other institutions usually start with math, science and engineering?
Hrabowski: Yes, exactly.
Finney: But it sounds to me like the model you’ve created to get more women and minority students into these disciplines can be a model for undergraduate
education generally.
Hrabowski: That's right, because I always say if you show me a campus that really thinks about how to be substantively engaged with undergraduates—whether in English, political science, or mathematics—I’ll show you a place that’s doing a better job with women and minorities also.
My colleague Ken Maton, some others, and I recently had a chapter published that focused on a proposed theory of change for institutional transformation in this area.
Challenges Ahead
Finney: In a recent speech you stated that “times are better now but the challenges even greater” Would you elaborate on that a bit?
Hrabowski: We now have larger percentages going on to college than ever before, so the times in that respect are better. If we go back to the 1950s and 1960s, well under 10 percent of the college graduates were African American, and today we’re moving towards 20 percent—about 18 percent of African Americans over 25 years of age have college degrees. We see improvement for other groups too.
But our challenge is to make sure the number of students going on to college and graduating continues to increase. We also need to have much more representative numbers in those disciplines where minorities and women have been starkly underrepresented. And that will require colleges and universities also to think carefully about how to strengthen K-12 education and to increase the numbers of students coming into their institutions who actually succeed.
The Change Strategy of the Meyerhoff Program
The successful implementation and sustainability of the Meyerhoff Program has been due to the combination of several strategic change elements: senior leadership, vision and buy-in, capacity building, and leveraging resources. The program has been fully supported from its inception through to the present by all high-level university administrators (i.e., the president, provost, and deans).
The compelling institutional vision of talented African-American students achieving outstanding success in the sciences and proceeding to prestigious Ph.D. and M.D./Ph.D. programs around the country is well suited to UMBC. The medium size of the university, its location in a geographic region with many high-achieving minority students (the Washington and Baltimore suburbs), a mission within the state university system that includes a focus on STEM fields, and an institutional culture that emphasizes undergraduate student involvement in faculty research all contribute to the match of the program to the institution.