The High Impact of Practice? The Need for Interrogating the Intersections of High-Impact Practices, Underrepresented Students, and Success by Kayla Gill and Kayla Johnson

Image by freepik

Introduction

Commitments to supporting students of color to and through higher education have rightly been called into question following the US Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling of race-conscious admissions as unconstitutional (Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 2023). This ruling has been swiftly followed by numerous state legislative bills attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in colleges and universities (Charles, 2024). These legislative movements are particularly troubling for Black and Brown students, who often face greater and different challenges to accessing and persisting in higher education than White students. To continue supporting Black and Brown students in higher education, we as practitioners and institutions must examine our commitments and practices and consider the extent to which they are serving this vulnerable group of students. 

Questions about supporting student success in higher education are often met with a common answer: high-impact practices (HIPs). However, the success of institutional practices like HIPs can intersect with legislative measures that directly influence the experiences and outcomes of marginalized students. For example, anti-DEI legislation can dissolve support structures that make HIPs accessible and equitable to racially marginalized students, such as scholarships and training that promotes equity. Programs aimed at increasing minoritized student participation in areas like undergraduate research and living learning programs face the imminent threat of being dismantled. Efforts to make current practices culturally responsive may be defunded. These changes may reinitiate historical barriers to HIPs and exacerbate gaps in participation and outcomes for our most vulnerable students. There is no better time than now to critically examine the practices we implement to support Black and Brown student success, how well we are meeting their needs, and what we could be doing better.

High-Impact Practices

Just as we must continue to question equity in our admissions practices, which historically have systematically excluded Black and Brown students from attending some institutions, we must also question the equity of our practices for supporting those who do enroll. All institutions have practices in place to support student success, with many of them deemed “high impact” —such as studying abroad, participating in undergraduate research, or completing internships. Kuh and Kinzie (2018) outline many benefits of students participating in HIPs, including high rates of persistence and graduation. Generally, students who participate in HIPs are more likely to be engaged with campus peers, staff, and faculty through intentional and meaningful interactions. HIPs can increase confidence, interpersonal understanding, and sociopolitical consciousness, which contributes to students’ life skills beyond university. HIP participation can also lead students to explore their own self-efficacy and identity, which can be particularly useful for marginalized students. However, not all HIPs are created equal, and practitioners must think intentionally about how they design and implement HIPs to best support students and their unique needs (Kuh and Kinzie, 2018).

Like with HIPs, research shows that students who are actively engaged or connected to academic and support spaces are more likely to persist (Adams and McBrayer, 2020). In general, when students are introduced to practices and spaces that are designed to support them, they feel a sense of belongingness at an institution, which enables larger academic and personal outcomes that are often attributed to HIPs (Strayhorn, 2022). Yet, like much of higher education itself, these practices and the research surrounding them are rooted in Whiteness, with most focusing specifically on the experiences of White students (Finley and McNair, 2013; Patton et al., 2015). There is still much to explore on how we craft such practices for marginalized populations who may require specific and responsive initiatives that differ from more traditional “high impact practices.”  

According to Kinzie et al. (2022), among the most common factors impacting student engagement and persistence are: student background characteristics; precollege academic experiences; structural characteristics of institutions such as mission, size, and selectivity; and interactions with faculty, staff, and peers (Kinzie et al., 2022). Some studies also show that student demographics can significantly influence their persistence (McCormick et al., 2017). For example, White students often persist at higher rates than students of color due to myriad inequitable systemic structures that privilege White students, such as curriculum (Joseph-Salisbury, 2019), resource allocation (Gansemer-Topf and Schuh, 2003), and other practices that center Whiteness (Gusa, 2010). Institutional practices that are developed with racially conscious retention constructs in mind—including a “sense of belonging” (Duran et al., 2020), “validation” (Nora et al., 2011; Rendón, 1994; Strayhorn, 2022), and stereotype threat (Kinzie et al., 2022)—aid in the persistence of students of color. Therefore, it stands to reason that HIPs that do not respect and reflect the identities and needs of students of color could potentially act as a deterrent for student attrition. 

(In)Equity in High-Impact Practices

Even as research demonstrates the promise of HIP participation as it relates to student success, other research shows that underrepresented minority students, such as Black and Brown students, participate in HIPs at much lower rates than their White middle-class peers (Kinzie, 2019). For underrepresented minority students who do participate in HIPs, they may reap disproportionately fewer benefits or have adverse experiences (Longmire-Avital, 2019; Finley et al, 2022). To continue to address equity concerns in higher education, it is imperative to explore how specific institutional practices can have a “high impact” on the retention and success of Black and Brown students. And to do that well, practitioners and institutions must consider who Black and Brown students are and the unique challenges they may face, such as issues related to belonging, imposter syndrome, and access to opportunities (Markle et al., 2022; Strayhorn, 2022). It is crucial for students to encounter representation of themselves across all aspects of their college campus, as students who encounter representation in campus spaces often report experiencing higher-quality interactions, forging deeper connections, and mitigating instances of harm such as microaggressions, which all contribute to retention and success (Longmire-Avital, 2022). Yet, Black and Brown students often have unequal opportunities to form connections with peers and mentors of similar backgrounds (Thiem and Dasgupta, 2022). The lack of equity in opportunities, including those for connection, academic engagement, and involvement, has persistently affected the experience of students of color.

Underrepresented Students, Intersectionality, and Success

Ultimately, HIPs make the highest impact when they include all aspects of the student’s identity (LePeau and Museus, 2023). As an example of the multiple identities that Black and Brown students may hold, Black and Brown students disproportionately identify as first-generation—59% and 60% respectively, compared to 39% of White students (Forbes, 2023). Compared to their continuing generation peers, first-generation students disproportionately struggle with poor academic preparation, internalization of negative stereotypes, less awareness of information about colleges and funding opportunities, ongoing financial concerns, culture shock, low self-esteem and self-efficacy, and underdeveloped study and time management skills (Conefrey, 2021). To begin to address these issues, Nunez (2017) argues two critical points of engagement for educational leaders. First, leaders must recognize that not all HIPs are effective for first-generation college students. Implementing the HIP that is the most likely to effectively serve the unique needs and experiences of first-generation college students should be at the forefront for educational leaders. Second, educational leaders must be willing to acknowledge and incorporate the racial, cultural, and ethnic identities and experiences of first-generation college students within their HIP strategies. 

There is limited research that employs Crenshaw’s framework of intersectionality on Black and Brown first-generation students and HIP participation. By utilizing Crenshaw’s (2017) intersectional analysis framework—considering students’ multiple identities, how they intersect with the practices they encounter, and how this intersecting of identities and practices leads to privilege and oppression—practitioners can identify structural barriers that limit participation and create strategies for students to overcome unique challenges. This framework also calls into question the unjust practices, or rather “blind spots” that have become common within higher education due to the lack of an equitable lens for diverse identities (Crenshaw, 1989; Davis, 2014).  

Conducting research that examines students’ multiple identities in relation to their experiences in higher education can address this gap. Research on who participates in HIPs and how those groups benefit provides singular evidence of students who have an identity as first-generation or Black and Brown, but it generally does not examine both. The dearth of current literature on developing and facilitating access to impactful practices for Black and Brown first-generation students motivates us to explore effective practices for supporting and retaining this population. It also motivates us to ask: What happens when Black and Brown first-generation students DO participate in HIPs? How does HIP participation impact their belongingness? Persistence? Success? We also ask: What are the conventional and unconventional practices institutions implement to ensure that Black and Brown first-generation students persist? What makes a practice “high impact” for these students?

A Call to Action

In her dissertation research, the lead author plans to explore the correlation between HIPs and sense of belonging among Black and Brown first-generation students. The aim is to initiate a dialogue that not only identifies existing gaps in our current understandings of how to best support these students, but also proposes practices aimed at enhancing the student experience. 

Although there may be overlapping experiences between Black and Brown first-generation students and their peers with other identities, with the increasing enrollment of this group in higher education, institutions must begin to create practices that wholistically support and validate these students. We can no longer look at one facet of student identity, without considering how each identity a student holds creates unique experiences, needs, and assets. We can no longer implement practices without regard for how they may (not) impact each and every student. As institutions of higher education, we are indebted to students, to validate, advocate, and affirm their identity and experiences and to support their academic success.  

About the Scholars

---

References

Adams, T. L., & McBrayer, J. S. (2020). The lived experiences of first-generation college students of color integrating into the institutional culture of a predominantly white institution. The Qualitative Report, 25(3), 733–757. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2020.4224

Charles, J. B. (2024, January 16). Amid national backlash, colleges brace for fresh wave of anti-DEI legislation. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/amid-national-backlash-colleges-brace-for-fresh-wave-of-anti-dei-legislation

Conefrey, T. (2021). Supporting first-generation students’ adjustment to college with high-impact practices. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 23(1), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025118807402

Crenshaw, K. W. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black Feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=uclf

Crenshaw, K. W. (2017). On intersectionality: Essential writings. The New Press.

Davis, K. (2014). Intersectionality as critical methodology. In N. Lykke (Ed.), Writing academic texts differently: Intersectional feminist methodologies and the playful art of writing (pp. 17­–29). Taylor & Francis.

Duran, A., Dahl, L. S., Stipeck, C., & Mayhew, M. J. (2020). A critical quantitative analysis of students’ sense of belonging: Perspectives on race, generation status, and collegiate environments. Journal of College Student Development, 61(2), 133­–153. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2020.0014

Finley, A., McNair, T., & Clayton-Pedersen, A. (2022). Designing equity-centered high-impact practices. In J. Zilvinskis, J. Kinzie, J. Daday, K. O.Donnell, & C. Vande Zande (Eds.), Delivering on the promise of high-impact practices (pp. 17–29). Routledge.

Finley, A., & McNair, T. (2013). Assessing underserved students’ engagement in high-impact practices. Association of American College and Universities. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/c6399970-32b5-4293-918b-801112f1ecd3/content

Gansemer-Topf, A. M., & Schuh, J. H. (2003). Instruction and academic support expenditures: An investment in retention and graduation. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 5(2), 135–145.https://doi.org/10.2190/LX9Y-3R2A-EV4T-TFXP

Gusa, D. L. (2010). White institutional presence: The impact of whiteness on campus climate. Harvard Educational Review, 80(4), 464­–490. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.80.4.p5j483825u110002

Hamilton, I. (2023, June 13). First-generation college students by state. Forbes Advisor. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/education/student-resources/first-generation-college-students-by-state/

Joseph-Salisbury, R. (2019). Institutionalised whiteness, racial microaggressions and black bodies out of place in Higher Education. Whiteness and Education, 4(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23793406.2019.1620629

Kinzie, J. (2019). The next decade of HIPs: Increasing access, quality, and equity. National Survey of Student Engagement. https://hdl.handle.net/2022/25568

Kinzie, J., Gonyea, R., Shoup, R., & Kuh, G. D. (2022). Promoting persistence and success of underrepresented students: Lessons for teaching and learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2022(170), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20507

Kuh, G. D., & Kinzie, J. (2018, May 1). What really makes a ‘high-impact’ practice high impact? Inside Higher Ed.https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2018/05/01/kuh-and-kinzie-respond-essay-questioning-high-impact-practices-opinion

LePeau, L. A., & Museus, S. D. (Eds.). (2023). The role of culture and identity in making practices high impact. New Directions for Student Services (Vol. 181). Wiley.

Longmire-Avital, B. (2018). Seven potential barriers to engaging in undergraduate research for HURMS. Threshold. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/seven-potential-barriers-to-engaging-in-undergraduate-research-for-hurms/

Longmire-Avital, B. (2022). High impact practices and historically underrepresented minority students. Elon University Center for Engaged Learning. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/resources/high-impact-practices-and-historically-underrepresented-minority-students/

Markle, R. S., Williams, T. M., Williams, K. S., deGravelles, K. H., Bagayoko, D., & Warner, I. M. (2022). Supporting historically underrepresented groups in STEM higher education: The promise of structured mentoring networks. In Frontiers in education (Vol. 7, p. 674669). Frontiers Media SA.

McDaniel, A., & Van Jura, M. (2022). High-impact practices: Evaluating their effect on college completion. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice, 24(3), 740–757. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025120947357

Nora, A., Urick, A., & Quijada Cerecer, P. D. (2011). Validating students: A conceptualization and overview of its impact on student experiences and outcomes. Enrollment Management Journal, 5(2), 34–52. https://www.academia.edu/download/31756507/EMJ.pdf#page=35

Nuñez, E. M. (2017). Getting HIP with first-generation college students: Decolonizing the high impact practice movement.Unpublished dissertation. California State University, Long Beach.

Patton, L. D., Harper, S. R., & Harris, J. (2015). Using critical race theory to (re) interpret widely studied topics related to students in US higher education. In A. Martinez-Aleman, B. Pusser, & E. M. Bensimon (Eds.), Critical approaches to the study of higher education (pp. 193–219). Johns Hopkins University Press.

Rendon, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19, 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191156

Strayhorn, T. L. (2022). Unraveling the relationship among engagement, involvement, and sense of belonging. In E. Bentrim & G. W. Henning (Eds.), The impact of sense of belonging in college (pp. 21–34). Routledge.

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. 600 U.S. 2023. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf

Thiem, K. C., & Dasgupta, N. (2022). From precollege to career: Barriers facing historically marginalized students and evidence‐based solutions. Social Issues and Policy Review, 16(1), 212–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12085