Sarah Cohodes watched high school students discover an open door: a six-week summer program at an elite technical university in the Northeastern United States that changed not just their college choices, but the trajectory of their entire lives. What she and her colleagues found, published in the Journal of Human Resources, upends how we think about creating opportunity in STEM. It turns out that reaching students before they apply to college—not after they're admitted—is the moment that matters most.
The study is the first randomized evidence showing how STEM-focused summer programs shape college enrollment and degree completion for underrepresented minority students. Between 2014 and 2016, researchers tracked three groups of high-achieving, STEM-interested students who participated in different formats of summer pipeline programs during the critical period between their junior and senior years of high school. A control group received no such intervention. The differences were striking.
All three programs boosted the share of students who earned a bachelor's degree within six years by between 2 and 9 percentage points. But the most dramatic gains came at elite institutions: degree attainment from those schools jumped by 9 to 15 percentage points. More importantly, these degrees were concentrated in STEM fields, reflecting both more students graduating overall and a meaningful shift toward STEM majors among those who did.
The financial impact is significant. Being offered a spot in one of these summer programs raised predicted earnings by 3 to 15 percent—gains driven by both the quality of the institution students attended and their choice to pursue STEM degrees. These weren't marginal improvements; they represented a pathway to economic security that might otherwise have remained closed.
The interventions themselves varied in scope. The six-week program offered personalized college counseling. The one-week option provided information sessions. An online version created a forum where students could ask college admissions questions. Each format worked, suggesting that the timing and presence of support matter more than the specific delivery method.
What makes this research particularly relevant is its timing. After the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision eliminating affirmative action in college admissions, universities have been searching for new pathways to build diverse STEM communities. This study offers a concrete answer: invest in students before they apply, not after acceptance. Most existing "summer bridge" programs serve students who have already been admitted to a particular college—arriving too late to influence where students choose to apply in the first place.
Cohodes emphasizes that this is not a call to abandon support at other levels. "College quality matters and getting underrepresented students to high-quality colleges makes a difference," she said. "But it's not a zero-sum game. We can also think about what types of support postsecondary institutions need to provide enriching STEM environments even if they are not elite institutions, and what governments can do to invest in higher education."
The research reveals a broader truth: Black, Hispanic, and Native American students express interest in STEM at rates similar to their white peers, yet are more likely to abandon the field or leave college entirely. College experience itself is a crucial factor—a reminder that intention and environment shape outcomes. By positioning intervention at the high school level, these programs redirect students toward institutions and fields where they're more likely to thrive, ultimately altering not just who enters the STEM pipeline, but who stays.