United States

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) trainings have come under fire in recent years, from lawmakers who oppose them for political reasons, from employees who argue that they are all talk and no action, and from organizational and behavioral scientists, whose research consistently shows that non-scientific DEI trainings either do nothing or make problems worse. Despite these widespread failures, there is considerable reason for hope that effective, meaningful DEI efforts can be developed, if we rely on scientific models of cognitive-behavioral and organizational change. One approach in particular, the bias habit-breaking training, has 16 years of experimental evidence demonstrating its widespread, long-lasting impact. Based in cognitive-behavioral science, this training approach empowers people to become impactful, autonomous agents of change, both within their own minds and behavior and in the social institutions they inhabit. 
This poster will provide an overview of the design and scientific framework of the bias habit-breaking training. It will then review highlights from the 16 years of research testing the training, which has shown its effectiveness to empower people to 1) reduce bias in their thoughts and behaviors, 2) create inclusion by improving their organizational climate and publicly speaking out against bias and prejudice, and 3) promote equity by identifying and correcting inequitable policies, increasing hiring of members of underrepresented groups, and reducing achievement gaps in educational settings. Lastly, it will provide links to access to a variety of free evidence-based DEI resources that build on the bias habit-breaking training, to help others in their efforts to champion impactful DEI in their own lives and organizations.
In contrast to the considerable despair and pessimism around DEI efforts, the bias habit-breaking training and other evidence-based interventions highlight considerable reasons for hope and optimism. Behavioral and organizational sciences can help individuals and institutions make meaningful, long-lasting progress on DEI outcomes.

2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

Empowering Agents of Change to Reduce Bias, Create Inclusion, and Promote Equity: 16 Years of the Bias Habit-Breaking Training

poster

### Welcome to the 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

This year’s event promises to be an enlightening experience, filled with opportunities for sharing, networking, engagement, and inspiration.

Our mission? To foster an inclusive environment where the science communities can come together to discuss, collaborate, and strategize on how to broaden participation in science careers. Whether you’re an educator, researcher, policymaker, or passionate advocate, this conference is designed to provide valuable insights and practical solutions.

Get ready for:
* **Cutting-edge Research:** Explore the latest trends and findings in interventions aimed at enhancing diversity and inclusion in science fields.
* **Networking Opportunities:** Connect with like-minded professionals, forge new partnerships, and exchange ideas that can drive meaningful change.
* **Inspiring Keynote & Speakers:** Gain insights from renowned speakers who are leading the charge in promoting diversity and equity in science.
* **Global Perspectives:** Engage with experts from around the world to gain diverse perspectives and approaches to addressing common challenges.
* **Professional Development:** Enhance your skills and knowledge through workshops, panel discussions, and interactive sessions tailored to your professional growth.
* **Seed Funding Opportunities:** Learn about funding opportunities and resources available to support initiatives aimed at increasing diversity in STEM.

Thank you for visiting Understanding Interventions 2025 Annual Conference event page.<br><br> In order to gain full access, please register [**here**](https://understandinginterventions.swoogo.com/ui2024/begin).

Please register!

Don’t miss out on this invaluable opportunity to be part of a movement towards a more inclusive and equitable future in science. This year’s event promises to be an enlightening experience, filled with opportunities for sharing, networking, engagement, and inspiration.
Mark your calendars, spread the word, and join us for the 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference on February 7-8th.

INTRODUCTION: Indigenous/Native Americans remain highly underrepresented in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields. Despite the recent emphasis on diversity in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields (Valantine & Collins, 2015), Indigenous people continue to be underrepresented in educational systems and the workforce. For example, while American Indians or Alaska Natives make up 0.8% of the U.S. population, they represented only about 0.4% of students graduating with a bachelor's degree in Science and Engineering (S&E) in 2019 (NCSES, 2021).  Their underrepresentation may be due, in part, to the incongruity between personally valued goals (e.g., the communal goal of “giving back” to one’s community or the agentic goal of “independence”) and opportunities to satisfy those goals in STEM careers. 

Goal congruity theory (GCT) is rooted in the expectancy-value theoretical framework, which explains individuals’ decisions regarding whether to engage with roles as a function of their expectations about the role and their values (Diekman et al., 2020). Goal congruity theory posits that individuals' attitudes towards a social role (e.g., being a scientist) are influenced by the communal/agentic goal affordances associated with that role and the congruity between those affordances and personally valued goals. Within GCT, two categories of goals are relevant: communal and agentic goals. Communal goals are oriented toward collaboration and assisting others, while agentic goals prioritize personal advancement and recognition (Judd et al., 2005). When individuals find that the goal affordances do not align with their goal endorsements, they experience a sense of goal incongruity. 

Research indicates that perceived communal opportunities in STEM fields increase interest and persistence, especially among underrepresented groups (Belanger et al., 2017; Thoman et al., 2015). However, the impact of goal incongruity (mismatch between expectations and valued goals) on STEM outcomes is less consistent, and evidence regarding the effect of goal incongruity has primarily been collected from non-Indigenous populations. Recent advancements in goal congruity research have begun to uncover the mechanisms underlying this influence. Belanger et al. (2020) introduced a role-based belonging model that suggests belongingness mediates the relationship between communal affordances and interest in STEM roles. Unfortunately, aside from a handful of efforts (e.g., Belanger et al., 2020), there have been relatively few longitudinal designs in both observational and experimental research, which are crucial for assessing the long-term and mediated impacts of goal affordances and congruity.
In summary, the growing GCT literature points to the potentially powerful influence of goal affordances and congruity on STEM-related outcomes for some. That is, while some research indicates that communal goals hold particular significance for students from underrepresented groups in STEM (e.g., Hispanic, African American, etc.), most studies have been conducted with White middle-class STEM students (e.g., Diekman et al., 2011; Allen et al., 2015), which limits generalizability to other demographic groups. Further, few studies have examined the links between goal affordance and congruity, role-based belonging, and well-being among Indigenous students who face systemic challenges to their entry into STEM careers.

As one of the least represented groups in STEM, Indigenous students frequently report feelings of social isolation and disconnection within predominantly White fields, negatively affecting their motivation to continue. Descriptive and qualitative studies have shown that Indigenous students value a learning environment that affirms and respects their culture, where Native-specific knowledge and practices are appreciated (Tachine et al., 2017; Stevens et al., 2016). For Indigenous college students in STEM, the concept of 'giving back' to their communities is particularly significant in their educational and career pursuits. Despite strongly valuing communal goal affordances in STEM roles, students continuously experienced frustration in achieving these goals due to perceived barriers and challenges (Page-Reeves et al., 2019). Consequently, Indigenous students facing a greater perceived incongruity between their cultural values and their learning environments are more likely to experience academic stress compared to their peers (Chee et al., 2019). Thus, research and theory can incorporate Indigenous concepts and ways of knowing to improve understanding of the opportunities and strengths through which students from these communities integrate into STEM fields.

The current study addressed several gaps in the GCT literature by longitudinally assessing the influence of communal and agentic goal affordances and congruity on STEM persistence and well-being outcomes in a national sample of Indigenous undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdocs pursuing STEM degrees and careers. The present study examines the following research questions.

RQ1: How do perceived communal affordances of STEM roles relate to later role outcomes among Indigenous STEM students?
RQ2:  How does incongruity between communal affordance and endorsement relate to later role outcomes among Indigenous STEM students?
RQ3: How do perceived agentic affordance of STEM roles relate to later role outcomes among Indigenous STEM students?
RQ4: How does incongruity between agentic affordance and endorsement relate to later role outcomes among Indigenous STEM students? 
RQ5: Is the relationship between prior goal affordances or incongruity and future role outcomes mediated by role-based belonging?

METHODOLOGY: This longitudinal research study followed Indigenous people (N = 154) pursuing STEM degrees/careers to investigate the direct and indirect effects of perceived communal/agentic goal affordances in STEM careers and incongruity (Time-2) on intentions to persist and personal well-being (Time-3) through a sense of belonging in their STEM field (Time-2), controlling for baseline (Time-1). 

RESULTS: Both communal and agentic goal affordances positively influenced persistence intentions through belonging. By contrast, agentic goal incongruity negatively influenced persistence intentions through belonging, but communal goal incongruity did not. Surprisingly, we found no significant results for well-being.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Supporting Indigenous students in STEM is of paramount importance. Based on GCT, goal affordances of STEM roles and congruity between goal affordances and personally valued goals are crucial to fostering interest and positive attitudes toward STEM careers (Diekman et al., 2020). Despite this, existing literature, predominantly centered on white samples, consisted of certain constraints in understanding the nuance of these relationships. The analysis reveals that Indigenous students benefit significantly from the perception that STEM roles can satisfy communal and agentic goals, thereby nurturing a stronger sense of belonging and a more pronounced intention to engage in STEM careers. Additionally, our findings suggest that a significant discrepancy between the students’ perceived affordances for agentic goals, but not communal goals and personal values, leads to students feeling lower feelings of belonging and reduced persistence intentions to persist in STEM. Our findings underscore the significance of supporting roles and environments that facilitate the fulfillment of communal and agentic goals and point to the complexity of the goal-pursuit process among Indigenous populations.

Navigating STEM Pathways: Belonging Mediates the Impact of Goal Congruity on Persistence (but not Well-being) Among Indigenous Students

Focus of the Study: Despite institutional efforts, faculty diversity has remained unchanged for decades. University systems provide an existing network of collaborating institutions that regularly engage in change-efforts in concert (Martin et al., 2022), and thus we hypothesized a coordinated program to diversify the faculty may be effective. Here we report on the five year impacts of an NSF-funded Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) PROMISE Academy Alliance, a consortium within the University System of Maryland (USM) collaborating to develop, implement and disseminate a unique postdoc-to-faculty conversion model (Cresiski et al., 2022). The initiative was piloted with five participating institutions within the USM, including teaching-focused institutions, comprehensive universities, research institutions, and professional schools. Methodology and Measures Used: Research through focus groups, meeting observations, focus groups and document review from internal and external evaluators have yielded significant quantitative and qualitative data about the impacts of the PROMISE Academy. The impacts of the AGEP PROMISE Academy Alliance are multifaceted, including positive outcomes on participating fellows and documented improvements to policy and practice across all participating institutions and at the university system office itself. Illustrative questions/issues to be discussed in the open-ended roundtable: What are some potential benefits and challenges in implementing a collaborative program across different institutional types (e.g., research universities, HBCUs, rural colleges, predominantly undergraduate institutions)? How can these challenges be addressed? What histories and lenses should be considered when forging such partnerships? When coordinating efforts across campuses, especially ones that may have long timelines, what benchmarking measures can be used to document incremental change (i.e. practice change prior to policy change)? What facilitates and hinders effective change efforts from one campus being scaled to other campuses regionally? Nationally?

Coordinating Change: Lessons from a Multi-Campus Faculty Diversity Initiative

The number of U.S. citizens from minority groups who have earned doctorates in science and engineering has increased over the past decade; however, minorities continue to represent a small proportion of the scientists and engineers in the United States (1, 2). In addition, a commonly identified barrier to underrepresented populations is limited or inadequate integration into the scientific communities that train them (3). Undergraduates from historically marginalized communities often lack significant exposure to research and professional development, limiting both their interest and competitiveness as applicants to PhD programs in biomedical science. The UAB Blazer BRAIN Summer Research  Program is a summer research experience for undergraduates (REU) which addresses the need to broaden participation in neuroscience-themed PhD programs, by promoting a sense of belonging for students in underserved communities. Accordingly, success for the UAB Blazer BRAIN Program targets a minimum 60% acceptance rate of participants to PhD programs in biomedical science. Blazer BRAIN Scholars, all of whom. identify as underrepresented, spend eight weeks at UAB in labs of their research mentors, completing hypothesis-driven, neuroscience-themed projects. Complementing our Scholars’ immersive research experiences are several opportunities to build confidence in writing and presenting skills, as well as many community building activities to promote their sense of belonging at UAB’s vast biomedical research campus. After their eight-week experience at UAB, our Scholars are funded to attend and present at the Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minoritized Scientists (ABRCMS) meeting, and additionally are invited to serve as “Alumni” Mentors to help onboard future cohorts of Scholars. UAB Blazer BRAIN represents an innovative partnership with five HBCUs in the state of Alabama; we reserve seats for their qualified student applicants, thus facilitating a pipeline between our respective institutions. An additional innovative feature of Blazer BRAIN is our partnership with the NIH-funded Roadmap Scholars R25 program, which recruits PhD students from historically marginalized communities for training in neuroscience. Roadmap Scholars serve as “near-peer” aspirational mentors or RAMs for our Blazer BRAIN Scholars. RAMs assist Blazer BRAIN Scholars in preparing abstracts and posters for research presentations and provide feedback for their end of summer oral presentations. RAMs also run the Blazer BRAIN journal club, to help Scholars learn how to read and critically review scientific literature. Our near-peer mentoring program allows Scholars to “see themselves” as future graduate students, while providing future mentors with leadership and mentoring training. This summer we are hosting our third cohort of we hosted our first cohort of Blazer BRAIN Scholars, ten undergraduates hailing from several different institutions primarily throughout the southeast, including our HBCU partner institutions. Results of prior evaluations indicated the following: Scholars had an overwhelmingly positive experience; they gained invaluable research skills and professional development; they had a better understanding of careers in biomedical research; and they expressed greater interest for careers in biomedical research. Being in our third year, we have also identified opportunities for improving our Program, including interventions designed to enhance effective engagement with our HBCU partners, and changes to our survey questions designed to more effectively evaluate our Scholars’ confidence, readiness, and sense of belonging in biomedical science. In summary, the Blazer BRAIN summer REU employs innovative strategies to promote the success of our Scholars and our HBCU partner institutions. Through analysis of our success and prospective reflection, we have identified and implemented targeted interventions to further improve the success of our Scholars and in turn our Program.

Mid-Point Assessment of Successes and Opportunities for Improvement of a Five-Year NIH-funded Summer Research Program to Broaden Representation and Inclusion in Neuroscience

In this cross-institutional, multidisciplinary collaboration, we leverage ten years of knowledge, expertise, and National Institutes of Health Diversity Program Consortium Funding (NIH-DPC) resources and experiences to identify mission-critical practices and considerations in developing undergraduate research infrastructure. Authentic engagement in research through mentored undergraduate research experiences (UREs) has been shown to increase students' research knowledge and skills, science identity, academic performance, persistence, graduation rates, postgraduate interests, degrees, and career pathways (Eagan et al., 2013). UREs are a proven high-impact practice that broadens participation in STEMM, particularly for individuals from underrepresented groups (URGs), such as ethnic minorities, women, and first-generation college students (Hernandez et al., 2018). This study adds to the literature on creating excellence in undergraduate research (Hensel, 2012; NASEM, 2020) by increasing understanding of exactly how to develop research infrastructure at teaching-intensive institutions. A multiple case study approach involving six of the ten BUilding Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) sites identifies mission-critical practices and considerations that either build or break the momentum of research infrastructure development. Core factors for accelerating research infrastructure development efforts include an array of foundational supports, continuing resources, institutional policies and procedures, and partnerships. Eighteen momentum builder domains are discussed, spread across the four core factors. Additionally, nine momentum breakers, or commonly experienced events that serve to dismantle or hinder research infrastructure development, such as siloed work and insufficient time for research, are described. 

After ten transformative BUILD Initiative years, progress is evident in the institutions’ improved Carnegie Classification ratings, new buildings, and materials, publication rates, and return on investment through new grant monies. Hundreds of faculty have been trained, and thousands of students have participated in new UREs. There is potential for high transferability of approaches, activities, and mission-critical practices and considerations in other settings. There are many benefits to increasing universities’ research capacity and institutionalizing undergraduate research, including enriching curriculum, fostering creative and dynamic learning environments, facilitating opportunities for interdisciplinary research collaborations, and increasing opportunities for meaningful cross-campus discussions on curricula and pedagogy (Malachowski et al., 2015). The Undergraduate Research Infrastructure Development - Momentum Builders and Breakers Conceptual Framework highlights key institutional development practices and considerations that may interest higher education leadership, funders, and grantees aiming to broaden participation in STEMM. Leveraging ten years of lessons learned, we conclude with seven key recommendations as guidance for institutions seeking to increase their research capacity.

Unpacking Recommendations for Developing Undergraduate Research Infrastructure: Leveraging  Ten Years of Lessons Learned from the Diversity Program Consortium

Background: The graduate education community increasingly recognizes the critical role that mentorship plays in trainee development and career preparation. Studies indicate that mentor-mentee relationships enhance graduate students’ academic research experience. The process of choosing a research group and dissertation committee to establish a foundation for the graduate school experience can significantly impact a trainee’s research skills and career development. However, navigating this process can be challenging, especially for students from historically marginalized backgrounds who may lack the social and cultural capital needed to navigate the research environment. Therefore, training that empowers graduate students with the skills and knowledge to choose an advisor, a research group, and a dissertation committee that best fits their identities and backgrounds is needed. 

Program: Science Communication Lab (SCL) and WISCIENCE teamed up to develop a course using evidence-based materials, including the Entering Research curriculum (Branchaw, Butz, & Smith, 2020), on establishing and maintaining healthy, professional relationships. The course, “Build Your Research Community,” aims to demystify the apprenticeship model of scientific training through a free, interactive online platform, and is designed for students transitioning into life-science graduate school (senior undergraduates, post-baccalaureate students, and early career graduate students). It guides students through the process of finding and developing healthy mentoring relationships, especially with one’s primary research advisor. To connect the practices to their individual situations, students watch videos, complete reflective questions, participate in online discussions, and are encouraged to reflect on their own strategies and challenges. 

Pilot test: In collaboration with 12 training programs, we conducted 2 years of pilot testing with 396 students in total. Preliminary results from this past year show that 75% of students (Ns 108-197) agreed or strongly agreed that the course topics were relevant to their training and 67% were somewhat or extremely likely to recommend the course to other trainees. In addition, more than 60% of students reported “a lot” or “a great deal” in the learning gains for the course and higher percentages of participants agreed or strongly agreed with science identity statements post-course compared to overall responses on a pre-survey.

Conclusion: ""Build Your Research Community"" addresses a critical need by providing accessible, evidence-based training to help students establish and maintain healthy mentoring relationships. By making the hidden curriculum explicit, graduate students are empowered, particularly those from historically marginalized backgrounds, to navigate the research environment effectively.

Session Format: This session will explore our instructional design approach to developing inclusive, interactive online curricula for navigating relationships for mentees, including sourcing diverse speakers and content selection. Representatives from SCL and the Wisconsin Institute for Science Education and Community Engagement (WISCIENCE) at University of Wisconsin-Madison will present an overview of the NIH-funded (IPERT) course on navigating mentoring relationships (5 mins). Preliminary evaluation results from ongoing pilot testing will be presented as well as lessons learned from the implementation process and guidelines on how to integrate the online course into existing curricula (10 mins). In the final section, participants will work in groups to identify potential strategies to incorporate the course into their research training programs. A final question and answer period will engage participants in a discussion of implementation strategies (5 mins). Participants will leave the session with an understanding of the hidden curriculum that graduate students and postdocs face, approaches to address those concerns through mentoring, and strategies for implementing a mentoring curriculum at their own institution.

"Build Your Research Community”: An Inclusive Online Course Effectively Guides Research Trainees in Building Mentoring Networks

Background: The graduate education community recognizes the critical role of mentorship and professional development in training and retaining a diverse biomedical workforce. However, the mentoring and professional development that students’ receive as they near the end of their PhD is often informal, unstructured, variable, and presents a unique set of planning, mentoring, and communication challenges. These challenges are even more pronounced for underrepresented minority students, increasing the likelihood of attrition. To address this, the Yale Ciencia Academy, an NIH-funded professional development program, partnered with Science Communication Lab to develop a series of online video courses to enhance trainees’ ownership of their career exploration and communication, mentoring, and planning skills as they near completion of their PhD and help their PhD to postdoc transition. 

Yale Ciencia Academy program, online course solution, and implementation: The Yale Ciencia Academy (YCA) is a free year-long program that equips biomedical or health sciences doctoral students from underrepresented backgrounds in the final 1-2 years of their programs with the knowledge, skills, and networks they need to find great postdoctoral positions that will further their academic interests and career goals. The YCA program increases mastery in career planning, mentoring-up, and communication skills through workshops, peer and role model discussions, and one-on-one mentoring meetings. YCA fellows showed higher PhD completion (93% YCA vs ~50% in six years or less for biomedical PhDs), clearer career interests, and higher self-efficacy in managing professional transitions. To extend the impact of the program, in collaboration with Science Communication Lab, we converted four of the YCA workshops into a free, interactive online course series. Entitled “Professional Skills for Proactive and Engaged Scientists,” the series aims to enhance trainees’ ownership of their career exploration and communication, mentoring, and planning skills as they near completion of their PhD. The series features courses in four key areas: (1) The Strategic Postdoc, which guides students through the process of considering whether a postdoc position is right for them and if so, finding, interviewing, and choosing a postdoc that fits with their personal and professional aspirations; (2) Strategies for Effective Public Engagement, which helps learners for whom outreach is an important aspect of their identity develop a plan for how to do it ethically and integrate it to their busy lives; (3) Career Planning for Early Career Scientists, which helps learners create an actionable roadmap for identifying career goals and moving on from a PhD; (4) Mentoring-Up, which focuses on establishing productive mentoring relationships to support PhD completion and career advancement. Participants of each course leave with a personalized plan, based on their responses to the course questions, to help implement their personal and career development. The skills acquired through these courses empower students to model supportive mentoring environments and effective career development practices contributing to more inclusive academic research environments. To connect the practices to their individual situations, learners watch videos, complete questions, participate in online discussions, and are guided to reflect and apply lessons to their own lives. We started to create these online courses in 2021 and some have already been pilot-tested by replacing the traditional workshop used in the YCA training with the online course. They have also been tested online as free, interactive online courses. We currently have tested two of the four courses, The Strategic Postdoc and Strategies for Effective Public Engagement. For these courses, students stated that they would highly recommend the course to a friend or colleague and were highly satisfied with the course (average above 4.5 out of 5). 
      
Session Format: In this session, we will present an overview of this new video course series entitled “Professional Skills for Proactive and Engaged Scientists,” including instructional design and online curriculum (10 mins). We will describe how we have incorporated these asynchronous courses into Yale Ciencia Academy (YCA), the importance of pairing online courses with synchronous/group peer-mentoring discussion sessions, and overview the preliminary data for the pilot test with YCA fellows (5 mins). The session will conclude with a discussion of how institutional leaders may be able to incorporate the series, individual courses, or single videos into graduate training programs; and why institutions might be interested in supporting students' explorations of these topics (5 mins). This session will provide the audience with an understanding of what each course provides, including the structure, learning objectives, and activities, the importance of professional development on the success of graduate training, and the benefits of incorporating these professional development training courses on graduate students. We will present models to our participants on how this curriculum can be incorporated into existing graduate training and provide an opportunity to discuss with others on alternative models.

"Professional Skills for Proactive and Engaged Scientists,” a Free, Online Courses Series to Pave the PhD-to-Postdoc Transition

Fair Play is a free, downloadable exploration game in which the player takes on the perspective of Jamal Davis, a Black graduate student on his way to becoming a renowned professor. Fair Play spans five chapters during which players navigate through the challenges of graduate school including finding an advisor, writing publications, and much more. On the journey, players experience situations that exemplify different types of racial biases, both directly (from interpersonal interactions) and indirectly (from environmental factors). Based on environmental and conversational interactions, the player will decide how to respond to each bias and become more familiar with the names and definitions of bias as they attempt to correctly identify the different types encountered in the virtual academic setting. 
Fair Play highlights many obstacles that prevent minoritized individuals from excelling in STEMM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine) fields. To enhance the capabilities of this learning tool, two workshops were developed to complement the Fair Play game and to address the needs of different audiences. Both workshops are based on a tested workshop model (Carnes et al., 2015), use the experiential component of Fair Play, and have similar content and learning objectives.
•The Fair Play Workshop for STEMM Faculty and Staff increases awareness about different types of microaggressions and other racial biases. Additionally, the workshop provides evidence-based techniques for workshop participants to overcome these biases within themselves.

•The Fair Play Workshop for Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scientists provides participants with the knowledge and strategies to empower them to persist in their field of study. The first module of the workshop provides a brief outline of the history of race, an overview of implicit bias, and discusses the impacts of implicit bias in academia. The final module of the workshop explores strategies to empower the participants to persist in their field and discusses bias intervention strategies.

At the Understanding Interventions conference, participants will experience a full workshop in its entirety and will also be provided with an orientation to the open access resources available to implement one at their home institution.

Fair Play: Conversations about Racial Bias in STEMM

In line with the nationwide effort to increase the number, caliber, and diversity of the STEM workforce, the NSF funded Hostos Engineering Academic Talent (HEAT) Scholarship Program was created to support the retention, graduation and transfer of high-achieving, low-income students pursuing associate and bachelor’s degrees in engineering and to improve their likelihood of academic and professional success. Many academically talented engineering students enrolled at the institution where this project took place were first-generation college students living below the poverty line and needed to work while they pursued a STEM major. Since these realities put them at risk for failure, HEAT Scholars were awarded financial support to help overcome these existing socio-economic barriers and were exposed to a variety of high-impact activities designed to improve Scholars’ likelihood of success. Over the five years of the program more than 90% (28/30) of its Scholars have either graduated with an associate or bachelor’s degree in engineering, transferred to a four-year institution, or are still pursuing their associate’s degree in engineering. Among the 24 Scholars who have transferred, 17 have gone to the designated partner institution (The City College of New York’s Grove School of Engineering of The City University of New York), while seven have matriculated to engineering programs outside of the partnership to institutions including Cornell University, Princeton University and New Mexico Tech. The primary outcomes of HEAT are the creation of a STEM community at an urban community college that serves historically underrepresented populations within these disciplines, increased academic preparedness, and a synergistic ecosystem between HCC and several 4-year institutions that provided robust mentorship, financial support, and research opportunities to its Scholars. As a result, HEAT has had a positive impact on the academic and professional growth of its Scholars and served to expand and diversify the STEM workforce.

The Hostos Engineering Academic Talent Scholarship Program – The Impact of Combined Mentorship and Financial Support After Five Years of HEAT

Securing external grants has become essential for the nation’s colleges where decreased funding for research and educational programs has triggered the imperative to supplement university budgets. There are a host of challenges, however, that inhibit grantsmanship success for those at community colleges, including a lack of time due to teaching, advising, service and other aspects of scholarly duties, the absence of experience and the requisite skills required to write and attain competitive grants, and the void of a culture of grantsmanship at the institution. To address the gaps associated with grantsmanship success at an urban community college in New York City, the Hostos Research Center (HRC), was created. Among the goals of the HRC is to educate faculty and staff on grantsmanship and to increase the number of competitive applications submitted to external funding sources. This, in turn, would increase the likelihood of success for those applications. To this end, the 
HRC created internal funding competitions similar those that exist at major external and federal funding sources. The HRC internal competitions awarded up to $10,000 for proposals that went through a detailed submission process that paralleled those of the National Science Foundation and included a formal request for proposals, HRC “Office Hours” and detailed feedback for submissions by a panel of reviewers with prior experience and success in securing external funding. In the three years since the creation of the HRC and its internal funding competitions, the success rate of external grant submissions has increased to an average of 86% from an average of 66% in the three years prior to the HRC. Additionally, this improvement in attaining external funding has also corresponded with increases in the number grant submissions that have been made and the amount of funding secured compared to the three years prior. Furthermore, survey responses on the impact of the HRC internal funding programs and its professional development opportunities have indicated an increase in the motivation to apply for new grant opportunities, improved grant writing skills and overall awareness of grant opportunities. We propose that the HRC could serve as a model for creating a culture of grantsmanship at other institutions.

Creating a Research Center and Leveraging Internal Funding Opportunities to Develop a Culture of Grantsmanship at an Urban Community College

Challenges for undergraduate students studying physics include underdeveloped abstract analytical and problem-solving skills, difficulty making connections with previous knowledge in mathematics, and insufficient experience in scientific reading, writing and presentations. These difficulties create feelings of discomfort and lack of self-efficacy around the subject matter, are often attributable to students’ prior preparation from under-resourced school districts and are particularly salient for students from underrepresented and marginalized populations. Furthermore, despite the great demand for scientists and engineers, these challenges may discourage students from considering Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) careers. To address the skill gaps for students historically underrepresented in STEM and improve their likelihood of success, we have created the NSF IUSE funded SPARC – Strengthening Physics Achievement via Research and Collaboration Project. SPARC focuses on methods that facilitate deep learning of content and transferable reasoning abilities in students enrolled in a calculus-based General Physics class that is required for all STEM students at an urban community college in New York City. SPARC’s overarching goal is to improve student outcomes in a calculus-based General Physics course, and thus better prepare them for subsequent science and engineering curricula. Here, we present our “Doing Physics” (DP) learning intervention which is designed to improve the gateway General Physics curriculum by emphasizing problem-solving, scientific and transferable reasoning, and collaborative skills. DP employs inquiry-based science, Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CURE), mentored research, and collaborative and game-based learning strategies. Findings to date indicate that SPARC is positively impacting student course outcomes and has improved the course pass rates ~11% on average (59% in Spring 2023, 65% in Fall 2023, and 53% in Spring 2024). Furthermore, SPARC students have reported that the DP Pre-Class preparation is helping them to better understand the day’s lectures (91% Spring 2023, 75% Fall 2023, ~50% Spring 2024 agree or strongly agree), and the DP In-Class preparation, including game-based learning strategies, is also helping them better understand the theory (e.g., Jeopardy-style questions, 73% Spring 2023, 56% Fall 2023, 69% Spring 2024 | experimental project, 73% Spring 2023, 69% Fall 2023, 69% Spring 2024 agree or strongly agree). In addition, SPARC students have stated that the research project helped them to improve their solving-problems skills (65% Spring 2023, 69% Fall 2023, 62% Spring 2024 agree or strongly agree) and think critically (73% Spring 2023, 56% Fall 2023, 62% Spring 2024 agree or strongly agree). In the DP After-Class component of SPARC, 17 students (2 from Fall 2022, 11 from FALL 2023, 4 from Spring 2024) conducted authentic research during the 2023 – 2024 Academic Year. Nine students were awarded external summer internships via the SPARC REU Awareness Program in collaboration with other HCC STEM Programs. A SPARC website (www.nsf-sparc.com) was created to serve as a STEM student resource to highlight the Doing Physics Model, REU Awareness Program, Resources, Events, and Collaborators. SPARC, as an intervention model, has shown to improve higher education outcomes in Physics for those enrolled in General Physics courses, serve as a bridge to increase the number and diversity of students pursuing, persisting, and being credentialed in STEM disciplines, positively affect all STEM majors, and be expanded to other institutions.

Premium content

Empowering Agents of Change to Reduce Bias, Create Inclusion, and Promote Equity: 16 Years of the Bias Habit-Breaking Training

Downloads

Next from 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

Navigating STEM Pathways: Belonging Mediates the Impact of Goal Congruity on Persistence (but not Well-being) Among Indigenous Students

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES