United States

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.

2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

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

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.

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. <br>Access credentials were sent to your email from Underline -  subject line "Welcome to 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

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.

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.

Strengthening Physics Achievement via Research and Collaboration at an Urban Community College – The SPARC Model

The CAncer Training Affecting Lives of Young Scientists and Teachers (CATALYST) program at the University of Maryland Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center (UMGCCC) is supported by a ‘Youth Enjoy Science’ grant from the National Cancer Institute Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities. CATALYST recruits middle and high school teachers to conduct summer research with UMGCCC faculty mentors. Teacher research methods and outcomes are used to develop curriculum material for West Baltimore middle school scholars in the UMB CURE program. In turn, scholar projects provide cancer-focused outreach material to be delivered by scholars and teachers in their schools and communities as well as in regional and national forums. Evaluation of CATALYST outcomes will inform best practices to inspire the next generation of cancer researchers and caregivers and ultimately increase diversity in the biomedical workforce.

The UMB CATALYST Program: Connecting Cancer Research to the Classroom

The National Longitudinal Study of Young Life Scientists (NLSYLS) is the integration of two ongoing studies of biomedical PhD students from 132 programs across the U.S. from the time they began their PhDs through differentiation into the many career options open to them. In the first study, annual in-depth interviews were conducted with 276 students across the U.S. (Wood, et al. 2020). The second study, the Academy for Future Science Faculty (the Academy) enrolled 297 students in a randomized controlled trial of a group-based coaching intervention (Williams, et al. 2017). Across these two studies, participants were asked a set of core interview questions which solicited their reflections on topics like career goals and planning, PI/mentor relationships, and lab environments. Interviews were conducted in a semi-structured manner, allowing the interviewers to follow-up and adapt to the answers of an interviewee. Together, the prospective study designs and in-depth qualitative data allow unprecedented insights into all aspects of PhD and postdoctoral training, including what leads students into different career paths and additional challenges and barriers encountered by minoritized individuals.

The varying nature of mentor-mentee relationships represents a key area of interest in efforts to understand career outcomes, with scholars suggesting that mentorship programming may be a crucial intervention toward greater science engagement (Lewis, et al. 2017). The PI role involves a variety of demands which are sometimes in competition with each other, such as developing and leading a line of research, grant-seeking, authoring manuscripts, publishing, and career advising. Thus, mentors regularly decide among activities which promote trainee futures and activities focused on their own careers – decisions which stand to shape trainee trajectories. Our in-depth, longitudinal approach allows us to explore consequences of mentors’ low or high engagement with trainee career goals from the trainee perspective. Given that not all mentors will closely follow former students as they settle into careers, trainee perspectives are most elucidating for how mentor efforts shape trainee outcomes. Through case studies of NLSYLS participants with different career outcomes, we identify a small number of cases which illustrate, from the trainee perspective, the pivotal role that some mentors play in student trajectories. While trainee outcomes may be attributable to factors both within and beyond quality of mentorship, we focus on crucial turning points in career planning as moments when participants encounter PI intervention that can radically change outcomes. 

Preliminary analysis focuses on two sets of cases. Our first set of cases highlights the influence of enthusiastic guidance from highly engaged mentors. These participants described mentors who thoughtfully considered their mentees’ futures, encouraged pursuit of difficult career goals and intervened when low morale jeopardized persistence toward these careers. Our second set of cases represent the opposite end of the spectrum – participants who attributed derailment from initial career goals to the actions of mentors who prioritized their own success over mentee futures. 

By focusing on cases at opposite ends of the spectrum, we will illustrate divergent ways in which mentorship can be highly impactful. We will discuss specific mentor behaviors and their consequences for mentee trajectories to illuminate implications for mentorship-focused interventions. Analysis of clear cases of PI intervention at these crucial turning points may also explicate strategies for improved day-to-day mentoring.

Mentors Changing the Course of History for Biomedical PhD Trainees

College students, especially those who completed high school during the COVID-19 period, are increasingly unprepared for college-level work. A significant challenge in freshman-level science courses is the reliance on rote memorization, which hinders students' ability to engage in higher cognitive learning (e.g., analysis, comprehension, and connecting ideas). To address this issue, we piloted a pre-college transition program aimed at promoting higher-order learning through a case study approach to teaching biology and chemistry. Case studies enhance academic performance, motivation, and critical thinking (Bonney, 2015). Considering the importance of math skills in science, we also incorporated ALEKS, an adaptive online learning platform, to provide individualized math curricula tailored to each student. ALEKS PPL has been shown to be an effective tool for reinforcing math concepts that the students have already seen so that they can achieve an improvement in their math course placement to at least college algebra and trigonometry (Reisel et al, 2014).

The primary objectives of the program were: 1) Improve students' understanding of foundational biology and chemistry concepts, and 2) help participants place into college-level math courses. Biology and chemistry instructors received training from the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS) at the University of Buffalo. The case studies used were selected from the NCCSTS Case Collection to align with freshman courses, targeting challenging topics identified from comprehensive exams. Students also completed an ALEKS math assessment to customize their learning path.

The summer program included morning sessions focused on group work with case studies in biology and chemistry, supported by short lectures and problem sets. Pre- and post-comprehensive exams were administered to measure students’ deep understanding without allowing extra study time. In the afternoon, students focused on mathematics, working on individualized exercises during class and completing ALEKS modules as homework. The math curriculum was adjusted daily based on student progress, and ALEKS placement scores were compared with those of non-participants.

Data were collected from three cohorts over three years (2021-2024). Statistical comparisons between program participants and non-participants included paired t-tests for pre- and post-exam scores (biology and chemistry), Chi-square tests to determine significant differences in ALEKS placement scores, and independent t-tests to compare GPA and grades. The program showed a significant positive effect on chemistry performance, while improvements in biology were not statistically significant but showed positive trends. ALEKS-based math instruction led to significantly more students placing into college-level math, including calculus. However, no significant differences were found in overall GPAs between participants and non-participants.

In conclusion, the pre-college transition program demonstrated promising outcomes in preparing students for college-level coursework, particularly in chemistry and mathematics. The case study approach to teaching biology and chemistry effectively engaged students in higher-order learning, while ALEKS provided personalized support for strengthening foundational math skills. The significant improvements in chemistry performance and increased placement into college-level math underscore the value of combining case studies and adaptive learning platforms to bridge the preparedness gap for incoming freshmen. Although no significant differences were found in overall GPAs, the positive trends in biology and math outcomes suggest that such interventions can serve as valuable tools for enhancing student readiness and success in STEM fields. Future iterations of the program could benefit from additional strategies to further strengthen biology learning outcomes and broaden the overall impact on student academic achievement. Supported by NSF grant 1912170.

MSU PERSIST Summer Program: Enhancing Science Student Retention through Pre-Matriculation Case-Based Learning

Mentor/Mentee Jobs on Campus (MMJOC) is a new career development and mentorship program launched at Hostos Community College (HCC) that is designed to provide undergraduate students with workforce experience to facilitate their transition from college to the workplace combined with mentoring to support students’ academic progress and professional development. Students are hired to work a maximum of 10 hours/week at various academic and administrative departments across HCC and paired with a faculty/staff mentor that supports their academic and career goals. MMJOC provides students with access to skill-building experiences and mentorship that equips them to effectively navigate work in a professional environment. Mentors receive guidance on how to strengthen mentoring relationships through focused mentoring sessions that address students’ academic support, professional development, personal development, and maintaining health/work/life and balance. Career development events are held every semester to help students further develop their career readiness skills and promote peer bonding. MMJOC integrates key components of effective mentorship and how to apply best practices in developing and sustaining mentor-mentee relationships, including setting clear expectations through objectives, establishing communication norms, and facilitating professional growth through programming. The NACE (National Association of Colleges and Employers) career readiness competencies (career and self-development, communication, critical thinking, equity & inclusion, leadership, professionalism, teamwork, technology) are foundational for preparing undergraduate students for the transition to the workforce. Capacity-building workshops educate mentors on strategies for integrating these into the work setting through focused skill-building opportunities, and they also assess students’ skill development each semester. A cohort of up to 25 students is employed each semester and most students work for an average of two semesters. Evaluation findings from mentor and mentee feedback surveys show, on average, 82% of mentees were able to accomplish career readiness skills “very well”; 70% of mentees reported that MMJOC “contributed greatly” to informing their career plans; and over 90% of mentors and mentees reported they were satisfied with the program experience. For institutions seeking to develop a mentorship-based career development program, MMJOC provides an adaptable framework for guiding students’ progress academically and providing students with the socio-emotional and career-building guidance that makes a difference in a student’s educational trajectory.

Mentoring to Advance Students’ Academic Success and Career Readiness

STEM education and careers are known for being inhospitable to people of color (e.g., McGee, 2020a, b), causing the most resilient scientists of color to begin to suffer from racial battle fatigue, chronic or acute physiological and psychological stress due to daily micro- and macro-aggressions (McGee & Stovall, 2015; McGee, 2020b). Given this traumatizing impact on scientists of color, McGee and Stovall (2015) call for the need to address mental health in STEM. They believe that Critical Race Theory (CRT), in particular, “provides an opportunity to understand and implement racially appropriate healing systems for black college students and other groups that are chronically underserved and understudied” [emphasis added] (McGee & Stovall, 2015, p. 508). 

 

Subsequently, in this hands-on, interactive workshop, we offer a way to “connect CRT [Critical Race Theory] as a theoretical construct to a livable, observable, teachable process of critical consciousness, knowing and doing” (CRiT walking - Hughes & Giles, 2010, p. 42). We do this through the enactment of a new methodology called Contemplative CRiT Collage (CCC) with the aim of moving marginalized students and professionals of color within STEM toward community- and self-mending. Like Ortiz (2018), we intentionally use mending rather than healing because mending recognizes that, though the wound is closed, or the direct effect has long since vanished, the bodymind is no longer the same. It has been forever changed by the hurt it has experienced. Thus, CCC’s objective is to mend the hurt within scientists of color to try to minimize traumatic retention and address institutionalized trauma (Menakem, 2017).  

 

CCC infuses visual arts-informed methods (i.e., photo elicitation and photovoice) with collage, contemplative practice, and CRT. Informed by contemplative methods (Chang, 2020), cultural intuition (Delgado Bernal, 1998), and women of color epistemologies (e.g., Cruz, 2001; Hurtado, 2003), CCC is a unique methodology that Dr. Torres-Gerald first began developing as a doctoral student looking for a way to document the stories of women of color in STEM while addressing the pain that she knew many of them were in, especially given her own journey as a female scientist of color with a disability (Torres, 2016). She has used portions of this methodology herself in examining her scholarly identity as a disabled Latina mother-scholar during COVID (Torres, 2021). As a trained scientist and mindfulness instructor, she also understands the value of adding meditation to reduce stress and improve telomere regulation, which is associated with aging (Conklin et al., 2019).  

 

This workshop will highlight the need for interventions that address racialized trauma and the use of CCC as a possible way to aid in the mending of students of color who encounter negative experiences in STEM. CCC is offered as a new approach to support their persistence in STEM through meditation and collage-making. Workshop attendees will engage in a four-part workshop: (1) learning about the CCC methodology; (2) engaging in a short meditation practice; (3) creating an individual and collective collage; and (4) participating in a large group discussion about their experience with this methodology and how it can be used in their respective STEM fields. It is our hope that attendees will take what they learn from this workshop and share or incorporate it at their institutions while understanding its challenges and risks. Attendees will leave this workshop with a new understanding of this innovative arts-informed method for data collection and strategies to support the persistence of students and professionals in STEM, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. They will be able to adapt CCC to campus programming that focuses on supporting marginalized students or professionals in STEM, such as STEM bridge and mentoring programs.

Mending the Path to Broader Participation in STEM Through Contemplative CRiT Collage

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

Introduction. Gender gaps persist in biomedical sciences. Men make up a greater proportion of the workforce (Plank-Bazinet et al., 2017) and report greater sense of belonging in the biomedical field compared to women (Gonzalez-Flores et al., 2023).  Men are also more likely to acquire independent research grants than women (Richter et al., 2020). Increasing grantsmanship self-efficacy (GSE) can positively impact funding acquisition, a key indicator of career success (Harwood et al., 2019). This study evaluates the personal and professional factors associated with sense of belonging and GSE, as well as the relationship between them among early-career researchers (ECRs), with the goal of informing interventions to reduce workforce disparities. 

Methods. This cross-sectional study utilized baseline data in a randomized trial examining two professional development models among non-binary and women ECRs with career development (K) awards. Before the professional development, ECRs completed a survey about their professional background, professional growth, and self-efficacy.
 
Outcomes of interest were sense of belonging and GSE. Sense of belonging in the scientific community was assessed with a 5-item validated tool (scale 1-5, agreement) (Estrada et al., 2011). GSE measured confidence in conceptualizing, designing, and acquiring funding for studies using a 19-item validated tool (scale 0-10, confidence) (Harwood et al., 2019). Linear regression models were used to examine factors associated with the two outcomes and to examine association between them. Adjusted models accounted for personal and professional factors, including race/ethnicity, disadvantaged background, disability status, years since first award (T, F, or K), receipt of clinical research-specific award (K08, K12, K23), and participation in national, regional, or institutional committees. Linear relationships were quantified with regression coefficients (denoted as beta). Based on primary analyses, post-hoc mediation analysis with bootstrapping was conducted to determine if belonging mediated the relationship between race/ethnicity (underrepresented vs not [non-Hispanic white or Asian]) and grantsmanship. 

Results. Almost all enrolled ECRs completed the baseline survey (n=97/98). About half of ECRs identified as non-Hispanic white (46%), 15% as non-Hispanic Black, 14% as Hispanic/Latinx, 16% as non-Hispanic Asian, and 8.2% as multiracial/other. A smaller proportion of ECRs reported having a disadvantaged background (26%) or disability (8%). ECRs most commonly had K01 awards (52%), then K23 (29%) and K08 (9.2%). 

Non-Hispanic Black ECRs reported higher sense of belonging to the community of biomedical researchers versus non-Hispanic white ECRs, as seen in unadjusted and adjusted models (unadjusted beta=0.36, p=0.02); adjusted beta=0.35, 95%CI 0.02–0.69, p=0.04). No other factors were significantly associated with sense of belonging.

Sense of belonging was significantly associated with GSE. For every 1-point increase in mean sense of belonging score, GSE scores increased by 0.84 points (p<0.001). This relationship held in adjusted models (beta=0.75, 95%CI 0.27–1.23, p=0.002). No other factors were significantly associated with GSE in unadjusted models. While race/ethnicity was not significantly associated with GSE in unadjusted or adjusted models, we found that belonging had a significant mediating effect on this relationship (average causal mediation effects beta=0.21, 95%CI 0.02–0.49, p=0.04).

Conclusions and Discussion. Among ECRs who identify as women and non-binary, higher sense of belonging is associated with greater GSE. Belonging also mediated the relationship between race/ethnicity and grantsmanship, suggesting nuanced differences in how sense of belonging influences GSE across racial groups. Interventions that promote inclusivity and foster sense of belonging among underrepresented biomedical researchers may positively influence career progression.

Relationship Between Sense of Belonging and Grantsmanship Self-Efficacy Among Early Career Biomedical Researchers

Exclusionary behaviors such as harassment, bullying, and microaggressions prevent participation in higher education and STEM. A National Academies report recommends the implementation of training to develop skills to interrupt and intervene in inappropriate behavior (NASEM, 2018). Evidence shows trainings that use a community approach, are tailored for relevance to specific audiences, are implemented with messenger integrity, and include social interaction have greater effectiveness (Clancy et al., 2020; NASEM, 2018; Rawski et al., 2023; and Kalinoski, et al. 2013).

The NSF ADVANCE funded ADVANCEGeo Partnership program is designed to empower scientists to transform workplace climate through enacting interventions at the individual and collective levels through behavior change education informed by intersectionality and ethics of care frameworks (Marin-Spiotta et al., 2022). One component is bystander intervention training designed to give members of the academic community the knowledge and tools to identify, prevent, and mitigate harm from discriminatory behavior that directly affects the retention of excluded groups in STEM. The ADVANCEGeo training includes evidence-based aspects contributing to participant satisfaction and long-term outcomes. Participants in the geoscience-focused bystander intervention training learn to address exclusionary behaviors using community approaches and the training is led by trained geoscience and STEM educators, offering interactive practice with real-world scenarios.

In this presentation we describe the ADVANCEGeo bystander intervention training program and present quantitative and qualitative evaluation data collected from 1283 participants of 81 workshops delivered between 2018-2022 and a 6-month follow-up survey with over 170 responses.

Responses to the anonymous post-workshop survey indicate the majority (98%) of respondents rated the quality of the workshop as excellent or good. The majority (90%) of participants reported that the scenarios used for bystander intervention practice are relevant or very relevant to experiences in their discipline. Almost all (93%) respondents indicated they intend to use the bystander intervention strategies presented in the workshop. Respondents report increases in knowledge about prevalence of harassment, how structures in research and academia influence harassment, and how professional societies, departments, institutions, and individuals can address exclusionary behaviors. Participant responses to open-ended items explain facilitator(s) use approaches that encourage participation and respectful conversation, and appreciation for interactions with peer geoscientists.
Six months after the training, the majority of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed they still found the workshop useful (93%), were able to practice things learned in the workshop (88%), and have discussed the training with others (79%). Ninety three percent of 44 workshop participants that said they had encountered an opportunity to use bystander intervention agreed or strongly agreed the techniques learned in the workshop were applicable and useful for the situation, 89% agreed or strongly agreed they were able to successfully implement bystander intervention techniques learned in the workshop, and 89% agreed or strongly agreed they felt more confident implementing bystander intervention techniques because of the workshop. These respondents were asked if they experienced barriers to using bystander intervention techniques. Seventeen respondents provided open-ended descriptions of the barriers they encountered which align with four themes: power dynamics, concern about negative repercussions, lack of confidence/need more practice, and resistant offender.

In conclusion, bystander intervention training tailored to a geoscience audience has positive short and long-term outcomes. Additional practice and training can boost confidence and reduce barriers to intervention.

Downloads

Next from 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

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

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES