United States

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, &amp; 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: &quot;Build Your Research Community&quot; 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.

2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

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

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

technical paper

### 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.

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

Abstract
Introduction. As demographic shifts continue to occur across the educational landscape, national goals remain salient for diversifying the biomedical workforce. In 2014, the NIH selected 10 undergraduate institutions across the U.S. as sites for the BUilding Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) award, a historic $500 million research training and institutional capacity-building initiative that utilized a multi-pronged approach to enact student, faculty, and institutional level change through evidence-based yet novel initiatives (Hurtado et al., 2017; Gibbs et al., 2022). This study examined efforts toward institutionalization and sustainability accomplished through the award. Through a multiple case study design, we identified what BUILD sites have accomplished at an institutional level and plan to maintain beyond grant funding. The following research questions guided this study:
1.What kinds of initiatives will be sustained and/or institutionalized after award funding ends?
2.What institutional conditions aided or inhibited programs in becoming a permanent part of the institution to advance diversity in biomedical sciences?
 
Methods. To understand program sustainability and institutionalization of the BUILD program, the researchers held one- to two-day site visits at each of the 10 BUILD sites and conducted 259 interviews and focus groups with 368 total participants, including staff, students, faculty, principal investigators, and central administration. The team created summary reports from the site visits and developed matrices to conduct a cross-case analysis of the initiatives. They then conducted multiple rounds of coding of the interview and focus group data, including descriptive coding, thematic coding, and pattern coding. The team continued to create and refine matrices at each step in the process to thoroughly examine the collected data (Saldaña, 2013; Miles et al., 2020).
 
Results. There are several program elements being sustained beyond the grant. At the student level, program elements include: undergraduate scholarship, research, and biomedical training; graduate student programming; and curriculum and courses. At the faculty and organizational levels, interventions include faculty training, changes in faculty hiring practices, and infrastructure developments. However, while this expanded our understanding of what was being sustained beyond the grant, it was also necessary to understand the context and circumstances of these maintained initiatives. The study found four contextual elements that facilitated whether or not programs would be sustained: institutional financial status; organizational infra/structure and partnerships; commitment from central administration and STEMM faculty; and alignment with institutional priorities. The presence of these elements, or lack thereof, described whether or not an institution’s context was receptive toward intervention sustainability.
 
Conclusions and Discussion. This study provides lessons for future grant-funded teams and senior administrators engaged in STEMM equity and inclusion efforts. Regarding the most commonly sustained activities, the interventions that required the fewest resources to maintain were most salient: undergraduate training in courses, faculty mentor training, hiring developments, and infrastructure changes. Regarding contextual elements, the study found that interventions can only be maintained if they are financially viable and supported by the institution at structural, organizational, and individual levels. It is important to note that these contexts, while often preexisting, are also malleable. Context may initially be nonreceptive to sustainability, but there may also be circumstances fostered by program teams to increase the likelihood of sustaining initiatives beyond grant funding.
 
Acknowledgments. Work reported in this publication was supported by NIH Grant U54GM119024 and several NIH offices, centers, and institutes. We thank members of the Coordination and Evaluation Center who contributed to data collection and/or coding: Christian Cabunag, Justin Andrew Gutzwa, and Patricia Martin, and the change agents who shared their experiences for the Enhance Diversity Study and members of the DPC.

Sustaining Grant-funded Programs: Conditions for Sustaining Initiatives that Enhance Diversity in STEMM

Science is inherently hard for most learners. Research demonstrates that learners from underrepresented racial and ethnic backgrounds experience additional difficulties with subject matter. Moreover, at every post-secondary educational level, in the sciences, the representation and retention of underrepresented learners is steadily declining where contributing factors include students’ experience of reduced self-efficacy, stereotype threat, limited familial and financial support as well as insufficient academic preparation. Poor teaching techniques have also been demonstrated to contribute to the decline. Current interventions of mentoring to mitigate the disparity in attrition of said learners do not directly address learner-identified issues within the classroom where instructors are tasked with maximizing the learning experiences for students. Here, in this session, instructor misbehavior is proposed as an unconventional candidate responsible for modulating the attrition of underrepresented learners in science. 

This session is designed to introduce attendees to the literature describing the types of instructor behaviors that are favored and unfavored by students as well as educate attendees on the impact of such behaviors on student affect for subject matter. Following this introduction, session attendees will participate in an activity to generate candid conversation about their opinions as it pertains to instructor (mis)behavior on student learning outcomes in science courses as well as contribute to budding discussions to help foster a much-needed typology that describes how racial and ethnic identity influences student perceptions of instructors’ behaviors.

Whose Fault is it Anyway? The Case of Instructor Misbehavior in the Persistence of Underrepresented Students in Science

Do I Fit? Am I LINKED?, is leaving STEM to much of a SACRIFICE?: STEM Persistence and Career Embeddedness Theory

Despite several institutional and national efforts, underrepresentation persists among the faculty ranks, particularly in STEM disciplines. Innovative faculty hiring interventions are key to correct this historical underrepresentation, but many yield slow or limited progress and are mired by institutional politics and challenging departmental cultures. Longitudinal, sustained efforts are required to advance these initiatives and promote equitable systemic change and advance hiring goals. Duke University developed a novel, multi-faceted approach to faculty hiring over the last 8 years that builds on theoretical frameworks informing culture change, including systemic advancement, increasing self-efficacy and capacity, developing equitable policies and educational opportunities, and building authentic communities. The approach centers extensive efforts to create environments for all faculty to thrive and includes leadership development as an essential component of faculty development, hiring, and retention. Together, these collective efforts have resulted in significant increases in the representation of historically underrepresented racial, ethnic, and gender groups in the academy. This growth is sustained with a parallel focus on faculty retention that has resulted in low institutional attrition for underrepresented faculty in the campus community. 
In this session, participants will discuss successes and roadblocks to equitable faculty hiring and retention programs. They will also learn about the different aspects of the Duke faculty hiring model and discuss aspects of their own institutional approaches. Finally, they will consider ways to strengthen their local hiring efforts and learn from the experiences of their peers.

An Evidence-based, Holistic Model of Faculty Hiring and Retention

Intergenerational education mobility is one of the key dimensions of social mobility. Educational mobility is defined as the association between parents and children’s educational attainment. Children born to parents with a college degree are more likely to graduate from college (Yaish et al 2021). On the other hand, first generation college students (i.e., students who have parents without a college degree) are less likely to go to college and are more likely to drop out of college compared to students with college-educated parents (Ishitani and DesJardins 2002). Previous literature has suggested that parental involvement in higher education leads to improved student performance (Wintre and Yaffe 2000; Kenny 1987).  Parents who did not attend college, on the other hand, might not have the knowledge to help their children navigate college. College students, especially in their freshman year, face many challenges, such as a heavier workload and a distracting peer culture. At our Historically Black University, we developed a year-long communication plan targeting parents of first-year students that aimed to boost the educational cultural capital of parents and cultivate a supportive environment that enhances students' educational experiences and outcomes. One of our main goals was to help retain students in the academic pipeline in majors related to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), as well as the health sciences, while also motivating students to pursue graduate school or obtain a job in the field. The program has graduated 3 cohorts of freshman parents. Applying an online survey method, our preliminary results indicate that our intervention may be beneficial to parents without a college degree. For example, parents reported decreased levels of worriedness regarding their children’s healthy living, performance in class, and securing a job after graduation. In addition, the program might also have empowered parents with educational cultural capital, including information about course registration, jobs, internships, research opportunities, how to communicate with professors, and resident life. Details about the intervention and the implications of our findings will be presented.

Testing a Parent-Support Intervention to Improve Success of First-Year Students at a Historically Black University

Developing Culturally Responsive Metrics for STEM Student Success in Minority Serving Institutions

Exploring First-Year Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of STEM Career through Reflections on a Summer Research Program

Keywords: Undergraduate, Summer research experience, Experiential learning, STEM career development 
 
Introduction. This paper explores how experiences of students who participated in an undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) summer research intervention program shape and reinforce the students' career trajectories. The Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) is a congressionally mandated program funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF).  LSAMP assists universities and colleges in their efforts to significantly increase the number of students matriculating into and successfully completing STEM degree programs. To diversify the STEM workforce, emphasis is placed on transforming undergraduate STEM education through innovative, evidence-based recruitment and retention strategies, and relevant educational experiences in support of historically underrepresented students (African Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Native Pacific Islanders) in STEM disciplines. The University of Cincinnati LSAMP site provides an educational environment to meet three goals: academic integration, social integration and professionalization of the LSAMP program. Students from Arts & Science, Allied Health and the College of Engineering and Applied Science participate in the program.  All LSAMP Scholars participate in the Dr. Edward N. Prather Summer Bridge Program, a seven-week residential program that seeks to enhance their academic preparedness for the freshman year. Upon completion of their freshman year, LSAMP Scholars are selected for this summer research program, an experiential learning environment that enables them to gain research experience through active experimentation. The program is based on authentic experiential learning theory (Kolb, 2014), where students engage in hands-on, interactive research projects of their choice that expose them to practical and research application of their major. Each student is paired with an active STEM research faculty member who offers professional guidance, helping students interpret their environment. Therefore, this study seeks to understand how the students’ experiences influenced their perceptions of workplace practice (Burnett & Taylor, 2024).

Methods.This qualitative study analyzed participants’ (female=1, male=4; Black/African American=3, Latino=2) reflections about their participation in a 12-week cohort-based STEM summer research program at a large R1 state university in Midwestern United States. To elicit student perceptions of STEM careers from their research experiences, three of the 12 reflective prompts were selected for this paper based on an instrument used by McDevitt (2016). They included (1) Week 1-Describe yourself as you started bridge. Describe yourself now. (2) Week 3-Problem-solving is a critical skill to employers. What unexpected challenges did you encounter in your research project, and how did you address them? and (3) Week 12-In what ways did your research impact your plans for your co-operative practice, career or graduate school? Question 1 addressed the general changes in student experiences. Question 2 investigated work-related skills, while question 3 sought to uncover the value and career consequences of the research experiences (Seymour et al., 2004).  The data in this study utilizes five participants’ weekly self-reported reflections. Only participants who completed their reflections in each of the 12 weeks were selected for analysis. Four students had incomplete submissions and were removed from the data sample. A total of five participants met the criteria for the study (Table 1). We developed codes for thematic analysis (Belotto, 2018) of the data to contextualize the student experiences in a STEM setting and generate detailed information about their career perceptions while participating in the program. 


Results.Two themes emerged from the student reflections: (1) Work relationships and (2) Professional skills. The first theme shows challenges experienced by the participants while establishing relationships with peers and mentors in the research learning community. Hicks had initially expressed unwillingness to engage peers, stating:

“When I started Bridge, I was more of a shut in type of person. I never personally asked for help in any subjects because I always struggled my way through topics. Now, I'm comfortable asking for help in subjects I'm not great at and more comfortable when talking to other people.”

However, Rick developed self-confidence, became proactive, and was open to divergent perspectives from the beginning of the program and asserts:

“I am more willing to jump in when something isn't right instead of letting others dominate a conversation.”

This was confirmed by a reflection by Mos. 

“Confused. Lost and in the moment. Now I would say I'm determined and looking towards the future now.”

Regarding professional skills, the study demonstrates how success in the research program impacted the participants’ view of their future careers. The participants gained and appreciated the importance of problem-solving skills in research setting and the linkage to an actual STEM practice. Davin asserts:

“When Somethings did not work the way they intended for example the flow meter was not able to work with the station upstairs so we had to configure a whole new system for the downstairs station.”

Davin exhibited the ability to craft new ideas while maintaining the provided design specifications when faced with challenges. This was confirmed by Hicks. 

“When I was first introduced to the project I'm currently working on, some code was already written by my mentor, so, at first, I struggled with what the code he wrote intended to do. There were functions I'd never seen before, and his structure was different from how I code. I broke down the code part by part and wrote down on paper what each line of code was meant to do. Eventually, I got the whole picture and understood what I could modify and where to pick up.”

This case demonstrates that the research experience exposed the participant to a new dimension of coding, leading to an expansion of coding perspectives. This view is reinforced by Katy who adds:

“There was a Quality Assurance role I applied for that I felt resonated with my experience this summer.”

The participants discovered that the project increases their self-belief in prospects for future employability

Discussion and Conclusions. A key element of the research program is that students write a research abstract and create a poster presentation suitable for submission to an undergraduate research forum or professional conference. Findings revealed that students faced different challenges as they engaged in workplace-focused activities while conducting research. Some of these challenges were exhibited by the relationships developed and meeting the expectations of their mentors. As indicated in the findings, Mos had difficulties finding a good fit and felt confused. Regarding relationships, findings show that there is a need for improved orientation (Barth et al., 2021) to create a sense of belonging early in the program. We argue that this instance is reminiscent of challenges new STEM professionals face in the workplace. Moreover, Hicks could not comprehend the code as suggested by faculty mentor and had to convert the program into smaller working units to make the code easy to execute. This suggests that the program solidified the participant’s interest in the research. While research experiences can be used to learn and develop problem-solving skills, there is risk that when students encounter task-related challenges in the learning environment, it can negatively impact their self-efficacy. The results provide a positive outlook of the program. This study is specific to the program and cohort of the site of the study with respect to programmatic differences and financial endowment. Further studies investigate comparisons across different research cohorts with a more heterogeneous sample to provide more insights into STEM student experiences and their career goals.

Acknowledgments. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Award Abstract #1817314, through The Ohio LSAMP Alliance, which aims to enhance the recruitment, retention, and graduation of underrepresented minority students in STEM disciplines across the state. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not represent the official position of LSAMP or NSF.

Exploring First-Year Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of STEM Career through Reflections on a Summer Research Program

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

(a) The focus of study
The National Institute on Aging (NIA) is dedicated to increasing diversity in the research workforce by increasing the numbers of trained researchers from underrepresented groups who become leaders in aging research. Hence, Wake Forest University School of Medicine (WFUSM), Wake Forest University (WFU) and Winston-Salem State University (WSSU) in Winston-Salem, NC, host two types of research opportunities; one during the academic year, the other in the summer. The program, Enhancing Undergraduate Education and Research in Aging to Eliminate Health Disparities (ENGAGED), is a research training program that is open to WFU and WSSU students during the academic year. When held during the summer, it is open to students from all colleges and universities. We hypothesize that engaging underrepresented students in research with faculty mentors across a broad array of aging topics, while providing professional development activities in a research community setting that fosters science identity will increase their research acumen and encourage them to continue in a biomedical science career targeting aging. 
(b) Methodology and measures used
During the academic year, the program provides a “hands-on” research internship and/or an ENGAGED Research Club designed to increase science identity by promoting a sense of belonging in an aging research community. Most students choose to participate in both. Tuition is paid if students want to take the Research Club for credit. During the summer, students perform research with an experienced faculty member, attend lectures, trainings and professional development sessions to build technical and academic skills, and share their findings at the ENGAGED Symposium, held at the end of the program. Post-program surveys are given to assess student satisfaction and track the success of alumni. To date, we have trained 82 students (68% female, 62% Black/African American, 18% Hispanic; 7% with a disability; 46% from disadvantaged backgrounds). Results indicate that ENGAGED program participants continue to thrive in MSTEM careers.
(c) Illustrative questions/issues to be discussed in the open-ended roundtable discussion.
•What MSTEM training programs do you have at your institution?
•How do you measure short- and long-term success?
•Do you have longitudinal data?
•How are students tracked?
•What elements of your program are critical to promoting long-term interests of the students in an MSTEM field?
•Given the Supreme Court decision, how has your institution addressed the need to diversify the MSTEM workforce?
•How is the mental health of the students addressed?

Diversifying the MSTEM Talent Pool Through the Enhancing Undergraduate Education and Research in Aging to Eliminate Health Disparities (ENGAGED) Program

Premium content

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

Downloads

Next from 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

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

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES