United States

Introduction. The American Indian Science and Engineering Society Lighting the Pathway to Faculty Careers (AISES LTP) has a proven success record, with 93.48% (N=182) of participants persisting in career trajectories toward STEM faculty careers. However, the program is resource-intensive, which limits the number of program participants. We aimed to understand the potential to scale up the AISES LTP program by sharing online methods of communication and support for additional Indigenous scholars. 
We utilized the Tripartite Integration Model of Social Influence (TIMSI), which has shown that efficacy (confidence to perform STEM-related tasks), identity (seeing oneself as a part of a STEM community), and values (endorsement of a STEM community’s core values) predict STEM persistence among historically underrepresented scholars (Estrada et al., 2011; Estrada et al., 2018). We measured learners’ harmony of STEM-Indigenous identities to test the hypothesis that Indigenous scholars benefit from finding harmony between one’s STEM identity and one’s Indigenous identity (Windchief &amp; Brown, 2017), as opposed to acculturating and abandoning Indigenous identity. Previous research has found that professional-cultural heritage identity harmony was critical for the well-being of Chinese Americans and people of color (Benet-Martinez &amp; Haritatos 2005; Lee et al., 2021) 

Method. We build upon TIMSI to understand the effects of the AISES LTP intervention and the potential to scale up the program by conducting a longitudinal quasi-experimental study. Participants were 165 members of the AISES national organization who self-identified as Indigenous STEM scholars. The study had three groups. The first was the AISES LTP group (Full intervention group) which received a complete STEM professional development intervention program. Propensity score matching was used to identify 48 other scholars who were similar to the Full intervention groups. The group was randomly assigned to one of two groups, the Modified intervention group who received an online STEM professional development intervention program, or the No intervention group, which were a propensity score matched control group that did not receive intervention programming. 

Results. Using a One-Way ANOVA, we compared differences in identity harmony among the full intervention, modified intervention, and No intervention groups. We found group differences in identity harmony after 18-months of intervention (F (2,15) = 6.54, p=.002, eta-squared = .09) and 24-months of intervention (F(2,132 = 3.21, p=.04, eta-squared = .05). Post-hoc analysis using the Tukey test indicated the mean score for the full intervention group was significantly lower than the modified treatment group (M = -0.60, SE = 0.17 ) and the propensity score matched control group (M = -0.42, SE = 0.17) after 18-months,  but only significantly lower than the modified treatment group (M=0.44, SE=0.18 ) after 24th-months of intervention. 

Conclusion. The findings indicate significant differences in identity harmony between participants in the full AISES LTP intervention and those in the modified and control groups, particularly after 18 and 24 months. The full intervention group consistently showed lower scores in identity harmony compared to the modified group, suggesting that the in-person components of the AISES LTP program may lead to continued individual dissonance between professional and cultural identities. These results highlight the need to further understand Indigenous STEM program components and their impact on Indigenous STEM identity harmony. 

Acknowledgements. 
The research reported in this study was supported by NIH grants 3R01GM138700-01S1 and #K99GM151640.

2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

Fostering Indigenous STEM Identity Harmony through Online and In-Person Interventions

Introduction. The American Indian Science and Engineering Society Lighting the Pathway to Faculty Careers (AISES LTP) has a proven success record, with 93.48% (N=182) of participants persisting in career trajectories toward STEM faculty careers. However, the program is resource-intensive, which limits the number of program participants. We aimed to understand the potential to scale up the AISES LTP program by sharing online methods of communication and support for additional Indigenous scholars. 
We utilized the Tripartite Integration Model of Social Influence (TIMSI), which has shown that efficacy (confidence to perform STEM-related tasks), identity (seeing oneself as a part of a STEM community), and values (endorsement of a STEM community’s core values) predict STEM persistence among historically underrepresented scholars (Estrada et al., 2011; Estrada et al., 2018). We measured learners’ harmony of STEM-Indigenous identities to test the hypothesis that Indigenous scholars benefit from finding harmony between one’s STEM identity and one’s Indigenous identity (Windchief & Brown, 2017), as opposed to acculturating and abandoning Indigenous identity. Previous research has found that professional-cultural heritage identity harmony was critical for the well-being of Chinese Americans and people of color (Benet-Martinez & Haritatos 2005; Lee et al., 2021) 

Method. We build upon TIMSI to understand the effects of the AISES LTP intervention and the potential to scale up the program by conducting a longitudinal quasi-experimental study. Participants were 165 members of the AISES national organization who self-identified as Indigenous STEM scholars. The study had three groups. The first was the AISES LTP group (Full intervention group) which received a complete STEM professional development intervention program. Propensity score matching was used to identify 48 other scholars who were similar to the Full intervention groups. The group was randomly assigned to one of two groups, the Modified intervention group who received an online STEM professional development intervention program, or the No intervention group, which were a propensity score matched control group that did not receive intervention programming. 

Results. Using a One-Way ANOVA, we compared differences in identity harmony among the full intervention, modified intervention, and No intervention groups. We found group differences in identity harmony after 18-months of intervention (F (2,15) = 6.54, p=.002, eta-squared = .09) and 24-months of intervention (F(2,132 = 3.21, p=.04, eta-squared = .05). Post-hoc analysis using the Tukey test indicated the mean score for the full intervention group was significantly lower than the modified treatment group (M = -0.60, SE = 0.17 ) and the propensity score matched control group (M = -0.42, SE = 0.17) after 18-months,  but only significantly lower than the modified treatment group (M=0.44, SE=0.18 ) after 24th-months of intervention. 

Conclusion. The findings indicate significant differences in identity harmony between participants in the full AISES LTP intervention and those in the modified and control groups, particularly after 18 and 24 months. The full intervention group consistently showed lower scores in identity harmony compared to the modified group, suggesting that the in-person components of the AISES LTP program may lead to continued individual dissonance between professional and cultural identities. These results highlight the need to further understand Indigenous STEM program components and their impact on Indigenous STEM identity harmony. 

Acknowledgements. 
The research reported in this study was supported by NIH grants 3R01GM138700-01S1 and #K99GM151640.

symposium

### 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 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

Research training is a fundamental component in preparing undergraduates to gain essential research skills and receive mentoring in undergraduate research.  Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) generally exist in two modalities: the independent or mentored UREs  (Lopatto, 2010) and Course-based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) (Auchincloss et al., 2014). Though mentored UREs are effective methods to engage undergraduates in research and faculty agree that undergraduate research mentoring is important, many faculty face challenges finding the time, space, and other resources to provide quality mentored undergraduate research experiences, especially to diverse student populations (Pierszalowski et al., 2021). 
One solution to this bottleneck has been the implementation of CUREs. However, most CUREs have been developed for upper-level students, neglecting the fact that the earlier the URE, the more impactful it can be for the students (Bowman & Holmes, 2018).  At the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), the Freshman Year Research Intensive Sequence (FYRIS) (Echegoyen et al., 2024) was developed to address this critical need and improve student retention by providing research training and experiences to acquaint students with biomedical research and create a pathway towards mentored UREs. FYRIS adopts a course-based approach, integrating research foundations with research-intensive courses. In particular, FYRIS consists of one general research foundations course (RFC) and a sequence of two research driven courses (RDCs) from participating departments. 
The long-term impact of programs that use the FYRIS model remains understudied. In this presentation, we describe the FYRIS program and student experience in the course sequence. We will also present compelling longitudinal findings that underscore the positive influence of FYRIS and subsequent mentored research experiences on 4-year retention and graduation rates. Our findings describe the effect of FYRIS participation using a quasi-experimental design to compare students who completed a full-FYRIS sequence (one RFC and a sequence of two RDCs), students who completed a partial FYRIS sequence (one or more of the designated courses, but not the full sequence), and those who took regular, non-FYRIS courses. Using this design, we present compelling longitudinal findings that underscore the efficacy of the FYRIS and research mentoring on major academic outcomes. Remarkably, FYRIS impacts often surpass historical socioeconomic, demographic, and educational factors, such as high school percentile, gender, and community college transfer status.

A Freshman Year Research Intensive Sequence for Improving Inclusive Equity in Research Training

Introduction. Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) are increasingly valued as high-impact experiential educational activities that have broad and long-standing positive impacts on college students (Adedokun et al., 2014; Hu et al., 2007), particularly those in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical (STEMM) fields. UREs are beneficial for broadening the participation of underrepresented minorities in STEMM (Hernandez et al., 2018). In this study, we delve into the crucial role of family support for students attending an undergraduate research program at a Hispanic-serving university and how family members effectively encouraged their students while in the program. In this presentation, we present results from interviews and focus groups with the first cohort of BUILDing Scholars. 
Methods. This study includes former students of BUILDing Scholars, an undergraduate program aimed at broadening biomedical research participation. In addition to tuition support, scholars conducted research with a faculty mentor during the academic year and attended a summer research program at a partner institution. They also attended professional development workshops (i.e., how to present a poster and GRE preparation) and presented their research at local symposia. One of the key features of BUILDing Scholars has been family involvement, such as invitations to orientations before they start the program and before they leave for a summer research program, local symposia, lecture presentations, and graduation events. For this study, 19 students from the first cohort who graduated from the program and were either in graduate school or working in industry were interviewed to reflect on their experiences upon graduation. Interviews took place in the winter of 2019-2020. We also collected data from focus groups with 7 of those participants during the spring of 2021. Semi-structured interviews included questions about their decisions to attend graduate school, the different types of support they have received, and their experiences during the pandemic. Data was analyzed using the NVivo qualitative software, using a content and thematic analysis (Saldaña, 2016). 
Results. Students talked about how their parents are very supportive even though they don’t fully understand their research. When students talked about choosing a graduate program or a job, they often expressed the importance of going to a place close to home or easy to go back home (i.e., a short flight or an easy drive). Students also talked about how they exercised their roles as scientists concerning family, community, and STEM research careers during the pandemic. Students revealed that their experiences in the program allowed them to take a more active role in explaining different science terms to their family and community members. Participants translated scientific research into a language easier to understand for family members unfamiliar with science. In addition, they talked about the importance of their research and their impact on their community. They also reported how they dealt with home responsibilities and school with online learning.
Conclusion and Discussions. Results from interviews and focus groups showed the importance of family involvement with the program as it eased the transition to external summer research programs and graduate school and provided a better understanding of the students’ research and their role as scientists within their families. Interventions such as UREs should find ways to integrate family members to better prepare students for their life after graduating from college. 
Acknowledgments. Research reported in this paper was supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under linked Award Numbers RL5GM118969, TL4GM118971, and UL1GM118970. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Familial Ties and Student Success: Perspectives from Biomedical Research Program Alumni

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

Relationships between academic institutions and the communities they are embedded in have been tumultuous and often unfair, with the institutions seemingly using the communities’ resources, without giving back. However, in the more recent decades there have been intentional efforts within universities and departments focused on outreach and engagement in the local and surrounding community (Bruning et al., 2006). University of Illinois’ Grainger College of Engineering’s outreach and engagement department is one such entity which seeks to engage local K-12 students and families in STEM learning experiences during the school year through afterschool and weekend programs and partnerships. For these programs to run successfully, we look to our university’s undergraduate and graduate students to play key roles as mentors, content creators, program leads, and helping hands.  

Despite the various benefits of volunteering and engagement, (Haski-Leventhal et al., 2020) we have found that creating and sustaining a culture of community outreach and engagement among university students has been challenging. Recruiting students for individual events, as well as developing long-term partnerships with student organizations has been a hit-or-miss, and informal conversations with service-oriented student organization leaders have revealed the lack of outreach and service culture within the university experience. To this end, previous studies have looked to understand factors impacting university students’ volunteering participation (Moore et al., 2014).  

In this study, we analyze one-on-one interviews with three university students who have been extensively engaged in community engagement efforts, to understand their experiences. Through an insight-oriented approach of qualitative analysis (Scherr, 2009), we discovered that the interviewees were motivated to engage with the community for reasons such as wanting to give back, and engaging in activities that they had once engaged in as school students. We also seek their input to understand some ways that community engagement can be made more accessible to the university students and summarize some key points that could be put into practice by university outreach departments.

Building a Culture of Community Engagement among University Students

Scholars in educational psychology and STEM learning indicate that an individual’s social identities like race, ethnicity, and gender influence both the opportunities of learning that are afforded to them, and the nature of their learning experience. Unlike what many traditional members of the community believe, STEM is not a purely meritocratic field, and the experience of students in STEM learning environments, and their decision to persist in it is influenced by their identities and lived experiences. Studies have shown that Black students, specifically girls have been the target of systemic and individual injustices and harms within STEM learning environments, resulting in lack of sense of belonging and identity development within STEM. Scholars, community leaders, curriculum developers, teachers have been implementing formal and informal initiatives to counter these negative experiences, and provide personally relevant and meaningful STEM experiences to students from Black and other marginalized communities. Some of these initiatives have focused on effective and equitable family and community involvement in student learning, which is influential to students’ learning experiences and choices (Roque, 2020).  

In partnership with The Well Experience (local community organization) and University of Illinois student organizations we coordinated two family STEM events – one to design paper rollercoasters to understand physics concepts, and one to make alarm boxes by using code and electronics. The Well Experience works with local Black girls and families to provide afterschool programming, counseling, and family services for women and girls, many of whom have been impacted by trauma or violence. These STEM events were conducted in the evening, accompanied by dinner, and all family members were welcome.  

With these events, we focused on centering the teenagers of the community organization in roles of mentorship. Marginalized students, specifically Black girls rarely see those with their intersectional identities in such roles especially within STEM. To counter these experiences, the teenage girls in the community organization worked with university students to design the family event activity, lead the event, and highlight a person from the Black community who had made an impact in the field of STEM.  

Drawing from the idea of transformative justice as implemented in Digital Youth Divas (Erete et al., 2021), our program strives to create a safe community for STEM engagement, so as to foster a sense of belonging and support within STEM. We seek to create a counter space to explore STEM for the students and families while being able to express their identities in a safe and empowering environment. At the conclusion of these two events, we conducted focus group interviews with families about their participation and experiences in the events, and interviews with some of the middle and high school students about their experience as leaders. Using the qualitative analysis methodology of thematic analysis, initial coding indicates that the families enjoyed participating in the events, with adult caregivers expressing surprise at how interactive and interesting STEM can be. They enjoyed being able work within a community of Black families, and suggested that these events would enable them to spark conversations about STEM at home more often. Parents, researchers, teenage mentors were surprised and impressed by how eagerly elementary school attendees participated in advanced coding. The middle and high school mentors enjoyed leading the sessions and suggested more preparation, and applicable projects for future sessions. We plan to continue implementation and study of these events during the upcoming school years, and will build on these findings to inform future planning, understand impacts, and explore best practices of nurturing STEM identity development and leadership through this lens of transformative justice.

Family STEM Nights and Teen Leadership Development as a Transformative Justice Strategy

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

“Have We Been Achieving Desired Outcomes? NO! Time to Think Outside the Box of a 55 Year Old Formula”

Patterns of Effective Mentorship Among NIH Career Development (K) Awardees

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 scientists and engineers in the United States (1, 2). In addition, a commonly identified barrier to under resourced 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 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, 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 Scholars; they help Scholars revise 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 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 past summer we hosted our third cohort of Blazer BRAIN Scholars, ten undergraduates hailing from several different institutions primarily throughout the southeast, including our HBCU partner institutions. Our Scholars are asked to complete self-evaluation surveys before and after their summer research experience and are also asked to evaluate their mentors at the end of their in-person experience. Performance of our Program is assessed via annual presentation of program outcomes to our External Advisory Committee. 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

Premium content

Fostering Indigenous STEM Identity Harmony through Online and In-Person Interventions

Downloads

Next from 2025 Understanding Interventions Annual Conference

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

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES