More Like this

1. Work-in-Progress: Running an in-person NSF IRES Program in South Korea before and during COVID-19

   Kim, Gloria ; Yoon, Yong ; Choi, Jin-Woo ( July 2022 , ASEE annual conference exposition proceedings)

   The goal of the National Science Foundation’s International Research Experiences for Students (IRES) program is to provide high quality educational experiences for small groups of U.S. students through active research participation in collaboration with foreign researchers at an international site and provide students with international collaborative research training and a personal network on which to build future collaborations. Interdisciplinary Research in Korea on Applied smart systems (IRiKA) is an NSF IRES Track I program that commenced in 2019. Over the lifetime of this 3-year project (2019 - 2021), a cohort of 5 students selected from three participating U.S. institutions are to be supported each year, making the total number of participants 15. In Summer 2019, the first cohort of five students completed their 8-week immersive research internship at Korea’s top-ranked university. COVID-19 affected most, if not all, in-bound and out-bound international programs. IRiKA was no exception. In late February 2020, the program was canceled altogether because no viable alternative could be offered for Summer 2020, as institutions world-wide were grappling with disruptive challenges the pandemic brought on. In Fall 2020, with contingency plans in place and an additional Korean host site aboard, the project team solicited applications. However, in early 2021, before the final selection of the 2021 cohort was complete, two of the U.S. participating institutions announced that international travel would not be permitted for their faculty and students. The project team went on to select a cohort from one U.S. institution only and continued to monitor the travel health notice level for Korea. While some modifications were made to the in-country program to comply with the COVID-19 regulations in Korea, the 8-week research experience was in-person and remained largely uncompromised for the 2021 cohort. In this Work-in-Progress paper, the three US-based lead investigators compare the two versions of the IRiKA program – before and during the pandemic – and share the lessons learned. The no-cost-extension will allow IRiKA to continue until Summer 2022. Selection of the Summer 2022 cohort will be complete by early March of 2022. 

   more » « less
2. Mentoring across difference and distance: building effective virtual research opportunities for underrepresented minority undergraduate students in biological sciences

   https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.01452-23  

   Knox, Corey J. ; Ab Latif, Faqryza M. ; Cornejo, Natasha R. ; Johnson, Michael D. ( January 2024 , mBio)

   Freitag, Nancy E. (Ed.)

   The National Summer Undergraduate Research Program (NSURP) is a mentored summer research program in biosciences for undergraduate students from underrepresented backgrounds in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Conducted virtually over 8 weeks every summer starting in 2020, NSURP provides accessible and flexible research experiences to meet the needs of geographically diverse and schedule-constrained students. Drawing from mentee reporting and surveys conducted within the NSURP framework involving over 350 underrepresented minority undergraduate students over three cohorts (2020–2022), matched with mentors, this paper highlights the potential benefits of students participating in virtual mentored research experiences. In addition to increased access to quality research experiences for students who face travel or academic setting constraints, we found that virtual mentoring fosters cross-cultural collaborations, generates novel research questions, and expands professional networks. Moreover, this study emphasizes the role of virtual mentorship opportunities in fostering inclusivity and support for individuals from underrepresented groups in STEM fields. By overcoming barriers to full participation in the scientific community, virtual mentorship programs can create a more equitable and inclusive environment for aspiring researchers. This research contributes to the growing body of literature on the effectiveness and the potential of virtual research programs and mentorship opportunities in broadening participation and breaking down barriers in STEM education and careers.

   Summer Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REUs) are established to provide platforms for interest in scientific research and as tools for eventual matriculation to scientific graduate programs. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the cancellation of in-person programs for 2020 and 2021, creating the need for alternative programming. The National Summer Undergraduate Research Project (NSURP) was created to provide a virtual option to REUs in microbiology to compensate for the pandemic-initiated loss of research opportunities. Although in-person REUs have since been restored, NSURP currently remains an option for those unable to travel to in-person programs in the first place due to familial, community, and/or monetary obligations. This study examines the effects of the program's first 3 years, documenting the students’ experiences, and suggests future directions and areas of study related to the impact of virtual research experiences on expanding and diversifying science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

    

   more » « less
3. Study on U.S. Parents' Divisions of Labor During COVID-19, Waves 1-2

   https://doi.org/10.3886/E183142V2  

   Carlson, Daniel L. ; Petts, Richard J. ( January 2022 , ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research)

   The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered family life in the United States. Over the long duration of the pandemic, parents had to adapt to shifting work conditions, virtual schooling, the closure of daycare facilities, and the stress of not only managing households without domestic and care supports but also worrying that family members may contract the novel coronavirus. Reports early in the pandemic suggest that these burdens have fallen disproportionately on mothers, creating concerns about the long-term implications of the pandemic for gender inequality and mothers’ well-being. Nevertheless, less is known about how parents’ engagement in domestic labor and paid work has changed throughout the pandemic, what factors may be driving these changes, and what the long-term consequences of the pandemic may be for the gendered division of labor and gender inequality more generally.
   
   The Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 (SPDLC) collects longitudinal survey data from partnered U.S. parents that can be used to assess changes in parents’ divisions of domestic labor, divisions of paid labor, and well-being throughout and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of SPDLC is to understand both the short- and long-term impacts of the pandemic for the gendered division of labor, work-family issues, and broader patterns of gender inequality.
   
   Survey data for this study is collected using Prolifc (www.prolific.co), an opt-in online platform designed to facilitate scientific research. The sample is comprised U.S. adults who were residing with a romantic partner and at least one biological child (at the time of entry into the study). In each survey, parents answer questions about both themselves and their partners. Wave 1 of SPDLC was conducted in April 2020, and parents who participated in Wave 1 were asked about their division of labor both prior to (i.e., early March 2020) and one month after the pandemic began. Wave 2 of SPDLC was collected in November 2020. Parents who participated in Wave 1 were invited to participate again in Wave 2, and a new cohort of parents was also recruited to participate in the Wave 2 survey. Wave 3 of SPDLC was collected in October 2021. Parents who participated in either of the first two waves were invited to participate again in Wave 3, and another new cohort of parents was also recruited to participate in the Wave 3 survey. This research design (follow-up survey of panelists and new cross-section of parents at each wave) will continue through 2024, culminating in six waves of data spanning the period from March 2020 through October 2024. An estimated total of approximately 6,500 parents will be surveyed at least once throughout the duration of the study.
   
   SPDLC data will be released to the public two years after data is collected; Waves 1 and 2 are currently publicly available. Wave 3 will be publicly available in October 2023, with subsequent waves becoming available yearly. Data will be available to download in both SPSS (.sav) and Stata (.dta) formats, and the following data files will be available: (1) a data file for each individual wave, which contains responses from all participants in that wave of data collection, (2) a longitudinal panel data file, which contains longitudinal follow-up data from all available waves, and (3) a repeated cross-section data file, which contains the repeated cross-section data (from new respondents at each wave) from all available waves. Codebooks for each survey wave and a detailed user guide describing the data are also available. Response Rates: Of the 1,157 parents who participated in Wave 1, 828 (72%) also participated in the Wave 2 study. Presence of Common Scales: The following established scales are included in the survey:
   

   • Self-Efficacy, adapted from Pearlin's mastery scale (Pearlin et al., 1981) and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 2015) and taken from the American Changing Lives Survey
   • Communication with Partner, taken from the Marriage and Relationship Survey (Lichter & Carmalt, 2009)
     
   • Gender Attitudes, taken from the National Survey of Families and Households (Sweet & Bumpass, 1996)
     
   • Depressive Symptoms (CES-D-10)
   • Stress, measured using Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983)
     

   Full details about these scales and all other items included in the survey can be found in the user guide and codebook
   The second wave of the SPDLC was fielded in November 2020 in two stages. In the first stage, all parents who participated in W1 of the SPDLC and who continued to reside in the United States were re-contacted and asked to participate in a follow-up survey. The W2 survey was posted on Prolific, and messages were sent via Prolific’s messaging system to all previous participants. Multiple follow-up messages were sent in an attempt to increase response rates to the follow-up survey. Of the 1,157 respondents who completed the W1 survey, 873 at least started the W2 survey. Data quality checks were employed in line with best practices for online surveys (e.g., removing respondents who did not complete most of the survey or who did not pass the attention filters). After data quality checks, 5.2% of respondents were removed from the sample, resulting in a final sample size of 828 parents (a response rate of 72%).
   
   In the second stage, a new sample of parents was recruited. New parents had to meet the same sampling criteria as in W1 (be at least 18 years old, reside in the United States, reside with a romantic partner, and be a parent living with at least one biological child). Also similar to the W1 procedures, we oversampled men, Black individuals, individuals who did not complete college, and individuals who identified as politically conservative to increase sample diversity. A total of 1,207 parents participated in the W2 survey. Data quality checks led to the removal of 5.7% of the respondents, resulting in a final sample size of new respondents at Wave 2 of 1,138 parents.
   
   In both stages, participants were informed that the survey would take approximately 20 minutes to complete. All panelists were provided monetary compensation in line with Prolific’s compensation guidelines, which require that all participants earn above minimum wage for their time participating in studies.
   To be included in SPDLC, respondents had to meet the following sampling criteria at the time they enter the study: (a) be at least 18 years old, (b) reside in the United States, (c) reside with a romantic partner (i.e., be married or cohabiting), and (d) be a parent living with at least one biological child. Follow-up respondents must be at least 18 years old and reside in the United States, but may experience changes in relationship and resident parent statuses. Smallest Geographic Unit: U.S. State

   This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. In accordance with this license, all users of these data must give appropriate credit to the authors in any papers, presentations, books, or other works that use the data. A suggested citation to provide attribution for these data is included below:            
   
   Carlson, Daniel L. and Richard J. Petts. 2022. Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 User Guide: Waves 1-2.  

   To help provide estimates that are more representative of U.S. partnered parents, the SPDLC includes sampling weights. Weights can be included in statistical analyses to make estimates from the SPDLC sample representative of U.S. parents who reside with a romantic partner (married or cohabiting) and a child aged 18 or younger based on age, race/ethnicity, and gender. National estimates for the age, racial/ethnic, and gender profile of U.S. partnered parents were obtained using data from the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS). Weights were calculated using an iterative raking method, such that the full sample in each data file matches the nationally representative CPS data in regard to the gender, age, and racial/ethnic distributions within the data. This variable is labeled CPSweightW2 in the Wave 2 dataset, and CPSweightLW2 in the longitudinal dataset (which includes Waves 1 and 2). There is not a weight variable included in the W1-W2 repeated cross-section data file.
    

   more » « less
4. Lessons Learned in Adopting a Multi-Site Combined REU/RET Program for Exclusive Remote Participation Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic

   Nyarko, Kofi ( October 2021 , 2021 Fall ASEE Middle Atlantic Section Meeting)

   The Smart City Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) and Research Experience for Teachers (RET) (SCR2) Mega-Site program, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) (#1849454), was formed in 2018 to address the low participation and graduation rates of post-secondary students belonging to underrepresented minority groups in the engineering field. The participating schools in the program are all minority serving and members of a consortium consisting of 14 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and 1 Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), where Morgan State University (MSU) serves as the lead institution. The program targets lower division underperforming REU students who are less likely to have the opportunity to participate in research as undergraduates. Participation in this type of experience has been demonstrated to be transformative and to have the potential to increase retention and graduation rates at these institutions. RET participants are recruited from local community colleges and high schools that serve as feeder schools to the consortium institutions. These teachers are responsible for preparing students who could potentially be interesting in pursuing a college major in engineering by exposing them to hands-on engineering design practices. Over the last two years of the program’s existence, 61 students and 24 teachers have successfully participated. As with most 2020 summer programs, the SCR2 program was challenged by the novel corona virus (COVID-19) pandemic, which hit the United states during the recruitment period of the project. Consequently, the project leadership team decided to offer the summer program remotely (on-line) rather than bring students to the participating three campuses across which the program is distributed. The planning and execution of the program during a global pandemic has brought key insights into techniques, methods, and technologies for effective cross-site communication, faculty advisor/mentor involvement, participant engagement, and leveraging the strong network that connects the participating schools. Essentially, a multi-site remote only combined REU/RET program is efficacious in increasing participant’s confidence, knowledge and desire to pursue further engineering research experiences. This paper presents these insights along with supporting program evaluation findings. 

   more » « less
5. COVID-19 and Housing Security in Remote Alaska Native Communities

   Nicewonger, Todd E. ; McNair, Lisa D. ; Fritz, Stacey ; Supple, Laura ; Criss-Carboy, Laura ( November 2023 , Virginia Tech Publishing)

   Nicewonger, Todd E. ; McNair, Lisa D. ; Fritz, Stacey (Ed.)

   https://pressbooks.lib.vt.edu/alaskanative/ At the start of the pandemic, the editors of this annotated bibliography initiated a remote (i.e., largely virtual) ethnographic research project that investigated how COVID-19 was impacting off-site modular construction practices in Alaska Native communities. Many of these communities are located off the road system and thus face not only dramatically higher costs but multiple logistical challenges in securing licensed tradesmen and construction crews and in shipping building supplies and equipment to their communities. These barriers, as well as the region’s long winters and short building seasons, complicate the construction of homes and related infrastructure projects. Historically, these communities have also grappled with inadequate housing, including severe overcrowding and poor-quality building stock that is rarely designed for northern Alaska’s climate (Marino 2015). Moreover, state and federal bureaucracies and their associated funding opportunities often further complicate home building by failing to accommodate the digital divide in rural Alaska and the cultural values and practices of Native communities.[1] It is not surprising, then, that as we were conducting fieldwork for this project, we began hearing stories about these issues and about how the restrictions caused by the pandemic were further exacerbating them. Amidst these stories, we learned about how modular home construction was being imagined as a possible means for addressing both the complications caused by the pandemic and the need for housing in the region (McKinstry 2021). As a result, we began to investigate how modular construction practices were figuring into emergent responses to housing needs in Alaska communities. We soon realized that we needed to broaden our focus to capture a variety of prefabricated building methods that are often colloquially or idiomatically referred to as “modular.” This included a range of prefabricated building systems (e.g., manufactured, volumetric modular, system-built, and Quonset huts and other reused military buildings[2]). Our further questions about prefabricated housing in the region became the basis for this annotated bibliography. Thus, while this bibliography is one of multiple methods used to investigate these issues, it played a significant role in guiding our research and helped us bring together the diverse perspectives we were hearing from our interviews with building experts in the region and the wider debates that were circulating in the media and, to a lesser degree, in academia. The actual research for each of three sections was carried out by graduate students Lauren Criss-Carboy and Laura Supple.[3] They worked with us to identify source materials and their hard work led to the team identifying three themes that cover intersecting topics related to housing security in Alaska during the pandemic. The source materials collected in these sections can be used in a variety of ways depending on what readers are interested in exploring, including insights into debates on housing security in the region as the pandemic was unfolding (2021-2022). The bibliography can also be used as a tool for thinking about the relational aspects of these themes or the diversity of ways in which information on housing was circulating during the pandemic (and the implications that may have had on community well-being and preparedness). That said, this bibliography is not a comprehensive analysis. Instead, by bringing these three sections together with one another to provide a snapshot of what was happening at that time, it provides a critical jumping off point for scholars working on these issues. The first section focuses on how modular housing figured into pandemic responses to housing needs. In exploring this issue, author Laura Supple attends to both state and national perspectives as part of a broader effort to situate Alaska issues with modular housing in relation to wider national trends. This led to the identification of multiple kinds of literature, ranging from published articles to publicly circulated memos, blog posts, and presentations. These materials are important source materials that will likely fade in the vastness of the Internet and thus may help provide researchers with specific insights into how off-site modular construction was used – and perhaps hyped – to address pandemic concerns over housing, which in turn may raise wider questions about how networks, institutions, and historical experiences with modular construction are organized and positioned to respond to major societal disruptions like the pandemic. As Supple pointed out, most of the material identified in this review speaks to national issues and only a scattering of examples was identified that reflect on the Alaskan context. The second section gathers a diverse set of communications exploring housing security and homelessness in the region. The lack of adequate, healthy housing in remote Alaska communities, often referred to as Alaska’s housing crisis, is well-documented and preceded the pandemic (Guy 2020). As the pandemic unfolded, journalists and other writers reported on the immense stress that was placed on already taxed housing resources in these communities (Smith 2020; Lerner 2021). The resulting picture led the editors to describe in their work how housing security in the region exists along a spectrum that includes poor quality housing as well as various forms of houselessness including, particularly relevant for the context, “hidden homelessness” (Hope 2020; Rogers 2020). The term houseless is a revised notion of homelessness because it captures a richer array of both permanent and temporary forms of housing precarity that people may experience in a region (Christensen et al. 2107). By identifying sources that reflect on the multiple forms of housing insecurity that people were facing, this section highlights the forms of disparity that complicated pandemic responses. Moreover, this section underscores ingenuity (Graham 2019; Smith 2020; Jason and Fashant 2021) that people on the ground used to address the needs of their communities. The third section provides a snapshot from the first year of the pandemic into how CARES Act funds were allocated to Native Alaska communities and used to address housing security. This subject was extremely complicated in Alaska due to the existence of for-profit Alaska Native Corporations and disputes over eligibility for the funds impacted disbursements nationwide. The resources in this section cover that dispute, impacts of the pandemic on housing security, and efforts to use the funds for housing as well as barriers Alaska communities faced trying to secure and use the funds. In summary, this annotated bibliography provides an overview of what was happening, in real time, during the pandemic around a specific topic: housing security in largely remote Alaska Native communities. The media used by housing specialists to communicate the issues discussed here are diverse, ranging from news reports to podcasts and from blogs to journal articles. This diversity speaks to the multiple ways in which information was circulating on housing at a time when the nightly news and radio broadcasts focused heavily on national and state health updates and policy developments. Finding these materials took time, and we share them here because they illustrate why attention to housing security issues is critical for addressing crises like the pandemic. For instance, one theme that emerged out of a recent National Science Foundation workshop on COVID research in the North NSF Conference[4] was that Indigenous communities are not only recovering from the pandemic but also evaluating lessons learned to better prepare for the next one, and resilience will depend significantly on more—and more adaptable—infrastructure and greater housing security. 

   more » « less