skip to main content


Title: Broadening the ecological mindset
Abstract

Over the past three decades, the Harvard Forest Summer Research Program in Ecology (HF‐SRPE) has been at the forefront of expanding the ecological tent for minoritized or otherwise marginalized students. By broadening the definition of ecology to include fields such as data science, software engineering, and remote sensing, we attract a broader range of students, including those who may not prioritize field experiences or who may feel unsafe working in rural or urban field sites. We also work towards a more resilient society in which minoritized or marginalized students can work safely, in part by building teams of students and mentors. Teams collaborate on projects that require a diversity of approaches and create opportunities for students and mentors alike to support one another and share leadership. Finally, HF‐SRPE promotes an expanded view of what it means to become an ecologist. We value and support diverse career paths for ecologists to work in all parts of society, to diversify the face of ecology, and to bring different perspectives together to ensure innovations in environmental problem solving for our planet.

 
more » « less
Award ID(s):
1950364
NSF-PAR ID:
10362632
Author(s) / Creator(s):
 ;  ;  ;  
Publisher / Repository:
Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Ecological Applications
Volume:
31
Issue:
6
ISSN:
1051-0761
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. This work presents the research methods and preliminary results from a pilot study that assesses mentoring approaches used to support racially minoritized students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. There is a national imperative to broaden participation of racially minoritized undergraduates in STEM fields as evidenced by reports and the recent calls for social justice and equity in these fields. In STEM, mentoring has been recognized as a mechanism that can help to support racially minoritized student populations (e.g., persons who identify as Black, Hispanic/Latinx, and American Indian/Alaskan Native). Yet for mentors in higher education, minimal examples exist that detail effective mentoring approaches, strategies, and competencies that support the persistence and success of minoritized mentees in STEM. In better understanding mentoring approaches, we can make visible how to better mentor these populations and help to employ more equitable mentoring participation. The research question guiding this study is: What approaches are used by mentors who help racially minoritized undergraduate mentees persist in STEM fields? Mentoring literature and two theoretical frameworks were leveraged to situate these mentoring experiences. Intersectionality theory is used to explore the role of compounding minoritized identities within the power contexts (i.e., structural, hegemonic, disciplinary, and interpersonal) of higher education. Community cultural wealth is also used as a lens to examine six forms of capital (i.e., family, social, navigational, aspirational, resistant, and linguistic) that may be used in mentoring practices with minoritized students. This paper will present the methods and findings from the pilot study, centering on the development of the team’s interview protocol. This work will provide insights about the piloting process of a larger study as well as initial emergent themes about the approaches and experiences of mentors who mentor minoritized undergraduate students in STEM. 
    more » « less
  2. Academic Abstract

    Personality and social psychology have historically viewed individuals’ systemically marginalized identities (e.g., as people of color, as coming from a lower-income background) as barriers to their success. Such a deficit-based perspective limits psychological science by overlooking the broader experiences, value, perspectives, and strengths that individuals who face systemic marginalization often bring to their societies. The current article aims to support future research in incorporating a strength-based lens through tracing psychology’s journey away from an emphasis on deficits among people who contend with systemic marginalization and toward three distinct strength-based approaches: the universal strengths, difference-as-strength, and identity-specific strengths approaches. Through distinguishing between each approach, we advance scholarship that aims to understand systemically marginalized identities with corresponding implications for addressing inequality. Strength-based approaches guide the field to recognize the imposed limitations of deficit-based ideologies and advance opportunities to engage in research that effectively understands and values systemically marginalized people.

    Public Abstract

    Inequalities, including those between people from higher- and lower-income backgrounds, are present across society. From schools to workplaces, hospitals to courtrooms, people who come from backgrounds that are marginalized by society often face more negative outcomes than people from more privileged backgrounds. While such inequalities are often blamed on a lack of hard work or other issues within marginalized people themselves, scientific research increasingly demonstrates that this is not the case. Rather, studies consistently find that people’s identities as coming from groups that face marginalization in society often serve as a valuable source of unique strengths, not deficiencies, that can help them succeed. Our article reviews these studies to examine how future research in psychology may gain a broader understanding of people who contend with marginalization. In doing so, we outline opportunities for psychological research to effectively support efforts to address persistent inequalities.

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract  
    more » « less
  4. Grundy, Quinn (Ed.)
    Early research on the impact of COVID-19 on academic scientists suggests that disruptions to research, teaching, and daily work life are not experienced equally. However, this work has overwhelmingly focused on experiences of women and parents, with limited attention to the disproportionate impact on academic work by race, disability status, sexual identity, first-generation status, and academic career stage. Using a stratified random survey sample of early-career academics in four science disciplines ( N = 3,277), we investigated socio-demographic and career stage differences in the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic along seven work outcomes: changes in four work areas (research progress, workload, concern about career advancement, support from mentors) and work disruptions due to three COVID-19 related life challenges (physical health, mental health, and caretaking). Our analyses examined patterns across career stages as well as separately for doctoral students and for postdocs/assistant professors. Overall, our results indicate that scientists from marginalized (i.e., devalued) and minoritized (i.e., underrepresented) groups across early career stages reported more negative work outcomes as a result of COVID-19. However, there were notable patterns of differences depending on the socio-demographic identities examined. Those with a physical or mental disability were negatively impacted on all seven work outcomes. Women, primary caregivers, underrepresented racial minorities, sexual minorities, and first-generation scholars reported more negative experiences across several outcomes such as increased disruptions due to physical health symptoms and additional caretaking compared to more privileged counterparts. Doctoral students reported more work disruptions from life challenges than other early-career scholars, especially those related to health problems, while assistant professors reported more negative changes in areas such as decreased research progress and increased workload. These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately harmed work outcomes for minoritized and marginalized early-career scholars. Institutional interventions are required to address these inequalities in an effort to retain diverse cohorts in academic science. 
    more » « less
  5. Current science instruction does not educate K-12 students equitably and creates short- and long-term impacts on individual students and society. While students may be present in class, they may not have access to quality science learning experiences. The goals of this paper are to show how science instruction may not be reaching its aim of equitable access and to offer recommendations for creating a new baseline standard for equitable science instruction. Though not exhaustive, this paper identifies groups of students who are marginalized in current-day science instruction—the racially minoritized, those with physical and cognitive differences, and those in urban or rural communities. First, this paper challenges the neutrality of science by highlighting systemic yet negative outcomes that disproportionately impact minoritized populations in everyday life because of the narrow network of people who define and solve problems. Second, this paper identifies examples where science instruction is not of its highest quality for the highlighted groups. Third, we present a synthesis of research-informed solutions proposed to improve both the quality of science instruction and its equitable access for the highlighted groups, creating a new baseline standard for equitable science instruction. An elevated baseline would address the existing disparities in who has access to quality science instruction and consequently reduce the gatekeeper effect of who defines and solves societal problems that perpetuate intergenerational inequities. 
    more » « less