More Like this

1. Minority Student Preparation for STEM PhD Study: Impact of NSF Bridge to the Doctorate Programming

   https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i3.122  

   Preuss, Michael D.; Merriweather, Samuel P.; Walton, Shannon D.; Butler-Purry, Karen L. (June 2020, International Journal of Technology in Education and Science)

   The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) received funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) for a Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP) project in 1991 as one of the six initial awardees. As part of these efforts and upon reaching eligibility, the TAMUS LSAMP applied for and received additional funding to support a Bridge to the Doctorate (BTD) program. BTD programming provides financial, educational, and social support to incoming STEM master’s degree and PhD students for the first two years of their graduate study. BTD cohorts consist of up to 12 fellows who participate in a program of academic and professional development seminars and workshops. In project evaluation, annual interviews were conducted with the TAMUS BTD participants, the vast majority of whom were underrepresented minorities (92%). During the interviews, the BTD students were asked to discuss ten topics some of which addressed concerns specific to the implementation of the BTD project. This report considers answers provided in the five topic areas which have broader applicability: 1) the learning achieved by participants through participation in BTD, 2) the personal impact of participation in BTD, 3) the influence of BTD on informants’ educational goals, 4) the influence of BTD on informants’ career goals, and 5) barriers the BTD participants perceived to pursuing a PhD. Eighty project participants responded to the questions between 2009 and 2018. They were from eight distinct cohorts of BTD students and represented 32 different areas of STEM specialization. Qualitative analysis of their responses confirmed that students perceived the elements of the TAMUS BTD project to be efficacious and that there was a set of nine seminars from which participants consistently reported benefit. Additional findings were eight key areas in which learning was reported by participants, four areas in which the programming  had personal impact, five influences on educational goals,  nine impacts on career goals, and a detailed list of barriers graduate students who are underrepresented minorities (URM) perceive to pursuing a doctoral degree. The proven and easily replicated pattern of support programming, the demonstrated results of this programming, and insight into barriers URMs perceive to pursuing a STEM doctorate are immediately applicable to URM graduate student support at many institutions of higher education. 

   more » « less
2. A Structured Mentoring Program Addressing Graduate Student Challenges, Well-Being and Success

   McCallum, C; Libarkin, J; Vasquez, E; Webb, S; Sule, V; Choudhuri, D; Tornquist, W (January 2022, The Chronicle of Mentoring & Coaching)

   Dominguez, N (Ed.)

   There is clearly a retention issue in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for underrepresented groups (Estrada et al., 2016; Sithole et al., 2017). Although students leave STEM for many reasons (Bonous-Harmmath, 2000; Estrada et al., 2016; Gasiewski et al., 2012; Hurtado et al. 2011), one underlying and well documented cause is lack of attention to effective mentoring and student well-being, especially in graduate school (Becker et al., 2002). The paper presents a National Science Foundation sponsored mentoring program that prepares graduate students to become effective mentors while simultaneously providing them the necessary tools to advocate for themselves as mentees. In addition to mentoring, the program emphasizes the importance of mental and physical well-being. Evaluation results conclude that the program has improved students' sense of belonging on campus and provided them with support for navigating graduate school and socializing into careers. 

   more » « less
3. A Preliminary Analysis of Identity Development in the Figured Worlds of High-Achieving, Low-Income Engineering Students

   Cogburn, B. (July 2023, 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition)

   The ongoing lack of diversity in STEM fields has been described as both: a) a critical issue with a detrimental impact on the United States’ ability to compete with global innovation (Chen, 2013) and b) a systemic issue that excludes certain groups of people from opportunities for economic mobility and job security (Wait & McDonald, 2019). Historically excluded groups, such as women, Black/African Americans, Latin Americans, and economically disadvantaged individuals, continue to be in the minority in STEM (Carnevale et al., 2021). Through the years of research on historically excluded groups, researchers have asserted the importance of developing an engineering identity in determining later success in engineering (Allen & Eisenhart, 2017; Kang et al., 2019; Stipanovic & Woo, 2017). With only 8% of all engineering students entering higher education from low income backgrounds (NCES, 2016; Major et. al, 2018), these students often face significant barriers to their success (Chen, 2013; Hoxby & Avery, 2012), yet there has been very little attention given to them in the research historically. Our study seeks to address the gap related to this population and support the developing understanding of how high achieving, low income students form an engineering identity, as well as the intersectionality and salience of their other socio-cultural identities. Using the theoretical framework of figured worlds (Holland et al., 1998; Waide-James & Schwartz, 2019), we sought to explore what factors shaped the formation of an engineering identity for high achieving, low income college students participating in an engineering scholarship program. Specifically, our research questions were: 1) What factors shape the formation of engineering identity for high achieving, low income students participating in an engineering scholarship program? and 2) How salient are other social identities in the formation of their engineering identity? A constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2014) design guided our selection of individual interviews and focus groups as data collection tools, allowing us to tailor our interview questions and shape our programming around the needs of participants. NSF SSTEM-sponsored program activities that could shape the figured world of participants included intentional mentoring, cohort-based seminars, targeted coursework in design courses, and connecting students to internships and co-ops. Emerging themes for our preliminary data analysis reveal the importance of peer relationships, professional mentorship, and cultural wealth, including social capital. Preliminary results from this study have the potential to increase understanding of how to best support the success of high achieving, low income college students in engineering programs, including the implementation of targeted interventions and supports, as well as shed further light on the skills they use to overcome systemic barriers. 

   more » « less
4. Understanding Students’ Views of Science Identity Development

   Pedersen, D. E. (January 2022, The chronicle of mentoring coaching)

   Science identity is composed of three key components, including competence (possessing scientific knowledge), performance (the capacity to use scientific tools and language in appropriate settings), and recognition (earning validation from others in the field) (Carlone & Johnson, 2007). The significance of a strong science identity is in shaping a student’s future behavior, such as intent to graduate and pursue a STEM career (Chang et al., 2011; Chemers et al., 2011), which is particularly important for those with notable retention challenges within STEM like women, underrepresented minorities, first generation, and rural students (President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2012). The work of building students’ science identity and encouraging their development as emerging scholars and scientists relies on both classroom experiences and the form and quality of mentoring relationships with faculty (Kendricks et al., 2013). This study considers how students see their own science identity development, and which supports they believe most central to science identity. 

   more » « less
5. Work in Progress: Design and Preliminary Results of a Survey to Explore Relationships Between Faculty Mentoring, Engineering Doctoral Student Psychological Safety, and Work Outcomes

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--48345  

   Bobbett, Dorian; Sanders, Jeanne; Martini, Larkin; Huerta, Mark; Jensen, Karin (June 2024, ASEE Conferences)

   A psychologically safe environment is characterized by people who feel safe to voice ideas and concerns, willingly seek feedback, have positive intentions to one another, engage in constructive confrontation, and feel safe to take risks and experiment. Outside of academia, psychological safety has been shown to impact creativity, work performance, and work engagement. In academic research environments, faculty have a major leadership role in cultivating a psychologically safe environment amongst their academic research teams. Effective graduate student mentoring, which includes both career and psychosocial support, is critical to the development and retention of talented engineers in the US workforce. There is a need to better understand how engineering departments can cultivate more inclusive, psychologically safe environments in which graduate students feel safe to engage in interpersonal risk-taking, especially in research settings. Guided by the Conservation of Resources theory, this project aims to address the following research question: What are the relationships between faculty advisor mentoring, doctoral student psychological safety, and the subsequent positive and negative outcomes for doctoral students? This work in progress paper presents the first quantitative phase of an explanatory mixed methods research design within the overarching project. The quantitative phase will address the following research aims: 1) Identify relationships between mentorship, psychological safety, and engineering doctoral student mental health, 2) Identify mentoring competencies that are predictive of research group psychological safety, and 3) Identify how different demographics experience mentoring and psychological safety in their research groups. Researchers developed a survey consisting of five pre-existing scales, four open-ended questions, and demographics questions. The scales include dyadic and team psychological safety, mentoring competency, mental health and well-being, and job stress. The survey was reviewed by graduate students outside of the participant pool at multiple institutions as well as an external advisory board panel and revised to improve clarity and ensure the selection of appropriate subscales. The survey will be administered via Qualtrics. Graduate students who have been enrolled in their doctoral program for at least one year and currently have a doctoral research advisor will be recruited to participate in the survey at four public, research-intensive institutions. The planned target sample size is 200-300 graduate students. This paper will present the design of the survey and preliminary survey results. As the first part of a larger mixed-methods study, the survey responses provide insight into graduate level engineering education and how doctoral students can be better supported. 

   more » « less