Search for: All records

The purpose of this research paper is to test to see if science and engineering identity differ between students along the basis of minoritized sexual and gender identities. LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning) students are more likely to leave engineering and other STEM majors before the end of their fourth year of college, much of which is due to the hetero- and cisnormative climate they experience in STEM departments. The climate may undermine students' identification with science and engineering, affecting their motivation, belonging, and persistence in these fields. The data for this study was collected from student surveys at four research universities nationally, with 548 students forming the analytic sample. About 56% of the sample are LGBQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer), 16% TGNC (transgender, gender nonconforming, or nonbinary), and 65% are in a STEM major. Students completed a two-part survey which encompassed data about their social networks and their college experiences. The data for this analysis were drawn from the section on students' college experiences, which included an adaptation of Godwin's engineering identity measures to assess students' interest in their chosen field of study, students' assessment of their competence and performance in their courses, and students' perceptions of being recognized as a science person and as an engineering person. Demographic data on sexual identity, gender identity, and major were used to test comparisons. ANOVA and regression modeling were used to test group differences. For the most part, few differences were observed between groups regarding measures of science and engineering identity. Interest in their field of study only differed marginally by LGBQ status, with LGBQ students scoring slightly higher than heterosexual students. Perceptions of competence and performance in their field of study differed only by STEM major, with STEM students scoring slightly lower, suggesting some potential degree of insecurity among STEM students regarding their academic performance. Recognition as a science person only differed by STEM major as STEM students reported much higher recognition than their non-STEM peers. Recognition as an engineering person also differed by STEM major similar to recognition as a science person, but to a somewhat lesser degree; however, LGBQ students also reported being less likely to be recognized as an engineering person as well. Taken together, if engineering and other STEM fields look to broaden participation among people from groups historically excluded from full, authentic participation, one factor is the extent to which LGBTQ people see themselves as part of these fields. The data presented here suggest to some extent that LGBTQ people score similarly to their peers on indicators of science and engineering identity, but that attention to their experiences is still warranted. As LGBTQ issues become politicized across the nation, LGBTQ individuals need safe environments in STEM fields to nurture their intrinsic motivation and pursue fulfilling careers. 

The purpose of this poster paper is to present progress toward reaching the third research aim of an NSF CAREER-funded study, using qualitative methods to explore the intersection of LGBTQ and STEM identities. The overall project purpose is to explore LGBTQ students’ engagement in STEM disciplines. LGBTQ students often leave engineering and other STEM fields at a higher rate than their peers due to unwelcoming environments, and engineering educators should tackle issues like heteronormativity and cissexism in the learning environment to promote diversity among future practicing engineers. The past year of the project has been focused on finishing data collection for the first research aim, investigating the influence of LGBTQ students' social networks on non-cognitive STEM outcomes, and securing data access agreements for the second research aim, comparing STEM degree completion rates between LGBTQ students and cisgender, heterosexual peers. For this poster, we focus on the process of developing a qualitative, narrative study exploring how LGBTQ STEM students experience discipline-based identities. Our poster presents the development of our interview protocol, grounded in engineering identity and possible selves, as well as our methods for collecting and analyzing qualitative data elicited through interviews. We use possible selves as an identity-based motivation framework in developing the interview protocol that focuses on students' anticipated career paths helping to understand how students are motivated to act in ways that are congruent to who they wish to become and wish to avoid becoming with respect to their decision to enter STEM. Development of the instrument began with a review of the literature to find key concepts that need to be covered in the interviews as well as example interview questions to be adapted for this study. In particular, the research team reviewed instruments used in prior research on possible selves to understand how existing procedures could be adapted to fit the purposes of this project. Following IRB approval, the interview protocol was refined through pilot testing with people who meet the study’s criteria for inclusion. Our next step is to recruit students for participation in this phase of the research. Many of these students will be identified through the survey from the first research aim of the project which gathered contact information for participants interested in participating in follow-up research. Others will be identified through recruitment nationally with organizations such as oSTEM. We expect to have preliminary data to discuss at the ASEE 2024 poster session, but data collection is expected to last through much of the coming year. Once these data are collected and analyzed, the overall project will move into a phase focused on completing the project’s educational aims and broad dissemination of findings across all three research aims. 

The purpose of this research study is to test whether LGBTQ network homophily predicts higher sense of belonging among LGBTQ students, and if this relationship differs between STEM and non-STEM majors. Network homophily describes how sameness and difference within a person’s social network provides access to different types of resources, and we hypothesize that LGBTQ STEM students have access to fewer LGBTQ sources of support than their peers outside of STEM. The study comprised 315 LGBTQ students from four U.S. research universities nationally. In this sample, 66% of participants were STEM majors, and 29% identified as transgender, gender nonconforming, or nonbinary (TGNC). Multiple regression analyses were performed to test the effect of being a STEM major and homophily within students’ social networks on sense of belonging. Results demonstrated several nuances in the relationship between network homophily and sense of belonging. Cisgender LGBQ students reported significantly higher sense of belonging than their TGNC peers. LGBTQ students relying exclusively on cis-hetero sources of academic support reported lower belonging than those with at least some LGBTQ network members. Few differences were observed between STEM and non-STEM students, meaning that gender identity and network homophily play a stronger role in sense of belonging than being a STEM major. Overall, these findings support the conception of homophily as an indicator of a supportive STEM learning environment for LGBTQ students, fostering equitable education. This emphasizes the need for targeted support mechanisms within academic disciplines to enhance the persistence and success of LGBTQ students in higher education.