United States

The positive impacts of shadowing experiences on undergraduate students’ career exploration has been well documented in medicine and other health-related fields.1 However, use of shadowing to introduce students to scientific research careers has not been as thoroughly explored. At Xavier University of Louisiana (Xavier), under the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS)-funded Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Program, research shadowing has been used to make students more aware of the research process and expand their knowledge of and enthusiasm for biomedical careers. The BUILD Program at Xavier, Project Pathways, offers opportunities for students to shadow in Xavier research labs and at local partner institutions. The participants observe undergraduate and graduate research students along with research staff and faculty in labs over a period of several weeks. Students are also given the opportunity to attend graduate courses in biomedical and psychological sciences. The benefits to the shadowing students include but are not limited to the opportunity to observe and ask questions about live experiments; the ability to explore the pros and cons of participating in research and attending graduate school; and the opportunity to experience the format and rigor of various types of graduate courses. Participants can also form and benefit from mentoring and near-peer mentoring relationships. Shadowing participants are uniformly positive in their responses to post-shadowing surveys, and have indicated that shadowing was effective at helping them to understand the research process and clarify their goals as related to research. Participants shadowing graduate students responded in a similar, positive manner overall, and on their intent to apply for graduate school. Overall the assessment results show that research shadowing is a low-cost, high-impact intervention, beneficial for large numbers of undergraduate students who are curious about biomedical research careers.

12th Conference on Understanding Interventions 2020

Research Shadowing: High Impact, Low Cost Introduction to Research

research shadowing

UI is excited to announce the rescheduled 12th Annual Conference on Understanding Interventions December 10 & 12, 2020! As you may recall, the original conference scheduled back in March 2020 had to be cancelled due the worsening global conditions, and further declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. Stay tuned for details regarding the virtual conference.

On December 10, 2020 from 12:00-5:00pm (EST), and December 12, 2020 from 11:00am-5:00pm (EST), UI will host the Virtual 12th Annual Understanding Interventions Conference powered by Underline. Attendees will experience plenaries, workshops, symposia, and poster presentations on hypothesis-based research on interventions and initiatives that broaden participation in STEM careers. The conference will continue to facilitate the dialogue among education, behavioral, and social science researchers, evaluators, and faculty in STEM fields who participate in intervention programs. Graduate students in these fields are strongly encouraged to attend. Workshops, sessions, and posters will communicate effective strategies from successful STEM intervention programs, present results from empirical research studies, and synthesize the translation of research findings into practice on STEM learning, undergraduate research, graduate education, and student retention.

12th Annual Understanding Interventions Conference continues to facilitate the dialogue among education, behavioral, and social science researchers, evaluators, and faculty in STEM fields who participate in intervention programs. Workshops, sessions, and posters communicate effective strategies from successful STEM intervention programs, present results from empirical research studies, and synthesize the translation of research findings into practice on STEM learning, undergraduate research, graduate education, and student retention.

poster

This study examined how students’ experiences in a Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP)-funded summer bridge program were associated with two social psychological factors, self-efficacy and belonging, which are strongly related to retention and success in college. Specifically, the degree to which students broadly report a positive bridge experience appears to be sufficient to promote a sense of belonging; however informal social experiences that may foster a peer social network might be most impactful. Activities that increase students’ awareness of campus resources and help build a peer social network may boost students’ confidence in their ability to reach their academic goals.

LSAMP Summer Bridge Programs: Effects on Academic Self-Efficacy and Belonging

Despite efforts to improve diversity in STEM career pathways, many demographic groups are still underrepresented based on ability status, gender identity, race and ethnicity, or sexual orientation; and this disproportional recruitment and retention manifests at every stage of the academic pipeline from undergraduate through professional appointments (Bernard & Cooperdock, 2018). Although many solutions to inequity have been proposed, research indicates that comprehensive mentoring and role modeling programs can improve women’s motivation and persistence in STEM (Haacker, 2015). However, comprehensive programs often consist of multiple components and require intensive resources (e.g., time, money, logistical support) that may limit their replicability and scalability (Komro, Flay, Biglan, & Wagenaar, 2016). Therefore, we conducted a randomized field experiment to one-of-three one-day professional development workshops to identify the critical elements of a prototypical comprehensive mentoring program for women: (a) exposure to STEM careers via female career role models; (b) training on how to maintain and grow their network of mentoring relationships; or (c) introduction to a local female scientist mentor. Here we show that the combination of all three elements were necessary to improve mentoring, motivational, and persistence outcomes.

Building optimal support programs: Evidence from a randomized field experiment

The NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub is eager to contribute a poster to introduce Understanding Interventions leaders and conference participants to the NSF INCLUDES National Network. One of the National Science Foundation’s “10 Big Ideas,” NSF INCLUDES (Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science), aims to enhance U.S. leadership in science and engineering by developing talent from all sectors of our society, including underrepresented minorities, women, and people with disabilities (NSF, 2018).

To achieve this aim, NSF has invested in robust collaborative infrastructure – the NSF INCLUDES National Network – to support the development, sharing, and scaling of knowledge and best practices across STEM broadening participation networks and projects nationwide. The INCLUDES Network, which is open to all interested in broadening participation in STEM, offers members opportunities to meet new partners and connect with funders and industry representatives; build capacity in areas such as measurement, communication, and sustainability; and share their own expertise and project impacts at a national scale. 

As a poster session participant, a leader from the NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub (which leads and supports the INCLUDES Network) will ask conference leaders and participants about the successes and challenges they experience in their broadening participation work, and describe for them resources, topical online affinity groups, and other Network activities the INCLUDES Network offers that align with their needs. The Hub leaders will also offer that people can sign into the Network website to join the Network’s online community and highlight its relevant features. 


Citations:
NSF (2018, January 31). NSF INCLUDES Report to the Nation. Retrieved from: https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/nsfincludes/pdfs/INCLUDES_report_to_the_Nation.pdf on 


An Introduction to the NSF INCLUDES National Network

Fair Play is a virtual simulation in which the player takes on the perspective of Jamal Davis, a Black graduate student on his way to becoming a renowned professor (Virtual Games for STEMM Faculty to Break the Bias Habit, DP4 GM096822; PI: Carnes, 2010-2014). While interacting with other characters and the environment in Fair Play, players experience situations that exemplify different types of racial biases and decide how to respond to each bias experience as it occurs. Research about the effects of game play suggests that the player is able to engage in perspective taking, which increases empathy, and it also increases their understanding of a number of racial bias concepts (Kaatz et al., 2017, Gutierrez et al., 2014). Do You Play Fair? A Workshop About Bias in Academia is a workshop that was developed to further extend the learning through Fair Play (NIH-NIGMS, R25GM114002, PI: Pribbenow, 2015-2020). It is based on the “habit breaking” model, which has been shown to decrease gender bias and has proven to be successful at improving bias literacy among players (Carnes et al., 2015). During the implementation of this project, the Fair Play workshop has been delivered to ~1170 faculty/instructors, administrators, academic staff, researchers, postdoctoral scientists and graduate students at sixteen universities and fourteen national STEMM-related conferences across the country. Evaluation results show consistently favorable responses on questions pertaining to participant satisfaction and learning; 96% of the participants indicated that the workshop was an effective way to teach about bias; 95% indicated they would recommend the workshop to a colleague. Workshop participants learned bias concepts and definitions, engaged in perspective taking, increased in their concern for the issues, and became more aware of the prevalence of bias-related issues in higher education and STEMM. Furthermore, participants articulated steps they intended to take to address bias in their professional environments.

Breaking the Bias Cycle for Future Scientists: A Workshop to Learn, Experience, and Change


At the center of efforts to diversify the biomedical science workforce is the need to empirically identify factors that predict individual persistence. Many in the biomedical sciences are employed in academic medicine and clinical research (here jointly referred to as academic medicine), fields in which persistence challenges have been documented (Pololi et al., 2012). Of these efforts, few have capitalized on the social science knowledge base to study persistence factors and guide relevant interventions (Byars-Winston, Gutierrez, Topp, & Carnes, 2011). Turnover theory, and its counterpart, embeddedness theory, were developed to emphasize the importance of motivations for people's choices to remain or leave in an organization or field (Hom et. al., 2017). Although prior research has documented the competing demands of professionals in academic medicine (Pololi et al., 2012), data on motivations to leave are lacking. In this study, we apply psychosocial theory to investigate predictors of persistence and leadership intentions for academic medical faculty.

A group of researchers used turnover theory in a previous study of researchers and clinicians at the Medical College of Wisconsin, concluding that female faculty "may not be leaning into promotion and leadership roles because of increased role conflict, work-life concerns, and organizational factors," and that this issue was more prominent for clinical rather than research faculty (Ellinas, Fouad, and Byars-Winston, 2018). Unlike the Medical College of Wisconsin, the University of Wisconsin's School of Medicine and Public Health (SMPH) has time limits for tenure and promotion, creating organizational pressure for faculty advancement which could potentially affect leadership and promotion aspirations. In order to both explore and better develop interventions and cultural change at UW SMPH, it is important to identify factors that locally affect the decisions of female faculty to seek out leadership and promotion opportunities as well as leave the institution. Using turnover and embeddedness theory, we replicated the original study, performing hierarchical multiple regressions to examine the motivating factors for SMPH faculty to seek promotion and leadership. We investigated group differences by gender in the relationships of role strain, work-life conflict, and organizational and departmental climate to leadership and advancement decisions.

We found that organizational commitment and support were significantly associated with faculty's promotion aspirations, leadership aspirations, and intentions to leave the organization. Given that our sample consists of both research and clinical faculty at a large midwestern university, the conclusions of our study are limited to these populations. However, in the context of previously published literature (Ellinas, Fouad, and Byars-Winston, 2018), these results confirm that organizational context can affect the aspirations of faculty in biomedical training environments, regardless of other external factors such as a tenure clock. Investing in policy, infrastructure, and evidence-based interventions and programming for the intentional career development of faculty is therefore an important aspect of a proactive talent development and retention model in academic medical centers.

Predictors of Career Advancement and Intentions to Leave in Biomedical Faculty

The percentage of students of color and women in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is low relative to European American students and men and is often a result of both racial and gender discrimination (Castro, 2014). Specifically, a large portion of African American women are less likely to earn a degree in engineering (Gregory, 2015), yet research on the relationship between their representation and retention is still limited. Indeed, prior studies suggest that a strong sense of community and science identity can potentially mitigate the effects of racial discrimination on retention outcomes among students of color in STEM (Maton et al., 2016). Thus, the current study seeks to examine whether the relationship between racial climate and science self-efficacy is mediated by sense of community among African American female students in STEM in general, and engineering in particular. Specifically, we hypothesize that the effect of negative racial climate on science self-efficacy will be weaker for students with high sense of community but stronger for students with low sense of community. 
Data for this study will come from the Meyerhoff Scholars Program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Two sets of data analyses will be conducted: the first will consist of female Meyerhoff undergraduate students in STEM from six cohorts, and the second will consist of African American female Meyerhoff undergraduate students in engineering from the same six cohorts. Racial/ethnic climate was measured using Discrimination and Bias Scale (Hurtado & Alvarado, 2015), which assesses students’ experience of different forms of bias, harassment, and discrimination on campus at the end of first year. Sense of community was measured also at the end of first year using the Sense of Community Index-2 (Chavis et al., 2008), which assesses the degree to which the students feel like a part of the Meyerhoff Scholars community. Scores on Science Self-Efficacy Scale (Chemers et al., 2010) by the end of second year were used to assess the degree to which the students feel like they are scientists. Lastly, being STEM majors at the beginning of third year was used as measure of retention. The hypothesis will be tested using logistical regression analyses (analyses currently underway). If the hypothesis is supported, the study could inform scholars’ programs about potential areas of intervention (i.e., building strong sense of program community, and science self-efficacy) to increase retention of women, and specifically African American women in STEM despite of their experiences with negative racial climate.


The relationship of racial climate, sense of community, and science self-efficacy among African American female undergraduate students in STEM 


The number of under-represented (UR) scientists in biomedical research remains alarmingly low. New mechanisms are needed to facilitate the success of members of UR groups to ensure a diverse and vibrant workforce. We partnered with 9 Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) to identify and address training needs related to the formal and informal curriculum, networking opportunities, and mentoring for scholars from under-represented backgrounds. We developed a year-long, online, instructor-led training program with 9 modules for postdoctoral fellows and faculty from the 9 MSIs to help launch their research careers. Scholars who complete the modules participate in an annual 3-day Summit for further training, networking, mentoring, and peer feedback on works in progress. LEADS has enrolled a total of 60 scholars since 2017. We found significant improvements in the Scholars' research skill confidence. Collectively, they published 132 articles, submitted 73 grants and secured 46 grants for a 63% success rate. Feedback from LEADS Scholars has suggested the need for enhanced training in additional areas, as well as increased opportunities for networking and mentoring. 



Leading Emerging and Diverse Scientists to Success (LEADS)

Student involvement in the classroom and laboratory, also known as academic integration, is an essential condition for student persistence and success (Tinto, 1997). Furthermore, transforming instructional methods to specifically incorporate diversity and inclusion is vital for promoting an inclusive classroom environment (Handelsman, Miller, & Pfund, 2007). Complicating this, STEM faculty rarely receive training on diversity, equity, and inclusion, including effective and evidence-based inclusive teaching practices. Therefore, providing opportunities for professional development for STEM faculty centered on diversity, equity, and inclusion is imperative not only for improving student learning and academic integration but also for increasing student persistence and broadening participation in STEM education and careers (Killpack & Melón, 2013).

Responding to this need, in May 2016 we launched a year-long professional development program focused on inclusive excellence for faculty in the biological sciences. This initiative was supported by an HHMI grant, the goal of which was to increase retention and graduation rates in the biological sciences (specifically for underrepresented students). The “Faculty Fellows for Inclusive Excellence” program aimed to help faculty develop a greater understanding of the impact of diversity in the classroom and lab and become more inclusive teachers and research mentors, which will broaden participation in STEM education and careers. We engaged 29 Assistant and Associate Professors in the biological sciences during three iterations of this professional development program.

The final iteration of this program required faculty to participate in workshops on topics such as being a leader in equity and diversity, designing courses for inclusion, and implicit bias in hiring and decision-making along with completing a year-long “Inclusive Excellence in Action” project of their own design, which had to positively impact student success and broaden participation in the biological sciences. Projects included analyzing course outcome data across student demographic categories to determine potential performance gaps, adapting assignments and exams to eliminate performance gaps, studying how the diversity of small groups impacts creativity in research, incorporating diverse scientist profiles and videos into an introductory biology course to increase science identity, adapting syllabi and class activities to support the inclusion of first generation and low income students, assessing the engagement of transfer students in undergraduate research experiences, and more. These projects moved faculty away from simply being participants in a diversity, equity, and inclusion program and toward being active creators of change in their classrooms, research labs, and departments (Williams, 2007).

In this session, I will present what I learned and the program outcomes from the past three years of this professional development program on diversity, equity, and inclusion for biological sciences faculty.


Professional Development for STEM Faculty on Diversity, Equity, andInclusion

African Americans carry the highest cancer burden of any racial or ethnic group in the United States. Eliminating disparities in cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment is essential to improved health outcomes for all Americans, especially in racial and ethnic communities (Noone et al., 2018). Addressing this goal requires a trained cadre of researchers, physicians, and public health professionals who are representative of these populations (Kreuter et al., 2011). These individuals are attuned to financial, cultural, and educational issues within the affected community that affect risk and risk-reducing behaviors, health care seeking and health care access, patient compliance, and participation in prevention, screening, and clinical trials. They are also more likely to focus their efforts on diseases and conditions that affect members of their own ethnic, racial or socioeconomic group. Unfortunately, while underrepresented minorities made up 38% of the U.S. population in 2014 (NSF, 2017) and were awarded 20% of undergraduate baccalaureate degrees conferred in science and engineering (NSF, 2013). African Americans constituted only 2.8% of doctorate degrees earned in the biological sciences and 2.6% in the chemical sciences (3) Furthermore, from 2003-2012, the acceptance rate for African Americans into Schools of Public Health was substantially lower than for any other ethnic group (ASPH, 2013). Participation by the African American community in all aspects of cancer research is crucial to the success of eliminating cancer disparities in cancer prevalence, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. To assist in this endeavor, the PARTNERS Cancer Research Education Program was developed as a collaboration between North Carolina Central University (NCCU), the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and the UNC-CH Gillings School of Global Public Health. PARTNERS is integrative in providing education, research training, and professional development in cancer biology, public health, and the role of both disciplines in ultimately alleviating cancer disparities. NCCU fellows participate in a unique, continuous, 2-year educational experience encompassing both biomedical and public health aspects of cancer research at two different venues -- NCCU and UNC-CH. PARTNERS also provides education in cancer research and health disparities for UNC-CH fellows who participate in summer research experiences at NCCU combined with professional development experiences with NCCU students carrying out summer internships at UNC-Chapel Hill. Our goals are to: educate students about cancer disparities among different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups; engage Fellows in research into the causes of these disparities and strategies to reduce them; and help Fellows develop the social capital and professional skills necessary to become successful graduate or professional students, and eventually researchers or practitioners in a workforce focused on eliminating cancer disparities. To date, 55 fellows (46 NCCU and 9 UNC) have benefited from PARTNERS. Our session will focus on the overall 5 year process, continuous improvement using evaluation feedback, and share reflections, lessons learned and future training goals to build undergraduate research skills.

PARTNERS Cancer Research Education Program for Undergraduate Students

Transfer students from 2-yr colleges are more likely to be women, underrepresented minorities (URM), lower income, older, and financially independent than their non-transfer peers. All of these characteristics are also hallmarks of nontraditional students. Nontraditional students now comprise the majority of students in higher education in the US (Cruse, Eckerson, and Gault, 2018). The challenges faced by nontraditional students translate to lower retention rates in STEM (Kenner and Weinerman, 2011) with a lack of flexibility and technology gap cited as main barriers to success.

The Microbiology and Cell Science (MCS) program implemented targeted interventions, including a hybrid online 2+2 degree track, face-to-face bootcamp labs, and need-based scholarships, with the hypothesis that increased opportunities and accessibility would enhance the retention and success of transfer students and reveal insights about their unique pathways and challenges. Evaluating the impact of these interventions on transfer student outcomes will lead to better design of strategies to enhance success. By considering Bean's model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition (1985), we explore factors leading to retention within the context of our STEM major, which has transitioned from an entirely face-to-face to an online mode of delivery, and we consider the applicability to other STEM fields.

A mixed methods approach was used to research socioeconomic and academic traits and outcomes of on-campus FTIC (N=900), on-campus transfer (N=240), and online transfer (N=182) microbiology students. We conclude that while these interventions broadened participation and increased diversity, transfer students still face different challenges than FTIC peers. Notably, over 75% of students in the online transfer track enroll part-time; whereas, nearly 90% of their on-campus transfer peers enroll full-time. This result is important because many scholarship interventions and policies require full-time enrollment for eligibility. Thus, a vast majority of our STEM students in transfer tracks are ineligible for programs designed to increase success. Most of these students are nontraditional, women, working parents and from underrepresented minorities. Understanding their unique pathways and challenges can enhance strategies and reframe policies for student success and serve as a model in other STEM disciplines.

Speaker bio:Dr. Jennifer Drew is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Microbiology and Cell Science in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS) at the University of Florida. She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in human genomics. Her scholarship explores factors that affect student pathways and outcomes in STEM. With partner institution Miami Dade College, Jennifer Drew is the PI of an NSF S-STEM grant with an emphasis on researching the role of online education in increasing access and diversity in STEM, 2-year to 4-year transfer pathways in STEM, and meeting the challenges and needs of nontraditional undergraduate students. 


Research Shadowing: High Impact, Low Cost Introduction to Research

Downloads

Next from 12th Conference on Understanding Interventions 2020

LSAMP Summer Bridge Programs: Effects on Academic Self-Efficacy and Belonging

Similar lecture

Adolphus “Tol” Toliver Award Recognition

Research Shadowing: High Impact, Low Cost Introduction to Research

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from 12th Conference on Understanding Interventions 2020

LSAMP Summer Bridge Programs: Effects on Academic Self-Efficacy and Belonging

Similar lecture

Adolphus “Tol” Toliver Award Recognition

Downloads