The culture of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) is often cited as being competitive. This creates a driving force for attrition from these fields, especially for minoritized students. But what-according to students-defines competition in the STEM classroom environment? This study seeks to answer that question by examining the factors that students report as contributing to competition in STEM classrooms. To do this, we conducted semistructured interviews with 25 first-generation and racially minoritized students enrolled in an introductory biology course, and with experience in other university-level STEM courses. Using thematic analysis, we identified four broad categories shaping students' sense of competition: student factors (e.g., grade comparisons), instructor factors (e.g., instructor messaging), course factors (e.g., grading), and out-of-class factors (e.g., intended career goals). These findings suggest that competition is not a singular classroom characteristic but rather a multidimensional experience shaped by interpersonal, environmental, and structural factors. We contextualize our findings in a conceptual framework of competition, which identifies how trait-competitiveness, perceived environmental competitiveness, and structural competition all shape competition. Our findings help operationalize these dimensions of competition in STEM classrooms and provide actionable context for mitigating the disproportionate impact of competition on minoritized students.
Incorporating counterstereotypical scientist role models into undergraduate biology courses is a powerful, evidence-based way to support student persistence in STEM fields. However, educational resources featuring counterstereotypical scientists could unintentionally have adverse impacts on student attitudes towards science. Here, we leveraged a multi-institution experiment that manipulated whether educational materials included information on the obstacles faced by counterstereotypical scientists in their careers. After students received these variable materials, we documented the obstacles they perceived they may face as scientists. Through the lens of attribution theory, we found that students are aware of a variety of obstacles they would face as scientists and that student perceptions of those obstacles are not changed by sharing the obstacles that scientists had to overcome. We encourage instructors to share scientists' stories of the obstacles they faced in their careers without concern that this will alter students' perceptions of careers in science.
Social metacognition occurs when students monitor and evaluate their own and others' thinking out loud during group work. Social metacognition, such as directly correcting peers, may be perceived as risky by students. However, this has not yet been systematically investigated. To address this gap in knowledge, we used the sociolinguistic framework of politeness theory to explore student perceptions of risk associated with social metacognition use during group work in undergraduate life science courses. We recorded four small groups as they worked together in introductory biology labs and biochemistry courses and then conducted stimulated recall interviews with 12 students from those groups. Transcripts were analyzed qualitatively and iteratively using a narrative and holistic group profile approach. Our findings support the prediction that social metacognition that involves the skill of evaluation tends to involve more risk. Students employ politeness strategies like hedging and questioning when the use of social metacognition involves greater risk to either the hearer's or speaker's face. Additionally, students' views of group member expertise and identity influenced their perceptions. This is the first study to explore student perceptions of risk associated with social metacognition, providing essential information for developing effective social metacognition interventions.
Stereotypes about scientists narrow how students relate to them and influence how students see themselves in science. However, sharing identities and interests of contemporary scientists enables students to see aspects of their possible selves in that role. Previous work has demonstrated positive impacts of scientist role models on students who share marginalized identities in society and STEM, though less work has addressed whether the same positive effect would occur if the shared identity is more common in a broader societal context. We address this question by exploring the impact of an instructor revealing that she is Christian as a counter-stereotypical scientist identity in a large-enrollment undergraduate biology course. Scientists are less religious than the general population and are often stereotyped as non-religious. We found that briefly revealing the instructor's religious identity had a neutral impact on most students and that Christian students were most likely to report that the information was appropriate, positively impacted their course experience, and positively impacted their sense of inclusion. We contribute to the role model literature with an example of how shared identities positively impact students who most relate, even when the identity is not underrepresented in the educational context or across the United States.
Build Your Research Community (BYRC) is an asynchronous, free online course that guides research students to build effective relationships with their primary research advisors as well as build mentoring networks that provide holistic support as they navigate their research training experiences and careers. Preliminary evaluation evidence of the effectiveness of BYRC was collected from undergraduate, postbaccalaureate, and graduate students in 22 biomedical research training programs, as well as students who enrolled in the course independently from across the country. Students valued the course components, module topics, and structure, and the majority indicated they would recommend it to others. Students self-reported learning gains for all course modules, identified several specific course elements that positively impacted their learning and development, and indicated that the course positively impacted their current and future training experiences and mentoring relationships. Students at earlier training stages reported the greatest impacts. In addition, training program directors reported satisfaction with the course and their ability to integrate the course into their existing programs. Overall, these results indicate that the BYRC course may be an effective addition to research training programs. All course materials are freely available online (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/WR6KP), and the modules may be implemented independently.
