Giving back or giving up: Native American student experiences in science and engineering.

Abstract

Native Americans are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers. We examine communal goal incongruence-the mismatch between students' emphasis on communal work goals and the noncommunal culture of STEM-as a possible factor in this underrepresentation. First, we surveyed 80 Native American STEM freshmen and found they more highly endorsed communal goals than individualistic work goals. Next, we surveyed 96 Native American and White American students in STEM and non-STEM majors and confirmed that both Native American men and women in STEM highly endorsed communal goals. In a third study, we conducted a follow-up survey and in-depth interviews with a subset of Native American STEM students in their second semester to assess their experiences of belonging uncertainty, intrinsic motivation, persistence intentions, and perceived performance in STEM as a function of their initial communal work goals. Results demonstrate the prominence of communal goals among incoming Native American freshman (especially compared with White male STEM majors) and the connection between communal goals and feelings of belonging uncertainty, low motivation, and perceived poor performance 1 semester later. The interview data illustrate that these issues are particularly salient for students raised within tribal communities, and that a communal goal orientation is not just a vague desire to "help others," but a commitment to helping their tribal communities. The interviews also highlight the importance of student support programs for fostering feelings of belonging. We end by discussing implications for interventions and institutional changes that may promote Native American student retention in STEM.

Losing its expected communal value: how stereotype threat undermines women’s identity as research scientists

“…In line with recent work showing that helping parents see the personal utility of math and science improves their high-school sons and daughters' motivation for the fields (Harackiewicz et al 2012), our findings go one step further and suggest that not all ''utility'' values are equal when considering improving women's science identity. Instead, communal utility in particular (compared to agentic utility for example) may be important for educators and scholars to consider when designing and delivering classroom interventions aimed at broadening the participation of women in science (and other underrepresented minority groups, see Smith et al 2014a). Our results imply that women's identification with science may be enhanced when the communal utility value of physics is made salient, which remains to be tested in future research.…”

Sense of Belonging in Computing: The Role of Introductory Courses for Women and Underrepresented Minority Students

“…Johnson (2012) found that women of color in STEM had lower sense of belonging compared to their counterparts from other groups. Additionally, women and URM students may perceive a lack of fit between their identities or values and a major or career in STEM (Diekman et al 2010;Smith et al 2014); this mismatch may further augment a false sense that they do not belong. In turn, as is suggested by the work of Thoman and colleagues (2014), sense of belonging (or a lack thereof) can work as a force to push women out of STEM fields, where they may feel low levels of belonging, and toward non-STEM fields where they are more likely to feel a sense of fit.…”

Guiding the Way

“…Such a posture goes against the very nature of the human species and the reality of scientific knowledge production as a "community effort comprising innumerable interdependent contributions" (Casadevall & Fang, 2012, p. 893). Furthermore, for students of color and women, individualistic approaches are largely contrary to more prevalent community-focused or collectivist approaches that may be active in their communities of origin and/or socialization (Coon & Kemmelmeier, 2001;Gaines et al, 1997;J. L. Smith, Cech, Metz, Huntoon, & Moyer, 2014;Su, Rounds, & Armstrong, 2009).…”

“…Such arrangements promote beneficial peer interactions, and address the need for an environment wherein the cultural foundations of students and junior faculty are integrated in the mentoring process. All of these are identifiable as factors contributing to or detracting from the success of the aforementioned populations (Ackelsberg et al, 2009;Davidson & Foster-Johnson, 2001;Dodson et al, 2009;Ellis, 2001;Gasman et al, 2008;Johnson-Bailey, 2004;Johnson-Bailey et al, 2009;King & Chepyator-Thomson, 1996;Patterson-Stewart et al, 1997;J. L. Smith et al, 2014;Thomas et al, 2007).…”

“…For most graduate students of color attending such institutions, the focus is on promoting their assimilation into a predominantly White environment rather than promoting an environment that recognizes the cultures and contributions of all participants, or promoting "authentic cultural pluralism" (Davidson & Foster-Johnson, 2001, p. 554). Mentoring for students of color is likely to benefit from engaging collectivist perspectives (e.g., Blue, 2001;Davidson & Foster-Johnson, 2001;McGee, Saran, & Krulwich, 2012;J. L. Smith et al, 2014), which align more with these students' cultures of origin.…”