The goal for this research study was to determine the role of the SciGirls gender-equitable strategies on participating youths’ STEM identity changes in 16 participating SciGirls’ programs across the nation. The definition of STEM identity was based on Eccles (2007), Carlone and Johnson (2007) and Calabrese Barton and colleagues (2013). According to these researchers, individuals must have a positive STEM identity in order to persist in STEM careers. This positive STEM identity is affected by an individual’s expectations of success in STEM and the value they see in STEM and STEM careers (Eccles, 2007). Once students develop an interest in STEM, they must have opportunities to perform their STEM understanding and be recognized by individuals that they view as experts in the field (Carlone & Johnson, 2007). STEM identity development is both a reflection of how one perceives, positions, and aligns oneself within STEM, and how one is perceived and recognized by meaningful others (Carlone & Johnson, 2007). Calabrese Barton and colleagues’ (2013) work indicates that young women’s varying experiences over time ultimately result in an identity trajectory progression towards or away from STEM. A positive trajectory towards STEM is interpreted as movement toward more central participation in the STEM community of practice, which includes choosing a STEM major in college and pursuing the necessary courses and requirements that lead to a STEM career (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
The research question guiding this project is: What effect does participation in SciGirls programs have on participants’ STEM identity? To study STEM identity development we utilized a mixed methods approach that included the following data collection methods: (1) pre/post survey data of youth at 16 study sites that measures STEM identity; (2) observations of program components in three site-based case studies; (3) interviews with educators and parents from case study sites; and (4) interviews with students at case study sites. The study was approved by Florida State University’s Human Subjects Internal Review Board. We provide a summary of the quantitative and qualitative findings here before unpacking a more descriptive account of each of these summaries.
TEAM MEMBERS
Citation
Funders
If you would like to edit a resource, please email us to submit your request.