Part 8

The Dilemma Facing Women of Color in STEM

By: Jocelyn M. Ferguson Strategic Research Project

ESRP 9001 (Fall 2021) Doctoral Candidate

● Born NY ● FL (4 years old) ● FAU (Bachelors) ● NOVA (Masters & Specialist) ● NOVA (Doctoral candidate) ● SDPBC

○ Science ■ 10 years (MS) ■ 2 years (HS)

○ Instructional Specialist ■ 3rd year ■ Science & SS Assessment

writer ● Background

○ Dominican Republic ○ African American

Meet the Researcher Jocelyn M. Ferguson

● Critical Analysis

● Organization Overview

● SWOT Analysis

● Internal & External Factor Evaluations

● Problem Statement

● Identifying Solutions

○ Possibilities

○ Barriers

○ Selected Solution

○ Strategy to Accomplish Selected Solution

● Strategies Evaluation

● Plan of Action

● Reflection

● References

Contents

Critical Analysis

● Propel America, Inc. ● Talent Forward

○ enrichment program ○ female HS students’ ○ STEM interest

● Nursing higher rate ● Challenges

○ sexism ○ racism

● Understanding ○ access & exposure ○ influence

● Studies show… ○ Earlier influence ○ Higher performance/interest

Critical Analysis

(Hanson, 2004; Ong et al., 2011)

Organization Overview

○ People Reaching Out to Provide Education & Leadership (PROPEL)

○ founded 2004

○ supports academics & HS students

○ Title I schools

○ positive relationships w/students & parents

○ Established

■ STEM interest

■ underrepresented

■ female students

Organization Overview: Background

Propel America

(Clark, 2018; Propel America, 2021)

Organization Overview: Background

Propel America ● Provides opportunities ● Offers chances ● Attributes

○ mentorship ○ internship

● Need ○ increase representation women of color

● Action ○ improve rates

● Change ○ the perspective

(Clark, 2018; Propel America, 2021)

The mission statement for PROPEL is to support academic advancement, leadership development, and post-secondary

planning for middle and high school aged students who attend Title I schools.

Organization Overview: Mission Statement

(Propel America, 2021)

● focus

○ developing

○ MS & HS students

○ organization serve better

● defines

○ organization - actively seeking

● specifies

○ targeted community

Organization Overview: Mission Statement

(Powers, 2012; Propel America, 2021)

PROPEL is dedicated to supporting the academic and social-emotional needs of the most vulnerable in our

community. Providing programming to adolescents who are systematically under served, PROPEL fosters self-sufficiency, and supports the development of

strategies to overcome obstacles.

Organization Overview: Vision Statement

(Propel America, 2021)

● dedicated to supporting academic & social-emotional needs

○ vulnerable in community

● provided academic programming

○ young females of color

○ systematically underserved

● foster self-sufficiency

● support development of strategies

○ young women interested in STEM

● committed

○ provide tools to build up

Organization Overview: Vision Statement

(Kantabutra & Avery, 2010)

PROPEL is committed to presenting new and innovative programming to

students, preparing them for their future. PROPEL measures success

when students graduate with the confidence and foundational knowledge

and skills to take on new challenges and pursue their dreams; an

understanding of their talents and strengths; a commitment to their own

academic, emotional, and physical health and a passion to engage with

their community.

Organization Overview: Value Statement

(Propel America, 2021)

● Displays importance ● Foundation

○ comfortable learning environment ● Development created

○ while attending & beyond MS/HS ● Propel purpose

○ assist in academic development ○ make priority for students to feel accomplished in academics

● Value statements ○ essential ○ organization built on ○ what it represents

Organization Overview: Value Statement

(Desmidt et al., 2011; Marsick & Watkins, 2003)

SWOT Analysis

● Instrumental tool

○ examines/analyzes strengths, weaknesses, opportunities & threats

○ educational organization

● Performed SWOT analysis (PROPEL)

○ Total list of 40 factors

○ internal/external

○ ratings score assigned to categories

○ different aspects of program

(Thompson et al., 2007)

SWOT Analysis

Strengths & Weaknesses

Opportunities & Threats

Internal & External Factor Evaluations

IFE (Internal Factor Evaluation) ● Strengths & Weaknesses ● Internal factors

○ Contribute to effectiveness

(Thompson et al., 2007)

Four Weaknesses

Four Strengths

● Mission

● Vision

● Leadership

● Curriculum

● Pandemic (Declining enrollment)

● Attrition rates

● Student Placement

● Recruitment

IFE (Internal Factor Evaluation)

These internal factors contribute to the effectiveness at Propel. (Propel America, 2021; Smooth, 2013)

EFE (External Factor Evaluation) ● opportunities & threats ● external factors

○ Useful or harmful to organization

(Perez, 2017; Washburn, 2004)

Four Threats

Four Opportunities

● Enrollment events

● Community Outreach

● Expanding Locations

● Partnerships

● Trends Changing

● Rely on Donors

● Staffing (Unreliable)

● Limited Resources

EFE (External Factor Evaluation)

Some of these external factors could move Propel in a beneficial way. (Perez, 2017; Washburn, 2004)

Problem Statement

● Limited research

○ women/women of color in STEM

○ importance - overall outcomes of women in general in STEM

● Insufficient research

○ reasons women do not pursue majoring in STEM

○ outcomes of women of color in STEM

● Enormous amounts

○ research outcomes of women at undergraduate/graduate

● Dominant

○ men w/ STEM majors & degree conferrals (Perez, 2017)

Problem Statement: Focus - women and women of color representation in STEM

(Perez, 2017)

● Women lag

○ In enrollment/degree conferrals in STEM

● Understand

○ motivation/lack thereof

○ pursue STEM careers

● Critical shortage

○ STEM workers in the US

○ US less competitive (Master et al., 2016)

● Initiative launched 2009

○ President Obama

○ Educate to Innovate

○ broaden participation & inspire diverse STEM pool

○ Target group - women & girls

Problem Statement: Focus - women and women of color representation in STEM

(Master et al., 2016)

● Topic importance: ○ educational policymakers ○ school districts

■ state funding & achieve educational goals ● HS courses

○ develops interest ○ increases chances women pursue STEM ○ increases probability women entering STEM fields (Justman & Mendez, 2018)

● Problem - identified ○ how to help women/women of color in STEM programs at the Propel organization. (Propel America,

2021) ● Essential

○ gender ○ racial gap

● Identify Gaps ○ increase both female/females of color outcomes in STEM

Problem Statement: Focus - women and women of color representation in STEM

(Justman & Mendez, 2018; Propel America, 2021)

Identify Solutions

Identifying Solutions: Possibilities

(AAUW, 2021; Asare, 2018; Purcell, 2015)

Identifying Solutions: Barriers

(Atkins et al, 2020; Byars-Winston & Rogers, 2019; Smith et al., 2015)

● Best solution ○ mentorship

■ “what works” ■ Effective increasing female students in STEM (Simpson & Bouhafa, 2020)

● Mentoring elements ○ formal & informal structures ○ one-on-one & group ○ student involved

● Mentoring contributions ■ curricular reform ■ content improvement ■ interest ■ support

● “Mentoring is not just about opening the door…It’s about making people feel welcome. It’s about developing them; it’s about providing for the whole person” (Huckins, 2021, para. 15)

Identifying Solutions: Selected Solution

(Huckins, 2021; Simpson & Bouhafa, 2020)

Identifying Solutions: Strategy to Accomplish Selected Solution

(Atkins et al., 2020; Huggett et al., 2020; Montgomery, 2017)

Strategies Evaluation

Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix (QSPM)

● QSPM applied using SWOT analysis

○ examines an organization's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, & threats (Thompson et al., 2007)

○ top-down planning

○ analyzes output & internal strengths & weaknesses based on 0-4 scale rating

○ creates strategic map, identifying future advantages & opportunities (Abbasi et al., 2016)

● Strategies analyzed:

○ mentoring self-matching

○ mentoring support network.

(Abbasi et al., 2016; Lashgari et al., 2014; Thompson et al., 2007)

Evaluation of Internal Factor Evaluation

(Montgomery, 2017; Propel America, 2021)

Evaluation of External Factor Evaluation

(Forward on Talent, 2021; Master et al, 2016; Propel, 2020; Spencer et al., 2020)

Overall Attractiveness Scores

Mentoring Self-Matching Mentoring Support Network

3.95 4.56

Plan of Action

Mentoring Support Network

● Hands-on

● Planning

● Promotes growth & development

● Leadership opportunities

● Teamwork & collaboration

● Encourages achievement

● Includes four goals:

○ identify and recruit mentors for database,

○ provide training for mentors,

○ provide trainings for mentees, and

○ create mentoring network to help support mentors (Beede et al., 2011)

(Beede et al., 2011; Montgomery, 2017; Ong et al., 2020; Spencer et al., 2020)

Roles and Responsibilities Director of Talent Acquisition •decide/direct recruitment

•monitoring procedures •in charge of planning/needs •building talent pipelines (Hardy & Thompson, 2017) •maintaining relations w/STEM groups & institutions

Mentors •share knowledge & advice •provide guidance, motivation, emotional support, & role modeling (King, 2016) •help explore careers, setting goals, developing contacts, & identifying resources •develop mutual trust and respect •maintain confidentiality (Mack et al., 2014)

Mentees •absorb mentor’s knowledge •know what to do with this knowledge •practice what has been learned (Blackburn, 2017) •decides amount of help and guidance needed (Dennehy & Dasgupta, 2017) •ask for help or advice •identify initial learning goals and measures of success •be open to and seek feedback •take active role in their own learning •help drive the process •schedule and attend mentor conversations • follow through on commitments

(Blackburn, 2017; Dennehy & Dasgupta, 2017; Hardy & Thompson, 2017; King, 2016; Mack et al., 2014)

Timeline

Barriers or Resistance ● Four barriers to mentorship:

○ mismatched expectations between mentor/mentee ○ lack of mentors ○ time lack/compensation ○ separation between mentor/mentee (Blackburn, 2017)

● Imbalance of power ○ differences between mentor/mentee

■ professional experience ■ DOK ■ professional status ■ collegial network

● Mentee ○ vulnerable (Hardy & Thompson, 2017) ○ dependent ○ Competitive

■ loss of interest ■ unwillingness (Clancy et al., 2017)

(Blackburn, 2017; Clancy et al., 2017; Hardy & Thompson, 2017)

Evaluation ● 2 types of evaluations

○ Formative Evaluation ■ info collected during mentoring ■ help improve the program ■ help w/ revision of program before a summative evaluation

○ Summative Evaluation ■ evidence collected @ completion of program ■ displays whether program achieved objectives ot not ■ Used in stable program that's been in place for awhile

● Importance ○ collect both kinds of information ○ emphasis varies ○ based on program’s stage of development

● Gathering information from questions ○ helps prioritize stage the program is ○ evaluate resources needed

● Questions ○ what mentees think of program? ○ what mentors think of program? ○ what impact mentoring program is having? ○ are more women in leadership positions as a result of program?

(Clancy et al., 2017; Diaz-Garcia and Welter, 2013)

Reflection

● Action Plan aided in implementation

○ Mentoring strategy

○ Must be followed to meet goals

● Tasks listed

● Prioritize resources

● Evaluating mentoring method

○ guided organization back to impact (Propel, 2020, Propel America, 2021).

(Propel, 2020, Propel America, 2021)

References Abbasi, H., Khanmoradi, S., Eydi, H. & Rasekh, N., 2016. Quantitative Strategic Planning of General Office of Sports and Youth in Regard to Championship Sport Using QSPM in Kermanshah. International Journal of Sports Science, 6(2), pp. 3645.

American Association of University Women (AAUW) (2021). Where we stand in STEM education. https://www.aauw.org/.

Asare, J. (2018). How to Increase Female Representation in the STEM Field. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2018/10/16/how-to-increase-female-representation-in-the-stem-field/?sh=14adc9f6466a.

Atkins, K., Dougan, B.M., Dromgold-Sermen, M.S., Potter, H., Sathy, V., and Panter, A.T. (2020). Looking at Myself in the Future: how mentoring shapes scientific identity for STEM students from underrepresented groups. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(42).

Beede, D., Julian, T., Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Khan, B., Doms, M. (2011). Women in STEM: A gender gap to innovation. U.S. Department of Commerce (August 1, 2011). Economics and Statistics Administration Issue Brief No. 04-11.

Blackburn, H. (2017). The Status of Women in STEM in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature 2007–2017, Science & Technology Libraries, 36(3), 235–273.

Byars-Winston, A., & Rogers, J. G. (2019). Testing intersectionality of race/ethnicity × gender in a social–cognitive career theory model with science identity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 66(1), 30–44.

Clancy, K. B. H., Lee, K. M. N., Rodgers, E. M., & Richey, C. (2017). Double jeopardy in astronomy and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of gendered and racial harassment. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets, 122, 1610–1623.

Clark, L. (2018, February 12). What Are Title 1 Schools? Student Debt Relief | Student Loan Forgiveness; Student Debt Relief | Student Loan Forgiveness. https://www.studentdebtrelief.us/student-loans/title-1-schools/.

Dennehy, T. C., & Dasgupta, N. (2017). Female peer mentors early in college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 5964–5969.

Desmidt, S., Prinzie, A., & Decramer, A. (2011). Looking for the value of mission statements: A meta-analysis of 20 years of research. Management Decision, 49, 468-483.

References cont. Díaz-García, M., & Welter, F. (2013). Gender identities and practices: Interpreting women entrepreneurs' narratives. International Small Business Journal, 31(4), 384–403.

Forward on Talent (2021). https://www.ForwardonTalent.org/stories/johnsonjohnson/.

Hanson, S.L. (2004). Integrating black consciousness and critical race feminism into family studies research. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 452–473.

Hardy, J. A., & Thompson, L. K. (2017). Mutual mentoring to promote success and satisfaction of women faculty. In R. Waterman & A. Feig (Eds.), STEM educational and outreach projects from the Cottrell scholars collaborative professional development and outreach (Vol. 1259, pp. 1–11). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society Books.

Huckins, G. (2021). As More Women Enter Science, It’s Time to Redefine Mentorship. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/as-more-women-enter-science-its-time-to-redefine-mentorship/.

Huggett, K., Borges, N., Blanco, M., Wulf, K., and Hurtubise, L. (2020). A perfect match? A scoping review of the influence of personality matching on adult mentoring relationships Implications for academic medicine. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. 40(2), 89-99.

Justman, M., & Méndez, S. J. (2018). Gendered choices of STEM subjects for matriculation are not driven by prior differences in mathematical achievement. Economics of Education Review, 64, 282-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.02.002.

Kantabutra, S. & Avery, G.C. (2010). The power of vision: statements that resonate. Journal of Business Strategy. 31(1):37–45.

King, B. (2016). Does postsecondary persistence in stem vary by gender? AERA Open, 2(4), 1- 10.

Lashgari S, Antuchericiene J, Delavari A, Kheirkhah O (2014) Using QSPM and WASPAS methods for determining outsourcing strategies. J Bus Econ Manag 15(4):729–743.

References cont. Mack, K., Tayor, O., Cantor, N., & McDermott, P. (2014). If not now, when? The promise of STEM intersectionality in the twenty-first century. Peer Review. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/if-not-now-when-promise-stemintersectionality-twenty-first.

Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2003). Demonstrating the value of an organization’s learning culture: The dimensions of the Learning Organization Questionnaire. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 5(2), 132–151.

Master, A., Cheryan, S., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2016). Computing Whether She Belongs: Stereotypes Undermine Girls' Interest and Sense of Belonging in Computer Science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 424-437.

Montgomery, B. (2017). Mapping a Mentoring Roadmap and Developing a Supportive Network for Strategic Career Advancement. SAGE Open. 1-13.

Ong, M., Jaumot-Pascual, N., & Ko, L.T. (2020). Research literature on women of color in undergraduate engineering education: A systematic thematic synthesis. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(3), 581– 615. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20345.

Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L., & Orfield, G. (2011). Inside the double bind: A synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 172–209.

Perez, J. O. (2017). Understanding the experience of women in undergraduate engineering programs at public universities. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Claremont Graduate University. Claremont, CA.

Powers, E. L. (2012). Organizational mission statement guidelines revisited. International Journal of Management & Information Systems. 16, 281-290. Propel (2020). About Us. https://www.propelyourfuture.org/index.php/about/.

Propel America (2021). https://www.propelamerica.org/.

References cont. Purcell, K. D. (2015). Five (5) Ways to Get Girls into STEM. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/blog/5-ways-girls-involved-STEM-karen-purcell.

Simpson, A., & Bouhafa, Y. (2020). Youths’ and adults’ identity in STEM: A systematic literature review. Journal for STEM Education Research, 1–28.

Smith, J. L., Brown, E. R., Thoman, D. B., & Deemer, E. D. (2015). Losing its expected communal value: How stereotype threat undermines women’s identity as research scientists. Social Psychology of Education, 18(3), 443–466.

Smooth, W. G. (2013). Intersectionality from Theoretical Framework to Policy Intervention. In: Wilson A.R. (eds) Situating Intersectionality. The Politics of Intersectionality. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137025135_2.

Spencer, R., Gowdy, G., Drew, A., McCormack, M., and Keller, T. (2020). It takes a village to break up a match: A systematic analysis of formal youth mentoring relationship endings. Child & Youth Care Forum. 49(1), 97-120.

Thompson, A. A., Strickland, A. J. & Gamble, J. E. (2007). Crafting and Executing Strategy-Concepts and Cases, (15th Edition), USA: McGraw Hill/Irwin.

Washburn, M. H. (2004). Is your classroom woman-friendly? College Teaching, 52(4), 156-158.