Abstract
Despite the broad scope of literature on the topic of women in STEM, women in male-dominated spaces within academia are rarely given the opportunity to speak openly about their disadvantages in the toxic STEM culture. The current study implements a Critical Utopian Action Research method, Future Creating Workshop (FCW), with undergraduate women in STEM in order to highlight women’s voices in the context of their experiences in their undergraduate STEM programs, and develop a salient and timely action plan with women in STEM that capitalizes on their strengths and works towards dismantling barriers to their STEM participation. Four key themes that arose from the FCW that highlighted barriers women in STEM majors face: (1) Social Inequalities, (2) Research Accessibility, (3) Unwelcoming Academic Environment, and (4) Lack of Confidence. A fifth theme, ‘Need for Mentorship,’ developed from the action phase of the FCW, in which the women came up with suggestions for programming moving forward. The current study is couched in a larger participatory action research project, Participatory Opportunity for Women Researchers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (POWER in STEM). The purpose of POWER as a whole is to understand the lived experiences of women in STEM at the University of Cincinnati, and mobilize this knowledge to create an action plan that will influence programming.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aboagye, R., Senesac, P., Morris A., Johnston J., & Cherala, S. (2016). Quality improvement (QI) in evaluation: Anatomy of a fishbone (diagram). Center for Health Policy and Research (CHPR) Publications, 1(1), 1–3. https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/healthpolicy_pp/191
Alminde, S., & Warming, H. (2020). Future workshops as a means to democratic, inclusive and empowering research with children, young people and others. Qualitative Research, 20(4), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119863165
Appel, M., Kronberger, N., & Aronson, J. (2011). Stereotype threat impairs ability building: Effects on test preparation among women in science and technology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 904–913. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.835
Arthur, B., & Guy, B. (2020a). “No, I’m not the secretary”: Using participatory methods to explore women engineering students’ experiences on co-op. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(3), 211–222.
Arthur, B. & Guy, B. (2020b). What you can learn from 2,000 sticky notes: Using participatory action research to study women in engineering. Experience Magazine: Practice and Theory, 7(2), 1–8. https://experiencemag.org/what-you-can-learn-from-2000-sticky-notes-using-participatory-action-research-to-study-women-in-engineering/
Ballen, C. J., Lee, D., Rakner, L., & Cotner, S. (2018). Politics a “chilly” environment for undergraduate women in Norway. PS: Political Science & Politics, 51(3), 653–658. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096518000045
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2017.1371658
Bladt, M., & Nielsen, K. A. (2013). Free space in the processes of action research. Action Research, 11(4), 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750313502556
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research? Action Research, 1(1), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/14767503030011002
Brydon-Miller, M., Gayá, P., Noone, P., Willatt, A., Book, C., Cohen, S., Nichols, A., Tetreault, L., & Williams, B.T. (In press). Pass the parcel: The ever expanding impact of critical utopian action research. In H. P. Hansen & L. T. Clausen (Eds.), Festschrift volume for Birger Nielsen.
Byars-Winston, A.M., Branchaw, J., Pfund, C., Leverett, P., & Newton, J. (2015). Culturally diverse undergraduate researchers’ academic outcomes and perceptions of their research mentoring relationships. International Journal of Science Education, 37(15), 2533–2554. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1085133
Collins, K. H., Price, E. F., Hanson, L., & Neaves, D. (2020). Consequences of stereotype threat and imposter syndrome: The personal journey from stem-practitioner to stem-educator for four women of color. Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, 19(4), 161–180. https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/taboo/vol19/iss4/10
Cox, M., & Sandberg, K. (2018). Modeling causal relationships in quality improvement. Current Problems in Pediatric and Adolescent Health Care, 48(7), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cppeds.2018.08.011
Desai, M. S., & Johnson, R. A. (2013). Using a fishbone diagram to develop change management strategies to achieve first-year student persistence. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 78(2), 51–64.
Espinosa, L. L. (2011). Pipelines and pathways: Women of color in undergraduate STEM majors and the college experiences that contribute to persistence. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 209–240. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.92315ww157656k3u
Flores, L.Y., Atilano, R., Suh, H.N., & Navarro, R.L. (2020). A latent growth modeling analysis of the effects of perceived supports, perceived barriers, and coping efficacy on Latina/o engineering students’ life satisfaction. Journal of Career Development, 47(1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845319826251
Gayá, P., & Brydon-Miller, M. (2017). Carpe the academy: Dismantling higher education and prefiguring critical utopias through action research. Futures, 94(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.10.005
Guy, B., Feldman, T., Cain, C., Leesman, L., & Hood, C. (2020). Defining and navigating ‘action’ in a participatory action research project. Educational Action Research, 28(1), 142–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2019.1675524
Hall, B. L., & Tandon, R. (2017). Decolonization of knowledge, epistemicide, participatory research and higher education. Research for All, 1(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.18546/RFA.01.1.02
Jackson, S. F. (2008). A participatory group process to analyze qualitative data. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 2(2), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.0.0010
Jensen, L. E., & Deemer, E. D. (2019). Identity, campus climate, and burnout among undergraduate women in STEM fields. The Career Development Quarterly, 67(2), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12174
Jorstad, J., Starobin, S. S., Chen, Y., & Kollasch, A. (2017). STEM aspiration: The influence of social capital and chilly climate on female community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 41(4–5), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2016.1251358
McCurdy, E. R. (2020). Discrimination as a barrier to diversity: Sexism and microaggressions against African American women in computer science and engineering [Doctoral dissertation, University of Akron]. OhioLink. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron158696994423105
Nielsen, K. A., & Nielsen, B. S. (2006). Methodologies in action research. Action and interaction research: Beyond practice and theory. Shaker Publishing.
NSF (National Science Foundation). (2015). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/women/
NSF (National Science Foundation). (2019). Women, minorities. persons with disabilities in science and engineering. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/women/
O’Brien, R. (1998). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. http://web.net/~robrien/papers/xx%20ar%20final.htm
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. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.t022245n7x4752v2
Ong, M., Smith, J. M., & Ko, L. T. (2018). Counterspaces for women of color in STEM higher education: Marginal and central spaces for persistence and success. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(2), 206–245. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21417
Saucerman, J., & Vasquez, K. (2014). Psychological barriers to STEM participation for women over the course of development. Adultspan Journal, 13(1), 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0029.2014.00025.x
Simon, R. M., Wagner, A., & Killion, B. (2017). Gender and choosing a STEM major in college: Femininity, masculinity, chilly climate, and occupational values. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(3), 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21345
Talley, K. G., & Ortiz, A. M. (2017). Women’s interest development and motivations to persist as college students in STEM: A mixed methods analysis of views and voices from a Hispanic-serving institution. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(5), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0059-2
Thoman, D. B., Arizaga, J. A., Smith, J. L., Story, T. S., & Soncuya, G. (2014). The grass is greener in non-science, technology, engineering, and math classes: Examining the role of competing belonging to undergraduate women’s vulnerability to being pulled away from science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(2), 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684313499899
Tofteng, D., & Bladt, M. (2020). ‘Upturned participation’ and youth work: Using a critical utopian action research approach to foster engagement. Educational Action Research, 28(1), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2019.1699843
Tofteng, D., & Husted, M. (2011). Theatre and action research: How drama can empower action research processes in the field of unemployment. Action Research, 9(1), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750310396953
Troxler, P., & Kuhnt, B. (2007). Future workshops: The unthinkable and how to make it happen. Hands-on Knowledge Co-Creation and Sharing: Practical Methods & Techniques, 1(1), 483–495.
Walker, D., Steinfort, P., and Maqsood, T. (2014). Stakeholder voices through rich pictures. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 7(3), 342–361. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-10-2013-0050
Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x
Wilson R.E., & Kittleson J. (2013). Science as a classed and gendered endeavor: Persistence of two white female first-generation college students within an undergraduate science context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7(1), 802–825. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21087
Yang, Y., & Carroll, D. W. (2018). Gendered microaggressions in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Leadership and Research in Education, 4(1), 28–45.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
We have no funding sources to share. We have no conflicts of interest/competing interests to disclose. Both Dr. Guy and Mrs. Feldman provide consent to publish. Anonymized data/materials are available upon request. Coding availability is not applicable. Dr. Guy is the Primary Investigator, but both authors equally contributed to this manuscript.
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Guy, B., Feldman, T. Deboning the Fish: Hosting a Future Creating Workshop with Undergraduate Women in STEM. Innov High Educ 46, 591–603 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-021-09548-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-021-09548-8