2016 - A Case Study of Long-Term Engagement and Identity-in-Practice: Insights Into the STEM Pathways of Four Underrepresented Youths

Attribution: Rahm, Jrene, & Moore, John C.
Researchers: John C. MooreJrene Rahm
University Affiliation: Universite de Montreal, Colorado State University
Email: jrene.rahm@umontreal.ca
Research Question:
1) In what ways did youths' figured worlds, positionality, and authoring of self come through at the time they applied to the program? 2) What kinds of figured worlds of science, positionality, and authoring of selves emerged and were supported by COSMOS (a Math and Science Upward Bound program)? 3) What kinds of educational and identity pathways in science are evident from the four youths' navigations in and through Cosmos, and college?
Published: Yes
Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation: Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Journal Entry: Vol. 53, No. 5, Pp. 768-801
Year: 2016
Findings:

– Collectively, their individual history and positioning in COSMOS next to forms of engagement with science and resources they had access to through their mentorship led to the envisioning of new social futures as college goers and for some as insiders to science.
– Once in college, Edric opted out of science to complete a college degree in ways financially manageable. In his case, the system failed him. His position as a first college bound youth struggling financially cut off potential navigations into STEM programs at Universities possibly more congruent with his figured worlds of science and identity in science.
– While all four students described themselves as potential college goers who will “…do [it] and be successful” in the words of Brian, only two of the four had completed their bachelor degree at the last point of data collection in 2007. It had little to do with science but primarily with the educational system and the positioning of youth within them and in society.
– Hannah, who envisioned a career in science and pursued an education in a first class science engineering college was successful in the end, landing a science career she always dreamed of. In many ways, her trajectory in STEM aligned well with the pipeline model that suggests that an early and enduring interest in science, next to a strong academic standing are key for making it all the way through.
– Brian failed science in the second tier University he attended which made him reconsider his options, opting for a career that seemed more readily accessible to him and more closely aligned with his interests.
– The contextual, economical, and political circumstances Edric struggled with made it impossible for him to seek out another university that could have offered him the courses he needed to complete a STEM degree. He did not have the flexibility and financial means to put up with delays that would stretch his time in college. He found himself tangled up in a complex matrix of oppression that was thin in terms of actual opportunities in STEM, which in turn, seriously constrained his movement and eventual pursuit of STEM. Similar circumstances led to a moving in and out of a University and community college for Joe who worked while studying.

 

Scholarship Types: Journal Article Reporting Empirical ResearchKeywords: BarriersCollegePathways to STEMSTEMUnderrepresented MinoritiesRegions: WestMethodologies: QualitativeResearch Designs: Case StudiesAnalysis Methods: Content Analysis Sampling Frame:Students that completed COSMOS
Sampling Types: Non-Random - PurposiveAnalysis Units: StudentData Types: Qualitative-Longitudinal
Data Description:

The authors explore identity in science in terms of its four interrelated and constitutive dimensions: figured worlds, positionality, spaces of authoring, and the making of new worlds. This theoretical framework conceptualizes identity in science as something always in the making and as an on-going process in practice that is constrained and driven by structural features and society.

COSMOS offered an intensive summer residential component in addition to services in counseling, academic advising, and tutoring. It did so, through (1) intensive hands-on learning opportunities in mathematics and science; (2) opportunities to interact with mathematicians and scientists; (3) activities at the elbows of graduate and undergraduate students in math and science; and (4) access to some university course work. COSMOS worked rolling cohorts of 45 participants over 3 years. The program accepted students who were in 9th or 10th grade and were first-generation college-bound and/or low-income.

The four students they selected for this article represent the four content areas of the mentorships, namely ecology, mathematics, physics, and biochemistry. They also had follow-up data on those four students including an interview in 2004 and school enrollment data in 2007. It made possible the documentation of their navigations into college. Two of the four selected youth completed their education by 2007 (Hannah & Edric), and two were still registered in college (Brian & Joe).

For analysis, they compiled data for three moments during the four youths’ tenures in the program and beyond, spanning over four years: (1) during the application process (year 1999); (2) during program participation (year 2000-2001); and (3) once mid-way through college (year 2004).

The interviews consisted of open-ended questions with a focus on the following dimensions: (1) How they experienced the program in general; (2) how they experienced their project in their second year or the mentorship in their third year; (3) how STEM in COSMOS compared to school science;(4) how STEM in COSMOS made them think about science and self in science; and (5) how they think of themselves in STEM now and in the future.

Theoretical Framework:
Relevance:Barriers to STEM
Archives: K-16 STEM Abstracts