ArticlePDF Available

A Community-Based, Culturally Engaging STEM Learning Environment and Its Impact on Students' Psychosocial Attributes at a Rural Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI)

November 2024
CBE—Life Sciences Education 23(4)

DOI:10.1187/cbe.23-12-0238

Authors:

Elvira Abrica

University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Justine Garcia

New Mexico Highlands University

Show all 5 authorsHide

Using the Culturally Engaging Campus Environments (CECE) Model, this qualitative study examined development of psychosocial attributes (i.e., sense of belonging, science identity , and self-efficacy) among 1st-year life science undergraduate students who participated in integrated and culturally engaging research activities at New Mexico Highlands University, a rural Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI). Research activities were part of a project called SomosSTEM [We are STEM], which included four major components: 1) course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) that are laboratory modules integrated into introductory life science classes; 2) summer Bridge Science Challenge Academy for 1st-year students; 3) full summer internship program; and 4) Community Voices lecture series. We found the integrated nature of SomosSTEM represents an engaging learning environment that positively impacted students' perceptions of their development of psychosocial attributes. This paper's significance is it outlines specific, integrated activities that are also community-based and culturally engaging. We discuss community-based and culturally engaging learning environments as a viable solution to the problem of individualistic and exclusionary learning environments. Stacy Alvares, Monitoring Editor

Content uploaded by Aalap Dixit

Content may be subject to copyright.

ARTICLE

A Community-Based, Culturally

Engaging STEM Learning Environment

and Its Impact on Students’ Psychosocial

Attributes at a Rural Hispanic Serving

Institution (HSI)

Elvira J. Abrica,†*Deryl Hatch-Tocaimaza,‡Sarah Corey-Rivas,§Justine Garcia,║

and Aalap Dixit¶

†Department of Educational Administration, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588;

‡Department of Educational Administration, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588;

§Department of Biology, New Mexico Highlands University, Las Vegas, NM 87701; ║Department

of Biology, New Mexico Highlands University, Las Vegas, NM 87701; ¶Department of Forestry,

New Mexico Highlands University, Las Vegas, NM 87701

ABSTRACT

Using the Culturally Engaging Campus Environments (CECE) Model, this qualitative study

examined development of psychosocial attributes (i.e., sense of belonging, science iden-

tity, and self-ecacy) among 1st-year life science undergraduate students who partici-

pated in integrated and culturally engaging research activities at New Mexico Highlands

University, a rural Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI). Research activities were part of a

project called SomosSTEM [We are STEM], which included four major components: 1)

course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) that are laboratory modules

integrated into introductory life science classes; 2) summer Bridge Science Challenge

Academy for 1st-year students; 3) full summer internship program; and 4) Community

Voices lecture series. We found the integrated nature of SomosSTEM represents an en-

gaging learning environment that positively impacted students’ perceptions of their de-

velopment of psychosocial attributes. This paper’s signiﬁcance is it outlines speciﬁc, in-

tegrated activities that are also community-based and culturally engaging. We discuss

community-based and culturally engaging learning environments as a viable solution to

the problem of individualistic and exclusionary learning environments. Stacy Alvares, Monitoring Editor

Submitted Jan 26, 2024; Revised Sep 3, 2024;

Accepted Oct 21, 2024

CBE Life Sci Educ December 1, 2024 23:ar62

DOI:10.1187/cbe.23-12-0238

Conﬂicts of interest: The authors declare no

conﬂicts of interest.

*Address correspondence to: Elvira J. Abrica

(elvira.abrica@unl.edu).

Biology. This article is distributed by The

American Society for Cell Biology under license

from the author(s). It is available to the public

under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share

Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-

sa/3.0).

“ASCB®” and “The American Society for Cell

Biology®” are registered trademarks of The

American Society for Cell Biology.

BEYOND INTERVENTIONS: COMMUNITY-BASED, CULTURALLY ENGAGING

STEM LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND THEIR IMPACT ON STUDENTS’

PSYCHOSOCIAL ATTRIBUTES

Decades of research on racial and ethnic disparities in science, technology, en-

gineering, and mathematics (STEM) ﬁelds has established the crucial role of

psychosocial attributes we know inﬂuence persistence and degree completion both

in STEM ﬁelds and undergraduate education more broadly (e.g., Carlone and

Johnson, 2007). Among the most well-established psychosocial attributes in higher

education research are sense of belonging, efﬁcacy, and identity. Generally, sense

of belonging refers to a sense of feeling accepted, valued, and included in the

learning environment (Harper and Quaye, 2007;Rodriguez et al., 2019). Sense

of academic self-efﬁcacy, a student’s conﬁdence in their own intellectual abilities

to succeed academically, positively impacts persistence and degree completion

(e.g., Hausmann et al., 2007;Vuong et al., 2010;Honicke and Broadbent, 2016;

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, 1–14, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 1

E. J. Abrica et al.

Strayhorn, 2018). Finally, science identity, an ability to see

oneself as a scientist, has been identiﬁed as an important fac-

tor in undergraduate STEM success.

Substantial research evidence points to the importance of

psychosocial attributes in shaping students’ interest, commit-

ment, persistence, and degree completion in STEM. Yet, re-

searchers must explore questions about whether and how

students’ psychosocial attributes are developed or fostered

through institutionalized, systemic, and culturally attuned en-

vironments designed for this purpose. In other words, STEM

education literature consistently documents what matters

in STEM success; positive psychosocial development is cor-

related to speciﬁc intervention activities. Yet, questions of

whether and how a web of integrated interventions across

diverse STEM educational environments result in substantive

and meaningful differences in the lives of students in the ways

intended are comparably under researched. Thus, a critical

gap in STEM education knowledge is how to create learning

environments, not sole interventions, that nurture psychoso-

cial development.

Distinction in research objectives—studying environments

rather than interventions—is nuanced but important to move

beyond identiﬁcation and description of beneﬁcial factors in

STEM education and toward creation and development of

the contexts that foster them. For example, undergraduate re-

search opportunities are often identiﬁed as a key intervention

to foster STEM success speciﬁcally because these opportuni-

ties not only provide deep and meaningful engagement with

science content but also opportunities to engage with faculty

and peers, all of which support efﬁcacy, identity, and belong-

ing. Yet, even more holistic intervention approaches are lim-

ited in attending to the cultural contexts in which these inter-

ventions unfold. To promote diversity and inclusion truly and

meaningfully in STEM, there is a need to understand how to

foster culturally relevant, STEM learning environments across

diverse social contexts, centering students’ perspectives, and

experiences of their multilayered, complex learning environ-

ment.

In this paper, we provide an empirical basis for under-

standing how students’ psychosocial development is poten-

tially connected to the STEM environment in a rural Hispanic

Serving Institution (HSI). We present ﬁndings from a qualita-

tive study of student perceptions of the SomosSTEM [We are

STEM] Program, a grant-funded intervention designed to pro-

vide early, integrated, and culturally informed research expe-

riences for undergraduate students at New Mexico Highlands

University (NMHU). NMHU, founded in 1893, is a rural, open-

enrollment public HSI in northeastern New Mexico, and serves

a large rural population characterized by diverse cultural, eco-

nomic, linguistic, and educational backgrounds. At this ru-

ral HSI, SomosSTEM offers multiple opportunities to engage

in undergraduate research experiences that are community-

based, culturally engaging, and integrated across time.

STUDY CONTEXT

NMHU serves a large rural population characterized by di-

verse cultural, economic, linguistic, and educational back-

grounds. The most recent IPEDS data available from Fall 2022

indicate the student demographics of NMHU were reported as

54% Hispanic, 21% White, 10% American Indian or Alaska

Native, 4% Black or African American, 3% two or more races,

2% unknown, and 1% Asian. U.S. nonresidents, for whom

race/ethnicity is not tracked, were 5% of the student body.

Among undergraduates, 45% were 25 years or older. The

unduplicated 12-mo student enrollment was 2066 undergrad-

uate and 1386 graduate students, with a total of 3452 stu-

dents. Forty percent of undergraduate students are part-time

status. Based on this demographic proﬁle, NMHU has the sec-

ond highest enrollment of students from underrepresented

populations1among New Mexico HSIs that are also members

of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities. Ac-

cording to Carnegie classiﬁcations, NMHU is classiﬁed as a

large public 4-year institution, primarily baccalaureate insti-

tution.

SomosSTEM was developed speciﬁcally to support reten-

tion of 1st-time, full-time, 1st-year STEM majors, particularly

life science majors for whom retention rates are lower than

non-life science STEM majors. Speciﬁcally, one challenge to

retention before SomosSTEM was that 1st-year students 87%

of incoming STEM majors did not have the math prerequi-

sites needed to start life sciences introductory courses. Sub-

sequently, most life sciences majors would not enroll in the

STEM gateway courses until their 2nd year; and therefore,

not have opportunity to engage with STEM faculty and upper-

level STEM majors at early stages of their academic careers.

Relatedly, although NMHU has demonstrated improvements

in outcomes for Hispanic STEM students through the incor-

poration of the evidence-based best practice of Supplemen-

tal Instruction in STEM gateway courses with historically low

pass rates, many students do not have these courses until their

2nd year or later. Additionally, other evidence-based strate-

gies incorporated at NMHU (e.g., undergraduate research ex-

periences, internships, and NSF S-STEM scholarships) target

upper-level students, leaving 1st-year and 2nd-year students

without support and disconnected from the STEM community.

SomosSTEM ﬁlls a critical need speciﬁcally for 1st- and 2nd-

year life science majors by providing them with an early con-

stellation of research-intensive activities that are designed to

promote retention through development of students’ positive

psychosocial outcomes. Retention data thus far are positive.

For example, before SomosSTEM was designed, life sciences

retention 1st to 2nd year was 51%, and to the 3rd year was

36%, to fourth year 33%. After 2-3 years of SomosSTEM, life

science retention has increased from 51% to 58% and reten-

tion to 3rd year has risen to 56%. It is important to note that

within this same 3-year period, the community has been chal-

lenged by the global COVID-19 pandemic, a series of severe

wildﬁres, and most recently, a water contamination crisis.

1We use “underrepresented populations” to refer to student populations who

are not statistically represented in STEM or higher education at rates that are

on par with their overall population size. In reference to demographics and data,

we use “under represented” to be consistent with institutional and federal de-

mographic reporting which focuses on the extent to which demographic groups

and/or identities (racial, gender, socioeconomic) are represented or overrep-

resented relative to the size of their population nationally or relative to other

groups. Later on this this paper, we use the terms Students of Color to refer

speciﬁcally to groups of students belonging to racial categories of American In-

dian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic, Paciﬁc Islander, and of Two or more

races. Finally, we use the term “racially minoritized students” to also to refer

to students of color, but do so in cases where we wish to emphasize racially

minoritized status in relation to STEM learning environments.

23:ar62, 2 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

STEM Learning Environment at HSI

SomosSTEM involves four major components: 1) course-

based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) that are

laboratory modules integrated into introductory life science

classes at NMHU (Lo and Mordacq, 2020); 2) summer Bridge

Science Challenge Academy for 1st-year students; 3) full sum-

mer internship program; and 4) Community Voices lecture se-

ries. It provides a structured pathway for students early in

their careers at NMHU to develop science identity, sense of

belonging, and science self-efﬁcacy, all of which are critical

to STEM success. One of the distinguishing features of So-

mosSTEM is the program was designed to offer students mul-

tiple opportunities to engage in undergraduate research ex-

periences, both in a classroom and outside of the classroom

setting. In SomosSTEM, they engage research in their under-

graduate coursework, but also coconstruct new research ex-

periences for incoming groups of students through internship

activities. CUREs developed by interns are called intern-based

course-based undergraduate research experiences (ibCUREs).

In addition to the student activities in SomosSTEM, there were

also professional development activities for faculty and staff

focusing on the development of CUREs, culturally responsive

teaching practices, and development of research and teaching

protocols for academy and internship activities. Agency part-

ners who work with faculty, staff, and students through the

lecture series or as student mentors represent the following

units in the local community: Albuquerque Wildlife Federa-

tion, U.S. Fish & Wildlife, New Mexico Forestry Division, Her-

mits Peak Watershed Alliance, U.S. Forest Service, Los Alamos

National Labs.

The goal of this paper is to strengthen the conceptual and

empirical linkage between students’ learning and develop-

ment and their learning environment by investigating, from

the perspective of college students, how facets of a purpose-

built culturally engaging environment might uniquely con-

tribute to their development of important psychosocial at-

tributes. We describe why psychosocial outcomes, particularly

sense of belonging, self-efﬁcacy, and science identity develop-

ment matter in student success. We also highlight higher edu-

cation literature on STEM learning environments, which over-

whelmingly points to the holistic and cultural context of STEM

learning as an important factor in success. For this reason, we

applied Museus’ (2014) Culturally Engaging Campus Environ-

ments (CECE) model to an empirical study of students’ percep-

tions of sense of belonging, self-efﬁcacy, and science identity

development in the SomosSTEM environment. The research

questions guiding our investigation were:

1. To what extent do students experience a purpose-built web

of integrated interventions as a culturally engaging learn-

ing environment?

2. How do students perceive this learning environment as

inﬂuencing their sense of belonging, science identity, and

self-efﬁcacy?

LITERATURE REVIEW

Psychosocial Development Informs Success Outcomes in

STEM

Decades of STEM education literature identify science identity,

building self-efﬁcacy and sense of belonging as being critical

to STEM success outcomes (broadly deﬁned as persistence, de-

gree completion, and retention) but often not sufﬁciently or

equitably nurtured in the STEM learning context. Brieﬂy, sci-

ence identity broadly refers to the degree one sees oneself and

is recognized by others, as a “science person” (Carlone and

Johnson, 2007). Science identity includes internal processes,

such as an interest in science and motivation to pursue a

career in STEM disciplines (Vincent-Ruz and Schunn, 2018).

Science identity also includes social processes, such as so-

cialization into the norms of particular STEM disciplines and

recognition by others that one is a “science person” (Carlone

and Johnson, 2007;Vincent-Ruz and Schunn, 2018). Students

develop a science identity through socialization experiences

that keep them motivated and identiﬁed with the science

domain.

Though science identity is essentially how one views them-

self in terms of being a scientist, self-efﬁcacy is whether a

person sees themself as capable of success. Students with

strong self-efﬁcacy persist despite challenges and reach aca-

demic goals, and academic achievement, in turn, bolsters self-

efﬁcacy and supports persistence (Bandura, 1997;Valentine

et al., 2004). STEM self-efﬁcacy is conceptualized as a subarea

of academic self-efﬁcacy and characterized as a student’s con-

ﬁdence in their ability to complete tasks speciﬁcally related to

mathematics and science (Britner and Pajares, 2006;Mensah

and Jackson, 2018). Inherent in building STEM self-efﬁcacy is

the opportunity to engage in authentic experiences that allow

students to form judgments about their capabilities to engage

and succeed in STEM.

Such opportunities are relatively few in the ﬁrst years of

most STEM coursework that focuses on transmission and mas-

tery of fundamental concepts, with applied and generative

work typically reserved for upper-level coursework. In the ab-

sence of relevancy of course material, feelings of community,

and opportunities to establish efﬁcacy and identity, new col-

lege students who otherwise wish to pursue STEM studies may

turn to other ﬁelds of study. A sense of belonging—students’

feelings of connectedness or sense of mattering on campus—

is equally important in fostering retention in STEM, yet, as

we will describe in coming sections, is differentially fostered

across student populations (Strayhorn, 2018). Development

of these psychosocial traits is particularly important at a rural

HSI such as NMHU, where out of 2066 undergraduate stu-

dents in Fall 2022, 54% were Hispanic and 74% from minori-

tized racial and ethnic groups. Hispanic/Latinx populations re-

main underrepresented at every stage of the STEM pipeline

(NSF, 2017) making the need for early interventions to en-

hance retention and development of psychosocial traits timely.

Interventions to Develop Psychosocial Outcomes

Speciﬁc intervention activities are correlated with positive

psychosocial development in STEM. Speciﬁcally, interventions

that promote critical thinking, problem solving, and applica-

tion of course materials support STEM self-efﬁcacy. The most

successful interventions are those which integrate collabora-

tion, mentoring relationships, and critical thinking. For exam-

ple, when students have opportunities to collaborate through

peer supplemental instruction and peer collaborative learning,

there are gains in student motivation, autonomy, and critical

thinking in STEM ﬁelds (Stigmar, 2016). Robnett et al. (2018)

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 3

E. J. Abrica et al.

identiﬁed a relationship between instrumental mentoring

(i.e., support in learning tasks, skills, and professional devel-

opment) and STEM self-efﬁcacy. STEM higher education lit-

erature consistently points to faculty interaction and relation-

ships as being among the most important factors in shaping

student experiences and outcomes (McCoy et al., 2017;Park

et al., 2020).Though research evidence is clear that meaning-

ful relationships among students and faculty promote positive

psychosocial development, it is difﬁcult to create formalized

mentoring relationships when mentors rarely receive guid-

ance or training in effective mentoring or identify cultural

practices which support students from minoritized ethnic and

racial groups in recognizing strengths they bring (Yosso, 2005;

Robnett et al., 2019;Espinoza and Rincón, 2023). Instead,

faculty often act as gatekeepers, providing access to oppor-

tunities for speciﬁc students, and beneﬁcial learning oppor-

tunities to those whom they deem as prepared or talented.

For example, in a study by McCoy et al. (2017), Students

of Color2experienced faculty interactions in which they felt

they were dismissed and actively being “weeded out” of STEM

through repeatedly negative interactions with their professors.

Students of Color frequently report negative faculty interac-

tions, and “nuances of faculty interactions” are largely under-

studied (McCoy et al., 2017; p. 659). Much of the literature on

faculty interactions comes from predominantly white (PWI) 4-

year universities, with very little empirical studies conducted

in rural and/or Hispanic serving (HSI) contexts. Research is

unclear around whether and how diverse cultural contexts

might provide culturally relevant mentoring, validation of stu-

dents’ diverse backgrounds and talents, and creation of oppor-

tunities for students to engage in research, as these have been

studied as interventions in PWIs (Grifﬁn et al., 2020).

Much emphasis is on opportunities for students to engage

in undergraduate research through formalized, course-based

research (Estrada et al., 2018). Speciﬁcally, CUREs are re-

search opportunities integrated into curriculum in entry-level

classes. Importantly, CUREs offer “authentic” research experi-

ences that allow students to have hands-on engagement with

course material. Research on CUREs over the past decade has

shown CUREs impact knowledge acquisition and psychoso-

cial outcomes and persistence for students (Shear and Sim-

mons, 2011;Brownell et al., 2012;Alkaher and Dolan, 2014;

Bangera and Brownell, 2014;Jordan et al., 2014). CUREs

have been shown to increase student self-efﬁcacy and clar-

ity about STEM careers and may enhance students’ sense of

science identity (Corwin et al. 2015). The success of CUREs

is consistent with extant higher education which documents

when students have opportunities to learn and share knowl-

edge about the issues in and needs of their own communi-

2In the context of higher education research literature, authors most frequently

use the terminology “Students of Color” as a broad term to identify and refer

to individuals who are American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic,

Paciﬁc Islander, and of two or more races. We use this term throughout the

literature review section because this is the term used in literature cited. In

other sections in the paper, we use the term “racially minoritized” students to

refer to the same populations. We prefer the term racially minoritized because

it more critically points attention to the active ways in which students of color

are minoritized and oppressed on the basis of race. “Students of color” is a more

general and descriptive term we borrow from higher education literature while

“racially minoritized” implicates the minoritizing and oppressive consequences

of racial minority status.

ties of origin, it can be associated with stronger connections

to their respective institutions, higher levels of motivation,

and greater likelihood of success (e.g., Guiffrida, 2003, 2005;

Harper and Quaye, 2007;Kiang, 2002,;Museus, 2008, 2011;

Museus et al., 2012).

STEM Learning Environments

Given the signiﬁcance of psychosocial development in STEM

success, it is important to understand whether and how

STEM learning environments shape this development. STEM

ﬁelds are high stakes, competitive, and academically demand-

ing learning environments. The culture of STEM is one that

privileges an individualistic, meritocratic, and survival-of-the-

ﬁttest mentality (McGee, 2016, 2020). In this cultural context,

students from racially minoritized backgrounds are often un-

derrepresented in STEM ﬁelds, and experiences of racial iso-

lation, and negative stereotypes from peers and faculty, and

their deleterious effects, are well documented (Hurtado et al.,

2009;Estrada et al., 2018;McGee, 2016, 2020). There re-

mains a widespread tendency to rely on individual-level cir-

cumstances, effort, and abilities leading to make sense of one’s

success or failure in STEM studies and career pursuits, rather

than a misalignment between the STEM environment and stu-

dents’ diverse cultural backgrounds.

Although customs, norms, and values in STEM may be seen

as normal and race-neutral, they directly align with customs,

norms, and values of white culture. White culture is a value

system that prioritizes rugged individualism, competition, lin-

ear and future time orientation, objective science, owning

goods and property, and hierarchical power structures (Mills,

1997;Bonilla-Silva and Forman, 2000;Sue, 2004;Bonilla-

Silva, 2022). Students of Color in STEM environments will

deny their own cultural values, ideas, and customs to assimi-

late into the white norms and values of STEM that tell them

they alone need to work harder, do more, and align themselves

with the dominant cultural environment. For example, McGee

et al. (2022) challenge ways Students of Color are made to

feel like imposters, and these students do not really have what

it takes to succeed in STEM. Imposter syndrome, rather than

racism, is often identiﬁed as the individual-level attribute that

limits student success. From a nuanced and critical lens, the

STEM learning environment is understood as a ﬁxed constella-

tion of norms, values, and practices that epistemically exclude

different ways of knowing and being.

STEM learning environments assimilate racially and ethni-

cally diverse students into white culture, values, and ideolo-

gies rather than including materials, values, and norms that

resonate with culturally diverse student populations. For this

reason, the experience of learning in STEM is linked to vari-

ous forms of racial stress. For example, Abrica (2022) recently

argued racial stress creates an additional cognitive load for

Students of Color where they must constantly reassess and

reappraise their identity, values, beliefs, and ways of being

with respect to white norms and values. For example, empiri-

cal studies of Latina/o/x students in higher education capture

nuanced and complex ways racial consciousness, beliefs, and

meaning making (Abrica and Dorsten, 2020) that are relevant

to our argument in favor of learning environments that sup-

port diverse student populations.

23:ar62, 4 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

STEM Learning Environment at HSI

Community-Based, Culturally Engaging STEM Learning

Environments

In contrast to highly individualistic learning environments,

STEM learning environments are designed to validate stu-

dents’ backgrounds, so students are not forced to assimilate

to white norms and values traditionally upheld in STEM

environments. Community-based and culturally engaging

STEM learning environments embrace students’ cultural

values and are reﬂective of the communities they are a

part of (Hurtado et al., 2009;Estrada et al., 2018). We

highlight two important dimensions of community-based,

culturally engaging STEM learning environments: 1) a focus

on community-based learning and 2) culturally relevant

undergraduate research opportunities. Researchers have

long identiﬁed a community-oriented learning environment

as promotive or science identity, self-efﬁcacy, and sense of

belonging, particularly for Students of Color (e.g., Syed et

al., 2018). A student’s sense of belonging to a community has

been shown to inﬂuence student academic motivation, well-

being, and academic achievement (Trujillo and Tanner, 2014;

Ashley et al., 2017). For example, Lane and colleagues’ work

(2016) establishes community building involves coordinated

services and activities designed to support underrepresented

students in STEM (Lane, 2016). Communities emerge because

of shared interests and connectedness among participants,

which is strengthened through program features that can

include social activities, mentoring, and familial atmosphere

among staff, students, and mentors (Lane, 2016).

CUREs can be understood for how they exemplify and fa-

cilitate the kinds of cohort-based research projects in STEM

courses and scale up the impacts of individual internships

in a more inclusive environment for students to experience

the positive psychosocial and content learning beneﬁts of re-

search (Bangera and Brownell, 2014). For example, ﬁrsthand

involvement in research relies on a strong relationship be-

tween sense of belonging and community involvement. Early

research experiences are important and directly contribute to

student motivation to persist in STEM and lead to the student

identifying as a scientist (Schultz et al., 2011;Graham et al.,

2013;Rodenbusch et al., 2016).

Considering literature on student success and the college

learning environment, Museus (2014) explains culturally

engaging learning environment are those that incorporate

educationally purposeful engagement strategies while also

attending to racial and cultural context (e.g., nature of the

campus cultures in which students’ involvement or engage-

ment behaviors occur). Speciﬁcally, educational engagement

includes challenging students with rigorous academic activ-

ity, academic and collaborative learning including in-class

discussions, group projects, service-learning, and academic

discussions outside of the classroom. Additionally, engage-

ment involves cross-cultural involvement, participation in

service work, internships, learning communities, and strong

relationships with faculty, students, administrators (Pike and

Kuh, 2005).

Higher education research offered perspectives of student

engagement that consider how racial and cultural contexts

shape experiences and outcomes of diverse student popula-

tions. Researchers need to closely examine the cultural norms

of the learning environment to understand how members

of dominant and nondominant groups on campus are pro-

vided with different opportunities to engage (Museus, 2014).

Indeed, engagement experiences cannot be understood as

universally beneﬁcial (Dowd et al., 2011). For example, the

concept of student engagement implies frequency of faculty–

student interactions will enrich the college experience and

facilitate success. However, if those frequent interactions

consistently send signals to students their cultural identities

are devalued, they are second-class citizens, or the faculty

member does not care about their success, such experiences

might not have a positive inﬂuence on the college experience

or success at all. As such, frameworks that consider the

qualitative aspects of the environments where students are

immersed in and activities, they participate in are warranted

(Museus, 2014).

We used the CECE model to understand students’ devel-

opment of sense of belonging, self-efﬁcacy, and STEM iden-

tity in relation to their learning environment. By emphasizing

and specifying dimensions of the learning environment that

students perceive as promotive of positive psychosocial out-

comes, we move toward greater empirical understanding of

STEM learning environments.

THECECEMODEL

The CECE model by Museus (2014) posits undergraduates

who encounter more CECE are more likely to 1) exhibit a

greater sense of belonging, more positive academic disposi-

tions like self-efﬁcacy and intent to persist, and higher lev-

els of academic performance and 2) ultimately be more likely

to persist to graduation. The CECE model suggests nine indi-

cators of CECE that engage students’ racially diverse cultural

backgrounds or identities, reﬂect their diverse needs as they

navigate their respective institutions, and facilitate their suc-

cess in college.

CECE Indicator #1: Cultural Familiarity

The CECE model posits the extent college students have op-

portunities to physically connect with faculty, staff, and peers

with whom they share common backgrounds on their re-

spective campuses being associated with greater likelihood of

success.

CECE Indicator #2: Culturally Relevant Knowledge

Second, the CECE model indicates postsecondary institutions

that offer opportunities for their students to cultivate, sustain,

and increase knowledge of their cultures and communities of

origin can positively impact their experiences and success.

CECE Indicator #3: Cultural Community Service

The CECE framework hypothesizes cultural community ser-

vice positively impacts the experiences and success of racially

diverse populations. Cultural community service manifests

when institutions provide students with spaces and tools to

give back and positively transform their cultural communi-

ties including engaging in community activism, participating

in community service and service-learning opportunities, or

engaging in problem-based research projects that aim to solve

problems in their cultural communities. The model suggests

the level of access students have to opportunities to develop

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 5

E. J. Abrica et al.

such transformational cultural connections is positively asso-

ciated with success.

CECE Indicator #4: Opportunities for Meaningful

Cross-Cultural Engagement

Fourth, the CECE Framework indicates students’ access to

opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement is

positively associated with their success in college. The model

indicates opportunities to engage in positive and purposeful

interactions with peers from disparate cultural origins can

positively impact college experiences and success. Although

research examining the relationship between meaningful

cross-cultural engagement and persistence and attainment

in college is difﬁcult to ﬁnd, existing literature does offer

substantial evidence campus environments that promote

meaningful cross-cultural engagement are conducive to many

positive outcomes in college.

CECE Indicator #5: Collectivist Cultural Orientations

Fifth, the CECE model proposes college students who en-

counter institutional environments that are based on more

collectivist cultural orientations, as opposed to more individu-

alistic ones, are more likely to succeed. This proposition is con-

gruent with existing evidence indicating both white students

and Students of Color from communities with more collectivist

cultural orientations might encounter salient challenges ad-

justing to and navigating colleges and universities with more

individualistic orientations (Thompson and Fretz, 1991).

CECE Indicator #6: Culturally Validating Environments

The CECE model postulates culturally validating environ-

ments are positively related to success in college. Speciﬁcally,

the CECE framework suggests students who are surrounded

by postsecondary educators who validate their cultural back-

grounds and identities will have more positive experiences

and be more likely to succeed in college (Rendón, 1994;

Museus and Quaye, 2009;Barnett, 2011;Rendón and Muñoz,

2011).

CECE Indicator #7: Humanized Educational

Environments

The CECE model hypothesizes students who encounter hu-

manized educational environments on their campuses are re-

lated to more positive experiences and greater likelihood of

success. The concept of humanized educational environments

refers to campus environments characterized by institutional

agents who care about, are committed to, and develop mean-

ingful relationships with their students.

CECE Indicator #8: Proactive Philosophies

Proactive philosophies are present when faculty and staff go

beyond making information and support available to making

extra efforts to bring that information and support to students

and maximize their likelihood of success, so students can in-

crease the rates of persistence and attainment of among the

racially diverse college student populations they serve.

CECE Indicator #9: Availability of Holistic Support

Holistic support is the extent postsecondary institutions pro-

vide their students with access to one or more faculty or staff

members they are conﬁdent will provide them with the infor-

mation they seek, offer the help they require, or connect them

with information or support they need. More speciﬁcally, evi-

dence suggests when students are not always expected to hunt

down information and support they require on their own, but

rather can access one or more institutional agents that func-

tion as conduits to broader support networks on their cam-

puses, those students are more likely to succeed in college

(Museus and Neville, 2012).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This research study used a qualitative approach to understand

how and why a sequence of community-based student STEM

experiences (i.e., CUREs, science challenge academy, and in-

ternships resulting in the creation of intern-built CUREs) con-

tributed to the development of psychosocial attributes (i.e.,

science identity, sense of belonging, and science self-efﬁcacy)

among 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-year life science students. We in-

clude qualitative data collected over 3 years, part of a 5-year,

cross-sectional, longitudinal, and mixed methods study de-

signed to assess the inﬂuences of SomosSTEM activities on

educational outcomes (i.e., persistence in STEM education,

academic performance, and degree completion). This paper

covers only our qualitative ﬁndings and quantitative analysis

and reporting is forthcoming.

Study Participant Recruitment

SomosSTEM CUREs are offered in introductory life science

courses, which are open to all 1st- and 2nd-year students at

NMH. There was a total of 561 students who participated in

CUREs between 2020 and 2023. A total of 247 students par-

ticipated in seven CUREs in Year 1, 147 students in six CUREs

in Year 2, and 167 students in seven CUREs in Year 3. All

561 1st- and 2nd-year students were invited to participate in

the research study. Criteria used to determine which students

were eligible or ineligible to participate in the study included

students who were enrolled I introductory life science classes

and were 18 years of age or older.

Participants were recruited through a combination of pur-

posive and convenience sampling strategies. The instructional

administrators and faculty members distributed information

to students via the course syllabus and course Learning

Management System (LMS), in addition to sending individual

emails to students who were enrolled in the course(s). Addi-

tionally, instructional administrators were invited to publish

regular announcements to the LMS system for all students

enrolled in their courses, where students saw the announce-

ment and information link when they logged in to the LMS.

Students who agreed (via the initial survey consent process)

to be contacted again for subsequent survey administrations

wer sent emails directly. Participants were recruited across

program activities, primarily through CURE courses. Recruit-

ment was characterized by email recruitment primarily, which

led to presurvey participation, postsurvey participation, and

focus group interview participation. Surveys (pre and post)

were administered at the beginning and end of each main

Fall and Spring semester, although due to low response rate

and ongoing analysis of our comparatively small quantitative

sample, we engage only our qualitative study ﬁndings at this

23:ar62, 6 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

STEM Learning Environment at HSI

TABLE 1. Characteristics of participants, of those interviewed

and in the overall study

Interviewed In overall study

N%N%

Age

18 years old 16 45.7 82 34.2

19 to 21 10 28.6 98 40.8

22 to 27 5 14.3 26 10.8

28 or older 1 2.9 14 5.8

Gender

Man 8 22.9 80 33.3

Woman 24 68.6 131 54.6

Prefer to

self–describe

––72.9

Prefer not to say – – 3 1.3

Enrollment

Full time 30 85.7 211 87.9

Less than full–time 2 5.7 10 4.2

Transfer

Started college here 23 65.7 162 67.5

Started college

elsewhere

9 25.7 59 26.7

Note. Percentages do not include missing data from nonresponses. Partici-

pants who indicated a preference to self-describe their gender left the ﬁeld

blank.

point in time. The integration of quantitative and qualitative

ﬁndings to support the original mixed-method study design is

forthcoming.

Data Collection

Data for this research paper are drawn from qualitative study

data, speciﬁcally, cross-sectional focus groups that were con-

ducted in the ﬁrst 3 years of our study, 2020–2023. A quali-

tative cross-sectional focus group design involves conducting

focus group discussions at a single point in time to explore

and understand the participants’ perspectives on a speciﬁc is-

sue. The original study design targeted 6–8 students per fo-

cus group, with a total of 3–4 focus groups each semester,

for 3 years. However, in light of the wildﬁre national dis-

aster and the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, nine fo-

cus groups were conducted during the 3-year period but with

far fewer participants. In some cases, focus groups included

only 2–3 students. Focus group interviews lasted 60 min and

were audio-recorded and transcribed. All focus groups were

conducted by the ﬁrst author who identiﬁes as a Chicana

female from Southern California. The study was conducted

in accordance with the ethical guidelines set forth by the

Institutional Review Board at NMHU and UNL, which ap-

proved all study procedures, including the informed consent

process.

Study Participant Demographics

Participants (Table 1) for our study tended to be younger, iden-

tiﬁed as women, and described themselves using multiple-

response and open-ended prompts (Table 2) as Hispanic, New

Mexican, or of Mexican descent. We collected demographic

data for all participants via an online survey in Qualtrics. As

of Spring 2023, 196 participants were enrolled in the full

mixed-methods study. Of the larger study sample, we inter-

viewed 36 of the 196 students in the overall study. To date

there are 240 students in the study. Our tables provide data

of participants: those interviewed in our qualitative study and

those enrolled in the overall study.

Data Analysis

In accordance with the qualitative research approach, we used

a conversational, semistructured interview approach aimed at

understanding participants’ meaning making of the perceived

inﬂuence of SomosSTEM activities on sense of belonging, self-

efﬁcacy, and science identity. Data analysis followed a four-

stage process informed by Moustakas’ (1994) framework for

analyzing student experiences. The analysis was led by the

ﬁrst author of this paper, along with a small research team

of educational researchers with qualitative expertise at her

campus who could conduct multiple reviews and code study

transcripts. As a smaller team of qualitative researchers, [ﬁrst

author] and colleagues engaged in reﬂexive journaling to doc-

ument and examine beliefs and assumptions, these reﬂections

were integrated into the analysis and development of our cod-

ing process and schema. Speciﬁcally, the coding process be-

gan with open coding, where the research team independently

reviewed transcripts to identify emerging themes and mean-

ing units. To ensure rigor, intercoder reliability was assessed,

with any discrepancies resolved through discussion and con-

sensus over a year’s time. The coding scheme was reﬁned it-

eratively, leading to the development of higher-order themes

that encapsulate the core of the students’ experiences. Trust-

worthiness was further ensured through triangulation, where

data from different focus groups were compared, and through

member checking, where participants were invited to review

and validate the ﬁndings. [First author] reported high-order

themes over a year of bi-weekly meetings with [second, third,

fourth, and ﬁfth author] where, as a larger team of authors

and investigators, we worked together to make meaning of

themes, discuss the qualitative analysis process, and contextu-

alize ﬁndings with our collective ideas and observations. As

a team, we worked to develop this paper’s presentation of

ﬁndings and continue to collaborate around how our research

ﬁndings and the SomosSTEM program can be leveraged across

other institutional contexts.

Limitations

This study has several limitations that should be acknowl-

edged. The small size of some focus groups, particularly those

affected by the national wildﬁre disaster and the COVID-19

pandemic, limits the depth that conversations with a slightly

larger group of students might have yielded and delimits the

overall power of the focus group design. Additionally, the

online format of the focus groups, while necessary due to

pandemic restrictions, likely inﬂuenced the dynamics of the

discussions. Participants often had limited technology and

internet access and because many reside in rural areas, con-

nections were often lost or interrupted. These limitations were

considered during data interpretation, and the challenges

rural students faced in accessing learning technologies was a

point of analysis and discussion to be reported in forthcoming

reporting efforts.

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 7

E. J. Abrica et al.

TABLE 2. Racial and ethnic identity or origin, of those interviewed and in the overall study

Ninterviewed (of Nin overall study)

Racial/Ethnic Identity or Descent 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

1. Black or African American 7 (24) 3 (7) – (2) – (2)

2. Hispanic, Latino/x, Spanish 3 (7) 23 (155) 5 (38) 1 (6) – (2) – (1) – (1)

3. White – (2) 5 (38) 9 (79) 1 (4) – (3) – (1) – (1)

4. American Indian, Alaska Native, Indigenous, or First Nations – (2) 1 (6) 1 (4) 3 (13)

5. Asian or Asian American – – (2) – (3) – – (7) – (1)

6. Native Hawaiian or other Paciﬁc Islander – – (1) – (1) – – (1) – (2)

7. Some other race or origin – – (1) – (1) – – – – (2)

8. Total 10 (35) 32 (206) 15 (128) 5 (25) – (13) – (5) – (4)

Note. Totals are greater than number of participants (36 interviewed of 240 in overall study) since respondents could select all that apply.

FINDINGS

In response to our research questions of how students ex-

perience the purpose-built SomosSTEM environment, our

interviews with students provided ample evidence that So-

mosSTEM provided holistic and integrated interventions

nested in a culture of validation and cultural engagement.

This was achieved through four activities that we describe

below, speciﬁcally as they map onto or relate to the various di-

mensions of the CECE framework outlined by Museus (2014).

We found no evidence diversity was explicitly engaged to

support students’ science identity, efﬁcacy, or belonging

(Indicator #4). SomosSTEM activities include the follow-

ing: 1) CUREs that are laboratory modules integrated into

introductory life science classes at NMHU; 2) full summer

internship program; and 3) Community Voices lecture series.

Through the lens of the CECE model, we found students

involved across SomosSTEM activities consistently noted

faculty engagement was key to their sense of validation, con-

tributing to their view of NMHU as an inclusive and respectful

environment.

Indicator #1 Cultural Familiarity

The CECE model posits the extent college students have op-

portunities to connect with faculty, staff, and peers with whom

they share common backgrounds on their respective campuses

is associated with greater likelihood of success. Students who

can establish connections, preferably in person, with institu-

tional agents who have similar backgrounds and experiences

are more likely to succeed in college. Students shared their ex-

periences in strengthening or building connection with com-

munity agents was most important in developing their science

identity—that they could see themselves as ﬁlling important

roles in science like the members of the community they in-

teracted with. This happened through the SomosSTEM Com-

munity Voices lecture series in which local-area scientists and

professionals who share students’ cultural, racial, and/or eth-

nic backgrounds gave presentations, focusing on real-life illus-

tration of what it looks like to conduct place- and community-

based science in real life.

Students articulated how speakers validated their expe-

riences and connection to their home communities, sharing

each speaker inspired them to pursue science in some way.

For example, students mentioned being exposed to people in

different careers, all of which were ways of being a scientist

or doing science. One student stated, “there’s a huge range

of jobs in the STEM ﬁeld.” They learned about a myriad of

options for working in a science ﬁeld while also seeing how

those careers related to, as one student said, “the land and

the history of this place.” In providing talks that were place-

based, students not only received information about science

careers but discussed the ways science is connected to peo-

ple around them and land where they were situated. Having

speakers from the local area, individuals who have graduated

from their local schools, were particularly inspiring to stu-

dents. Several students remarked the lecture series speakers

disrupted their idea that pursuing STEM had to be a linear

path. Many of the speakers had unpredictable and challenging

pathways into their STEM careers and students were inspired

by meeting successful people in STEM who perhaps changed

their path along the way (e.g., changed majors, left, and came

back to school, failed, and succeeded).

Indicator #2: Cultural Relevance

The CECE model posits opportunities for students to culti-

vate, sustain, and increase knowledge of their cultures and

communities of origin can positively impact their experiences

and success. Students create, maintain, and strengthen con-

nections to their home communities through opportunities to

acquire knowledge about their communities of origin, which

supports academic success. Cultural relevance was exempli-

ﬁed in the two main activities of SomosSTEM: 1) course-based

undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) and 2) the

9-wk SomosSTEM summer internship. The internship is a

summer experience in which advanced students receive hands

on mentorship, training, and coconstruct place-based and cul-

turally relevant curriculum for future students. Speciﬁcally,

during the last week of the internship, students work with

faculty to connect their internship experiences to the class-

room by helping to create ibCUREs (intern-built CUREs). Ide-

ally, SomosSTEM sets students up to participate in a CURE,

internship, and series of activities which culminate in them de-

signing their own ibCUREs. Next, ibCUREs are integrated back

into introductory life science courses, so students can support

peers as part of their own individual learning. Students shared

because they had the opportunity to learn and share knowl-

edge about the issues in and needs of their own communities,

these activities promoted their sense of self-efﬁcacy, can “do”

science, and their perception they can be a scientist, thereby

providing evidence of enhanced self-efﬁcacy and emerging sci-

ence identity.

23:ar62, 8 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

STEM Learning Environment at HSI

Community relevance was achieved through place-based,

localized learning opportunities where students worked in

their community. A group of student interns collaborated with

the U.S. Forestry Service during a summer when the commu-

nity faced life-threatening and destructive wildﬁres. These in-

terns described the tension between helping the community

by providing resources and support for speciﬁc land practices

and recognizing the politicized nature of that assistance, as

experienced by the rural residents. For instance, cattle grazing

practices are managed differently by local residents compared

with federal regulations. Students highlighted the complexity

of the assessments they were learning about during their in-

ternship with the U.S. Forestry Service. One student shared: “It

has been an interesting summer working for the forest service.

Even being in the trucks and driving around… yeah. The pub-

lic is not always the most reasonable when we are out there

just trying to help.”

“Driving around” in a forestry truck, attending community

meetings with landowners whose land bordered U.S. forestry

land, and being engaged in discussions about land use was an

impactful and engaging learning experience where students

witnessed ﬁrsthand the ways science was intertwined with lo-

cal social and political context. Students’ learning experiences

highlights historical transitions of land control from Spanish

to Mexican, and ﬁnally to U.S. governance. Each transition

brought changes in land ownership and management prac-

tices, impacting the local communities’ way of life and their

relationship to the land. This history is crucial to understand-

ing current conﬂicts and cultural dynamics in the region. The

communal land grants under Spanish and Mexican rule cre-

ated a deep cultural and familial connection to the land for

the local people. Students learned this connection persists de-

spite changes in governance, illustrating the enduring bond

between communities and their ancestral lands. The wildﬁre

incident, where a controlled burn by the forestry service got

out of hand, exacerbated these tensions, highlighting chal-

lenges of managing land in a way that respects both ecolog-

ical needs and cultural heritage. Students identiﬁed their lo-

cal communities continue to resist and assert their rights to

land they have historically used and managed. This place-

based and culturally relevant learning experience gave stu-

dents deeper knowledge of their home community, which they

said motivated them to pursue STEM and teach others.

CECE Indicator #3: Cultural Community Service

The CECE framework posits cultural community service

enhances the success of diverse students. It involves institu-

tions providing resources for students to positively transform

their cultural communities including engaging in community

activism. Inherently, by focusing on culturally relevant, and

place-based content, SomoSTEM promoted strong relation-

ships with and learning about their local community. We found

service to the community was implied as an integral part of

doing science or being a scientist in the community. For exam-

ple, students were not explicitly instructed on how to engage

in community activism, but CUREs, internships, and lectures

all prompted students to think about relationships between

what they are studying and the social and political context.

For example, faculty led CUREs speciﬁc to the COVID-19 pan-

demic and explicitly encouraged students to think about the

social and community effects of the pandemic. A student said:

We have been making connections in our labs between the

human body and health, and that’s been something we’ve

been discussing in our biology class. Especially because of

this time of pandemic, our teacher has made that a main fo-

cus and how we’ve been throughout it, how we think other

people have been reacting to it. She took a whole section off

during like a week or two, just talking about the pandemic

and how it can affect people in different ways. That’s been

really interesting.

Perhaps the strongest way community service was com-

municated as an important consideration for students was

through the exposure to agency partners through the lec-

ture events, internships (where students were mentored and

worked in a community organization) and CUREs where

agency partners provided access to ﬁeld areas, data, support,

and resources. Partners included Fish and Wildlife (Rio Mora),

Albuquerque Wildlife Federation, U.S. Forest Service, Hermit’s

Peak Watershed Alliance, New Mexico State Forestry Division,

and Mora Valley Community Health Services. Although activ-

ities did not seem to explicitly advocate for community ser-

vice, students worked ﬁrsthand across multiple activities with

representatives of the community who communicated through

real-world and place-based information, what the community

needs are/were and invited students to consider themselves in

these service-oriented careers.

CECE Indicator #5: Collectivist Cultural Orientations

The CECE model suggests students are more likely to succeed

in collectivist-oriented environments than in individualistic

ones. This aligns with evidence students from collectivist com-

munities, both white and color, often struggle in more indi-

vidualistic college settings (Thompson and Fretz, 1991). Stu-

dents described SomosSTEM environments as spaces where

students worked collaboratively to solve problems and used

technology to help their community. CUREs and the intern-

ship experience provided opportunities for students to work

together and described their collaborative efforts as reward-

ing and impactful. For example, in describing a CURE, Jacob

said:

Usually with each lab, we work as a group. So that always

makes me feel kind of important because we all have to help

each other out and we all don’t know everything either. So,

we all help each other out, and some of us, maybe I’m better

at something than one of my lab mates, so then I kind of am

a little bit important there.

Jacob’s experience of feeling important, that he was doing

science and behaving as a scientist. Speciﬁcally, he said,

I think in my class, everyone would see themselves as a sci-

entist, because our groups are just of three people, so it’s not

really a big group where someone could do all the work, or

someone could just watch what’s happening. Everyone is

having to do something. And that gives them a sense of…

[identity, belonging, efﬁcacy]. Honestly, everyone is just, I

feel like they’re pretty dedicated to their major and stuff,

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 9

E. J. Abrica et al.

and they’re willing to learn and stuff. So, it just makes the

atmosphere that much better.

Another student, Gianna did not feel a strong sense of efﬁ-

cacy or science identity, but she did describe feeling “a little bit

of importance.” As she described what she meant by a sense of

importance, she described it as a sense of mattering, belong-

ing, and feeling a part of a scientiﬁc community, even if she

did not see herself yet as a full-ﬂedged scientist. Jacob seemed

to beneﬁt from peer interaction in an in-person lab where all

his classmates were equally engaged and empowered to learn.

However, Gianna did not feel she strongly identiﬁed as a sci-

entist or efﬁcacious but was still committed to biology. She

said she wanted to do more outdoor work in the ﬁeld, and she

looked forward to her internship over the summer providing

her with that experience. Gianna and Jacob described use of

technology and working in small groups in the CURE as a par-

ticularly valuable experience, that gave them a sense of own-

ership over learning and enhanced their efﬁcacy. The cultural

norms of CUREs and internship were to work collaboratively

and use tools to support community-based work.

CECE Indicators #6 and #7: Culturally Validating and

Humanizing Environments

Cultural validation refers to how much postsecondary educa-

tors value the cultural backgrounds and identities of their di-

verse student populations. Humanizing educational environ-

ments, where institutional agents show care, commitment,

and build meaningful relationships with students, lead to

more positive experiences and greater success. Students em-

phasized the importance of these humanizing and validating

interactions with faculty in afﬁrming their sense of belong-

ing, efﬁcacy, and science identity development. One student,

who previously felt disconnected at another institution, de-

scribed the supportive environment at NMHU after meeting

SomosSTEM faculty. For instance, Dr. Medina encouraged her

to engage deeply with material and provided opportunities

to present at conferences, boosting her conﬁdence and sense

of belonging. She stated, “I practiced in front of my peers….

Hearing their feedback… gave me the conﬁdence to say, ‘Yeah,

I can present this and I’m comfortable doing it.”

Another student highlighted the importance of faculty sup-

port in understanding course material, praising Dr. Snow for

her thorough and responsive teaching. “She makes sure you

understand it… if you do have more questions, she’ll wait for

us to ask,” the student shared. Yet another student added all

her professors made students feel heard and valued, creat-

ing a supportive classroom atmosphere. “Anytime we have a

question…they’re just ready to help us and explain it… They’ll

make sure and take the time to help us understand. These stu-

dents’ experiences illustrate the CECE framework’s indicators

of effective faculty support and engagement, showing how hu-

manizing and validating educational environments contribute

to positive outcomes and student success.

CECE Indicator #8 and #9: Proactive Philosophies and

Availability of Holistic Support

Students reported a strong sense of support, understanding,

and belonging due to the personalized and empathetic ap-

proaches of their faculty. For example, Henry felt a strong

sense of belonging and personalized attention at NMHU com-

pared with larger universities. He noted professors at NMHU

knew students by name and were more accessible, which en-

hanced his academic experience and helped him learn bet-

ter. For example, Henry shared his professor: “understands if

you’re going through something, if you need an extension or

something, he’s not just like, ‘No, that’s in the syllabus. You

have to turn in at this date.’ He’s super understanding. He

went on to say,

If you’re confused about anything, you could just email him

about anything, and he always helps… He’s really just very

inviting and everything. If we can’t make it to class…. he

does Zoom so that we can do that too. It makes us feel like

someone cares about how we feel and how we’re doing be-

cause during the pandemic it was so hard to feel that way.

Similarly, Ethan shared how Dr. Snow’s assignments dur-

ing the COVID-19 pandemic allowed him to engage with im-

portant and personal topics. This opportunity to discuss real-

world issues related to his sister’s experience as a nurse made

him feel more connected to his studies. Overall, these expe-

riences highlight the importance of a proactive and holistic

approach that supported students’ sense of belonging and ef-

ﬁcacy. The faculty’s proactive support, anticipating and asking

about students’ needs, enhanced students’ sense of belonging.

DISCUSSION

Perception of the Structured Environment of SomosSTEM

Our inquiry began with the recognition in STEM and other

social contexts, white cultural norms often reinforce racial

trauma, microaggressions, and other harms, limiting the

development of psychosocial attributes crucial for student

success (McGee, 2016, 2020). Cultural norms shape STEM

environments. If meritocratic, highly individualized, and com-

petitive learning environments hinder formation of science

identity, self-efﬁcacy, and sense of belonging, then we need

to empirically document environments that are the oppo-

site: collaborative, humanizing, validating, and culturally

responsive learning environments and their effects.

As early research experiences are important in connection

to students’ cultural values and communities (Schultz et al.,

2011;Graham et al., 2013;Rodenbusch et al., 2016), we

found validating actions were more than faculty taking inter-

est in and caring for students. Rather, students talked specif-

ically about how instructors and community partners drew

on culturally relevant matters that validated students’ expe-

riences and backgrounds. For example, the community voices

lecture series was consistently viewed by students to see peo-

ple who look like them having careers that were science-based

and in the community. Students pointed out how CURE activ-

ities and summer internships focused on matters and settings

in their immediate environment, prompting them to consider

not just the pure scientiﬁc questions involved, but sociohis-

torical dimensions of those issues. This opportunity provided

students to not only be validated across multiple aspects of

their identity (i.e., social identity, rural identity, and science

identity) but also be tangibly connected to issues in their com-

munity.

23:ar62, 10 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

STEM Learning Environment at HSI

We also observed validation in students’ diverse ways of

knowing and being. This ﬁnding is in line with the litera-

ture showing how CUREs and related early research experi-

ences can be very effective in fostering self-efﬁcacy, science

identity, and other near- and long-term educational outcomes

(Auchincloss et al., 2014;Corwin et al., 2015). What our

ﬁndings contribute is further insight into how CUREs can

be effective in providing opportunities for students from un-

derrepresented backgrounds to engage in scientiﬁc research

and gain experience that may not be typically available to

them (Bangera and Brownell, 2014). Speciﬁcally, just as we

saw how validation involved cultural engagement along with

demonstrations of care, evidence suggested the effectiveness

of CUREs for these students from minoritized backgrounds

goes beyond just facilitating hands-on authentic scientiﬁc in-

quiry in a structured setting. Rather it occurs through, or at

least is bolstered by, students having opportunities to learn

and share knowledge about the issues in and needs of their

own communities of origin, just as researchers have proposed

is the case for higher education generally (Guiffrida, 2003,

2005;Harper and Quaye, 2007,Museus, 2008, 2011;Museus

et al., 2012).

This ﬁnding is particularly salient to the challenge of im-

proving STEM college success and career trajectories for stu-

dents from and in minoritized communities. We consider ob-

servations in student performance in a CURE are generally

a more accurate estimate of how well a student will per-

form in a research environment than standard criteria, such as

grade point average or high school experience (Bangera and

Brownell, 2014). Prior literature underscores the primacy of

community for science self-efﬁcacy and science identity (Lane,

2016;Syed et al., 2018;Robnett et al., 2019). Our ﬁndings

afﬁrm this assertion and show it is necessary to understand

community as not limited to peers and college personnel, but

extending the concept of community to be inclusive of the peo-

ple and places students are connected to, an important consid-

eration for those crafting culturally engaging college environ-

ments.

Finally, a note about dissonance. We did not ﬁnd evidence

of the dissonance so often found in literature on racially

minoritized students in STEM. Our ﬁndings point to stu-

dents’ perceptions of validation, but they did not experi-

ence the burden often faced by minoritized students in nav-

igating cultural dissonance (Museus and Quaye, 2009). As

Abrica (2022) explains, Students of Color in STEM ﬁelds

are constantly engaged in a process of reappraising and re-

assessing their own value systems relative to white norms of

STEM, resulting in added cognitive work. Then, STEM learn-

ing environments are not only exclusionary but play an of-

ten unnoticed but signiﬁcant role in delimiting opportuni-

ties for learning and development. Having to evaluate their

own abilities, belonging, and efﬁcacy in relation to the cul-

ture they are being assimilated into is a heavy emotional,

mental, and cognitive load to carry. Future research should

continue to explore evolving forms of cultural dissonance

and stressors related to assimilation in the white norms and

values that continue to permeate educational spaces. Rather

than not naming and taking as normal the whiteness of

STEM spaces, we can do better to acknowledge and name

the cognitive, emotional, and physical stress of even being in

these environments while simultaneously working to change

them.

The Learning Environment’s Inﬂuence on Psychosocial

Attributes

Turning to the question of how students perceived the inﬂu-

ence of their learning environment on their sense of belong-

ing, science identity, and self-efﬁcacy, we found supporting

evidence throughout their experiences with SomosSTEM and

its various activities, acknowledging the activities necessarily

complement and reinforce each other from our participants’

perspective.

Sense of Belonging. Faculty emerged as validating agents

through their collectivist and holistic approaches that led stu-

dents to feel part of a larger academic community. Gianna’s

experiences made her realize she was more inclined toward

forestry and outdoor work than indoor lab work. Though this

might be seen as a student deviating from or only partially

feeling a sense of belonging in STEM, it represents the realiza-

tion there are multiple avenues and paths in science-related

ﬁelds as described when students experienced the Commu-

nity Voices lecture. For Gianna, working in labs as part of

a group made her feel important, even if she estimated she

was not as knowledgeable in certain aspects of the labs. Still,

the group’s collective effort made her realize everyone in the

group contributed, reinforcing her belongingness, true to the

proposition of the beneﬁts of a collectivist cultural orienta-

tion (Museus, 2014). This insight translated to Gianna’s un-

derstanding and pursuit of an internship with the U.S. Forest

Service meant she could explore her interests in forestry while

still maintaining ties to the biological sciences ﬁeld broadly.

We observed such a nuanced sense of belonging emerged

through interpersonal interactions in the experience of others.

For instance, one student who—despite ﬁnding the learning

environment and programs at NMHU impersonal overall—

was nonetheless pushed by their professor to help present

alongside them at an academic conference. This demonstra-

tion of trust, combined with a supportive peer group to re-

hearse with, translated to a sense of purpose in being a part of

NMHU. In essence, this created a sense of belonging because

of validating experiences (Rendón, 1994). A sense of belong-

ing depended on more than the amiable nature of individuals

(Strayhorn, 2018), as what mattered more was authentic dis-

plays of care, investment, and recognition. Most importantly,

this experience occurred in a community of peers who shared

similar experiences, which is particularly salient for minori-

tized groups (Abrica et al., 2022).

Science Identity. SomosSTEM program elements were in-

strumental in fostering a robust science identity among

students that expands on what we know of the role of

socialization in three ways (Carlone and Johnson, 2007;

Vincent-Ruz and Schunn, 2018). First, through CUREs, stu-

dents began to understand how being a scientist involved

mastering the tools and methods of science and how wielding

them to solve real problems positioned the student relative

to others around them. Jacob expressed feeling like a leader

when called to answer applied questions using technology as

part of a CURE, and Alexander began to imagine a future role

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 11

E. J. Abrica et al.

as a faculty member in biology. We see a relational mechanism

for developing a scientiﬁc identity in how a person takes on a

leadership and expert role which beneﬁts others.

The second way we saw science identify formation was a

function of a learning community. The design of SomosSTEM

intentionally included student interns designing CUREs for

students entering the program after them to close the loop

from apprentice to expert in a way that acknowledges and de-

velops their capacity to contribute to a community of learners

and scientists. This was the case for Alexander whose budding

aspirations as a scholarly researcher emerged during his role

in his internship developing a CURE for use in future classes.

Importantly, the boost to students’ science identity was from

these experiences. As important as the hands-on CURE ac-

tivities were, students identiﬁed the impact of insights from

speakers in the Community Voices Lecture Series and mentor-

ing of community partners. Peers were another source of sec-

ondhand inspiration. Jacob noted how fellow students were

dedicated to their majors, creating an atmosphere where pro-

fessionalism was respected and valued.

Last, it was clear in our ﬁndings speciﬁc settings and loca-

tions selected to inform various components of SomosSTEM

had signiﬁcant inﬂuence on students’ formation of a science

identity, with students frequently highlighting the relevance

of places and issues in their communities, revealing this as-

pect as an important ingredient to their identify development

beyond observing and conducting science in action, as pre-

viously established (Rodenbusch et al., 2016). For instance,

when students deliberated on the complex dynamics of assist-

ing their community with resources and land practices, they

also grappled with nuances of politics and community senti-

ments related to the land’s history. Such reﬂections accentuate

the importance of interweaving scientiﬁc insights with tangi-

ble political and community contexts scientists play a role in

inﬂuencing.

Self-Ecacy. Multilayered experiences offered by So-

mosSTEM, from CUREs to faculty mentoring and community

interactions, cumulatively contribute to heightened self-

efﬁcacy. However, a heightened self-belief is not an isolated

outcome, it is profoundly inﬂuenced by how students perceive

their place in the scientiﬁc community and how they envision

their future role in it, as authentic experiences allow them

to judge their abilities (Britner and Pajares, 2006). In our

analysis looking for evidence of the development of self-

efﬁcacy, we found the moments students felt a strong sense

of belonging and identity were also the instances they felt

most empowered and competent. Without evidence or reason

to propose an inﬂuential ordering of the phenomena, what

we can conclude is nuances of these moments in relation to

self-efﬁcacy lie in the conﬁdence students displayed in talking

about their capabilities and envisioning of future roles. For

instance, though Alexander’s conﬁdence in creating a CURE

highlighted his budding scientist identity, further realization

he could teach others underscores a newfound conﬁdence in

his abilities—a strong marker of self-efﬁcacy. Similarly, Jacob’s

pride in using technology to answer real-world questions can

be viewed as a manifestation of his science identity. Yet, the

way he embraced a leadership role during this process sheds

light on his self-assurance and his belief in his potential.

What stands out in our analysis of this dimension of our in-

quiry, like in the rest of our ﬁndings, is how these facets of self-

efﬁcacy do not just stem from individual accomplishments but

are also shaped by their interactions in the academic commu-

nity (Syed et al., 2018) made up of individuals who provided

both instrumental and socioemotional mentoring (Robnett et

al., 2018). This also extends to peer mentors. Jacob’s observa-

tions about his peers’ dedication to their majors reinforced an

environment of mutual respect and aspiration, pushing every-

one to believe more in their capabilities. In students’ descrip-

tions of the structured environment and human-centric focus

of SomosSTEM, we saw students exhibiting increased engage-

ment, openness to feedback, willingness to ask questions, and

tackle challenges and opportunities they would have other-

wise avoided or not encountered.

CONCLUSION

This study sought to understand how an integrated, culturally

engaging STEM learning environment, rather than isolated in-

terventions, impacted development of students’ sense of be-

longing, self-efﬁcacy, and science identity. The study found

students who participated in the SomosSTEM program re-

ported feeling more connected to their community and to

STEM. They also reported feeling more conﬁdent in their abil-

ity to succeed in STEM ﬁelds. The study also found the pro-

gram helped students to see how STEM can be used to address

real-world problems. The study’s ﬁndings suggest integrated,

culturally engaging STEM learning environments can have a

positive impact on students’ sense of belonging, self-efﬁcacy,

and science identity.

More importantly, these ﬁndings contribute to current un-

derstandings and rhetoric about interventions to improve

STEM education as they underscore how STEM education

can be more effective if it is designed to be culturally rel-

evant beyond incorporating topics and values that resonate

with students, but also connects students to their communi-

ties in tangible ways. According to participants in our study,

the SomosSTEM program was promotive of a sense of belong-

ing, science identity, and efﬁcacy because it embodied a cul-

ture marked by a humanizing educational experience where

students were encouraged to work collaboratively and collec-

tively to learn and develop as scientists. The culture of So-

mosSTEM was characterized by caring, commitment, and re-

lationships that all served to validate students’ diverse cultural

backgrounds and was designed to ameliorate the burden of

having to assimilate into white cultural norms and values.

The SomosSTEM learning environment at New Mexico

Highlands University challenged the exclusionary nature of

STEM by tailoring effective strategies (i.e., course-based un-

dergraduate research experiences, summer academy and in-

ternship programs, and community involvement) to center

students’ diverse cultural backgrounds and emphasizing a

community-oriented approach to learning and development.

Our ﬁndings afﬁrm to perform well in any postsecondary

learning environment, it is important for a student to perceive

what they are learning as an extension of who they are and

where they come from. Learning must be seen as involving

behaviors that do not require sacriﬁcing the culture and val-

ues of one’s community.

23:ar62, 12 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

STEM Learning Environment at HSI

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work was supported by the , Award No. 1953487. Any

opinions, ﬁndings, and conclusions or recommendations ex-

pressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not

necessarily reﬂect the views of the National Science Founda-

tion.

REFERENCES

Abrica, E. J. (2022). Revisiting the complexity of racial understandings and

subjective experiences of race among students of color in STEM higher

education: Toward a racial reappraisal framework. Journal of Women and

Minorities in Science and Engineering,28(2), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.

1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2022036573

Abrica, E. J., & Dorsten, A. K. (2020). How students think about race: Explor-

ing racial conceptions and their implications for student success among

Latino male community college students. New Directions for Community

Colleges,2020(190), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20388

Abrica, E. J., Lane, T. B., Zobac, S., & Collins, E. (2022). Sense of belonging

and community building within a STEM intervention program: A focus on

Latino male undergraduates’ experiences. Journal of Hispanic Higher Ed-

ucation,21(2), 228–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192720974884

Alkaher, I., & Dolan, E. L. (2014). Integrating research into undergraduate

courses: Current practices and future directions. In: D. Sunal, C. Sunal,

D. Zollman, C. Mason, & E. Wright (Eds.), Research in Science Education:

Research Based Undergraduate Science Teaching (pp. 403–434). Charo-

lette, NC: Information Age Publishing..

Ashley, M., Cooper, K. M., Cala, J. M., & Brownell, S. E. (2017). Building better

bridges into STEM: A synthesis of 25 years of literature on STEM sum-

mer bridge programs. CBE—Life Sciences Education,16(4), es3. https://

doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-05-0085

Auchincloss, L. C., Laursen, S. L., Branchaw, J. L., Eagan, K., Graham, M.,

Hanauer, D. I., … & Dolan, E. L. (2014). Assessment of course-based un-

dergraduate research experiences: A meeting report. CBE—Life Sciences

Education,13(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-01-000

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-ecacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY: Free-

man..

Bangera, G., & Brownell, S. E. (2014). Course-based undergraduate re-

search experiences can make scientiﬁc research more inclusive. CBE—

Life Sciences Education,13(4), 602–606. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-

06-0099

Barnett, E. A. (2011). Validation experiences and persistence among com-

munity college students. The Review of Higher Education,34(2), 193–

230. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2010.0019

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2022). Color-blind racism in pandemic times. Sociol-

ogy of Race and Ethnicity,8(3), 343–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/

2332649220941024

Bonilla-Silva, E., & Forman, T. A. (2000). “I am not a racist but…”: Mapping

white college students’ racial ideology in the USA. Discourse & Society,

11(1), 50–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926500011001003

Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-ecacy beliefs of

middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,43(5),

485–499. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20131

Brownell, S. E., Kloser, M. J., Fukami, T., & Shavelson, R. (2012). Undergraduate

biology lab courses: comparing the impact of traditionally based “cook-

book” and authentic research-based courses on student lab experiences.

Journal of College Science Teaching,41(4), 36–45.

Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change:

Lack of training, time, incentives, and… tensions with professional identity?

CBE—Life Sciences Education,11(4), 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1187/

cbe.12-09- 0163

Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences

of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Jour-

nal of Research in Science Teaching,44(8), 1187–1218. https://doi.org/10.

1002/tea.20237

Corwin, L. A., Graham, M. J., & Dolan, E. L. (2015). Modeling course-based

undergraduate research experiences: An agenda for future research and

evaluation. CBE—Life Sciences Education,14(1), es1. https://doi.org/10.

1187/cbe.14-10- 0167

Dowd, A. C., Sawatzky, M., & Korn, R. (2011). Theoretical foundations and a

research agenda to validate measures of intercultural eort. The Review

of Higher Education,35(1), 17–44. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2011.0033

Espinoza, K. J. C., & Rincón, B. E. (2023). Color-evasive/conscious? A content

analysis of how engineering faculty discuss race and racism in a US-based

equity-focused STEM professional development program. Education Sci-

ences,13(3), 233. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030233

Estrada, M., Eroy-Reveles, A., & Matsui, J. (2018). The inﬂuence of arm-

ing kindness and community on broadening participation in STEM ca-

reer pathways. Social Issues and Policy Review,12(1), 258–297. https://

doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12046

Graham, M. J., Frederick, J., Byars-Winston, A., Hunter, A.-B., & Handelsman,

J. (2013). Increasing persistence of college students in STEM. Science,

341(6153), 1455–1456. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240487

Grin, K. A., Baker, V. L., & O’Meara, K. (2020). Doing, caring, and being:

“Good” mentoring and its role in the socialization of graduate students

of color in STEM. In: J. C. Weidman & L. DeAngelo (Eds.), Socialization in

Higher Education and the Early Career: Theory, Research and Application

(pp. 223–239). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/

978-3- 030-33350- 8_13

Grineski, S., Daniels, H., Collins, T., Morales, D. X., Frederick, A., & Garcia, M.

(2018). The conundrum of social class: Disparities in publishing among

STEM students in undergraduate research programs at a Hispanic majority

institution. Science Education,102(2), 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/

sce.21330

Guirida, D. A. (2003). African American student organizations as agents of

social integration. Journal of College Student Development,44(3), 304–

319. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2003.0024

Guirida, D. (2005). To break away or strengthen ties to home: A complex

issue for African American college students attending a predominantly

White institution. Equity & Excellence in Education,38(1), 49–60. https://

doi.org/10.1080/10665680590907864

Harper, S. R., & Quaye, S. J. (2007). Student organizations as venues for

Black identity expression and development among African American male

student leaders. Journal of College Student Development,48(2), 127–

144. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0012

Hausmann, L. R., Schoﬁeld, J. W., & Woods, R. L. (2007). Sense of belong-

ing as a predictor of intentions to persist among African American and

White ﬁrst-year college students. Research in Higher Education,48,803–

839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-007-9052-9

Hillman, N. W. (2016). Geography of college opportunity: The case of ed-

ucation deserts. American Educational Research Journal,53(4), 987–

1021. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216653204

Honicke, T., & Broadbent, J. (2016). The inﬂuence of academic self-ecacy

on academic performance: A systematic review. Educational Research

Review,17, 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.11.002

Hurtado, S., Cabrera, N. L., Lin, M. H., Arellano, L., & Espinosa, L. L. (2009).

Diversifying science: Underrepresented student experiences in struc-

tured research programs. Research in Higher Education,50(2), 189–

214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9114- 7

Jordan, T. C., Burnett, S. H., Carson, S., Caruso, S. M., Clase, K., DeJong, R. J.,

… & Elgin, S. C. (2014). A broadly implementable research course in phage

discovery and genomics for ﬁrst-year undergraduate students. mBio,5(1),

e01051–e01013. https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.01051-13

Kiang, P. (2002). Stories and structures of persistence: Ethnographic learning

through research and practice in Asian American studies. In: Y. Zou & H.

Trueba (Eds.), Ethnography and Schools: Qualitative Approaches to the

Study of Education, (pp. 223–256). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littleﬁeld..

Lane, T. B. (2016). Beyond academic and social integration: Understanding

the impact of a STEM enrichment program on the retention and degree

attainment of underrepresented students. CBE—Life Sciences Education,

15(3), ar39. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0070

Lo, S. M., & Mordacq, J. C. (2020). Course-based undergraduate research ex-

periences (CUREs) in biological sciences. In: J. J. Mintzes & E. M. Wal-

ter (Eds.), Active Learning in College Science (pp. 467–479). Switzerland:

Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33600-4_29

McCoy, D. L., Luedke, C. L., & Winkle-Wagner, R. (2017). Encouraged or

weeded out: Perspectives of students of color in the STEM disciplines on

faculty interactions. Journal of College Student Development,58(5), 657–

673. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2017.0052

McGee, E. O. (2016). Devalued Black and Latino racial identities: A by-product

of STEM college culture? American Educational Research Journal,53(6),

1626–1662. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216676572

McGee, E. O. (2020). Interrogating structural racism in STEM higher edu-

cation. Educational Researcher,49(9), 633–644. https://doi.org/10.3102/

0013189X20972718

CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024 23:ar62, 13

E. J. Abrica et al.

McGee, E. O., Botchway, P. K., Naphan-Kingery, D. E., Brockman, A. J., Hous-

ton, S., & White, D. T. (2022). Racism camouﬂaged as impostorism and the

impact on Black STEM doctoral students. Race Ethnicity and Education,

25(4), 487–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2021.1924137

Mensah, F. M., & Jackson, I. (2018). Whiteness as property in science teacher

education. Teachers College Record,120(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.

1177/016146811812000108

Mills, C. W. (1997). The Racial Contract. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press..

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage..

Museus, S. D. (2008). The role of ethnic student organizations in foster-

ing African American and Asian American students’ cultural adjustment

and membership at predominantly White institutions. Journal of College

Student Development,49(6), 568–586. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.

0039

Museus, S. D. (2011). Generating ethnic minority student success (GEMS): A

qualitative analysis of high-performing institutions. Journal of Diversity in

Higher Education,4(3), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022355

Museus, S. D. (2014). The culturally engaging campus environments (CECE)

model: A new theory of success among racially diverse college student

populations. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research,189–

227. Netherlands: Springer.. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 94-017- 8005-

6_5

Museus, S. D., & Neville, K. M. (2012). Delineating the ways that key in-

stitutional agents provide racial minority students with access to social

capital in college. Journal of College Student Development,53(3), 436–

452. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2012.0042

Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Toward an intercultural perspective of

racial and ethnic minority college student persistence. Review of Higher

Education,33(1), 67–94. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.0.0107

Museus, S. D., Ravello, J. N., & Vega, B. E. (2012). The campus racial culture: A

critical race counterstory. In: S. D. Museus & U.M. Jayakumar (Eds.), Creat-

ing Campus Cultures: Fostering Success among Racially Diverse Student

Populations (pp.28–45). New York, NY: Routledge..

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Un-

dergraduate Research Experiences for STEM Students: Successes, Chal-

lenges, and Opportunities. Washington, DC: The National Academies

Press..

Ovink, S. M., & Kalogrides, D. (2015). No place like home? Familism and

Latino/a–White dierences in college pathways. Social Science Research,

52,219–235.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.12.018

Ovink, S., Kalogrides, D., Nanney, M., & Delaney, P. (2018). College match

and undermatch: Assessing student preferences, college proximity, and

inequality in post-college outcomes. Research in Higher Education,59,

553–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9482-y

Park, J. J., Kim, Y. K., Salazar, C., & Hayes, S. (2020). Student–faculty in-

teraction and discrimination from faculty in STEM: The link with reten-

tion. Research in Higher Education,61, 330–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/

s11162-019- 09564-w

Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). First-and second-generation college students:

A comparison of their engagement and intellectual development. The

Journal of Higher Education,76(3), 276–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/

00221546.2005.11772283

Rendón, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new

model of learning and student development. Innovative Higher Educa-

tion,19(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01191156

Rendón, L. I., & Muñoz, S. M. (2011). Revisiting validation theory: Theoretical

foundations, applications, and extensions. Enrollment Management Jour-

nal,5(2), 12–33.

Robnett, R. D., Nelson, P. A., Zurbriggen, E. L., Crosby, F. J., & Chemers, M. M.

(2018). Research mentoring and scientist identity: Insights from under-

graduates and their mentors. International Journal of STEM Education,

5(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0139-y

Robnett, R. D., Nelson, P. A., Zurbriggen, E. L., Crosby, F. J., & Chemers,

M. M. (2019). The form and function of STEM research mentoring: A

mixed-methods analysis focusing on ethnically diverse undergraduates

and their mentors. Emerging Adulthood,7(3), 180–193. https://doi.org/

10.1177/2167696818758734

Rodenbusch, S. E., Hernandez, P. R., Simmons, S. L., & Dolan, E. L. (2016). Early

engagement in course-based research increases graduation rates and

completion of science, engineering, and mathematics degrees. CBE—Life

Sciences Education,15(2), ar20. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0117

Rodriguez, S. L., Hensen, K. A., & Espino, M. L. (2019). Promoting STEM iden-

tity development in community colleges & across the transfer process.

Journal of Applied Research in the Community College,26(2), 11–22.

Schultz, P. W., Hernandez, P. R., Woodcock, A., Estrada, M., Chance, R. C.,

Aguilar, M., & Serpe, R. T. (2011). Patching the pipeline: Reducing edu-

cational disparities in the sciences through minority training programs.

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,33(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/

10.3102/0162373710392371

Shear, R. I., & Simmons, S. L. (2011, November). Teaching through research:

ﬁve-year outcome data from the Freshman Research Initiative at The Uni-

versity of Texas at Austin. In 67th Southwest regional ACS meeting.

Stigmar, M. (2016). Peer-to-peer teaching in higher education: A critical lit-

erature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning,24(2), 124–

136. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2016.1178963

Strayhorn, T. L. (2018). College Students’ Sense of Belonging: A Key to

Educational Success for All Students (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Rout-

ledge.. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315297293

Sue, D. W. (2004). Whiteness and ethnocentric monoculturalism: Making the"

invisible" visible. American Psychologist,59(8), 761–769. https://doi.org/

10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.761

Syed, M., Zurbriggen, E. L., Chemers, M. M., Goza, B. K., Bearman, S., Crosby, F.

J., … & Morgan, E. M. (2018). The role of self-ecacy and identity in medi-

ating the eects of STEM support experiences: Science self-ecacy and

identity. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy,19(1), 7–49. https://

doi.org/10.1111/asap.12170

Thompson, C. E., & Fretz, B. R. (1991). Predicting the adjustment of Black stu-

dents at predominantly white institutions. The Journal of Higher Educa-

tion,62(4), 437–450. https://doi.org/10.2307/1982004

Trujillo, G., & Tanner, K. D. (2014). Considering the role of aect in learning:

Monitoring students’ self-ecacy, sense of belonging, and science iden-

tity. CBE—Life Sciences Education,13(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1187/

cbe.13-12- 0241

Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between

self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Edu-

cational Psychologist,39(2), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985

ep3902_3

Vincent-Ruz, P., & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of science identity and

its role as the driver of student choices. International Journal of STEM

Education,5(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0140-5

Vuong, M., Brown-Welty, S., & Tracz, S. (2010). The eects of self-ecacy

on academic success of ﬁrst-generation college sophomore students.

Journal of College Student Development,51(1), 50–64. https://doi.org/

10.1353/csd.0.0109

Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion

of community cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education,8(1), 69–

91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006

23:ar62, 14 CBE—Life Sciences Education r23:ar62, Winter 2024

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.

Color-Evasive/Conscious? A Content Analysis of How Engineering Faculty Discuss Race and Racism in a U.S.-Based Equity-Focused STEM Professional Development Program

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2023

Against a backdrop of calls for increased access and participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) in the United States have emerged as critical access points for Latina/o/x and other Students of Color. Federal grants can become important levers for building institutional capacity for broadening participation in STEM and transforming HSIs toward better serving Students of Color, specifically as it relates to curricula and pedagogy. In this study, we focus on the engineering faculty at an HSI who are participants in a National Science Foundation-funded, equity-focused professional development program. Operationalizing Bonilla-Silva’s color-evasive racial ideology framework, we use content analysis techniques to explore how engineering faculty discuss race and racism as part of the professional development experience. First, we find that engineering faculty largely rely on color-evasive racial frameworks (i.e., abstract liberalism, minimization of racism) when describing their motivations for participating in the program. Moreover, we find that engineering faculty responses depict a range of surprise and familiarity when reflecting on issues of race and racism. Finally, regardless of prior exposure to module concepts, at the end of the program, the majority of action projects reflect a recognition of race and racism as important.

Racism camouflaged as impostorism and the impact on Black STEM doctoral students

Article

Full-text available

May 2021

Black doctoral students in engineering and computing fields experience racialized stress, as structural racism in STEM takes a toll on their sense of belonging and acceptance as intellectually competent in comparison to White and some Asian peers and faculty. Black doctoral students are often told by campus administrators that the source of this racialized stress is impostorism and it is curable. In this article, we employ phenomenological analysis to examine how 54 Black engineering and computing students experience racism marketed as impostor syndrome (syndrome meaning in their heads). Results show that 51 of our study participants understood their experiences as both impostorism and racism, as some realized that racism created the conditions for being racially positioned as an impostor. We problematize impostorism peddled by campus administrators as a cover for racism, once again placing onus on students and claiming they have irrational but curable behaviors, while institutional and individual racism in STEM runs rampant by design.

Interrogating Structural Racism in STEM Higher Education

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2020

Ebony McGee

The racialized structure of STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) higher education maintains gross inequities that are illustrative of structural racism, which both informs and is reinforced by discriminatory beliefs, policies, values, and distribution of resources. Thus, an examination into structural racism in STEM is needed to expose the marginalization of underrepresented groups in STEM and to improve understanding of the STEM policies, practices, and procedures that allow the foundation of racism to remain intact. I argue that, even at the top of the education hierarchy, Black STEM doctorate students and PhD degree holders consistently endure the racist residue of higher education institutions and STEM employers. Thus, this manuscript also discusses how universities institutionalize diversity mentoring programs designed mostly to fix (read “assimilate”) underrepresented students of color while ignoring or minimizing the role of the STEM departments in creating racially hostile work and educational spaces. I argue that, without a critical examination of the structural racism omnipresent in the STEM, progress in racially diversifying STEM will continue at a snail’s pace.

First- and Second-Generation College Students: A Comparison of Their Engagement and Intellectual Development

Article

Oct 2016

Predicting the Adjustment of Black Students at Predominantly White Institutions

Article

Nov 2016

Themed Issue:Revisiting the Complexity of Racial Understandings and Subjective Experiences of Race Among Students of Color in STEM Higher Education: Toward a Racial Reappraisa

Article

Jan 2022

Elvira Abrica

Sense of Belonging and Community Building within a STEM Intervention Program: A Focus on Latino Male Undergraduates’ Experiences

Article

Nov 2020
J Hispanic High Educ

Relying on semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 13 Latino male undergraduates in engineering, this study explored students experiences and sense of belonging within a Minority Retention Program at a 4-year public university in California. Findings support extent research on the importance of structural interventions in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) while highlighting nuance in experiences of Latino males, including perceptions of stigma associated with participation. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

Color-Blind Racism in Pandemic Times

Article

Jul 2020

Eduardo Bonilla-Silva

In this article the author examines how the frameworks of color-blind racism have influenced many topics during the pandemic. Using readily available material from popular culture (TV shows, newspaper and magazine articles, and advertisements) and from statements by government officials, the author examines how color blindness has shaped our national discussion on essential workers and heroes, charity, and differential mortality. The main argument is that color-blind racism is limiting our understanding of the structural nature of the various racial problems coronavirus disease 2019 has revealed, making it difficult to envision the kinds of policies needed to address them. the author concludes by summarizing what these ideological perspectives block from view as well as addressing the nascent discursive cracks that might be used to produce alternative frames for interpreting matters and organizing collective action.

How Students Think About Race: Exploring Racial Conceptions and Their Implications for Student Success Among Latino Male Community College Students

Article

Jun 2020

This chapter describes the importance of students’ conceptualizations of race, defined as the abstract ideas that students have about race as well as how they express these ideas as influencing their own experience or that of the social identity group(s) to which they belong. Empirical findings from a study of racial conceptualization among Latino male community college students attending a 2‐year Hispanic Serving Institution in Southern California are presented. Implications of racial conceptualization for programmatic interventions and curriculum development are discussed.

Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences (CUREs) in Biological Sciences

Chapter

Feb 2020

Research experiences provide tremendous benefits to students, such as improved learning outcomes and increased persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). However, the opportunity to do research in a faculty laboratory can be limited by available resources. As a solution, national reports have called for laboratory courses that engage undergraduates in authentic research experiences. These course-based undergraduate research experiences (CUREs) have the potential to make research experiences accessible to all students. While CUREs have been reported in the literature across STEM disciplines, many of them are in the biological sciences. Here, we present two examples of large introductory biology CUREs, where students work collaboratively on research projects that have the potential to generate novel results with broader relevance. The goal of these courses is to help students develop an understanding of research in the biological sciences by engaging in authentic research experiences. We also report data from quantitative surveys and qualitative focus groups that are used to evaluate these courses and to provide continuing feedback for improvement over many implementation cycles. While the courses described in this chapter are in biological sciences, we believe that our approach is applicable to colleagues across STEM disciplines who wish to develop their own CUREs.

A Community-Based, Culturally Engaging STEM Learning Environment and Its Impact on Students' Psychosocial Attributes at a Rural Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI)

Abstract

Recommended publications

Long-Term Outcomes of Biotechnology Student Participation in Undergraduate Research Experiences at D...

Improving Underrepresented Minority Student Persistence in STEM

Training program for Research Educators of sequential course-based undergraduate research experience...

Introduction to Research: A Scalable, Online Badge Implemented in Conjunction with a Classroom-Based...