Increasing Diversity in STEM through Professional Development Activities

1. Increasing Diversity in STEM through Professional Development Activities Jonathan M. Holland, Debra A. Major, Valerie J. Morganson, & Karin A. Orvis Old Dominion University This research was supported by a SEED grant from Old Dominion University.

2. Retention in STEM • Difficult to retain women and minorities in STEM • Fewer of these underrepresented groups enter and persist (Varma, 2007) • Why? Differential preparation outside of classroom? • STEM fields have a “chilly” climate(Morganson et al., in press)

3. Capitalization Capitalization = Proactive participation in voluntary professional development activities • Builds professional identity in the workplace(Ibarra, 1999) • Influenced by environmental supports and barriers (Maurer et al., 2003) • Differences in these factors between men and women (Lent et al., 2008) • Capitalization has been relatively unexplored in an academic setting

4. Research Questions • How do engineering and computer science students capitalize? • Why do they capitalize? • What factors support or discourage capitalization? • What are the similarities and differences in capitalization, its supports, and its barriers, across gender, major, and university environment?

5. Method • 8 focus groups consisted of: • Men and women • Computer Science and Engineering students • Students from a primarily white institution (PWI) and a historically black institution (HBI)

6. Results (1) How do students capitalize? • Formal Activities • Student organizations • Tutoring programs • Career-building services • Internships and work opportunities • Informal Activities • Networking with peers and alumni • Forming study groups with classmates • Seeking out mentoring from faculty • Independent research

7. (2) Why do students capitalize? • Intrinsic Incentives • Personal interest in the field • Peers provide emotional support and a “break” from coursework • Extrinsic Incentives • Resume building • Immediate payment • Enhancing skills to become more marketable

8. (3a) What factors support capitalization? • Role models • Advisor and faculty encouragement • Active information about activities (3b) What factors prevent capitalization? • Time • Lack of information about events • Underrepresentation in the activity

9. Gender • Women preferred formal activities • Student organizations • Men preferred informal activities • Networking • Opportunities for applied experience • Women often expressed discomfort at participating in predominantly male activities

10. Major • Engineering majors prioritized forging professional contacts for career positioning • Peer and alumni networks • Participating in internships and work opportunities • Computer Science majors prioritized attaining technical skills • Keeping “ahead of the curve” by learning programming skills above and beyond their coursework

11. University • The HBI seemed to offer a more supportive environment than the PWI • Advisors were more often described as proactive • Students were better informed about opportunities • Organizations targeting underrepresented groups had more presence • Gender was not discussed as often as a barrier

12. Implications • STEM education is a pipeline for the workforce • Capitalization continues in the workplace (Maurer et al., 2003)

13. Directions for Application • Programs should actively disseminate information about opportunities • Advisors should take a proactive role in encouraging capitalization • More experienced students who have capitalized should share their experiences with other students • Offer formal activities to attract/retain female talent

14. Future Research • Empirical research investigating antecedents and outcomes of capitalization in an academic context • Differences in university type