Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0188-x
(2019) 6:34
International Journal of
STEM Education
RESEARCH
Open Access
Innovative Professional Development and
Community Building Activity Program
Improves STEM URM Graduate Student
Experiences
Rosana G. Moreira1*, Karen Butler-Purry2, Adrienne Carter-Sowell3, Shannon Walton2, Isah V. Juranek2,
Linda Challoo4, Gloria Regisford5, Richard Coffin6 and Angela Spaulding7
Abstract
Background: Strong consensus exists on the need to expand participation of URM doctoral students in STEM
fields, to increase their retention, reduce their average time to degree, and provide these students with the
preparation necessary to compete for faculty positions. This paper provides a model for implementing effective
strategies to support the success of URM STEM graduate students across a system with various types of institutions.
An innovative professional development, participation incentive, and community building program for
underrepresented minority (URM) Graduate students in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)
fields was instrumental in preparing them to secure academic positions, navigating graduate school successfully,
and form a support network that helped them excel at the next level. The program provided sustained support and
several activities in a collaborative environment for 84 Ph.D. and 84 Master’s students, in over 43 graduate
programs. Data were collected using evaluation questionnaires containing open-ended responses and responses to
specific items sent to the students after each activity, and a survey seeking their feedback on the program.
Results: In only 4 years, the program helped 13 students to secure faculty or post-doctoral positions, and improved
the opinion of the professoriate career as thirteen students transitioned to the Ph.D. program and are now more
interested in applying for faculty positions. The program was successful in developing and sustaining large-scale,
distributed, yet interconnected STEM communities among the diverse Alliance system institutions and increased
participation (from 58 in 2013 to 98 in 2017), reduced barriers, and promoted the success of URM doctoral students
preparing for careers in the professoriate.
Conclusions: We have developed activities that connected students and faculty across institutions, providing
multiple paths to the professoriate that align with students’ diverse academic career aspirations. This article
illustrates that professional development, incentives, and community building interventions are essential in
generating URM STEM education transformation.
Keywords: Underrepresented minority, Graduate students, STEM, Professoriate, Professional development,
Community building
* Correspondence: rmoreira@tamu.edu
1
Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering, Texas A&M University,
310 Scoates Hall, College Station, TX 77843, USA
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 2 of 16
Introduction
It is clear that the US must remain competitive (Autenrieth,
Lewis, & Butler-Purry, 2017) by continuing investments in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
higher education, in particular graduate school, to provide
well-trained doctoral degree holders for the US scientific
workforce. Doctoral graduates in STEM fields account for a
proportionally larger share of the US workforce compared
to those in non-STEM fields (National Science Board,
2016). As the US population becomes more diverse, it is
critical that STEM as well as non-STEM career pathways
become available to all Americans, particularly, underrepresented minorities (URM), defined as American Indians/
Alaska Natives, Blacks/African Americans, Hispanic/
Latinos, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islanders, and other
Mixed-Race individuals (Handelsman & Smith, 2016).
Training these individuals would provide the educated
workforce necessary to meet the US economic and social
demands of the twenty-first century.
In the past 20 years, many federal initiatives were created with a goal of minimizing existing disparity among
URM students and whites in higher education STEM
fields. Although graduate enrollment for URM students
in STEM fields has increased steadily over the last decade, more work needs to be done to increase URM
STEM doctorates to equitable rates (Okahana, Klein,
Allum, & Sowell, 2018). Persistent underrepresentation
of URMs in the STEM doctoral workforce rightfully
causes concern, as it can affect workforce innovation.
Therefore, to prepare a future US STEM academic
workforce, faculty from universities and colleges must
value ethnic diversity, provide supportive participation
practices, and reward a multi-cultural learning and research climate (Byars-Winston, 2014).
A study (Sowell, Allum, & Okahana, 2015) conducted
by the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) provides
comprehensive facts on outcomes of URM (AfricanAmerican and Hispanic) students enrolled in STEM
doctoral programs at 21 research universities in the
USA. Their data shows that the majority (64%) of the
enrolled URM STEM doctoral students completed their
degrees within 10 years and the remaining 36% withdrew
from graduate school. During these 10 years, Hispanic
students had higher completion and lower attrition rates
than black/African-American students.
A wide range of motives may cause students to withdraw once they have experienced academic life (Sowell
et al., 2015): attractive employment opportunities; a poor
fit of scientific research with their personal life; change
of degree; or the prospect of long, poorly paid graduate
school and postdoc years followed by an uncertain career future in a saturated job market. Some URM students may find the culture of graduate school
uncongenial, especially if they attend institutions with
small URM populations. Sowell et al. (2015) provided
examples of institutional actions that may help to mitigate these challenges: early and often interventions; enhanced academic support; program evaluations and
interventions; and cultivating a culture of diversity and
inclusion. However, more innovative strategies to increase
students
“motivation
to
continue—and
complete—their studies are still needed”.
The main contribution of this paper is to demonstrate
that interventions in the areas of professional development together with community building and participation incentives are essential to success of URM STEM
graduate students to complete their graduate degrees
and secure tenure-track and postdoctoral positions in
STEM disciplines. The paper discusses activities in three
intervention areas that were implemented as a part of a
program facilitated by four institutions (operating in different regional, cultural, geographic, and demographic
contexts) in a university system to support URM Ph.D.
and Master’s STEM students.
Relevant literature review
Okahana et al. (2018) presented important information
on timely completion of STEM doctorates by underrepresented minority students. Their study was based on
student level data from the Completion and Attrition in
Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate
(AGEP) and non-AGEP Institutions project. By using
multivariate logistic regression models, they evaluated
the effect of different variables on attrition and completion rates, including gender, race, institutions (private
versus public, AGEP versus non-AGEP, very high research versus high research), and prior master’s degree.
The above mentioned study found that Hispanic/
LatinX and other URM students (American Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Mixed races) were more likely than
their Black/African American counterparts to complete
their STEM doctorates within 10 years and they were
also more likely to earn their STEM doctorates. For
Black/African American students, the challenge has
more to do with retention than with prolonged completion of their doctoral degrees. The analyses in that study
showed that institutional sector and Carnegie Classification matter to the probability of STEM doctoral completion for men, Black/African Americans, and those who
started without a prior master’s degree. Having a prior
master’s degree was positively correlated with the chance
of earning a doctorate within 10 years among Black/African American students and among URM men in STEM
fields. Therefore, efforts such as the NSF AGEP program
facilitate doctoral completion of URM doctoral students
in STEM fields, and continued investment should focus
not only on recruitment of URM students, but also on
other aspects of STEM doctoral pipelines such as
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 3 of 16
community building. However, building a diverse community should be based on institutional values of diversity and inclusion, which are aligned with institutional
missions to support excellence (Butts et al., 2012; Smith
& Calasanti, 2005).
The literature on recruitment and persistence of URM
students in STEM graduate programs identified several
major challenges (Lovitts, 2008; Ong, Wright, Espinosa, &
Orfield, 2011; Tinto, 2016, 2012). These include social
climates and cultural practices in STEM, academic and
social integration of students, academic sense of self (selfefficacy), sense of belonging, interpersonal relationships
and expectations, attitudes and support of family, mentors,
and peers (Gardner, 2008; Lovitts, 2001). Internal assessments in the form of surveys, interviews, focus groups, as
well as data on recruitment and retention from Texas
A&M University System URM programs (Bridge To
Doctorate-BTD and Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority
Participation-LSAMP) provided preliminary data for the
development of the TAMUS-AGEP program. In general,
the data revealed that URM college students do not pursue doctoral degrees because they do not (1) consider
graduate study or academia as a possible goal, (2) understand the process by which a student can pursue such a
goal, (3) know the availability of potential career options
for those who pursue that path, and (4) think that they
could be successful (TAMUS LSAMP Bridges to the
Doctorate (HRD-1249272), 2012a, 2012b). Some URM
students may also face lack of understanding from family
members and the home community, in particular URM
students who are first generation college students. An
example of a common statement is: “For me, being from a
really small town, they won’t understand the Ph.D. and
what that really means” as quoted in Saenz, Hurtatdo,
Barrera, Wolf, and Yeung (2007).
A disconnect in expectations and culture compared to
the students’ undergraduate program can also present
problems when students go from one institution for
undergraduate study where, for example, mathematics
requirements are less rigorous, to a graduate program at
another institution with more rigorous requirements
(Goulde, 2005). This issue applies equally to cultural differences; for instance, students may perceive a much
more competitive, less nurturing or welcoming atmosphere than what they experienced at their undergraduate
institutions. Furthermore, many minority students have
financial constraints requiring that they work to support
themselves and, sometimes, their families (TAMUS
LSAMP Bridges to the Doctorate (HRD-1249272),
2012a). These students may also have dependent children or other family obligations that pose challenges to
pursuing full-time graduate study.
Poor student-advisor relationships (lack of trust, interaction, or intellectual support) are a major factor in
doctoral student attrition in science and other STEM departments (Goulde, 2005). Furthermore, informal mentoring networks have long been essential to the nurturing of
graduate students and development of future faculty (Carter-Sowell, Dickens, Miller, & Zimmerman, 2016). In situations where minority students are not included in those
networks, they experience a distinct disadvantage.
Preliminary assessment (surveys, interviews, focus
groups) at our institutions indicated that community
building emerged as a key strategy that underpins informal and personal mentoring, enhancing feelings of inclusion, and providing support and encouragement (TAMUS
LSAMP, 2012a and 2012b). Multi-level mentoring (where
a structured program includes mentoring relationships
with peers, faculty, and staff), along with research experiences, and special training related to learning and study
strategies, were found to be particularly effective for URM
students (Wilson et al., 2012). Mentoring helped URM
graduate students negotiate new cultures and expectations
they encountered in graduate school, to learn strategies
for success, and to avoid feelings of isolation. Moreover,
effective mentoring relationships at the doctoral level were
characterized by a personal connection between mentor
and mentee that went beyond academic and career counseling as presented by Wilson et al. (2012).
TAMUS LSAMP and BTD students who participated
in the program evaluation also commented that professional development activities, including monthly workshops and opportunities to present at conferences,
proved “extremely helpful” in allowing them to build the
skills needed to succeed in graduate studies. Participants
mentioned that these components should combine with
the student financial support necessary for successful recruitment and retention of URM students. They also
stressed that the program should include strong research
activities and graduate curricula required for any graduate to compete successfully in the academic job market.
Therefore, this article demonstrates the implementation
of the activities mentioned above and provides recommendations that may be implemented at other institutions to increase URM STEM graduate students
motivation and preparation to compete for faculty positions. The challenge we undertook with this program involved implementing interventions across an Alliance
comprised of institutions operating in different regional,
cultural, geographic, and demographic contexts.
Methods
The Texas A&M System Alliance for Graduate and the
Professoriate (TAMUS-AGEP) program, funded by the
NSF-AGEP program, aimed at increasing the number of
successful URM STEM faculty by measurably increasing
the number of STEM doctoral degrees awarded to URM
students and the number of URMs transitioning to
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 4 of 16
STEM faculty positions (or to competitive postdocs that
lead to faculty positions) each year.
The Alliance consisted of five Texas A&M System
Universities: Texas A&M University, TAMUCS, as the
lead institution (a predominant white, public, doctoralhighest research activity university); Prairie View A&M
University (PVAMU) (an HBCU, public, doctoral Universities: Moderate Research Activity university); Texas
A&M University-Corpus Christi, TAMUCC (an HIS,
public, doctoral Universities: Moderate Research Activity
university); Texas A&M University-Kingsville, TAMUK
(an HIS, public, doctoral Universities: High Research Activity university); and West Texas A&M University,
WTAMU (a predominant white, public, Master’s Colleges & Universities: Larger Programs University).
To improve motivation and enhance the professional
skills of URM Doctoral students to become competitive
candidates for academia positions, TAMUS-AGEP offered a series of interventions in three areas: (a) professional development, (b) community building, and (c)
participation incentives.
Examples of activities included an annual AGEP Conference, a Summer Institute, a Summer National Fellowship and Application Lab, peer-writing workshops, and a
series of professional development seminars and workshops to help students plan for successful doctoral and
postdoctoral experiences to enable a smooth transition
into future academic roles. The program also offered
students the opportunity to attend the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) Teaching & Mentoring
Institute, and Travel Awards and Mini-Grants.
The professional development interventions were designed to develop the following professional and technical
skills: (1) Academic development; (2) Leadership and communication development; (3) Instruction and assessment;
and (4) Career development. Community-building interventions were intended to increase support and a sense of belonging to URM graduate students at the five participating
system institutions. Incentives in the form of travel awards
and collaborative mini-grants were created to provide
financial support for these experiences to students actively
participating in the program. Also, a bonus program encouraged students’ participation as they could earn points
and receive a participation bonus up to $2500 per semester.
A few students who were very active in the program were
selected to participate as AGEP ambassadors and each
received $500 for assisting with recruitment and providing
leadership in planning and implementation of activities.
Table 1 shows the activities offered by the program in
each of the intervention areas. Eighty-seven activities
were developed and implemented with 1154 students attending the events. Nineteen students served as program
ambassadors from 2013 to 2017. Below follows a description of each main activities offered by the program.
From 2013 to 2017, this AGEP program provided interventions to support the success of 84 Ph.D. and 84
Master’s students over 43 STEM graduate programs. Of
the total number of students (only US citizens and permanent residents) who participated in the program (n =
168), 55% of them were female, 63% were Hispanic
Americans, 32% were African Americans, and 5% others
(Native Hawaiian and Native Alaskan). Figure 1 further
illustrates the number of students who participated in
the program across these institutions from 2013 to 2017.
TAMUCS accounted for 55% of all students (n = 168),
while the other institutions added 8–14%, respectively,
of the total student participants.
Table 2 lists the total number of URM graduate students
who participated in the program per year for each of the
institutions in the Alliance. The number of students who
participated in the program increased annually for most
Institutions. The number of Ph.D. students who participated in the program (data not shown) increased by 2.25
times from 28 in 2013–2014 to 63 in 2016–2017 and the
master’s students averaged 34 ± 10 during the same
academic period. New Ph.D. students who joined the
program every year averaged 14 ± 3 in that period.
Quantitative and qualitative measures
This research utilized quantitative and qualitative measures to evaluate the participants’ perception of how the
activities provided professional development skills, community
building
opportunities/experiences,
and
incentives.
The data for this paper comprise of three parts: (1)
evaluation questionnaires sent to students after each activity, (2) focus group interviews, and a (3) survey administered to all former and current AGEP students
seeking their feedback on the program. Data collection
efforts were collaborations among TAMUS-AGEP institutions. All the data collected were treated as confidential and were not reported in a way that could be
credited to a particular institution or individual. The
project includes 168 URM STEM graduate students who
participated in the program between September 2013
and August 2017.
Evaluation questionnaires
After each activity, students were asked to fill out an
evaluation questionnaire containing open-ended questions to collect the narrative (qualitative) data coupled
with closed-ended questions (quantitative data) to specific items. Figure 2 shows a sample of an evaluation
questionnaire.
Focus group interviews
Focus groups consisted of students in the program and
questions typically included the following topics:
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
Page 5 of 16
(2019) 6:34
Table 1 How intervention areas and activities are connected in the program
Intervention areaa
Activity
PD
Seminars/workshops/informational
Student learns several skills and gains awareness
Travel award
Student develops oral communication skills
SNFALb
Student develops writing communication skills
Annual TAMUS-AGEP Conference
Student develops oral communication, leadership,
and career development skills
Peer writing groups/support
Student develops writing communication skills
Summer retreats
Student develops additional skill set, firming
professional development skills
Collaborative mini-grants
Student develops research collaborative skills by
working with faculty from two alliance institutions
SREBc participation selection
Student develops teaching skills at College
and University levels
Welcome back kick-off
New students share their ideas in a new
community of scholars
Summer retreats
Student shares personal issues around a selected theme
Annual TAMUS-AGEP Conference
Students work side-by-side and develop bonds
CB
Activity connection to Intervention area
b
PI
SNFAL
Students work side-by-side and develop bonds
Piazza online chats
Students freely discuss their ideas around
a professional theme
End of the year celebration
Student affirms interactions and feel warm about
the community and themselves
SREBc participation selection
Student expands network around their community
Collaborative Mini-grants
Student receives financial support to
work on their research
Participation bonus
Student receives financial support for active
participation in the program
AGEP Ambassadors
Student receives financial support
and develops leadership skills
Travel award
Student receives financial support to
present her/his research in a conference
SREBc participation selection
Student receives financial support to attend the
Institute of Teaching and Mentoring
a
PD professional development, CB community building, PI participation incentives
SNFL Summer National Fellowship Application Lab
SREB Southern Regional Education Board
b
c
TAMUS-AGEP experiences and personal impacts. The
interviews ranged an average length of 20 min.
Participant student survey
Online survey were administered on 2018 to all former
and current AGEP students seeking their feedback on
the program (qualitative). The survey included a range
of questions regarding students’ perceptions of the program, the student experience, and factors that influenced
in preparing them to secure academic positions, navigating graduate school successfully, and form a support
network that helped them excel at the next level. Responses (n = 38) were collected by TAMU-CS and consolidated into one dataset for analyses.
Data analysis
The qualitative and quantitative data collected were analyzed to address programmatic questions.
Responses from both evaluation questionnaires and
surveys were summarized according to three key areas
for each activity they attended: professional development, community building, and financial incentives. To
understand how useful the interventions in the program
were for their career advancement, responses were
ranked within these three areas. The quantitative data
analysis was based on the responses collected from a
Likert 6-point scale multiple-choice questions part of
the questionnaire.
Student focus group interview transcripts were independently reviewed and field notes generated, which
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
Page 6 of 16
(2019) 6:34
Fig. 1 Number of students participating in the program from 2013-2017 (total # 168)
summarized reflections on major themes that emerged
related to overall program experience, professional development, degree completion, securing Faculty positions, mentoring, networking, and community building.
Results and discussions
The program was designed to provide a series of activities to help the participants with graduating and succeed in their chosen fields by creating a community of
scholars. Because participation was not mandated, not
all students attended all the activities for many reasons,
including time conflict, topic of interest, location of the
activity, etc. We addressed these issues by using different
strategies to announce the events (flyers/posters, email
listservs, events calendar, social media), providing food,
offering activities in the evening, and virtual options.
The positive responses of students suggest that means to
improve participation should be encouraged by providing, for example, certificates for the professional development activities.
Professional development intervention
Multiples activities were developed to helped the students to develop their professional skills. Results of the
student’s responses to questionnaires presented for each
professional development activity are shown in Table 3.
The national fellowship application lab
This activity helped students to develop writing communication skills by preparing and submitting applications
to highly competitive and prestigious national fellowships. The labs provided students with information and
tips regarding completing a national fellowship application. The labs covered research and/or personal statements, tips for developing a proposal, successful
strategies, and proposal-writing process. Networking
with their peers was encouraged during the process as
they worked in groups and helped each other to achieve
the same goals.
The majority (67%) of students (n = 13) who
responded (n = 20) noted “very helpful” (Table 3) the information presented at the Summer National Fellowship
Lab (SNFL). Twenty-five percent of the students (n = 5)
indicated the information presented was “helpful” and
8% (n = 2) “not helpful at all.”
Although a small number of students responded to the
survey, these findings suggest that this activity provided
useful information to students and helped them to successfully apply for national fellowships. Five out 20
Table 2 Number of URM STEM graduate students in the program every year per institution
Academic year/institution
TAMUCS
TAMUK
PVAMU
WTAMU
TAMUCC
Total
2013–2014
35
7
3
6
0
51
2014–2015
52
9
4
4
3
72
2015–2016
62
13
15
5
6
101
2016–2017
65
10
7
6
10
98
TASMUCS Texas A&M University at College Station, TAMUK Texas A&M University at Kingsville, PVAMU Prairie View A&M University, WTAMU West Texas A&M
University, TAMUCC Texas A&M University at Corpus Christi
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
Page 7 of 16
(2019) 6:34
Fig. 2 A sample of the questionnaire used to assess student participation on activities
Table 3 How helpful do you believe the following aspects of the event/activity will be for you: information presented during the
event/activity?
Activity
Very
Helpful
Somewhat
Only a little
Not at all
Not sure
# Responses
SNFAL (n = 3)
67%
25%
0%
0%
8%
0%
20
Conference (n = 4)
51%
38%
7%
4%
0%
0%
81
SREB (n = 3)
92%
0%
8%
0%
0%
0%
23
Retreat (n = 3)
76%
16%
8%
0%
0%
0%
52
SNFL Summer National Fellowship Application Lab., SREB Southern Regional Education Board
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 8 of 16
students were able to secure funding through fellowship
awards, as some of them were selected and/or awarded
scholarships/fellowships (one Ford Foundation Dissertation Fellowship, one American Association of University
Women (AAUW) Dissertation Fellowship, and three
NSF Graduate Research Fellowships).
One student who attended this activity commented
that
I am already incorporating much [what I learned at
the Conference] into the courses I teach as well as
mentoring students. I will be honored to attend [the
Conference] next year as I gained so much from the
experience, it needs to be repeated!! The connection
we make, the friends, mentors, collaborators, and all
we learn from each other at these conferences makes
the road to our PhDs much easier to follow! AGEP
participation has grounded me to my university, to
my academic aspirations, and fellow graduate students
that I would not have if I did not participate in AGEP
The program has a plethora of training opportunities.
My success in securing external funding is associated
with my participation in the summer AGEP National
Fellowship Application Lab. During the summer lab
sessions, successful grant writers and reviewers
exposed me to the best practices on preparing and
submitting grant applications. Since my participation
in the lab, I secured the following funding: Ford
Foundation 2016 Dissertation Fellowship and the
American Association of University Women 2016
Dissertation Fellowship.
Annual TAMUS-AGEP conference
The 2-day conference occurred once per year at different
institutions and the majority of the students were supposed
to attend the Conference. This activity provided academic
support and professional development opportunities to
TAMUS AGEP students through workshops, seminars, and
presentations. As a community of scholars, students who
attended the conferences were supposed to bond with each
other, become comfortable to share their personal issues,
and encourage each other with positive feedbacks.
From 2103 to 2017, the total attendance of the Conference was 240 (around 33% were faculty/staff) for the four
conferences. Table 3 shows the student evaluations,
averaged for the four conferences. When asked how
helpful the information presented at this activity was for
them, approximately 51% of the students (n = 41) who
answered the surveys (n = 81) found the AGEP Conferences
to be “very helpful,” 38% (n = 31) “helpful,” 7% (n = 6)
“somewhat helpful,” and 4% (n = 3) “only little helpful.”
These findings suggest that the students appreciated
what they learned at all conferences. Some of the students’ comments indicate that (1) they liked more engaging and interactive sessions; (2) Q&A panels proved
very instructive to them; (3) PechaKucha 15 × 20 presentations helped public speaking while teaching audiences about STEM research; (4) race relations topics
should be carefully presented to not look like preaching
to the choir; and (5) networking is very important, but
they would like to have a more structured session on
how to effectively communicate with others outside of
their field.
One of the students commented on this activity,
Institute on Teaching and Mentoring-Southern Regional
Educational Board
The main goal of this activity, as listed in professional
development and community building intervention areas
(Table 1), was to develop scholars with needed skills for
graduate studies and to prepare them for success as faculty members at colleges and universities. All students
who attended the Institute had expressed interest in
teaching at the post-secondary level. The numbers of
graduate students who qualified to attend the Institute
each year ranged from six to 14. By attending the Conference as a group, it was expected them to expand their
network and share deeply with one another and set
goals.
Student responses suggest that their persistence in the
program might improve when they attend the SREB
Teaching and Mentoring Institute workshops as they acquired inspiration and motivation to complete their degrees. Ninety-two percent (n = 21) of students who
responded to the survey (n = 23) found the information
presented to be “very helpful” (Table 3).
This activity was very popular among the participants.
The students reported gaining inspiration and motivation as the most valuable aspects of this conference.
Some of their comments appear below:
The conference was a reminder of what is at and
beyond the finish line, what I have to offer my
mentors and mentees, and that others have overcome
and thrived in situations similar to mine and I can
too!
I am re-motivated besides being inspired to complete
my PhD even when I have thought of dropping out it is the motivation and inspiration I gain from SREB
Institute on Teaching and Mentoring that keeps me
in the program. The workshops are great!
We learned from the comments that students value
(1) networking and learning the importance of engaging
with other scientists; (2) hearing and sharing the
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 9 of 16
struggles that help demystify the graduate experience;
(3) learning about higher education and the National
Center for Faculty Development and Diversity; (4) finding that many other people like them have the same
dreams and aspirations; (5) inspirational stories and motivations; (6) career planning activities; and (7) visiting
with recruiters.
providing support and assistance from their peers. Students were paired up as writing partners for eight pairs
from TAMUMC.
Working as a group, students were able to develop
their writing skills. The students voiced concerns about
having additional writing support and wanted to have a
more organized way to receive feedback on what they
were working on. To accommodate their needs, the program hired an expert in scientific writing to oversee the
Peer Writing Groups.
Some of the testimonials from students who utilized
this activity were:
Summer retreats
The objective of this activity included providing current
students the opportunity to gain additional skill sets
based on their current stage in their graduate program
(Early, Middle, or Late), strengthening professional development skills, networking with other students and
faculty, and participating in community building activities. They learned new tips about work-life balance,
stress reduction, and mental health; they discovered new
aspects of themselves and others; and developed communication skills.
During the Summer Retreats, 60 students participated
in networking activities with peers, staff, and faculty;
they acquired new tips surrounding work-life balance,
stress reduction, and mental health; they discovered new
aspects of themselves and others; and developed communication skills. These activities were designed to
strengthen students’ sense of belonging and help them
to visualize the “finish line.” When asked how helpful
the information presented at this activity would be for
them (Table 3), 76% (n = 40) of students who responded
to this question (n = 52) found the information presented to be “very helpful” and 16% (n = 8) “helpful.”
Students’ comments indicate that they value (1) the
opportunity to concentrate on themselves, (2) interaction with their peers, (3) right selection of topics that
improve their ability to cope with graduate life in general, and (4) communication. Furthermore, one student
said that the summer retreat has proven to be her most
valuable experience with the program, while other student commented:
There were so many things that I learned throughout
the retreat that I plan on implementing in my life, but
my primary focus will be on maintaining the holistic
“me” and finding the work/life balance.
I was overwhelmed by the thought of writing my PhD
proposal and felt like my advisor would be upset if he
knew that I hadn't been making progress. I took
AGEP up on their writing support and scheduled a
1:1 appointment via WebEx. After an hour of
meeting, we were able to create a plan so I could
finish my proposal on time!
With class and research demands, it is hard for me to
devote meaningful time to writing projects, especially
when tempted by Netflix. The peer-writing group provides a dedicated space for me to focus on writing
without distraction. [The personal writing support] is
an invaluable resource for any scientific communications and can guide you through all stages of the writing process. I accomplish much more in a writing
session than I do “working from home.
Community building intervention
The type of program assessed in this paper represents a
venue for faculty and students across the Alliance to
build cultivating relationships, resulting in students developing a sense of community in the various campuses.
Networking with peers helped them to develop a community of scholars that provided personal support as social interactions. In this section, see a series of activities
related to community building. Results of the student’s
responses to questionnaires presented for each of the
community building activity are shown Table 4.
TAMUS-AGEP peer writing group and writing support
The program helped form the Peer Writing Group activity for students. The goal of the Peer Writing Group is
to encourage students to write weekly and focus on master’s/dissertation proposals, thesis/dissertations, and
scholarly publications. Students participating in the Peer
Writing Group are paired up and serve as writing accountability partners. This program is aimed at
The National Fellowship Application Lab
Students were asked to rate how helpful networking with
other students at this activity was for them (Table 4),
and 59% (n = 12) of students who responded to the survey (n = 20) found the networking with others to be
“very helpful” to “helpful,” 34% (n = 7) between “somewhat helpful” to “only little helpful.”
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
Page 10 of 16
(2019) 6:34
Table 4 How helpful do you believe the following aspects of the event/activity will be for you: networking with others?
Activity
Very
Helpful
Somewhat
Only a little
Not at all
Not sure
# Responses
SNFAL (n = 3)
44%
15%
17%
17%
0%
7%
20
Conference (n = 4)
37%
31%
21%
8%
2%
1%
81
SREB (n = 3)
70%
30%
0%
0%
0%
0%
23
Retreat (n = 3)
72%
16%
9%
3%
0%
0%
52
SNFL Summer National Fellowship Application Lab., SREB Southern Regional Education Board
Annual TAMUS-AGEP conference
Sixty-eight percent (n = 75) of students who responded
to the survey (n = 81) found the networking with others
to be “very helpful” to “helpful,” 20% (n = 17) “somewhat
helpful,” and 10% (n = 2) “only a little” or “not at all
helpful” (Table 4).
One of the student commented on this activity,
The connection we make, the friends, mentors,
collaborators, and all we learn from each other at
these conferences makes the road to our PhDs much
easier to follow! AGEP participation has grounded me
to my university, to my academic aspirations, and
fellow graduate students that I would not have if I did
not participate in AGEP
Institute on Teaching and Mentoring-Southern Regional
Educational Board
For the 21 students who participated in this activity, 70%
(n = 16) found that networking at this activity was “very
helpful” and 30% (n = 7) “helpful” (Table 4).
Some of their comments appear below:
…it is the networking, camaraderie, knowledge gained,
sharing of experiences, and seeing those individuals
who have reached the finish line walk that stage that
fires the flames of getting to the finish line myself that
is really the most valuable experience of the
Conference.
…I met with students from across the country, and
several leading mentors in their fields…. I was able to
meet with a professor and go over my CV with her. I
found this experience extremely rewarding, and am
grateful for the opportunity.
The workshops and summer retreats have helped me
to network more and discuss my graduate journey
with others who could offer support.
During the summer retreat II I learned what kind of
person I am, but more importantly I learned how to
understand other people, and modify my mannerisms
to be a more effective communicator. This experience
has impacted me in a tremendously positive way both
personally and professionally.
…the summer retreat taught me how to interact
better with my PI, which has drastically improved my
completion of my PhD.
Online networking platform—Piazza
Virtual cohorts were created across the TAMUS AGEP
alliance institution with Piazza, an online platform, to increase communication among students from different
institutions, to encourage a sense of belonging and to
create networking opportunities. TAMUS AGEP created
several online meeting spaces for students at similar
stages in their degree programs.
Although we did not observe large participation during
the Piazza chats, the positive aspects of this activity include (1) students facilitated the chats; and (2) small
group participation provided richer conversations. Students handled topic selection and led the group chats.
One student commented that:
Majority of students (53%, n = 23) agreed that they
felt more prepared to provide mentorship (techniques
you learned) because they participated in the Piazza
AGEP Café.
Welcome back kick-off facilitate luncheon
Summer retreats
Networking with other students at this activity (Table 4)
was “very helpful” for 72% (n = 37) of the 52 the students who responded to this question.
Three students commented that
This activity took place in the fall with the objectives of
(1) presenting the new programming for the semester,
(2) networking and discussions with peers, and (3) developing presentations on a special topic of interest to the
students. One student expressed that
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
Page 11 of 16
(2019) 6:34
The luncheons [were] helpful as the topics [were]
easily digestible in the time the format allowed.
summer retreat taught me how to interact better with
my PI, which has drastically improved my completion
of my PhD.
End of year celebration
This event provides an opportunity for the students to
celebrate personal and professional accomplishments. Students shared how the program assisted them throughout
their graduate studies. Family members and friends were
invited to attend. The end of year celebration helped students to connect and share experiences with friends and
family. The program represents a venue for faculty and
students across the Alliance to build cultivating relationships, resulting in students developing a sense of community and belonging on the various campuses.
Activities such as luncheons, socials, and retreats really
solidified student interaction with and learning from each
other. Because of these interactions, small networking
groups formed, thus creating a great support system. We
found that building an effective community requires an
atmosphere of positivity, fun, and ease, and these activities
promoted this even further. One student commented
The end of year [celebration] was nice because I was
able to interact with the direct of the program 1-on-1.
Participation incentive intervention
A list of activities that provided monetary incentives to
the students are listed below.
TAMUS-AGEP mini-grants and travel awards
The TAMUS-AGEP mini-grant competition awarded up
to $7,000 to students to support alliance-wide collaboration activities. The mini-grants provided seed funding
to support the development of new collaborative research and/or teaching efforts as well as financial resources to attend conferences to enhance their
professional development skills. It must be a collaborative research from at least two Alliance institutions.
Travel awards provided financial resources to attend
conferences to enhance their professional development
skills. Travel expenses were allowed for full-time students, who were active participants in the program and
in good academic standing.
Besides providing professional development skills,
these activities offer financial incentives to the participants. From 2014 to 2017, 16 students were awarded the
mini-grant. The impact of the mini-grants on students
appears below:
Monetarily the funding from the AGEP mini grant
gave me the data to write two papers that are now the
major components of my thesis project. Also the
My biggest professional development through AGEP
has come as a result of being a recipient of the
TAMUS AGEP Mini-Grant Award.
My advisor has been very supportive and instrumental
in developing the grant supported summer camp for
STEM students.
Monetarily the funding from the AGEP mini grant
allowed us to pursue our next generation sequencing
project looking and gave me the data to write two
papers on the microbiome that are now the major
components of my thesis project.
During the period of 2015 to 2017, 21 students received a travel award. Three students commented on
this program:
…it offered me a travel award for a recognized
conference in my field, which was wonderful for
networking and sponsored me to participate in the
CASE workshop offered by the AAAS which was an
amazing exposure to the world of science policy.
… attending this conference was instrumental to the
completion of the fundamental goal of my degree
plan, that is, to disseminate the results of my doctoral
dissertation to was wide audience. The
overwhelmingly positive response to my research
presentation helped me establish key connections
within my academic field.
Not only did I learn about research related to my field
and develop and establish new collaborations, but my
passion and excitement for [my research area] has
been strengthened and invigorated.
TAMUS AGEP ambassador
One of the highlights of the program is the TAMUSAGEP ambassadors. It provides participation incentives
and at the same time students developed leadership and
communication skills. Students ambassadors were
selected based on their level of participation on all the
activities and were responsible for facilitating two
Piazza chats per semester; coordinating/facilitating the
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 12 of 16
seminar/workshop presented as a luncheon and learning
activity or as an evening learning dining; meeting with the
Coordinator and Director once a month to discuss future
topics for the next semester activities and selecting
speakers.
One student commented on her experience
was going to make it work and my decision to stay
was strongly influenced by joining and participating in
AGEP… it provided me with training, skills, and
confidence to see myself as being a member of
academia, i.e. junior faculty.
The leadership role [as an AGEP Ambassador] has
allowed me to interact with fellow students, faculty,
administrators, and staff as an advocate for the
program’s mission and values. During my on-campus
job interviews, I was asked about my AGEP experiences and the overwhelming consensus was that it
was obvious that I learned the importance of service
and leadership. It was reaffirming to hear first-hand
from other universities how well regarded the program is at a national-level.
Summary
The impact that the above described interventions had
on students’ skills development while participating in a
community scholars is summarized in this section.
Students reported that the professional development
activities helped them to become more confident and
competitive in the job market. Below are three examples.
One former participant who attended 90 activities related to professional development is now a tenure-track
assistant professor at a public, doctoral-highest research
activity institution. This individual commented on the
support received by the program:
“I firmly believe that the Texas Alliance for Graduate
Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) was
instrumental in preparing me to secure this position,
to navigate graduate school successfully, and to form
a support network that will help me excel at the next
level…each semester my zeal for the program
consistently grew as I found new topics that were
relevant to my overarching goal of securing a tenuretrack position at a research-intensive institution.
Another student who attended 54 activities and transitioned into a tenure-track assistant professor position at
a private, doctoral-highest research activity institution
attributed much of the student’s success in obtaining a
tenure track position to the support provided by the
program. The observations about the program are as
follows:
There were many occasions throughout graduate
school when I was ready to quit. I could do the
coursework and research, but I did not see myself as
an academic professional. Then one day I decided I
Finally, another student who participated in 44 workshops and seminars became a postdoctoral researcher in
a public, doctoral-highest research activity institution:
The program has had a huge impact on my progress
towards my degree. I have received invaluable
professional development skills through opportunities
that would not have been available without AGEP.
AGEP has also supported me financially, through
travel grant, research grants, and stipends
(participation bonus).
Analysis of the qualitative data indicates that the professional development program played a role in supporting student success in securing Faculty positions. The
activities and supportive environment fostered their professional development away from the laboratory bench.
The participants were able to enhance many aspects of
their career development beyond their academic/research requirements, including self-care practices, communication skills, and networking skills.
Of the 84 doctoral students, 18% (n = 15) transitioned
to post-doctoral, Faculty, or professional career positions. Approximately 40% (n = 6) of the students (n =
15) secured tenure-track faculty positions; 47% (n = 7)
obtained postdoctoral positions; and 13% (n = 2) chose
to continue their studies in professional careers.
In general, participation in the program has affected
the future educational and/or career plans of the students. The student participants were pleased with the
support and programs related to their educational and
career plans. Some students were only interested in a
career in industry but after participating in the program
they are now interested in a faculty position. Others
however were appreciative to know that they have options either in academia or in industry.
Some students commented on the personal impact of
the community building intervention:
I can't say enough good things about the program. It
has given me motivation at the times when I needed it
most. This has come mostly through the personal
connections I've made with other people in the
program.
The program provide me with a community of
scholars. I created a strong bonding and friendship
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
with the other participants, that we were able learn
about each other, as well as to share our success and
struggles during this journey of graduate school.
The most valuable experience has to be the community
of individuals I gained who provide advice and a support
system as I matriculate through the PhD process.
When the participants were asked, what was the most
valuable program experience and the impact it has had
on their educational and career goals, two students
stated the following:
There are two prongs, one’s been community
building. Isolation is a feeling… You live on different
sides of the campus and you never see people so it’s
was fun interacting. We spend time together and get
to know each other and that has been really good. But
also, you never know what you don’t know until
someone until someone kind of shoves it in your face,
so it’s always been really good. The variety of topics
that’d been covered and the people that we’d been
exposed to, there’s been a lot of information so I can’t
put a price tag on that one.
Page 13 of 16
The panel of Ph.D.’s at the conference had a major
impact on me.
The program has helped me realize that there are
more options as far as career choices for my major.
Also, I have learned that you should apply for any
positions/career paths that interest you even if you
feel like you do not have any experience with that
specific career and/or company.
Of the students who participated in the program, one
doctoral student commented on how programs like ours
have helped her succeed in her career even though it
took her more than 5 years to graduate:
Despite it taking over 5 years for me to complete my
PhD, the program has only provided me with the
knowledge that will keep it from taking twice as long.
When I have felt that my research was stalled, the
program gave me other avenues to succeed in and
opportunities to develop professional skills that will
ensure my continued success in my program and after
it. While my time to degree is certainly longer than I
wanted it to be, the program continues to ensure that
I do finish and I am successful in my career to follow.
I think the summer institute when I first met
everyone. I thought it was so great to meet so many
women in engineering because I come from an area
where it’s mainly men and when I walked into the
room it was majority women and lots of them were
engineering and I was just amazed because that was
something I hadn’t encountered at all.
During 2013–2017, 15% (n = 13) of the master’s students (n = 84) transitioned to a Ph.D. program. Exposure
to Ph.D. peers and participation in activities that promote the professoriate along with academic and social
mentorships have motivated some of the master’s level
students to continue to Ph.D. programs. Two students
commented on that:
The participants’ indicated that their overall program
experience and the extent to which the supported activities
have prepared them to accomplish their graduate school
tasks were in average “good” to “excellent.” The majority of
students indicated that after participating in the program
they had a better understanding of the various options
available including becoming a faculty member and interest
in post-doctoral positions. In regarding to the program
impact in their career choices, some commented that:
The program has helped me complete my Master
program because of the mentorship that they
provided and is one of the main reasons I have
continued into my PhD program and have a better
work and life balance.
After attending the [Annual Conference] I definitely
became more open-minded and knowledgeable in
possible post-graduate school careers. Initially I was
firm in going to industry after I obtain my Ph.D. but
the work in national labs also spurred my interest.
Lastly, I realized that many of the responsibilities
Ph.D.’s face in their career are similar. For instance,
national labs, academia, and even industry are
expected to publish and find funding on their own.
Well, I’m actually looking at doctoral programs, but I
also have and internship with industry. After joining
the program, I think it helped me coming out of my
shell in this environment. Yea and it pretty much
taught me enough professionalism, how to show my
character without suppressing my culture. If I list
about anything you could possibly need, you can
pretty much find it at AGEP.
Another example on how the program influenced
completion of many students is illustrated in the statement below:
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Participation in AGEP has truly helped me. It has
inspired and motivated me to continue in my degree
multiple times.
Evaluation of the program using the data collected
suggest that both motivational and professional development activities may improve the chances that
graduate students continue their degree and successfully graduate. For example, during the 4 years of
TAMUS-AGEP, 18% (n = 15) of the doctoral students who participated in the program (n = 84)
graduated while only 6% (n = 5) of them dropped
out entirely from the University. Of the 84 participant masters students, 45% (n = 32) graduated and
8% (n = 7) dropped out of college. By comparison,
the CGS Doctoral initiative on URM attrition and
completion study (Sowell et al., 2015) found that
44% of the STEM students graduated within 7 years,
while 36% of them withdrew from their doctoral
programs. The overall median time-to-degree for
STEM Doctoral and URM students at TAMU-CS
who completed their doctorates in the 2013–2014 to
2016–2017 academic period was 5.99 years (Texas
A&M University - accountability, 2018). Data from
other institutions were not considered due to the
small population size.
Overall, student participants found the support and
programs related to their educational and career plans
to be very helpful. At the beginning of this program,
some students were only interested in a career in industry, but after participating in the program, they became
interested in a faculty position. The program provided
support to URM STEM students to remain competitive,
and increased the number of URMs admitted to competitive institutions and postdocs. Several participants
shared the following comments:
Well, I’m actually looking at doctoral programs, but I
also have an internship with industry. After joining
the program, I think it helped me coming out of my
shell in this environment. Yea and it pretty much
taught me enough professionalism, how to show my
character without suppressing my culture. If I list
about anything you could possibly need, you can
pretty much find it at AGEP.
I think the support has been definitely overwhelming.
There are many workshops about how to write a
resume, to be in a faculty position, and interview. I
have taken the advantage and that is what I like about
being in the program, there are so many things you
can choose to do and it is really up to you what you
think you need to be better at.
Page 14 of 16
Future studies of this nature as well as demonstration
of impact should pay greater attention to understanding
which opportunities URM STEM graduate students invest in as they emerge from isolation, and why students
select particular pathways to succeed in finishing their
doctoral degrees.
In only 4 years, the program helped 11 students to secure faculty or post-doctoral positions, and improved
the opinion of the professoriate career as 13 students
transitioned to the Ph.D. program and are now more interested in applying for faculty positions. From the student’s comments, 45 percent described that participating
in the program influenced their career path by considering the academic track; for example:
The program has encouraged me to pursue the
professoriate. Without AGEP, I would most certainly
be on a direct path to an industry research job. The
AGEP program has given me much insight into the
academia as a viable option to pursue.
Feedback from participants indicated that the program
should continue to incentivize students to attend professional development activities. Added benefits to students
included positive effects on their teaching experience, research activities, successful job searching, and personal
and professional achievements that could be linked to
their AGEP experiences
A common theme (90%) from participant responses to
the assessment activities was the impact that the professional development seminars and workshops offered by
the program had on their career and personal goals.
Some comments are given below:
The program gave me the opportunity to participate in
professional development workshops that help me get to
know myself and what I want to pursue after graduation.
I am a more desirable candidate for any position that
I apply for, because of the skills I have gained through
the program. For example, the program sent me to a
two-week policy workshop in DC. I enjoyed it so
much that I applied to a policy fellowship that would
start after completion of my PhD. The program highly
encourages a path to academia, and so I am also considering post--doc positions so that I will be qualified
if I decide to apply for a professor position.
Participants (100%) indicated that the program should
continue sending doctoral students to attend workshops
such as the ones offered by the Teaching and Mentoring
Institute, at least once a year. It is clear that to better
gauge experiences with and benefits of the workshops,
participants should provide a reflection describing their
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Page 15 of 16
experiences and the impact on their academic skills and
persistence and future career.
The majority of the students (100% of those who answered the survey) agreed that the program should continue to provide travel awards to students to present
their work or attend scientific conferences. In brief,
these opportunities enabled the participants to meet experts in their area of research, present their research results, and attend career fairs.
It is clear from our evaluation that community building
(CB) initiatives contributed to students’ engagement. While
it may appear that there is little empirical quantification of
program effects on engagement and impact, qualitative assessment data exist, and clearly show students support of
these activities. Students have constantly expressed the importance of networking and that community support
makes a great difference in their way to success:
The program was also successful in developing and
sustaining large-scale, distributed, yet interconnected
STEM communities among the diverse Alliance system
institutions and increased enrollment of Ph.D. by 18%
students (from 58 in 2013 to 68 in 2017), reduced barriers, and promoted the success of URM doctoral students preparing for careers in the professoriate. In only
4 years, 13 student’s secured faculty or post-doctoral positions; and thirteen students transitioned from master’s
to doctoral programs
With AGEP I have a network of people who give me a
sense of belonging and help me balance my work and
relationships.
I cannot say enough good things about the program.
It has given me motivation at the times when I
needed it most. This has come mostly through the
personal connections I have made with other people
in the program.
It has helped to feel more confident in my abilities as
a student. The community has helped me to reduce
my stress and I feel a lot less alone in this process.
In particular, the students liked the Summer Retreats
and the Facilitated Luncheons (targeted sessions) and indicated that these activities provide a community of
scholars where they can share their success and struggles
during this journey of graduate school. Therefore, the
prospect of other Institutions of Higher Education with
strong commitment to diversity to implement all the activities described in this paper is high.
Conclusions
The program described in this paper provided sustained
support and several activities in a collaborative environment for 84 Ph.D. and 84 Master’s students, in over 43
graduate programs. Professional development (PD) interventions assisted URM graduate students in developing the core competencies required of graduate
education that can apply to multiple career paths; and
participation incentives (PI) and community building
(CB) interventions were essential to strengthen URM
doctoral student support.
Abbreviations
AGEP: Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate; BTD: Bridge to
doctorate; CGS: Council of Graduate Schools; CTE: Center for Teaching
Excellence; G.R.A.D. Aggies: Graduate Resources and development for Aggies;
LSAMP: Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation; PD: Professional
development; PVAMU: Prairie View A&M University; SREB: Southern Regional
Education Board; TAMUCC: Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi;
TAMUCS: Texas A&M University College Station; TAMUK: Texas A&M
University-Kingsville; TAMUS: Texas A&M System; URM: Underrepresented
minority; WTAMU: West Texas A&M University
Availability of data and supporting material
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this
published article.
Authors’ contributions
RGM developed activities, collected and analyzed the data, major contributor
in writing the manuscript. KBP provided review on content, data analysis,
and on paper preparation. ACS performed retreated activities, provided data
collection, analysis, and review of paper preparation. SW developed activities
for URM programs and provided data and review of paper preparation. IVJ
coordinated the program, developed activities, collected and analyzed data.
LC directed the TAMUK activities, provided data collection and analysis. GR
direct the PVAMU activities and provided data collection and analysis and
review of paper preparation. RC directed the TAMUCC activities, provided
data collection, analysis, and review of paper preparation. AS directed the
WTAMU activities and provided data collection and analysis. All authors read
and approved the manuscript.
Funding
Funds used in this research was provided by the National Science
Foundation (NSF) TAMUS AGEP Transformation Grant: Advancing
Interdisciplinary STEM Graduate Education in Energy and Sustainability
Disciplines, Award Nos. HRD-1308144, 1308163, 1308149, 1308080, and
1308200 and Texas A&M University Office of Graduate and Professional
Studies.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Procedures followed were in approved by and in accordance with the
ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Texas A&M
University Division of research. All participants signed consent forms. IRB ID:
IRB2013-0435D—Reference Number: 069613.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Author details
1
Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering, Texas A&M University,
310 Scoates Hall, College Station, TX 77843, USA. 2Office of Graduate and
Professional Studies, Texas A&M University, 112 Jack K. Williams
Administration Building, College Station, TX 77843, USA. 3Department of
Psychology & Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, 271 Psychology Bldg,
College Station, TX 77843, USA. 4Office of Research & Graduate Studies, Texas
A&M University–Kingsville, 955 N. Univ. Blvd, Kingsville, TX 78363, USA.
5
Department of Biology, Prairie View A&M University, 430G E.E. O’Banion
Building, Prairie View, Texas 77446, USA. 6Department of Physical &
Environmental Sciences, Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi, 6300 Ocean
Moreira et al. International Journal of STEM Education
(2019) 6:34
Dr, Corpus Christi, TX 78412, USA. 7The Graduate School, Killgore Research
Center, Room 104A, West Texas A&M University, 25th St, Canyon, TX 79015, USA.
Received: 23 August 2018 Accepted: 27 August 2019
References
Autenrieth, R. L., Lewis, C. W., & Butler-Purry, K. (2017). Long-term impact of the
enrichment experiences in engineering (E3) summer teacher program.
Journal of STEM Education, 19(4), 19–29.
Butts, G. C., Hurd, Y., Palermo, A.-D. S., Delbrune, D., Saran, S., Zony, C., & Krulwich,
T. (2012). Role of institutional climate in fostering diversity in biomedical
research workforce: a case study. Mt Sinai Journal of Medicine, 79(4), 498–511.
Byars-Winston, A. (2014). Toward a framework for multicultural STEM-focused
career interventions. The Career Development Quarterly, 62, 340–357.
Carter-Sowell, A. R., Dickens, D. D., Miller, G., & Zimmerman, C. A. (2016). Present
but not accounted for: examining how marginalized intersectional identities
create a double bind for women of color in the academy. In J. Ballenger, B.
Polnick, & B. Irby (Eds.), Women of Color in STEM: Navigating the Workforce in
Research on Women and Education series (pp. 181–200). Charlotte:
Information Age Publishing.
Gardner, S. K. (2008). What’s too much and what’s too little?: the process of
becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education. Journal of
Higher Education, 79, 326–350.
Goulde, C. M. (2005). The role of the department and discipline in doctoral
student attrition: Lessons from four departments. The Journal of Higher
Education, 76(6), 669–700.
Handelsman, J., & Smith, M. (2016). STEM for all. Washington, DC: The Obama
Administration White House https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2
016/02/11/stem-all. Assessed 05 Apr 2018.
Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: the causes and consequences of
departure from doctoral study. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Lovitts, B. E. (2008). The transition to independent research: who makes it, who
doesn’t, and why. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 296–325.
National Science Board. (2016). Science and engineering indicators 2016, NSB-20161. Arlington: National Science Foundation.
Okahana, H., Klein, C., Allum, J., & Sowell, R. (2018). STEM doctoral completion of
underrepresented minority students: challenges and opportunities for
improving participation in the doctoral workforce. Innovative Higher
Education., 43(4), 237–255.
Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L., & Orfield, G. (2011). Inside the double bind: a
synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of
color in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Harvard
Educational Review., 81(2), 172.
Saenz, V. B., Hurtatdo, S., Barrera, D., Wolf, D., & Yeung, F. (2007). First in my family:
a profile of first-genetation college students at four-year institutions since 1971.
Los Angeles: Higher Eduaction Research Institute, UCLA.
Smith, J. W., & Calasanti, T. (2005). The influences of gender, race and ethnicity on
workplace experiences of institutional and social isolation: an exploratory
study of university faculty. Sociological Spectrum, 25, 307–334.
Sowell, R., Allum, J., & Okahana, H. (2015). Doctoral initiative on minority attrition
and completion. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools.
TAMUS LSAMP Bridges to the Doctorate (HRD-1249272). (2012a). Interview Report.
TAMUS LSAMP Bridges to the Doctorate (HRD-1249272). (2012b). PVAMU Focus
Group Report.
Texas A&M University—accountability. (2018). https://accountability.tamu.edu/AllMetrics/Mixed-Metrics/Student-Demographics . Accessed 05 Apr 2018.
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college. Rethinking institutional action (p. 283). The
University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (2016). From retention to persistence. Inside higher Ed. Opinion. https://
www.insidehighered.com/views/2016/09/26/how-improve-studentpersistence-and-completion-essay
Wilson, Z. S., Holmes, L., DeGravelles, K., Sylvain, M., Batiste, L., Johson, M., McGuire, S.
Y., Pang, S. S., & Warner, I. M. (2012). Hierarchical mentoring: a transformative
strategy for improving diversity and retention in undergraduate disciplines.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 148–156.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
Page 16 of 16