STEM Program Overview

STEM Women: Thriving in the 21st Century

Introduction
Although the domain of higher education is typically considered to be a venue of personal
growth, maturational change, and a means of increasing opportunity, it remains a stage in which the
complex societal norms surrounding gender continue to perform. Despite the fact that women are
now perpetually outnumbering men in higher education, women’s presence in the STEM (Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math) fields still remains largely underrepresented. A myriad of
contributing factors, both external and internal, have been mulled over by researchers, all of which
relate in some way to the intricate concept of “sense of belonging.” The following section provides a
comprehensive look at relevant research topics surrounding the complex issues of women’s
underrepresented participation in STEM, both in academic and professional venues. Succeeding the
literature review is an executive summary of the proposed sessions of a workshop series for female
students in STEM, complete with their associated student development goals.
Sense of Belonging and Females in STEM
Researchers are beginning to recognize the concept of sense of belonging as an integral
aspect of human happiness. Although the human need for a sense of belonging is a vital foundation
in almost every aspect of life, it was not until recently that the operational definition of sense of
belonging as a research construct was established. Hagerty, Lynch-Sauer, Patusky, Bouwsema, and
Collier (1992) propose a definition of sense of belonging as “…the experience of personal
involvement in a system or environment so that persons feel themselves to be an integral part of
that system or environment” (p. 173). Furthermore, Hagerty et al. (1992) delineated the two
components of sense of belonging:
1.

Valued involvement: the experience of feeling valued, needed, and accepted.

2. Fit: the person’s perception that his or her characteristics articulate with or complement
the system or environment. (p. 173)
Hence, in order for a student to experience a true sense of belonging on campus, they must possess
a combination of these two traits.
Measures of sense of belonging have been correlated with persistence among students in
higher education (Hausmann, Ye, Schofield, & Woods, 2009; Hartley, 2011), but hold special

Zoe Sullivan, California Polytechnic State University, 2014

1

implications for female students studying the STEM fields. Although more women than men
graduate from college with a bachelor’s degree, men continue to earn higher proportions of degrees
in many science and engineering fields of study (National Science Foundation, 2011). Compared to
men, women’s participation is notably lower in the fields of physical science, mathematics, computer
science, and engineering (NSF, 2011). Sense of belonging is a probable component in many female’s
intentions to switch out of the STEM fields. In a study on the intervening factors of the persistence of
women within STEM majors, Good, Rattan, and Dweck (2012), found that women who experienced a
reduced sense of academic belonging within the STEM field were more likely to leave the domain –
even when achievement remained high – in order to pursue studies that better enabled sense of
belonging to take root. A focus on interactional factors between women and the STEM environment
within academia brings to light the possible antecedents of lowered sense of belonging for women
in these fields. Good et al. (2012) established that “the more women perceived fixed-ability
environments and high gender stereotyping the more they were susceptible to lowered sense of
belonging, whereas the more women perceived malleability in environments, the more they
maintained a sense of belonging to math even when they perceived their environments as highly
gender-stereotypical” (p. 709). In order to best help female students in STEM succeed, professionals
in higher education must pay attention to the messages students receive about their environment in
an academic setting. Professionals must be committed to establishing an environment in which
these students feel like active and contributing participants, for that seems to be an essential
constituent to their sense of belonging to their field.
The Role of Self-Efficacy
In addition to a lowered sense of belonging, a variable interplay has emerged among
sociocultural influences and reported levels of self-efficacy among women in STEM, another
relationship that may affect women’s persistence in these fields. To understand this relationship, it is
helpful to refer to Erikson’s (1959/1980, 1968) theory of how self-efficacy beliefs are differentially
constructed among men and women. Erikson’s research elucidated that men tend to form selfefficacy beliefs from mastery experiences and work-related accomplishments, whereas females tend
to form self-efficacy beliefs from the development and depth of personal relationships. Therefore, if
females feel unwelcome in a particular environment, it is possible that this will lead to decreased selfefficacy beliefs, and eventual departure for that environment.


2

Additional studies have shown a marked difference in self-efficacy beliefs between men and
women and STEM, a possible resulting effect of gendered information men and women are exposed
to via societal norms. Johnson, Stone, and Phillips (2008) found that men tend to report higher levels
of self-efficacy than do women in STEM, regardless of the fact that differences in academic
achievement are virtually nonexistent (Eisenberg, Martin, & Fabes, 1996). The variance in selfefficacy levels extends beyond the classroom into the realm of career behaviors. Betz and Hackett
(1983) utilized self-efﬁcacy expectations as a heuristic tool to measure students’ professional
persistence in STEM fields. As predicted, female students reported lower levels of self-efficacy in the
realm of mathematics. The decreased self-efficacy level of these students, as suggested by Betz and
Hackett (1983), may have created a domino effect. Female students’ lowered levels of perceived
future academic success lead to an avoidance of mathematics-based coursework and pursuit of
science-related majors, and eventually, a lack of pursuit of professional STEM positions.
In order to counteract this phenomenon and increase females’ self-efficacy in the STEM
domains, professionals must implement interventions that allow relational growth to flourish in a
positive manner. Zeldin, Britner, and Pajares (2008) found that important relationships were
intertwined with self-efficacy beliefs among women in such a way that these relationships were
identified as requirements for their perseverance, and in fact aided the women in defining
themselves as scientists and mathematicians. This evidence further instates the need for a
supportive community for STEM females in which they are given the opportunity to form close social
bonds with others in their field.
Stereotypes and the Gender Gap
The mere existence of the gender gap within the STEM fields is yet another cog in the
reciprocal relationship between the lack of support for women in these fields and their internalized
judgments of potential success. The continuous chicken and egg situation surrounding this issue has
made it even harder to enact change. Gender inequity regarding the disproportionate representation
of females in higher education, more specifically in STEM disciplines, continues to be one of the most
significant challenges in colleges and universities (Rypisi, Malcom, & Kiln, 2009). The intricacies of
both external and internal perceptions of gender roles are greatly explored, yet still nebulous. To
begin to understand this gap, it’s imperative to investigate how women experience and negotiate
gender within the pursuit of these fields, which in turn will better explain how women’s
understandings of gender inform their self-efficacy development and eventual choices to pursue

3

STEM fields as career paths after graduation (Goldman, 2010). According to Betz (2004), the career
development of women can be affected by two channels of stereotyping: gender stereotypes
involving women’s role in the family, and gender stereotypes involving the idea of which occupations
are best suited for women and for men. For student affairs professionals working with this specific
population, it is important to be aware of these types of stereotypes, both as they are divulged in
students’ stories of environmental occurrences and as they are purported in students’ own
internalization of these stereotypes.
Another vital issue to take note of when addressing women’s gender negotiation in the
STEM fields is students’ awareness of it as an influential facet of their academic life. Previous
research has shown that female STEM students may not perceive gender to be something that
directly impacts their lives and experiences as college students, subsequently relating it to “a
concept that was much more relevant to their parents’ and grandparents’ generation,” (Goldman,
2010, p. 131). In essence, all of the participants in the study described several examples in which
gender had impacted their college experience, yet they were not necessarily conscious of this effect
when asked to describe it in the interviews and share their stories about gender negotiation
(Goldman, 2010). (I would also like to note that similar themes emerged when I conducted
qualitative research with female STEM students in Spring, 2013). Despite the possibility of students’
undermining the influence of gender on their experiences in academia, the existence of the gender
gap within STEM remains and it would be beneficial for these students to not only understand this
relationship, but to become self-advocates for themselves in the realm of gender equality.
Lack of Mentors
A lack of the presence of mentors is yet another component that may influence women’s
persistence in STEM. In a study by Davis (2001), female STEM students in a specialized, female-only
organizational group, were aware that they were excluded from experiences within social networks
that would teach them valuable professional and communication skills necessary for progressing in
their fields. Not only do mentors model and disseminate valuable logistical, strategic, and social
information, but they can have a measured effect on students’ self-efficacy beliefs. Students enrolled
in an online mentor program for female STEM students reported elevated confidence levels in STEM
competencies, in addition to an increased knowledge of professional STEM activities and knowledge
about jobs in STEM (Stoeger, Duan, Schirner, Greindl, & Ziegler, 2013). Mentors have the potential to


4

serve as networking “gatekeepers” for females in STEM, while indirectly inspiring students to
become more confident in their abilities.
Interstitial Communities as a Buffer
Combining a mentorship opportunity with a support group is the most strategic way to bring
about positive change that supports persistence in the STEM fields for women. The very existence of
the group itself provides a platform upon which students may not only learn from each other, but
discuss challenges they may face due to gender norms in their academic communities and the
workplace. Identified as “interstitial communities,” specialized groups for females in STEM have the
potential to create an environment in which issues like these can be brought to the surface, hence
increasing students’ self-awareness of their existence. Additionally, students can learn from each
other by sharing stories regarding their experiences within STEM, paired with effective tactics for
navigating these sometimes challenging social and academic environments. Davis (2001) identified
interstitial communities of practice as settings in which students may come to better understand:
1.

Gatekeeping practices.

2. The goals and practices ICPs develop and how they compare and contrast with
those of the science community.
3.

The capital ICPs value and acquire as a result of those practices and what that means for
their members’ legitimate participation in science.

4.

The ways in which ICPs do or do not provide their members with access to legitimate
participation in the science community and, therefore, to its valued capital and identity.

5.

The ways ICPs are able to change their science settings to be more inclusive and
participatory. (p. 374)

These issues were brought to light via members’ increased sense of belonging within the group and
the depth of disclosure that accompanied it. The group provided a setting for its members to “voice
issues, concerns, and problems relating to their educational and work environment; construct new
understandings about the “culture of science”; make decisions about their education and careers;
and receive the support needed to “take action” (Davis, 2001, p. 368).


5

In addition to the exploration of gendered experiences in academia, the actuality of a place
where female STEM students felt comfortable communicating in a more communal way enabled
them to share personal stories and strategies, an opportunity that appears rare to find in traditional
STEM communities. Davis (2001) asserted that through their conversation, the students came to
recognize the competitive, aggressive nature of science talk, yet the kind of discourse that took
place during the group meetings provided a distinctly opposite communication style. The nature of
the talk within the group was based on the acquisition and sharing of information. Members
practiced genuine inquiry of their counterparts, shared anecdotal experiences, provided suggestions,
conveyed experiential stories, advised one another, and reported on activities and practices that
individuals had tried out (Davis, 2001). The demonstrated awareness of gender issues, establishment
of sense of belonging among participating members, and opportunity to contribute to a community
of learning and progression by sharing anecdotal experiences and effective strategies are just a few
of the multitude of benefits that can be gleaned from the allowance of communal communication.
Providing a space that is separate from the traditional academic community in which women may
converse freely about gender roles and personal experiences can be an essential component not
only to students’ personal and career development, but to their persistence in their chosen fields as
well. As there continue to be limitations, obstacles, and tensions that inhibit females’ equitable
participation in the science community, specialized groups for women can increase participants’
voice and power and challenge the daily inequities that they encounter in their professional and
educational settings (Davis, 2001, p. 406).
In addition to providing a space where women can communicate openly about pressing
sociocultural issues, interstitial communities can also be a space in which women can be trained in
effective assertiveness. In the realm of career development for women in pursuit of the STEM fields,
an essential assertiveness skill to focus on is salary negotiation. It has been sustained that not only
does a gender gap exist in the physical presence of women and men working in the STEM fields, but
between pay grades as well (Carvajal, Armayor, & Deziel, 2012; Sorenson & Snyder, 2012). The
differences among advocacy behaviors for men and women may, in part, be a cause of these existing
pay differences. Wade (2001) suggested that advocacy behaviors are closely tied to conventional
social roles. This socially-embedded relationship elucidates the connection between permissive
attitudes towards men’s assertiveness and higher levels of self-advocacy, and the more constraining
expectation that women act selflessly, leading to lower levels of self-advocacy among women.
Furthermore, women may be less likely to initiate the negotiation process due to the social and

6

psychological factors that make self-advocacy costly for women. For example, if a female
professional expressed self-advocating behaviors, it is more likely that she will be judged unfavorably
for engaging in these non-normative actions, thus decreasing her likeability (Wade, 2001). Moreover,
decreased likeability is related to decreased influence (Carli, 1990), framing self-advocacy as a risky
move for female professionals. Despite the perception of risks involved with self-advocacy,
developing salary and work-related negotiation tactics among women has the potential to be an
active means by which to close the gender-wage gap.

Methodology and Theory: The Social Cognitive Model of Career Self-Management

A potential method of improving women’s self-efficacy in negotiation, as well as increasing
perceived self-control in a professional setting, is the self-management training model. Stevens,
Bavetta, and Gist (1993) identified self-management as an effective means by which to eliminate
gender differences in negotiating salary. Placing an emphasis on anticipating and planning to
overcome obstacles, the self-management training module has been shown to be instrumental in
increasing perceived control and the range of reactive tactics used by women in response to
intimidation attempts during the negotiation process (Stevens, Bavetta, & Gist, 1993). Essentially,
research supports the notion that increasing awareness of potential obstacles through a
psychoeducational approach combined with goal-setting is more successful for women in the realm
of negotiation compared to similar approaches without the psychoeducational element. The model
rests on five essential components, which will be the guiding tenets of the proposed group plan: (a)
anticipating performance obstacles, (b) planning to overcome performance obstacles, (c) setting
goals to overcome obstacles, (d) monitoring one’s own progress, and (e) rewarding one’s goal
attainment (F. Kanfer, 1975; Marx, 1982, as cited in Stevens, Bavetta, & Gist, 1993).
Since societal gender norms are deeply rooted in a social learning structure, Albert Bandura’s
(1986, 1997) social cognitive learning theory serves as a valid theoretical platform on which to
cushion self-management training. Introduced by Lent and Brown (2013), the social cognitive model
of career self-management expands social cognitive career theory to include a focus on adaptive
career behaviors and on the external (environmental, societal) and internal (person-based) factors
that encourage (or discourage) their use. The model invites the term “self-management,” in that it is
based on the assumption that all individuals possess a degree of agentic capacity in some aspects of


7

their career development. While leaving room for the notion that people live in – and must navigate
through – a social world comprised of normative beliefs, the self-management model accounts for
individual agency. The model emphasizes the factors that lead people to enact behaviors that aid
their own educational and occupational progress (e.g., planning, information-gathering, deciding,
goal-setting, job-finding, self-asserting, preparing for change, negotiating transitions) beyond field or
job selection alone (Lent & Brown, 2013, p.2).
The social cognitive model of career self-management (Lent & Brown, 2013) seamlessly
addresses the previously discussed mitigating factors in women’s struggle with gendered norms and
environments in the STEM fields. One of the proximal antecedents of adaptive career behavior is the
category of cognitive-person factors, namely, self-efficacy. Coping efficacy (beliefs about one’s
ability to negotiate specific obstacles) and process efficacy (the perceived ability to manage the
tasks necessary for career development), are two of these factors that are simultaneously relevant
to the study of women’s career persistence and sense of belonging in STEM. Outcome expectations
(simplified in the question: “What will happen if I try?”), work in tandem with self-efficacy beliefs to
inform career behaviors (Lent & Brown, 2013). Drawing from Bandura’s (1977, 1997) research on selfefficacy beliefs, Betz (2008) explained the concept of self-efficacy in relation to career development:
“Low self-efficacy expectations regarding various behavioral domains are postulated to lead
to avoidance of those domains, poorer performance in them, and increased tendency to
‘give up’…In the context of career development, self-efficacy expectations can influence the
types of courses, majors, and careers individuals feel comfortable attempting.” (p. 724)
An individual’s self-efficacy appears to be interlaced with one’s perception of self and one’s depiction
of how they are viewed by others. The link between self-efficacy and women’s persistence in STEM is
clear in that both are rooted in social constructions. Self-efficacy perceptions form from the fusion of
both individual and societal observations, while women’s persistence in STEM is similarly affected by
these factors.
Social cognitive theory explains this relationship in its assertion that people are more likely to
initiate and foster behaviors when they believe both that they possess the necessary abilities to
perform them, and that the effort will produce desired consequences (Bandura, 1977). This concept
relates back to women’s bridled communication efforts in the domain of salary negotiation. In
concert with the formation of self-efficacy beliefs, the model accounts for an expanse of person


8

inputs (gender, culture, personality, ability), and contextual aspects (educational quality,
socioeconomic resources) that may play a hand in one’s development of career behaviors. In
marrying person-based and contextual variables to understand the emergence and sustainability of
career behaviors, the model adequately attends to the array of complex variables found in the STEM
gender gap.
Tying It All Together: Marrying the Research to the Model

The social-cognitive model of career self-management not only connects relevant factors to
women’s pursuit and persistence of STEM, but provides a guided framework to specialized female
STEM groups that encourages practice of self-directed career behaviors, the very behaviors that
research has found successful in closing the gender gap (Davis, 2001; Stevens, Bavetta, & Gist, 1993).
Keeping in mind the over-arching goal of empowering female STEM students to persist in their
respective fields, the social-cognitive model of career self-management paired with the informative
research on gender roles aids in the formation of five “meta-goals.” First, a specialized group will
allow a social arena by which members can engage in communal sharing that allows for a genuine,
supportive connection to be formed. Since members may be accustomed to communicating in a
more competitive environment, the group will provide a safe space in which to learn, as well as
foster an increased sense of belonging among members. Second, it is imperative that individuals in a
group possess or develop an awareness of how gendered societal norms influence both external
occurrences and barriers and internal perceptions of self and environment to inform individual
career behaviors. The development of this understanding not only allows the group to bond
together through anecdotal sharing (also lending itself to a climate of sense of belonging), but may
also mentally prepare members to adopt effective strategies for navigating obstacles (both real and
perceived) within STEM. Third, providing a space in which female STEM students can discuss
effective strategies for negotiation has the potential to not only increase individual levels of selfefficacy, but to lend a hand in closing the gender wage and occupational gap through women’s
adoption of these career behaviors across the lifetime. Fourth, the practice of matching a female
professional mentor in STEM with a group member interested in pursuing a similar field will not only
provide the student with an opportunity to glean information about career development strategies,
but will allow female students to gain access to the greater STEM social network. Lastly, students
will be given the opportunity to engage in open sharing of personal experiences, which will help

9

normalize any feelings of doubt they may hold about their abilities. Recognition of this process will
allow the space for students to begin to feel at ease and more confident in their academic abilities,
thus raising perceptions of their academic self-efficacy. Additionally, students will have the
opportunity to become well-versed in various career development and social strategies, allowing for
an increase in both their personal and professional self-efficacy.


10


Executive Summary of Sessions and Associated Goals
Based on the information delineated in the previous section, I am proposing the following workshop
series geared towards female STEM students:
Population: Female college students in science, technology, engineering and math majors.
Group Structure: Once selected for the group, students will sign a confidentiality and expectations
agreement to commit to the group, which will meet once a week for eight weeks. All sessions will
run approximately 1.5 hours, with the exception of session 7 (2 hours) and session 8 (1 hour). All
sessions will meet in the Career Events Center of the Career Services Building on campus starting at 5
p.m. (with the exception of session 8, will take place at a ropes course). Each week, a different topic
will be covered that will help the students gain insight into how to navigate their academic and
professional environments and will allow for an environment of support for these students. Some
sessions will involve career development assignments.
Proposed Group Sessions:
1.

Introduction: Leader will introduce topic of workshop and present qualifications. Group
members will introduce themselves and complete an icebreaker in order to start the process
of group cohesion. Students will sign a confidentiality agreement. Students will be asked why
they were interested in the program and what they hope to get out of it. Students will
complete a pre-assessment and identify their individual goals for the quarter. Session topics
will be reviewed. Towards the end of the session, group goals and expectations will be
constructed and established.
o

Goal addressed in this session: Sense of Belonging

2. Introduction to Sense of Belonging and Persistence: Discussion of traditional sex roles in the
STEM fields and how culture influences the perception of women. Students are encouraged
to share any stories or insights they have on this topic, as well as support systems or
strategies that help them cope with occurrences of sexism. Activity: Students will be asked
to think about their field of study and conceptualize why they are interested in it in a creative
way using various craft materials. Students will then share their concept with a partner, thus
remembering why they have pursued this field in the first place. Students will complete a

11

worksheet detailing the different social influences in their lives that may inform their selfconcept.
o

Goals addressed in this session: Sense of Belonging, Awareness of Self, Others, and
Society, Strategy and Self-Management, Self-Efficacy

3. The Importance of Mentors: Students will discuss what a mentor is and any mentors they
have had in the past that have positive affected them. Research on the importance of
mentors for females in STEM will be presented. Students will then learn about the
importance of networking in the process of finding of finding a job. The process of
informational interviewing will also be introduced. Activity: students will practice
informational interviews with each other. Students will be assigned to complete their first
informational interview with their mentor (covering an overall introduction the work world,
the professional’s career path, and the future outlook of that industry).
o

Society, Strategy and Self-Management, Personal and Professional Development,
Self-Efficacy

4. Navigating the STEM Environment: First, students will share what they have learned from
their first informational interviews. Students will discuss their academic environments and
the extent to which they feel they are a participating member in their field of study. Students
will discuss strategies for combatting sexism in the academic/work environments. Students
will be asked to complete their second informational interview with their mentor (covering
harder topics such as sexism in the workplace and support strategies and methods used by
professionals to overcome these obstacles).
o

Self-Efficacy

5. Standing Out: How to Make a Professional Impression in the Job Search: Students will share
what they have learned during their second informational interview. Leader will present
information on resume writing, cover letters, interview skills, and elevator pitches. Students
will write their own elevator pitch and practice in pairs. Students will be assigned to
complete their mock interview with their mentor.


12

o

Self-Efficacy

6. Building a Support System from the Inside-Out: Students will complete an activity: What
Makes You Awesome? To identify their strengths. Keeping their strengths in mind, students
will be asked how they can utilize their strengths in their future professional environment.
Students will be asked to entertain the idea of being a mentor to a female high school
student in the STEM field. What advice would they have? How would they positively
encourage their mentees? Students will then be asked to recognize the support they have
built around them via their participation in this group. Students will complete the activity:
Rolling Forward – each student will be given a “slice” of a circle and asked to write one
positive mantra they will keep in mind when they meet an obstacle in their career path; after
sharing their slices, they will place them all together to form a circle, which symbolizes a
wheel that will continue to roll forward, helping them visualize progress and their collective
positivism as a team.
o

Goals addressed in this session: Sense of Belonging, Strategy and Self-Management,
Personal and Professional Development, Self-Efficacy

7. Negotiation and Confidence: Students will be introduced to the topic of negotiation. Leader
will implement all elements of the $mart $tart Salary Negotiation workshop, including
presentation of materials, facilitation of budgeting activity, and conducting a mock
negotiation process.
8. Evaluation/Closure: Students will meet a ropes course. Upon completion of the course,
students will share their experiences of the program and group/individual goals will be
reviewed. Students will share what they have learned from the program and how they plan
to apply this knowledge in the future. Students will complete a post-assessment of the
program.


13

References
Bandura, A. (1999). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. In R.F. Baumeister
(Ed.), The self in social psychology. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Betz, N.E. (2004). Women’s career development. In S.D. Brown & R.W. Lent (Eds.), Career
development and counseling. New York, NY: Wiley.
Betz, N.E., & Hackett, G. (1983). The relationship of mathematics self-efficacy expectations to the
selection of science-based college majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23(3), 329-345.
doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(83)90046-5
Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5),
941–951. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.941
Carvajal, M.J., Armayor, G.M., & Deziel, L. (2012). The gender earnings gap among pharmacists.
Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 8(4), 285-297. Retrieved from:
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.calpoly.edu/10.1016/j.sapharm.2011.06.003
Davis, K.S. (2001). ‘Peripheral and subversive’: Women making connections and challenging the
boundaries of the science community. Science Education, 85(4), 368-409.
doi: 10.1002/sce.1015
Eisenberg, N., Martin, C.L., & Fabes, R.A. (1996). Gender development and gender effects. London,
England: Prentice Hall International.
Erikson, E. (1959/1980). Identity and the life cycle. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.


14

Goldman, E.G. (2012). Lipstick and labcoats: Undergraduate women’s gender negotiation in STEM
fields. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 115-140.
doi:10.1515/njawhe-2012-1098
Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C.S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s
representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700-717.
doi: 10.1037/a0026659
Hagerty, B.M.K., Lynch-Sauer, J., Patusky, K.L., Bouwsema, M., & Collier P. (1992). Sense of
belonging: A vital mental health concept. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 6(3), 172-177. doi:
10.1016/0883-9417(92)90028-H
Hartley, M.T. (2011). Examining the relationships between resilience, mental health, and academic
persistence in undergraduate college students. Journal of American College Health, 59(7), 596604. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2010.515632
Hausmann, L.R.M., Ye, F., Schofield, J.L., & Woods, R.L. (2009). Sense of belonging and persistence in
white and African American first-year students. Research in Higher Education, 50(7), 649-669.
doi: 10.1007/s11162-009-9137-8
Johnson, R.D., Stone, D.L., & Phillips, T.N. (2008). Relations among ethnicity, gender, beliefs,
attitudes, and intention to pursue a career in information technology. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 38(4), 999-1022. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00336.x
Lent, R.W., & Brown, S.D. (2013). Social cognitive model of career self-management: Toward a
unifying view of adaptive career behavior across the lifetime. Journal of Counseling
Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0033446


15

National Science Foundation (2011). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and
engineering: 2011. NSF 11-309. Retrieved
from: http://www.eric.ed.gov.ezproxy.lib.calpoly.edu/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?ac
cno=ED516940
Rypisi, C., Malcom, L.E., & Kim, H.S. (2009). Environmental and developmental approaches to
supporting women’s success in STEM fields. In S.R. Harper & S.J. Quaye (Eds.), Student
engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse
populations (pp. 117-136). New York, NY: Routledge
Sorenson, C.E., & Snyder, J. (2012). The gender earnings gap for physicians and its increase over time.
Economic Letters, 116(1), 37-41. Retrieved from:
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lib.calpoly.edu/10.1016/j.econlet.2011.12.133
Stevens, C.K., Bavetta, A.G., & Gist, M.E. (1993). Gender differences in the acquisition of salary
negotiation skills: The role of goals, self-efficacy, and perceived control. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 78(5), 723-735. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.723
Stoeger, H., Duan, X., Schirner, S., Greindl, T., & Ziegler, A. (2013). The effectiveness of a one-year
online mentoring program for girls in STEM. Computers & Education, 69, 408-418.
doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.032
Wade, M.E. (2001). Women and salary negotiation: The costs of self-advocacy. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 25(1), 65-76. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00008
Zeldin, A.L., Britner, S.L., & Pajares, F. (2008). A comparative study of the self-efficacy beliefs of
successful men and women in mathematics, science, and technology careers. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 1036-1058. doi: 10.1002/tea.20195

16

Statement of Techniques, Goals & Purposes of Group
Group Workshop Series
Career Services
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Theoretical Basis:
Albert Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory asserts that while individuals hold agentic power in their lives, they often
do not have direct control over the social conditions and institutional practices that affect their everyday lives
(Bandura, 2002). Bandura stated people do not live their lives autonomously, and that many things people seek
require some degree of interdependence. Du e to our immersion in a social world, we have to pool our knowledge,
skills, and resources provide mutual support, form alliances, and work together to secure what we cannot achieve
on our own. Bandura’s theory also lends itself to the explanation for how gendered norms are formed and
maintained via the interaction between one’s culture and the resulting social schemas within one’s mind. To put it
simply, we live in a social world and must understand how culture works and how we work within that culture to be
able to enact change for ourselves and society.
Guiding Methodology:
Group structure will be embedded in the Social Cognitive Theory of Career Self-Management model. The model
takes into account both the societal obstacles and beneficial social strategies that are necessary for understanding
gender norms within the STEM fields and society at large. The self-management piece focuses on two essential
elements: (a) individual goal-setting and (b) the application of information and workable strategies to real world
environments. The self-management training model has been shown to increase participants’ carryover utilization of
skills (i.e. in providing females with the necessary techniques to negotiate salary in professional environments)
(Stevens, Bavetta, & Gist, 1993).
Overarching Goal:
The primary goal for this group workshop series is to establish a space where female students majoring in the STEM
fields have the opportunity to be supported outside of an academic setting. Participants will be encouraged to
explore the role that gender plays in society and within their respective academic settings. Through personalized
group interactions, members will be given the opportunity to share anecdotal experiences and learn from each
other, thus developing an increased awareness and skill strategy when navigating through academic and
professional environments. This primary goal is heavily supported by the increased sense of belonging that comes
with group work, paired with the adoption of applicable strategies that are transferable to real-life experiences.

17

Meta-Goals:
Meta-goals play a supporting role in contributing to the primary goal of the group. They are research-based and have
been interwoven throughout the curriculum of the workshop sessions. Table 1.1 displays meta-goals and
corresponding session activities.

Meta-Goals & Criterion

Supporting Activity

Measurable Student Learning
Outcomes

Sense of Belonging

Group cohesion achieved via
individual disclosure and leader’s
linkages of members’ personal stories

Students will be able to identify
a safe social community on
campus that fits their needs as a
female STEM student

Increase sense of belonging to the
STEM fields
Increase sense of belonging on
campus

Increase/develop awareness of
gender roles in STEM and society
Explore perceptions of self

Students will place personal
interest in their field above the
perceptions of others as a
motivational direction in their
profession

Social interactions and relationshipbuilding among students in similar
fields on campus
Awareness of self, others, and society

Students will express meaning by
using craft materials to conceptualize
their interest in their field

at least one other group
member with whom they have
formed a connection with

Group discussions centered around
the topic of gender norms,
discrimination, and withheld
resources in academic and social
environments

societal influence in the
construction of gender norms
within the STEM fields

Students will complete “The Social
You” worksheet and discuss how
they may/may not have been
influenced by norms set forth by
society/family/media
Strategy and self-management
Develop strategic knowledge that
enables students to effectively
navigate academic and professional
environments in the presence of
gender norms

Group discussions on the topic of
gendered experiences within STEM
Anecdotal sharing on effective and
non-effective strategies for
navigating gendered environments

Process of creating individual goals
and practicing effective social
strategies via role-play


Students will report
competence in their selfknowledge and recognize how
self-concepts can be influenced
by societal norms
Students will develop
competence in the following
areas: (a) anticipating
performance obstacles, (b)
planning to overcome
performance obstacles, (c)
setting goals to overcome
obstacles, (d) monitoring one’s
own progress, and (e)
rewarding one’s goal
attainment
Students will demonstrate
increased awareness of and
intent to use negotiation skills
18

Engage in personal and professional
development
Foster advanced career development
strategies

Increase self-efficacy
Raise individual perceptions of selfefficacy in academic tasks and
professional pathways
Raise individual perceptions of selfefficacy in interactions with others in
a social world

Students will engage in professional
communication with mentors
Students will conduct two
informational interviews with
mentors for career development and
networking purposes

Group sharing will help uncover
performance anxiety and the
potential for internalized gender
norms as an obstacle faced by
women in STEM, thus taking the
focus off of the student’s ability and
bringing in the external influences at
play

Students will practice negotiation
strategies and other related social
strategies that stress gender equality


at least two important pieces of
information gained from
interactions with their mentor
Students will be competent
with professional
communication and the process
of informational interviewing
Students will report moderatehigh levels of self-efficacy in
their field
Students will indicate an
awareness of the potential
effect of internalized gender
norms on their perceptions of
self
Students will be able to
recognize a transferable skill
they have acquired through
group interactions

19

STEM Program Overview

More Related Content

What's hot (14)

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to STEM Program Overview (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

STEM Program Overview