The proportion of Black, Latinx, and American Native individuals annually earning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) doctoral degrees in the United States (US) has been enduringly and inequitably low for decades compared to their White peers. Despite the intransigent connection between race and STEM doctoral outcomes, US STEM education policy documents typically fail to identify racism as influencing this racial inequity. This paper presents critical capital theory (CCT)—an integration of critical race theory, forms of capital, and fictive kinship—to give racism full explanatory power within the context of US STEM doctoral outcomes. CCT proposes that access to large and affluent social networks containing supportive individuals who have knowledge of how to successfully navigate institutions of power is currently core to STEM doctoral success. This access reinforces STEM identity and belonging, but has been and continues to be primarily preserved for White students via an ever‐evolving system of racism. CCT proposes systems supporting STEM faculty’s consistent provision of high‐quality mentorship experiences for all their students—coupled with accountability for providing this mentorship—would result in more equitable STEM doctoral outcomes.

Traditionally underserved students (TUSs), including Black, Latinx, American Native, and low-socioeconomic (SES) students, have higher rates of departure from STEM undergraduate programs than their more privileged peers. These higher departure rates are associated with TUSs' lower performance in STEM gatekeeper courses compared to non-STEM courses through their sophomore year. Flipped models of instruction when used in gatekeeper chemistry courses are broadly shown to improve student course performance (higher course grades; reduced W/D/F rates). However, there is no clear evidence that flipped models specifically improve course performance for TUSs. This study's objective was to determine the impact of a flipped model on students' course performance in General Chemistry I on the basis of their race/ethnicity and SES. Using a nonparallel quasi-experimental design, student performance by race/ethnicity and SES in the flipped model course was compared to that of students in the traditional course. Results show TUSs were significantly more likely to have higher course grades in the flipped model course as compared to the traditional course. Further, the performance gap was closed between Black and Latinx students and their White/Asian peers in the flipped model. However, a performance gap between low-SES and middle-to high-SES students emerged in the flipped model. The W/D/F rate was decreased in the flipped model for all student groups. Therefore, although flipped models are not a panacea, they can be one critical support strategy used in freshman and sophomore chemistry gatekeeper courses to mitigate TUSs' departure from STEM undergraduate programs.

While there is evidence to support the existence of identity-based disparities, inequities, and biases in the academic journal peer-review process, little research supports the presence of this bias in the peer-review process for academic journals in science education.

This qualitative study examined how and why a research experiences for teachers (RET) influenced middle and high school science teachers' beliefs, attitudes, and values about teaching science as inquiry. Changes teachers reported after participating in the RET ranged from modifying a few lessons (belief change) to a comprehensive revision of what and how they taught to better reflect inquiry (attitude change). Some teachers who described comprehensively changing their instruction also described implementing actions meant to change science education within their respective schools, not just their own classrooms (value change). We present how and why teachers went about changes in their practices in relation to the researcher created teacher inquiry beliefs system spectrum (TIBSS). The TIBSS conceptualizes the range of changes observed in participating teachers. We also describe the features of the RET and external factors, such as personal experiences and school contexts, that teachers cited as influential to these changes.

There has been a recent rapid increase in the number of primary studies comparing the impacts of flipped to traditional instruction in undergraduate chemistry courses. Across these studies, there are wide variations in flipped model design, implementation, and reported impacts. To investigate these variations, 28 primary peer-reviewed studies were systematically analyzed. There were three notable trends. First, compared to final exams, course GPA seems to be the more sensitive measure of significant gains in students’ overall academic performance. Second, courses reporting significant gains in course GPA concertedly used (i) an extrinsic motivational tool for students to complete pre- and in-class activities, (ii) responsive mini-lecturing as an in-class instructional strategy, and (iii) the optional flipped model feature of independent postclass problem solving. In stark contrast, studies reporting no difference in course GPA rarely incentivized student completion of pre- and in-class activities, and none used responsive mini-lecturing or postclass problem solving. It was difficult to determine robust trends in impacts on various student populations as impacts were seldomly disaggregated by descriptors such as sex, race/ethnicity, and income level. Third, although there was a clear trend of constructivism being used as the theoretical framework for flipped courses, extrinsic motivation potentially plays a key role in the model’s impact. Instructor ability or desire to motivate students to engage with learning, however, was not addressed in most studies. These trends imply - more research is needed to determine impacts of flipped courses on diverse student populations and the role of instructor beliefs and ability to motivate students to engage with learning in a flipped course. Such research should be used to advance the theoretical understanding of how, why, and in what contexts flipped courses positively and significantly impact diverse students’ academic performance.