Untitled

Eimers, Mardy T.; Braxton, John M.; Bayer, Alan E.

doi:10.1023/a:1011002310742

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Where educational gaps between students of color and the general student body persist, HSI and AANAPISI institutions can be considered “Hispanic or AANAPISI-Enrolling” rather than “Hispanic or AANAPISI-Serving.” Indeed, diversity can be seen as a commodity for colleges and universities [17] who marginalize ethnic studies departments and allow or foster other departments to teach the content of ethnic studies departments, leading to further opportunities for the majoritarian voice to interpret the experiences of people of color without full comprehension of their lived experiences [18]. Even when the university makes changes to improve student services, these improvements often benefit the majority students the most, a form of interest convergence [17, 23, 111, 112]. …”

Section: Infrastructure Development: the Health Equity Research And Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Critical race theory as a bridge in science training: the California State University, Northridge BUILD PODER program

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and purposeUnconscious bias and explicit forms of discrimination continue to pervade academic institutions. Multicultural and diversity training activities have not been sufficient in making structural and social changes leading to equity, therefore, a new form of critical consciousness is needed to train diverse scientists with new research questions, methods, and perspectives. The purpose of this paper is to describe Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD); Promoting Opportunities for Diversity in Education and Research (PODER), which is an undergraduate biomedical research training program based on transformative framework rooted in Critical Race Theory (CRT).Key highlightsBy employing a CRT-informed curriculum and training in BUILD PODER, students are empowered not only to gain access but also to thrive in graduate programs and beyond. Poder means “power” or “to be able to” in Spanish. Essentially, we are “building power” using students’ strengths and empowering them as learners. The new curriculum helps students understand institutional policies and practices that may prevent them from persisting in higher education, learn to become their own advocates, and successfully confront social barriers and instances of inequities and discrimination. To challenge these barriers and sustain campus changes in support of students, BUILD PODER works toward changing campus culture and research mentoring relationships. By joining with ongoing university structures such as the state university Graduation Initiative, we include CRT tenets into the campus dialogue and stimulate campus-wide discussions around institutional change. Strong ties with five community college partners also enrich BUILD PODER’s student body and strengthen mentor diversity. Preliminary evaluation data suggest that BUILD PODER’s program has enhanced the racial/ethnic consciousness of the campus community, is effective in encouraging more egalitarian and respectful faculty-student relationships, and is a rigorous program of biomedical research training that supports students as they achieve their goals.ImplicationsBiomedical research programs may benefit from a reanalysis of the fit between current training programs and student strengths. By incorporating the voices of talented youth, drawing upon their native strengths, we will generate a new science that links biomedical research to community health and social justice, generating progress toward health equity through a promising new generation of scholars.

show abstract

Section: Infrastructure Development: the Health Equity Research And Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Critical race theory as a bridge in science training: the California State University, Northridge BUILD PODER program

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Systems Model of Innovation Processes in University STEM Education

Porter

Roessner

Oliver

et al. 2006

Journal of Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing upon understanding of innovation processes in other domains, we construct a model of the innovation system for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. The model suggests that higher educational innovation in research universities is severely disadvantaged in many regards. Paramount is the lack of a "natural" innovator who, analogous to the engineer in an industrial research and development lab, has professional training and incentives to perform a significant professional role-teaching. The model suggests a number of organizational and structural factors that must be addressed, systemically, to bolster prospects of educational improvement at research universities. Changing single factors, without attention to the interactive systems nature of STEM educational processes, is unlikely to prove effective in improving undergraduate education.

show abstract

Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature

Henderson¹,

Beach²,

Finkelstein³

2011

J Res Sci Teach

821

853

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews current scholarship about how to promote change in instructional practices used in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses. The review is based on 191 conceptual and empirical journal articles published between 1995 and 2008. Four broad categories of change strategies were developed to capture core differences within this body of literature: disseminating curriculum and pedagogy, developing reflective teachers, enacting policy, and developing shared vision. STEM education researchers largely write about change in terms of disseminating curriculum and pedagogy. Faculty development researchers largely write about change in terms of developing reflective teachers. Higher education researchers largely write about change in terms of enacting policy. New work often does not build on prior empirical or theoretical work. Although most articles claim success of the change strategy studied, evidence presented to support these claims is typically not strong. For example, only 21% of articles that studied implementation of a change strategy were categorized as presenting strong evidence to support claims of success or failure of the strategy. These analyses suggest that the state of change strategies and the study of change strategies are weak, and that research communities that study and enact change are largely isolated from one‐another. In spite of the weak state of the literature, some conclusions related to the design of change strategies can be drawn from this review. Two commonly used change strategies are clearly not effective: developing and testing “best practice” curricular materials and then making these materials available to other faculty and “top‐down” policy‐making meant to influence instructional practices. Effective change strategies: are aligned with or seek to change the beliefs of the individuals involved; involve long‐term interventions, lasting at least one semester; require understanding a college or university as a complex system and designing a strategy that is compatible with this system. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 48: 952–984, 2011

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 6 publications

References 28 publications

Critical race theory as a bridge in science training: the California State University, Northridge BUILD PODER program

Critical race theory as a bridge in science training: the California State University, Northridge BUILD PODER program

A Systems Model of Innovation Processes in University STEM Education

Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About