University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Independent research internship experiences of underrepresented minorities in biological sciences: an interview case study

(USC Thesis Other)

Independent research internship experiences of underrepresented minorities in biological sciences: an interview case study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 1

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCES OF UNDERREPRESENTED
MINORITIES IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES: AN INTERVIEW CASE STUDY

by
Karol Lu

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2019

Copyright 2019 Karol Lu
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am indebted to my mentor, Dr. Pamela Eversole-Cire, who taught me a great deal about
scientific research and life in general. Dr. Pamela Eversole-Cire has been supportive of my
career goals and worked actively to provide me with the protected academic time to pursue those
goals. I would especially like to thank my home institution that continues to support students,
staff, and faculty who are in the pursuit of their academic and career aspirations. I am grateful to
all of those with whom I have had the pleasure to work with during this and other related
projects. I am thankful to those who have helped develop my career as a K-12 teacher, my
Principal Michael Kerr, my co-teacher and mentor, Jeremy Shedlosky and Rita Ashlock, and my
colleague and best friend, Dixon Deutsch. Each has inspired my motivation to pursue the change
I wish to see in education. The members of my Dissertation Committee, Dr. Fredrick Freking,
Dr. Anthony Maddox, and Dr. Courtney Malloy, have provided professional guidance and taught
me about educational research, and personal persistence. Nobody has been more important to me
in the pursuit of this project and my overall academic, professional, and personal growth than my
spouse, Wally Liu, and my sister, Ellen Lu, as well as my closest friends. I would like to thank
my parents (by blood and by marriage), whose lived experiences and perseverance as
immigrants, as parents, and as citizens of this country provided me with a framework for success
as a first-generation college student. Most importantly, I wish to thank the University of
Southern California Rossier School of Education for the relentless, consistent and compassionate
pursuit for educational reform, and for providing access and opportunities to postsecondary
education for students like myself.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: An Overview of the Study 8
Background of the Problem 8
Significance of the Study 10
ABC City College 11
Research Internship Profile 12
Statement of the Problem and Purpose of the Study 14
Research Questions 15
Limitations of the Study 15
Delimitations of the Study 16
Assumptions 16
Chapter Two: Literature Review 17
Research Question 17
Literature Review 17
Astin’s Student Involvement/Engagement Theory 18
Limitations of Research on Student Engagement 18
Student Engagement and STEM Persistence 20
Transition and College Adjustment 21
Contextual Barriers to Independent Research Internship Experience 22
Independent Research Internship Experience Impacts Persistence 23
Conceptual Framework: Social Cognitive Career Theory 25
Self-Efficacy, Outcome Expectations, and Choice Goals 26
Limitations of Literature 28
Student Population at Two-Year Institutions 30
Chapter Summary 30
Chapter Three: Methodology 32
Research Question 32
Research Design and Methods 32
Why Qualitative Approach? 33
Sampling 34
Access/Entry 36
Protocols 36
Data Collection Approach 39
Data Analysis 40
Limitations 40
Chapter Summary 41
Chapter Four: Findings 42
Research Methods 42
Qualitative Strategies Used 42
Findings 44
Research Question 1 44
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 4
Benefits 52
Challenges 57
Persistence and Choice Goals 61
Research Question 2 61
Outcome Expectations and Future Career Insight 62
Performance Domains and Attainment (Outcomes) 63
Choice Goals and Choice Actions 64
Conclusion 69
Chapter Five: Discussions and Conclusions 71
Summary of Findings 72
Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectations 72
Interests 73
Choice Goals, Choice Actions, and Performance Domains and Attainment 75
The Role of Persistence 76
Implications for Practice 77
Recommendations for Research 78
Conclusion 79
References 81
Appendix A Student Research Intern Alum Interview Protocol 95
Appendix B Document Review Template 104
Appendix C Recruitment Letter 106
Appendix D Definition of Terms 107

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Demographics of the IRIE Participants 35
Table 2: Interview Summary of the IRIE Participants 45
Table 3: Performance Domains and Attainment (Outcomes) of the IRIE Participants 64
Table 4: Choice Goals and Choice Actions of the IRIE Participants 65

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Model of person, contextual, and experiential factors effecting career-related
choice behavior (Lent & Brown, 2006). 26
Figure 2: Qualitative approach methodology design. 33
Figure 3: Model of person, contextual, and experiential factors effecting career-related
choice behavior (Lent & Brown, 2006). 72
Figure 4: Model of person, contextual, and experiential factors effecting career-related
choice behavior: A revision, adapted from Lent and Brown (2006). 75

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 7
ABSTRACT
As the structural diversity of the country is changing, there is an increasing need in the
workforce to fill and diversify STEM occupations to accommodate this change. Identifying and
understanding factors influencing underrepresented minorities and their decision to complete a
postgraduate degree will shed light on challenges related to the lack of diversity in the STEM
workforce. A qualitative methods approach was used in this study to provide insights on whether
undergraduate research experience for underrepresented minorities attending a 2-year institution
influences choice goals and persistence in scientific research or related careers. The central
guiding theoretical framework for the study is the social cognitive career theory.
Underrepresented minorities (URM) in STEM, specifically in biological sciences, who
participated in a one-year independent research internship experience (IRIE) at local renowned
research institutes were recruited on a voluntary basis to participate in this study. The
participants’ perception regarding the benefits and challenges of performing an IRIE and the
potential influence on career choice were evaluated using interview and document data. Results
demonstrate that participants perceived the IRIE as having a positive influence on their choice to
pursue a STEM-related career which may ultimately contribute to the diversity of the STEM
workforce. The study may inform funding sources to develop programs that effectively increase
STEM persistence, access, and retention for URM.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 8
CHAPTER ONE: AN OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
The current study sought to address issues of representation of underrepresented
minorities (URM) in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines at
postsecondary institutions. Specifically, the study seeks to explore how research internship
experience in biological sciences influences URM persistence and career choice.
Background of the Problem
Growing demands of the STEM workforce and declining availability in the talent pool of
postsecondary education graduates challenge the United States’ global competitiveness. Overall,
U.S. postsecondary institutions’ challenge of URM persistence in STEM can adversely affect
their long-term social mobility and perpetuate social economic inequity. The National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES, 2015) reports that URM also have the fastest growing rates of
enrollment at 2-and 4-year institutions of higher education. However, in 2015, Colby and Ortman
reported that the supply of STEM graduates with at least a bachelor’s degree will not meet the
demands of projected STEM occupations by the year 2060. Eagan, Hurtado and Chang (2010)
found that URM have a lower probability of completing a STEM degree compared to their White
counterparts. Native American students are 8.9% less likely, and Black and Latino students are
11.28% and 8.32%, respectively, less likely to earn a STEM degree compared to Whites (Eagan
et al., 2010). Chen and Soldner (2013) and the Office of Science and Technology Policy show
that underrepresented groups such as females have higher attrition rates compared to that of
males. With the high attrition rate in STEM majors, compounded by the higher probability of
attrition among URM in STEM, lack of diversity in the STEM workforce is an emerging and
urgent national issue. Identifying and understanding factors influencing URM in STEM and their
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 9
decision to complete a postsecondary degree will shed light on challenges related to the lack of
structural diversity in the STEM workforce and improve rates of URM STEM students’ success.
The social and economic impact of the issue includes lack of diversity in the workforce
and financial inequity. STEM students eventually go on to diversify the overall workforce and
increase their economic worth with higher median salaries and lower unemployment rates
compared to workers in non-STEM careers (Hurtado, Newman, Tran, & Chang, 2010; U.S.
Census Bureau, 2012). Additionally, the country’s structural diversity is changing significantly,
specifically in URM groups such as Hispanics/Latinos, American Indian and Black or African
Americans. From 2014 to 2060, the prediction for change in structural diversity includes the
following: a change of -8.2% for non-Hispanic Whites, 42% change for Black or African-
Americans, 41% change for American Indians and 115% change for Hispanics/Latinos (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2012). The literature shows an increasing need in the workforce to fill and
diversify STEM occupations to accommodate our country’s changing structural diversity
(NCES, 2015; U.S. Census Bureau, 2012).
Lack of diversity in the workforce could also have an impact on the quality of workforce
training for individuals and groups. For example, social science studies on economic group
composition show that diverse groups develop more effective approaches to solving problems
compared to homogenous groups (Hong & Page, 2004; Stahl, Maznevski, Voigt, & Jonsen,
2010) and this is especially true when crowd size increases (Robert & Romero, 2015).
Homogeneous groups, even those with relatively greater ability, are offset by their lack of
problem-solving diversity because a diverse group of people carry differences in their
demographic characteristics, cultural identities and ethnicity, training and expertise (known as
identity diversity) that is linked to their functional diversity or differences in how they approach
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 10
a problem (Hong & Page, 2004). Other studies report that a diverse workgroup composition
fosters creativity (Cho, Kim, & Mor Barak, 2017; Stahl et al., 2010).
Postsecondary institutions, specifically, 2-year (i.e., community or city colleges)
institutions, play an important and unique role in addressing the need to improve the persistence
of URM in STEM. Given these institutions’ open door policy, a disproportionate number of
students at community colleges come from disadvantaged backgrounds, seeking alternative
pathways to a college education or better career opportunities (Labov, 2012; Wang, 2015). Thus,
community college students are far more diverse than their 4-year counterparts within the same
geographic locations (Labov, 2012). In 2010, 47% of Asian or Pacific Islanders, 55% of
Hispanics, and 57% of Native Americans were enrolled at approximately 1,200 community
colleges in the United States compared to over 3,000 enrollments in 4-year postsecondary
institutions (Labov, 2012). Improving STEM persistence could close the economic pipeline gap
by serving a diverse student population in need of an affordable postsecondary education. Labov
(2012) suggests several points to resolve such issues. Among them are improving interactions
between 2- and 4-year postsecondary institutions, developing STEM education pathways to
increase employment of community college graduates, and aiding community colleges in
broadening participation for students, especially those from underrepresented populations.
Significance of the Study
The literature findings, specifically within the last 5 years, add to our current
understanding of factors influencing URM STEM persistence. As practitioners at postsecondary
institutions, we will need to target areas of improvement, allocate resources to high-need
programs and develop programs to increase STEM persistence while considering the unique
needs of URM. Several private, liberal arts and minority-serving 4-year institutions developed
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 11
programs to increase URM STEM persistence and degree attainment (D’Souza, Kroen, Stephens,
& Kashmar, 2015; Yelamarthi & Mawasha, 2008). One such example is Wesley’s STEM-
directed research program sponsoring undergraduate research and the pre-engineering program
for low-income first-generation college-bound students at the Wright Science Technology and
Engineering Preparatory Program (D’Souza et al., 2015; Yelamarthi & Mawasha, 2008). These
programs show significant increase to access and retention of STEM majors for URM. Founded
on empirical data, the programs provide research opportunities while developing a critical mass
of URM STEM students to enhance student engagement and improve perception, self-efficacy
and faculty-student interactions. Improving URM STEM persistence is critical to fulfilling and
diversifying the STEM workforce to reflect the growing structural diversity of our economy.
Similar to undergraduate research opportunities at 4-year institutions and the program
targeting college-bound public high school students developed to increase URM STEM
persistence and degree attainment, research opportunities at community colleges may hold the
same value. However, there are very few studies on the impact of undergraduate research
opportunities at community colleges.
ABC City College
ABC City College (ABCCC) was established as a public, comprehensive 2-year
community college in Los Angeles County, California. The college serves an urban multi-ethnic
population with more than 400,000 people. In the 2016–2017 academic year, the college enrolled
more than 60,000 students; 47% of them were Hispanic, 24% Asian, 3% Filipino, 15% White,
4% Black or African American, and 7% multi-ethnic or unknown (California Community
Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2017). ABC City College is widely recognized for its high rate of
student transfers to 4-year institutions. The college houses over 100 associate degree programs,
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 12
and it offers over 50 certificate programs in career and technical education, including
biotechnology.
The students participating in the ABCCC Biotech Program represent the diversity of
California’s workforce: first-generation college students, high school students, individuals
pursuing a second career, women re-entering the workforce, displaced workers, and veterans.
The students are ethnically and culturally diverse and include economically disadvantaged
students. From the years 2012 to 2016, minority students made up 41% of total enrollment in the
ABCCC Biotechnology Program. Of these students, 32% were Hispanic, one of the primary
groups that remains underrepresented in STEM subjects and professions. Students entering the
program have educational backgrounds ranging from no college experience to bachelor’s and
advanced degrees, which creates a spectrum of student outcomes as students’ science biological
sciences content knowledge and laboratory background vary.
Research Internship Profile
Bridges Undergraduate Research Program at ABC City College (ABCCC) is a stem cell
training program funded by a state government agency. The program offers research,
educational, and training opportunities to qualifying ABCCC biotechnology students.
Participants take part in a research internship and are eligible for coursework, educational
enhancement activities, and training related to stem cell biology and regenerative medicine. They
also take part in community outreach activities that increase awareness of stem cell research
among high school students in diverse communities as well as patient and healthcare engagement
activities to raise their own awareness of the importance of their research efforts. The program
has produced highly qualified lab personnel for stem cell research in both academic and industry
settings.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 13
Qualifying students selected for the internship program receive a year-long paid
internship in a laboratory performing human stem cell research using the undergraduate research
internship experience apprenticeship model (Linn, Palmer, Baranger, Gerard, & Stone, 2015;
Wei & Woodin, 2011). In contrast to the course-based undergraduate research internship
experience where the internship serves as an alternate or replacement for a laboratory course
with graded assignments, the apprenticeship model allows students to conduct independent
research projects in an individual faculty member’s laboratory, observe a mentor, learn data
collection methods, collect data for his/her own or mentor’s research questions, attend lab
meetings, and reflect on data collected (Linn et al., 2015).
Internship sites are three renowned research institutes: Technology University, University
School, and Teaching Hospital. Trainees are offered research opportunities with mentors in fields
ranging from basic science of stem cells to translational research in regenerative medicine.
Internship laboratory activities are designed to allow interns to participate directly in performing
a hypothesis-driven research project, properly learn new laboratory techniques and practice,
obtain authorship on published papers, become a productive team member, and experience
working in an intensive research environment. Internship opportunities for 10 interns per
academic year are available. Selected students are also eligible for coursework, including
instruction on the process for development and regulation of new stem cell-based therapies, and
educational enhancement activities related to stem cell biology and regenerative medicine. A
training course in human embryonic stem cell culture techniques prepares them for these
research opportunities. Former Bridges Undergraduate Research Program internship participants
serve as the sample population in the evaluation of URM persistence in biological sciences or
related field at the community college.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 14
Students applying for the internship experience are required to complete a certificate of
achievement in biotechnology (or equivalent) prior to the internship and a stem cell culture
certificate. These certificates can be completed within 2 years and require core biotech courses
and transfer courses in chemistry, biology, microbiology, statistics and ethics. ABC City College
biotechnology courses are taught in a working laboratory setting so that students can learn more
than the core competencies. Students are mentored and their performance is evaluated as if they
were employed by a biotech company or research institution to prepare the students for the
workplace expectations.
Statement of the Problem and Purpose of the Study
It is of economic importance that educators address the challenges of URM persistence in
STEM degree attainment and career choice to alleviate social inequity and supply our country
with the human capital necessary to compete globally. The literature shows an increasing need in
the workforce to fill and diversify STEM occupations to accommodate our country’s changing
structural diversity (NCES, 2015; U.S. Census Bureau, 2012) and, although URM are declaring
STEM as an undergraduate major, they are not graduating with a STEM degree at the same rate
as their White and Asian counterpart (Estrada et al., 2016; Museus, Palmer, Davis, & Maramba,
2011). Large gaps in STEM degree completion and the subsequent lost talent disproportionally
affect historically underrepresented groups (people of color, women, and women of color). Even
in STEM majors where women and women of color have shown comparable completion
outcomes, they do not pursue STEM careers (Espinosa, 2011; National Research Council, 2006).
Social science studies on economic group composition show that diverse individuals
develop more effective approaches to solving problems, achieve greater productivity, and foster
creativity in the workplace when compared to homogenous groups (Cho et al., 2017; Robert &
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 15
Romero, 2015; Stahl et al., 2010). A diverse scientific community can minimize the bias
associated with scientific reasoning because people from different backgrounds approach a
problem with different perspectives (Intemann, 2009). Current approaches to increasing diversity
in STEM careers focus on graduating STEM majors, but undergraduate research internship
experiences may be necessary in preparation for a career in STEM, specifically in the biological
sciences. Undergraduate research internship experiences have been shown to improve retention
and increase interest in pursuing a graduate degree (American Association for the Advancement
of Science, 2011; Eagan et al., 2010; Russell, Hancock, & McCullough, 2007; Seymour et al.,
2004). The current study used a qualitative approach to provide insights on whether an
undergraduate research internship experience in biological sciences at a 2-year institution
influences self-efficacy and outcome expectations, interests, choice goals (career choice) and
persistence in biological sciences or related field.
Research Questions
The study sought to answer the following research questions: What are the perceptions of
students regarding the benefits and challenges of participating in an independent research
internship experience (IRIE)? In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their career choice?
Limitations of the Study
Although every effort was made to triangulate data from different sources, there are still
limitations to consider (Creswell, 2013; McEwan & McEwan, 2003). The findings cannot be
generalized to all postsecondary institutions in the United States. The Bridges Undergraduate
Research Program at ABCCC is unique in that it is offered at a 2-year institution rather than a 4-
year institution, and the length of research internship is longer than those available at most
undergraduate institutions. Future studies comparing undergraduate research programs with
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 16
varying research internship lengths and program components at postsecondary institutions for
student persistence could provide insight for practitioners serving URM at similar institutions. It
should also be noted that some participants may hold bachelor’s or higher degrees, as 2-year
institutions have an open door policy and students with varying educational levels may enroll.
Delimitations of the Study
For the purposes of the study, the site was selected because it is one of two community
colleges awarded Bridges Undergraduate Research funding for the year-long student internship
and program support. The site also represents the California community college system, and only
10 internship positions are available per year.
Assumptions
Although the study serves to investigate persistence in biological sciences or related field
and career choice, the specific population of interest are students who participated in a biological
sciences research laboratory. Therefore, persistence and career choice may mean that they
continue to pursue biological sciences and health science fields, but not necessarily in a career or
advanced degree in scientific research. For example, students identified as showing persistence
may decide to use their research internship experience to attend medical school and integrate
their scientific research training as a physician.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 17
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
The current study sought to address issues of URM representation in biological sciences
at postsecondary institutions. Specifically, the study explored how an undergraduate research
internship experience influences URM persistence in biological sciences or related field and
career choice. The following literature review addresses issues of URM persistence in STEM at
postsecondary institutions. This problem is important to address from an educational, social and
economic standpoint.
Research Question
The current study used a qualitative approach to answer the following research questions:
What are the perceptions of students regarding the benefits and challenges of participating in an
independent research internship experience (IRIE)? In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their
career choice?
Literature Review
A synthesis of existing literature on student persistence in STEM disciplines at post-
secondary institutions reveals several themes that serve as a driving force of URM persistence,
including student perception and barriers that challenge student persistence. Many students enter
college with an intended major in mind and change their intended major partway through their
education. This is especially true for students entering college majoring in a STEM discipline
(Espinosa, 2011; Griffith, 2010; Wang, 2013b). Women and minorities are even less likely to
persist in a STEM field major during college than are male and non-minority students (Espinosa,
2011; Griffith, 2010). Much of the literature explores the role of self-efficacy in educational
psychology theories, for example, social cognitive theory and student involvement theory, to
explain the low persistence among URM (SCT; Bandura, 1977, 2001) and (Astin, 1984, 1999)
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 18
while others focus on contextual barriers to persistence, and the impact or lack of opportunities
(Chang, Sharkness, Hurtado, & Newman, 2014; Graham, Frederick, Byars-Winston, Hunter, &
Handelsman, 2013; Hernandez, Schultz, Estrada, Woodcock, & Chance, 2013; Russell et al.,
2007).
Astin’s Student Involvement/Engagement Theory
One of the main themes of the literature on URM STEM persistence is student
involvement/engagement, originally proposed by Astin (1984). The theory of student
involvement explains the relationship between student involvement and the degree of student
development (Astin, 1984). Astin (1999) defined student involvement as “the amount of physical
and psychological commitment to the academic experience” (p. 518). Astin proposed that active
involvement in one’s college environment leads to student learning, development, and,
ultimately, a positive perception of their own college experience. Thus, the theory on student
involvement is appealing in that it is simple and explains most of the empirical knowledge on
environmental influences (Astin, 1984, 1999). Students’ involvement is associated with
persistence and identification with the college of attendance or student population (Astin, 1984,
1999). The initial study emphasized the predictive value of what Astin later identified as
involvement. Student involvement predicted college dropout outcomes, persistence in college
and identity with the institution (Astin, 1984, 1999). Similar results supported the original
findings published in 1975, indicating that results were repeatable (Astin, 1984, 1999).
Limitations of Research on Student Engagement
The empirical studies supporting Astin’s (1984, 1999) theory of student involvement
often generalize the relationships between college success and student development to on-
campus involvement for traditional-age college students. It is important to note, when reviewing
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 19
the studies, that the sample population is somewhat homogenous and that race, culture, ethnicity,
gender, abilities and sexual orientation are not mentioned (Astin, 1999; Waterman, 2012; Patton,
Renn, Guido, & Quaye, 2016). The popularity of Astin’s theory among student affairs
practitioners has increased the degree of blindness, where all students, regardless of race, age,
gender or cultural background, are assumed to be further developed when they display
involvement behavior. Furthermore, the majority of the literature supporting Astin’s theory of
student involvement reported results from traditional college students (late teens to early 20s);
this is problematic in that it does not represent the full spectrum of students on all college
campuses (Wolf-Wendel, Ward, & Kinzie, 2009).
When taking into consideration culture and ethnic identity development, students of color
are perceived as having low involvement, measured by frequent home visits and commuter status
(Waterman, 2012). According to Astin’s theory, the degree of student learning success
(measured by degree completion) and personal identity development of students of color is
expected to be lower compared to their White peers who live on-campus (Waterman, 2012). In
Waterman’s study (2012), Native American students’ success and overall educational
satisfaction was the same for those who remained on campus to those who went home
frequently. Native American students in the study reported feeling isolated and not connected to
their tribal culture without the frequent commute; thus, home-going contributed to the success of
the students when in a non-Native college environment (Waterman, 2012).
Further analysis of Astin’s (1984, 1999) work reveals that, while Astin claims that
involvement can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively, his research has focused on
quantitative measures. Research on student involvement typically measures time on task and
frequency of activities with little focus on expenditure of energy

(Carter & Fountaine, 2012). Of
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 20
the small number of studies on student involvement exploring the expenditure of energy, all are
quantitative in a nature with small sample size at unique institutions (e.g., HBCU) that limit
generalizability (Carter & Fountaine, 2012; Harper, 2009; Waterman, 2012; Wolf-Wendel et al.,
2009). Justification for the lack of qualitative studies on student involvement by one of Astin’s
supporters points to the labor intensiveness, time-consuming, and impracticality of qualitative
studies (Carter & Fountaine, 2012).
Although the theory of student involvement is practical and clearly supports the influence
of involvement on social integration, there is little evidence to support the direct impact of
student involvement on academic success. Further, evidence supporting the theory is limited in
generalizability, and the theory does not consider the issues of access, equity and opportunity
that may limit URM involvement on college campuses.
Student Engagement and STEM Persistence
Engagement/involvement emphasizes the unique interaction between the student and the
institution influencing students’ decisions to persist in a STEM major (Espinosa, 2011; Tinto,
1988). The model theorizes that students’ interaction with their chosen major is influenced by
characteristics, behaviors, and experiences, which, in turn, produce a connection, or engagement,
between the student and his or her institution that leads to persistence and degree attainment
(Espinosa, 2011; Tinto, 1988; Hurtado et al., 2010). Studies have noted that undergraduate
research participants attend STEM-related graduate programs at a higher rate than that of non-
participants (Bauer & Bennett, 2003; Hathaway, Nagda, & Gregerman, 2002). These studies,
however, did not account for pre-existing interests in graduate education. Women of color are
more likely to persist in a STEM discipline when the institutions have undergraduate research
opportunities (D'Souza et al., 2015; Hurtado et al., 2010). According to Hurtado and colleagues
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 21
(2010), URM student involvement in undergraduate science research opportunities appears to
contribute to persistence and the development of an identity as a scientist. Hurtado and
colleagues (2010) further suggested that it may also be that engagement/involvement in these
programs allow URM STEM students to engage with peers with similar interests, and indirectly
influences their self-efficacy.
Transition and College Adjustment
The transition from high school to college is often referred to as a psychological
adjustment process. Studies measuring the psychological adjustment process of high-school-to-
college transition focus on traits and behavior, such as student self-efficacy, student involvement,
and motivation (Astin, 1984; Locks, Hurtado, Bowman, & Oseguera, 2008; Tinto, 1988).
Although traits and behaviors may provide information about students’ response to their
environment, understanding context and college campus climate can inform institutional policies
and practices (Locks et al., 2008). The transition experience can be challenging and affect
student outcomes in significant ways, namely academic outcomes that include persistence and
degree attainment (Locks et al., 2008; Tinto, 1999). Challenges during the college transition and
adjustment period may include financial concerns along with social and academic integration.
Student Integration and Interactionists Models
Many models of college persistence, particularly those of URM pursuing STEM majors,
consider the adjustment period during the first year as a crucial component. Student integration
and interactionist models explain how student experiences influence persistence. Greater social
and academic integration leads to greater academic performance in terms of grade point average
(GPA). Tinto’s (1988, 1999) model of student integration is widely supported, whereby the level
of integration into the academic and social system of the college is a predictive value of college
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 22
attrition or persistence. Academic integration, however, is influenced by one’s perception. For
example, findings from previous studies show that URM students often leave the sciences due to
the perception that STEM interest lacks social value or relevance to improving conditions for
their families and/or communities (Bonous-Hammarth, 2000; Hurtado et al., 2010). The
literature on URM persistence in STEM also speaks to the negative impact of financial concerns
on transition, college adjustment, and aspirations to pursue a career in scientific research
(Hurtado et al., 2010; Oseguera, Hurtado, Denson, Cerna, & Sáenz, 2006; Wang, 2013b). URM
students tend to have a lower socioeconomic status and work during college to alleviate their
financial burden, leaving little time to dedicate to academic content and research opportunities
that may shape their STEM identities (Oseguera et al., 2006).
Contextual Barriers to Independent Research Internship Experience
A wealth of literature speaks to the contextual barriers to persistence that affect URM at
postsecondary institutions. The racial disparity of URM persistence in STEM is caused by
barriers that include stereotype threat, sense of belonging, campus climate, and self-efficacy.
Negative college climate affects all students, but it is specifically more challenging for URM as
they are often targets of discrimination (Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini, Pascarella, & Hagedorn, 1999;
Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Hurtado, Clayton-Pedersen,
Allen, & Milem, 1998). Social cohesion or students’ sense of belonging and perception of hostile
racial climate affects their intention to persist in college and, ultimately, degree attainment
(Mounts, 2004). Lent et al. (2000) suggest that contextual barriers like sense of belonging,
stereotype threat, and campus climate inhibit self-efficacy and choice goals.
Other barriers that hinder one’s access and/or participation in independent research are
the availability of such opportunities and the awareness that they exist as well as lack of cultural
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 23
capital (Bangera & Brownell, 2014). Spronken-Smith, Mirosa, and Darrou (2014) demonstrated
that availability and awareness of research opportunities increases as URM progress through
school. Students at community colleges are often unaware of such opportunities because these
research internship experiences may not exist at their own institutions (Bangera & Brownell,
2014). A large proportion of community college students are from lower socioeconomic groups
and/or members of historically underrepresented groups; this impacts a significant population of
students who would otherwise have opportunities to participate in independent research (Teacher
Advisory Council, 2012). Even students at institutions with extensive research infrastructures
may not be aware of the research opportunities available to them if these are not advertised
widely, effectively or specifically targeting URM. Underrepresented minorities, particularly first-
generation college students, may not be aware of the benefits of undergraduate research
internship experience, and lack of cultural capital may prevent students from prioritizing
research internship experience or getting involved (Bangera & Brownell, 2014).
Independent Research Internship Experience Impacts Persistence
One major theme is the positive impact of research internship experience/opportunities
on persistence in a STEM field (Chang et al., 2014; Graham et al., 2013; Hernandez et al., 2013;
Russell et al., 2007). Undergraduate student participation in research opportunities increases
understanding, confidence, awareness and influences career choice by clarifying interests in a
STEM career (Graham et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2007). Studies indicate that the effect of
undergraduate research internship experience was strongest among Hispanic/Latino students and
weakest among non-Hispanic Whites and other URM (Hernandez et al., 2013; Russell et al.,
2007). In a longitudinal study by Chang et al. (2014), findings suggest that higher education
institutions can improve URM STEM persistence by providing research opportunities among
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 24
other key academic experiences. The researchers reported five college experiences that
significantly predicted the likelihood of URM students’ persistence through their freshman year
as a STEM major. The strongest of these predictors was participation in an undergraduate
research program (Chang et al., 2014). Using the Survey of Undergraduate Research internship
experience (SURE), Lopatto (2004, 2007) found that over 83% of the 1,135 who participated in
undergraduate research began or continued to plan for postgraduate education in the sciences.
Despite empirically reported benefits of research internship experience, most undergraduates are
not offered research opportunities until late into their undergraduate careers, while the critical
period of STEM attrition occurs during the first 2 years of college (Graham et al., 2013; Russell
et al., 2007).
Several private, liberal arts and minority-serving 4-year institutions developed programs
to increase URM STEM persistence and degree attainment (D’Souza et al., 2015; Yelamarthi &
Mawasha, 2008). One such example is Wesley’s STEM-directed research program, sponsoring
undergraduate research (D’Souza et al., 2015). Another example includes a pre-engineering
program for low-income, first-generation college students at the Wright Science Technology and
Engineering Preparatory Program (Yelamarthi & Mawasha, 2008). These programs show
significant increases in access and retention of STEM majors for URM. Founded on empirical
data, the programs provide research opportunities while developing a critical mass of URM
STEM students to enhance student engagement, improve perception and self-efficacy and
faculty-student interactions. Interestingly, in a study by Hernandez, Woodcock, Estrada, and
Schultz (2018), findings show that just having an undergraduate research internship experience
was not enough to influence persistence in a science discipline, as such influence required a
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 25
commitment of 10 or more hours per week of continuous participation, specifically two or more
semesters of faculty-mentored research.
Among the few qualitative studies that exist, Adedokun, Zhang, Parker, Bessenbacher,
Chilcress, and Burgess (2012) explored the processes through which an undergraduate research
internship experience influences students’ career choices and the specific program characteristics
that catalyze the processes. The study revealed three key processes: (a) increased awareness of
career options, (b) clarification of preferred career pathways through research confidence and
research identity, and (c) enhancement of student professional credentials from the opportunities
for research presentations/publications, awards/fellowships, and letters of recommendations from
faculty mentors.
Conceptual Framework: Social Cognitive Career Theory
Much of the literature explores the persistence of URM in STEM using several learning
theories stemming from self-efficacy and SCT (Bandura, 1977; Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara,
& Pastorelli, 2001). These include self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2012) and Social
cognitive career theory (SCCT; Lent, Brown, and Hackett, 2000). A major tenet of SCT and
SCCT is that motivation and self-efficacy, or the beliefs in one’s own capabilities, have an
impact on one’s behavior (Lent et al., 2000; Simon, Aulls, Dedic, Hubbard & Hall, 2015). Both
SCT and SCCT create a useful framework that provides the possible link between student’s
acquisition of (research) skill, (research) self-efficacy, graduate education and career aspirations
in STEM disciplines, including biological sciences. Thus, SCCT posits that one’s career
interests, aspirations and choice goals are influenced by one’s self-efficacy, outcome
expectations, experienced, and expected environment/contextual support or barriers (Adedokun,
Bessenbacher, Parker, Kirkham, & Burgess, 2013).
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 26
A model of SCCT, as proposed by Lent and Brown (2006) and adapted from Lent et al.
(1994) is illustrated in Figure 1. The model shows basic core person (self-efficacy, outcome
expectations, interests, goals) and contextual (supports and barriers) variables and their roles in
SCCT. According to SCCT, self-efficacy expectations, outcome expectations, interests, choice
goals and environmental influences (gray boxes) represent a proximal set of influences on
performance domains and attainments or career outcomes. The same variables can also be
viewed as intermediate outcomes that reflect the effects of background context features such as
environmental influences, person inputs (gender, race/ethnicity, disability/health status), and
learning experiences.

Figure 1. Model of person, contextual, and experiential factors effecting career-related choice
behavior (Lent & Brown, 2006).

Self-Efficacy, Outcome Expectations, and Choice Goals
Two elements of SCCT are particularly relevant to the current study: (a) acquisition of
skills and its influence on self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations and (b) the influence of
self-efficacy on career aspirations or choice goals (Lent & Brown, 2006). The two elements are
closely related and perhaps, sequentially linked. The first element, Lent and Brown (2006)
Experiences
Performance

Choice

Environmental

Expectations
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 27
showed that the acquisition of mastery skills through learning experiences has the strongest
influence on self-efficacy beliefs and some influence on outcome expectations; thus, students
who feel they have acquired research-related skills (both technical and laboratory workplace
competencies) as a result of their research internship experience (learning experience) in
biological sciences are more likely to hold higher levels of research self-efficacy beliefs, an
establishment of research competencies. Additionally, the acquisition of the research skills may
also influence outcome expectations, or the beliefs about the extent to which they will be able to
satisfy their primary values if they were to pursue particular career paths (Lent & Brown, 2006).
Higher level of self-efficacy and outcome expectations, in turn, is a strong predictor of career
interests and persistence (Deci & Ryan, 2012; Simon et al., 2015; Soldner, Rowan-Kenyon,
Inkelas, Garvey, & Robbins, 2012).
Self-efficacy influences persistence. Several empirical studies suggest a relationship
between persistence and self-efficacy; in other words, self-efficacy influences persistence (Deci
& Ryan, 2012; Simon et al., 2015; Soldner et al., 2012). Females, who are traditionally
underrepresented in undergraduate STEM majors, have lower self-efficacy in science
performance compared to their male counterparts; lower self-efficacy, in this case, predicted
lower levels of persistence (Deci & Ryan, 2012; Soldner et al., 2012). Underrepresented minority
students who reported higher self-efficacy and autonomy support experience higher levels of
positive affect and achievement; the higher levels of positive affect and achievement contributed
to greater persistence in their STEM major (Deci & Ryan, 2012; Soldner et al., 2012).
STEM identity and self-efficacy. Other research relating to SCT shows URM STEM
students facing challenges of isolation, lowering self-efficacy by resurrecting stereotype threat;
these feelings can have a negative impact on their scientific identity (Allen-Ramdial &
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 28
Campbell, 2014; Griffith, 2010; Lent et al., 2000; Soldner et al., 2012). Institutions with a large
population of URM and women in STEM positively affect the persistence of URM and women
in STEM (Allen-Ramdial & Campbell, 2014; Griffith, 2010; Lent et al., 2000; Soldner et al.,
2012). Furthermore, individuals’ identity and self-efficacy benefit from the presence of peers to
whom trainees relate best and whose presence affirms their sense of belonging (Allen-Ramdial &
Campbell, 2014). The large presence of women and URM STEM students provide opportunities
for academic conversations to take place on campus, thus stimulating persistence through better
GPA and goal attainment (Allen-Ramdial & Campbell, 2014; Soldner et al., 2012). Similar to
Bandura’s (1977, 2001) SCT, Soldner et al. (2012) used SCCT (Lent et al., 2000), to explain
URM persistence in STEM. Soldner et al. found student-faculty interactions increase URM
STEM pursuits and GPA in both STEM and non-STEM courses and supervised-research
projects. With the exception of Wang (2013a), no prior research has applied SCCT in examining
relevant STEM research topics pertaining to community college students. This study
incorporates the core constructs of SCCT: self-efficacy, interest and goals, contextual supports
and barriers, and choice actions related to one’s pursuit of the study area of biological sciences.
In summary, the model hypothesizes that students’ self-efficacy and research learning
experiences affect their interest and choice goals.
Limitations of Literature
Although there is a wealth of literature in support of Astin’s student involvement theory
on college campuses, the term “involvement” is used synonymously with “engagement” (Kuh,
1995, 2009; Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, Kinzie, & Gonyea, 2008) and integration (Milem & Berger,
1997; Tinto, 1988). The synonymous use of these terms can be confusing, and it is not clear
whether the studies are actually measuring involvement, engagement or integration.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 29
It is also difficult to measure quality of involvement, and this is obvious from the limited
qualitative research available in this area. The rarity of such data is attributed to amount of effort
needed to accurately measure quality. In addition to the difficulty of showing students’ quality of
involvement, clarity in regards to the intensity of effort or, rather, how much effort/energy
students are exerting is difficult to measure and rarely defined. What does “energy” entail? In the
field of biological sciences, the term “energy” refers to calories exerted by the body to complete
a task. Energy, in this case, is measured by the differences in amount of calories before and after
an activity. Many researchers often cite Astin’s theory and claim that their findings relate to
students’ “effort” or “energy,” even though the studies are merely reporting number of hours of
participation, or frequency of attendance at events (Astin, Vogelgesang, Ikeda, & Yee, 2000;
Berger & Milem, 1999; Harper, 2009; Kuh, 1995, 2009; Kuh et al., 2008; Wolf-Wendel et al.,
2009).
Much of the current research on undergraduate research internship experience focus on
program outcomes and less on examining participants’ perception, including the relationship
among outcomes and the contextual (i.e., structure of program characteristics and components),
as well as participant factors such as race and gender that influence them (Adedokun et al.,
2013). Within the last decade, there are few studies on undergraduate research internship
experiences that focus on gathering data in context or exploring participants’ lived experiences,
and those that do deviate from persistence in STEM or a related field such as biological sciences.
For example, Thiry, Weston, Laursen and Hunter (2012), examined the participants’ perspective
on the benefits of multi-year research internship experiences and compared learning gains of the
undergraduate student researcher to the more experienced researcher. This study did not explore
persistence in the discipline related to the research internship experience, nor did it discuss the
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 30
students’ choice goals as a result of the experience. The literature gap that qualitatively discusses
student’s research internship experience and its influence on persistence and choice goals still
exists.
Student Population at Two-Year Institutions
The gap in the literature is exacerbated by the limited empirical studies on student
populations at 2-year institutions. The result is a body of literature that lacked valid
generalizations. For example, although the literature generally supports the predictive value and
validity of Tinto’s student integration model, the studies have largely been conducted at 4-year
institutions, with the exception of Karp, Hughes, and O'Gara (2010), Mutter (1992), Nora (1987),
and Pascarella, Smart, and Ethington (1986). The literature supporting Tinto’s model has ignored
students who begin their postsecondary education at 2-year institutions and the nontraditional
student populations typically found at 2-year institutions.
Chapter Summary
The chapter examines the literature relevant to the topic of URM persistence in STEM
disciplines and the potential role of undergraduate research participation to establish a need for
conducting the study. Some of the main themes of the literature on URM STEM persistence that
emerged are student engagement/involvement, SCT, and SCCT, which explain career choice.
Major tenets of SCT and SCCT linked to persistence are motivation and self-efficacy. Many
models of college persistence, particularly those of URM pursuing STEM majors, also consider
the adjustment period during the first year of college as a crucial component as well as the
contextual barriers that include lack of opportunities in research, campus climate, and stereotype
threat among others.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 31
The existing literature on URM research internship experience and persistence in STEM
tends to focus on program outcomes rather than examine participants’ perceptions or lived
experiences. The current study contributes to the existing literature by using SCCT as the
theoretical framework, adding to the descriptive nature coming from students’ perceptions, and
explores relationships among the program outcomes that are unique to the diversity found in the
California community college setting. Improving URM STEM persistence is critical to fulfilling
and diversifying the STEM workforce, mirroring the growing structural diversity of our
economy. The SCCT framework used in this study focused on self-efficacy and career choice.
SCCT provides the possible link between students’ acquisition of (research) skill, (research) self-
efficacy, graduate education and career aspirations in biological sciences.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 32
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The current chapter discusses the data collection decisions made to address the issues of
URM representation in biological sciences at a community college. Specifically, the study sought
to explore how research internship experience influences URM persistence in biological sciences
or related field and career choice or scientific workforce participation.
Research Question
The current study used a qualitative approach to answer the following research questions:
What are the perceptions of students regarding the benefits and challenges of participating in an
independent research internship experience (IRIE). In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their
career choice?
Research Design and Methods
The study’s approach to data collection was qualitative; the qualitative data enrich the
quantitative nature of the literature currently available on URM persistence, success, and choice
goals. The data collection addressed the two research questions. This study adapts several key
items found on the survey instrument, SURE, used in empirical studies by Lopatto (2004, 2007),
in the interview protocol. The study also includes document compilation that consists of
program-related activities and of undergraduate URM enrolled in the Bridges Undergraduate
Research Program at a 2-year institution. The study’s main objective was to explore the
perceptions of those participating in independent research and how participation influenced their
career choices. Figure 2 illustrates this current study’s methodology design.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 33

Figure 2. Qualitative approach methodology design.

Why Qualitative Approach?
To add validity to the current study, a qualitative approach was used, gathering data from
multiple sources. While quantitative methods are helpful to determine what is happening and
may even provide information on the strengths of relationships, qualitative data are helpful in
understanding why or how an event occurred. Thus, the qualitative approach is appropriate in
answering the study’s research questions (Creswell, 2013; Johnson & Christensen, 2015).
According to Maxwell (2013) and Merriam and Tisdell (2016), qualitative methods are
interactive and flexible. This allows the components of the study to extend, inform, and add to
the richness of the data that will answer the guiding research questions in this study (Maxwell,
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 34
2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The compatibility of the research questions to the qualitative
methods is greater than that of quantitative methodology.
Many studies relating to URM persistence in STEM, the impact of undergraduate
research internship experience on persistence, and decisions to pursue STEM careers have
utilized quantitative or mixed methodology approaches (Bangera & Brownell, 2014; Espinosa,
2011; Graham et al., 2013; Griffith, 2010; Hernandez et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2007; Spronken-
Smith et al., 2014; Wang, 2013b). While Meyer and Marx (2014) qualitatively examined
engineering students’ reason to drop out, Zimbardi and Myatt (2014) explored the integration of
research internship experiences into undergraduate science curriculum, and Dai, Steenbergen-Hu
and Zhou (2015) used a grounded theory approach to document changes to students’ STEM
program. None have explored STEM students’ perceptions nor have the studies explored
students’ perceptions at 2-year community colleges. The use of qualitative methods serves to fill
the gap in the literature by delving into the students’ research internship experiences, the reasons
behind persistence and career choice as reported by many quantitative studies (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Sampling
Participants. Within the span of nine years, a total of 65 students participated in the
Bridges Undergraduate Research Program at ABCCC, a state funded, one-year research
internship. Purposeful sampling for the current qualitative study includes a selection of members
of racial/ethnic minorities defined as URM, including Black or African American, Native
Americans, Pacific Islanders, Hispanics and all female former/current participants (Creswell,
2013; Johnson & Christensen, 2015; Mau & Li, 2018; McEwan & McEwan, 2003). McEwan and
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 35
McEwan (2003) suggest using convenience samples that contain volunteers who have expressed
a willingness to participate to best understand the problem and research question.
Sample characteristics. All participants identified as URM, defined as Black or African
American, Hispanics or Latina/o, Native American and Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and
Pacific Islanders, and/or women (Bianchini, 2013; Eagan et al., 2010). Forty-four out of 65
(68%) former students who participated in the one-year IRIE were recruited for the study. Of the
44 former students recruited, 17 volunteered and were interviewed for the study, a 39% response
rate. The mean age of the participants, at the time of the IRIE, was 27 years old. The study
consisted of 11 females (65%) and six males (35%). Participant ethnic backgrounds are as
follows: eight Hispanic or Latina/o (47%), five Asian (29%), one Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander (6%), one White (6%), and two identified as Other (12%). Seven participants (41%)
were identified as first-generation college students, and 16 participants (94%) had a Bachelor of
Arts or Bachelor of Science degree; one participant was an undergraduate student at the time of
the research internship experience. Table 1 summarizes the descriptive data of the participants.
Table 1
Demographics of the IRIE Participants
n Percentage
Response Rate 17 out of 44 39%
Age (mean, at the time of internship) 27
Gender
Females 11 65%
Males 6 35%
Ethnicity
Hispanic 8 47%
Asian 5 29%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 1 6%
White 1 6%
Other 2 12%

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 36
Table 1, continued
n Percentage
First-Generation College Student
Yes 7 41%
No
10 59%
Level of Education (at time of internship)
B.A./B.S. 16 94%
Undergraduate student 1 6%

Interview respondents. Purposeful selection was used, and the interview respondents
were selected deliberately to provide information that is relevant to the research questions and
goals; students who participated in undergraduate independent research and identified as an
underrepresented minority were sampled (Maxwell, 2013). Current interns have challenging
schedules that may not allow for interviews and have not completed their research internships,
making it challenging to assess the influence of the research internship experience on career
choice and were therefore not included in the study.
Access/Entry
An informal face-to-face meeting with the director of the internship program, the Dean of
Natural Sciences, and the institutional review board committee at the home institution was held
to ask for permission to conduct the study. Interview respondents were contacted in writing by
email to receive consent to participate (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Protocols
Interview protocol. An integration of pre-interview questions was used to establish
rapport with the respondents. Initially, pre-interview questions was deemed unnecessary based
on the familiar relationship of the interviewer to the respondents. However, many of the
sociodemographic identifiers of the respondents were assumptions made by the interviewer and
rapport may vary among the potential respondents. Thus, pre-interview background questions
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 37
and descriptive statistics are appropriate and necessary. Other changes to the interview protocols
were made regarding word choice, increasing specificity of the questions, and using relevant
questions directly related to the focus of the research questions. Examples of word choice change
include changing “What are things you enjoyed least about your research internship experiences”
to “What are the key takeaways/lessons learned from the research internship.” Changes to reflect
question specificity include changing “What is your opinion about the opportunity of a research
internship” to “What would you say to others who would like to participate in the experience.”
Finally, questions were excluded if they were repetitive and/or unrelated, such as “Suppose
someone said that you do not need independent research internship experience to pursue your
career of interest. What would you say to those people?”
Interview. The interview protocol was designed with the intention of extracting data to
inquire about the perception of interns’ research internship experience and its influence on career
choice. Pre-interview questions were descriptive in nature and used to determine internship site
and sociodemographic data. The information helped to identify URM, a key concept, for the
study. These questions include identity of gender, age, level of education, race/ethnicity, and
whether the participant was a first-generation college student. To establish rapport and make
respondents feel comfortable, respondents were asked to provide information on their
background leading up to the internship. The main portion of the interview was semi-structured,
and questions continued in a chronological manner to mimic a retelling of the internship.
Although there was a predetermined order of questions and the interview was guided by a list of
questions/issues to be explored, the flexibility of the interview questions allowed respondents to
elaborate and expand on answers (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The semi-
structured telephone interview was the best approach for this particular qualitative study because
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 38
a highly structured interview is rigid and does not allow access to participants’ perspective,
which would conflict with the very nature of the study’s research question (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). On a similar note, unstructured interviews are used in ethnography,
participant observation and case studies that would not serve the purpose of the current study.
Furthermore, a completely unstructured interview may yield unrelated/unconnected pieces of
information (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Interview questions. Interview questions were selected strategically to target key
concepts used in the literature review and correspond to the overarching research questions
guiding the conceptual framework. These include terms used in the first four questions asking
respondents to discuss careers goals (prior to internship), rationale for internship participation
and internship expectations. Of the 15 interview questions, five were adopted from Lopatto’s
(2004, 2007) SURE instrument. These asked if interviewees had participated in research prior to
the Bridges Undergraduate Research internship experience (question 1), their overall sense of
satisfaction from the research internship experience (question 8), the benefits (if any) they gained
from the research internship experience (question 9), identification (if any) and description of the
program component(s) included in the research internship experience (question 10), and whether
interviewees had plans to continue their education beyond undergraduate studies (question 11).
Questions 5,6,7, 8, 9,10, 13 are student perception questions (research question 1) related to
independent research internship experience and solicit information regarding internship
experience enjoyment, key takeaways/lesson learned, and advisement to future interns.
Questions 11, 12, 14, 15 are related to research question 2, the influence (if at all) of the research
internship experience on career choice. These questions ask interns about current career
positions, networking opportunities through the research internship experience (to enhance
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 39
career prospect), pre- and post-career goal(s) and motivation(s) to pursue a STEM career (and
whether it was related to the internship experience).
Data Collection Approach
Document compilation. After the interviews, additional documents that students
identified as being key factors in their academic and/or career success were collected; this
included documents detailing program components such as course descriptions, educational
enhancement activities, and attendance at scientific conferences as well as publication and/or
patent(s) resulting from internship and thereafter. Participant activities and program reflections
were also collected; these included the internship appointment form detailing student’s
demographic and participation agreement, student self-evaluation form and progress report, and
internship termination form detailing overall participation and post-internship goals or plans. The
document compilation helped us to understand the context of the interviews and make
connections in gaps that may not be understood by interviews alone (Creswell, 2013; McEwan &
McEwan, 2003). The focus of the document review (Appendix B) was to examine the records of
the research internship participants to find evidence of perceived benefits and/or challenges, and
immediate outcomes of the experience.
Interview approach. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted in a private
office setting. The telephone interview was utilized rather than a face-to-face interview as many
of participants had busy work and graduate school schedules and/or have moved outside of a
commutable distance. Additionally, the telephone interview increased the response rate for the
study to include participants from several geographical regions. Sturges and Hanrahan (2004)
compared telephone to face-to-face interviews and found that there were no significant
differences in results between the two different modes. Advantages of this mode of data
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 40
collection include reduced need for travel (economical), thereby increasing the number of
participants and reducing interviewer effects that often emerge as a result of face-to-face
interviews (Hill et al., 2005; Musselwhite, Cuff, McGregor, & King, 2007; Shuy, 2003).
Interviews were scheduled based on the availability of the respondents, and lasted approximately
30 minutes. Audio recording was used (then transcribed) without note-taking to create an
environment that was more conducive to conversation.
Data Analysis
The NVivo Qualitative Analysis Software was used to identify, code and organize
emergent themes (Museus & Liverman, 2010). To maintain qualitative validity and reliability,
Creswell (2013) suggests presenting major findings and themes in a follow-up interview with
participants in the study and providing an opportunity for them to comment on findings.
Ethics. Since the credibility and trustworthiness of a study depend on the ethics of the
researcher, ethical considerations were taken into account. These considerations included
explanation of the purpose of the inquiry and methods to be used, awareness and agreement of
reciprocity, maintaining confidentiality, limiting data access to the researcher, a verbal informed
consent to participate in the interview and access to documents for further analysis. A
submission for study approval was submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) to the
University of Southern California and the home institution where the study was conducted. The
study was approved by the IRB at both sites.
Limitations
Although the design of the study was comprehensive and every effort was made to
triangulate data, there are still limitations to consider (Creswell, 2013; McEwan & McEwan,
2003). The findings cannot be generalized to all postsecondary institutions in the United States.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 41
It should also be noted interviewees may hold bachelor’s or higher degrees, as students with
varying educational levels may enroll at 2-year institutions. The Bridges Undergraduate
Research Program at ABCCC is unique in that it is offered at a 2-year institution rather than a 4-
year institution, and the year-long internship is longer than research internships available at most
undergraduate institutions.
Creswell (2013) and McEwan and McEwan (2003) noted that, although interviews
provide rich and descriptive data, this method of data collection is not foolproof. There are
interview questions and reflections that rely on participants’ memory and are retrospective; thus,
recall error is possible (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Lastly, differences in articulation of
thoughts/perspective and misinterpretation of interviewees’ perspective can alter the data
(Creswell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Chapter Summary
This chapter described the research design and the methodological approach in this
qualitative methods study. Additionally, it provided an overview of the data collection process
and interview protocol followed by the data analysis approach to answer the two research
questions and discussed the limitations of the methodology approaches. The goal of the designed
methodology and the presented protocol was to create the best approach within the existing
limitations to gather richly descriptive data that will shed light on the topic at hand.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 42
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
In Chapter One, contextualization of the issues and challenges of STEM persistence and,
consequently, the lack of URM in the STEM workforce was presented. After a synthesis of
existing literature on STEM persistence, STEM career choice, and STEM workforce diversity,
two research questions were developed aimed to address the lack of descriptive data on student
perceptions of the research internship experience that may influence their persistence in
biological sciences and related choice goals. The descriptive nature of this study will add to the
current understanding of the various complexities of existing STEM persistence challenges,
specifically in biological sciences. The following chapter is a report of the data collected and the
findings that aim to answer the two research questions. The methodological approaches outlined
in Chapter Three were developed through the synthesis of relevant literature and the gaps that
emerged as a result of the available empirical literature; additionally, the methodological
approaches were informed through a pilot study.
Research Methods
Qualitative Strategies Used
Interview and document compilation analysis. Analysis of interviews and documents
in this narrative study was performed simultaneously with data collection. Maxwell (2013), and
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) recommended simultaneous data collection and analysis both in and
out of the field to avoid data saturation, as, without ongoing analysis, the data can be unfocused
and repetitious. Therefore, general qualitative approaches used in this study were memos and
categorizing strategies such as coding and thematic analysis (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). After careful review of the data, categories were constructed or coded inductively using
computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software, Atlas.ti, known for its advantages in coding
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 43
efficiency. The number of categories were then determined by open coding (Creswell, 2013;
Harding, 2013; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The actual names of the categories
came from a mix of three sources: the researcher, the participants, and existing literature. Next,
the data analysis process moved from more descriptive and concrete in nature to more abstract, a
process of systematically theorizing, or developing a theory that explains practice (Miles,
Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Miles et al. (2014) suggested the use of
comparison tables, clustering, and finally, building a logical chain of evidence to theorize. This
approach was used throughout the analysis process with both interview and document
compilation data.
Credibility and trustworthiness. Triangulation was used to ensure both reliability and
internal validity or credibility; this included multiple methods of data collection, respondent
validation and maintaining an audit trail or memos (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016;
Miles et al., 2014). Data collection triangulation consisted of interviews and document
compilation while respondent validation includes the feedback solicitation of emerging findings
from interview respondents (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Respondent validation or member
checking was utilized once categorization/coding of content were completed to rule out the
possibility of misinterpreting meaning of the responses. For example, researcher categorized
“gain relevant experience,” “get a letter of recommendation,” “research internship really boosted
my resume,” and “increase my competitiveness” as benefits of research internship experience,
even though the respondents did not directly state some as benefits. All respondents in the study
confirmed the categorization and findings. The audit trail details the processes through which the
data were collected and the categories were derived as well as reflections and questions that
arose during data collection, analysis and interpretation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To avoid
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 44
biases stemming from researcher effect on site, intention/purpose was made clear and interviews
were conducted via telephone (Miles et al., 2014).
Findings
The story that emerged from the data is the idea that students pursuing a STEM discipline
sought the IRIE as a means to progress towards a STEM career and ultimately help inform
choice goals. Five major findings emerged from data analysis. First, participants believe that the
benefits of the IRIE play an important role in helping them achieve their STEM career goals
despite challenges. Secondly, relevant learning experience and the acquisition of skills influences
participants’ self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations. Third, self-efficacy influences
participants’ [developing] interests, career aspiration(s) or choice goal(s), choice actions, and
eventually, performance domains and attainment. Fourth, the relevant learning experience may
have a direct influence on participants’ [developing] interests and, subsequently, career
aspiration(s) or choice goal(s), choice actions, and eventually, performance domains and
attainment. Finally, prior interests, otherwise known as initial interests, may have a direct
influence on the learning experience. The themes are discussed in the data analysis according to
the research question of focus.
Independent Research Internship Experience
Research Question 1
Participants’ responses were categorized into findings and themes that emerged
throughout the interviews. Table 2 summarizes the responses by benefits and challenges of the
research internship experience, as well as participants’ immediate and long-term outcomes, and
finally, participants’ career or choice goals. The following sections explain the findings emerging
from interview data in detail.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 45
Table 2
Interview Summary of the IRIE Participants
Participants Independent Research Internship
Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy
or Outcome
Expectations)
Key Takeaways
or Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent 1:
Female,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
letter(s) of
recommendation
, acquire a skill
set, add
competitive
edge to resume,
rewarding,
networking,
collegiality
Workplace
competencies
(e.g. time
management,
communication,
teamwork)
CG: Pursue
professional
program
(D.D.S.)
*PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

*CG 2: Pursue
professional
program
(D.D.S.)
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
professional
program
(D.D.S.)
Respondent 2:
Female, Other
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set, add
competitive
edge to resume,
rewarding (the
nature of
science),
networking
Building
background
knowledge to
address
knowledge gaps
CG: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement
in biological
sciences-
related field
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 46
Table 2, continued
Participants Independent Research
Internship Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy or
Outcome
Expectations)
Key
Takeaways or
Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent 3:
Male,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
letter(s) of
recommendation,
acquire a skill
set, add
competitive edge
to resume,
rewarding
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research
and/or project,
building
background
knowledge to
address
knowledge
gaps

CG: Pursue
graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue a
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field

CA 1: Apply
to graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 2:
Enrolled in a
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 3:
Complete
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
Respondent 4:
Male,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
networking
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research
and/or project
CG: Pursue
employment
or graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 47
Table 2, continued
Participants Independent Research Internship
Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy
or Outcome
Expectations)
Key Takeaways
or Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent 5:
Female, Asian
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set, networking,
resume
Staying current
on trends in the
field
CG: Pursue
employment
in biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement
in biological
sciences-
related field
Respondent 6:
Female,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set, add to
resume
Workplace
competencies
(e.g. time
management,
communication,
teamwork), the
difficult nature
of scientific
research and/or
project

CG: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
or
professional
program
(M.D.)
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement
in biological
sciences-
related field
Respondent 7:
Female, Asian
Relevant
experience,
opportunities to
present to an
audience, inform
career choice
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research and/or
project
CG: Pursue
employment
in biological
sciences-
related field,
pursue
second
bachelor’s
in STEM-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
employment
advancement
in biological
sciences-
related field

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 48
Table 2, continued
Participants Independent Research
Internship Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy or
Outcome
Expectations)
Key
Takeaways or
Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent 8:
Female, White
Relevant
experience,
inform career
choice
Learning to be
independent
with regards
to research
projects in the
laboratory
CG: Pursue
employment
in biological
sciences-
related field
CG 1: Pursue
employment in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 2:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CA 2:
Currently
applying to
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
Respondent 9:
Female,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
letter(s) of
recommendation,
acquire a skill
set, networking
opportunities
Learning to be
independent
with regards
to research
projects in the
laboratory
CG:
Pursue/compl
ete BS in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field
(part-time)

PDA 1:
Complete BS
in biological
sciences-
related field
(full-time)

CG 2: Pursue
graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field
(M.S. or
Ph.D.)

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 49
Table 2, continued
Participants Independent Research Internship
Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy
or Outcome
Expectations)
Key Takeaways
or Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent
10:
Female, Asian
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set
Workplace
competencies
(e.g. time
management,
communication,
teamwork)
CG: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 1:
Undecided
Respondent
11:
Female, Asian
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set, networking
Workplace
competencies
(e.g. time
management,
communication,
teamwork)
CG: Pursue
professional
program
(D.D.S.)
CG 1: Pursue
employment in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 2:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
health
science-
related
professional
program
(R.N. or
D.D.S.)
Respondent
12:
Male,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
rewarding
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research and/or
project
CG: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
CG 1: Pursue
employment in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 2:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 1: Pursue
professional
program
(M.D.)

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 50
Table 2, continued
Participants Independent Research Internship
Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy
or Outcome
Expectations)
Key Takeaways
or Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent
13:
Female,
Hispanic
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set
Workplace
competencies
(e.g. time
management,
communication,
teamwork)
CG: Pursue
employment
in biological
sciences-
related field
CG 1: Pursue
employment in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 2:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 1:
undecided
Respondent
14:
Male, Other
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set,
compensation;
collegiality,
networking;
rewarding

Staying current
on trends in the
field
CG: Pursue
employment
in biological
sciences-
related field
CG 1: Pursue
employment in
biological
sciences-
related field

PDA 2:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 1: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
Respondent
15:
Male,
Pacific
Islander

Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set, collegiality,
mentorship,
inform career
choice,
rewarding
(nature of
science)
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research and/or
project
CG: Pursue
professional
program
(M.D.)
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
health science-
related
professional
program (R.N.)
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CA 1:
Currently
applying to
health
science-
related
professional
program
(R.N.)

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 51
Table 2, continued
Participants Independent Research
Internship Experience (IRIE)
Choice
Goals (CG)
Choice Actions (CA) or
Performance
Domains/Attainment (PDA)
Benefits
(Self-Efficacy or
Outcome
Expectations)
Key
Takeaways or
Challenges
Before the
IRIE
Within Six
Months After
the IRIE
(Immediate)
One or More
Years After
the IRIE
Respondent
16:
Male,
Hispanic

Relevant
experience,
letter(s) of
recommendation,
competitive edge;
rewarding
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research
and/or project
CG: Pursue
graduate
program in
biological
sciences
(M.S.)
PDA 1: Enrolled
in a graduate
program in
biological
sciences-
related field
(M.S.)

CG 2: Pursue
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CA 1:
Currently
applying to
graduate
program
(Ph.D.) in
biological
sciences-
related field
Respondent
17:
Female, Asian
Relevant
experience,
acquire a skill
set, letter(s) of
recommendation,
competitive edge;
networking,
rewarding
The difficult
nature of
scientific
research
and/or project
CG: Pursue
health
science-
related
professional
school
(D.D.S.)
PDA 1:
Employed in
biological
sciences-
related field

CA 2: Pursue
health science-
related
professional
program
(D.D.S.)
PDA 1:
Enrolled in
graduate
program
(M.S.) in
biological
sciences-
related field

CG 2: Pursue
health
science-
related
professional
program after
graduate
school
(D.D.S.)
*The numerical subscript refers to the order of events during the selected time period. For example, PDA 1
followed by CG 2 indicates that participants reached the PDA or outcome (employment or enrollment in an
academic/training program) then subsequently set a choice goal (CG) for his/her next steps. Numerical
subscripts remains (within a given period) the same if participants reported the events occurring
concurrently.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 52
Benefits
One theme to emerge was that participants believe the research internship experience
plays an important role in helping them to achieve their STEM choice goals, despite challenges.
All students believed that there were benefits associated with their participation in the IRIE that
helped them to achieve their goals. These benefits included relevant experience that may inform
career choice, letter(s) of recommendation from research mentors, networking opportunities,
acquisition of research-related skills, compensation, and overall, a rewarding experience.
Relevant experience to help inform career choice(s). When asked what their primary
reasons for participating in the research internship experience were, most of the respondents
acknowledged that they were interested in the IRIE because they believed the experience would
provide them with relevant experiences to help inform career choice(s), and/or acquire a skill set
necessary for employment or a graduate/professional program. Respondent 1 stated,
I wanted to gain laboratory skills and research skills to enhance my professional
development. I wanted to pursue a graduate program or medical school so my
expectations were to gain strong network and support group to help towards my future
goals.
Respondent 5 said,
I wanted to expand my laboratory techniques/make my resume better so that I could be a
better applicant when it comes to applying for research jobs. I also wanted to make more
connections in research field…I was hoping to learn various laboratory skills related to
stem cells and the ability to conduct a mini project in a limited time frame.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 53
Similarly, Respondent 7 mentioned,
It fulfilled my desire to experience working in a lab as well as what a career in research
science would entail, work-volume and time-wise. I hoped to gain lab experience and
more knowledge in the science field in general. The hands-on experience gave me a
better understanding and idea of what is required to work in this lab setting. I’ve always
been interested in scientific research so this gave me an opportunity to explore that career
option.
In addition, Respondent 9 said,
I expected to be taught lab skills needed to carry out experiments, be provided guidance
and instructions for assignments given by my supervisor… my supervisor who was a
postdoctoral scholar in the lab took the time to show and teach me many of the
techniques I know today.
Respondent 10 stated similar reasons for participating in the research internship experience: to
gain relevant experience, obtain a letter(s) of recommendation from a mentor and add a
competitive edge to their own academic profile that included an academic publication:
I honestly participated because I wanted help getting to graduate school and be more
competitive. In addition, it was in the field where I wanted to be. I was hoping to gain
relevant experience and a letter of recommendation. Some other faculties have been open
to letting me volunteer on dental-related research projects to boost my resume and led to
letters of [recommendation] for dental school. I also enjoyed the freedom to conduct my
own research and the connections I made. I was hoping to gain substantial research
internship experience for jobs. I did manage to get on a paper which I can state on my
dental applications.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 54
Respondent 8 replied, “Experience, familiarity with scientific research…access to a project and
guidance…training in both techniques and scientific thinking,” and Respondent 4 stated, “I
wanted to begin a career in scientific research. Getting into a lab was my primary goal.” Similar
to the other respondents, Respondent 14 also added that there was a potential opportunity for
publication(s) which enhances graduate/professional school application: “It was a great
experience, I made connections (networking), obtained letters of recommendation, and I was
able to publish a paper that may ultimately help me get into a graduate program.” The
respondents’ statements demonstrate that they were pursuing the IRIE to gain relevant
experience that may inform career choice(s).
Letter(s) of recommendation. Some respondents, when asked their primary reasons for
participating in the research internship experience, mentioned that they did so because they were
seeking letter(s) of recommendation from someone in the field to secure biological sciences-
related employment or pursue a biological sciences-related graduate or professional program.
Examples of such responses include Respondent 3’s stating, “I wanted to get strong letter(s) of
recommendation and research experience.” Respondent 9 said, “I was hoping to get research
experience and a reference letter, if possible.” Respondent 14 mentioned, “Great experience,
connections, letter(s) of recommendation, publishing a paper,” and Respondent 16 said, “I was
hoping to gain relevant experience and a letter(s) of recommendation.”
Networking opportunities and collegiality. Respondents also cited the benefits of
networking opportunities with experts in the field, or meeting peers with similar interests and
developing professional relationships to support their choice goals. Respondent 1 stated, “my
expectation was to gain a strong network and support group to help towards my future goals. I
have gained many mentors that I can always turn to for support and guidance for my future
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 55
decisions and goals.” Respondent 2 replied, “I’ve been able to network after the research
experience and that is how I got hired for my current lab manager position. It was through my
mentor/PI. That was my bridge to where I am today.” Respondent 6 stated, “I have been able to
meet other PIs [principal investigators] through collaborations and also from retreats and talks. I
started working in another lab and the opportunity came to me by being connected through the
work community.”
Respondent 5 similarly added that networking may have helped her secure her current
employment following the research internship experience:
I also wanted to make more connections in research field. The networking might
indirectly help me progress towards my career goals because I had a small talk to an
assistant professor during lunch break in an annual retreat that happened during my
research internship. That assistant professor is my current PI. Furthermore, my PI during
my research internship is a good friend with my current PI.
Respondent 15 recounted a similar experience to that of Respondent 1 with regards to the
networking benefits and supportive mentorships/relationships formed as a result of the research
internship experience:
I’ve developed a strong relationship with many people in my lab and in the program.
Should I ever need a contact or letter(s) of recommendation, I know I can rely on them.
My mentors have told me that though I may no longer be in their lab or under their
tutelage, I have become their responsibility and they will do anything they can to see my
success. I believe that is probably the best thing I have gained.
The responses from the interview validated the emerging theme that students believe that
the research internship experience will help them to achieve their STEM career path or choice
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 56
goals. Responses such as “I did manage to get on a paper which I can state on my dental
applications” and “[networking through the research internship experience] led to letters of
[recommendation] for dental school” indicated that the students’ expressed that the opportunities
through the research internship experience have benefited their choice goals.
When asked if they found it useful in helping to get hands-on, realistic experiences, all
respondents were in agreement and replied, “Yes.”
Compensation. Some participants stated that the compensation was one of the primary
reasons for participating in the research internship experience. These responses include
respondent 14, “To get hand-on research experience, also being a paid internship was critical,”
and respondent 9, “It was an opportunity to work in a research lab, get hands-on experience, and
be compensated for it.” Although compensation was an attribute of the IRIE, only two
participants stated that the compensation was critical to the IRIE.
Rewarding experience. Some students mentioned that, although their primary reasons
for participating in the research internship experience were related to expected tangible benefits,
they found the experience or the nature of science and/or associated projects to be rewarding.
This finding emerged from several responses. Respondent 3 stated, “I love science and I love
helping people. I got a chance to work as a scientist and work on a research project geared at
helping people. I enjoyed doing research aimed at helping disease afflicted individuals.”
Respondent 8 said, “I didn’t know I was capable of this, and it’s extremely rewarding. I learned
that I truly love the work.” Respondent 12 added, “In my case, I loved research, so I was eager to
be in the internship and I am extremely happy that I was fortunate to have that opportunity.”
Respondent 16 mentioned, “This experience was rewarding. I think that biomedical research help
people live longer healthier lives,” and Respondent 17 said, “It’s an incredibly challenging and
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 57
rewarding experience. It really depends on how the student wants to set the groundwork and
pave his or her own way.”
There were other similar responses. Respondent 15 said,
I was very proud of my work. I loved learning about my experiment and combining that
with the knowledge I learned [in my coursework]. The payoff of having everything click
and come together was so refreshing! It was beautiful! Being able to wow some of my
friends with what I’d learn was a lot of fun, too.
Respondent 16 stated,
I am very interested in lab science in general. I find it more rewarding of a career to work
in research or just in a lab as compared to other work I’ve done previously. I want to find
a career in which I can learn new things and I like the field.
Participants who stated that the nature of science or nature of the project was rewarding
may have been motivated to pursue the IRIE with preexisting [initial] interests. These initial
interests may reflect participants’ biological sciences degree or STEM-related declared
disciplines attained prior to the IRIE (see Table 1).
Challenges
Overcoming challenges through persistence and acceptance. Another emerging theme
supporting the first major finding that students believe that the research internship experience
plays an important role in helping them achieve their STEM choice goals despite challenges
relates to persistence. This means they overcame challenges through persistence and acceptance.
Challenges and key takeaways, based on responses, were centralized around the difficult nature
of conducting scientific research and the associated experimental failures. Some participants
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 58
mentioned struggling with subject matter knowledge gap, project and technique-specific learning
curve, or learning to navigate a research project(s) independently.
The difficult nature of science and/or project(s). When asked about key
takeaways/lessons learned from the research internship experience and challenges that made
them feel this way, many participants responded that the difficult nature of science or assigned
projects proved to be challenging and that failure was inevitable. Several supporting responses
led to this finding. Respondent 12 said, “this whole process is difficult, and you learn most of the
time you are wrong. The many times I carried out an experiment and the data did not correspond
to my expectations,” and Respondent 4 said, “I did struggle a lot [with an experiment] and that
delayed a lot of things that I otherwise could have accomplished. Still, I learned how to
persevere.” Respondent 3 stated,
The most invaluable lesson was knowing that failure was inevitable and overcoming
these challenges were empowering. Nothing really ever went according to the plan, so
learning to adapt is something I apply to school and my everyday life.
Respondent 15 said,
I’ve discovered a deep respect for the research process. Although I enjoyed performing
experiments, I also learned about the arduous process involved in attempting to achieve
the results you expect. Getting negative results after a month of work can really knock
your spirit down though. Challenges mainly involved finding out [something] didn’t
work, a month into the trial. We would adjust a little before the next trial and with each
subsequent trial, we would get further in the experiment. But each failure hurt.
Respondent 16 mentioned,
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 59
Failure. Experiments were unlikely to have worked the first time. Being confident enough
in our basic skill set to execute more complicated experiments was daunting. It was
discouraging to know the cost of rerunning these experiments, but I had to learn quickly
that this is the cost of research. It is independent work that requires direction and mentors
from the PI, but the student has to put in the rest of the work.
Lastly, Respondent 17 added,
Things might seem overwhelming at first, but everything gets easier. Basically, the
student can either fall into the role of a lab tech or prove herself on a project with more
responsibilities. Some failures initially were challenging. I believe like in all things you
do, you get what you put in.
The statements by the respondents indicated that there was a realization of the difficult
nature of scientific research, but that persistence helped to overcome challenges so that they are
able to move towards their choice goals.
Depth of knowledge and laboratory workplace skill set. When asked about key
takeaways/lessons learned from the research internship experience and about challenges that
made them feel this way, many students responded that the realization of the knowledge gap that
existed in the subject matter made the experience more difficult than expected. Respondent 3
mentioned, “I had significant knowledge gaps after being away from school for so long.
However, I slowly filled those gaps and continue to do so now although I have gained a lot more
knowledge now [since then].” Respondent 2 said, “I had almost no strong background in human
biology and that was a challenge for me as well English [as a second/new language].”
Additionally, lack of technical laboratory skills and workplace competencies like time
management were recognized as challenges of the experience. Respondents replied, “I was
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 60
involved in too many projects and spread myself thin. Being involved in too many projects
stymied my progress/depth of work in my main project.” Respondent 14 said, “Challenging
aspects were time management, ways to improve productivity and work efficiency.” Respondent
1 stated,
Key takeaways/ lessons learned from the research internship was learning how important
time management is to work efficiently and optimally. I also learned how crucial it is to
document diligently and carefully to save time in the future and making errors. Some of
the challenges faced with these components were completing them in parallel with the
research projects in the lab. My PI treated me as though I was a graduate student and
imposed those expectations on me so it was difficult to balance all of the program
requirements as well as completing the research projects assigned to me.
Respondent 11 said,
Learning time management with experiments and working in a team. I learned to time
experiments so that I could be more productive in less time. I also learned how important
it is to keep communication going about the projects in order to stay on track and refocus
on the goal.
Learning to be independent. When asked about key takeaways/lessons learned from the
research internship experience and challenges that made them feel this way, few participants
attested to the challenges that stemmed from learning to be independent. Respondent 9 stated,
It is a commitment. Expect to learn things on your own because not everyone will have
time to answer questions that seem basic knowledge to them. Many researchers don’t
have the time to be teaching someone how to do something. You have to put in the time
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 61
yourself to do your own research about something you have a question about or how to
do something.
Respondent 8 said,
I learned the hard way that, although mentors are very helpful and want you to succeed,
they simply do not have time for you; so it’s your job to do experiments and tell your PI
how you did it and what you found. Above that, anything you can do to drive the project
yourself and gain independence is much more helpful to becoming a real scientist.
Additionally, document compilation data, including progress reports and self-evaluation
forms before, during and after the end of the research internship experience suggests that
collegial and mentor support (e.g. presence/absence of senior staff during troubleshooting) may
contribute to challenges or influence student persistence during the experience. For example, the
presence of peers, classmates and the availability of mentors during the research internship
experience may increase one’s sense of self-efficacy through active guidance, encouragement,
motivation, and perhaps assist in troubleshooting experimental failures. The themes that emerged
during the interviews support the finding that students believe that the research internship
experience plays an important role in helping them achieve their STEM choice goals despite
challenges, which addresses the first research question of the current study.
Persistence and Choice Goals
Research Question 2
A major finding in this area was that the research internship experiences validated
participants’ STEM choice goals, specifically in biological sciences, and influenced their
persistence in this field through self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interests. Two themes
emerged to support the finding: (a) students’ expectations of how the research internship
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 62
experiences would benefit their career path were met and provided insights into their future
career of choice, and (b) students who were on a biological sciences career path continued to
pursue a biological sciences career path, or a related STEM field, after the research internship
experience. In addition to summarizing benefits and challenges of the research internship
experience, Table 2 also includes participants’ reports of outcomes gathered through document
compilation and interview data, and, ultimately, choice goals prior to the experience as well as
immediately following the end of the research internship experience and current choice goals (at
least a year after the experience). The following sections explain the findings in detail.
Outcome Expectations and Future Career Insight
All respondents mentioned that their expectations of the research internship overall were
met or exceeded and that these expectations helped to inform career choices. Respondent 13 said,
“I feel the research internship exceeded my expectations. The combination of courses, research
project, and presenting the results of the research resulted in gained skilled such as multitasking,
working under pressure, and communication skills with peers.” Respondent 8 said, “[I expected
to have] access to a project and guidance for fundamental scientific research, and training in both
techniques and scientific thinking. I had a wonderful project and excellent mentorship.”
Respondent 15 added, “Expectations were far exceeded. I did not expect to be put into a research
lab...The hands-on, practical experiences I obtained from this internship have far exceeded my
expectations.” In addition, Respondent 6 said,
I expected to learn all the skills [technical & practical] necessary for being able to work
in a laboratory. These expectations were definitely met. I learned technical skills. I
learned about project planning, the importance of communicating with lab members,
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 63
contributing to the lab [ordering, stocking up, etc.] and, most importantly, learned from
my mistakes—both the things that I did and did not do.
The respondent later mentioned that she expected to continue to pursue her initial career goal of
obtaining a degree as a clinical laboratory scientist but walked away from the research internship
experience with an immediate job at the internship site and, later, an admission to graduate
program. In this particular case, one would argue that the student’s expectation of how the
research internship experience would benefit her career path was exceeded.
Performance Domains and Attainment (Outcomes)
At the time of the research internship experience, 16 out of the 17 respondents (94%)
held a STEM-related degree (or at least a STEM-related major); 13 (81%) of these majors were
in biological sciences, while three (19%) were in fields like astronomy, environmental sciences,
and agricultural engineering. Only one (6%) participant held a non-STEM degree in
anthropology. After the conclusion of the research internship experience, participants’ immediate
outcomes showed that all pursued a STEM-related undergraduate/graduate degree or was
employed or volunteered (full/part-time) in biological sciences research-related field (see Table
3). Two of the 17 participants (12%) either continued their undergraduate programs or enrolled
in a graduate program in a biological sciences-related field within 6 months (immediate) of the
conclusion of the IRIE, while 15 participants (88%) were employed or volunteered (full/part-
time) in a biological sciences research-related field. Consistent with the immediate outcomes,
long-term (current, at the time of the interviews) outcomes, defined as one or more years
following the end of the research internship experience, revealed similar, consistent data: all
participants pursued/enrolled in a STEM-related undergraduate/graduate degree or were
employed or volunteered (full/part-time) in biological sciences research-related field. A
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 64
summary of participant prior goals, immediate outcomes, and long-term outcomes can be found
in Table 3.
Table 3
Performance Domains and Attainment (Outcomes) of the IRIE Participants
n Percentage
Major or degree (at time of internship)
STEM-related 16 94%
Biological sciences 13 81%
Other STEM 3 19%
non-STEM related 1 6%
Immediate Outcome (after internship)
STEM-related 17 100%
Undergraduate/graduate programs in biological sciences (enrolled) 2 12%
Biological sciences research-related employment/volunteer 15 88%
Professional programs (M.D., D.D.S., R.N., etc.) 0 0%
Long-term Outcome (1 or more year(s) after internship; current)
STEM-related 17 100%
Undergraduate/graduate programs in biological sciences (enrolled) 2 12%
Biological sciences research-related employment/volunteer 15 88%
Professional programs (M.D., D.D.S., R.N., etc.) 0 0%

Choice Goals and Choice Actions
Finally, the data also revealed that all participants had STEM-related career goals prior to
the research internship experience. The interview data suggests that, aside from the participants’
immediate and long-term outcomes, 15 participants (88%) revealed that they were currently or
would like to pursue a STEM-related career; of the 15 participants who have identified STEM-
related choice goals, six participants (40%) plan to apply or complete a graduate program in
biological sciences, four participants (27%) plan to stay employed or pursue advanced
employment positions in biological sciences-related field, and five participants (33%) plan to
pursue professional programs such medical, dental and nursing and use his/her research
internship experience to drive their professional aspirations; of the 17 participants, only two
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 65
(12%) mentioned that he/she is currently undecided or unclear of his/her choice goals. Table 4
provides a summary of data discussed.
Table 4
Choice Goals and Choice Actions of the IRIE Participants
n Percentage
Choice Goals (Prior to research internship experience)
STEM-related
17 100%
Choice Goals and Choice Actions (Current, pursuing or plan to pursue)
STEM-related
15 88%
Undergraduate/graduate programs in biological sciences 6 40%
Biological sciences research-related employment 4 27%
Professional programs (M.D., D.D.S., RN, etc.) 5 33%
Other/Undecided 2 12%

Undergraduate/Graduate programs in biological sciences. In answering the questions,
regarding career goal(s) prior to the internship, after the internship, and currently, six out of the
15 (40%) respondents who stated that their choice goals were STEM-related mentioned that they
were interested in pursuing a graduate program in biological sciences. For example, Respondent
9 said, “To finish my undergraduate degree. Pursue a graduate degree. I'm still not sure what
graduate program, still figuring things out, but something that is related to the [biological
sciences] field.” Respondent 3 stated,
[Prior to the research internship experience], I wanted to continue my education in the
life sciences. [I am] currently in graduate school, and, by the summer of 2020, I plan on
earning a Ph.D. in genetics. I know that I will continue in biomedical related research,
most likely in industry. I know that I eventually will hold some type of leadership role
and want to mentor scientists that are less experienced than me.
Respondent 4 added,
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 66
[Prior to the research internship experience], I wanted to begin a career in scientific
research for my career. I just wanted to be a lab technician or pursue [a graduate program
in] clinical lab sciences. I have yet to begin the clinical lab scientist application. I hope to
continue working as a lab technician until I decide to apply [to a graduate program] in
clinical lab sciences or another technical science field.
Respondent 8 said,
[Prior to the research internship experience], I wanted to see if I wanted a career in
science. [I was] not sure [what my goals were]. I needed to explore to find my path in
science. I was not sure of my goals after the internship. [I am currently] applying for a
graduate program now. Now I want to earn my Ph.D. in molecular biology. I hope to stay
in the same field as my internship for my career, a field I never would have been
introduced to without the internship.
Respondent 14 mentioned,
[Prior to the research internship experience], I was hoping to (take the bar exams) and
getting a M.D. license or get a clinical lab scientist job. Currently, I hope to gain
experience in the lab so that I can be a graduate student. I would like to pursue a Ph.D. in
cancer immunology.
Lastly, Respondent 16 stated,
Before the internship, I wanted to go to graduate [in biological sciences]. Now [after the
internship], I want to pursue either Ph.D. or M.D. school but concentrating in research
regardless. I just finished a master’s degree [in biological sciences-related field].
Biological sciences research-related employment. In answering the questions about
career goal(s) prior to the internship, after the internship, and currently, four out of the 15 (27%)
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 67
respondents indicated that their goals included remaining employed in a biological sciences
research-related field. Respondents, however, mentioned that they will pursue advancement in
employment. For example, Respondent 2 said,
Before [the research internship experience], I wanted to get into Ph.D. program. I never
applied due to a personal matter but never gave up to educate myself either. My new goal
is to educate myself without being a Ph.D. student as a lab manager.
Respondent 5 stated,
My career goal was to have a decent job in a research laboratory before the internship,
whether it is in academia or industry. I already have a decent job [related to the
internship], and I really love what I am doing now. Perhaps, I will only look for a higher
paying job if there is a major change in my life in the future.
Respondent 6 added,
Before I started the internship, I thought about M.D.-Ph.D. but that wasn’t for me. I’m
still unsure about whether to pursue an MS or Ph.D. I knew I wanted to stay in the
research field, but, as of now, I don’t think I want to do bench work. I didn’t think I
would be in research for the rest of my career. Now, I do, but I don’t want to be an
associate researcher for the rest of my career. I want a more higher-up position.
Lastly, Respondent 7 said,
Prior to the internship, I was planning to work as a lab tech or return to school for a M.S.
[biological sciences-related field] or second B.S. in chemistry. My career goals after the
internship was to work as a stem cell scientist, but, currently, I am thinking of any sort of
laboratory technician type work will do. I hope to be working as a lab tech in the near
future, either in the [biological sciences-related] field or chemistry.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 68
Professional programs. In answering the question about career goal(s) before the
internship, after the internship, and currently, some respondents indicated that their choice goals
are STEM-related. However, they are currently pursuing or plan to pursue professional programs
such as medicine, dentistry, or nursing. For example, Respondent 1 said,
[Prior to the research internship experience], I wanted to pursue Ph.D. graduate program
[in biological sciences] or medical school. My career goals after the internship were to
get into dental school and do research in dental school. [I am currently] working towards
getting into dental school or pursuing a career in clinical research. I hope to be able to
conduct clinical research as a dentist and run clinical trials on my own patients.
Respondent 11 added,
[Prior to the research internship experience], I was considering dental school and a Ph.D.
program [in biological sciences]. I am still considering going to school to become a
dentist or a nurse with the intent to be involved in the research aspect of either field.
Another option I am considering is a master’s program. I'm looking into biology master’s
programs, definitely considering STEM-related fields.
Respondent 12 stated,
[Prior to the research internship experience] I wanted to go to graduate school. I wanted
to pursue a Ph.D. in either molecular or stem cell biology. In addition, the internship also
influenced me to pursue a M.D. My current goals are to obtain both an M.D. and a Ph.D.
Respondent 15 said,
[Prior to the internship experience] I had aspirations to apply to medical school. Within
the near future, I hope to be a nursing program, training to be an RN. It is not really
related. I do hope to be involved with clinical trials once I’m a nurse.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 69
Lastly, Respondent 17 said,
Prior to the internship, I was interested in pursuing dentistry. I am currently applying to
dental school. [In the near future,] I hope to be in dental school. Since I did enjoy it, I am
considering integrating research with clinical work in dentistry. The projects during the
[research internship experience] focused on facial nerve regeneration, which is somewhat
relevant to dentistry.
Undecided. Two out of the total 17 respondents (12%) mentioned that their current
choice goals were undecided. Respondent 10 said, “Prior to the internship, I wanted to get a
Ph.D. [in biological sciences-related field]. I am unsure. I’m still undecided in pursuing a Ph.D.
It’s difficult to say at the moment,” and Respondent 13 said, “Currently, I am taking time off to
reassess my career goals. I hope to get a little career clarity. I would like to use the skills I
acquired in the internship.” It may be important to note that although the participants stated that
they were undecided regarding their choice goal(s), the same participants also reported
employment outcomes in a biological sciences research-related position immediately after the
IRIE completion, as well as at the time of the interview.
Conclusion
Two themes emerged from the interview data. The first theme suggests that students
believed that the benefits of the research internship experience provided insight into their future
career choice, and, consequently, those benefits (e.g. relevant experience, letter(s) of
recommendation, add competitive element to their resume, networking, and informing future
career choice/decisions) motivated them to pursue their career. The second emergent theme
relates to students’ perception of the challenges of their research internship experience; they
believed that they overcame their challenges through persistence, acceptance and effort. The
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 70
emergent themes are supported by findings that showed participants who intended to pursue a
biological sciences career path prior to the research internship experience had outcomes that
were related to their research internship experience. Additionally, most participants (88%) who
intended to pursue a biological sciences career path continued to pursue that path through
employment, graduate programs or professional programs. These findings are supported by both
interview and document compilation reports of immediate and long-term academic or
employment outcomes as well as participants’ reports of choice goals prior to the research
internship experience, immediately after the experience, and one or more years later (at the time
of interview).

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 71
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
The findings in Chapter Four align with the two research questions that derive from the
issues of URM persistence in STEM-related disciplines such as biological sciences, and the lack
of STEM diversity in the workforce. Two research questions guided the design of the current
study including data collection and analysis and the selection of sample population:
1. What are the perceptions of students regarding the benefits and challenges of
participating in an independent research internship experience (IRIE); and
2. In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their career choice?
From the analysis of the data, emergent themes and major findings were consistent with
elements of SCCT relevant to the study. This study yielded five major findings. First,
participants believe that the benefits of an IRIE play an important role in helping them achieve
their STEM career goals despite challenges. Secondly, relevant learning experience and the
acquisition of skills influences participants’ self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations.
Third, self-efficacy influences participants’ developing interests, career aspiration(s) or choice
goal(s), choice actions, and eventually, performance domains, and attainment informs both
academic community on the positive influence of a learning experience. Fourth, the relevant
learning experience may have a direct influence on participants’ developing interests and,
subsequently, career aspiration(s) or choice goal(s), choice actions, and eventually, performance
domains and attainment. Finally, prior interests may have a direct influence on the learning
experience.
As discussed in earlier chapters, Lent and Brown (2006) showed that the acquisition of
mastery skills has the strongest influence on self-efficacy beliefs and some influence on outcome
expectations. Thus, students who feel they have acquired research-related skills, both technical
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 72
skills and laboratory workplace competencies, in biological sciences are more likely to hold
higher levels of research self-efficacy beliefs, an establishment of research competencies. A
higher level of self-efficacy, in turn, is a strong predictor of career interests and persistence (Deci
& Ryan, 2012; Simon et al., 2015; Soldner, Rowan-Kenyon, Inkelas, Garvey, & Robbins, 2012).
Summary of Findings
The emergent themes are supported by findings that showed all participants who intended
to pursue a biological sciences career path prior to the IRIE developed interests, choice goals,
choice actions, and performance domains and attainment (outcomes) in terms of employment or
enrollment in graduate/professional programs that were related to their research internship
experience (Table 3). The following sections revisit the elements of SCCT as they relate to the
current study in detail using the model illustrated in Figure 3, as discussed in Chapter Two.

Figure 3. Model of person, contextual, and experiential factors effecting career-related choice
behavior (Lent & Brown, 2006).

Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectations
Self-efficacy beliefs refer to one’s beliefs in one’s capabilities to pursue goals and
execute courses of action required to attain the related goals (Lent & Brown, 2006). While self-
Experiences
Performance

Choice

Environmental

Expectations
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 73
esteem can be thought of as a global trait, self-efficacy is dynamic. Thus, self-beliefs are linked
to performance or specific tasks and activities (Lent & Brown, 2006). In the current study, the
learning experiences, or the IRIE, directly influenced the participants’ self-efficacy and outcome
expectations. These results are similar to those of Adedokun et al. (2012) who found three key
processes through which undergraduate research experience influences students’ career choices
and the specific program characteristics that catalyze the processes: increased awareness of
career options, clarification of preferred career pathways through research confidence and
research identity, and enhancement of student professional credentials. All participants of the
current study cited that their primary reasons for participating in the IRIE was to acquire a skill
set and/or gain relevant experience that may inform career choice since the learning experience
provided an opportunity for participants to learn, practice, and refine the research skills
necessary to pursue a career in biological sciences. Additionally, all participants indicated that
their expectations, as these relate to their primary reasons to participate, were met. Both self-
efficacy expectations and outcome expectations influenced participants’ developing interests,
choice goals, choice actions, and, eventually, performance domains and attainments.
Interests
Some respondents stated that the IRIE was “rewarding” in and of itself, and that,
although expectations (self-efficacy and outcome) were met, their motivation to pursue a career
in a biological sciences-related field was directly influenced by the developing interests that were
cultivated from the experience. For example, when asked about career goals after the internship
and current career goal(s) followed by questions about motivation for pursuing that career and
how it related to the IRIE, some respondents answered, “I am very interested in lab science in
general. I find it more rewarding of a career to work in research or just in a lab as compared to
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 74
other work I’ve done previously,” “I love science and I love helping people. I got a chance to
work as a scientist and work on a research project geared at helping people,” and “It is extremely
rewarding. I learned that I truly love the work.”
It is important to note that participants of the IRIE were self-selected in that most held a
STEM-related degree or declared it as a major (16 out of 17, 94%), and, of the STEM-degrees or
declared major, 13 (81%) were biological sciences-related disciplines. It may be that the self-
selected participants held STEM and/or biological sciences interests, also known as initial
interests, prior to the learning experience. These findings contradict the SCCT model in two
ways. As presented in Figure 1, while the current model shows that self-efficacy and outcome
expectations influence [developing] interests and that the relationship may be bidirectional (Lent
& Brown, 2006), the findings indicate that, in addition to acting as an intermediary, the learning
experience can also directly influence [developing] interests (shown as red dotted arrow in
Figure 4), and subsequently, choice goals, choice actions, and performance domains and
attainment.
In addition, since self-selected students may have STEM or biological sciences-related
[initial] interests prior to the learning experience, as evident by reports of STEM-related
degrees/majors (see Table 3), the initial interests may have driven the learning experience. For
example, academic/career [initial] interests (STEM-related degree/major) can influence one’s
decision to participate in a learning experience and these initial interests may have been a
reflection or result of person inputs and background environmental influences. In this case,
[initial] the interests may have existed prior to the learning experience and the same [initial]
interests may have been solidified by the learning experience either directly or through self-
efficacy and outcome expectations. While this may be true, it is plausible (in some cases) that
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 75
initial interests may not exist prior to the learning experience at all (as suggested by the current
SCCT model). A proposal for a revision of the current model representing SCCT framework
(Figure 1) is illustrated in Figure 4 (below), as indicated by the red box and dotted arrow:

Figure 4. Model of person, contextual, and experiential factors effecting career-related choice
behavior: A revision, adapted from Lent and Brown (2006).

Choice Goals, Choice Actions, and Performance Domains and Attainment
The findings revealed that, of the 17 participants, all of whom reported STEM-related
choice goals prior to the IRIE, 15 (88%) reported STEM-related choice goals after the IRIE. The
participants’ report of STEM-related choice goals after the IRIE may suggest that the
participants maintained similar STEM interests or developed new interests related to the IRIE;
maintaining similar STEM interests or the development of new interests related to the IRIE may
be a display of STEM persistence. Interestingly, two of the 15 participants who cited that they
were undecided in regards to their choice goals after the IRIE, reported employment outcomes in
a biological sciences research-related field similar to the IRIE.
Additionally, some participants who reported choice goals related to a professional
program may not be perceived as a display of persistence in a biological sciences-related field,
the five participants who reported choice goals or actions related to professional programs (e.g.,
Experiences
Performance

Choice

Environmental

Expectations

Interests
(developing)
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 76
M.D., D.D.S., R.N.) mentioned that they plan or hope to integrate their learning experiences into
their profession. This suggests that the learning experience may have influenced their decision to
integrate their research skills into their profession; thus, persistence in the field remains to some
extent.
The Role of Persistence
In the literature review, a synthesis of existing literature on student persistence in STEM
disciplines at post-secondary institutions revealed several themes that serve as a driving force of
URM persistence, including student perception and the barriers that challenge student
persistence. Many students enter college with an intended major in mind but change their
intended major pathway; this is especially true for students entering college majoring in a STEM
discipline (Espinoza, 2011; Griffith, 2010; Wang, 2013b). Interview data suggest that
participants exhibited persistence and demonstrate program completion (100%). Examples of
participants’ own persistence recognition, despite reported challenges of the difficult nature of
research project/science, knowledge gaps, experimental failures, and a lack of technical and
laboratory workplace competencies, include responses such as “I did struggle a lot…still, I
learned how to persevere,” “the most invaluable lesson was knowing that failure was inevitable
and overcoming these challenges were empowering,” and “things might seem overwhelming at
first but everything gets easier.” Participants also displayed persistence throughout the choice-
making process after the IRIE (measured by reports of choice goals, choice actions, and
performance attainments or outcomes). After the IRIE, even when participants decide to pursue a
professional program (considered STEM-related), these participants merely changed their choice
goals from one STEM discipline to another. The persistence through this process led to fostering
of the STEM pipeline: 15 out of the 17 participants (88%) reportedly entered the workforce or
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 77
are currently pursuing advanced degrees in a graduate or professional program. Specific to this
sample population, however, is the level of education reported as well as the type of degree held
at the time of the IRIE. Since the majority of participants held a STEM-related degree or major
(94%) and 13 out of the 16 STEM-related degrees (81%) were in biological sciences, it is
plausible that the participants were self-selected persistent individuals.
Implications for Practice
Much of the literature presented in earlier chapters speaks to the United States’ workforce
deficit of STEM postsecondary graduates (Eagan et al., 2010; Chen & Soldner, 2013; Colby &
Ortman, 2015). The need to address low retention of STEM students, specifically among URM,
and to increase workforce diversity was echoed throughout the literature (Eagan et al., 2010;
Chen & Soldner, 2013; Colby & Ortman, 2015). Efforts to address this need have been
inconsistent and may be caused by lack of knowledge about effective approaches (Graham et al.,
2013). Successful STEM programs targeting URM retention and persistence commonly use
research experience as a learning tool to encourage and cultivate STEM identity (D’Souza et al.,
2015; Yelamarthi & Mawasha, 2008, Hernandez et al., 2018) while also implementing research
coursework to provide students with intellectual challenges associated with problem-solving in
the laboratory (as cited in Graham et al., 2013; Olson & Riordan, 2012). It is important to
reiterate that the Bridges Undergraduate Research Program at ABCCC provides both the
technical laboratory training as well as the research coursework prior and in parallel to the IRIE.
Perhaps, the additional components added to the learning experience influence self-efficacy and
outcome expectations, and subsequently influence one’s developing interests, career aspirations
or choice goals, choice actions, and, eventually, performance domains and attainment
(employment or graduate/professional program enrollment). Findings demonstrate that
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 78
participation in an IRIE was perceived by the participants to have a positive influence on their
decision to pursue a STEM-related career which may ultimately contribute to the diversity of the
STEM workforce. Contrary to some findings reported in literature, an IRIE attributes, including
number of hours students commit and duration of an IRIE may be the key to highly effective
undergraduate research programs. For example, Hernandez et al. (2018) found that just having
the research experience was not enough to influence persistence in a science discipline for URM.
Influence required a commitment of 10 or more hours per week (intensity) of participation and
two or more semesters (duration) of faculty-mentored research. Students who do participate in
programs with the intensity and duration elements show the greatest gains in outcomes such as
baccalaureate completion, graduate school acceptance, and employment in STEM (Carpi, Ronan,
Falconer & Lents, 2017; Hernandez et al., 2018; Russell et al., 2007; Thiry et al., 2012).
The study addresses the literature gap that qualitatively discusses an IRIE and its
influence on persistence and choice goals; moreover, the study contributes to the limited
empirical studies on URM student populations at 2-year institutions. Finally, the study may
inform funding sources to improve or develop existing programs and efforts to maximize the
impact of research experiences that effectively increase STEM persistence, access, and retention
for URM at 2-year institutions that may broaden the diversity of the scientific workforce.
Recommendations for Research
Future research proposals should explore several emergent themes that could not be
addressed within the scope of the current study. For example, the qualitative nature of the current
study did not allow for an assessment of the strength of benefits or challenges of the IRIE (i.e.
quality of mentorship, collegial support, networking, knowledge gaps, etc.), which may affect
one’s choice goals to pursue employment, a graduate program, or a professional program. There
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 79
was also not an opportunity to explore the strengths or causal relationships of each core person
and contextual variables in the SCCT model.
Additionally, proximal environmental influences such as support and barriers during
choice-making were not explored, but may be an important part of a developing persistence
model. While Lent and Brown (2006) indicated that the proximal environmental influences
affect choice-making, these variables may also play a role during the learning experiences. The
participants’ persistence and success, as reported through choice goals, choice actions, and
performance domains and attainment, may be unique to the Bridges Undergraduate Research
Internship Program. It may be that individual elements of the program, including, length of the
IRIE, full-time commitment, required seminars, retreats, training sessions, and journal clubs
among other training activities, provided the type of support that was essential to the
participants’ success. Thus, specific program characteristics that catalyze the processes should
also be explored. Future research comparing the success, retention, or persistence of STEM
URM participating in an IRIE of varying lengths may be helpful in the development and/or
evaluation of short-and long-term programs. Finally, it may be informative to track the current
participants over the course of their careers to identify career persistence and their contributions
to the STEM workforce and the scientific community.
Conclusion
The extent to which funding agencies are willing to award 2-year institutions with
enough compensation to develop highly comprehensive IRIE training programs may be the
ultimate barrier for STEM students and URM STEM students. Highly effective, comprehensive
programs that offer research coursework prior or in parallel to the IRIE, monetary compensation,
and salaries to compensate support staff can be costly. Although only two participants in this
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 80
current study mentioned that the monetary compensation was a benefit of the IRIE, what is
known is that participating in a full-time IRIE is costly (at an individual level) in terms of time,
effort and may be a financial barrier, especially to those who have been historically
underrepresented in STEM, first-generation college students, or those who come from low
socioeconomic backgrounds. The compensation that comes with this particular IRIE may have
allowed more time for participants to develop a scientific identity, thus cultivating their interests
and goals. Regardless of the financial costs to develop and run high-impact IRIE programs, long-
term societal costs will always be greater.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 81
REFERENCES
Ackerman, P. L., Kanfer, R., & Beier, M. E. (2013). Trait complex, cognitive ability, and domain
knowledge predictors of baccalaureate success, STEM persistence, and gender
differences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 911–927.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032338
Adedokun, O. A., Zhang, D., Parker, L. C., Bessenbacher, A., Chilcress, A., & Burgess, W. D.
(2012). Towards an understanding of the processes of the effects of undergraduate
research experiences on students’ aspiration for research careers and graduate education.
Journal of College Science Teaching, 42, 82–91.
Adedokun, O. A., Bessenbacher, A. B., Parker, L. C., Kirkham, L. L., & Burgess, W. D. (2013).
Research skills and STEM undergraduate research students’ aspirations for research
careers: Mediating effects of research self‐efficacy. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 50(8), 940–951. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21102
Allen-Ramdial, S. A. A., & Campbell, A. G. (2014). Reimagining the pipeline: Advancing
STEM diversity, persistence, and success. BioScience, 64(7), 612-618.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297–308.
Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Development, 40(5), 518.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 82
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self‐efficacy beliefs as
shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72(1), 187–
206. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00273
Bangera, G., & Brownell, S. E. (2014). Course-based undergraduate research experiences can
make scientific research more inclusive. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 602–606.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-06-0099
Bauer, K. W. & Bennett, J. S. (2003). Alumni perceptions used to assess undergraduate research
experience. The Journal of Higher Education 74(2), 210-230.
Berger, J. B., & Milem, J. F. (1999). The role of student involvement and perceptions of
integration in a causal model of student persistence. Research in higher Education, 40(6),
641-664.
Bianchini, J. A. (2013). Expanding underrepresented minority participation: America’s science
and technology talent at the crossroads. Science Education, 97(1), 163–166.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21032
Bonous-Hammarth, M. (2000). Pathways to success: Affirming opportunities for science,
mathematics, and engineering majors. The Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 92–111.
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E., & Hagedorn, L. S. (1999). Campus
racial climate and the adjustment of students to college: A comparison between White
students and African-American students. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(2), 134–
160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.1999.11780759
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 83
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (2017). Retrieved from
https://datamart.cccco.edu/Students/Student_Term_Annual_Count.aspx
Carpi, A., Ronan, D. M., Falconer, H. M., & Lents, N. H. (2017). Cultivating minority scientists:
Undergraduate research increases self‐efficacy and career ambitions for underrepresented
students in STEM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 169-194.
Carter, J. D., & Fountaine, T. P. (2012). An analysis of White student engagement at public
HBCUs. The Journal of Educational Foundations, 26(3/4), 49.
Chang, M. J., Sharkness, J., Hurtado, S., & Newman, C. B. (2014). What matters in college for
retaining aspiring scientists and engineers from underrepresented racial groups. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 555–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21146
Chen, X., & Soldner, M. (2013). STEM attrition: college students’ paths into and out of STEM
fields. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education; http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014001rev.pdf
Cho, S., Kim, A., & Mor Barak, M. E. (2017). Does diversity matter? Exploring workforce
diversity, diversity management, and organizational performance in social enterprises.
Asian Social Work and Policy Review, 11(3), 193–204.
https://doi.org/10.1111/aswp.12125
Colby, S., & Ortman, J. M. (2015). Projections of the size and composition of U.S. population:
2014-2060. Washington, D.C.: United States Census Bureau. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p25-
1143.pdf
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 84
Dai, D. Y., Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Zhou, Y. (2015). Cope and grow: A grounded theory
approach to early college entrants’ lived experiences and changes in a STEM program.
Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(2), 75–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986214568719
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded
social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The
Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85-107). New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
D’Souza, M. J., Kroen, W. K., Stephens, C. B., & Kashmar, R. J. (2015). Strategies and
initiatives that revitalize Wesley College STEM programs. Journal of College Teaching
and Learning, 12(3), 195. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v12i3.9311
Eagan, K., Hurtado, S., & Chang, M. (2010, October). What matters in STEM: Institutional
contexts that influence STEM bachelor’s degree completion rates. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Indianapolis, IN.
Espinosa, L. (2011). Pipelines and pathways: Women of color in undergraduate STEM majors
and the college experiences that contribute to persistence. Harvard Educational Review,
81(2), 209–241. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.92315ww157656k3u
Estrada, M., Burnett, M., Campbell, A. G., Campbell, P. B., Denetclaw, W. F., Gutiérrez, C. G., .
. . Zavala, M. E. (2016). Improving underrepresented minority student persistence in
STEM. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(3), es5. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0038
Graham, M. J., Frederick, J., Byars-Winston, A., Hunter, A. B., & Handelsman, J. (2013).
Increasing persistence of college students in STEM. Science, 341(6153), 1455–1456.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240487
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 85
Griffith, A. L. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the
school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 911–922.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.06.010
Gurin, P., Dey, E., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and
impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330–367.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.3.01151786u134n051
Hathaway, R. S., Nagda, B. A., & Gregerman, S. R. (2002). The relationship of undergraduate
research participation to graduate and professional education pursuit: An empirical study.
Journal of College Student Development, 43(5), 614–631.
Harper, S. (2009). Race-conscious student engagement practices and the equitable distribution of
enriching educational experiences. Liberal Education, 95(4), 38–45.
Hernandez, P. R., Schultz, P., Estrada, M., Woodcock, A., & Chance, R. C. (2013). Sustaining
optimal motivation: A longitudinal analysis of interventions to broaden participation of
underrepresented students in STEM. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 89–107.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029691
Intemann, K. (2009). Why diversity matters: Understanding and applying the diversity
component of the National Science Foundation’s broader impacts criterion. Social
Epistemology, 23(3-4), 249-266.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Harding, T., & Whitehead, D. (2013). Analysing data in qualitative research. Nursing &
midwifery research: Methods and appraisal for evidence-based practice, 141-160.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 86
Hernandez, P. R., Woodcock, A., Estrada, M., & Schultz, P. W. (2018). Undergraduate research
experiences broaden diversity in the scientific workforce. Bioscience, 68(3), 204–211.
https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix163
Hill, C. E., Knox, S., Thompson, B. J., Williams, E. N., Hess, S. A., & Ladany, N. (2005).
Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2),
196–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196
Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of
high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 101(46), 16385–16389.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403723101
Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus
racial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education,
70(4), 324–345. https://doi.org/10.2307/2673270
Hurtado, S., Clayton-Pedersen, A. R., Allen, W. R., & Milem, J. F. (1998). Enhancing campus
climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The Review of
Higher Education, 21(3), 279–302. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1998.0003
Hurtado, S., Newman, C. B., Tran, M. C., & Chang, M. J. (2010). Improving the rate of success
for underrepresented racial minorities in STEM fields: Insights from a national project.
New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 5–15.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.357
Karp, M. M., Hughes, K. L., & O’Gara, L. (2010). An exploration of Tinto’s integration
framework for community college students. Journal of College Student Retention, 12(1),
69–86. https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.12.1.e
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 87
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects
of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The journal of higher
education, 79(5), 540-563.
Kyoung Ro, H., Lattuca, L. R., & Alcott, B. (2017). Who goes to graduate school? Engineers’
math proficiency, college experience, and self‐assessment of skills. Journal of
Engineering Education, 106(1), 98–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20154
Labov, J. B. (2012). Changing and evolving relationships between two-and four-year colleges
and universities: They’re not your parents’ community colleges anymore. CBE Life
Sciences Education, 11(2), 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-03-0031
Landivar, L. C. (2013). Disparities in STEM employment by sex, race, and Hispanic origin.
Education Review, 29(6), 911–922.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of
career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
45(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and barriers to career
choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(1), 36–49.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.1.36
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown &
Associates (Ed.). Career choice and development (4th ed., pp. 255–311). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lent, R. W., & Brown, S. D. (2006). On conceptualizing and assessing social cognitive
constructs in career research: A measurement guide. Journal of Career Assessment,
14(1), 12–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072705281364
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 88
Linn, M. C., Palmer, E., Baranger, A., Gerard, E., & Stone, E. (2015). Undergraduate research
experiences: Impacts and opportunities. Science, 347(6222), 1261757.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1261757
Locks, A. M., Hurtado, S., Bowman, N. A., & Oseguera, L. (2008). Extending notions of campus
climate and diversity to students' transition to college. The Review of Higher
Education, 31(3), 257-285.
Lopatto, D. (2004). Survey of undergraduate research experiences (SURE): First findings. Cell
Biology Education, 3(4), 270–277. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.04-07-0045
Lopatto, D. (2007). Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and
active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6(4), 297–306.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.07-06-0039
Mau, W. C. J., & Li, J. (2018). Factors influencing STEM career aspirations of underrepresented
high school students. The Career Development Quarterly, 66(3), 246–258.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12146
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What’s good, what’s not,
and how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483328591
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 89
Meyer, M., & Marx, S. (2014). Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why
undergraduates leave engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(4), 525–548.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20054
Milem, J. F., & Berger, J. B. (1997). A modified model of college student persistence: Exploring
the relationship between Astin's theory of involvement and Tinto's theory of student
departure. Journal of college student development, 38(4), 387.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. 3rd.
Museus, S. D., & Liverman, D. (2010). High-performing institutions and their implications for
studying underrepresented minority students in STEM. New Directions for Institutional
Research, 148, 17-27.
Museus, S. D., Palmer, R. T., Davis, R. J., & Maramba, D. (Eds.). (2011). Racial and ethnic
minority student success in STEM education. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Musselwhite, K., Cuff, L., McGregor, L., & King, K. M. (2007). The telephone interview is an
effective method of data collection in clinical nursing research: A discussion paper.
International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44(6), 1064–1070.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.05.014
Mutter, P. (1992). Tinto’s Theory of departure and community college student persistence.
Journal of College Student Development, 33(4), 310–318.
National Academy of Engineering Committee on public understanding of engineering messages.
(2008). Changing the conversation: Messages for improving public understanding of
engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 90
National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2012). Community colleges
in the evolving STEM education landscape: Summary of a summit. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13399.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Table 306.10: Total fall enrollment in degree-
granting post-secondary institutions, by level of enrollment, sex, attendance status, and
race/ethnicity of student: Selected years, 1976 through 2014 [Data Table]. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_306.10.asp?current=yes
National Research Council. (2006). To recruit and advance: Women students and faculty in
science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Nora, A. (1987). Determinants of retention among Chicano college students: A structural model.
Research in Higher Education, 26(1), 31–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991932
Olson, S., & Riordan, D. G. (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college
graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Report to
the President. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.
Oseguera, L., Hurtado, S., Denson, N., Cerna, O., & Saenz, V. (2006). The characteristics and
experiences of minority freshmen committed to biomedical and behavioral science
research careers. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12(2-3),
155–177. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v12.i2-3.40
Pascarella, E. T., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (1986). Long-term persistence of two-year
college students. Research in Higher Education, 24(1), 47–71.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00973742
Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student development in college:
Theory, research, and practice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 91
Pfund, C., Byars-Winston, A., Branchaw, J., Hurtado, S., & Eagan, K. (2016). Defining
attributes and metrics of effective research mentoring relationships. AIDS and Behavior,
20(2), 238–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-016-1384-z
Richard, O. C., Murthi, B. S., & Ismail, K. (2007). The impact of racial diversity on intermediate
and long‐term performance: The moderating role of environmental context. Strategic
Management Journal, 28(12), 1213–1233. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.633
Robert, L., & Romero, D. M. (2015, April). Crowd size, diversity and performance. In
Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 1379-1382). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery.
Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. (2007). Benefits of undergraduate research
experiences. Science, 316(5824), 548–549. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1140384
Seymour, E., Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S. L., & DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of
research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three‐year
study. Science education, 88(4), 493-534.
Shuy, R. W. (2003). In-person versus telephone interviewing. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium
(Eds.), Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns (pp. 175–193). Thousand Oaks:
Sage.
Soldner, M., Rowan-Kenyon, H., Inkelas, K. K., Garvey, J., & Robbins, C. (2012). Supporting
students’ intentions to persist in STEM disciplines: The role of living-learning programs
among other social-cognitive factors. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(3), 311–336.
https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2012.0017
Spronken-Smith, R., Mirosa, R., & Darrou, M. (2014). ‘Learning is an endless journey for
anyone’: Undergraduate awareness, experiences and perceptions of the research culture
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 92
in a research-intensive university. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(2),
355–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.832169
Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. (2010). Unraveling the effects of
cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups.
Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4), 690–709.
https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.85
Sturges, J. E., & Hanrahan, K. J. (2004). Comparing telephone and face-to-face qualitative
interviewing: A research note. Qualitative Research, 4(1), 107–118.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104041110
Teacher Advisory Council, D. B. A. S. S. E., & National Research Council. (2012). Expanding
Minority Participation in Undergraduate STEM Education. In Community colleges in the
evolving STEM education landscape: Summary of a summit. National Academies Press.
Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/read/13399/chapter/3
Thiry, H., Weston, T. J., Laursen, S. L., & Hunter, A. B. (2012). The benefits of multi-year
research experiences: Differences in novice and experienced students’ reported gains
from undergraduate research. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(3), 260–272.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-11-0098
Tinto, V. (1988). Stages of student departure: Reflections on the longitudinal character of student
leaving. The Journal of Higher Education, 59(4), 438–455.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1981920
Tinto, V. (1999). Taking retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of college. NACADA
Journal, 19(2), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.12930/0271-9517-19.2.5
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 93
United States Census Bureau. (2012). Table 3: Percent Unemployed by Field of Degree,
Occupation, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin [Data Table].
http://www.census.gov/people/io/
Van Soom, C., & Donche, V. (2014). Profiling first-year students in STEM programs based on
autonomous motivation and academic self-concept and relationship with academic
achievement. PLoS One, 9(11), e112489. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112489
Wang, X. (2013a). Modeling entrance into STEM fields of study among students beginning at
community colleges and four-year institutions. Research in Higher Education, 54(6),
664–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9291-x
Wang, X. (2013b). Why students choose STEM majors: Motivation, high school learning, and
postsecondary context of support. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1081–
1121. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213488622
Wang, X. (2015). Pathway to a baccalaureate in STEM fields: Are community colleges a viable
route and does early STEM momentum matter? Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis,37(3), 376–393. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373714552561
Waterman, S. J. (2012). Home-going as a strategy for success among Haudenosaunee college
and university students. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 49(2), 193–
209. https://doi.org/10.1515/jsarp-2012-6378
Wei, C. A., & Woodin, T. (2011). Undergraduate research experiences in biology: alternatives to
the apprenticeship model. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 10(2), 123-131.
Wolf-Wendel, L., Ward, K., & Kinzie, J. (2009). A Tangled Web of Terms: The Overlap and
Unique Contribution of Involvement, Engagement, and Integration to Understanding
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 94
College Student Success. Journal of College Student Development, 50(4), 407–428.
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.0.0077
Yelamarthi, K., & Mawasha, P. R. (2008). A pre-engineering program for the under-represented,
low-income and/or first generation college students to pursue higher education. Journal
of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 9(3/4), 5.
York, T., Gibson, C., & Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and Measuring Academic Success.
Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 20(5), 1–20.
Zimbardi, K., & Myatt, P. (2014). Embedding undergraduate research experiences within the
curriculum: A cross-disciplinary study of the key characteristics guiding implementation.
Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 233–250.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 95
APPENDIX A
Student Research Intern Alum Interview Protocol
Student Name:
Internship Site:
PI’s Lab:
Research Questions
1) What are the perceptions of students regarding the benefits and challenges of participating in
an independent research internship experience (IRIE)?
2) In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their career choice?
Introduction
Prior to the interview: Participants will be given a brief survey to collect demographic
information including gender, age, race/ethnicity, and whether or not he/she is a first-generation
college student (yes or no), college attended (if any), and level of education.
Interviewer: Thank you for agreeing to participate in my research study today. I know that your
time is valuable and I appreciate your participation. My name is Karol Lu, and I will be
interviewing you today. I am a Program Coordinator for the XXX Program and I am currently
conducting this study for my doctoral dissertation. In this interview, please feel free to express
your thoughts and opinions openly. Please keep in mind that I will not be sharing your name or
any names when I present the information in my class.
So that I do not miss any important information that you may share with me, we will be
tape-recording this interview session. Do I have your permission to record your feedback?
Please speak up clearly so that all valuable information can be captured. In addition, please
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 96
inform me if at any time if you feel uncomfortable with the questions that I am asking and we
may end the interview.
Transition: First, I would like to know a little bit about your background.
Where did you attend high school?
Where did you attend college?
What did you study? What degree(s) did you obtain?
How did you hear about the internship?
What was your age when you started the IRIE?
What is your current age?
What is the gender that you identify with?
What is your ethnicity?
Are you a first-generation college student (both parents did not attend college)?
Transition: Thank you for sharing a little bit about your background to bring me up to speed with
your participation in the internship. Now, I’d like to learn about your independent research
internship experience.
Interview Questions
(*Note: the second-level questions allows interviewer to probe for the information if
respondent/participant have not answered the question thoroughly and offered the information).
Previous Experience and Expectations
1. Have you participated in research prior to participating in the IRIE?
a. If you answered "Yes", where you carried out your research?
2. What are the primary reasons why you decided to participate?
a. What did you hope to get out of it?
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 97
3. What were your career/educational goals prior to the IRIE?
a. Are you currently pursuing these goals?
4. What were your expectations, if any, for the IRIE?
a. Was the expectation(s) met? Explain.
Transition: Now, I’d like you to walk me through your day.
Overall Research Internship Experience
5. Can you please describe your “typical day” during the IRIE?
a. How many hours a day do you spend in the lab?
b. How many hours a day did you spend total, including activities that are related to
your IRIE obligations and lab?
Transition, now, tell me…
6. What are/were things you enjoyed the most about the IRIE?
7. What are/were key takeaways/lessons learned from the IRIE?
a. Were there any challenges that made you feel this way? Explain.
8. What is your overall sense of satisfaction from the IRIE?
9. What are the benefits (if any) that you may have gained from the IRIE?
Program Components
Transition: Many undergraduate research programs include a number of components in addition
to the time you spend in the lab engaged in your research.
10. Please identify (if any) and describe the program component(s) that was included in the IRIE
(i.e. seminars, retreats, training workshops, journal clubs, etc.).
a. What are some challenges/benefits of these components?
Transition: I know it must have been awhile since your internship has ended, but can you please
tell me…
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 98
Choice Goals
11. What did you do immediately after the end of your internship (within six months)?
a. Do you have plans to continue your education to finish and/or beyond your
undergraduate degree?
b. What are you doing now (for example, working in an academic lab, applying for
graduate school, unemployed, etc.)?
12. Have you been able to network with others in the field during (or since) the IRIE?
a. If so, how?
b. How has it helped (if at all) you progress towards your career goals?
Transition: Some people would say that you get what you put into (the internship)…
13. What would you say to others who were seeking the IRIE?
a. Do you find it useful in helping to get hands-on, practical experiences?
b. Do you think the IRIE will help others in your position? Explain.
14. What was/were your career goals after the internship? What is/are your current career
goal(s)?
a. What/where do you hope to be in the near future?
15. What is your motivation for pursuing that career?
a. How is this related to the IRIE (if at all?)?
Thank you for your patience and answering the interview questions so thoroughly.
Closing: This concludes the end of our interview. Do you have any questions for me? May I
contact you, if necessary, with any follow-up questions? Thank you once again for allowing me
to interview you and for all that you do to bring the benchtop to the bedside! Your contribution
to the research is invaluable and I wish you the best of luck as you continue your journey.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 99
Research Question Interview Question Type of Question
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
Have you participated in research
prior to participating in the IRIE?
 If "Yes", where you carried out
your research?

Experience and
Behavior
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
What are the primary reasons why you
decided to participate in the IRIE?
(look out for the following
information, and probe if necessary to
access the information from
participants):
 What did you hope to get out of it?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
2) In what ways, if at all, has
it influenced their career
choice?
What were your career/educational
goals prior to the IRIE?
 Are you currently pursuing these
goals?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
What were your expectations, if any,
for the IRIE?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 100
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
 Were these expectations met,
explain?
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
Can you please describe your “typical
day” during the IRIE?
 How many hours a day did you
spend in the lab?
 How many hours a day do you
spend total, including activities
that were related to your
research/internship obligations and
lab?
Hypothetical
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
What are/were things you enjoyed the
most about the IRIE?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
What are/were key takeaways/lessons
learned from the IRIE?
Interpretive
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 101
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
 Were there any challenges that
made you feel this way? Explain.
Experience and
Behavior
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
What is your overall sense of
satisfaction from the IRIE?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
What are the benefits (if any) that you
may have gained from the IRIE?

Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
Please identify (if any) and describe
the program component(s) that was
included in the IRIE (i.e. seminars,
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 102
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
retreats, training workshops, journal
clubs, etc.).
 What were some
challenges/benefits of these
components?
2) In what ways, if at all, has
it influenced their career
choice?
What did you do immediately after the
end of the IRIE?
 Do you have plans to continue
your education beyond your
undergraduate degree?
 What are you doing now (for
example, working in academic lab,
applying for graduate school,
unemployed, etc.)
Experience and
Behavior
2) In what ways, if at all, has
it influenced their career
choice?
Have you been able to network with
others in the field during (or since) the
IRIE?
 If so, how?
 How has it helped (if at all) you
progress towards your career
goals?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior
Opinion and Values
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 103
1) What are the perceptions
of students regarding the
benefits and challenges of
participating in an
independent research
internship experience
(IRIE)?
What would you say to others who
were seeking the experience?
 Do you find it useful in helping to
get hands-on, practical
experiences?
 Do you think the IRIE will help
others in your position? Explain.
Opinion and Values
2) In what ways, if at all, has
it influenced their career
choice?
What was/were your career goals after
the IRIE? What is/are your current
career goal(s)?
 What/where do you hope to be in
the near future?
Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior

2) In what ways, if at all, has
it influenced their career
choice?
What is your motivation for pursuing
that career?

Interpretive
Experience and
Behavior

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 104
APPENDIX B
Document Review Template
RQ1: What are the perceptions of students regarding the benefits and challenges of participating
in an independent research internship experience?
Data Needs Documents
▪ Evidence of students’ self-
evaluation/participation in
undergraduate research
☐ Student self-evaluation/progress form during
internship participation year. Contains initial, mid-
year and final self-evaluation.

RQ2: In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their career choice?
Data Needs Documents
▪ Evidence of participants’ career
choice before/after internship
participation
☐ Student self-evaluation/program form. Contains
initial, mid-year and final self-evaluation.
☐ Student application for the Bridges
Undergraduate Research Internship
☐ Student outcomes (immediate) after the end of
the internship in the termination form.

▪ Evidence of enrollment in
biological sciences or related
graduate/professional program

☐ Current/previous enrollment in the
graduate/professional program
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 105
☐ Professional/vocational certificates or graduate
degree since the end of the research internship
experience.
▪ Evidence of alum securing
biological sciences or scientific
workforce-related positions
☐ Scientific publications/patents after exiting
program to signify work-product from
employment.

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 106
APPENDIX C
Recruitment Letter
You have been selected to participate in this study based on your former participation in
the Bridges Undergraduate Research Program at ABC Community College. As a participant in
this study, your contribution will assist in understanding the impact of your research internship
experience on STEM persistence and career choice.
The purpose of this project is to better understand how your independent research
internship experience in the program helped shape your perceptions of the challenges and
benefits of the research internship experience. The interview questions will ask about topics
including your experience in the Bridges Undergraduate Research Program and your current
career status or educational attainment.
The following research questions are posed to help generate knowledge with the goal of retaining
students in STEM educational and career pathway:
1) What are the perceptions of students regarding the benefits and challenges of participating in
an independent research internship experience?
2) In what ways, if at all, has it influenced their career choice?
In addition to completing the initial survey, your participation in this study will be comprised of
the following activities:
1. 1-2 interviews
You may decline to answer any question in the interview and the data collected will be kept
strictly confidential. Any results published will not identify any participant from the interviews.
Thank you in advance for considering this invitation. Your participation is critical to the success
of this study.
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 107
APPENDIX D
Definition of Terms
Choice actions: actions that are designed to implement choice goals; the pursuit of choice goals
(e.g. enrolling in a training program or academic major) (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Lent &
Brown, 2006)
Choice goals: career or academic goals stemming from one’s academic/career interests (Lent,
Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Lent & Brown, 2006); the intent to pursue a particular career path and
performance attainments are both feedback systems that impact self-efficacy (Pfund et al., 2016)
Outcome expectations: beliefs about the consequences or outcomes of performing particular
behaviors. For example, anticipated social (e.g., benefits to one’s family), material (e.g.,
financial gain), and self-evaluative (e.g., self-approval) outcomes (Bandura, 1986)
Performance domains and attainment: the result or outcome of choice actions; sometimes
referred to as outcomes (e.g. admission or acceptance in a training program, employment) (Lent,
Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Lent & Brown, 2006)
Persistence: degree or educational pathway completion (York, Gibson & Rankin, 2015)
Post-secondary institutions: 2-and 4-year higher education institutions
Psychological adjustment process: transition from high school to college (Locks, Hurtado,
Bowman, & Oseguera, 2008)
Science: the study of the natural world, including the laws of nature associated with physics,
chemistry, and biology and the treatment or application of facts, principles, concepts or
conventions associated with these disciplines. Science is both a body of knowledge that has been
accumulated over time and a process – scientific inquiry – that generates new knowledge.
Knowledge from science informs the engineering design process. (NAE, 2009; NRC 2006)
INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXPERIENCES OF URM 108
Self-efficacy: a person’s beliefs about his or her ability to perform the particular behaviors or
courses of action (Bandura, 1977; Bandura, 1986; Lent & Brown, 2006; Lent, Brown, & Hackett,
1994, 2000; Pfund, Byars-Winston, Branchaw, Hurtado, & Eagan, 2016)
Social cognitive theory (SCT): theory of learning and social behavior; proposes that new
behaviors can be acquired by observing and imitating others (Bandura, 1977, 1986, & 2001)
Social cognitive career theory (SCCT): a theory stemming from Bandura’s (1977 & 2001)
SCT; explains three interrelated aspects of career development: basic academic and career
interests, educational and career choices, and how academic and career success is obtained (Lent,
Brown, & Hackett, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2006)
STEM: science, technology, engineering and mathematics
Student involvement/engagement: the amount of physical and psychological commitment to
the academic experience (Astin, 1984 & 1999)
Underrepresented minorities (URM): Black or African American, Hispanics or Latina/o,
Native American and Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, and women
(Bianchini, 2013; Eagan, Hurtado & Chang, 2010)

For additional resources - http://dissertationedd.usc.edu/
DSC contact information – rsoedsc@rossier.usc.edu or (213)740-8099

Abstract (if available)

Abstract As the structural diversity of the country is changing, there is an increasing need in the workforce to fill and diversify STEM occupations to accommodate this change. Identifying and understanding factors influencing underrepresented minorities and their decision to complete a postgraduate degree will shed light on challenges related to the lack of diversity in the STEM workforce. A qualitative methods approach was used in this study to provide insights on whether undergraduate research experience for underrepresented minorities attending a 2-year institution influences choice goals and persistence in scientific research or related careers. The central guiding theoretical framework for the study is the social cognitive career theory. Underrepresented minorities (URM) in STEM, specifically in biological sciences, who participated in a one-year independent research internship experience (IRIE) at local renowned research institutes were recruited on a voluntary basis to participate in this study. The participants’ perception regarding the benefits and challenges of performing an IRIE and the potential influence on career choice were evaluated using interview and document data. Results demonstrate that participants perceived the IRIE as having a positive influence on their choice to pursue a STEM-related career which may ultimately contribute to the diversity of the STEM workforce. The study may inform funding sources to develop programs that effectively increase STEM persistence, access, and retention for URM.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Influence of mentorship on career development for underrepresented minoritized students in STEM undergraduate research experiences

PDF

Plugging the leaky pipeline: how academic deans support the persistence of underrepresented minority students in science and mathematics

PDF

Faculty’s influence on underrepresented minority (URM) undergraduate retention

PDF

Impact of participation in STEM organizations and authentic learning experiences on women of color engineering students

PDF

Discovering implicit academic science norms through the experience of historically underrepresented STEM faculty

PDF

Experiential learning curriculum supporting guided pathways in California community colleges

PDF

The evaluation of in-person versus virtual interviews from underrepresented minorities in medicine

PDF

Exploration of STEM teachers’ knowledge, motivation, and the organizational influences of culturally inclusive teaching practices

PDF

Girls in cybersecurity: an evaluation study

PDF

Influence of globalization, school leadership, and students’ participation in science competitions on 21st-century skill development, instructional practices, and female students’ interest in sci...

PDF

Underrepresented minorities in medicine in the United States: an innovation study to develop an effective holistic admissions process for the New School of Medicine

PDF

Influence of SciFest on Irish students in developing interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and 21st-century skills in preparation for competing in a global economy

PDF

Addressing the underrepresentation of women in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math: a focus on African American and Hispanic women in community college and university programs

PDF

Internships in the entertainment industry: From the perspectives of colleges and universities, and internship employers

PDF

An evaluation of general education faculty practices to support student decision-making at one community college

PDF

An examination of ethnic minority physician representation in clinical medicine to reduce health disparities among minoritized groups

PDF

Underrepresentation of women of color in railroad engineering

PDF

Influence of globalization and educational policy on development of 21st-century skills and education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and the science and technology fairs in ...

PDF

Impact of globalization and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics on postsecondary education in Costa Rica: a case study of project-based learning and national science and engineering...

PDF

Computer science education in California public high schools: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Lu, Karol (author)

Core Title Independent research internship experiences of underrepresented minorities in biological sciences: an interview case study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 05/02/2019

Defense Date 03/25/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Biological Sciences,career choice,challenges and benefits of research internship experience,choice goals,community college,community college population,community college research internship experience,developed interests,independent research experience,independent research internship,independent research internship experience,initial interests,internship,interview case study,learned experiences,OAI-PMH Harvest,persistence,research experience,research experience influences choice goals and persistence,research internship,SCCT,self-efficacy,social cognitive career theory,STEM,STEM persistence,undergraduate research experience,undergraduate research internship,underrepresented minorities,underrepresented minorities at community colleges,underrepresented minorities in STEM

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Freking, Fredrick (committee chair), Maddox, Anthony (committee member), Malloy, Courtney (committee member)

Creator Email karollu@usc.edu,mskarollu@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-166344

Unique identifier UC11660510

Identifier etd-LuKarol-7397.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-166344 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LuKarol-7397.pdf

Dmrecord 166344

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Lu, Karol

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA