University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Profiles of successful persistence for women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)

(USC Thesis Other)

Profiles of successful persistence for women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM
PROFILES OF SUCCESSFUL PERSISTENCE FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS (STEM)
by
Rosa G. Wilkins-Langie

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 2016

Copyright 2016 Rosa G. Wilkins-Langie

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 2

PROFILES OF SUCCESSFUL PERSISTENCE FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS (STEM)
by
Rosa G. Wilkins-Langie

A Dissertation Presented

in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

2016

APPROVED:

___________________________________
Alan Green, Ph.D.
Committee Chair

____________________________________
Reynaldo Baca, Ph.D.
Committee Member

_____________________________________
Nicole MacCalla, Ph.D.
Committee Member
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 3

ABSTRACT
In the last three decades, there has been a growing concern regarding the dearth of Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) degree attainment for women. Women are
considered the untapped resource with an affinity towards STEM fields; however, they tend to be
absent in higher education commencements across the country. After nearly 30 years for a call
to action by economists, scientists, workforce organizations, and the government, this disparity is
chronically pervasive in these academic disciplines. Women entering into STEM fields are seen
as crucial as it ensures the continuation of intellectual capital – the 21st century commodity
needed for global competitiveness and strong economy. The study’s impetus was to understand
those women who, despite the historical and modern barriers have maneuvered to success
through the STEM pipeline from undergraduate degree procurement to career. This success has
been daunting for all women, due to their historical educational legacy of sexism. However,
some have had even a greater challenge to achievement due to the intersectionality of
experiences which are layered with systemic barriers of not only a legacy of sexism, but, racism
as well (double-bind). This qualitative study sought to generate a deeper insight of double-bind,
female’s persistence in STEM pursuits of degree attainment into their career entrance. An
extension of Padilla’s (2009) Expertise Model of Student Success (EMSS) framed the STEM
graduates as the experts to produce the Graduate Success Profiles (GSP). The lens of this study
utilized critical and sociocultural theories to examine this phenomenon and remove the historic
opacity and discover the emancipatory attributes surrounding female STEM attainments. The
study discussed how eight female STEM graduate career professionals successfully maneuvered
through the obstacles of STEM degree to career. Included in this study, were findings related to
challenges in integration, normative content, socialization processes, and resource motifs.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 4

Dedication
This work is dedicated to Rosalie and Jalen –
Great women before me and that will be after me

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest thanks for my amazing husband (Louis) and daughter
(Jalen) for their unwavering and tireless support, patience, and love every day. You are the best
cheerleaders anyone could ever have. You both inspire me in some way daily. Thank you for
being there for me, listening, and making me laugh. I could not have accomplished this without
you.
My sincerest gratitude to all my family members (especially Marsha, Brenda, Kevin), my
friends (Stephanie, Darlene, Janet, Crystal), and collegiate sisters Nea and Laura for your
exhortation and faith in me in difficult moments. I appreciate your time and words of wisdom
more than you will ever know.
My deepest appreciation to my co-chairs (Dr. Green and Dr. Baca) and committee
member (Dr. MacCalla), for your diligent attention to this work, as well as your brilliance and
expertise that continued to make me delve deeper and challenge myself in ways I didn’t know
possible. Thank you for sharing your excellence with me.
Many thanks to Dr. Felina Castillo who took the time at a social event to listen and
deeply discuss the rantings of a woman she didn’t know about wanting to purse a doctorate and
produce work on women in STEM. Your dedication to educate others, inside or outside of
academia settings, cultivated the path, journey, and now accomplishment of my work.
Most importantly, my deepest thanks to all the women who shared their triumphs,
struggles, tears, and joy in this study. Your voices and stories are invaluable. Thank you for
your honesty, directness, and transparency.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ....................................................................................................................3
Dedication ................................................................................................................4
Acknowledegments ..................................................................................................5
List of Tables ...........................................................................................................8
List of Figures ..........................................................................................................9
List of Appendices .................................................................................................10
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .....................................................................11
Background and Problem Content .............................................................13
Statement of the Problem ...........................................................................18
Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................20
Methodology ..............................................................................................21
Research Questions ....................................................................................22
Theoretical Framework ..............................................................................23
Significance of the Study ...........................................................................25
Limitations and Delimitation .....................................................................27
Definition of Study Terms .........................................................................27
Chapter Two: Literature Review ...........................................................................29
Critical and Socio-Cultural Perspectives ...................................................29
Overview of Literature: Moving Forward by Looking Back at
Female Education...........................................................................31
Historical Female Educational Legacy ......................................................34
21st Century Legacy Resultants in STEM Education................................40
Summary ....................................................................................................53
Chapter Three: Methodology .................................................................................58
Conceptualizing Female Success in the STEM Pipeline ...........................60
Sampling and Populations..........................................................................64
Research Questions ....................................................................................65
Data Collection and Analysis.....................................................................66
Chapter Four: Findings ..........................................................................................78
Frameworks and Literature Context ..........................................................80
Research Questions and Design .................................................................84
Taxonomic Graduate Success Profile (GSP) for Women in STEM ..........85
Overcoming Barriers to Success – Integration ..........................................86
Knowledge Exemplars for Integration Success .........................................96
Overcoming Barriers to Success – Drives ...............................................103
Knowledge Exemplars for Drive Success (Normative) ...........................107
Knowledge Exemplars for Drive Success (Socialization
Processes) .....................................................................................114
Overcoming Barriers to Success – Supports ............................................117
Knowledge Exemplars for Supports Success ..........................................120
Overcoming Barriers to Success – Skills Transferred to
Careers through Exemplars (GSP) ...............................................123
Conclusion ...............................................................................................127
Chapter Five: Discussion .....................................................................................131
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 7

Summary of Findings ...............................................................................133
Implications for Practice ..........................................................................137
Recommendation for Research ................................................................141
Conclusion ...............................................................................................143
References ............................................................................................................146

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 8

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Unfolding Matrix for Assessing Heuristic Knowledge of Women
who Successfully Graduated in STEM Disciplines and Continued
through the Pipeline to Enter STEM Careers .........................................68
Table 2. SOC STEM Limited Higher Ed STEM Majors and Occupations ...........79
Table 3. Taxonomy of Barriers Overcame by STEM Women
Undergraduates: Category Integration ....................................................88
Table 4. Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates:
Category Integration ...............................................................................98
Table 5. Taxonomy of Barriers for STEM Women Undergraduates:
Category Drives - Normative ................................................................104
Table 6. Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates:
Category Drives ...................................................................................110
Table 7. Taxonomy of Barriers for STEM Women Undergraduates:
Category Drives – Socialization Process (Cont’d.) ..............................111
Table 8. Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates:
Category Drives ....................................................................................116
Table 9. Taxonomy of Barriers for STEM Women Undergraduates:
Category Supports .................................................................................118
Table 10. Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates:
Category Supports .................................................................................122
Table 11. Women in STEM Barrier Exemplars in Graduate Success
Profile (GSP) .......................................................................................127
Table 12. Women in STEM Knowledge Exemplars in Graduate Success
Profile (GSP) .......................................................................................129

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 9

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Literature Library Tree ...........................................................................57
Figure 2: Black Box Conceptualization of Female STEM Students’
Experiences in College .........................................................................62
Figure 3: Wordle Barrier Exemplar – Integration..................................................89
Figure 4: Wordle Barrier Exemplar – Drive (Normative Content) ......................105
Figure 5: Wordle Barrier Exemplar Frequency – Drive (Socialization
Process) .................................................................................................112
Figure 6: Wordle Barrier Exemplars – Supports – (Resources) ..........................119
Figure 7: Wordle Barrier Exemplar (Frequencies) ..............................................130

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 10

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Table A1 Detailed STEM Occupations and Standard
Occupational Classification (SOC) ................................................161

Table A2 Detailed STEM Undergraduate Majors ........................162

Appendix B: Information/Facts Sheet for Exempt Non-Medical
Research ........................................................................................163

Appendix C: Tandem (Focus) Group Interview Guide .......................................165

Appendix D: Qualitative Survey .........................................................................170

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 11

CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Intellectual capital is a crucial commodity in order for the United States to maintain
stability and continue advancement in this global world that is increasingly propelled by
knowledge in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM; National Science
Foundation, 2014). STEM education is profoundly connected to our nation’s economic and
workforce tenacity, as well as our national security. “STEM intellectual capital is the group of
individuals with education and prowess in science and technology who use those talents to
benefit the nation” (Smith, 2011, p. 190). The intellectual capital STEM education provides to
our country are scientists and engineers for research and economic development, technology
workers for our science-based and technological workforce demands, and knowledge to citizens
as voters who can comprehensively make decisions for policies and perform civic duties to
improve the environments in which they live. These are essential elements to maintain and
strengthen our infrastructure in this progressive world at large. Additionally, STEM education is
needed individually. American’s new 21st millennium requires individuals to possess skillsets
that are increasingly more scientific and technological and have the ability to connect them to
health, environment, or technology for both personal and political voting choices. As a result,
the impetus of STEM education is to increase STEM literacy regardless of one’s selection in
vocation or occupation.
STEM literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific and mathematical
concepts and processes currently needed for personal decision-making, participation in civic and
cultural affairs, and economic productivity for all individuals (Lan, Hale, Rivers, 2015).
However, factors such as changing immigration patterns, developing countries improvements in
education and economies, and competition for the talented in both developing and developed
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 12

countries have made drastic changes in the advantages once held in American education. As a
result to these changes and the global economic and national safety implications surrounding
STEM, it has become vital to seek out highly talented individuals in order to keep the United
States competitive.
Throughout this search for America’s STEM talent it has been well documented that
women have been historically underrepresented in STEM disciplines and the workforce. It has
been noted that the demographics within women as a group have produced constraints in STEM
fields based on the intersectionality of sex (single bind) and sex and ethnicity (double bind)
(Malcom, Hall, Brown, 1976; Ong, Wright, Espinosa, & Orfield, 2011). And although there is a
proliferation of literature directed towards women as the resource needed, as well as their lack of
attainment in STEM, there is limited scholarly work that addresses the historical constraints
intersectionality produces –as it relates to sex and ethnicity (dual minority statuses) and
documented counter narratives that focus on women’s ability to maneuver through the pipeline
to STEM success despite these complexities. For the purpose of this study, “status” is the
societal positioning or placement of an individual. In this study, it is “ascribed” meaning it is an
assigned position one is given at birth, involuntarily. However, each status ascribed provides
guidelines for how individuals are to act, feel, and provides limits of what can and cannot be
done. From each status individuals hold in society, the person will receive assigned “roles” that
dictates appropriate behavior, obligations, and privileges which are attached to a status (Henslin,
2010).
Regardless to one’s status or role in society the function of education is to teach
knowledge and skills, and to be the gatekeeper of credentialing (Henslin, 2010). Educational
pathways are the pipelines that can open and close opportunities for males or females for jobs,
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 13

income, and into the global economy. Unfortunately, research reflects that educational
institutions are not producing enough STEM graduates, especially women, to keep up with the
labor market pace of the 21st century (Mickittrick, Langdon, & Julian, 2011; President’s Council
of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2010). Businesses, educators, and economist cite
women as being considered the untapped source needed to double the STEM graduates in order
to keep our country internationally competitive (Ong et al., 2009; Reid, 2008). Therefore, it is
imperative for educators and policy makers to cultivate, develop, and sustain learning pathways
that will successfully support current and future female STEM student’s pursuits. In order to
accomplish this task, there must be an assurance of access and an understanding of ways women
persist and their maneuvering tactics through the STEM undergraduate pipeline into STEM
careers. As diversity continues to proliferate nationwide, increases in the collegiate population
of ethnically- and gender-diverse students are imminent. Trends project increase will create
continual changes in the postsecondary landscape in the United States (Cole & Barber, 2003).
Governmental, economy, and scientific experts consistently affirmed, if the United States does
not increase diverse population into the STEM pipeline, America will be jeopardizing industries
that drive our economy, our ability to prevent threats through scientific and technological
innovations, and the country’s overall well-being (Malcolm, Chubin, & Jesse, 2004).
Background and Problem Context
There continues to be a growing concern regarding the lack of Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) degree attainment for women. After nearly 30 years for a
call to action by economists, scientists, workforce organizations, and the government, this
disparity is chronically pervasive and the reproduction of the status quo is omnipresent in these
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 14

academic disciplines. Although some strides have been made in these fields for females, there is
still a long way to go in bridging the gap for this problem.
The National Center for Education Statistics (2012) confirmed that college
commencements across the nation are strikingly marked by the lack of women obtaining
undergraduate degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Due to
this dearth in degree attainment it is not surprising that roughly only 7% of women are in the
STEM workforce (National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education;
NCES, 2012). The recent data reflected on average that 3.7 million degrees are annually
awarded, of a bachelor’s or higher, from a STEM field of study. Yet, about only 14% of these
STEM graduates are females (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012). Single bind
women (assigned as Angelo women) reflect 11% attainment for undergraduate STEM degrees in
computer science and math, engineering, physical and life sciences (NCES, 2012; National
Science Foundation (NSF, 2013). These STEM categories are based on the STEM Occupations
and Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) (see Appendix A) and, therefore, excludes
psychology and social sciences in degree attainment which are more elevated attainment levels
of around 7% inclusively for all women (NCES, 2012; NSF, 2013). In the last 20 years, women
overall have made most noticeable gains in STEM fields in psychology and some in biosciences;
however, only very limited gains (11% attainment based on SOC) have been made in the areas
that are needed to fortify intellectual capital for the US (NCES, 2012; NSF, 2013).
Further, analysis of demographic information on undergraduate STEM degree
achievement reveals a slightly smaller representation of those who are considered double-bind
women. Women assigned as African-American, Hispanic, and Native American earned around
9% of undergraduate degrees in STEM degrees (NSF, 2013). Those assigned as Asian or Pacific
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 15

Islander women faired best at 22% in undergraduate STEM degree attainment. These gains for
this group has been primarily seen in one area, biosciences. However as stated with all women,
there is an increase in achievement in the social sciences in political science, sociology, and
elevated gains psychology. Regardless of ethnicity, bind type or small strides made one fact is
apparent, STEM degree attainment needs to increase for all women in diverse STEM disciplines
and not just a few. It is imperative that gender gaps as well as industry gaps be closed in order to
build intellectual capital. Despite the fact there are Title IX laws and policies that ensure equity
in education, including STEM access for both males and females, these gaps and polarizations in
fields have persisted for several decades (Mickittrick, et al., 2011; National Center for Education
Statistics, 2012).
Literature on women experiences in STEM give some insight to the educational
landscape women must maneuver in STEM field. There are copious discussions that reflect that
due to the historical authority by white males, education’s academic environment is still
unreceptive and produces a culture and norms that adversely effects women (Cartwright, 1983;
Harding, 1986; Harraway, 1991; Traweek, 1988). Likewise, there are discussions within the
STEM communities (e.g. research, development, academic, and technologies) about the adverse
effects on women’s identities, as well as the intersectionality of ethnicity, sex, and gender
complexities that surface as women confront compounded forms of oppressions (Zinn & Dill,
1996; Maher & Tetreault, 1994). These types of exclusions in communities is additionally
contributed to the limited resources, tools, and strategies for women, since they are basically left
out of these communities and networks (Shain, 2011). As a result, full integration and
acceptance have been very difficult for women in STEM communities and fields.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 16

Other discourse in association with the tentacles of “binds” for women in STEM is the
specific climate of the environs. Much of the post-secondary and workforce literature is
cognizant of the coldness and lack of belongingness for women in STEM fields (Carlone &
Johnson, 2007; National Research Council, NRC, 2006). It is noted that interactions for women
within the STEM communities facilitate in cultivating a women’s individual identity either
positively or negatively. Interpersonal relationships are essential to her social and personal
development as well as her intrapersonal processes (Weidman, 1989) whereby these integrations
create legitimacy for her as an academic and social member in the STEM community.
There is much conversation regarding how the environment is plagued often with
microaggressions, marginations, stereotypes, and alienation for women in STEM (Brown, S.,
1994; Joseph, 2007). These are fueled by the historical power and privilege dynamics that is
attached to the belief of white male superiority in STEM (as well as other “hard’ disciplines) and
played out in everyday practices (MacLachlan, 2006). These types of environs, as well as formal
and informal interactions for women, are seen as negatively affecting performance for STEM
degree attainment and stifle persistence for women in STEM, especially those who have a
double-bind (Allan & Madden, 2006; Johnson, A. C., 2007; Justin-Johnson, 2004; Ong et al.,
2011; Sosnowski, 2002, Valenzuela, 2006). These women, by having no social ties or
integration, often increase their isolation which negatively impacts the ability to persist.
Other dialogue denotes social and cultural factors that frame as to why there is such a
persistence disparity for women. There are copious implications around structural and cultural
problems that disconnect females from these academic fields (National Coalition for Women and
Girls in Education, 2011). Values and ideologies embedded in normative content, functions,
integration, and socialization processes that create pressures (Weidman, 1989; Ong et al., 2011).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 17

In general, most of the discussions persist on female failure to remain and attain in STEM
disciplines. Most conversations reflect the onus resides with females who have a lack of
persisters, deficits, dearth in motivation, and/or initiative as a student (Xu, 2008). Limited
counter narratives, juxtaposed, as Bensimon (2005) give alternative insight that inequality in
educational outcomes can be a problem due to the institutional actors including faculty,
administrators, counselors, and others instead of a student’s learning ability, which viewpoint is
typically supported. Additionally, there is a tenacity of disparity in educational outcomes for
groups who have been historically discriminated against in higher education, which would
include women. Traditionally, female disenfranchisement in academia was imbued in power and
social structures. Critical theorists (Darder, 1991; Freire, 1971, 1998; Giroux, 1997; Lopez,
2003, MacLaren, 1994) contended that failure for minorities within academia is not a surprising
phenomenon due to power and social structures, nor is it one that can be addressed without
transformation in society and school organizations. Thus, they argued underachievement is the
product of a society that differentially structures access to resources.
By all appearances, college STEM doors are open to women (Chanderbhan-Forde,
Heppner, & Borman, 2012). However, closer examination revealed STEM educational doors
have been historically built with a “sex-based filter” for achievement (Blickenstaff, 2005).
Despite Title IX policies, access, and support given to women, it is well documented that
traditionally women have been disconnected from the STEM learning community through
negative cultural clueing, social-psychological influences, and a chilly climate (Erwin &
Maurutto, 1998; Whalen & Shelley, 2010). These factors, among others, have been noted as
emergent contributors and construct conceptual framework to female failure in obtaining a
degree in this discipline and the completion lag to chronically ensue.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 18

There are so many divergent explanations for female persistence failure; however, there
is limited information on ways these women have overcome many of these chronic obstacles,
documentation of their maneuvering strategies utilized to address these external and internal
issues in persistence, and their driving contributors to maintaining their STEM pursuits directly
from the women who have advanced through the pipeline. Further, there is need for a
comprehensive understanding of this phenomenon to be connected in the discourse to the well
documented outcomes of adverse performance to better inform various administrations in
decision making, educational and policy development, program design, and to increase
performance for women in STEM. With so much ambiguity and complexities in the STEM data,
studying women in higher education is prominent priority. Overall, the generation of more
knowledge to better understand their persistence success and what specifically women are
utilizing, can facilitate in their advancement in STEM disciplines, which can ultimately
strengthen our economy and national security through their STEM contributions.
Statement of the Problem
Historically, women in higher education STEM disciplines claims of equity and
excellence have been juxtaposed. It has been well documented that the accepted societal
ideologies towards females in higher education has revolved around differences between men
and women in ability. Women were deemed unfit for serious academic pursuits (Bowen,
Kurzweil, Tobin, 2005; Lucas, 1994). For more than a century, there has been fierce debate over
whether admitting a student from different backgrounds threatens established verities, social
mores, and the educational quality (Bowen et al. 2005). These perceived differences which are
residuals from traditional ideologies have contributed in today’s disparities for women in STEM.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 19

For over 100 years, males were allowed the privilege of higher education, before
permitting women into the doors (Lucas, 1994). Most ideologies constructed on “excellence”
have been ethnocentric and were based upon the cultural knowledge and performance of white
males. Consequently, only their knowledge became the meaning, standard, and measurement of
excellence in performance. When women were allowed to enter into the door of higher
education, it was accompanied with the societal dogma of female stratification which only
guaranteed them limited access of being appropriately prepared for and in collegiate spheres.
It has been well noted historically the American school system has been impacted by
religion which resulted in traditional gender roles and difference, sex segregation, limited
resources and support, male privilege, and power. Regardless of the laws and policies that have
ensued for female inclusion, many of these historical motifs are pervasive within the educational
architecture. Consequently, these historical themes are imbedded into societal normative and
socialization processes, reflective in values and ideologies, and an outcome of educational
performance. These salient legacy patterns from the past can be seen as present day variables by
the observation of the challenges in gender integration in STEM fields, need for resources and
support, gender role differences, stratification in educational institutions, and social and cultural
dynamics that inhibit the persistence of women in STEM.
Due to the historic background of this problem, this study, unlike most studies,
emphasizes the historical content as the foundational guide of how females’ social placement and
“status” or positioning in society has impacted their educational pursuits for centuries. The
history and sociology of education for females are important guides for this study. Consequently,
this foundational guide has been consciously included in order to fully understand the breadth
and depth of the female experience in educational fields that are male dominated. Most studies
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 20

discuss the female plight in STEM from middle school, often without contextual foundation of
how this phenomenon transpired and continues to proliferate in our educational structures. For
this reason, in addition to building a narrative of women’s success in STEM, in order to not
minimize their experience, this study acknowledges over time and space the challenges to
persistence due to America’s female educational legacy of “placement” of women within the
educational structure which have rendered these “residuals” that are impediments and pitfalls
which contribute to the lack of females of STEM degree attainment for today’s modern times.
The work builds upon the thematic historical context of the residuals from the past that after
centuries contribute and remain in our educational system. Moreover, due to the female
positioning within the educational structure, the historical residuals become the variables for
modern examination for the study. These variables intersect at race, ethnicity, and sex (which
are also historical tenements) and attempt to remove the opacity of the impact and outcomes for
women in education, especially in male-dominated fields such as STEM.
Purpose of the Study
The impetus of this work is to compile data that will produce profiles and strategies
utilized by women who have successfully procured an undergraduate STEM degree and
progressed into a STEM vocation within the last three years of degree attainment. Since there is
such an emphasis on persistence failure of women in STEM there are gaps in female persistence
success. This study will build on research abjuring from models that marginalizes and makes the
onus rest on the underserved students. Research tends to focus on underrepresented student’s
deficit and not achievements (Rodriguez, 1997). Further, for the last two decades there has been
a plethora of information on the adverse effects social and institutional factors have on
underrepresented student advancement. The existing deficit in literature is the dearth in
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 21

knowledge of how some of these marginalized students succeed despite impediments and
adverse contributors (Rodriguez, 1977, p. 16).
Although it is extremely important to understand all women’s struggles in STEM,
especially due to the daunting numbers in STEM degree attainment and overarching needs for
this nation’s stability, this study will not focus on women with a single bind (sex), but, rather
those who have a double bind (sex and ethnicity) in overcoming obstacles in the STEM pipeline
from college to career. Double bind females were selected as a group for the study due to their
seemingly shared ethnic family structure in kinship design and collectivism (Taylor et al., 1997;
Hatchett & Jackson, 1993; Kibria, 1994; Vega, 1995; Wilkinson, 1993). Additionally,
sociologists state individuals facing more than one minority status (sex and race) may have more
barriers to advancement or face “double jeopardy” (Henslin, 2010). Having more than one
minority status can increase disproportionately exposure to various forms of discrimination.
Selecting this group gives opportunity to examine women with multiple minority statuses, which
is different than examining other minorities who have one minority bind (e.g. non-Angelo males
or Angelo women). Women with a single bind have a distinct experience in that ethnically their
experience is supported emotionally and cultivated by the dominant group; thus, they do not
have the obstacle of race/ethnicity to maneuver.
Methodology
The rationale for qualitative methodology selection is that it is the most compatible with
the research inquiry. Since the research questions are descriptive in nature, it requires qualitative
data collection to address and guide the enquiry. As a result, the research needs to be led by
using qualitative research characteristics that employ collections in natural settings, using the
researcher as an instrument, inductive data analysis, seek the participant’s perspective for
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 22

meanings, and have a flexible emergent research design (Creswell, 2013; Hatch, 2002; Marshall
& Rossman, 2011). Using qualitative design allows for exploration of this issue through a
process orientation, reflectivity, and holistic accounts. All of these characteristics would be
required to produce a rich narrative description for a new examination in order to generate a
deeper understanding of female persistence success in STEM.
Qualitative investigation allows for facilitating in obtaining an authentic perspective and
meanings directly from the female STEM students. The interviews contribute to generating the
knowledge regarding this issue as information is procured from students about their thoughts,
feelings, opinions, and what could not be observed (Patton, 2002). In order to shed light on these
women’s stories and create narrative of STEM success, the unfolding matrix technique will be
utilized (Padilla, 1994). This technique facilitates in framing the research problem into well-
formed research questions (WFRQs) and structure the collection of pertinent data. This
technique will facilitate in bounding the data collection and build the typologies and concept
development for a deep narrative of women STEM experiences. It was also necessary to use an
interview instrument that had highly structured open-ended questions to probe and have a deeper
understanding of this issue. The unfolding matrix enables the expansion of the base of
experiences of the interviewees, therefore, capturing multiple features present in the
phenomenon that are often invisible. Neither quantitative nor mixed methods would allow the
needed flexibility or deep probing required for this research inquiry.
Research Questions
The proposed questions for this study were to generate a deeper understanding of female
persistence in the STEM disciplines. The questions need a design that will evolve and is fluid in
order to probe for data. Based on the research questions, this was a descriptive study. Although
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 23

there is literature on this subject matter of women and STEM, there is a limited amount of data
that explores it from the female STEM student’s viewpoint. As a result, to get a more
comprehensive understanding of female STEM student persistence, this study utilized a
qualitative phenomenology approach. This inquiry focuses on the lived experience and voice of
the female STEM student. The study looked for the commonalities for the level of analysis and
not variance, to build a collective profile from eight female STEM graduates (two from each
field) who have been in a STEM career for up to three years.
The construct of these research questions align with the qualitative methods, as it sought
to discover, uncover, and seek to explore for knowledge (Pineda, 2014). The main research
questions that guide this case study are as follows:
1. How do women experience their STEM undergraduate University residence?
2. What drives female STEM students to persist to degree completion in STEM settings?
3. What supports do women in STEM utilize to successfully maneuver for achievement in
their undergraduate University incumbency?
4. What skill set has been developed in higher education to continue persistence into the
STEM occupational pipeline?
Theoretical Framework
Many of the concepts revolve around elements of social capital of females, effective
female-based mentoring for male dominated discipline, female role-models, supportive services,
and financial resources. Other thematic concepts circle around gender, Discourse/discourse, and
faculty. Consequently, these areas often overlap, intersect, and link within institutional, social,
and cultural backdrops and architecture. However, due to their saturation in research, these areas
were not the focus of this inquiry. Understanding these connections are important in order to
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 24

facilitate in successful female maneuvering for STEM degree achievement. However, like many
of these topics, the underpinnings were related to a particular framework and were discussed as
they relate to the research question. As a result, to better discover these dynamics related to
STEM persistence the theoretical framework of critical and sociocultural theories was utilized as
guides for this work.
Brookfield’s (2001, 2002, 2005a, 2005b) critical theory framework explained that the
core of adult learning is understanding how adults learn to recognize the predominance of
ideology in daily actions and thoughts and from societal institutions. Brookfield’s model
reflected learning tasks for female development should challenge every day ideologies,
contesting hegemony and unmask power. Additionally, Brookfield’s (2005b) theory would
implore that females overcome alienation by not allowing manipulation of their creative power,
reclaim their reason by deciding their values to live all spheres of life, and finally practice
democracy, knowing it is a partially functioning ideal as it relates to equity.
Learning does not happen in an isolated vacuum (Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner,
2007). Critical and sociocultural theories align with this inference. The learner often learns in
their intimate world they are related to and become affected by their society (Jarvis, 1987).
Socio-cultural context which includes elements such as race, class, gender, ethnicity, and sexual
orientation influence development and learning due to societal constructs. People are not
separate from context in which they live, but are a part of it. Learning is holistic, consequently,
meanings and development is affected by the intersection of the mind, body, and sociocultural
influences.
Culture shapes what people think about and what skills they can obtain based on those
thoughts. Culture denotes the time of which individuals can participate in certain activities and
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 25

who is allowed to do which activities. Theorists from critical theory and sociocultural models
stress the importance of examining the historical aspect as a factor that contour an individual’s
development (Horkheimer & Adorno, 2007; Tennant & Pogson, 1995). According to these
paradigms, an individual’s development and learning (results in their performance) comes from
the social context in which it occurs, including the socio-historical development. Adult learning
and development cannot be understood apart from socio-historical context that it occurs. As a
result, these frameworks are essential to investigating the female student’s meaning, making
processes and context as outlined in the research questions ways to help generate knowledge to
persist in STEM. Both model’s features will be utilized as to examine the conceptual layers of
the inquiry questions and discovery of substructures in female persistence.
En bloc, understanding these conceptual relationships and associations for possible
strategies in addressing the dearth in female STEM attainment is vital. Additionally, this
generation of knowledge of female STEM persistence could facilitate for informing U.S. college
goals for persistence in STEM degree attainment, creating an equitable educational system, as
well as assisting the global economy and workforce with strong STEM workers that could keep
America competitive in the 21st century.
Significance of the Study
It is apparent that there is an unquestionable relationship between the STEM educational
system that teaches the next generation’s scientists and innovators and the nation’s global
leadership (National Academy of Sciences, 2007; President’s Council of Advisors on Science
and Technology, 2010). In 2009, President Obama launched “Educate to Innovate” to increase
STEM fields and cultivate STEM literacy (Obama, 2009). Additionally, in 2010, the President
initiated a STEM initiative that awarded funding to increase the number of STEM graduates.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 26

This initiative and funding were in response to the looming economic STEM demands that if not
rectified could adversely impact the country’s financial well-being. Since the educational
mechanisms have been unable to produce a large enough pool of credentialed individuals, which
must include women (Burke & Mattis, 2007) in order to meet the current and future demands,
their funding awards may be affected. As a result, educational STEM allocations (local, state,
federal) could be returned to funding sources, or reduced, resulting in a loss of financial support
to academic institutions for STEM disciplines.
Another disconcerting issue that face women is that if the lack of attainment continues,
females will remain disenfranchised as degree completers and untapped as a source. As a result,
women will continue to be disconnected from an academic community and from an industry that
is filled with social and economic opportunities, as STEM jobs tend to net 33% more income
than non-STEM jobs (Beede et al., 2011, p. 1). Additionally, if solutions are not found, women
would not be included in policies related to those fields and their perspective absent in decision-
making and academia (Ong et al., 2009).
It is evident that the lack of female degree attainment in STEM can have unfavorable
overreaching consequences and, therefore, imperative to understand ways women successfully
persist. First, the deficient reflects on the U.S. educational institution’s ability or ineptness to
produce female STEM degree completers, in a time that is imperative to the country’s economy.
Second, if higher learning institutions are unable to produce or increase female STEM graduates,
thereby not expanding the pool for STEM demand, the result can be a loss of funding in
academia. Additionally, the nation’s economic well-being could be affected as an outcome from
not meeting the country’s STEM demand. Lastly, for women, if the disparity is not addressed,
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 27

this could mean being estranged from the STEM academic community, limited voice in policy,
and decreasing female chances for social mobility and economic stability.
Limitations and Delimitations
Reflection, as a technique for inquiry brings awareness of the disadvantages and
advantages I have from my background that may shape this work. A disadvantage to this work
could be any female-based proclivities I may have (since I am a woman) when interpreting data.
Any biases reflected could impact the study’s validity and not be considered value free. What
can be viewed as an advantage in this work is I have over a decade of experience working with a
myriad of partners in workforce development as a manager, higher education as an educator, and
participant on STEM boards. This intrinsic and extrinsic knowledge (higher education and
workforce development) can facilitate having a broader perspective than other researchers might
reflecting in this work. Having the knowledge and access could facilitate in the development of
new, outside collaborations and partnerships to perhaps build models that are asset-based for
comprehensive, successful STEM pipeline development.
Definition of Study Terms
In copious research, the words “persistence” and “retention” are often used
interchangeably. The National Center for Education Statistics (2009), however, differentiates the
terms by using “retention” as an institutional measure and “persistence” as a student measure.
Since understanding persistence is considered a student matter, the student’s perspective is
essential to grok the complexity of this prolix attainment gap issue.
Likewise, the terms “navigation” and “maneuvering” are reciprocally utilized in copious
research regarding women and STEM persistence. However, the Latin words navigatus or
navigare – navigate means “to sail a ship” and the other manū operā re – maneuvering means
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 28

“work by hands.” One word evokes a picture of sailing around, on, and through waters with a
compass and direction. The other infers the use of someone’s hands related to their power or
possession that is adroit, tactical, and careful in movement in skillful way. There is movement
for both; however, maneuvering involves going “into” tactical modes which prepares for
difficulty, which must be confronted without the option of sailing around, on, or going through.
If the classroom poses a chilly environment for females, there is no circumventing it since it is in
the environment and in the path to attainment. It is hand-to-hand, without the protection of a
ship or airplane or mechanism. There is no concrete direction in attempting to successfully deal
with the difficulty in front of you. Perhaps in this setting males navigate having tools; however,
it may be necessary for females to maneuver.
Given that research affirms there are significant systemic obstacles to STEM
achievement, no real compass, nor proven mechanism that is a one-size-fits-all remedy, it
becomes vital to observe not only what is working for achievement, but, what females may have
done that have been tactical maneuvering to give themselves advantages that have resulted in
their attainment when so many others fail. As a result, in order to look deeper and generate more
knowledge in how women persist in STEM, the focus will be on how they maneuver and not
navigate. With this clarity noted, the next chapter focuses on empirical research in literature that
will form this study.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 29

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
In order to generate knowledge on how female students may successfully persist in
STEM disciplines, pervasive historical contributors to the gaps, the content in which female
students move must be included to best frame their modern experiences and stories. This
alternative narrative must include the lens of how women have been and are seen by others
which are trajectories for maneuvering and must be comprehensively examined (Ong et al.,
2011). As reflected previously, there are copious literature conversations on the female plight
and deficiency in STEM degree attainment; however, it renders limited explanation as to why
this phenomenon exists or shapes female know-how. Likewise, understanding the historical
journey and intersectionality of the female experience holistically can shed light on these very
complex dynamics to better gleam their realization. By going backwards to move forward in
examination, there can be effective progress made due to having a comprehensive understanding
of this prolix and omnipresent problem.
Critical and Socio-Cultural Perspectives
Due to the nature of reflexivity of the study, it was necessary to utilize critical and
sociocultural theories that could frame and give credibility and value in structuring the historical
content for this study, as well as the need for inclusion of the structural power and cultural
dynamics in the female experience. In this study, the critical theory approach sought what was
problematic by excavating the surface of everyday life and uncovering the social conditions,
assumptions, and opacities that prevent full understanding of the phenomena’s workings. It
looked at the totality of society for women in STEM within its historical specificity and how it
came to be at this point and time in its current social reality. Critical social scientists believe that
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 30

it is necessary to understand the lived experience of real people in their context (Collins, 1991;
Welton, 1993).
Critical scholarship in this study allowed for the interpretation of the acts and the symbols
of society in order to understand the ways in which various social groups are oppressed and to
create alternative narratives of emancipation through their triumphs (Brookfield (2001, 2002,
2005a, 2005b). Littlejohn (1992) explained the nature of critical thought as theory that calls to
action positive change through critical search for those oppressed and/or as in this study
underrepresented:
This means that understanding the ways one is oppressed enables one to take action to
change oppressive forces. Critical social science makes a conscious attempt to fuse
theory and action. Critical theories are thus normative; they serve to bring about change
in the conditions that affect our lives. By definition, criticism involves the application of
principles or values in order to make judgments for the purpose of bringing about positive
change. (para. 1 and items 3 and 4 below)

Additionally, the sociocultural perspective in this study cements the value of the
historical, as well as the socio and cultural lens to understand women struggles to advance in
STEM fields. As stated previously in Chapter One, people cannot be understood aside from
these contexts, these contexts are a part of them and sociocultural elements such as race, class,
gender, and ethnicity have significant impact on adult development (Merriam, 2009). Berk &
Winsler (1995) stated,
The basic premise in sociocultural theory is that ‘all human, higher forms of mental
activity are derived from social and cultural contexts and are shared by members of those
contexts because these mental processes are adaptive [Chaiklin & Lave, 1993; Cole,
1996; Cole & Engestrom, 1994; Leontiev, 1981; Vygotsky, 1931/1997).] They lead to
knowledge and skills that are essential [necessary] for success within a particular
culture.’ (p. 12)

Individuals learn through their culture and are changed by it, as well as the culture being changed
through the members of that culture (Rogoff, 2003).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 31

Both critical and sociocultural theories through the aforementioned elements provide the
reader of this study with a complimentary lens that provide a framework to support and echo
women’s historical and modern educational journeys and experiences. These perspectives can
give insight for practice (on macro levels and micro interactions), generate knowledge of female
students’ in STEM authentic experience, understand the workings and strategies for
achievement, and offer remedy for this chronic call to action by our nation’s experts.
Overview of Literature: Moving Forward by
Looking Back at Female Education
This literature review discusses the historical legacy for females in American education
to the resultants of STEM challenges in their 21st century performance. It links historic social
facts to recent studies for observation and enquiry. Durkheim (1895; 1982) defined social facts
as a category of facts with distinctive characteristics. Social facts consist of ways of acting,
feeling and thinking. It is external to the individual and endowed with a power of coercion by
means of which they control. Additionally, this review is from a macro perspective, the broad
features of social structure influencing behavior; and micro in scope, examining the social
interactions in everyday life. Both sides are needed to gleam a holistic and critical approach to
fully understand female experiences in persistence.
The literature review provides the historical context of the resultants that after centuries
contribute and remain in our educational system. These resultants are the outcomes or outputs
that have derived from the historical content of the female’s placement and, or, positioning
within her society connecting to her educational institution and various intersections. The
research review is comprised of two primary sections: (1) Historical Female Educational Legacy
and (2) 21st Century Legacy Resultants in STEM Education. Section One, Legacy, examines
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 32

historically female education gender placement and its influence on their paths to STEM degree
attainment. First, the literature shows the historical aspects of the journey of girls in schools
(Henslin 2010; Lucas, 1994; Madigan, 2009). It will examine how education has been
influenced by aspects of religion, which resulted in America’s traditional gender roles, sex
segregation and gender stratification. These aspects become reflective in educational policies,
practices, and eventually funding eliminations for girls in STEM disciplines. Key factors
discussed are integration based on sex, formation of traditional gender roles, ascribed status,
subordinate placement, alienation, and resources. Second, the literature highlights historically,
the educational architecture adoption of gender placement into its frames through values and
ideologies (Darling-Hammond, 2007; Henslin, 2010; Lucas, 1994; Madigan, 2009; National
Coalition for Women and Girls in Education, 2011). The contents within architectural frames
are often covert. Consequently, a discussion on how these values and ideologies are imbued in
educational normative and socialization processes will be presented. Elements within the
sections include power, privilege, and difference based on gender, male dominance, structural
opacity of power, masculinity and femininity assignments in educational disciplines, and the
educational system of preference (Iverson 2007; Johnson, A. G. 2006; Stanton-Salazar, 1997).
Like traditional gender roles, these elements were an outcome of the religious influence in
education which supported power and differences between males and females, and is the lens by
which the sexes are viewed in value and ideologies.
Section Two, is a discussion of the 21st century legacy resultants in STEM education.
The literature connects the historical aspects to the present-day contributors that play a role in
female STEM persistence. First, the review revisits the previous discussion of the educational
system of preference based on the historical motifs of gender, sex, and race as it relates to
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 33

women in STEM that concluded the previous section. A discussion of the intersectionality of
race in female STEM discipline follows. The intersectionality is built on concepts of the double
bind through Ong’s et al. (2011) extensive six-year study of which examined 40 years of
empirical research on double bind women and their experiences. This will include examining
how the double bind regarding race/ethnicity and sex/gender play a role in performance, identity,
and persistence in STEM attainment (Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Ong et al., 2011).
Race in this study will be defined as a biological myth that exists today with historical
residuals of superiority based on some physical characteristics which assigns a minority status
(Henslin, 2010; Marger, 2009). The minority status of “race” renders women unequal access to
power, privilege, and resources (Bensimon, 2004; Darling-Hammond, 2007; Henslin, 2010;
Johnson, A. G., 2006; Madigan, 2009). This biological myth is linked to racism which is defined
as the belief of one group being superior to others. Although race and racism have been proven
to be non-scientific and not attached to any genetic markers related to one’s ability, it is
nonetheless a historical social construct that is embedded in American culture and a powerful
force with resultants in everyday life historically and in modern times (Goffman, 1959; Henslin,
2010; Marger, 2009). Second, modern contributors linked from the past are examined such as
the intersectionality of race in STEM disciplines, integration challenges in climates, resources,
institutional agents influence on gender, social and cultural ideological factors, and STEM
performance gaps and abilities. As it relates to integrational challenges in climate there is a
discourse on persistence through isolation, alienation, and divergent environments (Giguette,
Lopez, & Schulte, 2006; Lent et al., 2005; Whitten, Foster, & Duncome, 2003; Whitten et al.,
2004). Additionally, this area discusses the ability to maneuver in climates embedded with
traditional gender roles and race in male-dominated disciplines. How resources contribute
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 34

includes an examination of tools, strategies, and programs. It further addresses maneuvering for
support networks that are academic and social. The institutional agents influence on identity
discusses the agents’ role on gender development and role construction, female stereotyping,
marginalization, and microaggressions (Brown, 1994, 2000; Joseph, 2007; MacLachlan, 2006).
Next it will connect social and cultural factors of U.S. core values and ideologies as it relates to
females. And finally, the discussion will conclude with an examination of female STEM
disparities in degree attainment.
Historical Female Educational Legacy
Historical Female Placement in Education
Understanding how females have been positioned in education is an importance factor in
moving women forward in STEM disciplines, as well as other non-traditional or
underrepresented realms. In the historic landscape has been the emergence of traditional gender
roles rooted in sexism which places females in subordinate societal locations, inferior in ability
to males, socially constrained to female domains, and an ascribed status through birth that could
not change these factors, regardless of a woman’s achievements (Henslin, 2010; Lucas, 1994).
Knowing where females educationally began their journey, facilitates in an appropriate
assessment of their current location, and how best to position them for this new era. In
examining the historical aspects in the placement of girls there are two overarching factors. One
factor is the historical aspects of how girls’ journeyed in the American school system to their
position. The other factor is the educational architectural frames, which housed girls’ societal
location through shared values and ideologies regarding women. Regarding the first factor
related to the female journey emerges historic social facts, which focus on past integration based
on sex and gender which has dictated female resources and support. The second factor focuses
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 35

on the establishment of gender placement through education’s architecture via values and
ideologies imbedded in normative everyday life and socialization processes (Weidman, 1989).
Historical Aspects of the American School System: Girls and Schools
Literature associated with the historical aspects for girls and schools observed the
historical journey as it relates to sex and gender role integration and resources. Regarding
integration, the literature weaves together the historical aspects that establishes female gender
roles through religion (Blumenfeld, 2006; Cole & Ahmadi, 2010). Gender roles by definition
produce differences in experiences, by sorting based on sex, and of what is acceptable roles for
males and females in expectations (Henslin, 2010). These differences are considered biological
and, therefore, ascribed. Throughout lower and higher levels of education, these biological
differences become linked with ability intellectually and physically, need for sex separation and
inequity in society, and education (Blumenfeld, 2006; Lucas, 1994). These gender ideologies
made their way into modern policies and laws, which ultimately influence female support and
resources in education today (Darling-Hammond, 2007; National Coalition for Women and Girls
in Education, 2011).
Traditionally, America’s public school system has been influenced by religion
(Blumenfeld, 2006; Cole & Ahmadi, 2010; Madigan, 2009). This historical fact has existed
since the arrival of the Mayflower; the Massachusetts educational system was founded with
Protestants ideologies which were infused with gender role differences. In the 18th century,
boys attended single-gender, home instruction in small groups (dame school models) which
prepared them for town schools (Madigan, 2009; Monaghan, 1988). Eventually, in the 19th
century, girls were permitted to attend “dame schools” at different times, holidays, and seasons
(summer) when boys did not participate (Riordan, 1990). Educational institutions, beyond home
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 36

schools, were usually private, segregated by sex, and usually for the wealthy. Social factors that
influenced girls’ acceptance into school were the growing economy in the colonies that created
the need for girls to have some literacy and the need to understand biblical scripture (Riordan,
1990). In 1850, all states had established government supported schools (elementary and
secondary) to educate all white children regardless of social class (Renzetti & Curran, 2003).
However, children labeled African American were excluded until after the civil war and then
racially segregated, as all the other non-white children that followed into school.
In regards to higher education for women, universities and colleges were more reluctant
to admit women with men. It was not until the 20th century that most colleges became
predominately coeducational. This was also a fact for secondary schools. When women were
admitted, it was believed they were naturally less intelligent than men, which lowers the
academic standard. Additionally, women were more fragile than men; thus, the rigors of higher
education could disrupt their natural constitution, causing illness and disturbance of their uterine
development producing unhealthy children (Lucas, 1994; Renzetti & Curran 2003).
Despite the change to admission, coeducation did not ensure equality of opportunity in
education. In 1918, the Commission of the Reorganization of Secondary Schools created a two
track system. One track steered primarily males towards college preparatory work and women
(Whites and non-White) into the vocational track. Regardless of a girl’s strong academic
achievements, girls were required to take domestic or home economics courses (Tyack &
Hansot, 1992). Through the mid 1960’s, girls were funneled into primarily four occupational
choices: secretarial, nursing, teaching, or motherhood/housewife (Sadker & Sadker, M., 1995).
As a result, in the 21st century these occupations remain saturated predominately by females
(Henslin, 2010).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 37

Title IX of the Educational Amendment Act of 1972 made it illegal to discriminate in
public schools on the basis of sex in school athletics, career counseling, financial aid,
admissions, and treatment of students (Madigan, 2009). In 1974, the passage of the Women’s
Educational Equity Act (WEEA; National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education, 2011)
provided support of the recruitment of girls for math, science, and athletic programs. Educators
were given gender bias training to increase awareness of inequality in curriculum and pedagogy.
However, in the 1980s, WEEA and other federal funding were significantly cut (Darling-
Hammond, 2007; National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education, 2011). The reductions
of funds left a dearth in teachers’ understanding of disparities in science and math academic
delivery for women and girls, which currently affects Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM).
Since colonial times, copious differences in education for males and females have been
structurally imbued into the system, primarily for white, male hegemony (Blumenfeld, 2006).
Although we now have laws and policies to ensure girls are not left behind, the residuals from
differences persist in the structure today. When examining these historical aspects of females’
educational experiences in the United States, it suggests that traditionally there has been
differences in expectations, sex segregation, inequities in opportunities, and limiting access for
females compared to males, due to copious social factors (Bensimon, 2004; Darling-Hammond,
2007; Johnson, A. G., 2006). These conditions have ensued for centuries, leaving women with
vast, achievement gap and educational debt (Darling-Hammond, 2007).
Walls of Power, Privilege, and Differences within the Educational System
Lucas (1994) discussed in detail how traditional gender ideologies and values have been
imbedded into the American educational system. These ideologies created values of power and
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 38

privilege for white males; and differences for white women and non-white minority females.
This led to male-dominance in gender roles and the establishment of white males as superior,
favored, and a natural leader. Consequently, traditional gender roles and males as dominant
seeped into educational structures mostly unnoticed (Blumenfeld, 2006). Henslin (2010) stated
within gender constructs were ascribed status and the assignment of masculinity and femininity
in academic disciplines. Superiority and dominance in academic realms were for males, since
academia was hard, it was therefore masculine; as a result, in health fields for example males
should be doctors. Contrarily, females should be in subordinate fields of less leadership, take
directions, and remain in care giving and femininity disciplines; women should be nurses. The
resultant has been an educational legacy of systematic preference based on race, traditional
gender roles, and sex segregation (Lucas, 1994; Henslin 2010).
As stated previously, the literature asserted many of America’s traditional ideologies
about gender that were placed in the educational structure were derived from Christian values.
Blumenfeld’s (2006) work stated the tentacles of Christianity within a social institution meant
some groups were promoted, whereas, other groups were limited in access, excluded, and
rendered unseen based on one’s social identity and social status. As a result, the structure was to
support the life experiences of those who followed the rules of Christianity. In Christianity,
there was a belief that males were to have dominion, which was the divine ordinance of God.
The resultant was the educational system has been constructed and influenced by the religious
perceptions of white, heterosexual, able, males, which has laid the foundation in the educational
structure of hegemony and advantages for them.
Iverson (2007), A. G. Johnson (2006), and Stanton-Salazar (1997) concurred that
privilege, power, and differences exist in society’s structural design. It is a system that we all
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 39

participate in and maintain. Consequently, norms of privilege, power, and differences emerge
from within the system; access is distributed from it. In the construct of social systems, there is
participation through dominance, identifying with, and centering on the privileged group, who
are considered as superior and deserving. In regards to men and women in education, these
gendered patterns of unequal power are imbedded into paths of least resistance we learn to daily
follow. These paths support a schema, which chronically result in differences between the sexes
and maintenance of power. Johnson stated understanding male dominance in the privilege
system explains why there were fewer females in powerful positions in certain organizations and
their exclusions in various arenas. In a power and privilege structure, women and other
minorities, are often invisible (Blumenfeld, 2006, Johnson, A. G., 2006).
A myriad of research correlates with A. G. Johnson’s (2006) findings which stated
individuals in a position of power and privilege tend to deny and minimize. Regardless of the
call to action to the massive body of research regarding the adverse implications in society for
the lack of women’s attainment of STEM degrees, there is still no urgent response for
transformational change in educational institutions, pass inquiry. Johnson further suggested
those who were of the privileged group tend to interpret the needs of others for them. The
literature asserted within the educational structure there was the ascribing and maintaining of
ideologies that STEM areas were primarily masculine, too difficult for females to understand,
and women really aren’t interested in these disciplines (Henslin, 2010; Ong et al., 2011). Harris
and Edwards (2010) built on this concept that the traditional definition of masculinity was
hegemonic. Thus, the defining of masculinity relied on misogyny as its primary means to
enforce rigid and limited gender norms for men, and consequently, women. Nonetheless,
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 40

research stressed that if females do not achieve in the hegemony structure, she was to blame for
deficiencies or oppression (Freire, 1971, 1993; Johnson, A, G,, 2006).
Finally, by observing the historical legacy for girls in education in literature, it was
evident how placement plays a role in the journey for girls and school, leaving challenges for
integration based on sex and inequity in resources. Further, it was observed how the educational
structure was influenced by the values and ideologies of power and privilege for males and
differences for females in both secondary and post-secondary levels. Thereby constructing a
legacy imbued with systematic preference based on race, gender roles, and sex segregation
throughout the institution of education.
21st Century Legacy Resultants in STEM Education
Legacy contributors influencing female STEM persistence connects the historical
landscape to modern challenges in STEM. This section is a discussion of the system of
preference based on race, sex, and gender in undergraduate STEM disciplines (double bind). It
will include a discussion of the integrational challenges such as climate in persistence,
maneuvering through climates of gender and race. Another key discussion will be about female
STEM resources, tools, and strategies and the role of maneuvering for support networks – both
academic and social. There will also be a discussion on institutional agents’ influence on
identity by examining human development in environment, gender construct roles, and
stereotypes, marginalization, and microaggressions. This section will explore the social and
cultural factors with a focus on values and ideologies. And finally, the discussion will conclude
with observing female STEM achievement gaps.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 41

System of Preference in Education based on Sex and Race: Double Bind
Modern work by Ong et al. (2011) resonated with the historical foundation previously
discussed in Female Legacy in American Education. The connection of sexism and racism,
primarily in post-secondary education, is observed in the Ong’s et al. (2011) study on
understanding this type of double bind experience for women in STEM. In this extensive
scholarship study, similar historical factors that influence persistence and achievement can be
observed today in the system of preference. This study, along with others asserted that despite
the scientific and technological global threats and economic need America is facing, women and
racial/ethnic minorities are underutilized and represent crucial, untapped human capital that
could provide sustainability for America’s economic power for the future (Ong, 2010; National
Academies 2010a, 2010b). It is well documented the U.S. education system systematically does
not just underutilize women, but, under educates them as well (NSF, 2009; Nelson, 2007; Ong et
al., 2010). Ong’s works conducted 35 years later aligns with the initial challenges of the double
bind work by Malcom et al. (1976) which both have roots in America’s historical legacy context
200 years ago.
Malcom’s et al. (1976) pioneering work regarding the double bind stated that racially
minority women especially have unique challenges in STEM fields, as they are confronted with
experiences of sexism and racism through their educational-to-career pipeline simultaneously.
The research stated that because of both their race and gender (double bind) they have
traditionally been excluded. Programs that were created to assist minorities and women were
devoted to assisting one or the other, not both. Consequently, white females and ethnic diverse
males received most of the programmatic benefits. The data further stated the ongoing
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 42

challenges were related to integration based on diversity and inclusion of membership, resources,
support, and funding, social and cultural factors, and preparedness in higher education.
The literature reviewed reflected both in the study and the pioneering work on the double
bind were in alignment with the historical data presented in this literature compilation. One of
the strengths of Ong’s et al. (2011) study, although not a historical factor, was that it sought
along with copious other researchers, to dispel a prevalent myth that non-white females are not
interested in STEM fields and, therefore, not likely to pursue undergraduate degrees (Bonous-
Hammarth, 2000; Chipman & Thomas, 1987; Ethington & Wolfle, 1988; Hanson, 2004; Huang,
Taddese, Walter, & Peng, 2000; Smyth & McArdle, 2004; Staniec, 2004). Further, these studies
reaffirmed that despite non-white females’ prodigious interest to pursue STEM undergraduate
degrees, there were resurfacing trends that these groups continue to be inadequately represented
in degree completion. A weakness of the study is although Ong’s et al (2011) longitudinal study
was empirical and collected and processed 634 documents, it was from primarily a secondarily
analysis with very limited authentic voices or excerpts represented from women in STEM in how
they persisted or were retained. This was stated as the focus of the article, however, the study
was over pronounced with 40 years of data that could not confirm nor deny experiences by the
voices of women in STEM in the 21st.
Contrasting, with the other work by Malcom’s et al. (1976) there were overwhelming
voices of 30 women with post-secondary degrees and careers in STEM. However, these voices
were from numerous decades ago, with a plethora of advancements in technology that produce
anonymity and change some of these dynamics. Nonetheless, all these studies help us
understand the past and present experiences for females and provide intersectionality of the
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 43

historical legacy of sexism and racism and academia for women, and their double bind in the
21st century.
Challenges of Integration Today
The historical literature significantly wavered to the traditional challenges as it related to
integration for women. As discussed, for women the path through education was segregated,
isolated, and alienated. This has been a complex obstacle in creating solidarity and equity in
education with an overarching implication on female performance. Over the centuries, many
researchers have discussed the importance of integration as it relates to settings or environments.
Observing the conceptual roots of integration, first formed by a study conducted by Durkheim
(1895; 1982) stated integration is the extent to which an individual experiences a sense of
belonging, has social ties, and interconnectedness to a social group or collectivity. These social
ties are formed by virtue of sharing its norms, values, beliefs, etc. Durkheim’s work stated the
greater the social tie, sense of belonging, and connectedness the less likely one would seek
termination of their environment.
Likewise, Weidman’s (1989) more modern theory on undergraduates’ socialization
processes discussed the importance of integration and the role in persistence. Weidman’s theory
stated students are socialization into specific university environments. Weidman’s theory stated
that integration is bi-relational between students and their background and university setting
which includes people whom there is interaction. These factors become the normative context
and socialization processes that produce the outcomes related to pressure, performance, and
persistence (Ong et al., 2011; Weidman, 1989). Scholars have acknowledged the negative
effects of hostile sub-environment on campuses on persistence (Bonous-Hammarth, 2000;
Chang, Cerna, Han, & Saenz, 2008). This is particularly factual with the persistence of those
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 44

assigned in society as African-American students (Elliot, Strenta, Adair, Matier, & Scott, 1996).
According to Campbell (1996), what was problematic was failure of addressing persistence as
due to the under-emphasis on institution deficiencies and overemphasis on student deficits.
These theories from a sociological perspective facilitated in framing our understanding for
student learning and persistence through integration which is both social and academic (Hurtado,
2007; Spady, 1970, 1971; Tinto, 1975, 1993).
Climate in STEM disciplines for female persistence. There is a plethora of discourse
as it relates to environmental climate for women in educational settings, and, also the intersection
of gender and race. Much of the historical research appeared to coincide with modern climates
in education. In Ong’s et al. (2011) study, STEM climate was a focal measure and key factor in
the experience for non-white women pursing STEM undergraduate majors. Crawford and
MacLeod’s (1990) study stated there is differential treatment of women verses men by science
faculty and peers and women reported the climate as “chilly.” It was reported that what also
complicated this environment for these women is the double-bind. Copious studies have well
documented female experiences that reported daily double-bind bias in STEM educational
settings, positioning them to confront multiple systems of oppressions (Carlone & Johnson,
2007; Justin-Johnson, 2004; Ong; 2002; Sosnowki, 2002; Valenzuela, 2006).
Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) ethnographic study findings of non-white women in STEM
majors in a Predominately White Institution (PWI) setting emphasized their need to feel
recognized as legitimate members of the STEM community. Carlone and Johnson’s science
identity model stated this recognition that these women need in this setting is often elusive and
problematic due to its procurement rests on an external audience. This audience, who is
primarily white males, had institutional and historical constructs, imagery, and meanings of who
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 45

is a scientist, which is a white male. These historical and institutional implications made
females’ recognition bids complicated and unattainable, and therefore, difficult to persist.
Females tended to remain virtually unrecognized, invisible, and excluded as legitimate members.
Justin-Johnson’s (2004) work discussed how negative racialized treatment in climates
had an effect on persistence. Women in the study articulated indirectly or openly that the
character of the relationship with faculty and students was determined by race. These findings
were reaffirmed in D. Johnson’s (2007) study, which showed a relationship between racial
climates and a sense of belonging for non-white females. This was a salient point for women
who were designated in society as African-American. When there was an absence of reflective
peers in the science department, the study stated these women had feelings of segregations,
which had an impact racially, ethnically, and culturally on their identities.
Contrasting other studies reflected how positive racialized treatment in climates can
impact persistence. Their data reported better STEM persistence outcomes and a supportive
climate for women, particularly at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
(Giguette et al., 2006; Lent et al., 2005; Whitten et al., 2003; Whitten et al., 2004).
Characteristic findings in these climates were fluidity towards major routes for attainment, lack
of stigma for interventional pedagogy, high achievement philosophy in expectations for all
students, and the cultivation of healthy relationships between students and faculty.
Female Maneuvering through climates of gender and race. Studies by Carlone and
Johnson (2007), as well as Varma (2002), stated that the social realities of sexism and racism
were rarely considered in the STEM departments. The structure is perceived to be purely
meritocratic, with an emphasis on classroom performance, research results, and grades.
However, non-white women voiced a significant amount of maneuvering that was calculating
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 46

and strategic for acceptance and membership in the environment. These women reported having
to carry out an incredible amount of “extra” and “invisible work” in order to gain acceptance
from peers and faculty. Additionally, they noted that they studied the environment and learned
how to move and articulate for themselves the affiliation rules that were unexpressed in the
culture, and then learned innovative ways to procure, maintain, and retain this association.
Other studies stated some strategies to maneuvering in unwelcoming environments of
gender and race expressed by women included becoming more guarded and understanding there
were a myriad of negative stereotypes about women and blacks held by classmates (Dickey,
1996; Varma & Galinda-Sanchez, 2006). Other comments offered by women from Varma,
Prasad, and Kapur’s (2006) study attested the need to understand in male dominant fields, such
as computer science and engineering disciplines, women were not expected to be in these field,
and if you are a black woman they don’t expect underrepresentation, but, rather absence from the
field altogether. Chinn’s (1999) work stated these overarching campus experiences and
unsupportive climates are not just injurious to a woman’s self-efficacy, but, for these women
facilitated in social stratification and low expectations.
Resources, Tools, and Strategy Needs
Historically the literature has shown resources are connected to one’s status in society.
Minorities are not defined by the number of people, but, by their social status that gives them
unequal access to power, prestige, and resources (Henslin, 2010). For this reason, resources,
tools and strategies to maintain persistence have been heavily deliberated. What part they play
and how significant is their impact has been a complex and layered discussion in literature. The
STEM Enrichment programs in the literature noted one salient resource that produced tools and
strategies that were discussed in length. STEM Enrichment programs provided opportunities for
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 47

women to be mentored, gleam tools from faculty and obtain hands-on, practical experience for
potential careers (Dickey, 1996; Ellington, 2006; Schimmel, 2000). There was a significant
body of literature that discussed the importance of mentors and role models; however, these
types of programs often have a one-stop ideology that encompassed a solidified approach which
included these important elements, as well others.
Espinosa’s (2009) study reported undergraduate research programs reflected positive
outcomes for racial minority women in persistence, as it did for all other college-age populations.
These programs encouraged STEM participation and offered research prospects. Study findings
have shown a positive impact on a significant number of student experience dimensions (S. V.
Brown, 2000; S. W. Brown, 2002; Ellington, 2006; Heller & Martin, 1994; Meiners & Fuller,
2004).
Ong’s (2002, 2005) ethnographic study on non-white women in physics noted that at a
PWI strategies were implemented that provided critical safe spaces to facilitate in retention and
persistence. These strategies facilitated in helping women belong to a scholarly, supportive
community, to rejection of negative stereotypes, acknowledge them as growing scientists and
ways to address micro-aggressive behavior from peers and faculty, and, teaching them how to
cultivate their sub-community through service by mentoring, teaching, and role modeling.
Historical Black colleges’ STEM enrichment programs have likewise had success in
performance and graduation. Nave, Frizell, Obiomon, Cui, and Perkins’ (2006) examination of
NSF-STEM programs found that the females in a HBCU did better academically, with higher
GPAs in their first year than their male counterparts. Additional strategies that have contributed
with increasing persistence can be observed with Latina women in the Mathematics,
Engineering, Science Achievement (MESA) program. Ellington’s (2006) and A. Johnson’s
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 48

(2005) examinations of MESA found that strategies that reflected high expectations by program
staff and creating a cohesive peer community were vital in order to increasing supporting
persistence of female students.
Maneuvering for Support Networks
Shain’s (2011) study stated that racial minority women thoughtfully and purposefully
sought out academic and personal support robustly. These types of relationships are essential to
strengthening their confidence and STEM learning, as well as their fortitude for degree
attainment. The study recorded that in order to increase their sustainability, women cultivated
strong social networks and tapped into parents, faculty members, university administrator, and
peers within and outside of STEM arenas.
As discussed in Chapter One, double bind females were selected as a group for the study
due to their seemingly shared ethnic family structure. Those assigned ethnically as African-
American, Latino, Asian-American, and Native American have studies that reflect structural
similarities in strong kinship networks (extended, supportive, or cohesive) and a more collective-
minded decision making process for their families (Hatchett & Jackson, 1993; Kibria, 1994;
Taylor et al., 1993; Vega, 1995; Wilkinson, 1993). Ethnicity involves a shared identity that
fulfills a deep psychological need that is both conscious and unconscious and gives us a sense of
historical continuity (Carter & McGoldrick, 1989). It transmits within it an emotional language
within our cultural structure and reinforced by our communities. With this understanding as a
result our ethnic group, may have particular strengths that can be given to their members in
adverse times to endure prejudices and hostility from the larger society. Women with double
binds have historically suffered from discrimination, not just for being female, but due to race
which makes their experiences distinct and collectively shared. Understanding and appreciating
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 49

these shared yet diverse characteristics with the group as a whole, as well as individually, can
give insight to how these women have adapted in adverse situations.
Institutional Agents Influence on Identity
Human development in environments. According to Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, 1989,
1995) Ecological Model of Human Development, the social context of individual interactions
and experiences determined the degree to which an individual can develop their abilities and
realize their potentials. Ecology involves interrelationships between humans and their
environments. In bio-ecological theory, the structures (microsystem, mesoystem, exosystem,
macrosystem) in which relationships and interactions unfold, patterns form that affect human and
identity development. In the microsystem, education is a vital agent of socialization, which
formally teaches students about their society, who they are, and power they possess in
educational attainment (Berns, 2007). In this setting, teachers who are a pivotal role model
encourage students to develop various skills and behaviors that are to facilitate in their success in
learning.
Gender role construction. Gender is a socially constructed identity (Berns, 2007; Harris
& Edwards, 2010; Henslin, 2010). Research indicated teacher-student interactions varies based
on the student’s gender, regardless of the educator’s gender (Bennett, 2001; Sadker & Sadker,
M., 2003). Studies constantly showed that males have more interactions with teachers than do
females (Streimatter, 1994). Males are called on more in class to answer questions and
intellectually acknowledged more frequently. Often the responses from educators for males are
more instructional, however, nurturing for females. Frequently, there are stereotypical gender-
based items around the room’s setting, in discussions, and duties assigned to students. Feedback
that is received for students’ intellectual quality of their work differs by gender. Males receive
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 50

criticism related to failing because they did not follow the rules; girls receive significant criticism
related to their performance (Berns, 2007). As a result, boys learn from this interaction their
failure lies in a lack of effort, whereas, girls learn their failure is due to their lack of their ability
(Dweck, Davidson, Nelson, & Enna 1978). These interactions shape the identities of males and
females as they matriculate through the educational system.
Stereotypes, marginalization, and microaggressions. Contrary to the stereotypes that
proliferate in society regarding girls’ inability in math and science, test data reflects that girls
consistently perform better academically than boys in the areas of math and science in
elementary school (American Association of University Women, AAUW, 1991; Cahill, S., &
Maccoby, 1974). However, by the time girls enter high school their achievements in these areas
considerably falter. Societal gender-based stereotypes and subordinate roles expectation
supported through teacher-student interactions and other factors, contribute to the lack of
confidence and assertiveness girls need to be successful in these courses and many others. Thus,
within the female identity framework lies the perception that her achievements are based only on
her innate abilities or lack thereof, not their continued efforts (like males) she puts into her
learning. Consequently, by the time females enter college, they take fewer advance math classes
and avoid the harder sciences, ultimately impacting the STEM educational pipeline (AAUW,
1991; Sadker & Sadker, D., 1994; Sadker & Sadker, M., 2003).
There is substantive empirical work that discusses the trajectory of persistence based on
interpersonal relationships between racial minority women and other STEM community
members and the practices and cultural beliefs that govern those relationships. S. V. Brown’s
(1994, 2000) studies reported that women stated structural barriers (financial aid, recruitment
practices, diversity of faculty, tutorial support, etc.) were less of a problem than the nature of
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 51

interpersonal personal relationships (isolation, racism, racially identifiable, interactions with
peers and faculty). S. V. Brown’s (1994, 2000), Joseph’s (2007), and MacLachlan’s (2006)
studies found that microaggressions were played out daily, due to the prevalent ethnocentric
belief in white male superiority, particularly in STEM disciplines. Further, the data stated these
microaggressions in the form of subtle insults and marginalization affected their individual
studies and experiences. Students expressed feeling adversely judged by male peers as
intellectually inadequate, resulting in alienation in social and academic study groups.
Social and Cultural Factors Influences
Social scientists stated that culture is the lens by which an individual sees. As an
individual, one is taught what is appropriate behavior and actions within the culture they belong.
Culture includes two components: material culture (e.g. buildings, art, hairstyles, food, clothing)
and non-material culture (e.g. ideologies, perceptions, attitudes, language). These are
characteristics of the social environment in which one grows up. The sociocultural expectation
of those around a person continues to influence that individual’s behavior through social
restraints and unseen controls or social forces to establish cultural conformity (Henslin, 2010).
Values and Ideologies
The United States is a pluralistic society. It is made up of a strikingly rich diversity from
numerous religious groups, racial-ethnic groups, and countless interest groups. These factors
make it difficult to specify the U.S. core values. Core values are extremely important as they are
shared by most of the groups that make up U.S. society. Sociologists explained that America’s
cultural, core values are often contradictory. The value of “group superiority” contradicts
freedom, democracy, and equality, which are all U.S. core values (Williams, 1965). The core
values of freedom, democracy, and equality cannot be fully expressed alongside with sexism,
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 52

racism, and inequality, which are also American values. Thus, the United States values contain
both equality and inequality within its framework. As such, these conflicting, shared values in
the societal walls frequently impede the progress in gender relations, attitudes, and perspectives
within the educational architecture.
Contrasting, Espinosa’s (2008) study stated minority women place significant value on
collaboration on group projects, tutoring another student, and have high academic expectations.
Additionally, Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) study reported that these women have a personal
desire to use STEM as a means to altruistic ambition or other theoretical contributions to their
society. These sentiments echo the collective values and ideologies of these groups and desire to
make contributions to their society.
Ellington’s (2006) and Valenzuela’s (2006) studies showed despite obstacles minority
women have personal drive and mi fuerza or inner fire to succeed. These studies both reflected
findings of an extraordinary dynamism of personal strength, confidence, and competence. That
regardless of marginalization they could excavate cultural, ethnic, and female identities for
empowerment which ties to their ability to sustain in STEM atmospheres. Hanson’s (2004)
study aligned with these findings and noted that those labeled African Americans have gender
and cultural constructs that correlates with personal characteristics required for science success,
which are high self-esteem, autonomy, assertiveness, and high educational and occupational
goals. However, since these are not mainstream values and ideologies these drives and attributes
can be problematic for women in STEM, resulting in racial/gender disparities and adverse gender
typing (Gonzales, Blanton & Williams, 2002).

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 53

Female STEM Degree Achievement Gap
In the last decade, there has been an increased rise in concern regarding the dearth of
female STEM degree attainment. In 2005, distinguished U.S. scientific groups collaboratively
called for strengthening the STEM pipeline through postsecondary education (National Academy
of Sciences, 2007). Those recommendations included enlarging the pool of students and ensure
it was more inclusive of women. Similar policy endorsements have come from other
organizations and government agencies (Government Accountability Office 2007; National
Science Board 2007; National Research Council, 2010).
National studies have called for reform in STEM since the late 1980’s (AAAS, 1990;
NRC, 1999; NSF, 1996; Project Kaleidoscope, 1991). These cries for STEM change have
elevated over the years and have attracted the attention of university administrators. Educators
have acknowledged the need for more women in STEM and that strategies were required to
prevent the loss of female talent (Bhattacharjee, 2009). This loss of talent and creativity have
occurred among the most highly qualified college entrants, which includes women, at
disproportionately higher rates (60%) (Bhattacharjee, 2009). According to U.S. Census Bureau
(2011), white males are declining as a traditional source of STEM professionals. In the face of
the daunting figures, educational organizations have continued to delve into research to seek
ways and implement strategies to increase the number of female graduates, and fulfill their role
in society as the credentialing gatekeeper.
Summary
This literature review noted the historical aspect in the American school system has been
impacted by the Protestants, religious gender roles, and sex segregation. Regardless of the laws
and policies that have ensued for female inclusion, many of the foundational ideologies persists
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 54

within the system. Privilege, power, and difference were other dynamics that were fluid within
the educational system as a result of America’s female educational legacy. In the structural
educational construct in macro and micro levels resided hegemony. Moving into the 21st
century, historical residuals were discussed that contribute to STEM persistence today. The
historical legacy left American education with racism and sexism in the educational system.
This was observed in the discourse of the double bind for some women, or either for single bind
women. In modern times it was noted there was a continuation of challenges with integration
based on sex in the climate and ways those maneuvered through race and gender. Resources
were another key resultant that remained constant from the past and part of the discussion. A
salient issue for resources discussed was procurement of support networks and ways to maneuver
for procurement. There were institutional agents that influenced identity through ecological
models of human development, social construction, sex stereotyping, and gender development.
There were dynamics in daily interactions that encompassed microaggressions and
marginalization that played a role of persistence for women in STEM. And finally, social and
cultural factors were key contributors to maintain inequity through the U.S. core values, culture,
ideologies, perceptions, and language. These factors influence female persistence in STEM
disciplines and directly attached to the normative content and socialization processes.
The discovery through the literature points to a hybrid, layered problem which intertwine
historic aspects today infused with barriers engulfed in integration, resource, normative content,
and socialization processes. These main themes that are braided throughout the literature which
are problematic have no real beginning or end; however, these aspects and dynamics are linked
and mortared in our educational system both overtly and covertly. In order to excavate these
complexities as it relates to women in STEM, it is invaluable to have the experts who have
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 55

successfully maneuvered the STEM field create a roadmap and list the navigational tools which
assisted in their achievement. Emancipation is led by the oppressed, for revolution and
transformation, however, in collaboration of all others (Brookfield, 2005b). As it relates to
creating equity for the lack for female attainment, Meyer (2007), A. G. Johnson (2006), Baldwin
(1963), and Freire (1971), stated the importance and necessity of awakening the conscience,
waking up as the solution, and conscience raising for change. They suggested awareness must
replace illusion and hypocrisy to obtain equity. They agreed that the system is oppressive for
everyone and it is everyone’s responsibility to work towards changing it. Meyer and Freire
further stressed the value of switching from hegemonic banking style of learning for more
problem-solving environments if the goal is equality in education.
The Literature Library Tree (Figure 1) is a visual representation of the main studies and
concept developments discussed in this literature review. Examining literature of divergent
framework, models, and concepts can be pivotal for transformational change in addressing the
STEM degree dearth for females and providing what females need for attainment, effective
instruction, and create better practitioners from the voice of the student. It facilitates in
removing opacity surrounding the system from a macro and micro level in order to better
understand how female students maneuver in STEM disciplines for degree attainment. It further
facilitates in understanding the contributing factors to the gaps, content in which female students
move, lens of how they are seen by others which helps us understand female STEM students’
experiences in maneuvering within STEM discipline. And finally, it can provide profiles that
can move all students from maneuvering in tactical modes, to handing them compasses and maps
for navigation to STEM attainments. With this detailed understanding of the historical and
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 56

modern experiences of women through the literature review, attention will now be turned to the
approach for this study.

Figure 1: Literature Library Tree
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 57
57
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 58

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This study examined the college experiences of women who persist in STEM to procure a
degree and successfully maneuver on through the pipeline into STEM-related careers. There is
limited scholarly work on understanding how experiences of double bind women can lead
individuals to positively overcome these chronic barriers discussed in the literature. Research on
female students who are at-risk of not completing stated it was important to pay attention to
successful students if the goal was to increase the success rate of other at-risk students in college
and not just on those who discontinue their programs (Padilla, Trevino, Trevin, Gonzalez, 1997).
The impetus of this study was to contribute to this budding, but, limited discourse regarding
female STEM students’ successful maneuvering through their undergraduate degree procurement
into post collegiate STEM career pursuits. Findings from this study sought to generate
knowledge to construct success profiles and conceptual models to enhance the persistence for
women in STEM for post-secondary matriculation, as well as graduate STEM workforce
endeavors. In order to examine this phenomenon, this section includes a discussion of the
processes of methodology. This includes discussions on conceptualizing female success models,
sampling and population, research question connections, and data and collection analysis. The
main research questions that guided this study are listed below with more construction details of
the questions in the Research Questions section to follow:
1. How do women experience their STEM undergraduate University residence?
2. What drives female STEM students to persist to degree completion in STEM settings?
3. What supports do women in STEM utilize to successfully maneuver for achievement in
their undergraduate University incumbency?
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 59

4. What skill set has been developed in higher education to continue persistence into the
STEM occupational pipeline?
The rationale for qualitative methodology selection was that it was the most compatible
with the research inquiry. Since the research questions were descriptive in nature, it
required qualitative data collection to address and guide the enquiry. As a result, the research
needed to be led by using qualitative research characteristics that employed collections in natural
settings, using the researcher as an instrument, inductive data analysis, sought the participant’s
perspective for meanings, and had a flexible emergent research design (Creswell, 2013, Hatch,
2002, Marshall & Rossman, 2011). Using qualitative design allowed for exploration of this
enquiry through a process orientation, reflectivity, and holistic accounts. All of these
characteristics were required to produce a rich narrative description for a new examination in
order to generate a deeper understanding of female persistence success in STEM.
Qualitative investigation allowed for facilitating in obtaining an authentic perspective and
meanings directly from the female STEM students. The interviews contributed to generating the
knowledge regarding this issue as information was procured from post-secondary graduates
about their thoughts, feelings, opinions and what could not be observed (Patton, 2002).
In order to shed light on these women’s stories and create narrative of STEM success, the
unfolding matrix technique was applied (Padilla, 1994). This technique facilitates in framing the
research problem into well-formed research questions (WFRQs) and structures the collection of
pertinent data. This built the typologies and concept development for a deep narrative of women
STEM experiences. Additionally, there was a necessity to use an interviewing instrument that
had highly structured, open-ended questions to probe and have a deeper understanding of this
issue. The unfolding matrix enables the expansion of the base of experiences of the
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 60

interviewees, therefore, capturing multiple features present in the phenomenon that are often
invisible. Neither quantitative, nor mixed methods, would allow the needed flexibility or deep
probing required for this research inquiry.
Conceptualizing Female Success in the STEM Pipeline
Understanding why some females persist through the STEM pipeline while others do not
is a complex matter. The literature revealed copious factors for the disparities in completion
grounded at the intersection of sex, race, and gender. Both historical and contemporary literature
discussed showed pervasive patterns in education that must overcome obstacles related to:
(1) holistically integrate students regardless of race, sex, and gender; (2) distributions of relevant
resources that would pertain to the unique needs for female STEM students; and (3) power
stratifications imbedded in normative content and socialization processes which influence STEM
success for women. It was from these main factors—integration, resources, normative content,
and socialization processes—the research questions were formatted.
Tinto’s (1998) work stressed the importance of academic and social integration in an
environmental culture if students are to be successful. However, this content is not enough to
integrate. Other researchers emphasized that as students are integrated there needs to be a
validation of the students’ experiential knowledge (Rendón 1994). The prototype of a successful
student is mostly seen as one who is advantaged, with no binds, and not disadvantaged in any
way. Women are minorities which has not allowed them to be recognized as a knowledgeable
source within educational institutions. Consequently, because of their status women have not
been viewed as experts or seen as a source to procure knowledge regarding their success.
Considering women as experts due to their heuristic knowledge requires conceptualizing
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 61

approaches and applying lens to study women in STEM in a new way. As a result, for this study
the application of the “black box” concept modeling techniques was utilized (Padilla, 1994).
This approach facilitates conceptualization of female STEM graduates with expertise and
contributory expert systems thinking. This is an extension of the Expertise Model of Student
Success (EMSS; Padilla, 2009) in which the graduates are the experts who in this study will
produce the STEM Graduate Success Profile (GSP).
The Black Box Approach: College Experience
In this study, the black box was utilized to facilitate in studying what was not known:
specifically, what women do to successfully maneuver throughout the STEM post-secondary-
career pipeline. The inputs, outputs, and outcomes in examining an enquiry or model are clearly
succinct. There is significant data that substantiates women as college STEM students (as
inputs), their adverse or negative completions (as outputs), and employment in STEM as
outcomes. This study will not focus on the adverse outcomes, but, the positive outcomes in what
happened in between the inputs and outputs – such as brought/procured knowledge, meanings,
and maneuvering narratives (Padilla et al., 1997). This knowledge was likewise in the black box
that has led some to attainment and can potentially benefit others.
The black box in Figure 2 represents conceptually college students with divergent
experiences that have been brought as well as learned experiences through matriculation, and
placed in social and academia cultures. These experiences were cultivated and sorted
particularly because of the student’s election of a STEM major. What was not known was the
expertise that was acquired as a result of this placement that made them successful in their
STEM post-secondary-career pipeline. Figure 2 also mirrors that which was not known as
“reflective” in that the experience now gleamed that created the expertise for persistence as a
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 62

college student are the same skills that also may retain the individual in their career STEM
pursuits.

Figure 2: Black Box Conceptualization of Female STEM Students’ Experiences in College

Geography of Obstacles
Attinasi’s (1989) work stated that it can be presumed that the college experience has
within it a geography of barriers or obstacles that students must conquer for degree completion.
With this in mind, the black box contains the student’s experience with copious possible
obstacles and geography. The student is measured as successful when they can advance beyond
the barriers with mastery. All students face challenges, however, not all students face every
possible challenges or obstacles as experienced by some students. Likewise, student success was
contingent on their skill set to conquer a unique construct of barriers within their collegiate
location and based on the salience of each individual obstruction given to each distinct student.
It is mostly assumed that students who achieve were those who have triumphed over each
specific challenge faced through taking effective actions. These actions were resultant of their

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 63

particular skill set or knowledge they have procured that related to the problem facing them.
Non minorities often assign their success to their own efforts and talents, while others (often
minority students) ascribe their attainment to luck (Cuádraz, 1999). Nonetheless, those who
seem to have skills in avoiding or overcoming obstacles take effective actions, thereby,
possessing expert knowledge which maneuvers them to success and attainment. Therefore, the
student as the expert in being a student can be theorized as owning accumulated knowledge that
consist of two distinctive knowledge mechanisms: Theoretical knowledge and heuristic
knowledge (Harmon & King, 1985, Padilla 1991a; Padilla et al., 1997).
Theoretical knowledge is acquired through coursework and formal study, whereas,
heuristic knowledge is locally given and is procured experientially in situ. For the purpose of
this study there was an emphasis on heuristic knowledge. College students have both knowledge
skills as they matriculate in and through their college experience. As they interact within the
black box they attempt to utilize these skills to address the geography of obstacles they
individually face. Conceptually, students who have a level of knowledge to address any
specified barrier (uniquely to them) that arises will move forward. If there is inadequacy in
either knowledge component (theoretical or heuristic), in order to remain successful, the student
must acquire the knowledge immediately and take action in a timely manner prior to the barrier
having an adverse impact on the continuation of degree attainment. As a result, overcoming a
maze of unique barriers should be recognized not just as complicated by itself, but, a time driven
learning process that connects knowledge(s) (brought/learned/theoretical/heuristic) to effective
maneuvering actions for successful degree attainment. As a result, the black box approach along
with a few assumptions (barriers and student expertise) provides a basic framework to
understand female STEM success in the post-secondary-career pipeline. This model can benefit
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 64

student and colleges STEM success rates by influencing student behavior and institutional
practices.
Sample and Population
Maxwell (2013) stated decisions about site and participant selection were an essential
part of research methods. For this study, the site selections were purposive (four employers that
specialize in STEM) to capture the heterogeneity and range of variation in the population (female
STEM graduate professionals). The STEM organizations were large, nationally renowned
science, engineering, and technology companies. These selections were primarily contributed to
their diverse representation of STEM female graduate professionals as well as the readily
accessibility due to established professional linkages through collaborations. The STEM
graduate professionals were selected mainly as a result of the dearth in research about their
continued process through the pipeline from graduation to career. In research, there is a massive
disconnect for this experience of what made them persistent not just through to degree
procurement, but, STEM career attainment. The criterion for participation in the study were
women who have a STEM undergraduate degree and have worked in their STEM careers for up
to three years. Female STEM college graduates were procured through stratified, snowball
sampling at each STEM facility. It included a total of 8 female STEM graduate professionals,
minimum of two from each discipline (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics).
These graduates were placed into tandem groups which will be discussed in detail in the data
collection and analysis section to follow. Groups were interviewed at or near their work
environment. Each participant received an Information/Facts Sheet for Exempt Non-Medical
Research. The respondents were apprised the information shared was confidential and all data
was destroyed after use. Each STEM focus group was interviewed once for an average of 2.5
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 65

hours or more. Groups were identified on the matrices as (1) female science participants (FSP);
(2) female technology participants (FTP); (3) female engineering participants (FEP); and,
(4) female mathematic participants (FMP).
Research Questions
The research questions for this study generated a deeper understanding of female
persistence in the STEM disciplines. The questions’ impetus was to seek information from their
college STEM experience to compile profiles of success to persist to degree attainment and
career procurement. Although there was some research on this subject matter of women and
STEM, there was a limited amount of data that explored it from the female STEM students’
viewpoint that recognized them as the expert. Also, there was a deficiency of research on the
female STEM collegiate and post experience. Most research reflected the pre and collegiate
pipeline experience for women in STEM. As a result, to get a more of comprehensive
understanding of the holistic female STEM experience as stated the method used was qualitative,
however, with a phenomenology approach.
Maxwell (2013) stated the research questions should connect empirically in qualitative
methods. The inquiry questions were in alignment with the concepts found in the literature
research. The detailed Interview Guide (see Appendix B) included the interview processes for
the research and interview questions. The first research question was, “How do women
experience their STEM undergraduate University residence?” This question facilitated in giving
meaning to how females in STEM experience obstacles in historically disconnected disciplines.
The question sought to generate knowledge by probing for definitions and meanings associated
with overcoming barriers in gender dynamics, specifications of maneuvering, and skillset
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 66

developed in the classroom. Further, it sought to know how and what skillset has been and
continues to be utilized though the collegiate-career pipeline.
The second research question was “What drives female STEM students to persist to
degree completion in STEM settings?” This question assisted in probing for the normative
beliefs and mi fuerza, or inner fire, to succeed (Ellington, 2006; Valenzuela, 2006). It sought the
key barriers that must be overcome to maneuver their experience.
The third research question was “What supports do women in STEM utilize to
successfully maneuver for achievement in their undergraduate University incumbency?” This
question explored what resources, strategies, tools, and skill set do they have or learned that
facilitated in successful maneuvering in female persistence for STEM degree procurement.
The final research question was “What skillset has been developed in higher education to
continue persistence into the STEM occupational pipeline?” This question explored what skill
set (combination of skills and abilities developed) do STEM graduates have from their higher
education experience that they utilized in their early STEM career.
This study includes an in-depth cross comparison STEM data analysis from interviews.
In addition to the study’s data collection and analysis, credibility, trustworthiness, and ethics are
discussed. The research questions are answered with emergent themes through the unfolding
matrix and subsequent evidence are presented in profile findings.
Data Collection and Analysis
The methodology for this enquiry employed qualitative research with strategies and
techniques for identifying the appropriate sample, dialogical techniques for obtaining data, and
analyzing (building taxonomies, concepts, relationships) the raw text data by utilizing concept
modeling. These strategies and techniques were constructed through a qualitative survey.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 67

Qualitative Survey
The tool utilized for the study was a qualitative survey (see Appendix C). This
qualitative survey included a set of qualitative data acquisitions and analysis techniques that
allows for the perspective of the STEM students to be understood as well as the situation by the
investigator. The understanding from the survey was inductively designed and applicable to the
local phenomenon being studied. As a result, it is time, context, and participant bound. The
bounds may change based on time; the context had a specific geographic location (STEM
disciplines) with a specific history; and participant-bound due to goals, drives, experience,
resourcing, and maneuvering were based on other actors.
The qualitative survey was implemented by a data collection instrument and procedure,
sampling of participants, and utilizing a qualitative analytic strategy. In regards to creating
profiles for female persistence in STEM this study: (1) used the unfolding matrix strategy as the
instrument, (2) identified STEM post-secondary-career professionals for tandem groups of
participants which were organized into dialogical groups, and (3) created concept modeling as
the qualitative analytic strategy for female STEM persistence success.
The Unfolding Matrix
The unfolding matrix is a data acquisition instrument that started out as a single leading
construct derived from a given understanding of a local situation. In regard to successful women
in STEM disciplines, the leading construct or vector cover term was OBSTACLES of persistence
to attainment of STEM college degree. From this initial construct, the matrix opened vertically
and horizontally. This method gave a field notion of a “covered term” which exemplified
exhaustively on the perspective of participants as well as the ways obstacles are overcome by the
female STEM students as shown in Table 1 (Spradley, 1979).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM

Table 1

Unfolding Matrix for Assessing Heuristic Knowledge of Women Who Successfully Graduated in STEM
Disciplines and Continued through the Pipeline to Enter STEM Careers

Obstacle
s

Knowledge

Meaning

Maneuver
(Action)

Length (college-
post grad year)
Frequency
(rarely,
seldom,
often)
Involvement (faculty,
counselor,
administration, work,
family, other

Had Learned 1 2 3 4 PGC R S O F C A W F O

Note: Source: Unfolding Matrix (Padilla, 1994)

PROFILES OF FEMALE PERSISTENCE IN STEM 68
PROFILE OF FEMALE PERSISTENCE IN STEM 69

The horizontal unfolding of the matrix elaborates the features of the lead construct/vector
titled obstacles. For this study, the leading concept includes the prominent features of each
obstacle as determined by vectors—knowledge, meaning, maneuver, length, frequency, and
involvement. In regards to successful women in STEM the data vector is expanded by including
data vectors and their respective cover terms:
1. Knowledge Vector – Assessment of knowledge of what student possess for successful
persistence through the post-secondary-career pipeline. This vector has two sub-vectors
which are knowledge the student brought to college and knowledge learned while in
college which are implemented in that setting and still utilized in post-graduate-career
pursuits.
2. Meaning Vector – gathers information on how the meanings are significant for them and
how this is interpreted in moving forward.
3. Maneuvering Vector – seeks to understand based on the knowledge and meaning what
tactics and strategies are gleamed, implemented, or worked advantageously.
4. Length of time Vector – assesses the duration periods of maneuvering implementation or
first time noticed the need for this maneuver. This vector has five sub-vectors based on
matriculation years college-post college career: College years 1, 2, 3, 4 , and post-
graduate-career.
5. Frequency Vector – assesses how often these skills are/were called upon for success over
obstacles. This vector has three sub-vectors: rarely, sometimes, and often.
6. Involvement Vector – explores who has involvement or has been engaged in vectors and
how they are involved. There are six sub-vectors: faculty, counselors, administration,
work, family, and other.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 70

Tandem Groups
Padilla’s (1993) tandem groups are similar to focus groups in that data is collected
through small groups to take advantage of dialogical nature. Freire (1971) stated dialogical
format provide discussion wherein exploration of contradictions among participant perspectives
result in “meaningful thematics” (p. 105). Padilla (1993) built upon these concepts through
dialogical focus groups in lieu of individual interviews for qualitative data collection not only for
the group dialog but to “cover comprehensively the range of experiences likely to exist for the
focal group(s) in the populations targeted” (p. 140). McMillian and Schumacher (1997) aligned
with this technique in that focus groups can provide an enhanced quality and depth of data and
improve efficiency through expediting data collection through using tandem groups. The tandem
groups are multiple-focus group sessions that are facilitated in succession of one another
(Padilla, 1994). As a result, at the end of one session, the second session continues completing
the matrix upon conclusion of the previous sessions, and so on in sessions, until the completion
of the instrument tool. Tandem groups also encompass more respondents across successive
groups. Upon administering the qualitative survey through utilizing the unfolding matrix, data
analysis ensued using taxonomic analysis and concept modeling discussed in the next section.
Groups ranged from two to three female STEM graduate informants from each discipline
from STEM. Informants were selected purposefully with the same criteria in degree attainment
and career backgrounds. This resulted in one matrix completed by eight STEM informants
(three tandem groups). Focus groups were interviewed as Focus Group (FG) 1, 2, and 3 as the
source of respondents in the study. Each Group was interviewed in a series in order to complete
the matrices. The matrix was an empty stimulus object (Freire, 1971) in order to promote
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 71

discussion regarding the phenomena among participants and session facilitator. The data was
captured through discourse systematically in the cells of the matrix.
Concept Modeling
Data reduction and interpretation were done through concept modeling by utilizing the
above analytic tool (Padilla, 1991b). Raw text data details were summarized into subcategories
and attached meanings. This created a conceptual structure from the set of categories, whereby
relationships between the categories were made. As a result, the interpretation is grounded
empirically by the dialogue and other data procured under enquiry.
An analysis was conducted on each column in the unfolded matrix. The taxonomic
analysis created the classification into ordered categories. Data reduction and an increase of
understanding of the situation were procured through the taxonomic analysis. The feature
vectors were analyzed similarly as to reduce the matrix fully to categories and subcategories that
summarized obstacles female STEM students confronted and maneuvered successfully.
Interview Guide
The Interview Guide for the study was developed around procuring descriptive data to
better understand how female STEM graduate professionals interpreted their experiences,
constructed their worlds, and what meaning they attributed to their experiences. Since
qualitative methods have sometimes been criticized for being less empirical due to
misrepresentation (Patton, 2002), it was important that the interviews were constructed with rigor
and skillfully implemented.
For the interview guide, initially the tool’s questions were worded, reworded, and
reworked until the questions could procure data that reflected feelings, thoughts, behaviors that
took place previously; and activities through observations. Questions were to communicate in
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 72

wording to students their stories were important, meaningful, and contributory. Wording was
designed to continue a good rapport during the interview while probing for information.
Construct for question items were grounded in phenomenology conceptual framework to best
understand students lived experience. In order to ensure rigor, the approach and format for the
interview questions were an open-ended, structured instrument to understand the maneuvering
practices influencing persistence related in STEM degree attainment for females. This was
selected due to time constraints of the study and needing a highly focused interview to use time
efficiently.
Other rationales for this interviewing guide design were the need to limit variations
among the different STEM students and simplifying my analysis by making the responses easier
to find and compare. The questions were designed around the six types of questions discussed
by Merriam (2009) which included questions around feelings, knowledge, sensory, experience,
opinions/values, and demographics. Question items additionally included types such as
hypothetical, devil’s advocate, and ideal position. Interviews were audio recorded with sporadic
notes taken on occasion in order to ensure noting a key point. Interview sessions lasted on
average 2.5 hours, not including a self-reporting data collection sheet (for background
information) submitted pre interview.
Data Collection
Data collection strategies were based on the convenience and availability of the STEM
graduate professionals, what was most feasible for a quality case study, and how best I could be
committed to the required follow through for completion. Every precaution was taken to make
them comfortable to liberally tell their stories. Focus group interview sessions were a primary
source of data collection. As a result, creating environments to make them comfortable and able
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 73

to freely speak was essential in procuring valid data. The interviews took place at the round
table in the offices and conference rooms, as well as near/off site as requested by respondent
members. All interviews were conducted in late afternoons after work hours. The STEM
graduates were done with their work for the day which could relieve the pressure for the day and
allow them to relax and talk in an unrushed manner. The interviews were audio recorded for
future transcription or re-visitation for clarification throughout the case study. Being on-site
gave me access to remain in a STEM facility and immediately include my observer’s comments
of personal thoughts and emergent questions.
In regards to data management, the goal was to provide anonymity for STEM graduates
group data, as well as data preparation for analysis. Data collected was archived in copious
formats that remain researcher accessible. The STEM graduates’ data was captured through
paper medium by the unfolding matrix. Audio recordings of respondents’ group sessions were
made for specifications and redundant clarification of data. Data captured in unfolding matrix
were transcribed into taxonomies, which facilitated in both data management and analysis. The
transcription of the researcher’s notes into Microsoft Word document format from the group
sessions was completed. All data (paper, electronically, audio) was stored under lock and key in
a file cabinet at the researcher’s home office and research under computer password protection.
Analysis
According to Merriam (2009), the impetus of analyzing data is to make sense out of the
data and answer your research questions. As a result, the EMSS methodology guided the
analysis through two strategies: (a) data reduction through the generation of taxonomies, and (b)
data expansion through concept modeling mentioned previously (Padilla, 1991a).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 74

Barrier taxonomization was the first step in data reduction. This produced the barrier
categories for STEM graduates’ data set. Next, by taking each column, taxonomies of exemplars
were developed in the knowledge and action/maneuvering columns of the unfolding matrix.
These columns were analyzed separately (without contingency upon) any barrier category. As a
result, these taxonomies constitute non-contingent analyses of the knowledge and action
exemplars. To develop the row-based taxonomies that are contingent upon a particular barrier
category, a second analytical data reduction – contingent analysis – was conducted. This method
allowed data to be reduced to inductively drawn categories of meaning, compare pieces of data
with each other, and identified similarities for grouping (Merriam, 2009). The data analysis was
inductive and comparative and built upon patterns, categories, and themes. There was a cross
comparative examination conducted of similarities and differences between phenomena or
classes of phenomena with the aim of establishing classification and typologies of social
phenomena (Jary & Jary, 1991). Additionally, this method lent itself to maintaining the essence
of the research questions through cross examinations and comparisons that included cultural,
societal, or historical phenomena. The structure expressed in the form of taxonomies provided
an expansion for elaboration of the concept model for students’ success.
Upon initiating the data analysis, all of the data was compiled into the matrix. The
compilation of data included three tandem group interviews. The raw data included thoughts,
hunches, and other expanded notes. These were documented immediately after sessions.
Harding (2013) suggested four steps which include identifying initial categories after transcript
readings, writing codes within the transcripts, reviewing/revising the list of codes, and looking
for themes and findings in each category as an effective process for analyzing data. These four
steps formulated a guide for the approach for data analysis. Identification of the conceptual
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 75

themes and created categories, were brought together with codes from different issues into the
categories, created sub-categories to reflect the different elements of themes, and used the
conceptual themes to explain the relationship between the different parts to formulate STEM
success profiles.
After a comprehensive review of readings and listening, categorizing analysis ensued
with identification of units or segments from the data that were meaningful to the inquiry
questions for an inductive attempt to gain new knowledge of “persister” females in STEM
disciplines. The strategy utilized was open coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2007). Data was parsed
by identifying segments that connected to the research questions. Phenomenon descriptions
were transferred into a unit of data which became small words. The units for utilization aligned
with Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) criteria of being heuristic and stand-alone information which
can be interpreted. For this study, each discipline has their own unit of information (for science,
technology, engineering, mathematics) and individually examined for regularities within their
data. During this process, data was fractured (Strauss, 1987) and rearranged into categories that
could facilitate comparisons between, first, similarities of any emergent in the same category
discipline; second, in cross categories between disciplines. These words were compiled in a list
of potential categories. This facilitated in organizing the data into broader themes and issues.
Data from the unit list were allocated and reallocated to one category or another. In this process,
there was a movement from open coding to analytic coding by reviewing data copious times to
gain a more comprehensive meaning of the data. The units were also placed in Wordles (Word
Clouds) software to visually see the commonalities and emergent themes as they related to
STEM persister females graduate professionals. Wordles were utilized as a supplemental
research tool in qualitative inquiry, for analysis, and guidance for detailed analysis (McNaught &
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 76

Lam, 2010). The advantage was it resulted in a quick visual display for data in the study and
validates findings. Word clouds or Wordle displays represent visuals of frequently pronounced
words from transcribed text. In this study, the Wordles emerged during the taxonomic and
analytical processes. These Wordles were excavated from within the qualitative thematic
analysis of written and transcribed text from STEM. Throughout this process data was placed in
groups based on their relationships and suitable codes into the categories (Merriam, 2009).
Categories formations were based on the responsiveness to the purpose of the research. The final
compilations of these categories (from the units) can be viewed in Wordles.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
In qualitative research, credibility and trustworthiness is considered an essential
component to producing quality, rigorous research. Merriam (2009) stated credibility can be
increased by triangulation, member check, reflexivity of the researcher, and peer examination
process. In order to increase credibility, respondent validation was procured by distributing
STEM Wordles to the STEM participants. The members (female STEM graduates) who
participated in the study received a Wordle based on session feedback. This ensured categories
and themes were not misinterpreted (Merriam, 2009). It also facilitated in the researcher being
able to identify misunderstandings and biases (Maxwell, 2013) in what may have been observed
in the observation.
Disseminating the Wordles to STEM graduates added to the ethical integrity presented
during the process of this study. Patton (2002) has an Ethical Issue Checklist used to identify
items of concern when conducting qualitative research. A few important issues to consider are
explaining purpose and methods, confidentiality, promises, data access, and ownership. During
this process there was significant thought in each activity as it related to the participant’s need or
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 77

comfortability in order to obtain truthful information, as well as any logistical element involved
for observation.
The purpose for the project was clearly stated with veracity in all communications
(written and verbally) with others. Merriam (2009) affirms credibility in qualitative studies is
also dependent upon the ethics of the researcher and their ability to carry out the study in an
ethnic manner. Throughout the study, professionalism was maintained in all interactions with all
graduates, employer coordinators and staff, and those assisting with scheduling. Integrity was
maintained as it related to scheduling and follow-up. And lastly, in submitting to respondents
the data access through the word clouds for review, it was confirmation that what participants
had been told in the interviews was true about wanting their authentic voice represented about
their experience, and that their experience was of so much value that inaccurate information
would be corrected.
En bloc, this section described the methodology, rationales, and logistic processes of the
study. It examined the conceptualization of female success by utilizing the Black Box: College
Experience, and the geography of obstacles. It described the sample and population selection
and why this population is important to study. It threads the research questions throughout the
methodology through identification and clarity. This section included the data collection and
analysis which details the operational structure and statistical techniques utilized for the study.
Within this topic area, discourse of specifics regarding the qualitative survey, unfolding matrix,
tandem groups, concept modeling, protocols, data collection approach, and analysis were
included. These elements facilitated in understanding the plan of study in order to generate
knowledge of how women successfully persist in STEM endeavors. With this clarity noted, the
next chapter focuses on results from the implementation of this methodology.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 78

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
For nearly three decades, the dearth in women’s Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) degree attainment in higher education has become an ever-growing
concern. Despite concerns and the urging of those in economic, scientific, and workforce fields,
the issue of women’s STEM degree attainment has maintained its severe deficits in STEM
disciplines. As stated throughout this study, women are considered the untapped resources
needed in the 21st century that can provide the commodity of intellectual capital. The lack of
women in STEM arenas contributes to the overall detriment of the United States’ economic
stability and global competitiveness, since these factors are highly dependent on STEM related
intellectual capital. To ensure national security and safety, equal opportunity and incorporation
of women into these fields are imperative if the United States is to sustain and increase its
position in global competitiveness.
The purpose of this qualitative study was to generate a deeper understanding of female
experiences for successful persistence in STEM degree completion. The study’s impetus was to
understand this knowledge from the voices of women who have procured STEM degrees.
Further, the work sought to understand connections of their higher education skill set into their
STEM pipeline of early career entrance. The detailed STEM undergraduate majors and
Standards Occupational Classification (SOC) (see Appendix A) listed higher educational degree
attainment in disciplines such as Physical and Life Science, Engineering, Math, and Computer
Science as considered even more limited areas for women in STEM. As a result, the occupations
to these majors reflected a similar deficit. Table 2 reflects the women sampled, STEM degree
attainment, and related occupations, as these women’s experience can contribute to the even
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 79

narrower scope STEM attainment. These women have made this achievement in the mostly
limited areas of STEM.

Table 2
SOC STEM Limited Higher Ed STEM Majors and Occupations

STEM
Respondent
Higher
Education
Discipline
(SOC
Related)

Major Degree (SOC
Related)

Related Occupations

SOC Title
SM1 Physical,
Life Science
&
Mathematics

Biochemistry &
Applied Mathematic
(Dual)
Genetics/Biochemical 19-4021
S2 Physical,
Life Science

Physics Physical science
Research
10-2099
S3 Physical,
Life Science

Physics Atmospheric and
Space Scientist
19-2021
S4 Physical,
Life Science

Biochemistry Biochemical/Inorganic
Chemistry
19-4021
TM1 Math and
Computer
Science

Computer Science
and Applied
Mathematics (Dual)
Computer Scientist &
Systems Analyst
15-10XX
T2 Math and
Computer
Science
Computer Science Computer Support 15-1041

E1 Engineering Civil &
Environmental
Engineering

Engineering Project
Manager
11-9041
E2 Engineering Construction
Engineering
Engineering Project
Manager
11-9041

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 80

Additionally, these women also have a double bind which means they also have the
possibility to be discriminated against based not only their sex, but race (have two minority
statuses). The ethnicities of those sampled were 25% Middle Eastern (Palestinian & Iranian);
25% Latinas (Mexican); 25% assigned African-American; 25% Asian (Indian & Chinese).
The study sought to understand women in STEM’s higher education experiences, the
barriers they overcame, and the knowledge they procured that made them persist to STEM-
degree achievement. Further, if that knowledge through experiences was transferable into early
STEM careers, what knowledge in these womens’ higher education experience facilitated in their
successful attainments of degrees, and the knowledge and skills procured that contributed to their
early STEM-careers persistence. Areas of scholarly success for women in STEM have been
limited to primarily quantitative approaches through secondary analysis. Additionally, those
whose higher education knowledge has been connected in their early STEM careers are even
narrower due to the limited qualitative studies. The purpose of the chapter is to present this issue
within the context and significance of the problem, answer the research questions through data
analysis, and discuss the implications of my findings for research, the education of women in
STEMS, and policy.
Frameworks and Literature Context
The historical and sociological implications of the positioning or placement of women in
society as subordinate in every setting including academia must be examined in order to fully
understand the depth of this phenomenon. As a result, both Sociocultural and Critical
frameworks were utilized. A Sociocultural theory framework was utilized since people cannot
be understood aside from societal contexts, these contexts are a part of them, and sociocultural
elements such as race, class, gender, and ethnicity have significant impact on adult development
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 81

in education (Merriam, 2009). The sociocultural perspective in this study cements the value of
the historical, as well as the socio and cultural lens, to understand women struggles to advance in
STEM fields. Additionally, critical theory approach reified what is problematic by excavating
the surface of everyday life and uncovered the social conditions, assumptions, and opacities that
prevent full understanding of the phenomena’s workings. It looked at the totality of society for
women in STEM within its historical specificity and how it came to be at this point and time in
its current social reality. Critical social scientists stressed the importance in understanding the
lived experience of real people in their context (Welton, 1993, Collins, 1991). Critical
scholarship in this study allowed for the interpretation of the acts and the symbols of society in
order to understand the ways in which various social groups are oppressed and to create
alternative narratives of emancipation through their triumphs (Brookfield, 2001, 2002, 2005a,
2005b). Through examination of both these framework lens, ways that STEM women were
emancipatory in their fields as experts and leaders emerged with correlating themes, despite the
historical and cultural constraints the educational legacy has assigned to them.
Throughout the literature review conducted, common themes emerged pointing to some
main concepts surrounding the historical and present day constraints of women in the
educational system and architecture. The most prominent themes related to female persistence
were hinged on integration, resources and support, normative content, and socialization
processes. In understanding how this specifically related currently to how women persist in
STEM education, the traditional positioning of women that has been pervasive today must be
recognized to understand the content.
Historical themes reflected integration as a salient obstacle for educational persistence for
females. Since the establishment of traditional female gender roles through Christianity in
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 82

America, women were placed in a subordinate role, inferior in identity and ability, and locked
out of areas considered to pertain to a man. When females were finally allowed to attend school
(elementary and secondary) in the mid-19th century, more than 100 years later after white males,
they were considered substandard and different because of their ascribed status (Renzetti &
Curran, 2003). However, children labeled African American were excluded until after the civil
war and then racially segregated, as all the other non-white children that followed into school.
All females were therefore, segregated, isolated, and alienated in areas of academia.
As a consequence of their societal placement, another barrier to persistence was lack of
receiving equitable support or resources for their endeavors in education, in which some deemed
these pursuits as pathological and deviant for females (Lucas, 1994). It was not until the 20th
century that women were let into college (co-ed). And it was several decades later near the end
of the 20th century that there would be equity in policy and laws for women in education through
Title IX of the Educational Amendment Act of 1972, which made it illegal to discriminate in
public schools on the basis of sex in school athletics, career counseling, financial aid,
admissions, and treatment of students. In 1974, the passage of the Women’s Educational Equity
Act (WEEA) provided support of the recruitment of girls for math, science, and athletic
programs. Educators were given gender bias training to increase awareness of inequality in
curriculum and pedagogy. However, in the 1980s, WEEA and other federal funding were
significantly cut (Darling-Hammond, 2007; National Coalition for Women and Girls in
Education, 2011). The reductions of funds left a dearth in teacher understanding of disparities in
science and math academic delivery for women and girls, which currently affects Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 83

Despite the policies, another salient historical obstacle embedded within the educational
walls was the same traditional normative and socialization processes. Within the educational
system resided the foundational structure of hundreds of years. The system had housed within it
values and ideologies that support the establishment of power and privilege for white males
within the educational system which cultivated gender stratification. It continually reflected
white male-dominance in gender roles as superior, favor, and the leader or head in every setting.
Consequently, there was an ascribing of status and assigning of masculinity and femininity in
educational disciplines including STEM. Resulting in an educational legacy of systemic
preference based on race and sex. This becomes problematic for anyone else who is not included
in the system of preference.
The barriers to persistence historically have been found in this study as pervasive today.
Emergent themes surrounding integration, resources and support, normative content and
socialization processes were found to be related to female STEM persistence. Many of the
concepts found in the study revolve around integration challenges in climate in STEM for a
double-bind female and their ability to maneuver; resources and support procurement; gender
roles/identity, and normative and socialization processes. These areas were often opaque;
however, these concepts overlapped, intersected, and linked within social and cultural backdrops,
and institutional architecture. The opacity in the institutional architecture obstructs the view of
the educational system as a whole, structural building, communities, open areas, environment
and materials (concepts) used to construct the walls, therefore, removing it is imperative for
transparence of this phenomenon. Understanding these connections were important to better
understand how successful female maneuvering ensued to STEM degree achievement, and
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 84

further throughout the pipeline to STEM careers, as their maneuvering to success must persevere
in areas that are obstructed and without navigational equipment.
Research Questions and Design
This is a qualitative study of the lived experiences and voices of female STEM graduates.
The study looked for the commonalities for the level of analysis and not variance, to build a
collective profile—Graduate Success Profile (GSP) from eight female STEM graduates (two
from each field) who possessed undergraduate STEM degrees and have been in their STEM
careers for at least up to three years.
The construct of these research questions aligns with the qualitative methods, as it sought
to discover, uncover, and seek to explore for knowledge (Pineda, 2014). The research questions
that guided this case study are as follows:
1. How do women experience their STEM undergraduate University residence?
2. What drives female STEM students to persist to degree completion in STEM settings?
3. What supports do women in STEM utilize to successfully maneuver for achievement in
their undergraduate University incumbency?
4 What skill set has been developed in higher education to continue persistence into the
STEM occupational pipeline?
The design of this inquiry was framed and implemented by the unfolding matrix
acquisition technique (Padilla, 1994, 2004). The unfolding matrix is a data acquisition
instrument that starts out as a single leading construct derived from a given understanding of a
local situation. It folded both horizontal and vertically and allowed for data collection. Upon
initiating the data analysis, all of the data was categorized and compiled into tables. The data has
been procured from three focus or tandem groups interviews (containing two to three STEM
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 85

graduate students, 10.5 hours.) Padilla’s (1993) tandem groups are similar to focus groups in
that data is collected through small groups to take advantage of dialogical nature; however, they
work in tandem, one after the other to complete the unfolding matrix. The empty matrix was
filled with information from these informants (female STEM respondents). The matrix
constituted as qualitative data set. The data set then became the object of analysis and
conventional data coding to construct taxonomies, typologies, and grounded models. Taxonomic
exemplars of the graduate students were barriers overcame for success, knowledge procured used
to maneuver to address the barrier, and actions/applications of transference to career success. As
the matrix fully expanded, it provided a means to efficiently collect and bind the data and drew
back to the research questions. Additionally, the table list units were also placed in Wordles
(Word Clouds) software to visually see the barrier exemplars’ commonalities of frequencies. As
stated in Chapter Three, Wordles can be utilized as a supplemental research tool in qualitative
inquiry, for analysis, and guidance for detailed analysis (McNaught & Lam, 2010). The
advantage is it results in a quick visual display for data in the study and validates findings. The
next section presents the findings to answer the research questions.
Taxonomic Graduate Success Profile (GSP) for Women in STEM
In Iran there are so many athletic fields that are forbidden for females. Females are very
limited in many areas where they can participate. At an event, one of the ministers said
‘we have limited ourselves because we only participate with half of a team, because
women were not allowed to participate. Any team that only plays half of the talent of the
team is sure to lose.’ In the United States we have all these good opportunities to work
together, but we still really only play half our team in talent for STEM. The other half
could be a great asset in resources and provide relief and contributions to the team by
working together. And if we can’t get the other half of this team (women in STEM) on
the field I fear like the minister said in Iran, as Americans we will be losers too. (FG2,
2015)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 86

This statement above from a female STEM respondent from this study reverberated the
importance of getting women into the STEM fields just as so many other experts have in
education, workforce, and government entities. Cultivating and harnessing women’s talents,
who are interested and capable to work in STEM through education and into the workforce
pipeline can be pivotal to the country to increase intellectual capital, the continuance of a strong
economy, and our national security.
Various emergents reified around themes of integration, normative content, socialization
processes, and supports in this study. The integrational theme surfaced when addressing how
women experienced their higher education tenure. Both normative content and socialization
process themes emerged in the examination of STEM women’s drive to persistence in STEM
fields. Supports as a theme cemented the resources that have continued their persistence in
STEM. Collectively these themes have built into the Women in STEM Graduate Success Profile
(GSP). The GSP was a construct of exemplars of barriers and knowledge for profiles of success.
Finally, the GSP which was obtained from their higher educational experiences was then
connected to women’s early STEM careers for adaptation of this skillset into the workforce
pipeline.
Overcoming Barriers to Success – Integration
Research Question 1. How do women experience their STEM undergraduate University
residency?
In the study, there was a consensus by respondents that sited frequently some area of
obstacle that clustered around the theme of integration in higher education. Integration involved
the degree female students were connected or tied to their group through shared values, social
bonds, and overall social cohesion. There are several discussions that sited their experiencing
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 87

hindrances related to university serving structure, student status upon entering, sex, gender roles,
ethnicity/cultural background, communications, climate and power dynamics. One statement
that exemplified the disconnection echoed in different majors by several respondents was:
I really had an abhorrence for some of my experiences. My classes were fine but, I didn’t
like my classmate interactions. Most of the male engineers seemed to think they were
better than all other groups who were not engineers, or those who did not meet their
standards of a stereotypical engineer, male. No one else belonged and they would not
really let you in. There were plenty of egos and arrogance to go around. Most of the
time I was not sure if I would like working in engineering long term because of these
types of attitudes and condescending interactions. I took various classes to get different
kinds of people, but it was the same attitude as long as I was in engineering classes. The
people I told about it would say ignore it but, I don’t know how anyone can breathe
toxicity in their environment and not be impacted. I just learned ways to deal with it that
protected me in the process. I ended up sticking with engineering because that is what I
wanted for me. (FG1, 2015)

Table 3 lists the taxonomy of barriers in persistence from tandem group discussions that
most frequently emerged in their undergraduate experience as it related to integration. Figure 3
Wordle construct reflects the frequency in barrier exemplars for integration. These are the
barriers women had to overcome to be successful.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 88

Table 3
Taxonomy of Barriers Overcame by STEM Women Undergraduates: Category Integration
Barriers
Categories

Barrier Exemplars
I. Integration 1.1 Institution Serving Structure
1.2 Student Status (upon entering)
1.3 Ethnicity/Cultural background
1.4 Gender Roles (historical positioning)
1.5 Discourse
1.6 Communications
1.7 Role Confusion
1.8 Climate
1.9 Unknown Misogyny
1.10 Gender Stratification
1.11 Insufficient male knowledge of accurate female/gender competencies
(Ignorance)
1.12 Stereotyping
1.13 Double-Bind
1.14 Male hegemony
1.15 Male superiority
1.16 Female incompetency
1.17 Female discoloration

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 89

Figure 3: Wordle Barrier Exemplar – Integration

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 90

In addressing the question how do women experience their STEM undergraduate
programs, the respondents reported varying degrees of integrating throughout their matriculation
in their undergraduate university residence. Data was procured from the self-reporting data
collection sheet (for background information) distributed pre interviews in addition to focus
group interviews. Scales were interpreted as follows: 1-3 Low; 4-6 Moderate; 7-9 High in
connectedness. Contingent on what type of university serving structure was attended, the level
of integration varied, as structures associated with an increase or decrease of barriers to
persistence for female STEM women. Most women (6) reported as STEM students moderate to
higher levels of connectedness; with their university’s faculty and administration. It was
believed because the recent focus on women in STEM some changes had been made within their
institutions that made them more visible and an important part of the academic community. The
variance levels of integration reported was based on whether as students they had attended
Predominately White Institutions (PWIs), Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), or dual serving
institutions (two dominating ethnic groups make up 40% or more of student population.) Of
those sampled, three attended MSIs, three PWIs, and two dual serving institutions. STEM
women who attended MSIs reported higher overall levels of integration with their experiences
(an increase with faculty, moderately on resources). Dual-serving institution STEM women
reported moderate levels of integration (faculty and resources), but higher levels of integration if
their ethnicity belonged to one of the predominant groups being served. PWIs reported lower-
moderate levels of integration with their overall experience (lower with faculty, higher on
resources) with an emphasis on adverse experiences in integration with classmates.
The experiences also differed based on student status upon entering – for example,
transferring students into a four-year university. There were three STEM women represented in
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 91

the sample. For one student who had transferred from a diverse community college into a PWI,
the experiences were more polarized in dealing with faculty, adjusting to the rigor due to moving
from a semester to a quarter system. She stated the following about her experience:
For me as an undergraduate, I went from community college and transferred to a 4-year
university which allowed for me to have two very different experiences. Community
college was good because you had this great interaction with the professors. You were
able to communicate directly with them if there was something you didn’t understand.
You could go directly to them and you didn’t have to make an appointment. You could
email them and they were very responsive and there for you. However, when I
transferred it was much harder there to switch from semester to quarter. It was a shorter
time and it was more intense; and there was more material to retain in a shorter time.
And most importantly, what added to the difficultly was the professors were not readily
available for students and seemed to be a lot more focused on their own research. I don’t
regret transferring because in their absence I guess I got the experience and confidence to
withstand pressure and I’m able to carry on regardless of sleepless nights or what I go
through. I think I learned in my experience how to get what I need and be resourceful.
The resources were better at the university level for STEM females. Nonetheless, I got
through those last two years, although they were tough, I was able to learn in a short time,
retain the material, and graduate! (FG2, 2015)

Contrastingly, if you were a transfer student that had attended a diverse community
college and moved to an MSI, the faculty interactions were similar to the community college
setting, more available, one-on-one, hands-on, and responsive, except for the adjustment of the
time length of classes and rigor. Both transferring students agreed that in community college,
professors had a very strong presence and seemed more attentive with the learning of their
students; however, had fewer resources than their four-year universities. However, they also
stated, in a 4-year university there were some faculty members with strong expertise outside of
the classroom that can be beneficial for your career and affiliations pursuits. Additionally,
comparatively they found in a four-year university there were more well-trained advisors, which
better knew options available for you. Advisory staff also seemed better versed in counseling
students for those stressed-out periods and offering other supports.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 92

Ethnicity and cultural background were another factor in shaping their experience of
integration. The level to which a female STEM student experienced integration in their higher
educational setting depended on the ethnic background and culture. STEM women from the
Middle East were in agreement to the following that was stated:
Okay, I’m coming from the Middle East where it is very, very conservative and it is
being governed by radical Islam now. It’s really hard to communicate with male genders
back there like you cannot even compare what we have here in the United States. In all
of academia males and females sit apart, you sit on one side of the classroom and they sit
on the other. You feel the pressure even more. Here in the states, when I have friends
that tell me in school there’s only one female in the class, I tell them you should’ve
experienced what I experienced in the Middle East. Comparatively there is no pressure
here compared to there. Here I feel that I am just a student that is being asked a question
that’s a different gender in the class. No pressure. We are the same . . . just students that
are different genders. Back there it is a totally different story. In the Middle East, there
is so much attention to how a female reacts and they can label you because of your
answering a certain question in a certain way. And it’s a bad label on you. Being here in
the diverse university environment I attended was a plus for me. However, here when
I’m the only girl, to be honest I enjoyed it because when you interact with males they
were more willing to help you and if you asked questions they are willing to help you.
(FG2, 2015)

Depending on the ethnicity or cultural background and/or those who have come from
more conservatively traditional backgrounds (25% sampled) seemed to fare (less frustrated)
better in integration in male dominated majors as it related to gender roles. They were aware and
acknowledged the disparities between men and women; however, inequalities were more
minimized and accepting as “this is just how it is […] men are considered better” perspective
compared to the other respondents.
Contrastingly, the other 50% of the ethnically diverse respondents did not fare as well,
citing experiences with traditional gender roles as a significant obstacle for maneuvering to
success as it was embedded in every day interactions, norms, and socialization. Gender roles are
the behavior and attitude that are appropriate based on being males and females, roles they are
sorted into and controlled by and what is expected of you in that role. Traditional gender roles
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 93

are tied to the historical content and placement of their fixed role and position of being in a
subordinate and inferior status to males in education and society at large. These respondents
reported barriers and strategies to maneuver in STEM fields due to male hegemony, gender
stratification (unequal access on the basis of their sex of wealth, po`wer, prestige), and
condescending and male superior environments.
The said barriers which have been shaped by American historical context produced a
sex/gender-based communication in their interactions as another obstacle. As a result, most
communication reflected a one-style based communication for men with women in STEM. Most
male responses were reflective both verbally and non-verbally in some way as the female being
biologically, physically, mentally weaker and thus, subordinate and inferior in ability.
Additionally, respondents reported communication exchanges were based on as if they were
being treated as if they were a girlfriend, wife, or mother in interactions, and expected to reply
responsively to their requests. Respondents reported there were sometimes looks of disapproval
or different forms of negative sanctions. If you did not want to do something their way in a
group project, there was pressure to do it their way or end up looking incompetent in front of the
group since you did not do as instructed. Respondents stated males often had a difficult time
when called on to interact in a multi-role fashion, which were responses that required replies
from them to a woman as a peer, equal, or leadership role position. At times there appeared to be
a type of role confusion for appropriate responses which was an additional obstacle within the
communications. Respondents agreed this area of multi-role communications needed a new
space for development between males and females. Additionally, there was a need for
instruction on communication for colleagues, as equal or as a leader. Nonetheless, women saw
this as an advantage for women because they have this multi-role communication style which
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 94

was also an accepted trait (verbal and connectedness) promoted in society belonging to females.
This will be discussed later in the study. The tandem group members gave examples that in
college males often would assign tasks to you, take charge of your work, ignore you or take you
for granted as if you were “obligated to put up with their behavior or requests” in whatever tone
you had been directed. One respondent summed it up by saying:
I’m not your girlfriend, wife or mother. I’m not in an intimate relationship with you and
not invested in doing what you want me to do. I have my own way to explore how to
solve problems, create, and innovate. I need and welcome your help as a peer, which is
no different than what you would offer our male collegiate members. (FG1, 2015)

Traditional, or historical gender roles, were considered by the respondents as one of the most
difficult issues to tackle, for it was fiercely pervasive in some form and had tentacles in many
facets in various settings.
Additionally, in class women had to endure climate interactions that influenced the
overall environment. Climate issues seemed to be subtler and entangled in the listed cluster of
integration barriers. Adverse climate issues were also infused in interactions of power in sex and
race. In class, women stated they had to: “endure the inappropriate comments that females were
overly emotional, have some inability, in need of help, and what a woman does not need” (in
some form of gender stratification) between male classmates along with other forms of
stereotyping (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015). In addition to sex and gender exchanges were
jokes about both sex and race, which reified double-bind. Of which respondents affirmed, if you
did not laugh and look in agreement with comments, you were considered overly “politically
correct or too sensitive.” In discussions there were copious statements that affirmed this
response below regarding gender roles:
If a woman steps out of her box, asserts herself, or gets angry, she’s considered and, or
called a bitch. That is the first word and easiest word that comes out of their (males)
mouths. I’ve seen this since I was 10 years old. It’s often the way of putting us (women)
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 95

down through belittling to keep us in our place. But I think it is really not us it is their
own lack of insight of women and their inability to deal with things they are not ready for
and wanting to keep the status quo [. . . ] it has nothing to do with what you said
necessarily but, their self-importance is involved. And I know that fear is tied to
misogyny and misogyny is a facet in society and maybe that’s why. I don’t even think
men are aware in all the ways they reflect misogynic attitudes. (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015;
FG3, 2015)

Additionally, in regards to STEM climates in the class as being “cold” the consensus was
STEM classes were “no chillier than any other general education classes” (FG1, 2015; FG2,
2015; FG3, 2015). Respondents stated any coldness faced was just met with sitting in front,
forced engagement, staying visible for the professor enough that your name was known and
participating in office hours. This was a type of refusal to being invisible graduates admitted.
Respondents stated overall the chillness was resultant often of the professor’s inabilities in
classroom management, something offensive from speaking outside of their subject expertise
(English teacher’s opinion on slavery implications) or the disconnections in interactions with
classmates, not a particular subject.
Likewise, respondents stated men were not the only ones who were hard on women in the
treatment in a collegiate setting. At times, attitudes of male hegemony, male superiority, and
female incompetence were adopted by females. Respondents stated since females are in male
dominant fields they are at risk of adoptions as well. Women, because of the societal smog they
were socialized also produced hardship in treatment and hold strict adherence to male standards
on other females; however, the reasons were sometimes different. One salient reason the group
members stated was they considered themselves as being seen in their STEM communities as a
collective unit and not an individual allowed to make mistakes as men were often seen and
permitted to do. These statements resonated as the consensus:
My mom graduated from West Point and she was one of the first classes that all four
years had women in it. She was promoted into a position of leadership there. I
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 96

remember her telling me when I was little she was always harder on women. I would tell
her that didn’t make any sense. After all we’re girls! She would repeatedly explain that
if a woman falls behind it’s really bad because that’s what they (men) expect you to do.
There’s only 10 of us females, so if one of us shows any shortcomings it’s a significant
amount of us who can’t keep up and don’t belong. If you want to stay here inadequacy
can’t be tolerated for females. The comments from the men were going to be – look at
how bad we (women) all are and overall how much we all suck. Even though, if one man
falls behind its just him. There’s hundreds of men and he is part of a big population. But
because there so few of us, any lack seems to reflect on all of us. (FG1, 2015)

It was more difficult at times to work with female STEM professors because they were
under some of the same pressures female STEM students were under. As a result, in
class they tended to be stricter and inflexible on female students as not to look as there
was any biases from them. They were hard to figure out sometimes. However,
sometimes in office hours they seemed more relaxed and able to assist you more,
unmonitored. (FG2, 2015)

There was a consensus in these experiences which were the same until their third year.
Junior year, during upper division classes, was an extremely important time in which knowledge
that has been mostly retained and used in STEM disciplines was mostly attained in this period.
However, gender roles’ dynamics and knowledge were understood more later in their sophomore
year. Integrational challenges were a salient consideration in whether some decided to continue
or not during the sophomore year based on these interpersonal dynamics with male students and
professors. Respondents stated freshman year was a blur with these dynamics. The first
collegiate year was a “time when it is known there were some disparities but, can’t put your
finger on it since you are just trying to find your way, get to class, manage your time, and find
money to eat and pay tuition” (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015)
Knowledge Exemplars for Integration Success
In regards to addressing the STEM challenges that ensued and the women’s ability to
maneuver to success, as one respondent stated, “one must remember diamonds are made through
pressure” (FG3, 2015). And although it was not always pleasant, the women reported
“invaluable” knowledge and skills procured from their experience in higher education, both
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 97

directly and indirectly, which made them not only persist to STEM degree attainment, but assist
them in their successes today in their early STEM careers. These barriers to integration created a
disconnect and kept social ties to their majors loose to their STEM community. In regards to the
integration obstacles (listed in Table 3) experienced throughout their university tenure, tandem
group members reported obtaining heuristic knowledge to address the barriers. Heuristic
knowledge is locally given and is procured experientially. For the purpose of this study, there is
an emphasis on heuristic knowledge and the STEM graduate as the expert for success. These
skills were procured during their higher education experience (directly and indirectly) and were
consciously utilized to maneuver towards STEM degree attainment. This was both knowledge
and skills respondents stated they did not have prior to attending university institutions. Table 4
reflects the higher education experiential knowledge procured that facilitated in their
maneuvering for successful integration.
The knowledge exemplars were analyzed from responses from the unfolding matrix of
how respondents handled the barriers, the knowledge procured, and experienced some success in
its utilization. These knowledge exemplars specified were reported as the most frequently skills
needed in dealing with integrational challenges in university settings (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015;
FG3, 2015).

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 98

Table 4

Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates: Category Integration
Knowledge Exemplars for Integration
 Know how to seek help and be reflective about your individual needs
 Know how to reduce stereotypes in environments (in you and others)
 Know how to shape interactions with those who need to heighten their cultural and
gender competencies
 Know how to embrace multi-role communications
 Know how to use soft skills advantageously
 Know the dynamics in leadership, sex/gender, and cultural settings at all times
 Know how femininity is efficient, effective, and productive
 Know how to lead like a woman, not a man

Six of the respondents stated they spent a huge part of their time trying to not just fit in
with the boys, but being the boys. They stated they were submerged in most things masculine
and had to find ways to be a part of their communities as much as they could. Respondents
stated they just didn’t know how to keep themselves as a person nor not be unconsciously
swallowed up in their masculine environments. Knowing when and how you need help was
important to their persistence and integration. Many respondents didn’t want to ask for help
because of the perceived stigma of “well of course dear you need help; after all you are a
woman” (FG1, 2015; FG3, 2015). Six of the respondents reported not wanting to ask for help
because they did not want to meet the negative expectancy in their settings that could reinforce
“low expectation or unsuccessfulness” by asking for help. The collective belief was “if I’m in
college I should just know, just like the guys, I’m smart and omniscient” (FG1, 2015; FG3,
2015). One student shared her experience by saying she spent copious time in some type of
feminine discoloration in order it be a part and be accepted. She noticed she had to some extent
take on an adverse perspective regarding women themselves and began to diminish anything that
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 99

could be perceived as feminine. As discussed, in some regards as a female undergraduate some
took on misogynistic attitudes themselves regarding each other. Those who fell into this state
contributed their escape of this perspective to having assistance through great STEM mentors,
STEM related internships, and quality university leadership programs. Five respondents stated
the turning point for them was when they became internally reflective (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015;
FG3, 2015). Those who took advantage of these opportunities agreed with this statement:
In college, I was trying to be a man and did whatever I could to avoid looking feminine
or too girly. I tried not be emotional, learn, outperform, not be loud, and do my work. I
would talk badly about traits that I perceived as female. I’m comfortable in
acknowledging not being a guy more now than I was in college. In college it was more
about fitting in with my classmates, being one of the guys and blending in. And now it is
more what can I do to stand out because of this knowledge. I think this knowledge
started in college because of a leadership program. I interacted with more women than I
did in my classes, I saw more women excel in their field and the program, and were given
credit for being women who excelled in their field. These women who were successful
were accepted in their circle and remain a girl. They were not blend-in girls. I think that
is why the sparks started for me accepting my feminine uniqueness and stop trying to be
one of the boys. I understood good performance was going to have to be enough as a
female and that only can make you win. I understood no matter what I did I was never
going to be male anyway. And because I stopped buying into the negative female
stereotypes in college, I was told by male classmates I helped them understand how to
work better with me as a woman and from my perspective. (FG1, 2015)

Group members stated knowing when to seek help and be reflective on your needs have
facilitated in solving persistence needs and led to various forms of achievement. Resolving and
sorting their own gender challenges freed their mobility. Additionally, for the respondents,
having these types of experiences facilitated in them having some triumphs in knowing how to
teach those who may need to heighten their cultural and gender competencies as well.
Respondents agreed by “unpacking your own stereotypes in your own environment you reduce
them, and therefore, can assist others in reducing theirs” thereby heightening their cultural and
gender competencies in the process (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015). This statement
resonates as a consensus:
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 100

I plan and move within the educational structure by fully understanding its constraints
and mobility for both the sex I am and the skin I’m in. I know some of us have
wonderful parents and some don’t, but we all get a backpack in life to fill up which has
been shaped by our experiences. Women and minorities have more things we put in that
backpack (like our purses have the kitchen sink) because we need more items often to
help others and not necessary for ourselves. We may actually need less than we carry,
but to make things work we carry extra for others . . . so I ask you who really has the
areas of insufficiency? And based on what has been placed through experiences and
interactions in that backpack, especially while in college, means you have learned what
works and what doesn’t, what to unpack for later or completely discard because it was
disastrous. And this takes time and paying attention to you, your psychological health,
mentality, your efforts, and consciously and consistently digging through this stuff.
Especially the harder stuff because it’s the hardest stuff that really shapes your
confidence. It is these experiences that has shaped the way you talk to people, your
ability to interact with people, and know how to shape your gender and race interactions.
(FG1, 2015)

Another important knowledge discovery to increase persistence at college was how to
embrace multi-role communications. The majority of the respondents stated although they
adamantly disagreed and were often angry in dealing with traditional gender roles, especially in
realms of academia and now career, they use still have to use a traditional gender role
communication style as a starting point to teach for those who need it, and then little at a time
switch to a more peer-based interaction. The respondents stated that productivity was increased
when the communication was more traditional which includes looking attractive (adding
lipstick), being sugar and spice (extra polite, soft tones), and overall non-threatening in any
verbal or non-verbal interactions when assistance was requested. Not necessarily flirtatiously or
dummy down as four group members reported many of the other females do in class which
seems to get even more male assistance; however, a little traditional interspersed goes a long
way. “Males’ understanding of providing help for the damsel in distress can work to your
advantage in accomplishing goals” (FG1, 2015; FG3, 2015). The narrative below reflects these
sentiments:
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 101

During group projects, women were usually the last selected on the team. Sometimes the
professor would have to assign females to teams or collaborative projects. When
working with males and you are the only female voice, it is often as if they can’t hear
you. It is clear that the answer to what is programmatic is to simply open the jar.
However, the males would often want to discuss in the details the ways and best ways to
proceed in opening the jar, the process, and so forth. The discourse in class were good,
however, sometimes there were time constraints. As women, we have jumped into the
discussion and no one can hear us or talk over us. Sometimes our ideas were credited to
someone else. So in order to expedite time and be a contributor in the solution, the
female partner may politely ask can you guys help me get the jar lid off, with a very non-
threatening smile and immediately the jar is opened and the problem solved. It’s not to
say they do this intentionally but, it makes me wonder why can’t they hear my voice
alone. Why is it the cry for help they readily hear? I learned then which things can be
your learning tools and which battles to pick. As a woman, you have enough battles and
each one different. (FG1, 2015)

For those who speak or can hear more “traditional” languages, meeting them where they
were in communication as a way to expedite time in accomplishing a project and open the door
to show them how to elevated gender and cultural competencies.
Neither one of us may have created this exchange, or even want it because it is so
laborious, but it’s here and we have to work with and through it sometimes to reach
goals. Maybe not all males speak this language or have this form of communication, but
many of them seem to, especially those in STEM fields. (FG1, 2015)

In this scenario femininity (in traditional ways) was efficient, effective, and productive. This
skill was utilized by all women regardless of ethnicity, age, or diverse sexual orientations.
Additionally, connected to embracing multi-role communication knowledge was the
knowledge of soft skills usage. Soft skills have been described as the emotional quotient which
is attached to the emotional literacy of a person. It is attached to a person’s traits that identify,
comprehend, and apply knowledge in communications, leadership, and ability to manage people
as it relates to having the ability of building relationships, trust, and morale (Duncan & Dunifon,
2012). Hard skills are the technical expertise and subject knowledge whereas soft skills are all
the other myriad of skills that it takes to bring a task to successful completion in working with
people or a team. Employers now state that to be offered employment soft skills are just as
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 102

important as hard skills in workforce settings (Heckman & Kautz, 2012). Respondents reported
that their softness or non-threatening approach as a woman worked in their favor, as sharing and
connectedness with people were not used against them as a power dynamic. These women
reported knowing that all these roles contribute to understanding the whole person, having this
skillset was advantageous. Connectedness has primarily been seen as a natural biological
function and trait of women in society (Henslin, 2012), even though these women state it takes
work to stay connected and use soft skills. Respondents confirmed that their conscientious in
paying attention to how to use them, when best to use them, calculate the response of others, and
how statements can be viewed. The consensus agreed with this statement:
I think with women we have a lot of different spectrums and layers in our communication
and our ability to connect to many types of people. I think if I could be the positive one
here, I would say we are at an advantage in our industries because men can’t easily do
what we do, they just can’t. But don’t tell my boss. I’m bringing this up because I
learned to sharpen this skill in college through good and frustrating experiences in
interactions and having good resources in leadership. I know men are just as capable in
terms of their brains, but the whole womanly emotional connecting thing, not many men
can do although there are probably some. I have known many great men leaders who are
great, but they don’t have that. The great women leaders I know can do what men do in
STEM expertise and connect to different people as well. There is an advantage there. I
think that it is also societally driven. You have a lot of alpha females that can get it done
like a man and be soft at the same time. You don’t have a lot of alpha males who have
the same softness and that makes sense because men are certainly not taught that
(emotional, softness in interaction). Many males are taught to lead by fear and power. I
don’t have to lead like a man, I can lead like a woman and have success. I worked with a
seasoned Caucasian guy who was my manager and he would always laugh at me and say
I don’t know how you get people to open up so easily. Because after the first week with
all my subcontractors I knew if they were married, going through a divorce, what the kids
were doing, to make them mad. And all I had to do and say good morning, how is going,
that’s all I had to say and people open up to me. He would go on to say by the end of
next week you will have them wrapped around your finger, getting them to do whatever
you need. But, I understand, like it or not, people bring their whole self into the room
(roles and positions). All of these have the ability to impact productivity at college or
work. I can use the characteristics that may be considered as weakness, softness,
feminine attributes to build trust and inspire without fear, because some people will let
me in only because I’m a woman. For me, that makes me a great leader, valuable, and
powerful in any setting. (FG1, 2015)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 103

Overcoming Barriers to Success – Drives
Research Question 2. What drives female STEM students to persist to degree completion in
STEM settings?
To address the question of what drives female STEM students to persist in a higher
education setting, the findings were imbedded in both normative content and social processes
themes. The normative content housed the rules, standards, and social order of everyday life that
were intertwined in culture, value, and ideologies of a social setting. Actions, motives, and
drives were regulated and controlled mostly covertly in this content. Likewise, was the
transmission of these ideologies and values to an individual. As a result, persistence was
influenced by the pressure to conform within both normative content and socialization processes
in higher education settings. The pressures from normative content and socialization processes
ultimately shaped their drive, barriers, and calculations needed to strive to success. Table 5 lists
the barrier exemplars (normative) for drives to persistence in degree completion in a STEM
setting. These are the barriers women had to overcome to be successful Figure 4 Wordle
construct reflects the frequency in barrier exemplars for normative content (drives).
All eight of the respondents answered that the negative experiences have just as much
weight as the positive experiences that keep their fires burning in STEM and paving the road to
accomplishment. They acknowledged these obstacles should be eliminated so that there could be
equity and equality for all; however, until that day has manifested, some of the negatives make
them hold the STEM reins a bit tighter.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 104

Table 5

Taxonomy of Barriers for STEM Women Undergraduates: Category Drives
Barrier Category Barriers Exemplars – Drives (Normative Content)
2. Normative
Content
2.1 Negative Sanctions/Punishment
2.2 Unknown Misogyny
2.3 Alpha Males
2.4 Anger
2.5 Role Conflict
2.6 Femininity Contradiction
2.7 Condescending Environment
2.8 Low graduate success rates

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 105

Figure 4: Wordle Barrier Exemplar – Drive (Normative Content)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 106

The consensus stated the normative rules, standards, and social order of everyday life
were frustrating at times and could stoke the flames of anger instead of the fire to persistence.
As stated, the overarching regular interactions have alpha males often with unknown misogynic
attitudes and condescension can be laborious. Respondents stated even the rules aren’t the same
for both men and women in treatment. Respondents agreed in the classroom setting, men’s
mistakes were marginalized and their knowledge was magnified, while a woman’s knowledge
was marginalized and her mistakes magnified. “When a male was incorrect he basically
misspoke and it’s just a mistake; if she was incorrect, its due to her significant lack of
knowledge” (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015). Additionally, for every good suggestion made
in class by a female, a male somehow was the recipient of its praise.
Males were often given credit for good suggestions that were initiated by a woman.
Sometimes the classmates could only hear the male voice when they repeated the
woman’s idea, even though she had stated it repeatedly. So we have to work harder to be
seen and be heard and really think about how to do it in every setting which is different.
And when I say really think what the best way to respond should be. That goes beyond
how to calculate how to pay tuition because everyone must do that so it does not require
additional effort. (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015)

This was valid at school and continues into the workplace. In everyday life, there were
some form (slight or large) of negative sanctions or punishment if the women did not understand
what the social order consists of in the setting. And the challenges to dowse their drives even
more were that they must be content with themselves in their own personal role conflicts,
feminine contradictions, and fight through any self-doubt from the barrage of negative female
STEM achievement and low success that was frequently promoted in the media and academic
realms.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 107

Knowledge Exemplars for Drive Success (Normative)
Despite the copious obstacles from external forces that have been cited, the adamant
consensus was they themselves were their largest obstacle to persistence. The hardest part was
to persist despite the negativity and no one could do that but them. The respondents stated they
had to “unlearn” the very same ideologies, values, and norms that others may have believed
about their abilities and competencies. They had to and continue to fight against slipping back
into the world of deficits ascribed and assigned to them by society and left by the educational
legacy. At times, the knowledge procured to drive was in both bitter and sweet conditions,
separately and combined. Experiencing both allowed them an opportunity to build these skills
and individually create their own personal drives to persist.
Following, the Narrative Compilations (1-9) reflect the knowledge found in Table 6 that
was procured in their higher education stories that facilitated in their drive to persist in higher
education. The most common ways they drove to persistence involved making conscientious
adjustments regularly to their own drives, knowing why they were doing it (family, altruistic,
duty, challenge), finding individual ways to stay engaged and inspired, having professors who
love what they did infectiously drove them, great role models, using their anger positively, and
clutching a continued focus on exploring and cultivating their craft.
Narrative 1:

It is very difficult not to stereotype yourself around alpha males. Clicking off all the ‘can
I do this tapes and messages can be hard. So I know getting over myself was the biggest
obstacle in college. Just getting me out of the way so I would not trip myself up was the
challenge. There was an example with my counselor. He was a great counselor but, I
didn’t want to listen because he told me from his assessment I was a better match in
construction engineering than civil. Well construction to me was where people went who
could not handle civil engineer. I thought he was stereotyping me because I was a Latina.
I was so offended and angry with him I contemplated quitting, but every day now I’m
thankful because he was right. He connected me to an internship in construction and I
loved it so I switched my focus in engineering, before I wasted money and time. I
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 108

realized I was stereotyping (man trying to keep a woman down) so I would not be
stereotyped. I was wrong and in my own way. It wasn’t because my counselor thought
any less of me, but because he had experience counseling people and so he knew.
Getting over myself enough to listen to someone that has an opposing view and
acknowledge I don’t know everything and I do need to learn things was huge. For me
this was an important turning point to know that a huge obstacle to my success could be
me and there was no bigger enemy to beat me than me. I also learned to make the best
choices for me not a sex, regardless if that choice aligns with gender stereotypes or not.
Likewise, good advisory can be invaluable in continuing. And knowing just because you
know a lot does not mean you have to know it all. That’s a relief, lessens the pressure
and helps you go on. (FG1, 2015)

Narrative 2:

I was my own obstacle in my drive just because I could not get out of my own head. I
don’t think I fully understood this until the end of my junior year. Not believing any of
the negativity was difficult for me at first. But steadily I built my confidence with every,
and sometimes even small successes and then I congratulated me. First my drive was to
prove them all (naysayers) wrong, prove I could break past their molds and boxes for me.
Then I realized I first had to prove me wrong. To me, we ladies are own biggest obstacle
no one else. You can’t stop me if I refuse to be stopped. Once I decided I would only let
go of those ‘I-can’t-believe-he-said-that’ moments and allow myself to have positive
anger (because the mistreatment is wrong) it really becomes a pole vaulting stick that lifts
you over your goal bar. Then you can press on! I could keep going when it was hard in
college because I learned and now know where my restrictions and limitations are, seek
help and be okay with removing the “S” off my chest (for superwoman). I learned in
collaborative work that there is always someone who can do something better than you
can in college, so make your contributions, be satisfied and happy with what you
contribute. That’s why it’s a team and there is no I in team. I eventually learned to work
at my own pace and I don’t over promise trying to fit in. I just perform at my level of
excellence and know the areas I’m good in. If I don’t have the answers, I will find the
resources, just like I did then. Driving in my own lane helps me to persist. (FG1, 2015)

Narrative 3:

I learned how to stay inspired through seeing other women in my academic or career
field. Another way I learned to persist was by knowing when it’s not my problem, so
move on. After experiencing some rejection from the boys’ club in college, I sought out
women in the field who were speakers. I would attend different universities if necessary
to hear them. I compiled a list of those I thought were really doing something in the
industry to and listen to and read about them. This helped me to even start to connect
more with the women around me and meet others in that circle. Anyway, as time went
on, I learned how to connect with the different personalities and still be me regardless and
talk to them. I could not make anyone want to work with me and this was not my
problem, I just stayed open to working with them. (FG3, 2015)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 109

Narrative 4:

I recently had this conversation with a coworkers and he didn’t understand why women
needed to see other women in the college fields anymore. He stated, you know they’re
there whether you see them or not. I told him how important it was and it was easy to
envision yourself in that position or place when you see similarities of yourself in others.
You think you can be in that place or position too. I told him how a female teacher’s
presence and words encouraged me when I wanted to withdraw because it all seemed
hard. She caught me after class and asked if I was alright and told me to hang in there
because as sure as she stood there, I could too where ever I wanted. And this gentleman
he wasn’t putting it down and he’s not a bad guy. I think they (men) don’t get it because
they haven’t been a little girl. They see themselves everywhere and in everything. He
doesn’t understand that when you’re little we envision ourselves in someone like us. A
girl does not necessarily need to see a lot of us but, one can impact, it can be very
powerful. (FG1, 2015)

Narrative 5:

For immigrant parents, it is very important that they are taken care of so our
responsibilities and duties are culturally different. Coming from a different culture there
are a lot of expectations from the parents and the pressure not to go back on my word. I
do want to be a doctor but, my family is also a motivation because that was what I told
them that I was going to do. My self-expectations and my confidence also drives me to
continue because I believe I can. I can be the first doctor in my family. I want for my
parents to look and feel they have achieved and how much they went right in raising me
and given me all they could. (FG2, 2015)

Narrative 6:

There is a certain level of family expectation. The parents do their best to raise their kids
with the tight band. There is an expectation for that exchange and parents have a level of
expectation in those kids. We are not forced but, there is an expectation to achieve
certain educational gains and be in a career that’s considered valuable in their culture and
prestigious. (FG2, 2015)

Narrative 7:

In computer science it’s a field that you must stay on top of things and regularly update
your skills. As we learned in college, technology moves very quickly and it is the same
way in the workplace. If I had a younger sister I would tell her to stay engaged in her
field in order to persist, explore your crafts and those around it. I would tell her in STEM
you must constantly improve yourself and your skill set. Know your field because
technology is very competitive and you will have to want to compete. Be good at what
you do and stay competitive. That will keep you in the game in school and afterwards.
(FG2, 2015)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 110

Narrative 8:

My drive has lot to do with my family. Of course the final decision was mine, but my
family’s belief in me and supports and keeps me moving forward. Additionally, I have
also been fortunate enough to have some wonderful professors in higher education that
impacted my love for science. College only cultivated the love that I had for science and
made me want to pursue being a doctor even more. It all sparked my love of learning in
this field and kept it interesting. It’s easy to persist when your professors love what they
do because it is infectious and you want to know more. And because of them I cannot
see myself in any other field except science and math. (FG2, 2015)

Narrative 9:

My drive is often fueled by the need to give back to others if I’m successful in this field.
I can really make a difference and help people. I can make contributions to my
community. I can teach other little girls what I’m doing is possible for them as well. I
want to be there for the next generation so they will have me to look up to as other role
models and mentors have been a driving force for me. I want to be the advantage they
have since they have so many hurdles. I guess I kept going partially, so I could pay it
forward. (FG 3, 2015)

From these discussions the unfolding matrix revealed the following knowledge as it
related to daily normative content in how female STEM women drive to persistence. Table 6
represents the compiled knowledge of the most frequently emergents discussed by group
members that have led to success.

Table 6
Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates: Category Drives
Knowledge Exemplars for Drive (Normative)
 Know how to get out of your own way
 Know how to identify your own stereotyping
 Know how to channel anger positively
 Know how to address internal role conflicts
 Know when it is not your problem
 Know how to work perceived negative feelings into positives
 Know pros and cons of STEM fields
 Know your how to stay engaged with your field
 Know what to use to keep the fires flame
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 111

Table 6 (Cont’d.)

Knowledge Exemplars for Drive (Normative)
 Know how to keep the picture or visual in front of you
 Know the value of updating skills/continuous improvement

The other significant theme that emerged in the drive to persist was the socialization
process. The socialization process reflected how the drive to persistence influenced the
transmission processes of the normative content. Table 7 represents the findings of STEM
women undergraduates’ drives to persistence. These are the barriers women had to overcome to
be successful. Figure 5 Wordle construct reflects the frequency in barrier exemplars for Drive
(Socialization Process).

Table 7

Taxonomy of Barriers for STEM Women Undergraduates: Category Drives (continued)

Barrier Category Barrier Exemplars – Drive (Socialization Process)
3. Socialization
Processes
3.1 Alienation
3.2 Isolation
3.3 Language/communication
3.4 Marginalization
3.5 Microaggressions
3.6 Assertiveness Backlash
3.7 Misunderstanding of Egalitarian/Matriarchal Backgrounds
3.8 Males non requirement to understand females (Ignorance)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 112

Figure 5: Wordle Barrier Exemplar Frequency – Drive (Socialization Processes)
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 113

As stated there were significant challenges in the interaction process. In the American
socialization process many of these obstacles exist as part of the historical legacy passed down.
It is such a part of the American fabric many of these barriers are learned without necessarily
conscience knowledge. These transmissions make it difficult to persist as it influences your
daily drive and adds regular pressure. The social constraints can add so much pressure that it can
make you feel forced to “first comply by becoming invisible in your setting, next absent, and
then withdraw from the discipline” (FG1, 2015; FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015). Respondents reported
these fuel isolation and alienation as the drive is influenced with feelings of anxiety, separateness
and loneliness, as well as disconnection and sense of powerlessness to change their settings.
As discussed in the previous findings, respondents reported there were substantial
communication issues; however, in socialization the women stated that it’s not just sex-based
language that was an issue for persistence, but, world languages as well as cultural aspects.
American citizens (50%) respondents who spoke other languages than English found it difficult
to understand more American cultural nuances and idioms in addition to the actual grasp of the
English language. One respondent reported that she selected her second choice science major,
physics over a social science, because she thought her first choice in social sciences required
more understanding of American idioms. There were other challenges with language as well in
the classroom regarding transmission, some English words just don’t translate over well for some
groups who speak more languages and they need more time to process some words.
Hesitation or time to process for females translated into a confirmation of why females
should be marginalized. It supported reasons in class “not listening to my comments or take
them serious” (FG2, 2015; FG3, 2015). And some respondents stated likewise, they had been
marginalized by some women as well in kind of a “dismissive fashion.” However, males were
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 114

more condescending and interacted more with aggression regarding sex and race. And any
responses to their insults can result in assertiveness backlash (considered a bitch, angry black
woman, that time of the month). Another respondent added this comment to others:
Additionally, I don’t think some people understand that not everyone has not come from
a male dominant culture background. Some of us were raised to be a strong (black)
women culturally. It is the expectation for us culturally. Women from these
backgrounds, especially African-American women and my girls from South America,
seem to be foreign or deviant to them. (FG1, 2015)

It was further summed up by the group in this statement, “Males are not required to know
anything about us. Nothing and no one requires them to know. Maybe they feel there is no
punishment or adverse consequence they see so it’s not a big deal.” (FG1, 2015)
Knowledge Exemplars for Drive Success (Socialization Processes)
Respondents agreed they had more success in the socialization process by finding new
transmissions to infuse their drives. Respondents affirmed if they were to continue in these
environments they would need new or alternative ways to transmit ideologies and values to
facilitate in persistence and stimulate their drives. These would need to be more positive to
negate the dispersions cast on them as STEM women.
The following Narrative Compilations (1-3) reflect the knowledge found in Table 8 that
was procured in STEM women’s higher education stories that facilitated their drive to persist in
socialization processes. The most important ways shared that drove persistence involved making
important the validation of the transmissions of knowledge from diverse women, building their
confidence in their abilities and skill level, adding positive self-talk regularly of their value, and
surrounding themselves around a support system that motivated them in hard times.
Narrative 1:

I’m also a big fan of women in STEM teaching other young women in STEM. We as
women don’t have role models, especially women of color. We need physical examples
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 115

and they don’t need to be needles in a haystack or hard to find. Mentors and comradery
are readily available for men because the fields are dominated by them. I’m already at a
disadvantage because I am part of a small group of women and even smaller when I add
race. My drive has increased from time to time when I see physically a person, who may
share my looks and possibly languages, teaching me. And if she is good at what she
does, as a woman I think I walk a little taller from class. I don’t see myself in an old
white man. I think it even improves our knowledge of women’s capabilities and drives
toward goals. Although I think it is good for men to see competent women too, I also
think women need to increase their knowledge in culture and gender competencies as
well. (FG1, 2015)

Narrative 2

Right before I was going to drop out, I realized then that it was just my fear and that I
was so scared that I didn’t know as much as they (males) did. My fear was that they
knew everything and maybe I don’t know as much. The professor who encouraged me to
stay told me the males in class tend to overestimate their ability sometimes, and
unfortunately feel they have to because they are male. So in the classroom the real issue
was how they (males) had to pretend they know, whereas females think they need to
know lots before they talk about the subject. An example of this is with my younger
brother who I graduated with together from the same field. And I noticed our different
approaches to how we were looking through jobs and their descriptions. If there were
five duties and if I didn’t have all five, I wouldn’t apply. However, if my brother had two
or three he would still apply. I asked him ‘why are you applying, why aren’t you scared
that you don’t have all of the experience?’ He said, ‘listen I know that I can learn and I
have ability, when I interview I will tell them what I know in this area and I know that,
but I can learn in some of these other areas in technology.’ I realized then he and other
males are not necessary pretending, but are maybe more confident in their ability to learn.
And when I talked to my female friends I found that they were thinking just as I did that
95% of the skills needed to be mastered before applying. Whereas with males they are
confident internally and they have it inbred in them that they can learn whatever it is. It
is our lack of confidence in ability or need for complete mastery that makes this
challenging and I think it is the same reason we sell ourselves at a lower price. (FG2,
2015)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 116

Narrative 3

You need to have a good support system one that keeps you going. Stay around people
who can keep you motivated and have a positive outlook in hard times. There are times
you will feel overwhelmed and pressure, but over coming is a part of your life’s success.
When you get through it, you will feel stronger. I told myself I refused to become
invisible no matter what. That my voice matters and has impact on this world. I forced
myself to always ask questions, always stay curious, and be open. I will tell myself stay
determined and pursue it, you’re the only person that can do this, no one else can do this
for you. It’s hard to ignore who won’t slink to the back or go away quietly although you
may feel this way some times. Its challenging not to hide because those around you act
as if you are invisible. I decided I would not keep silent, I would share, be seen, and not
be afraid to shine regardless of who it made uncomfortable. (FG3, 2015)

From these discussions, the unfolding matrix revealed the following knowledge as it
related to socialization processes in how female STEM women drive to persistence. Table 8
represents the compiled knowledge of the most frequently emergents discussed by group
members that have guided them to success. Figure 6 Wordle construct reflects the frequency in
barrier exemplars for drive (socialization process).

Table 8

Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates: Category Drives – Socialization Process
(Cont’d.)

Knowledge Exemplars for Drive (Socialization Processes)
 Know how to find ways to heighten your cultural and gender competencies
 Know how to build develop and maintain confidence
 Know your ability for continued growth
 Know the value of continuously asking questions
 Know the importance and how to reach out to others and others to you for help
 Know how to stay visible and shine

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 117

Overcoming Barriers to Success – Supports
Research Question 3: What supports do women in STEM utilize to successfully maneuver for
achievement in their undergraduate University incumbency?
To address the question, what supports do women in STEM utilized to successfully
maneuver to achievement seemed to resonated with how underachievement was the product of a
society that differentially structured access to resources. As stated, resource stratifications
seemed to be contingent on the service structure in integration. Respondents affirmed that they
often had to try their alternative plans due to not having accessibility to resources. Sometimes
respondents stated it was not because they were not available, but because resources and
supports were hindered through poor marketing and late dates in notifications of supports and
resources by the institution. Likewise, outreach and recruitment (targeting) efforts were
somewhat ineffective; sometimes because the written and marketing materials from the
universities were offensive. One respondent stated “trying to get me to come hear what they had
to say while addressing me as underserved, underrepresented or some other lowly, unseen status
did not inspire me to listen or be involved. I had to find other alternatives” (FG3, 2015).
Additionally, “there seem to be constant reminders of low female success, low numbers in
STEM classes statistics, female deficits and low expectations in the collegiate materials that
made me not want to go for support” (FG1, 2015; FG3, 2015). Group members also reported
how these issues sometimes were coupled with some staff and advisors not as well versed in
STEM supports and resources for women. If you did not know the right question to ask,
sometimes you were left on your own. “Counselors could be more informative about what is
available in details, not only what you ask. They are a major part of student life that helps in our
decision making and alternative planning when we need to find help” (FG2, 2015).
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 118

Resources and supports maneuvering were also adjusted due to proximity for those who
relocated out of state or extreme distances within the state.
I moved to college that was a far distance from all my family and friends. I knew no one.
The weather was horrible and cold. Me and my dad are very close and I didn’t have him.
But I found other supports, resources and ways to make it since not much was readily
available (resources and supports), although accessible. I did find out in that experience
that I could make it on my own. (FG2, 2015)

Table 9 reflects the compilation from the unfolding matrix of barrier exemplars in
supports and resources. These are the barriers women had to overcome to be successful.
Figure 6 Wordle construct reflects the frequency in barrier exemplars for Supports.

Table 9

Taxonomy of Barriers for STEM Women Undergraduates: Category Supports

Barrier Category Barrier Exemplars - Support
4. Supports 4.1 Poorly marketed STEM resources/communication
4.2 Lack of female success rates
4.3 Low success expectation from others
4.4 Low female numbers in class
4.5 Untrained staff/advisors
4.6 Relocation out of state or distance from family/friends

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 119

Figure 6: Wordle Barrier Exemplars – Supports – (Resources)
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 120

Knowledge Exemplars for Supports Success
Respondents stated the theme in regards to resources and supports were significant to
their persistence in integration as well as their drives. For all students, some form of supports
and resources were pertinent in their experience towards persistence. For some, it was extended
lab and library hours which gave them the longer accessibility they needed. For others, it was an
increase in various textbooks in quantity and rentals available at the library, so that books could
be acquired until funds were received to purchase books. Internal resources such as the student
union were also considered a good place to find resources. Outside resources were equally as
important in that when internal resources were not available, students went to co-workers and
family to get the assistance they needed to be successful.
Following, the Narrative Compilations (1-4) reflect the knowledge found in Table 10 that
was procured in their higher-education stories of supports and resources discovered for
attainment. For resources and supports people were of the utmost important source, which
included family, instructors, advisors, and staff. Other supports of value were in and outside of
the university’s purview of mentors (both male and female), meaningful and relative programs
and services and hands-on STEM internships. However, the highest emphasis was placed on
themselves as their own support for empowerment and encouragement and the onus to find
resources to make them succeed.
Narrative 1

My first obstacle was even before I arrived on campus. It was moving without my
parents. That was a great obstacle that made me not want to be there at first. Then with
some of the class challenges, I felt like I wanted to go back home, I don’t want to be with
this teacher, and language (my accent) was an obstacle. But in time I learned to be
stronger, ignore people who try to make me feel bad, because I came to know if they
really felt good about themselves or their own abilities they wouldn’t take pleasure in
trying to make me feel bad or inadequate. I started to believe that they were no better, no
smarter, and no more accomplished than I could be. I started to build my confidence and
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 121

realized I had the strength. I had no one to share my concerns or fears with there so I
learned to be self-determined, persevere and tell myself that I can get through it. I would
talk to myself (daily) and just keep going and it turned out well. One step at a time until
one day I was walking across the stage with my Science degree in my hand. Prior to
graduation, I did eventually find others on campus to share my passions which motivated
me too, so I decided not to isolate myself. They didn’t all have to be STEM majors just
different kinds of people with different perspectives and could help me see things
including STEM in different ways and different lights. So people around you can
definitely give you strength and encourage and inspire you in difficult times if you allow
them. So you should definitely show up for you and know also you don’t have to go it
alone! (FG1, 2015)

Narrative 2

STEM mentors and leadership program helped me so much. Both of these opportunities
nurtured the understanding and importance of valuing other’s positions, other’s roles, and
really how to connect our communication styles to other’s styles through observation and
evidence, not by force; not just understand others’ styles as some one-size different.
(FG1, 2015; FG3, 2015)

Narrative 3

I had an excellent female professor who taught advanced computer science classes. In
the first three weeks of class I felt like I wasn’t getting it. I felt that all my classmates,
especially the male ones, had a certain level of knowledge that I just didn’t have. I was a
junior and I thought because this was so difficult now and easy for the others that maybe
I should drop the class and the major in general. So I went to see her during office hours.
Her answer was don’t worry about that because males tend to brag in these fields and
overestimate their knowledge when talking while women tend to under estimate theirs.
To me she was very impressive as she had a doctorate from Carnegie Malone. She
shared during her coursework in her educational matriculation there were three times she
decided that she was going to quit computer science because of the way the males acted
in classrooms and in the work internships. She said that’s a normal thing that the male
students brag and pretend that they know. Not because they are all ego maniacs, though
some are, it’s just as a male they still don’t know there is no judgement on them for what
they may not know. Whereas females they know, but they don’t feel that they know
enough unless they know at least 95% of the topic they’re discussing. So after a week. I
was still feeling the same way. So I went back to her office and I told her I think I’m
going to drop this class, I’m so frustrated I’m already an older student I was just so
frustrated. So the professor had another student who was in the office tell me her story.
And she stated her professor had responded to her in the same fashion as my professor
had responded to me. She told her don’t drop your class because of how males or
females respond and behave in the class environment. You have talent and don’t give up
because you have what it takes to continue to the end. I saw our experiences were
similar. She stated that in the end she was able to pass the class, get a prestigious
scholarship, and a wonderful internship. And so she told me don’t give up so I didn’t.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 122

And I’m so very, very happy I listened to their advice that was given to me. I did end up
with a wonderful internship and shortly afterward being hired at one of the most prestige
and renown space organizations in the country. I love my job and what I do every day. It
was so worth it! (FG2, 2015)

Narrative 4

My advisor connected me with a wonderful internship opportunity. In my internship I
had this amazing mentor. She would point me in the direction that was best for me in
exploration and increasing my skill set. She told me don’t be afraid to go and get what
you need to be successful. Study those who have what you want, male or female. She
told me don’t have one mentor or role model, but select them based on how you plan to
transition from one level to the next. Someone can help you only where they are, so as
you move you may need feedback from others at the level you want to be at so don’t’ get
comfortable with one role model. She told me about networking experiences and their
importance and value. She also stated I wasn’t too young that I shouldn’t consider my
long-term supports as I move through this industry as far as marriage or children. She
stated this industry is time consuming so know what you are getting into. If you have a
goal of where you want to be in your career, you may want to consider at what phase for
the other areas of your life. Know what you are getting into before you go into this area.
Explore and figure out what is best suited for you in the long term. (FG1, 2015)

From these discussions, the unfolding matrix revealed the following knowledge as it
related to supports for maneuvering to persistence. Table 10 represents the compiled knowledge
of the most frequently emergents discussed by group members that have guided them to success.

Table 10

Taxonomy of Knowledge for STEM Women Graduates: Category Supports

Higher Education Knowledge – Support Exemplars
 Know where to find resources/supports (in others and in yourself)
 Know how to ask advisors/faculty for detailed assistance
 Know the right people for mentoring both female/male
 Know how to network and find opportunities
 Know how to participate in leadership opportunities
 Know how to seek out diverse transitioning mentors
 Know how to plan for long-term support and resources
 Know where to find programs in/outside of settings

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 123

Overcoming Barriers to Success – Skills Transferred to
Careers through Exemplars (GSP)
Research Question 4: What skill set has been developed in higher education to continue
persistence into the STEM occupational pipeline?
There was a consensus from the group members that higher education has facilitated in
cultivating their hard skills and soft skills, both directly and indirectly through experiences.
They stated they credit their university experience because those experiences that were
collegiate- based were the only place that these dynamics could have happened and could
produce these certain types of scenarios in that setting. Knowledge surrounding gender roles and
its transference was still very stifling to the respondents and continued into early career.
All respondents affirmed these skills from higher education were transferable in their
early career. Mostly because the same obstructions found in the themes of this study as they
relate to integration, normative content, socialization processes, and supports were alive and well
in their workplace. Respondents agreed that integration area of the double-bind was still an
issue:
You know there are a lot of egos especially in construction. Their language verbally and
nonverbally reflect that they are macho men, who have been doing macho things for over
60 years, even before you were even born or thought about. And now here comes this
little, colored girl coming in here telling me I did something wrong, really? And I know
it’s hard on them, but we all have to adjust to the fact that I’m good at what I do and
respectfully I’m the one in charge. (FG1, 2015)

Yeah, I agree, that’s the other thing. We are not just working through as women, but we
are in leadership as minorities. And for a long time now minorities and brown people
before were considered, especially in my field, as the ones who could only do sweaty
work and considered as that’s all they could do. Definitely not be in charge like us. For
me, they thought people who look like me can’t speak English well so how could they be
in charge, they don’t know how to think, they don’t understand. So now here I am their
boss and some look at me, a young women and minority, and shocked that I actually
know what I’m talking about. And if I’m right about something and their wrong you can
see the shock sometimes on their face. (FG1, 2015)
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 124

However, the respondents still stated overall they think they have an advantage because
they are very proficient in soft skills, which have become equally sought out by most companies
and organizations (Heckman & Kautz, 2012). The majority of those sampled feel it is only a
matter of time before norms and processes change as companies see and value and embrace all
their skills especially their soft skills, communication and its ability to impact their bottom line
financially. One respondent stated:
You have to be open and evolve. The wind may be changing in STEM workplaces.
Being around your female peers is important and keeps you connected in some ways that
are just us. But you have to understand the value of it. With this change, I don’t think
we will have to immersed ourselves into everything male as a standard. In college, that is
what we are forced to do because they don’t understand the value of our communication
styles or softness of delivery in class. However, at work that Midas divergence in
communication and soft skills will eventually be recognized because this skill will
translate to dollars and cents in their bottom line. Even the MCAT test reflects social
skills as an important part to be in medicine. There is a huge part based on social
sciences you must pass. I think it is slowly changing and at some point I think it (soft
skill/communications) will be recognized as a commodity as all things that make money
in society. (FG2, 2015)

Some respondents reported there was significant change that occurred recently as well as
the initial call to rally for women in STEM by some major corporations for resources and
supports for women in STEM. Corporations have stepped up their efforts to ensure resources,
supports, mentorships, and promotional advancements through tracking and recognition.
Respondents agreed these resources and others like them increase the longevity and remaining in
STEM fields. A respondent shared this story:
We have so many resources and supports that it is no wonder turnover is so low at my
nation-wide space and national security organization. Our company started a science
women committee in the 70’s primarily because they started recognizing the need for
women in male dominant fields. This increased their hiring of more women in
engineering and sciences. Next, they created something called speed mentoring and
networking. This gave us an opportunity to interact with VIPs (CEO and other leaders)
one-on-one and ask questions directly. You may have one or two people sitting there in
positions of power at the tables. And you have a script in front of you of the four
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 125

questions that you want to specifically ask. Staff (like me) will remain at the table and
the CEOs, VPs, executives, managers (men/women) will rotate so you get to hear
different things. So you may hear your questions and others’ questions and responses to
how those in that position got there, how did they continue on, how do they feel about
this as a strategy, or what do they think is a good move to get on this pathway. Most of
them said things like they always seek advancement and they were never content to be in
one place. Constantly looking for ways to sharpen their skills and to better their skills.
Looking for the door of advancement. They would say networking is key and using
people as resources was invaluable, taking the initiative and talking to people who do
what you may want to do and to explore if your thoughts are in line with what the job
entails. Some of this I did hear in higher education. The speed mentor was part of the
networking to ensure women were being promoted and advanced. It is important to have
a mechanism on to show why women are not being advanced in school and work. They
also have the mentoring initiative on the website for in-house use only, which list people
and their specialties, degrees, and their backgrounds, and what they can help you with.
You can network with colleagues directly. I also learned the importance of being
resourceful in higher education and who can help me with this project. Because just like
sometimes in higher education the resources were there, you have to look. I guess those
collaboration projects were good for something because in times when I had no help, I
had to search it out for necessity. My company on-site has over 4,000 employees. You
just have to step out of the box and step out of your comfort zone for resources. (FG1,
2015)

In addressing the question regarding what skill set has been developed in higher
education to continue persistence into STEM occupations, the consensus was every skill was
transferable into their workforce setting. What was different was the frequency (higher use) of
areas and necessity to call on or use knowledge more. Gender roles and contradictions were
higher. Frequencies increased in gender role contradictions and role confusion and that
depended on culture of employment. In communications, use of multi-role communications
increased in frequency along with multiple uses of styles for corporate culture. At times, it is
acceptable in corporations to use profanity, oblique, and anger to be productive and fit into their
male dominated positions of leadership. In addition to this type of communication styles,
traditional gender roles of sugar and spice were necessary depending on if it was a client or
subcontractor to get the job done. Additionally, attire was of concern as it related to traditional
gender roles. According to science and engineering respondents, some companies expect you to
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 126

look more feminine if you are seeing clients or you would be negatively sanctioned. This can
mean being seen as a team player or influence upward mobility if not taken seriously.
Respondents reported figuring out how to plan for their work days so all their ducks were in a
row to meet all the expectations. For some, this meant bringing a change of clothes for your
meetings. One respondent stated,
I was out at a construction site so I was dressed appropriate. I had a meeting at 11:00 am
with a group of clients and had to change from my work boots and hard hats to my heels
and suit. Then I returned to work at 2:00 pm and changed back into my hard hat and
work boots. The men don’t have this expectation. (FG1, 2015)

Marginalization, microaggressions, and the double-bind (as stated previously) knowledge
is also called on more in a career setting. This can be seen “when others won’t talk to you
directly when you are in charge, they speak to males around you or just contact your male boss”
(FG1, 2015). In some corporations, resources were plenteous in education in the form of
workshops, videos, and protocols for communication should problems ensue in these areas or
other issues. However, those in the chain of command in the protocol processes (for mediation)
have been in the corporation often themselves for 35 plus years and only comprehend
(marginalization, microaggressions, and double-bind issues) from a traditional perspective,
which was these issues were not really there.
Respondents also report having to use supports knowledge more in career than in higher
education as in higher education they were more readily available and you were given some
direction. In the career setting, group members reported “you must find them and use your
knowledge to network and work collaboratively skill set more” (FG1, 2015).
From the unfolding matrix, knowledge exemplars were compiled to construct the STEM
women Graduate Success Profile (GSP). The GSP reflects the knowledge respondents procured
in higher educational that made them successful in persistence to degree attainment. The skills
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 127

set listed below in the GSP was affirmed as transferable skills used in their careers. However,
the usage of skills varied in frequency in which skills were called upon more or less in career
settings.
Conclusion
The women in STEM Graduate Success Profile (GSP) were compiled from themes that
emerged in integration, normative content, socialization processes, and supports/resources.
Respondents shared their experiences in higher education and through the use of the unfolding
matrix techniques barrier exemplars (Table 11) and knowledge exemplars (Table 12) created the
GSP. Figure 7 Wordle construct demonstrates the frequency of all the barrier exemplars that
needed to be overcome in higher education settings. The skill set or knowledge exemplars were
additionally applicable to early STEM career persistence and remaining in their STEM fields.
Barrier Exemplars seen crossing over into more than one theme were climate/ environment,
communications, ignorance or lack of female competency and gender roles reified in traditions,
conflicts, and contradictions. Following the GPS and Wordle (Figure 7), attention will be turned
to the discussion section of this study.

Table 11

Women in STEM Barrier Exemplars in Graduate Success Profile (GSP)

Barriers Categories Barrier Exemplars
I. Integration 1.1 Institution Serving Structure
1.2 Student Status (upon entering)
1.3 Ethnicity/Cultural background
1.4 Gender Roles (historical positioning)
1.5 Discourse
1.6 Communications
1.7 Role Confusion
1.8 Climate
1.9 Unknown Misogyny
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 128

Table 11 (Cont’d.)

Barriers Categories Barrier Exemplars (Cont’d.)
1.10 Gender Stratification
1.11 Insufficient male knowledge of accurate female/gender
Competencies
1.12 Stereotyping
1.13 Double-Bind
1.14 Male Hegemony
1.15 Male superiority
1.16 Female incompetency
1.17 Female discoloration
Barrier Category Barriers Exemplars – Drives (Normative)
2. Normative
Content
2.1 Negative Sanctions/Punishment
2.2 Unknown Misogyny
2.3 Alpha Males
2.4 Anger
2.5 Role Conflict
2.6 Femininity Contradiction
2.7 Condescending Environment
2.8 Low graduate success rates
Barrier Category Barrier Exemplars – Drive (Socialization Process)
3. Socialization
Processes
3.1 Alienation
3.2 Isolation
3.3 Language/communication
3.4 Marginalization
3.5 Microaggressions
3.6 Assertiveness Backlash
3.7 Misunderstanding of Egalitarian/Matriarchal Backgrounds
3.8 Males non requirement to understand females
Barrier Category Barrier Exemplars - Support
4. Supports 4.1 Poorly marketed STEM resources/communication
4.2 Lack of female success rates
4.3 Low success expectation from others
4.4 Low female numbers in class
4.5 Untrained staff/advisors
4.6 Relocation out of state or distance from family/friends

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 129

Table 12

Women in STEM Knowledge Exemplars in Graduate Success Profile (GSP)
Knowledge Exemplars for Integration
 Know how to seek help and be reflective about your individual needs
 Know how to reduce stereotypes in environments (in you and others)
 Know how to shape interactions with those who need to heighten their cultural and gender
competencies
 Know how to embrace multi-role communications
 Know how to use soft skills advantageously
 Know the dynamics in leadership, sex/gender, and cultural settings at all times
 Know how femininity is efficient, effective and productive
 Know how to lead like a woman, not a man
Knowledge Exemplars for Drive (Normative)
 Know how to get out of your own way
 Know how to identify your own stereotyping
 Know how to channel anger positively
 Know how to address internal role conflicts
 Know when it is not your problem
 Know how to work perceived negative feelings into positives
 Know pros and cons of STEM fields
 Know your how to stay engaged with you field
 Know what to use to keeps the fires flame
 Know how to keep the picture or visual in front of you
 Know the value of updating skills/continuous improvement
Knowledge Exemplars for Drive (Socialization Processes)
 Know how to find ways to heighten your cultural and gender competencies
 Know how to build develop and maintain confidence
 Know your ability for continued growth
 Know the value of continuously asking questions
 Know the importance and how to reach out to others and others to you for help
 Know how to stay visible and shine
Knowledge Exemplars for Support
 Know where to find resources/supports (in others and in yourself)
 Know how to ask advisors/faculty for detailed assistance
 Know the right people for mentoring both female/male
 Know how to network and find opportunities
 Know how to participate in leadership opportunities
 Know how to seek out diverse transitioning mentors
 Know how to plan for long-term support and resources
 Know where to find programs in/outside of settings

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 130

Figure 7: Wordle of Barrier Exemplar (Frequencies)
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 131

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION

This chapter focuses on the study’s findings, implications for practice, and
recommendations for future research. The summary of the findings reports the significant results
of the inquiry’s research questions. The implication for practice addresses what has surfaced and
been identified from the study for potential practices to increase success for STEM women. And
finally, the recommendations will discuss how research can continue the gains and advancement
for females throughout the STEM pipeline. This dialog is beneficial not only to women in
STEM majors, but administrators, educators, and staff members who serve or create policies,
practices, and programs to increase success for STEM females.
As stated in the study, the lack of women procuring STEM degrees in higher education
influences our nation’s intellectual capital. Women are considered the untapped resources who
are both interested in and needed to enter into STEM fields in order to keep the United States
universally competitive and ensure our financial stability and safety. Intellectual capital has been
conferred as a critical commodity that hinges America’s global positioning as a leader in the 21st
century. It has been deemed vital for our country’s continued economic stability, building of a
strong workforce, and ensuring our national security to prevent devastating events such as 9/11
in 2001. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) are essential pillars in
intellectual capital which is produced in higher education and dispersed into the workforce. As a
result, it is important in understanding how women are successful in degree attainment, skills
concert and synchronization, and their value of being united together in one STEM pipeline.
Both higher education and our workforce are reliant on one another for success. Higher
education initially builds the skills needed for STEM producing intellectual capital and the
workforce continues to advance and professionally develops the skillset rendered from higher
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 132

education (NCES, 2012). Failure of either can have adverse outcomes on our economy,
workforce, and security.
As the study has explained, there is a dearth of women successfully attaining STEM
degrees and entering the workforce. And although data has reflected STEM has historically been
male dominant fields, there have been some trends that indicate some decrease of males
continually entering STEM majors and selecting other fields (National Research Council, 2010).
Without enough women being utilized and male entrance on the decline, this deficit can
jeopardize U.S. needed intellectual capital. This plight has overarching implications for all of us.
Consequently, understanding female success in STEM fields from those who have overcome the
obstacles to degree achievement and career entrance are imperative and understanding those who
have been successful is pivotal to transformation of this phenomena.
The research inquiry was addressed by investigating the female students’ meaning,
making, processes, and context. These conceptual relationships and associations answered the
research questions regarding persistence and achievement in STEM for females. This study was
a small sample (eight individuals) and not necessarily enough to form a formal hypothesis and
theory to continue to an elevated level of research. Nonetheless, this generation of knowledge
for female STEM profiles of persistence tells STEM graduates’ stories from the perspective of an
expert, thus, rendering substantive insight to understand their experiences and maneuvering that
have led to success, as well as meanings of these experiences for females in STEM disciplines.
As a result, this study provided a framework to continue future exploration of this subject matter
for its contributory benefits that reflect women increasing gains in this subject area.
This investigation utilized a qualitative phenomenology approach which generated a
deeper understanding of female persistence in STEM disciplines through the voice of the experts
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 133

(female STEM graduates). The impetus has been to understand the obstacles women overcame
for success, experiential knowledge and skills procured for achievement, and actions used in
maneuvering them to degree procurement. Further, it examined the skills obtained in higher
education experiences that are utilized in their early careers in a STEM field. As a result, the
study rendered data that constructed exemplars from parameters on (a) barriers to student
success, (b) knowledge that successful students use to overcome the barriers, (c) actions that
successful students take to overcome the barriers for success in STEM, and (d) skill set procured
in higher education utilized in an early STEM career. The compilation and construct of this data
was finalized as the women in STEM Graduate Success Profile (GSP).
Summary of Findings
This study was guided by four research questions which rendered four poignant findings.
As seen in Chapter Four, the results were the emergence of four predominant themes
surrounding integration, normative context, socialization processes, and resource supports.
These themes were often reliant on, intertwined in, and products of one another. Likewise, these
four motifs were also seen in the historical content from over 100 years ago as females’
educational legacy (Historical Female Educational Legacy, see Chapter Two) as well as the
recent salient study by Ong et al. (2011) that examined 40 years of empirical research on double
bind women and their experience (21st Century Legacy Resultants in STEM Education see
Chapter Two.) However, each theme pronouncement was observed more in the dynamics of one
question over another question. These aforementioned themes were recognized by STEM
women as potential problems to persistence and perceptively aware as having the need to be
resolved in year 1.3 to year 2 of their matriculation. The knowledge reflected in each finding
that follows was procured during late in year 2 into year 3 of matriculation. Barriers were more
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 134

pronounced as students moved from lower to upper classes of STEM. In year 3.5 until
graduation, which varied by women in completion years, the knowledge procured was being
utilized in maneuvering (consciously and purposefully) until STEM degree attainment.
Finding 1: In the first question related to how women experience STEM
undergraduate University residence, their tenure experiences were significantly influenced by
overcoming obstacles interrelated to integrational issues. As stated, integration had to do with
more than just being in a physical space or putting parts together, but involved their connection
or ties through shared values, social bonds, and overall social cohesion. Their experiences as a
shared consensus to overcome for success related to maneuvering in situations in their unique
institutional serving structure, adjustments based on the student’s status upon entering (year,
transfer, etc.), sex and gender roles’ interactions, ethnicity/cultural background perceptions of
others, multi-role communications, and climate and power dynamics (derived from Exemplars
1.1-1.17 in Chapter 4).
The most salient knowledge was procured through their higher education experience to
address barriers related to integration. Such knowledge that facilitated in their success included
their ability to seek help and be reflective of their needs, reduce stereotypes in themselves and
others, shape interactions that heighten others’ cultural and gender competencies, having diverse
communication styles, embracing soft skills, knowing their settings expectations, and femininity
usage for effectiveness and value of its embrace (see Table 4 in Chapter 4).
Finding 2: The next question probed what drove women STEM students to persist to
degree completion in their collegiate setting. There were two themes that emerged within the
drive enquiry which were overcoming normative context and socialization process to ensure their
success. As stated in Chapter 4, the normative content housed the rules, standards, and social
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 135

order of everyday life that were intertwined in culture, value, and ideologies of a social setting
(Henslin, 2010). Actions, motives, and drives were regulated and controlled mostly covertly in
this content. Likewise, the socialization process was the transmission of these ideologies and
values to an individual. As a result, persistence was influenced by the pressure to conform
within both normative content and socialization processes in higher education settings. The
pressures from normative content and socialization processes ultimately shaped their drive, kinds
of unique barriers, and calculations needed to strive to success.
In regards to the normative content, the barriers to drive that STEM women needed to
overcome for success included the ability to maneuver in negative sanctions and punishments,
those unaware of their misogyny, alpha males’ interactions, anger, role conflict, femininity
contradictions, condescending environments, and low graduation success rate knowledge
(derived from Exemplars 2.1-2.8 in Chapter 4). Women persistence in STEM reported their
success continued by knowledge that included how to get out of your own way, identify your
own stereotyping, channeling anger positively, address internal role conflicts, you work on your
problem and let others keep theirs, work perceived negative feelings into positives, pros and cons
of STEM fields, how to stay engaged with your field, what to use to keep the fires flaming, how
to keep the picture or visual in front of you, and the value of updating skills/continuous
improvement (see Table 5 in Chapter 4).
As it relates to the socialization processes, the obstacles that needed to be tackled for
STEM women’s persistence were alienation, isolation, language/communication,
marginalization, microaggressions, assertiveness backlash, misunderstanding of
egalitarian/matriarchal backgrounds, and male (ignorance) due to societal non requirement to
understand females (derived from Exemplars 3.1-3.8 in Chapter 4). The knowledge exemplars
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 136

for their drive persistence related to socialization processes included knowledge of how to find
ways to heighten cultural and gender competencies; how to build, develop, and maintain
confidence; their ability for continued growth; the value of continuously asking questions; the
importance of and how to reach out to others and others to you for help; and how to stay visible
and shine (see Table 8 in Chapter 4).
Finding 3 – Question number 3, explored what supports do women in STEM utilize to
successfully maneuver for achievement in their undergraduate University incumbency. The
significant barriers to supports were poorly marketed STEM resources, notifications, and
detailed communications. Other obstacles to overcome were the lack of female success rates,
low success expectation from others, low in female representation in class, untrained staff and
advisors, and being relocated away from family and friends (derived from Exemplars 4.1-4.6 in
Chapter 4).
In regards to supports and resources, knowing how to access people for copious reasons
were considered invaluable. These supports included family, instructors, advisors, and staff.
Other supports of value were in and outside of the university’s purview of mentors (both male
and female), meaningful and relevant programs and services, and hands-on STEM internships.
However, the highest emphasis was placed on themselves as their own support for empowerment
and encouragement and the onus to find resources to make them succeed. In order to take on
support and resource barriers, knowledge exemplars included where to find resources/supports
(in others and in yourself), how to ask advisors/faculty for detailed assistance, accessing the right
people for mentoring both female/male, ways to network and find opportunities, how to
participate in leadership opportunities, how to seek out diverse transitioning mentors, how to
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 137

plan for long-term support and resources, and where to find programs in/outside of settings (see
Resource Knowledge Table 11 in Chapter 4).
Finding 4 – The final question investigated the skill set that has been developed in
higher education that continued their persistence in their STEM careers currently. Another
salient finding was that all of the exemplars from the unfolding matrix (from research questions
1-3) which built the higher education skillset were currently being utilized in their STEM
careers. However, the difference was use varied in frequency. Some themes and skillsets were
called upon more for utilization in their careers than it was in a collegiate setting; this varied by
culture, occupational title, and position of the STEM graduate’ career professional. The final
result was the development of the women in STEM Graduate Success Profile (GPS) which
included the higher education experience skillset that is transferrable to early STEM careers (see
Table 11 in Chapter 4).
Implications for Practice
Based on the findings in Chapter 4, several implications for practice can be derived.
Implications for practice were based on the exemplars referenced throughout Tables 11 and 12 of
the GSP. These exemplars were sorted into categories that recommended the improvement in
(a) climate and environment, (b) communications, (c) education for female competency,
(d) gender roles steeped in tradition, conflicts, and contradictions. The exemplars were selected
due to appearing in more than one theme and in higher frequencies. These categories have been
further sorted into practices for individuals who may be directly participating in or in control of
the activities for practice. As a result, these implications for practice are relevant for double bind
(dual minority statuses), female STEM students, faculty, advisors, and administration.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 138

In regards to double bind, female STEM students, this study offers profiles of persistence
(via GSP) of those who have gone before them and their heuristic experiences which made them
succeed in a male-dominant field despite their pervasively obstacle-driven educational legacy for
women. Women in STEM fields, as the experts themselves, have identified barriers and shared
knowledge they vetted to maneuver their way to success in degree attainments and STEM career
entrance. The profiles gave strategic ways of how women found to persist in challenges that
have chronically continued for over 100 years in education. There is no specific roadmap, as I
had hoped to find; but rather, women have found success in purposely being fluid, adaptive, and
confidence in divergent, difficult settings as seen in their profiles. The GSP showed how women
can set the example of focusing and building themselves internally and their expertise despite
obstacles to maneuvering to attainment. The GPS can be a tool to better understand the STEM
women’s lived experiences, and that despite obstacles, minority women have personal drive “mi
fuerza” or inner fire that can lead them to succeed (Ellington, 2006; Valenzuela, 2006). Strives
have been made throughout this century; however, more work is necessary. Until then, the study
has produced success profiles to move women from maneuvering with no guides to navigation
which would include some tools and guidance for success through the STEM pipeline.
Practical application for faculty includes understanding the importance in not minimizing
your influence in persistence for females. As stated previously in Chapter 4, STEM women
report your encouragement, high expectation in their ability, and sharing your practical career
experience and expertise contributed to their desire to continue learning and engagement in
STEM fields. Discourse of struggles, failures, and triumphs assisted in their comprehensive
knowledge for them to assess their STEM fields. It further facilitated in their evaluation of the
appropriateness of their selected field and career pathway. When faculty experts in the field are
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 139

generous with their knowledge and experiences, it has been stated that it was advantageous to the
students and a vital resource for them.
Another practice would be for faculty teams to regularly conduct evaluations of the
campus climate for areas of gender-based discourse, interactions, treatment, and collaboration.
STEM graduates encourage that faculty be conscious and proactive to capitalize on teachable
moments when they present themselves in the areas discussed in this study. This facilitates in
class maintenance or climate maintenance to produce a learning environment that everyone can
effectively learn. Passiveness in the class was noted as a way that keeps the status quo in most
integrational issues and barriers.
In regards to advisors, who give them guidance and resources, this study revealed the
importance of ensuring that you have been updated on what resources are available and
understand the specificity of serving STEM women, especially those with a double bind. As
resources become available, or are forth coming, that the information is generously (full of
details) disseminated in a timely manner. Additionally, be mindful and understand the weight,
pressure, and frustration of working under labels (underserved, underrepresented, minority), as
well as any communication of low expectation and graduation rates. It also causes pressure to
persist when there are stereotypes in interactions and advisement, as well as labels and
stereotypes in advertisements for outreach or any decision-making processes.
Practical implication for administration would include implementing in the curriculum as
lower division requirements that all students take a class that could increase their female
competency knowledge. The study reflected that education was needed in the areas of female
competency to give all students a similar knowledge base and to combat the misogyny,
microaggressions, and marginalization female STEM students are subjected to regularly
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 140

on campus. As stated in Chapter 4, most often neither males or females were unaware when they
were participating in these behaviors. Female competency courses in D/discourse would educate
and make all students aware of how its lack contributes to counterproductive in learning
environments and the importance of reshaping them would be viewed as transformative for many
of the STEM women.
Another implication for practice in order to transform the higher education experience for
women in STEM and all the other students is to create a “new space” in the educational
collegiate structure that all of these mentioned themes can be addressed and a new modern
placement can be established inclusively of women. This space would be a platform that would,
through a series of workshops, guest speakers, and campaigns, co-create a validation of power of
both men and women and change women’s positioning in all fields including traditionally male-
dominant spaces. This space would promote ways and strategies that femininity can flourish in
masculine settings, usher in new norms and ideologies about the positive outcomes that can
ensue from men and women’s shared strengths of this alliance. The conceptualization of “spaces
or hybrid spaces” was derived from hybridity theory. In education, this hybrid framework has
been utilized to give insight in the creation of how people use a myriad of sources to make sense
of their world (Moje et al, 2004). The spaces infer physical and social spatial dimensions of
interaction from which knowledge can be constructed which can lead to full integration and
legitimacy for women in the STEM community. Within education, these spaces can be a place
that can produce categories of “new” ideologies and resources internally and externally of
collegiate knowledge (Moje et al, 2004) as well as in Discourses (Gee, 1996) for men and
women to coalescence into one community.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 141

And lastly, for administration is the recommendation to change double bind female
images (via visuals, written news, campus radio) to be revamped in support of women in diverse
majors and acknowledge their successes regularly. In Chapter Four, women stated they used
new and alternative transmissions of ideologies and values in order to drive to persistence in
their socialization processes. The imagery, values, and ideologies were stated as too adverse and
impacted their ability to persist. Changing imagery and thoughts about women was suggested as
a key factor to contribute in drive persistence. This space would be monitored to ensure
continued growth and a mechanism in place for auditing of developmental benchmarks as seen
by successful supports in the study. These new goals and benchmarks become part of the
institutional policy, missions, and part of performance appraisal for personnel staff. This would
ensure in transforming the overall campus culture and educational architectural walls for all
students. Through the implementation of these proposed measures, the onus of accountability
for these practices resides with all members who are part of the collegiate architecture in
whatever capacity or role, whether in learning, serving, instruction, or making policy. We are all
responsible and should be accountable if we are part of the educational architecture.
Recommendation for Research
This study has shown that the previously discussed issues in the themes and results from
findings for women in male dominant disciplines such as STEM, has been chronically pervasive.
Many of the disparities, inequalities, and conflicts are resultant of females’ traditional,
educational legacy that has placed them in subordinate roles due not only to their sex, but also
construct of race, which aligns with intersectionality of the double bind as discussed in Ong’s et
al. (2011) study stated in the literature review. These challenges appear that they can no longer
be marginalized in its gravity because of the overarching consequences looming regarding the
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 142

threat to the economy, workforce, and national security. Further, the study substantiates the long
historically deep roots and opacity as a result of time ensuing which causes problems in
rectifying these pervasive challenges in higher education. Thus, removing centuries of status
quo for females needs to be seen as a priority, for the benefit of our nation and us all.
As found in the literature review in Chapter Two, there is limited scholarly work on
understanding how experiences of double-bind women can lead individuals to positively
overcome the long-standing barriers discussed in the literature. And as stated in critical
approaches Chapter Three, emancipation and transformation are led by the oppressed with the
collaboration of others (Brookfield, 2005b). As a result, it is women in STEM’s voice that can
emancipate STEM women as a group through their sharing of their lived experiences. However,
their knowledge procured and the authenticity of their journey are often absent in research.
Nonetheless, it is their experiences that assist in building and reifying the success models for
others’ degree attainment and direction for the skill set needed in STEM careers. Likewise,
socio-cultural theories in this study have framed and resonated the need for successful women who
can give insight to their reality constructions by providing meanings, rules, and norms in STEM
groups and culture (Littlejohn & Foss, 2004). With these factors in mind, it is recommended that
more qualitative studies be conducted as there are so many quantitative studies published with
STEM women through secondary analysis and limited voice excerpts. It is recommended that
these studies be conducted using STEM women as the primary source. Further, these inquiries
should be larger in sample sizes with larger bind pools with diverse intersectionality (ethnicity,
race, class, religion, etc.) in order to have a comprehensive representation of this phenomena
similar to Ong’s et al. (2011) longitudinal work. Other areas to explore could be a
constructivism approach which was not a focus of this study; however, could be observed as a
part of the unfolding matrix as it relates to how STEM women learn and constructed their
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 143

knowledge and understanding of the world through experiences and how they reflected in these
experiences. And, by utilizing the unfolding matrix techniques studies could be replicated and
the nuances of STEM female experiences strengthened in literature.
Conclusion
As the guiding theories for this study have stated, learning does not happen in an isolated
vacuum (Merriam, 2009). Critical and sociocultural theories align with this inference as well as
being evident in the themes and exemplars presented. Critical framework has explained how the
core of adult learning is to understand how adults learn to recognize the predominance of
ideology in daily actions and thoughts and from societal institutions. This investigation confirms
the learner has learned, in their intimate world, they are related to and become affected by their
society (Jarvis, 1987). Likewise, Socio-cultural context which includes elements such as
ethnicity/race, gender, or sexual orientation influence development and learning due to societal
constructs. The study affirmed people were not separate from context in which they live, but
were a part of it. The emergent themes from the inquiry related to integration, normative
content, social processes, and the need for support and resources likewise, aligned with attributes
of the theories. Whereby, showing that learning was holistic, and consequently, meanings and
development were affected by the intersection of the mind, body, and sociocultural influences.
As it relates to continuing the gains in the need for equity in the lack of female
attainment, the recommendations of Meyer (2007), A. G. Johnson (2006), Baldwin (1963), and
Freire (1971) agree upon understanding the importance and necessity of awakening the
conscience, waking up as the solution, and conscience raising for change presents a viable
opportunity for revolution and transformation. If the impetus for continued gains in STEM fields
is educational transformation, awareness must replace illusion and hypocrisy to obtain equity.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 144

This system, that is entrenched in power and privilege within its educational walls has an
appearance of one sided utopia for males, but in the removal of the opacity through the voice of
STEM women, this system can be oppressive and hard to maintain for both women and men. As
a result, from the debt of this historical legacy it is everyone’s responsibility to work towards
changing it.
Despite the 100-year delay of women entering education, female stagnation and
flourishes in gains due to gender and race placement, some women who have selected the male
dominant arenas such as STEM have managed to move forward, triumphantly and struggling,
nonetheless pressing into fields they stated they love and desire to make contributions. There is
a consensus to give back to those young women who will come behind them. And as this study
began with a focus of representing the authentic voice of women in STEM, it will conclude with
a letter written as part of the study in the final reflection period of the focus group session. These
reflections were written by a woman in STEM that has successfully transitioned into a STEM
career. Her response is to the question: What advice for success would you give to young
women in college and at the beginning stages of their STEM careers? These reflections will
conclude this study and hopefully lay a foundation towards constructing a “new space” for men
and women to work in STEM fields.
Writing a piece of advice to young women who are in the beginning stages of their
STEM educations and careers has been harder to do than I expected. I have plenty of
things to say, but most would not be any more poignant for women than for men. For
example, I’d suggest that everyone take time to learn yourself and to figure out why you
do some of the things you do. It will help to keep your intentions pure and your feet on
the ground, in industry and in life. I’d also suggest that you stay true to yourself and to
have the courage to stand up for yourself and for what you believe is right. I think these
are good suggestions. They are suggestions which I have to give myself and which my
support system gives me as well. So then, what would be different when talking to a
young man or a young woman? The challenge that is exclusive to women is that as little
girls, we don’t see women in the positions we dream about. We have to create our own
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 145

fairy tales where the princess wears a hard hat. And because we don’t see it, to an extent,
we aren’t sure that we can do it. I believe in you, and I think you can do it.
As we get older, the lack of women in our career industry becomes a second challenge.
People are not used to seeing people like us in our positions, and they certainly aren’t
used to taking directives or following a woman’s lead. Every new experience can be one
where ‘proving yourself’ feels required. Do not fall into that trap. The truth of the matter
is that you will never give the same first impression as your male peers. You will never
be an imitation of a face that they already trust. So create your own path. Be strong.
Have integrity. Work hard. Ask questions. Speak up. Be yourself. Be exceptional. Put
in the time and the work and let the results speak for you. By being authentic and being
the best teammate and leader you can be, you will naturally build your own relationships
and trust within your team.
As a woman in STEM, I then have one request for you. Give back to other young
women. Let the little girls of the world see you in your lab coat, your work boots,
drawing on CAD, with your stethoscope or with your calculator. Let them dream and
know that their dreams are possible, and that you believe in them.” (FG1, 2015)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 146

References
Allan, E. J., & Madden, M. (2006). Chilly classrooms for female undergraduate students: A
question of method? The Journal of Higher Education, 77(4), 684-711.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). The liberal art of
science. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 13(3), 52-61.
American Association of University of Women. (1991). Shortchanging girls, shortchanging
America. Advances in Gender and Education Journal, 1(9), 11-13.
Attinasi, L. C. (1989). Getting in: Mexican Americans’ perceptions of university attendance and
the implications for freshman year persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 60(3),
247-277.
Baldwin, J. (1963). My dungeon shook: A letter to my nephew on the one hundredth anniversary
of the emancipation. Retrieved from
http://www.thenagain.info/Classes/Sources/Baldwin.html
Beede, D., Julian, T., Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011, August).
Women in STEM: A gender gap to innovation: Executive summary. ESA Issue Brief
#04-11. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics
Administration. (2011).
Bennett, C. (2001). Genres of research in multicultural education. Review of Educational
Research, 71(2), 171-217
Bensimon, E. (2004). The diversity scorecard: A learning approach to institutional change.
Change, 36(1), 44-52.
Bensimon, E. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective, New Directions for Higher Education, 131.
Berk, L. E., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding children's learning: Vygotsky and early childhood
education. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Berns, R. (2007). Child, family, school, community: Socialization and support. Ecology of the
School, 326-341.
Bhattacharjee, Y. (2009). US STEM WORK FORCE study finds science pipeline strong, but
losing top students. Journal of Technology Education, 23(1), 55-75.
doi:10.1126/science.326_654a
Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender
and Education, 17(4), 369-386.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 147

Blumenfeld, W. J. (2006). Christian privilege and promotion of secular and not–so secular
mainline Christianity in public schooling and in the larger society. Equity & Excellence,
39, 195-210.
Bonous-Hammarth, M. (2000). Pathways to success: Affirming opportunities for science,
mathematics, and engineering majors. Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 92-111.
Bowen, W. G., Kurzweil, M. A., & Tobin E. M. (2005). Equity and excellence in American
higher education. Framework and road map (pp.1-9). Charlottesville, VA and London:
University of Virginia Press
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child
development (Vol. 6). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future
perspective. In P. Moen, G. H. Elders, Jr. & K. Luscher (Eds.), Examine lives in context:
Perspectives on the ecology of human development. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Brookfield, S. (2001). Repositioning ideology critique in a critical theory of adult learning. Adult
Education Quarterly, 52(1), 7-22.
Brookfield, S. (2002). Overcoming alienation as a practice of adult education: The contribution
of Erich Fromm to a critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education
Quarterly, 52(2), 96-111.
Brookfield, S. (2005a). Overcoming impostership, culture suicide and lost innocence:
Implications for teaching critical thinking in the community college. In C. M. McMahon
(Ed.), Special issue: Critical thinking: Unfinished business (pp. 49-57). New Directions
for Community Colleges, No. 130, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brookfield, S. (2005b). The power of critical theory: Liberating adult learning and teaching. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brown, S. V. (1994). Underrepresented minority women in graduate science and engineering
education. Princeton, NJ: Education Testing Service.
Brown, S. V. (2000). The preparation of minorities for academic careers in science and
engineering: How well are we doing? In G. Campbell, R. Denes, & C. Morrison (Eds.),
Access Denied: Race, Ethnicity, and the Scientific Enterprise (pp. 239-268). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Brown, S. W. (2002). Hispanic students majoring in science or engineering: What happened in
their educational journeys? Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and
Engineering, 8(2), 123-148.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 148

Burke, R., & Mattis, M. (2007). Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics. Upping the Numbers. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Cahill, S., & Maccoby, E. (1999). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together.
Contemporary Sociology, 28(4), 422. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2655304
Campbell, G. J. (1996). Bridging the ethnic and gender gaps in engineering. NACME Research
Letter, 6(1), 1-12.
Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful
women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 44(8), 1011-1245.
Carter, B., & McGoldrick, M. (1989) The changing family life cycle: A framework for family
therapy (2nd ed). New York, NY, Allyn and Bacon.
Cartwright, N. (1983). How the laws of physics lie. Oxford & New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Chanderbhan-Forde, S. Heppner, R., & Borman, K. (2012). The doors are open, but still they
don’t come in: Cultural capital and the pathway to degrees for women. Journal of Women
and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 18(2), 179-198.
Chang, M. J., Cerna, O. S., Han, J. C., & Saenz, V. B. (2008). The contradictory roles of
institutional status in retaining underrepresented minority students in biomedical and
behavioral science majors. The Review of Higher Education, 31(4), 433-464.
Chinn, P. W. U. (1999). Multiple worlds/matched meanings: Barriers to minority women
engineers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 621-636.
Chipman, S. F., & Thomas, V. G. (1987). The participation of women and minorities in
mathematical, scientific, and technical fields. Review of Research in Education, 14(1),
387-430.
Cole, D., & Ahmadi, S. (2010). Reconsidering campus diversity: An examination of Muslim
students’ experiences. Journal of Higher Education, 81(2) 121-139.
Cole, C., & Barber, E. G. (2003). Increasing faculty diversity: The occupational choices of high-
achieving minority students. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Collins, M. (1991). Adult education as vocation. New York, NY: Routledge.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crawford, M., & MacLeod, M. (1990). Gender in the college classroom: An assessment of the
“chilly climate” for women. Sex Roles, 23(3/4), 101-122.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 149

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cuádraz, G. H. (1999). Stories of access and “luck:” Chicana/os, higher education and the
politics of incorporation. Latino Studies Journal, 10, 100-123.
Darder, A. (1991). Culture and power in the classroom. Westport, CT: Greenview.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). The flat earth and education: How America’s commitment to
equity will determine our future. Educational Researcher, 36(6), 318-334.
Dickey, C. A. (1996). The role of quality mentoring in the recruitment and retention of women
students of color (Thesis, University of Minnesota) . Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses database, Publication No. 304267372.
Duncan, G. J., & Dunifon, R. (2012), “Soft-Skills” and long-run labor market success.
In Solomon W. Polachek, Konstantinos Tatsiramos (Eds.), 35th Anniversary
Retrospective (Research in Labor Economics, 35, 313-339). doi:10.1108/S0147-
9121(2012)0000035036
Durkheim, E. (1895; 1982). The rules of sociological method. Translation © 1982 by The
Macmillan Press Ltd.
Dweck, C. S., Davidson, W., Nelson, S., & Enna, B. (1978). Sex differences in learned
helplessness: II. The contingencies of evaluative feedback in the classroom: III. An
experimental analysis. Developmental Psychology, 14, 268-276.
Ellington, R. (2006). Having their say: Eight high-achieving African-American undergraduate
mathematics majors discuss their success and persistence in mathematics. (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Maryland). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses
database, Publication No. 305304604.
Elliott, R., Strenta, A., Adair, R., Matier, M., & Scott, J. (1996). The role of ethnicity in choosing
and leaving science in highly selective institutions. Research in Higher Education, 37(6),
681-709. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01792952
Erwin, L., & Maurutto,P. (1998). Beyond access: Considering gender deficits in science
Education. Gender and Education, 10(1), 51-69. Journal of STEM Education, (11),
(2010).
Espinosa, L. L. (2008). The academic self-concept of African American and Latina(o) men and
women in STEM majors. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering,
14(2), 177-200.
Espinosa, L. (2009). 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.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 150

Ethington, C. A., & Wolfle, L. M. (1988). Women’s selection of quantitative undergraduate
fields of study: Direct and indirect influences. American Educational Research Journal,
25(2), 157–175.
Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York, NY: Herder and
Herder.
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed: New rev. 20th-Anniversary ed. New York, NY:
Continuum.
Freire, P. (1998). Politics and education (P. L. Wong, Trans.). Los Angeles: UCLA Latin
American Center Publications.
Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London:
Falmer.
Giguette, M. S., Lopez, A. M., & Schulte, L. J. (2006, October). Perceived social support:
Ethnic and gender differences in the computing disciplines. Paper presented at the 36th
Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, San Diego, CA.
Giroux, H. A. (1997). Pedagogy and the politics of hope: Theory, culture, and schooling: A
critical reader. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. London, UK: Penguin Books
Gonzales, P. M., Blanton, H., & Williams, K. J. (2002). The effects of stereotype threat and
double-minority status on the test performance of Latino women. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 659–670.
Gorski, P. (2008). Peddling poverty for profit: Elements of oppression in Ruby Payne’s
framework. Equity and Excellence in Education, 41(1).
Government Accountability Office. (2007, July). Information sharing could help institutions
identify and address challenges some Asian Americans and Pacific Islander students
face. (Publication No. GAO-07-925). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Hanson, S. L. (2004). African American women in science: Experiences from high school
through the post-secondary years and beyond. NWSA Journal, 16(1), 96–115.
Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Harding, J. (2013). Chapter 7: Alternative approaches to analyzing qualitative data. Qualitative
data analysis from start to finish (pp. 145-147). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Harmon, P., & King, D. (1985). Expert systems: Artificial intelligence in business. New York,
NY: Wiley Press.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 151

Harraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature. London: Free
Association.
Harris, F., III, & Edwards, K. E. (2010). College men’s experiences as man: Findings and
implications from two grounded theory studies. Journal of Student Affairs Research and
Practice, 47(1), 43-62.
Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in educational settings. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Hatchett, S. J., & Jackson, J. S. (1993). African American extended kin systems: An assessment.
In H. P. McAdo (Ed.), Family ethnicity: Strength in diversity (pp. 90-108). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Heckman, J., & Kautz, T. (2012). Hard evidence on soft skills. Labour Economics, 19(4), 451-
464. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2012.05.014
Heller, R. S., & Martin, C. D. (1994). Attracting young minority women to engineering and
science: Necessary characteristics for exemplary programs. IEEE Transactions on
Education, 37(1), 8–12.
Henslin, J. (2010). Sociology: A down to earth approach. Education in Global Perspective:
Colleges challenges old and new (pp. 490-493). Upper Saddle River; NJ: Pearson.
Henslin, J. M. (2012). Sociology: A down-to-earth approach. Boston, MA: Pearson
Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (2007). Dialectic of enlightenment: Philosophical fragments
(Cultural Memory in the Present). G. S. Noerr (Ed.) tanslated by Edmund Jephcott.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Huang, G., Taddese, N., Walter, E., & Peng, S. S. (2000). Entry and persistence of women and
minorities in college science and engineering education. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Education.
Hurtado, S. (2007). The study of college impact. In P. J. Gumport (Ed.), Sociology of higher
education: Contributions and their contexts (94-112). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Iverson, S. V. (2007). Camouflaging power and privilege: A critical race analysis of university
diversity policies. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(5), 586-611.
Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in the social context. London: Croom Helm.
Jary, D., & Jary, J. (1991). Sociology. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Johnson, A. (2005). Policy implications of supporting women of color in the sciences. Journal of
Women, Politics and Policy, 27(3), 135–150. doi:10.1300/J501v27n03_09
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 152

Johnson, A. C. (2007). Unintended consequences: How science professors discourage women of
color. Science Education, 91(5), 805–821.
Johnson, A. G. (2006). Privilege, power, and difference. New York, NY, McGraw Hill.
Johnson, D. (2007). Sense of belonging among women of color in science, technology,
engineering, and math majors: Investigating the contributions of campus racial climate
perceptions and other college environments. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Maryland, College Park). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database,
Publication No. 304850760.
Joseph, J. (2007). The experiences of African American graduate students: A cultural transition
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Southern California, Los Angeles.)
Justin-Johnson, C. (2004). Good fit or chilly climate: An exploration of the persistence
experiences of African-American women graduates of predominantly White college
science programs. (Doctoral dissertation, University of New Orleans, LA). Retrieved
from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database, Publication No. 305172242.
Kibria, N. (1994). Household structure and family ideologies: The dynamics of immigrant
economic adaptation among Vietnamese refugees. Social Problems, 41(1), 81–96.
Retrieved from http://doi.org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.2307/3096843
Lan, F., Hale, K., & Rivers, E. (2015, September). Immigrants’ growing presence in the U.S.
science and engineering workforce: Education and employment characteristics in 2013.
Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15328/ -
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., Sheu, H., Schmidt, J., Brenner, B. R., Gloster, C. S., . . . & Lyons, H.
(2005). Social cognitive predictors of academic interests and goals in engineering: Utility
for women and students at historically Black universities. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 52(1), 84–92.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Littlejohn, S. W. (1992). Critical theories in Theories of Human Communication (4th ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Littlejohn, S., & Foss, K. (2004). Chapter 3. Student Workbook for Littlejohn's Theories of
Human Communication. Wadsworth Pub Co.
Lopez, G. P. (2003). The (racially neutral) politics of education: A critical race theory
perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 68-94.
Lucas, C. J. (1994). American higher education: A history. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 153

Malcom, S. M., Hall, P. Q., & Brown, J. W. (1976). The double bind: The price of being a
minority woman in Science (No. 76-R-3). Washington, DC: American Association for the
Advancement of Science.
MacLaren, P. (1994). Life in schools. White Plains, NY: Longman.
MacLachlan, A. J. (2006) The graduate experience of women in STEM and how it could be
improved. In J. M. Bystydzienski & S. R. Bird (Eds.), Removing barriers: Women in
academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pp. 237-253).
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Madigan, J. C. (2009). The education of women and girls in the United States: A historical
perspective. Advances in Gender and Education, 11-13.
Maher, F., & Tetreault, M. (1994). The feminist classroom. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Malcolm, S. M., Hall, P. Q., & Brown, J. W. (1976). The double bind: The price of being a
minority woman in science (No. 76-R-3). Washington, DC: American Association for the
Advancement of Science.
Malcolm, S., Chubin, D. E., & Jesse, J. K. (2004). Standing our ground: A guidebook for STEM
educators in the post-Michigan era. Washington, DC: American Association for the
Advancement of Science.
Marger, M. (2009). Race and racism. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Designing qualitative research (5th ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
McMillan, J. & Schumacher, S. (1997). Research in education: A conceptual introduction (4th
ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
McNaught, C., & Lam, P. (2010, May). Using Wordle as a supplementary research tool. The
Qualitative Report, 15(3). Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-
3/mcnaught.pdf
Meiners, E., & Fuller, L. (2004). Empowering women? Engaging a technology grant for social
change. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 5(4), 1–19.
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 154

Meyer, E. (2007). “But I’m not gay:” What straight teachers need to know about queer theory. In
M. Rodriguez & W. Pinar (Eds.), Queering straight teachers: Discourse and identity in
education (pp. 15-32). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Mickittrick, G., D., Langdon, D., & Julian, F. (2011). Women in STEM: A gender gap to
innovation. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic, and Statistical Administration.
Retrieved from http://esa.doc.gov/pub/2011/womeninstemagaptoinnovation8311.pdf
Moje, E. B., Ciechanowski, K. M., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004).
Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds
of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38-70.
doi:10.1598/RRQ.39.1.4
Monaghan, E. J. (1988). Literacy instruction and gender in Colonial New England. American
Quarterly, (40), 18-41.
National Academies. (2010a). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching
category 5. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Academies. (2010b). Expanding underrepresented minority participation: America’s
science and technology talent at the crossroads. Washington, DC: National Academies
Press.
National Academy of Sciences. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and
employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press. doi:10.17226/11463
National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Stats in brief: Students who study science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in postsecondary education.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/ pubs2009/2009161.pdf.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Higher education: Gaps in access and
persistence study. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012046/tables/e-42-2.pdf
National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education. (2011). Title IX at 40: Working to ensure
gender equity in education. Washington, DC: Author.
National Research Council (NCR). (1999). Transforming undergraduate education in science,
mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: J. B. Labov et al. 160
CBE—Life Sciences Education National Academies Press. Retrieved from
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_ id6453 (accessed 31 May 2009)
National Research Council (NRC). (2010). Exploring the intersection of science education and
21st century skills: Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/20035467.pdf
National Research Council (NRC). (2006). To recruit and advance: Women students and faculty
in science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 155

National Science Foundation. (1996). Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate
education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. (NSF 96 –139).
Arlington, VA. Retrieved from www. nsf.gov/pubs/1998/nsf98128/contents.pdf
(accessed 27 May 2009)
National Science Foundation. (2007). Report to the National Science Board in the National
Science Foundation’s merit review process: Fiscal year 2006. NSB-07-22. Retrieved
from http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2007/2006_merit_review.pdf
National Science Foundation (NSF). (2014). Investing in science, engineering, and education for
the nation’s future: Strategic plan for 2014 – 2018, March 2014. Retrieved from
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2014/nsf14043/nsf14043.pdf
National Science Foundation (NSF), Division of Science Resources Statistics. (2013). Women,
minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. NSF 09-305.
Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/pdf/nsf09305.pdf
Nave, F., Frizell, S., Obiomon, P., Cui, S., & Perkins, J. (2006, June). Prairie View A&M
University: Assessing the impact of the STEM-enrichment program on women of color.
Paper presented at the WEPAN 2006 National Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
Nelson, D. J. (2007) A national analysis of minorities in science and engineering faculties at
research universities. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Obama, B. (2009). Remarks by the President at the National Academy of Sciences annual
meeting. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/
Ong, M. (2002). Against the current: Women of color succeeding in physics. (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved June 1, 2008, from
Dissertations and Theses database.
Ong, M. (2005). Body projects of young women of color in physics: Intersections of gender,
race, and science. Social Problems, 52(4), 593-617.
Ong, M. (2010). The mini-symposium on women of color in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM): A summary of events, findings, and suggestions. A report to
the Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering (CEOSE). Cambridge,
MA: TERC. Retrieved from
https://www.nsf.gov/od/oia/activities/ceose/reports/TERC_mini_symp_rprt_hires.pdf
Ong, M, Espinosa, L. L., & Orfield, G. (2009). Women of color: An untapped national resource
for U.S. science and engineering. Unpublished manuscript.
Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L., & Orfield, G. (2010, March 31). Inside the double bind: A
synthesis of empirical research on women of color in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics. White paper presented to the National Science Foundation,
Washington, DC (NSF/REESE Project DRL-0635577). Retrieved from
http://www.terc.edu/work/1513.html
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 156

Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L. L., & Orfield, G. (2011). Inside the double bind: A synthesis
of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 172-208,
389-390. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/874155317?accountid=14749
Padilla, R. V. (1991a). Assessing heuristic knowledge to enhance college student’s success. In
G. D. Keller, J. R. Deneen, & R. J. Magallan (Eds.), Assessment and access. (81-92).
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Padilla, R. V. (1991b). Using computers to develop concept models of social situations.
Qualitative Sociology (Special Issue, Part I), 14(3), 263-274.
Padilla, R. V. (1993). Using dialogical research methods in group interviews. In D. L. Morgan
(Ed.), Successful focus groups (pp. 153-166). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Padilla, R. V. (1994). The unfolding matrix: A technique for qualitative data acquisition and
analysis. In R. G. Burgess (Ed.), Studies in qualitative methodology (pp. 273-285).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Padilla, R. V. (2004). Implementing the student success model in higher education. Unpublished
Manuscript.
Padilla, R. V. (2009). Student success modeling: Elementary school to college. Sterling, VA:
Stylus Publishing.
Padilla, R. V., Trevino, J., Trevino, J., & Gonzalez, K. (1997, March). Developing local models
of minority student success in college. Journal of College Student Development, 38(2),
125- 135.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd

ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Pineda, C. (2014). Ed.D. Inquiry, 532 PPT. Class materials. Los Angeles, CA: University of
Southern California.
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Report to the President:
Prepare and inspire: K-12 education in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) for America’s future: 2010. Retrieved from
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast
Project Kaleidoscope. (1991). What works: Building natural science communities. Journal of
STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 13(3), 52-61.
Reid, R. L. (2008). U.S. not meeting ambitious goals for graduates. Civil Engineering, 78(9), 25-
27.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 157

Rendón, L. I. (1994, August). Beyond involvement: Creating validating academic and social
communities in the community college. Keynote address presented to the American River
Community College, Sacramento, CA.
Renzetti, C., & Curran, D. (2003). Women, men, and society. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Riordan, C. (1990). Girls and boys in school: Together or separate? New York, NY: Teachers
College Press.
Rodriguez, A. J. (1997). Counting the runners who don’t have shoes: Trends in student
achievement in science by socioeconomic status and gender within ethnic groups.
Madison, WI: National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at fairness: How America's schools cheat girls. New
York, NY: C. Scribner.
Sadker, M., & Sadker, M. (1995). Failing at fairness: How our schools cheat girls. New York,
NY: Touchstone.
Sadker, D., & Sadker, M. (2003). Teachers, schools, and society (6th ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Schimmel, D. B. (2000). Developing science talent in minority students: Perspectives of past
participants in a summer mentorship program (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Connecticut.. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database, Publication
No. 304597242.
Shain, C. H. (2011). Revisiting the problem of engineering school persistence in African-
American women students (Doctoral dissertation.). In M. Ong, C. Wight, L, Espinosa, &
G. Orfield Inside the double blind: A synthesis of Empirical Research on Undergraduate
and Graduate Women of Color in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.
Harvard Educational Review, Summer, (81)2, 172-208).
Smith, S. T. (2011, April). Science and technology intellectual capital: A critical US
asset. Maxwell Papers, (59). Retrieved from
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/maxwell/mp59.pdf
Smyth, F. L., & McArdle, J. J. (2004). Ethnic and gender differences in science graduation at
selective colleges with implications for admission policy and college choice. Research in
Higher Education, 45(4), 353–381.
Sosnowski, N. H. (2002). Women of color staking a claim for cyber domain: Unpacking the
racial/gender gap in science, mathematics, engineering and technology (SMET)
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts - Amherst). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses database, Publication No. 275796259.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 158

Spady, W. G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and
synthesis. Interchange, 1(1), 64-85.
Spady, W. G. (1971). Dropouts from higher education: Towards an empirical model.
Interchange, 2(3), 38-62.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Staniec, J. F. O. (2004). The effects of race, sex, and expected returns on the choice of college
major. Eastern Economic Journal, 30(4), 549–562.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of
racial minority youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1) 1-40.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Streitmatter, J. (1994). Toward gender equity n the classroom: Everyday teachers’ beliefs and
practices. New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
Taylor, R. D., Casten, R., & Flickinger, S. M. (1993). Influence of kinship social support on the
parenting experiences and psychosocial adjustment of African-American
adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 29(2), 382.
Taylor, R. J., Jackson, J. S., & Chatters, L. M. (1997). Family life in Black America. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Tennant, M. C., & Pogson, P. (1995). Learning and change in the adult years: A developmental
perspective. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropouts from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.).
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The
Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167-177.
Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy and physicists.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tyack, D., & Hansot, E.(1992). Learning together: A history of coeducation in American public
schools. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Retrieved from Project MUSE
database.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2011). Statistical abstract of the United States 2011, Table 6, (p. 10.)
Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0006.pdf
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 159

U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. (2011). STEM: Good
Jobs Now and for the Future: Executive Summary. Retrieved from
https://www.purdue.edu/hhs/hdfs/fii/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/s_iafis04c01.pdf
Valenzuela, Y. (2006). Mi fuerza/My strength: The academic and personal experiences of
Chicana/ Latina transfer students in math and science (Doctoral dissertation, University
of California, Irvine and University of California, Los Angeles). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertation and Theses database, Publication No. 304916976.
Varma, R. (2002). Women in information technology: A case study of undergraduate students in
a minority-serving institution. Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, 22(4), 274–
282.
Varma, R., & Galindo-Sanchez, V. (2006). Native American women in computing. Retrieved
from http://www.unm.edu/~varma/print/Native.pdf
Varma, E. M., Prasad, E. M., A., & Kapur, D. (2006). Confronting ‘socialization’ barrier: Cross-
ethnic differences in undergraduate women’s preference for IT education. In J. McGrath
Cohoon & W. Aspray (Eds.), Women and information technology: Research on
underrepresentation (pp. 301–322). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vega, W. A. (1995). The study of Latino families: A point of departure. In R. E. Zambrana (Ed.),
Understanding Latino families: Scholarship, policy, and practice (pp. 3-17). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Weidman, J. C. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J. C. Smart
(Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, 5, 289-322. New York, NY:
Agathon Press.
Welton, M. R. (1993). The contribution of critical theory to our understanding of adult learning.
In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), An update on adult learning theory (pp. 81-90). New Directions
for Adult and Continuing Education, 57. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Whalen, D. F., & Shelley, C., II. (2010). Academic success for STEM and non-STEM majors.
Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 11(1), 45-60.
Whitten, B. L., Foster, S. R., & Duncombe, M. L. (2003). What works for women in
undergraduate physics? Physics Today, 56(9), 46–51.
Whitten, B. L., Foster, S. R., Duncombe, M. L., Allen, P. E., Heron, P., McCullough, L., . . .
Zorn, H. M. (2004). “Like a family:” What works to create friendly and respectful
student-faculty interactions. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and
Engineering, 10(3), 229-242.
Wilkinson, D. (1993). Family ethnicity in America. In McAdoo, H. P. (ed.), Family ethnicity:
Strength in diversity (pp. 15–59). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 160

Williams, R. M., Jr. (1965). American society: A sociological interpretation (2nd ed.) New York,
NY: Knopf.
Zinn, M. B., & Dill, B. T. (1996). Theorizing difference from multiracial feminism. Feminist
Studies, 22(2), 321-331.
Xu, Y. (2008). Gender disparity in STEM disciplines: A study of faculty attrition and turnover
intentions. Research in Higher Education, 49(7), 607-624. doi:10.1007/s11162-008-
9097-4.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 161

APPENDIX A: TABLE A1 DETAILED STEM OCUPATIONS AND
STANDARD OCCUPATIONAL CLASSIFICATION (SOC)

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, (2011, p. 8)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 162

APPENDIX A: TABLE A2 DETAILED STEM
UNDERGRADUATE MAJORS

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. (2011, p. 9)

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 163

APPENDIX B: INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR
EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

(Fact sheet adapted from USC, University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB)

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

Research Topic
Profiles of Successful Persistence for Women in Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Rosa Wilkins-Langie under the
supervision of Drs. Rey Baca and Alan Green at the University of Southern California because
you are a female Science, Technology, Engineering, or Mathematics (STEM) graduate working
in the early phases of your STEM career. In order to participate, you must have at least an
undergraduate degree in a STEM discipline and entered a STEM vocation for up to 3 years. You
must be age 18 or older. Research studies include only people who voluntarily choose to take
part. This document explains information about this study. Feel free to ask questions about
anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The study aims to generate knowledge and compile data that will produce persistence profiles of
women who have successfully procured an undergraduate STEM degree and progressed into a
STEM vocation. Scholarly work is limited in understanding female STEM persistence success. I
am particularly interested in understanding how these women successfully maneuvered through
their university tenure triumphantly, narratives of struggles overcame and skills procured, as well
as strategies, tools, resources utilized. Further, I am interested in how their knowledge,
maneuvering skills, and resources procured in higher education facilitate in their persistence in
their new career.

PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 164

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked in small focus group format (3-4 STEM
women) to address 4 primary research questions through a series of probing interview questions.
The focus sessions are anticipated to take between 1-1/2 – 2 hours and will be audio taped. You
do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to; if you don’t want to be taped,
handwritten notes will be taken.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There will be no compensation for this project.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is not to participate. Your relationship with your employer will not be affected
whether or not you participate in this study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential.
Your responses will be coded with a false name (pseudonym) and maintained separately. The
audiotapes will be destroyed once they have been transcribed. At the completion of the study,
direct identifiers and the key to the codes will be destroyed. Data will be stored on a password-
protected computer in the researcher’s office for one year after the study has been completed and
then destroyed. Please note: The members of the research team and the University of Southern
California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP
reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published, no identifiable information will be included in the
research paper.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Principal
Investigator Rosa Wilkins-Langie via email wilkinsl@usc.edu or Faculty Chairs Reynaldo Baca
email - rbaca@usc.edu or Alan Green email - alangree@usc.edu.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, . . . or if you want to talk to
someone independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional
Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213)
821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 165

APPENDIX C: TANDEM (FOCUS) GROUP INTERVIEW GUIDE
Guide Introduction
Ladies, thank you for agreeing to participate in my study to create profiles of persistence
for successful STEM women. This study is to generate a deeper understanding of your previous
journey and experiences and knowledge(s) obtained in female persistence to your STEM degree
attainment and how the knowledge(s) from that journey retains you in your STEM career today.
I appreciate the time that you have set aside to answer some of my questions that can give better
insight to not only your student experiences in STEM disciplines, but, how those experiences are
transferred and assist you in your success in your STEM career pursuits. If you are
uncomfortable at any point during the discussion, you may terminate the interview. Please take
your time in answering the questions and don’t feel rushed. Feel free to help yourself to one of
the cold drinks or food (if you would like) throughout the interview. As discussed, the group
interview should take 2.5 hours, does that still work for everyone? We will be taking two 5-10
minutes breaks as needed. Also, don’t be alarmed regarding the matrix on the board or its
length. The matrix we will work with on the board will not be completed totally by your group.
The way this works is you will complete a part of the matrix through chatting up to a point, and
then the next group will pick up where you left off and continue forward.
Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of my study and answer
any questions you might have about participating. At the conclusion, please let me know if I
have not answered a question you may have. As you know, I am currently enrolled at USC in
the Ed.D program and this is my study. The primary purpose of this study as I have stated is to
generate knowledge(s) in these two areas: your previous college experience and recent STEM
career. There is not enough scholarly information regarding these areas. As you are well aware,
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 166

the success of STEM is important to our nation’s economic stability and security. More women
are needed on the STEM rolls to ensure that. Now, you all come from mixed STEM
backgrounds and have not been in the workforce more than three years. So there is both
commonality and contrast in your stories. In all triumphs, there is both joy and difficulty in your
experiences. Please feel free to say anything and express your feelings in any way that suits you.
Your candidness is welcome, valued, and appreciated in this study. You are the experts in this
study and your authentic voice essential.
I want to assure you that I am strictly wearing the hat of researcher today. What this
means is that the nature of my questions are not evaluative. I will not be making any judgments
no matter what you say. What happens in this room will remain in this room. None of the data I
collect will be shared, especially with employers.
I am happy to provide you with a copy of my final dissertation if you are interested. As a
reminder, we will meet again for about an hour after this session later to review the completed
profiles, stories, and letters once constructed to ensure your voice was accurately portrayed. The
profiles and stories will better instruct academia and policy makers, while the letters will give
insight to your freshman STEM sisters and employers who need to retain you. Do you have any
questions about the study before we get started? If you don’t have any (more) questions I would
like to have your permission to begin the interview. I have brought a recorder with me today so
that I can accurately capture what you share with me. May I have your permission to record our
conversation? I may also take notes from time to time to ensure I focus on particular comments.
Are you all comfortable with that as well? Remember, this is reflective so let’s go back to your
undergraduate time in college. It will be important to when you can think of the specific time
period was this 1st year, 2nd year, or the whole matriculation you recall this experience or had
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 167

this knowledge. While you are not expected to remember every little detail, the most important
facets you feel in your experience that surface are points that we want to discuss. Now let’s get
started……
Setting and Staging
I am hoping we could start with you telling me about your undergraduate tenure . . . let’s
just close our eyes for a moment and take a couple of cleansing breaths just to relax and get
ready to go back in time . . . we will take about 30 seconds breathing . . . Now you are standing
on your campus at any point and time . . . with your eyes closed tell me what do you see (call
each name) . . . what is around you . . . what is it that is significant regarding this time and place
in college? When you complete your statements you may open your eyes. Upon completion of
this exercise . . . if you remember anything else you want to add even after you have spoken
please feel free to add more statements. If you would like to connect your thoughts or
experience to someone’s story please do so. Great . . . now that we have chatted about a
significant time and place in your journey, let’s talk about your experiences….
Interview Questions
Interview Questions for Female STEM Graduate, Early Career Professionals
Interviewing Questions for Tandem Sessions
Tell me what has your experience been like in your STEM fields?
What is your opinion of the treatment of students in your STEM field? Does this hold true for men
and women equally? Give examples?
How have you experienced triumphs? Give examples. What makes that a triumphant for you?
How have your experienced obstacles? Give examples. What makes that an obstacle to you?
Describe how the instructor interacted with the STEM students? Did this equally apply to women in
STEM? Describe the interaction both within the context of the classroom and outside the classroom?
What are the gender dynamics that may require maneuvering?
What role does maneuvering play in persisting in a classroom setting?
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 168

If I was a fly in your classroom buzzing about flying from the instructor and various students, what
would I see or hear as obstacles for STEM women?
Some students might describe the class environment as cold for females in your STEM field. How do
you feel about that statement?
If you had a younger sister who asked you “what is it like for you to be in a male-dominant
discipline,” what would you say to her?
Describe to me your experience matriculating through your STEM discipline.
Now you are sitting on your campus at any point and time that you viewed as difficult during your
matriculation…with your eyes closed tell me what do you remember as a difficult time? How did you
handle it?
What makes you dig deep to the core of your being when times are most difficult to keep going?
What are the key barriers that female STEM students must overcome to successfully maneuver their
undergraduate University experience?
What are the reasons you pursued a degree in STEM? What made you remain committed to your
STEM field?
What have been the beliefs you have had that position you to successfully maneuver your
undergraduate University experience? In what ways might others have contributed to those beliefs?
Family? Friends? Community? Be specific.
Describe how gender roles in your family setting might influence your drive to persist? Your
community values may influence your drive to persist?
What were your most contributing factors for pursing a STEM degree? Individual desire? Family?
Duty? Community?
Historically, some have stated men are more superior in the STEM arenas then women. How you
would you respond to this statement? How would you handle supposed superiority in your academic
setting?
Research infers women’s abilities in STEM are marginalized in the classroom by other male students?
How would you respond to that statement? How would you handle marginalization?
Some data has stated there are times at which STEM disciplines can be isolating or alienating for
women? Describe any experiences you would you would consider isolating or alienating for women
in STEM disciplines? How would you handle this situation?
I have been given some great information on STEM women experiences and or what drives you.
Now let’s chat about your thoughts on the resources and support. Describe the resources that were
available for STEM students.
If I was a new student (freshman) and you were my senior student mentor, what resources would you
recommend for maneuvering through your STEM discipline?
What strategies do female STEM students use in successfully maneuvering their undergraduate
University tenure? What tools have been developed that contribute to successful completion?
What skills do you think female STEM students possess that enable them to successfully maneuver
their undergraduate University tenure?
PROFILES OF WOMEN PERSISTENCE IN STEM 169

Tell me about how resources available generated persistence?
Tell me about any support groups that generated persistence?
Describe the key skills that female STEM career professionals have that causes them to successfully
maneuver in their work experience?
Describe the skills you learned in college interactions that you use in your early STEM career.
Between those in authority positions? Between male classmates? Between female classmates?
Some research might describe the STEM environment as cold for females in early STEM career
fields. What has been your experience in handling chilly environments? What steps did you take to
address the coldness if any?
If you had a younger sister who asked you “what continues to inspire you to work in a predominately
male-dominant field,” what would you say to her?
Thinking back to your college times and connected your present career experience, what skills do you
possess that have retained (given by university/employer) you and continually keep you committed to
your STEM field? What resources? What strategies?

Transitional Wrap Up……
I am wondering if there is anything that you would add to our conversation today that I
might not have covered? Was there other questions I should have asked about your experience?
This concludes our interview today.
Interview Closing
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate
your time and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my
study. If I find myself with a follow-up question, I am wondering if I might be able to contact
you, and if so, if email is ok? I will be contacting you shortly for a final review and getting your
feedback. Again, thank you for participating in my study and much success to you!

APPENDIX D: QUALITATIVE SURVEY (unfolding matrix and interview guide)

Source: Unfolding Matrix (Padilla, 1994)
PROFILE OF FEMALE PERSISTENCE IN STEM 170

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) leadership positions

PDF

African-American parent perspectives on special education

PDF

Mathematics, Engineering, Science, Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher a...

PDF

Developing the next generation of organization leaders: a gap analysis

PDF

Establishing domestic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs in the global market: an innovation study

PDF

Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement (MESA) and student persistence in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities and courses: the perceptions of MESA teacher advis...

PDF

The influence of globalization on the Irish educational system in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and development of 21st-century skills in secondary schools

PDF

Networking in the age of virtual work: women’s experiences and strategies for success

PDF

The mentorship of instructors and its impact on computer science interest among middle school girls: an evaluation study

PDF

Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement and persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors: the influence of MESA on the retention of first generation females in STEM...

PDF

Struggles build character: the impact of developmental math and the psychological, social and cultural factors that influence Latino males' persistence in STEM

PDF

A review of the effects of juvenile delinquency on entrance into post-secondary institutions of higher education

PDF

Developmental math in California community colleges and the delay to academic success

PDF

Obstacles to and motivations for women pursuing and serving in academic leadership positions in STEM fields at California universities

PDF

Significant others in the lives of Latino first-generation college students: how social capital aids persistence

PDF

Self-efficacy beliefs and intentions to persist of Native Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors

PDF

Exploring the prevalence and mitigating variables of secondary traumatic stress in K-12 educators

PDF

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

PDF

Staff members’ transfer of social capital to first-generation, low-income Latino/a students of Mexican descent

PDF

African American males matter: closing the discipline gap and increasing engagement

Asset Metadata

Creator Wilkins-Langie, Rosa G. (author)

Core Title Profiles of successful persistence for women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 04/21/2016

Defense Date 03/17/2016

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

Tag double-bind STEM women,OAI-PMH Harvest,STEM,STEM persistence for women,successful persistence,women in STEM

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Green, Alan (committee chair), Baca, Reynaldo (committee member), MacCalla, Nicole (committee member)

Creator Email professorrgl@aol.com,wilkinsl@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-240594

Unique identifier UC11278324

Identifier etd-WilkinsLan-4344.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-240594 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-WilkinsLan-4344.pdf

Dmrecord 240594

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Wilkins-Langie, Rosa G.

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