An Intersectional Application of Expectancy-Value Theory in an Undergraduate Chemistry Course

Abstract

The underrepresentation of women and Black, Latinx, and Native Americans within the United States scientific workforce is a persistent and multifaceted problem warranting an intersectional approach. Applying intersectionality to the expectancy-value theory of motivation, we examined initial motivation and subsequent achievement among a sample of undergraduate students (N = 687) enrolled in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) gateway course of introductory chemistry at a diverse 4-year university. We found no racial/ethnic group differences in initial motivation, but small (d = .30) group differences in achievement. Results revealed a pattern of gender differences across both underrepresented (i.e., Black, Latinx, and Native American) and well-represented (i.e., White, Asian American) racial/ethnic groups such that, relative to men, women began the class with lower levels of confidence about their performance, but greater utility value and attainment value in learning chemistry. Consistent with expectancy-value theory, motivation at the beginning of the semester positively predicted final exam scores across gender and racial/ethnic intersectional groups. For Black, Latinx, and Native American students, attainment value was an especially strong predictor of subsequent achievement. Our findings point to the need to cultivate social contexts within undergraduate STEM education that promotes all aspects of science motivation among students from underrepresented groups. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843231153390.

Keywords

motivation interest academic achievement intersectionality racial and ethnic differences human sex differences

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aguinis

Stone-Romero

E. F.

(1997). Methodological artifacts in moderated multiple regression and their effects on statistical power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 192–206. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.82.1.192

Avraamidou

(2020). Science identity as a landscape of becoming: Rethinking recognition and emotions through an intersectionality lens. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(2), 323–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09954-7

Beale

(1970). Double jeopardy: To be black and female. In Bambara

T. C.

(Ed.), The black woman: An anthology (pp. 109–122). Washington Square Press.

Beigman Klebanov

Burstein

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Priniski

S. J.

Mulholland

(2017). Reflective writing about the utility value of science as a tool for increasing STEM motivation and retention – Can AI help scale up? International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Education, 27, 791–818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0141-4

Biggs

Hawley

P. H.

Biernat

(2018). The academic conference as a chilly climate for women: Effects of gender representation on experiences of sexism, coping responses, and career intentions. Sex Roles, 78, 394–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0800-9

Bowen

R. S.

Cooper

M. M.

(2022). Grading on a curve as a systemic issue of equity in chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(1), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00369

Bowen

W. G.

Kurzweil

M. A.

Tobin

E. M.

(2005). Equity and excellence in American higher education. University of Virginia Press.

Brown

E. R.

Smith

J. L.

Thoman

D. B.

Allen

J. M.

Muragishi

(2015). From bench to bedside: A communal utility value intervention to enhance students’ biomedical science motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 1116–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000033

Buchanan

N. T.

Wiklund

L. O.

(2021). Intersectionality research in psychological science: Resisting the tendency to disconnect, dilute, and depoliticize. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 49, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-020-00748-y

10.

Buldu

(2006). Young children’s perceptions of scientists: A preliminary study. Educational Research, 48(1), 121–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880500498602

11.

Carnevale

A. P.

Cheah

Hanson

A. R.

(2015). The economic value of college majors. Center on Education and the Workforce, Georgetown University.

12.

Casad

B. J.

Oyler

D. L.

Sullivan

E. T.

McClellan

E. M.

Tierney

D. N.

Anderson

D. A.

Greeley

P. A.

Fague

M. A.

Flammang

B. J.

(2018). Wise psychological interventions to improve gender and racial equality in STEM. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(5), 767–787. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218767034

13.

Chavous

T. M.

Rivas-Drake

Glover

C. S.

Griffin

Cogburn

C. D.

(2008). Gender matters, too: The influences of school racial discrimination and racial identity on academic engagement outcomes among African American adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 44(3), 637–654. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.3.637

14.

Cheryan

Ziegler

S. A.

Montoya

A. K.

Jiang

(2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000052

15.

Clancy

K. B. H.

Lee

K. M. N.

Rodgers

E. M.

Richey

(2017). Double jeopardy in astronomy and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of gendered and racial harassment. Journal of Geographical Research: Planets, 122(7), 1610–1623. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JE005256

16.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.

17.

Cole

E. R.

(2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64(3), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014564

18.

Collins

P. H.

Bilge

(2016). Intersectionality. Polity Press.

19.

Combahee River Collective (1982). A Black feminist statement. In Hull

G. T.

Scott

P. B.

Smith

(Eds.), All the women are White, all the Blacks are men, but some of us are brave (pp. 13–22). The Feminist Press.

20.

Cooper

A. J.

(1892). A voice from the South. Aldine.

21.

Crenshaw

(1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140(1), 139–167. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315582924-10

22.

Crenshaw

(1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

23.

Diekman

A. B.

Brown

E. R.

Johnston

A. M.

Clark

E. K.

(2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1051–1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610377342

24.

Diekman

A. B.

Steinberg

(2013). Navigating social roles in pursuit of important goals: A communal goal congruity account of STEM pursuits. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(7), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12042

25.

Durik

A. M.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(2007). Different strokes for different folks: How individual interest moderates the effects of situational factors on task interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 597–610. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.597

26.

Eaton

A. A.

Saunders

J. F.

Jacobson

R. K.

West

(2020). How gender and race stereotypes impact the advancement of scholars in STEM: Professors’ biased evaluations of physics and biology post-doctoral candidates. Sex Roles, 82, 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01052-w

27.

Eccles

J. S.

(1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(4), 585–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x

28.

Eccles

J. S.

(2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In Elliot

A. J.

Dweck

C. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). Guilford.

29.

Eccles

J. S.

(2007). Where are all the women? Gender differences in participation in physical science and engineering. In Ceci

S. J.

Williams

W. M.

(Eds.), Why aren't more women in science?: Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 199–210). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11546-016.

30.

Eccles

J. S.

Wigfield

(2020). From expectancy-value theory to situated expectancy-value theory: A developmental, social cognitive, and sociocultural perspective on motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101859

31.

Ellis

J. M.

Powell

C. S.

Demetriou

C. P.

Huerta-Bapat

Panter

A. T.

(2019). Examining first-generation college student lived experiences with microaggressions and microaffirmations at a predominately White public research university. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25(2), 266–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000198

32.

Else-Quest

N. M.

Hyde

J. S.

(2016a). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research: I. Theoretical and epistemological issues. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316629797

33.

Else-Quest

N. M.

Hyde

J. S.

(2016b). Intersectionality in qualitative psychological research: II. Methods and techniques. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316647953

34.

Else-Quest

N. M.

Hyde

J. S.

Linn

M. C.

(2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(1), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018053

35.

Else-Quest

N. M.

Mineo

C. C.

Higgins

(2013). Math and science attitudes and achievement at the intersection of gender and ethnicity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(3), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684313480694

36.

Estrada

Eroy-Reveles

Matsui

(2018). The influence of affirming kindness and community on broadening participation in STEM career pathways. Social Issues and Policy Review, 12(1), 258–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12046

37.

Estrada

Young

G. R.

Nagy

Goldstein

E. J.

Ben-Zeev

Márquez-Magaña

Eroy-Reveles

(2019). The influence of microaffirmations on undergraduate persistence in science career pathways. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 18(ar40), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-01-0012

38.

Fine

Sojo

(2019). Women’s value: Beyond the business case for diversity and inclusion. The Lancet, 393(10171), 515–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30165-5

39.

Fry

Kennedy

Funk

(2021). STEM jobs see uneven progress in increasing gender, racial and ethnic diversity. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/

40.

Gayles

J. G.

Smith

K. N.

(2019). Advancing theoretical frameworks for intersectional research on women in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 179, 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.20274

41.

Grant

Kennelly

Ward

K. B.

(2000). Revisiting the gender, marriage, and parenthood puzzle in scientific careers. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 28(1/2), 62–85. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40004446

42.

Guo

Parker

P. D.

Marsh

H. W.

Morin

A. J. S.

(2015). Achievement, motivation, and educational choices: A longitudinal study of expectancy and value using a multiplicative perspective. Developmental Psychology, 51(8), 1163–1176. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039440

43.

Guo

, et al. (2016). Probing the unique contributions of self-concept, task values, and their interactions using multiple value facets and multiple academic outcomes. AERA Open, 2(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415626884

44.

Handelsman

, et al. (2005). More women in science. Science, 309(5738), 1190–1191. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1113252

45.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Canning

E. A.

Tibbetts

Priniski

S. J.

Hyde

J. S.

(2016a). Closing achievement gaps with a utility-value intervention: Disentangling race and social class. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(5), 745–765. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000075

46.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Durik

A. M.

Barron

K. E.

Linnenbrink-Garcia

Tauer

J. M.

(2008). The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.105

47.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Hecht

C. A.

Asher

M. W.

Beymer

P. N.

Lamont

L. B.

Else-Quest

N. M.

Priniski

S. J.

Smith

J. L.

Thoman

D. B.

(2022). A prosocial value intervention in gateway STEM courses. [Manuscript submitted for publication].

48.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Priniski

S. J.

(2018). Improving student outcomes in higher education: The science of targeted intervention. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 409–435. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011725

49.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Smith

J. L.

Priniski

S. J.

(2016b). Interest matters: The importance of promoting interest in education. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 220–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216655542

50.

Harding

S. G.

(2015). Objectivity and diversity. University of Chicago Press.

51.

Harris

R. B.

Mack

M. R.

Bryant

Theobald

E. J.

Freeman

(2020). Reducing achievement gaps in undergraduate general chemistry could lift underrepresented students into a “hyperpersistent zone”. Science Advances, 6(24), eaaz5687. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz5687

52.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford.

53.

Hazari

Sadler

P. M.

Sonnert

(2013). The science identity of college students: Exploring the intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 82–91. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43631586

54.

Herring

Henderson

(2011). From affirmative action to diversity: Toward a critical diversity perspective. Critical Sociology, 38(5), 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920511402701

55.

Hidi

Renninger

K. A.

(2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4

56.

Hilts

Part

Bernacki

M. L.

(2018). The roles of social influences on student competence, relatedness, achievement, and retention in STEM. Science Education, 102(4), 744–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21449

57.

Hoff

P. T.

(2020). Picked to pieces: The cost of opportunity. In Niemann

Y. N.

Gutiérrez y Muhs

González

C. G.

(Eds.), Presumed incompetent II: Race, class, power, and resistance of women in academia. Utah State University Press.

58.

Hogan

K. A.

Sathy

(2022). Inclusive teaching: Strategies for promoting equity in the college classroom. West Virginia University Press.

59.

Hong

Page

S. E.

(2004). Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(46), 16385–16389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403723101

60.

Hoy

A. Q.

(2019). Diverse STEM workforce needed to preserve U. S. competitiveness . https://www.aaas.org/news/diverse-stem-workforce-needed-preserve-us-competitiveness

61.

Hsieh

T.-Y.

Simpkins

S. D.

Eccles

J. S.

(2021). Gender by racial/ethnic intersectionality in the patterns of adolescents’ math motivation and their math achievement and engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66, 101974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101974

62.

Hulleman

C. S.

Durik

A. M.

Schweigert

S. B.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(2008). Task values, achievement goals, and interest: An integrative analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 398–416. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.398

63.

Hulleman

C. S.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326(5958), 1410–1412. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1177067

64.

Hyde

J. S.

(2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581

65.

Jiang

Simpkins

S. D.

Eccles

J. S.

(2020). Individuals’ math and science motivation and their subsequent STEM choices and achievement in high school and college: A longitudinal study of gender and college generation status differences. Developmental Psychology, 56(11), 2137–2151. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev00011101110

66.

Kim

A. Y.

Sinatra

G. M.

Seyranian

(2018). Developing a STEM identity among young women: A social identity perspective. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 589–625. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318779957

67.

Leaper

Starr

C. R.

(2019). Helping and hindering undergraduate women’s STEM motivation: Experiences with STEM encouragement, STEM-related gender bias, and sexual harassment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318806302

68.

Lorde

(1981). The uses of anger. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 9(3), 7–10. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40003905

69.

May

V. M.

(2015). Pursuing intersectionality, unsettling dominant imaginaries. Routledge.

70.

McCall

(2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800. https://doi.org/10.1086/426800

71.

McGee

E. O.

(2020). Black, brown, bruised: How racialized STEM education stifles innovation. Harvard Education Press.

72.

McGee

E. O.

White

D. T.

Jenkins

A. T.

Houston

Bentley

L. C.

Smith

W. J.

Robinson

W. H.

(2016). Black engineering students’ motivation for PhD attainment: Passion plus purpose. Journal for Multicultural Education, 10(2), 167–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-01-2016-0007

73.

Melguizo

Wolniak

G. C.

(2012). The earnings benefits of majoring in STEM fields among high achieving minority students. Research in Higher Education, 53, 383–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-011-9238-z

74.

Metcalf

Russell

Hill

(2018). Broadening the science of broadening participation in STEM through critical mixed methodologies and intersectionality frameworks. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(5), 580–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218768872

75.

Moss-Racusin

C. A.

Dovidio

J. F.

Brescoll

V. L.

Graham

M. J.

Handelsman

(2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474–16479. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109

76.

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (2021). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2021. Special Report NSF 21-321. National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/wmpd

77.

National Science Board (2019). Science and engineering indicators 2020: Science and engineering labor force. Science and Engineering Indicators 2020. NSB-2019-8. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20198/

78.

National Science Foundation (2014). Pathways to broadening participation in response to the CEOSE 2011-2012 recommendation . https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2015/nsf15037/nsf15037.pdf

79.

National Student Clearinghouse Research Center (2015). Science & engineering degree attainment: 2004–2014. https://nscresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/SnapshotReport15-DegreeAttainment.pdf

80.

Nielsen

M. W.

, et al. (2017). Gender diversity leads to better science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(8), 1740–1742. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1700616114

81.

O'Brien

L. T.

Blodorn

Adams

Garcia

D. M.

Hammer

(2015). Ethnic variation in gender-STEM stereotypes and STEM participation: An intersectional approach. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(2), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037944

82.

OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en.

83.

Okahana

Klein

Allum

Sowell

(2018). STEM doctoral completion of underrepresented minority students: Challenges and opportunities for improving participation in the doctoral workforce. Innovative Higher Education, 43, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-018-9425-3

84.

O’Keefe

D. J.

(2007). Brief report: Post hoc power, observed power, a priori power, retrospective power, prospective power, achieved power: Sorting out appropriate uses of statistical power analyses. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(4), 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450701641375

85.

Ong

Smith

J. M.

L. T.

(2018). Counterspaces for women of color in STEM higher education: Marginal and central spaces for persistence and success. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(2), 206–245. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21417

86.

Parker

P. D.

Van Zanden

B. V.

Marsh

H. W.

Owen

Duineveld

J. J.

Noetel

(2020). The intersection of gender, social class, and cultural context: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 197–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09493-1

87.

Pascarella

E. T.

Terenzini

P. T.

(1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. Jossey-Bass.

88.

Pomerantz

E. M.

Altermatt

E. R.

Saxon

J. L.

(2002). Making the grade but feeling distressed: Gender differences in academic performance and internal distress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 396–404. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.396

89.

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Executive Office of the President.

90.

Rodriguez

S. L.

Blaney

J. M.

(2021). “We’re the unicorns in STEM”: Understanding how academic and social experiences influence sense of belonging for Latina undergraduate students. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 14(3), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000176

91.

Rolón-Dow

Davison

. (2021). Theorizing racial microaffirmations: A critical race/latcrit approach. Race Ethnicity and Education, 24(2), 245–261. \x{FDDF}https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2020.1798381

92.

Rowe

(2008). Micro-affirmation and micro-inequalities. Journal of the International Ombudsman Association, 1(1), 45–48.

93.

Sansone

Smith

J. L.

(2000). Interest and self-regulation: The relation between having to and wanting to. In Sansone

Harackiewicz

J. M.

(Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 341–372). Academic. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012619070-0/50034-9

94.

Sarju

J. P.

Jones

L. C.

(2022). Improving the equity of undergraduate practical laboratory chemistry: Incorporating inclusive teaching and accessibility awareness into chemistry graduate teaching assistant training. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(1), 487–493. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00501

95.

Schreffler

Vasquez

III Chini

James

(2019). Universal design for learning in postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: A systematic review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(8), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0161-8

96.

Seidel

S. B.

Reggi

A. L.

Schinske

J. N.

Burrus

L. W.

Tanner

K. D.

(2015). Beyond the biology: A systematic investigation of noncontent instructor talk in an introductory biology course. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 14(ar43), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-03-0049

97.

Seo

Shen

Alfaro

E. C.

(2019). Adolescents’ beliefs about math ability and their relations to STEM career attainment: Joint consideration of race/ethnicity and gender. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48, 306–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0911-9

98.

Smith

J. L.

Cech

Metz

Huntoon

Moyer

(2014). Giving back or giving up: Native American student experiences in science and engineering. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20(3), 413–429. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036945

99.

Spencer

S. J.

Logel

Davies

P. G.

(2016). Stereotype threat. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 415–437. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235

100.

Strayhorn

T. L.

(2018). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students (2nd ed.). Routledge.

101.

Sue

D. W.

Constantine

M. G.

(2007). Racial microaggressions as instigators of difficult dialogues on race: Implications for student affairs educators and students. College Student Affairs Journal, 26(2), 136–143. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ899387

102.

Sun

Pan

Wang

L. L.

(2011). Rethinking observed power: Concept, practice, and implications. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 7(3), 81–87. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1027/1614-2241/a000025

103.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1986). An integrative theory of intergroup relations. In Austin

W. G.

Worchel

W. S.

(Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.

104.

Tanner

K. D.

(2013). Structure matters: Twenty-one teaching strategies to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 322–331. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-06-0115

105.

Thoman

D. B.

Brown

E. R.

Mason

A. Z.

Harmsen

A. G.

Smith

J. L.

(2015). The role of altruistic values in motivating underrepresented minority students in biomedicine. Bioscience, 65(2), 183–188. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu199

106.

Thoman

D. B.

Smith

J. L.

Brown

E. R.

Chase

Lee

J. Y. K.

(2013). Beyond performance: A motivational experiences model of stereotype threat. Educational Psychology Review, 25(2), 211–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9219-1

107.

Truth

(1851). Ain't I a woman? https://www.nps. gov/wori/learn/historyculture/sojourner-truth.htm

108.

Walton

G. M.

Logel

Peach

J. M.

Spencer

S. J.

Zanna

M. P.

(2015). Two brief interventions to mitigate a “chilly climate” transform women’s experience, relationships, and achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037461

109.

Wang

M.-T.

Degol

J. L.

(2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x

110.

Weston

T. J.

Seymour

Koch

A. K.

Drake

B. M.

(2019) Weed-out classes and their consequences. In Seymour

Hunter

A.-B.

(Eds.), Talking about leaving revisited: Persistence, relocation, and loss in undergraduate STEM education (pp. 197–243). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25304-2_7

111.

Wigfield

Eccles

(2020). Chapter five – 35 years of research on students’ subjective task values and motivation: A look back and a look forward. Advances in Motivation Science, 7, 161–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adms.2019.05.002

112.

Wilson-Kennedy

Z. S.

Payton-Stewart

Winfield

L. L.

(2020). Toward intentional diversity, equity, and respect in chemistry research and practice. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(8), 2041–2044. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00963

113.

Wyss

V. L.

Heulskamp

Siebert

C. J.

(2012). Increasing middle school student interest in STEM careers with videos of scientists. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(4), 501–522.

114.

Zell

Krizan

Teeter

(2015). Evaluating gender similarities and differences using meta-synthesis. American Psychologist, 70(1), 10–20. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0038208

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

0.28 MB