The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is committed to attracting, developing, and supporting the best scientists from all groups as an integral part of excellence in training. Biomedical research workforce diversity, capitalizing on the full spectrum of skills, talents, and viewpoints, is essential for solving complex human health challenges. Over the past few decades, the biomedical research workforce has benefited from NIH programs aimed at enhancing diversity. However, there is considerable room for improvement, particularly at the level of independent scientists and within scientific leadership. We provide a rationale and specific opportunities to develop and sustain a diverse biomedical research workforce through interventions that promote the successful transitions to different stages on the path toward completion of training and entry into the biomedical workforce.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has a long history of investment in broadening participation (BP) in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. A review of past NSF BP efforts provides insights into how the portfolio of programs and activities has evolved and the broad array of innovative strategies that has been used to increase the participation of groups underrepresented in STEM, including women, minorities, and persons with disabilities. While many are familiar with these long-standing programmatic efforts, BP is also a key component of NSF’s strategic plans, has been highlighted in National Science Board reports, and is the focus of ongoing outreach efforts. The majority of familiar BP programs, such as the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (now 25 years old), are housed in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources. However, fellowship programs such as the Graduate Research Fellowships and Postdoctoral Research Fellowships under the Directorate for Biological Sciences (and parallel directorates in other STEM disciplines) are frequently used to address underrepresentation in STEM disciplines. The FY2016 and FY2017 budget requests incorporate funding for NSF INCLUDES, a new cross-agency BP initiative that will build on prior successes while addressing national BP challenges. NSF INCLUDES invites the use of innovative approaches for taking evidence-based best practices to scale, ushering in a new era in NSF BP advancement.

The National Institute of Food and Agriculture within the U.S. Department of Agriculture provides leadership, capacity, and funds to support the continuing development of a safe and competitive agricultural system. Many of the agency’s educational programs are led by the Division of Community and Education (DOCE). These programs span agricultural education, enhancing agricultural literacy through both formal and nonformal education. Here, we have highlighted funding opportunities within DOCE that enhance agricultural education and literacy by supporting the improvement of students’ critical communication, leadership skills, and experiential learning opportunities. Some of these programs include opportunities for which students can apply, while others focus on faculty applications. Opportunities faculty can apply for may support student-recruitment and student-retention techniques, curriculum development, innovative teaching methods, and institutional capacity-building programs. Overall, these programs foster a diverse workforce in agricultural science that matches the increasing diversity of the country.

In spite of modest gains in the past four decades, the United States has not been able to substantially improve on the pervasive underrepresentation of minorities in postsecondary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pathways. We suggest a way to guide a national effort to double the persistence of underrepresented minorities in STEM in the next decade.

This research methods Essay details the usefulness of critical theoretical frameworks and critical mixed-methodological approaches for life sciences education research on broadening participation in the life sciences. First, I draw on multidisciplinary research to discuss critical theory and methodologies. Then, I demonstrate the benefits of these approaches for researchers who study diversity and inclusion issues in the life sciences through examples from two critical mixed-methods studies of prominent issues in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) participation and recognition. The first study pairs critical discourse analysis of the STEM workforce literature, data, and underlying surveys with quantitative analyses of STEM pathways into the workforce. This example illustrates the necessity of questioning popular models of retention. It also demonstrates the importance of intersecting demographic categories to reveal patterns of experience both within and between groups whose access to and participation in STEM we aim to improve. The second study’s critical approach applies research on inequities in prizes awarded by STEM professional societies toward organizational change. This example uses data from the life sciences professional societies to show the importance of placing data within context to broaden participation and understand challenges in creating sustainable change.

Members of the Joint Working Group on Improving Underrepresented Minorities (URMs) Persistence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)—convened by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute—review current data and propose deliberation about why the academic “pathways” leak more for URM than white or Asian STEM students. They suggest expanding to include a stronger focus on the institutional barriers that need to be removed and the types of interventions that “lift” students’ interests, commitment, and ability to persist in STEM fields. Using Kurt Lewin’s planned approach to change, the committee describes five recommendations to increase URM persistence in STEM at the undergraduate level. These recommendations capitalize on known successes, recognize the need for accountability, and are framed to facilitate greater progress in the future. The impact of these recommendations rests upon enacting the first recommendation: to track successes and failures at the institutional level and collect data that help explain the existing trends.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently documented the positive effects of social–psychological interventions on the performance and retention of underrepresented students in the life sciences. We review two types of social–psychological interventions that address either students’ well-being in college science courses or students’ engagement in science content. Interventions that have proven effective in RCTs in science courses (namely, utility-value [UV] and values-affirmation [VA] interventions) emphasize different types of student values—students’ perceptions of the value of curricular content and students’ personal values that shape their educational experiences. Both types of value can be leveraged to promote positive academic outcomes for underrepresented students. For example, recent work shows that brief writing interventions embedded in the curriculum can increase students’ perceptions of UV (the perceived importance or usefulness of a task for future goals) and dramatically improve the performance of first-generation (FG) underrepresented minority students in college biology. Other work has emphasized students’ personal values in brief essays written early in the semester. This VA intervention has been shown to close achievement gaps for women in physics classes and for FG students in college biology. By reviewing recent research, considering which interventions are most effective for different groups, and examining the causal mechanisms driving these positive effects, we hope to inform life sciences educators about the potential of social–psychological interventions for broadening participation in the life sciences.

Private and public policies are increasingly aimed at supporting efforts to broaden participation of a diverse body of students in higher education. Unfortunately, this increase in student diversity does not always occur alongside changes in institutional culture. Unexamined biases in institutional culture can prevent diverse students from thriving and persisting in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Given the daily personal interactions that faculty have with students, we suggest that individual educators have the opportunity, and responsibility, to improve the retention and persistence of diverse students. However, in our experience, faculty professional development programs often limit discussions of diversity to “comfortable” topics (such as learning styles) and miss opportunities to explore deeper issues related to faculty privilege, implicit bias, and cues for stereotype threat that we all bring to the classroom. In this essay, we present a set of social science concepts that we can extend to our STEM courses to inform our efforts at inclusive excellence. We have recommended strategies for meaningful reflection and professional development with respect to diversity and inclusion, and aim to empower faculty to be change agents in their classrooms as a means to broadening participation in STEM fields.

An important step in broadening participation of historically underrepresented (HU) racial/ethnic groups in the sciences is the creation of measures validated with these groups that will allow for greater confidence in the results of investigations into factors that predict their persistence. This study introduces new measures of theoretically derived factors emanating from social cognitive and social identity theories associated with persistence for HU racial/ethnic groups in science disciplines. The purpose of this study was to investigate: 1) the internal reliability and factor analyses for measures of research-related self-efficacy beliefs, sources of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and science identity; and 2) potential group differences in responses to the measures, examining the main and interaction effects of gender and race/ethnicity. Survey data came from a national sample of 688 undergraduate students in science majors who were primarily black/African American and Hispanic/Latino/a with a 2:1 ratio of females to males. Analyses yielded acceptable validity statistics and race × gender group differences were observed in mean responses to several measures. Implications for broadening participation of HU groups in the sciences are discussed regarding future tests of predictive models of student persistence and training programs to consider cultural diversity factors in their design.

Recent research suggests that underrepresented minority (URM) college students, and especially first-generation URMs, may lose motivation to persist if they see science careers as unable to fulfill culturally relevant career goals. In the present study, we used a mixed-methods approach to explore patterns of motivation to pursue physical and life sciences across ethnic groups of freshman college students, as moderated by generational status. Results from a longitudinal survey (N = 249) demonstrated that freshman URM students who enter with a greater belief that science can be used to help their communities identified as scientists more strongly over time, but only among first-generation college students. Analysis of the survey data were consistent with content analysis of 11 transcripts from simultaneously conducted focus groups (N = 67); together, these studies reveal important differences in motivational characteristics both across and within ethnicity across educational generation status. First-generation URM students held the strongest prosocial values for pursuing a science major (e.g., giving back to the community). URM students broadly reported additional motivation to increase the status of their family (e.g., fulfilling aspirations for a better life). These findings demonstrate the importance of culturally connected career motives and for examining intersectional identities to understand science education choices and inform efforts to broaden participation.

Best-practices pedagogy in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) aims for inclusive excellence that fosters student persistence. This paper describes principles of inclusivity across 11 primarily undergraduate institutions designated as Capstone Awardees in Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s (HHMI) 2012 competition. The Capstones represent a range of institutional missions, student profiles, and geographical locations. Each successfully directed activities toward persistence of STEM students, especially those from traditionally underrepresented groups, through a set of common elements: mentoring programs to build community; research experiences to strengthen scientific skill/identity; attention to quantitative skills; and outreach/bridge programs to broaden the student pool. This paper grounds these program elements in learning theory, emphasizing their essential principles with examples of how they were implemented within institutional contexts. We also describe common assessment approaches that in many cases informed programming and created traction for stakeholder buy-in. The lessons learned from our shared experiences in pursuit of inclusive excellence, including the resources housed on our companion website, can inform others’ efforts to increase access to and persistence in STEM in higher education.

Xavier University of Louisiana leads the nation in awarding BS degrees in the biological sciences to African-American students. In this multiyear study with ∼5500 participants, data-driven interventions were adopted to improve student academic performance in a freshman-level general biology course. The three hour-long exams were common and administered concurrently to all students. New exam questions were developed using Bloom’s taxonomy, and exam results were analyzed statistically with validated assessment tools. All but the comprehensive final exam were returned to students for self-evaluation and remediation. Among other approaches, course rigor was monitored by using an identical set of 60 questions on the final exam across 10 semesters. Analysis of the identical sets of 60 final exam questions revealed that overall averages increased from 72.9% (2010) to 83.5% (2015). Regression analysis demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between high-risk students and their averages on the 60 questions. Additional analysis demonstrated statistically significant improvements for at least one letter grade from midterm to final and a 20% increase in the course pass rates over time, also for the high-risk population. These results support the hypothesis that our data-driven interventions and assessment techniques are successful in improving student retention, particularly for our academically at-risk students.

Research into science identity, stereotype threat, and possible selves suggests a lack of diverse representations of scientists could impede traditionally underserved students from persisting and succeeding in science. We evaluated a series of metacognitive homework assignments (“Scientist Spotlights”) that featured counterstereotypical examples of scientists in an introductory biology class at a diverse community college. Scientist Spotlights additionally served as tools for content coverage, as scientists were selected to match topics covered each week. We analyzed beginning- and end-of-course essays completed by students during each of five courses with Scientist Spotlights and two courses with equivalent homework assignments that lacked connections to the stories of diverse scientists. Students completing Scientist Spotlights shifted toward counterstereotypical descriptions of scientists and conveyed an enhanced ability to personally relate to scientists following the intervention. Longitudinal data suggested these shifts were maintained 6 months after the completion of the course. Analyses further uncovered correlations between these shifts, interest in science, and course grades. As Scientist Spotlights require very little class time and complement existing curricula, they represent a promising tool for enhancing science identity, shifting stereotypes, and connecting content to issues of equity and diversity in a broad range of STEM classrooms.

As we transition our undergraduate biology classrooms from traditional lectures to active learning, the dynamics among students become more important. These dynamics can be influenced by student social identities. One social identity that has been unexamined in the context of undergraduate biology is the spectrum of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA) identities. In this exploratory interview study, we probed the experiences and perceptions of seven students who identify as part of the LGBTQIA community. We found that students do not always experience the undergraduate biology classroom to be a welcoming or accepting place for their identities. In contrast to traditional lectures, active-learning classes increase the relevance of their LGBTQIA identities due to the increased interactions among students during group work. Finally, working with other students in active-learning classrooms can present challenges and opportunities for students considering their LGBTQIA identity. These findings indicate that these students’ LGBTQIA identities are affecting their experience in the classroom and that there may be specific instructional practices that can mitigate some of the possible obstacles. We hope that this work can stimulate discussions about how to broadly make our active-learning biology classes more inclusive of this specific population of students.

Challenges particular to second-year students have been identified that can impact persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. We implemented a program to improve student success in intermediate-level science courses by helping students to feel they belonged and could succeed in STEM. We used survey measures of perceptions and attitudes and then qualitative measures to characterize the impact of support strategies, including peer mentoring, a second-year science student retreat, learning and advising support resources, and department-specific activities. Analysis of registration and transcript information revealed underperformance by students of color (SOC) and first-generation (FG) students in 200-level science courses. Comparison of these data before and during programming revealed significant improvement in success rates of these students in 200-level biology and chemistry courses, but success rates of SOC and FG students remain lower than the overall rate for 200-level science courses. Contemporaneous with the program, qualitative and quantitative measures of student attitudes revealed a high level of belongingness and support. The results suggest that a focus on students’ metacognition about their own abilities and strategic knowledge of how to succeed may be a fruitful direction for future research.

Study group meetings (SGMs) are voluntary-attendance peer-led team-learning workshops that supplement introductory biology lectures at a selective liberal arts college. While supporting all students’ engagement with lecture material, specific aims are to improve the success of underrepresented minority (URM) students and those with weaker backgrounds in biology. Peer leaders with experience in biology courses and training in science pedagogy facilitate work on faculty-generated challenge problems. During the eight semesters assessed in this study, URM students and those with less preparation attended SGMs with equal or greater frequency than their counterparts. Most agreed that SGMs enhanced their comprehension of biology and ability to articulate solutions. The historical grade gap between URM and non-URM students narrowed slightly in Biology 2, but not in other biology and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses. Nonetheless, URM students taking introductory biology after program implementation have graduated with biology majors or minors at the same rates as non-URM students, and have enrolled in postcollege degree programs at equal or greater rates. These results suggest that improved performance as measured by science grade point average may not be necessary to improve the persistence of students from underrepresented groups as life sciences majors.

The Microbiology and Cell Science (MCS) Department at the University of Florida (UF) developed a new model of a 2 + 2 program that uses a hybrid online approach to bring its science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) curriculum to students. In this paradigm, 2-year graduates transfer as online students into the Distance Education in MCS (DE MCS) bachelor of science program. The program has broadened access to STEM with a steadily increasing enrollment that does not draw students away from existing on-campus programs. Notably, half of the DE MCS students are from underrepresented minority (URM) backgrounds and two-thirds are women, which represents a greater level of diversity than the corresponding on-campus cohort and the entire university. Additionally, the DE MCS cohort has comparable retention and academic performance compared with the on-campus transfer cohort. Of those who have earned a BS through the DE MCS program, 71% are women and 61% are URM. Overall, these data demonstrate that the hybrid online approach is successful in increasing diversity and provides another viable route in the myriad of STEM pathways. As the first of its kind in a STEM field, the DE MCS program serves as a model for programs seeking to broaden their reach.

In 2014, the National Institutes of Health invested $31 million in 10 primary institutions across the United States through the Building Undergraduate Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) program; one requirement of BUILD is sending undergraduate trainees from those primary institutions to partner institutions for research experiences. Mechanisms like BUILD are designed to broaden research opportunities for students, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds. However, to our knowledge, no studies have examined faculty willingness to mentor undergraduates from other institutions through structured training programs. Survey data from 536 faculty members at 13 institutions were collected in Fall 2013 and analyzed using multiple statistical techniques. Results show that faculty who valued the opportunity to increase diversity in the academy and those who believed that mentoring undergraduates benefited their own research expressed greater willingness to serve as research mentors to visiting undergraduates, and faculty who perceived that they did not have the ability to accommodate additional students expressed less willingness to do so. Most respondents viewed student and faculty incentives as motivating factors in their willingness to mentor, but their perspectives on different types of incentives varied based on faculty career stage, discipline, and research funding status. Results have important implications for designing multi-institutional undergraduate research training programs.

Increasing inclusion of underrepresented minority and first-generation students in mentored research experiences both increases diversity in the life sciences research community and prepares students for successful careers in these fields. However, analyses of the impact of mentoring approaches on specific student gains are limited. This study addresses the impact of mentoring strategies within research experiences on broadening access to the life sciences by examining both how these experiences impacted student success and how the quality of mentorship affected the development of research and academic skills for a diverse population of students at a public, minority-serving institution. Institutional data on student grades and graduation rates (n = 348) along with postresearch experience surveys (n = 138) found that students mentored in research had significantly higher cumulative grade point averages and similar graduation rates as a matched set of peers. Examination of the relationships between student-reported gains and mentoring strategies demonstrated that socioemotional and culturally relevant mentoring impacted student development during mentored research experiences. Additionally, extended engagement in research yielded significantly higher development of research-related skills and level of independence in research. Recommendations are provided for using mentoring to support traditionally underrepresented students in the sciences.

Undergraduate research experiences (UREs) confer many benefits to students, including improved self-confidence, better communication skills, and an increased likelihood of pursuing science careers. Additionally, UREs may be particularly important for racial/ethnic minority students who are underrepresented in the science workforce. We examined factors hypothetically relevant to underrepresented minority student gains from UREs at a Hispanic-serving institution, such as mentoring quality, family income, being Latino/a, and caring for dependents. Data came from a 2013 survey of University of Texas at El Paso students engaged in 10 URE programs (n = 227). Using generalized linear models (GzLMs) and adjusting for known covariates, we found that students who reported receiving higher-quality mentorship, spending more hours caring for dependents, and receiving more programmatic resources experienced significantly greater gains from their URE in all three areas we examined (i.e., thinking and working like a scientist, personal gains, and gains in skills). In two of three areas, duration of the URE was positive and significant. Being Latino/a was positive and significant only in the model predicting personal gains. Across the three models, quality of mentorship was the most important correlate of gains. This suggests that providing training to faculty mentors involved in UREs may improve student outcomes and increase program efficacy.

Although the importance of undergraduate research experiences in preparing students for graduate study and research careers is well documented, specific examination of program components is needed to assess the impact of these programs on underrepresented (UR) students. The Leadership Alliance, a consortium of leading PhD-granting and minority-serving institutions (MSIs), has leveraged its diverse partnership to place UR students from MSI and non-MSI institutions in competitive research environments through its national Summer Research Early Identification Program. Using longitudinal pre/post data collected from student surveys, we applied social cognitive career theory as a conceptual framework to examine how research engagement, skill development, and mentorship aspects of a summer research program affect students’ commitment to pursue research careers. Self-reported knowledge of research skills, time engaged in research activity, and students’ understanding of and attitudes toward pursuing graduate study were measured in relation to the classification of students’ home undergraduate institution, level of students’ pre-existing research experience, and demographic factors. Our results provide evidence of specific programmatic components that are beneficial for UR students from varying academic and cultural backgrounds. This study describes important aspects of summer research programs that will contribute to students’ ability to persist in science careers.

With the primary objective of attracting and retaining students from underrepresented backgrounds in the sciences, evaluation of one institution’s program has been ongoing over the past three years. Interviews with mentors in the program followed by focus groups conducted with mentees reveal key factors that shape undergraduate students’ research experiences. In the present study, attention is given to data gathered from 15 mentees in the program, the majority of whom have enrolled in community colleges, represent low socioeconomic backgrounds, and are nontraditional students. The results from focus groups with the mentees provide information on the benefits of participating in the program, characteristics of good mentors, challenges to the mentoring relationship, and the effects of underrepresented status on pursuit of advanced degrees. Comparisons of mentees’ comments about the mentoring relationship with mentors’ comments reveal similar themes and patterns while also demonstrating interesting differences. The qualitative findings are also juxtaposed with participants’ responses on the Survey of Undergraduate Research Experiences. Taken together, the data enhance our understanding of the experiences of underrepresented students in faculty-mentored research programs and highlight challenges and perspectives of students who are transferring to the university from a community college.

Previous research has shown that the Meyerhoff Scholars Program at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, is an effective intervention for high-achieving underrepresented minority (URM) students; African-American Meyerhoff students are significantly more likely to enter science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) PhD programs than comparison students. The first of two studies in this report extends the prior research by examining levels of PhD completion for Meyerhoff (N = 479) versus comparison sample (N = 249) students among the first 16 cohorts. Entering African-American Meyerhoff students were 4.8 times more likely to complete STEM PhDs than comparison sample students. To enhance understanding of potential mechanisms of influence, the second study used data from the 22nd (Fall 2010) to 25th (Fall 2013) cohorts (N = 109) to test the hypothesis that perceived program benefit at the end of freshman year would mediate the relationship between sense of community at the end of Summer Bridge and science identity and research self-efficacy at the end of sophomore year. Study 2 results indicated that perceived program benefit fully mediated the relationship between sense of community and both criterion measures. The findings underscore the potential of comprehensive STEM intervention programs to enhance PhD completion, and suggest mechanisms of influence.

The current study used a case study methodological approach, including document analysis, semistructured interviews, and participant observations, to investigate how a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) enrichment program supported retention and degree attainment of underrepresented students at a large, public, predominantly white institution. From this study, a model emerged that encompassed four components: proactive care, holistic support, community building, and catalysts for STEM identity development. These components encompassed a number of strategies and practices that were instrumental in the outcomes of program participants. This paper concludes with implications for practice, such as using models to inform program planning, assessment, and evaluation.

Equal representation within higher education science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and the STEM workforce in the United States across demographically diverse populations is a long-standing challenge. This study uses two-to-one nearest-neighbor matched-comparison group design to examine academic achievement, pursuit of graduate science degree, and classification of graduate institution attended by students participating in the Hopps Scholars Program (Hopps) at Morehouse College. Hopps is a highly structured enrichment program aimed at increasing participation of black males in STEM fields. Morehouse institutional records, Hopps Program records, and National Student Clearinghouse data were used to examine differences between Hopps and non-Hopps STEM graduates of Morehouse. Two-way sample t tests and chi-square tests revealed significant differences in academic achievement, likelihood of STEM degree pursuit, and the classification of graduate institutions attended by Hopps versus non-Hopps students. Hopps Scholars were significantly more likely than non-Hopps STEM graduates both to pursue STEM doctoral degrees and to attend doctoral-granting institutions with higher research activity. The Hopps Program’s approach to training black male students for scientific careers is a model of success for other programs committed to increasing the number of black males pursuing advanced degrees in STEM.

This report builds upon our previous study, which described five patterns of why college graduates join National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded diversity-focused Postbaccalaureate Research Education Programs (PREP). A 2015 report from the NIH showed that a high fraction of PREP participants matriculate into PhD and MD/PhD programs. This current study reveals how participants change during PREP, the program elements that facilitate change, and how identity as a graduate student and future scientist develops. Data come from in-depth interviews done at the beginning and end of PREP with 48 individuals from seven PREP programs. Results reveal three domains of development: academics, research, and presentation of oneself; each domain contains a developmental continuum. Key attributes of PREP enabling development include opportunities to attend graduate-level classes and seminars; time to practice reading literature; extended lab time with one’s own project; high and explicit expectations from mentors; and multiple opportunities to talk about science and improve communication skills. PREP enabled participants to develop their identities as graduate students and to anticipate being seen by others as highly prepared for PhD training. After PREP, 85% (n = 41) started the PhD or MD/PhD, making PREP an intervention approach with great potential to broaden participation in biomedical PhD programs.

Certain racial and ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds remain underrepresented (UR) in the biomedical sciences. This underrepresentation becomes more extreme at each higher education stage. To support UR scholars during the critical transition from baccalaureate to PhD, we established an intensive, 1-yr postbaccalaureate training program. We hypothesized that this intervention would strengthen each participant’s competitiveness for leading PhD programs and build a foundation of skills and self-efficacy important for success during and after graduate school. Scholar critical analysis skills, lab technique knowledge, and Graduate Record Examination scores all improved significantly during the program. Scholars reported significant confidence growth in 21 of 24 categories related to success in research careers. In 5 yr, 91% (41/45) of scholars transitioned directly into PhD programs. Importantly, 40% (18/45) of participating postbaccalaureate scholars had previously been declined acceptance into graduate school; however, 17/18 of these scholars directly entered competitive PhD programs following our training program. Alumni reported they were “extremely well” prepared for graduate school, and 95% (39/41) are currently making progress to graduation with a PhD. In conclusion, we report a model for postbaccalaureate training that could be replicated to increase participation and success among UR scholars in the biomedical sciences.

The Annual Biomedical Research Conference for Minority Students (ABRCMS) is designed to support undergraduate students’ professional development as future scientists. Juniors, seniors, and postbaccalaureates who attended ABRCMS during 2008–2011 were emailed a link to an online questionnaire in which they reported their experiences at the conference. Attendees reported many ABRCMS-provided benefits. Frequency of attending or presenting at ABRCMS is positively related to science self-efficacy, research confidence, sense of belonging in science, and intentions to pursue a research degree in graduate school. Increased research confidence predicts graduate school plans and intentions for a research career in science; however, men were slightly more likely to intend to pursue a research career than women, likely due to higher research confidence. Although all attendees benefited from ABRCMS, underrepresented minority (URM) students had higher science self-efficacy and sense of belonging in science after attending ABRCMS than non-URM students. This finding demonstrates the effectiveness of ABRCMS as an intervention to increase the representation and success of URMs in science. Results highlight the importance of attending a minority-oriented research conference where URMs can develop their science self-efficacy, research confidence, and sense of belonging in science. However, changes to the conference and undergraduate research experiences may be necessary to reduce gender gaps.

Despite growing diversity among life sciences professionals, members of historically underrepresented groups (e.g., women) continue to encounter barriers to academic and career advancement, such as subtle messages and stereotypes that signal low value for women, and fewer opportunities for quality mentoring relationships. These barriers reinforce the stereotype that women’s gender is incompatible with their science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) field, and can interfere with their sense of belonging and self-efficacy within STEM. The present work expands this literature in two ways, by 1) focusing on a distinct period in women’s careers that has been relatively understudied, but represents a critical period when career decisions are made, that is, graduate school; and 2) highlighting the buffering effect of one critical mechanism against barriers to STEM persistence, that is, perceived support from advisors. Results of the present study show that perceived support from one’s advisor may promote STEM engagement among women by predicting greater gender–STEM identity compatibility, which in turn predicts greater STEM importance among women (but not men). STEM importance further predicts higher sense of belonging in STEM for both men and women and increased STEM self-efficacy for women. Finally, we describe the implications of this work for educational policy.

The problem of PhD attrition, especially at the dissertation-writing stage, is not solely related to mentoring, departments, or disciplines; it is a problem that affects the entire institution. As such, solutions require collaborative efforts for student success. Building on Yeatman’s master–apprentice model, which assumes mastering disciplinary writing in singular advisor–student contexts, and Burnett’s collaborative cohort model, which introduced doctoral dissertation supervision in a collaborative-learning environment with several faculty mentors in a single discipline, the Dissertation House model (DHM) introduces a model of doctoral dissertation supervision that involves multiple mentors across several disciplines. On the basis of more than 200 students’ reflections, we find that challenges in completing the dissertation extend beyond departmental and disciplinary boundaries. The DHM’s multidisciplinary approach preserves the traditional master–apprentice relationship between faculty and students within academic departments while providing an additional support mechanism through interdisciplinary collaborative cohorts. Using Thoits’s coping assistance theory and data from DH students over a 10-year period, the DHM incorporates Hoadley’s concept of knowledge communities to establish a successful dissertation-writing intervention for graduate students across doctoral programs. Using propensity score analysis, we provide in this study an empirical assessment of the benefits and efficacy of the DHM.

Postdoctoral training is an optimal time to expand research skills, develop independence, and shape career trajectories, making this training period important to study in the context of career development. Seeding Postdoctoral Innovators in Research and Education (SPIRE) is a training program that balances research, teaching, and professional development. This study examines the factors that promote the transition of postdocs into academic careers and increase diversity in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Data indicate that SPIRE scholars (n = 77) transition into faculty positions at three times the national average with a greater proportion of underrepresented racial minorities (URMs) and females represented among SPIRE scholars. Logistic regression models indicate that significant predictors are the intended career track at the start of the postdoctoral training and the number of publications. Factors necessary for successful transition are teaching experience as independent instructors, professional development opportunities, and the experience of balancing teaching with research. Scholars’ continued commitment to increasing diversity in their faculty roles was demonstrated by their attainment of tenure-track positions at minority-serving institutions, continued mentorship of URMs, and engagement with diversity initiatives. These results suggest that a postdoctoral program structured to include research, teaching, and diversity inclusion facilitates attainment of desired academic positions with sustained impacts on broadening participation.

A national sample of PhD-trained scientists completed training, accepted subsequent employment in academic and nonacademic positions, and were queried about their previous graduate training and current employment. Respondents indicated factors contributing to their employment decision (e.g., working conditions, salary, job security). The data indicate the relative importance of deciding factors influencing career choice, controlling for gender, initial interest in faculty careers, and number of postgraduate publications. Among both well-represented (WR; n = 3444) and underrepresented minority (URM; n = 225) respondents, faculty career choice was positively associated with desire for autonomy and partner opportunity and negatively associated with desire for leadership opportunity. Differences between groups in reasons endorsed included: variety, prestige, salary, family influence, and faculty advisor influence. Furthermore, endorsement of faculty advisor or other mentor influence and family or peer influence were surprisingly rare across groups, suggesting that formal and informal support networks could provide a missed opportunity to provide support for trainees who want to stay in faculty career paths. Reasons requiring alteration of misperceptions (e.g., limited leadership opportunity for faculty) must be distinguished from reasons requiring removal of actual barriers. Further investigation into factors that affect PhDs’ career decisions can help elucidate why URM candidates are disproportionately exiting the academy.

BRAINS: Broadening the Representation of Academic Investigators in NeuroScience is a National Institutes of Health–funded, national program that addresses challenges to the persistence of diverse early-career neuroscientists. In doing so, BRAINS aims to advance diversity in neuroscience by increasing career advancement and retention of post-PhD, early-career neuroscientists from underrepresented groups (URGs). The comprehensive professional development program is structured to catalyze conversations specific to URGs in neuroscience and explicitly addresses factors known to impact persistence such as a weak sense of belonging to the scientific community, isolation and solo status, inequitable access to resources that impact career success, and marginalization from informal networks and mentoring relationships. While we do not yet have data on the long-term impact of the BRAINS program on participants’ career trajectory and persistence, we introduce the BRAINS program theory and report early quantitative and qualitative data on shorter-term individual impacts within the realms of career-advancing behaviors and career experiences. These early results suggest promising, positive career productivity, increased self-efficacy, stronger sense of belonging, and new perspectives on navigating careers for BRAINS participants. We finish by discussing recommendations for future professional development programs and research designed to broaden participation in the biomedical and life sciences.

Mounting experimental evidence suggests that subtle gender biases favoring men contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), including many subfields of the life sciences. However, there are relatively few evaluations of diversity interventions designed to reduce gender biases within the STEM community. Because gender biases distort the meritocratic evaluation and advancement of students, interventions targeting instructors’ biases are particularly needed. We evaluated one such intervention, a workshop called “Scientific Diversity” that was consistent with an established framework guiding the development of diversity interventions designed to reduce biases and was administered to a sample of life science instructors (N = 126) at several sessions of the National Academies Summer Institute for Undergraduate Education held nationwide. Evidence emerged indicating the efficacy of the “Scientific Diversity” workshop, such that participants were more aware of gender bias, expressed less gender bias, and were more willing to engage in actions to reduce gender bias 2 weeks after participating in the intervention compared with 2 weeks before the intervention. Implications for diversity interventions aimed at reducing gender bias and broadening the participation of women in the life sciences are discussed.