The role of mentoring in promoting diversity equity and inclusion in STEM Education and Research

Abstract

The success of mentoring derives from active and respectful listening and the willingness to learn and accept opportunities for personal growth. This shapes every trainee and their destined path in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The act of cultivating rapport, asking, and pondering meaningful questions, and receiving constructive feedback are critical to support a productive mentoring relationship. Successful mentoring in STEM can be established and allow mentees, especially underrepresented minorities (URMs), to flourish in an environment where they feel welcomed and supported. However, mentees from underrepresented groups often experience inadequate mentoring due to a mentor's lack of awareness, poor trainings themselves, or lack of understanding of the mentee’s hardships. It is important for mentors and mentees to work together to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in STEM education through creativity, authenticity, and networking. We analyzed data obtained from students who attended a recent workshop that are interested in going to graduate school. Our results show that despite low initial expectations for the workshop, many students were satisfied in the knowledge they gleaned. The future and role of diversity in STEM within these underrepresented groups lies in community support and an important role that they can play in the lives of others through DEI initiatives and throughout their careers all of which involves positive mentoring.

Notably, underrepresented minorities (URM) trainees often experience inadequate mentoring due to their mentor’s inexperience with URM groups, poor mentorship training, or a lack of understanding of their mentee’s journey.

Abbreviations

DEI

Diversity, equity, and inclusion

STEM

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics

URM

Underrepresented minorities

Introduction

Innovation is driven by diversity (Hofstra et al. 2020). As such, it is critical to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education to ultimately increase innovation. We believe this is possible through the leadership of mentors and promotion of supportive environments. Often STEM mentoring is focused on an individual-centered, information-based, cooperative relationship built on passing on knowledge and experience from a senior researcher to a junior or student researcher. The mentor is usually someone, i.e. an entrusted advisor or an individual that trains and advises on various issues around career development, personal challenges, or goals (National Academies of Sciences 2020, Hinton et al. 2020b, Shuler et al. 2021). We also believe that a mentor, traditionally thought of as an individual that gave advice to a younger or less experienced person, especially around an occupation or a trade, can also be a same aged individual or even older. STEM fields are fueled by the efforts of trainees at all career stages, and fostering the development of young scientists, especially underrepresented minorities (URM) scientists, is a key goal for the future of STEM (National Academies of Sciences 2020, Hinton Jr et al. 2020b, Shuler et al. 2021). We designed this workshop as an effective tool for improving development in the mentee and mentor relationship to promote retention in the pipeline and improve upon casual mentoring relationships (Hinton Jr et al. 2020a, Uddin and De Los Reyes 2021).

Mentorship is not only availing opportunity, but having the willingness to show and lead by example. We suggest that mentors utilize the framework laid out here (Fig. 1) to develop opportunities with their labs or mentees to create a plan that would work with the career plan of the mentees. Mentoring is individualistic and should be adapted to the individual mentee. It should also be noted that opportunities around DEI do not harm the chances of trainees to obtain an assistant professor position or other positions reliant on research experience. Past literature has shown that DEI papers in fact increases the chances of applicants (Brandt et al. 2021). As such, we encourage mentors to engage in DEI in addition to research endeavors and encourage the same in their mentees by applying the practices we lay out here.

Figure 1.

Graphical flowchart of layout of the workshop.

Framework of the workshop

We have discussed the subject of mentoring and its vital nature to a successful career in STEM before (McReynolds et al. 2020, Hinton Jr et al. 2020b, Shuler et al. 2021, Termini et al. 2021a, 2021,b). As such, we will focus on the novel aspects of mentoring presented in this workshop as it relates to DEI. Mentoring in the past has been negligent in some ways when it comes to DEI. To progress, mentoring must utilize new techniques to promote DEI work in mentees and help cultivate novel viewpoints. In promoting DEI in mentoring, it is critical that mentors endeavor to create an environment that encourages learning while giving mentees whatever assistance they may need, by understanding the cultural parameters and unique needs and issues of different minority groups (Lewellen-Williams et al. 2006). The literature has shown that women and minorities are more likely to consider mentoring to be a critical aspect of their career (Kosoko-Lasaki et al. 2006, Lewellen-Williams et al. 2006). Although there may be a lack of underrepresented mentors, while gender and ethnic similarities are important, nonunderrepresented mentors are just as precious (Lewellen-Williams et al. 2006).

In this workshop, we not only go over the various types of mentoring and the challenges that may arise when mentors must guide trainees for the first time, but also lay out a blueprint for aiding in DEI papers for trainees to disrupt the status quo. DEI has been shown to be a very timely topic over the past few years. There had been an emphasis placed on it to show a pragmatic plan of action that thoroughly allows for transformative action, as opposed to performative action, in a place of academia. Allowing for proper training on these subjects to occur, one will have an authentic relationship with trainees from diverse backgrounds and represent a wider audience for inclusivity. This workshop also discusses how using various types of outreach opportunities, while using outlets for DEI, are needed to provide an opportunity to trainees to excel. In this workshop, there is an additional module for how to tell accuracy in social media post, to ensure scientific trust is effectively being utilized. This together, ensures a mentee is efficient at working on social media, which is an important facet for building trust in a community and networking (Ross et al. 2012, Streeter 2014, Madakam and Tripathi 2021). This workshop also discusses how to engage with the public regarding the science topics one may be familiar with in an engaging way.

Beyond this, this workshop highlights the importance of engaging in multiple forms of DEI work. We challenge mentors and mentees to not only engage in one type of DEI, and instead work to raise awareness regarding several URM. In this workshop, we also talk about how to engage public interest by working with several communities, such as the community of scholars, and how to broaden this impact beyond the institution one is at. Additionally, in this workshop we also prescribe references for how to gain community trust and how to use STEM resources to do this. We also discuss how to develop young scientists and encourage them to move along in the pipeline. We further talk about how to replicate programming and ensure it is a success when applied. We finally talk about other opportunities that mentors can do with their mentees to allow for scientific advancement of young scholars. We encourage the use of tools that are already visible online and offline, such as the National Research Mentoring Network, to further enhance the mentoring experience (Sorkness et al. 2017, McReynolds et al. 2020). With these as the general themes of the workshop, we have several more specific sections in the workshop.

Fostering creativity to aid DEI

One simple way for mentors to aid mentees in the development of their DEI portfolio is to incorporate the mentees into their own active work. This can easily be implemented at small and large institutions to advance underrepresented mentees along the STEM pipeline (Hinton Jr et al. 2020a, Jayabalan et al. 2021). For example, if a mentor participates in educational outreach by visiting local schools, mentees should be invited to give them hands-on exposure. If a mentee has their own idea for the development of a DEI initiative, mentors should serve as a guide and aid. Much of the expertise, i.e. required to maintain a successful research career is transferable into the DEI arena. Teamwork, critical thinking, planning, and budgeting are all valuable skills in relation to this. Often the excitement of the proposed idea can overshadow the amount of work required to make that idea a reality. Mentors are key to establishing realistic boundaries that enables a mentee to have good work–life balance. We suggest mentors also help mentees set realistic goals around research performances and DEI around stem education outreach performance. Thus, mentors have the real power to teach mentees the power of saying no (Hinton et al. 2020). Therefore, having a mentor can help instill these skills, set realistic goals in accomplishing DEI initiatives, and help initiatives from becoming overwhelming.

Identifying a need: authenticity

The crux of DEI is the desire to serve. To be able to serve effectively, one must identify the community they seek to aid and what that community needs. In some cases, the need may be evident; e.g. literature has shown that black scientists are less likely to get grant funding as compared to their white counterparts with comparable CVs (Ginther et al. 2011, Dzirasa 2020, Platt 2020, Stevens et al. 2021). Facing disadvantage as a black and/or women scientists is also is true for when minority faculty is applying for a new job, all while faculty of color innovate at higher levels (Moss-Racusin et al. 2012, Reuben et al. 2014, Eaton et al. 2020, Hofstra et al. 2020). In other cases, particularly ones that may concern local communities, more work is needed to identify issues. In these instances, it is important to approach these communities from a place of authenticity. A facet of this is cultural humility, or cultural competency, which aids in recognizing the humanity in the population one seeks to serve (Cheng 2007, Foronda 2020). Spending time in the community and getting to know community leaders demonstrates authenticity and builds credibility in the community, while also offering first-hand experience in addressing the issues. Humility is also necessary at this stage, as even if one has the resources and identifies a need, they should be able to pass the project onto someone better suited to the project, if someone.

Role of DEI in mentoring

In this particular workshop, mentees learn about how to fortify the relationship experience between themselves and the mentor (Hinton Jr et al. 2020a, 2020b, Shuler et al. 2021). One way this can be done is through cultivating a holistic mentoring bond that values mutual trust and respect. This workshop also teaches mentees about the necessary skills needed in doing DEI while still being successful in science, and how to properly relay these things to the mentor. These skills do not only include effective strategies about mentorship, but teaches mentors and mentees how to navigate gaining public trust in science and conveying that science to others (Termini et al. 2021a). A large aspect of this is emphasizing the necessary to build trust with the community by conducting oneself in a proper way to gain credibility over time. If one lacks this credibility, their DEI papers can lack the networks they need to thrive. Additionally, this workshop provides information in developing DEI initiatives, and offers suggestions of general practices for a long-lasting relationship. A large aspect of developing DEI initiatives is being able to make an observation, identify a problem, and analyze and present a solution.

Importantly, this workshop discusses the importance of organization and planning skills for DEI initiatives, especially large-scale ones. DEI initiatives, additionally, are not one-and-done and this workshop emphasizes the importance of longer-term follow up to ensure they have a lasting impact. Long-term follow up also shows authenticity, showing that one had a commitment to creating lasting change, which is important to building trust in the community. In this particular framework, we talk about how to replicate STEM education programming initiatives and how that may be used as a way to leverage collaborative mentoring and forge networks. This includes identifying and utilizing resources that one has available to themselves and working with others who may broaden their impact, including community leaders. With this, we discuss the importance of unity and humility in DEI to both advocate for other diverse groups and step-aside for those other individuals better suited for the task, when appropriate. Lastly, with this framework, we cover activities around STEM education. At the beginning of the workshop, it heavily focuses on mentorship, but later balances out by focusing on DEI and STEM education efforts. In promoting DEI, social media is a large facet and one must be mindful that what is being portrayed and displayed in social media is professional, regardless of political orientation. Other important skills for DEI and STEM education efforts we discuss are cultural competency, which is the ability to work and emphasize with a wide range of individuals (Cheng 2007, Powell Sears 2012).

Methods

A total of 24 students from a range of demographics (Table 1) Winston-Salem State University attended the workshop virtually, which lasted for approximately 90 minutes including a Q&A. Specifically, this was a webinar workshop which was administered as a speaker with a PowerPoint over Zoom, followed by a large group Q&A during which participants could unmute themselves to ask questions and privately or publicly put them in the Zoom chat. This workshop targeted undergraduates, specifically in reference to graduate school, to better view how the workshop altered their knowledge and confidence in potential future academic aspirations. All participants were currently enrolled in the Maximizing Access to Research Careers (MARC) research training program, and attendance of the workshop was offered to MARC trainees on a completely voluntary basis, free of compensation. Prior to and following the workshop, students completed optional and anonymous questionnaires to measure their knowledge about the topics presented in the workshop (Table 2).

Table 1.

Participant demographics.

Race/ethnicity	Participant count
Black/African American	21
Hispanic	1
Afro Latinx	1
Non-Hispanic White	1
Total	24
Sex/gender
Male	12
Female	12
Total	24
Education level
High school diploma or equivalent	24
Total	24

Table 2.

Pre- and postworkshop evaluations.

Preworkshop survey questions	Postworkshop survey questions
Do you think the presentation will keep you well-informed on a scale of 1–10?	How do you like the presentation on a scale of 1–10?
How much do you know about graduate school or professional school on a scale of 1–10?	How much do you know about graduate school or professional school on a scale of 1–10?
How well are you prepared for graduate school before this talk on a scale of 1–10?	How well are you prepared for graduate school after this talk on a scale of 1–10?
How well do you think the presentation will better prepare you for graduate school on a scale of 1–10?	Did the presentation better prepare you for graduate school on a scale of 1–10?
How well do you think the the talk will improve your confidence to apply to a professional or graduate school a scale of 1–10?	How much do you think the talk helped you improve your confidence to apply to a professional or graduate school a scale of 1–10?
How well do you think the talk will improve your networking skills on a scale of 1–10?	How much do you think the talk helped you improve your networking skills on a scale of 1–10?
How do you think the talk will improve your understanding of what a support team really does on a 1–10 scale?	How much do you think the talk helped you improve your understanding of what a support team really does on a 1–10 scale?
How do you think the talk will improve your learning style on a 1–10 scale?	How much do you think the talk helped you improve your learning style on a 1–10 scale?
How do you think the talk will improve your verbal and nonverbal communication on a 1–10 scale?	How do you think the talk helped you improve your verbal and nonverbal communication on a 1–10 scale?

Postsurvey analysis plotted the data into box and whisker plots, with individual answers represented by circles, standard error represented by error bars, and median represented by red centerline. All raw data were analyzed with nonparametric tests for comparison within paired samples. Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test determined the differences between measures Differences were considered statistically significant when P-values were less than .05. ^****P < .0001; ***P < .001; **P < .01; *P < .05; and NS, not significant P > .05; Data center line, median; boxes, first and third quartiles; whiskers, range; and circles represent individual values.

Results

Preworkshop questionnaire responses revealed a distinct pattern of students with low expectations. By self-assessment, the majority of students reported not seeing much value in the workshop, as well as a lack of knowledge about graduate school as well as confidence for applying (Fig. 2, preworkshop). It is unclear if these expectations were influenced by previous experience or simply lack of knowledge. After the workshop, postworkshop questionnaire results indicated significant (P < .0001) improvement in all categories, including information, preparedness, and confidence in applying to graduate school. Using a self-assessment scale of 1–10, with 10 being the most favorable response, responses score nearly doubled in all categories. Scores increased by a median of 6 points for the informativeness of the workshop (Fig. 2A), suggesting the workshop was better than students expected. There was similarly a median increase of 5 points regarding students’ knowledge of graduate school following the presentation (Fig. 2B). This is likely linked to the workshop helping to inform students of graduate school, of which there was a large median increase of 7 points (Fig. 2C). Finally, students felt both more prepared and confident in applying for graduate school, with median increases of 5 and 6, respectively (Fig. 2D and E). These results indicate that an initially apprehensive crowd of students found the workshop to be worthwhile in gaining both interest and confidence in a future involving graduate school.

Figure 2.

Results from pre- and postworkshop evaluations for questions on their overall knowledge of graduate school. This shows that on average students found the workshop informative, and it increased their knowledge of graduate schools as well as increasing their perceived preparedness.

Similar results were found concerning questions more attune to the mentee aspect of the mentorship experience and the specific applicability of the workshop regarding themselves as students. Preworkshop questions concerning student networking skills, support team knowledge, learning style, and communication skills found students feeling ill informed, although slightly more informed than their knowledge of graduate school (Figs 2 and 3, preworkshop). A significant increase (P < .0001) in scores for all categories occurred following the workshop, indicating students felt better informed about these important aspects of the mentoring relationship. Although students did not expect this workshop to aid in networking skills, with an average initial score of 3.375, following the workshop the average rose to 9.125, showing an increase of 5.75 (Fig. 3A). Similarly, students understanding of a support team rose by 5.291, from averages of 4.417 to 9.708, following the workshop (Fig. 2B). This workshop also helped students in improving their learning style, prestudent expectations were moderate at an average of 4.750, but following the workshop this average rose to 9.917, showing an increase of 5.167 (Fig. 3C). Finally, there was a similarly large change when it came to helping students improve communication skills, both verbal and nonverbal; averages rose from 4.583 to 9.250, showing an increase of 4.667 (Fig. 3D). Altogether, in all cases student expectations of the talk ranged from low to moderate, and their postsurvey scores nearly, or more than, doubled their initial scores. Following the workshop, in all questions presented here, the median score was either 9 or 10 suggesting that the talk was very beneficial for students. Together this data presents a dual benefit of the workshop as not only are student empowered to see graduate school as a viable option for their future, but they feel educated in the necessary skills required for the self-advocacy needed in a mentor–mentee relationship.

Figure 3.

Results from pre- and postworkshop evaluations on how well the workshop helped inform them of skills needed to navigate successfully in graduate school. This shows that on average this workshop increased key skills associated including networking and a greater understanding of how they functioned in a team.

Discussion

Our study demonstrates the need to educate on mentorship and support teams made up of academic professionals, faculty members, and students to work together to promote successful progression through their career stages.

Our data supports the need to be able to network and one defining skill that we support is that mentors establish a network for their trainees and also share in their networking experience so that trainees gain a better understanding. Networking skills are tough to develop and something that mentees need to grow, and typically they may only be able to grow through conferences and meetings (Streeter 2014). These skills also allow students to expand their mentorship network away from official settings. The provided skills can be utilized when seeking mentors in other venues, including family, outside organizations, religious settings, or even among peers at the same level or in groups. Thus, students can apply these skills to developing a mentorship network that can be kept and maintained at all stages of their career. These suggested recommendations are supported by our pre- and post-test questionnaire (Fig. 2).

Although researchers have shown that diversity and innovation go hand-in-hand, it is also important to cultivate inclusive opportunities so that diversity can thrive (Hofstra et al. 2020). The workshop has supported, going from pre to post-test, that students are supportive of having opportunities involving diversity and inclusion to enrich their training experience. This data is supported by Figs. 2 and 3 from the pre- and post-test questionnaires. This workshop suggests the potential for more workshops to be used as a necessary reference and resource for others to create environments that support DEI, diverse thinking, and valuable mentoring relationship.

Although there is a developing interest in supporting students to do DEI work, there remains an improper understanding of the time commitment to do a good job. We suggest supporting and listening to students interested in STEM outreach or DEI research get the proper resources to establish a network of DEI individuals, so they get optimal results. We also believe, based on the results, Beyond the scope of the study, the aggregate data suggests there must be a more consistent conversation that spans beyond the mentor to the entire department-level, dean office, and institutional-level to better enable these efforts. This will allow for the mentee to get the training they need that a mentor may not always have access to.

Availability of data and materials

A PowerPoint presentation of the workshop are available in English and Spanish. Survey data may be made available upon reasonable request.

Ethics declaration, project title

Promoting Engagement in science for underrepresented Ethnic and Racial minorities (P.E.E.R), 21-MortonD-HSR-SOM-01, Kaiser Foundation Research Institute FWA: FWA00002344.

Ethics approval and consent to participate and for publication

Yes.

Funding

This work was supported by the NIH grants 1K99DA052641-01 MOSAIC grant to L.J.B., 1K99GM141449-01 MOSAIC grant to C.P.M., the United Negro College Fund/Bristol-Myers Squibb E.E. Just Postgraduate Fellowship in the Life Sciences Fellowship (H.K.B.), the United Negro College Fund/Bristol-Myers Squibb, E.E. Just Faculty Fund, Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career Awards at the Scientific Interface Award, Burroughs Wellcome Fund Ad-hoc Award, National Institutes of Health Small Research Pilot Subaward 5R25HL106365-12 from the National Institutes of Health PRIDE Program, DK020593, Vanderbilt Diabetes and Research Training Center for DRTC Alzheimer’s Disease Pilot and Feasibility Program to A.H.J., and the NSF grant MCB 2011577I and the NIH T32 5T32GM133353 to S.A.M.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.