Explore the vast range of titles available.

We tested the hypothesis that underrepresented students in active-learning classrooms experience narrower achievement gaps than underrepresented students in traditional lecturing classrooms, averaged across all science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and courses. We conducted a comprehensive search for both published and unpublished studies that compared the performance of underrepresented students to their overrepresented classmates in active-learning and traditional-lecturing treatments. This search resulted in data on student examination scores from 15 studies (9,238 total students) and data on student failure rates from 26 studies (44,606 total students). Bayesian regression analyses showed that on average, active learning reduced achievement gaps in examination scores by 33% and narrowed gaps in passing rates by 45%. The reported proportion of time that students spend on in-class activities was important, as only classes that implemented high-intensity active learning narrowed achievement gaps. Sensitivity analyses showed that the conclusions are robust to sampling bias and other issues. To explain the extensive variation in efficacy observed among studies, we propose the heads-and-hearts hypothesis, which holds that meaningful reductions in achievement gaps only occur when course designs combine deliberate practice with inclusive teaching. Our results support calls to replace traditional lecturing with evidence-based, active-learning course designs across the STEM disciplines and suggest that innovations in instructional strategies can increase equity in higher education.

Recent events prompted scientists in the United States and throughout the world to consider how systematic racism affects the scientific enterprise. This paper provides evidence of inequities related to race–ethnicity and gender in graduate school experiences and career plans of PhD students in the top 100 ranked departments in one science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) discipline, chemistry. Mixed-model regression analyses were used to examine factors that might moderate these differences. The results show that graduate students who identified as a member of a racial/ethnic group traditionally underrepresented in chemistry (underrepresented minorities, URM) were significantly less likely than other students to report that their financial support was sufficient to meet their needs. They were also less likely to report having supportive relationships with peers and postdocs. Women, and especially URM women, were significantly less likely to report supportive relationships with advisors. Despite their more negative experiences in graduate school, students who identified as URM expressed greater commitment to finishing their degree and staying in the field. When there was at least one faculty member within their departments who also identified as URM they were also more likely than other students to aspire to a university professorship with an emphasis on research. Men were significantly more likely than women to express strong commitment to finishing the PhD and remaining in chemistry, but this difference was stronger in top-ranked departments. Men were also more likely than women to aspire to a professorship with an emphasis on research, and this difference remained when individual and departmental-level variables were controlled.

This article examines the mentoring experiences of 58 underrepresented minority (URM) faculty at 22 research-extensive institutions. Drawing on in-depth interviews and focus group data, participants discussed the importance of mentoring across the life course, the ideal attributes of mentoring relationships, the challenges to effective mentoring, and the role of political guidance. These data elicited three main themes regarding mentoring: (a) Life course practices geared toward accumulating social capital are critical, (b) major barriers are linked to the undervaluing of faculty research areas and community-engaged scholarly commitments, and (c) connections with mentors who understand the struggles specific to URMs at predominantly White institutions (PWIs) can assist with retention and success. This study provides a roadmap for shifting how we engage with URM faculty and strategies and knowledge to assess the effectiveness of mentoring to increase the retention of URM faculty.

Background Although women account for approximately half of the medical students in the United States, they represent only 13% of orthopaedic surgery residents and 4% of members of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). Furthermore, a smaller relative percentage of women pursue careers in orthopaedic surgery than in any other subspecialty. Formal investigations regarding the gender discrepancy in choice of orthopaedic surgery are lacking. Questions/purposes (1) What reasons do women orthopaedic surgeons cite for why they chose this specialty? (2) What perceptions do women orthopaedic surgeons think might deter other women from pursuing this field? (3) What role does early exposure to orthopaedics and mentorship play in this choice? (4) What professional and personal choices do women in orthopaedics make, and how might this inform students who are choosing a career path? Methods A 21-question survey was emailed to all active, candidate, and resident members of the Ruth Jackson Orthopaedic Society (RJOS, n = 556). RJOS is the oldest surgical women’s organization incorporated in the United States. An independent orthopaedic specialty society, RJOS supports leadership training, mentorship, grant opportunities, and advocacy for its members and promotes sex-related musculoskeletal research. Although not all women in orthopaedic practice or training belong to RJOS, it is estimated that 42% of women AAOS fellows are RJOS members. Questions were formulated to determine demographics, practice patterns, and lifestyle choices of women who chose orthopaedic surgery as a specialty. Specifically, we evaluated the respondents’ decisions about their careers and their opinions of why more women do not choose this field. For the purpose of this analysis, the influences and dissuaders were divided into three major categories: personal attributes, experience/exposure, and work/life considerations. Results The most common reasons cited for having chosen orthopaedic surgery were enjoyment of manual tasks (165 of 232 [71%]), professional satisfaction (125 of 232 [54%]), and intellectual stimulation (123 of 232 [53%]). The most common reasons indicated for why women might not choose orthopaedics included perceived inability to have a good work/life balance (182 of 232 [78%]), perception that too much physical strength is required (171 of 232 [74%]), and lack of strong mentorship in medical school or earlier (161 of 232 [69%]). Respondents frequently (29 of 45 [64%]) commented that their role models, mentors, and early exposure to musculoskeletal medicine were influential, but far fewer (62 of 231 [27%]) acknowledged these in their top five influences than they did the more “internal” motivators. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the largest study of women orthopaedic surgeons regarding factors influencing their professional and personal choices. Our data suggest that the relatively few women currently practicing orthopaedics were attracted to the field because of their individual personal affinity for its nature despite the lack of role models and exposure. The latter factors may impact the continued paucity of women pursuing this field. Programs designed to improve mentorship and increase early exposure to orthopaedics and orthopaedic surgeons may increase personal interest in the field and will be important to attract a diverse group of trainees to our specialty in the future.

Background Women and minorities remain underrepresented in orthopaedic surgery. In an attempt to increase the diversity of those entering the physician workforce, Nth Dimensions implemented a targeted pipeline curriculum that includes the Orthopaedic Summer Internship Program. The program exposes medical students to the specialty of orthopaedic surgery and equips students to be competitive applicants to orthopaedic surgery residency programs. The effect of this program on women and underrepresented minority applicants to orthopaedic residencies is highlighted in this article. Questions/purposes (1) For women we asked: is completing the Orthopaedic Summer Internship Program associated with higher odds of applying to orthopaedic surgery residency? (2) For underrepresented minorities, is completing the Orthopaedic Summer Internship Program associated with higher odds of applying to orthopaedic residency? Methods Between 2005 and 2012, 118 students completed the Nth Dimensions/American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Orthopaedic Summer Internship Program. The summer internship consisted of an 8-week clinical and research program between the first and second years of medical school and included a series of musculoskeletal lectures, hands-on, practical workshops, presentation of a completed research project, ongoing mentoring, professional development, and counselling through each participant’s subsequent years of medical school. In correlation with available national application data, residency application data were obtained for those Orthopaedic Summer Internship Program participants who applied to the match between 2011 through 2014. For these 4 cohort years, we evaluated whether this program was associated with increased odds of applying to orthopaedic surgery residency compared with national controls. For the same four cohorts, we evaluated whether underrepresented minority students who completed the program had increased odds of applying to an orthopaedic surgery residency compared with national controls. Results Fifty Orthopaedic Summer Internship scholars applied for an orthopaedic residency position. For women, completion of the Orthopaedic Summer Internship was associated with increased odds of applying to orthopaedic surgery residency (after summer internship: nine of 17 [35%]; national controls: 800 of 78,316 [1%]; odds ratio [OR], 51.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21.1–122.0; p < 0.001). Similarly, for underrepresented minorities, Orthopaedic Summer Internship completion was also associated with increased odds of orthopaedic applications from 2011 to 2014 (after Orthopaedic Summer Internship: 15 of 48 [31%]; non-Orthopaedic Summer Internship applicants nationally: 782 of 25,676 [3%]; OR, 14.5 [7.3–27.5]; p < 0.001). Conclusions Completion of the Nth Dimensions Orthopaedic Summer Internship Program has a positive impact on increasing the odds of each student participant applying to an orthopaedic surgery residency program. This program may be a key factor in contributing to the pipeline of women and underrepresented minorities into orthopaedic surgery. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study.

Peer reviewed research is paramount to the advancement of science. Ideally, the peer review process is an unbiased, fair assessment of the scientific merit and credibility of a study; however, well-documented biases arise in all methods of peer review. Systemic biases have been shown to directly impact the outcomes of peer review, yet little is known about the downstream impacts of unprofessional reviewer comments that are shared with authors. In an anonymous survey of international participants in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, we investigated the pervasiveness and author perceptions of long-term implications of receiving of unprofessional comments. Specifically, we assessed authors' perceptions of scientific aptitude, productivity, and career trajectory after receiving an unprofessional peer review. We show that survey respondents across four intersecting categories of gender and race/ethnicity received unprofessional peer review comments equally. However, traditionally underrepresented groups in STEM fields were most likely to perceive negative impacts on scientific aptitude, productivity, and career advancement after receiving an unprofessional peer review. Studies show that a negative perception of aptitude leads to lowered self-confidence, short-term disruptions in success and productivity and delays in career advancement. Therefore, our results indicate that unprofessional reviews likely have and will continue to perpetuate the gap in STEM fields for traditionally underrepresented groups in the sciences.

Background Orthopaedic surgery now has the lowest percentage of women in residency programs of any surgical specialty. Understanding factors, particularly those related to the medical school experience, that contribute to the specialty’s inability to draw from the best women students is crucial to improving diversity in the profession. Questions/purposes (1) Does required medical school exposure to orthopaedic surgery increase the proportion of women choosing the specialty? (2) Do negative perceptions deter women from choosing orthopaedic surgery? (3) What proportion of orthopaedic faculty members are women, and what proportion of residents are women? (4) To what degree has gender bias been identified in the application/interview process? Methods Two PubMed searches of articles between 2005 and 2015 were performed using a combination of medical subject headings. The first search combined “Orthopaedics” with “Physicians, women” and phrases “women surgeons” or “female surgeons” and the second combined “Orthopedics” with “Internship & Residency” or “exp Education, Medical” and “Sex Ratio” or “Sex Factors”, resulting in 46 publications of which all abstracts were reviewed resulting in 11 manuscripts that were related to the research questions. The Google Scholar search of “women in orthopaedic surgery” identified one additional publication. These 12 manuscripts were read and bibliographies of each reviewed with two additional publications identified and included. Results Required exposure to orthopaedics was found to be positively associated with the number of women applicants to the field, whereas negative perceptions have been reported to deter women from choosing orthopaedic surgery. Orthopaedics has the lowest percentage of women faculty and women residents (14%) compared with other specialties; this suggests that same gender mentorship opportunities are limited. For women applying to orthopaedics, gender bias is most evident through illegal interview questions, in which women are asked such questions more often than men (such as family planning questions, asked to 61% of women versus 8% of men). Conclusions Successful recruitment of women to orthopaedic surgery may be improved by early exposure and access to role models, both of which will help women students’ perceptions of their role in field of orthopaedic surgery.

How do students discover ecology? Answering this question is essential for diversifying the environmental workforce because scientific disciplines, such as ecology, are often not discovered until students enter academia and are exposed to different disciplinary options. Ecology, and many of the environmental sciences, have persistent and alarmingly low numbers of underrepresented minorities (URM; African American, Hispanic American, Native American, and Pacific Islanders), while other science and technology fields have shown progress in diversification. Why does such underrepresentation persist in environmental disciplines? Social factors such as sense of belonging, science identity, implicit biases, and stereotypes all have been explored and are known to influence the participation of URM students in science. The unique role of the field experience in environmental sciences as a “rite of passage” and “authentic” research experience is one important influence on how URM students experience ecology. Interventions using social elements such as belonging and sense of place are demonstrated ways to broaden participation particularly in environmental science fields, yet dramatic underrepresentation still persists. Here we review known factors affecting and enhancing the recruitment and retention of URMs in the sciences and focus on comprehensive strategies shown to be effective recruiting URM students into the environmental workforce.

Student-faculty (S-F) interactions that are conducive to students’ learning can help reduce the retention and graduation gaps in higher education, especially for college students from underrepresented and underprivileged backgrounds. The aim of the study was to explore students’ perceptions of their interactions with faculty, and the subjective impact of these interactions on students’ academic and personal life. We analyzed qualitative data from a larger study with the goal of providing best practice models to support students experiencing displacement and food insecurity. Through purposive sampling techniques, 53 students from a diverse public university were recruited. Recruitment strategies focused on students who were likely to be facing academic, personal, and/or financial challenges that may affect their academic performance. Students were interviewed three to four times over a four to six-month period, using semi-structured interview guides. Our multidisciplinary team analyzed data thematically in team-based coding sessions using an online software. We identified four themes for faculty practices: (1) Creating Pedagogical Space, (2) Being Inclusive and Aware, (3) Being Engaged and Engaging Students, (4) Doing More Than Teaching. Based on students’ perspectives, these practices lead to supportive and responsive S-F relationships that facilitate learning and success. The findings have implications related to how faculty can encourage caring S-F relationships and create conducive learning environments where students can thrive, especially during times of crisis.

Lack of mentorship may deter medical students who identify as underrepresented minorities (URM) from entering academic surgery. 30 mentor-medical student pairs from the AWS 2020 virtual mentorship pilot-program were surveyed pre-and post-program to explore 1) feasibility of meetings, and, 2) program's perceived efficacy in fostering professional development skills. Participants responded using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all; 5 = completely). Proportions of participants in each category were compared. Proportion of participants perceiving monthly meetings to be completely feasible did not differ from pre-to post-program surveys for mentees (75%(21/28) vs. 71%(12/17); p = 0.743) or mentors (71%(17/24) vs 71%(13/18); p = 1.00). Compared to pre-program responses, mentees endorsed “completely” (Likert scale 5) improving with regard to their elevator speech (p = 0.001), developing their curriculum vitae (p = 0.003), ability to network (p = 0.021), and acquiring skills for career advancement (p = 0.003). Virtual mentorship may be a feasible and effective means of increasing access to mentors for URM medical students. •Mentorship in surgery is associated with mentee career success and satisfaction.•Mentor-mentee pairs can cultivate relationships via virtual platforms.•Virtual platforms expand access to mentors who are underrepresented minorities.•Increased availability of mentors can mitigate some disparities in opportunity.