{"title":"推进以公平为中心的STEM博士坚持理论:批判资本理论的小规模定性探索","authors":"Senetta F. Bancroft","doi":"10.1002/sce.21952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>A longstanding failure to achieve racial and ethnic equity in STEM doctoral programs in the United States exists alongside a research landscape struggling to comprehensively explain this enduring failure. Towards a comprehensive explanatory model of STEM doctoral persistence and disruption of this failure, I previously proposed critical capital theory (CCT). CCT integrates critical race theory, forms of capital, and fictive kinship. Using a small-scale critical qualitative abductive study, I explored the extent to which CCT explained participants' experiences and their science doctoral program outcomes. Narratives of factors influencing doctoral persistence were interpreted from interviews of 3 female former science doctoral students from racially and ethnically marginalized communities. They experienced immediate, intense, and sustained overlapping forms of oppression in their doctoral programs. To cope, all activated different forms of capital including non-Bourdieuan forms. However, oppressive tactics used by faculty and administrators devalued their capital including supposedly high value Bourdieuan forms, constrained their ability to form fictive kinships within departmental networks, and negatively impacted their mental health and allegiances to science. To explain these findings, which align with other studies, I expand CCT to incorporate intersectionality and community cultural wealth and refined it to explicitly link capital, field, and habitus. Although the study's scale is small, these findings underscore the potential of CCT as an increasingly comprehensive tool to examine and explain STEM doctoral persistence. Further exploration across diverse STEM disciplines and contexts is needed to refine and generalize CCT, optimizing its utility to disrupt enduring inequities in STEM doctoral programs.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"109 5","pages":"1232-1256"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing a Comprehensive Equity Centered Theory of STEM Doctoral Persistence: A Small-Scale Qualitative Exploration of Critical Capital Theory\",\"authors\":\"Senetta F. Bancroft\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/sce.21952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>A longstanding failure to achieve racial and ethnic equity in STEM doctoral programs in the United States exists alongside a research landscape struggling to comprehensively explain this enduring failure. Towards a comprehensive explanatory model of STEM doctoral persistence and disruption of this failure, I previously proposed critical capital theory (CCT). CCT integrates critical race theory, forms of capital, and fictive kinship. Using a small-scale critical qualitative abductive study, I explored the extent to which CCT explained participants' experiences and their science doctoral program outcomes. Narratives of factors influencing doctoral persistence were interpreted from interviews of 3 female former science doctoral students from racially and ethnically marginalized communities. They experienced immediate, intense, and sustained overlapping forms of oppression in their doctoral programs. To cope, all activated different forms of capital including non-Bourdieuan forms. However, oppressive tactics used by faculty and administrators devalued their capital including supposedly high value Bourdieuan forms, constrained their ability to form fictive kinships within departmental networks, and negatively impacted their mental health and allegiances to science. To explain these findings, which align with other studies, I expand CCT to incorporate intersectionality and community cultural wealth and refined it to explicitly link capital, field, and habitus. Although the study's scale is small, these findings underscore the potential of CCT as an increasingly comprehensive tool to examine and explain STEM doctoral persistence. Further exploration across diverse STEM disciplines and contexts is needed to refine and generalize CCT, optimizing its utility to disrupt enduring inequities in STEM doctoral programs.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science & Education\",\"volume\":\"109 5\",\"pages\":\"1232-1256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science & Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.21952\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.21952","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Advancing a Comprehensive Equity Centered Theory of STEM Doctoral Persistence: A Small-Scale Qualitative Exploration of Critical Capital Theory
A longstanding failure to achieve racial and ethnic equity in STEM doctoral programs in the United States exists alongside a research landscape struggling to comprehensively explain this enduring failure. Towards a comprehensive explanatory model of STEM doctoral persistence and disruption of this failure, I previously proposed critical capital theory (CCT). CCT integrates critical race theory, forms of capital, and fictive kinship. Using a small-scale critical qualitative abductive study, I explored the extent to which CCT explained participants' experiences and their science doctoral program outcomes. Narratives of factors influencing doctoral persistence were interpreted from interviews of 3 female former science doctoral students from racially and ethnically marginalized communities. They experienced immediate, intense, and sustained overlapping forms of oppression in their doctoral programs. To cope, all activated different forms of capital including non-Bourdieuan forms. However, oppressive tactics used by faculty and administrators devalued their capital including supposedly high value Bourdieuan forms, constrained their ability to form fictive kinships within departmental networks, and negatively impacted their mental health and allegiances to science. To explain these findings, which align with other studies, I expand CCT to incorporate intersectionality and community cultural wealth and refined it to explicitly link capital, field, and habitus. Although the study's scale is small, these findings underscore the potential of CCT as an increasingly comprehensive tool to examine and explain STEM doctoral persistence. Further exploration across diverse STEM disciplines and contexts is needed to refine and generalize CCT, optimizing its utility to disrupt enduring inequities in STEM doctoral programs.
期刊介绍:
Science Education publishes original articles on the latest issues and trends occurring internationally in science curriculum, instruction, learning, policy and preparation of science teachers with the aim to advance our knowledge of science education theory and practice. In addition to original articles, the journal features the following special sections: -Learning : consisting of theoretical and empirical research studies on learning of science. We invite manuscripts that investigate learning and its change and growth from various lenses, including psychological, social, cognitive, sociohistorical, and affective. Studies examining the relationship of learning to teaching, the science knowledge and practices, the learners themselves, and the contexts (social, political, physical, ideological, institutional, epistemological, and cultural) are similarly welcome. -Issues and Trends : consisting primarily of analytical, interpretive, or persuasive essays on current educational, social, or philosophical issues and trends relevant to the teaching of science. This special section particularly seeks to promote informed dialogues about current issues in science education, and carefully reasoned papers representing disparate viewpoints are welcomed. Manuscripts submitted for this section may be in the form of a position paper, a polemical piece, or a creative commentary. -Science Learning in Everyday Life : consisting of analytical, interpretative, or philosophical papers regarding learning science outside of the formal classroom. Papers should investigate experiences in settings such as community, home, the Internet, after school settings, museums, and other opportunities that develop science interest, knowledge or practices across the life span. Attention to issues and factors relating to equity in science learning are especially encouraged.. -Science Teacher Education [...]