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

IF 3.4 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Senetta F. Bancroft
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在美国的STEM博士项目中,长期未能实现种族和民族平等,与此同时,研究领域也在努力全面解释这一持久的失败。为了全面解释STEM博士的坚持和这种失败的破坏,我之前提出了关键资本理论(CCT)。CCT整合了批判种族理论、资本形式和实际亲属关系。通过一项小规模的批判性定性溯因研究,我探索了有条件现金培训在多大程度上解释了参与者的经历和他们的科学博士项目成果。通过对3名来自种族和民族边缘群体的理科前女博士生的访谈,对影响博士坚持的因素进行解释。他们在博士课程中经历了直接的、强烈的、持续的重叠形式的压迫。为了应对这种情况,所有人都激活了不同形式的资本,包括非布迪厄形式的资本。然而,教师和管理人员使用的压迫策略使他们的资本贬值,包括被认为是高价值的布迪安形式,限制了他们在部门网络中形成有效亲属关系的能力,并对他们的心理健康和对科学的忠诚产生了负面影响。为了解释这些与其他研究一致的发现,我扩展了CCT,将交叉性和社区文化财富纳入其中,并将其改进为明确地将资本、领域和习惯联系起来。尽管这项研究的规模很小,但这些发现强调了CCT作为一种越来越全面的工具来检查和解释STEM博士的持久性的潜力。需要在不同的STEM学科和背景下进行进一步的探索,以完善和推广CCT,优化其效用,以打破STEM博士项目中持续存在的不公平现象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Science & Education
Science & Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
14.00%
发文量
0
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 [...]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信