Dropdown items
My Academies

Personal Library

Account settings

Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors (2020)

Chapter: Appendix A: List of Interventions Across Levels

Visit NAP.edu/10766 to get more information about this book, to buy it in print, or to download it as a free PDF.

Previous chapter Next chapter
Page of 214
Search this publication

Page 197 Cite Bookmark

Suggested Citation: "Appendix A: List of Interventions Across Levels." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25585.

APPENDIX A

Page 198 Cite Bookmark

List of Interventions Across Levels

Intervention	Level	Goal	Outcome (s)	Tested in STEMM field?	Citation
Bias literacy (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM; VIDS)	Individual level (behavioral intentions)	Recruitment	Reported behavioral intentions to recruit and mentor female students	Yes – Faculty across science departments	(Moss-Racusin et al., 2018)
Bias literacy workshop (faculty recruitment workshop; FRW)	Individual level (attitudes and behavioral intentions)	Recruitment	Positive attitudes toward equitable search strategies from workshop attendees, intentions to use equitable strategies during search	Not specifically, faculty across all departments	(Sekaquaptewa et al., 2019)
Changing STEM classroom environments	Individual level (changing students’ individual level beliefs about computer science	Recruitment	Reported interest in computer	Yes – Computer science	(Cheryan et al., 2009; Cheryan et al., 2011b)
Description of STEM male or female potential mentor (using communal words in ads)	Individual level (interest in working with a STEM mentor)	Recruitment	Reported interest in working with STEM mentor	Yes – Across STEM majors	(Fuesting and Diekman, 2017)
Describing STEM jobs with communal of feminine words	Individual level (interest in working at job)	Recruitment	Reported interest at working at jobs	No – Female students generally (not specifically STEM majors)	(Gaucher et al., 2011)
Describing biomedical research as fulfilling communal/helping goals	Individual level (career motivation)	Recruitment	Reported motivation to pursue a career in biomedical sciences	No – Male and female students generally (not specifically STEM majors)	(Brown et al., 2015)
Having a female scientist describe career as fulfilling communal goals (helping others working with others)	Individual level (interest in STEM)	Recruitment	Reported interest in STEM careers	No – Female students generally (both college students and adolescent girls)	(Diekman et al., 2011; Weisgram and Bigler, 2006)

Page 199 Cite Bookmark

Presenting students with female scientist role models	Individual level (career motivation)	Recruitment/retention	Reported intentions to pursue a career in engineering	Yes – Female college engineering majors	(Stout et al., 2011)
Writing about favorite role models	Individual level (sense of fit in STEM)	Recruitment	Reported sense of fit in the sciences	No – Female middle school students attending a science summer camp	(O’Brien et al., 2017)
Having Black female or male scientist in recruitment materials (i.e., on a school or company’s website)	Individual level (anticipated belonging)	Recruitment	Anticipated belonging at company/or school	Yes – Black women across STEM majors	(Johnson et al., 2019; Pietri, 2018a)
Watching women scientists in television shows	Individual level	Recruitment	Majoring in STEM, and entering a STEM career (participants respectively reported whether they watched the X-files with Agent Scully)	Yes – Women currently working in STEM fields	(Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, 2018; Steinke et al., 2009)
Having a STEM graduate program emphasis that men and women work hard for success in the program	Individual level (reported interest)	Recruitment	Reported interest in graduate program	Yes – Female students generally, and female STEM graduate students	(Smith et al., 2012)
Teaching female students that intelligence is malleable and can improve	Individual level (career motivation, grades in Math)	Recruitment	Higher career motivations in math, higher grades in math	No – Female middle school students	(Blackwell et al., 2007; Good et al., 2003)
Bias literacy workshop (WISELI)	Individual level behavior	Retention	Self-reported actions to promote equity in department (when > 25% of department attended)	Yes – Departments in medicine, science, and engineering	(Carnes et al., 2015)
Ensuring Black female students have Black woman role models	Individual level (reported belonging)	Retention	Reported belonging in STEM	Yes – Black female students across STEM majors	(Johnson et al., 2019)

Page 200 Cite Bookmark

Intervention	Level	Goal	Outcome (s)	Tested in STEMM field?	Citation
Having multiple allies in a STEM environment	Individual level (reported belonging)	Retention	Reported belonging in STEM	Yes – Black female STEM majors	(Johnson et al., 2019)
Values affirmation–having women write about a valued aspect of their identity	Individual level (grades and attitudes toward major)	Retention	Higher grades and positive attitudes toward engineering major/grades in a physics class	Yes – Female engineering majors/female students enrolled in a physics class	(Miyake et al., 2010; Walton et al., 2015)
Exposure to counter-stereotypical exemplars (female leaders)	Individual level beliefs	Advancement	Women-leadership IAT	No (student samples)	(Dasgupta and Asgari, 2004)
Imagine contact (imagining a strong capable leader)	Individual level beliefs	Advancement	Women-strength IAT	No (student samples)	(Blair et al., 2001)
Bias literacy workshop	Individual level beliefs	Advancement	Women-leadership IAT	Yes – Medicine faculty	(Girod et al., 2016)
Bias literacy training (incorporated into week long workshop on improving STEM education)	Relational/groups levels (STEM instructors’ beliefs about STEM courses)	Recruitment	Reported valuing of diversity in STEM classes	Yes – STEM instructors across fields	(Moss-Racusin et al., 2016)
Bias literacy workshop (interactive theater GEAR UP workshop)	Group level behavior (search committees)	Recruitment	Search committees engaged in positive behavior	Yes – Across all departments, with a focus on STEM	(Shea, 2019)
Lab environments that promote perceptions that STEM is communal	Relational/groups level (research mentors and lab environments)	Recruitment	Reported interest and career motivation in STEM	Yes – Male and female research assistants across STEM laboratories	(Allen et al., 2018; Thoman et al., 2017)

Page 201 Cite Bookmark

STEM instructors with a growth mindset	Relational/groups level (STEM instructors and STEM classes)	Recruitment	Interest in STEM career, motivation in classes, and grades in STEM courses	Yes – Male and female students in STEM classes	(Canning et al., 2019; Fuesting et al., 2019; Rattan et al., 2012)
Incorporating service learning projects into STEM courses	Groups level (structuring STEM classes)	Recruitment	Interest in taking a STEM course	No – Male and female college students’ interest in taking an engineering class	(Belanger et al., 2017)
Peer Led Team Learning in introductory to computer science courses	Relationship/groups level (structuring STEM classes)	Recruitment/retention	Entering and persisting in computer science major, higher grades in computer science	Yes – female students in computer science	(Horwitz et al., 2009)
Having a female mentor	Relational (having female peer mentors)	Recruitment/retention	Reported belonging and self-efficacy, and interest in engineering career	Yes – female engineering majors	(Dennehy and Dasgupta, 2017)
Egalitarian norms intervention	Groups level (STEM classes)	Recruitment/retention	Higher valuing of diversity and intentions to confront bias	Yes – White male students in introductory engineering course	(Bennett and Sekaquaptewa, 2014)
Having positive mentor relationships (or fostering positive mentor relationships) for female college students	Relational level (the importance of mentor relationships)	Retention	Remaining in engineering majors/reported interest in major	Yes – Female engineering majors/female STEM majors generally	(Downing et al., 2005; Marra et al., 2009)
Culturally aware mentor training	Relational (improving mentoring relationships)	Retention	Reported improved mentoring behaviors	Yes – clinical and translational researchers	(Pfund et al., 2013; Pfund et al., 2015)
Integrating active learning in STEM courses	Relationship/groups level (structuring STEM classes)	Retention	Persisting in computer science major		(Latulipe et al., 2018)

Page 202 Cite Bookmark

Intervention	Level	Goal	Outcome (s)	Tested in STEMM field?	Citation
Having female majority activity groups in STEM classes	Relationship/groups level (group composition)	Retention	Higher reported interest in STEM careers	Yes – Female engineering majors	(Dasgupta et al., 2015)
Having students watch a video of students behaving counter-stereotypically in project teams	Relationship/groups level (student group intervention	Retention	Resulted in women and men contributing equal amounts in group work (rather than men speaking more than women)	Yes – Students in STEM project teams	(Lewis et al., 2019)
Research experiences in college	Relationship/groups level (research mentors)	Retention/advancement	Persisting in biology major, graduating with biology degree, and earn higher grades in biology major.	Yes – Male and female students who reported an interest in majoring in biology	(Jones et al., 2010a)
Mentor relationships for STEM female faculty	Relational level (positive mentor relationships)	Advancement	Helping build connections with regard to research and teaching (i.e., aspects of the job that help with promotion)	Yes – Female faculty across the sciences	(Misra et al., 2017)
Having a sponsor to promote women for leadership positions and prestigious awards	Relationship/groups (sponsor relationships)	Advancement	More advancement opportunities	No – Multiple review papers suggest sponsorship should be utilized in STEM	(Hewlett et al., 2010; Huston et al., 2019; Serbin, 2018)
Bias literacy workshop (WISELI)	Organizational level hiring	Recruitment	Increased hiring of women in STEMM departments by 18%	Yes – Departments in medicine, science, and engineering	(Devine et al., 2017)
Bias literacy workshop (faculty recruitment workshop; FRW)	Organizational level norms	Recruitment	Positive attitudes toward equitable search strategies among department mentors who did not attend workshop (when a higher % of departmental faculty attended)	No – Faculty across all departments	(Sekaquaptewa et al., 2019)

Page 203 Cite Bookmark

Bias literacy workshop (interactive theater GEAR UP workshop)	Organizational Level (hiring))	Recruitment	% women hired in STEM departments went from 40% to 63.6%	Yes – Across all departments, with a focus on STEM	(Shea, 2019)
TRACS training for faculty search committees (relied on self-determination theory)	Organizational Level (hiring)	Recruitment	Compared to control searches, searches in intervention were 6.3 times more likely to make an offer to a woman, and women were 5.8 times more likely to accept	Yes – Across STEM departments	(Smith et al., 2015)
Bias literacy workshop (WISELI)	Organizational level (climate)	Retention	Fit perceptions in department, comfort in raising personal/professional conflict in department	Yes – Departments in medicine, science, and engineering	(Carnes et al., 2015)
Presence of gender-inclusive policies	Organizational level (climate)	Retention	More positive cross-gender conversations and lower social identity threat	Yes – Working engineers	(Hall et al., 2018)
Project TRACS dedicated grant support staff, family advocate, equity advocates	Organizational level (climate)	Retention	Increased autonomy, competence, relatedness, and job satisfaction	Yes – STEM and non-STEM faculty	(Smith et al., 2018)
TRACS grant-writing boot camp	Organizational level (climate)	Retention/Advancement	Higher likelihood of submitting and receiving a grant	Yes – Female STEM faculty	(Smith et al., 2018)