View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Role of Mentoring as a Critical Innovation in Postbaccalaureate Programs Designed to Increase Representation of Women of Color in STEM Graduate Programs

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Role of Mentoring as a Critical Innovation in Postbaccalaureate Programs Designed to Increase Representation of Women of Color in STEM Graduate Programs
Language: English
Authors: Laurenia C. Mangum (ORCID 0000-0002-8291-6754), Jaime M. Booth (ORCID 0000-0002-1730-4284), Valire C. Copeland (ORCID 0000-0002-6925-6800)
Source: Innovative Higher Education. 2025 50(6):2241-2268.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 28
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Graduate Study, Mentors, African American Students, Hispanic American Students, Womens Education, Females, Predominantly White Institutions, Student Experience, Interpersonal Relationship, Conflict, Persistence, Teacher Behavior, College Faculty, Interpersonal Communication, Student Research, Supervision, Training, Program Effectiveness
DOI: 10.1007/s10755-025-09792-2
ISSN: 0742-5627
1573-1758
Abstract: Postbaccalaureate programs have become essential in addressing the underrepresentation of racial/ethnic minoritized and socially disadvantaged groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduate programs. By maximizing institutional resources, which facilitate technical training, lab exposure, and specialized mentoring support, postbaccalaureate programs create a pathway for increasing the representation of people of color in STEM fields. While this may be the case, there is a dearth of literature on the lived experiences of underrepresented women of color participating in STEM postbaccalaureate programs. Moreover, descriptive accounts of women of color mentorship experiences in STEM postbaccalaureate programs are under-researched. As such, this study explored the mentorship experiences of Black and Latina women participating in a postbaccalaureate STEM program in a mid-western, research-intensive (R1), predominantly white institution (PWI). As part of a larger evaluation study of the Hot Metal Bridge (HMB) program, transcripts of past participants who identified as Black or Latina women (N = 25) were analyzed using thematic analysis. Four themes representing the experiences of Black and Latina women were generated: 1) mentor-mentee discordance, 2) mentor's commitment, 3) effective mentee-mentor communication, and 4) research supervision and training dynamics. Findings suggest that mentoring was a unique innovation within HMB, which contributed to the success of Black and Latina women pursuing STEM graduate education. Thus, mentorship should be viewed as an integral innovation of postbaccalaureate STEM programs for women of color.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1496708
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEzPW80PXJLbZb2eIMRhmKlAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDEv5yBPw4ULEX3mkdgIBEICBmxmHj-UbZAU6BMhz8AEG0NWMw0U8eE9dmlQupdFZNAc3ShCkZ4IbSnO8x2fgpKx7S6parb-ftSgQcPB3yeiBvAvxfL_0m1JTzHkt3velY9WWXQNW5BaoKL7bTrA0PArFRA0vwigcfPWN151srsgWugziJmBVxbcJ2vhXziQsePo6acPMsJ-57-4navjQhS7_YXMoeTE0NVH8A0N_
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0189417203;ihe01dec.25;2025Nov24.01:10;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0189417203-1">The Role of Mentoring as a Critical Innovation in Postbaccalaureate Programs Designed to Increase Representation of Women of Color in STEM Graduate Programs </title> <p>Postbaccalaureate programs have become essential in addressing the underrepresentation of racial/ethnic minoritized and socially disadvantaged groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduate programs. By maximizing institutional resources, which facilitate technical training, lab exposure, and specialized mentoring support, postbaccalaureate programs create a pathway for increasing the representation of people of color in STEM fields. While this may be the case, there is a dearth of literature on the lived experiences of underrepresented women of color participating in STEM postbaccalaureate programs. Moreover, descriptive accounts of women of color mentorship experiences in STEM postbaccalaureate programs are under-researched. As such, this study explored the mentorship experiences of Black and Latina women participating in a postbaccalaureate STEM program in a mid-western, research-intensive (R1), predominantly white institution (PWI). As part of a larger evaluation study of the Hot Metal Bridge (HMB) program, transcripts of past participants who identified as Black or Latina women (N = 25) were analyzed using thematic analysis. Four themes representing the experiences of Black and Latina women were generated: 1) mentor–mentee discordance, 2) mentor's commitment, 3) effective mentee-mentor communication, and 4) research supervision and training dynamics. Findings suggest that mentoring was a unique innovation within HMB, which contributed to the success of Black and Latina women pursuing STEM graduate education. Thus, mentorship should be viewed as an integral innovation of postbaccalaureate STEM programs for women of color.</p> <p>Keywords: Mentoring; Women of color; STEM; Postbaccalaureate programs; Studies in Human Society Sociology</p> <p>Copyright comment Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</p> <p>Studies have shown that women's participation in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields decreases at each educational STEM pathway stage, with fewer women participating in graduate education than in undergraduate programs and fewer participating in the STEM labor market than graduate school (Casad et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref1">12</reflink>]; Xu, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref2">65</reflink>]). Similarly, while research shows women comprise the largest groups of conferred doctoral degrees in health sciences, men continue to outpace women in earning various advanced degrees in other STEM areas such as engineering and computer science (Fry et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref3">15</reflink>]). The concern with the lack of women, especially women of color, such as African Americans, Latinas, and Native Americans, in the STEM field, has been evident for decades (Riegle-Crumb & Humphries, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref4">49</reflink>]; Riegle-Crumb et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref5">51</reflink>]; Rossi, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref6">52</reflink>]; Xie et al., [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref7">64</reflink>]). Reasons for this disparity are multifaceted and include structural and gender-racial oppression and discrimination. Manifestations of such experiences of marginalization include feelings of lack of belonging, which directly impacts persistence and retention in STEM majors (Alfred et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref8">1</reflink>]). In addition, stereotypes and messaging that depict STEM as a majorly men's field and profession, the lack of women of color mentors, and the overall invisibility within STEM spaces contribute to the disparity (Alfred et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref9">1</reflink>]). Consequently, the racial-gendered disparity in STEM is a social justice issue with foreseeable residual costs at the individual level (lack of heterogeneity in the workforce) and costs to society if the STEM workforce is not diversified. Both threaten the competitiveness of the United States globally (Alfred et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref10">1</reflink>]; Xie & Killewald, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref11">63</reflink>]).</p> <p>Previous research on higher education and student success has demonstrated the importance of mentoring underrepresented students at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) (Kezar & Kitchen, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref12">22</reflink>]; Kincey, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref13">24</reflink>]; Montgomery et al., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref14">37</reflink>]), and the effectiveness of postbaccalaureate programs in increasing representation of racially minoritized and disadvantaged students in graduate programs (Kezar & Kitchen, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref15">22</reflink>]; Remich et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref16">47</reflink>]). However, the role of mentoring women of color in postbaccalaureate STEM programs at PWIs remains a relatively understudied area within higher education.</p> <p>Post-baccalaureate programs are celebrated for their focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and their potential to bridge gendered-racial disparities in STEM graduate programs. However, there is a pressing need for more research on the experiences of Black and Latina individuals, especially women, participating in STEM post-baccalaureate programs at PWIs. This study seeks to address this need by examining the role of mentoring in a post-baccalaureate bridge program designed to increase the number of women of color in STEM graduate programs.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-2">Women of Color in STEM</hd> <p>Despite the increase in the number of women enrolled in STEM education, the proportion of women of color has remained steady (National Science Foundation, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref17">40</reflink>]). Women make up the majority of degree earners in social sciences and biology, but they are significantly underrepresented in engineering, the physical sciences, math, and computer science (Fry et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref18">15</reflink>]; National Science Foundation, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref19">40</reflink>]).</p> <p>Gender disparity across the STEM fields is, in part, primarily explained by U.S. social constructions of gender norms rather than academic achievement and aptitude (Bertrand, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref20">6</reflink>]; Carter et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref21">11</reflink>]; Morgan et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref22">39</reflink>]; Riegle-Crumb et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref23">50</reflink>]). Traditional norms and beliefs, coupled with gender roles and stereotypes of women and men are often reinforced within gendered labor expectations. Such stereotypes are reflective of historical workforce expectations of white women (women work within the home and take care of children), and their proclivity of careers (women are suited for careers outside of hard sciences). Furthermore, teacher's gendered biases regarding girls' and boys' academic achievement in primary and secondary education, perpetuate gender disparities in STEM, which have long-term impacts (Lavy & Sand, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref24">25</reflink>]; Legewie & DiPrete, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref25">26</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref26">27</reflink>] (a); Riegle-Crumb & Humphries, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref27">51</reflink>]; Legewie & DiPrete, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref28">26</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref29">27</reflink>] (b)). Such systematic and discriminatory biases can lead to the loss of innovation by excluding a subset of the population from being welcomed and or retained in the STEM field.</p> <p>Overall, Black and Latina women are underrepresented in STEM higher education relative to their share of the U.S. population (Orrell & Cox, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref30">44</reflink>]). Prior research suggests that underrepresented women of color encounter unique obstacles and have distinct experiences from their white women counterparts, including social exclusion, isolation, and a lack of belonging (Ball & Steimetz, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref31">5</reflink>]; Newton, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref32">41</reflink>]). This experience is often discussed as a "double bind", the double oppression of sex and race or ethnicity that women of color experience simultaneously in STEM (Malcom & Malcom, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref33">31</reflink>]; Guerin, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref34">18</reflink>], p. 18). Historically, African American women in our society have been perceived as having a lower status as women than their white counterparts (Brown & Keith, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref35">10</reflink>]), thus further exacerbating gender disparities in STEM.</p> <p>Research suggests African American women are steered away from STEM careers and towards careers in social science, vocational, technical, education, and sociology early on in their academic pursuits (Heck et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref36">20</reflink>]; Perry et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref37">45</reflink>]; Riegle-Crumb & Grodsky, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref38">48</reflink>]). Once they arrived in higher education, Seymour and Hewitt ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref39">55</reflink>]) found that URM students reported feeling isolated and often faced challenges adapting to the "White middle-class culture of science" due to limitations on resources and time and not being exposed to some norms and expectations. Furthermore, a lack of familiarity with STEM culture undermines students' confidence and the likelihood of persisting in STEM (Chang et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref40">13</reflink>]). In a similar study, researchers found that minority graduate students pursuing degrees in STEM, reported that their ideas were ignored or discouraged, they lacked access to information that was common knowledge to white students, and they felt like an outsider instead of part of the larger group (e.g., in the lab or the science community) (Malone & Barabino, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref41">32</reflink>]). Lastly, URM students reported several challenges with their mentors, including not having an equivalent amount of face time to discuss work, not being given equivalent information, difficulty in relationships, and lack of minority advisors to discuss navigating racism in the field and offer empathy and understanding (Malone & Barabino, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref42">32</reflink>]). Such conditions lead to racial battle fatigue and emotional strain, which may compromise Black women's ability and/or desire to remain in STEM disciplines (McGee & Bentley, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref43">33</reflink>]; McGee et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref44">34</reflink>]; Smith et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref45">57</reflink>]).</p> <p>Latina women have described similar but unique experiences navigating STEM programs. For instance, Latina women enrolled in doctoral STEM programs at Hispanic-serving institutions reported protective factors such as faculty mentorship, undergraduate research programs, family support, peer encouragement, and awareness of career options as facilitating factors to continue their education (Arroyo, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref46">3</reflink>]; Silva, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref47">56</reflink>]). These factors help buffer adverse experiences of racism, gender biases, and dominant cultural norms within predominately white institutions. The mentoring needs of women of color in STEM are unique. They must account for their lived socio-cultural experiences with racism, oppression, and sexism.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-3">Postbaccalaureate Programs</hd> <p>Postbaccalaureate programs across the United States have become formal educational strategies to address educational preparation gaps for women, racial-ethnic minorities, and disadvantaged groups in STEM careers by increasing their representation within STEM graduate programs (Kezar & Holcombe, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref48">21</reflink>]; Kezar & Kitchen, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref49">22</reflink>]; Remich et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref50">47</reflink>]). Postbaccalaureate programs provide specialized training and support to prospective graduate students. Program participation is designed for individuals who have earned a bachelor's degree and would benefit from enhanced training and mentoring. Programming is traditionally implemented as summer bridge programs, yearlong programs, or specially designed STEM courses (Kezar & Holcombe, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref51">21</reflink>]). Outcomes from participating in a postbaccalaureate program include 1) an increased likelihood of graduate school admittance, and 2) an enhanced acclimation to the academic graduate environment (Remich et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref52">47</reflink>]).</p> <p>Common components of postbaccalaureate programs include graduate course work, professional development seminars, scientific training in a lab environment, mentorship in an area of developing expertise, orientation to reading scientific literature, and strengthening oral and written science communication through presentations and manuscript preparation (Remich et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref53">47</reflink>]). Postbaccalaureate programs are unique in that they provide socialization to graduate school without the performance pressure. Similarly, postbaccalaureate programs cultivate a sense of community and collegial support where participants can grow into the graduate student identity and see themselves as future scientists (Remich et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref54">47</reflink>]). Moreover, participants can thrive in these graduate environments with formal mentoring, academic support, financial support and investments, and guided acclimation to graduate school expectations.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-4">Faculty Mentoring of Underrepresented Minorities in STEM</hd> <p>Historically, mentoring was the primary means for one generation of scholars to impart their knowledge to succeeding generations (Nuis et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref55">42</reflink>]). More than textbooks and formal classes, the relatively informal dimensions of scholarship and research, including the relationship between mentor and trainee, prepare the next generation of scholars and the opportunity for the mentor's legacy of work to continue to the next level (Grant & Ghee, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref56">17</reflink>]). In addition, mentorship provides transactional benefits to trainees as a result of trainees having access to a mentor's network and resources in instances where mentors have high degrees of social capital (Brittian et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref57">9</reflink>]; Edwards, et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref58">14</reflink>], Garibay, et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref59">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>While the literature on mentorship in postbaccalaureate STEM programs is limited, a research study by Remich and colleagues (2016) suggested that receiving tailored and individualized mentorship during postbaccalaureate programs can increase underrepresented minorities' readiness for graduate studies in STEM fields. Participants reported being supported by their mentors, having established expectations early on about working independently of the mentor, and developing rigor in scientific thinking, which were beneficial aspects of the postbaccalaureate program (Remich et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref60">47</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-5">Current Study</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189417203-6">Description of the Program</hd> <p>Hot Metal Bridge (HMB) is a two-semester post-baccalaureate fellowship program that began in 2010 at a Midwestern, research-intensive, R-1 Carnegie-classified, predominantly white institution, within the University of Pittsburgh Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences. Since its inception, HMB program applications have ranged from 38 applicants beginning in 2010, to 140 applicants during the 2015–2016 cohort year. The program was established to provide undergraduate students of color intending to pursue a STEM graduate degree an academic experience to prepare them for the application process and give them the experience they need to succeed in a STEM graduate program. It also gave the [redacted] a competitive advantage to recruit and retain diverse students and increase underrepresented minority enrollment within STEM programming. Therefore, the program had buy-in at an institutional level and departmental level.</p> <p>Hot Metal Bridge program administrators accept 8–10 participants annually with the specific purpose of increasing underrepresented minority representation in STEM graduate programs in Humanities, (e.g., English, History of Art, and Architecture), Natural Sciences (e.g., Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Mathematics, Neuroscience, and Psychology), and Social Sciences (e.g., Computer Science, and Economics) (The Dietrich School of Arts & Sciences Graduate Studies, University of Pittsburgh, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref61">59</reflink>]). The expansion of programming into the humanities and social sciences was intended to attract talented prospective students who would matriculate to doctoral programs. It was also due, in part, to the availability of mentors. As such, HMB recruitment of the aforementioned majors aligns with the National Science Foundation's inclusion of STEM fields (mathematics, natural sciences, engineering, computer and information sciences, social and behavioral sciences -psychology, economics, sociology, and political science) (NSF, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref62">40</reflink>]).</p> <p>The delivery of the Hot Metal Bridge Post-Baccalaureate Program is comprehensive (broad range of supports coordinated within a single program) (Kezar & Kitchen, 2020) and inclusive of four central and critical components: financial assistance, mentoring, education and training, and professional development and socialization. Admitted students receive a nine-month fellowship stipend, full tuition remission (an estimated $21,000 per academic year), an individualized plan of study, faculty mentors and peer mentors, and access to professional development events and educational workshops. In addition, participants were included in the regular socialization activities of their host department, including, but not limited to, student orientations and gatherings, professional growth and development sessions, and the Student of Color (SOC) dinner series. The SOC dinner series allows participants to network with students across the university and receive first-hand knowledge of the graduate admissions and matriculation process.</p> <p>Faculty mentor–mentee assignments were coordinated with HMB staff based on prospective student interest and faculty capacity. The pairing of HMB mentor-mentees varied according to each department. Participants in some departments were assigned a faculty mentor for professional development and progress review and a graduate student mentor for daily research supervision.</p> <p>In another department, participants did rotations, working with two mentors, one in the fall semester and one in the spring semester. Finally, in departments where participants were placed with a faculty mentor with a large research lab, there was an additional lab mentor (e.g., research staff, post-doc, graduate student) who provided support as needed. Faculty mentors were selected based on their interest in supporting the HMB program and their current research capacity to support new HMB applicants. Faculty mentors were not paid; their participation was considered a service to the department and university, contributing to tenure and promotion.</p> <p>Faculty mentor–mentee ratios were 1:1 or 1:2. Faculty mentors received an orientation to HMB, its purpose, and intended outcomes. After being oriented to the HMB program, faculty mentors then shared this information with lab members during their lab meetings. At that point, graduate students were informed that they would serve as peer mentors to HMB participants. Graduate students serving as peer mentors were not compensated an additional stipend, as it is understood that more senior lab mentors help train newer members and help with acclimation to the research lab. The additional duties were within their paid graduate student assistant hours. Faculty mentors were given autonomy in their approach to mentoring as long as it aligned with the University's values, mission, and commitment to student success.</p> <p>Applicants complete an application packet in the spring (March) prior to participating in the two-semester program. The packet includes a standard online application, transcripts of prior academic work, a statement of academic goals, a resume or CV, and two letters of recommendation. The Graduate Record Examination (GRE) is not required to be submitted for applications. Some departments require additional materials such as a research statement, writing samples, prior research experience, and a recommended minimum GPA (3.0 is recommended but HMB staff will review applicants with a 2.75 GPA and higher). Accepted students are notified of their acceptance between mid-April and early June. The program starts in the fall, and participants must relocate to the institution's city by August. Applicants must be U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents who hold a Bachelor's degree (Fig. 1).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Hot metal bridge post-baccalaureate program components</p> <p>To date, 82 participants have completed the HMB program. Of those participants who have completed the program since 2011, 85% have gone on to graduate studies at the University of Pittsburgh and elsewhere. Although participants may have pursued graduate education regardless of their involvement in the HMB program, we cannot determine whether they would have attended the host institution or when they would have started their graduate studies without participating in the HMB postbaccalaureate program.</p> <p>In 2017, HMB joined the Collaborative to Advance Equity Through Research (CAETR) Initiatives to advance women and girls in STEM fields (Anna Julia Cooper Center, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref63">2</reflink>].; Wake Forest University, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref64">60</reflink>]). This national collaborative sought to highlight research and community activities on college campuses on behalf of women and girls of color. The initial work of this collaborative began in 2015 at Wake Forest University and was co-sponsored by the White House Council on Women and Girls and the Anna Julia Cooper Center. As part of this national initiative, the HMB program sought an external evaluation of the post-bac program's effectiveness in the areas of mentoring assignments, academic components, and professional development activities. All alumni of the HMB from 2010 through 2017 were invited to participate in the evaluation.</p> <p>This investigation uses qualitative data collected during the 2021 HMB program evaluation study. Our guiding research question was, "What is the role of mentorship in a post-baccalaureate bridge program designed to increase the number of underrepresented women of color in STEM graduate programs"?</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-7">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189417203-8">Study Design</hd> <p>In order to better understand how Black and Latina women experience mentoring in a postbaccalaureate STEM program, we conducted a qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured in-depth interviews with HMB alumnae. In the larger HMB evaluation study, program alumni were contacted and invited to participate in a structured telephone interview designed to assess their perceptions and experiences of the HMB program components, what they found to be beneficial, and what aspects of the program they believed could be improved. Participants received a $25.00 incentive for their participation. Thirty (<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref65">30</reflink>) participants agreed to participate out of the total 82 alumni (37% response rate). Table 1 presents sample demographics and characteristics per cohort.</p> <p>Table 1 Summary of HMB participants in the parent evaluation study and current study</p> <p> <ephtml> <table rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2" /><th align="left"><p>Evaluation study</p></th><th align="left" colspan="2"><p>Current study</p></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><p>Sample</p></th><th align="left"><p>Sample</p></th><th align="left"><p>Women participants</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>HMB Cohort Year</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2010–2011</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2011–2012</p></td><td align="left"><p>8</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2012–2013</p></td><td align="left"><p>10</p></td><td align="left"><p>5</p></td><td align="left"><p>5</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2013–2014</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>5</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2014–2015</p></td><td align="left"><p>10</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2015–2016</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2016–2017</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2017–2018</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> 2018–2019</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Total</p></td><td align="left"><p>82</p></td><td align="left"><p>30</p></td><td align="left"><p>25</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0189417203-9">Data Collection</hd> <p>A purposive sampling approach was used to gather the sample of HMB alumnae. The inclusion criteria included identifying as a Black and or Latina woman and being an alumna of HMB during the years 2010–2019. Out of 30 respondents who participated in the larger evaluation study, five HMB alumni were excluded from this analysis; three HMB alumni self-identified as men, and two HMB alumnae self-identified as white women. The final sample size included 25 Black and Latina women. The semi-structured interviews lasted an average of 33 min, with the shortest interview lasting 15 min and the longest lasting 1 h and 10 min. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The Institutional Review Board designated this project as a program evaluation and therefore did not require Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval (University of Pittsburgh, Institutional Review Board, July 2016).</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-10">Measures and Materials</hd> <p>The open-ended structured interview guide included ten questions (see Appendix 1), which provided an overall thematic inquiry with several follow-up questions designed to elicit information about the aspect of the program element being discussed. In addition, four interview questions focused on mentorship. Those questions were: 1. how would you describe the relationship between yourself and your mentor?, 2. can you identify strengths and challenges faced in the mentorship relationship?, 3. what were some of your expectations of a mentor before beginning this program? Did they match your experience?, and 4. if possible, how would you improve your relationship with your mentor?</p> <p>Demographic data collected from alumnae included age, time between their last degree and HMB participation, their home department during HMB, post-HMB career choices (graduate degree or industry job), and details about any graduate degree pursued (masters, doctoral, or professional). They were also asked about their current progress in the program and expected graduation date.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-11">Trustworthiness</hd> <p>Research demonstrates that 10–12 in-depth interviews are enough if the topic is focused and the sample is homogenous (Guest et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref66">19</reflink>]). Given the great amount of homogeneity of the sample population and the focused topic on the mentoring experiences of Black and Latine women who participated in the same postbaccalaureate program at different times but have similar lived experiences, the study meets this criterion as 25 interviews are sufficient. To establish dependability, inter-rater reliability was conducted among the coders to establish comparable data analysis (Ulin et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref67">58</reflink>]). The authors and graduate assistants engaged in the process of understanding the data and the themes that were developed through process memos, and analytic memoing after reading the transcripts to establish credibility in addition to the use of triangulation and peer debriefing (Lincoln & Guba, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref68">28</reflink>]). Furthermore, researchers engaged in weekly discussions of the data to establish the existence of relational meaning among the data and assessed if the data was sufficiently rich to support the findings, a process of prolonged engagement (Lincoln & Guba, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref69">28</reflink>]; Miles & Huberman, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref70">36</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-12">Positionality</hd> <p>Engaging in reflexivity throughout our research study was integral for many reasons. One is that reflecting on our positionality and who we are in relation to the participants helped us understand how we were interpreting the data and findings (Merriam et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref71">35</reflink>]). As such, the corresponding author, an early career professional, self-identifies as an African American, cisgender, neurotypical woman of a low-income and first-generation background. She recognizes that the mentorship she received from Black women during her academic journey catalyzed her success in the academy. The senior author is an African American woman, a tenured professor in a PWI, and a first-generation college graduate from a Historically Black College and University (HBCU). Her lived experience includes, but is not limited to, growing up with a divorced mother who became a single female head of household. Her mentorship experiences date back to her undergraduate matriculation; strong mentors contributed to her success in the academy. Our second author identifies as a white cisgender woman who is a first-generation college graduate from a middle-class background. She recognizes that she does not have the lived experience of women of color and relies on the expertise of her coauthors and the study participants in the process of data analysis and summary. Collectively, we are proponents of mentoring and see the value of mentoring women of color, who occupy an underrepresented space in academia. We were also sure to have discussions about our interpretation of the data to ensure that participants' experiences were honored in the analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-13">Data Analysis</hd> <p>The thematic analysis approach was used to analyze the data (Braun & Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref72">8</reflink>]). Interview transcripts were initially coded by two research staff members using open coding. Next, we developed a codebook using open coding. Meetings were held once a month during coding to discuss the developed codes, reconcile discrepancies, and finalize the codebook. Then, transcripts were recoded using the codes from the codebook. A second coding sequence using the rigorous and accelerated data reduction (RADaR) technique in qualitative data analysis (Watkins, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref73">61</reflink>]) was conducted with three coders—1 coder from the first round and two new coders. The RADaR technique is effective in team-based coding to systematically and efficiently code textual data (Watkins, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref74">61</reflink>]). Guided by a deductive theoretical approach, based on extant mentorship literature, the authors first pulled all representative quotes that mentioned mentoring or the mentoring relationship from NVivo (Watkins, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref75">61</reflink>]).</p> <p>Thematic analysis was then conducted (Braun & Clarke, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref76">8</reflink>]), where codes with similar topics were grouped together, and representative quotes were discussed as a team to analyze inductively for themes (Kiger & Varpio, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref77">23</reflink>]). After identifying the initial themes, they were reviewed and discussed with representative quotes. Next, themes were revised, defined, and named. This process resulted in the generation of four themes significant to the mentoring relationships for women of color in this postbaccalaureate STEM program. To ensure confidentiality in presenting participant narratives, all participants are identified using pseudonyms in this study.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-14">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189417203-15">Sample Demographics</hd> <p>The sample comprised 19 Black women and six Latina women N = 25 (Table 2). The average participant age was 27.48 years (SD = 5.21). Participants' average length of time between their prior degree and participation in the Hot Metal Bridge program was 2.48 years (SD = 1.36). A total of nine cohorts were represented in this study, beginning in 2010 through 2018. Across cohorts, most participants (60%) were placed in the Psychology department, while less than one-third (28%) of women were placed in the Biological Sciences department. A smaller percentage of participants were placed in the English (8%) and Chemistry (4%) departments. After completing the Hot Metal Bridge program, most of the participants (84%) went to graduate school. Of those women, 84% matriculated into research doctoral programs, while 16% pursued a master's degree programs.</p> <p>Table 2 Sample demographics and characteristics (<emph>N</emph> = 25)</p> <p> <ephtml> <table rules="groups"><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Age </p></td><td align="left" colspan="2"><p>27.48 (SD = 5.21)</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Time Between Degrees</p></td><td align="left" colspan="2"><p>2.48 (SD = 1.36)</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p><italic>N</italic></p></td><td align="left"><p>%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><p>Department</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Psychology</p></td><td align="left"><p>15</p></td><td align="left"><p>60</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Biological Science</p></td><td align="left"><p>7</p></td><td align="left"><p>28</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Chemistry</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> English</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td align="left"><p>8</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>25</p></td><td align="left"><p>100</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><p>Immediate Goal Achievement Post-HMB Program Participation*</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Graduate Degree</p></td><td align="left"><p>21</p></td><td align="left"><p>91</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Industry</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>23</p></td><td align="left"><p>92</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="3"><p>Long-term Educational Outcomes**</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> PhD</p></td><td align="left"><p>16</p></td><td align="left"><p>64</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p> Masters </p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td><td align="left"><p>12</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>19</p></td><td align="left"><p>76</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <sups>*</sups>Post-HMB program participation information is unavailable for two participants <sups>**</sups>Post Bachelor's degree information unavailable for six participants</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-16">Findings</hd> <p>The findings highlighted the importance of relationship building over transactional interactions and fostering connections beyond technical skills to support future women in STEM. More specifically, themes reflective of relationship building were generated in four areas: 1) mentor–mentee discordance, 2) mentor's commitment, 3) effective mentee-mentor communication, and 4) research supervision and training dynamics (Fig. 2).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 Generated Mentoring Themes</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-17">Mentor–Mentee Discordance</hd> <p>Research shows that many mentoring programs in higher education use a mentor–mentee concordance approach, which involves matching mentors and mentees based on similarities in social identities (Blake-Beard et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref78">7</reflink>]). Administrators of the HMB program did not employ such a strategy. Therefore, many of the mentor–mentee pairs experienced racial/ethnic and/or gender discordance. Much of the literature on mentoring underrepresented minority students in higher education pursuing STEM degrees suggests that having a mentor based on concordance can be a positive asset for underrepresented students because it boosts their self-confidence and ability to see themselves in the field (Grant et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref79">17</reflink>]). In this regard, students experience the "mirror effect" (Morales et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref80">38</reflink>], p.9). However, when students are placed in discordant mentoring pairs, it is said that they stand to experience the "window effect", which means that students may benefit from those relationships because they provide new perspectives and different opportunities than they otherwise would have (Morales et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref81">38</reflink>], p. 9).</p> <p>Experiencing mentor–mentee discordance did not hinder the development of a meaningful connection between mentors and their mentees. While racial, ethnic, and gender identity are important to the participants, their socialization in academic spaces was equally important. Participants recalled feeling supported by their mentor despite the cultural differences in identities. Brenda, in Biological Sciences, recalled,"<emph>I mean she wasn't a woman of color, and that wasn't something I expected. That is something I can say that wasn't entirely important to me because she listened to me and made me feel like my concerns were real and validated my feelings all the time...</emph>"</p> <p>Similarly, Leticia, in the Psychology department, recalled,"<emph>.... my mentor is actually Native American, ...he kind of understands some of the challenges... you face that average people may not know, things that are inappropriate to say. He has always...supportive, and always there to listen and give feedback. I lucked out with a good mentor. I wasn't expecting like an advisor to check in and see how I'm doing mentally, making sure I'm having work life balance and that type of thing... I was expecting the support ... if I wanted to go to grad school or helping me with a research project. But I didn't expect the personal interest in "are you doing okay as a person" and not just the as a graduate student."</emph></p> <p>Then, there were occasions when the participants conditionally spoke about how the mentoring dynamics and relationship could have been improved if gender or racial/ethnic concordance had been achieved. Linda, in the Chemistry department, shared,"Yes<emph>, if he was a woman or if he was Hispanic, I think things would have been, we would have connected more, yeah. Maybe if our demographics, I don't know what I would call those things, if I could connect with him on a deeper level than just your science is cool, it would have been a better relationship".</emph></p> <p>Felicia, in Biological Sciences, expressed feeling that a greater representation of faculty of color, in general, would enhance the mentoring experience in HMB. She stated,<emph>"I really wished I worked with someone, someone who knows how to work with students of different backgrounds and it was just really, understanding the support and needs and how, the most rational and logical approach to go about that, and I didn't really get that... I think having more of that faculty to connect with would be really helpful, or faculty of color. Whatever people are, whether they are Latino, Asian or whatever, I think having more of them to help out be better, especially in biology</emph>."</p> <p>The experiences of racial-ethnic and/or gender discordance with HMB mentors and mentees were nuanced and unique to each participant. However, a constant that echoed throughout the interviews was their experiences of being treated with respect, which impacted their relationships and was a catalyst in relationship building.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-18">Mentor's Commitment</hd> <p>The mentor's commitment to their mentees and the HMB program was critical and had a lasting impact on mentees and was the crux of the HMB program. Commitment was often demonstrated through time invested with mentees. It was evident that a mentor's time investment was an important component of a mentoring relationship, particularly in a program where students recently completed their bachelor's degree and lacked training and skills in the area of their mentors. In academia, time is a commodity; at most research-intensive institutions, faculty are expected to split their time between research, teaching, and service, with more time being spent on research endeavors than teaching and subsequently, a smaller percentage of time being spent on service activities. Mentoring, which falls into the service category, can often be gendered, with women STEM faculty bearing the responsibility of mentoring more students than their male counterparts. Dawn, in Psychology, recalled,"<emph>I think the strength, the strength was that she had a lot of time for me, and I guess all of her students kind of. I didn't feel like it was forced time. I felt like she really wanted to help me and was there for me even if we were just passing in the hallway. And I think that was a really good strength, and it was a comfort to me because I felt like she was really invested in me and my success."</emph></p> <p>Similarly, Inez, in the English department, stated,<emph>"My mentor[she] really took the time to talk to me about professional development, that I knew what...courses I needed to take advantage of and making sure I was prepared for graduate study. It was a really successful mentorship. And I see now looking back, the value of those conversations and what goes into professional development, career aspirations, having that time spent with my mentor was really one of the most successful aspects of that relationship. I had someone I could go to, to ask questions and to be really straightforward with what I needed for my success."</emph></p> <p>Additionally, Alicia, in the English department, stated,"<emph>... we would often have coffee after different courses, we would often meet outside of academia, and it was really helpful for me to bridge being a graduate student to being an eventual colleague. So, my mentor really took the time to talk to me about professional development... I had not really expected the degree to which the mentor would help me to develop as a person and as a scholar."</emph></p> <p>Participants also reflected on the generosity of their time, knowing that time is a commodity in the academy, and they were still selfless in providing support to HMB participants. Teresa, in the Psychology department, described her experience.<emph>"in regard to school selection, interviewing,...I think this is something she actually went above and beyond in comparison with maybe some of the other mentors for the other students in the HMB program... we had biweekly meetings just individual, and we had group meetings just with her lab.... she really treated me like a graduate student. So, for her to ....be so busy...have so many grants constantly rolling... to be involved such amazing research and for her to take the time to mentor me, who she knew wasn't going to be there longer than a year. I feel like that was really kind of her to do that. And looking back on it now, I can't really believe that she would volunteer for that position considering how busy she was and how demanding her role was as an investigator. So... she made herself available whenever I needed a mentor. Very generous".</emph></p> <p>Conversely, some participants wished they had more time with their mentors. Participants attributed the lack of one-on-one time with mentors to the mentor's workload or the mentor's perception of their mentee's need for autonomy. Monica, in Psychology, recalled,<emph>"... in terms of my faculty advisor, he was just really busy in the second semester, which is okay, and I completely understand it. It would have been great if we had a little bit more time together, but he had an insane amount of things on his plate, and I get that".</emph></p> <p>The student's lack of time with a mentor could have contributed to relationship strain rather than relationship building among this mentoring pair. The student recognized that the mentor's lack of time with her reflected his fulfilling duties for his primary role at the university.</p> <p>A mentor's access to institutional infrastructure, research resources, and social capital was often seen as an extension of their commitment to their mentees and the HMB program. Such provisions were often offered in the forms of material, symbolic, and intellectual assistance. Material resources included supplies in a lab, equipment, advanced data analysis software, funding for open-access journal fees, stipends to attend professional development events, etc. Symbolic resources included having access to research staff and other graduate students in the lab to assist with projects. Lastly, intellectual resources were namely grantsmanship, letters of recommendation, co-authoring manuscripts, conducting research, and co-presenting scientific knowledge at conferences. This is significant because mentors frequently exceeded their expected roles, which was especially important given that many HMB participants came from low-income backgrounds and were first-generation college students. These acts of collective care mirrored mutual aid practices common in Black/African American and Latina cultures (Littman et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref82">29</reflink>]; Reese & Johnson, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref83">46</reflink>]), which are vital to building and sustaining relationships. Participants' proximity to institutional infrastructure, research resources, and mentors' social capital enhanced their experiences during the HMB program and after, during their post-HMB graduate studies. These findings support existing evidence on mentors' social capital as factors propelling mentees STEM participation (Sánchez et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref84">53</reflink>]; Saw, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref85">54</reflink>]). Sharon, in Psychology, recalled,<emph>"I honestly don't believe that I would be in my Ph.D. program were it not for my mentor... She has written me letters of recommendation for all these awards I am going for... and grants on my own.... the connections I made.... Everything I can think of was enhanced by Dr. XXX ...my writing style, my oral presentations, my productivity, my organization, all that stuff was really finessed while I was in HMB."</emph></p> <p>Nikki, in Biological Sciences, shared how her mentor advocated on her behalf for new computer equipment,<emph>"So with the laptop thing...she was the one who told the chair[department chair] with me. I didn't walk up to the chair and was like "my laptop broke because you didn't give one to me". That is not at all how that happened. Um you know she was the one like [who said] oh my god your laptop broke. let me see what I can do, to find resources for you". She went off to him [the chair of the department] and was like my student needs some resources."</emph></p> <p>Similarly, Lisa, in the Biological Sciences stated,<emph>"They were open to, for instance one of my advisors, I saw the opportunity to take a field ecology class in Costa Rica and he basically sat down and told me what the program was about and about other students that had done the program. And we worked on the application together and basically helped me get into the field ecology class which you would think for an HMB program, who would invest that much time in a student who they didn't know if they were going to stay or not at the school or if they were going to go somewhere else?."</emph></p> <p>Mentors' intentional engagement of their resources and social capital translated into an investment in their mentees' academic independence, social mobility, and, more broadly, retention in STEM. Since the mentoring training was not standardized across mentors in HMB, this set a tone and provided an exemplary experience for the mentees. Another caveat is that the mentors did not choose their mentees, as is customary in academia. They were assigned mentees. Mentors like to know in advance who they are working with to make sure they get a return on their investment. However, with HMB, they were willing to relax some of their expectations to support this institutional program, recognizing the significance of the service commitment and the long-term impact of participating in the program.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-19">The Importance of Effective Mentee-Mentor Communication</hd> <p>Communication was critical to developing effective mentoring relationships and sustaining short-term and long-term relationships between participants and their mentors. Setting the tone for expectations with communication and modeling good oral and written communication helped participants become socialized within the STEM environment and gain soft skills they can use in future academic or STEM endeavors. Learning how to communicate effectively impacted participants' professional development. As they reflected on their experience, they agreed that since their time in HMB, their views had matured, and they later understood the benefit of the communication style. Some HMB participants experienced communication "hiccups" relating to the academic research environment (e.g., understanding concepts, ideas, and processes, being unfamiliar or not socialized to the lab environment), therefore not having the language to express themselves. Veronica, in Biological Sciences reflected,<emph>"I think it was just a communication problem. I think also being fresh out of undergrad and not as self-aware I was a little bit more intimidated by this person. And I think neither one of us articulated with one another rather efficiently. I think I wanted somebody I could talk to just about my mental health and um in addition to how I could be able take the next steps to graduate school. And of course, helping me get into graduate school and being really supportive and just having this open line of communication where we can just sort of talk about how I'm doing, how my science is doing, learn about some of the things that I can</emph> work<emph> on so I can improve as well as kind of chat with me about what I'm doing well."</emph></p> <p>Similarly, Karen, in Biological Sciences recalled,"<emph>The first relationship I had was not ideal. It wasn't bad, it wasn't any kind of disrespect or anything, it was just a matter of communication. We weren't really communicating well enough. The challenging thing was I didn't really know what my next step was... </emph><bold><emph>the second rotation</emph></bold><emph> was the exact opposite. He was very engaging, very good at communicating. We had weekly meetings... to see how I was doing, he asked me about class, he asked me how I felt about the project I was doing, if I was having any trouble, if I was stuck anywhere, and how to overcome that."</emph></p> <p>Other participants reported there were times when they felt like there was a lack of communication with their mentor compared to the level of support they received as undergraduate students. However, as they became socialized to academic expectations and the culture within academia, they have reflected on their HMB experience and think differently now. Vicky, in Psychology, shared,<emph>"I think when I was there I thought that I didn't get a lot of supervision, maybe because sometimes she was gone and then our communication was poor. But looking back at it now, I believe that I actually got adequate and probably more than most in terms of supervision and communication. Of course I came from undergrad where everyone is sort of helicoptering you making sure you are doing well and doing good. But at the graduate level you are kind of given a task and sent on your way to fill that... So I always felt like I was a burden at the beginning and that reason, maybe there was a lack of communication on my end because I didn't want to constantly ask for help and I was new there so I didn't know who to go to for help, what was expected of her".</emph></p> <p>Participants often shared that they felt intimidated by being paired with national experts, compared to their early career and novice background. Tonya in Psychology stated,<emph>"I think just being able to speak with Dr. XXX, coming from a small university and being with a guy who has written a lot of papers was interesting. And I think it was all self-induced where I thought he was too hard to talk to. But I think, there weren't too many challenges. I think it was just a matter of learning. He was very available, so if you had questions."</emph></p> <p>Some participants reported a conflict between their expectations and those of their mentors. In one case, some of these conflicts were due to a misunderstanding of the participant's level of expertise coming into the lab environment. Some of these conflicts were about the role of the HMB student in the faculty mentor's research. Diane, in Psychology shared,<emph>"I struggle with normally, just like expressing myself in a way they understand I want them to understand, if that makes sense... I didn't know like certain questions and how to ask them so I had to learn how to ask those questions to get the answer I needed instead of just a general response."</emph></p> <p>As depicted, some participants were satisfied with their mentors' communication, while others experienced communication challenges. It isn't an anomaly for graduate students within the same program to have varying experiences with communication with faculty mentors, as communication styles vary across generations, genders, cultures, academic settings, and neurodiversity. The HMB program did not provide mentors with specific training to address communication best practices when working with post-baccalaureate program fellows.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-20">Research Supervision and Training Dynamics</hd> <p>Research supervision took on many forms. Notably, some participants felt the process was prescriptive and left very little room for autonomy, while others enjoyed the structure and additional guidance. Participants often lacked autonomy in the projects to pursue, the level of supervision, scheduled activities and research tasks and responsibilities, and the level of direction and guidance provided in the labs. Lori, in Psychology, recalled,<emph>"From the moment of our first meeting, we had a list of goals that we were going to accomplish. Sometimes to the point where I didn't really have an option. She just told me you are going to do this, and have it completed by the time you leave here. But that is probably because you know this woman has a vision and if we don't have that vision it is going to make us feel anxious or try to withdraw or avoid doing those activities. But she didn't let me do that. She just told me these are the requirements, this is what you are going to do, so whatever way you are going to do just get it done. So, I appreciate that."</emph></p> <p>At times, participants felt tension between their desired research goals and that of the<emph> s</emph>upervising mentor. Addressing this tension did not always end in a favorable consensus for both the mentee and mentor. Carla, in Psychology shared,<emph>"... And I kept having to fight with him, he seemed to forget that my funding came from HMB and not his own grant, so I had to really take a stand to not be put onto his project and focus on my own research. That part was really difficult and because I wasn't working on his project, he really disengaged himself a lot from mine."</emph></p> <p>Others recalled having complete independence and autonomy with their own projects and faculty-led research projects but wanting more guidance. Veronica, in Biological Sciences shared,<emph>"Yeah so, they were pretty hands off, so you know they gave me the project and said these are the things we want to figure out and I was kind of left to my own devices to figure it out. So, there wasn't like a lot of guidance".</emph></p> <p>Similarly, Selena, in the Psychology, recalled,<emph>"Um, I think the strength is that I was provided independence, but I think a weakness is that I was provided so much independence. Because I think that, um, at some points, I would have liked a little more guidance."</emph></p> <p>Some participants credited the level of independence and autonomy they experienced with their projects to the relationship they developed with their mentors and the fact that their mentors trusted and had confidence in the mentee's capacity to execute the project. Katrina in Psychology recalled,<emph>"Um, I think we had a pretty good relationship. I am a pretty independent worker and Dr. XXX was pretty hands-off, but she would still provide guidance. So, I feel like, yeah, I feel like she provided me with guidance but left me with space to do my own thing too. Yeah."</emph></p> <p>Sabrina in the Psychology department recalled,<emph>"Strengths... I think that just her willingness to allow me to design my own research project was a huge strength on her end because it would have been easier for me to just have latched on to a project that she was already working on. And also, the project that we designed was kind of outside of both of our areas, so I think she did end up spending a lot of time working with me and working on the project. I really appreciated that."</emph></p> <p>It is evident that mentors stood to gain the most from this portion of the program in terms of having help with their research agendas. However, the approach may need to be tailored more to meet the mentees' needs. This entire experience is service, but this is one area that can be relational as opposed to transactional. A key takeaway was that some mentees were able to work independently, and some needed the structure and additional support.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-21">Discussion</hd> <p>The HMB program is a comprehensive postbaccalaureate STEM bridge program that offers education and training, mentoring, professional development, socialization, and financial assistance to students of color, low-income, or first-generation backgrounds seeking to matriculate to graduate STEM programs. Mentoring had a central role in the experiences of Black and Latina women, paths, which were fostered by and large through relationship-building and relational experiences during their nine-month fellowship. The specific strategies employed by mentors highlight the heterogeneity in mentorship but the commonalities among faculty mentors working at R1 institutions. It is also important to note that the heterogeneity in mentorship approaches often resulted in participants experiencing different outcomes with HMB.</p> <p>Mentor–mentee discordance was acceptable to HMB participants. The findings support existing research demonstrating that racial/ethnic and/or gender discordance does not deter mentor–mentee relationships in STEM (Morales et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref86">38</reflink>]). This could be because of the well-known disparities in women of color in STEM. The research also demonstrates that when women of color experience discordance with mentors, women of color in STEM often create counterpaces and networking groups to support their success and thrive (Ong et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref87">43</reflink>]; Wheaton & Moore, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref88">62</reflink>]). From one perspective, in part, this is why mentoring is important. Historically, in the academy, we witnessed the mentoring of male scholars from one generation to the next; we can now observe the positive impact of mentoring on women and people of color, both of whose presence continues to grow in institutions of higher education. In cases of mentor–mentee discordance, mentors who affirm both the participants' social identities and their STEM identities, often connect more deeply with participants. The notion of validating one's identity and personhood is important for building strong relationships, fostering mutual trust and understanding, and working effectively together in a mentoring context. Addressing these identity differences openly can show that the learning environment values tolerance, inclusion, and diverse contributions to science, making it more welcoming to people from different backgrounds.</p> <p>In addition, mentors who affirmed the scientific identity of mentees using their research resources and social capital cultivated burgeoning environments for women of color. A mentor's acts of networking and sponsorship help challenge, disrupt, and reduce the social inequities affecting the representation of women of color in STEM, working to improve their visibility and opportunities in the field. In their role of liaising, mentors leverage their social capital to strengthen the trainee's scientific identity and credibility in the field. Furthermore, mentors represent a realm of academia that trainees have not yet reached and may not fully comprehend. These findings support existing evidence that mentoring by established faculty members in STEM significantly enhances the retention of women of color in graduate studies (Lopez & Duran, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref89">30</reflink>]; Wheaton & Moore, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref90">62</reflink>]). The participants' experience may also have been shaped by the culture of the mentor's field (e.g., mentors from Psychology vs mentors from Biological Sciences).</p> <p>The perceived presence and quality of effective mentee/mentor communication varied based on the situational environment. Participants with a novice background in research environments often struggled to fully engage early on due to the lack of familiarity with STEM terminology and inadequate socialization into STEM culture. Communication is important for transferring knowledge and ideas from one person to the next, but as the findings suggest in this setting, communication was not just a vehicle for learning new skills but also essential for becoming an integral part of the team and making impactful contributions to science.</p> <p>Additionally, unfamiliarity with lab nuances, difficulty reading non-verbal communication, uncertainty about preferred feedback methods, and an inability to gauge research culture in a lab environment can hinder one's ability to address communication gaps. Consequently, the sharp learning curve and ineffective communication can impede the mentoring process. During the program mentees saw this as a deficit, but after being socialized to STEM culture, mentees learned the communication style was commonplace for this arena. Future programs should offer an orientation for participants of color that discusses STEM research culture so that the experience is not jarring when it occurs in real-time. Orientation and training on STEM-specific communication culture can also help to reduce feelings of perceived alienation and internalized imposter syndrome, as the participants reported feeling intimidated by their mentors, which made them hesitant to communicate openly with them.</p> <p>A mentor's commitment, demonstrated through time investment, was a key indicator of their overall dedication to their mentee. For participants, the time investment was a tangible sign of feeling supported and eventually feeling and becoming comfortable with their faculty mentors. This finding builds on the research by Malone and Barabino, ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref91">32</reflink>]) that found that URM did not receive enough face time with mentors to discuss their work. In contrast, participants of this study described open-door policies, regular one-on-one meetings, and involvement in their mentor's lab meetings. This is significant because the mentor is the primary person providing support and socialization within the academic and STEM settings, setting expectations for what participants can anticipate if they enter a graduate program. It also highlights that while most participants are focused on the relational aspects of being a part of the HMB program, mentors, though equally invested, must navigate job demands and expectations and are often accustomed to more transactional relationships in academia.</p> <p>Research supervision and training exposure boosted participants' self-efficacy and mastery of specific tasks. This, in turn, increased their STEM confidence, contributing to their enhanced scientific identity (Atkins et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref92">4</reflink>]). In terms of measurable outcomes and assessing the success of HMB, this is an area where outcomes can be quantified. Moreover, it is relevant to the overall development and socialization in STEM and academia. For instance, many participants acquired invaluable skills in scholarly writing, delivering scientific feedback in colloquiums, conducting laboratory research, and preparing competitive packages for graduate school. Leadership during research supervision can seem imbalanced in the early stages, as the mentors often have a clear vision and approach for achieving success, with minimal input from the mentee. However, this is where communication, trust, and rapport become important. Over time, effective research supervision and training can lead to mentees successfully executing projects. This not only reflects the mentee's achievements but also serves as a shared accomplishment for mentors, highlighting the successful outcomes of their mentoring efforts.</p> <p>While much of the findings support existing evidence on mentoring underrepresented minoritized groups in STEM postbaccalaureate programs, this study offers a unique contribution in that participants retrospectively reflected on their experiences on their involvement with HMB and their subsequent life paths. With an extended follow-up period post HMB participation, participants were able to critically assess the long-term impact of HMB on their academic trajectories and recognize their personal growth since their initial experiences with mentors. This new perspective adds greater depth to their experiences, highlighting the importance of understanding that the true impact of mentoring often becomes evident only years later. Participants included in this study participated in HMB from 2010- 2019, therefore providing a follow-up period ranging from 2–13 years from the time of the larger evaluation study in 2021.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-22">Implications</hd> <p>Several implications for future work in developing mentoring programs for women of color in STEM emerge from this study. First, postbaccalaureate programs in STEM are effective at recruiting and retaining women of color, offering enriching experiences that will enhance their skills and prepare them for successful matriculation into graduate programs. Second, participants' experiences may vary depending on the culture and communication styles of their mentor's department. These departmental differences can impact the mentoring experience. Investments in the mentoring process, including attention to departmental culture and communication, will enhance the postbaccalaureate experience for mentees. Effective mentoring and its extensions are particularly important for Black and Latina women with limited research experience and exposure to STEM fields.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-23">Limitations</hd> <p>Our study has limitations. Although our sample was relatively homogenous, most participants were Black. It is unclear whether the insights gained are applicable to Latinas in other contexts. However, this sample is representative of the Latino population in the city where the university is located. Additionally, recall bias may impact some of the findings, as participants were asked to recall their experiences. In some instances, participants were asked to remember their experiences from 5–7 years prior when they were involved with HMB. Despite these limitations, the study's strengths lie in its contribution to the research on mentoring women of color in postbaccalaureate STEM programs at predominantly white institutions (PWIs).</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-24">Conclusion</hd> <p>Hot Metal Bridge is a distinctive postbaccalaureate program designed to address the need for increasing the representation of underrepresented minorities, particularly women in STEM fields. A hallmark of the HMB program is relationship building which was achieved through its mentoring component. Postbaccalaureate STEM programs that incorporate supportive mentorship for Black and Latina women may impact their experiences and career trajectories. As such, mentorship can be an integral component of a postbaccalaureate STEM program for women of color at predominantly white institutions.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-25">Author Contributions</hd> <p>All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by [Laurenia Mangum], [Jaime Booth] and [Valire Copeland]. The first draft of the manuscript was written by [Laurenia Mangum] and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-26">Funding</hd> <p>The authors declare that they did not receive any financial research support for the conduct of this study.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-27">Data Availability</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are not openly available due to reasons of sensitivity and are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Data are located in controlled access data storage at the University of Pittsburgh School of Social Work.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-28">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189417203-29">Conflicts of Interest</hd> <p>The authors report there are no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-30">Research involving Human Participants</hd> <p>This study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board designated this project as a program evaluation and, therefore, did not require Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval (University of Pittsburgh, Institutional Review Board, July 2016).</p> <hd id="AN0189417203-31">Appendix</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0189417203-32">Semi-structured Interview Guide</hd> <p>A semi-structured interview guide was used to complete this evaluation. In a phone interview. Prior to every interview, participants were asked to complete a brief demographic survey. The interview guide questions included:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> What would you say is the overall purpose of the Hot Metal Bridge Project (HMBP)?</item> <p></p> <item> How did the HMBP prepare you to continue to graduate school?</item> <p></p> <item> What elements of the program would you say supported or prepared you the most for your next educational steps?</item> <p></p> <item> What elements of the program did you find most beneficial?</item> <p></p> <item> How did you find out about the program? What was the recruitment process like for you?</item> <p></p> <item> Why did you choose to participate in an enrichment program for minorities?</item> <p></p> <item> Why did you choose this program over others?</item> <p></p> <item> Did you encounter any difficulties in the process?</item> <p></p> <item> How would you describe the relationship between yourself and your mentor?</item> <p></p> <item> Can you identify strengths and challenges faced in the mentorship relationship?</item> <p></p> <item> What were some of your expectations in a mentor before beginning this program? Did they match your experience?</item> <p></p> <item> If possible, how would you improve your relationship with your mentor?</item> <p></p> <item> How would you describe the sense of community created through the HMBP? On campus as a whole?</item> <p></p> <item> What types of social events do students participate in outside of meetings?</item> <p></p> <item> How do students expand relationships outside of HMBP?</item> <p></p> <item> What other things do you think could be done to improve the feeling of community in the program? And on campus?</item> <p></p> <item> Can you describe the relationships you have with peers and peer groups through the program?</item> <p></p> <item> How would you describe your lab experience while in the program?</item> <p></p> <item> What was your prior lab experience? Negative and positive? What did you expect from lab experience?</item> <p></p> <item> What would you identify as benefits of increased lab exposure?</item> <p></p> <item> How does the program monitor the lab experience?</item> <p></p> <item> What part of the lab experience did you find most beneficial? What would you change?</item> <p></p> <item> Can you tell me about the HMB meetings?</item> <p></p> <item> What did you think their intentions were?</item> <p></p> <item> What did you find the most beneficial? What you would you change about program meetings?</item> <p></p> <item> What is the typical structure of meetings?</item> <p></p> <item> If you could change or improve anything about the program what would it be? And why?</item> <p></p> <item> Is there anything else about the HMBP that you think would be helpful for us to know?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0189417203-33">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0189417203-34"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref8" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alfred MV, Ray SM, Johnson MA. Advancing Women of Color in STEM: An Imperative for U.S. Global Competitiveness. Advances in Developing Human Resources. 2019; 21; 1: 114-132. 10.1177/1523422318814551</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref63" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anna Julia Cooper Center (n.d.) Collaborative to Advance Equity. https://ajccenter.com/collaborative-to-advance-equity</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref46" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Arroyo JL. Latina women in STEM: A critical analysis of ph. 2017; California State University, Fresno</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref92" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Atkins K, Dougan BM, Dromgold-Sermen MS, Potter H, Sathy V, Panter AT. "Looking at Myself in the Future": How mentoring shapes scientific identity for STEM students from underrepresented groups. International Journal of STEM Education. 2020; 7; 42: 2-15. 10.1186/s40594-020-00242-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref31" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Ball K, Steinmetz C. Campus counterspaces: Black and Latinx students' search for community at historically white universities: By Micere Keels. 2022; NY, Cornell University Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref20" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bertrand, M. (2020). Gender in the twenty-first century. In AEA Papers and proceedings (Vol. 110, pp. 1–24). https://doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20201126</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref78" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Blake-Beard S, Bayne ML, Crosby FJ, Muller CB. Matching my race and gender in mentoring relationships: Keeping our eyes on the prize. Journal of Social Issues. 2011; 67; 3: 622-643. 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01717.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref72" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006; 3; 2: 77-101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref57" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Brittian, A. S, Sy, S. R, & Stokes, J. E. (2009). Mentoring: Implications for African American college students. Western Journal of Black Studies, 33(2), 87–97. https://proxy.cc.uic.edu/login?url=https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/mentoring-implications-african-american-college/docview/200362739/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/mentoring-implications-african-american-college/docview/200362739/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown D, Keith V. In and out of our right minds: The mental health of African American women. 2003; Columbia University Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carter, D. F, Razo Dueñas, J. E, & Mendoza, R. (2019). Critical examination of the role of STEM in propagating and maintaining race and gender disparities. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 34, 39–97.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Casad BJ, Franks JE, Garasky CE, Kittleman MM, Roesler AC, Hall DY, Petzel ZW. Gender inequality in academia: Problems and solutions for women faculty in STEM. Journal of Neuroscience Research. 2021; 99; 1: 13-23. 10.1002/jnr.24631</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chang MJ, Sharkness J, Hurtado S, Newman CB. What matters in college for retaining aspiring scientists and engineers from underrepresented racial groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2014; 51; 5: 555-580. 10.1002/tea.21146</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Edwards JB, Bryant S, Clark TT. African American Female Social Work Educators in Predominantly White Schools of Social Work: Strategies for Thriving. Journal of African American Studies. 2008; 12: 37-49. 10.1007/s12111-007-9029-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fry R, Kennedy B, Funk C. STEM Jobs See Uneven Progress in Increasing Gender Racial and Ethnic Diversity. 2021; Pew Research Centerhttps://<ulink href="http://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/">www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/04/01/stem-jobs-see-uneven-progress-in-increasing-gender-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garibay JC, Hughes BE, Eagan MK, Hurtado S. Beyond the Bachelor's: What Influences STEM Post-Baccalaureate Pathways. 2013; Association for Institutional Research Annual Forumhttps://<ulink href="http://www.heri.ucla.edu/nih/downloads/AIR-2013-Beyond-the-Bachelors.pdf">www.heri.ucla.edu/nih/downloads/AIR-2013-Beyond-the-Bachelors.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grant CM, Ghee S. Mentoring 101: Advancing African-American women faculty and doctoral student success in predominantly White institutions. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. 2015; 28; 7: 759-785. 10.1080/09518398.2015.1036951</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guerin A. Unpacking the Double Bind: Exploring How the Intersection of Race and Gender Shape the Undergraduate Experiences of African American Women in Engineering. 2018; Louisiana State University. LSU Doctoral Dissertations</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods. 2006; 18; 1: 59-82. 10.1177/1525822X05279903</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Heck IA, Santhanagopalan R, Cimpian A, Kinzler KD. Understanding the Developmental Roots of Gender Gaps in Politics. Psychological Inquiry. 2021; 32; 2: 53-71. 10.1080/1047840X.2021.1930741</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kezar, A, & Holcombe, E. (2020). The role of collaboration in integrated programs aimed at supporting underrepresented student success in STEM. American Behavioral Scientist, 64(3), 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869421</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kezar A, Kitchen J. Supporting first-generation, low-income, and underrepresented students' transitions to college through comprehensive and integrated programs. American Behavioral Scientist. 2019; 64; 3: 223-229. 10.1177/0002764219869397</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kiger ME, Varpio L. Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No 131. Medical Teacher. 2020; 42; 8: 846-854. 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kincey SD. Mentoring African American Students at a Predominantly White Institution: Its Relationship to Academic Performance, Persistence, and Retention. 2007; Florida State University Libraries. Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lavy V, Sand E. On the origins of gender human capital gaps: Short and long term consequences of teachers' stereotypical biases (Now20909). 2015; National Bureau of Economic Research. 10.3386/w20909</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Legewie J, DiPrete TA. Pathways to science and engineering bachelor's degrees for men and women. Sociological Science. 2014; 1: 41-48. 10.15195/v1.a4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Legewie J, DiPrete TA. The high school environment and the gender gap in science and engineering. Sociology of Education. 2014; 87; 4: 259-280. 10.1177/0038040714547770</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lincoln YS, Guba EG. But Is It Rigorous? Trustworthiness and Authenticy in Naturalistic Evaluation. 1986; New Directions for Program Evaluation</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Littman DM, Boyett M, Bender K, Dunbar AZ, Santarella M, Becker-Hafnor T, Saavedra K, Milligan T. Values and beliefs underlying mutual aid: An exploration of collective care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research. 2022; 13; 1: 89-115. 10.1086/716884</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lopez, P. D. J, & Duran, A. (2021). The role of mentoring on the retention of women from diverse backgrounds in STEM. In Implementation Strategies for Improving Diversity in Organizations (pp. 271–310). IGI Global.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Malcom LE, Malcom SM. The double bind: The next generation. Harvard Educational Review. 2011; 81: 162-172. 10.17763/haer.81.2.a84201x508406327</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Malone KR, Barabino G. Narrations of race in STEM research settings: Identity formation and its discontents. Science Education. 2009; 93; 3: 485-510. 10.1002/sce.20307</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGee EO, Bentley L. The troubled success of Black women in STEM. Cognition and Instruction. 2017; 35; 4: 265-289. 10.1080/07370008.2017.1355211</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGee EO, Botchway PK, Naphan-Kingery DE, Brockman AJ, Houston S, White DT. Racism camouflaged as impostorism and the impact on Black STEM doctoral students. Race Ethnicity and Education. 2021; 25; 4: 487-507. 10.1080/13613324.2021.1924137</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merriam SB, Johnson-Bailey J, Lee M-Y, Kee Y, Ntseane G, Muhamed M. Power and positionality: Negotiating insider/outsider status within and across cultures. International Journal of Lifelong Education. 2001; 20; 5: 405-416. 10.1080/02601370120490</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 19942; Sage Publications Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Montgomery BL, Dodson JE, Johnson SM. Guiding the way: Mentoring graduate students and junior faculty for sustainable academic careers. SAGE Open. 2014; 4: 4. 10.1177/2158244014558043</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morales DX, Grineski SE, Collins TW. Advancing understanding of discordant mentoring relationships in STEMM: A method and framework. ANNALS of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2023; 1526: 8-15. 10.1111/nyas.15035</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morgan SL, Gelbgiser D, Weeden KA. Feeding the pipeline: Gender, occupational plans, and college major selection. Social Science Research. 2013; 42; 4: 989-1005. 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.03.008</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Science Foundation. (2023). STEM definitions. https://stem.ucdavis.edu/what-stem#:~:text=The%20NSF%20definition%20of%20STEM%20fields%20includes%20mathematics%2C,sciences%20%E2%80%93%20psychology%2C%20economics%2C%20sociology%2C%20and%20political%20science</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newton VA. Hypervisibility and Invisibility: Black Women's Experiences with Gendered Racial Microaggressions on a White Campus. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2023; 9; 2: 164-178. 10.1177/23326492221138222</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nuis W, Segers M, Beausaert S. Conceptualizing mentoring in higher education: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review. 2023; 41: 100565. 10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100565</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ong M, Smith JM, Ko LT. Counterspaces for women of color in STEM higher education: Marginal and central spaces for persistence and success. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2018; 55; 2: 206-245. 10.1002/tea.21417</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Orrell B, Cox DA. STEM Perspectives: Attitudes, Opportunities, and Barriers in America's STEM Workforce. 2020; American Enterprise Institutehttps://<ulink href="http://www.aei.org/research-products/report/stem-perspectives-attitudes-opportunities-and-barriers-in-americas-stem-workforce/">www.aei.org/research-products/report/stem-perspectives-attitudes-opportunities-and-barriers-in-americas-stem-workforce/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Perry BL, Link T, Boelter C, Leukefeld C. Blinded to science: Gender differences in the effects of race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status on academic and science attitudes among sixth graders. Gender and Education. 2012; 24; 7: 725-743. 10.1080/09540253.2012.685702</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reese AM, Johnson SA. We all we got: Urban Black ecologies of care and mutual aid. Environment and Society. 2022; 13; 1: 27-42. 10.3167/ares.2022.130103</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Remich R, Naffziger-Hirsch ME, Gazley JL, McGee R. Scientific growth and identity development during a postbaccalaureate program: Results from a multisite qualitative study. CBE Life Sciences Education. 2016; 15; 3: ar25. 10.1187/cbe.16-01-0035</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Riegle-Crumb C, Grodsky E. Racial-ethnic differences at the intersection of math course-taking and achievement. Sociology of Education. 2010; 83; 3: 248-270. 10.1177/0038040710375689</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Riegle-Crumb C, Humphries M. Exploring bias in math teachers' perceptions of students' ability by gender and race/ethnicity. Gender & Society. 2012; 26; 2: 290-322. 10.1177/0891243211434614</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Riegle-Crumb C, King B, Grodsky E, Muller C. The more things change, the more they stay the same? Prior achievement fails to explain gender inequality in entry into STEM college majors over time. American Educational Research Journal. 2012; 49; 6: 1048-1073. 10.3102/0002831211435229</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Riegle-Crumb C, King B, Irizarry Y. Does STEM Stand Out? Examining Racial/Ethnic Gaps in Persistence Across Postsecondary Fields. Educational Researcher. 2019; 48; 3: 133-144. 10.3102/0013189X19831006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rossi AS. Women in Science: Why So Few?: Social and psychological influences restrict women's choice and pursuit of careers in science. Science. 1965; 148; 3674: 1196-1202. 10.1126/science.148.3674.1196</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sánchez B, Mroczkowski AL, Flores LY, de los Reyes W, Ruiz J, Rasgado-Flores H. How mentors contribute to Latinx adolescents' social capital in the sciences. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2022; 37; 1: 128-161. 10.1177/0743558420985454</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saw GK. Leveraging social capital to broaden participation in STEM. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2020; 7; 1: 35-43. 10.1177/2372732219895997</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seymour, E, & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving (Vol. 34). Westview Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Silva, R. d. C. A. (2023). How Latina College STEM Students Describe Their Experiences Attending Hispanic Serving Institutions in Southern California (Order No. 30569656). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global Closed Collection; Publicly Available Content Database. (2835787995). https://proxy.cc.uic.edu/login?url=https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/how-latina-college-stem-students-describe-their/docview/2835787995/se-2">www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/how-latina-college-stem-students-describe-their/docview/2835787995/se-2</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, W. A, Hung, M, & Franklin, J. D. (2011). Racial Battle Fatigue and the MisEducation of Black Men: Racial Microaggressions, Societal Problems, and Environmental Stress. The Journal of Negro Education, 80(1), 63–82. https://<ulink href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/41341106">www.jstor.org/stable/41341106</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ulin PR, Robinson ET, Tolley EE. Qualitative Methods in Public Health: A Field Guide for Applied Research. 2004; Jossey-Bass</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> University of Pittsburgh. (2023). The Deitrich School of Arts and Sciences Graduate Studies. Hot Metal Bridge Post-Bac Program. https://<ulink href="http://www.asgraduate.pitt.edu/hot-metal-bridge-post-bac-program">www.asgraduate.pitt.edu/hot-metal-bridge-post-bac-program</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wake Forest University (2016). Wake Forest News. https://news.wfu.edu/2016/12/22</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watkins DC. Rapid and rigorous qualitative data analysis: The "RADaR" technique for applied research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 2017; 16; 1: 1-9. 10.1177/1609406917712131</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wheaton, D, & Moore, L. (2020). Advancing women of color in STEM through meaningful mentoring: Key observations from the Jackson State University advance institutional transformation project. Advance Journal, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.5399/osu/ADVJRNL.1.2.5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Xie Y, Killewald A. Is American Science in Decline?. 2012: Cambridge, MA; Harvard University Press. 10.4159/harvard.9780674065048</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Xie Y, Fang M, Shauman K. STEM Education. The Annual Review of Sociology. 2015; 41; 19: 331. 10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Xu YJ. Gender Disparity in STEM Disciplines: A Study of Faculty Attrition and Turnover Intentions. Research in Higher Education. 2008; 49: 607-624. 10.1007/s11162-008-9097-4</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Laurenia C. Mangum; Jaime M. Booth and Valire C. Copeland</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Laurenia Mangum Laurenia C. Mangum PhD, MPH, LMSW (she/hers) is an Assistant Professor of Social Work at Jane Addams College of Social Work at the University of Illinois Chicago. Dr. Mangum's extensive research expertise spans family well-being, maternal-child health, community health, and community development, where she worked with women and children of under-resourced and historically marginalized communities to promote optimal health and wellness.</p> <p>Jaime Booth Jaime M. Booth is an Associate Professor in the School of Social Work at the University of Pittsburgh. Jaime Booth is the PI of the SPIN Project, a NIDA funded project that seeks to understand youths' experiences of supportive and stressful spaces in their neighborhood, with the goal of designing interventions that will increase youths' engagement in supportive spaces. Dr. Booth's research focuses on the role of context and identity in the stress process, the impact of differential stress experiences on health disparities and strives to identify protective factors that can be enhanced to mitigate these outcomes.</p> <p>Valire Copeland Valire C. Copeland Dr. Copeland's teaching, training, and research build on developing evidenced-based engagement and intervention strategies for increasing access to, and utilization of, treatment and intervention services. As a researcher with expertise in health care, the purpose of my training agenda is to build the knowledge, skill, and training connections between social work in health care via the bio-psychosocial framework. Dr. Copeland's collaborations include colleagues in Public Health, Medicine/Family Medicine, Nursing, and the Health Sciences. She worked with, trained, and educated many undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral students during her tenure at the University of Pittsburgh.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref88"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1496708
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Role of Mentoring as a Critical Innovation in Postbaccalaureate Programs Designed to Increase Representation of Women of Color in STEM Graduate Programs
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Laurenia+C%2E+Mangum%22">Laurenia C. Mangum</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8291-6754">0000-0002-8291-6754</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jaime+M%2E+Booth%22">Jaime M. Booth</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1730-4284">0000-0002-1730-4284</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Valire+C%2E+Copeland%22">Valire C. Copeland</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6925-6800">0000-0002-6925-6800</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Innovative+Higher+Education%22"><i>Innovative Higher Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 50(6):2241-2268.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 28
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Tests/Questionnaires
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Graduate+Study%22">Graduate Study</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mentors%22">Mentors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22African+American+Students%22">African American Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hispanic+American+Students%22">Hispanic American Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Womens+Education%22">Womens Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Females%22">Females</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Predominantly+White+Institutions%22">Predominantly White Institutions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Experience%22">Student Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Relationship%22">Interpersonal Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Conflict%22">Conflict</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Persistence%22">Persistence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Behavior%22">Teacher Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Communication%22">Interpersonal Communication</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Research%22">Student Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Supervision%22">Supervision</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Training%22">Training</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Effectiveness%22">Program Effectiveness</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s10755-025-09792-2
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0742-5627<br />1573-1758
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Postbaccalaureate programs have become essential in addressing the underrepresentation of racial/ethnic minoritized and socially disadvantaged groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduate programs. By maximizing institutional resources, which facilitate technical training, lab exposure, and specialized mentoring support, postbaccalaureate programs create a pathway for increasing the representation of people of color in STEM fields. While this may be the case, there is a dearth of literature on the lived experiences of underrepresented women of color participating in STEM postbaccalaureate programs. Moreover, descriptive accounts of women of color mentorship experiences in STEM postbaccalaureate programs are under-researched. As such, this study explored the mentorship experiences of Black and Latina women participating in a postbaccalaureate STEM program in a mid-western, research-intensive (R1), predominantly white institution (PWI). As part of a larger evaluation study of the Hot Metal Bridge (HMB) program, transcripts of past participants who identified as Black or Latina women (N = 25) were analyzed using thematic analysis. Four themes representing the experiences of Black and Latina women were generated: 1) mentor-mentee discordance, 2) mentor's commitment, 3) effective mentee-mentor communication, and 4) research supervision and training dynamics. Findings suggest that mentoring was a unique innovation within HMB, which contributed to the success of Black and Latina women pursuing STEM graduate education. Thus, mentorship should be viewed as an integral innovation of postbaccalaureate STEM programs for women of color.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1496708
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1496708
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s10755-025-09792-2
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 28
        StartPage: 2241
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Graduate Study
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mentors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: African American Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hispanic American Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Womens Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Females
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Predominantly White Institutions
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Conflict
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Persistence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Faculty
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Communication
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Supervision
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Training
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Effectiveness
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Role of Mentoring as a Critical Innovation in Postbaccalaureate Programs Designed to Increase Representation of Women of Color in STEM Graduate Programs
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Laurenia C. Mangum
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jaime M. Booth
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Valire C. Copeland
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0742-5627
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1573-1758
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 50
            – Type: issue
              Value: 6
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Innovative Higher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1