How social norms in research labs influence STEM workforce development

To increase the size of our skilled biotechnology workforce, it is critical that we develop strategies to retain those who show interest and talent in these fields. For undergraduate students, even those who excel in their classes, it is required to work in a faculty-led research lab in order to advance into STEM graduate programs and higher-level workforce opportunities. While working in research labs, students not only learn technical skills, but also what it means to be a professional scientist working in a research team. These insights about the day-to-day interactions of the research lab also inform students’ decisions about whether they want to continue pursuing STEM careers. Faculty, however, receive little training on how to effectively manage and train students in their research labs, in part because there is limited evidence to guide recommendations. This project will draw insights from research in the workplace, focusing on organizational culture and behavior, to generate new knowledge about how lab culture and daily social and organizational practices shape students’ continued interest in STEM research and careers. This project’s findings will be shared with science faculty to improve student research training, retain talented young scientists, and advance national workforce development aims in biotechnology and beyond. The project will focus on organizational respect norms–the extent to which people convey respect for others in their work group–which reliably predict workplace experiences and outcomes but have not been studied in the context of STEM research labs. The overall aim of this project is to examine whether and how social norms related to organizational respect in research labs shape students’ research engagement and science career interests. Specifically, this project will answer three research questions: (1) To what extent do students’ perceptions of organizational respect norms in the lab predict undergraduate student research engagement and career interest? (2) What behavioral indicators within the lab shape students’ perceptions of organizational respect norms? and (3) To what degree do we observe discrepancies between faculty and student perceptions of what communicates respect in research labs, and what are the consequences of these discrepancies? To answer these questions, the project will employ a multi-phase sequential mixed methods study with a nationally representative sample of 140 faculty who direct STEM labs in biotechnology-related fields and 700 undergraduate students working in these labs. Longitudinal survey data will be collected on students’ perceptions of lab organizational respect norms and their influence on students’ research engagement and career interests over time. Follow-up interviews with students and faculty will yield rich data on the behaviors that shape students’ perceptions of respect in research labs and reveal potential discrepancies between faculty and student views of what conveys respect. Data analysis will involve systematic comparisons of data across project phases to examine the consequences of these discrepancies. Key intellectual merit contributions include a) extending organizational behavior theory to novel questions about social norms in STEM labs, with direct implications for biotechnology education and workforce development, and b) producing new empirical tools and theoretical insights to guide future research on how training environments influence participation and career choices. The plan for disseminating findings and propagating the products of this work will produce knowledge capital and student training activities will produce positive human capital impacts for STEM education research. This project is supported by NSF’s EDU Core Research (ECR) program. The ECR program emphasizes fundamental STEM education research that generates foundational knowledge in the field. Investments are made in critical areas that are essential, broad and enduring. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.