-
A Web of Support:A Critical Narrative Analysis of Black Women's Relationships in STEM Disciplines
While nearly half (40%) of Black students leave STEM disciplines, and racialized and gendered social and environmental factors play a role in STEM pathways of Black women, less known is how relationships and critical social capital facilitate undergraduate STEM success. Using a critical narrative approach, we explored how strong relationships at Spelman College helped Black women thrive in STEM degree programs at HBCUs and beyond. Findings focused on three out of 105 narratives suggest that Black women strategically created dynamic webs of support that included families, faculty, and administrators in and out of STEM disciplines, often leading to increased opportunities and a greater likelihood of persistence.
STEM, Black women, relationships, student success, social capital
[End Page 93]
There are racial and gender disparities in degree attainment and career representation in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, as Black women hold only 2.5% of all STEM–career jobs nationwide (National Science Foundation, 2019). While Black and White students enter STEM fields at similar rates, 40% of Black students leave STEM fields, compared to 29% of their White counterparts (Riegle-Crumb et al., 2019). This level of persistent inequity in degree attainment is unique to the STEM disciplines and does not exist in other disciplines (Lee & Ferrare, 2019; McGee, 2021; Riegle-Crumb et al., 2019). Black students who persist through STEM degree programs often encounter isolation and racism during their studies (McGee, 2021). Despite the constrained STEM pathways for Black students at the national level (Fletcher et al., 2021; McGee, 2021), certain institutions, such as historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), educate large numbers of Black students who go on to earn doctorates in STEM (National Science Foundation, 2021; Williams & Johnson, 2019). Of the top ten U.S. baccalaureate institutions for Black women who eventually earn science doctoral degrees, seven are HBCUs (National Science Foundation, 2021), highlighting important differences in how campus contexts prepare students for accessing and maintaining their involvement in these disciplines, a trend evidenced in empirical studies (Morton, 2021; Perna et al., 2009; Williams & Taylor, 2022). While HBCUs have found some success in helping Black students persist in STEM disciplines, these institutions enroll around 10% of all Black college students (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020). Most Black students attend predominantly White institutions (PWIs), warranting research to better understand how some HBCU practices might translate to other institution types, such as PWIs.
Gender disparities also exist in STEM educational participation and degree attainment (McGee, 2021). The number of women majoring in STEM has increased significantly over the past four decades (Pew Research Center, 2018). Although Black women exceed Black men in degree attainment (Anthony et al., 2021), they still represent a small percentage of all STEM [End Page 94] majors and remain underrepresented in many STEM professions (McGee & Bentley, 2017; Pew Research Center, 2018). Social and environmental factors such as societal beliefs, stereotypes, and learning environments contribute to underrepresentation, with an accelerating decline in representation at the graduate–education level and again while transitioning into the workforce (Hill et al., 2010; McGee, 2021; Pew Research Center, 2018). Black women hold identities at the nexus of these STEM disparities and experience what is characterized as the double bind hindrance (Malcom et al., 1976) to STEM pathways, where Black women are both excluded from STEM education spaces and often face career derailment even if they do succeed (Charleston et al., 2014; Ireland et al., 2018; McGee, 2021; Ong et al., 2011). Thus, scholars highlight the need for intersectional qualitative scholarship, which exclusively samples and disaggregates data on Black women's unique STEM experiences, which are not necessarily replicated with other groups (Ireland et al., 2018).
Contributing to scholarship that makes Black women in STEM "unhidden figures" (Ireland et al., 2018, p. 234), the purpose of this study is to understand Black women's experiences in STEM environments, with a focus on institutional actors and relationships that supported student opportunities and success both at the HBCU and in their subsequent transitions to a PWI for either dual degree programs or graduate school. Research on the role of gatekeepers in STEM disciplines often focuses on introductory STEM courses that often "weed out" underprepared students from pursuing their intended major (Gasiewski et al., 2012; Hoffman et al., 2010; Scott et al., 2017), or on how certain institutions, such as community colleges, can be a gateway to higher education for underserved communities (Dowd, 2007).
We ask: How do HBCU alumnae describe their relationships as enhancing or impeding access to STEM opportunities? After analyzing data on academic experiences from a larger study with 105 Black women alumnae across five states, we focused on those participants who earned undergraduate degrees in STEM. A narrative approach was necessary for a more robust understanding of how Black women alumnae structured their support networks within particular environments. While many studies about support emphasize relationships (e.g., student–faculty mentoring) across institutional environments (Byars-Winston et al., 2015; Griffin et al., 2010; Luedke et al., 2019; McCoy et al., 2015), our early analysis suggested that a deeper, narrative analysis of how alumnae activated support within a particular campus environment was warranted. As such, we could reveal ways that the environment and the particular individuals worked together to structure support networks. After analyzing the larger data on STEM graduates, we selected three participants who graduated with STEM undergraduate degrees from the same HBCU (Spelman College) within a similar period.
We present a narrative analysis of the support experiences that Black alumnae identified to demonstrate how campus environment and relationships [End Page 95] work together to provide support. First, we show that relationships were positive, affirming, and interconnected within the HBCU environment. The web of support often propelled Black women towards STEM opportunities outside of the HBCU (e.g., graduate programs at PWIs). Through the narrative analysis, we argue that alumnae persistence in STEM was related to a dynamic web of support created by multiple institutional actors and roles. Yet, the type of support and their association with STEM disciplines mattered to how connected alumnae felt to their academic programs. While all the narratives suggest the importance of an interconnected web of support from faculty, peers, and family that often connected to the institution, when such support was strategically built with faculty, administrators, and staff within STEM disciplines, there appeared to be a greater chance of student persistence in those disciplines.
Literature Review
Black women in STEM disciplines face numerous challenges (Fletcher et al., 2021; Joseph et al., 2017; McGee & Bentley, 2017; McGee, 2021; Morton & Parsons, 2018). These challenges include a lack of institutional support, racial microaggressions, discriminatory experiences from faculty, and low self-efficacy, or the idea that a student has minimal confidence in their abilities (Estrada et al., 2016; Joseph, 2012; Morton & Parsons, 2018; Suarez-Belcazar et al., 2003). In addition, alienation, isolation, and invisibility are common experiences of Black women in STEM disciplines (Charleston et al., 2014; Ireland et al., 2018; McGee, 2021), especially those attending PWIs (Leath & Chavous, 2018; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016).
Individual and institutional barriers facilitate the double bind phenomenon of excluding and undermining Black women in STEM spaces and careers (Ireland et al., 2018). Hostile institutional and campus climates, cultural misalignment with programs, stereotype threat, and experiences with microaggressions are key factors for disparities in STEM retention (Ireland et al., 2017; Ong et al., 2011; Sue et al., 2008; Steele, 1992). The systematic review by Ireland and colleagues (2018) of 60 empirical studies on Black women in STEM revealed that STEM identity, interest, confidence, persistence, ability perceptions, and support structures all facilitate the visibility of Black women in STEM spaces. They encouraged researchers to take an intersectional theoretical and methodological approach to explore the commonality and within-group differences of Black women's experiences in STEM disciplines. Likewise, Ireland et al. (2018) encouraged programs to utilize culturally relevant pedagogy and curriculum and to attend to the psychological needs of Black women to mitigate commonly reported negative social climates in STEM departments. The necessity of focusing on structural environments and campus climates cannot be underscored enough. For instance, Ong and colleagues (2011) [End Page 96] systematic literature review of undergraduate and graduate experiences of STEM Women of Color found that structural environments and STEM climate remains the most common barrier to STEM persistence for Women of Color.
A growing body of research highlights the structural and environmental differences between Black women who study STEM at HBCUs and those attending PWIs (Charleston et al., 2014; King & Pringle, 2019). In general, HBCUs are shown to have more supportive and inclusive campuses, meeting students' educational and social needs (Ong et al., 2011; Whitten et al., 2003; Williams & Taylor, 2022; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016). Ong et al. (2011) review of 116 journal articles identified four key features of this supportive HBCU environment that contributes to more desirable student experiences and outcomes (i.e., openness to alternative routes to and through STEM majors, lack of stigma for remediation, high expectations for success, and healthy relationships between students and faculty). Student–faculty interactions, including mentoring, are a vital component of STEM persistence, with HBCU faculty more frequently creating positive and supportive relationships with students (McCoy et al., 2017; Perna et al., 2009; Williams & Johnson, 2019; Williams & Taylor, 2022). HBCUs have been shown to provide rich undergraduate research opportunities as pathways into STEM majors and careers (Morton, 2021; Williams & Taylor, 2022). As HBCUs are more likely to have Faculty of Color1 represented in STEM departments, this compositional (i.e., demographic) diversity may also decrease feelings of isolation for underrepresented students, maintaining persistence within the STEM pathway (Johnson & Winfield, 2022; Solórzano, 1995; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016). Overall, scholarship on HBCU climates presents a more positive and supportive environment for Black women than PWIs (Commodore et al., 2018; Johnson & Winfield, 2022; Nguyen et al., 2021; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2017). For example, in one study using the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) instrument to examine teaching practices and the quality of student–faculty interactions, the findings suggest that interactions of Black women with faculty were of higher quality with consistent feedback and discussion of the material with the faculty member outside of class (Williams & Johnson, 2019).
Faculty mentoring, sometimes framed as gatekeeping, can have important negative or positive implications for STEM success and persistence (Byars-Winston et al., 2015; Griffin et al., 2010; Luedke et al., 2019; McCoy et al., 2015). Faculty gatekeeping has a long tradition in the social sciences, especially in social work (Elpers & Fitzgerald, 2013; Grady, 2009; Moore & Urwin, 1991), [End Page 97] and considers those who provide access to a particular discipline (Montgomery, 2020). We define gatekeepers as those who use power to guard or promote access to opportunities. For instance, Black women often report a lack of support from faculty and staff (Commodore et al., 2018; Stewart, 2017), particularly in STEM degree programs where they remain underrepresented (Charleston et al., 2014). Faculty and staff with the power to include or exclude students in STEM degree programs may serve as gatekeepers, as they hold the keys to opportunities in that discipline. Pathway support to guide students toward success (e.g., peer study groups) could be led by many and can be more than just those with the power to guard or promote access to STEM disciplines (e.g., faculty outside of STEM, administrators).
Additionally, gatekeeping could be a positive support that provides access, even though the term sometimes has a negative connotation of someone having the power to impede access (Gasiewski et al., 2012). While student–faculty relationships are particularly important for Black women in STEM disciplines (Commodore et al., 2018; McCoy et al., 2017; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016), little research has been conducted on how the process of gatekeeping might shape Black women's successful navigation of STEM disciplines. Also, some STEM students report positive peer mentoring when faculty relationships are absent, but more research is needed (Anderson et al., 2019; Rockinson-Szapkiw & Wendt, 2020).
In comparison, STEM experiences at PWIs are shown to exhibit cold and chilly climates, where Black women experience daily racial and gendered discrimination and invisibility, leading to experiences of isolation and lack of support (Leath & Chavous, 2018; McGee, 2021; Ong et al., 2011; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016). In these spaces, Black students, particularly Black women, frequently encounter structural racism, sexism, and bias via stereotypes, racial microaggressions, assumptions about intellectual abilities, and social exclusion (Charleston et al., 2014; Leath & Chavos, 2018; McGee & Bentley, 2017: McGee & Martin, 2011). In particular, microaggressions from PWI peers and faculty, coupled with avoidance and isolation, lowers a sense of belonging and self-efficacy by Black women (Dortch & Patel, 2017). In HBCU and PWI spaces, faculty and peer support and mentoring are crucial to persistence (Espinosa, 2011).
For those Black women who graduate with STEM degrees from HBCUs, the transition experience from HBCU to PWI STEM environments is of particular importance, as many Black women in STEM often transition from supportive undergraduate HBCU environments into chillier PWI environments for graduate education, and this represents a significant decrease in retention for Women of Color in STEM (Alexander & Bodenhorn, 2015; Joseph, 2012; Ong et al., 2011). Other studies found that students transitioning from an HBCU undergraduate institution to a PWI graduate school experienced social and academic difficulties, isolation, and reduced academic [End Page 98] efficacy (Alexander & Hermann, 2016; MacLachlan, 2006). One qualitative study found that not only did Black students experience a difficult transition from a supportive HBCU to a chillier PWI, but the strategies and behaviors that worked in one environment no longer worked in another (Joseph, 2012). This often forced students to quickly, and sometimes drastically, alter their behaviors and expectations to succeed (Joseph, 2012). Students may utilize bridge programming (Johnson, 2016), social relationships, and support structures differently, depending on the program environment. Scholars are utilizing intersectional approaches in qualitative research (see Esposito & Evans-Winters, 2021) and considering the role of racism and sexism on the academic experiences of Black women.
Limited scholarship accounts for the interaction between individual and relational resources and interventions. Understudied is how Black women use social relationships as assets in their respective disciplines (e.g., how they build social capital). While there are studies that qualitatively compare and analyze the support experiences of Black women who persisted, as well as those who were pushed out of STEM spaces (Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Joseph et al., 2017), less focus has been on the processes, strategies, and long-term impact of those social relationships in STEM spaces for Black women. This study addresses several gaps in the literature. First, we provide a critical qualitative narrative analysis highlighting how Black women cultivated critical social capital in STEM spaces. Second, we analyze how relationships work at gatekeeping Black women's success in their academic programs.
Theoretical Framework
We used critical social capital as our theoretical framework for this analysis, or the idea that relationships from one's background can become assets in future contexts (Ginwright, 2007). We used critical social capital to explore how relationships with peers, faculty, staff, families, and communities became assets for STEM degree alumnae. Relationships, or the absence of relationships, can either facilitate or impede progress in degree programs (Elpers & Fitzgerald, 2013; Grady, 2009; Moore & Urwin, 1991). Thus, we contemplated how alumnae activated their social capital (e.g., relationships, obligations, social ties) within their degree programs in ways that appeared to support them.
Traditional conceptions of social capital focus on actual or perceived group membership and how social connections, trust, or obligations are assets in a particular social context to influence how resources such as credentials, property, or opportunities are utilized (Bourdieu, 1979). Critical social capital builds on the aforementioned social capital conceptions to focus on asset-based assumptions of youth to intentionally engage in collective and community-oriented civic engagement (Ginwright, 2007). Specifically, critical [End Page 99] social capital serves as a theoretical framework to center racial identity, socio-political awareness, and civic engagement to cultivate empowerment through positive cultural and racial identity, collective social consciousness, and trust (Baldridge, 2014; Christens, 2012; Khalifa et al., 2016). Critical social capital emphasizes agency (Ginwright, 2007) and offers a collective idea of how social relationships can be used in social spaces. Critical social capital can also inform education research and inquiry by reconsidering how students harness the power of community by utilizing assets of their identity and background, such as families and neighborhoods (Luedke et al., 2019).
While most empirical research on critical social capital centers on community spaces with youth, critical social capital is an ideal framework for higher education, through the lens of civic engagement. Civic engagement has remained a central purpose of higher education since its inception (Hendrickson et al., 2013), and studies show that undergraduate college students who are civically engaged have a range of positive outcomes, including a greater sense of belonging and increased self-esteem (Flanagan & Blundick, 2011; Flanagan & Levine, 2010). However, research has less frequently explored the connections between critical social capital and how relationships convert into assets in STEM disciplines. After early analysis of the data on academic experiences (see below), relationships emerged as an important area of further analysis. We employed critical social capital as an analytic tool to connect the data to larger social structures. The connection of critical social capital to power, prior social structures, and empowerment was also a congruent framework for our critical narrative inquiry approach to the original study (Jones et al., 2013; Winkle-Wagner et al., 2019). Thus, critical social capital informed the research question, analysis, interpretation, and our thinking about connecting the findings to larger social structural ideas.
Methodology and Methods
The data comes from a larger critical oral history project, a form of critical narrative inquiry, about Black women alumnae reflections on college success across a 60–year period. The larger project included 105 Black women alumnae. Esposito and Evans-Winter (2021) frame narrative inquiry as a methodology and a method of data collection and analysis. Narrative inquiry emphasizes understanding the lived experience where the participants are embodied stories shaped by larger sociocultural ideas (Esposito & Evans-Winter, 2021). As explained in this analysis, we aimed to delve more deeply into a smaller set of participants who shared a common experience in STEM disciplines at the same HBCU during the same period. Narrative inquiry can include multiple approaches such as life history, oral history, biography, and autoethnography (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Jones et al., 2013). We used a critical narrative inquiry approach (Pino Gavidia & Adu, 2022) in that [End Page 100] our study was rooted in critical theory (critical social capital in this case), highlighted the experiences of a historically marginalized population (Black women), emphasized structural inequalities and how to remedy them, and allowed us to think more deeply about time, context, and social structures (Carspecken, 1996; Pino Gavidia & Adu, 2022; Winkle-Wagner et al., 2019). The research question that guided this study was: How do HBCU alumnae describe their relationships as enhancing or impeding access to STEM opportunities?
Participants and Data Collection
We utilized criterion, chain, and snowball sampling for the larger study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Five researchers collected data in five states (Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Detroit, Michigan; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Lincoln/Omaha, Nebraska) for the larger project. We chose the selected areas because they all had concentrated Black populations. The principal investigator identified a gatekeeper from each area and asked them to participate in the project data collection and analysis. The gatekeepers also played a significant role in identifying participant "chains" for the project, where one person would help to recruit others in their social circles (e.g., churches, employment, or community organizations). The larger critical oral history project included 105 participants who: (a) identified as African American or Black; (b) female; and (c) graduated from college during a 60–year period (1954–2014).
While the larger study included 105 participants, after analysis of the full dataset for this phase of the study, we engaged in purposeful sampling (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) to identify participants from the larger study, focusing specifically on narratives from STEM graduates (n = 15). We then selected three participants for the narrative approach who identified as Black alumnae from the same HBCU (Spelman College) and majored in STEM disciplines around a similar period (Table 1). We chose to focus on the longer narratives of these three participants to better contextualize their experiences within a particular institutional context and time, which is congruent with our critical narrative approach that attempts to connect participants' lives to larger sociopolitical time periods and social structures (Esposito & Evans-Winter, 2021). We reanalyzed the data specifically for the STEM graduates before selecting the three narratives presented. Wells (2011) emphasized the importance of focusing on an in-depth analysis of narratives rather than a more generalizing analysis of a larger data pool. We focused specifically on these participants because they pursued their undergraduate degrees during the same period (1997–2005) and graduated from the same institution with their undergraduate degrees. Thus, they were more likely to share some experiences and institutional norms. Using a critical narrative approach allowed us to: (a) better demonstrate the interconnected supportive relationships [End Page 101]
Sociodemographic Characteristics of Participants
across peers, faculty, and family; (b) demonstrate how the institutional environment may work to support connections between relationships (e.g., connecting family and academic disciplines with faculty and students); and (c) show how alumnae who graduated from the same institution during the same period made these connections between various supportive relationships and the campus environment.
Critical narrative researchers often view social identities as narratives and embrace the idea that people construct identities through storytelling (Esposito & Evans-Winter, 2021; Riessman, 2008). The data collection team, which included the principal investigator and five gatekeepers, asked the participants to share stories about their experiences as students in STEM disciplines. Data collection consisted of spoken and written life stories (Atkinson, 1998). Team members prompted participants to use the metaphor of "book chapters" for the significant moments of their college careers and reflect on where the "book started and finished." The participants in this phase shared their life stories orally in their chosen chronology. The interviews lasted 90–180 minutes. In addition to the metaphor prompt, the research team conducting the data collection had a series of prompts for follow-up questions about relationships with peers, family, and faculty.
Data Analysis
The principal investigator used NVivo (qualitative coding software) to manage the data. Data were coded in the larger project using a codebook initially developed by the principal investigator after a six-month inductive coding process (Carspecken, 1996, 2013). The steps of analysis in this article are summarized in Table 2. [End Page 102]
We first pulled all data coded in NVivo coding software related to "academic experiences" and "STEM disciplines." Then, we analyzed all the data on academic experiences (150 pages), using the codebook for the larger project allowing common experiences to emerge across narratives. The early analysis of academic experiences data revealed that relationships and support were an important part of STEM degree program experiences. At that point, we incorporated critical social capital (Ginwright, 2007) into this particular analysis. Then, the current research team engaged in another round of analysis where each member individually coded the data in the participants' words (low-level coding) to create a codebook that related specifically to "academic experiences" within HBCUs. We repeated the analysis and dialogue about the process multiple times in an effort of triangulation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). After commonalities emerged among participants in STEM disciplines, we then focused our next round of analysis specifically on the full narratives of the 15 STEM discipline alumnae, considering how each individually crafted their support networks: (a) coding for social capital (supportive relationships, and whether they overlapped, benefits of support); (b) writing a narrative of the support network for each participant; and (c) crafting a story of critical social capital for each participant.
We found important commonalities within HBCUs that differed from the PWI alumnae. Different experiences in HBCUs and PWIs emerged from that round of analysis, suggesting that we should focus more on these institutional types specifically. We proceeded with a separate round of analysis on these three narratives (low-level coding of the narratives again). Once the research team identified numerous quotes related to the gatekeeping concept, we then used another data reduction technique (see Neumann, 2009) that guided the last round of analysis. Throughout the analysis, we engaged in peer debriefing (Carspecken, 1996; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) until reaching a consensus.
Trustworthiness
We address how we developed trustworthiness with the data and the analysis process to be theoretically and methodologically congruent in our critical narrative research approach (Jones et al., 2013). The principal investigator and her team of four gatekeepers from the larger study (several of whom are HBCU graduates) were responsible for the data collection, resulting in rich, extensive narratives from the participants. To develop trustworthiness (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) and to address any potential inconsistencies of multiple interviews and coders in the data, the data collection research team and the principal investigator asked the participants to engage in member checking (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), checking their life story transcripts for accuracy. We also triangulated the data with the literature. Finally, during our data analysis, we invited scholars familiar with the research to engage with the data as a form of peer debriefing (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). [End Page 103]
Summary of Data Collection and Analysis
Positionality
The data collection team was comprised of three Black women, a multiracial woman, and a White woman. The data collection team had weekly meetings to discuss how our identities related to the participants and how our racial phenotypes (i.e., complexions) likely informed trust with participants. The current research team includes tenured faculty and graduate students within educational research whose collective scholarship utilizes critical approaches for addressing racial inequity in higher education. As critical qualitative scholars, we must acknowledge and examine how our work perpetuates or disrupts current systems of inequity. The analysis team for this article included two Black women, a Black man, and a White woman.
The first author is a Black woman and doctoral candidate who studies the socio-relational components of student success, especially for Black and Indigenous women. She led the analysis for this article, but did not interact with participants. The second author identifies as a tenured faculty administrator and a Black man. As a tenured faculty member, he consistently asks how his scholarship, particularly this study, contributes (or not) to Black women's success in STEM disciplines. He was involved in analysis but not on the data collection team. The third author is the project's principal investigator, identifies as a White woman, and is a tenured full professor. She conceptualized, led, and initiated the study, led the data collection team, collected two-thirds of all interviews, and interacted with all participants during the project. She [End Page 104] has reflected extensively in her writing on what it means to conduct cross-racial data collection and analysis as a White woman (the challenges and possibilities of it) and was also involved in the analysis and writing for this article. The fourth author is a Black woman and doctoral student whose work centers on the experiences of Black Christian-identifying women in graduate school. She did not interact directly with participants and was involved in the early analysis of this publication.
Collaboratively we discussed how our positionalities intersected with the data. We had numerous conversations about ways our backgrounds may have influenced our approach to data analysis and interpretation. The principal investigator, who had interacted with the participants over several years, often added other details to the participants' stories based on knowing the participants in a more personal way. Since none of the team members attended an HBCU, we continually asked close colleagues with more personal HBCU experience for insight into the complexities of those institutions. As a team, our heterogeneous racial, gender, and educational experiences comprising both marginalized and privileged identities gave us a blended insider–outsider status (Dwyer & Buckle, 2009). It allowed for diverse perspectives when analyzing the data and additional insights into the complexities of power and status within higher education. The spirit of the overall project was to elevate Black women's lives, both in the narratives and throughout the research processes, as an ongoing commitment to support past, current, and future Black women in academia.
Findings
The findings emphasize the role of relationships and how participants crafted their pathways via a "web of support" rather than relying on a single person for connection. Within the Spelman College STEM environments or while connected to other successful women, participants more readily utilized critical social capital (Ginwright, 2007) to cultivate vertical and horizontal elements of their web of support that provided them with institutional and program resources to overcome academic challenges or further develop within their field. This section offers multiple narratives of STEM alumnae, reflective of the various web of relationships that formed pathways for students to persist through their STEM degree programs. We present three narratives below, which emerged as the following claims about how alumnae built a web of support to persevere in their STEM degree programs:
1. A web of family, faculty, and peer support where one support network builds to the next (Lisa A.'s story)
2. Connecting community, family, and faculty support (Nadia's story)
3. Embracing the HBCU legacy of nurturing excellence to reinforce a web of support and asset-based empowerment (Lisa D.'s story) [End Page 105]
The narratives include three Spelman College alumnae, a private women's liberal arts HBCU in Atlanta, Georgia, that is part of the Atlanta University Consortium (AUC). Twenty-five percent of Spelman graduates earn degrees in STEM disciplines, and they are considered the country's leading producer of Black women who complete Ph.D.'s. in STEM (SMASH, 2022; Spelman College, 2017). The participants from Spelman graduated within a similar period (the late 1900s/early 2000s) and were involved in STEM degree programs.
Building From One Form of Support to the Next: Lisa A.'s Story
Lisa A. connected her Spelman experiences to her family's long history of college graduates. Her maternal grandparents, New York University and Columbia University graduates in the 1950s, strongly encouraged her to attend college and to find faculty to support her. Lisa A.'s brother is a historically Black Florida A&M University alumnus. When Lisa A. finished high school, she remembered:
My family took a trip with me, and we did the college tour thing. I have an older brother, he's seven years older than I am; and both my parents, we all went to Atlanta just to preview all the campuses. I enjoyed touring every single one of them. But the one thing that stuck in the back of my mind was after we finished everything, my brother came up to me and he said, "Lisa, I think you should go to Spelman. Because that's the only place where I think they will really take care of you."
Lisa A. relied on her strong web of family support from her parents, brother, and grandparents as she entered Spelman College, she followed her brother's advice, connecting her family support and creating a faculty-integrated web of support in her physics and biomedical engineering program. Spelman offered a cooperative program with Georgia Tech, a PWI, which Lisa attended during the final year to take the last series of courses to prepare her for graduate programs. At the time of the interview, Lisa A. was in the final stages of writing her dissertation in a Georgia Tech chemistry Ph.D. program. Lisa contemplated her experience with the faculty at Spelman, identifying faculty as opening the gates to her discipline. She remembered how she became aware of the cooperative program between Spelman and Georgia Tech, saying, "Professors cared enough to ask you, 'What are you doing? What do you want to do? Why don't you try this?'" Lisa A. shared another example where supportive relationships with faculty provided her with a viable option to complete a research requirement:
As a part of the honors program in the chemistry department, I needed to do research. But it's my junior year, and I haven't been doing research. So, what am I supposed to do? Everybody's already selected their students and groups are full and things like that. [End Page 106]
Lisa A. noticed that others seemed to know what to do and how valuable it was that the department chair noticed that there was a concern and for that faculty member to help her:
Once I found that out, I'm scrambling. That's how I think maybe the chair at that time knew it was a situation and she told me about that program. I've never done research. I want to do something. She was like, "well, you could do this over the summer." Which was good because every summer, I was working, but I wasn't doing anything in my field. So that's how I ended up at Georgia Tech.
Internship coordinators and academic advisors are typically responsible for ensuring students meet program requirements such as summer research. However, both are noticeably absent from her recollection of support. She instead highlights how other faculty (the department chair) stepped in to connect Lisa to STEM opportunities at a nearby institution. The academic department chair played a vital role in getting the program on Lisa A.'s radar, helping her persist. Not only was Lisa A. made aware of an opportunity, but one that was relevant to her field and would help her progress. She recalled another encounter with a faculty member at Spelman who insisted that she apply for research internships at a conference:
[One professor] made me take my resume and walk around that conference and introduce myself to people and pass out my resume. I was so embarrassed. I mean, I did it. But I just felt really embarrassed. But it was a good thing.
Her professor's advice led to future STEM opportunities:
So, I ended up meeting my [Ph.D.] advisor at Georgia Tech. He was moving to Georgia Tech… So, I end up meeting with him. And he was like, "Oh yeah, you can come and do some research with me." And I was like, "Did [my professor] just force this man to give me a job?" I just felt bad. Anyway, in July, I started doing research with him.
Throughout her interview, Lisa A. referenced needing to learn or understand different hidden curricula in her program and overall journey. Equally important in Lisa A.'s narrative is her willingness to accept critical social capital even though she initially felt uncomfortable and "embarrassed" to accept help. While Lisa A. had a great web of support from Spelman, who reached out, pushed her, and initiated helping her in different ways, she also struggled with her STEM identity and seeking help. Lisa reflected on the relationship differences between a single-gender HBCU and a co-ed PWI environment. When asked how she thought about her identities in each institution, she considered the following: [End Page 107]
Once I got to Georgia Tech, I ended up doing a lot of events with the Women's Resource Center. So, they would have these weekly lunches for women. And we would kind of discuss issues. And so, as women, we all had the same issues. As Black women, it was just a little extra nuance to it. But it was just the same kind of thing.
Lisa A. identified how she gravitated towards campus-wide women-identifying support spaces at Georgia Tech. Here, the web of support at Georgia Tech shifted away from her faculty and lab group and towards the women's group on campus. In these groups, she could discuss how it felt to be the only woman and the only Black woman in her lab group. In addition to this support shift outside her Georgia Tech department, Lisa A. recalled new challenges with male classmates that she did not experience at Spelman:
I might not be as aggressive about answering certain questions or making sure that it gets said. So, when it's time for the credit to be given for who said it, this guy is going to get it because he's like, "Oh, I know…" I'm not going to fight you to say that or whatever. So, it was that kind of thing. And I certainly didn't have to worry about that at Spelman because it was rare for me to have guys in my class. And then in the sciences, maybe the types of guys were different when they were there. They were trying to be the guy who was taking over the class. Whereas that might be the case in some other settings if that makes sense.
In the PWI setting, Lisa A. spoke to the challenges of learning alongside the overwhelming number of particularly competitive men in the class. The demographics eventually changed how she engaged in the program, sometimes choosing to abate her brilliance, withhold knowledge, or disengage. Over time, Lisa A. realized that it is okay to not always have the answers and to seek out what is needed to persist and succeed. She considered:
I struggled a lot with that whole thing about imposter syndrome and learning how to ask for help. So having identified those things, now I make it a point to say, "I don't know." Sometimes here [in her Ph.D. institution], I do it just to be cheeky. Whatever the question is, the first answer is, "I don't know." And then, I'll actually answer the question. Even stuff that you do know. I've not looked at that for however so many odd years. So, I don't remember it. But I could go figure it out. So no, I don't know, but I can go find the answer. And that's okay. And as women, I think that's important because I feel like that prevented me from taking care of myself. It's okay for you to ask for help. It has nothing to do with you as a person, as a woman, as a Black person, or as a Black woman. Or you as a wife.
Regarding how she resisted imposter syndrome, or the idea that others might find out she was incapable (Clance & Imes, 1978), Lisa continued, acknowledging that all students need help and should not pretend to be strong all the time. While Lisa A. had early family support and solid faculty [End Page 108] support at Spelman College, and later had peer support in her Ph.D. program, faculty support was noticeably absent from Lisa's description of her doctoral program. She continued to refer to her Spelman College faculty as mentors, and she was still involved in Spelman alumnae groups, so it is likely that the relationships may have persisted. Likely linked to the bridge built by the Spelman faculty into the chemistry program at Georgia Tech, Lisa A. remained in her discipline and on track to earn her Ph.D. She reframed her inner dialogue around asking for help and detached from asking for help as a value judgment of her race or gender. Additionally, Lisa A. continued to draw on familial and peer support despite the absence of faculty support in her academic discipline during her Ph.D. program.
Critical Social Capital and a Web of Support for Lisa A
Lisa A. activated her support network by building from one form of support to the next. She began with her family, then built faculty support at Spelman based on her family's recommendations. Finally, she built peer support in her graduate program. While all forms of support might have been working simultaneously, it seemed for Lisa A. that she built from one support network to another rather than overlapping them. She began with familial support from her grandparents, parents, and brother, which helped connect her to her undergraduate institution, Spelman College. Once she enrolled at Spelman, multiple faculty members offered an essential gateway into her academic discipline. As such, she was able to build a web of support comprised of well-connected faculty in her discipline and even leverage internships and future summer internship opportunities outside of Spelman. For example, a Spelman faculty member connected Lisa A. to the summer research program at Georgia Tech.
Important to her narrative is that Lisa's institution was a small, private, liberal arts HBCU. Faculty were likely more accessible because there were fewer students to support at Spelman. But it is also very likely that the HBCU environment, and the institution's ethos, played a role in the active ways faculty engaged and supported students. For example, the resources offered by the faculty appear to be freely given, even without Lisa A. asking for help; she did not have to change her mode of engagement to fit into the environment. The Spelman faculty connected Lisa A. to the PWI faculty, who became mentors in her Ph.D. program. It could very well be that because of the supportive faculty that Lisa A. encountered at her HBCU, she remained in that discipline through her Ph.D. program because she did infer that those mentoring relationships from Spelman persisted.
At the PWI, Lisa A. seemed to turn to peers outside of the discipline for support, deemphasizing the local faculty role in her support network. It could be that Lisa A. found the faculty in her Ph.D. program less supportive or inaccessible due to her increasing impostor syndrome and her realization of how [End Page 109] few women were in her discipline. One important lesson Lisa A. garnered from her Ph.D. program was asking for help and activating her support system. Lisa's enactment of her critical social capital, which built upon with familial, faculty, and peer support as she continued in her STEM discipline, may have helped her to persist and start a STEM-related career.
The Necessity of Connecting Community, Family, and Faculty Support: Nadia's Story
Nadia earned an undergraduate degree in chemistry in the 2000s. She then completed a master's degree from Old Dominion University, a large doctoral research PWI in Virginia, shortly after completing her bachelor's degree at Spelman. When the principal investigator met Nadia in Chicago, she was enrolled in a Ph.D. program in a social sciences discipline at Loyola University, a large private religious-affiliated liberal arts PWI in Chicago, Illinois, a degree she has since completed. Nadia reflected first on the relationships she built and the mentors who helped her succeed in her degree programs.
I can start with my childhood mentors. I would credit them for putting me on the path for wanting to be educationally and spiritually grounded. They were through my church, but they had a youth mentoring program called [Achieve] program. [The mentors] were actually at my wedding a month ago. But their program allowed inner-city children to see different things around us… things we probably would not have been privy to. For that, I am forever grateful because they definitely took us on conferences, and etiquette classes, and public speaking classes, and things that just kind of created a desire to want to do better and present a better self for ourselves, not just for other people. As I do my journey, I have to say that they were the foundation for that mentorship example.
Nadia also recalled how informal and formal mentorship shaped her undergraduate STEM program experiences: "In college, I admired the vice president. She was not my direct mentor. But just being a mom of three, trying to finish her Ph.D. And she did it and she's a tenured faculty member. It can be done." Nadia elaborated on how seeing other Women of Color in faculty and leadership positions shaped her beliefs about her ability to succeed:
You might hear some of the trauma stories. People who are childless and depressed. But I've seen in my own eyes that it can be done. I look at my current advisor here at Loyola and she's also a Woman of Color. I'm very blessed to be able to have Women of Color who see my potential, who also know that I am destined to do something probably bigger than I can even imagine for myself. They want to make that happen because they see that there is a void and there is a need, and there's not enough representation. [End Page 110]
Nadia elaborated on how she continued to rely on her master's mentor and her Ph.D. advisor for support and encouragement, "Especially at the professor level. It's encouraging to know that I can tap into my master's [degree] mentor. Or you know, the relationship that I'm fostering right now with my current advisor, to have that support and that encouragement."
She ruminated on the differences between the three institutions she attended for her undergraduate, master's, and Ph.D. degrees:
They're both two different experiences from Spelman. Where I can look to my left, look to my front, look to my back, and I can see my sisters and I can see someone that looks like me, whose story may be similar to mine. I think that experience by itself, it empowers you to a whole different level. I don't know if I would be the same person I am today if I went to a different institution for undergrad. Because that experience alone, like I said, just shaped and contributed to shaping this person today. I think I have a different level of comfort because I already got my foundation. I've already defined for myself, who I was, and what I wanted out of life.
Nadia was able to use the "foundation" of her family and then connect that foundation to mentors at Spelman and then within her Ph.D. program. She described the common factor in her support network as primarily comprised of Black women in her undergraduate and graduate programs. Nadia reflected on the differences between an HBCU and a PWI in her experience:
To be put into a majority environment when I am in the minority, I still feel empowered, and I still feel like I have a voice and I still feel like my voice matters. I don't feel threatened. Whereas I've interacted with some of my other Women of Color friends who went to predominantly White schools for undergrad or all through. And it's a whole different thing. They feel isolated. They feel different. I don't have that feeling. But I think that's greatly contributed to the empowering support that I received from my undergrad experience.
Having attended Spelman and cultivated the sisterhood and support she carried to graduate school, Nadia felt empowered and ready to enter the PWIs she attended for her graduate degrees. It seemed important to Nadia to point out that she saw other Women of Color who had attended PWIs for their undergraduate degree struggle differently with finding their voice and dealing with isolation. She asserted the importance of building an empowering foundation, comfort, and the sense that she and her voice mattered. She seemed to take the experience of empowerment at Spelman into the PWI. Additionally, Nadia noted that she could identify a Black woman as her mentor in her doctoral program. [End Page 111]
Critical Social Capital and Nadia's Story
When she was young in her community, Nadia started building her critical social capital (Ginwright, 2007). She carried those relationships into her undergraduate degree program at her HBCU, activating an overlapping support system. She noted that at her HBCU, not only was she encouraged by faculty to complete her degree in a physical sciences discipline, but she considered a primary leader of the institution, the Spelman vice-president at that time, to be a mentor. The faculty and the administrators helped offer important gateways into STEM disciplines and college success more generally for Nadia. While Nadia did not pursue a long-term career in STEM, her doctoral program was in the social sciences; she did draw support from her STEM experience at Spelman.
Nadia noted that most of her mentors across degree programs were Women of Color, and this was a testament to how she experienced Women of Color as assets to her and her career. Because Nadia's primary mentors were Women of Color, these mentors may have helped buffer some of the culture shock she experienced in transitioning from an HBCU for her undergraduate degree to navigating PWIs for her master's and Ph.D. programs. Nadia also recalled the importance of being educated first at an HBCU, where she saw many people who looked like her and viewed her peers as "sisters." She took this strength and support she built in those relationships at Spelman with her into the PWIs she later attended.
Embracing HBCUs Legacy of Nurturing Excellence: Lisa D.'s Story
At the time of her interview in Chicago, Lisa D. worked as an adjunct science professor after completing graduate work in engineering. Lisa D. had been exposed to Black excellence at an early age:
I would start with my maternal grandparents. Education from a very early age was pretty much an expectation. It was supported. It was pushed. They were pretty much saying, "This is the door to your future." And so, my grandparents, my maternal grandparents, are from the mid-central Florida area. And they both were educated, college-educated. And then, they went on in their thirties to get graduate degrees. My grandfather went to school first. And at that time, they weren't educating many Blacks from the South. Both of them went to New York, but he went first. He went to NYU and graduated. I think it was 1952, with a master's degree. And my grandmother went to Columbia a few years later and graduated with her master's degree. Both of them were in education. My grandfather ended up being a principal. And then my grandmother was a teacher. So, from there, they birthed my mother. And she ended up meeting my father in college. And so, my father comes from a blue-collar family. But again, still very much, education is key to your future. And then they discovered, I was smart. Very, very smart. [End Page 112]
Lisa D. cultivated her web of support early, through her grandparents, family, and community, emphasizing the importance of being educated in a Black space. She remembered:
I just started getting a lot of attention. I was put into gifted programs. Accelerated learning programs. All these things. I grew up in a neighborhood, all Black, but all educated people. So, it was a very middle, upper-middle-class community. We had a judge, one of the first Black federal judges in the South. He was in our neighborhood. He's still there. We had doctors, prominent doctors in the city. Black doctors that is! For Black people! We had principals. We had teachers. All of that was, that's the community I grew up in. So, education was, you're going to college, no question. It was more about where are you going.
Lisa D. built her success through her community's long legacy of Black accomplishments. Notably, she knew she needed to build her roots in Black educational spaces.
I continued on through high school, I was consistently in honors and AP courses and everything. They want you to go to Harvard, they want you to go to, like, Stanford. Especially some of my mother's White friends. The ones who knew about me. Most of the people in my neighborhood were educated at HBCUs. And so, I was like, you know, these people are doing well in their lives. I can always go to those type of [White] schools for grad school if I chose to do that. But I still want that Black experience. Even though I had really gotten a good dose of the Black experience growing up. So long story short, I ended up at Spelman. And the best decision I think I've ever made in my life.
Choosing Spelman was strategic because Lisa D. knew that Spelman would connect to her familial and community legacy.
One thing I keep from that experience to this day is Spelman taught me that no, you don't look like most of the people out in this world. No, you will not be treated like most of the people out in this world. However, you are still somebody. A person to be contended with. Don't let anybody tell you differently. You are unique. You are special. You are intelligent. You are beautiful. That carried me, for the most part, through the rest of my life. And it's something that I still instill to this day. So that's the short version of my history. And then eventually I show up to go to graduate school at Northwestern. Where I ended up in a Ph.D. program in engineering… I went to BU [Boston University] first for the dual degree portion for biomedical engineering. And then, I went to Northwestern for a master's. And entered into a Ph.D. program in biomedical engineering. But after trials and tests, I left without my Ph.D. and just left with a master's in 2010.
Lisa D. connected her success in STEM disciplines to the overlapping support networks of Spelman that connected to her family and community. [End Page 113] She credited this support network for completing a STEM undergraduate degree and enrollment in a STEM Ph.D. program. Lisa also remarked on her student organization experiences at Spelman, allowing her to thrive in her STEM exploration.
I was in the physics club. I was in the National Society of Black Engineers. I had a scholarship through NASA. So that pretty much made us our own little club. It was specifically a scholarship for women in science and engineering, sponsored by NASA. We had regular meetings and regular activities that we had to do together. Technically, that was a club too. I had to spend, as an obligation of the scholarship program, we had to spend three summers at a NASA center. I was at Kennedy Space Center before they shut down the space shuttle program. Which was awesome. I am again thankful for that as well. It was a fabulous experience.
Lisa D. also spoke of the message of care and excellence that seemed to permeate every area of her HBCU experience.
[the expectation of excellence] was pretty much… it was almost an everyday thing. It was reinforced in class. It was reinforced walking on the campus. It was reinforced in the artwork. I remember some of the people who came and spoke to us. Especially some of the alumni who came back and spoke. It was just like, you are amazing. That's basically what I kept hearing. I was only on campus three years, 'cause I did a dual degree. But for a solid three years, that's what I heard. I don't know how else to describe it. It was just an amazing experience. I didn't appreciate it as much as I do now while I was there. I mean, I appreciate it. But I appreciate it like I can't even describe now, knowing what I went through when I was there. 'Cause like I said, it helped me become who I am now.
Lisa D. brought her HBCU experience and the support she built into her Ph.D. program. But the Ph.D. program at Northwestern University, a private PWI in Evanston, Illinois, in the Chicago area, was starkly different from Spelman.
And then, when I got to Northwestern, especially entering into grad school, it was again a different ball game. Northwestern [is] a Research I. We're in Chicago. We try to compete with the Stanfords and the University of Chicagos of the world. And the Harvards. And the Dukes of the world. And so again, it was another shock that I don't think I was quite prepared for. But what I really wasn't prepared for was the lack of support that I received from, or didn't receive, I should say, from my department. I was an NSF scholar. And I'm like, you know, again, how much do I have to prove? How much do I have to show that I'm good enough?
While Lisa D. came to graduate school with funding and significant experience in STEM disciplines, she received little faculty support in graduate [End Page 114] school, a possible reason that she left her Ph.D. program and was hesitant to return at the time of the interview. However, Lisa D. offered advice to Black women entering higher education.
I would mostly say find a support system quick, fast! If you find they are not a good support system, find a better one. Because that's the difference between staying or going a lot of times. That's the difference between sanity and insanity a lot of times. 'Cause of course, college life in general, you're gonna make mistakes. Of course. In a lot of ways, you can still remain grounded with those support systems.
Critical Social Capital and Lisa D's Story:
Lisa D. built a web of support from her family, NASA summer programs, and her undergraduate faculty. She noted that her first gateway into college and her STEM discipline was her family, who encouraged her to attend an HBCU. She connected her family and her degree program, partly through her completed NASA summer program. The summer program offered a gateway into the STEM disciplines, and the institution and faculty continued reinforcing the connection to the discipline. While Lisa D. does not name specific faculty relationships that supported her success, she frequently recalls high expectations and positive empowerment at Spelman, giving her the confidence to pursue her intellectual passions. This reinforcement of high expectations from everyone on campus and "even in the artwork" provided an assets-based campus-wide web of support offering intellectual spaces inclusive of race, gender, and culture. The reinforced emphasis on inclusive support both inside and outside of her major might be one of the reasons she continued forward in the discipline as it emboldened Lisa D. to pursue the opportunities available, gain and sustain confidence and self-efficacy, and progress towards completing her degree in STEM at her undergraduate institution.
Discussion
Research focusing on STEM disciplines often emphasizes a departure from STEM majors or how a few individuals with power (e.g., faculty) control access to disciplines or experiences (Fletcher et al., 2021; Lee & Ferrare, 2019). More recent work calls for contemplating how STEM disciplines are racialized to create educational environments that might harm Black students (McGee, 2021). Our study explored Black women's experiences within STEM degree programs at HBCUs as a "web of support" where Black women considered how they could bridge multiple supporters (e.g., family and faculty) to create a network that elevated them in their educational pursuits. It was not simply that the Black women alumnae identified multiple forms of support, but that [End Page 115] the alumnae described ways that the supporters were linked to their academic program (e.g., ways that families were connected to campus or campus actors were connected to families). The findings reveal how positive social relationships within predominantly Black environments can serve as critical social capital (Ginwright, 2007) that reinforces assets-based opportunities to keep Black women within STEM disciplines instead of pushing them out.
The three narratives identified how alumnae built a web of support, which worked best when the various parts of that support network were connected to and reinforced by one another and to the STEM disciplines. That is, if there was a way to connect families to the discipline (e.g., Lisa D.'s experience in the NASA program), it might strengthen students' support networks from the specific degree program. Also, if administrators and faculty in STEM disciplines were better interconnected (e.g., Nadia's connection between the vice president and the faculty in her STEM discipline), it may have offered a reinforced and complementary form of support. Black women could activate and enhance their critical social capital (Ginwright, 2007) when faculty met student needs while cultivating a network of other supporters (e.g., family, peers) and resources to keep students on the pathway to success. While our analysis focused on HBCU environments as crucial entry points for STEM participation for Black women, the idea of an interconnected web of support that includes faculty, staff, peers, and family would not have to be isolated to only HBCU environments. Predominantly White campuses could undoubtedly adapt the idea of finding ways to connect various parts of a support network.
While Black women possess both racialized and gendered experiences in STEM, sometimes resulting in them leaving the field and not graduating (Estrada et al., 2016; Fletcher et al., 2021; Joseph, 2012; Lee & Ferrare, 2019; Suarez-Belcazar et al., 2003), our study reframes this narrative by moving away from an individual deficit lens of gatekeeping where students lack agency and are waiting for others to initiate support. Some STEM climates and faculty interactions have proven to be a gatekeeping barrier to Black women in STEM, hindering agency, relationships, and opportunities (Charleston et al., 2014; Leath & Chavous, 2018; McGee, 2021; McGee & Bentley, 2017: McGee & Martin, 2011). Instead, the alumnae narratives demonstrated agency where the women identified, created, and managed social relationships before, during, and after their STEM degree programs. Aligning with previous research on the nurturing environments of HBCUs (Commodore et al., 2018; Perna et al., 2009; Williams & Johnson, 2019; Williams & Taylor, 2022), this study highlights the unique institutional characteristics and support structures of Spelman College that can facilitate Black women's STEM success, such as having representation of Black scholars and women in STEM spaces so that students did not have to compartmentalize parts of their identity (i.e., Lisa D. [End Page 116] belonging to student organizations for Black women in STEM). Additionally, administrators and faculty were connected with programs in and outside the institution, with growing evidence of the need for support beyond campus actors (Winkle-Wagner et al., 2020). For example, families were more normalized as connected to academic disciplines and the institution.
Findings from our study indicate that, through the collective action of relational support, Black women were persevering in STEM and persisting to graduation. While this study centers on Spelman College graduates, the ideas here may translate to other institutional types, including PWIs. Practical implications suggest the importance of providing Black women in STEM a "web of support" early in their degree programs. Access to meaningful feedback, encouragement, and support networks through study groups, peers, and faculty–student relationships are paramount to their success in a collective effort. Discipline-based support for STEM disciplines cannot be underscored enough (McGee, 2021; Winkle-Wagner & McCoy, 2016). Our findings additionally showcase the sense of agency Black women have in creating the web around them by initiating contact with their networks, especially those in positions of power and influence. Future research could explore the bridges between supporters to understand better ways to connect sometimes diffuse forms of support, such as family and institutional actors like faculty.
Translating these ideas to other institutions, these findings assert that it should not be the sole responsibility of Black women to create supportive networks, particularly at PWIs. In disciplines (e.g., STEM) where Black women remain underrepresented, administrators, faculty, and professional associations must facilitate opportunities for developing webs of support. Rather than assuming students should know how to initiate their support structures, institutionalizing team-based approaches where faculty and administrators' interactions make connections to STEM disciplines and norms could be one way to better support Black women. Institutions, particularly academic departments and programs, should be responsible for initiating webs of support for Black women students in STEM. Additionally, these findings highlight the importance of connecting institutions and disciplines to families. Creating discipline-based programs might allow families to understand the topics of study in which students engage and could contribute to the interaction of institutional and familial support.
By expanding the idea of gatekeeping using critical social capital (Gin-wright, 2007), our findings challenge the deficit narrative of Black women's STEM experiences. Through critical social capital, we can acknowledge the sense of agency Black women have in creating unique pathways and assert that institutional structures should be established to ensure access to multiple gatekeepers, as it is a powerful tool in successfully navigating STEM [End Page 117] programs. Furthermore, we assert that STEM programs should intentionally support Black women through excellent gatekeeping by openly and willingly providing them with the access and resources needed for success in STEM. While our participants went out of their way to forge these webs of support, we emphasize and urge, as others have done (see Joseph et al., 2017), that the responsibility is on the institutions (and not solely on students) to facilitate and maintain support structures and relationships that allow Black women to thrive in STEM. Based on the narratives in this study, faculty, staff, and administrators at Spelman College were engaged in both collective gatekeeping of students in STEM as well as the idea of "groundskeeping," where faculty and administrators were connected in facilitating structural and institutional support for students in the STEM disciplines (Montgomery, 2020).
Future research can expand on the transition of Black undergraduate women in STEM at HBCUs to their STEM graduate programs, noting how to transfer or transform critical social capital with Black women into their STEM graduate programs, particularly at PWIs. Future studies should also consider following Black women through their STEM programs longitudinally for a holistic view of their experiences between undergraduate and graduate education, institution types, and how they experience and make meaning of STEM gatekeeping and relationships, especially for those pursuing dual degree STEM options. Finally, additional research should further examine how Black women in STEM disciplines are supported through means that are intentional, reinforced, and relevant to Black women's abilities to navigate their respective programs successfully.
Several important implications for practice can be garnered from these narratives. First, bridge programs between HBCUs and PWIs could be beneficial in expanding the web of support for Black women in STEM. STEM programs could be more intentional about finding and creating ways to assist in "webbing" the support around Black women, considering how faculty, administrators, and other institutional actors can connect to create better experiences for Black women in STEM. Third, creating discipline-based familial connections, such as STEM visit days, could help connect families to institutions and degree programs.
Conclusion
We explored the relationships that facilitated Black women's undergraduate STEM success and found that Black women strategically created webs of support to succeed as undergraduates in their disciplines. The most successful webs facilitated asking for help and allowed for linkages between students' communities, families, peers, and faculty. Also, successful webs of support were reinforced (connected across departments/programs) inside and outside [End Page 118] the STEM discipline. This study supports previous research on HBCUs' unique institutional and structural contributions in facilitating Black women in STEM, notably Spelman College. Additionally, these findings contribute new ideas on the positive gatekeeper role that relationships can play when students can gain and convert critical social capital (Ginwright, 2007) within and between institutions. It is not only important that scholars recognize and study the importance of creating a web of support around and for Black women, but also to connect those webs of support specifically to STEM disciplinary content. PWIs and co-educational HBCUs can learn from these narratives, highlighting Spelman's unique racial and gendered institutional structures (Commodore et al., 2018) on how a cross-institutional and interconnected web of relationships can and should help Black women thrive in STEM.
Paris Wicker completed her Ph.D. candidate in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and is an incoming Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy at the University at Buffalo. Paris studies the access, success, and well-being of Black and Indigenous students and faculty in higher education. Please send correspondence to pariswic@buffalo.edu.
Dorian L. McCoy is Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion for the College of Education, Health, and Human Sciences and an Associate Professor of Higher Education in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Dorian is a faculty-administrator whose scholarship explores the socialization of graduate students, faculty, and administrators, particularly People of Color.
Rachelle Winkle-Wagner is a Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Her work focuses on how students and Faculty of Color survive and thrive in higher education.
Imani Barnes is a Ph.D. student in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She looks at the role of Christian faith and spirituality in Black women's graduate school experiences.
References
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We are immensely grateful to the Black alumnae participants who gave their time, experiences, and wisdom, and to the five gatekeepers who played a significant role in recruiting and interviewing participants. Thank you to the University of Wisconsin–Madison for graduate fellowship support through the Wisconsin Center for Educational Research (WCER) and the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF).