Familial STEM identity: Reframing "STEM Identity" to Consider Social Units

• In Event: Consequential Arrangements for Becoming: Considering Identity Work in STEM Across Social, Institutional, and Practice Spaces

Abstract

Purpose
We illustrate the need for a comprehensive model of STEM identity development that accounts for the STEM affiliation of youths, their caregivers, and siblings, not as a collection of individuals but as a coherent and functional unit. We introduce the concept of familial STEM identity as a framework to expand STEM identity development theory, particularly for learners with social identities embedded in family relationships, values, and culture.

Theoretical Grounding
Identity is often operationalized in terms of how an individual sees themselves as a “kind of person” (Gee, 2000) or “member of a community” (Avraamidou, 2019; Rahm & Moore, 2016). Although such perspectives underscore the social context of identity development, they undervalue the central role of social relationships, especially in family contexts. For youths, that social context of STEM identity development is highly defined and bounded by their parents, and in some cases siblings, more so than extended family members or friends (Authors, 2021; Pattison et al., 2020), with the influence of teachers expanding as the child develops (Verhoeven et al., 2019).

Research Approach
We conducted a longitudinal multi-case study of three families. All parents were migrants from Latin American countries living in U.S. cities with large Latine and migrant communities. Data included five interviews and two videos of family engagement in STEM activities. Interviews progressed from discussions of children’s broader extracurricular and educational experiences to experiences and conceptualizations more focused on STEM contexts (as defined by the participants). In analysis, we attended to the social circumstances of the contexts in which STEM identities developed and were expressed.

Findings
We found that although children constructed their identification with STEM in different ways, their articulations predominantly aligned with parents’ STEM interests, values, and performance-competence, which were constructed and reinforced through language. For example, during our first interview, Màfe, a 12-year-old Latina and first-generation migrant, expressed an interest in herpetology, which her mother encouraged. As the focus of our interviews turned toward Mafe’s career aspirations and her personal and family-related values and experiences, her mother’s encouragement abated, instead urging Màfe to consider careers she felt were more aligned with Mafe’s interests and abilities. The tone of Màfe’s and her mother’s STEM-related narratives shifted over time from a state of consonance to a state of dissonance and back (Lichtwarck-Aschoff et al., 2008), coinciding with changes in Màfe’s self-perception in herpetology and science broadly.

Significance
An objective of many STEM learning institutions is to trigger and sustain positive STEM affiliation of learners (i.e., STEM identity). Our concept of a familial STEM identity suggests that efforts may not produce persistent outcomes if restricted to individuals, especially for younger learners in families with collectivist values (McGee & Bentley, 2017). Thus, objectives to “increase” STEM identity may have limited short-term effectiveness. Efforts to reframe how STEM identity is understood to reflect social group units may be more durable. This work implies a need to rethink programmatic objectives to focus on learners’ familial groups and to (re)develop tools that evaluate the effectiveness of family-centered learning efforts.

Authors

• Remy Dou, Florida International University
  Presenting Author

• Heidi Cian, Maine Mathematics and Science Alliance
  Presenting Author