Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T02:07:50.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accidental Scientists: How Undergraduate Research in Political Science Can Help to Patch the “Leaky Pipeline” in STEM Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Lisa Mueller Open the ORCID record for Lisa Mueller [Opens in a new window]
Lisa Mueller*
Affiliation:
Macalester College, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Education advocates lament the “leaky pipeline” in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), whereby students—especially minorities and women—drop out of STEM at successive stages of the educational system. Defining empirical political science as a branch of STEM, this article proposes that undergraduate research in political science can help to patch this leaky pipeline and expand access to scientific skills and habits of mind. I elaborate on three rationales to support my claim: (1) political science is a relatively diverse field of STEM; (2) college primes students to think like (political) scientists; and (3) students often encounter political science research opportunities for the first time as undergraduates, presenting an opportunity for faculty to “catch” those who selected out of STEM after high school. I substantiate my arguments by drawing on enrollment data, archival documents, the theories of John Dewey, and testimonials from former undergraduate researchers. I also recommend ways for political science departments to provide a meaningful STEM education by enhancing research programs.

Type
Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 56 , Issue 4 , October 2023 , pp. 506 - 511
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adcock, Robert. 2007. “Interpreting Behavioralism.” In Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1870, ed. Adcock, Robert, Bevir, Mark, and Stimson, Shannon, 180–208. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Alberts, Bruce. 2022. “Why Science Education Is More Important Than Most Scientists Think.” FEBS Letters 596:149–59.10.1002/1873-3468.14272CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boaler, Jo, and Selling, Sarah Kate. 2017. “Psychological Imprisonment or Intellectual Freedom? A Longitudinal Study of Contrasting School Mathematics Approaches and Their Impact on Adults’ Lives.” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 48 (1): 78–105.10.5951/jresematheduc.48.1.0078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cetina, Karin Knorr. 1999. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674039681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Marie. 2019. “STEM to STEAM: Policy and Practice.” In The STEAM Revolution: Transdisciplinary Approaches to Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, Humanities and Mathematics, ed. Armida de la Garza and Travis, Charles, 223–36. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-89818-6_15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crossley, Nick, and Ibrahim, Joseph. 2012. “Critical Mass, Social Networks, and Collective Action: Exploring Student Political Worlds.” Sociology 46 (4): 596–612.10.1177/0038038511425560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, John. 1910. “Science as Subject-Matter and as Method.” Science 28 (31): 121–27.10.1126/science.31.787.121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gismondi, Adam, and Osteen, Laura. 2017. “Student Activism in the Technology Age.” New Directions for Student Leadership 153:63–74.10.1002/yd.20230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez, Heather B., and Kuenzi, Jeffrey J.. 2012. “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Primer.” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, August 1. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R42642.pdf.Google Scholar
Gray, William A., and Albert, William. 2013. “Create a STEM Pipeline for Students Who Become Engineering Majors Who Become Engineers.” Leadership and Management in Engineering 13 (1): 42–46.10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillygus, D. Sunshine. 2005. “The Missing Link: Exploring the Relationship between Higher Education and Political Engagement.” Political Behavior 27 (1): 25–47.10.1007/s11109-005-3075-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homola, Jonathan, Pereira, Miguel M., and Tavits, Margit. 2020. “Legacies of the Third Reich: Concentration Camps and Out-Group Intolerance.” American Political Science Review 114 (2): 573–90.10.1017/S0003055419000832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loader, Brian D., Vromen, Ariadne, Xenos, Michael A., Steel, Holly, and Burgum, Samuel. 2015. “Campus Politics, Student Societies, and Social Media.” Sociological Review 63 (4): 820–39.10.1111/1467-954X.12220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowndes, Vivien, Marsh, David, and Stoker, Gerry. 2018. “Introduction.” In Theory and Methods in Political Science, ed. Lowndes, Vivien, Marsh, David, and Stoker, Gerry, 1–16. London: Palgrave.10.1057/978-1-137-60353-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Rose, and Hatemi, Peter K.. 2010. “Emerging Models of Collaboration in Political Science: Changes, Benefits, and Challenges.” PS: Political Science & Politics 43 (1): 49–58.Google Scholar
Mejias, Sam, Thompson, Naomi, Sedas, Raul Michael, Rosin, Mark, Soep, Elisabeth, Peppler, Kylie, Roche, Joseph, Wong, Jen, Hurley, Mairéad, Bell, Philip, and Bevan, Bronwyn. 2021. “The Trouble with STEAM and Why We Use It Anyway.” Science Education 105 (2): 209–31.10.1002/sce.21605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Lisa. 2022. “Replication Data for ‘Accidental Scientists: How Undergraduate Research in Political Science Can Help to Patch the “Leaky Pipeline” in STEM Education.’” Harvard Dataverse. DOI:10.7910/DVN/596TQ4.10.7910/DVN/596TQ4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nonnemacher, Jeffrey, and Sokhey, Sarah Wilson. 2022. “Learning by Doing: Using an Undergraduate Research Lab to Promote Diversity and Inclusion.” PS: Political Science & Politics 55 (2): 413–18.Google Scholar
Rutherford, F. James, and Ahlgren, Andrew. 1990. Science for All Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidgen, Henning. 2021. “The Laboratory.” Encyclopedia of the History of Science. DOI:10.34758/sz06-t975.10.34758/sz06-t975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Bureau of Education. 1916. “The Social Studies in Secondary Education.” Bulletin No. 28. Washington, DC: US Bureau of Education of the Department of the Interior.Google Scholar
van den Hurk, Anniek, Meelissen, Martina, and van Langen, Annemarie. 2019. “Interventions in Education to Prevent STEM Pipeline Leakage.” International Journal of Science Education 41 (2): 150–64.10.1080/09500693.2018.1540897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Deth, Jan W., Abendschön, Simone, and Vollmar, Meike. 2011. “Children and Politics: An Empirical Reassessment of Early Political Socialization.” Political Psychology 32 (1): 147–73.10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00798.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dyke, Nella. 1998. “Hotbeds of Activism: Locations of Student Protest.” Social Problems 45 (2): 205–20.10.2307/3097244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Edward O. 1998. Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Mueller Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/596TQ4
Link