Search

Hawai'i's diverse population prime it to be an exemplary environment to study representation in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). In actuality, Hawai'i has low STEMM enrollment and therefore, low representation in STEMM. What primarily inhibits Hawai'i from having a strong STEMM workforce is the lack of education in STEMM, resources allocated to STEMM, and mentorship to succeed in STEMM. Other factors such as cultural values, high costs of living, and geographical barriers also contribute to Hawai'i's low STEMM enrollment. To combat these issues, I offer suggestions to encourage STEMM enrollment, such as directing funds toward after-school education. I also suggest combatting the lack of resources by providing more online opportunities for students and workers. As for Hawai'i's low mentorship, I suggest that more programs be created within communities and universities to create a platform for mentors and mentees to network. This manuscript seeks to highlight these areas of improvement and recognize lessons to be learned from Hawai'i, thus serving as a resource for individuals internationally., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Cellular Physiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The present study explored LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other non heterosexual/cisgender identities) engineering students' navigation of engineering educational contexts and reported the impacts of the engineering educational culture on LGBTQ + students' well-being. Drawing from a sample of ten LGBTQ + university students in the United States, we found that students described cultural norms sustained through minimal tolerance for and the avoidance of identity talk or expression. Systemic homogeneous cultural norms redefine safety expectations for LGBTQ + engineering students while normalizing expectations that LGBTQ + students be silent and tolerate mistreatment. Participants also described the consequences of invisibility and identity conflict that they face for being different within an inequitable field. These findings bring attention to a culture within engineering programs that silences LGBTQ + expression and leaves students feeling isolated. Further research is needed to explore the effect of affirming communities on LGBTQ + engineering students' well-being. We conclude with research and clinical implications for working with LGBTQ + engineering students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]