CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,433Career Development and DiversityScience Education and PerceptionsCritical Race Theory in Education

Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens

Open access
Carlone, Heidi B., Johnson, Angela·2007·Journal of Research in Science Teaching
DOI 10.1002/tea.20237
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this study, we develop a model of science identity to make sense of the science experiences of 15 successful women of color over the course of their undergraduate and graduate studies in science and into science‐related careers. In our view, science identity accounts both for how women make meaning of science experiences and how society structures possible meanings. Primary data included ethnographic interviews during students' undergraduate careers, follow‐up interviews 6 years later, and ongoing member‐checking. Our results highlight the importance of recognition by others for women in the three science identity trajectories: research scientist; altruistic scientist; and disrupted scientist. The women with research scientist identities were passionate about science and recognized themselves and were recognized by science faculty as science people. The women with altruistic scientist identities regarded science as a vehicle for altruism and created innovative meanings of “science,” “recognition by others,” and “woman of color in science.” The women with disrupted scientist identities sought, but did not often receive, recognition by meaningful scientific others. Although they were ultimately successful, their trajectories were more difficult because, in part, their bids for recognition were disrupted by the interaction with gendered, ethnic, and racial factors. This study clarifies theoretical conceptions of science identity, promotes a rethinking of recruitment and retention efforts, and illuminates various ways women of color experience, make meaning of, and negotiate the culture of science. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 1187–1218, 2007

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/tea.20237

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • URM undergraduate and graduate students in science report feeling perceived by faculty and peers as less intellectually capable than white students.

    “URM undergraduate and graduate students in science report feeling perceived by faculty and peers as less intellectually capable than white students (Carlone and Johnson, 2007; Hurtado et al., 2009; Griffin et al., 2015)”

    From Race and Gender Differences in Undergraduate Research Mentoring Structures and Research Outcomes (2017) · cites this paper as Carlone and Johnson, 2007

    In “Disrupted Scientist Identities,” an undergraduate woman of color describes professors treating white classmates as future peers while she felt out of place. “Gendered failures of recognition” reports another student saying professors made her feel stupid. These passages support the faculty-perception part of the claim, but the study concerns undergraduate women of color; they do not establish the same report among graduate students or clearly attribute judgments of intellectual capability to student peers. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Science identity predicts STEM persistence and achievement.

    “In turn, science identity is repeatedly found to predict STEM persistence and achievement (e.g., Carlone and Johnson, 2007; Malone and Barabino, 2009; Espinosa, 2011; Estrada et al., 2011; Eagan et al., 2013; Hernandez et al., 2013; Krogh and Andersen, 2013; Chang et al., 2014).”

    From Outcomes and Processes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Program: STEM PhD Completion, Sense of Community, Perceived Program Benefit, Science Identity, and Research Self-Efficacy (2016) · cites this paper as Carlone and Johnson, 2007

    In “A More Grounded (and Still Evolving) Model of Science Identity” (page not provided), the authors link strong, satisfying science identities to persistence among successful students of color. The paper does not establish that science identity predicts STEM achievement, and its qualitative account does not establish the predictive relationship claimed. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Having a strong science identity plays an important role in student involvement, persistence, and career selection.

    “Having a strong science identity plays an important role in student involvement, persistence, and career selection (Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Chang et al., 2011; Williams & George-Jackson, 2014).”

    From "It Just Makes It Feel Like You're Not Alone": A Qualitative Study of a Social Support Group for High-Achieving, Low-Income STEM Majors (2024) · cites this paper as Carlone & Johnson, 2007

  • Recognition has been conceptualized as a core dimension of science identity.

    “Recognition has been conceptualized as a core dimension of science identity (Carlone and Johnson 2007)”

    From Science identity as a landscape of becoming: rethinking recognition and emotions through an intersectionality lens (2020) · cites this paper as Carlone and Johnson 2007

  • In Carlone and Johnson 2007 ethnographic study with 15 successful women of color, participants' experiences resolved into three main categories: research scientist identities; alternative scientist identities; and science identity formation disrupted by others.

    “The analysis of the data resulted in resolving the participants' experiences into three main categories: those who formed research scientist identities; those who formed alternative (but effective and satisfying) scientist identities; and those whose science identity formation was disrupted by others.”

    From Science identity as a landscape of becoming: rethinking recognition and emotions through an intersectionality lens (2020) · cites this paper as Heidi Carlone and Angela Johnson (2007)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 90 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. [18]18. Chinn, P.W.U. (1999). Multiple worlds/mismatched meanings: Barriers to minority women engineers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 621-636.
  2. [23]23. Davidson, A. (1996). Making and molding identities in schools: Student narratives on race, gender and academic engagement. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  3. [39]39. Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural?. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press.
  4. [41]41. Hopper, R. (2003). Gendering talk. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
  5. [50]50. LeCompte, M., & Shensul, J. (1999). Paradigms for thinking about ethnographic research, Designing and conducting ethnographic research. (pp. 41-60). Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
  6. [51]51. Lemke, J.L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 296-316.
  7. [56]56. Manning, K. (1989). Roger Arliner Young, scientist. Sage: A Scholarly Journal on Black Women, 6, 3-7.
  8. [66]66. Parsons, E.C. (under review). Science education research and African Americans: A more critical approach.
  9. [68]68. Patterson, R. (1989). Black women in the biological sciences. Sage: A Scholarly Journal on Black Women, 6, 8-14.
  10. [69]69. Rahm, J. (2007). Urban youths' identity projects and figured worlds: Case studies of youths' hybridization in science practices at the margin. Chicago, IL: The Chicago Springer Forum, Science Education in an Age of Globalization.
  11. [77]77. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  12. [86]86. Tuana, N. (1993) The less noble sex. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
  • St. Mary's College of Maryland (US)
Corresponding author
Carlone, Heidi B.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-09-11
Volume
44
Issue
8
Pages
1187-1218
ISSN
  • 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2736
DOI
10.1002/tea.20237
OpenAlex
W2128879035
Cited by
2,433
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 258 · 2025: 230 · 2024: 266 · 2023: 216 · 2022: 223 · 2021: 197 · 2020: 220 · 2019: 197 · 2018: 127 · 2017: 89 · 2016: 92 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 47
FWCI
39.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Journal of Research in Science Teaching (publishedVersion)
  • NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Science Education and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
Keywords
science identity, women of color, gender and race in science, scientific culture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review