Building Infrastructure Leading To Diversity Research Articles

Enacting inclusive science: Culturally responsive higher education practices in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM).

Novel approaches in higher education are needed to reverse underrepresentation of racial/ethnic groups in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). Building on theoretical frameworks for practice in diverse learning environments, this study provides evidence for Inclusive Science as a conceptual model that reflects initiatives intended to diversify biomedical research training for undergraduates. Using multiple case study design and cross-case analysis, we analyzed data from 10 higher education sites that were awarded the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) grant funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). We identified the following dimensions of the Inclusive Science model: promoting participation of diverse researchers; introducing diversity innovations in science and research curriculum; improving campus climate for diversity; providing tangible institutional support; creating partnerships with diverse communities; and integrating students' social identities with science identity. We illustrate each dimension of the model with examples of campus practices across BUILD sites. While many may doubt that science can be responsive to diversity, the interventions developed by these campuses illustrate how colleges and universities can actively engage in culturally responsive practices in STEMM undergraduate training that integrate trainees' identities, knowledge of diverse communities, and create a greater awareness of the climate for diversity that affects student training and outcomes. Implications include culturally responsive strategies that many more higher education institutions can employ to support scientific career training for historically excluded groups.

Comparing undergraduate research experiences before, during, and after the COVID-19 quarantine: The successful adaptation of the BUILD PODER Summer JumpStart program.

In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic forced many in person undergraduate research experiences (UREs) to pivot to remote online training. To investigate how the COVID-19 quarantine disrupted student URE outcomes over time, the current study examines Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Promoting Opportunities for Diversity in Education and Research (PODER) URE outcomes across different platforms (in-person, remote, and hybrid models) by comparing student survey data from 2019 to 2021. Participants consisted of three cohorts: 2019 (n = 26 students), 2020 (n = 33), 2021 (n = 34). The BUILD PODER Summer JumpStart program (SJS), which aims to increase diversity in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) by recruiting mostly underrepresented students, was conducted in person in 2019, remotely in 2020 and using a hybrid model in 2021. All students completed an online survey on the first and last day of the four-week SJS program. We used one-way and mixed ANOVA models to analyze Cohort, Time (pre-test vs. post-test scores), and interaction of Cohort and Time for Research Self-Efficacy, Sense of Belonging, Mentor Relationship, Mentee Knowledge, Health, Stress, and Student Program Satisfaction measures. Despite the platform changes, student scores increased significantly over time for all measures. There was a significant main effect of Time for Research Self-Efficacy, Sense of Belonging, Mentor Relationship, Mentee Knowledge, Health Assessment, and Stress Management. Findings indicate that URE programs that are implemented remotely and using a hybrid format can provide students with experiences similar to in-person URE programs. In addition, remote UREs may provide added benefits compared to in-person programs. For instance, remote UREs could engage more historically minoritized students, who may experience barriers to access, such as work/family commitments, financial constraints, and geographic limitations.

Investigating the relationship between participation in the building infrastructure leading to diversity (BUILD) initiative and intent to pursue a science career: A cross-sectional analysis

This paper presents an analysis of survey data to examine the association between supervised structured mentoring and students’ intent to pursue a career in science. Data were collected from students in the 10 Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) research training programs, developed through grants from the National Institutes of Health. Propensity score matching and multinomial logistic regression demonstrated that exposure to BUILD programs—meaning participation in undergraduate research, receipt of mentoring from a primary mentor, and/or participation as a funded scholar and/or associate of each BUILD site’s training program—was associated with increased intent to pursue a science career. These findings have implications for STEM program evaluation and practice in higher education.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Sense of Belonging and Science Outcomes among Biomedical Science Students: A Longitudinal Study

To understand how COVID-19 impacted undergraduate research experiences (URE), the current study examined how student outcomes changed over time among biomedical science majors. In addition, this study describes how a Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Promoting Opportunities for Diversity in Education and Research (PODER) URE program shifted entirely online in response to COVID-19. Biomedical science majors at a university in Southern California completed surveys in 2019 and 2020 and rated their science identity, science self-efficacy, and academic self-concept. We examined how scores changed over time by comparing: (1) BUILD and non-BUILD students and (2) students from underrepresented groups (URG) and non-URG students. Sense of belonging scores from 2020 were also compared among BUILD and non-BUILD students. BUILD students reported a significant increase in science self-efficacy scores, unlike non-BUILD participants. BUILD students also increased their science identity scores, unlike non-BUILD participants. Differences in sense of belonging were not significant, and differences between URG and non-URG students were not significant. Given the importance of science self-efficacy and science identity in a student’s academic trajectory, our results indicate that UREs such as BUILD PODER were able to improve or maintain critical student outcomes during a pandemic. These results highlight the importance of URE participation among biomedical science majors.

Enhancing grant-writing expertise in BUILD institutions: Building infrastructure leading to diversity.

BackgroundThe lack of race/ethnic and gender diversity in grants funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a persistent challenge related to career advancement and the quality and relevance of health research. We describe pilot programs at nine institutions supported by the NIH-sponsored Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) program aimed at increasing diversity in biomedical research.MethodsWe collected data from the 2016–2017 Higher Education Research Institute survey of faculty and NIH progress reports for the first four years of the program (2015–2018). We then conducted descriptive analyses of data from the nine BUILD institutions that had collected data and evaluated which activities were associated with research productivity. We used Poisson regression and rate ratios of the numbers of BUILD pilots funded, students included, abstracts, presentations, publications, and submitted and funded grant proposals.ResultsTeaching workshops were associated with more abstracts (RR 4.04, 95% CI 2.21–8.09). Workshops on grant writing were associated with more publications (RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.64–4.34) and marginally with marginally more presentations. Incentives to develop courses were associated with more abstracts published (RR 4.33, 95% CI 2.56–7.75). Workshops on research skills and other incentives were not associated with any positive effects.ConclusionsPilot interventions show promise in supporting diversity in NIH-level research. Longitudinal modeling that considers time lags in career development in moving from project development to grants submissions can provide more direction for future diversity pilot interventions.

A meta-analysis approach for evaluating the effectiveness of complex multisite programs.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) created the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) initiative to incentivize undergraduate institutions to create innovative approaches to increasing diversity in biomedical research, with the ultimate goal of diversifying the NIH-funded research enterprise. Initiatives such as BUILD involve designing and implementing programs at multiple sites that share common objectives. Evaluation of initiatives like this often includes statistical analyses that combine data across sites to estimate the program's impact on particular outcomes. Meta-analysis is a statistical technique for combining effect estimates from different studies to obtain a single overall effect estimate and to estimate heterogeneity across studies. However, it has not been commonly applied to evaluate the impact of a program across multiple different sites. In this chapter, we use the BUILD Scholar program-one component of the broader initiative-to demonstrate the application of meta-analysis to combine effect estimates from different sites of a multisite initiative. We analyze three student outcomes using a typical "single-stage" modeling approach and a meta-analysis approach. We show how a meta-analysis approach can provide more nuanced information about program impacts on student outcomes and thus can help support a robust evaluation.

Implementing case study design to evaluate diverse institutions and STEM education contexts: Lessons and key areas for systematic study.

This chapter highlights the important contributions of case study research to the evaluation of student-centered programs and broader STEM initiatives in higher education. We summarize the Diversity Program Consortium's case study evaluation of the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) initiative, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), with aims to enhance diversity in the NIH-funded workforce. We describe lessons learned from the case study design used for the evaluation of BUILD that applies to administrators of STEM initiatives who are interested in case study methods and to evaluators who are familiar with case studies and tasked with program evaluation of a multisite STEM program. These lessons include practical considerations for logistics and the importance of clarifying the goals of the case study design within the larger program evaluation, fostering the continuation of knowledge within the evaluation team, and embedding trust building and collaboration throughout all stages of the case study.

Theoretical and conceptual frameworks across local evaluation efforts in a nationwide consortium.

This paper describes the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used to guide the site-level evaluations of Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) programs, part of the Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), funded by the National Institutes of Health. We aim to provide an understanding of which theories informed the evaluation work of the DPC and how the frameworks guiding BUILD site-level evaluations are conceptually aligned with one another and with the consortium-level evaluation.

Evaluating Mentorship Programs: Survey Items for Improving Student Affairs Practice.

Evaluating Mentorship Programs:Survey Items for Improving Student Affairs Practice Frank Fernandez (bio), Sarah Mason (bio), Carrie L. Saetermoe (bio), and Gabriela Chavira (bio) Student affairs professionals are increasingly expected to assess and evaluate programs that support student success (Fallucca, 2018). Beyond satisfying accountability pressures, assessment and evaluation work is important for gathering data to improve practice and support students. The two leading student affairs associations, ACPA and NASPA (2015), have called upon student affairs professionals to use assessment and evaluation practices in ways that are culturally relevant and that support the ethics and values of the profession. In this Research in Brief, we draw on our experiences evaluating a program that uses critical race theory to improve faculty–student mentoring. We share survey items from the quantitative portion of the evaluation, which examines the extent to which race is part of [End Page 223] mentoring relationships. Then we provide preliminary findings to show that the survey items predict sense of belonging when they are used as a summative scale. We discuss implications for professionals who work with student affairs-based mentoring programs, who use assessment and evaluation in their work, and for undergraduate research mentors. LITERATURE REVIEW AND STUDY CONTEXT Positive mentorship perceptions relate to higher intent to persist (Baier et al., 2016) and sense of belonging (e.g., Apriceno et al., 2020). Apriceno and colleagues (2020) used multiple survey items to examine student engagement with mentors, but they were unable to consider how mentors incorporate Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) students' minoritized statuses as part of the mentoring relationship. Other scholars have captured multiple factors in mentoring relationships but overlooked the importance of race in those relationships (Docherty et al., 2018). For instance, while Strayhorn and Terrell's (2007) study did not examine mentor demographics, it showed that mentoring relationships were more influential when they moved beyond personal, informal interactions and became research-focused. Black students who experienced research-focused relationships had higher college satisfaction (Strayhorn & Terrell, 2007) Prior literature has suggested that student affairs professionals must consider how mentoring relationships can support racially minoritized students. Rendón (1994) concluded that colleges and universities should "orient faculty … to the needs and strengths of culturally diverse student populations" because those faculty may then serve "as validating mentors for students who find the transition to college difficult" (p. 46). Recent qualitative studies have supported Rendón's early work. In a study of a single campus, Rodriguez (2020) highlighted the importance of using mentoring to promote students' racial efficacy. Additionally, a multicampus case study of students in STEM found that some mentors do, in fact, validate racially minoritized backgrounds (McCoy et al., 2015). Conversely, when faculty take a colorblind approach to mentoring, they tend to frame "their mentoring relationships in culturally racist ways" and, perhaps unintentionally, assume "a condescending, paternalistic attitude toward Students of Color" (McCoy et al., 2015, p. 236). This paper adds to prior literature by presenting a set of items that may be used to evaluate mentoring programs that incorporate discussion of race and ethnicity. BUILD PODER The study is part of a program evaluation of an NIH-funded project, Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Promoting Opportunities for Diversity in Education and Research (PODER) program at California State University, Northridge, a four-year comprehensive university. BUILD PODER (BP) is an established program that focuses on increasing diversity in biomedical and biomedically related fields. The program is designed to explicitly train faculty mentors and students from four colleges within the university (i.e., Health and Human Development, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Science and Mathematics, Engineering and Computer Science) about critical race theory (CRT). CRT is generally thought to include five tenets: (a) racism is "ordinary, not aberrational"; (b) racism serves the interest of "white-over-color ascendancy"; (c) race is socially constructed; (d) the dominant group alters notions of racial groups over time to suit needs; and (e) People of Color have unique insights and stories to tell (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017, pp. 8–9). [End Page 224] BP faculty mentor training in the first year consisted of a 16-hour face-to-face workshop related to the more familiar aspects of CRT—microaggressions and microaffirmations...

Impact of Undergraduate Research Training Programs: An Illustrative Example of Finding a Comparison Group and Evaluating Academic and Graduate School Outcomes.

In this study, researchers at a large, urban, comprehensive minority-serving institution used propensity score matching to identify a unique comparison group to study academic and graduate school outcomes in students served by the National Institutes of Health-funded Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Initiative. Acknowledging that students' self-selection biases may confound findings, the use of propensity methods to match students served with those who were not (but were otherwise eligible) provides a valuable tool for evaluators and practitioners to combat this challenge and better evaluate their effectiveness and impact on students' success. This study's findings indicate that BUILD participants had higher academic and graduate school success with regard to cumulative GPA, units attempted and completed, graduation status, and application and admission to graduate programs.

A cross-case analysis of developing program sustainability and institutionalization in early stages of a multisite biomedical student diversity initiative

BackgroundGrant funding often drives innovative programming in efforts to enhance diversity in biomedical fields, yet strategies for sustainability of grant-funded biomedical intervention are not well understood. Additionally, as funding agencies shift toward supporting institutional change to biomedical training, less is known about the extent to which sustainability strategies can support long-term institutionalization of the original goals of the grant-funded initiative. The purpose of this study is twofold: to identify strategies used by grant-funded programs for promoting sustainability, and to examine the interrelations between the concepts of sustainability and institutionalization during early stages of grant-funded biomedical career training efforts.MethodsWe employed a multiple case study design and cross-case analysis using interviews of program administrators and participants from 10 undergraduate institutions that received Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) awards funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).ResultsBUILD sites engaged in the following strategies to develop program sustainability: 1) scaling and adapting to expand programmatic impact, 2) identifying additional funding and cost-cutting measures, 3) developing and maintaining infrastructure and structural operations, 4) leveraging relationships and with intra-and inter-institutional partners, and 5) and addressing hiring, policies, and reward systems at the institution. Senior administrative support supported program sustainability and early institutionalization, although we also identified situations where participants felt that they were on track for sustainable changes without administrative support or institutional change. Of the strategies identified, those that involve organizational and infrastructural changes contribute to early stages of institutionalization.ConclusionsThis study contributes to literature on organizational change by providing evidence of distinctions and interrelations between program sustainability efforts and institutionalization of change efforts in that some sustainability strategies can overlap with strategies to move toward institutionalization. The findings indicate the importance of program administrators developing early sustainability plans that also lead to institutionalization, as well as an opportunity for funding agencies to develop technical assistance on sustainability, organizational change, and institutionalization as a resource to support program administrators’ efforts toward making lasting, structural change on their campuses.

Preparing Undergraduate Students for Summer Research Experiences and Graduate School Applications in a Pandemic Environment: Development and Implementation of Online Modules.

Engaging students in research is a high impact practice that improves student retention and persistence in behavioral and biomedical sciences and engineering. The California State University Long Beach (CSULB) Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Program offers an intensive research training experience to undergraduate students from a wide range of health-related disciplines. The goal of this program is to provide students with research skills, psychosocial resources, and graduate school application guidance that will make them competitive for Ph.D. programs. With the COVID-19 pandemic forcing the campus closure of many universities, including CSULB, our student training had to transition from in-person training to online training. This paper discusses the development and implementation of a series of eight online modules for guiding students through the application process for summer research experiences and graduate schools. Overall, the BUILD trainees were positive about the online modules. Specifically, they indicated that the modules were useful, informative, easy to access/use, good use of their time, and a good supplemental activity to their learning community activities. Most trainees indicated that they preferred the modules to be implemented in a hybrid format, where the students can view the modules on their own first and then have an opportunity to engage in in-person/synchronous online discussions.

Baseline Characteristics of the 2015-2019 First Year Student Cohorts of the NIH Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD ) Program

The biomedical/behavioral sciences lag in the recruitment and advancement of students from historically underrepresented backgrounds. In 2014 the NIH created the Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), a prospective, multi-site study comprising 10 Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) institutional grantees, the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN) and a Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC). This article describes baseline characteristics of four incoming, first-year student cohorts at the primary BUILD institutions who completed the Higher Education Research Institute, The Freshmen Survey between 2015-2019. These freshmen are the primary student cohorts for longitudinal analyses comparing outcomes of BUILD program participants and non-participants. Baseline description of first-year students entering college at BUILD institutions during 2015-2019. Ten colleges/universities that each received <$7.5mil/yr in NIH Research Project Grants and have high proportions of low-income students. First-year undergraduate students who participated in BUILD-sponsored activities and a sample of non-BUILD students at the same BUILD institutions. A total of 32,963 first-year students were enrolled in the project; 64% were female, 18% Hispanic/Latinx, 19% African American/Black, 2% American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 17% Asian, and 29% White. Twenty-seven percent were from families with an income <$30,000/yr and 25% were their family's first generation in college. Primary student outcomes to be evaluated over time include undergraduate biomedical degree completion, entry into/completion of a graduate biomedical degree program, and evidence of excelling in biomedical research and scholarship. The DPC national evaluation has identified a large, longitudinal cohort of students with many from groups historically underrepresented in the biomedical sciences that will inform institutional/national policy level initiatives to help diversify the biomedical workforce.

BUILDING INTEGRATED PATHWAYS TO INDEPENDENCE FOR DIVERSE BIOMEDICAL RESEARCHERS: PROJECT PATHWAYS.

Diversity of backgrounds and life experiences on scientific teams is known to lead to more innovative ideas and better scientific products. However, in the United States, the percentages of individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups who obtain doctoral degrees in the Sciences continue to be significantly lower than their percentages in the population. This has resulted in the need for nation-wide initiatives to remedy this inequality, and consequently produce more productive teams of scientific minds. Xavier University of Louisiana is a historically Black and Catholic university that is widely recognized in the US for the success of its undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) programs. Project Pathways at Xavier is one of ten federally-funded Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) programs with the overarching goal of diversifying the Biomedical research workforce. Project Pathways is designed as a holistic, integrated, and coordinated program across Biomedical academic departments, student academic and career support offices, and the University's faculty development center. The overall hypothesis of Project Pathways is that if individuals from groups underrepresented in scientific research careers are provided with a) early awareness and deepening exposure to Biomedical careers, b) supportive relationships as they move through the pathway, c) suitable infrastructure, and d) meaningful engagement in Biomedical research experiences and adequate research resources, then a higher number will succeed in entering and successfully completing graduate programs, leading to increased diversity in the Biomedical research workforce. Here, the significant strides of this program during its first five-year funding cycle are presented.

Development of New Methods for Enhanced Conformational Sampling of GPCRs

G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are integral membrane proteins that enable a cell to respond to extracellular stimuli like light, small molecules, peptides, and proteins. These receptors have evolved as highly flexible proteins that possess multiple functionally important conformational states, which enable these receptors to activate pleiotropic signaling events inside the cells. Recent progress in membrane protein structural biology techniques and cryo‐electron microscopy is providing structural evidence of two or more distinct receptor conformations for these receptors. Computational structural modeling approaches can complement and supplement these studies by predicting all functionally important states of a receptor, however, they run into the classical protein conformational sampling problem. We are developing a computational biophysical method called Enhanced Conformational Markov‐state Sampling in Membrane BiLayer Environment (EnCoMSeMBLE) to solve this sampling problem for GPCRs. We are utilizing Markov‐State‐Models to combine the Boltzmann sampling of receptor conformations from molecular dynamics (MD) with the brute‐force sampling of receptor conformations from our previously developed ActiveGEnSeMBLE method. The method was applied to the A2A receptor starting from the active state by only using traditional MD simulations. This is not surprising because the pre‐activce states is a downhill direction on the energy landscape. However, applying both MD and ActivateGEnSeMBLE methods was able to predict pre‐active states from the inactive states which, classical MD cannot achieve. Our results indicated that our methods provide an unbiased method to sample the conformational landscape. This can protentional sample unexplored regions of the conformational landscape and find novel conformations that can elucidate the mechanistic properties that GPCRs possess.Support or Funding InformationThis project was funded through a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) #5TL4GM118977 or # 5RL5GM118975.

CLOSING THE LEAK: KEEPING LATE-DECIDING STUDENTS IN THE PIPELINE TO BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CAREERS.

With the increased competitiveness of undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs, the continuously accelerating rate of technological innovation and development of new global means of communication, and the evolving face of the local, national, and global job markets, choosing a long-term career has become a challenge for many. More and more students opt to take a gap period in their education, pre- or post-college, for soul searching to determine their future path or for improving their skills and competitiveness for successfully applying to academic institutions. Even though such gap years can lead to more mature and determined students, they often derail the educational path of the individual by leading to loss of interest or to new commitments which hinder going back to school. Engaging students in academic and skills training programs that keep them within the academic environment and provide them with exposure to the benefits of higher education has been shown to increase their persistence, leading to an increased rate of attaining higher-level degrees. A number of United States (US) federal funding agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), have programs such as the Bridges to Baccalaureate Program (support for easing a student's transition from a 2-year junior or community college to a 4-year baccalaureate-granting institution) and Post-baccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP, support for recent college graduates from underrepresented groups or disadvantaged backgrounds to strengthen their research skills and academic competitiveness for pursuing a doctorate degree in the Biomedical Sciences). At Xavier University of Louisiana (Xavier), we have developed a post-baccalaureate technician program under Project Pathways (the NIH National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Division of Training, Workforce Development, and Diversity (TWD)-funded Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) Program), that provides research experience and training in soft skills to recent Xavier graduates to increase their preparation and competitiveness for graduate programs. The BUILD Technicians also receive both mentee and mentor training and serve as near-peer mentors to undergraduate students in their labs, increasing their scientific identity and preparing them for their future role as graduate teaching assistants. Here, we report the lessons learned from this program and how its differences from other post-baccalaureate programs, including those under the NIH PREP umbrella, have led to improved outcomes for Xavier graduates gaining admission to graduate programs in the Biomedical Sciences.

All for One And One for All: Coordinating the Resources of Individual Student Research Training Initiatives in Biomedical Sciences at Xavier University of Louisiana.

Xavier University of Louisiana has a national reputation for producing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduates who go on to obtain MD and PhD degrees. According to a 2013 National Science Foundation report, Xavier is ranked first in producing African American graduates who go on to receive life sciences PhD degrees, fifth in the nation in producing African American graduates who go on to receive science and engineering PhD degrees, and seventh in producing African American graduates who go on to receive physical sciences PhD degrees. Xavier is currently third among the nation's colleges and universities in the number of African American graduates enrolled in medical school, according to data compiled by the Association of American Medical Colleges, and ranked first in the number of African American alumni who successfully complete their medical degrees. The success of Xavier's graduates is due to a combination of university-based student support initiatives and externally funded programs, in particular, the Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD), Maximizing Access to Biomedical Research Careers (MARC) U*STAR, and Research Initiative in Scientific Enhancement (RISE) programs. These three programs, funded by the Training, Workforce Development, and Diversity (TWD) Division at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), offer select trainees undergraduate research opportunities, support mechanisms, and a variety of activities designed to improve their potential for success in graduate school. The BUILD, MARC U*STAR, and RISE programs work closely together and with the University to leverage the resources provided by each in order to provide the best experience possible for their students with a minimum of redundancy of effort. This chapter focuses on the program components and how the programs work together.

BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE LEADING TO DIVERSITY PROGRAM AT XAVIER UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA, PROJECT PATHWAYS.

Xavier University of Louisiana (XULA) is the only historically Black and Catholic institution of higher education in the United States. XULA's mission focuses on "the promotion of a more just and humane society" by educating students in a diverse learning environment. Even though Xavier's reputation in the sciences attracts many of the best and brightest students in the nation, the University also continues to provide an excellent educational opportunity to many students who, due to socioeconomic disparities, lack the appropriate preparation for college. The ultimate goal of Project Pathways, the National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded BUILD (Building Infrastructure Leading to Diversity) Program at Xavier, is to increase the number of students who enter graduate programs in biomedical disciplines, successfully earn terminal degrees, and enter the biomedical research workforce. Xavier's plan to meet this challenge is based on a holistic approach, providing an integrated and coordinated student support and research skills training network. This coordinated effort cuts across academic departments in biomedical disciplines, academic support offices that include the Student Academic Success Office (SASO), the Office of Career Services (OCS), and the Center for Undergraduate Research and Graduate Opportunity (CURGO), as well as the Center for the Advancement of Teaching and Faculty Development (CAT+FD) for faculty support and mentor training. This work seeks to counter the regular practice at higher education institutions that have yet to address the importance of integrated programming across academic programs, student support programs, and research programs. This lack of coordinated and integrated programming often leads to duplication of efforts and ineffective use of resources. Xavier's BUILD program intentionally provides mechanisms and safeguards to ensure that coordination and integration occur at all levels. The overall hypothesis of Project Pathways is that when in a systematic way underrepresented minorities are provided with: early awareness and deepening exposure to biomedical careers;supportive relationships for students as they move through the pathway;suitable infrastructure; andmeaningful student engagement in biomedical research experiences and adequate research resources, a higher number will succeed in first entering, and later successfully completing graduate programs, leading to increased diversity in the biomedical research workforce. Preliminary assessment results are very encouraging; these results show higher course pass rates and better student preparation overall. The Project Pathways' initiatives can be replicated at other institutions with similar goals.

Computational studies on HdeA and its pH‐Dependent Activation

HdeA is a chaperone protein found in pathogenic gram‐negative bacteria such as E. coli that forms homodimers, provides bacterial stress response and acid resistance. HdeA is inactive in its dimeric form and becomes activated in low pH environments such as the mammalian stomach. In low pH environments it binds to other periplasmic proteins protecting them from aggregation and denaturation. Computational biophysical methods such as constant pH molecular dynamics in explicit and implicit solvent are utilized to couple protein dynamics and protonation states in order to reveal a plausible unfolding mechanism for HdeA. Our computational models are providing insight into the unfolding mechanisms for HdeA. The structural models have shown important interactions, some of which have not yet been observed in experimental structures, which can potentially stabilize the monomers at neutral pH while destabilizing and triggering partial unfolding in acidic pH conditions.Support or Funding InformationBuilding Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) # 5TL4GM118977This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

A participatory approach to evaluating a national training and institutional change initiative: the BUILD longitudinal evaluation

Background and purposeThe National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds training programs to increase the numbers and skills of scientists who obtain NIH research grants, but few programs have been rigorously evaluated. The sizeable recent NIH investment in developing programs to increase the diversity of the NIH-funded workforce, implemented through the Diversity Program Consortium (DPC), is unusual in that it also funds a Consortium-wide evaluation plan, which spans the activities of the 10 BUilding Infrastructure Leading to Diversity (BUILD) awardees and the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN). The purpose of this article is to describe the evaluation design and innovations of the BUILD Program on students, faculty, and institutions of the 10 primarily undergraduate BUILD sites.Key highlights of the projectOur approach to this multi-methods quasi-experimental longitudinal evaluation emphasizes stakeholder participation and collaboration. The evaluation plan specifies the major evaluation questions and key short- to long-term outcome measures (or Hallmarks of Success). The Coordination and Evaluation Center (CEC) embarked on a comprehensive evaluation strategy by developing a set of logic models that incorporate the Hallmarks of Success and other outcomes that were collaboratively identified by the DPC. Data were collected from each BUILD site through national surveys from the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA (HERI), annual followup surveys that align with the HERI instruments, site visits and case studies, program encounter data (“tracker” data), and institutional data. The analytic approach involves comparing changes in Hallmarks (key outcomes) within institutions for biomedical students who participated versus those who did not participate in the BUILD program at each institution, as well as between institution patterns of biomedical students at the BUILD sites, and matched institutions that were not BUILD grantees. Case studies provide insights into the institutionalization of these new programs and help to explain the processes that lead to the observed outcomes.ImplicationsUltimately, the results of the consortium-wide evaluation will be used to inform national policy in higher education and will provide relevant examples of institutional and educational programmatic changes required to diversify the biomedical workforce in the USA.