Hello everyone.
In this article, I will introduce a paper I read in the English seminar and share my thoughts on it.

Authors: Yiyun “Kate” Fan, Amanda Barany & Aroutis Foster
Volume/Pages: 10(1) 1-22
Publication Year: 2023
Journal: International journal of STEM education

1. Research Background and Purpose: Why is a diverse workforce needed in STEM fields?
This paper focuses on the need to address issues related to career development for individuals belonging to racial and ethnic minorities in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Previous research suggests that activities promoting “identity exploration,” where individuals consider their future possibilities and goals, contribute significantly to students’ career development.
However, the authors point out several gaps in existing identity research:

・A bias toward the “present”: Many studies focus on the identity learners currently possess, and the process of how they reflect on and form meaning regarding their “Possible Future Selves”—who they want to become in the future—has not been sufficiently explored.

・A student-centered perspective: Research subjects are mainly limited to students, and there have been few studies comparing them with professionals already in their careers or capturing how identity changes from a long-term perspective.

・Insufficient use of qualitative data: There is a tendency to rely on large-scale survey data, which fails to capture the qualitative nuances of identity exploration that individuals express in their own words.

To overcome these challenges, this paper focuses on minority individuals at different career stages—undergraduate students and alumni—and aims to analyze the thought patterns and conceptual connections they use when discussing identity exploration using interview data.
The research question is set as: “How do minority students and alumni describe their identity exploration process when asked to reflect on their ‘Possible Future Selves’ in STEM?”

2. Research Methodology
Utilization of Quantitative Ethnography: About “ENA”
To compare the differences in thought patterns and structures between the two groups of “students” and “alumni,” the authors adopted a method called Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA), which allows for the “quantitative comparison and visualization” of thought structures using interview data.
ENA is a method that measures how specific concepts (codes) “co-occur (appear together)” in conversation data and visualizes the patterns of these associations as a network model. This allows for statistical verification of differences in thought structures, such as whether the word “action” is strongly linked to “uncertain future” or to “self-efficacy (one’s own ability).”
Subjects and Analysis Process
Participants: A total of 21 individuals, consisting of 11 minority students and 10 alumni who participated in a program by a consortium of U.S. higher education institutions (Northeast AMP). The alumni include individuals at diverse career stages, with graduation years ranging from 1995 to 2021.
Data Collection: Semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom for approximately one hour, and the analysis was limited to responses to questions prompting reflection on the exploration process of “Possible Future Selves” in STEM fields.
Analysis Process: From the interview text data, 12 recurring themes (e.g., “current interest,” “taking actions,” “uncertain future”) were identified as codes, and ENA was used to analyze how these codes were connected (co-occurred) in the discourse.

3. Research Results: Differences in Thought Patterns by Career Stage
As a result of the ENA analysis, it was found that there are statistically significant differences in the thought patterns of students and alumni when talking about their “Possible Future Selves.”
Student Group Thought Pattern: “Open-ended Exploration”
The student group’s thought pattern showed a clear structure where the concept of “Taking Actions” was at the center of the network.
This “Taking Actions” was strongly linked to the following three concepts:
・Less Certain Future
・Current Interest
・Future Career Field
The authors state that this pattern suggests that while students are at a stage where they do not yet have concrete career goals (uncertain future), they are actively taking specific actions, such as internships or faculty research programs, to explore their current interests. In the paper, this stage is interpreted as “open-ended exploration.” It was also shown that the students’ thought patterns were relatively uniform, suggesting they may be experiencing similar exploration processes through university support programs.

Alumni Group Thought Pattern: “Complex and Individualized Integration”
On the other hand, the alumni group’s thought pattern was in contrast to that of the students.
Distributed balance: Instead of a specific concept being at the center, they showed a balanced pattern where connections were distributed across diverse themes. This suggests that identity exploration becomes more holistic and complex throughout one’s career.
Connection with self-efficacy: While “Taking Actions” appeared frequently among alumni as well, whereas the student model was linked to “uncertain future,” the alumni tended to be associated with “self-efficacy” (their own abilities and skills).
This is thought to suggest that alumni envision their future after clearly recognizing their own abilities, interests, and the specific skills required to advance their careers.
Also, the individual thought patterns of alumni were more diverse than those of students. The wide distribution of data suggests that diverse career paths and social experiences after graduation lead to unique, “individualized” identity exploration processes for each person. For example, one alumnus linked their ability to “self-definition,” while another linked it to specific “actions” or “future career roles.”

4. Discussion and Practical Implications
Identity exploration is a dynamic process that continues and evolves
This paper argues that the results show that identity exploration is a dynamic process that changes its nature according to the career stage.
The pattern seen in students—”taking active steps based on current interests even in an uncertain future”—supports the claim in previous research that identity exploration is an intentional and goal-oriented process. It is considered to represent an attempt to actively form an identity through action, even if the future is not yet determined.
On the other hand, the diversification of the alumni’s exploration process states that identity exploration does not stop as a career progresses, but rather continues in a complex and individualized form.
This finding provides a new perspective that reinterprets the previous research observation that “the effects of university support programs appear to fade a few years after graduation” as “evidence of successful maturation.” In other words, it can be interpreted as reflecting a process where alumni move away from standardized support provided by university programs and branch out into diverse and individualized growth paths as they walk their own unique career paths.

The results of this paper suggest the following two specific possibilities for the design and practice of higher education programs that support minority students:
・Importance of providing a wide range of opportunities for students: Based on the fact that students are in a stage of “open-ended exploration,” it is important for programs to provide a wide range of opportunities for diverse STEM majors and career experiences so that they can explore their interests from multiple angles. Specifically, this includes supporting the activities of student organizations that deal with diverse themes and expanding internships in various industries.
・Strengthening collaboration between students and professionals (alumni): The finding that the identity exploration process shifts toward “concrete and professional envisioning” after graduation emphasizes the value of connecting people at different stages of their careers. In particular, mentorship and networking opportunities that connect current students with alumni (professionals) who also have minority backgrounds are extremely beneficial. It is stated that this can be a powerful support for students to imagine their “Possible Future Selves” more concretely and realistically.

5. Conclusion and Future Challenges
This paper made an academic contribution by capturing “future” identity exploration from a long-term perspective, including alumni, going beyond the traditional student-centered and present-oriented framework. It also demonstrated that the ENA method is effective for objectively visualizing and comparing differences in thought patterns between groups without losing the nuances of qualitative data such as interviews.
As for future challenges, to overcome the limitations of a cross-sectional study based on a single point in time, the paper describes the need to conduct longitudinal studies that track the same group over a long period to clarify the transformation process of identity exploration in more detail, and to perform comparative analyses by detailed attributes such as race, field of expertise, and type of support program.

Below are my thoughts after reading this paper.
I chose this paper because I am interested in cases where qualitative data such as interviews are handled quantitatively using ENA in the field of career education. The method of considering career maturity by capturing the connections of content regarding future images of one’s own career was very informative. Also, by comparing not only students but also alumni, I think it provides hints for thinking about interventions based on career development throughout one’s life. For example, at the high school stage, one could consider methods such as how learning that allows students to recognize the complexity of adult work and skills, and to experience how current interests affect future branching, leads to the formation of career awareness.
On the other hand, as noted in the limitations of the study, this result does not evaluate the effectiveness of the program content itself. I think it will be necessary in the future to look at individual transformation, such as what kind of intervention programs aimed at what effects worked in the long term.
I was also curious about why the nature of “minority” was limited in terms of subjects, and how the research design was conducted according to the situation of minorities.
In the future, I would like to think about how to capture learner transformation from various angles through various analyses and considerations in my own research.

Responsible for text: Kohei Ozaki