The End of a STEM Identity Pathway: A Girls in Science Program Falls Prey to Current Ideology

Abstract

This article provides a compelling argument using qualitative analysis for the longitudinal impact of an all-girls’ summer camp that was recently canceled due to an Executive Order from the Federal government. This paper will discuss: (1) the history of the program, including its changing funding sources over time; (2) the support of the local community that sustained this program; and (3) the ways in which the program influenced girls long after they graduated from middle and high school. Since 2006, 611 girls have participated in the Girls in STEM (GIS) summer camp. Surveys to alumnae were sent in 2022 and 2024, and 81 GIS alumnae responded. Many of these women explained how the camp helped them to see STEM career options that they were not aware of; improved their confidence that they could pursue careers that were male-dominated; and provided them with peers and mentors who became part of their network. The article concludes with a discussion of the cancellation of the program and the potential consequences of that decision.

1. Introduction

The underrepresentation of women in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce continues to be an issue in the United States (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine [NASEM], 2021; National Science Board [NSB], 2021; National Science Foundation [NSF], 2023). Women make up half of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020) but only 35% of the STEM workforce (National Science Foundation [NSF], 2023). Although this representation has improved over the last fifty years, it is a slow process. Research has demonstrated that youth are already seeing boys as naturally smart as early as age six (Bian et al., 2017). These stereotypes, along with the lack of women in some STEM spaces, affect girls’ sense of belonging and belief in their potential success in these fields, which results in fewer women pursuing and persisting in STEM.

To counter these stereotypes and increase the representation of women in STEM, multiple U.S. federal agencies required, or at the very least encouraged, a focus on equity for girls and women as part of the broader impacts of grant applications. These agencies historically supported programs that focused on girls and women in STEM (Gewin, 2025). For example, in 2024, the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) spent $1.1 billion of its $9 billion budget on grants that supported girls, women, and other marginalized populations in STEM (Mervis, 2025). However, on 21 January 2025, the President of the U.S. signed Executive Order 14173 (2025) Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity), which declared programs focusing on girls and women as discriminatory. As of April 2025, 200 NSF grants that focused on girls, women or other marginalized populations have been canceled by the agency, leading to the end of multiple programs and research studies (Mervis, 2025).

This is particularly concerning, since one of the research-based programmatic solutions to the underrepresentation of women in STEM has been introducing girls to STEM careers during adolescence—a time when they are exploring their STEM identities and career aspirations (Carlone et al., 2015; Tan & Calabrese Barton, 2008). These programs aim to counter stereotypes by creating supportive all-girl spaces where girls can interact with role models and engage in hands-on activities so that they can see their potential for success in STEM (American Association of University Women [AAUW], 2010; Calabrese Barton et al., 2013; King & Pringle, 2019; McCreedy & Dierking, 2013; National Research Council, 2009; Riedinger & Taylor, 2016; Robinson et al., 2016; Spielhagen, 2008). This was the goal of the Girls in STEM (GIS) summer camp, a pseudonym, that ran from 2006 to 2024 at a large interdisciplinary STEM research center in the southeastern United States and is the focus of this article.

This Special Issue of Education Sciences called for articles that illuminate the hidden costs and investments that educators and institutions make to nurture identity work and to examine how systemic factors like policy and funding enable or hinder these efforts. This article will provide details on the history and structure of the GIS program to demonstrate the hidden costs of identity work in an informal STEM education space. Then, the authors will introduce the research study that highlights how GIS longitudinally influenced girls’ STEM identities. The article will conclude with a discussion of how current federal policies may be limiting the ability of institutions to create and sustain programs that build girls’ STEM identities.

1.1. Theoretical Framework: STEM Identity

The foundation for our conceptualization of STEM identity comes from Carlone and Johnson’s (2007) science identity model, wherein an individual must develop their competence (e.g., skills) in science, have opportunities to perform these skills and be recognized by perceived experts. Through this ongoing identity work (i.e., performance and recognition), individuals develop stronger science identities. Because the GIS camp does not differentiate between science, technology, engineering, and mathematics but exposes girls to all four of these disciplines through interdisciplinary activities, we chose to combine all four as a STEM identity rather than a science identity. Research has highlighted the importance of two other components to STEM identity—interest (Hazari et al., 2013) and sense of belonging (Archer et al., 2017; Carlone et al., 2014; Hazari et al., 2013). Interest and sense of belonging work in combination with competence, performance, and recognition. For example, for an individual to seek out STEM-related school and extracurricular activities, they need to have an initial interest in STEM. Through the recognition of their performances in these spaces, they will strengthen their STEM identity, which includes their interest in STEM.

In addition to interest, girls need to feel like they belong in STEM spaces to even choose to perform their skills (Archer et al., 2017; King & Pringle, 2019). For girls, this sense of belonging is influenced by social and cultural messages that tell girls that they do not belong in STEM (Archer et al., 2017; Carlone et al., 2014). If a girl does not have a strong sense of belonging, they may not have confidence in their STEM competence and choose not to perform, or they may feel like recognition from others is not justified. This could result in a reduced STEM identity that includes loss of interest. Hence, interest alone is not enough to sustain individuals’ STEM identities. They must have continued opportunities to strengthen their sense of belonging and build their interest through recognized performances.

The GIS program that is the study site for this research study served as a space for girls to develop their STEM identity. They could develop their competence through participation in hands-on STEM activities and be recognized for their performances by STEM role models, educators, and their peers. The decision to make GIS an all-girls’ environment was made to create a space for girls to feel like they belong by meeting women role models and collaborating with girls who were interested in STEM. Recognition from experts plays a crucial role in individuals’ recognizing themselves as scientists and feeling like they belong and can succeed in STEM (Hazari et al., 2020). For this article, our research question was: what is the longitudinal impact of the GIS program on alumnae’s STEM identities?

1.2. Literature Review

Before describing the GIS camp, we want to situate our study in the literature.

1.2.1. Reports and Studies That Compare Multiple Programs

The GIS summer camp was created in 2006. At that time multiple studies pointed to the benefits of all-girls programs. Darke et al. (2002) conducted an evaluation to determine the impacts of 40 girls/women’s programs funded by the NSF’s Program for Women and Girls (PWG). PWG began in 1992 and funded over 250 projects at $85 million. These projects have spanned K-16 educational levels with the largest amount going towards programs aimed at middle school age girls. The authors chose a random stratified sample of 40 projects to study in-depth. As part of their evaluation, they interviewed principal investigators, project evaluators; reviewed PWG products; visited and observed ongoing projects; and reviewed project evaluations. Over 31,688 total individuals participated in the 40 programs. The authors could not discuss long term outcomes in their paper, but the short-term outcomes included participants’ increased interest in STEM and STEM courses, increased STEM course taking, and increased content knowledge. These results highlight the benefits of programs on potential STEM identity components (e.g., interest and competence). However, the report was limited to programs funded by NSF.

A decade after this report, McCreedy and Dierking conducted a research study to highlight the effects of six girls-only informal STEM education programs. This report (McCreedy & Dierking, 2013) attempted to understand the longitudinal impacts of these programs unlike the Darke et al. (2002) from the preceding decade. In the Cascading Influences report, the authors measured impacts of participation by focusing on: career outcomes, changes in interest, engagement, participation in science-related hobbies, and ways of thinking about science. The review included 174 participants from six programs who completed a survey, participated in an interview or an in-person gathering. The alumnae had participated in their respective programs at least 5 years from the study date and no more than 25 years. Participants highlighted the hands-on activities and exposure to female role models as key influences on their attitudes and understanding of STEM and STEM careers as well as their increased participation in STEM activities. One of the interesting findings from the study was women who were not in a STEM occupation saw this career choice as a potential failure compared to their middle school career ideals.

Further support for the benefits of girls-only programs came from Kim et al.’s (2018) literature review of research studies guided by a STEM identity lens that focused on girls-only programs from the preceding decade. The authors defined STEM identity similar to our own theoretical framing: identity is “grounded in the extent to which individuals see themselves and are accepted as a member of a STEM discipline or field”, which is influenced by the recognition they receive and their own sense of belonging (p. 591). The literature review highlighted the value of creating a supportive environment in combination with conversations with role models so that girls can see counters to STEM stereotypes and see themselves belonging in STEM.

1.2.2. Studies of Individual Programs

Studies on individual programs throughout the first quarter of the 21st century have shown mixed results for the benefits of all-girls programming. Watermeyer and Stevenson’s (2010) research on an informal STEM education weekend series for girls in the United Kingdom supported single-sex programming. The goal of this program was to counter the dominant cultural attitudes that prevented girls from seeing themselves in STEM fields. A key piece of this program was introducing girls to role models and engaging them in STEM activities. The authors found that the key piece to increasing girls’ interest in STEM and confidence in achieving a STEM career was the exposure to role models who demonstrated occupational possibilities and the all-girls space where girls felt more comfortable.

In comparison, a longitudinal study focused on the effects of an all-girls residential engineering program in the U.S. on girls’ self-efficacy and interest in/pursuit of engineering careers five years after participation showed no significant effects (Demetry et al., 2009). One hundred and seventy-six young women participated in the study. These included 67 applicants who did not participate in the camp and 109 campers who participated between 1997 and 2001. Participants completed a survey to assess the impact of the program on self-efficacy and career interest five years after their participation or application. These results were compared to their applications or post surveys. The results showed no significant differences between participants and applicants. For both of these studies it is important to note that the metrics for success are different. The Watermeyer and Stevenson study was measuring confidence and interest whereas in the Demetry et al. study they were measuring self-efficacy and career interest. This is still an issue for the field as it is difficult to compare across programs when each study is using different metrics.

With the proliferation of programs serving girls in STEM, research in the US has broadened to include programs that focus on particular disciplines (e.g., computer science, Pinkard et al., 2017; cybersecurity, Jethwani et al., 2017; makers spaces, Calabrese Barton & Tan, 2018) and/or the influence of programs on girls from marginalized populations (e.g., Calabrese Barton & Tan, 2018; Pinkard et al., 2017). These studies have shown promise for individual programs, but again the metrics for success are different across studies (e.g., improvements in justice orientations, Calabrese Barton & Tan, 2018; increased agency in design, Pinkard et al., 2017; increased interest in skill development and careers, Jethwani et al., 2017). The inability to compare across programs because of different metrics to determine impact has been a persistent issue. Our study will add to the field by helping us to better understand how a 1–2-week program can influence participants beyond the pre-/post program. Better understanding how a program can influence girls’ STEM identity long term can help program designers as well as show funding agencies the benefits of these programs to building the STEM workforce.

1.2.3. Where GIS Fits into This History

These studies and reports that compare multiple programs align with the design of GIS over its 19-year existence. Early on, the goal of the program was to create a space for girls to come together, meet female scientists, and work on activities designed by these scientists so that they could strengthen their STEM identities. As the years progressed, additional GIS programs were created to focus on girls of color and we focused the program on physical science, engineering, and computer science disciplines as these were the careers where women remained severely underrepresented. Our next section will provide more context for this.

2. Girls in STEM Summer Camp

To address the call for this Special Issue, we want to highlight the history of the program to demonstrate the financial and resource investments and support by multiple community members throughout the history of the program.

2.1. History of Girls in STEM Camp

The GIS camp began with the investment of a $5000 grant from the public television station in 2006. As part of the grant, all educators and directors participated in a training on how to incorporate gender equitable strategies into STEM education. The GIS camp was held in a city in the southeast. In 2006 the one-week camp was held at a local museum and sixteen middle school girls attended. After this first year, parents asked for additional options for their daughters citing a lack of STEM focused programming in the community (Communication with original Director). Many of these parents said that they liked that GIS was girls-only because it provided a space for girls to learn about science without the distraction of boys. So in 2007, with funding from the midwestern public television station, GIS offered a second camp for girls who had participated in 2006 along with a camp for newcomers. In 2007, 32 girls participated.

After the first two years of the camp, a large scientific facility (Interdisciplinary Lab; IDL) agreed to house the camp with the help of the local public television station. GIS charged a fee for attendance to support the program but offered scholarships for those in need. The camps were split into GIS-1 for rising 6th and 7th graders and GIS-2 for rising 8th and 9th graders along with repeaters. Both camps ran simultaneously for two weeks in the summer. Within two years, local community members donated to the program to provide scholarship opportunities. In 2011, IDL created a co-ed camp in addition to the GIS programs to meet the demand from parents of the need for a STEM-focused program that served boys in the community. In 2012, IDL set aside funds to pay the camp teachers for GIS and the co-ed camp ($12,500), however the camps were all reduced to one-week. Beginning in 2017 with funding from the same Midwest public television station, we offered an additional option—Girls Code—to our GIS-1, GIS-2, and co-ed camps, which would teach coding skills. The Midwest public television station developed a curriculum for this camp that incorporated gender equitable strategies for engaging girls in coding.

The IDL continued to offer these four camps until the pandemic forced us to cancel all camps in 2020. After the pandemic, Girls Code continued through 2022. In 2021 we offered a Girls Code camp at IDL, and one at a local school which continued through 2022. Beginning in 2021, we offered one GIS camp for all middle schoolers and one co-ed camp, each lasting one week. In 2022 the local school district agreed to fund the camp teacher salaries since they were local middle and high school teachers. In terms of participant numbers, the GIS camp never rebounded after COVID-19. Before COVID-19, we would have more applications for GIS than we could accept. After COVID-19, we took all applicants since the numbers didn’t exceed capacity. This was not the case for the co-ed camp, although those applications were lower than before COVID-19.

Table 1. Number of Girls served each summer.

Year	Girls in STEM	Girls Code on-Site	Girls Code off-Site	Total Girls Served by All GIS Programs
2006	16			16
2007	32			32
2008	33			33
2009	33			33
2010	32			32
2011	37			37
2012	32			32
2013	35			35
2014	36			36
2015	32			32
2016	46			46
2017	48	15		63
2018	40	14		54
2019	65	13		78
2020				0
2021	21	10	7	38
2022	21		4	25
2023	22			22
2024	20			20

shows the number of girls served over the course of the GIS program.

2.2. The Support of the Local Community

The section above provides the history of the GIS program, with some reference to the varied sources of financial support during the program’s duration. This section will describe the community support and GIS’s role within the community. At the conclusion of GIS in 2006, parents asked for an expansion of the program because there were so few STEM programs, particularly ones that focused on girls, for youth in the community. At that time there were two museums in town who offered science-related camps; one was a NASA-funded museum which offered camps related to space science, and the other was a natural history museum which offered camps related to life science and ecology. Youth could participate in these programs beginning as early as age 5. Hence, by the time local youth were in middle school, these science camps felt repetitive.

The GIS camp operated for 19 years and relied heavily on in-kind support. The camp directors collaborated with community organizations in STEM fields to provide hands-on activities, including two major universities, a community college, engineering firms, veterinarians, and state and local agencies. Many partners were motivated by the camp’s mission, which aligned with their own efforts to increase diversity in STEM. Both the local public television station and staff from the IDL who ran the camps did not receive additional payment for their work. The local public television station provided their in-kind contributions through marketing, video production, and radio segments featuring camp participants. Communicating the importance of science to public audiences was intentionally built into the curriculum, reinforcing the camp’s broader impact. The staff at the IDL served as educators in the program and helped to coordinate scientist visits and activities.

GIS was unique in that from 2006–2019, campers would take field trips to meet STEM professionals working across a range of fields throughout the local community. The scientists developed camp activities themselves, offering novel experiences that were not available outside of GIS. Most of the activities were led by women scientists. When male scientists were participating, they would make sure to bring female graduate students or postdocs to help with the activities. On average, girls would meet two STEM professionals a day. These interactions included time for girls to ask the women questions about their lives and careers. Beginning in 2021, the program directors decided to end field trips due to budget constraints and instead refocus the activities and scientist interactions on those researchers working at IDL. The IDL facility focused on materials science, condensed matter physics, biomedical engineering, organic chemistry, and physical chemistry. These fields have a low representation of women and are not well known by most youth and their parents (Barry et al., 2023; Fergusson & Givens, 2023; Funk et al., 2019). Thus, girls were consistently learning about careers from women scientists and expanding their future career options.

Apart from the scientists who worked alongside both the IDL staff and public television staff assisting the GIS program over the years, many other members of the community were involved across multiple sectors. In 2008, a local chapter of a national engineering firm donated $5000 to GIS to be used over three years. This donation was repeated every three years until the cancelation of the program in 2025. Women engineers from this firm would also participate in GIS as role models and designed bridge building activities for the girls. In 2010, a city leader whose daughters attended GIS donated $500 to the program. In 2020, a local brewery created a science-related theme brew for the month of March, and half of all proceeds went to GIS and the co-ed camp at IDL. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic ending this charity early, the programs received $6000. Beginning in 2022, staff at the IDL could donate to GIS and we received $1000 across the co-ed and GIS program.

In addition to these funders, other members of the community have been involved with the GIS programs as educators. Beginning in 2008, four educators from the local middle and high schools were hired to facilitate the camps. From 2008–2012, two graduate students also worked with the camps. From 2012–2024, local elementary, middle, and high school teachers were hired to facilitate the camps. The camps were advertised in local schools and youth centers, as well as on the local public television and radio stations. Teachers would often recommend that their students apply. The widespread involvement of community members and educators is an indicator that many folks within the community knew about the program and supported its role as a nontraditional, identity-affirming source of STEM learning for girls.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Data Sources

The authors chose to conduct a qualitative research study using open-ended survey questions sent to alumnae of the GIS program. The lead author sent a Qualtrics survey embedded in an email to alumnae of all the IDL middle and high school programs in 2022 and 2024. GIS had been the second longest running program at IDL. All program participants had signed assent forms and parents signed consent forms at the time of their participation in their respective programs. The first page of the alumnae survey included a consent form that they checked to proceed. The study was approved by the first author’s Institutional Review Board. The survey asked demographic questions including which IDL programs they participated in and their race/ethnicity selected from a drop-down menu. Students could then select their educational level from a drop-down menu (i.e., middle school, high school, pursuing an associate’s degree, pursuing a bachelor’s degree, pursuing an advanced degree (e.g., Master’s, PhD, JD), in the workforce, not currently enrolled in school). A second question asked alumnae to select the category that best described the career they are most interested in or currently pursuing from a drop-down menu (i.e., Biology, non-medical sciences; Medical sciences (MD, nursing); Chemistry; Physics; Engineering; Computer science; Veterinary medicine; Law; Social Sciences). The drop-down menu included an “other” category where they could write in their career interest. Students were assigned a randomized identity number when they first participated in their respective IDL program. Each survey was linked to the individual’s identity number so that we could verify demographic information and their program participation.

The main question for the research came from the next two survey items. Respondents were asked to choose “yes” or “no” in response to the following question: My participation in my respective program has had a lasting influence on my interest in STEM. This question was followed by an open-ended option to explain why they chose yes or no. The open-ended responses served as the data sources for our data analysis. All survey responses were included in the analysis. There were no exclusion criteria.

3.2. Population

The data for this article focuses on all alumnae who participated in at least one GIS program. Since 2006, 611 girls have participated in a GIS camp at IDL; 81 responded to the longitudinal survey. Fifteen women responded in 2022 and 2024, while 34 responded in 2024 only and 32 responded in 2022 only. Of these 81 alumnae, 80 identify as female and one as non-binary. The demographics of these respondents can be found in

Table 2. Demographics of Participants (n = 81).

Race/Ethnicity	Percent of Respondents
White	59%
Asian American	22%
Black or African American	17%
Hispanic or Latina	14%
Alaskan Native or Pacific Islander	1%

.

3.3. Data Analysis

For the analysis of the open-ended responses, in vivo coding was used (Saldana, 2021). The lead author read through the comments and used respondents’ own phrases as codes. The codes that were referenced by the alumnae to describe the lasting influence of GIS were: encouraged their love of STEM, inspired lifelong learning, introduced them to multiple career options, major reason for current career, seeing other women was motivating, reinforced previous love for STEM, established a strong foundation, and enjoyed the supportive environment. Each of these will be highlighted in Section 4. These codes were reviewed with a staff member at IDL who runs the middle and high school programs. The lead author identified the codes for each response and shared this with the staff member. The two met to discuss any disagreements over codes and came to consensus on the identified codes.

4. Results

The distribution across career trajectories can be found in

Table 3. Educational and Career Stages of Respondents.

Educational or Career Stage	Percent of Respondents (n = 81)
Middle School	9% *
High School	28%
College	33%
Pursuing an Advanced Degree	15%
In the Workforce	15%

* Note: the survey was not sent to all alumni as the goal for the longitudinal survey was to assess the impact of the programs on high school students and older. The calculation for high school students was based on the grade level they provided at the time they participated in the camp. The 9% who were still in middle school at the time of the survey were in 8th grade and not meant to receive the survey but sometimes reporting of grade levels for a summer program is confusing with students putting the grade they plan to attend rather than the one they just completed.

. The majority of our respondents were in college, pursuing an advanced degree or in the workforce.

These 81 respondents represented 110 GIS participants, meaning some participated in multiple GIS camps.

Table 4. Representation across Years.

Year	Number of All GIS Alumnae Respondents from That Year	Number of GIS Only or GIS First Respondents from That Year
2006	3	3
2007	3	3
2008	4	2
2009	4	2
2010	0	0
2011	4	3
2012	4	2
2013	8	6
2014	5	2
2015	9	7
2016	8	6
2017	14	8
2018	12	2
2019	18	8
2020
2021	12	11
2022	2	3

provides the representation of alumnae across the years. These participants could have been part of programs outside of GIS. Of the 81 GIS participants, 60% only participated in a GIS program at IDL (n = 49) and an additional 22% (n = 18) attended a GIS program before any of the other co-ed programs offered at IDL e.g., the co-ed camp, middle and high school internships). The final column in Table 4 shows the distribution across the years for these individuals.

Of the 81 alumnae respondents, 6 women (7%) said the program did not have a lasting influence on their interest in STEM, and only one provided a qualitative response and indicated that she was pursuing an advanced degree in music. Of these six, one was in high school at the time of her 2024 response and planned to pursue an education degree in college. One who was in college during both surveys initially said the program had an influence on her when she was majoring in engineering (2022) but changed her answer to no in 2024 when she switched her major to accounting. One who was in the workforce at the time of her response indicated she was in the medical sciences. Two were in high school at the time of their response and indicated they were interested in medical sciences. It is difficult to make any conclusions since these individuals did not provide a qualitative response. For example, they might have believed that the program didn’t have a lasting influence if they were no longer in a STEM major. Or they might have always been interested in STEM and the program didn’t change that interest.

The remaining seventy-five respondents (93%) said that the program had a lasting influence on their interest in STEM. Of these women, 59 provided open-ended responses to explain why they selected yes.

Table 5. Codes and Number of References.

In Vivo Code	Number * of Times the Code Was Mentioned
encouraged love of STEM	13
introduced her to multiple career options	12
inspired lifelong learning	9
major reason for current career	9
seeing other women was empowering	9
strengthened previous love for STEM	4
established a strong foundation	3
enjoyed the supportive environment	1

* Note, these add up to 60 because one respondent referenced two codes.

provides a summary of the in vivo codes and the number of respondents who mentioned them as a reason for the programs’ lasting influence. The codes are bolded throughout this section.

Due to our research methods for this study, we do not have data on the performances and recognition experiences as they occurred during the camp. Rather we have reflections from the alumnae. Hence, the main STEM identity (Archer et al., 2017; Carlone et al., 2014; Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Hazari et al., 2013) components that we can see through our data are increased and/or sustained STEM interest (i.e., encouraged love of STEM, introduction to career options, strengthened previous love of STEM, established a strong foundation) and increased sense of belonging (major reason for current career, seeing other women was empowering, enjoyed the supportive environment).

4.1. Increased or Sustained STEM Interest

Many of these participants credited GIS with introducing them to STEM and or building their STEM interest. For example, one alumna from 2008 and 2009 who is currently in the computer science workforce said, “It’s one of my fondest memories from childhood. It really helped me realize my interest and establish a strong foundation in STEM.” A 2006 alumna who is working in the medical field explained that “GIS gave me an early exposure to hands on science that laid the foundation for my future career as a physician.” This concept of “laying the foundation” articulates the baseline interest and strengthening of that interest that is a crucial part of STEM identity development (Hazari et al., 2013). Another alumna from the very first year of GIS, explained that the camp “encouraged my love of STEM. I am now a veterinarian. And as of 4 months ago I became the Director of Medicine in our vet clinic.” This reference to a love for STEM again highlights the interest that the camp inspired.

Other alumnae indicated that they were already interested in science and GIS simply reinforced this. As one 2015 alumnae who is currently in the biology workforce explained, “GIS helped strengthen and solidify my interest in STEM”. She went on to explain why:

Collaborating with other girls in my age group with similar interests was very rewarding and refreshing along with meeting professional women working in the STEM helped fuel my determination and passion to pursue a career in STEM. Their experiences, insights, and knowledge inspired and validated me. These women served as role models for me. Additionally, the many activities I participated in and the experiences I gained during GIS were invaluable and bolstered my passion for STEM.

In this response, she expresses how the camp influenced her STEM identity: meeting other girls who were interested in STEM (Hazari et al., 2013; Watermeyer & Stevenson, 2010) and seeing the possibilities of STEM careers helped her to see herself belonging in STEM (Kim et al., 2018; McCreedy & Dierking, 2013).

Alumnae also referenced the benefits of GIS as a place where they were introduced to multiple career options, another form of developing interest in STEM. As a 2015 GIS alumna and a 2016 co-ed camp alumna pursuing her bachelor’s degree in materials science engineering explained, “It exposed me to what scientists actually do. I am studying Material Science Engineering which is the perfect blend of science and engineering.” GIS helped participants see what scientists “actually do” so that they could begin to determine or broaden which STEM careers they were most interested in. A 2017 alumna pursuing a bachelor’s degree in medical science referenced a program activity where girls would research a potential career and create a poster about it:

Though I don’t have my poster anymore, the career poster that we did at the end of the camp was one of the first times that I really thought about my future, what I wanted to do, and how I was going to get there.

She also referenced the value of meeting the other girls, “GIS was really empowering and I remain friends with the girls in my class even to this day.”

4.2. Sense of Belonging

The reference to empowerment and being around friends highlights the sense of belonging that girls felt within STEM due to their participation in GIS (Archer et al., 2017; Carlone et al., 2014). One of the respondents, a 2013 and 2015 alumna who is pursuing a PhD in biology, actually referenced her developing competence and linked it to her sense of belonging when she said:

I remember GIS as a very fun STEM experience, I liked that we had to opportunity to experience so many different STEM fields and such a wide spread of research. The hands-on projects were great for building skills and made me feel like I could do science.

Her comment highlights how the combination of skill development and opportunities for self-realization through career exploration improved her sense of belonging (“made me feel like I could do science”).

Additionally, respondents indicated that GIS was the major reason they were in their STEM career currently. A 2007 and 2008 alumna who is now an engineer said, “I credit GIS as one of the major reasons I am an engineer and why I continue to try and show younger girls that Women in STEM are some of the best kinds of engineers”. This participant shows how her participation in GIS not only influenced her career choice but has also motivated her to recruit and share the possibility and belonging that STEM can provide for other girls and women. A 2012 alumna in medical school explained:

I didn’t truly realize how much I enjoyed science until I participated in GIS. I had an idea, but GIS exposed me to so much that it encouraged me to pursue a Bachelor of Science in Biomedical Sciences on the Pre-Medicine track. I am currently on track to be a doctor and a part of the reason why is GIS.

This comment emphasizes how the program made her feel like she could succeed and belong in STEM.

One of the most cited reasons for the lasting influence of GIS was seeing other women in STEM (both peers and role models), who served as a source of motivation and example of women’s belonging in STEM. A 2016 and 2019 alumna, currently in high school and planning to major in biology highlighted this code when she said, “Attending GIS opened my eyes to how empowered women in STEM are and fostered my love for biological sciences.” A 2019 alumna pursuing a bachelor’s in computer science highlighted the value of the girls-only space:

That was the first and only time I’ve been to a STEM camp that wasn’t dominated by men. It also showed me the power of science, fostering my curiosity for it. It made me intentionally seek out opportunities to deepen my knowledge and pursue my STEM career.

Here she highlights the value of a STEM space not dominated by men (McCreedy & Dierking, 2013). Through this all-girls space she was able to develop her competence in STEM and feel like she belonged so much so that she is committed to her STEM degree. A 2008 and 2009 alumna completing her PhD in biology explained:

I was in GIS for a couple summers in middle school. We saw women in different fields of science show enthusiasm for their work, and that was an inspiration to me and the girls around me. Being surrounded by the other girls interested in science gave me a community. Although it’s been about 15 years since I was in GIS, I remember it vividly and fondly. I’ll be graduating with my PhD next year and I can say with certainty that during GIS, being shown many examples of women pursuing their careers in science showed me that I can do it too.

In this quote she highlights the value of the community of girls created, and the inspiration and motivation that the role models provided for her so that she could see herself in STEM.

Similarly, a 2011 and 2012 GIS alumna (she also attended the co-ed camp in 2011 and 2012) completing her PhD in biophysics explained the value of the GIS space to help her combat imposter syndrome:

My experiences in GIS helped me to see myself as a real scientist at an early age, and this positive self-image persisted throughout my time in high school despite the lack of other students of my background (Black female) in my STEM classes at the time. I am now completing a PhD in biophysics and GIS was instrumental in my decision to pursue science as a career choice.

This quote highlights how GIS developed STEM identity for this participant. She was able to see herself as a scientist by meeting other girls and women. This knowledge helped her to persist even when she was the only Black woman in some STEM spaces.

One participant, a 2013 alumna working in engineering, saw the benefits of the all-girl environment of GIS as a source of motivation in her male-dominated field:

Being around other girls while being exposed to different fields of science probably gave me courage to continue in those spheres myself. I am now a Navy officer and pilot. It’s only when I really stop and look around do I realize that there have been few women around me. But for me, it feels totally normal and natural to be in this field because I was exposed to them [at a] young [age].

Here she demonstrates how even a week-long summer camp 10 years ago could strengthen her STEM identity enough that despite being in spaces with few women, she could still see herself as an engineer.

4.3. Non-STEM Career Alumnae: Belonging and Interest

Even alumnae who are not pursuing STEM careers highlighted the value of the supportive environment of GIS. As a businesswoman alumna from 2012 explained:

I participated in SciGirls at a time in my life when I was extremely shy and anxious. The field trips and activities were challenging for me on a social level, but the support of the staff and other girls allowed me to gain awesome experiences in STEM I otherwise wouldn’t have.

This comment highlights how the support within the all-girls environment helped this young woman to feel comfortable enough to participate and develop confidence in herself. In addition, a 2019 alumna in 12th grade planning to major in communications in college explained: “My participation in GIS has given me a unique opportunity and perspective by providing a wide range of exposure to myself and other young girls, in order to picture ourselves in places that society often never places us.” This comment highlights the benefit that the all-girls space had on this participant. It allowed her—and others—to begin to see themselves belonging in STEM and other fields where women are underrepresented.

Many of the non-STEM majors commented on the benefits of GIS in inspiring their lifelong learning. For example, a 2018 and 2019 GIS alumna currently in college planning to pursue a law degree said:

Even though I am not pursuing a STEM career, I have an appreciation for STEM. I also have a great level of interest in the sciences and continue to strive to learn all I can. GIS taught me a lot about science and technology in particular and I feel they were fulfilling experiences.

Similarly, a 2006 alumna working in law explained, “Though I chose not to pursue a STEM career, I enjoyed learning about these topics and knowing how the world works. My current job involves climate change litigation and I have the fun opportunity to learn about climate science.” Another 2017 alumna pursuing an English teaching degree said, “even though I am not pursuing a career in a STEM field, I am always interested in learning about stem related topics because of the GIS program”. All of these comments demonstrate how the GIS program influenced girls’ interest and sense of belonging in STEM even if they chose not to pursue a STEM career.

5. Discussion

The goal of the GIS program was to create a supportive space for girls to come together, interact with female scientists, and work on activities designed by these scientists so that they could strengthen their STEM identities. Our STEM identity framework highlighted how interest, competence, performance, recognition and sense of belonging are intimately tied to STEM identity development (Archer et al., 2017; Carlone & Johnson, 2007; Hazari et al., 2013). The lens helped us to identify the longitudinal impact of the GIS program on the respondents’ STEM identities even for those women who were not pursuing a traditional STEM career.

5.1. Lasting STEM Interest

One of the lasting influences of the GIS program was sustained STEM interest, even for those alumnae who were not in STEM careers. This is a contradiction to McCreedy and Dierking’s (2013) finding that women who were no longer in STEM felt like they had failed in their pursuits. Our participants saw value in the role that GIS had on their love of STEM and how STEM and their love for it could still be applicable to non-STEM careers like law. This is an interesting finding that requires more investigation—how programs can help participants to see STEM in their everyday lives and the principles of STEM apply to non-STEM careers. This lasting interest points to the value programs like GIS can have on participants that allow them to see the value of STEM and their potential to belong in STEM even if they are not pursuing a STEM career. This influence is particularly important during this current time when scientific findings are questioned leading to public opinion that undermines centuries of public health advancement (Funk et al., 2019). If programs like GIS can instill a lasting interest in STEM, perhaps they could be a tool for combatting distrust in science.

5.2. Feeling Like a Scientist

Beyond interest, the all-girls space created by GIS along with the women role models helped the participants to feel like they belonged. This has been supported by other research as well (Kim et al., 2018). Many of the alumnae credited the program as the major reason they were in their current, often male-dominated, field even if that field was not designated as STEM. This is preliminary evidence of the longitudinal influence of GIS on women’s sense of belonging even in male-dominated fields based on their participation in an all-girls’ summer camp 5 or more years ago. Research has shown that programs like GIS provide a supportive memory for them—in moments where they might doubt their belonging in STEM, they can look back on their experience in GIS and be reminded of a time when they were supported in their STEM interest and this memory can motivate their persistence during setbacks (Ibourk et al., 2022).

This finding deserves more investigation due to the lack of reference to recognition, which research shows is a crucial part of our STEM identity lens (Hazari et al., 2020). None of our respondents mentioned being recognized as a scientist and yet many of them felt like one. This could be because the data collection question was posed as a question about the camp and the respondents might not have been thinking about specific individuals who made them feel like a scientist.

5.3. Memories of Performed Competence

Despite not having data to show the active process of performed competence and recognition, some of the alumnae did mention the benefit of hands-on activities in GIS that helped them develop their interest. This connection between skill development (i.e., hands-on activities) and improved interest has been highlighted by other research and demonstrates that these memories from 5 or more years ago have a lasting influence on participants (Kim et al., 2018; McCreedy & Dierking, 2013; Watermeyer & Stevenson, 2010). The comments made by alumnae highlight how hands-on activities can provide opportunities for girls to develop their STEM competence which connects to their improved interest. This finding also supports the combination of hands-on activities along with role model interactions to support STEM identity development.

5.4. Implications for Practice and Program Design

Unlike studies that have shown no lasting influence on self-efficacy (Demetry et al., 2009), our study highlights that exposure to role models and engagement with hands-on activities in a supportive all-girls environment can have a lasting influence on STEM identity. For some of our alumnae they actually credit GIS with helping them achieve their current STEM career. With the closure of all-girls programs across the nation, what will happen to girls who do not have opportunities like GIS? Perhaps interactions with women role models in co-educational settings will be enough to build girls’ sense of belonging and interest so that their STEM identity can develop. But is there something related to STEM identity that can only happen for some girls in a girl-only environment? Because research has not conclusively answered the debate regarding single-sex versus co-educational settings (Hughes, 2015; Hughes et al., 2013), there is a need for more quality research studies on these venues. And yet, our own government has decided, without research-based proof, that these programs are no longer worthy of existence or study, consequently ending a potential solution to building the STEM workforce and undermining the US’s STEM endeavors.

6. Limitations

It is important to note that GIS was just one opportunity along a continuum of STEM experiences that strengthen or weakened these young women’s STEM identity. We don’t know what other experiences these women had that could have also influenced their STEM identity. Due to our research methods, we are relying on their self-reflection of a program they participated in 5 or more years ago. We also do not have data on the ways in which girls were recognized during the camp. Despite this, the memories of GIS and its influence, made a lasting impression on these 70 young women.

Another limitation is that we only had 81 of our 611 alumnae respond to the survey. It is difficult to know if the resulting respondents are a representative sample. Distribution-wise, we were able to hear from at least two girls from each year of the camp, except for 2010. This allows us to see similar influences no matter what year the girls’ participated. And the fact that seven girls checked no in response to the program having a lasting impression highlights that respondents were willing to tell us their honest feedback.

Lastly, the authors of this article have experience with GIS. The lead author has been a teacher in the program and eventually became the co-director with the third author who has been the co-director since 2006. The second author is an alumna of GIS. Although this could bias the interpretations, as we worked on the paper, we were able to discuss the findings and challenge our assumptions. In addition, the second author served as a source of member checking since she was also a participant. Lastly, a staff member from IDL verified the codes. This allowed us to check our findings with someone outside of the GIS original team.

7. Conclusions

Our paper not only highlights the value of GIS from a STEM identity development perspective but also describes the value of this program to the local community. Parents, scientists, engineers, and community partners saw value in GIS and supported it through donations of money and/or their own time. Despite the value of GIS within the local community and for the many girls who participated, the program was canceled in 2025. GIS is one of many programs across the country that served girls and aimed to help them see themselves as future scientists. In terms of local impacts, the GIS program incorporated close to 20 years of community building by the directors. Even if GIS is brought back at some point in the future, it may take time to rebuild those relationships. On a national scale, GIS is not the only girls-focused program that was canceled in 2025 due to the Executive Order. With these cancellations, how many women and girls might be lost to STEM because they can’t engage in programs that counter stereotypes and help them to see themselves as valued members of the STEM enterprise? What are the consequences to America’s STEM workforce if we lose programs like GIS? To become and persist as a scientist, technician, or engineer in the STEM workforce, one must have a strong STEM identity. This loss of programs that strengthen STEM identity at an early age may not only lower the number of scientists in America but reduce the diversity of ideas that scientists can produce, a detriment that may far outweigh the costs of implementing and maintaining these programs over time.