The Delphi method (DM) was initially conceived as a forecasting technique whose results are based on the consensus of a panel of experts. It has been used in many fields, assisting researchers, policymakers, and others in setting directions and future agendas. This study presents an application of the DM, with a broader interpretation of the notion of “expert” as a qualitative tool to explore gender issues in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. Its aim is to analyze the use of the DM as a technique to achieve agreement among a group of early-career researchers from the UK and Mexico, who are not considered “experts” in the traditional sense. The other aim was to explore the advantages and disadvantages of using the DM in this context. We used three stages to collect information and reach a consensus. The first two were online activities, and the last consisted of a five-day face-to-face workshop. In the first stage, participants sent research questions, and organizers categorized them into themes. Participants responded to a survey ranking all research questions in the second stage. In the last, organizers analyzed the highest scored questions and arranged them into research topics in which participants worked on research proposals. The DM worked successfully with this group of participants by combining their interest in the field and engagement with the activities. The research strands and proposals of using this method are usable. The method used in this paper can serve as a model to develop research graduate courses to develop students’ skills.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.