Introductory STEM courses represent entry points into a major, and student experiences in these courses can affect both their persistence and success in STEM disciplines. Identifying course-based student concerns may help instructors detect negative perceptions, areas of struggle, and potential barriers to success. Using an open-response survey question, we identified 13 common concerns expressed by students in introductory STEM courses. We converted these student-generated concerns into closed-ended items that were administered at the beginning and middle of the semester to students in 22 introductory STEM course sections across three different institutions. Students were asked to reflect on each item on a scale from very concerned to not concerned. A subset of these concerns was used to create a summary score of course-based concern for each student. Overall levels of student concern decreased from the first week to the middle of the semester; however, this pattern varied across different demographic groups. In particular, when controlling for initial concern and course grades, female students held higher levels of concern than their peers. Since student perceptions can impact their experiences, addressing concerns through communication and instructional practices may improve students’ overall experiences and facilitate their success.
- PAR ID:
- 10171934
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- CBE—Life Sciences Education
- Volume:
- 18
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 1931-7913
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- ar60
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
Abstract Background Large introductory lecture courses are frequently post-secondary students’ first formal interaction with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Grade outcomes in these courses are often disparate across student populations, which, in turn, has implications for student retention. This study positions such disparities as a manifestation of systemic inequities along the dimensions of sex, race/ethnicity, income, and first-generation status and investigates the extent to which they are similar across peer institutions.
Results We examined grade outcomes in a selected set of early STEM courses across six large, public, research-intensive universities in the United States over ten years. In this sample of more than 200,000 STEM course enrollments, we find that course grade benefits increase significantly with the number of systemic advantages students possess at all six institutions. The observed trends in academic outcomes versus advantage are strikingly similar across universities despite the fact that we did not control for differences in grading practices, contexts, and instructor and student populations. The findings are concerning given that these courses are often students’ first post-secondary STEM experiences.
Conclusions STEM course grades are typically lower than those in other disciplines; students taking them often pay grade penalties. The systemic advantages some student groups experience are correlated with significant reductions in these grade penalties at all six institutions. The consistency of these findings across institutions and courses supports the claim that inequities in STEM education are a systemic problem, driven by factors that go beyond specific courses or individual institutions. Our work provides a basis for the exploration of contexts where inequities are exacerbated or reduced and can be used to advocate for structural change within STEM education. To cultivate more equitable learning environments, we must reckon with how pervasive structural barriers in STEM courses negatively shape the experiences of marginalized students.
-
Norwich University, the oldest Senior Military College in the nation and the first private U.S. institution to teach engineering, has a residential program for approximately 2,100 primarily undergraduate students in both the Corps of Cadets and civilian lifestyles. Norwich secured a National Science Foundation S-STEM award in the beginning of 2020 to develop a program to attract and retain highly talented, low-income students in STEM. One of the aims of the project was to support students who enter college with less experience in mathematics as these students were significantly less likely to graduate with a STEM degree. In the fall of 2020, as a result of the S-STEM award, the mathematics department offered a pilot corequisite calculus course to STEM majors requiring calculus their first semester but placed into precalculus by the mathematics departmental placement test. The corequisite calculus course includes content from precalculus into a one semester calculus course that meets daily for 6 contact hours rather than a standard 4 credit hour calculus course. The Norwich University Civil, Electrical and Computer, and Mechanical Engineering programs are accredited by the Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET, placing restrictions on the 8-semester engineering degree pathway. The added credits to the first semester corequisite calculus course fit the constraints of the first semester engineering course load and this course has enabled engineering students that place into precalculus to complete an on-time degree plan without taking summer courses. The corequisite course has been approved by the university curriculum committee and is a regular offering at the institution. The initial offering of the corequisite course occurred during the COVID pandemic necessitating the use of additional instructional technology. There was also an increase in low stakes assessments to encourage students to engage in the material. The added credits also increased the regularity of student interacting with calculus. Since the implementation of this pilot course, there have been several similar changes in other courses required by engineering majors. The pilot corequisite course has become institutionalized and even is now scaling, with the engineering department requesting the course to be offered each semester to benefit students who are out of sync with the intended curriculum pathway. This project examines how the corequisite calculus course may have influenced changes in the general education courses and engineering first year sequence. Outcome harvesting as well as process tracing are used to determine the strength of evidence linking the corequisite course to institutional change. Qualitative and quantitative data will be examined as well to understand how the S-STEM award contributed to breakdown of the resistance to curriculum change and the readiness to implement and scale corequisite courses in other areas. It is important to understand the mechanisms used for building capacity at the institution to transform STEM education in higher educationmore » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Background The first day of class helps students learn about what to expect from their instructors and courses. Messaging used by instructors, which varies in content and approach on the first day, shapes classroom social dynamics and can affect subsequent learning in a course. Prior work established the non-content Instructor Talk Framework to describe the language that instructors use to create learning environments, but little is known about the extent to which students detect those messages. In this study, we paired first day classroom observation data with results from student surveys to measure how readily students in introductory STEM courses detect non-content Instructor Talk.
Results To learn more about the instructor and student first day experiences, we studied 11 introductory STEM courses at two different institutions. The classroom observation data were used to characterize course structure and use of non-content Instructor Talk. The data revealed that all instructors spent time discussing their instructional practices, building instructor/student relationships, and sharing strategies for success with their students. After class, we surveyed students about the messages their instructors shared during the first day of class and determined that the majority of students from within each course detected messaging that occurred at a higher frequency. For lower frequency messaging, we identified nuances in what students detected that may help instructors as they plan their first day of class.
Conclusions For instructors who dedicate the first day of class to establishing positive learning environments, these findings provide support that students are detecting the messages. Additionally, this study highlights the importance of instructors prioritizing the messages they deem most important and giving them adequate attention to more effectively reach students. Setting a positive classroom environment on the first day may lead to long-term impacts on student motivation and course retention. These outcomes are relevant for all students, but in particular for students in introductory STEM courses which are often critical prerequisites for being in a major.
-
more » « less
Abstract Research suggests that interacting with more peers about physics course material is correlated with higher student performance. Some studies, however, have demonstrated that different topics of peer interactions may correlate with their performance in different ways, or possibly not at all. In this study, we probe both the peers with whom students interact about their physics course and the particular aspects of the course material about which they interacted in six different introductory physics courses: four lecture courses and two lab courses. Drawing on social network analysis methods, we replicate prior work demonstrating that, on average, students who interact with more peers in their physics courses have higher final course grades. Expanding on this result, we find that students discuss a wide range of aspects of course material with their peers: concepts, small-group work, assessments, lecture, and homework. We observe that in the lecture courses, interacting with peers about concepts is most strongly correlated with final course grade, with smaller correlations also arising for small-group work and homework. In the lab courses, on the other hand, small-group work is the only interaction topic that significantly correlates with final course grade. We use these findings to discuss how course structures (e.g. grading schemes and weekly course schedules) may shape student interactions and add nuance to prior work by identifying how specific types of student interactions are associated (or not) with performance.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-05-0084
