skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Advising in science education: Critiquing where we have been, moving toward an equitable and holistic advising approach
Award ID(s):
2029956
PAR ID:
10333802
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Science Education
Volume:
106
Issue:
5
ISSN:
0036-8326
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Background: Graduate education provides students with specialized skills needed to advance science and discovery and prepares future educators and role models for future generations of learners. Given the importance of graduate education, the estimate that more than half of the students who begin it do not complete their degrees is troubling. Existing scholarship suggests that this substantial attrition from graduate school is in part due to inadequate advising. To address this concern, it is important to examine students’ experiences with graduate advising. Purpose: This article presents a new model—the Model of Wholeness in Graduate Advising (MWGA)—that characterizes a range of students’ advising experiences. In so doing, it encourages faculty to move toward a more caring and wholeness-promoting framework in graduate advising. Research Design: To better understand the complexities of graduate advising and the various types of experiences—and relationships—that students have, desire, expect, and need to thrive both professionally and personally, this study included interviews with 42 Black male graduate students attending historically and predominantly White institutions (HPWIs). Thematic analysis revealed that students’ advising experiences included aspects of “ethics of care” (or degrees of care: whole, partial, empty). Iterative analysis of data led to the creation of the practice-informing model: the Model of Wholeness in Graduate Advising (MWGA). Findings: Although some students described experiencing positive interactions and teachable moments with their advisors, others painted pictures of demoralizing encounters and public shaming practices. Still others described advising experiences they did not have but would want. Accounting for this range, the MWGA denotes an upwardly moving relationship between degrees of care (i.e., empty, partial, whole) and students’ perceptions of their advising experiences and relationships (i.e., weak, basic, strong) in part shaped by students’ expectations for their advising experiences and relationships, and their lived experiences. Conclusions and Recommendations: The findings from this study, represented in the MWGA, illustrate theoretical linkages between students’ expectations of advising, the levels of their advising experiences and relationships, and degrees of care demonstrated by their advisors. Most notably, more elements of care tend to result in better lived advising experiences and relationships. For current and future faculty, moving toward a more caring and wholeness-promoting framework might start with recognizing the needs of students as whole people. Creating more caring advising experiences and developing more caring relationships may better assist students in progressing through degree completion, and doing so more fully whole. 
    more » « less
  2. This paper introduces the pilot implementation of the Evidence Based Personas survey instrument for assessing non-cognitive attributes of relevance from undergraduate students at different stages of their engineering degree for the purpose of informing proactive advising processes. The survey instrument was developed with two key objectives: first, to assess its potential for streamlining and shortening existing instruments, and second, to explore the possibility of consolidating items from different surveys that measure the same or closely related constructs. A proactive advising system is being developed that uses the Mediation Model of Research Experiences (MMRE) as a framework. Within this framework, participation in various educational activities is linked to increased Commitment to Engineering via three mediating parameters: Self-Efficacy, Teamwork/Leadership Self-Efficacy, and Engineering Identity. The existing, validated MMRE survey instrument was used as a starting point for development of the current instrument with a goal of streamlining / shortening the number of questions. Ultimately, we envision augmenting the shortened instrument with items related to broader non-cognitive and affective constructs from the SUCCESS instrument. Noting that both the MMRE and SUCCESS instruments include measures of Self-Efficacy and Engineering Identity, selected questions from both were included and compared. Data was collected from 395 total respondents, and subsequent data analysis was based on 337 valid participants. Factor Analysis techniques, both exploratory and confirmatory, were employed to uncover underlying or latent variables within the results, particularly in the areas of Self-Efficacy where the combined items of the SUCCESS instrument and the MMRE instrument were used. Cronbach’s alpha analysis was employed to assess the internal consistency of the survey instrument. The Teamwork, Engineering Identity, and Commitment to Engineering constructs all produced a Cronbach’s alpha value in excess of 0.80. The Self-Efficacy construct fell below the 0.80 threshold at 0.77 which is considered to be respectable but is indicative of some short comings compared to that of the other constructs. The results of the EFA four-factor pattern matrix show the SUCCESS instrument items breaking out into their own components while the MMRE items merge with some of the items from the Engineering Identity construct suggesting a distinction in the underlying concepts these items may be measuring. This finding is further supported in the CFA through an assessment of the Goodness of Fit (GFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) of these constructs. The initial groupings of the four constructs produced a robust CFI value of 0.853, robust TLI value of 0.838, and a robust RMSEA value of 0.075. Self-Efficacy is broken out into two sub-scales one defined by the three items from the SUCCESS instrument and the other defined by the four remaining items from the MMRE instrument. Engineering Identity was also broken into two sub-scales. The robust CFI and TLI report values of 0.928 and 0.919 respectively, and the robust RMSEA is reported to be 0.053. The findings of the factor analyses indicate that a shortened form of the MMRE survey instrument will provide reliable measures of the underlying constructs. Additionally, the results suggest that the self-efficacy as measured by items from the MMRE and from the SUCCESS instruments are related to two separate aspects of self-efficacy and do not load well into a single factor. 
    more » « less
  3. This essay is the second paper of a related three-paper set that examines, critiques, and offers responses to current conceptions of academic advising within P-20+ STEM education. In this essay, we offer a review of the current understandings of academic advising and its existing limitations with meaningfully supporting Black and Brown STEM learners. As a response to this critique, we call for a critical-ecological perspective to STEM academic advising, leveraging Phenomenological Variant Ecological Systems Theory (PVEST) as the conceptual background for this approach. We then provide a set of guiding principles for educators to consider when taking a PVEST approach to academic advising. In providing these guiding principles, we situate the third paper in the set as those authors offer specific examples for how this approach can be implemented across the P-20+ STEM spectrum. 
    more » « less
  4. At San Francisco State University, a Hispanic Serving Institute and a Primarily Undergraduate Institution, 67% of engineering students are from ethnic minority groups, with only 27% of Hispanic students retained and graduated in their senior year. Additionally, only 14% of students reported full-time employment secured at the time of graduation. Of these secured jobs, only 54% were full-time positions (40+ hours a week). To improve the situation, San Francisco State University, in collaboration with two local community colleges, Skyline and Cañada Colleges, was recently funded by the National Science Foundation through a Hispanic Serving Institute Improving Undergraduate STEM Education Strengthening Student Motivation and Resilience through Research and Advising program to enhance undergraduate engineering education and build capacity for student success. This project will use a data-driven and evidence-based approach to identify the barriers to the success of underrepresented minority students and to generate new knowledge on the best practices for increasing students’ retention and graduation rates, self- efficacy, professional development, and workforce preparedness. Three objectives underpin this overall goal. The first is to develop and implement a Summer Research Internship Program together with community college partners. The second is to establish an HSI Engineering Success Center to provide students with academic resources, networking opportunities with industry, and career development tools. The third is to develop resources for the professional development of faculty members, including Summer Faculty Teaching Workshops, an Inclusive Teaching and Mentoring Seminar Series, and an Engineering Faculty Learning Community. Qualitative and quantitative approaches are used to assess the project outcomes using a survey instrument and interview protocols developed by an external evaluator. This paper discusses an overview of the project and its first-year implementation. The focus is placed on the introduction and implementation of the several main project components, namely the Engineering Success Center, Summer Research Internship Program, and Faculty Summer Teaching Workshop. The preliminary evaluation results, demonstrating the great success of these strategies, are also discussed. 
    more » « less