To combat math underperformance among incoming STEM majors, Rice University designed a summer bridge program with National Science Foundation (NSF) S-STEM funding that included an intensive calculus course. Students invited to participate in the program were identified as being underprepared for STEM classes based on their standardized test scores, high school STEM coursework, and socioeconomic status. One of the program’s goals is to improve students’ preparation for the advanced math courses required for all STEM majors at Rice. The bridge program is designed to teach the material that has historically been most challenging for underprepared students, meaning the math content covered primarily second-semester calculus topics. We explored the impact of bridge program participation on math performance in first and second-semester math. First, we examined group differences in math preparation. Though program administrators attempt to create equivalent bridge and comparison groups, the bridge program is optional, meaning group assignment is not completely random. Bridge students were less prepared than comparison students on number of high school calculus AP (or equivalent) credits received. We analyzed group differences in final class grades from 2012-2017 among the comparison group, the bridge group, and the rest of the class (i.e. non-comparison and nonbridge), standardizing grades using Z-scores. Planned contrasts found that bridge students performed slightly better than, but not significantly different from, comparison students in first semester math. Conversely, planned contrasts found that the bridge group significantly outperformed the comparison group in second-semester math. These results suggest that bridge program exposure to calculus may improve performance relative to a comparison group, which is especially noteworthy because bridge students are the least math-prepared STEM students entering the university. Future research will analyze outcomes in more advanced math classes. We will use these findings to refine the bridge program’s approach to teaching students how to succeed at collegiate-level math classes and, ultimately, as STEM majors at Rice.
more »
« less
Board 14: Examining First-Year Chemistry Outcomes of Underprepared STEM Students Who Completed a STEM Summer Academic Bridge Program
This NSF S-STEM Grantee poster examines the results of Rice University's summer science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) bridge program, the Rice Emerging Scholars Program (RESP), on participants' introductory chemistry grades in a quasi-experimental design that compared performance of participants in RESP, a control group with similar preparation as RESP participants, and the remaining students in the class. The outcome of interest was first and second-semester chemistry exam performance. The researchers also examined performance on first-semester exam items that directly tested concepts taught in RESP versus concepts that were not taught during the program, as well as class grade distribution by group for both first and second-semester chemistry. Results showed that engaging in RESP enhanced performance on items that directly assessed content taught in the program but did not significantly improve
performance on items not taught in RESP. However, the proportion of students in RESP
earning As and Bs was no different from other students in the class during the first semester. Although not all results were significant, trends in the data point to the promise of RESP. Implications for near and far learning transfer as a result of program participation are discussed.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1565032
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10348880
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- American Society for Engineering Education
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract Background There is overwhelming evidence that evidence-based teaching improves student performance; however, traditional lecture predominates in STEM courses. To provide support as faculty transform their lecture-based classrooms with evidence-based teaching practices, we created a faculty development program based on best practices, Consortium for the Advancement of Undergraduate STEM Education (CAUSE). CAUSE paired exploration of evidence-based teaching with support for classroom implementation over two years. Each year for three years, CAUSE recruited cohorts of faculty from seven STEM departments. Faculty met biweekly to discuss evidence-based teaching and receive feedback on their implementation. We used the PORTAAL observation tool to document evidence-based teaching practices (PORTAAL practices) across four randomly chosen class sessions each term. We investigated if the number of PORTAAL practices used or the amount of practices increased during the program.
Results We identified identical or equivalent course offerings taught at least twice by the same faculty member while in CAUSE (
n = 42 course pairs). We used a one-way repeated measures within-subjects multivariate analysis to examine the changes in average use of 14 PORTAAL practices between the first and second timepoint. We created heat maps to visualize the difference in number of practices used and changes in level of implementation of each PORTAAL practice. Post-hoc within-subjects effects indicated that three PORTAAL practices were significantly higher and two were lower at timepoint two. Use of prompting prior knowledge and calling on volunteers to give answers decreased, while instructors doubled use of prompting students to explain their logic, and increased use of random call by almost 40% when seeking answers from students. Heat maps indicated increases came both from faculty’s adoption of these practices and increased use, depending on the practice. Overall, faculty used more practices more frequently, which contributed to a 17% increase in time that students were actively engaged in class.Conclusions Results suggest that participation in a long-term faculty development program can support increased use of evidence-based teaching practices which have been shown to improve student exam performance. Our findings can help prioritize the efforts of future faculty development programs.
-
A diagnostic of thirty questions administered to incoming STEM students in Fall 2013 and Fall 2015 - Fall 2018 reflects that their spatial visualization skills (SVS) need to be improved. Previous studies in the SVS subject [1], [2], [3] report that well-developed SVS skills lead to students’ success in Engineering and Technology, Computer Science, Chemistry, Computer Aided Design and Mathematics. Authors [4], [5] mention that aptitude in spatial skills is gradually becoming a standard assessment of an individual’s likelihood to succeed as an engineer. This research reports the qualitative and quantitative results of a project designed to improve SVS’s for STEM students managed under two strategies. The first strategy utilized was a series of face-to-face (FtF), two-hour training sessions taught over six weeks to all majors in STEM. This strategy was offered in Spring 2014 and every semester from Fall 2015 - Spring 2018. The second strategy was an embedded training (ET) implemented by one faculty from Fall 2017- Fall 2018. The faculty embedded the training in the US 1100 freshman seminar and was highly motivated to increase awareness of students on the importance and applicability of SVS in their fields of study. As reported by Swail et al. [6], cognitive, social, and institutional factors are key elements to best support students’ persistence and achievement. Both interventions used in this project encompassed all these factors and were supported by an NSF IUSE grant (2015-2019) to improve STEM retention. The FtF training was taken by 34 students majoring in diverse STEM fields. Its effectiveness was statistically assessed through a t-test to compare the results in the Purdue Spatial Visualization Skills Test - Rotations before and after the training and through analysis of surveys. Results were very positive; 85.29% of the participants improved their scores. The average change in scores was 5.29 (from 16.85 to 22.15; 17.65% improvement) and it was statistically significant (p-value 3.9E-8). On the surveys, 90% of students answered that they were satisfied with the training. Several students reported that they appreciated a connection between SVS, Calculus II and Engineering Graphics classes while others based the satisfaction on perceiving the critical role SVS will play in their careers. Results from the ET strategy were also encouraging. Teaching methods, curriculum and results are discussed in this paper. Adjustments to the teaching methods were done over 3 semesters. In the last semester, the faculty found that covering the modules at a slower pace than in the FtF training, asking the students to complete the pre-and post-diagnostic in class, and introducing the Spatial VisTM app to provide students with additional practice were key elements to assure students success and satisfaction. In conclusion, both strategies were demonstrated to be powerful interventions to increase students’ success because they not only offer students, particularly freshman, a way to refine SVS but also increase motivation in STEM while creating a community among students and faculty. The ET is effective and apt to be institutionalized. Lastly, this experimental research strengthens the literature on SVS.more » « less
-
The current study examines the validity of the RESP diagnostic exam and its predictive validity relative to standardized tests with a sample of students (N = 976) who matriculated into Rice University from 2012 to 2014. The RESP diagnostic exam was related to grades, and we found that the correlation between the RESP diagnostic exam and grades was greater for STEM grades than non-STEM grades. We found that the diagnostic exam accounted for an incremental 9% of variance in STEM grades above SAT performance, but only 1% of incremental variance above SAT in non-STEM grades. Moreover, we found evidence of range restriction for both SAT and RESP diagnostic exam performance for Rice University matriculants, further suggesting the utility of the diagnostic exam is at the lower end of the distribution. In summary, our results suggest that an additional diagnostic exam written by schools to specifically measure STEM preparation for their program can be a useful addition to procedures for selecting students for special experiences such as summer bridge programs.more » « less
-
In this research-based paper, we explore the relationships among Rice University STEM students’ high school preparation, psychological characteristics, and career aspirations. Although greater high school preparation in STEM coursework predicts higher STEM retention and performance in college [1], objective academic preparation and college performance do not fully explain STEM retention decisions, and the students who leave STEM are often not the lowest performing students [2]. Certain psychosocial experiences may also influence students’ STEM decisions. We explored the predictive validity of 1) a STEM diagnostic exam as an objective measure of high school science and math preparation and 2) self-efficacy as a psychological measure on long-term (three years later) STEM career aspirations and STEM identity of underprepared Rice STEM students. University administrators use diagnostic exam scores (along with other evidence of high school underpreparation) to identify students who might benefit from additional support. Using linear regression to explore the link between diagnostic exam scores and self-efficacy, exam scores predicted self-efficacy a semester after students’ first semester in college; exam scores were also marginally correlated with self-efficacy three years later. Early STEM career aspirations predicted later career aspirations, accounting for 21.3% of the variance of career outcome expectations three years later (β=.462, p=.006). Scores on the math diagnostic exam accounted for an additional 10.1% of the variance in students’ three-year STEM career aspirations (p=.041). Self-efficacy after students’ first semester did not predict future STEM aspirations. Early STEM identity explained 28.8% of the variance in three-year STEM identity (p=.001). Math diagnostic exam scores accounted for only marginal incremental variance after STEM identity, and self-efficacy after students’ first semester did not predict three-year STEM aspirations. Overall, we found that the diagnostic exam provided incremental predictive validity in STEM career aspirations after students’ sixth semester of college, indicating that early STEM preparation has long-lasting ramifications for students’ STEM career intentions. Our next steps include examining whether students’ diagnostic exam scores predict STEM graduation rates and final GPAs for science and math versus engineering majors.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--29939
