STEM graduation rates, cumulative GPAs, and final GPA distributions of years 2016 to 2019 graduates were evaluated for students who participated in Rice University’s STEM intervention (the Rice Emerging Scholars Program, or RESP, which is partly funded through an NSF SSTEM grant), which begins with a pre-freshman STEM summer bridge program. RESP participants (n=89) and a comparison category of students (n=81) were identified as being underprepared for STEM coursework. Outcomes from the rest of the graduating classes were also assessed (i.e., non-comparison, non-RESP students). Incoming high school AP and IB credits were a moderate predictor of cumulative graduation GPA. After controlling for test credits, student status predicted cumulative graduation GPA, with higher GPAs in the noncomparison, non-RESP condition. Seventy-two RESP students graduated with a STEM major (81% STEM retention) compared with 62% of comparison students and 87% of non-comparison, non-RESP students. A chi-square test found a significant difference in favor of higher STEM retention among RESP students than the comparison students. Of RESP STEM graduates, 94% graduated with at least a B- GPA, compared with 86% of the comparison students, and 97% of the non-comparison, non-RESP students. A chi-square test approached significance in favor of more B- and above GPAs among RESP students than the comparison students. Overall, we found that high school preparation predicted STEM students’ graduation GPAs. Further, although RESP participation did not predict the cumulative GPAs of STEM majors, the program may: 1) improve STEM degree persistence and 2) ensure that more of the program’s STEM graduates achieve at least a B- cumulative graduation GPA. The number of RESP and comparison students is relatively small, yet these findings
nevertheless offer preliminary evidence that the intervention may be effective at improving STEM outcomes for students who would otherwise struggle the most with their coursework. As more students graduate from the university, we will be able to make stronger conclusions about the effectiveness of RESP in improving outcomes of underprepared STEM students.
more »
« less
STEM Bridge Program Participation Predicts First- and Second-Semester Math Performance
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
- Award ID(s):
- 1565032
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10348882
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- American Society for Engineering Education
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
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
-
null (Ed.)This complete research paper discusses how students’ feelings of inclusion change throughout their undergraduate career. Student responses acquired through focus groups and one-on-one interviews were examined to determine how included the students felt in their engineering college and also the broader scientific community. A small group of non-calculus ready engineering students enrolled in a large land grant institution in the Mid-Atlantic region consented to participate in the study. The student cohort participated in an NSF S-STEM funded program aimed at fostering a sense of inclusion in engineering by implementing a curriculum focused on cohort formation, career exploration, and professional development. The AcES, consisting of a weeklong pre-fall bridge experience, two common courses, and a variety of co-curricular activities, has been operating for eight years. Students who receive S-STEM funded scholarships participate in three focus groups and two one-on-one interviews each semester throughout their undergraduate studies. Student responses from the one-on-one interviews and focus groups conducted from 2017-2020 were examined with qualitative coding methods. Questions examined in this work include: 1) Did the engineering in history course help make you feel like you belong in engineering at WVU and that you are included in engineering at WVU?, 2) Do you feel part of the group when working on projects in your engineering courses?, 3) Do you consider yourself a member of the scientific and engineering community here at WVU? Why or why not, and 4) Do you consider yourself a member of the broader scientific and engineering community? During the exploratory coding phase three codes were established to represent the degree of inclusion felt by students: Edge of Inclusion, Slight Inclusion, and Feelings of Inclusion. Edge of Inclusion was characterized by student responses such as “almost there but not totally”, “just starting to be”, and “no, well maybe a bit” while student responses such as “yes, but only a little” and “in some classes or situations” were recognized as Slight Inclusion. Examples of student responses such as “yes, I do feel part of it”, “absolutely, since I’ve…”, and “I would consider myself part of . . .” were classified with the code Feelings of Inclusion. Since the sample size was limited by scholarship funding, statistically significant results weren’t obtainable, but clear themes emerged that can be used to influence engineering curricula and serve as justification for an expanded study. Participating in an internship emerged as a major contributor to students feeling included in the broader scientific community. Interestingly, a decrease in the average degree of inclusion occurred after the students’ first semester, prior to increasing in later semesters. It is hypothesized that the emphasis on cohort formation, career exploration, and planned co-curricular activities during the first semester in the AcES program bolstered the initial feelings of inclusion. A student’s feeling of inclusion is known to be a contributing factor in retention. The findings of this research indicate that internships should not only be strongly encouraged, but university resources should be invested in helping students be prepared for, apply to, and obtain internships. The researchers suggest the study be expanded beyond the AcES program to examine a broader sample and greater number of students.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)This Complete Research paper will describe the implementation of an introductory course (ENGR194) for first semester engineering students. The course is meant to improve retention and academic success of engineering first-year students in the College of Engineering at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The implementation of this course is part of an ongoing National Science Foundation (NSF) Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (S-STEM) project. This paper reports on the impact of combinatorial enrollment in ENGR194 and a previously described two-week Summer Bridge Program (SBP) offered only for entering S-STEM scholars before their first semester. To measure the impact of this course on student retention and academic success, various evaluation metrics are compared for three separate Comparison Groups (C-Groups) of students. The results show that the ENGR194 course had a significant positive impact on the first-year retention rate. The results also revealed that students who participated in both ENGR194 and SBP (C-Group 1) made changes to their declared majors earlier than students who had only taken ENGR 123 or neither of the courses (C-Groups 2 and 3 respectively). Furthermore, students in C-Group 1 received better grades in math and science than their peers, and students in C-Groups 1 and 2 had significantly higher GPAs than their peers in C-Group 3.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)The Academy of Engineering Success (AcES) program, established in 2012 and supported by NSF S-STEM award number 1644119 throughout 2016-2021, employs literature-based, best practices to support and retain underprepared and underrepresented students in engineering through graduation with the ultimate goal of diversifying the engineering workforce. A total of 71 students, including 21 students supported by S-STEM scholarships, participated in the AcES program between 2016-2019 at a large R1 institution in the mid-Atlantic region. All AcES students participate in a common program during their first year, comprised of: a one-week summer bridge experience, a common fall professional development course and spring “Engineering in History” course, and a common academic advisor. These students also have opportunities for: (1) faculty-student, student-student, and industry mentor-student interaction, (2) academic support and student success education, and (3) major and career exploration – all designed to help students develop feelings of institutional inclusion, engineering self-efficacy and identity, and academic and professional success skills. They also participate in the GRIT, Longitudinal Assessment of Engineering Self-Efficacy (LAESE), and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) surveys plus individual and focus group interviews at the start, midpoint, and end of each fall semester and at the end of the spring semester. The surveys provide a measure of students’ GRIT, their beliefs related to the intrinsic value of engineering and learning, their feelings of inclusion and test anxiety, and their self-efficacy related to engineering, math, and coping skills. The interviews provide information related to the student experience, feelings of inclusion, and program impact. Institutional data, combined with the survey and interview responses, are used to examine four research questions designed to examine the relationship of the elements of the AcES program to participants’ academic success and retention in engineering. Early analyses of the student retention data and survey responses from the 2017 and 2018 cohorts indicated students who ultimately left engineering before the start of their second year initially scored higher in areas of engineering self-efficacy and test anxiety, than those who stayed in engineering, while those who retained to the second year began their engineering education with lower self-efficacy scores, but higher scores related to the belief in the intrinsic value of engineering, learning strategy use, and coping self-efficacy. These results suggest that students who start with unrealistically high expectations of their performance leave engineering at higher rates than students who start with lower personal performance expectations, but have stronger value of the field and strategies for meeting challenges. These data appear to support the Kruger-Dunning effect in which students with limited knowledge of a specific field overestimate their abilities to perform in that area or underestimate the level of effort success may require. This paper will add an analysis of the academic success and retention data from 2019 cohort to this research, discuss the impact of COVID-19 to this program and research, as well as illuminate the quantitative results with the qualitative data from individual and focus group interviews regarding the aspects of the AcES program that impact student success, their expectations and methods for overcoming academic challenges, and their feelings of motivation and inclusion.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--32296
