Search for: All records

University science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) summer bridge programs provide incoming STEM university students additional course work and preparation before they begin their studies. These programs are designed to reduce attrition and increase the diversity of students pursuing STEM majors and STEM career paths. A meta-analysis of 16 STEM summer bridge programs was conducted. Results showed that program participation had a medium-sized effect on first-year overall grade point average ( d = 0.34) and first-year university retention (Odds Ratio [ OR] = 1.747). Although this meta-analytic research reflects a limited amount of available quantitative academic data on summer STEM bridge programs, this study nonetheless provides important quantitative inroads into much-needed research on programs’ objective effectiveness. These results articulate the importance of thoughtful experimental design and how further research might guide STEM bridge program development to increase the success and retention of matriculating STEM students. 

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. 

Researchers of team behavior have long been interested in the essential components of effective teamwork. Much existing research focuses on examining correlations between team member traits, team processes, and team outcomes, such as collective intelligence or team performance. However, these approaches are insufficient for providing insight into the dynamic, causal mechanisms through which the components of teamwork interact with one another and impact the emergence of team outcomes. Advances in the field of animal behavior have enabled a precise understanding of the behavioral mechanisms that enable groups to perform feats that surpass the capabilities of the individuals that comprise them. In this manuscript, we highlight how studies of animal swarm intelligence can inform research on collective intelligence in human teams. By improving the ability to obtain precise, time-varying measurements of team behaviors and outcomes and building upon approaches used in studies of swarm intelligence to analyze and model individual and group-level behaviors, researchers can gain insight into the mechanisms underlying the emergence of collective intelligence. Such understanding could inspire targeted interventions to improve team effectiveness and support the development of a comparative framework of group-level intelligence in animal and human groups. 

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. 

This research paper describes a preliminary analysis of panel summaries of proposals submitted to the National Science Foundation’s (NSF’s) Scholarships for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (S-STEM) program. S-STEM provides awards to institutions to fund scholarships and to implement evidence-based strategies to recruit, retain, and graduate students from low-income backgrounds who have the academic potential to succeed in eligible STEM disciplines. The ultimate goal of the program is to build the US STEM workforce. In 2017, Rice University received funding from NSF to support teams of principal investigators and their co- investigators, who were experts in educational or related research areas, to attend a two-day workshop that was developed to help them prepare more competitive proposals to the S-STEM program. The emphasis was on investigators from predominantly undergraduate institutions, primarily those located in Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) jurisdictions and/or designated as Minority-Serving Institutions. One of the workshop’s aims was to investigate factors that impact the success (or lack thereof) of proposals to the S-STEM program. We began with examining the feedback participants received from review panels on their proposal submissions. In this case study, we compare panel summaries for five S-STEM proposals submitted from five different institutions, exploring the similarities and differences in the overall reviews, as well as the strengths and weaknesses cited for both awarded and declined proposals that were awarded and declined in the context of their alignment with NSF’s merit review criteria. This is submitted for consideration as a traditional paper presentation. 

In this research-based paper, we discuss the development of a measure of Rice University students’ STEM study strategies and then explore the measure’s correlation with several important psychological outcomes in a sample of underprepared first-year STEM students (n=94). STEM attrition remains a pressing concern nationally, particularly for students who took less rigorous STEM courses in high school, a population that disproportionally comprises underrepresented minorities. The authors developed an 11-item measure of STEM-specific study strategies, termed the STEM Study Strategies Questionnaire. We explored STEM-specific identity, self-efficacy, and career aspirations, as well as perceived utility of attaining a STEM degree, using a model based on Eccles and Wigfield’s (2002) expectancy-value framework of achievement. An exploratory factor analysis found a four-factor solution to the newly developed scale: Group Work in STEM, Active STEM Learning, Interactions with STEM Professors, and STEM Exam Familiarity. The authors found significant moderate to strong correlations among all psychological variables, as well as with the Group Work and STEM Exam Familiarity factors. Next steps for this research are to develop further measure items to capture each of the four factors and to conduct confirmatory analyses on different samples of STEM students, both those who are relatively underprepared and appropriately prepared for college STEM coursework. 

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. 

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. 

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.