We investigated changes in and factors affecting American adolescents' subjective wellbeing during the early months (April -August 2020) of the coronavirus pandemic in the United States. Twenty-one teens (14-19 years) participated in interviews at the start and end of the study and completed ecological momentary assessments three times per week between the interviews. There was an aggregate trend toward increased wellbeing, with considerable variation within and across participants. Teens reported greater reliance on networked technologies as their unstructured time increased during lockdown. Using multilevel growth modeling, we found that how much total time teens spent with technology had less bearing on daily fluctuations in wellbeing than the satisfaction and meaning they derived from their technology use. Ultimately, teens felt online communication could not replace face-to-face interactions. We conducted two follow-up participatory design sessions with nine teens to explore these insights in greater depth and reflect on general implications for design to support teens' meaningful technology experiences and wellbeing during disruptive life events.

After-school and summer programs provide important opportunities for youth to learn STEM practices and form STEM-related identities. However, there has been limited coordination across these programs to measure effectiveness toward learning outcomes. To better understand the constructs that are used to evaluate these programs, we searched key terms related to out-of-school time STEM learning on several education research databases. Our search uncovered 36 different tools. Across these tools, we discovered 76 measures, which were then grouped into 10 constructs based on similar themes. Constructs included: attitude toward science, career awareness and career interest, curiosity, engagement, home/school environment, interest, motivation, nature of science, self-efficacy, and STEM practices. Each construct is defined and clarified with examples from the tools. The review also considers tensions between attempts to standardize measures for evaluating program success and the need to account for equitable STEM learning pathways and adaptability across diverse communities.