One way to encourage performance and persistence in STEM fields is to have students write about the utility value (UV) or personal relevance of course topics to their life. This intervention has been shown to increase engagement and performance in introductory courses. However, questions remain about the longevity of the effects and how best to implement the intervention in terms of dosage and timing. We tested a UV intervention in the first semester of a two-semester introductory biology sequence. For each of three units across the semester, students (N = 577) were randomly assigned to receive either a UV writing assignment, in which they explained why course material was useful to them personally, or a control assignment, in which they summarized course material. This fully crossed design tested the effect of UV dosage level (0, 1, 2, or 3 UV assignments) as well as the effect of timing (e.g., UV first, control first). We found that students exposed to any dosage of UV earned higher grades in the course, were more likely to enroll in the second course of the biology sequence, and were less likely to abandon their STEM major than students who did not receive any UV assignments. In terms of timing, students with a history of poor performance benefitted from writing a UV essay in the beginning of the semester, whereas higher-performing students benefitted from a UV essay at the end of the semester. Recommendations for practice are discussed.

Personal relevance goes by many names in the motivation literature, stemming from a number of theoretical frameworks. Currently these lines of research are being conducted in parallel with little synthesis across them, perhaps because there is no unifying definition of the relevance construct within which this research can be situated. In this paper we propose a new framework to synthesize existing research on relevance and provide a common platform for researchers to communicate and collaborate. In light of this new framework we review the role of relevance in three prominent theories in the motivation literature: the four-phase model of interest development (Hidi & Renninger, 2006), expectancy-value theory (Eccles et al., 1983), and self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985). We then explore eight relevance constructs commonly used in the literature and the educational interventions that derive from them. Finally, we offer a synthesis of these constructs and suggest some directions for future research.

A wide range of occupations require science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) skills, yet almost half of students who intend to pursue a postsecondary STEM education abandon these plans before graduating from college. This attrition is especially pronounced among underrepresented groups (i.e., racial/ethnic minorities and first-generation college students). We conducted a 2-year follow-up of a utility-value intervention that had been implemented in an introductory biology course. This intervention was previously shown to improve performance in the course, on average and especially among underrepresented students, reducing the achievement gap. The goal of the present study was to examine whether the intervention also impacted persistence in the biomedical track throughout college. The intervention had a more positive impact on long-term persistence for students who were more confident that they could succeed at the beginning of the course, and this effect was partially driven by the extent to which students reflected on the personal relevance of biological topics in their essays. This mechanism was distinct from the process that had been found to underlie intervention effects on performance—engagement with course material—suggesting that utility-value interventions may affect different academic outcomes by initiating distinct psychological processes. Although we did not find that the intervention was differentially effective for underrepresented students in terms of persistence, we found that positive effects on performance were associated with increased persistence for these students. Results suggest that utility-value interventions in an introductory course can be an effective strategy to promote persistence in the biomedical sciences throughout college.

No abstract

First-generation (FG) college students (students for whom neither parent has a 4-year degree) face a number of challenges as they attempt to obtain a post-secondary degree. They are more likely to come from working-class backgrounds or poverty (Reardon, 2011) and attend lower quality high schools (Warburton et al., 2001) while not benefiting from the guidance of a parent who successfully navigated the path to higher education. FG college students also contend with belonging or “fitting in” concerns due a perceived mismatch between their own values and the values implicit in institutions of higher education (Stephens et al., 2012a). Specifically, prior research has demonstrated that FG college students face an unseen disadvantage that can be attributed to the fact that middle-class norms of independence reflected in American institutions of higher education can be experienced as threatening by many FG students who have been socialized with more interdependent values commonly espoused in working-class populations. The present research examines this theory (cultural mismatch theory) in the understudied context of 2-year colleges and tests if a values-affirmation intervention (i.e., an intervention that has shown promise in addressing identity threats and belonging concerns) can be effective for FG college students at these 2-year campuses. By considering the tenets of cultural mismatch theory in the creation of the values-affirmation interventions we were able to vary different aspects of the intervention in order to examine how its effectiveness may depend on the nature and magnitude of a perceived cultural mismatch. Results from surveying faculty and students at 2-year colleges indicated that compared to traditional 4-year institutions, the norms of 2-year colleges and the motivations of FG students may be different. That is, FG student motives may be more consistent (and thus less mismatched) with the cultural context of 2-year colleges which could result in fewer belonging concerns when compared to FG students at 4-year institutions. This may carry implications for the efficacy of values-affirmation interventions and could help explicate why FG students in the current sample perceived a greater match with their college when they reflected on their interdependent values.