Evaluating Psychosocial Mechanisms Underlying STEM Persistence in Undergraduates: Scalability and Longitudinal Analysis of Three Cohorts from a Six-Day Pre–College Engagement STEM Academy Program

Abstract

In a previous report, we validated that a cohort of first-year undergraduates who participated in a weeklong pre–college engagement STEM Academy (SA) program were retained in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) at a higher rate than a matched comparison group (MCG). In addition, SA students yielded increases in science identity and sense of belonging to STEM and to the university. Here, we report the ability to scale the size of the SA program to accommodate more students and replicate the previous findings with two additional cohorts. Longitudinal analysis of the 2015 and 2016 program cohorts demonstrate that both groups were retained to STEM disciplines and the university at higher rates than a MCG. To assess what underlying psychological mechanisms lead to increases in science identity and university belonging, we tested three exploratory models. These models indicate that positive changes in university and STEM belonging indirectly predict an increase in science identity. Further, positive changes in perceived family support indirectly predict increases in university belonging. Thus, through the evaluation of three different cohorts, we found robust evidence that the SA program increases sense of belonging and science identity, and these attitudinal changes promote undergraduate persistence in STEM.

Developing Self-Efficacy and Behavioral Intentions Among Underrepresented Students in STEM: The Role of Active Learning

“…In retrospect, Study 2's data are consistent with past STEM intervention research indicating that URG students do not consistently show changes in cognitive, motivational, and attitudinal changes throughout college (Dennehy and Dasgupta, 2017;Estrada et al, 2019). First, students who enter college in pursuit of STEM typically demonstrate high STEM self-efficacy, but often experience a decrease in selfefficacy when they are exposed to the rigors of STEM coursework and expectations (Liu, 2018;Kuchynka et al, 2019). It appears that self-efficacy drops are explained in part by the anxiety and self-doubt experienced during the transition from high school to college (Rosenthal et al, 2011), and the stress experienced when transferring from a 2-years to 4-years institutions (Laanan, 2001).…”

“…Instead of exclusively focusing on how to increase self-efficacy and future intentions, researchers should also address research questions about how to protect these psychological constructs during critical periods of development. Past research highlights the instability of self-efficacy during transition periods and college (Estrada et al, 2019;Kuchynka et al, 2019;Liu, 2018;Rosenthal et al, 2011). The community college students participating in Study 2's mentorship program sought to transfer to a 4-year university, and started the intervention with relatively strong intentions to pursue STEM and high self-efficacy levels.…”

Connecting Theory to Practice: Using Self-Determination Theory To Better Understand Inclusion in STEM

“…SDT states that the more a person's psychological needs are met, the more internally motivated they will be in that particular situation (27). Research on different aspects of biology education has shown that SDT can explain the positive effects of teambased learning (28), socio scientific issues-based laboratory curricula (29), mentoring interventions (30), and STEM retention resulting from scalable STEM academy programs (31,32).…”

Understanding and Addressing Gender‐Based Inequities in STEM: Research Synthesis and Recommendations for U.S. K‐12 Education

“…Many K‐12 teachers across the United States have classroom sizes with over 25 students (Taie & Goldring, 2020) making it difficult to implement educational recommendations such as cultivating relational classrooms with active learning components. Applying lessons learned from college STEM outreach programs, teachers and school districts should focus on small‐group interactions to create cooperative and collaborative STEM environments that foster meaningful relationships (Kuchynka et al., 2019). That is, one way to address these high student‐teacher ratios is to develop small‐group interactions with about six students per group (Kuchynka et al., 2019).…”