An evidence-based framework offers a guide for efforts to increase student persistence in STEM majors.

We used computational linguistic and content analyses to explore the concept of project ownership for undergraduate research. We used linguistic analysis of student interview data to develop a quantitative methodology for assessing project ownership and applied this method to measure degrees of project ownership expressed by students in relation to different types of educational research experiences. The results of the study suggest that the design of a research experience significantly influences the degree of project ownership expressed by students when they describe those experiences. The analysis identified both positive and negative aspects of project ownership and provided a working definition for how a student experiences his or her research opportunity. These elements suggest several features that could be incorporated into an undergraduate research experience to foster a student's sense of project ownership.

Predictors of student commitment and engagement in an undergraduate science course featuring active learning are explored. The study identified student trust in the instructor as an important predictor of student commitment and engagement in an active-learning context.

Background Evidence-based teaching, such as active learning, is associated with increases in student learning and engagement. Although many faculty are beginning to adopt innovative practices, traditional lecture-based teaching tends to dominate college science education. What are the factors associated with faculty’s decision to incorporate evidence-based teaching? While there are known barriers that limit adoption of evidence-based practices in science classrooms (e.g., lack of time, student resistance), the present work reveals that instructors’ perceptions of supports (e.g., access to teaching resources, encouragement from colleagues) shows a stronger relationship to instructors’ use of evidence-based teaching. Results These results come from a uniquely large dataset of college science faculty and instructors from across the USA ( n = 584), who received training in evidence-based teaching. Multiple linear regression analyses of the relationship among perceived supports, barriers, and reported implementation of evidence-based practices showed that instructors report greater implementation when they perceive more social, personal, and resource supports even when barriers are also indicated as present. Conclusion Faculty’s perceived supports, not perceived barriers, are most strongly related to their reported implementation of evidence-based teaching. These findings suggest relevant stakeholders devote increased attention identifying and building the factors that promote evidence-based teaching in addition to reducing what inhibits it. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40594-019-0166-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Ithaka S+R provides research and strategic guidance to help the academic and cultural communities serve the public good and navigate economic, demographic, and technological change. Ithaka S+R is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization that works to advance and preserve knowledge and to improve teaching and learning through the use of digital technologies. Artstor, JSTOR, and Portico are also part of ITHAKA.

Evidence-based teaching (EBT), such as active learning and formative assessment, benefits student learning but is not present in many college science classrooms. The choices faculty make about how to teach their science courses are influenced by their personal beliefs and motivations, as well as their departmental structures and institutional cultures. With data from 584 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty trained in EBT, we compare which of the following factors most relate to faculty’s use of EBT: 1) faculty’s personal motivations (e.g., teaching value, confidence, beliefs about intelligence); and 2) their experiences with their institutional teaching environments (e.g., departmental support, student enthusiasm). Faculty’s perceived supports in their teaching environments (e.g., having supportive colleagues, being able to access curricular resources) were by far most predictive of their use of EBT. Faculty’s personal motivations had little to no relationship when supports were included in these models. The effects were robust, even when controlling for faculty gender, minority status, and teaching experience. Much of the literature has focused on perceived barriers to EBT implementation (e.g., lack of time, constrained teaching space). The current data indicate that a focus on building supports for faculty may have the greatest impact on increasing the presence of EBT in college STEM courses.

This study examines the role of contextual factors in the efficacy of professional development for graduate teaching assistants by comparing presemester workshops for graduate teaching assistants at three Northeastern research universities.

In the wake of the 2016 election, which surprised pundits and voters on both the left and the right, there has been renewed interest in understanding what predicts American voters’ choices. In this article, we investigate the roles of personality and issue importance in how people voted in the 2016 U.S. election. In this longitudinal study of 403 MTurk workers who voted in the election, we assessed the relations between personality (openness, social dominance orientation, and national identity importance) and issue importance (group rights and social justice, economic rights, and individual and national rights), and voting for Clinton or Trump. Our results indicate that both individual differences and issue importance as measured in July 2016 predicted votes in November. We also found that the links between personality and voting were mediated by issue importance. Implications for political psychology and the study of personality, campaign issues, and voting behavior are discussed.