Despite efforts to increase participation in science, technology, engineering and math fields (STEM), the role of students' perceptions of the social relevance of science in guiding their expectations to major in STEM remains largely unexplored. Though science education scholars predict that perceptions of social relevance likely matter equally for boys and girls, gender scholars suggest that these perceptions should matter more for girls than boys. Using longitudinal data from a large, urban, low-income, and predominantly minority-serving district, this study examines the potentially gendered role of perceptions of social relevance in ninth graders' expectations to major in STEM. Further, it examines these dynamics with respect to expectations to major in any STEM field as well as expectations to major in specific STEM fields. Findings largely support the perspective of gender scholars; perceptions of the social relevance of science positively and significantly predict female, but not male, students' intentions to major in STEM (vs. non-STEM fields). Subsequent analyses that look at intentions to major in specific STEM fields reveal a similar pattern, such that perceptions of relevance positively predict female students' intentions to major in the biological sciences, the physical sciences, and engineering, while male students' intentions are not similarly impacted. By contrast, positive perceptions of the relevance of science predict a modest increase in interest in computer science for both boys and girls.

No abstract

No abstract

As academic advisors help students navigate academic challenges toward a degree, seemingly mundane interactions have the potential to shape students' beliefs about themselves and their abilities. This study examines whether subtle cues within messages from advisors may help students develop what Carol Dweck calls a growth mindset—the belief that ability is malleable through effort, strategy, and help-seeking—and lead to greater perceived support from advisors and student confidence. Drawing on focus groups and interviews with twenty undergraduate students at a large public university, this study offers empirical support for the positive impact that growth mindset language can have within advisor-student communication, as well as a set of practical recommendations for bringing these insights to day-to-day advising practice.

Universities are increasingly turning toward data-driven technologies like data dashboards to support advisors’ work in student success, yet little empirical work has explored whether these tools help or hinder best practices in advising, which is in many ways a relationship-based enterprise. This mixed-methods study analyzed whether and why the release of a student success dashboard impacted proactive and/or developmental advising at a large public university. After quantitatively demonstrating no measurable changes in advising practice following the release of the dashboard, qualitative evidence from interviews with advisors was used to interpret and explain the disconnect between the tool and the advising community. This study places scholarly attention from a practitioner perspective on the largely structural challenges to integrating retention software into advisors’ work in supporting their students’ success, with implications for the successful implementation of data-driven student success tools more broadly.