Large‐scale student programs increase persistence in STEM fields in a public university setting

Abstract

Background: Louisiana State University's (LSU) STEM Talent Expansion Program (STEP) was established to increase students' persistence in first-year, declared engineering majors (a project priority), in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) majors (an NSF goal), and in all majors at LSU (an institutional goal). Over 8 years, 3,097 (27%) engineering students participated in one or more STEP activities including a residential college, a student mentoring program, an introductory engineering design course, and a summer bridge camp for first-year students. Purpose: This paper describes the influence of the STEP activities on persistence, while accounting for demographic and academic preparation variables. Design/Method: Data collected over 8 years from first-year engineering students include demographics, academic preparation, participation in STEP activities, and yearly status regarding major and graduation. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and multiple logistic regression determine which factors significantly impact persistence in engineering majors, in STEM majors, and in all majors at LSU. Results: STEP participants have higher persistence levels than nonparticipants by at least 11% in engineering, 9% in STEM, and 5% in all majors at LSU. Gender, ACT math scores, and, in some cases, ethnicity significantly impact persistence. Participation in the residential college, introductory course, and mentoring programs significantly increased persistence in engineering majors, in STEM majors, and at the university, while the summer bridge camp did not show as much influence on persistence overall. Conclusion: STEP was successful at increasing persistence in engineering and STEM majors. Specific STEP activities continue to evolve in the College of Engineering and should continue to reap positive results in the persistence of engineering students. K E Y W O R D S attrition, persistence, quantitative analysis, regression, retention

Scientific Performance and Mapping of the Term STEM in Education on the Web of Science

“…For this reason, the term of STEM education should be taken with caution, since for some authors it is represented as a pedagogical action that prepares students for university engineering courses; others value it as a career path for an engineering profession, while others value it as a component of general education, when trying to improve STEM knowledge in the population [21]. The use of STEM in education involves students working as a team, to focus on problem solving, to increase decision making and creativity, to improve critical thinking and self-esteem, to acquire significant learning, to develop interaction between peers, to enhance self-efficacy, scientific identity and an attitude towards mathematics and science, to develop active learning, to improve reasoning skills, collaboration and the self-regulation of learning [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38].…”

Engineering Students’ Perceptions of Belongingness in Civil Engineering

“…Another approach to mitigate students' sense of isolation is to provide role models and mentors; this is particularly needed for female undergraduates in a male-dominated discipline (Matsui, Liu and Kane, 2003). Various studies describe positive outcomes of peer mentoring programs that pair new students with more senior students (Matsui, Liu and Kane, 2003;Nicklow, Kowalchuk, Gupta, Tezcan and Mathias, 2009), including benefits for the mentored students as well as the mentors themselves (Ikuma, Steele, Dann, Adio, Waggenspack, 2019). Ikuma et al (2019) report that a peer mentoring program for STEM students, in combination with other initiatives, significantly increased participants' persistence in engineering majors, in STEM majors, and at the university level compared to non-participating STEM students.…”

Facilitating a Student-Led, Large-Scale Engineering Bridge Camp: Twelve Years of Tips from the Trenches

“…A recent paper by LSU faculty and staff [11], found E 2 participation to have a significant impact on retention in engineering between the first and second year, although this trend was not seen in years 3-6. By comparing demographic and academic preparation variables, it was shown that students who attended E 2 were representative of the student population as a whole; this is important to note since the participants self-select for the camp.…”