Repairing the leaky pipeline: A motivationally supportive intervention to enhance persistence in undergraduate science pathways

Abstract

The current study reports on the efficacy of a multi-faceted motivationally designed undergraduate enrichment summer program for supporting science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) persistence. Structural equation modeling was used to compare summer program participants ( = 186), who participated in the program between their first and second years in college, to a propensity score matched comparison sample ( = 401). Participation in the summer program positively predicted science motivation (self-efficacy, task value), assessed eight months after the end of the program (second year in college). The summer enrichment program was also beneficial for science persistence variables, as evidenced by significant direct and indirect effects of the program on science course completion during students' third year of college and students' intentions to pursue a science research career assessed during the third year of college. In general, the program was equally beneficial for all participants, but ancillary analyses indicated added benefits with respect to task value for students with relatively lower prior science achievement during the first year of college and with respect to subsequent science course taking for males. Implications for developing effective interventions to reduce the flow of individuals out of STEM fields and for translating motivational theory into practice are discussed.

Early year undergraduate researchers’ reflections on the values and perceived costs of their research experience

“…(p. 16) Thus, it can be said that tasks may be valued partly because of the consistency of the task with the person's identity. Therefore, participating in STEM-related activities, such as UR, may fit with the students' identity, support their connection to STEM fields, and may promote their persistence in their STEM major (Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018).…”

“…According to the EVT, individuals may assign one or multiple values to a task, and the degree of value they attach to the task may differ for different individuals as well (Cooper et al, 2017(Cooper et al, , 2019Peters & Daly, 2013;Wigfield & Cambria, 2010). Based on the current literature, UR programs can function as a powerful contextual factor for the model of EVT (Cooper et al, 2019;Hernandez et al, 2013;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018;Robnett, Chemers, & Zurbriggen, 2015). However, as the vast majority of the UR programs offered to juniors or seniors (though not exclusively) (NSSE, 2018), the existing literature largely explain students' task values associated with their research experience starting at the end of the sophomore or junior year (e.g., Hernandez, Woodcock, Estrada, & Schultz, 2018;Seymour et al, 2004;Thiry et al, 2011).…”

“…Seymour and Hewitt (1997) pointed out the crucial role of motivational aspects in STEM retention, stating that losing interest and motivation to engage in STEM-related activities is the most common reason for students' decision to switch away from STEM majors. Although student gains and outcomes of undergraduate research (UR) experience have been well-discussed in the literature, systematic and empirical research to clarify the motivational factors, perceived drivers, and barriers of the processes of the research programs is limited (Adedokun, Bessenbacher, Parker, Kirkham, & Burgess, 2013;Cooper et al, 2019;Gardner, Forrester, Jeffrey, Ferzli, & Shea, 2015;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018). Mostly, evaluation and research studies regarding UR experience focus on reporting program outcomes with less emphasis have been put on exploring contextual factors (e.g., the design of the program and institutional features), sociocultural factors (e.g., socialization, mentor-student relationship), and participants' psychological factors (e.g., motivational beliefs) (Adedokun et al, 2013;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018).…”

“…For instance, students who indicate having a positive lab environment and enjoying everyday research tasks were more likely to continue their research experience (Cooper et al, 2019;Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Perez, Cromley, & Kaplan, 2014) and link the perceived value of their experience to their personal and professional gains (Mabrouk & Peters, 2000;Seymour et al, 2004;Thiry, Laursen, & Hunter, 2011). On the other hand, students who leave their UR may not value engaging in research or may perceive high costs on staying in their UR (Cooper et al, 2019;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018). Although engaging in UR during the first year is becoming more common (Lopatto, 2010), annual results of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE, 2018) revealed that students who engage in UR during their first year are 6%, whereas it is 26% for seniors.…”

Nursing students' motivation regulation strategies in blended learning: A qualitative study

“…The motivation to learn is crucial for successfully completing a degree and preventing burn-out in a career (Boekaerts, 2016;Linnenbrink-Garcia et al, 2018). Motivation is not a permanent individual trait.…”