The Science Teaching and Research (STAR) Leadership Program at Austin College was designed to intentionally include leadership development into the science curriculum and provides an opportunity to determine the effects of student leadership development on the retention of students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). This dissertation used a quasi-experimental design to determine: 1) if STEM retention can be explained though the inclusion of leadership development into the curriculum; 2) if there is a difference between Austin College students who choose a STEM major compared to students who do not; and 3) if there is a difference between Austin College students who complete a STEM degree compared to students who do not. Census data were collected on 2,137 students who enrolled in STEM courses beginning in the fall of 2008 through the spring of 2017, and factors affecting retention were compared across three 3-year time periods that spanned before the program was initiated through wider implementation. A logistic regression showed that there was no significant positive association between leadership development and STEM retention when taking into account other pre-college and demographic factors that have been linked to retention in the literature. However, a one-way ANOVA showed that the academic factors significantly decreased as the STAR program progressed. Further studies are required to understand student benefits associated with the current program.

Low enrollment and high attrition of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) continues to be an issue for postsecondary institutions. Improvements in representation of women has been seen in some of the agricultural and biological sciences; however, in many of the more math intensive areas such as geosciences, engineering, mathematics/computer science, and physical sciences (GEMP), women continue to be underrepresented leading to underrepresentation in the workforce and further exacerbating gender gaps. Studies suggest the lack of representation is not due to a gap in math ability between men and women, yet underrepresentation remains predominantly within math intensive STEM areas, suggesting something like math self-efficacy (MSE) and math self-concept (MSC) may be impacting enrollment and retention. The research presented here investigates the link between enrollment in GEMP STEM and retention in STEM with the factors of MSE, MSC, and gender. Structural equation modeling (SEM) with Bayesian estimation is used incorporating additional factors from previous research. Study results indicated that MSE and male were both positive and significant indicators of enrollment in GEMP STEM and retention in STEM. MSC was not a significant indicator of retention in STEM but was shown to be significant for GEMP STEM enrollment; however, it was negatively associated with GEMP STEM when combined with MSE. Several program related factors were also shown to be significant indicators of GEMP STEM enrollment and STEM retention. This study highlights the importance of MSE and gender for enrollment and retention and should encourage future efforts towards improving MSE as a possible method of increasing representation of women in underrepresented areas of STEM.

Schools face the problem of recruiting and retaining students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) degrees. One reason that students leave STEM fields is because their introductory classes are too hard or not engaging. These introductory classes are typically taught using a lecture-heavy, instructor-centered approach, contrary to current evidence based pedagogy. Many who call for teacher reform put the blame on the way teachers are educated, which is often not student-centered, citing that because ‘teachers teach the way they were taught,’ current education is also not student-centered. The idea that ‘teachers teach the way they were taught’ is commonly used to promote an agenda for improved teaching training and accepted as fact in the scientific literature. However, little empirical data has been collected to support this conclusion. We aimed first to determine empirically if teachers teach the way they were taught, and second to determine the influences behind teaching practices. We observed, surveyed, and interviewed a sample of 44 instructors at seven colleges and universities throughout the state of Utah who taught select STEM introductory courses. Instruments used included observational, survey, and interview protocols developed specifically for this study during preliminary trials, and inspired by the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). A paired t-test was used to compare the professors’ teaching practices with their own educational experiences. Interview responses were then grouped into common categories and used to determine the influences behind teaching practices. We discovered that there is a significant difference between how teachers teach and how they were taught during their own educational experience. This finding does not support our hypothesis that teachers teach the way they were taught. Qualitative data from interviews introduces a new hypothesis that teachers teach the way they themselves preferred to be taught, or the way they think students learn best, demonstrating that teachers are taking a much more metacognitive approach to teaching than is suggested by that famous quote, ‘teachers teach the way they were taught.’ Our results suggest that reform classes and workshops develop a more metacognitive approach to exposing future teachers to current, evidence based pedagogy, allowing teachers to reflect on their own learning and experience for themselves the benefits of student-centered learning. These future teachers will then apply what they learn if they are convinced it is a better way to teach students. They will teach the way they were taught because they experienced a positive experience when leaning.

No description available.

The objective of this research is to explore the perceptions of UCF Upward Bound Program participants using focus groups and pre-posttest surveys in order to assess students' level of understanding of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) related coursework, secondary education preparation in science and mathematics, and their perceptions of barriers to a STEM college education. Also, this study centers on the summer 2010 science and mathematics residential portion of the Upward Bound Program. Program outcomes and effectiveness were evaluated based on the change in student insight of the Upward Bound Program's stake in their secondary education. In addition, pre-posttest measures and interviews allowed a greater understanding of teacher and parent involvement in high school coursework success. Factors that involve self-efficacy, same or other group orientation and perceptions of student college environment were also analyzed. This research facilitated the understanding of first generation, low income and multicultural student's perceptions and what they view as a benefit or a hindrance to entering and successfully completing degrees in post-secondary institutions, specifically in STEM-related disciplines.