Concern about the impact of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs on society are not new. STEM employment in the United States has grown twice as fast as other fields during the last decade. School districts have been encouraged to consider STEM-focused schools to meet this demand and have responded by offering STEM magnet program options. This mixed-methods study used Lewin’s Theory of Change and Fullan’s ideas on Coherence as the theoretical frameworks to examine how students who participate in a high school STEM magnet program perform academically. Academic performance was measured using grade point average (GPA) and graduation rate. We compared the number of mathematics and science courses students in a STEM magnet program completed to the number of courses completed by students not participating in a STEM magnet program. Additionally, we surveyed teachers and administrators to learn their perceptions of student success factors in STEM magnet programs. There was a positive difference in graduation rates with a low effect size. The differences in the number of math and science courses completed were not practically significant. Moreover, magnet students earned a statistically significant higher GPA than non-magnet students. Furthermore, teachers reported a high degree of teacher efficacy, while administrators rated themselves higher on general leadership ability than on STEM leadership. We recommend clearly defining STEM education, additional professional development for teachers and administrators, streamlining accountability for STEM programs, and continuing to invest in STEM education as a pathway to producing college and career-ready students.

Transparent design has been promoted as a teaching pedagogy to promote student success, especially among marginalized student populations. This study seeks to understand the impact of participation in a transparently designed course on low-income students self-reported levels of academic self-efficacy and employer-valued skills in Washington state. This research furthers the understanding of low-income student success on campus while also providing a rigorous independent review of the Transparency in Learning and Teaching initiative’s (TILT) findings. The study uses data previously collected by the Washington State TILT Higher Ed research team in the Spring 2019 semester (n = 395) through a pre- and post- test survey methodology. Using a repeated measure ANOVA, results are compared by group (low-income and not-low-income) for a change in means over time and the interaction of both time and group. The findings of the study indicate that transparent design does not have an effect on the development of academic self-efficacy or a meaningful impact on the development of employer-valued skills. The results may be explained by issues with instrumentation, a lack of implementation fidelity throughout the study, or the sample’s demographics. This study identifies the need for a significant reexamination of prior findings by other researchers and the need for rigorous replication of TILT research. Additional areas related to the low-income student experience are also discussed.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.