2017 - Quantitative Analysis of an Urban Community College S-STEM Program

Attribution: Chapman, Amanda
Researchers: Amanda Chapman
University Affiliation: University of Phoenix
Email:
Research Question:
(1) How does success differ between the group of STEM students that received the S-STEM program intervention and a matched group of STEM students who do not? (2) How does average cumulative GPA differ between the two groups of STEM students? (3) How does average progress rate differ between the two groups of STEM students? (4) How does average progress rate differ prior to, and after beginning the S-STEM program intervention within the S-STEM Cohort?
Published: No
Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation:
Journal Entry:
Year: 2017
Findings:

– There were higher rates in student success, progress, and cumulative GPA in the group of students who received the program as an intervention than a comparison group of students, matched on previously reported measures of success, who did not receive the intervention.
– The evidence presented supports the efficacy of the UC S-STEM program in increasing student progress rate for credits earned, cumulative GPA, and success.
– Progress rates for Cohort students were lower prior to program entry than after program entry, by an average of almost three credit hours per semester. This observed difference in rate means was statistically and represented a large effect size.

Scholarship Types: DissertationKeywords: Academic AchievementCommunity CollegeDiversityEducationGPAmentorPostsecondary EducationRetentionSocioeconomic StatusRegions: UnknownMethodologies: QuantitativeResearch Designs: Quasi-ExperimentAnalysis Methods: Independent t-testPearson's chi-square Sampling Frame:Undergraduate students in STEM degree or program fields attending UC from the Fall of 2012 through the Fall of 2015
Sampling Types: Non-Random - PurposiveAnalysis Units: StudentData Types: Quantitative-Longitudinal
Data Description:

The S-STEM program is built upon Student Development and Expectancy Value Theory foundations and research that suggests both faculty mentoring and undergraduate research/authentic hands-on experiences improve success and retention in STEM fields, particularly for students with a STEM minority status (women, minorities, low SES).

The experimental group consists of students who applied for and received S-STEM scholarship awards. Between Fall of 2012 and Fall of 2015 there were 45 such students. The comparison group was composed of students with a declared STEM major who are matched for age, financial need, gender, and ethnicity with the experimental group(s).

The sample size was 135 for the GPA analysis. Control group sampling resulted in an adequate number of matches to provide two Controls (n=90) for each Cohort student (n=45). The sample size was 52 for the Success and Progress analysis. One comparison student was matched to each S-STEM scholar in the study group resulting in 26 Control group students.

IV: participation in S-STEM (Students admitted to the S-STEM program who participated for at least 1 semester)

DV: Success (Completion of a degree or program at UC, retention at UC, or transfer to a four-year institution), Cumulative GPA, Progress rate (Number of credits accumulated during an academic year divided by the number of semesters)

Theoretical Framework:
Relevance:Community college and STEM; Factors related to STEM readiness
Archives: K-16 STEM Abstracts