Access to School Counseling and the Connection to Postsecondary STEM Outcomes

Access to school counseling services leads to access to college-readiness counseling initiatives, including science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education–focused counseling for students. School counselor caseload and percentage of time spent on college-readiness counseling were analyzed in relation to longitudinal STEM postsecondary outcomes of students in a nationally representative sample. Access to school counselors who spend 21% or more of their time on college-readiness counseling predicted persistence and attainment of a STEM postsecondary degree. The current results offer implications for school counselors, counselor educators, and future researchers, including the need for STEM self-efficacy interventions, unbiased curriculum, and professional development on STEM counseling for school counselors; and the call for a more nuanced understanding of this topic.

Laying the Foundation for a Spatial Reasoning Researcher-Practitioner Partnership with CPS, SILC, and The Learning Partnership

The goal of this project was to explore how explicit instruction in spatial reasoning in primary grades can contribute to reductions in variation in STEM outcomes for low-income, minority students in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS). Our project focused on the persistent gender, racial and ethnic, and socioeconomic inequalities in STEM educational and career achievement and attainment. Our approach to addressing this problem was guided by research evidence that much of the variation in STEM outcomes for these groups can be explained by spatial reasoning abilities. Importantly, spatial reasoning skills can be improved through practice, but are rarely explicitly taught in the classroom. The spatial reasoning needs and opportunities identified by this work are relevant to CPS in that they focus on the prevalent science, math, and computer science curricula currently used in CPS K-2 instruction. As such, our findings provide specific, actionable guidance for the development of curricular supports that infuse explicit spatial reasoning instruction.

Developmental Trajectories of Science Identity Beliefs: Within-Group Differences among Black, Latinx, Asian, and White Students

Though adolescents’ science identity beliefs predict positive STEM outcomes, researchers have yet to examine developmental differences within racial/ethnic groups despite theoretical arguments for such studies. The current study examined science identity trajectories for Black (14%), Latinx (22%), Asian (4%), and White (52%) students (N = 21,170; 50% girls) from 9th grade to three years post-high school and the variability within each racial/ethnic group based on gender and college generational status. Contrary to the literature, students’ science identities increased over time, and the increases were larger for potential first- versus continuing-generation White students. Potential continuing-generation boys had stronger 9th grade science identities than potential first-generation girls in all groups except Asians. The findings suggest who might benefit from additional supports within each racial/ethnic group.

First-year students’ math anxiety predicts STEM avoidance and underperformance throughout university, independently of math ability

Math anxiety is widely considered a potential barrier to success in STEM. Current thinking holds that math anxiety is directly linked to avoidance of and underperformance in STEM domains. However, past evidence supporting these claims is limited in important ways. Perhaps most crucially, it is possible that math anxiety predicts STEM outcomes merely as a proxy for poor math skills. Here, we tested the link between math anxiety and subsequent STEM outcomes by measuring math anxiety, math ability, and several covariates in 183 first-semester university students. We then tracked students’ STEM avoidance and achievement through four years at university via official academic transcripts. Results showed that math anxiety predicted both a reduction in how many STEM courses students took and, separately (i.e., controlling for one another), lower STEM grades. Crucially, these associations held after controlling for math ability (and other covariates). That math anxiety predicts math-related academic achievement independently of Math Ability suggests that, contrary to current thinking, math anxiety’s effects on academic performance likely operate via mechanisms other than negatively affecting math ability. Beyond this, we show evidence that math anxiety can account for associations between math ability and STEM outcomes, suggesting that past links between math ability and real-world outcomes may, in fact, be at least partially explainable by attitudes toward math. These findings provide clear impetus for developing and testing interventions that target math anxiety specifically and suggest that focusing on math ability without additional attention to math anxiety may fail to optimally boost STEM outcomes.

STEM Degrees and Military Service: An Intersectional Analysis

Given that the U.S. military uses science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) exposure as a key recruitment tool, one should expect that military service is associated with STEM outcomes. While research demonstrates this pattern for women veterans, we know little about racialized and intersectional patterns. This article uses the American Community Survey data (2014–2018) to examine the association between military service, race/ethnicity, and gender to STEM degrees earned. We find that military service operates contingently: White men’s plus white, Hispanic, and multiracial/other women’s predicted probability of earning a STEM degree increases with military service. In contrast, for other minority groups, military service is not associated with a higher predicted probability of earning a STEM degree. Indeed, for groups typically overrepresented in STEM fields (i.e., Asian veterans), a negative association exists. These findings inform extant research on the long-term impact of military service on civilian reintegration, including educational and occupational outcomes.

They’re Comparing Me to Her: Social Comparison Perceptions Reduce Belonging and STEM Engagement Among Women With Token Status

Belonging and academic engagement are important predictors of women’s retention in STEM. To better understand the processes influencing these outcomes, we investigate how numerical underrepresentation (i.e., token status) triggers social comparison perceptions—concerns that others are comparing oneself to another person—that can undermine women’s STEM outcomes. Across four experiments, female college students recruited via subject pool (Study 1a) and MTurk (Studies 1b–3) read a hypothetical scenario in which another female (Studies 1a–3) or male (Study 2) student performed well or poorly in an engineering course. Findings showed that having token (vs. non-token) status in the course increased social comparison perceptions (i.e., perceptions about being compared to an ingroup peer), which subsequently reduced course belonging (Studies 1a and 1b). Study 2 found that (a) token status increased social comparison perceptions in response to the ingroup (vs. outgroup) peer and (b) social comparison perceptions decreased belonging through stereotype threat concerns, particularly when the peer performed poorly. Study 3 directly manipulated social comparison perceptions to further establish their causal role on negative outcomes and demonstrated that these perceived direct comparisons predicted additional consequences signaling STEM disengagement. Collectively, findings identify a novel process that can diminish belonging and academic engagement for women in STEM. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843211005447

Professional development that improves STEM outcomes

How should teachers spend their STEM-focused professional learning time? To answer this question, Heather Hill, Kathleen Lynch, Kathryn Gonzalez, and Cynthia Pollard analyzed a recent wave of rigorous new studies of STEM instructional improvement programs. They found that programs work best when focused on building knowledge teachers can use during instruction. This includes knowledge of the curriculum materials they will use, knowledge of content, and knowledge of how students learn that content. They argue that such learning opportunities improve teachers’ professional knowledge and skill, potentially by supporting teachers in making more informed in-the-moment instructional decisions.