Castle Sarah D, Byrd W Carson, Koester Benjamin P, Pearson Meaghan I, Bonem Emily, Caporale Natalia, Cwik Sonja, Denaro Kameryn, Fiorini Stefano, Li Yangqiuting, Mead Chris, Rypkema Heather, Sweeder Ryan D, Valdivia Medinaceli Montserrat B, Whitcomb Kyle M, Brownell Sara E, Levesque-Bristol Chantal, Molinaro Marco, Singh Chandralekha, McKay Timothy A, Matz Rebecca L
Department of Mathematics and Statistical Science, University of Idaho, MS 1103, 875 Perimeter Dr, Moscow, ID 83844 USA.
Center for the Study of Higher & Postsecondary Education, University of Michigan, 2117 School of Education Building, 610 E University Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA.
Int J STEM Educ. 2024;11(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s40594-024-00474-7. Epub 2024 Feb 23.
Large introductory lecture courses are frequently post-secondary students' first formal interaction with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Grade outcomes in these courses are often disparate across student populations, which, in turn, has implications for student retention. This study positions such disparities as a manifestation of systemic inequities along the dimensions of sex, race/ethnicity, income, and first-generation status and investigates the extent to which they are similar across peer institutions.
We examined grade outcomes in a selected set of early STEM courses across six large, public, research-intensive universities in the United States over ten years. In this sample of more than 200,000 STEM course enrollments, we find that course grade benefits increase significantly with the number of systemic advantages students possess at all six institutions. The observed trends in academic outcomes versus advantage are strikingly similar across universities despite the fact that we did not control for differences in grading practices, contexts, and instructor and student populations. The findings are concerning given that these courses are often students' first post-secondary STEM experiences.
STEM course grades are typically lower than those in other disciplines; students taking them often pay grade penalties. The systemic advantages some student groups experience are correlated with significant reductions in these grade penalties at all six institutions. The consistency of these findings across institutions and courses supports the claim that inequities in STEM education are a systemic problem, driven by factors that go beyond specific courses or individual institutions. Our work provides a basis for the exploration of contexts where inequities are exacerbated or reduced and can be used to advocate for structural change within STEM education. To cultivate more equitable learning environments, we must reckon with how pervasive structural barriers in STEM courses negatively shape the experiences of marginalized students.
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40594-024-00474-7.
大型入门讲座课程通常是高等院校学生首次与科学、技术、工程和数学（STEM）学科进行的正式互动。这些课程的成绩在不同学生群体中往往存在差异，这反过来又对学生的留校率产生影响。本研究将这种差异视为性别、种族/民族、收入和第一代身份等维度上系统性不平等的一种表现，并调查了这些差异在同类院校中的相似程度。
我们研究了美国六所大型公立研究型大学在十年内选定的一组早期STEM课程的成绩。在这个超过20万次STEM课程注册的样本中，我们发现，在所有六所院校中，学生拥有的系统性优势越多，课程成绩优势就越显著。尽管我们没有控制评分方式、背景以及教师和学生群体的差异，但各大学在学术成果与优势方面观察到的趋势惊人地相似。鉴于这些课程通常是学生首次接触高等院校的STEM经历，这些发现令人担忧。
STEM课程的成绩通常低于其他学科；选修这些课程的学生往往会受到成绩惩罚。一些学生群体所经历的系统性优势与所有六所院校中这些成绩惩罚的显著减少相关。这些发现在不同院校和课程中的一致性支持了这样一种观点，即STEM教育中的不平等是一个系统性问题，其驱动因素超出了特定课程或个别院校的范畴。我们的工作为探索不平等加剧或减少的背景提供了基础，并可用于倡导STEM教育内部的结构性变革。为了营造更公平的学习环境，我们必须认识到STEM课程中普遍存在的结构性障碍如何对边缘化学生的经历产生负面影响。
在线版本包含可在10.1186/s40594-024-00474-7获取的补充材料。
