An External Evaluation of the Maryland Mathematics Engineering and Science
Achievement (MESA) Program
The Center for Research and Reform in Education (CRRE)
Johns Hopkins University
Roisin P. Corcoran, Ph.D.
Jane M. Eisinger
Joseph M. Reilly
Steven M. Ross, Ph.D.
July 31, 2014
MESA Evaluation
2
An External Evaluation of the Maryland Mathematics Engineering and Science
Achievement (MESA) Program
Maryland MESA is a structured, grade 3–12, precollege program designed to prepare
students for academic and professional careers in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM). The program is generally held weekly either before or after school for
1–2 hours, depending on the school. The program's stated goals are to (a) increase the number
of engineers, scientists, mathematicians, and related professionals at technical and
management levels, and (b) serve as a driving force in encouraging minorities and females to
participate in these fields.
Maryland MESA provides services and programs to over 2,100 students and 180
teachers from the following geographical areas: Baltimore City, Anne Arundel County,
Baltimore County, Calvert County, Charles County, Howard County, Montgomery County,
Prince George’s County, and Talbot County. More than 24,000 Maryland students have been
served since the program's inception in 1976.
To achieve its goals, the MD MESA program offers the following educational
outreach components:









Advisor (teacher) professional development training
STEM-based project activities
Field trips and academic competitions
Tutoring/study skills instruction
Industry involvement/guest speakers and presenters
Business collaboration/outreach
Parental/guardian support
College and career counselling
Scholarships/incentives
Study Design
Evaluators from the Center for Research and Reform in Education (CRRE) of the
Johns Hopkins University School of Education visited three MESA school clubs in the
Howard County Public School District (one elementary, one middle, and one high school) for
the purpose of observing the clubs’ activities and interviewing the clubs’ site leaders. In
addition, students from multiple Maryland MESA clubs were asked to complete an online
survey regarding their experiences in the clubs, their reasons for joining, and their interests in
STEM.
Evaluation Questions
This study sought to address the following questions:
1. How effective is the MESA program at helping students develop an interest in
STEM?
MESA Evaluation
3
2. What are the average self-reported grades (math, science, and computer science) for
students in the MESA program?
3. What is MESA doing well, and what are some suggestions for program improvement?
MESA Evaluation
4
Survey Findings
Participant Survey Overview
The student program survey addressed student participation and self-reported
achievement in STEM coursework, student interest in future STEM pursuits (including
coursework, college focus, and career focus), and student perception of the MESA program.
The survey was created by CRRE for the purpose of this study and administered online in the
spring of 2014.
Survey Population
Participants were 77 MESA club members who attended six schools in Maryland: one
high school, two middle schools, and three elementary schools. . MESA program
coordinators selected the schools that participated in the survey activity. The mean age of
participants was 12.28 years. In terms of grade representation, 76.7% of participants were
between fourth and seventh grades, and the remaining 23.3% of participants were distributed
across grades 8–12. The sample consisted of 47 boys (61.0%) and 30 girls (39.0%). In total,
49.4% of the participant population identified themselves as African American, 19.5%
identified as White, and 19.5% as Asian Indian. Participants of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish
origin made up 11.7% of the survey sample, and participants of numerous other ethnicities
were also represented, although at somewhat lower percentages. Of these participants, 75.3%
indicated that MESA was the only school-based STEM program in which they were currently
participating. Participants who responded (76.6%) to the question, what is the highest level of
education completed by a parent or guardian they lived with most of the time, reported the
following:



85.6% of participants reported having a parent who completed an associate’s degree
or higher
79.2% of participants reported having a parent who completed a bachelor’s degree or
higher
40.3% of participants reported having a parent who completed a master’s degree or
higher
Participant Course Selection and Performance
Participants were asked to respond to questions concerning their current course
selection for math, science, and computer science. They were then asked follow-up questions
concerning their reasons for selecting the courses they did, and their general performance in
these classes. Overall, the majority of participants (68.8%) indicated that they participated in
at least one STEM class during the 2013–2014 school year that was categorized as “honors,”
“gifted/talented,” “advanced,” “International Baccalaureate,” or “AP.” More detailed analysis
of the item blocks corresponding to these questions are discussed for math, science, and
computer science.
MESA Evaluation
5
Math Course Selection and Performance
Although participants selected a wide variety of math courses, the courses selected
most often were as follows: 26.0% of students selected Pre-Algebra, 26.0% selected “other
math course,” and 14.3% selected Algebra I.
As shown in Table 1, when participants were asked, “Why are you taking this math
course?” the two options reflecting intrinsic interest: “You really enjoy math,” and “You like
to be challenged” were the most common responses (26.0% and 19.5%, respectively).
However, participants also frequently selected courses because of school course
requirements. Specifically, 15.6% of participants indicated that they had no choice in the
course they enrolled in, and 16.9% of participants indicated that the course was assigned to
them. Thus, 32.5% of participants selected their courses primarily due to school assignment.
Interestingly, these two selection patterns represent the two most frequently cited criteria in
students enrolling in math courses.
When asked “What have most of your grades been in math this year?” 57.1% of
participants reported receiving mostly “A” grades; 90.9% of participants reported mostly
receiving “B” grades or higher, and no participant reported mostly earning grades below a
“C.”
Table 1
Participant Reasons for Math Course Selection
Reason for Taking the Math
N
Course You’re Enrolled In
You really enjoy math
20
You like to be challenged
15
You had no choice, it is a
12
school requirement
The school counsellor
0
suggested you take it
Your parent(s) encouraged you
0
to take it
A teacher encouraged you to
3
take it
There were no other math
0
courses offered
You will need it to get into
1
college
You will need it to succeed in
6
college
You will need it for your career
2
It was assigned to you
13
Some other reason
2
You don’t know why you are
3
taking this course
Total = 77
%
26.0
19.5
15.6
0.0
0.0
3.9
0.0
1.3
7.8
2.6
16.9
2.6
3.9
100.0
MESA Evaluation
6
Science Course Selection and Performance
More participants selected “other science course” than any other course option, with
32.5% of participants indicating this category as their science class. No other course option
was selected by more than 13.0% of participants. Outside of this course selection, other
science courses participants enrolled in included:




Earth Science (13.0% of participants)
Environmental Science (9.1% of participants)
Physical Science (7.8% of participants)
Biology I (7.8% of participants)
Participants were asked to indicate the reasons for enrolling in science courses. As is
seen in Table 2, the response “You really like science” was the option selected most
frequently (29.9%), followed by “You had no choice, it is a school requirement” (20.8%),
“You like to be challenged” (14.3%), and “It was assigned to you” (13.0%). When related
response options are combined, 44.2% of participants used either “You really like science,”
or “You like to be challenged” as their primary criteria, and 33.8% of participants indicated
that the course was a school requirement or assigned to them as their reason for enrolling.
Additionally, 10.4% of participants indicated that they selected the course because it would
either help them get into or succeed in their college or career; and 5.2% of participants
indicated that encouragement from a parent, teacher, or guidance counsellor was a primary
factor.
When asked, “What have most your grades been in science this year?” 64.2% of
participants reported receiving mostly “A” grades; 90.6% of participants reported receiving
mostly “B” grades or higher, and no participant reported receiving mostly failing grades.
MESA Evaluation
7
Table 2
Participant Reasons for Science Course Selection
Reason for Taking the Science
N
Course You’re Enrolled In
You really enjoy science
23
You like to be challenged
11
You had no choice, it is a
16
school requirement
The school counsellor
0
suggested you take it
Your parent(s) encouraged you
2
to take it
A teacher encouraged you to
2
take it
There were no other science
1
courses offered
You will need it to get into
1
college
You will need it to succeed in
5
college
You will need it for your career
2
It was assigned to you
10
Some other reason
2
You don’t know why you are
2
taking this course
Total = 77
%
29.9
14.3
20.8
0.0
2.6
2.6
1.3
1.3
6.5
2.6
13.0
2.6
2.6
100.0
Computer Science Course Selection and Performance
In total, 10 out of the 77 survey participants (13.0%) indicated that they were taking a
computer science class during the 2013–2014 school year. Six participants indicated that they
were taking computer science courses described as either “general,” “basic,” or
“introductory.” The remaining participants reported taking “AP Computer Science A,”
“Computer Programming, Other,” “Computer Programming 1,” or “Computer Programming
2.” Participants reported the following as their top three reasons for their course selection:



“You really enjoy computer science” (40.0%)
“You like to be challenged” (20.0%)
“It was assigned to you” (20.0%)
Unlike participants’ math and science course selections, none of the participants
indicated that the course was a school requirement. Furthermore, no participants selected
options related to parent, teacher, or counsellor encouragement as their reason for enrolling.
Lastly, no participants selected options related to the courses’ utility in helping them succeed
in college or a career.
MESA Evaluation
8
Of the 10 participants enrolled in computer science courses, 8 participants indicated
that they received mostly “A” grades in the computer science course, 9 participants indicated
they received mostly “B” grades or higher, and only one participant indicated that most of
his/her grades were lower than a “B” (this participant received mostly “C” grades).
Table 3
Participant Reasons for Computer Science Course Selection
Reason for Taking the
N
Computer Science Course
You’re Enrolled In
You really enjoy computer
4
science
You like to be challenged
2
You had no choice, it is a
0
school requirement
The school counsellor
0
suggested you take it
Your parent(s) encouraged you
0
to take it
A teacher encouraged you to
0
take it
There were no other computer
0
science courses offered
You will need it to get into
0
college
You will need it to succeed in
0
college
You will need it for your career
0
It was assigned to you
2
Some other reason
1
You don’t know why you are
1
taking this course
Note. N = 10 response rate for each item
%
40.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
10.0
10.0
Participant Perceptions on STEM Topics
Participants were asked to respond to survey items pertaining to how interested,
confident, and competent they felt with math, science, and computer science, respectively.
Ten of the 77 total participants (13%) responded to this section. As indicated in Table 4,
participant Likert responses showed a degree of interest, confidence, and competence with
each of the STEM subjects being addressed.
On average, the respondents’ reported positive opinions on all the STEM statements
covered; furthermore, participant means exceeded 3.50 for all 16 of these survey items, and
exceeded 3.75 for 14 out of the 16 items. Participants, on average, indicated agreement with
the statement: “Someday I plan to have a career in a math, science, or computer-science
related field” (M = 4.40, SD = 1.26). The participant response mean for this question (4.40)
represented the highest response mean for this entire section of survey items. Additional
MESA Evaluation
9
aggregated findings pertaining to this section are listed below (within each bullet point,
subjects are listed in order of their response means):

Participants, on average, found each STEM subject to be interesting: computer
science (M = 4.10, SD = 1.29), math (M = 4.00, SD = 1.15), and science (M = 3.90,
SD = 1.20).

Participants, on average, agreed that they understood science (M = 3.90, SD = 1.10),
math (M = 3.80, SD = 1.03), and computer science (M = 3.80, SD = 1.23).

On average, participants felt confident doing science (M = 4.10, SD = 1.20), computer
science (M = 3.80, SD=1.23), and math (M = 3.70, SD = 1.06).

Participants, on average, indicated that they liked learning computer science (M =
3.90, SD = 1.29), science (M = 3.80, SD = 1.23), and math (M = 3.70, SD = 1.34) in
school.

Participants, on average, indicated that they planned to keep taking classes in science
(M = 4.10, SD = 1.20), computer science (M = 4.00, SD = 1.25), and math (M = 3.90,
SD = 1.20) in the future.
As outlined in Table 5, “experiments” and “field trips” were the activities most
frequently cited as participant favorites in math and science classes. In addition,
“competitions” and “design activities” were cited by more than 50% of participants as being
favorite activities.
MESA Evaluation
10
Table 4
Participant Perceptions of STEM Topics
Survey Item
Strongly Disagree Neither
disagree
(%)
agree or
(%)
disagree
(%)
I think math is
10.0
0.0
0.0
interesting
I understand math
10.0
0.0
0.0
I feel confident doing
10.0
0.0
10.0
math
I like learning math in
10.0
10.0
10.0
school
I plan to keep taking
math classes in the
10.0
0.0
10.0
future
I think science is
10.0
0.0
10.0
interesting
I understand science
10.0
0.0
0.0
I feel confident doing
10.0
0.0
0.0
science
I like learning science
10.0
0.0
20.0
in school
I plan to keep taking
science classes in the
10.0
0.0
0.0
future
I think computer
10.0
0.0
10.0
science is interesting
I understand computer
10.0
0.0
20.0
science
I feel confident doing
10.0
0.0
20.0
computer science
I like learning
computer science in
10.0
0.0
20.0
school
I plan to keep taking
computer science
10.0
0.0
10.0
classes in the future
Someday I plan to have
a career in a math,
10.0
0.0
0.0
science, or computer
science-related field
Note. N = 10 response rate
Agree
(%)
Strongly
agree
(%)
M
SD
60.0
30.0
4.00
1.15
80.0
10.0
3.80
1.03
70.0
10.0
3.70
1.06
40.0
30.0
3.70
1.34
50.0
30.0
3.90
1.20
50.0
30.0
3.90
1.20
70.0
20.0
3.90
1.10
50.0
40.0
4.10
1.20
40.0
30.0
3.80
1.23
50.0
40.0
4.10
1.20
30.0
50.0
4.10
1.29
40.0
30.0
3.80
1.23
40.0
30.0
3.80
1.23
30.0
40.0
3.90
1.29
40.0
40.0
4.00
1.25
20.0
70.0
4.40
1.26
MESA Evaluation
11
Table 5
Participant Preferences in Math and Science Class Activities
My favorite part(s) of math and
N
science classes are . . . (check
all that apply)
Coursework
21
Competitions
43
Field trips
57
Design activities
43
Learning about math/science
26
careers
Experiments
60
Other
20
%
27.3
55.8
74.0
55.8
33.8
77.9
26.0
Participant Future Plans
A total of 12 participants responded to survey items concerning college and career
plans (only high school students were eligible to respond to this section). As shown in Table
6, 91.7% of participants indicated that they planned on applying to/attending a 4-year college,
with several indicating that they would like to apply to/attend other types of schools as well.
As indicated in Table 7, these participants used/were using a variety of different college
information-gathering activities as they applied to college. Participants demonstrated
unanimous interest in taking STEM-related classes in their postsecondary future, with 100%
of participants indicating that they planned on taking math, science, or computer science
classes postsecondary. Similarly, 100% of participants indicated that they planned to obtain
an advanced degree such as an M.S., Ph.D., or M.D. Lastly; all but two participants indicated
that they planned to eventually pursue a STEM career (83.3% of participants).
Table 6
Participant College Plans
Did you apply to (or are you
making plans to attend) any of
the following types of
colleges/schools? (Check all
that apply)
A 4-year college
A 2-year college
A vocational, technical or trade
school
A military school
I haven’t thought about
applying and/or attending
college yet
Note. N = 12 response rate
N
%
11
2
91.7
16.7
1
8.3
3
25.0
2
16.7
MESA Evaluation
12
Table 7
Participant College Preparation Activities
If you DID apply or make plans
to attend college/school, have
you done any of the following
activities? (Check all that
apply)
Visit any of the colleges you
were interested in?
Talk with professors or other
staff at any of these colleges?
Talk with students who
attended these colleges about
how they liked it there?
Get information about specific
colleges (for example, on the
computer or in the mail)?
Attend a test preparation class?
Attend a mock interview
(practice for college
interviews)?
Attend a “shadow” day at a
college?
Talk with a school counsellor or
other school staff members
about your college plans?
I didn’t do any of these things.
Note. N = 12 response rate
N
%
7
58.3
5
41.7
6
50.0
10
83.3
3
25.0
6
50.0
2
16.7
7
58.3
1
8.3
Participant Perceptions of MESA
Participants were asked to rate the overall influence of the MESA program on a
variety of their personal outcomes in STEM, including their excitement toward, and interest
and achievement in math, science, and computer science classes. The Likert mean for all 10
survey items in this section exceeded 3.00 (the Likert scale’s “neutral” rating), and exceeded
3.50 for 9 of 10 items. Notably, the item block’s final response (“It has made me more
interested in having a job in a math, science, or computer science–related career”) had the
highest response mean (M = 3.95, SD = 1.23) of any item in this section. Additional findings
pertaining to this section are listed below:

Participants, on average, agreed that MESA made them more excited about science
(M = 3.87, SD = 1.15), math (M = 3.62, SD = 1.12), and computer science (M = 3.52,
SD = 1.26).

Participants, on average, agreed that MESA made them more interested in taking
classes in science (M = 3.77, SD=1.16), math (M = 3.64, SD = 1.11), and computer
science (M = 3.51, SD = 1.23).
MESA Evaluation

13
Participants, on average, agreed that MESA helped them improve their performance
in science classes (M = 3.57, SD = 1.28), math classes (M = 3.56, SD = 1.19), and
computer science classes (M = 3.27, SD = 1.17).
Although the response statistics between survey items in these areas are relatively
uniform, two additional trends are worth noting. First, the survey items pertaining to
competence (e.g., “It has helped me do better in my _____classes”) have Likert means lower
than the survey items pertaining to interest and excitement for all three subjects. Secondly,
Likert means for questions pertaining to math and science are higher than computer science
in all three key areas (i.e., the program’s influence on participants’ excitement, interest, and
performance.)
MESA Evaluation
14
Table 8
Participant Perceptions of MESA
Survey Item
Strongly Disagree
disagree
(%)
(%)
It has made me more
excited about math.
It has made me more
interested in taking
math classes.
It has helped me to do
better in my math
classes.
It has made me more
excited about science.
It has made me more
interested in taking
science classes.
It has helped me to do
better in my science
classes
It has made me more
excited about
computer science.
It has made me more
interested in taking
computer science
classes.
It has helped me to do
better in my computer
science classes.
It has made me more
interested in having a
job in a math,
science, or computer
science-related
career.
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
(%)
Agree
(%)
Strongly
agree
(%)
M
SD
6.5
6.5
29.9
32.5
24.7
3.62
1.12
6.5
5.2
31.2
32.5
24.7
3.64
1.11
7.8
7.8
31.2
27.3
26.0
3.56
1.19
7.8
0.0
26.0
29.9
36.4
3.87
1.15
7.8
2.6
26.0
32.5
31.2
3.77
1.16
10.4
6.5
29.9
22.1
31.2
3.57
1.28
10.4
7.8
28.6
26.0
27.3
3.52
1.26
9.1
7.8
33.8
22.1
27.3
3.51
1.23
9.1
9.1
48.1
13.0
20.8
3.27
1.17
9.1
1.3
19.5
26.0
44.2
3.95
1.23
MESA Evaluation
15
Site Leader Interview Findings
Two evaluators from CRRE conducted in-person interviews with three MESA site
leaders (representing one elementary, one middle, and one high school participating in the
program) during May and June 2014. The site leaders had been in their positions at their
respective schools for 8–12 years. MESA program membership ranged from 18–30 students
at each site. The site leader interview content was developed by the CRRE research team to
provide an administrator’s view of the program and its use in schools. All participants agreed
to participate in the interviews, which lasted approximately 30–35 minutes. Questions
focused on three areas: the school’s use of the program, the site leader’s attitude toward the
MESA program, and his/her perception of student response to the program.
Schools’ Use of the MESA Program
MESA provided the school program’s base funding, which allowed site leaders to
purchase equipment and materials, such as robotics kits. Site leaders provided building
materials for the students to use on some of their projects, including items such as scrap
wood, plastic bottles, and cardboard. One leader made a point of saying that funding was not
an issue for his/her club whereas another spoke of decreased funding resulting in decreased
field trip opportunities for his/her students.
Site Leaders’ Attitudes toward MESA
When asked about the degree to which degree they believed the MESA program
benefitted their schools, two of the leaders stated that they felt the program brought a measure
of prestige to their school. One stated that the program had lapsed briefly at his/her school;
parents and students alike had been disappointed, with parents calling and emailing the
principal “pleading” for it to be restarted. The elementary school site leader said that he/she
thought that students who participated in the club were better prepared for middle school.
“I do have to say for many of the students and for me, it’s the highlight of the week . .
. I can’t wait . . . I get to see that glimmer in the eye where they’re (the students) like
‘Oh yeah!’”(SL2)
All of the site leaders indicated that they would strongly recommend the MESA
program to other educators, with one saying that he/she actually had done so. Two of the
three site leaders mentioned that they wished the program was offered at all schools within
their county.
Administrator and Parental Involvement
School administrators did not appear to play a direct role in the program’s functioning
at the schools that were visited. Administrators uniformly provided help to their MESA clubs
by including their news in school announcements, providing funding from the schools’ PTAs,
and occasionally attending team meetings or events. One site leader noted that at one time in
the past, his/her assistant principal had helped to decide which students would participate in
the program. The site leaders who were interviewed for this evaluation seem to have great
autonomy in the way they chose to manage their clubs. One leader ran the club solely with
MESA Evaluation
16
the help of parents; two received additional help in the form of supplies, assistance, and work
space from their Tech Ed. teachers; and one of the three had an assistant provided by the
school.
Parental involvement varied from school to school, with the most parental
involvement evident at the elementary school. At that school, the site leader stated that the
program would not be successful if the students were not able to do a lot of work on their
MESA projects after school and on the weekends. Parents provided meeting places (in their
homes) and supervision at these times. Some of the parents at the elementary site had served
as MESA team leaders for various projects conducted during the year. At both the middle and
high schools, the site leaders commented that their students were less inclined to want to have
their parents around at school:
“We’ll have them (parents) come in occasionally . . . I see a tendency for the parents
to kind of fall back in middle school.” (SL2)
All of the site leaders spoke of parents’ willingness to volunteer, to take time off from work
to chaperone at MESA competitions and field trips, and to turn out to take pictures and cheer
their students on.
How MESA Differs from other STEM Programs
Each of the site leaders voiced differing opinions on this topic. One felt that other
STEM programs, as compared to the one at his/her school, focused on writing and reading
rather than “doing.” Another believed that his/her school’s location within the state gave
him/her a possible advantage over other STEM clubs when it came to the support he/she
received. A third site leader noted that his/her program was less costly than other STEM
programs, as the investment was in the students’ ideas and academics rather than in
equipment.
Meeting Student Needs and Interests
Overall, the site leaders agreed that the program was meeting the needs of their
students. An interesting point raised by one site leader was that in his/her school, the program
appealed to students with a variety of interests—not just those with an interest in math and
the sciences.
“I think that it (MESA) does a pretty good job in allowing the kids to choose their
difficulty of the project that they do. Sometimes it’s hard to teach a lot of physics and
math to (the youngest students in the club).” (SL2)
“(Students are) learning good engineering, and learning to work together as teams.”
(SL2)
“They’re exposed to a lot of different things that they might not get in class.” (SL3)
“I think it really opens the door for them because some of them are taking more
engineering classes, rethinking what they want to do.” (SL3)
MESA Evaluation
17
The site leaders unanimously agreed that students enjoyed participating in the MESA
program at their schools. Two of the three schools could only accommodate approximately
half of the students who would like to participate in their programs due to staffing, funding,
and space.
“I know they look forward to it . . . and I know that they enjoy their time here. I mean
shucks, if they didn’t, they wouldn’t be here on a Friday afternoon!” (SL2)
Reported Impact on Student Achievement
One site leader had successfully used participation in MESA as a motivation for
students to keep their grades up in math. Another felt that the real impact on achievement
would be seen in several years’ time, when students in the program continued to take science
classes. One stated that he/she had heard from parents that their children do better in school
when they are members of the team. All three site leaders mentioned that they knew of
students from their program who had gone on to be MESA club members, or had continued
in the sciences at their subsequent schools.
“ . . . then they come back and they talk about it and you see what they’ve
accomplished later on.” (SL3)
“ . . . greatest benefit is that kids learn about themselves and their limits, while
demonstrating what they are capable of doing if given the opportunity.” (SL1)
Implementation of MESA
The MESA program was in place when all of the site leaders interviewed for this
evaluation had taken their positions at their respective schools. One of the present site leaders
was currently trying to find someone to assume his/her role with the program but had not
been successful in recruiting another teacher from the school.
One of the three site leaders began his/her association with MESA as a parent
volunteer. He/she went on to become the club leader at the school where he/she was working
when no one else was showing interest in the position. On deciding to take on the job and
continuing the club, he/she commented:
“I think it’s very important that students learn to problem solve. They need to learn
how to read directions, see the objectives, it’s just very important.” (SL3)
Positive Aspects about MESA
Site leaders liked the variety of projects that their students had the opportunity to
work on, including robotics and steamboats. They also really appreciated seeing students
solving problems together and sharing ideas with one another—sometimes with students of
very different backgrounds or ideas from their own. Another highlight for the site leaders was
seeing students make the connection between something they had learned in one of their
classes and what they were doing in MESA, and vice-versa.
“I really like it when the kids get to discover science hands-on without a textbook
telling them . . .” (SL2)
MESA Evaluation
18
One leader discussed the many unseen benefits of MESA, such as the skills that
students acquire by presenting their projects before professionals, thereby gaining a sense of
ease and confidence in that type of situation.
“. . . (T)hey don’t realize it until they get to college, and they go ‘You know, I can do
this!’ “(SL3)
Suggestions for Improvement
Suggestions for improvement varied between site leaders. Two of the three stated that
while judging and general organization of the MESA team competitions had gotten better in
recent years, there was still room for improvement. Two of the three site leaders also stated
that the Effective Communication competition (one of the MESA Day competition events)
was not popular with their students, and that they would like to see something done to make
that component of MESA more engaging for students.
“I would like to see them maybe change some of the different projects a little bit
more.” (SL2)
Another issue raised was a desire for more (and varied) “hands-on” field trips and
activities for students, such as trips to museums and venues where they could interact with
professionals in STEM-based industry. One site leader said that this component of the MESA
program seemed to have diminished in scope during the past few years and that he/she hoped
that this pattern would change. He/she viewed the times when students got to meet with
STEM mentors as very valuable.
MESA Evaluation
19
Conclusions
Site leader and student participant reactions to MESA participation demonstrated
consistently strong support for the program. Specifically, site observations, survey response
statistics, and interview responses corroborated that students found the program interesting
and beneficial to their STEM learning. Furthermore, site leaders felt that the program served
the needs of the students it reached, but regretted that it could not accommodate all of the
students who expressed an interest in participating. Further conclusions concerning the data
gathered are summarized below.

According to site leader interviews, Maryland MESA provided a framework, funding,
and general support for the individual MESA clubs. School administrators did not
appear to play a direct role in the MESA clubs’ functioning but did provide an
element of support in facilitating the site leader’s autonomy in running the school’s
MESA program. Participant responses indicated substantial parent support for the
program and a degree of direct parental involvement during the elementary school
years (visiting the clubs, chaperoning field trips, etc.). Although parental support for
the program seemed to continue in middle and high school, direct parental
involvement generally became more limited as students progressed through school.

Site leaders consistently exhibited highly positive attitudes toward the program’s
purpose and outcomes. Site leaders consistently indicated that parents and students
enjoyed and valued the program and suggested that their (the site leader’s)
participation in leading the program brought them fulfillment. All interviewed site
leaders indicated that they would recommend the MESA program to other educators
and that the program was meeting the needs of their students.

Site leader interviews as well as participant survey responses indicated a strong level
of student interest in the MESA program. Site leaders consistently indicated that
students thoroughly enjoyed participating in the program, and student survey
responses indicated the program’s positive influence in increasing their interest in and
excitement about math, science, and computer science. Furthermore, over 80% of the
MESA high school students surveyed indicated that they planned to pursue a career in
STEM after college.

Although not as robust as the support demonstrated for the program’s influence on
student STEM engagement, site leader interviews and participant survey data
provided support suggesting the program’s potentially positive influence on student
achievement. Site leaders shared multiple anecdotes of student STEM learning, and
student survey responses indicated that they frequently felt the program helped them
perform better in math, science, and computer science classes.