STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
STEPping into the Future:
The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the
National STEM Enterprise
December 8, 2014
Prepared by:
STEPping into the Future Working Group on STEPCentral
Bethany Bowling, Northern Kentucky University
Pamela Brown, CUNY New York City College of Technology
Janet Callahan, Boise State University
John Davis, Alma College
Cynthia Furse, University of Utah
Jose Herrera, Western New Mexico University
Pat Hogan, Suffolk University
John Idoux, Tarleton State University
Richard Kopec, St. Edward's University
Anant Kurkreti, University of Cincinnati
Pamela Leggett-Robinson, Georgia Perimeter College
Janet Liou Mark, CUNY New York City College of Technology
Heidi Manning, Concordia College
Pat Marsteller, Emory University
Karen Olmstead, Salisbury University
Diane Rover, Iowa State University
Maureen Scharburg, San Jose State University
Tania Siemens, Association of American Colleges and Universities
Edmund Tsang, Western Michigan University
Mark Urban-Lurain, Michigan State University
1
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Executive Summary
The Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Talent Expansion Program (STEP) was
Initiated in FY 2002 by an Act of Congress, the Technology Talent Act of 2001 and subsequently
implemented by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The goal of Type 1 grants was to increase
the number of college graduates in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), at
the associate and baccalaureate levels, in response to the national priorities for U.S. global
leadership in STEM fields. In December 2013, NSF announced that the STEP program (along with
Widening Implementation & Demonstration of Evidence-Based Reforms (WIDER) and Transforming
Undergraduate Science Education (TUES)) would be replaced by a new program, Improving
Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE). The IUSE program is intended to fund initiatives supported
by these discontinued programs, while allowing more flexibility in the breadth of evidence-based
practices to be implemented in proposed projects, along with an articulated emphasis on
pedagogical research.
In response to the IUSE solicitation, STEP grantees have coalesced to articulate to NSF, and the
broader STEM community, how the STEP program has positively impacted their students, faculty
and institutions, and improved STEM education. The STEP community has successfully
implemented numerous sustainable, innovative, exportable, and effective educational practices
with STEP funding, even though the scientists and engineers responsible for these STEM advances
were not necessarily experts in pedagogical research. Examples of the successful and sustainable
implementation of best practices for STEM education and their impacts on student engagement
and retention are presented here for two-year and four-year institutions across the country. As the
IUSE program evolves, we strongly recommend that the STEP priorities of adoption of evidencebased practices to increase retention and graduation rates continue to be a significant focus for
award decisions in the IUSE program. This is because we know first-hand of the demonstrated
transformative power of STEP funding to the higher education enterprise through: 1) the
advancement of enhanced pedagogical competencies by STEM faculty members, 2) the expansion
of administrative and institutional support for STEM programs, and 3) the development of
collaborative intra- and inter-institution networks for STEM retention and education. The STEP
community strongly recommends that NSF continue to support these priorities in the IUSE program
when making funding decisions:
1. Adapting and implementing sustainable and potentially scalable best practices and
projects, including support for scaling up at the institution and across institutions.
2. Forming and sustaining partnerships and community networks, that build and maintain
relationships and disseminate results, particularly venues like the STEP grantee meeting
and STEPCentral (soon to be STEMCentral).
3. Supporting creative new laboratory course and curriculum development, including funding
for equipment.
4. Focusing on students, including diversity and inclusion, which complement workforce
needs.
5. Recognizing the resource limitations of small institutions when assessing the education
research component of the project.
2
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
STEPping into the Future:
The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
1) The STEP Way: Student-focused, Scalable, and Sustainable
We believe that implementation of best (evidence-based) practices in STEM education is
the most critical element of the STEP program that should be sustained and funded by
IUSE. Thanks to STEP funding, institutions of higher education across the country have
implemented best practices in STEM education with impressive results. Many of these high
impact practices could not have been established otherwise in this era of restrictively tight
budgets and diminishing funding sources. As administrators across the country search for
ways to support existing programs, implementation of new pedagogical initiatives has
become a major challenge. The cachet of the NSF along with STEP grant support has been a
crucial catalyst for implementing best STEM educational practices and in garnering the
support of key administrators to institutionalize these practices once STEP funding has
expired. Highlighted examples of positive outcomes resulting from STEP funding follow, in
the areas of: 1) student support in STEP programs, often with scale-up and 2) sustainability
of STEP initiatives and institutional transformation. The critical role played by the STEP
program in the implementation of best practices will demonstrate why STEP grant
priorities should be continued.
Student Support in STEP-funded Programs
One of the key elements of many STEP-funded projects was the emphasis on student
support and student-centered initiatives. STEP funding allowed institutions to develop
integrated, multi-faceted approaches to attract students to, and support students in, STEM
majors. Table 1 summarizes the many different types of interventions developed for
students by STEP funding.
The opportunity to participate in undergraduate research projects early in student’s
academic careers has been identified as one of the most effective interventions for student
retention and success. Alma College in Michigan, for example, where STEP supported early
undergraduate research, reported that graduation rates were 25% higher in participating
students compared to a matched control group with similar academic credentials.
Concordia College used STEP funds to create a summer undergraduate research program
for rising sophomores. These students were retained as STEM majors at a higher rate than
those that did not participate in summer undergraduate research. Additional institutions
that supported undergraduate STEM research with similar, promising results are shown on
Table 1.
STEP funds were also used to initiate programs to support student success via integrated,
coordinated approaches to STEM instruction and advising. At San Jose State University,
STEP support was used to create a STEM student success “ecosystem” by coordinating
advising, learning opportunities, and student leadership and mentoring. A new advising
center, the College of Science Advising Center, was created which expanded and enhanced
3
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Table 1: Multi-faceted Student Support
Where did it happen?
What happened?
Development of early undergraduate
research programs, including summer
research programs, to enhance student
engagement and retention
Alma College, Concordia College, Georgia
Perimeter College, University of Cincinnati,
Northern Kentucky University, St. Edward’s
University, Emory University, Tarleton State
University/Temple College Collaboration
Development of learning communities,
including transfer student learning
communities, or cohort course scheduling and
collaborative learning
Michigan State University, St. Edward’s University,
Iowa State University, Des Moines Area Community
College, University of Cincinnati
Organization of coordinated approaches to
advising, mentoring, meaningful career
counseling, and/or specialized advising
centers
Western Michigan University , San Jose State
University, Tarleton State University/Temple
College Collaboration, Emory University
Use of peer-led team learning, supplemental
instruction, peer advisors, tutors, mentors,
and/or student STEM ambassadors
Michigan State University, San Jose State
University, Tarleton State University/Temple
College Collaboration, Northern Kentucky
University, University of Utah
Development of summer bridge programs to
effectively augment, remediate, or introduce
STEM subjects and majors
Georgia Perimeter College, New York City College
of Technology, St. Edward’s University, University
of Cincinnati, Emory University, Tarleton State
University/Temple College Collaboration
STEM academic and career advising to entering students. Comprehensive learning
communities for STEM majors were established, as well as opportunities for student
leadership that included roles as peer advisors, tutors, and mentors. With these STEPfunded changes, the College of Science’s first-year retention rates continue to be higher
than university-wide first-year retention rates, including the retention rates for firstgeneration college students.
STEP funding at Michigan State University (MSU) allowed the implementation of the Peer
Assisted Learning Program, a version of Supplemental Instruction (SI), with mentoring
from Lansing Community College faculty and staff. The New York City College of
Technology (NYCCT) used STEP funds to support a Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) program
in a mathematics course in 2007, which has since been expanded to twelve other
foundational STEM classes with further adoption of this model by other STEM
departments. Courses at NYCCT with a PLTL workshop session have resulted in at least a
15% higher pass rate and 10% lower withdrawal rate than sections without PLTL. Georgia
Perimeter College used their STEP funding to implement SI programs in gateway STEM
courses. Courses with SI leaders resulted in at least a 5-7% higher pass rate and 10% lower
withdrawal rate than sections without SI. Similar results were seen in a collaborative
4
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
project between Tarleton State University and
Temple College and at Emory University via
strategies like early intervention programs,
counseling and advising enhancements, exposure
to practicing STEM professionals, mentoring, and
peer-to-peer programming.
STEP funding has allowed
transformative STEM teaching
and learning changes across all
levels of the higher education
landscape. All STEM
stakeholders have been
impacted by these initiatives:
students, faculty members,
advising teams, and
administrators at participating
institutions.
STEP-funded bridge programs were important
activities at many institutions. In the 2014 STEP
Community Assessment Survey, 23 out of 33
responses reported having data showing a
demonstrable link between participation in the
bridge program and retention in the STEM major affiliated with their STEP project. As
examples, summer bridge programs which were targeted to effectively augment,
remediate, or introduce STEM skills to entry level students were developed at the
following institutions: Georgia Perimeter College, New York City College of Technology
(sustained beyond the funding period), St. Edward’s University, the University of Cincinnati,
Emory University, and Tarleton State University and Temple College via a joint
arrangement.
Developing a sense of community and shared experiences for students via learning
communities was another effective intervention strategy for STEM students supported by
STEP. At Western Michigan University (WMU), STEP funded the creation of living learning
communities (LLCs) that involved approximately 200 students. Western Michigan
University’s (WMU’s) initial STEP grant funded learning communities (LCs) which primarily
focused on student retention and success in STEM subjects. Based on the success of these
initial LCs, WMU was able to expand the LC strategy to involve more than 400 (nearly 95%
of all incoming) first year engineering and applied sciences students. The LC strategy is
now sustained with Differential Tuition and re-assignment of responsibilities of the
centralized Advising Office. A follow-up STEP grant allowed WMU to extend lessons
learned to include first-year transfer students and returning sophomores and is currently
being scaled-up. Three Student Success Centers (STEP SSCs) were located directly in
residential halls through collaboration with the Office of Residence Life. Engineering
House, which was developed through STEP support and also in collaboration with
Residence Life, is the most active living learning community on the WMU campus and
serves as a model for student support programs.
St. Edward’s University in Texas initiated a living learning community with 17 students in
the first year of their STEP grant. With the assistance of leveraged funding from the TG
Public Benefit Program, the learning community concept has been expanded in four years
to include 112 students and is on track to support all incoming first-year STEM
majors. Similar LLCs have also been implemented at Emory University where Learning
Communities have now been created in other disciplines, resulting in extraordinary
collaborative efforts across multiple academic and support units to address the needs of
first-year students. (Kline et al, 2011; Tsang et al, 2008; Kopec and Blair, 2014).
5
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Iowa State University and Des Moines Area Community College used STEP funds to
establish engineering transfer learning communities at Iowa State to support the transition
from 2-year to 4-year college programs. These strategies help engage community college
transfer students while still at the community college and through their transition to the
senior institution (Bowling et al, 2012).
STEP funding provided other types of student-focused support systems as well. The
University of Cincinnati used STEP support to implement student cohort building via cohort
course scheduling and freshman supplemental collaborative learning in math and science
courses. At Northern Kentucky University, STEP funding supported upper-level STEM
majors to serve as ambassadors for their disciplines. The Northern Kentucky University
STEM student ambassadors program, originally created for STEM disciplines only, is now
being replicated across the university in other disciplines. The University of Utah was able
to establish a similar undergraduate program called the ‘Engineering Ambassadors’
program. These Ambassadors went to high schools, helped host events on campus, and
served as student liaisons to help ‘students at risk’ stay motivated and engaged in the
engineering program.
Sustainability of STEP Program and Institutional Transformation
STEP has provided an extraordinary and vital catalyst for systemic institutional change at
numerous colleges and universities across the country. An analysis of the 2014 STEP
Central Community Survey revealed that approximately 70% of the survey respondents
noted that they had sustained or institutionalized some component of their STEP grant
(Scharburg, 2014). Inspired by STEM project successes, these sustainable institutional
changes include:
 integration of curricular and co-curricular activities into STEM courses and
programs,
 amplification of faculty engagement and community identity,
 development of systemic curricular changes to enhance student learning,
 enhancement of both internal and external partnerships, and
 significant recognition, support, and ultimately institutionalization of STEP-initiated
STEM project best practices by university- and system-level administrators.
Significant faculty development and engagement occurred at Boise State University in
Idaho (Shadle et al,2012) where Faculty Learning Communities assisted STEM faculty
members in implementing transformative best-practices for learning in their courses and
to serve as pedagogical leaders in their respective departments.
Examples of systemic curricular changes are seen in Concordia College in Minnesota,
(Manning et al 2014) where pedagogies proven to be successful at other institutions were
introduced into introductory physics and biology courses as well as a curriculum linking
content in the introductory biology and the introductory chemistry laboratory courses. At
San Jose State the computer science faculty stopped traditional lectures, changing their
introductory computer science curriculum to active learning labs with short lectures
(Scharberg, 2013).
6
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
STEP funding allowed the development of many different types of partnerships, both
internal and external. To produce effective partnerships that are long-lasting and
replicative, partnerships between components of the STEM education community must be
robust and systemic. Table 2 summarizes the self-reported robust partnerships that were
developed and supported by STEP funding.
Table 2: Robust Partnerships supported by STEP
What happened?
Where did it happen?
Development of a STEM coordinator positions to interface
with other stakeholders (high schools or internal offices like
Academic Affairs, Admissions and University Advancement)
to market STEM education and careers
University of Utah, Salisbury University
Enhanced communication and programming between high
schools and college institutions to engage students in the
STEM enterprise
Emory College, Georgia Perimeter
College
Enhanced collaboration between 2-year and 4-year
institutions
Oxford College and Emory University,
Georgia Perimeter College,
Tarleton/Temple College
Enhanced internal faculty collaboration via release time,
professional development opportunities, and other resources
to study STEM best practices for teaching and learning and
implement them
Concordia College, Emory College, San
Jose University
Increased college and university support via strengthened
internal partnerships between the STEM disciplines and
administrative areas such as dean’s offices, advancement
offices, admissions, offices of institutional effectiveness,
offices of institutional research, and finance and
administration offices
Salisbury University, San Jose University,
University of Utah, St. Edward’s
University
The importance of STEP-funding to instigate systemic, administration level, institutional
changes is demonstrated by the following examples. At San Jose State University
(Scharberg, 2013), the creation of the College of Science Advising Center catalyzed several
new programs focused on student success and professional development. Similar
institution-level transformations occurred at Boise State University (Callahan et al, 2014)
where STEM student success became part of the university’s strategic plan. At Salisbury
University in Maryland (Salisbury University 2014), internal funds were reallocated for
STEM scholarships. At Northern Kentucky University (Bowling et al, 2012) the STEM
student Ambassador program has now been spread across the institution. As a final
example, at St. Edward’s University, the summer faculty-undergraduate research program,
initially funded by STEP, became a high priority university advancement goal resulting in
the establishment of two annually funded endowed funds to support the program
expansion.
7
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
The STEP Community: Bonded by Philosophy and Practice
The STEP Program has been particularly effective in building a community of practice
between STEP grantees, developing a broader network of both STEP grantees and other
STEM faculty members and interested stakeholders, strengthening STEM community
connections both within and between institutions, and providing venues for information
dissemination. There are many examples of successful community networks and
relationships in STEP funded projects. Table 3 illustrates some of the successful community
networks that have been established by STEP funding.
Community networks and relationships have also been established between two
partnering institutions. Tarleton State University and Temple College have recently used
STEP funding to establish a network of practicing STEM professionals. These STEM
professionals supported summer internship and research experiences to build community
relationships and improve the educational experiences for their students.
Emory STEP affects retention and graduation rates among Emory and Oxford College
students by building connections between two-year and four-year college faculty and
students. Their program was extended to non-Emory faculty from local institutions
including Morehouse and Spelman College, Georgia State University, and Agnes Scott
College.
All of the previously mentioned STEP supported programs focus on college and university
networking and relationship establishment. However, the overarching mechanism for
building a STEP community is STEP Central. STEP Central is literally and figuratively the
heart of the STEP community - a virtual community of practice designed to assist the NSF
STEP grantees and others interested in furthering STEM undergraduate education. STEP
Central uses a multifaceted approach to sharing that supports synchronous and
asynchronous modes of interaction including a growing database of resources, blogs,
working groups, newsletters, webinars, and virtual brown bag lunches. STEP Central has
been growing since it was launched in April 2011, and currently has 1176 members, 33% of
which are active on the site-posting resources, commenting in discussion forums, and
joining working groups. Due to initial success, STEP Central is now partnering with
AAC&U/PKAL, and ASEE to expand and become STEMCentral, and will serve a much larger
and broader community of people working on improving undergraduate STEM Education –
an expansion effort we strongly support. The continued growth and stewardship of the
STEP/STEM Central website and community can be a key factor in the successful
implementation of not just STEP-like programs, but also for people, projects, and
institutions working to catalyze and institutionalize improvements in any undergraduate
STEM education project.
While STEP Central allows for virtual Web interaction, the annual STEP meetings held in
Washington, DC provide critical opportunities for face-to-face interactions, conversations,
and information sharing among STEP grantees. These meetings give faculty and
administrators the chance to establish stronger personal connections, exchange
information, and most importantly to share what works in STEM education and practice.
The loss of these annual meetings will adversely impact the STEP community. We would
support efforts to reestablish annual meetings for IUSE recipients.
8
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Table 3: Successful Community Networks
What happened?
Where did it happen?
Year-long learning communities for faculty expanding
to interdepartmentally or to additional institutions
Boise State University
Networks between educational institutions and
practicing STEM professionals to support summer
internship and research experiences and to build
community relationships
Tarleton State University/ Temple College
Collaboration
Development of connections between faculty and
students at 2-year and 4-year institutions
Oxford College and Emory University,
Morehouse and Spelman College, Georgia
State University, and Agnes Scott College
STEP grantee community building and co-learning
occurred within the STEP Central Community of
Practice and Annual STEP Grantee Meetings
All institutions with STEP Grant; Additional
institutions with interest in STEM
Undergraduate Education
The STEP Practice: Impacts on Inclusion
High Impact Practices and Under Represented Groups in STEM
STEP-funded programs have applied evidence based, high impact practices in pedagogy
and student support that benefit all students but have a particularly strong impact on
underrepresented students, first generation college students, and female students.
Numerous studies have identified factors that contribute to STEM undergraduate retention
and persistence. Although academic factors like performance in gatekeeper courses (Crisp
et al 2009) are important, other types of interventions and social factors are also
important, including targeted support programs (Good, 2000), bridge programs (Johnson,
2013; Kuh et al 2006 and 2007), social support, self-efficacy, identity as a scientist,
academic adjustment, early engagement in research, close faculty mentorship, and
resilience (D’Augelli and Hirschberger, 1993, Carter et a; 2008, Chang et al 2011, Seymour
2002). High Impact Practices (Kuh et al 2006 and 2007) particularly improve
underrepresented student retention, persistence, and entry into advanced degrees.
Graham et al (2013) introduce a persistence framework model that focuses on developing
student agency, confidence, and self-efficacy through learning and professional
identification - all key strategies used in many STEP projects. Numerous studies show that
underrepresented students who engage in research in the first two years are significantly
more likely to persist in STEM majors and to advance to doctoral programs (Hunter et al
2007, Pender et al 2010, Russell et al 2007).
Laboratory Needs for Active Learning
Students often leave science because they find introductory laboratory courses boring and
uninspiring. Many STEP projects have incorporated active learning in introductory courses
and added summer research experiences. Apprentice based research—the one student,
one mentor model—is effective, but this model cannot reach all of STEM students. Future
9
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
NSF projects must find ways to engage students in hands-on learning of science from day
one of their undergraduate careers. Discovery based research in introductory classes
dramatically improves student outcomes such as grades, interest in majoring in STEM and
interest in graduate school (PCAST p25). Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)
recommends replacing conventional labs with discovery labs, allowing students to own the
questions, ensuring that students are brought in to the scientific community through
collaborating and publishing with others, and allowing student work to contribute to
scientific knowledge. But in order to follow the recommendations of HHMI
(http://www.hhmi.org/advance-science/building-authentic-research-experiences), NSF and
other agencies must find ways to help small institutions and community colleges acquire
the needed equipment to allow students in introductory labs to do real science. The STEM
student population at community colleges often has large percentages of
underrepresented groups, first generation college students, and women. Therefore,
supporting these institutions via equipment grants is supporting these student cohorts and
aiding in building a more diverse STEM community. Since the elimination of
Instrumentation and Laboratory Improvement grants, it has been much more difficult for
small and mid-sized public and private four-year institutions to fund equipment and
supplies for cutting edge research.
STEP, the Common Guidelines and IUSE
In the IUSE program announcement, reference is made to the Common Guidelines and
“STEM faculty as they strive to incorporate results from educational research into
classroom practice and work with education research colleagues and social science
learning scholars to advance our understanding of effective teaching and learning.” The
outcomes described above give testimony to the STEP program advancing the national
goals to increase STEM graduates, improve STEM education, and implement
transformative and sustainable strategies. The new emphasis on educational research in
the IUSE program could potentially present an obstacle to the continuation of these
successful outcomes, particularly at community colleges and small, public and private
institutions that may lack the education and social science personnel who have experience
in pedagogical research, particularly at the perceived level of competence implied by the
Common Guidelines.
Most of the PIs and Co-PIs in the projects discussed here have discipline-specific research
backgrounds and a remarkable record of success has been compiled, despite the fact that
few, if any, of the PIs have had any formal training or experience in cognitive science as
applied to educational practice. At small institutions where faculty have 4-5 course
teaching loads per semester, it is challenging to maintain adequate discipline-specific
research programs, much less develop educational research expertise as well. The
apparent additional emphasis on a formal educational research component required by
the IUSE program may prove to be a significant and potentially discouraging hurdle for
small institutions with limited resources and faculty with high work-load expectations to
overcome. This new direction could also divert resources away from discipline-based
science research consequently inhibiting progress in undergraduate research participation.
We fear these competing tensions could result in diminished access to IUSE funding, and
10
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
may result in inflated project assessment budgets to secure external educational research
support or potentially discourage faculty lacking internal educational research expertise
from submitting grant requests entirely.
Recommendations for Future STEM Funding
The examples discussed here represent only a small cross-section of the institutions of
higher education that have received STEP grant support. But their stories are very similar
to the many other institutions that have received STEP funding. Nearly all of these projects
have been responsible for catalyzing significant change at the home institutions, changes
that will be sustained and continue to have an impact well past the award period.
Consequently, the STEP community strongly recommends that NSF continue to support
these priorities in the IUSE program when making funding decisions:
1. Adapting and implementing sustainable and potentially scalable best practices and
projects, including support for scaling up at the institution and across institutions.
2. Forming and sustaining partnerships and community networks, that build and
maintain relationships and disseminate results, particularly venues like the STEP
grantee meeting and STEPCentral (soon to be STEMCentral).
3. Supporting creative new laboratory course and
BEST Practices for
curriculum development, including funding for
STEM Success
equipment.
 Undergraduate Research
4. Focusing on students, including diversity and inclusion,
 Bridge Programs
 Peer Mentoring and
which complement workforce needs.
Learning
5. Recognizing the resource limitations of small
 Living learning
institutions when assessing the education research
communities
component of the project.
In summary, while we are greatly encouraged that the IUSE program has combined the
program outcomes from STEP, TUES, and WIDER into a single umbrella program that
allows more flexibility in strategies and budget design, we are concerned that the
concomitant increase in focus on educational research may prove counterproductive to
the program goals. Small and primarily undergraduate institutions lack many of the
resources of larger research institutions, yet collectively they educate more than half of
the STEM students across the nation. Small institutions can have just as much of an
impact on STEM student success as larger institutions because undergraduate
education comprises their core mission. We urge NSF to weigh these factors carefully
when evaluating IUSE grant applications and awarding funds, so that smaller
institutions may continue to access NSF funding to implement meaningful and
substantive best practices in STEM education at their institutions in proportion to the
number of students they serve collectively, even if those projects may not produce
cutting-edge educational research results.
11
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
References
A. Kline, B. Aller, and E. Tsang (2011). “Improving Student Retention in STEM Disciplines: A
Model That Has Worked,” Proceedings of Annual Conference of American Society for
Engineering Education, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, June 26-29, 2011, Session M138.FPD 1.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (2009). Understanding Interventions
that Broaden Participation in Research Careers. In Conference on Understanding
Interventions that Broaden Participation in Research Careers, ed. DE Chubin, AL DePass, L
Blockus, pp. 153. Bethesda, MD
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2001). In pursuit of a diverse
science, technology, engineering , and mathematics workforce: Recommended research
priorities to enhance participation by underrepresented minorities. Washington, D.C.:
AAAS.
Bowling, B.V., TJ Murphy, H.A. Bullen, M. Doyle, J. Filaseta, J. Mercer, and J. Taylor, (2012).
“The implementation of multiple strategies for recruiting and retaining students in the
STEM disciplines at Northern Kentucky University”, Third Annual University of Kentucky
STEM Education Symposium, Lexington, KY, Feb 3, 2012.
Carter, Frances D., Mandell, Marvin, and Maton, Kenneth I. The Influence of ON-Campus,
Academic Year Undergraduate Research on STEM Ph.D. Outcomes: Evidence from the
Meyerhoff Scholarship Program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. American
Educational Research Association and Sage Publications (2009). Dec 2009 31(4): 441 DOI:
10.3102/0162373709348584 Version of Record Dec 2009.
http://epa.sagepub.com/content/31/4/441
Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Shadle, S., Landrum, R.E. (2014). Creating a STEM Identity: Investment
with Return. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Expo,
AC2014-10733.
Chang, Mitchell J., Sharkness, Jessica, Hurtado, Sylvia, Newman, Christopher B. (2014).
What Matters in College for Retaining Aspiring Scientists and Engineers from
Underrepresented Racial Groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Wiley
Periodicals, Inc. pp 1:26
Crisp, G., Nora, Al, & Taggart, A. (2009). Student characteristics, pre-college, and
environmental factors as predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: An analysis
of students attending a Hispanic Serving Institution. AmericanEducational Research
Journal, 46(4), 924-942.
D'Augelli, A.R. and S.L. Hershberger (1993). African American Undergraduates on a
Predominantly White Campus: Academic Factors, Social Networks, and Campus Climate.
Journal of Negro Education, 1993. 62(1): p. 67-81.
DeAngelo, L., Franke, R., Hurtado, S., Pryor, J. H., & Tran, S. (2011). Completing college:
Assessing graduation rates at four-year institutions. Los Angeles: Higher Education
Research Institute,UCLA.
12
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Finley, Ashley, McNair, Tia (2013). Assessing Underserved Students’ Engagement in HighImpact Practices. 2013. Association of American Colleges and Universities. LEAP.
http://www.aacu.ort/assessinghips
Good, J.M. (2000). A Promising Prospect for Minority Retention: Students Becoming Peer
Mentors. Journal of Negro Education, 2000. 69(4): p. 375-83.
Graham, Mark J, J. Frederick, Angela Byars-Winston and Jo Handelsman (2013). Increasing
Persistence of College Students in STEM. Science 27 September 2013: Vol. 341 no. 6153 pp.
1455-1456 DOI: 10.1126/science.1240487. http://www.sciencemag.org
Higher Education Research Institute. (2010). Degrees of success: Bachelor’s degree
completion rates among initial STEM majors. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research
Institute.
Hunn, Vanessa (2014). African American Students, Retention, and Team-Based Learning: A
Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Retention at Predominately White
Institutions. Journal of Black Studies published online 8 April 2014. DOI:
10.1177/0021934714529594
Hunter A, Laursen LS, Seymour E. (2007). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate
research instudents’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science Education.
2007; 91:36–74.
Hurtado, Sylvia, June C. Han, Victor B. Sa´enz, Lorelle L.Espinosa, Nolan L. Cabrera, and
Oscar S. Cerna (2007). Predicting Transition and Adjustment to College: Biomedical and
Behavioral Science Aspirants' and Minority Students' First Year of College. Research in
Higher Education, 2007. 48(7): p. 841-887.
Hurtado, S., Eagan, M. K., Cabrera, N. L., Lin, M. H., Park, J., & Lopez, M. (2008). Training
future scientists: Predicting first-year minority student participation in health science
research. Research in Higher Education, 49(2), 126-152.
Hurtado, S., Milem, Jeffrey; Clayton-Pedersen, Alma; Allen, Walter. (1998). Enhancing
Campus Climates for Racial/Ethnic Diversity: Educational Policy and Practice. Review of
Higher Education, 1998. 21(3): p. 279-302.
Hurtado, S., Eagan, Kevin, Sharkness, Jessica (2009). Thinking and Acting Like a Scientist:
Investigating the Outcomes of Introductory Science and Math Courses. 2009.
http://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/conference/AIR2009-ClassroomStudy.pdf:
Idoux, John P., Spencer, Daniel (2014). "Developing a STEM Pipeline in Central Texas,"
Council on Undergraduate Research Conference "Creating the Citizens of Tomorrow:
Undergraduate Research for All," Washington, D.C., June 28-July 1, 2014.
Jeffe, D. B., Andriole, Dorothy A., Wathington, Heather D., Tai, Robert H. (2014).
Educational Outcomes for MD-PhD Program Matriculants: A National Cohort Study. Acad
Med. 2014 89(1): 1-16. DOI: 10.1097/ACM 0000000000000071
13
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Johnson, Lakitta (2013). The Benefits of a Comprehensive Retention Program for African
American Students at a Predominantly White University. Interdisciplinary Journal of
Teaching & Learning. Spring 2013, Vol 3(1):38-52
Kopec, Richard, Blair, D., (2014). "Community for Achievement in Science, Academics, and
Research: The CASAR Project", First Year Engineering Experience Annual Conference (FYEE
2014), College Station, TX, August 7-8, 2014, Session F2A.
Kuh, George D., Jillian Kinzie, Ty Cruce, Rick Shoup and Robert M. Gonyea (2006).
Connecting the Dots: Multi-Faceted Analysis of the Relationships between Student
Engagement Results from the NSSE, and the Institutional Practices and Conditions that
Foster Student Success. 2006, Lumina Report.
Kuh G.D., Kinzie J., Cruce T., Shoup R., Gonyea R.M. (2007). Connecting the Dots: MultiFaceted Analyses of the Relationships between Student Engagement Results from the
NSSE, and the Institutional Practices and Conditions That Foster Student Success, NSSE,
http://nsse.iub.edu/pdf/Connecting_the_Dots_Report.pdf
Lewis, D.E. (2003). Sloan Guide for the successful recruitment of minority students into
science and engineering PhD programs. http://www.nacme.org/user/docs/Sloan
ManualFinallast _3_.pdf
Manning, H. , B. Luther, L. Manzoni, T. Berquo and M. Gealy (2014). Transitioning all
Introductory Physics Courses to a Studio-Style Classroom. American Association of Physics
Teachers (AAPT) Minneapolis, MN, July 26-30, 2014, PST2B09.
Moss-Racusin, Corinne Vander Toorn, jojanneke, Dovidin, John F., Brescoli, Victoria L.,
Graham, Mark J., Handelsman, Jo (2014). Scientific Diversity Interventions. Policy Forum.
Social Science 2014. 343: 6150616. www.sciencemag.org
National Research Council (2011). Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation:
America’s Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads. Wasjington, DC: The National
Academies Press.
National Science Foundation (2013). National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics.
Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences. Women, Minorities, and Persons
with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
Nagda, Biren A., Gregerman, Sandra R., Jonides, John, VonHippel, William, and Lerner,
Jeffifer. S. (1998). Undergraduate Student-Faculty Research Partnerships Affect Student
Retention. ASHE: The Review of Higher Education 1998. 22(1): p 55-72.
PCAST, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Engage To Excel:
Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics (2012).
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excelfinal_2-25-12.pdf, February 2012.
14
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Pender, Matea, Dave E. Marcotte, Mariano R. Sto. Domingo, and Kenneth I. Maton (2010).
The STEM Pipeline: The Role of Summer Research Experience in Minority Students' Ph.D.
Aspirations. Educ Policy Anal Arch . 10 December 2010; 18(30): 1–36.
Rath, Kenneth A., Peterfreund, Alan R. Xenos, Samuel P., Bayliss, Frank and Carnal, Nancy
(2007). Supplemental Instruction in Introductory Biology I: Enhancing the Performance and
Retention of Underrepresented Minority Students. CBE Life Sci Educ, 2007. 6(3): p. 203216.
Russell HS, Hancock PM, McCullough J. (2007). The Pipeline: Benefits of undergraduate
research experiences. Science. 27 April 2007 316 (5824): 548-549.
Salisbury University (2014). Merit Scholarships for STEM Students:
http://www.salisbury.edu/henson/stem/SU_STEM_Scholarships.html
Scharberg, M. (2013). “Improving STEM Student Success and Beyond: One STEP at a Time”,
chapter in Trajectories in Chemical Education Innovation, American Chemical Society
Books,”.
Scharberg, M. (2014): “Strategies for Project Sustainability and Institutionalization: An
analysis of the 2014 STEP Community Assessment Survey.” Draft available at:
http://stepcentral.net/groups/posts/1181/#.VFEvm-ewHiv.
Seymour, E. (2002). Tracking the processes of change in US undergraduate education in
science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Science Education, 2002. 86(1): 79105.
Seymour, E. and N.M. Hewitt, (2007). Talking About Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave
the Sciences. 1997: Westview Press pp 444.
http://books.google.com/books/about/Talking_about_leaving.html?id=e3h48xnglrUC
Shadle, S., Nadelson, L., Callahan, J. (2012). Promoting STEM faculty members’ reflection
on their learning perceptions and teaching practices, American Society for Engineering
Education Annual Conference & Expo, AC2012-2983.
STEP Central (2014). STEP Central Community Assessment Survey. Analysis of data
subsections available on STEPcentral.net. Available analysis are listed here:
http://stepcentral.net/announcements/60/
Tsang, E., Darrah, L., Engelmann, P., Halderson, C., Thumme, B., Grice, A. (2013). “Research
Pilots Assess Enhanced Student Success Resulting from Student Affairs Collaboration with
Engineering and Applied Sciences,” Proceedings of American Society for Engineering
Education Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA, June 23-26, 2013.
Tsang, Edward and C. Halderson, (2008). “Create Learning Communities to Enhance
Success for Students with Diverse Academic Preparation Background,” Proceedings of
Frontiers In Education Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY, October 22-25, 2008, CD-Rom,
Session S1D, Paper 1771.
15
STEPping into the Future: The Impacts of NSF STEP Funding on the National STEM Enterprise
Villarejo M., Barlow A.E.L., Kogan D., Veazey B.D., Sweeney J.K. (2008). Encouraging
Minority Undergraduates to Choose Science Careers: Career Paths Survey Results. CBE-Life
Sciences Education 7: 394-409
Watson S.S. (2003). Retaining Minority Students in Higher Education: A framework for
success. ed. EP Institue.
http://www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/Retaining%20Minority%20Students.pdf
Wilson, Zakiya, Holmes, Lakenya, deGravelles, Karin, Sylvain, Monica R., Batiste, Lisa,
Johnson, Misty, McGuire, Sandra Y., Pang, Su Seng, Warner, Isaiah (). Hierarchical
Mentoring: A Transformative Strategy for Improving Diversity and Retention in
Undergraduate STEM Disciplines. J Sci Educ Technol DOI 10.1007/s10956-011-9292-5
Wisker G. (2005). The good supervisor: Supervising postgraduate and undergraduate
research for doctoral theses and dissertations. pp. 388. Palgrave Macmillan
http://books.google.com/books/about/The_good_supervisor.html?id=UnOqQgAACAAJ
Woodard, D.B., S.L. Mallory, and A.M. De Luca (2001). Retention and institutional effort: A
self-study framework. NASPA Journal, 2001. 39(1): p. 53-83.
Working Group on Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce [WGDBRW] (2012).
Draft Report of the Advisory Committee to the Director Working Group on Diversity in
the Biomedical Research Workforce.
Zachary L.J. (2000). The Mentor's Guide: Facilitating Effective Learning Relationships. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 195 pp.
16