Maximizing the Sustained Effects of Utility-Value Interventions in Community College Math

本研究通过研究门户社区大学数学课程的干预措施来解决STEM效用价值干预文献中的空白，这些课程是中学后成功的关键障碍或机会。弗吉尼亚大学（University of Virginia）和田纳西州校务委员会（Tennessee Board of Regents）的研究人员将调查三个研究问题：(1)与标准的实用价值干预或控制条件相比，定制的实用价值干预是否能改善学术成果？(2)与四年制大学一样，在社区大学环境中，效用价值干预是否通过同样的潜在机制使同样的学生受益？(3)效用价值干预的效果在未来的STEM课程中是否持续？该项目涉及田纳西州13所社区学院的1.6万名学生。研究人员采用双盲设计，将学生随机分配到定制的效用值、标准效用值或控制条件中。测量包括：学生对干预材料的反应、心理过程（即参与者成功期望、内在价值、成就价值、效用价值和感知成本）、调节变量（即学生学业准备、人口统计学、文化错配、身份威胁和感知教师价值支持实践）；以及结果（即课程完成或退学，课程成绩，STEM平均绩点和STEM课程数量）。该项目得到了EHR核心研究（ECR）计划的支持，该计划支持推进STEM学习和学习环境基础研究、扩大STEM参与和STEM劳动力发展的工作。ECR项目支持积累有力的证据，为理解、建立理论来解释、提出干预和创新建议的努力提供信息，以应对STEM兴趣、教育、学习和参与方面的持续挑战。促进多样化和技术能力强的STEM劳动力对于促进科学进步和我们国家的健康、繁荣和福利至关重要。参与本研究项目的学生可能会从调查中的干预措施中受益。通过研究数学入门课程中的效用价值干预，有可能为高等教育管理者、教师和教师提供更有效的教学实践，帮助学生在STEM教育中取得成功。此外，进一步了解有利于学生在社区大学环境中学习和坚持STEM的一些非常具体的潜在机制，以及这些机制是否与四年制大学STEM环境中已知的学生相似，可能有助于对那些独特的不同高等教育环境的实施研究，并可能显著有助于改善教学，使所有正在学习STEM的本科生受益。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

This study addresses gaps in the STEM utility-value interventions literature by studying the interventions in gateway community college math courses, which serve as a critical barrier or opportunity to postsecondary success. Researchers at the University of Virginia and the Tennessee Board of Regents will investigate three research questions: (1) Do customized utility-value interventions lead to improved academic outcomes compared to standard utility-value interventions or a control condition? (2) Do utility-value interventions benefit the same students in community college settings, and through the same underlying mechanisms, as in four-year institutions? (3) Are the effects of utility-value interventions sustained in future STEM courses? The project involves 16,000 students at 13 Tennessee community colleges. The researchers use a double-blind design with students randomly assigned to a customized utility-value, standard utility-value or control condition. Measures include: students’ reactions to the intervention materials, psychological processes (i.e., participant success expectancies, intrinsic value, attainment value, utility value, and perceived cost), moderator variables (i.e., student academic preparedness, demographics, cultural mismatch, identity threat and perceived instructor value-supportive practice; and instructor characteristics), and outcomes (i.e., course completion or withdrawal, course grades, STEM grade point average and number of STEM courses). This project is supported by the EHR Core Research (ECR) program, which supports work that advances fundamental research on STEM learning and learning environments, broadening participation in STEM, and STEM workforce development. The ECR program supports the accumulation of robust evidence to inform efforts to understand, build theory to explain, and suggest intervention and innovations to address persistent challenges in STEM interest, education, learning and participation.Advancing a diverse and technically competent STEM workforce is critical for contributing to the progress of science and to the health, prosperity and welfare of our nation. The students who participant in this research project are likely to benefit from the interventions under investigation. By studying utility-value intervention in math gateway courses there is potential to inform post-secondary administrators, faculty and instructors about more effective instructional practices for student success in STEM education. Additionally, advancing knowledge about some of the very specific underlying mechanisms that benefit student STEM learning and persistence in community college settings, and whether these mechanisms are similar to those already known about students in four-year college STEM settings, could benefit implementation research about those uniquely different post-secondary settings and may significantly contribute to improved instruction to benefit all undergraduate students who are learning STEM.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.