Indicators for Monitoring Undergraduate STEM Education (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Summary
Summary
Pages 1-12
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
Undergraduate STEM education prepares graduates for today's STEM professions and those of tomorrow, while also helping all students develop knowledge and skills they can draw on in a variety of occupations and as citizens. However, many capable students intending to major in STEM switch to another field or drop out of higher education altogether, partly because of documented weaknesses in STEM teaching, learning, and student supports.
|
From page 2... ...
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE INDICATOR SYSTEM Drawing on organizational theory and research, the committee developed a basic model of higher education: see Figure S-1. The model represents undergraduate education as a complex system comprising four interrelated components: inputs, incoming students; processes, students' educational experiences inside and outside the classroom; outcomes, including mastery of STEM concepts and skills and completion of STEM credentials; and environment, the structural and cultural features of academic departments and institutions.
|
From page 3... ...
They target improvement in various components of the undergraduate education system and interactions among these components that together will enhance students' success in STEM education, whether they are taking general education courses or pursuing a STEM credential. Some policy makers, parents, and students are particularly concerned about students' outcomes, especially the employment outcomes included in the third goal.
|
From page 4... ...
A common national assessment of core STEM concepts and skills does not exist. Therefore, the committee proposes to monitor progress in student learning through objectives and indicators of the adoption of teaching practices that have been shown by research to enhance student learning.
|
From page 5... ...
SUMMARY 5 TABLE S-1 Goals, Objectives, and Indicators to Monitor Progress in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education Conceptual Framework Objective Indicator Goal 1: Increase Students' Mastery of STEM Concepts and Skills by Engaging Them in Evidence-Based STEM Educational Practices and Programs Process 1.1 Use of evidence- 1.1.1 Use of evidence-based based STEM educational STEM educational practices in practices both in and course development and delivery outside of classrooms 1.1.2 Use of evidence-based STEM educational practices outside the classroom Environment 1.2 Existence and use of 1.2.1 Extent of instructors' supports that help STEM involvement in professional instructors use evidence- development based educational practices 1.2.2 Availability of support or incentives for evidence-based course development or course redesign Environment 1.3 An institutional culture 1.3.1 Use of valid measures of that values undergraduate teaching effectiveness STEM instruction 1.3.2 Consideration of evidence based teaching in personnel decisions by departments and institutions Process 1.4 Continuous No indicators: see "Challenges improvement in STEM of Measuring Continuous teaching and learning Improvement" in Chapter 2 Goal 2: Strive for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion of STEM Students and Instructors by Providing Equitable Opportunities for Access and Success Input 2.1 Equity of access to 2.1.1 Institutional structures, high-quality undergraduate policies, and practices that STEM educational strengthen STEM readiness for programs and experiences entering and enrolled college students 2.1.2 Entrance to and persistence in STEM academic programs 2.1.3 Equitable student participation in evidence-based STEM educational practices continued
|
From page 6... ...
6 INDICATORS FOR MONITORING UNDERGRADUATE STEM EDUCATION TABLE S-1 Continued Conceptual Framework Objective Indicator Outcome 2.2 Representational 2.2.1 Diversity of STEM diversity among STEM degree and certificate earners credential earners in comparison with diversity of degree and certificate earners in all fields 2.2.2 Diversity of students who transfer from 2- to 4-year STEM programs in comparison with diversity of students in 2-year STEM programs 2.2.3 Time to degree for students in STEM academic programs Environment 2.3 Representational 2.3.1 Diversity of STEM diversity among STEM instructors in comparison with instructors diversity of STEM graduate degree holders 2.3.2 Diversity of STEM graduate student instructors in comparison with diversity of STEM graduate students Environment 2.4 Inclusive environments 2.4.1 Students pursuing STEM in institutions and STEM credentials feel included and departments supported in their academic programs and departments 2.4.2 Instructors teaching courses in STEM disciplines feel supported and included in their departments 2.4.3 Institutional practices are culturally responsive, inclusive, and consistent across the institution Goal 3: Ensure Adequate Numbers of STEM Professionals Process 3.1 Foundational 3.1.1 Completion of foundational preparation for STEM for courses, including developmental all students education courses, to ensure STEM program readiness
|
From page 7... ...
DATA FOR THE INDICATOR SYSTEM The committee reviewed existing systems and data sources for monitoring undergraduate STEM education, considering whether they were rep
|
From page 8... ...
CONCLUSION 3 To monitor the status and quality of undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education, recurring longitudinal surveys of instructors and students are needed. The committee found that IPEDS and other federal data sources generally allow data to be disaggregated by students' race and ethnicity and gender.
|
From page 9... ...
CONCLUSION 4 To monitor progress toward equity, diversity, and inclusion of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics students and instructors, national data systems will need to include demographic characteristics beyond gender and race and ethnicity, including at least disability status, first-generation student status, and socioeconomic status. Proprietary Data Sources Many proprietary data sources have emerged over the past two decades in response to growing accountability pressures in higher education.
|
From page 10... ...
IMPLEMENTING THE INDICATOR SYSTEM The indicator system's potential to guide improvement in undergraduate STEM education at the national level can be realized only with new data collection by federal agencies or other organizations. The committee identified three options for obtaining the data needed to support the full suite of 21 indicators.
|
From page 11... ...
would take advantage of the rapid growth of data collection and analysis by institutions, state higher education systems, and education reform consortia across the country. Many institutions currently provide student unit record data, and new measures of student progress calculated from these data, to a state data warehouse and also to one or more education reform consortia databases.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.