An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Analysis of Factors Contributing to Students' Perceptions of Inclusion in Introductory STEM Courses.

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Alessandra M York, Kathryn G Miller, Michael J Cahill, Mindy A Bernstein, Ashton M Barber, Hannah E Blomgren, Regina F Frey
{"title":"An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Analysis of Factors Contributing to Students' Perceptions of Inclusion in Introductory STEM Courses.","authors":"Alessandra M York, Kathryn G Miller, Michael J Cahill, Mindy A Bernstein, Ashton M Barber, Hannah E Blomgren, Regina F Frey","doi":"10.1187/cbe.23-04-0055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this exploratory mixed-methods analysis of students' perceptions of inclusion in introductory STEM courses for STEM majors, we asked students to rate inclusion in their class and to provide an open-text explanation of their rating. Analyzing 1930 qualitative responses resulted in a codebook containing academic, identity, and nonspecific categories. The majority of responses (>80%) cited academic factors such as interactions between students and instructors or course elements and policies. Most academic responses aligned with evidence-based teaching practices fostering inclusion, describing a range of strategies and policies instructors can implement to increase students' perceptions of inclusion. A small number of student responses indicated that their perception of the required knowledge background for the course impacted course inclusivity. Few differences in frequency distributions were found between subgroups examined (gender, race and ethnicity, self-reported inclusion score, and discipline). Additionally, tracking a subset of students (135) across three courses revealed that most (80%) cited different factors influencing their perception of inclusion in each course. This suggests students' perceptions of inclusive practices are complex, and most students recognize multiple factors that influence their inclusion. Overall, our findings suggest instructors can significantly influence students' perceptions of inclusion by using multiple inclusive teaching strategies and course policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440732/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-04-0055","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this exploratory mixed-methods analysis of students' perceptions of inclusion in introductory STEM courses for STEM majors, we asked students to rate inclusion in their class and to provide an open-text explanation of their rating. Analyzing 1930 qualitative responses resulted in a codebook containing academic, identity, and nonspecific categories. The majority of responses (>80%) cited academic factors such as interactions between students and instructors or course elements and policies. Most academic responses aligned with evidence-based teaching practices fostering inclusion, describing a range of strategies and policies instructors can implement to increase students' perceptions of inclusion. A small number of student responses indicated that their perception of the required knowledge background for the course impacted course inclusivity. Few differences in frequency distributions were found between subgroups examined (gender, race and ethnicity, self-reported inclusion score, and discipline). Additionally, tracking a subset of students (135) across three courses revealed that most (80%) cited different factors influencing their perception of inclusion in each course. This suggests students' perceptions of inclusive practices are complex, and most students recognize multiple factors that influence their inclusion. Overall, our findings suggest instructors can significantly influence students' perceptions of inclusion by using multiple inclusive teaching strategies and course policies.

探索性混合方法分析学生对 STEM 入门课程包容性看法的因素。
在这一探索性的混合方法分析中,我们要求学生对他们班级的包容性进行评分,并对他们的评分提供开放文本解释。对 1930 个定性回答进行分析后,我们编制了一个包含学术、身份和非特定类别的代码簿。大多数回答(>80%)提到了学术因素,如学生与教师之间的互动或课程要素和政策。大多数学术回答与促进全纳的循证教学实践相一致,描述了教师可以实施的一系列策略和政策,以提高学生对全纳的认识。少数学生的回答表明,他们对课程所需知识背景的看法影响了课程的全纳性。在所研究的分组(性别、种族和民族、自我报告的包容性得分和纪律)之间,频率分布几乎没有差异。此外,通过对三门课程的学生子集(135 人)进行追踪发现,大多数学生(80%)在每门课程中都提到了影响其全纳观念的不同因素。这表明,学生对全纳实践的看法是复杂的,大多数学生认识到影响他们全纳的多种因素。总之,我们的研究结果表明,教师通过采用多种全纳教学策略和课程政策,可以极大地影响学生对全纳的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信