Factors Predicting the Extent to which STEM Students Value Cross-Disciplinary Skills: A Study across Four Institutions.

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Lindsay B Wheeler, Katerina V Thompson, Gili Marbach-Ad, Patrick Sheehan, Jacqueline L Bortiatynski, Cindy Ghent
{"title":"Factors Predicting the Extent to which STEM Students Value Cross-Disciplinary Skills: A Study across Four Institutions.","authors":"Lindsay B Wheeler,&nbsp;Katerina V Thompson,&nbsp;Gili Marbach-Ad,&nbsp;Patrick Sheehan,&nbsp;Jacqueline L Bortiatynski,&nbsp;Cindy Ghent","doi":"10.1187/cbe.22-06-0101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Expectancy-value theory of motivation (EVT) suggests that student values influence their likelihood of putting in the effort required to learn, and these values can be shaped by student characteristics, such as their experiences, sociodemographics, and disciplinary norms. To understand the extent to which these characteristics relate to students' values, we surveyed 1162 graduating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students across four universities using the previously developed and validated Survey of Teaching Beliefs and Practices for Undergraduates (STEP-U). The STEP-U survey included Likert questions to capture students' values of 27 cross-disciplinary skills and the frequency with which they experienced 27 instructional methods thought to develop particular skills. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) showed an understandable factor structure for both students' perceived value of cross-disciplinary skills and frequency of classroom experiences. Using multiple regression, we identified differences in values that were associated with classroom experiences, STEM discipline, participation in undergraduate research, and student sociodemographics. Findings were generalizable across institutions and disciplines. The theoretical framework (EVT), the broad data collection (four institutions with multiple disciplines), and the type of data analyses (e.g., EFA) used provide theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions and suggest additional directions for future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"22 2","pages":"ar20"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/34/15/cbe-22-ar20.PMC10228268.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.22-06-0101","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

Expectancy-value theory of motivation (EVT) suggests that student values influence their likelihood of putting in the effort required to learn, and these values can be shaped by student characteristics, such as their experiences, sociodemographics, and disciplinary norms. To understand the extent to which these characteristics relate to students' values, we surveyed 1162 graduating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students across four universities using the previously developed and validated Survey of Teaching Beliefs and Practices for Undergraduates (STEP-U). The STEP-U survey included Likert questions to capture students' values of 27 cross-disciplinary skills and the frequency with which they experienced 27 instructional methods thought to develop particular skills. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) showed an understandable factor structure for both students' perceived value of cross-disciplinary skills and frequency of classroom experiences. Using multiple regression, we identified differences in values that were associated with classroom experiences, STEM discipline, participation in undergraduate research, and student sociodemographics. Findings were generalizable across institutions and disciplines. The theoretical framework (EVT), the broad data collection (four institutions with multiple disciplines), and the type of data analyses (e.g., EFA) used provide theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions and suggest additional directions for future research.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

预测STEM学生重视跨学科技能程度的因素:一项跨四所院校的研究。
动机的期望价值理论(EVT)认为,学生的价值观会影响他们为学习付出努力的可能性,而这些价值观可以由学生的特征来塑造,比如他们的经历、社会人口统计学和学科规范。为了了解这些特征与学生价值观的关系程度,我们使用先前开发和验证的本科生教学信念和实践调查(STEP-U)调查了四所大学的1162名科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)毕业生。STEP-U调查包括李克特问题,以捕捉学生对27种跨学科技能的价值观,以及他们经历27种被认为是培养特定技能的教学方法的频率。探索性因素分析(EFA)显示,学生对跨学科技能的感知价值和课堂体验频率的因素结构都是可以理解的。使用多元回归,我们确定了与课堂经验、STEM学科、参与本科生研究和学生社会人口统计学相关的价值观差异。研究结果可推广到各个机构和学科。所使用的理论框架(EVT)、广泛的数据收集(四个多学科机构)和数据分析类型(如EFA)提供了理论、方法和实践方面的贡献,并为未来的研究提出了额外的方向。
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