x
2
The Florida-Caribbean Louis Stokes Regional Center of Excellence
2021 Advisory Board Meeting February 10, 2021 10 a.m. - 12 p.m.
MindsetsForSTEM.org
x
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS AGENDA ............................................................................. 3 LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION............................... 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................... 5 GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ..................................... 6 FINDINGS ........................................................................... 12 FACULTY TRAINING ........................................................... 15 DISSEMINATION................................................................. 22 DISSEMINATION VIA SOCIAL MEDIA ................................ 23 NEXT STEPS......................................................................... 25 APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS ................................ 26
2
MEETING AGENDA
10:00 a.m. Welcome and Introductions 10:15 a.m. Overview and Progress Report by Objective
OBJECTIVE 1: Research
OBJECTIVE 2: Annual Conference
OBJECTIVE 3: Professional Development
OBJECTIVE 4: Dissemination
10:45 a.m. Evaluation Findings 11:15 a.m. Next Steps and Advisory Recommendations 12:00 p.m. Adjournment
This collaborative project, the “Florida-Caribbean Louis Stokes Regional Center of Excellence,” is funded by the National Science Foundation and NSF INCLUDES award number HRD-1826532 (2018-2021.)
3
LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION Advisory Board Juan Arratia, Ph.D. Founder and President Scientific Caribbean Foundation/NSF UMET AMISRÂ
Sondra Evans, Ph.D. Dean of Arts & Sciences Florida State College at Jacksonville
Noel Blackburn Manager of University Relations and DOE Internship Programs in the Office of Educational Programs Brookhaven National Laboratory
Overtoun Jenda, Ph.D. Assistant Provost for Special Projects and Initiatives, Auburn University
Deborah Bordelon, Ph.D. Provost and Executive Vice President Columbus State University
Kelly Mack, Ph.D. Vice President for Undergraduate STEM Education and Executive Director of Project Kaleidoscope American Association of Colleges & Universities
Maurice Edington, Ph.D. Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Florida A&M University
Administration Stefanie Waschull, Ph.D. Co-Principal Investigator and Associate Vice President Santa Fe College
Camille McKayle, Ph.D. Co-Principal Investigator and Provost University of the Virgin Islands
Jhenai W. Chandler, Ph.D., Director Santa Fe College
Lawanda Cummings, Ph.D., Co-Director University of the Virgin Islands
Ada Lang, Program Assistant Santa Fe College
Resa Berkeley, Data and Research Analyst University of the Virgin Islands
Research Consultants
Faculty Development Consultants
Omid Fotuhi, Ph.D. Social Psychologist University of Pittsburgh & WGU Labs
Diana Bowen, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Mathematics University of the Virgin Islands
Valerie Purdie-Greenaway, Ph.D. Social Psychologist Columbia University
Miguel Angel Hernandez, Ed.D. Associate Dean of Students University of California, Irvine
External Evaluation Angelicque Tucker Blackmon, Ph.D. Innovative Learning Center, LLC.
4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida-Caribbean Louis Stokes Regional Center of Excellence (FL-C LSRCE) is one of six original Louis Stokes Regional Centers of Excellence (LSRCEs) funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 2018. LSRCEs are designed to serve as regional testbeds for outreach, knowledge-generating and activities that contribute to successful practices in STEM education. FL-C LSRCE activities have concentrated in the development of mindset intervention research and faculty development. The FL-C LSRCE seeks to strengthen underrepresented minority groups’ participation by developing customized psychosocial interventions based on research that impact students’ sense of competency (growth mindset,) belongingness (sense-of-purpose mindset,) and their academic success. In a considerable body of research, social psychologists have tested the effectiveness of mindset interventions on success of the students ranging from middle school to college. This 2018-20 Advisory Report shares the FL-C LSRCE’s progress and provides an overview of the center’s future direction. The FL-C LSRCE, got off to a quick start in February 2019 with the hiring of a both directors, collaboration with LSAMP leaders to identify faculty liaisons from the Central Florida LSAMP, Florida-Georgia LSAMP and the Greater Alabama Black Belt Region LSAMP, site visits to each partner campus to hear from students, a pilot of student psychosocial interventions and the 1st Annual Mindsets for STEM Conference. This two-day institute provided Growth Mindset training sessions led by FL-C LSRCE research consultants and social psychologists Drs. Fotuhi and Purdie-Greenaway, provided participants psychosocial interventions that promote growth mindsets in STEM, training to create classroom environments that foster continual learning, effective strategies for positive faculty feedback and student interaction. Collectively, these activities led to the development of customized interventions that were then deployed at partner institutions during the 2019-20 and 2020-21 academic years. Through these interventions, students are coached to think and feel differently about success and failure or about their motives for being in school. Mindset intervention research builds on a long history of research in social psychology focused on selfesteem, feedback students receive, and students’ beliefs about themselves and their abilities. To date, over 1,000 students at partner institutions have participated in the FL-C LSRCE interventions. The center also was able to develop resource and training guides participants could utilize at their home institutions. The resource guides are located at: MindsetsForSTEM.org/resources.
5
GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Florida Caribbean Louis Stokes Regional Center of Excellenc (FL-C LSRCE) is a researcher/practitioner collaboration between Santa Fe College and the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI). Overall Goal The overall goal of the FL-C LSRCE is to generate new knowledge and faculty training on psychosocial interventions that enhance the success of students from traditionally underrepresented minority populations in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) degree programs.
Overall Objective The FL-C LSRCE’s objective is to become a transformative research and training center to enhance STEM education by developing, testing and disseminating interventions that reduce the impact of psychosocialbarriers and to enhance students’ mindsets in the face of academic challenges.
Specific FL-C LSRCE Objectives 1. Host an annual conference on psychosocial interventions that provides faculty access to the research-based STEM-focused interventions and training on the importance of faculty feedback and interaction on student success. 2. Utilize the STEM-Central hub, this project will provide access to information about psychosocial interventions that overcome factors disproportionately impacting URMs in STEM fields. The hub will feature presentations on the impact of webinars that spotlight successful interventions in the K-20 STEM community to promote widespread dissemination of successful work. Expansion of networking opportunities for faculty and the center. See STEM-Central.net. 3. Partner with Brookhaven National Lab and others to provide internships for STEM faculty to increase their expertise. 4. Conduct rigorous research and assessment on the interventions to meet standards for publication in refereed journals. Assist participating institutions in data analysis and interpretation.
6
GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (continued)
Activities Objective 1: Annual conference on psychosocial interventions, research-based STEM-focused
interventions and training on the importance of faculty feedback and interaction on student success.
Activity 1:
The 1st Annual Mindsets for STEM Institute on psychosocial and classroom interventions took place July 18-19, 2019 at Santa Fe College in Gainesville, Florida. Over 70 participants attended with representation from both Alachua County and Bradford County public school districts, the Central Florida Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation (LSAMP), Florida-Georgia LSAMP, Greater Alabama Black Belt Region LSAMP, Santa Fe College, and the University of the Virgin Islands. Information about the conference can be found at mindsetsforstem.org/2019-institute. As a result of the institute, the FL-C LSRCE created and disseminated the “Developing Mindsets for STEM� Training Manual in September 2019. The Mindsets for STEM conference training content and faculty strategies were used to develop the training manual that allows for broad dissemination to STEM administrators and faculty beyond FL-C LSRSE partners. The center directors conducted multiple live training sessions using this training manual.
7
GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (continued)
Activity 2:
The 2nd Annual Mindsets for STEM Conference (June-August 2020) The 2nd Annual Mindsets for STEM conference was scheduled to take place July 2020 at the University of the Virgin Islands, but the impacts of a global pandemic and social unrest required a change of plans. Not just for the FL-C LSRCE, but for institutions, students, and faculty across the globe. Although we were unable to meet at the University of the Virgin Islands, engaging and preparing faculty for a new normal in higher education was our priority. After much planning we were able to successfully offer three virtual series that allowed us to keep safety first, equip faculty with tools and strategies to promote success in STEM and remote learning, and create opportunities to generate new knowledge. The virtual training series had over 180 registrants from 27 institutions and organizations. • • •
Adaptive Mindsets and Resilience Virtual Convening (June 15, 2020) Developing Mindsets for STEM and Beyond Virtual Series (July – August 2020) The Cultural Competency and Inclusion Certificate Program (September – November 2020)
The remainder of this report provides the outcomes of interventions, faculty development, FL-C LSRCE dissemination and engagement activities.
Objective 2: Utilize the STEM-Central Hub See STEM-Central.net. Activity 1:
Hosted Faculty Liaison Check-in Meetings (September 2019-June 2020) The critical work with faculty liaisons and institutional partners requires formalized structures for communication and feedback. The center hosted two informational sessions with the seven FL-C LSRCE faculty liaisons on October 11, 2019 and January 27, 2020 to clarify specific liaison duties, recruitment expectations, needs for institutional data, and offerings for faculty professional development. The FL-C LSRCE created a group on STEM Central and registered faculty liaisons and consultants. All participants were also signed up for STEM-Central accounts and received a tutorial on the usage of STEM-Central, utilizing the network space as a repository for faculty resources.
Activity 2:
Expanded Collaborative Partnership Between Santa Fe College and the University of the Virgin Islands with the Floribbean STEM Transfer Articulation Agreement (July 2020) Santa Fe College and the University of the Virgin Islands established a transfer articulation agreement that allows Santa Fe College graduates with an associate of arts degree and appropriate STEM prerequisites to seamlessly transfer to University of the Virgin Islands and pursue a bachelor’s degree in select STEM degree programs.
8
GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (continued)
Objective 3: Partner with Brookhaven National Laboratory and others to provide in-
ternships for STEM faculty to increase their expertise.
Activity 1 :
Partnered with Brookhaven National Laboratory for the Visiting Faculty Program (December 2019) The FL-C LSRCE hosted an informational session for faculty with Noel Blackburn, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Dr. Sidney Bolden, Jr., Assistant Professor of Chemistry at Bethune-Cookman University, a FL-C LSRCE partner institution, applied and was selected to participate. Dr. Bolden’s summer research plans were to investigate bio-mimetic light harvesting systems and materials to enhance energy transfer efficiency. This internship was disrupted by COVID-19. See mindsetsforstem.org/sidney-bolden. Dr. Sidney Bolden, Jr. Bethune-Cookman University
Objective 4: Research and assessment on the interventions. Assist participating
institutions in data analysis and interpretation.
Activity 1:
Received Institutional Review Board (IRB) clearance at two additional partner institutions (September-December 2019) The FL-C LSRCE project’s effectiveness is tied to aligning our research, intervention, and training work across seven partnering institutions. With varying requirements and processes for approval, the team has completed applications to all institutions with varying levels of revision and resubmission. Approvals from Alabama State University and Bethune-Cookman University, two HBCU partners, were received in December 2019 allowing the implementation of the full research design (student and faculty psychosocial interventions) at both institutions.
9
GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (continued)
Activity 2:
Conducted Preliminary Student Intentions Implementation Interventions and Surveys for Intervention Customization Process (August-December 2019) The FL-C LSRCE completed necessary steps to train participating faculty and secure Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval to launch research activities and intervention tailoring. Five institutions have received formal approval and remaining responses are anticipated to be received this academic year. The list of participating institutions includes: • • • • •
Alabama State University Bethune-Cookman University Tallahassee Community College Santa Fe College Valencia College
With the support of faculty liaisons and social psychology research consultants, the FL-C LSRCE administered an intentions implementation intervention and student experience survey at the IRB-approved institutions. Data collected on students’ implicit theories of intelligence, goal setting, sense of belonging, and STEM efficacy, collectively guided the development of the customized student intervention that was administered during the 2020-21 academic year. Table 1. Descriptive Statistics on the Intervention Implementation and Completion
10
Institution
Dates of Intervention Implementation
Number of Course Sections
Student Enrollment
Number of Intervention Completions
Santa Fe College
September November 2019
3
100
60
Valencia College
August September 2019
11
253
207
Tallahassee Community College
September 2019
4
124
110
Bethune-Cookman University
November 2019
4
250
31
GRANT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (continued)
Activity 2:
Activity 3:
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics on the Student Experience Survey Institution
End Date of Student Experience Survey
Number of Participants
Santa Fe College
September 30, 2019
46
Valencia College
September 30, 2019
230
Tallahassee Community College
October 21, 2019
40
Bethune-Cookman University
November 7, 2019
31
Conducted Student Focus Groups for Intervention Customization Table 3. Descriptive Statistics on Student Focus Groups Institution
Focus Group Date
Groups
Number of Participants
Santa Fe College
October 17, 2019
2
16
Valencia College
October 23, 2019
2
16
Tallahassee Community College
October 30, 2019
1
12
Bethune-Cookman University
December 2, 2019
1
8
The next section will introduce preliminary findings from the implementation intentions intervention, student experience survey and the student focus groups. These tools were used to inform the development of the customized adaptive mindsets interventions for 2020-21 and the faculty development trainings provided this current year.
11
FINDINGS Year 1 Student Data The collected student data for Year 1 included quantitative and qualitative data on the following variables: demographic factors, sense of belonging, self-efficacy, mindsets (growth, failure, math) and procrastination tendencies. The descriptive and inferential analysis and findings are below in Tables 4-8.
Data Analysis of Implementation Intentions Intervention and Student Experience Survey Results:
Table 4. Descriptive Analysis of Outcome Variables Variables
Results
Participants’ sense of belonging
Overall neutral or moderate sense of belonging
M = 11.32, SD = 2.71
Self-efficacy - students time in college
Moderate to positive
M = 4.55, SD = 0.70
Growth vs. Fixed mindset
Somewhat or more
Average ratings above 3 out of 6 M = 4.36, SD = 0.47
Math mindset
Moderate amounts of math discomfort and somewhat negative perceptions of failure
M = 3.74, SD = 1.27
Failure mindset
Somewhat negative perceptions of failure
M = 4.00, SD = 0.64
Procrastination
Somewhat above the midpoint
M = 3.21, SD = 0.76
Inferential Analysis Table 5. Correlates between sense of belonging and self-efficacy
12
Findings
Results
Data Analysis/ Interpretation
Sense of belonging and selfefficacy mostly highly correlated with a moderate positive relationship
r(302) = .42 p < .001
As studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; self-efficacy increased, so did their sense of belonging (and vice versa)
FINDINGS (continued)
Results:
Table 6. Correlates of Growth Mindset with other outcome variables.
(continued)
Findings
Results
Data Analysis/ Interpretation
Growth mindset showed a weak positive relationship with self-efficacy
r(302) = .42 p < .001
Increases in growth mindset were associated with increases in self-efficacy
Growth mindset showed a weak positive relationship with sense of belonging
r(286) = .22 p < .001
Increases in growth mindset were associated with increases in sense of belonging
Growth mindset showed a weak positive relationship sense of belonging
r(286) = .22 p =.003
Table 7. Correlates of failure and procrastination with other outcome variables. Findings
Results
Data Analysis/ Interpretation
Sense of belonging had a weak negative relationship with failure mindset
r(279) = -.13 Individuals with more positive perceptions of failure p = .03 also tended to have higher sense of belonging
Negative perceptions of failure were weakly associated with higher rates of discomfort with math
r(279) = .23 p < .001
People with higher levels of math discomfort also tended to have higher ratings of procrastination
r(283) = .15 p = .009
Table 8. Gender differences associated with other outcome variables. Findings
Results
There were significant differences by gender
F (6, 242) = 3.57, p = .002, Wilk’s Λ = 0.91, ηp2 = .08
Males tended to have higher growth mindset ratings than females
M = 4.60, M = 4.32 F(1, 247) = 6.38, p = .01 ηp2 = .03
Females tended to have more negative math mindset ratings than males
M = 3.73, F(1, 247)= 6.64, p = .01, ηp2 = .03; M = 2.95
Females tended to have more negative perceptions of failure than males
M = 4.14, M = 3.69 F(1, 247) = 9.93 p = .002, ηp2 = .04
There was a significant interaction between gender and institution only for growth mindset scores
F(18, 684.97) = 1.98 p = .002, Wilk’s Λ = 0.87 ηp2 = .05
13
FINDINGS (continued)
Results:
(continued)
Student Focus Group Findings Qualitative analysis included thematic coding for focus group transcripts from four institutions. The findings of the student focus groups yielded emerging themes related to unexpected benefits and challenges associated with students transition to college. The emergent benefits are listed in Table 9. Students appreciated having small class sizes, hands-on learning experiences, and â&#x20AC;&#x153;feeling importantâ&#x20AC;? at their HBCUs and community colleges. A second set of themes highlighted some challenges students experienced with their transition to college (Table 9). Many participants were first-generation college students, it was their first time away from home and they reported not knowing what to expect, which contributed to a lack of confidence in their academic capabilities. Table 9. Emergent themes about benefits & challenges from student focus group data Benefits The course purpose and contextualization Affirming messages of support Having information on available campus resources Ease of establishing connections with peers and faculty on campus
Challenges Time management Adjusting to new independence A lack of confidence Experiencing some form of loneliness
Small class sizes, hands-on learning experiences Feeling important at their HBCU and community colleges
Students were also asked to complete journey maps to identify key milestone and people that helped them reach their goals and the current point in their academic journey. Formal and informal social supports were often identified as motivating factors, while key pivotal life points also contributed to their decisions to enroll in college. Therefore, these findings informed the development of our adaptive mindsets intervention for Year 2 (2020-21). The currently in progress customized intervention addresses the importance and benefits of the utilization of academic and social supports in STEM.
14
FACULTY TRAINING Faculty Trainings Go Virtual The 2020 Mindsets for STEM Conference was originally scheduled to take place in July 15-18, 2020 at the University of the Virgin Islands. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic that impacted nations across the globe, we pivoted to virtual faculty trainings that allowed the FL-C LSRCE to reach more faculty at institutions across the country. The center offered two quality virtual series on Developing and Modeling Mindsets in STEM and Beyond and CCIT and develop two accompanying resource guides for participants and the public.
15
FACULTY TRAINING
g
odeling Gr dM ow n a t
hM
sets ind
Develo pin
(continued)
Florida-Caribbean Louis Stokes Regional Center of Excellence
in
STE
M a n d B eyo
nd
Description of Developing and Modeling Mindsets for STEM and Beyond Training Series The FL-C LSRCE developed a summer series entitled Developing and Modeling Mindsets for STEM and Beyond that provided 46 faculty from institutions across the country with a suite of interventions to better understand their students and classroom environments, promote growth mindsets, encourage active and reflective learning, and strategies to give effective feedback. In partnership with Dr. Diana Bowen, Assistant Professor in Math and Education at UVI, this series focused on more than just learning how to apply these strategies within classrooms, but challenged faculty to model these practices and behaviors with the use of technological applications, peer learning, and reflective assignments. At the conclusion of the three-part series, faculty participants were invited to put theory into practice by conducting action research with Dr. Diana Bowen and the FL-C LSRCE research team. The Faculty Mindset Ambassador study gives faculty the opportunity to apply and customize teaching strategies learned in the series, and then faculty will participate in the development of publications and curricular artifacts for dissemination.
Participant Feedback and Evaluation The Developing and Modeling Mindsets for STEM and Beyond series included participant qualitative feedback on each session. Those comments were compiled into a document for coding of feedback for emergent themes and collective learning. The themes and examples are listed in Table 10.
16
FACULTY TRAINING (continued)
Table 10. Emergent themes from Developing and Modeling Mindsets for STEM and Beyond faculty training series. Theme
Occurence
Examples
Practice in Learning
6
•
Apprenticeship of Practice is hard to overcome
Student Communication Strategies
13
•
The importance of language when communicating with students The impact of properly worded praise
Growth Mindset Defined
18
• • •
Growth mindset means that something can always be improved Mindset is on a continuum
Strategies and Tools
28
• •
Tools to implement in my classroom Developing a favorite ‘No’ strategy
Self-Reflection in Teaching
17
• • •
Focus on structuring teaching to emphasize strengths Our own mindset is important to model to students Seeing our own blind spots is tricky
Note. N = 35
Five emergent themes captured this intent of reflective practice:
Student Communication Strategies
Practice in Learning Growth Mindset Defined
Strategies and Tools
Self-Reflection in Teaching
The themes emerged from participant feedback on the learning outcomes for Developing and Modeling Mindsets for STEM and Beyond training series. With a focus on equipping participants to initiate and evaluate growth mindset strategies in their classrooms, the learning objectives focused on modeling growth mindset principles within the course by extending their skill set through applied use of new tools and strategies.
17
FACULTY TRAINING (continued)
Description of Cultural Competency and Inclusion Training Series Cultural competence allows educators to be effective with and successfully teach students from different cultures. As higher education is becoming more and more diverse, faculty, staff and administrators must begin to embrace diversity and become culturally competent to challenge their own personal biases and beliefs. The FL-C LSRCE facilitated the Cultural Competency and Inclusion virtual series for administrators and faculty in STEM and across disciplines. In partnership with Dr. Miguel Hernandez, Associate Dean of Students at UC Irvine, this series started on September 17th and spanned the 2020 fall semester. A group of participants will operationalize cultural competency by incorporating culturally responsive practices learned in their classrooms and departments to later present at the 2021 Mindsets for STEM Conference. Ninety-eight percent of participants rated the training as highly beneficial. Analysis of the separate sessions are listed below assessing participants beliefs on:
The relevance of training to professional development
18
The relevance of training to personal development The relevance of topics covered in the sessions
FACULTY TRAINING (continued)
Session 1: An Overview of Cultural Competency in Higher Education training A total of 43 participants attended session 1 (cohort 1 = 25, cohort 2 = 18.) The sample included administrators, faculty, staff members, and graduate students.
19
FACULTY TRAINING (continued)
Session 2: Cultural Competency in Administration & Academic Management A total of 35 participants attended session 1 (cohort 1 = 17, cohort 2 = 16.) The sample included administrators, faculty, staff members, and graduate students prompting Dr. Hernandez to prepare resources that fit the diverse roles held at institutions of higher education represented by registrants.
20
FACULTY TRAINING (continued)
Session 3: Applying Cultural Competency & Inclusion in Training, Teaching, Assessment & Research A total of 27 participants attended session 3 (cohort 1 = 11, cohort 2 = 16.) The sample included administrators, faculty, staff members, and graduate students prompting Dr. Hernandez to prepare resources that fit the diverse roles held at institutions of higher education among registrants.
21
DISSEMINATION (NOTE: Bolded names indicate faculty contributors )
Chandler, J. (2019). Developing mindsets for STEM: Social psychological interventions that promote student success in STEM. Louis Stokes Midwest Regional Center of Excellence and Indiana STEM LSAMP 2019 Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN. Chandler, J., Cummings, L., Waschull, S., McKayle, C. McSween, V., Lee, B. (2020). Power Up: Equipping Faculty to Develop Mindsets for STEM Success at Community Colleges and HBCUs. Society for Advancement of Chicanos/Hispanics and Native Americans in Science (SACNAS), Santa Cruz, CA. Cummings, L., Chandler, J., Waschull, S., McKayle, C., Wilson-Howard, D., & Brooks, R. (2020). Building it custom: Psychosocial interventions to navigate the -ISMs of higher education and STEM inclusion of URMs. Institute for the Study and Promotion of Race and Culture Diversity Challenge Conference, Boston, MD. Cummings, L., Chandler, J., Waschull, S., McKayle, C. Blackmon-Tucker, A. (2020). Customizing Mindset Interventions to Navigate the -ISMs of Higher Education: Inter sectionality as an Institutional Variable. Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA), Chicago, IL.
Original Products-Mindsets Training Resources See MindsetsForSTEM.org/resources • • •
22
Developing Mindsets for STEM Toolkit Cultural Competency and Inclusion Training Developing and Modeling Mindsets in STEM an Beyond
DISSEMINATION VIA SOCIAL MEDIA Dissemination via Social Media The FL-C LSRCE focused on dissemination beyond traditional academic spaces to broaden the reach and impact of the Centerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s efforts and interventions. Presently the Center maintains a Twitter account, a Facebook page, and a STEM Central Group page. Through these social media and online platforms, the team disseminates Center activities, training offerings, faculty spotlights, accomplishments, and perspective on seminal STEM Education issues. See examples below of posts, partnered events, and assessments of public engagement. Twitter Post Example
Twitter Engagement Summary
23
DISSEMINATION VIA SOCIAL MEDIA (continued)
Dissemination via Social Media (continued) Facebook Post Example
Facebook Engagement Summary
24
NEXT STEPS for FL-C LSRCE The anticipated next steps for the FL-C LSRCE include three main foci. The Center will engage in the following activities:
•
The packaging and dissemination of our student-facing intervention to reach diverse students across our partnering institutions.
•
The expansion of our faculty training interventions and resources with a focus on actionable Mindset strategies to boost URM inclusion.
•
The development of a repository of research vetted Mindset resources for Students, Faculty, Administrators, and Institutions.
25
APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS The evaluation results for faculty training (faculty-facing interventions,) student interventions, and internal team process data will be listed below. These assessments and descriptions provide insight into FL-C LSRCE’s areas of success and challenge. FACULTY-FACING INTERVENTIONS: Faculty professional development Activity 1: Growth Mindset Institute 2019 The FL-C LSRCE hosted its first annual Mindsets for STEM conference on psychosocial interventions at Santa Fe College (Gainesville, Florida.) Over 70 participants attended from local school districts, the Central Florida LSAMP, Florida-Georgia LSAMP, GABBR LSAMP, Santa Fe College and the University of the Virgin Islands. This two-day institute provided Growth Mindset training sessions led by FL-C LSRCE research consultants and social psychologists Dr. Valerie Purdie-Greenaway of Columbia University and Dr. Omid Fotuhi of the University of Pittsburgh. The research consultants provided participants with STEM-focused interventions to help students develop a growth mindset, training to create classroom environments that foster growth mindsets and effective strategies for positive faculty feedback and student interactions. Day 2 of the institute was dedicated to preparing faculty to participate in FL-C LSRCE research project. Participating faculty identified specific mindset interventions they planned to implement in their STEM classrooms beginning fall 2019, received training on conducting the FL-C LSRCE research activities and established networks of support with faculty across participating institutions. The FL-C LSRCE provided participating faculty with access to STEM Central and a course in the UVI’s Black Board ERP system to easily access institute training material, maintain communication and exchange ideas.
42
Registered for the Mindsets Institute Conference
28
College Faculty
13 K-12 Professionals 1
26
Other Staff
Overall, most participants found the sessions presented at the Mindset Institute 2019 as very relevant or relevant and were very satisfied or satisfied with conference activities.
42
Registered from the Southeast and Caribbean
32 Florida 6
Alabama
4
The U.S. Virgin Islands
Faculty provided plans for the intended application of Growth Mindset strategies including the following: Introducing an initial mindset intervention, Creating an environment of support and belonging that fosters a Growth Mindset When confidence wanesusing a ‘booster.’
APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS (continued)
FACULTY-FACING INTERVENTIONS: Faculty professional development (continued) Activity 2: The 2nd Annual Mindsets for STEM Conference (June - August 2020) The FL-C LSRCE framed the 2nd Growth Mindset Conference with a focus on faculty and team products from Year 1 using student and faculty facing intervention strategies. A call for papers was sent out to institutional partners for submissions to present at the conference. The FL-C LSRCE confirmed participation from faculty liaisons and faculty participants for Year 2 and the 2nd Growth Mindsets Conference (The University of the Virgin Islands) through an online survey. Upon agreement to the center’s expectations, travel awards were provided to all faculty participants including airfare ($600) and hotel accommodations for the 3-day event in July 2020. The original face-to-face conference was restructured into virtual conference sessions and series due to COVID-19. The three virtual events below were developed to provide continued faculty-facing intervention and support through December 2020: 1. Adaptive Mindsets and Resilience Virtual Convening (June 15, 2020) • A total of 24 faculty members participated in a virtual session with Dr. Omid Fothui. • Overall findings for student intervention data were shared and instructions were given for the 2nd student intervention distribution.
2. Developing Mindsets for STEM and Beyond Virtual Series (July – August 2020) • A total of 35 faculty members registered for this training from 10 institutions. • Overall findings for participants indicated high levels of satisfaction with the provided training. • Faculty members indicated that they learned and modeled 5 thematic strategies; those themes include; 1) Practice in learning, 2) Student Communication Strategies, 3) Growth Mindset Defined, 4) Strategies and Tools, and 5) Self-Reflection in Teaching. 3. The Cultural Competency and Inclusion Certificate Program (September - November 2020) • A total of 45 faculty members registered for this training from 14 institutions. • Overall findings for participants indicated high levels of satisfaction, relevance to faculty personal and professional development with the provided training. • Faculty members indicated that they learned and modeled 5 thematic strategies; those themes include; 1) Practice in learning, 2) Student Communication Strategies, 3) Growth Mindset Defined, 4) Strategies and Tools, and 5) Self-Reflection in Teaching. Additional information describing these offerings can be found at mindsetsforstem.org/training-events.
27
APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS (continued)
STUDENT-FACING INTERVENTION • • • • •
• • • • •
28
Overall, participants’ sense of belonging indicated they had a neutral or moderate sense of belonging (M = 11.32, SD = 2.71.) Participants also reported moderate to positive amounts of self-efficacy (scale of 1 to 7; M = 4.55, SD = 0.70) when it comes to their time in college. Overall, participants reported having somewhat more of a growth than fixed mindset, as indicated by average ratings above 3 out of 6 (M = 4.36, SD = 0.47.) Students’ math mindset (M = 3.74, SD = 1.27) and failure mindset ratings (M = 4.00, SD = 0.64) were around the midpoint of the scales, showing moderate amounts of math discomfort and somewhat negative perceptions of failure. Participants also rated the frequency with which they procrastinate, perceived frequency of others’ procrastination, and perceptions of whether procrastination is harmful or beneficial using a scale of 1 to 5. For this scale, participants scored somewhat above the midpoint (M = 3.21, SD = 0.76.) Sense of belonging and self-efficacy were the most highly correlated, with a moderate positive relationship, r(302) = .42, p < .001. As participants’ self-efficacy increased, so did their sense of belonging (and vice versa.) Growth mindset also showed a weak positive relationship with self-efficacy, r(286) = .22, p < .001, and sense of belonging, r(286) = .22, p =.003, such that increases in growth mindset were associated with increases in self-efficacy and increases in sense of belonging. Sense of belonging had a weak negative relationship with failure mindset, r(279) = -.13, p = .03, such that individuals with more positive perceptions of failure also tended to have higher sense of belonging. More negative perceptions of failure were weakly associated with higher rates of discomfort with math, r(279) = .23, p < .001. People with higher levels of math discomfort also tended to have higher ratings of procrastination, r(283) = .15, p = .009.
APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS (continued)
Student data analysis by University and Colleges To determine whether these variables of interest differed based on institution, a one-way MANOVA was conducted and showed that there were no significant differences among the four campuses, F(18, 764.16) = 1.47, p = .10, Wilk’s Λ = 0.91. There were significant differences by gender, F(6, 242) = 3.57, p = .002, Wilk’s Λ = 0.91, ηp2 = .08. Specifically, males tended to have high growth mindset ratings (M = 4.60) than females (M = 4.32), F(1, 247) = 6.38, p = .01, ηp2 = .03, while females tended to have more negative math mindset ratings (M = 3.73), F(1, 247) = 6.64, p = .01, ηp2 = .03, and more negative perceptions of failure (M = 4.14) than males (M = 2.95 and M = 3.69, respectively), F(1, 247) = 9.93, p = .002, ηp2 = .04. The impacts of the student interventions were administered within an HBCU and 3 state community colleges with distinct student populations that align to the URM characteristics. Student outcome data was further analyzed by institutions to inform efforts in customized intervention development. Those findings are listed below: Bethune Cookman University • • • •
•
Students rated their sense of belonging at BCU and the average belonging score (M = 10.96, SD = 2.76) indicates that participants have only a moderate sense of belonging (maximum = 19.00.) Students rated their self-efficacy on two items, averaging 4.70 out of 7; this hints that students have a moderate amount of self-efficacy. Overall, participants reported having more of a growth than fixed mindset, as indicated by average ratings above 3 out of 6 (M = 4.32, SD = 0.44.) Participants rated their (dis)comfort with math activities and their perception of failure. Students’ math mindset (M = 3.49, SD = 1.40) and failure mindset ratings (M = 3.34, SD = 0.80) were around the midpoint of their scale. This shows that there were a good proportion of students with high and low scores on both of these scales. Participants rated the frequency with which they procrastinate, perceived frequency of others’ procrastination, and perceptions of whether procrastination is harmful or beneficial using a scale of 1 to 5. For this scale, participants scored slightly above the midpoint (M = 3.34, SD = 0.80.)
29
APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS (continued)
Santa Fe College • • • •
•
Students rated their sense of belonging at SF College and the average belonging score (M = 11.34, SD = 2.96) indicates that participants have only a moderate sense of belonging (maximum = 19.00.) Students also rated their self-efficacy on two items, averaging 4.41 out of 7; this hints that students have a moderate amount of self-efficacy. Overall, participants reported having somewhat more of a growth than fixed mindset, as indicated by average ratings above 3 out of 6 (M = 4.37, SD = 0.46.) Participants rated their (dis)comfort with math activities and their perception of failure. Students’ math mindset (M = 3.69, SD = 1.32) and failure mindset ratings (M = 4.02, SD = 0.63) were around the midpoint of their scale. This shows that there were a good proportion of students with high and low scores on both of these scales. Participants rated the frequency with which they procrastinate, perceived frequency of others’ procrastination, and perceptions of whether procrastination is harmful or beneficial using a scale of 1 to 5. For this scale, participants scored slightly above the midpoint (M = 3.58, SD = 0.82.)
Tallahassee Community College • • • •
•
30
Students rated their sense of belonging at Tallahassee Community College and the average belonging score (M = 11.25, SD = 2.50) indicates that participants have only a moderate sense of belonging (maximum = 19.00.) Students rated their self-efficacy on two items, averaging 4.67 out of 7; this hints that students have a moderate amount of self-efficacy. Participants reported having somewhat more of a growth than fixed mindset, as indicated by average ratings above 3 out of 6 (M = 4.41, SD = 0.39.) Participants rated their (dis)comfort with math activities and their perception of failure. Students’ math mindset (M = 3.72, SD = 1.13) and failure mindset ratings (M = 4.06, SD = 0.69) were around the midpoint of their scale. This shows that there were a good proportion of students with high and low scores on both of these scales. Participants rated the frequency with which they procrastinate, perceived frequency of others’ procrastination, and perceptions of whether procrastination is harmful or beneficial using a scale of 1 to 5. For this scale, participants scored above the midpoint (M = 3.26, SD = 0.78.)
APPENDIX - EVALUATION FINDINGS (continued)
Valencia College • • • •
•
Students rated their sense of belonging at Valencia College and the average belonging score (M = 11.37, SD = 2.70) indicates that participants have only a moderate sense of belonging (maximum = 19.00.) Students rated their self-efficacy on two items, averaging 4.54 out of 7; this hints that students have a moderate amount of self-efficacy . Participants reported having somewhat more of a growth than fixed mindset, as indicated by average ratings above 3 out of 6 (M = 4.36, SD = 0.49.) Participants rated their (dis)comfort with math activities and their perception of failure. Students’ math mindset (M = 3.79, SD = 1.28) and failure mindset ratings (M = 3.99, SD = 0.64) were around the midpoint of their scale. This shows that there were a good proportion of students with high and low scores on both scales. Participants rated the frequency with which they procrastinate, perceived frequency of others’ procrastination, and perceptions of whether procrastination is harmful or beneficial using a scale of 1 to 5. For this scale, participants scored slightly above the midpoint (M = 3.12, SD = 0.72.)
31