Presentation given April 2014 in Chicago for advancement officers of NCSSSMST schools. Outlining study findings as well as strategies for using institutional data to promote advancement activities.

1. THE NSF STEM SCHOOL
STUDY: FINDINGS AND
LOCALIZED STRATEGIES
Christopher Kolar
Director of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

2. Why Study Selective Science High Schools?
 Advanced students are not being sufficiently challenged in many of
today’s high schools and SMT schools offer one way to meet their
educational needs.
 Recognition that some students complete middle school with strong
interests, skills, and knowledge in science and mathematics, and
aspire to high level careers in STEM.
 Curricular and environmental components of SMT schools that
appear to predict completion of STEM degrees might be adapted
more widely.

3. What Do We Know from the Literature on STEM
Talent Development
 Challenging curriculum
 Expert instruction
 Peer stimulation
 Apprenticeship/role models
 Appreciation of the utility and value of STEM disciplines
 Persistence in the “science pipeline”
To what degree do these factors exist in SMT high schools?

4. Study Research Goals
Overarching Research Question: What is the impact of participation in
a selective science high school (SMT) or Talent Search program on
completion of a STEM major in university.
Sub-research question 1: What characteristics of (a) the SMT
school/TS or (b) the participants contribute to this outcome?
Sub-research question 2: Do these characteristics differentially affect
male and female graduates? Those whose parents are not college
graduates? Those whose parents are not in STEM related careers?

5. School Model Descriptions
 Residential: Draws from an entire state. All students reside on campus.
(n=8)
 Half-Time: Students attend a regional center for SMT courses daily.
(n=7)
 Full-Time Commuter: Whole school is SMT and draws from local
metropolitan population. (n=4)
 School-within-School: An academy within a regular high school. (n=6)
No meaningful differences were found among school models in predicting
outcomes.

6. Participants
2004-2007 graduates of 25 selective SMT schools N=3,510
Comparison group of same age peers who attended Talent Search
and enrolled in mathematics or science classes in the summer: N=
603
BA+ HS-
SMT 2,703 SMT 546
TS 534 TS 13
Males Females
SMT 1,579 SMT 1,797
TS 257 TS 319

7. Completion of a STEM Degree
 49.8% percent of specialized SMT high school
graduates completed a STEM undergraduate degree.
 School w School: 58.3%
 Residential: 51.7%
 Half-Day: 48.4%
 Full-Time Commuter: 42.3%
 53.4% percent of comparison group completed a
STEM undergraduate degree.
 According to the National Science Foundation, 22.6%
of students entering college graduate with a STEM
undergraduate degree.

8. Percentage of Female Participants
Completing STEM degrees (by discipline)
SMT TS
Male 57.8% Male 61.9%
Female 46.1% Female 50.5%
SMT TS NSF
Bio & BioMed 33.1% 26.3% 5.4%
Physical Science 9.3% 10.0% 0.9%
Engineering 11.0% 12.2% 1.4%
Mathematics 6.0% 6.9% 0.7%

9. What is associated with this
intensification or growth in interest?
Emphasis on Deep
Conceptual
Understanding
Connections to Other
Content Areas
Laboratory Experiences
Hands On Experiences
Field Trips
Guest Lectures
Demonstrations
Internships
Allowed to Pursue Own
Interests
Collaboration
Pace (Too Fast, Too Slow)
Level of Teacher
Enthusiasm
Expertise of Teacher in
STEM
Awareness of Careers
Reinforce Self-Confidence
Reinforce Interest

10. How influential is research?

11. The organization of research
matters

12. Selection of research topic

13. IMSA’s local findings

14.  STEM Degrees:
59.6%
 Females: 53%
 Residential STEM:
51.7%
 Females: 46%
 National: 22.6%
 TD: 53%
IMSA Study STEM Participants

15.  90.5% of IMSA graduates reported having a
parent that had attained a college degree
 67.9% of IMSA graduates reported a parent
who worked in a field that required STEM
expertise

16. Intensification of interest while
at IMSA
29% of
graduates
reported an
intensification
of interest in
STEM while
at IMSA.
These
students were
2.5x more
likely to attain
a STEM
degree.
 Faculty reinforcement of interest
increased the odds of reporting
intensification by 347%.
 Faculty reinforcement of self-
confidence suppressed odds of
intensification.
 Having selected intended major by
sophomore year suppressed odds
of intensification.

17. Loss of interest
 If primary motivation
was “desire to be
with academically
focused peer
group”: 7.8 times
more likely
 If pace too fast: 2x
 Faculty engagement
in student interest: .
01 as likely
 Experienced
environment as
competitive: .003 as
likely
Amplification Suppression

18. Undergraduate research
IMSA grads
who
participated in
independent
research were
2.23 times
more likely to
engage in
undergraduate
research.
 50% of graduates reported
participation in undergraduate
research.
 Undergraduate research boosts
STEM attainment odds by 3.9x
 Mediation effect?

19. This material is based upon work supported by the
National Science Foundation under
Grant #0815421

20. Some presentation materials provided by:
Rena Subotnik American Psychological
Association
John Almarode James Madison
University