ABSTRACT

1. Twenty-five years of Success: A longitudinal study of a successful STEM program and a pilot project to Institutionalize its Success. Camellia Moses Okpodu1 and Arlene P. Maclin2 1Office of Research Development and Department of Biology, Norfolk State University, Norfolk, VA 23504 2Department of Engineering and Center for Academic Excellence, Norfolk State University, Norfolk, VA 23504 ABSTRACT KEY FINDINGS RESULTS This paper combines the results from a longitudinal evaluation study of an honors program as well as the three year implementation of a pilot integrated curriculum for freshmen students in engineering at Norfolk State University (NSU). A comprehensive formal evaluation of the NSU STEM honors program is called the Dozoretz National Institute for Mathematics and Applied Sciences (DNIMAS). The DNIMAS program admits students with high school GPAs of 3.2 and SAT scores in mathematics and verbal of 500 or better. There is considerable history of minority Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) enrichment programs that have largely reported success anecdotally and have not disseminated their findings in a manner that can help others to systematically adopt those educational strategies and philosophies that contribute towards the creation of a significant increase in the number of underrepresented students pursuing STEM training and career entry. This research project examines all of the obvious and not-so-obvious features of the training environment. This research has been funded by an NSF grant #0624929 in the Human Resources Directorate and the HBCU-UP program. • DNIMAS Program • College Experience – Students were asked on the quality of the programs and their overall satisfaction. However, there is some concern with the NSU recognition of the program as well as the DNIMAS students’ ability to engage in activities with the other students. • Academic Engagement – The responses were overwhelmingly positive. However, there was some dissatisfaction with the areas of academic advising, faculty praise and rewards. It is interesting to note that the DNIMAS students were rather critical in retrospect with themselves or their own self-evaluation. • Program Impact – The students were seemingly ecstatic about the fact that the program provided full funding but were similarly satisfied with most other aspect of the program. The areas of mentoring, use of tutoring, DNIMAS seminar and the DNIMAS Student Organization were matters of some concern. • Community Engagement - There was some dissatisfaction expressed. This fact may be attributable to the fact that the DNIMAS students were restricted in terms of most of their activities while they were students. The respondents who responded to this survey are almost evenly distributed over the early years 1990-1995 through 2005. Therefore, one may include that this is in fact endemic to the program itself and requires a change in policy by the administrators at the University. • Core Curriculum Pilot Project • Student Satisfaction - Students in the IC program indicated that they received continual feedback to improve their performance. 88% of the respondents indicated that the IC encouraged a community. They were satisfied with the support NSU alumni and other had for the IC program. • Academic Engagement - Students indicated that they very often used on-line technology to assists in the learning outcomes. The integrated curriculum was not stressful to the students; however the amount of time spent on projects did provide moderate stress for most participants. • Program Impact - Students felt that the instructors valued and respected their opinions. Faculty had complete control of the course content as well as assessment content. Most core faculty members emphasized writing in their integrated courses. • Community Engagement - Cooperative learning was enhanced due to the amount of group assignments given through the instructional design. Faculty felt that the integrated curriculum provides a positive effect on student learning. Faculty engaged in learning outcomes that would show relationship between disciplines. The Core Faculty members have restructured their courses to promote active learning through class team projects. The Core Faculty members have enhanced delivery of the courses by solving problems in class. • FUTURE DIRECTIONS • DNIMAS – We know that there are 148 DNIMAS Transfer Alumni. Of that number, only 30 of them have graduated from NSU. A large portion of them have withdrawn or are inactive according to NSUs official records. According to data received from the Institutional Research Office on January 13, 2009, 17 are active and 30 of them have graduated. The remainder have withdrawn or are inactive. Based on this result, we know that the DNIMAS transfer Alumni cannot be used as a comparison group. • Integrate Curriculum - Similar trends were examined as with the previous evaluation period. We do not have data from a comparison cohort. In addition, students in the sophomore stage of their academic progress spent less time studying and preparing for their classes. We are not sure if this trend is specific to students participating in the IC program. A comparison cohort of students with similar backgrounds will be used to help us examine if this is a trend specific to IC participants. Compilation of Academic Engagement Responses for NR= 132 respondents or a total NDA= 244 from 1990- 2005 METHODOLOGY Assessment An on-line evaluate was developed to assess students’ view of either the DNIMAS or IC (integrated curriculum) program mission (2007 and 2008 data only). In 2006, data was collected using a paper submission. In 2007, participants were also asked to complete an on-line evaluation. In addition, the results can provide a measure of the extent that students are achieving the Norfolk State University’s education learning goal of effective written communicate skills. For the IC component, we met with the faculty and talked about strategies and improvements for the next time the course is offered. The Assessment Coordinator (AC) collected 52 student on-line (42 responses in 2007 and 28 in 2008 and 4 core faculty evaluation responses (2007 only). Participating instructors agreed to allow the Assessment Coordinator to make an evaluation of their teaching. The AC made an unannounced visit to evaluate the Core Faculty members as they taught in the Integrated Curriculum Classroom . Demographic data were collected for each returned survey. These data were collected for analysis purposes only and the information cannot be used to identify an individual. The student demographic information associated with the samples was not shared with the Program Director. Summary of Student Satisfaction for the Integrated curriculum. The respondents indicated high ratings of dissatisfaction with support from the administration; involvement in campus activity. Respondents were satisfied with faculty availability, intellectual atmosphere and advisor availability. (Similar trends were seen in the 2006, 2007 data. Representative results are presented). Stressful Events. (Rating Scale 1 = no stress; 2 = little stress; 3= some stress; 4= significant stress; 5 = great deal of stress). Respondents were not stressed by the courses being offered in an integrated format. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank the following IC faculty members: Drs. Ira Falls (English), Michael Keeve (Mathematics), Katrina Patrick (Chemistry) and Leroy Salary (Physics). This research was supported by Grant #HRD06224929.