Kelly Miller, Gerhard Sonnert, and Philip Sadler. 11/7/2017. “
The influence of students’ participation in STEM competitions on their interest in STEM careers.” International Journal of Science Education, Part B, Pp. 1-20.
Publisher's VersionAbstractPre-college student participation in science fairs, robotics competitions, computing contests and other science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) competitions increases every year in the United States. This is despite the fact that little is known about the relationship between STEM competition participation and career interest in STEM. Through logistic regressions, this study addresses three main research questions: Controlling for student background variables and prior STEM career interest, does participating in a STEM competition increase the likelihood of STEM career interest at the end of high school? Does the field of competition (robotics, engineering, science fair, information technology) a student participates in influence the sub-discipline of STEM career interest? And, what is the relationship between the number of competitions participated in and the probability of interest in a STEM career? The study uses data from the ‘Outreach Programs and Science Career Intentions’ survey (N = 15,847), a large-scale sample of university students enrolled in mandatory English courses. Our data reveal three results of interest. First, students who participate in STEM competitions are more likely to express interest in a STEM-related career at the end of high school than are students who do not participate, even when students’ prior career interest in STEM is controlled for. Second, the relationship between competition participation and interest in a STEM career appears to be domain specific. Third, the impact of competition participation on pursuit of a STEM career is three times stronger when students compete in more than one competition. These findings suggest that competitions are an effective way to foster career interest in specific STEM careers.
Hyewon Jang, Nathaniel Lasry, Kelly Miller, and Eric Mazur. 3/1/2017. “
Collaborative exams: Cheating? Or learning?” American Journal of Physics , 85, 3, Pp. 223-227.
Publisher's VersionAbstractVirtually all human activity involves collaboration, and yet, collaboration during an examination is typically considered cheating. Collaborative assessments have not been widely adopted because of the perceived lack of individual accountability and the notion that collaboration during assessments simply causes propagation of correct answers. Hence, collaboration could help weaker students without providing much benefit to stronger students. In this paper, we examine student performance in open-ended, two-stage collaborative assessments comprised of an individually accountable round followed by an automatically scored, collaborative round. We show that collaboration entails more than just propagation of correct answers. We find greater rates of correct answers after collaboration for all students, including the strongest members of a team. We also find that half of teams that begin without a correct answer to propagate still obtain the correct answer in the collaborative round. Our findings, combined with the convenience of automatic feedback and grading of open-ended questions, provide a strong argument for adopting collaborative assessments as an integral part of education.