Background: Women and people of color are consistently underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields and careers. Though there are myriad factors underlying these gaps, one potential variable may be the extent to which these students feel connected to their STEM classroom experiences. Purpose: The present study investigated the potential of a service-learning experience to support STEM engagement for underrepresented youth. Methodology/Approach: Two cohorts of high school students participated in a summer program through which they built “solar suitcases” to provide electricity for communities in need. Observations and student surveys measured student engagement and changes in STEM attitudes, dispositions, and beliefs. Findings/Conclusions: Students were highly engaged in service-learning activities and demonstrated improved Science Fascination, Science Values, and STEM Career Affinity after participating in the program. Implications: Implications for the design and delivery of culturally relevant service-learning experiences are discussed.
ArcherL.DewittJ.OsborneJ. (2015). Is science for us? Black students’ and parents’ views of science and science careers. Science Education, 99, 199-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21146
2.
AronsonB. A.LaughterJ. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education. Review of Educational Research, 86, 163-206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066
3.
BathgateM.SchunnC. (2017). The psychological characteristics of experiences that influence science motivation and content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 39, 2402-2432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1386807
4.
Brown-JeffyS.CooperJ. E. (2011). Toward a conceptual framework of culturally relevant pedagogy: An overview of the conceptual and theoretical literature. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38, 65-84.
5.
CelioC. I.DurlakJ.DymnickiA. (2011). A meta-analysis of the impact of service-learning on students. Journal of Experiential Education, 34, 164-181.
ConwayJ. M.AmelE. L.GerwienD. O. (2009). Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning’s effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 233-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903172969
10.
DorphR.BathgateM. E.SchunnC. D.CannadyM. A. (2018). When I grow up: The relationship of science learning activation to STEM career preferences. International Journal of Science Education, 40, 1034-1057. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1360532
11.
DorphR.CannadyM.SchunnC. (2016). How science learning activation enables success for youth in science learning. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 20, 49-85.
12.
FurcoA. (2002). Is service-learning really better than community service? A study of high school service. In FurcoA.BilligS. H. (Eds.), Service Learning: The Essence of Pedagogy (pp. 23-50). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
13.
FurcoA. (2013). A research agenda for K-12 school-based service-learning: Academic achievement and school success. International Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, 1(1), 11-22.
HillN. E.TorresK. (2010). Negotiating the American dream: The paradox of aspirations and achievement among Latino students and engagement between their families and schools. Journal of Social Issues, 66, 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01635.x
16.
HowardG. S.RalphK. M.GulanickN. A.MaxwellS. E.NanceD. W.GerberS. K. (1979). Internal invalidity in pretest-posttest self-report evaluations and a re-evaluation of retrospective pretests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167900300101
17.
JacobyB. (2015). Service-learning essentials; questions, answers, and lessons learned. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18.
JamesJ. K.WilliamsT. (2017). School-based experiential outdoor education: A neglected necessity. Journal of Experiential Education, 40, 58-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825916676190
19.
KlattJ.Taylor-PowellE. (2005, October). Synthesis of literature relative to retrospective pretest design. Paper presented at the 2005 Joint CES/AEA Conference, Toronto, Canada.
20.
KluteM. M.BilligS. H. (2002). The impact of service-learning on MEAP: A large-scale study of Michigan learn and serve grantees. Denver, CO: RMC Research Corporation.
21.
KramerM.TallantK.GoldbergerA. O.LundF. (2015). The global STEM paradox. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
22.
LandivarL. C. (2013). Disparities in STEM employment by sex, race, and Hispanic origin. Education Review, 29, 911-922.
23.
MelchiorA.BailisL. N. (2002). Impact of service-learning on civic attitudes and behaviors of middle and high school youth: Findings from three national evaluations. In FurcoA.BilligS. H. (Eds.), Service learning: The essence of the pedagogy (pp. 201-222). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
24.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
25.
PakC., (2018). Linking service-learning with sense of belonging: A culturally relevant pedagogy for heritage students of Spanish. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 17(1), 76-95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192716630028
26.
Oakland Unified School District Department of Research, Assessment, & Data. (2018). Fast facts 2017-2018: Oakland unified school district. Available from http://www.ousddata.org/
27.
Riegle-CrumbC.MooreC.Ramos-WadaA. (2011). Who wants to have a career in science or math? Exploring adolescents’ future aspirations by gender and race/ethnicity. Science Education, 95, 458-476. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20431
28.
RMC Research Corporation. (2008). Service-learning policies and practices. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States, National Center for Learning and Citizenship. Retrieved from http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/78/58/7858.pdf
29.
SibthorpJ.PaisleyK.GookinJ.WardP. (2007). Addressing response-shift bias: Retrospective pretests in recreation research and evaluation. Journal of Leisure Research, 39, 295-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2007.11950109
30.
SimonetD. (2008). Service-learning and academic success: The links to retention research. Minnesota Campus Compact, 1, 1-13.
31.
SlavkinM. L. (2004). Authentic learning: How learning about the brain can shape the development of students. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
32.
SongW.FurcoA.LopezI.MaruyamaG. (2017). Examining the relationship between service-learning participation and the educational success of underrepresented students. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 24, 23-37. https://doi.org/10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0024.103
33.
WasleyP. (2006). Underrepresented students benefit most from “engagement.”The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53, A39-A40.
34.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
