Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Low science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) retention rates in higher education (HE) have been targeted with varying degrees of success. With recent calls for student-centered changes, this study utilizes peer-led focus groups to elicit students’ perspectives on their HE experience and to generate recommendations for improvements in student outcomes and retention in STEM. The findings from these unstructured interviews outline how major points of dissatisfaction influence students’ degree persistence which aligns with extant literature. Participant-generated solutions target satisfaction and retention across instructor-, department-, and institution-levels which allow for fine-grained recommendations and lay foundation for participatory action change research. This work offers evidence that focus group methodology bridges gaps between students’ experiences and stakeholders’ reform efforts to direct actions which will improve STEM retention in postsecondary education.

Keywords

retention peer-led focus groups STEM education participatory action research student voice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adey

Shayer

(1990). Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660270309

Afrassiabi

(1987). A study of undergraduate student perceptions of faculty advising effectiveness [Doctoral Dissertation, George Washington University]. Dissertation Abstracts International.

Alves

Raposo

(2009). The measurement of the construct satisfaction in higher education. Service Industries Journal, 29(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060802294995

Anderson

E. W.

Sullivan

M. W.

(1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing Science, 12(2), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.12.2.125

Appleton-Knapp

S. L.

Krentler

K. A.

(2006). Measuring student expectations and their effects on satisfaction: The importance of managing student expectations. Journal of Marketing Education, 28(3), 254–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475306293359

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.

Bateman

C. R.

(2010). A strategic framework for auditing and planning for reform of an undergraduate marketing curriculum: A practical application of the Boyer Commission Report. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 14(1), 107–128.

Betz

E. L.

(1970, March). The measurement and analysis of college student satisfaction. American Personnel and Guidance Association Convention. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED041294

Blank

L. M.

(2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding? Science Education, 84(4), 486–506. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200007)84:4<486::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-U

10.

Borrego

Henderson

(2014). Increasing the use of evidence-based teaching in STEM higher education: A comparison of eight change strategies. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(2), 220–252. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20040

11.

Brett

C. E.

Mathieson

M. L.

Rowley

A. M.

(2023). Determinants of wellbeing in university students: The role of residential status, stress, loneliness, resilience, and sense of coherence. Current Psychology, 42(23), 19699–19708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03125-8

12.

Chaves

Lafuente

(2024). Chapter 3: From guinea pigs to agents: The potential of participatory action research in union revitalisation and worker participation studies. https://www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap/book/9781035313891/book-part-9781035313891-16.xml

13.

Cheatham

G. A.

Smith

S. J.

Elliott

Friedline

(2013). Family assets, postsecondary education, and students with disabilities: Building on progress and overcoming challenges. Children and Youth Services Review, 35(7), 1078–1086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.04.019

14.

Chen

(2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM Fields. Statistical Analysis Report. NCES 2014-001. National Center for Education Statistics. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED544470

15.

Chen

Chiu

S. W. K.

Zhu

W. W. M.

(2022). Maintaining secondary school students’ STEM career aspirations: The role of perceived parental expectations, self-efficacy, and cultural capital. International Journal of Science Education, 44(3), 434–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2032463

16.

Chiu

L. F.

(2003). Transformational potential of focus group practice in participatory action research. Action Research, 1(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/14767503030012006

17.

DeKorver

Brown

Witcher

(2024). Student experiences of implementation of accommodations. https://doi.org/10.1163/25888803-bja10028

18.

Deloitte . (2024). Gen Z and Millennial survey: Living and working with purpose in a transforming world. https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/issues/work/content/genz-millennialsurvey.html

19.

Demirel

A. E.

(2022). Towards more inclusive engagements: Mapping the experiential realities of inclusivity in architectural education [Doctoral Dissertation, Middle East Technical University]. https://open.metu.edu.tr/handle/11511/98546

20.

Desai

Damewood

Jones

(2001). Be a good teacher and be seen as a good teacher. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(2), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475301232007

21.

Djohari

Higham

(2020). Peer-led focus groups as “dialogic spaces” for exploring young people’s evolving values. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(5), 657–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2020.1754763

22.

Elliot

A. J.

Dweck

C. S.

(2013). Handbook of competence and motivation (1st ed.). Guilford Publications.

23.

Ewell

P. T.

(1991). Assessment and public accountability. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00091383.1991.9940589

24.

Flavell

J. H.

(1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

25.

Franklin

K. K.

Shemwell

D. W.

(1995). Disconfirmation theory: An approach to student satisfaction assessment in higher education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED388199

26.

Georghiades

(2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: Focusing on transfer, durability and metacognition. Educational Research, 42(2), 119–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363773

27.

Georghiades

(2004). From the general to the situated: Three decades of metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119401

28.

Ghori

(2016). Deconstructing concepts of student satisfaction, engagement and participation in UK higher education [Doctoral Dissertation, Oxford Brookes University]. Research Archive and Digital Asset Repository.

29.

Glaser

B. G.

(1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843

30.

Glitz

(1997). The focus group technique in library research: An introduction. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 85(4), 385–390.

31.

Gold

Rhodes

Brown

Lytle

Waff

(2001). Clients, consumers, or collaborators? Parents and their roles in school reform during “Children Achieving,” 1995–2000. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed473412

32.

Gupta

Brooks

Abrahams

(2025). Higher education students as consumers: A cross-country comparative analysis of students’ views. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 55(2), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2023.2234283

33.

Guzzardo

M. T.

Khosla

Adams

A. L.

Bussmann

J. D.

Engelman

Ingraham

Gamba

Jones-Bey

Moore

M. D.

Toosi

N. R.

Taylor

(2021). “The ones that care make all the difference”: Perspectives on student–faculty relationships. Innovative Higher Education, 46(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-020-09522-w

34.

Hailikari

Virtanen

Vesalainen

Postareff

(2022). Student perspectives on how different elements of constructive alignment support active learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(3), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787421989160

35.

Han

Ellis

R. A.

(2019). Using phenomenography to tackle key challenges in science education. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01414

36.

Hanson

(2015). “I learned I am a feminist”: Lessons for adult learning from participatory action research with union women. Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 27(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.56105/cjsae.v27i1.3361

37.

Hart-Baldridge

(2020). Faculty advisor perspectives of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 40(1), 10–22. https://doi.org/10.12930/NACADA-18-25

38.

Hilts

Part

Bernacki

M. L.

(2018). The roles of social influences on student competence, relatedness, achievement, and retention in STEM. Science Education, 102(4), 744–770. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21449

39.

Kuh

G. D.

Gayles

J. G.

(2007). Engaging undergraduate students in research activities: Are research universities doing a better job? Innovative Higher Education, 32(3), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-007-9043-y

40.

Jayakumar Uma, M. (2022). Combatting the myth of “psychological distress” in anti-critical race theory legislation. Student Experience Research Network. https://studentexperiencenetwork.org/wpcontent/uploads/2022/05/SERN_Jayakumar042122.pdf

41.

Jiang

J. J.

Klein

(2009). Expectation-confirmation theory: Capitalizing on descriptive power. In Y. Dwivedi, B. Lal, M. Williams, S. Schneberger, & M. Wade (Eds.), Handbook of research on contemporary theoretical models in information systems (pp. 384–401). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-659-4.ch022

42.

Jones

Priestley

Brewster

Wilbraham

S. J.

Hughes

Spanner

(2021). Student wellbeing and assessment in higher education: The balancing act. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1782344

43.

Katkin

(2003). The Boyer Commission Report and its impact on undergraduate research. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2003(93), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.86

44.

Knekta

Chatzikyriakidou

McCartney

(2020). Evaluation of a questionnaire measuring university students’ sense of belonging to and involvement in a biology department. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 19(3), ar27. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-09-0166

45.

Kuh

G. D.

Cruce

T. M.

Shoup

Kinzie

Gonyea

R. M.

(2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116

46.

Landivar

L. C.

(2013). The relationship between science and engineering education and employment in STEM occupations (American Community Survey Reports). U.S. Department of Commerce—Economics and Statistics Administration—U.S. Census Bureau.

47.

Marton

(1981). Phenomenography—Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00132516

48.

Maxwell

(2024). Supporting science identity development with course-based interventions: Strategies to improve undergraduate student persistence in STEM. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/1877

49.

McKinnon-Crowley

Voyles

(2024). “The numbers are there but the attention is elsewhere”: An analysis of The Boyer Report. https://doi.org/10.26153/TSW/51990

50.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

Saldana

(2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

51.

Miller

Liu

Ball

A. F.

(2023). Misunderstanding the campaign against CRT: Absurdity and white supremacy in attacks on teaching and teacher education. Thresholds in Education, 46(1), 139–156.

52.

Moore

J. M.

(1998). The Boyer report. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(8), 935. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed075p935

53.

Muenks

Miele

D. B.

Wigfield

(2016). How students’ perceptions of the source of effort influence their ability evaluations of other students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(3), 438–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000068

54.

Murray

(2006). Peer led focus groups and young people. Children & Society, 20(4), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/CHI.892

55.

NACADA . (2011). Professional advisor load. National Survey of Academic Advising. https://nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/2011-NACADA-National-Survey.aspx

56.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine . (2016a). Barriers and opportunities for 2-year and 4-year STEM degrees: Systemic change to support students’ diverse pathways. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21739

57.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine . (2016b). Developing a national STEM workforce strategy: A workshop summary. National Academies Press.

58.

National Center for Education Statistics . (2022). Undergraduate retention and graduation rates. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

59.

Nixon

Scullion

Hearn

(2018). Her majesty the student: Marketised higher education and the narcissistic (dis)satisfactions of the student-consumer. Studies in Higher Education, 43(6), 927–943. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1196353

60.

Oliver

R. L.

(1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405

61.

Ononye

Bong

(2018). The study of the effectiveness of scholarship grant program on low-income engineering technology students. Journal of STEM Education, 18(5), 26–31. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182464/

62.

Pack

(2017). Apprenticeships, skilled trades and small-business creation (Understanding banking from the ground up). The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2017/july/understanding-banking-ground-up

63.

Piper

J. K.

Krehbiel

(2015). Increasing STEM enrollment using targeted scholarships and an interdisciplinary seminar for first- and second-year college students. Journal of STEM Education, 16(4), 36–43. https://www.jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/1935

64.

Plesner

(2011). Studying sideways: Displacing the problem of power in research interviews with sociologists and journalists. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(6), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411409871

65.

Sahin

Ekmekci

Waxman

H. C.

(2017). The relationships among high school STEM learning experiences, expectations, and mathematics and science efficacy and the likelihood of majoring in STEM in college. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1549–1572. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1341067

66.

Salter

Tapper

(2002). The external pressures on the internal governance of universities. Higher Education Quarterly, 56(3), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2273.00216

67.

Schreiner

L. A.

(2009). Linking student satisfaction and retention. Noel-Levitz.

68.

Schulze-Cleven

Olson

J. R.

(2017). Worlds of higher education transformed: Toward varieties of academic capitalism. Higher Education, 73(6), 813–831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0123-3

69.

Seymour

Hunter

A.-B.

(Eds.). (2019). Talking about leaving revisited: Persistence, relocation, and loss in undergraduate STEM education. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25304-2

70.

Slaughter

Rhoades

(2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. JHU Press.

71.

Smithers

L. E.

(2019). How should institutions of higher education define and measure student success? Student success as liberal education escapes definition and measurement. In P. M. Magolda, M. B. Baxter-Magolda, & R. Carducci (Eds.), Contested issues in troubled times: Student affairs dialogues about equity, civility, and safety (pp. 127–137). Stylus Publishing.

72.

Sweeder

R. D.

Strong

P. E.

(2012). Impact of a sophomore seminar on STEM majors desire to pursue a science career. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 13(3), 52–61. https://www.jstem.org/jstem/index.php/JSTEM/article/view/1623

73.

The Boyer 2030 Commission . (2022). The equity-excellence imperative: A 2030 blueprint for undergraduate education at U.S. research universities.

74.

The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University . (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research universities. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

75.

The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology . (2020). Recommendations for strengthening American leadership in industries of the future: A report to the President of the United States of America.

76.

Thurston

L. P.

Shuman

Middendorf

B. J.

Johnson

(2017). Postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: Lessons learned from a decade of NSF funding. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 30(1), 49–60.

77.

Trujillo

Tanner

K. D.

(2014). Considering the role of affect in learning: Monitoring students’ self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and science identity. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0241

78.

Upsher

Percy

Cappiello

Byrom

Hughes

Oates

Nobili

Rakow

Anaukwu

Foster

(2023). Understanding how the university curriculum impacts student wellbeing: A qualitative study. Higher Education, 86(5), 1213–1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00969-8

79.

Venkatesh

Davis

F. D.

(1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451–481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x

80.

Vogel

S. A.

Holt

J. K.

Sligar

Leake

(2008). Assessment of campus climate to enhance student success. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 21(1), 15–31.

81.

Walton

G. M.

Cohen

G. L.

(2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82

82.

White

C. J.

(2013). Higher education emotions: A scale development exercise. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(2), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.674496

83.

Wilson

Z. S.

Holmes

deGravelles

Sylvain

M. R.

Batiste

Johnson

McGuire

S. Y.

Pang

S. S.

Warner

I. M.

(2012). Hierarchical mentoring: A transformative strategy for improving diversity and retention in undergraduate STEM disciplines. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9292-5

84.

Wilt

C. L.

Morningstar

(2020). Student perspectives on peer supports in an inclusive postsecondary education context. Journal of Inclusive Postsecondary Education. https://doi.org/10.13021/jipe.2020.2461

85.

Wood

Ristow

(2024). Everyday talk: Self-directed peer focus groups with diverse youth. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 27(2), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2022.2138107

86.

Wyman

N. M.

Gedge

J. B.

(2015). Associations between adaptation of German style vocational education models and impact on apprenticeship pathways in regional American labour markets. In E. Smith, P. Gonon, & A. Foley (Eds.), Architectures for apprenticeship: Achieving economic and social goals (pp. 43-46). Australian Scholarly Publishing.

87.

Xue

Larson

R. C.

(2015). STEM crisis or STEM surplus? Yes and yes. Monthly Labor Review, 2015, https://doi.org/10.21916/mlr.2015.14

Peer-Moderated Focus Groups as Vehicles for Change in Undergraduate Science,Technology,Engineering,and Mathematics Attrition

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References