Cited by 66Higher Education Research StudiesCareer Development and DiversityMathematics Education and Programs

Association of Summer Bridge Program Outcomes With STEM Retention of Targeted Demographic Groups

Tomasko, David L., Ridgway, Judith S., Waller, Rocquel J., Olesik, Susan V.·2016·Journal of College Science Teaching

Abstract

Retention of students to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) major has been studied for four cohorts participating in a summer bridge program supported by the National Science Foundation. Students participated in a 6-week program prior to their first term of enrollment at a research-intensive land grant university. Comparisons to baseline incoming classes from 2009–2011 show gains in retention to major out to the third year for underrepresented minorities (African American, Hispanic, Native American), first-generation college students, and females. Gains for underrepresented minorities and females are statistically significant, whereas those for first-generation students are not. These gains are associated with participation in a 6-week summer bridge program and the resulting improvement in preparation for college coursework, sense of belonging as measured by qualitative surveys, and use of academic support structures. Qualitative data support the theory that students need social integration and a sense of belonging in addition to academic support structures to persist in STEM. We conclude that bridge programs should address the “whole student” and not simply academic coursework.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2505/4/jcst16_045_04_90

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The fourth STEM bridge program used a pre-post survey design but only provided the post survey score in the published report.

    “while the fourth program used a pre–post survey design, although they only provided the post survey score in the published report (Tomasko et al., 2013, 2016).”
  • The other STEM bridge program assessed students' written responses to open-ended questions about the impact of the program and coded for evidence of student sense of belonging.

    “The other study assessed students’ written responses to open-ended questions about the impact of the program and coded for evidence of student sense of belonging (Tomasko et al., 2013, 2016).”
  • Tomasko et al. (2016) compared the treatment of all university STEM-major students and also compared it to all underrepresented STEM-major students.

    “Tomasko et al. (2016) compared the treatment of all university STEM-major students and also compared it to that of all underrepresented STEM-major students.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tomasko, D. L., Ridgway, J. S., Waller, R. J., & Olesik, S. V.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
Venue
Journal of College Science Teaching
Published
2016-03
Volume
45
Issue
4
Pages
90-99
ISSN
  • 0047-231X (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-4898
OpenAlex
W2343143140
Cited by
66
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2
FWCI
17.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The journal of college science teaching (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › Mathematics Education and Programs
Keywords
summer bridge programs, STEM retention, underrepresented minorities, first-generation college students, women in STEM, sense of belonging, academic support, social integration, land-grant universities, college readiness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review