IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reihed/v66y2025i1d10.1007_s11162-024-09823-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transforming Undergraduate STEM Education: The Learning Assistant Model and Student Retention and Graduation Rates

Author

Listed:
  • Li Feng

    (Texas State University)

  • Eleanor W. Close

    (Texas State University)

  • Cynthia J. Luxford

    (Texas State University)

  • Jiwoo An Pierson

    (Texas State University)

  • Alice Olmstead

    (Texas State University)

  • Jieon Shim

    (Texas State University)

  • Venkata Sowjanya Koka

    (Texas State University)

  • Heather C. Galloway

    (Texas State University)

Abstract

Background Evidence-based and student-centered instructional methods hold the promise of transforming undergraduate STEM education and simultaneously solving the dual challenge of STEM workforce needs and inequities within STEM. The Learning Assistant (LA) Model was created to reform curriculum, recruit teachers, and inform discipline-based education research. Numerous studies have shown positive impacts on students and Learning Assistants (LAs) in terms of retention and pass rates, learning outcomes, attitudinal shifts, and emotional support. Several studies have explored demographic differences and found that LAs help close the gap in retention rates for women and first-generation students. While short-term effects have been well documented, the long-term effects on students’ college retention and completion rates have not been widely studied. We gathered information about LA-adopting institutions identified on the Learning Assistant Alliance website and from individual higher education institutions’ websites. Combining this information with the College Scorecard Database for four-year U.S. institutions allows us to examine student retention and graduation rates after these institutions have adopted the LA model and look for differences in both the student and university characteristics included in the dataset. We are interested in determining if there is a difference between LA-adopting and non-LA-adopting institutions in terms of their student outcomes. Results These LA-adopting institutions have larger enrollments and are more likely to award graduate degrees. Students in LA-adopting institutions are more likely to be younger with lower percentages of females, first generation, and Black students. No significant differences in the percentages of Hispanic students or in the average costs per student were observed in our study. Using regression analysis, we find LA-adopting institutions have significantly higher retention and completion rates. Conclusions Since LA-adopting institutions have different characteristics than non-LA institutions, these differences should be considered in future studies examining the impact of the LA model. After controlling for these differences in our study, we find that institutions with the LA model have 4 to 15 percentage points higher college completion rate and they have better outcomes for Hispanic and Black students. These findings suggest that increasing the adoption of the LA model may contribute to reducing inequity in STEM.

Suggested Citation

  • Li Feng & Eleanor W. Close & Cynthia J. Luxford & Jiwoo An Pierson & Alice Olmstead & Jieon Shim & Venkata Sowjanya Koka & Heather C. Galloway, 2025. "Transforming Undergraduate STEM Education: The Learning Assistant Model and Student Retention and Graduation Rates," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(1), pages 1-26, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:66:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s11162-024-09823-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11162-024-09823-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11162-024-09823-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11162-024-09823-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carruthers, Celeste K. & Fox, William F., 2016. "Aid for all: College coaching, financial aid, and post-secondary persistence in Tennessee," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 97-112.
    2. John M. Braxton & Jeffrey F. Milem & Anna Shaw Sullivan, 2000. "The Influence of Active Learning on the College Student Departure Process," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 71(5), pages 569-590, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Drew M. Anderson & David B. Monaghan & Jed Richardson, 2024. "Can the Promise of Free Education Improve College Attainment? Lessons from the Milwaukee Area Technical College Promise," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 65(8), pages 1747-1770, December.
    2. De Villiers, Rouxelle & Hess, Alexandra Claudia, 2018. "Melding traditional and progressive andragogy in marketing education, using the hermeneutic competency development strategy," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 140-156.
    3. Molina, Teresa & Rivadeneyra, Ivan, 2021. "The schooling and labor market effects of eliminating university tuition in Ecuador," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/527ht1a96e837pq2dubgo2953q is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Monica Njanjokuma Otu & Stanley Osezua Ehiane & Hlabathi Maapola-Thobejane & Mosud Yinusa Olumoye, 2023. "Psychosocial Implications, Students Integration/Attrition, and Online Teaching and Learning in South Africa’s Higher Education Institutions in the Context of COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Gorbunova, Elena & Ulyanov, Vladimir & Furmanov, Kirill, 2017. "Using data from universities with different structure of academic year to model student attrition," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 45, pages 116-135.
    7. Lindsay C. Page & Judith Scott-Clayton, 2015. "Improving College Access in the United States: Barriers and Policy Responses," NBER Working Papers 21781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Doyle, William R., 2009. "The effect of community college enrollment on bachelor's degree completion," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 199-206, April.
    9. Anderson, Drew M. & Goldrick-Rab, Sara, 2018. "Aid after enrollment: Impacts of a statewide grant program at public two-year colleges," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 148-157.
    10. Hsun-Yu Chan & Xueli Wang, 2018. "Momentum Through Course-Completion Patterns Among 2-Year College Students Beginning in STEM: Variations and Contributing Factors," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 59(6), pages 704-743, September.
    11. Steven W. Hemelt & Nathaniel L. Schwartz & Susan M. Dynarski, 2020. "Dual‐Credit Courses and the Road to College: Experimental Evidence from Tennessee," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(3), pages 686-719, June.
    12. Joonmo Cho & Wonyoung Baek, 2019. "Identifying Factors Affecting the Quality of Teaching in Basic Science Education: Physics, Biological Sciences, Mathematics, and Chemistry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    13. Anderson, Drew M., 2020. "When financial aid is scarce: The challenge of allocating college aid where it is needed most," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    14. Delaney, Taylor & Marcotte, Dave E., 2022. "Public Higher Education Costs and College Enrollment," IZA Discussion Papers 15320, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Juan Cándido Gómez Gallego & María Concepción Pérez Cárceles & Laura Nieto Torrejón (ed.), 2017. "Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación," E-books Investigaciones de Economía de la Educación, Asociación de Economía de la Educación, edition 1, volume 12, number 12, August.
    16. E. Opdecam & P. Everaert & H. Van Keer & F. Buysschaert, 2012. "The effect of team learning on student profile and student performance in accounting education," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/774, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    17. Page, Lindsay C. & Scott-Clayton, Judith, 2016. "Improving college access in the United States: Barriers and policy responses," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 4-22.
    18. J. Muthiani Malechwanzi & Hongde Lei & Lu Wang, 2016. "Students’ Perceptions and Faculty Measured Competencies in Higher Education," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 5(3), pages 1-56, August.
    19. Muhammad Adnan & Abid Mehmood Ansari & Bushra Yasmeen, 2022. "The Effects Of Institutional Environment On Academic Performance At Higher Level Of Learning: A Case Study Of Punjab University Lahore," Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 11(1), pages 104-112, March.
    20. Celeste K. Carruthers & Christopher Jepsen, 2020. "Vocational Education: An International Perspective," CESifo Working Paper Series 8718, CESifo.
    21. Peter Riley Bahr & Claire A. Boeck & Phyllis A. Cummins, 2022. "Is Age Just a Number? A Statewide Investigation of Community College Students’ Age, Classroom Context, and Course Outcomes in College Math and English," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 63(4), pages 631-671, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:66:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s11162-024-09823-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.