Students’ Perceptions of a Special Program for Developing Exceptional Talent in STEM

Barriers to Identification

Understanding the barriers that impede the identification of students with exceptional talent is essential to making important changes. Recent studies show that three critical factors are barriers to identifying students from diverse backgrounds for programs for exceptionally talented students.

Innovative Identification to Increase Diversity

The development of alternative approaches to identify exceptionally talented students from diverse backgrounds has gained researchers’ attention and consensus (McClain & Pfeiffer, 2012). One alternative approach is performance-based assessment, such as the Discovering Intellectual Strengths and Capabilities while Observing Varied Ethnic Responses (DISCOVER) assessment (Maker, 1993, 2019a; Maker, Alhusaini, Pease, Zimmerman, & Alamiri, 2015; Sarouphim, 2002). Although performance assessments have been criticized, they include important components not often found in multiple-choice tests, such as observation by an expert while completing open-ended tasks requiring higher order thinking and problem solving (Cao et al., 2017; Maker, 2017; VanTassel-Baska, 2014). In these assessments, correct use of English, both in writing and speaking, is not a requirement. Students’ abilities are assessed directly through the tools and symbol systems of each domain by evaluating the students’ original products (e.g., spatial, life science, physical science) rather than indirectly through the filter of language. Thus, these assessments can be used to identify exceptionally talented students who have not traditionally been identified (Cao et al., 2017; Maker, 2019a; Sarouphim & Maker, 2010).

Aligned with the talent development perspective (Subotnik, Olszewski-Kubilius, & Worrell, 2011), Maker and her research team started the Cultivating Diverse Talent in STEM (CDTIS) project in 2013. Drawing upon the long-term research and practical experiences gained during the DISCOVER assessment development projects funded by the U.S. Department of Education (Maker, 2005; Maker & Schiever, 2010; Maker, Zimmerman, Gomez-Arizaga, Pease, & Burke, 2015), Maker (2017) and the research team defined exceptional talent in STEM as consisting of two essential aspects:

(a) a highly integrated and interconnected knowledge structure, (b) the ability to solve a variety of types of problems, from well-structured and known to ill-structured and novel, in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in the most effective, efficient, original, or economical ways. (Maker, 2019a)

The team then developed, field tested, and implemented five new assessments. To assess the first component, “a highly integrated knowledge structure,” concept map exercises were designed for life science and physical science (Zimmerman, Maker, & Alfaiz, 2019). To assess the second component, two new performance assessments were designed, one in life science (naturalist; Zimmerman, Alfaiz, & Maker, 2019) and one in physical science (mechanical–technical; Alfaiz, Pease, Maker, & Zimmerman, 2019), and a paper/pencil assessment of problem solving in mathematics (Maker, 2019b). The spatial analytical assessment from the original DISCOVER assessment was included in the battery because of previous success with it as an assessment of analytical skills necessary in all domains, but particularly important in STEM (Maker, 2019b).

STEM Programs

Since 1941, in the Westinghouse Science Talent Search (STS), the first and the most prestigious science competition, high school seniors have been offered opportunities to participate in original research projects (Brandwein, 1992). Recently, the STS (Society for Science & the Public, 2019) has continued searching for students who show exceptional scientific and mathematical knowledge, demonstrate problem-solving abilities, and have the greatest potential to be future scientific leaders. The program has inspired countless students to pursue science-related academic achievements and careers. Many universities provide precollege summer program to enable students with exceptional talent to be challenged in unique ways (Best College Reviews, 2019). Furthermore, 369 STEM high schools were established between 2000 and 2012, demonstrating a significant increase (National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, 2013). Rigorous STEM programs have also been developed, such as the High School Apprenticeship Program, which provides high school students an authentic science and engineering research experience alongside university researchers, and UNITE, which is a precollege summer experience for talented high school students from groups historically underrepresented and underserved in STEM (Department of Defense, 2019). These programs have continued to provide opportunities and a nurturing environment for students to conduct advanced research, such as biotechnology experiments and agricultural research.

Student Development Resulting From Participating in STEM Programs

The role of laboratory experiences in internships that nurture students’ development has been highlighted, especially for minority high school students with exceptional talents (Fraleigh-Lohrfink, Schneider, Whittington, & Feinberg, 2013). STEM-based laboratory experiences have offered important benefits and impacts because such activities promote students’ logical and problem-solving skills if constructed appropriately (Porter, 2017). Students who participated in STEM programs increased their interest, motivation, and engagement in STEM fields (Sahin, Ayar, & Adiguzel, 2014). In a school-wide investigation, researchers found that, in the general population, teachers who integrated STEM into their content had a positive impact on student achievement. These students were better prepared for college than those from comparison schools with similar demographics with teachers who did not integrate STEM into their content (Kennedy & Odell, 2014).

STEM Program in an R1 University in the Southwest

Selected students were given the opportunity to nurture their talents in STEM in an R1 university through (a) the Keep Engaging Youth in Science (KEYS) summer internship program, (b) subsequent school-year research internships, and (c) successive summer workshops or internships. The CDTIS principal investigators used the idea of “learning by doing,” a component of “learning from doing within a specific social context with a support group or set, which helps members to engage in reflection about their practices” (Jarvis, 2006, p. 154).

The KEYS summer internship program was a 7-week summer laboratory research internship program initiated by the College of Pharmacy and BIO5, an institute of combined science disciplines, in 2006. Each student selected for the program was assigned to a laboratory that matched her or his interests to the extent possible. Students engaged in solving problems by working on research projects far beyond high school curricula. Students worked an average of 6 hr per day in various science laboratories, such as chemistry, biology, and entomology; they played an integral role within the research settings. During the summer internship, each student was observed a minimum of four times for 2 hr throughout the course of the internship. Six observers visited students in various laboratory and classroom settings. Each student observation was conducted by a different observer. Observers used an instrument adapted with permission from the Renzulli Scales for Rating the Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students: learning, creativity, motivation, leadership, artistic, musical, dramatics, communication, planning, mathematics, reading, technology, and science (Renzulli et al., 2013). During the school year, CDTIS students continued their research, engaged with their peers in newly learned research strategies in STEM, and/or initiated research studies based upon their interests. A university science professor mentored individual students in their areas of research interests. In the second year, a 3-week summer workshop in selected research was presented in one high school by teachers and the CDTIS education team. The focus of this workshop was to engage students in researching and solving the local problem of desertification.

Participants and Selection Procedures

Selection procedures

Just as assessment cannot be separated from curriculum and teaching strategies, it cannot be separated from the context in which it is administered (Lohman, 2005; Maker, 2019a). After all the assessment exercises were completed, the observers met to discuss and analyze each student’s performance and compare it with that of other students who were observed from the same or a similar school setting. In this project, students in schools serving American Indian students were compared with students in other schools serving predominantly American Indian students; students in the school serving predominantly Hispanic students were compared with students from the same school. Performance-based assessments are criterion-referenced, meaning that participants are scored according to the number of superior problem-solving skills they exhibit, not based on a right answer or the norm for a certain grade level. The observers’ debriefing process included rating each student’s ability in a particular assessment content area using a unique scale, which included five levels: Unknown, Maybe, Probably, Definitely, and Wow. For example, the Unknown rating was used to denote insufficient data to draw conclusions, whereas the rating of Definitely was used to denote exceptional talent. For the category of Wow, students’ results were highly creative and unique in comparison with their peers. After the observers discussed and agreed on each student’s rating on each assessment, profiles were developed for each student and each school. An average for each area of ability was calculated for each school and represented by the horizontal line in each student and school profile. The education team examined the profiles of all students assessed and looked for strengths in particular areas and across all areas. The first selection of students included those who had ratings of Wow and/or Definitely in all six areas assessed (Figure 1). Next, the education team selected students who had Definitely in four areas assessed (Figure 2). Students who had Wow and/or Definitely in two domains and the corresponding areas were considered to be alternates.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Example of student’s ability profile 1. Five levels: 1 = Unknown; 2 = Maybe; 3 = Probably; 4 = Definitely; 5 = Wow.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Example of student’s ability profile 2. Five levels: 1 = Unknown; 2 = Maybe; 3 = Probably; 4 = Definitely; 5 = Wow.

Data Collection

CDTIS education team members administered a questionnaire after students’ participation in the KEYS program and during the final semester of their senior year. Students were invited to answer four questions: (a) How have you continued your KEYS research project? (b) What kind of research projects have you conducted since participating in the KEYS program? (c) How has this experience changed your final year in high school? At home? and (d) What are your plans after graduation? Students answered the questionnaire in approximately 45 min.

Data Analysis

Core Theme

The core theme, active involvement in problem solving inspired and motivated students with exceptional talent, was identified as the students’ perceptions of the special program for developing exceptional talent in STEM. The responses were in three main categories: (a) academic initiative and engagement, (b) transition preparation, and (c) practical skill development. The links indicated parallel categories. Each category included three identified subcategories to describe a specific phenomenon from students’ responses. The core theme, categories, and subcategories are outlined in Table 1 to advance readers’ understanding of exceptionally talented students’ perceptions of active involvement in problem solving in STEM areas.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Core Theme, Categories, and Subcategories.

Core theme	Categories	Subcategories
Active involvement in problem solving inspired and motivated students with exceptional talent	Academic initiative and engagement	1.1 Research focus
		1.2 Extracurricular research participation
		1.3 Advanced learning pursuit
	Transition preparation	2.1 Education and career goal planning
		2.2 Perspective change
		2.3 Independence and confidence building
	Practical skill development	3.1 Self-management skills acquisition
		3.2 Leadership learning
		3.3 Social relationship expansion

Category 1: Academic Initiative and Engagement

When exploring students’ perceptions of the STEM program, the first category extracted from their responses was students’ academic initiative and engagement. This accounted for 47% of the total coded responses, representing the largest proportion of the content. The subcategories under the first category included (a) research focus, (b) extracurricular research participation, and (c) advanced learning pursuit.

Category 2: Transition Preparation

Students’ responses reflected the importance of preparation for the transition to college or careers, especially in their senior year. The percentage of coded responses (40%) shown under this category represented the second largest proportion of the content. The subcategories under the second category included (a) education and career goal planning, (b) perspective change, and (c) independence and confidence building.

Category 3: Practical Skill Development

The percentage of coded responses under the practical skill development category was 13% of the total responses, which was the smallest proportion of the content. These responses showed evidence of (a) self-management skills acquisition, (b) leadership learning, and (c) social relationship expansion.

The Emergence of a Core Theme

The purpose of this study was to explore how underrepresented students with exceptional talent in STEM perceived their KEYS summer internship and subsequent research experiences. Each participant described his or her experiences in a questionnaire administered by the CDTIS project team. After a qualitative analysis, active involvement in problem solving inspired and motivated students with exceptional talent was identified as a core theme of students’ experiences. When students were engaged actively in learning, especially in problem solving, the experiences helped to enhance not only their academic achievement but also their intrinsic motivation, enjoyment, and confidence (Lumpkin, Achen, & Dodd, 2015; Wu, Pease, & Maker, 2015).

Three impacts were (a) academic initiative and engagement, (b) transition preparation, and (c) practical skill development. First, during the KEYS program, each student engaged in his or her research focus actively in a university laboratory that matched her or his interests. After their participation in the internship, students pursued advanced learning and took rigorous courses in their own high schools. Most of them continued their research by participating in extracurricular activities through different avenues. During their time at the R1 university, students gained a better understanding of the university environment and life. Students’ engagement in STEM experiences prepared them for university and/or career transitions by helping them think about their academic and/or career goals. Not only have their independence and confidence increased, but also their short- and long-term education and/or career goals were clearly set. Furthermore, the research experiences contributed to students’ self-management and leadership abilities and expanded their social networks in academic settings. In sum, the students’ voices about their active involvement in problem solving reflected their learning process and influences.

A comparison of the STEM program objectives and what students thought the program brought them, some overlaps as well as some distinctions were found among the three identified categories. Students benefited from the program not only through “academic initiative and engagement” which achieved the program’s goals, but also included “transition preparation” and “practical skill development.” The latter two were not expected due to the program’s focus on academic preparation. These students’ perceptions can be used to improve program effectiveness and to encourage collaboration among students, program designers, and/or mentors; thereby maybe resulting in students’ long-lasting learning.

Strengths of Diverse, Underrepresented Students With Exceptional Talent in STEM

Individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds, low SES, and female groups have been historically underrepresented in science areas (American Institutes for Research, 2012; Deemer et al., 2014; Hernandez et al., 2013). Strengths of the three different groups are discussed in the context of this study.

Students with diverse cultural backgrounds in this study were predominantly Native American or Hispanic. In Native Americans’ culture, life experiences and learning perspectives are influenced deeply by their own culture, which is fundamentally different from Western culture. Native Americans focus on dealing with real problems in their communities and consider that learning is communal, lifelong, informal, and holistic. They highly endorsed communal goals than individualistic goals (Smith et al., 2014). Knowledge from informal experiences in daily life is more important than what is learned in formal school settings in Native American culture (Merriam & Kim, 2008). These two knowledge concepts are parallel with Gardner’s (1992) first-order knowledge (i.e., cultural life experience) and second-order knowledge (i.e., systematic learning at school). Thus, solving real problems in their communities can be considered one of their strengths. In this study, students’ strengths were identified using an alternative identification method that included performance-based, intelligence-fair assessments. Students were encouraged to build their own knowledge base on their cultural views in the STEM program or create their own research projects. The viewpoint to respect each culture can also be applied to Hispanic people who constitute the largest ethnic minority group in the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). In Hispanic culture, they emphasize their family interdependence and traditional gender roles, in which females have less freedom than males (Lorenzo-Blanco, Unger, Baezconde-Garbanati, Ritt-Olson, & Soto, 2012). A good understanding of students’ cultural backgrounds and values may contribute to cultivating their learning and abilities (Ruggs & Hebl, 2012).

The educational achievement gap between students with low-SES and high-SES backgrounds still exists nationwide (National Science Board, 2012). Low-SES students usually lack learning experiences and nurturing environments that can encourage them to pursue studies in STEM (Smith et al., 2014). However, academic resilience has been found to be a strength of students with high abilities and low-SES backgrounds (Rojas, 2015). Individuals who have high academic resilience are academically successful and capable of overcoming obstacles that prevent other individuals with a similar background from being successful. In an 8-year qualitative study, a comprehensive look at these high-achieving and low-SES individuals showed that they had persistence and strong future orientation (Morales, 2010). Participants in Morales’ study also addressed the importance of academic mentors who not only encouraged them to succeed but also considered individual cultural competency and community background when mentoring.

In gender groups, more women who have high math skills have equally strong verbal abilities, whereas men who have high math skills often have lower verbal abilities and profiles are asymmetrical (Schmidt, 2011). Females who have a symmetrical profile with strengths in both math and verbal competencies may have broader career choices; on the contrary, males who have high math ability and low verbal abilities have narrower options in STEM fields (Nye, Su, Rounds, & Drasgow, 2012; Valla & Ceci, 2014). Thus, mathematically and verbally capable female students need to be informed about their choices of STEM careers during the program, which may be beneficial to their goal planning. Also, during mentoring, exposure to STEM role models could be implemented to increase female interest in STEM in their high school years (Valla & Ceci, 2014).

Critical Elements of a Quality STEM Program

Combining the program design and positive impacts of students’ participation in the STEM program, researchers found three critical elements integrated in the program intervention: (a) content, focusing on individual research interests and real-world problems; (b) process, providing enriched and varied activities for students’ participation; and (c) learning environment, creating supportive mentoring relationships in research projects and future goals.

First, the content of the program was focused on cultivating individual research interests and solving real-world problems. In this study, each student with exceptional talent in STEM had a highly integrated and interconnected knowledge structure and an ability to solve real-world problems in the most efficient, effective, elegant, ethical, or economical ways (Maker, 2017). These abilities continued to be cultivated during an individual program that fit each student’s abilities, academic needs, and interests. Clearly, actively engaging in research projects not only nurtured their domain-specific abilities to increase expertise but also fostered their creative problem-solving abilities to deal with real-world problems. These two components embedded in the program content are aligned with the theories of intelligence and creativity in recent decades, including domain-specific (i.e., domain-relevant skills) and domain-general (i.e., creative-relevant skills) components (Amabile, 1996; Ceci, 1996; Sternberg, 1999). Expertise in specific domains that is necessary for innovative work and creative problem-solving abilities that cut across domains are interactive and can lead to remarkable and exceptional performance (Amabile, 1997).

Second, the process within a quality STEM program includes enriched and varied activities, laboratory projects, and extracurricular activities. Many researchers have found that a scientific laboratory experience within a period of time played a pivotal role in promoting students’ problem-solving skills and engagement (Porter, 2017; Sahin et al., 2014). Similar to other studies, in this program, students’ motivation increased through STEM laboratory experiences, and students desired to engage in more challenging tasks, rigorous courses, and STEM-related activities (Sahin et al., 2014). Task motivation has been considered an essential component of creativity, showing that students have interests in and attitudes toward specific tasks (Amabile, 1996). Students were also inspired and empowered by taking ownership in development of scientific knowledge within their research areas (Hurtado, Newman, Tran, & Chang, 2010). Other extracurricular activities were provided, such as joining conferences and board meetings. Researchers have found that enrichment programs designed for students with exceptional talents are beneficial to both cognitive and social–emotional growth (Baum, Schader, & Hebert, 2014; Gubbels, Segers, & Verhoeven, 2014; Vogl & Preckel, 2014). These extracurricular opportunities to present students’ own research helped enhance their academic engagement and leadership skills and contributed to their confidence and social relationships.

The third element of a quality STEM program is the learning environment in which students were mentored by graduate students in the laboratories whose research foci matched students’ individual interests. Mentors assist students from aspiration to achievement in STEM and bolster students’ STEM self-efficacy (Powers, Schmidt, Sowers, & McCracken, 2015; Robnett, Nelson, Zurbriggen, Crosby, & Chemers, 2019). The importance of mentoring women, ethnic minorities, and low-SES individuals has been emphasized; their academic performance and self-efficacy in STEM disciplines has been enhanced (Kendricks, Nedunuri, & Arment, 2013; MacPhee, Farro, & Canetto, 2013). In our study, a detailed qualitative examination showed that students became more academically engaged in their research projects, better prepared for their transition plans, and had well-developed practical skills. In addition, after the KEYS summer internship program, CDTIS project liaisons continued working with the students and assisted by discussing future education and career goals. Students’ responses reflected that they set their future goals for academic transitions and careers. Thus, mentoring can be considered “the most important vehicle by which the talents of young scientists are developed” (McGee, 2016, p. 231) when creating a natural and encouraging learning environment for students to participate in STEM programs.