Is It the Intervention or the Students? Using Linear Regression to Control for Student Characteristics in Undergraduate STEM Education Research

Although researchers in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education are currently using several methods to analyze learning gains from pre- and posttest data, the most commonly used approaches have significant shortcomings. Chief among these is the inability to distinguish whether differences in learning gains are due to the effect of an instructional intervention or to differences in student characteristics when students cannot be assigned to control and treatment groups at random. Using pre- and posttest scores from an introductory biology course, we illustrate how the methods currently in wide use can lead to erroneous conclusions, and how multiple linear regression offers an effective framework for distinguishing the impact of an instructional intervention from the impact of student characteristics on test score gains. In general, we recommend that researchers always use student-level regression models that control for possible differences in student ability and preparation to estimate the effect of any nonrandomized instructional intervention on student performance.     

Engaging White parents to address their White children's racial biases in the Black-White context

Multiple studies (n = 1065 parents, 625 females, 437 males, 3 nonbinary, 99.06% White; n = 80, 5 to 7-year-old children, 35 girls, 45 boys, 87.50% White; data collection September 2017–January 2021) investigated White U.S. parents' thinking about White children's Black-White racial biases. In Studies 1–3, parents reported that their own and other children would not express racial biases. When predicting children's social preferences for Black and White children (Study 2), parents underestimated their own and other children's racial biases. Reading an article about the nature, prevalence, and consequences of White children's racial biases (Study 3) increased parents' awareness of, concern about, and motivation to address children's biases (relative to a control condition). The findings have implications for engaging White parents to address their children's racial biases.     

Gahvora cradling in Tajikistan: Cultural practices and associations with motor development

In Tajikistan, infants are bound supine in a “gahvora” cradle that severely restricts movement. Does cradling affect motor development and body growth? In three studies (2013–2018), we investigated associations between time in the gahvora (within days and across age) and motor skills and flattened head dimensions in 8–24-month-old Tajik infants (N = 269, 133 girls, 136 boys)) and 4.3–5.1-year-old children (N = 91, 53 girls, 38 boys). Infants had later motor onset ages relative to World Health Organization standards and pronounced brachycephaly; cradling predicted walk onset age and the proficiency of sitting, crawling, and walking. By 4–5 years, children's motor skills were comparable with US norms. Cultural differences in early experiences offer a unique lens onto developmental processes and equifinality in development.     

Educational equity,academic standards,and countercontrol: Preventing academic deficits with supplemental interdependent rewards

School psychologists have been involved with developing and installing individual contingencies designed to remedy individual students' academic deficits. Group-oriented contingencies can be applied to broader efforts designed to prevent learning problems class-wide. Independent group-oriented rewards are frequently used in school settings to enhance learning by rewarding strong academic performance (e.g., reward for each student who maintains a 90% average). Research suggests overreliance on these contingencies may not be educationally equitable because they may be less effective or ineffective in influencing the behavior and learning of students with weaker academic skills. Theoretical and applied research is analyzed which suggests that maintaining ubiquitous independent rewards and providing supplemental interdependent group-oriented bonus rewards may allow educators to a) maintain their academic standards, b) enhance educational equity by improving learning in students who may not respond to typical independent group-oriented rewards, and c) enhance classroom climates. Also, recommendations are provided that may allow educators to mitigate concerns over perceived unfairness associated with interdependent group-oriented rewards.