Skip to main content

Weed-Out Classes and Their Consequences

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Talking about Leaving Revisited

Abstract

As the overall study findings described in Chap. 2 make clear, the majority of issues contributing to STEM switching or relocation, and to the ongoing difficulties of persisting, converge on student experiences in what are commonly referenced as “weed-out” classes. Overall, 25% of interviewees reported negative consequences arising from aspects of these classes, including 43% of STEM switchers and 35% whose decisions to switch were directly shaped by their weed-out class experiences. Among persisters, 18% also described negative consequences from particular weed-out classes, including 6% who relocated to a different STEM major or dropped a second major. This chapter addresses: what characteristics define certain foundational STEM classes or courses as “weed-out” in their nature and consequences; what do students experience that create learning and persistence difficulties; which student groups do weed-out classes place at most risk of switching, relocation, or dropping out of college? To answer these questions, we draw on findings from four component studies: institutional records analysis from the six sample sites; interview data from 96 switchers and 250 persisters; Student Assessment of their Learning Gains (SALG) surveys deployed in STEM foundation courses across all sites; and findings from an observation study of teaching practices in those same courses. We also present findings from our collaborators in a concurrent study of “DFWI” rates in four foundation-level STEM courses located in each of 36 institutions participating in the Gardner Institute’s “Gateways to Completion” project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Breussoud, D. (2015). Insights from the MAA national study of college calculus. The Mathematics Teacher, 109, 178–185.261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagan, K., Hurtado, H., Figueroa, T., & Hughes, B. (2014). Examining STEM pathways among students who begin college at four-year institutions. Commissioned paper prepared for the committee on barriers and opportunities in completing 2- and 4-year STEM degrees. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved from: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_088834.pdf

  • Ferrare, J. J. (2019). A multi-institutional analysis of instructional beliefs and practices in gateway courses to the sciences. CBE Life Sciences Education, 18(2), ar26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrare, J. J., & Miller, J. M. (2019). Making sense of persistence in scientific purgatory: A multi-institutional analysis of instructors in introductory science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses. The Journal of Higher Education, 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanders, G. R. (2017). The effect of gateway course completion on freshman college student retention. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 19(1), 2–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foertsch, J. M., Millar, S. B., Squire, L., & Gunter, R. (1997). Persuading professors: A study in the dissemination of educational reform in research institutions. Report to the NSF education and human resources directorate, Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication. Washington DC: University of Wisconsin-Madison, LEAD Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginorio, A. (1995). Warming the climate for women in academic science. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities, Program on the Status and Education of Women.

    Google Scholar 

  • Givens, S. M. B., & Tassie, K. E. (Eds.) (2014). Underserved women of color, voice, and resistance: Claiming a seat at the table. New York, NY: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grave, N. D. (2018). Demographics and the demand for higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. R. C., & North, K. K. (1999). Science through the looking glass: Winning the battles but losing the war? Science, 286(5447), 2072–2078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrabowski, F. A. (2003). Raising minority achievement in science and math. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kardash, C. A. M., & Wallace, M. L. (2001). The perceptions of science classes survey: What undergraduate science reform efforts really need to address. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 199–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, A. K. (2017). It’s about the gateway courses: Defining and contextualizing the issue. In A. K. Koch (Ed.), Improving teaching, learning, equity, and success in gateway courses (pp. 11–17). New Directions for Higher Education (180). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, A. K. (2018). Big inequity in small things: Toward an end to a tyranny of practice. National Teaching and Learning Forum, 27(6), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, A. K., & Drake, B. M. (2018). Digging into the disciplines: The impact of gateway courses in accounting, calculus, and chemistry on student success. Brevard, NC: John N. Gardner Institute for Excellence in Undergraduate Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, A. K., & Rodier, R. (2014). Gateways to completion guidebook. Brevard, NC: John N. Gardner Institute for Excellence in Undergraduate Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laursen, S. L., Hunter, A.-B., Seymour, E., Thiry, H., & Melton, G. (2010). Undergraduate research in the sciences: Engaging students in real science. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manoucheka, C., Diaz, S., Ginorio, A., & Joseph, R. (2014). A resistance story: Negotiating the institutional and material through collectivity. In S. B. Givens & K. E. Tassie (Eds.), Claiming a seat at the table: Feminism, underserved women of color, voice and resistance (pp. 91–106). Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure (revised and enlarged edition). New York, NY: The Free Press

    Google Scholar 

  • National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc. (2013). 2013 NACME data book: A comprehensive analysis of the “new” American dilemma. White Plains, NY: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parson, T. (1968). The structure of social action. New York, NY: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2012). Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Retrieved from www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf

  • Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (2013). Qualitative variation in approaches to university teaching and learning in large first-year classes. Higher Education, 67(6), 783–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rask, K. (2010). Attrition in STEM fields at a liberal arts college: The importance of grades and pre-collegiate preferences. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 892–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.06.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schutz, A. (1971). Collected papers: The problems of social reality. The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, E., & DeWelde, C. (2016). Why doesn’t knowing change anything? Constraints and resistance, leverage and sustainability (with K. De Welde). In Weaver, G. C., Burgess, W. D., Childress, A. L., & Slakey, L. (Eds.), Transforming institutions: Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century. Purdue, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, E., Melton, G., Pedersen-Gallegos, L., & Wiese, D. J. (2005). Partners in innovation: Teaching assistants in college science courses. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suresh, R. (2006). The relationship between barrier courses and persistence in engineering. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, and Practice, 8(2), 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tinto, V. (2000). Linking learning and leaving. Exploring the role of the college classroom in student departure. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the student departure puzzle (pp. 81–94). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy J. Weston .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Weston, T.J., Seymour, E., Koch, A.K., Drake, B.M. (2019). Weed-Out Classes and Their Consequences. In: Seymour, E., Hunter, AB. (eds) Talking about Leaving Revisited. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25304-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25304-2_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25303-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25304-2

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics