ArticleCBE life sciences education2024
An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Analysis of Factors Contributing to Students' Perceptions of Inclusion in Introductory STEM Courses.
Article in CBE life sciences education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating Undergraduate Student Perceptions of Classroom Inclusion-Emergence of the Student Perceptions of Instructor Practices-Inclusion/Exclusion (SPIP-I/E) Framework.CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
- The Fourth Credit Hour: How do we Teach in Biology Discussion Sections?CBE life sciences education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this exploratory mixed-methods analysis of students' perceptions of inclusion in introductory STEM courses for STEM majors, we asked students to rate inclusion in their class and to provide an open-text explanation of their rating. Analyzing 1930 qualitative responses resulted in a codebook containing academic, identity, and nonspecific categories. The majority of responses (>80%) cited academic factors such as interactions between students and instructors or course elements and policies. Most academic responses aligned with evidence-based teaching practices fostering inclusion, describing a range of strategies and policies instructors can implement to increase students' perceptions of inclusion. A small number of student responses indicated that their perception of the required knowledge background for the course impacted course inclusivity. Few differences in frequency distributions were found between subgroups examined (gender, race and ethnicity, self-reported inclusion score, and discipline). Additionally, tracking a subset of students (135) across three courses revealed that most (80%) cited different factors influencing their perception of inclusion in each course. This suggests students' perceptions of inclusive practices are complex, and most students recognize multiple factors that influence their inclusion. Overall, our findings suggest instructors can significantly influence students' perceptions of inclusion by using multiple inclusive teaching strategies and course policies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.