Measurements Of Adaptive Expertise Among Low-Income STEM Students

One of the goals of undergraduate education is to prepare students to adapt to a challenging career that requires continual learning and application of knowledge. Working professionals should have deep conceptual knowledge that they can apply in a range of contexts and possess the attitudes and skills of lifelong learners. Literature suggests the concept of Adaptive Expertise (AE), which describes the ability to apply and extend knowledge and skills to new situations, addresses some of these characteristics. Survey data concerning the level of AE displayed by various populations is extremely limited in most contexts, be it education or working professionals. As such, data concerning the level of adaptiveness displayed among various groups needs to be measured if activities designed to promote the development of AE are to be created and then tested in terms of their efficacy. This investigation provides this critical baseline data for future studies as we track the AE development of individual students through their studies and into their professional careers. In this study, an existing survey instrument designed to measure adaptive expertise was disseminated to a large number of incoming first-year STEM students in the fall of 2021 (n=711). In spring of 2022 this survey was followed up with another data collection effort targeting low-income students in particular. A total of n=208 low-income students from all four years of an undergraduate STEM education completed the AE survey. Targeted interviews were then conducted with 24 of these students (6 per year, 3 male, 3 female) to examine the differences displayed by low and high AE students. Results of the AE survey indicated no statistically-significant differences between low-income and non-low-income first-year students in terms of their level of adaptiveness. In addition, the level of AE displayed by low-income students increased through the program in a manner similar to non-low-income STEM students. Several themes emerged from the interview responses including: a general understanding among students of the likelihood of needing to continually learn new concepts throughout their careers, and students expressed growth in understanding the acceptance of reaching out for assistance from other students and faculty after exploring information on their own. Two dominant and divergent metacognitive processes were also observed: teaching/explaining concepts to others (highly adaptive) or primarily relying on exam/course grades for feedback (low adaptiveness). The data gathered here will allow the research team to develop activities to promote AE and to measure their effectiveness. Data gathered from interviews for example demonstrates the need for a greater emphasis on metacognitive practice to promote various aspects of AE.