Addressing Social and Academic Integration Challenges of Stem Students: Co-Creating Interventions for First-Year Minority Students

Workshop Recommended citation: Verboven, C., De Laet, T., Van den Broeck, L., Beagon, U., Ventura-Medina, E., Kovesi, K., & Van Soom, C. (2025). Addressing Social and Academic Integration Challenges of Stem Students: Co-Creating Interventions for First-Year Minority Students. In Kangaslampi, R., Langie, G., Järvinen, H.-M., & Nagy, B. (Eds.), SEFI 53rd Annual Conference. European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), Tampere, Finland. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17631583. This Conference Paper is brought to you for open access by the 53rd Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) at Tampere University in Tampere, Finland. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License. ADDRESSING SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INTEGRATION CHALLENGES OF STEM STUDENTS: CO-CREATING INTERVENTIONS FOR FIRST-YEAR MINORITY STUDENTS C. Verboven a, 1 , T. De Laet a, L. Van den Broeck a, U. Beagon b, E. Ventura-Medina c, K. Kövesi d, C. Van Soom a a KU Leuven, LESEC, Leuven, Belgium, 0009-0008-7998-8934; 0000-0003-0624-3305; 0000-0002-6276-750; 0000-0001-7677-0931 b TU Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, 0000-0001-6789-7009 c Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands, 0000-0002-1041-945X d ENSTA - Institut Polytechnique de Paris, BREST, France, 0000-0002-4036-6475 Conference Key Areas: Diversity, equity and inclusion in our universities and in our teaching; Improving higher engineering education through researching engineering education Keywords: social integration, academic integration, intervention, first-year students, minority ABSTRACT Despite ongoing efforts to enhance enrolment in STEM programs, dropout rates among first-year students remain significantly high, particularly among minority groups such as women, first-generation students, and apprenticeship students (Martin, 2017). These students often face unique challenges related to their social and academic integration (SAInt), which are crucial for persistence and academic success in higher education (Tinto, 1975). The In-4-STEM project aims to address these challenges by designing, implementing, and evaluating innovative interventions that support minority students during their transition into higher education (Erasmus+, 2024). This interactive workshop presents initial findings from focus groups with first-year STEM students, offering insights into the experiences and integration challenges faced by minority groups. Building on these insights, participants will consider their own institutional contexts and engage in a structured, collaborative process to design interventions targeting SAInt challenges. Through working in small groups, participants will create preliminary designs for interventions that can be implemented 1 Corresponding Author C. Verboven cindy.verbove[email protected] or adapted to their specific settings and offer constructive feedback on each other’s designs. The workshop therefore aims to foster inter-institutional dialogue, stimulate critical reflection, and inspire participants to consider solutions that can enhance minority students’ social and academic integration. Participants will leave the session with a deeper understanding of the integration challenges faced by minority students and a co-developed intervention, enriched by peer feedback about the constraints that are associated with the implementation of this particular intervention. Outputs from the workshop will also contribute to the In-4-STEM toolbox that aims to support educational innovators and lecturers worldwide to develop strategies to tackle SAInt challenges experienced by a diverse group of new STEM students. 1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE In response to the increasing demand for STEM graduates, universities have undertaken substantial initiatives to attract more students to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programs. However, removing barriers to enter STEM higher education is insufficient if the newly recruited students leave STEM programs without a degree. Indeed student retention, particularly in their first year, remains a significant challenge, with dropout rates in STEM disciplines higher than in other areas (González-Pérez et al., 2022; Shaw & Barbuti, 2010). This issue is especially pronounced among minority groups such as women, first-generation students, and apprenticeship students, who face unique barriers to social and academic integration (Martin, 2017). Studies have shown that these students often struggle with a lower sense of belonging (Meeuwisse et al., 2010), limited access to academic and peer support (Read et al., 2003), and difficulties adapting to the expectations and culture of STEM higher education (Thomas, 2002). The In-4-STEM project addresses these challenges by developing, implementing, and evaluating innovative interventions to support minority students during their transition into STEM higher education. These interventions are created through co-creation with educators, students, and institutional stakeholders, and are based on universal design principles, ensuring adaptability to various contexts. This workshop is part of the In-4-STEM project, aiming to inspire institutions to reflect on their practices and develop strategies that enhance the social and academic integration of their students. By bringing together diverse perspectives, the workshop fosters dialogue and creativity in tackling SAInt challenges and empowers participants to implement actionable ideas in their own settings, contributing to a more inclusive and resilient STEM community. 2 WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES 2.1 Target audience This workshop is designed for STEM educators, programme coordinators, student support staff, policymakers, diversity officers, and researchers. It is especially relevant for professionals engaged in first-year support and inclusion strategies. 2.2 Expected learning outcomes By the end of the workshop participants will • Gain insight into SAInt challenges faced by minority students in STEM (LO1) • Reflect on their institutional practices and policies in light of these findings (LO2) • Co-create an intervention that addresses one social/academic integration challenge (LO3) • Discuss the constraints associated with the implementation of a particular intervention (LO4) 3 WORKSHOP DESIGN 3.1 Time plan 0-10 minutes: Introduction to the In-4-STEM project and overview of the workshop; presentation of focus group insights on SAInt challenges experienced by STEM students in partner institutions (LO1) 10-15 minutes: Individual reflection on SAInt challenges in participants' own context (LO2) 15-30 minutes: Groups will engage in brainstorming sessions to co-create intervention ideas on different posters (LO3). To support this process, a template based on the literature will be provided, along with guiding questions to support participants and ensure they have a structured approach to work from. 30-55 minutes: Poster rotation: mixed groups present their interventions and give each other peer feedback about the constraints that are associated with the implementation of a particular intervention (LO4) 55-60 minutes: Wrap up: participants reflect and select one intervention to take back to their own institutional context (LO2 and LO4) 3.2 Interactivity This workshop uses an interactive design with three key phases: • Individual reflection: Participants reflect on guided questions related to minority groups, student needs, and institutional barriers. These prompts encourage them to think about their own specific context. • Collaborative design: Participants join small groups to brainstorm and co-create an intervention. Each group focuses on one key aspect of a SAInt challenge, with facilitators supporting the process (see Figure 1). • Peer feedback: Groups reorganise so that each poster includes members from different discussion groups. One member presents the intervention while others offer constructive feedback and suggestions for refinement. After several minutes the groups rotate to a new poster and repeat the process, allowing each participant to engage with multiple intervention ideas and provide feedback from different perspectives. Figure 1 Workshop flow: co-creation design and poster rotation 4 WORKSHOP RESULTS A total of 13 participants engaged in the workshop, distributed across three tables (two groups of four participants and one group of five), each supported by a facilitator. Across the groups, participants co-created three distinct intervention designs. To structure their ideas, groups were guided by four key questions: (1) Who is the target group? (2) When does the intervention take place? (3) What is the intervention about? (4) Who else is involved in the intervention? Intervention 1 (Table 1): This group combined several challenges into an extended programme aimed at supporting pioneer students and their parents. Their proposal centred on designing an orientation week complemented by tutorial services. The orientation would include practical sessions, small-group campus tours, and testimonies from senior students. In addition, the group proposed establishing a dedicated study spot for weekly sessions, offering continuity and fostering a sense of belonging. Intervention 2 (Table 2): This group focused on first-year students and designed an intervention to connect firstyear students with a diverse range of alumni and professionals from the field. Through talks, Q&A sessions, or role-playing activities, alumni would share insights about their daily work, highlighting how they allocate their time across different responsibilities. This was seen as a way to provide role models and demystify professional trajectories in STEM. Intervention 3 (Table 3): This group targeted all first-year bachelor students and proposed a year-long, continuous programme supported by a pilot study. The intervention took the form of a structured “How to Survive University” workshop series, complemented by a supportive app co-created with teachers. Activities would be tailored to students’ starting points, allowing them to select from a range of workshops. The intervention also included mentorship from near-peers (senior students close to year one) and a feedback loop where insights from sessions could inform teachers and programme leaders. Following the initial design phase, participants engaged in a poster rotation exercise to provide peer feedback on each group’s intervention. Feedback addressed both practical considerations (e.g., scheduling, room availability) and strategies to increase student participation (e.g., offering incentives such as free lunches). This exchange of perspectives enriched the interventions and encouraged participants to reflect on the feasibility of implementation within their own institutional contexts. The results of the workshop will inform the next phase of the In-4-STEM project, where we will develop interventions based on recurring needs. These interventions will be further refined with stakeholders and, where feasible, tested in a pilot intervention. A critical note is that several interventions depend on external actors (e.g., alumni, teachers, parents) and require long-term institutional commitment, which may challenge their feasibility over time. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In-4-STEM is cofunded by the Erasmus+ program of the European Union (Grant nr. 2024-1-BE02-KA220-HED-000254104) REFERENCES Erasmus+ Cooperation Partnership Project In-4-STEM, 2024, cofunded by the Erasmus+ program of the European Union https://erasmusplus.ec.europa.eu/projects/search/details/2024-1-BE02-KA220-HED000254104 González-Pérez, S., Martínez-Martínez, M., Rey-Paredes, V., & Cifre, E. (2022). I am done with this! Women dropping out of engineering majors. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918439 Martin, J. M. (2017). It Just Didn’t Work Out: Examining Nonreturning Students’ Stories About Their Freshman Experience. Journal of College Student Retention, 19(2), 176–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025115611670 Meeuwisse, M., Severiens, S. E., & Born, M. Ph. (2010). Learning Environment, Interaction, Sense of Belonging and Study Success in Ethnically Diverse Student Groups. Research in Higher Education, 51(6), 528–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9168-1 Read, B., Archer, L., & Leathwood, C. (2003). Challenging Cultures? Student Conceptions of ‘Belonging’ and ‘Isolation’ at a Post-1992 University. Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070309290 Shaw, E., & Barbuti, S. (2010). Patterns of Persistence in Intended College Major with a Focus on STEM Majors. NACADA Journal, 30. https://doi.org/10.12930/0271-9517-30.2.19 Thomas, L. (2002). Student retention in higher education: The role of institutional habitus. Journal of Education Policy, 17(4), 423–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930210140257 Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from Higher Education: A Theoretical Synthesis of Recent Research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170024