The PULSE Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Rubric: a Tool To Help Assess Departmental DEI Efforts.

In an attempt to redesign science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) departments to be more inclusive of all student populations, institutions of higher learning are reviewing their programs, policies, and the ways they engage students. The Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education (PULSE) has been working with STEM departments over the past 10 years to improve the student experience by incorporating evidence-based teaching practices and creating curricula with a deeper focus on conceptual understanding of scientific principles, competencies, and the process of science. PULSE created the PULSE rubrics, a set of five rubrics designed to assist life sciences departments in assessing their implementation of the recommendations of the American Association for the Advancement of Science Vision and Change report in the areas of curriculum, assessment, faculty practice and faculty support, infrastructure, and climate for change. An additional rubric, on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), is described in this paper. Each of the 13 criteria of the PULSE DEI rubric begins with a context section of background information with references and a scale of 0 to 4 (baseline to exemplar) with descriptors for each score. The PULSE DEI rubric has been added to allow departments to determine the starting point for their DEI work and reveal areas that require attention. All PULSE rubrics can be accessed from the PULSE Community website (https://www.pulse-community.org/rubrics).

Investigating the impact of peer supplemental instruction on underprepared and historically underserved students in introductory STEM courses.

Background: Supplemental instruction (SI) is a well-established mode of direct academic support, used in a wide variety of courses. Some reports have indicated that SI and similar peer-led academic support models particularly benefit students identifying with historically underserved racial/ethnic groups in STEM. However, these studies have not explicitly examined the role of prior academic experiences, an important consideration in college success. We report on the impact of a modified SI model, Peer Supplemental Instruction (PSI), on student success in introductory STEM courses at a diverse access institution. This study focuses on PSI's impact on the academic performance of students identifying with historically underserved racial/ethnic groups, while also considering the effects of prior academic experiences. Results: Data were aggregated for nine courses over five semesters to produce a robust data set (n = 1789). PSI attendees were representative of the overall student population in terms of previous academic experiences/performance (as determined by high school GPA) and self-identified racial/ethnic demographics. Frequent PSI attendance was correlated with a significant increase in AB rates (average increase of 29.0 percentage points) and reduction in DFW rates (average decrease of 26.1 percentage points) when comparing students who attended 10 + vs. 1-2 PSI sessions. Overall, students identifying as Black/African American received the largest benefit from PSI. These students experienced a significant increase in their final course GPA when attending as few as 3-5 PSI sessions, and exhibited the largest increase in AB rates (from 28.7 to 60.5%) and decrease in DFW rates (from 47.1 to 14.8%) when comparing students who attended 10 + vs. 1-2 sessions. However, students with similar HS GPAs experienced similar benefits from PSI, regardless of self-identified race/ethnicity. Conclusions: The data presented here suggest that PSI particularly benefitted underprepared students in their introductory STEM courses. Since students identifying with historically underserved racial/ethnic groups have traditionally had inequitable K-12 educational experiences, they enter college less prepared on average, and thus particularly benefit from PSI. PSI, in conjunction with additional strategies, may be a useful tool to help rectify the results of systemic educational inequities for students identifying with historically underserved racial/ethnic groups.

A qualitative analysis to identify the elements that support department level change in the life sciences: The PULSE Vision & Change Recognition Program.

The 2011 report, Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action, provided the impetus to mobilize the undergraduate life sciences education community to affect change in order to enhance the educational experiences of life sciences majors. The work of the appointed Partnership for Undergraduate Life Sciences Education (PULSE) Vision and Change (V&C) Leadership Fellows has focused on the development of programs and resources to support departmental change. In this report, we present a qualitative assessment of several documents generated from the PULSE V&C Leadership Fellow Recognition Team. The Recognition Team developed two initiatives to provide departments with feedback on their change process. The first initiative, the validated PULSE V&C Rubrics, enables departments to collaboratively self-assess their progress in enacting change. The second initiative, the PULSE Recognition Program, involves completion of the aforementioned Rubrics and a site-visit by two Recognition Team members to provide external insights and suggestions to foster a department's change process. Eight departments participated in the Recognition Program in 2014. An evaluation of the documents yielded from the Recognition Program review of seven of the eight departments and a comparison of Rubric scores from before and three years following the site-visits uncovered several common elements required for successful department level change. These elements include an institutional culture that values and supports excellence in teaching and learning with resources and infrastructure, a departmental emphasis on program and course level assessment, and, most importantly, a departmental champion who actively supports endeavors that enhance teaching excellence.

The PULSE Vision & Change Rubrics, Version 1.0: A Valid and Equitable Tool to Measure Transformation of Life Sciences Departments at All Institution Types.

The PULSE Vision & Change Rubrics, version 1.0, assess life sciences departments' progress toward implementation of the principles of the Vision and Change report. This paper reports on the development of the rubrics, their validation, and their reliability in measuring departmental change aligned with the Vision and Change recommendations. The rubrics assess 66 different criteria across five areas: Curriculum Alignment, Assessment, Faculty Practice/Faculty Support, Infrastructure, and Climate for Change. The results from this work demonstrate the rubrics can be used to evaluate departmental transformation equitably across institution types and represent baseline data about the adoption of the Vision and Change recommendations by life sciences programs across the United States. While all institution types have made progress, liberal arts institutions are farther along in implementing these recommendations. Generally, institutions earned the highest scores on the Curriculum Alignment rubric and the lowest scores on the Assessment rubric. The results of this study clearly indicate that the Vision & Change Rubrics, version 1.0, are valid and equitable and can track long-term progress of the transformation of life sciences departments. In addition, four of the five rubrics have broad applicability and can be used to evaluate departmental transformation by other science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines.