Vision II and Vision III (Bildung) scientific literacy (Sjöström& Eilks, 2018) requires the development of classroom models that go beyond traditional focus on content knowledge, and instead facilitate student experiences in communities through learning models such as experiential learning (EL). EL asks students to implement their science knowledge and skills in real-world contexts, and reflect on their learning, experiences and social impact (Kolb & Kolb, 2012; Talafian 2019). Importantly, EL can help prepare students to democratically engage in an uncertain world.

Unfortunately, at university levels, introductory science instruction is dominated by lectures where the large number of students often makes EL seem intractable. However, it is possible to integrate EL requirements in large lecture courses given commitment, creativity and clear guidance for students. This study is in the context of a university course (over 600 students per year) called Science Literacy 101: Science and Decision-Making for a Complex World (SCIL 101), which fills a need for EL models in higher education tied to theory (Talafian, 2019; Morris, 2020). The EL requirement involved student groups creating 4-6 hour out-of-class experiences allowing them to act on what they have learned during coursework to a socioscientific issue (SSI) of their choosing. Students independently found ways to engage in the issue, practiced engagement in a real-world context, and reflected on their experience. The SCIL 101 EL is brief, though it adds to the breadth of students’ EL experiences during their program (Schenck & Cruickshank, 2015). However, it is unclear how much EL is required to have an impact on students, and whether a brief experience in one course is enough to be meaningful. 

We used transformative experience theory to characterize EL’s impact on students. The theory describes three elements of students’ transformational experiences: motivational use or application of school content in everyday experience; expansion of perception or seeing aspects of the world through science content; and experiential value which is the increased value for aspects of the world when re-seen through the lens of science content (Pugh et al., 2023). 

Pugh (et al 2023) reviewed studies that reveal why some students may experience transformative learning and others do not, and found that science identity is a predictor along with interests, emotions and situated contexts. An unstudied aspect is how students’ perceptions of their own civic engagement knowledge and skills predicts the degree to which EL is transformative. Students who have a low self-concept for civic engagement may be less likely to draw connections between EL requirements in a course, and the value of the experience for their own personal and professional growth.

We used the science civic engagement self-concept (SCE-SC; Alam et al., 2022; Authors, in press) to characterize how students conceptualize themselves applying science learned in classrooms toward their communities. SCE is engagement with the community using science skills with the intention of strengthening local communities and supporting positive social change. Self-concept includes both cognitive and affective judgments about oneself (Bong & Clark, 1999). Therefore, SCE-SC describes how a student envisions their own SCE. Alam et al. (2022) described four dimensions of SCE-SC:  scientific civic value (the importance students assign to community engagement); scientific civic confidence (the confidence students have in their ability to use science skills to help a community); scientific civic action (the actions a student plans to take to aid others); and scientific civic knowledge (the knowledge of how a student can use science skills to help a community).

Our research questions were:

1) Do students have a transformative experience when engaging in brief EL activities?  

2) Do students with high SCE-SC have more impactful EL experiences (i.e., more transformative)?

Participants in the study were college students in Fall 2024 a large research university in the Midwestern United States. Data were collected in one in-person course of approximately 110 students, which included a biweekly lecture and a weekly recitation section. Through two SSI case studies and a final project, students work through a structured decision-making model for making societal decisions for SSI (e.g., plastic pollution, water conservation, flood mitigation). The science literacy skills taught include evidence gathering, evaluating sources, considering stakeholders points of view, and presenting an argument about solutions. In the final project, which was the focus of the last 5 weeks of the course, student teams selected a topic of their choice for SDM, and were required to engage in 4-6 hours of EL by creating an opportunity within the community that included volunteering, or guided research engagement, or other types of experiences (e.g., a tour of a facility, participating in an event or meeting or training). The predictors of science civic engagement instrument (Alam et al., 2022), a self-report instrument used to measure SCE-SC, was implemented as a pre and post semester evaluation. The PSCE instrument included 14 Likert-scale agreement statements addressing the four dimensions of SCE-SC. The transformative experience questionnaire (TEQ) given post-instruction uses 27 Likert-scale agreement items developed to reflect the three qualities of a transformative experience (motivated use, expansion of perception and experiential value) and a continuum ranging from in-school engagement (low transformative) to out-of-school engagement (high transformative), and was modified to be specific to each individual students’ EL activities to evaluate its impact in contrast to one SSI taught in the course, plastic pollution (Pugh et al., 2010). In their coursework, students were assigned to write a reflection on their EL and final project including perspective taking, finding and using information about the socioscientific system, students’ perceptions of their own science civic engagement, decision making, and general thoughts. In our preliminary analysis, a subset (n=20) of students’ reflections were coded deductively using the three qualities of a transformative experience to describe themes present in the students reponses.

Our preliminary analyses based on the post-TEQ indicate that students had transformative experiences where they applied their EL activity to a great extent to both out-of-school reasoning as well as in-school reasoning. Students’ transformative experiences were greater for EL than for an SSI module on plastic pollution used in the course. This suggests that students have meaningful experiences when engaging in EL in a topic of their choice, even for a brief 4-6 hours. In post assessments, student TEQ scores were significantly higher for students with high SCE-SC civic value and civic action, meaning students who value and intend to use their science skills to engage in their communities were more likely to have transformative experiences during EL. In student reflections, preliminary coding indicates a robust presence of themes regarding motivational use, expansion of perception, and experiential value, which will allow us to unpack in more detail what aspects of the EL resonated most with students. Taken together, our preliminary results suggest value in incorporating EL into large courses, despite the logistic challenges. Additionally, more incorporation of EL throughout a curriculum may have positive synergy, where more opportunities for students to civically engage may build their SCE-SC, which may make future experiences more meaningful. Engaging students in EL throughout their entire degree, not just in upper-level courses, is important in achieving the benefits of EL that extend over longer periods of engagement (Coker et al., 2017; Schenck & Cruickshank, 2015). Further, beginning early in a program enables lengthier reinforcement of important science literacy concepts, leading to capstone courses, post-graduate study or employment. Importantly, incorporating EL into a required course is one means to open new learning pathways for successful future STEM careers, and importantly, prepare students to contribute in an uncertain world (Thiry et al., 2011; Jin et al., 2019).

Authors, in press. Alam, I., Ramirez, K., Semsar, K., & Corwin, L. A. (2023). Predictors of Scientific Civic Engagement (PSCE) Survey: A Multidimensional Instrument to Measure Undergraduates’ Attitudes, Knowledge, and Intention to Engage with the Community Using Their Science Skills. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 22(1), ar3. Bong, M., & Clark, R. E. (1999). Comparison between self-concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 139–153. Coker, J. S., Heiser, E., Taylor, L., & Book, C. (2017). Impacts of experiential learning depth and breadth on student outcomes. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(1), 5-23. Jin, L., Doser, D., Lougheed, V., Walsh, E. J., Hamdan, L., Zarei, M., & Corral, G. (2019). Experiential learning and close mentoring improve recruitment and retention in the undergraduate environmental science program at an Hispanic-serving institution. Journal of Geoscience Education, 67(4), 384-399. Kolb, A.Y., Kolb, D.A. (2012). Experiential Learning Theory. In: Seel, N.M. (eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_227 Morris, T. H. (2020). Experiential learning–a systematic review and revision of Kolb’s model. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1064-1077. Pugh, K. J., Linnenbrink‐Garcia, L., Koskey, K. L., Stewart, V. C., & Manzey, C. (2010). Motivation, learning, and transformative experience: A study of deep engagement in science. Science Education, 94(1), 1-28. Pugh, K. J., Bergstrom, C. M., Wilson, L., Geiger, S., Goldman, J., Heddy, B. C., ... & Kriescher, D. P. (2023). Transformative experience: A critical review and investigation of individual factors. Learning, design, and technology: An International compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy, 1381-1416. Schenck, J., & Cruickshank, J. (2015). Evolving Kolb: Experiential education in the age of neuroscience. Journal of Experiential Education, 38, 73-95. Sjöström, J., & Eilks, I. (2018). Reconsidering different visions of scientific literacy and science education based on the concept of Bildung. Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education: Learning, teaching and assessment, 65-88. Thiry, H., Laursen, S. L., & Hunter, A. (2011). What experiences help students become scientists? A comparative study of research and other sources of personal and professional gains for STEM undergraduates. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(4), 357–388. doi: 10.1353/ jhe.2011.0023 Talafian, H., Galoyan, T., Hammrich, P. L., & Lamberson, L. (2019). Experiential Learning in a Summer Program: Engaging Undergraduate Students in STEM Research Experience. Summer Academe, 12.