2026 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

This evidence-based practice study examines the implementation and early outcomes of a support model developed through a National Science Foundation Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM) program for Pell-eligible first-year computer science (CS) majors at a large public research university. The program—the S-STEM Scholars Program (SOSP)—aims to address inequities in early academic progress and sense of belonging by providing coordinated supports, including orientation and bridge programming, faculty mentoring, peer tutoring, and industry-related forums.

The study examined: (1) program implementation and constraints; (2) processes for identifying eligible students, enrollment, and participation; (3) early academic outcomes compared with similarly eligible nonparticipants; and (4) students’ reported structural barriers and support needs influencing participation and help-seeking. Using a convergent mixed-methods design, participation records and institutional data were analyzed alongside scholar surveys, interviews, and stakeholder focus groups. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted separately and then combined during interpretation to examine implementation conditions, levels of student participation, and early outcomes.

Most scholars participated in required program components (welcome orientation: 11 of 12), whereas participation in optional activities was limited (Summer Bridge: 2; financial education forum: 1; CS industry forum: 0; program-specific tutoring: 0). Faculty mentoring contact varied across students (none: 2; once: 8; five or more contacts: 2). Delays in FAFSA data availability shortened recruitment timelines and constrained opportunities for early engagement.

In a Fall 2024 comparison between SOSP scholars (n = 12) and SOSP-eligible nonparticipants (n = 12), the proportion of students on track for credit accumulation (≥ 32 credits) was identical in both groups (83%), and mean cumulative GPA was similar (3.09 vs. 3.16). Overall, findings suggest that multi-component support programs benefit from clearly structured, time-anchored requirements—particularly for mentoring and career-related activities—and closer alignment with existing academic schedules to reduce participation barriers for students who commute or work substantial hours.