STEM Communal Affordances Growing together: Growth orientation indirectly leads to STEM communal affordances and interest Melissa A. Fuesting, Amanda B. Diekman, Dana L. Manson, and Brianne L. Safer Miami University Miami University Rutgers University Miami University Introduction Continued success in the global economy requires the U.S. to recruit and retain a larger and more diverse STEM workforce (e.g., NSB, 2014). Investigating how STEM academic contexts foster motivation may help to uncover key strategies to increase participation in STEM. Due to stereotypes that STEM fulfills fewer communal goals than other fields, perceptions that STEM can fulfill valued communal goals increase STEM motivation (e.g., Diekman et al., 2011). Growth orientation also conveys motivational benefits in STEM classes (e.g., Blackwell et al., 2007; Grant & Dweck, 2003). Students are more willing to help fellow classmates in growth orientation academic contexts (Poortvliet & Darnon, 2014), but no prior work links growth orientation to STEM communal affordances. The current work aims to link these areas of research together and investigate whether growth orientation in STEM academic contexts predicts increased STEM motivation in part because it fosters environments that increase STEM communal affordances. Results As predicted, 2 (class type: favorite, least favorite) by 2 (subject: math, science) ANOVAs demonstrated that participants perceived favorite classes to contain more growth orientation (Study 1: p < .001, d = 0.56, Study 2: p < .0001, d=0.94). No main effects of class subject or interactions between class subject and class condition emerged, ps > .10. Data in both studies were submitted to Hayes’ (2013) PROCESS macro model 6 with 10,000 bootstrapped samples. The weights in the figures represent unstandardized betas. Gender moderated the link between STEM communal affordances and interest in Study 1, p = .002. STEM communal affordances significantly predicted STEM interest for both men and women, but the relationship was stronger for men. This unexpected finding was not replicated in Study 2, p=.71. Gender did not moderate any other relationships in these models, ps > .10. Class Growth Orientation Collaborative Behavior in the Class STEM Communal Affordances STEM Interest 0.17** 0.51*** 0.47*** Study 1 Direct Effect: 0.05, ns Indirect Effect: 0.04 95% CI [0.01, 0.09] Note: *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.0001 General Discussion The STEM motivational benefits of growth orientation are well documented in the literature (e.g., Blackwell et al., 2007). This is the first work to investigate whether growth orientation in STEM academic environments may convey motivational benefits in part because growth mindset encourages behaviors that harness communal goal processes demonstrated to increase STEM motivation (Diekman et al., 2011). The current work suggests that growth orientation may increase STEM motivation in part because it fosters collaborative environments that help challenge stereotypes that STEM fulfills fewer communal goals than other fields (Diekman et al., 2011). The current work suggests these processes produce similar effects regardless of gender Future work will examine the causal relationship between growth orientation and increased STEM communal affordances. Method In 2 studies, participants responded to measures on scales from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely) about a favorite or least favorite class in science or math; participants chose the class subject. Study 1: 151 (79 women, Mage = 35) mTurk participants were paid $0.40 for their time. Class Growth Orientation: [In this class, I was] able to develop and improve [my] understanding of the subject. Collaborative Behavior in the Class: [In this class, I] helped others either inside or outside of the class and/or gained knowledge about how scientists or mathematics professionals help others. STEM Communal Affordances: 4 items from Diekman et al., 2011, α=0.84 STEM Interest: 4 items from Diekman et al., 2011, α=0.80 Study 2: 173 (89 women, Mage = 30) mTurk participants paid $0.40 for their time discussed a class taken within the past year. Perceptions of Teacher Growth Orientation: 5 items adapted from Midgely et al., 2000, (e.g., My teacher thought mistakes were okay as long as we were learning), α=0.90. Class Collaborative Behavior: Averaged 4 items (e.g., I helped my classmates understand class concepts), α=0.95. STEM communal affordances (α=0.81) and interest (α=0.81) were measured as in Study 1. Perceptions of Teacher Growth Orientation Collaborative Behavior in the Class STEM Communal Affordances STEM Interest 0.15* 0.44*** 0.56*** Study 2 Direct Effect: -0.04, ns Indirect Effect: 0.04 95% CI [0.01, 0.09] Note: *p<.05 **p<.01 ***p<.0001 References Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child development, 78, 246-263. Diekman, A. B., Clark, E. K., Johnston, A. M., Brown, E. R., & Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influences attraction to STEM careers: Evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 902. Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 541. Poortvliet, P. M., & Darnon, C. (2014). Understanding positive attitudes toward helping peers: The role of mastery goals and academic self-efficacy. Self and Identity, 13, 345-363. Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E….Urdan, T. (2000). Manual for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. National Science Board. (2014). Science and Engineering Indicators 2014, Arlington VA: NSF (NSB 14-01). Contact fuestima@miamioh.edu