A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy
IntroductionVery few studies have examined the relationship between student characteristics and their acceptance to research training programs that use holistic selection. The present study addressed this question using institutional and applicant data of three NIH undergraduate training programs at...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Education |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1474591/full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832539901821714432 |
|---|---|
| author | Young-Hee Cho Young-Hee Cho Chi-Ah Chun Chi-Ah Chun Hector Ramos Paul Buonora Paul Buonora Paul Buonora Vasanthy Narayanaswami Vasanthy Narayanaswami Kim-Phuong L. Vu Kim-Phuong L. Vu |
| author_facet | Young-Hee Cho Young-Hee Cho Chi-Ah Chun Chi-Ah Chun Hector Ramos Paul Buonora Paul Buonora Paul Buonora Vasanthy Narayanaswami Vasanthy Narayanaswami Kim-Phuong L. Vu Kim-Phuong L. Vu |
| author_sort | Young-Hee Cho |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | IntroductionVery few studies have examined the relationship between student characteristics and their acceptance to research training programs that use holistic selection. The present study addressed this question using institutional and applicant data of three NIH undergraduate training programs at California State University, Long Beach. Its first aim was to examine whether the applicants to the training programs were representative of the broader campus population. Its second aim was to investigate whether applicants who were accepted to the programs using a holistic selection process differed in academic discipline, demographics, and psychosocial characteristics from applicants who were not accepted.MethodsInformation on students’ majors, race/ethnicity, and gender was obtained from the university records or applications submitted by students. Majors were categorized as either biomedical or behavioral disciplines, while URM status was defined as students who self-identified their race and ethnicity as African American/Black, Native American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or Hispanic. Applicants’ psychosocial characteristics were obtained from a separate online survey. The acceptance status of applicants was obtained from the training programs’ records.ResultsThe applicant and non-applicant groups showed similar distribution of demographic characteristics regarding URM status and gender. Moreover, students’ academic discipline and other demographic variables were not associated with application status at either the lower division (LD) or upper division (UD) levels. Although psychosocial characteristics measured with the online survey were not considered in the selection process, post-hoc analyses showed that LD applicants with higher grit and UD applicants with higher science interests were more likely to be accepted to the programs.ConclusionThe equal representation of URM and female students in the applicant and non-applicant groups suggests that students from these traditionally underrepresented groups in STEM were just as likely to apply to our training programs. Furthermore, while the holistic selection process resulted in comparable acceptance rates across URM status and gender, it appeared to favor LD applicants with higher grit and UD students with higher science interests. These findings imply that research training programs can effectively recruit diverse students from underrepresented populations in STEM by using intentional outreach and recruitment efforts coupled with an objective and holistic selection process. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-681e6fb980b9469e93a1a923afc1e0a2 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2504-284X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-02-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Education |
| spelling | doaj-art-681e6fb980b9469e93a1a923afc1e0a22025-02-05T07:32:16ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Education2504-284X2025-02-011010.3389/feduc.2025.14745911474591A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategyYoung-Hee Cho0Young-Hee Cho1Chi-Ah Chun2Chi-Ah Chun3Hector Ramos4Paul Buonora5Paul Buonora6Paul Buonora7Vasanthy Narayanaswami8Vasanthy Narayanaswami9Kim-Phuong L. Vu10Kim-Phuong L. Vu11Department of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB BUILD Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesDepartment of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB BUILD Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB BUILD Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB BUILD Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB RISE Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB MARC U*STAR Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesDepartment of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesCSULB BUILD Program, California State University, Long Beach, CA, United StatesIntroductionVery few studies have examined the relationship between student characteristics and their acceptance to research training programs that use holistic selection. The present study addressed this question using institutional and applicant data of three NIH undergraduate training programs at California State University, Long Beach. Its first aim was to examine whether the applicants to the training programs were representative of the broader campus population. Its second aim was to investigate whether applicants who were accepted to the programs using a holistic selection process differed in academic discipline, demographics, and psychosocial characteristics from applicants who were not accepted.MethodsInformation on students’ majors, race/ethnicity, and gender was obtained from the university records or applications submitted by students. Majors were categorized as either biomedical or behavioral disciplines, while URM status was defined as students who self-identified their race and ethnicity as African American/Black, Native American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or Hispanic. Applicants’ psychosocial characteristics were obtained from a separate online survey. The acceptance status of applicants was obtained from the training programs’ records.ResultsThe applicant and non-applicant groups showed similar distribution of demographic characteristics regarding URM status and gender. Moreover, students’ academic discipline and other demographic variables were not associated with application status at either the lower division (LD) or upper division (UD) levels. Although psychosocial characteristics measured with the online survey were not considered in the selection process, post-hoc analyses showed that LD applicants with higher grit and UD applicants with higher science interests were more likely to be accepted to the programs.ConclusionThe equal representation of URM and female students in the applicant and non-applicant groups suggests that students from these traditionally underrepresented groups in STEM were just as likely to apply to our training programs. Furthermore, while the holistic selection process resulted in comparable acceptance rates across URM status and gender, it appeared to favor LD applicants with higher grit and UD students with higher science interests. These findings imply that research training programs can effectively recruit diverse students from underrepresented populations in STEM by using intentional outreach and recruitment efforts coupled with an objective and holistic selection process.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1474591/fulldemographic characteristicspsychosocial characteristicsapplicationacceptanceundergraduate research trainingdiversity |
| spellingShingle | Young-Hee Cho Young-Hee Cho Chi-Ah Chun Chi-Ah Chun Hector Ramos Paul Buonora Paul Buonora Paul Buonora Vasanthy Narayanaswami Vasanthy Narayanaswami Kim-Phuong L. Vu Kim-Phuong L. Vu A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy Frontiers in Education demographic characteristics psychosocial characteristics application acceptance undergraduate research training diversity |
| title | A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy |
| title_full | A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy |
| title_fullStr | A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy |
| title_short | A comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy |
| title_sort | comparison of applicant and accepted student characteristics to research training programs with implications for recruitment and selection strategy |
| topic | demographic characteristics psychosocial characteristics application acceptance undergraduate research training diversity |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1474591/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT youngheecho acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT youngheecho acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT chiahchun acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT chiahchun acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT hectorramos acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT paulbuonora acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT paulbuonora acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT paulbuonora acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT vasanthynarayanaswami acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT vasanthynarayanaswami acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT kimphuonglvu acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT kimphuonglvu acomparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT youngheecho comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT youngheecho comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT chiahchun comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT chiahchun comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT hectorramos comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT paulbuonora comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT paulbuonora comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT paulbuonora comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT vasanthynarayanaswami comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT vasanthynarayanaswami comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT kimphuonglvu comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy AT kimphuonglvu comparisonofapplicantandacceptedstudentcharacteristicstoresearchtrainingprogramswithimplicationsforrecruitmentandselectionstrategy |