Research ArticleSOCIAL SCIENCES

# A social-belonging intervention improves STEM outcomes for students who speak English as a second language

See allHide authors and affiliations

Vol. 6, no. 40, eabb6543

### Tables

• Table 1 Summary of term 1 and year 1 proportion of credits earned and GPA results.

Summary of term 1 and year 1 proportion of credits earned and GPA results.. SEs are in parentheses. For main effects analyses, condition was coded as −0.5 = control, 0.5 = treatment; ESL was coded as −0.5 = non-ESL, 0.5 = ESL; and cohort was coded as 0 = cohort 1, 1 = cohort 2. To obtain condition effects among ESL students and non-ESL students individually, we performed two separate sets of analyses with condition recoded. For condition effects among ESL students, ESL status was recentered so 0 = ESL, 1 = non-ESL. For condition effects among non-ESL students, ESL status was recentered so 0 = non-ESL, 1 = ESL. See the R code at the end of the Supplementary Materials for more information about the specifications for each analysis presented. ***P < 0.001, **P < 0.01, and *P < 0.05.

 Term 1 Year 1 Predictor Belonging change Proportion of STEMcredits completed STEM GPA Proportion of STEMcredits completed STEM GPA Main effect ofcondition 0.26*** (0.02) 0.02** (0.01) 0.05** (0.02) 0.01* (0.00) 0.01 (0.02) Main effect of ESLstatus −0.03 (0.02) 0.01 (0.01) 0.13*** (0.02) 0.01 (0.00) 0.12*** (0.02) Condition × ESLinteraction −0.09* (0.05) 0.03** (0.01) 0.12** (0.04) 0.03** (0.01) 0.06 (0.04) Cohort −0.16*** (0.02) −0.00 (0.00) −0.02 (0.02) −0.01 (0.00) −0.03 (0.02) ACT composite 0.01*** (0.00) 0.01*** (0.00) 0.09*** (0.00) 0.01*** (0.00) 0.10*** (0.00) Simple effects for the condition × ESL interaction Treatment effectamong ESL students 0.21*** (0.04) 0.03*** (0.01) 0.11** (0.04) 0.02** (0.01) 0.04 (0.03) Treatment effectamong non-ESLstudents 0.30*** (0.02) 0.00 (0.00) −0.01 (0.02) −0.00 (0.00) −0.02 (0.02)
• Table 2 Moderated mediation results.

Moderated mediation results.. Condition, coded as −0.5 = control, 0.5 = treatment, was the independent variable; ESL status, coded as −0.5 = non-ESL, 0.5 = ESL, was the moderator; anticipated belonging was the mediator; and each academic outcome was the dependent variable. Consistent with previous analyses, ACT scores and cohort, coded as 0 = cohort 1, 1 = cohort 2, were included as covariates. CI, confidence interval.

 ESL students Non-ESL students Outcomevariable Indirect effect Direct effect Total effect Proportion oftotal effectmediated byindirect effect Indirect effect Direct effect Total effect Proportion oftotal effectmediated byindirect effect Term 1proportion ofcredits(n = 11,279) b = 0.001193 b = 0.031242 b = 0.032435 b = 0.035918 b = 0.001803 b = −0.000660 b = 0.001143 b = 0.206760 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI (0.00038,0.00223) (0.01331,0.04878) (0.01465,0.04989) (0.01140,0.09307) (0.00062,.00302) (−0.00995,0.00869) (−0.00806,0.01045) (−5.3093,6.55635) P = 0.0032 P < 0.001 P < 0.001 P = 0.004 P = 0.002 P = 0.896 P = 0.825 P = 0.825 Term 1 GPA(n = 10,842) b = 0.003548 b = 0.109542 b = 0.113072 b = 0.030710 b = 0.005293 b = −0.009890 b = −0.004653 b = −0.129269 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI (0.00036,.00757) (0.03673,0.18097) (0.04049,0.18478) (0.00235,0.10483) (0.00055,0.01012) (−0.04760,0.02804) (−0.04252,0.03330) (−4.58174,3.99880) P = 0.029 P = 0.004 P = 0.003 P = 0.032 P = 0.028 P = 0.617 P = 0.822 P = 0.824 Year 1proportion ofcredits(n = 11,905) b = 0.000907 b = 0.022373 b = 0.023280 b = 0.037870 b = 0.00140 b = −0.00345 b = −0.00206 b = −0.21906 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI 95% CI (0.00022,0.00176) (0.00672,0.03825) (0.00750,0.03895) (0.00879,0.12439) (0.00037,0.00242) (−0.01151,0.00464) (−0.01013,0.00599) (−5.8007,4.57535) P = 0.004 P = 0.005 P = 0.003 P = 0.007 P = 0.007 P = 0.408 P = 0.627 P = 0.628

# A social-belonging intervention improves STEM outcomes for students who speak English as a second language

Jennifer LaCosse, Elizabeth A. Canning, Nicholas A. Bowman, Mary C. Murphy, Christine Logel

This PDF file includes:

• Exact wording of survey questions and response options
• Intervention materials
• Tables S1 to S10
• Fig. S1
• R code for all analyses

Files in this Data Supplement: