‍

From Disengagement to Discovery Transforming STEM Education 

‍

Quotes from Educators and Students 

“This semester has been the MOST challenging to get students motivated. I see so many students miss exams (mostly for no valid reason) and then expecting to make up these exams without any penalty. It is mind-boggling.” 

“I send out numerous reminders for due dates and exam reservations, but these go unread or ignored by a large population of my students.” 

“For that population of students that are ‘MIA’, I am just at a loss as to what I can do these days.”

“I have a stark dichotomy of students: some who stay engaged, consistently come to class, and earn A’s and B’s, and others who completely check out, stop attending lectures, completing assignments, communicating with me in any form, and earn D’s and F’s.”

“I have talked with them, and the common denominator is they have no life goal, no career goal, they do not study, and do not pay attention to any lectures.”

‍

Introduction: Why STEM Student Engagement is Non-Negotiable

STEM fields are what will drive our future. But, are we really doing enough to keep students plugged into these critical subjects in college? Simply delivering lectures isn't cutting it. We need students who are truly engaged—students who are invested, motivated, and actively participating in their own learning journey. We need them to feel that spark.

Think of it this way: if your college or university had a heartbeat, student engagement would be it. When students are tuned in, invested, and eager to learn, that's a sure sign that everything is okay. But when that spark begins to fade—when students start to tune out—it's usually an alarm signal that something's amiss underneath. And those issues don't just affect students; they can really hurt your institution's reputation. If students aren't engaged, nobody wins.

Understanding what engagement really looks like, spotting the signs (and costs) of disengagement, and recognizing why this matters now more than ever is the first step for faculty and administrators who want real student success in STEM. It's about creating an environment where students don't just attend; they engage. 

‍

What Does "Engagement" Really Mean in Today's World?

At its heart, student engagement is about the investment students pour into their education—their time, their effort, and their energy focused on learning (James et al., 2024). It's more than just showing up; it's a deep commitment. Think of it as a partnership: students need to invest, and universities need to create the kind of environment where that investment feels worthwhile and, just as importantly, possible. It's a two-way street.

Engagement isn't a single thing; it's multifaceted. Researchers often talk about three key dimensions (James et al., 2024):

• Behavioral: What students do. This means attending class, participating, spending time on tasks, and interacting with others.
• Cognitive: What students think. This involves wrestling with complex ideas, using effective learning strategies, and processing information deeply.
• Emotional/Affective: How students feel. This includes their interest, enthusiasm, and sense of belonging.

Some even add agentic engagement, where students proactively shape their own learning (Maričić et al., 2025). These dimensions are all connected; if a student feels like they don't belong (emotional), they might participate less (behavioral) (Kahu & Nelson, 2017). So, to really boost engagement, we've got to look at the whole picture. Matthias Polte, a Biology Teacher from RHG Kreufeld, notes, “There are so many parents and so many students who come to me and say, ‘Matthias, it's perfect. That is the digital learning we need, that kind of digital learning. Because when you just put a paper of exercises into your learning management system, that's not digital learning at all. You need tools that help you to understand science more in detail. And that's what Labster does, in my opinion” (Testa, 2023b).

In STEM, this is incredibly important. We need a STEM-literate workforce, and it's the engaged STEM students who are developing the critical thinking and problem-solving skills that our society needs. Strategies like project-based learning and STEAM initiatives are proving to be very effective (Maričić et al., 2025). Boosting STEM engagement is vital for our collective future.

‍

What is Disengagement and Why Does it Lead to Attrition?

Disengagement is the flip side: a lack of emotional investment, trouble concentrating, no interest, and pulling away from classes and campus life (Perry, 2022). It can look like boredom, anxiety, skipping class, or minimal effort (Maričić et al., 2025). It's a major warning sign, often predicting dropout intentions and actual attrition—students leaving STEM majors or college altogether. Disengagement often creeps up gradually, making early intervention crucial.

Engaged students simply do better. They participate more, learn more effectively, are more motivated, achieve more academically, and grow personally. Plus, engagement is strongly tied to keeping students enrolled and moving toward graduation (James et al., 2024).

There's a real sense of urgency around this today. Some signs point to a decline in engagement following the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Research suggests that the shift to online learning, increased mental health struggles, and economic worries may be taking a toll on students (Testa, 2023a). Today's Generation Z students also have unique expectations about technology, relevance, and well-being that shape how they engage with their education. When students check out of STEM, they're unprepared for our tech-driven future, and we face shortages in key professions.

‍

What Does Student Engagement (or Lack Thereof) Say About Your University?

Think of student engagement as your university's pulse. High engagement? It signals a healthy, effective institution. Widespread disengagement? It often points to deeper issues affecting everything from student success to your university's reputation.

Institutions where students are actively involved in meaningful learning are seen as higher quality institutions (Delfino, 2019). Engaged students have a better experience and are more satisfied, which boosts your institution's standing (Cooper & Fry, 2020). Andrew Thorne, Vice President for Distance Education noted, “We’ve seen OERs and Labster help enrollment because having students happy helps enrollment. The more that students are happy with what they’re getting, the more the word spreads that our programs are user-friendly and worth pursuing” (Toccoa Falls College, 2024). A strong reputation attracts top students and faculty, helps secure funding, and builds valuable partnerships. It can even be the deciding factor for international students or government sponsorships (Grove, 2025). Engagement builds crucial workforce skills like critical thinking and collaboration, and successful internships and job placements after graduation further enhance your university's perceived value (Deegan et al., 2023).

‍

The High Cost of STEM's "Leaky Pipeline"

The problem is especially acute in STEM due to the "leaky pipeline"—the steady loss of students, particularly from underrepresented groups, along the educational path (De Loof et al., 2021). We lose talent when students disengage, leaving them unprepared for a tech-focused world and creating potential shortages in critical fields.

In STEM, attrition often points to specific issues: struggles in those tough introductory "gateway" courses, falling behind on credits, negative interactions with faculty or peers, and a lack of belonging, especially for underrepresented students. Bias, stereotype threat, lack of representation, and exclusionary teaching methods can make students feel like they don't belong or can't succeed (Park et al., 2019). Fixing the leaky pipeline means improving academic support and transforming the STEM environment to be truly inclusive for everyone.

‍

How Engaged Are Your STEM Students, Really?

To tackle these engagement challenges, we need to know where we stand. Truly understanding engagement requires looking closely at data, how it varies for different students and learning settings, and the potential aftershocks of the pandemic.

Recent reports hint at a worrying dip in student engagement following the COVID-19 pandemic. National indicators like high school graduation rates slipped in 2021 (Perry, 2022). Some campus data echoes these concerns, with drops in areas like Collaborative Learning among first-year students (National Survey of Student Engagement, 2022). For example, one university saw drops in Collaborative Learning among first-year students between 2018 and 2021, as shown in supplementary data like Figure 3.

Student engagement looks different depending on who the student is, where they study, and how they learn. For instance, Figure 1 illustrates that Black STEM students at HBCUs report much higher engagement than peers at PWIs, particularly in Academic Challenge and Learning with Peers. Factors like GPA, full-time/part-time status, gender, and age also play a role (Njenga, 2023). Systemic inequities often create extra barriers for students from marginalized groups.

‍

Addressing Learning Challenges with Virtual Labs

Course delivery also makes a difference. The shift to online learning during COVID highlighted its challenges: decreased engagement, isolation, less interaction, and tech barriers (Akpen et al., 2024). Post-COVID studies indicate a vanishing performance gap between online and in-person classes, not due to online improvement, but because in-person performance dropped, especially for lower-GPA students, as summarized in supplementary data like Figure 2. However, innovative approaches like virtual labs show promise in mitigating these challenges in online and blended environments. 

For example, a 2025 study found that biology students rated (Navarro et al., 2025) virtual labs as easy to use and reported improved academic performance, with over 85% feeling more confident, motivated, and autonomous in their learning, suggesting these tools can boost attitudinal competencies (Navarro et al., 2025). Furthermore, implementing virtual labs has been shown to directly impact student success metrics; a case study demonstrated that introducing Labster (Pierce et al., 2025) in an online microbiology course led to a statistically significant 16% increase in completion rates, effectively reducing the historical gap between online and in-person student success (Pierce et al., 2025). A comprehensive study researched Labster’s impact on over 600 students in 14 life sciences courses at five higher education institutions in Ireland from 2021-2024. 90% of students said Labster enhanced their confidence in doing practical lab experiments. “Students provided consistent feedback that Labster provided the flexibility to engage with resources in their own time and at their own learning pace” (Griffin et al., 2025). One anonymous student from a Labster survey also noted, “I find it very hard to pay attention and absorb information from presentations or textbooks. Labster offers a very interactive take on learning and kept me engaged throughout the whole course” (Labster, 2024b).

‍

Why Aren't STEM Students Engaged? Getting to the Root Causes

To boost engagement, we first need to understand why students check out. In STEM, it's often a mix of factors: tough courses, outdated teaching methods, student well-being struggles, and bigger issues around equity and belonging.

Those early introductory STEM courses—"gateway" courses—are often major hurdles. Doing poorly in these courses is a strong predictor that students will leave STEM. Traditional lectures, hyper-competitive vibes, and high-stakes exams can create unwelcoming environments. Additionally, a study with the University of Szeged notes, “We’ve found that one of the biggest challenges we see is a lack of student focus. Students spend about 12 hours daily in lectures, from 8 a.m. - 8 p.m. Labster is assigned for them to do it anytime over the course of a week. We’ve gotten feedback that they have an easier time focusing on the virtual labs because they’re short, just 20-40 minutes. Student attention dips after 45 minutes” (University of Szeged, 2023).

One student from another university observed, “A lot of students who aren’t STEM majors shy away from science classes because they think they’re hard. Labster makes science fun by showing real-life applications of what’s being taught. It’s no longer just an abstract idea. I think it’s a great platform for both STEM and non-STEM majors” (The University of the Southern Caribbean, 2024). This feedback highlights how virtual labs can make science more accessible and relatable, removing some of the fear and abstraction. Steve Davis, Senior Lecturer and Module Leader for Foundation in Life Sciences of the University of Westminster, added, “When we used Labster, suddenly students were ‘getting’ things. I think Labster enabled them to get over that block of, ‘Okay, this is the text on the page, but how does that look in the real world?’ They can’t see cells, they can’t see membrane channels, so I think it really helped actually being able to visualize things in 3D on a screen like that” (University of Westminster, 2023).

But redesigning these courses to use active learning, be culturally responsive, connect to workforce needs, and build foundational skills can boost success, persistence, and equity.

How we teach STEM profoundly impacts engagement. Passive lecturing is far less effective than active learning for deep understanding, critical thinking, and long-term retention. Active learning reduces achievement gaps and failure rates (Theobald et al., 2020; Freeman et al., 2014). Supportive, respectful faculty relationships foster positivity, belonging, motivation, and success. Conversely, negative interactions are damaging, especially for those from marginalized groups (Park et al., 2019).

A student's internal state heavily influences their engagement. Lack of motivation and poor mental health—high stress, anxiety, depression, and burnout—can wreck a student's ability to focus, learn, participate, and stay motivated (Costello et al., 2025). Supporting engagement means supporting student well-being as a core part of learning.

Today's undergraduates are mostly Gen Z (born 1997-2012), and their experiences shape how they learn. As true digital natives, they're tech-savvy, process info fast, and often prefer visual, interactive content. They expect technology in their learning. Gen Z values authenticity, relevance, and transparency. Engaging Gen Z in STEM means using tech wisely, clearly linking learning to purpose, offering flexibility and active roles, and creating a supportive environment that addresses well-being (Testa, 2023a).

Where learning happens matters. Online offers flexibility but can lead to isolation, less interaction, and lower engagement (Akpen et al., 2024). Hybrid/blended models are now common. Students often appreciate the flexibility but feel some things—deep discussions, labs, personal help, major exams—work better face-to-face. No matter the format, the overall campus vibe is key. Feeling supported and connected to peers, faculty, and staff boosts engagement (National Survey of Student Engagement, 2022).

‍

Faculty Power Moves: Evidence-Based Ways to Engage STEM Students

Faculty are on the front lines of student engagement. By embracing proven teaching strategies, you can transform your STEM classroom into an active, inclusive, and motivating space where students truly learn.

The evidence is clear: lecturing less and engaging students more works wonders in STEM. Active learning means students are doing things—processing, discussing, applying, creating—not just listening. Active learning boosts exam scores, deepens understanding, sharpens critical thinking, and makes knowledge stick better than traditional lectures (Theobald et al., 2020). Studies show that it drastically cuts failure rates—students in lecture-based courses are 1.5 times more likely to fail (Freeman et al., 2014)! On the other hand, External research indicates Labster pre-labs significantly boost STEM career aspirations, making students 4 times more likely to consider them (Schechter et al., 2023).

You've got a whole toolbox of active learning strategies. Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Project-Based Learning get students to tackle real-world challenges, building collaboration and critical thinking skills. Peer Instruction has students teaching concepts to each other, which clears up confusion (Cheng, 2024). Other successful tools include interactive polling, guided notes, group work, case studies, and flipped classrooms (Okon, 2022). 

Active learning helps close achievement gaps, especially benefiting underrepresented minority students and those starting with lower performance levels (Theobald et al. 2020). 

One instructor shared their own positive experience, “What the students are saying, and what I’m seeing, is that they are engaged. Students are tired of video lectures and worksheets. When I give them a worksheet, they’re not all doing it. But when I give them Labster, they’re all actually doing it. It’s more motivating. And when we run through the experiment in my real lab, they’re all actually getting it. They’re coming into my room with the confidence that they already know the procedures” (Testa, 2023b).

Positive, interactive, respectful connections between you and your students boost engagement, motivation, and belonging. Simple things work: learn names, be open about expectations, show you care, be approachable. Setting classroom norms with students builds shared ownership. Be mindful of equity. Avoid actions or words that could create a hostile environment or signal bias.

Boosting student self-efficacy—their belief that they can succeed in STEM—is a game-changer. Higher self-efficacy predicts more interest, motivation, persistence, and STEM career aspirations. You can boost self-efficacy by creating opportunities for students to achieve mastery, highlighting diverse scientists as role models, giving specific and constructive feedback, and helping students manage stress (Butz et al., 2023).

Leveraging Technology, Inclusivity, and Relevance

Technology, used wisely, can be a fantastic engagement booster, especially for tech-savvy Gen Z students. Immersive tools like virtual labs show real promise. One student shared, "It’s not ordinary. It takes you to different settings. You’ll be in the lab, out in the wilderness, or at a hospital, which really held my attention because it was interesting. You’ll retain more information that way" (Labster, 2024b). Biochemistry Teacher and technical educator, Emily Dehoff, shared her first impression of Labster: “When I tried it, I was like, ‘Whoa, this one is actually engaging me!’ And I realized right then, if I’m engaged, my students are going to be. It’s got that game-like quality, and that's what this generation really connects with” (Testa, 2023b). Dr. Lewis Mattin of the University of Westminster saw Labster from a unique perspective in a case study. “I’m dyslexic, so I’ve always struggled to engage in books, even though reading is something that I actually very much like. And I saw some of the students who clearly didn’t necessarily like sitting there reading a book, or who were slower at reading a book, discover they could turn on Labster and keep up with the rest of the class because it would speak to them. And I saw that as a huge change in barrier for someone with that type of learning disability,” he said (University of Westminster, 2023).

Platforms like Labster let students run experiments safely, visualize complex ideas, and practice skills anytime, improving learning and boosting engagement (Labster, 2024a). AI can personalize learning, offer adaptive assessments, and make learning more game-like. But there are also challenges: potential over-reliance, data privacy/bias concerns, maintaining critical thinking, and academic dishonesty risks (Jares, 2025). In this environment, educators play a crucial role in helping students discern trustworthy information. As Bjorn Toft Madsen, Labster’s CPTO, notes in a video, "Teachers really play a crucial role in that. They help us as they help the students say, of all the information that you're drowning in, these are the things you should pay attention to" (Madsen, 2025). This highlights why faculty, staff, and teachers remain vital, complementing technological tools by providing a trusted voice in the classroom.

An inclusive classroom is essential for engaging all STEM students. It's about actively designing experiences where every student feels valued, respected, supported, and able to succeed. Offer multiple ways for students to engage, represent information, and show what they know. Use culturally relevant teaching, set clear norms for respectful discussion, and ensure all materials and tech are accessible and affordable. Be mindful of implicit messages and biases, and critically examine your curriculum and assessments for hidden biases.

Students tune in when they see how learning connects to their lives, goals, or the world. Use real-world examples and case studies. Link content to big societal challenges (climate, health) to show STEM's impact. Frame STEM careers inclusively, highlighting the collaborative, pro-social side of STEM. Integrate career exploration directly into your courses, and explicitly point out the transferable skills they're building. Ultimately, the effective integration and thoughtful deployment of any educational technology tool rests significantly on the capability and pedagogical approach of the educator.

Key Active Learning Strategies for STEM Engagement

‍

How Administrators Can Lead the Charge for STEM Engagement

Administrators hold the keys to creating a campus environment where STEM engagement thrives. This means strategic leadership in supporting faculty, shaping culture, allocating resources, and using data wisely.

Faculty drive engagement, so administrators must support them. Fund high-quality professional development (PD) focused on evidence-based, inclusive STEM teaching. Make PD ongoing, not just a one-off workshop. Faculty learning communities where colleagues collaborate and share are highly effective. Address the real barriers faculty face: time constraints, worries about covering content, and evaluation metrics that don't reward teaching innovation. Offer incentives, recognition, and time for pedagogical growth (Kirtman et al., 2024).

Ensure learning spaces—classrooms, labs, libraries—support active learning. Guarantee equitable access to technology and address the cost of course materials. Strategic funding for support services, tech access, and inclusive faculty development directly tackles barriers hindering diverse students' engagement (Mudenda, 2023).

Administrators must lead the charge for systemic change, weaving accessibility, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and mental health support into the university's DNA. This means identifying and dismantling institutional barriers—policies, practices, attitudes—that block equitable engagement.

‍

Labster: Where STEM Starts to Click

When students struggle, they disengage. When they’re disengaged, they fail. Labster helps. 

Students using Labster improve by an average of a full letter grade or more.

✅ 90% of students agree that Labster improves their grades

✅ 87% of students say Labster makes them feel more motivated to learn

✅ 90% of students say Labster raises their self-confidence

Labster’s virtual labs are interactive multimedia assignments for STEM courses that give students engaging activities where they practice their skills. If they have a gap in their understanding, Labster meets students where they are with visualizations that help them make sense of science and math. Whenever they make a mistake, Labster offers instant feedback with helpful hints and encouragement to keep trying. 

Educators report higher pass rates, stronger retention, and a thriving student body.

✅ Ready-made assignments + Auto-grading = Educator time back

Labster frees up instructors to teach new content instead of rehashing the basics.

Discover Labster → Labster.com

‍

Conclusion: Working Together for STEM Success

Boosting STEM student engagement isn't easy, but it's essential, requiring teamwork from faculty and administrators. The path is clear: shift from passive lectures to active, inclusive, relevant teaching. Faculty have powerful tools: active learning, building rapport, boosting confidence, leveraging tech, creating inclusive spaces, and connecting learning to purpose.

Administrators must build a supportive ecosystem: invest in faculty development, allocate resources for support services and tech access, drive systemic change for equity and well-being, and cultivate a culture where engagement is paramount. Using data smartly guides the way.

Faculty action and administrative support fuel each other. As higher education keeps changing—dealing with pandemic aftershocks, engaging Gen Z, harnessing AI, facing new pressures—enhancing STEM engagement demands constant adaptation, data-driven insights, a fierce commitment to equity, and ongoing collaboration. Creating truly engaging and equitable STEM education is a journey, not a destination, requiring everyone to work together for every student's success. To that end, practical guidance from educators who have seen positive changes is invaluable. Donald Wlodkowic from RMIT advises educators, “Keep an open mind, test Labster for yourself. Be adventurous in deploying next-generation technologies that can help not only you but also your students in expanding their knowledge, consolidating their knowledge, and learning something that is usually unavailable on campus for large cohorts of first or second-year students” (RMIT, 2022).

‍

References

Akpen, C. N., Asaolu, S., Atobatele, S., Okagbue, H., & Sampson, S. (2024). Impact of Online Learning on Student’s performance and Engagement: A Systematic Review. Discover Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00253-0

Butz, A. R., Byars-Winston, A., Leverett, P., Branchaw, J., & Pfund, C. (2023, June 7). Promoting STEM Trainee Research Self-Efficacy: A Mentor Training Intervention. National Library of Medicine. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10327546/

Cheng, X. (2024). Peer instruction: Assisting Active Learning in Science Education. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 23(1), 3633–3635. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.24.co326

Cooper, L., & Fry, K. F. (2020). The Relationship between Classroom Environment and Student Course Attrition and Perceptions of Engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 9(2), 93–102. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1273638.pdf

Costello, R. A., Hammarlund, S. P., Christiansen, E. M., Kiani, M. K., Glessmer, M. S., Cotner, S., & Ballen, C. J. (2025). Stem Students Prefer Assessment Practices Known to Reduce the Impact of Test Anxiety. Nordic Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.5324/njsteme.v9i1.5892

Deegan, M. M., Lau, R., & Ghama, J. (2023). Student Engagement in Experiential Learning Opportunities: Identifying Barriers and Solutions for Participation. Muhlenberg College. https://americantalentinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Muhlenberg-College-ATI-Academic-Equity-TRP-Report.pdf

Delfino, A. P. (2019, May 30). Student Engagement and Academic Performance of Students of Partido State University. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1222588.pdf

De Loof, H., Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2021). Engaging Students with Integrated STEM Education: A Happy Marriage or a Failed Engagement? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(7), 1291–1313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10159-0

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

Griffin, C. S., Loughran, S., Kelly, B., Healy, E., Lambe, G., van Rossum, A., Murphy, B., Moore, E., Burke, C., Morrin, A., Breslin, C., Heaney, F., Rooney, D., Bree, R., & Drumm, B. T. (2025). Virtual Laboratories Complement but Should Not Replace Face-to-Face C: Perceptions of Life Science Students at Dundalk Institute of Technology, Ireland. Advances in Physiology Education, 49(6), 314–330. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00227.2024 

Grove, J. (2025, February 18). World Reputation Rankings 2025: Results Announced. Times Higher Education (THE). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/depth/world-reputation-rankings-2025-results-announced

James, W., Oates, G., & Schonfeldt, N. (2024). Improving Retention While Enhancing Student Engagement and Learning Outcomes Using Gamified Mobile Technology. Accounting Education, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2024.2326009 

Jares, J. (2025, March 18). AI in the Classroom: Personalized Learning and the Future of Education. Workday Blog. https://blog.workday.com/en-us/ai-in-the-classroom-personalized-learning-and-the-future-of-education.html

Johnson-Ojeda, V., Hill, L. B., Shin, S., York, A. M., & Frey, R. F. (2025). Measuring STEM Instructors’ Learning of and Growth in Inclusive Teaching: Development and Evaluation of the STEM Faculty Inclusive Teaching Survey (FITS). CBE—Life Sciences Education, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.24-01-0016

Kahu, E. R., & Nelson, K. (2017). Student Engagement in the Educational Interface: Understanding the Mechanisms of Student Success. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(6), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1344197

Kirtman, N., Smith, C., Demeritte, T., Divinity, D., Amouzandeh, V., Fordham, J. A., & Fadavi, M. (2024). “Strategic and Steady Can Win the Race”: Incremental Exposure to Novel Multidisciplinary Pedagogies in STEM Fields Can Help Change Faculty “Teaching and Learning” Attitudes and Practices. Journal of College Science Teaching, 53(6), 573–583. https://doi.org/10.1080/0047231x.2024.2390301

Labster. (2024a). Evidence that Labster Boosts Student Success [2024]. Labster. https://www.labster.com/guides/evidence-labster-virtual-labs-work

Labster. (2024b). In Their Own Words: Students Weigh in on Labster’s Impact. Labster. https://www.labster.com/blog/students-weigh-in-on-labsters-impact

Maričić, M., Anđić, B., Mumcu, F., Marić, M., Gordić, S., Gorjanac Ranitović, M., & Cvjetićanin, S. (2025). Enhancing Student Engagement Through Instructional Steam Learning Activities and Self-explanation Effect. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15798

Madsen, B. T. (2025, April 18). The Role of Teachers and Labster Virtual Labs. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7N1fK0ZNDk

Mudenda, S., Daka, V., Mufwambi, W., Matafwali, S. K., Chabalenge, B., Skosana, P., Mfune, R. L., Kasanga, M., Okonji, O. C., Mayoka, G., Kampamba, M., Hikaambo, C. N., Mukosha, M., Kanaan, M. H., Zikalala-Mabope, L. A., Sinkamba, G., Okoro, R. N., Chulu, M., Godman, B., & Fadare, J. (2023). Student’s Perspectives, Satisfaction and Experiences with Online and Classroom Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings and Implications on Blended Learning. SAGE Open Medicine, 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121231218904

Navarro, C., Arias-Calderón, M., Henríquez, C. A., & Riquelme, P. (2024). Assessment of student and teacher perceptions on the use of virtual simulation in cell biology laboratory education. Education Sciences, 14(3), 243. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030243.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2022). NSSE 2021 Results. Lindenwood University. https://www.lindenwood.edu/provost/
academic-quality/assessment/nsse/

Njenga, J. (2023). STEM Student Engagement at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs): an Analysis of Differences Using National Survey of Student Engagement(NSSE) Data (Order No. 30485395). (2926319421). https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/stem-student-engagement-at-historically-black/docview/2926319421/se-2

Okon, T. (2022, March 22). Active Learning. Center for the Advancement of Teaching Excellence | University of Illinois Chicago. https://teaching.uic.edu/cate-teaching-guides/engaged-teaching-strategies/active-learning/

Park, J. J., Kim, Y. K., Salazar, C., & Hayes, S. (2019). Student–Faculty Interaction and Discrimination from Faculty in STEM: The Link with Retention. Research in Higher Education, 61(3), 330–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-019-09564-w

Perry, A. M. (2022). Student Engagement, No Learning Without It. Creative Education, 13(04), 1312–1326. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2022.134079

Pierce, R., Kirkwood-Watts, D. & Bryce, R. (2025). Reducing the gap in online student completion rates with a virtual lab: A case study. In R. Jake Cohen (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1391-1395). Orlando, FL, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from: https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/225683.

RMIT. (2022, October 13). Virtual Labs During (and After) Covid at RMIT Australia. Labster. https://www.labster.com/case-studies/virtual-labs-during-and-after-covid 

Schechter, R. L., Chase, P. A., & Shivaram, A. (2023, November). Virtual Lab Implementation Model Predicts STEM Future Plans: Insights from Contemporary Science Courses in Higher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED635875.pdf 

Testa, G. (2023a, January 10). How to Engage Disengaged STEM gen Z Students & Support their Well-being. Labster. https://www.labster.com/blog/how-to-engage-disengaged
-stem-gen-z-students-support-their-well-being

Testa, G. (2023b, June 22). What Students Think about Labster: How it Helps. Labster. https://www.labster.com/blog/what-students-think 

Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., Grummer, J. A., Hennessey, K., Hsiao, J., Iranon, N., Jones, L., Jordt, H., Keller, M., Lacey, M. E., Littlefield, C. E., … Freeman, S. (2020). Active Learning Narrows Achievement Gaps for Underrepresented Students in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117

The University of the Southern Caribbean. (2024, September 18). Empowering a Future Scientist: How a Student Utilized Labster to Ssucceed. Labster. https://www.labster.com/case-studies/empowering-future-scientist

Toccoa Falls College. (2024, August 8). Labster and OpenStax Play a Role in Enrollment Growth at Toccoa Falls College. Labster. https://www.labster.com/case-studies/toccoa-falls-college 

University of Szeged. (2023, August 14). The Immunology Department of the University of Szeged Had No Dedicated Lab Space for Medical Students, So They Implemented Labster. Labster. https://www.labster.com/case-studies/university-of-szeged

University of Westminster. (2023, May 22). University of Westminster Students Grasp Concepts Faster with Labster Multimodal Learning. Labster. https://www.labster.com/case-studies/university-of-westminster