International Educational Review

The Persistent Problem of Undergraduate Student Attrition in STEM

Alandeom W. Oliveira 1 * ,
Rabi A. Musah 2,
Zacharias C. Zacharia 3,
Yvoni avlou 3,
Christopher M. Sgro 4,
Robert Lathrop 4,
Yanghyun Kim 4,
Katherine Espinosa 4,
Nursultan Japashov 4,
Jaesung Park 4
1 State University of New York at Albany, United States2 Louisiana State University3 University of Cyprus4 State University of New York at Albany* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
International Educational Review, Volume 3, Issue 1, April 2025, pp. 85-111
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 29 DOWNLOADS: 25 Publication date: 29 Apr 2025
ABSTRACT
Despite burgeoning federal funding, expanding educational research, and mitigating efforts, undergraduate STEM programs in the United States and globally continue to grapple with persistently high rates of student attrition. This comprehensive literature review synthesizes recent empirical research to better understand the underlying factors contributing to this ongoing challenge and to inform future directions for both research and practice. Our analysis identified several key trends. First, most attrition in STEM occurs within the first two years of study, particularly during enrollment in high-stakes “gateway” or “weed-out” courses that often act as barriers to progression. Second, student attrition is not solely a function of academic ability but is strongly influenced by a combination of academic performance (particularly poor grades), social dynamics (such as sense of belonging, perceived support from and trust in instructors, and experiences of alienation), and personal psychological factors (including interest in the subject, academic motivation, self-efficacy, identity development, and the presence or absence of a growth mindset). Third, the literature consistently highlights three intervention strategies as particularly effective in promoting student retention and success: peer mentoring, undergraduate research experiences (UREs), and supplemental instruction or tutoring programs. Additionally, our review underscores critical gaps in the existing research. Notably, much of the current scholarship is heavily centered on U.S. educational settings, with limited empirical exploration in international contexts, particularly in Latin America, Asia, and parts of Europe. Another area requiring further investigation is faculty training and preparation to support diverse student populations effectively. Based on this synthesis of current findings, we argue that interventions aimed at reducing attrition must go beyond merely encouraging students to persist; they must also be designed to foster student thriving and flourishing. This requires a holistic, multi-level approach that considers the interplay of micro-level (individual and interpersonal), meso-level (institutional and community), and macro-level (societal and cultural) factors that shape student experiences in STEM disciplines across different national contexts.
KEYWORDS
undergraduate student attrition, university STEM education, persistence in undergraduate STEM, STEM underrepresentation
CITATION (APA)
Oliveira, A. W., Musah, R. A., Zacharia, Z. C., avlou, Y., Sgro, C. M., Lathrop, R., Kim, Y., Espinosa, K., Japashov, N., & Park, J. (2025). The Persistent Problem of Undergraduate Student Attrition in STEM. International Educational Review, 3(1), 85-111. https://doi.org/10.58693/ier.316
REFERENCES
  1. Achat-Mendes, C., Anfuso, C., Johnson, C., Shepler, B., Hurst-Kennedy, J., Pinzon, K., et al. (2020). Learning, leaders, and STEM skills: Adaptation of the supplemental instruction model to improve STEM education and build transferable skills in undergraduate courses and beyond. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 20(2), 5–14.
  2. Anfuso, C., Awong-Taylor, J., Curry Savage, J. et al. (2022). Investigating the impact of peer supplemental instruction on underprepared and historically underserved students in introductory STEM courses. International Journal of STEM Education, 9, 55, 1-17.
  3. Baiduc, R.R., Drane, D., Beitel, G.J., & Flores, L.C. (2016). A research preparatory program for first-year college students: Student selection and preparation lead to persistence in research. Innovative Higher Education, 42(3), 269–284.
  4. Banchefsky, S., Lewis, K.L., & Ito, T.A. (2019). The role of social and ability belonging in men’s and women’s pSTEM persistence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2386.
  5. Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.
  6. Benabentos, R., Hazari, Z., Stanford, J.S., Potvin, G., Marsteller, P., Thompson, K.V., Cassone, K.M., Murasko, D., & Laird Kramer, L. (2021). Measuring the implementation of student-centered teaching strategies in lower- and upper-division STEM courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 69(4), 342–356.
  7. Beauchamp, A.L., Roberts, S.J., Aloisio, J.M., Wasserman, D., Heimlich, J.E., Lewis, J.D., ... & Tingley, K. (2022). Effects of research and mentoring on underrepresented youths’ STEM persistence into college. Journal of Experiential Education, 45(3), 316-336.
  8. Bernacki, M.L., Chavez, M.M., & Uesbeck, P.M. (2020). Predicting achievement and providing support before STEM majors begin to fail. Computers & Education, 158, 103999.
  9. Bernacki, M.L., Cogliano, M.C., Kuhlmann, S.L., Utz, J., Strong, C., Hilpert, J.C., & Greene, J. A. (2023). Relations between undergraduates’ self-regulated learning skill mastery during digital training and biology performance. Metacognition and Learning, 18, 711-747.
  10. Bernacki, M. L., Vosicka, L., Utz, J. C., & Warren, C. B. (2021). Effects of digital learning skill training on the academic performance of undergraduates in science and mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(6), 1107–1125.
  11. Bhatt, R., West, B., & Chaudhary, S. (2020). Biomedical career enrichment programs: Exploring women and minority participants’ motivators and outcomes. PLOS ONE, 15(2), e0228934.
  12. Bowman, N. A., Preschel, S., & Martinez, D. (2021). Does supplemental instruction improve grades and retention? A propensity score analysis approach. The Journal of Experimental Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973. 2021.1891010.
  13. Brewe, E., Traxler, A., de la Garza, J., & Kramer, L.H. (2013). Extending positive CLASS results across multiple instructors and multiple classes of Modeling Instruction. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 9, 020116.
  14. Brewe, E., Sawtelle, V., Kramer, L.H., O’Brien, G.E., Rodriguez, I., & Pamelá, P. (2010). Toward equity through participation in Modeling Instruction in introductory university physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 6, 010106.
  15. Burt, B.A., McKen, A., Burkhart, J., Hormell, J., & Knight, A. (2019). Black men in engineering graduate education: Experiencing racial microaggressions within the advisor+advisee relationship. Journal of Negro Education, 88(4), 493–508.
  16. Castillo, A.J., Durán, P., Fuller, E., Watson, C., Potvin, G., & Kramer, L.H. (2022). Student attitudes in an innovative active learning approach in calculus, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, DOI:10.1080/0020739X.2021. 2023771.
  17. Castro, L. P. P. de. (2023). Evasão universitária e desigualdade: uma análise do fenômeno na Universidade de São Paulo após a adoção de políticas de cotas (Dissertação (Mestrado). Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo. Recuperado de https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8131/tde-04122023-161502/
  18. Cavanagh, A.J., Chen, X., Bathgate, M., Frederick, J., Hanauer, D.I., & Graham, M.J. (2018). Trust, growth mindset, and student commitment to active learning in a college science course. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(1), ar10.
  19. Chang, M.J., Sharkness, J., Hurtado, S., & Newman, C.B. (2014). What matters in college for retaining aspiring scientists and engineers from underrepresented racial groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 555–580.
  20. Chen, X., & Soldner, M. (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved online from https://doi.org/http://nces. ed.gov/ pubs2014/2014001rev.pdf.
  21. Cheng, T.M., Hou, H.Y., Agrawal., D.C., & Lin, J.Y. (2018). Modeling retention in a private university of technology: Improving the odds of undergraduates. Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia, 16(2), 107-122.
  22. Chiaburu, D.S., Thundiyil, T. & Wang, J. (2014). Alienation and its correlates: A meta-analysis. European Management Journal, 32, 24-36.
  23. Christe, B.L. (2013). The importance of faculty-student connections in stem disciplines. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(3), 22–26.
  24. Cianfrani, C., Hews, S., & DeJong, C. (2020). Student-driven research in the first year: Building science skills and creating community. Journal of College Science Teaching, 50(2), 58–68.
  25. Cogliano, M., Bernacki, M.L., & Kardash, C.M. (2021). A metacognitive retrieval practice intervention to improve undergraduates’ monitoring and control processes and use of performance feedback for classroom learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(7), 1421–1440.
  26. Cogliano, M., Bernacki, M.L., Hilpert, J.C., & Strong, C.L. (2022). A self-regulated learning analytics prediction-and-intervention design: Detecting and supporting struggling biology students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(8), 1801–1816.
  27. College Board (2021). College enrollment and retention in the era of Covid: 2021 update. College Board. Retrieved online from: https://research.collegeboard.org/reports/college-access/enrollment-retention-covid
  28. Crisp, G., Taggart, A., & Nora, A. (2015). Undergraduate Latina/o students: A systematic review of research identifying factors contributing to academic success outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 249–274.
  29. Cromley, J.G., Perez, T., & Kaplan, A. (2016). Undergraduate STEM achievement and retention: Cognitive, motivational, and instructional factors and solutions. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 4–11.
  30. Cui, Y., Hong, J.-C., Tsai, C.-R., & Ye, J.-H. (2022). How does hands-on making attitude predict epistemic curiosity and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics career interests? Evidence From an International Exhibition of Young Inventors. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-11.
  31. Cwik, S., & Singh, C. (2023). Students’ sense of belonging in introductory physics course for bioscience majors predicts their grade. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18, 010139.
  32. Dagley, M., Georgiopoulos, M., Reece, A., & Young, C. (2016). Increasing retention and graduation rates through a STEM learning community. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 18(2), 167–182.
  33. Dawson, P., van der Meer, J., Skalicky, J., & Cowley, K. (2014). On the effectiveness of supplemental instruction: A systematic review of supplemental instruction and peer-assisted study sessions literature between 2001 and 2010. Review of Educational Research, 84, 609–639.
  34. Dewsbury, B.M. (2017). On faculty development of STEM inclusive teaching practices. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 364, 2017, fnx179.
  35. Dickens, D.D., Ellis, V., & Hall, N.M. (2021). Changing the face of STEM: Review of literature on the role of mentors in the success of undergraduate black women in STEM education. Journal of Research Initiatives, 5(3), 1-11.
  36. Edward, J.D., Barthelemy, R.S., & Frey, R.F. (2022). Relationship between course-level social belonging (sense of belonging and belonging uncertainty) and academic performance in general chemistry 1. Journal of Chemical Education, 99, 71−82.
  37. Esquivel, A., Marincean, S., & Benore, M. (2023). The effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on STEM faculty: Productivity and work-life balance. PLoS ONE 18(1): e0280581.
  38. Estrada, M., Hernandez, P. R., & Schultz, P. W. (2018). A longitudinal study of how quality mentorship and research experience integrate underrepresented minorities into STEM careers. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 17(1), ar9.
  39. Fendos, J., Cai, L., Yang, X., Ren, G., Li, L., Yan, Z., Lu, B., Pi, Y., Ma, J., Guo, B., Wu, X., Lu, P., Zhang, R., & Ji Seung Yang. (2022). A course-based undergraduate research experience improves outcomes in mentored research. CBE - Life Sciences Education, 21(3), 1-21.
  40. Ganapati, S., & Ritchie, T.S. (2021). Professional development and career-preparedness experiences of STEM Ph.D. students: Gaps and avenues for improvement. PLoS ONE, 16(12), e0260328.
  41. González-Pérez, S., Martínez-Martínez, M., Rey-Paredes, V., & Cifre, E. (2022). I am done with this! Women dropping out of engineering majors. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 918439.
  42. Goy, S.C., Wong, Y.L., Low, W.Y., Noor, S.N.M., Fazli-Khalaf, Z., Onyeneho, N., Daniel, E., Azizan, S., Hasbullah, M., & GinikaUzoigwe, A. (2018). Swimming against the tide in STEM education and gender equality: A problem of recruitment or retention in Malaysia. Studies in Higher Education, 43(11), 1793-1809.
  43. Graham, M.J., Frederick, J., Byars-Winston, A., Hunter, A.B., & Handelsman, J. (2013). Increasing persistence of college students in STEM. Science, 341(6153), 1455–1456.
  44. Hartwell, S.K., & Gupta, T. (Eds.), From general to organic chemistry: Courses and curricula to enhance student retention. Washington, DC: ACS Publications.
  45. Hensley, L., Kulesza A., Peri J., Brady, A.C., Wolters, C.A., Sovic, D., & Breitenberger, C. (2021). Supporting undergraduate biology students’ academic success: Comparing two workshop interventions. CBE - Life Science Education, 20(4), ar60.
  46. Holmegaard, H.T., Madsen, L.M., & Ulriksen, L. (2014). To choose or not to choose science: Constructions of desirable identities among young people considering a STEM higher education programme. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 186-215.
  47. Hussain, M., & Khader, P.S.A. (2014). Analyzing student attrition and retention in engineering colleges of South India. Singaporean Journal of Scientific Research, 6(4), 213-218.
  48. Johannsen, B.F., Rump, C.Ø., & Linder, C. (2013). Penetrating a wall of introspection: A critical attrition analysis. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8(1), 87–115.
  49. Kaleva, S., Pursiainen, J., Hakola, M., Rusanen, J., & Muukkonen, H. (2019). Students’ reasons for STEM choices and the relationship of mathematics choice to university admission. International Journal of STEM Education, 6, 1-12.
  50. Kendricks, K., Nedunuri, K.V., & Arment, A.R. (2013). Minority student perceptions of the impact of mentoring to enhance academic performance in STEM disciplines. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(2), 38-46.
  51. Kornreich-Leshem, H., Benabentos, R., Hazari, Z., Potvin, G., & Kramer, L. (2022). The cognitive and affective roles of learning assistants in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics college classrooms: An exploration of classroom experiences and students’ metacognitive awareness and disciplinary identity. Science Education, 106(3), 545-572.
  52. Kramer, L., Fuller, E., Watson, C., Castillo, A., Oliva, P.D., & Potvin, G. (2023). Establishing a new standard of care for calculus using trials with randomized student allocation. Science, 381(6661), 995-998.
  53. Krishnakumar, S., Maier, T., Berdanier, C., Ritter, S., McComb, C., & Menold, J. (2022). Using workplace thriving theory to investigate first-year engineering students' abilities to thrive during the transition to online learning due to COVID-19. Journal of Engineering Education, 111(2), 474-493.
  54. Kricorian, K., Seu, M., Lopez, D., Ureta, E., & Equils, O. (2020). Factors influencing participation of underrepresented students in STEM fields: matched mentors and mindsets. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(16), 1-9.
  55. Kuh, G.D., O’Donnell, K. & Reed, S. (2013). Ensuring quality and taking high-impact practices to scale. Washington DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
  56. Lane, T.B. (2016). Beyond academic and social integration: Understanding the impact of a STEM enrichment program on the retention and degree attainment of underrepresented students. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(3), 1–13.
  57. Larsen, M.S., Kornbeck, K.P., Kristensen, R.M., Larsen, M.R., & Sommersel, H.B. (2012). Dropout phenomena at universities: What is dropout? Why does dropout occur? What can be done by universities to prevent or reduce it? Danish Clearinghouse for Educational Research, Department of Education, Aarhus University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  58. Leopold, D. (2022). Alienation. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved online from: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/alienation/>
  59. Lewis, K.L., Stout, J.G., Finkelstein, N.D., Pollock, S.J., Miyake, A., Cohen, G.L., & Ito, T.A. (2017). Fitting in to move forward: Belonging, gender, and persistence in the physical sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pSTEM). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41(4), 420-436.
  60. Lukes, L.A., & McConnell, D.A. (2014). What motivates introductory geology students to study for an exam? Journal of Geoscience Education, 62(4), 725–735.
  61. Millar, B., & Tanner, D. (2011). Students’ perception of their readiness for community college study. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 6(4), 1-6.
  62. Musah, R. A., & Ford, F. (2017). Peer-based supplemental instruction in STEM: Differences in effectiveness across transfer and nontransfer undergraduates. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10(3), 596-618.
  63. National Center for Education Statistics (2017). Beginning college students who change their majors within three years of enrollment. US Department of Education, Washington, DC.
  64. National Center for Education Statistics (2020). Digest of Education Statistics. Retrieved at https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/current_tables.asp.
  65. National Center for Education Statistics (2021). Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Retrieved online from https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/use-the-data.
  66. National Science Foundation. (2018). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/statistics
  67. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2022). Education at a glance 2022. OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved online from: https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en.
  68. Olsson, M., & Martiny, S.E. (2018). Does exposure to counter stereotypical role models influence girls’ and women’s gender stereotypes and career choices? A review of social psychological research. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2264.
  69. Packard, B.W. (2016). Successful STEM mentoring initiatives for underrepresented students: A research-based guide for faculty and administrators. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
  70. Pleskac, T.J., Keeney, J., Merritt, S.M., Schmitt, N., & Oswald, F.L. (2011). A detection model of college withdrawal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(1), 85-98.
  71. Porter, A.M., Chu, R.Y., & Yvie, R. (2024). Attrition and persistence in undergraduate physics programs. Melville, NY: American Institute of Physics Publishing.
  72. Rabitoy, E. R., Hofman, J. L., & Person, D. R. (2015). Supplemental instruction: The effect of demographic and academic preparation variables on community college student academic achievement in STEM-related fields. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 14(3), 240–255.
  73. Ream, R.K., Lewis, J.L., Echeverría, B., & Page, R.N. (2014). Trust matters: Distinction and diversity in undergraduate science education. Teachers College Record, 116(5), 1-50.
  74. Robinson, W.H., McGee, E.O., Bentley, L.C., Houston, S.L., & Botchway, P.K. (2016). Addressing negative racial and gendered experiences that discourage academic careers in engineering. Computing in Science and Engineering, 18(2), 29–39.
  75. Rogers, R., & Pagano, T. (2022). Catalyzing the advancement of diversity, equity, and inclusion in chemical education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 52(1), 3-8.
  76. Rosenzweig, E.Q., Hecht, C.A., Priniski, S.J., Canning, E.A., Asher, M.W., Tibbetts, Y., Hyde, J.S., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2021). Inside the STEM pipeline: changes in students’ biomedical career plans across the college years. Science Advances, 7, eabe0985.
  77. Rowland, A.A., Knekta, E., Eddy, S., & Corwin, L.A. (2019). Defining and measuring students’ interest in biology: An analysis of the biology education literature. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 18(3), ar34.
  78. Sensoy, Ö., & DiAngelo, R. (2017). Is everyone really equal? An introduction to key concepts in social justice education. Teachers College Press.
  79. Steinke, J. (2017). Adolescent girls’ STEM identity formation and media images of STEM professionals: considering the influence of contextual cues. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(716), 1-15.
  80. Stelter, R.L., Kupersmidt, J.B., & Stump, K.N. (2021). Establishing effective STEM mentoring relationships through mentor straining. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1483(1), 224-243.
  81. Strada Education Network & Gallup. (2020). Changing consumer priorities: Covid-19’s impact on pathways to postsecondary education. Strada Education Network. Retrieved from https://stradaeducation.org.
  82. Wang, C., Cavanagh, A.J., Bauer, M., Reeves, P.M., Gill, J.C., Chen, X., ... & Graham, M.J. (2021). A framework of college student buy-in to evidence-based teaching practices in STEM: The roles of trust and growth mindset. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(4), ar54.
  83. Wang, L., Muenks, K., & Yan, V.X. (2023). Interventions to promote retrieval practice: Strategy knowledge predicts intent, but perceived cost predicts usage. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(8), 1070–1086.
  84. Watkins, J., & Mazur, E. (2013). Retaining students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 36–41.
  85. Wei, T., & Ford, J. (2015). Enhancing the connection to undergraduate engineering students: A hands-on and team-based approach to fluid mechanics. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 16, 46–53.
  86. Wild, S., & Neef, C. (2023). Analyzing the associations between motivation and academic performance via the mediator variables of specific mathematic cognitive learning strategies in different subject domains of higher education. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 32, 1-14.
  87. Wilson, D., & VanAntwerp, J. (2021). Left out: A review of women’s struggle to develop a sense of belonging in engineering. SAGE Open, 11(3), 1-19.
  88. Yue, H., Sangha Rico, R., Kou Vang, M., & Aquino Giufrida, T. (2018). Supplemental instruction: Helping disadvantaged students reduce performance gap. Journal of Developmental Education, 41(2), 18–25.
  89. Zaniewski, A.M., & Reinholz, D. (2016). Increasing STEM success: a near-peer mentoring program in the physical sciences. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1-12.
  90. Zavala, J.A., Chadha, R., Steele, D.M., Ray, C., & Moore, J.S. (2019). Molecular sciences made personal: Developing curiosity in general and organic chemistry with a multi-semester utility value intervention. In S.K. Hartwell, & T. Gupta (Eds.), From general to organic chemistry: Courses and curricula to enhance student retention (pp.105-118). Washington, DC: ACS Publications.
  91. Zeidenberg, M., Jenkins, D., & Scott, M.A. (2012). Not just math and English: Courses that pose obstacles to community college completion (CCRC Working Paper No. 52). Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved online from https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments/not-just-math-and-english.pdf
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.