ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07447661STEM AIMUpdated Oct 2, 2026

STEM As I Am Phase I

An interventional study of Technology-based educational intervention in Academic Support for Black Middle School Student Success in STEM, sponsored by Oregon Research Behavioral Intervention Strategies, Inc.. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 10 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-02.

Sponsored by Oregon Research Behavioral Intervention Strategies, Inc. (part of Influents Innovations) · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

Updated Oct 2, 2026Start date movedGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
138
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
10 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Black students experience significant achievement gaps that contribute to underrepresentation in high paying STEM fields and disparity in health and economic outcomes. Effective middle-school interventions include exposure to culturally relevant STEM role models, instruction in academic behaviors and growth mindset, instruction in the academic vocabulary required to pass high stakes achievement tests, and support for family engagement. The goal of this proposal is to develop a media-enhanced technology that offers Black middle school students and their families a culturally responsive support tool for engaging in STEM learning in the home setting.

Read the detailed description

The feasibility test will consist of a 6-week intervention to assess the program's relevance, acceptability, cultural appropriateness, and potential for efficacy. The study will use a within-subjects pre-post design with 50 parent-student dyads to detect changes in student word knowledge, academic enabling behaviors, mindset, academic self-efficacy, and interest in STEM. Measures will also detect changes in parent word knowledge, use of AV words in the home, and self-efficacy with regard to AV use and academic support behaviors. Additionally, a post-test evaluation of consumer satisfaction, technology acceptability, and recommendations for modifications to the program will be administered to both students and their parents/guardians. Usage reports will be collected from the technology's backend system to measure frequency and duration of student and parent engagement with the technology components as well as numbers of correct/incorrect responses.

02

Conditions studied

  • Academic Support for Black Middle School Student Success in STEM
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Oregon Research Behavioral Intervention Strategies, Inc. is the lead sponsor of 24 studies on the registry; 3 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
10 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Eligibility criteria

  1. being the parent/guardian of a middle school student who identifies as Black/African American
  2. having a smartphone or tablet
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
138 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    STEM-AIM

    The STEM-AIM app will provide students and their families with a media-enhanced learning experience. Videos will feature Black STEM heroes who describe their paths to STEM and the growth mindset skills that helped them overcome barriers and challenges. STEM heroes and near-peer vignettes introduce a set of academic vocabulary words that underlie STEM achievement. Users then practice drag and drop definition, spelling, and usage games.

    Other: Technology-based educational intervention

Interventions

  • OtherTechnology-based educational intervention

    Mobile app to deliver culturally responsive role modeling and evidence-based instruction (modeling, practice, feedback) in the academic vocabulary, behaviors, and mindset that underlie STEM success.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Student Academic Vocabulary Word Meaning (SAVM)

    SAVM will measure change in student vocabulary knowledge (multiple choice test of meaning). The multiple choice test is based on the assessment used in Beck et al. (1982) and McKeown et al. (1983) with middle school students. Scores were computed as the total percentage of vocabulary words correctly identified out of 72. Score could range from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicate greater levels of vocabulary knowledge.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  2. Parent Academic Vocabulary Word Meaning (PAVM)

    PAVM will measure change in parent vocabulary knowledge (multiple choice test of meaning). The multiple choice test is based on the assessment used in Beck et al. (1982) and McKeown et al. (1983) with middle school students. Scores were computed as the total percentage of vocabulary words correctly identified out of 72. Score could range from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicate greater levels of vocabulary knowledge.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  3. Student Academic Vocabulary Word Usage (SAVWU)

    SAVWU will measure change in student ability to correctly use vocabulary words in sentence contexts. The sentence verification test is similar to the Test of Instructed Word Knowledge in Vocabulary used in the Apthorp et al. (2012) study of vocabulary learning in middle school. Scores were computed as the total percentage of vocabulary words correctly used in sentence context out of 72 items. Score could range from 0 to 100, and higher scores indicate greater levels of vocabulary words used correctly in a sentence.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  4. Parent Academic Vocabulary Word Usage (PAVWU)

    PAVWU will measure change in parent ability to correctly use vocabulary words in sentence contexts. The sentence verification test is similar to the Test of Instructed Word Knowledge in Vocabulary used in the Apthorp et al. (2012) study of vocabulary learning in middle school. Scores were computed as the total percentage of vocabulary words correctly used in sentence context out of 72 items. Score could range from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicate greater levels of vocabulary words used correctly in a sentence.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  5. Student Fixed Mindset (SFM)

    SFM is a four-item survey measure of fixed mindset. Student responds to statements about their beliefs about learning and intelligence. The measure uses a 6-point scale. The item scores are averaged into a single scale and can range from 1 to 6, with higher values corresondeing to more fixed mindsets. The measure has demonstrated reliability (Yeager et al., 2016).

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  6. Student Academic Behaviors (SAB)

    SAB is a five-item survey measure of academic behaviors strongly linked to student success. Students respond to questions about how frequently they engage in these behaviors (e.g., turn in assignments on time). The measure uses a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) and a mean score was computed and could range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicated greater levels of perceived academic learning behaviors., and has demonstrated reliability (Snipes \& Tran, 2016).

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Student Academic Vocabulary Usage Behaviors (SAVUB)

    SAVUB will measure change in student use of SAV words (10 items). Items were adapted from: the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI; Betts, Appleton, Reschly, et al., 2010). Items used a 4-point response option (1 = not at all, 4 = 3-4 times per week) and a mean score and could range from 1 to 4. Higher scores indicated greater use of SAV words.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  2. Parent Academic Vocabulary Usage Behaviors (SAVUB)

    SAVUB will measure change in parent use of SAV words (10 items). Items were adapted from: the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI; Betts, Appleton, Reschly, et al., 2010). Items used a 4-point response option (1 = not at all, 4 = 3-4 times per week) and a mean score and could range from 1 to 4. Higher scores indicated greater use of SAV words.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  3. Student Confidence in using AV words (SCAV)

    SCAV will measure student confidence in using SAV words (10 items). Items were adapted from the Efficacy to Influence School-related Performance subscale of the Parental Self-Efficacy Scale (PSES; Bandura, et al., 2001). Items were developed using procedures for developing self-efficacy scales (Bandura et al., 2001). Items used a 5-point response option (1 = not at all confident, 5 = extremely confident) and a mean score was computed and could range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicated greater confidence using SAV words.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  4. Parent Confidence in using AV words (PCAV)

    PCAV will measure parent confidence in using SAV words (10 items). Items were adapted from the Efficacy to Influence School-related Performance subscale of the Parental Self-Efficacy Scale (PSES; Bandura, et al., 2001). Items were developed using procedures for developing self-efficacy scales (Bandura et al., 2001). Items used a 5-point response option (1 = not at all confident, 5 = extremely confident) and a mean score was computed (alpha = .95) and could range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicated greater confidence using SAV words.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  5. Student Interest in choosing STEM careers (STEM)

    STEM will measure students' interest in STEM careers (4 items). Items were adapted from: the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI; Betts, Appleton, Reschly, et al., 2010) and the Efficacy to Influence School-related Performance subscale of the Parental Self-Efficacy Scale (PSES; Bandura, et al., 2001). Items used a 5-point response option (1 = not at all interested, 5 = extremely interested) and a mean score was computed and could range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicated greater interest in using SAV words.

    Time frame: Baseline (pre-treatment) and 6 weeks (post-treatment)

  6. Student Technology Acceptance (STA) - Acceptability of Intervention (AIM)

    Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM; 4-items) is a measure that often used in formative studies and are considered leading indicators of implementation success (Proctor et al., 2011; Bowen et al., 2009). Uses a 5-point response option, have demonstrated reliability, test-retest reliability, and shown to assess sensitivity to change (Weiner et al. 2017). A mean score will be computed and scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater acceptability of the intervention.

    Time frame: 6-weeks after baseline (Post treatment)

  7. Student Technology Acceptance (STA) - Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM)

    Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM; 4-items) is a measure that often used in formative studies and are considered leading indicators of implementation success (Proctor et al., 2011; Bowen et al., 2009). Uses a 5-point response option, have demonstrated reliability, test-retest reliability, and shown to assess sensitivity to change (Weiner et al. 2017). A mean score will be computed and scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater approriateness of the intervention.

    Time frame: 6-weeks after baseline (Post treatment)

  8. Parent Technology Acceptance (PTA) - Acceptability of Intervention (AIM)

    Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM; 4-items) is a measure that often used in formative studies and are considered leading indicators of implementation success (Proctor et al., 2011; Bowen et al., 2009). Uses a 5-point response option, have demonstrated reliability, test-retest reliability, and shown to assess sensitivity to change (Weiner et al. 2017). A mean score will be computed and scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater acceptability of the intervention.

    Time frame: 6-weeks after baseline (post treatment)

  9. Parent Technology Acceptance (PTA) - Intervention Approriateness Measure (IAM)

    Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM; 4-items) is a measure that often used in formative studies and are considered leading indicators of implementation success (Proctor et al., 2011; Bowen et al., 2009). Uses a 5-point response option, have demonstrated reliability, test-retest reliability, and shown to assess sensitivity to change (Weiner et al. 2017). A mean score will be computed and scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater approriateness of the intervention.

    Time frame: 6-weeks after baseline (post treatment)

  10. Student Satisfaction with STEM-AIM Program

    Student satisfaction with the STEM-AIM program will be measured with 15 items that ask students to rate, on a 5-point Likert response scale, the degree to which the STEM-AIM features were helpful, useful, enjoyable, and met their expectations. A mean score will be computed and scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction with the program.

    Time frame: 6-weeks after baseline (post treatment)

  11. Parent Satisfaction with STEM-AIM Program

    Parent satisfaction with the STEM-AIM program will be measured with 15 items that ask parents to rate, on a 5-point Likert response scale, the degree to which the STEM-AIM features were helpful, useful, enjoyable, and met their expectations. A mean score will be computed and scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction with the program.

    Time frame: 6-weeks after baseline (post treatment)

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Bandura A, Barbaranelli C, Caprara GV, Pastorelli C. Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children's aspirations and career trajectories. Child Dev. 2001 Jan-Feb;72(1):187-206. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00273. PubMed 11280478 ↗
  • Yeager DS, Romero C, Paunesku D, Hulleman CS, Schneider B, Hinojosa C, Lee HY, O'Brien J, Flint K, Roberts A, Trott J, Greene D, Walton GM, Dweck CS. Using Design Thinking to Improve Psychological Interventions: The Case of the Growth Mindset During the Transition to High School. J Educ Psychol. 2016 Apr;108(3):374-391. doi: 10.1037/edu0000098. PubMed 27524832 ↗
  • McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1983). The Effects of Long-Term Vocabulary Instruction on Reading Comprehension: A Replication. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968309547474 (Original work published 1983)
  • Beck I. L., Mccaslin E. S., Mckeown M. G. The rationale and design of a program to teach vocabulary to fourth-grade students (LRDC Publication 1980/25). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center, 1980. Google Scholar Beck I. L., Omanson R. C., Mckeown M. G. An instructional redesign of reading lessons: Effects on comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 1982, 17, 462-481.
  • Snipes, J., & Tran, L. (2016). Early Indicators and Academic Mindsets in the Clark County School District. Regional Educational Laboratory West.
  • Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, Boynton MH, Halko H. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017 Aug 29;12(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3. PubMed 28851459 ↗
  • Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Griffey R, Hensley M. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011 Mar;38(2):65-76. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7. PubMed 20957426 ↗
  • Betts, J. E., Appleton, J. J., Reschly, A. L., Christenson, S. L., & Huebner, E. S. (2010). A study of the factorial invariance of the Student Engagement Instrument (SEI): Results from middle and high school students. School Psychology Quarterly, 25(2), 84.
  • Bowen DJ, Kreuter M, Spring B, Cofta-Woerpel L, Linnan L, Weiner D, Bakken S, Kaplan CP, Squiers L, Fabrizio C, Fernandez M. How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med. 2009 May;36(5):452-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.02.002. PubMed 19362699 ↗
  • Apthorp, H., Randel, B., Cherasaro, T., Clark, T., McKeown, M., & Beck, I. (2012). Effects of a Supplemental Vocabulary Program on Word Knowledge and Passage Comprehension. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 5(2), 160-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2012.660240

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Updates

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
Start date
Aug 1, 2026→Nov 1, 2026
Oct 2, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 2, 2026
    Start date Aug 1, 2026→Nov 1, 2026
    + 1 other change: verification date

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07447661
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 3, 2026
Start date
Nov 1, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Jan 31, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 2, 2026

Study contacts

David R Smith, PhD
Contact
david.smith@influentsin.com
541-484-2123
David R Smith, PhD
principal investigator · Oregon Research Behavioral Intervention Strategies, Inc.

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Sep 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion