Comparing a sociological and psychological approach to summer bridge programs: a field experiment

Many higher education institutions organize summer bridge programs (SBPs) to prepare students for university. However, what a SBP should contain is unclear because few studies directly compare different theoretical approaches. This study evaluated two types of SBPs offered at a Dutch university: (A) a sociological approach focusing on academic capital and (B) a psychological approach targeting mindset and metacognition. We randomly assigned 250 applicants between these programs. Participants in both programs were compared with each other and with (C) 161 students who neither applied for nor attended any SBP. We hypothesized that A would improve students' academic capital, while B would improve students' mindset and metacognition. As hypothesized, Program A improved students' scores on two aspects of academic capital formation: navigation of systems and trustworthy information. Unexpectedly, Program B produced similar improvements. As predicted, Program B enhanced students' metacognition and mindset scores, with these participants outperforming both other conditions at posttest. Unexpectedly, Program A increased the growth mindset and effort beliefs of first-generation students, while it decreased scores for these outcomes for continuous-generation students. We found no significant differences in academic performance between groups, suggesting that brief SBPs may be insufficient to generate medium effects on longer term outcomes. Qualitative data revealed that while some students retained and applied specific SBP content, most prioritized familiarization with peers and the university environment over program curriculum.