"I Want to be an Engineer, Why Should I Study Biology?" - Using Future Time Perspective to Understand Students' Beliefs about Foundational Courses

Katherine G. Nelson; Jenefer Husman; Katherine C. Cheng; Judith M. Harackiewicz

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Publication Date: June 24, 2017
Start Date: June 24, 2017
End Date: June 28, 2017
Conference Session: Applied Frameworks
Tagged Division: Educational Research and Methods
Tagged Topic: Diversity
Page Count: 8
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--27428
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/27428
Download Count: 594

Paper Authors

biography

Katherine G. Nelson Rowan University

visit author page

Katie just recently finished her postdoc ASU and is currently working as temporary faculty in the college of engineering at Rowan University. Her research interests include complexity learning, cognition, and motivation.

visit author page

biography

Jenefer Husman University of Oregon

visit author page

Jenefer Husman received a doctoral degree in Educational Psychology from the University of Texas at Austin, in 1998. She served as an Assistant Professor at the University of Alabama from 1998 to 2002, when she moved to Arizona State University. In 2008 she was promoted by ASU to Associate Professor. She is currently an Associate Professor in the Educational Studies Department at the University of Oregon. Dr. Husman served as the Director of Education for the Quantum Energy and Sustainable Solar Technology Center - an NSF-funded Engineering Research Center from 2011-2016. Dr. Husman is an assistant editor of the Journal of Engineering Education, and is a member of the editorial board of Learning and Instruction. In 2006 she was awarded the U.S. National Science Foundation CAREER grant award and received the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers from the President of the United States. She has conducted and advised on educational research projects and grants in both the public and private sectors, and served as an external reviewer for doctoral dissertations outside the U.S. She publishes regularly in peer-reviewed journals and books. Dr. Husman was a founding member and first President of the Southwest Consortium for Innovative Psychology in Education and has held both elected and appointed offices in the American Psychological Association (APA) and the Motivation Special Interest Group of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction.

visit author page

biography

Katherine C. Cheng Arizona State University

visit author page

Katherine Cheng is a doctoral student at the Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University. She is interested in understanding the origins of students' academic performance and their well-being. Kat completed her BS and MA in Psychology, and is currently majoring in Family and Human Development. Her research emphasizes a multi-disciplinary perspective, including bringing together constructs from the fields of motivation, human development, and biopsychology. Her research is dedicated to understanding the links between students’ emotions, emotion regulation, attention, and future-oriented motivation with respect to optimal school performance and physiological well-being.

visit author page

biography

Judith M. Harackiewicz University of Wisconsin, Madison

visit author page

Paul Pintrich Professor of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Foundational courses are crucial first-year technically oriented courses that are required for engineering degree completion, but are typically taught outside of students’ engineering degree major. Students must be exposed to these initial science and mathematics courses to have a proper foundation for subsequent engineering courses. However, foundational courses appear to be incongruent with students’ paths in engineering; research demonstrates that students are more likely to leave engineering in their first and second years, years were they are primarily engaged in these foundational courses. Studies have emerged that demonstrate that engineering students demonstrate little motivation to learn and be successful when taking foundational courses. If students are not motivated to learn, their performance may be lacking and prevent them from moving on in their engineering coursework, or discourage them from pursuing engineering altogether.

In this study we sought to understand students’ motivational beliefs in a freshman level biology course. We framed our work using future time perspective (FTP), course belongingness, and interest. Future time perspective pertains to a set of psychological constructs that allow us to understand (1) how engineering students see the present task as instrumental for their future as engineers – perceived instrumentality (PI), and (2) how engineering students connect the present activities with their future engineering goals – career connectedness (CC). Course belongingness (CB) describes how well a student feels that they belong to a certain course. Interest (I) reflects a student’s interest for a particular course. Engineering students enrolled in a freshman biology course (n=124) were given a survey instrument containing items for PI, CC, course belongingness associated with biology (CB-B) and engineering (CB-E), and I at the completion of their course. Correlations were run to assess any relationships between the different variables (PI, CC, CB-B, CB-E, and I). Strong and positive correlations were found between PI and CB-B (r = 0.57, p < 0.05), PI and I (r = 0.69, p < 0.05), and CC and CB-E (r = 0.70, p < 0.01).

PI were positively and strongly related to I and CB-B, indicating that students that perceived this foundational biology course as instrumental for their future, were interested in the content and felt that they belonged there. CC and CB-E were positively and strongly associated, demonstrating that students who were strongly connected to their engineering careers felt that they belonged in engineering. However, the lack of association between CC, CB-E and PI showed that engineering students that want to be engineers found little instrumentality in the course. PI is an important variable for good strategy use and performance in courses. Traditionally CC and PI are highly related, but in the context of a foundational non-major course, students lack the association between PI and CC, leading to possible problems with student learning and course performance. Additional research is needed to understand what the implications of the lack of association between PI and CC and CB-E are for foundational courses, and more so, how engineering educators can helps students better connect PI, CC, and CB-E to encourage student success.

Citation
Format

Nelson, K. G., & Husman, J., & Cheng, K. C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2017, June), "I Want to be an Engineer, Why Should I Study Biology?" - Using Future Time Perspective to Understand Students' Beliefs about Foundational Courses Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--27428

TY - CPAPER
AB - Foundational courses are crucial first-year technically oriented courses that are required for engineering degree completion, but are typically taught outside of students’ engineering degree major. Students must be exposed to these initial science and mathematics courses to have a proper foundation for subsequent engineering courses. However, foundational courses appear to be incongruent with students’ paths in engineering; research demonstrates that students are more likely to leave engineering in their first and second years, years were they are primarily engaged in these foundational courses. Studies have emerged that demonstrate that engineering students demonstrate little motivation to learn and be successful when taking foundational courses. If students are not motivated to learn, their performance may be lacking and prevent them from moving on in their engineering coursework, or discourage them from pursuing engineering altogether.

In this study we sought to understand students’ motivational beliefs in a freshman level biology course. We framed our work using future time perspective (FTP), course belongingness, and interest. Future time perspective pertains to a set of psychological constructs that allow us to understand (1) how engineering students see the present task as instrumental for their future as engineers – perceived instrumentality (PI), and (2) how engineering students connect the present activities with their future engineering goals – career connectedness (CC). Course belongingness (CB) describes how well a student feels that they belong to a certain course. Interest (I) reflects a student’s interest for a particular course. Engineering students enrolled in a freshman biology course (n=124) were given a survey instrument containing items for PI, CC, course belongingness associated with biology (CB-B) and engineering (CB-E), and I at the completion of their course. Correlations were run to assess any relationships between the different variables (PI, CC, CB-B, CB-E, and I). Strong and positive correlations were found between PI and CB-B (r = 0.57, p &lt; 0.05), PI and I (r = 0.69, p &lt; 0.05), and CC and CB-E (r = 0.70, p &lt; 0.01).

PI were positively and strongly related to I and CB-B, indicating that students that perceived this foundational biology course as instrumental for their future, were interested in the content and felt that they belonged there. CC and CB-E were positively and strongly associated, demonstrating that students who were strongly connected to their engineering careers felt that they belonged in engineering. However, the lack of association between CC, CB-E and PI showed that engineering students that want to be engineers found little instrumentality in the course. PI is an important variable for good strategy use and performance in courses. Traditionally CC and PI are highly related, but in the context of a foundational non-major course, students lack the association between PI and CC, leading to possible problems with student learning and course performance. Additional research is needed to understand what the implications of the lack of association between PI and CC and CB-E are for foundational courses, and more so, how engineering educators can helps students better connect PI, CC, and CB-E to encourage student success.

AU - Katherine G. Nelson
AU - Jenefer Husman
AU - Katherine C. Cheng
AU - Judith M. Harackiewicz
CY - Columbus, Ohio
DA - 2017/06/24
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - "I Want to be an Engineer, Why Should I Study Biology?" - Using Future Time Perspective to Understand Students' Beliefs about Foundational Courses
UR - https://peer.asee.org/27428
DO - 10.18260/1-2--27428
ER -