intervention on studentmathematics self-efficacy: Development and application of revised measurement tool Page 26.1142.2Research into the effectiveness of a mathematics intervention course for first year engineeringstudents revealed anomalous results in relation to student persistence. While previous studies ofperformance of college engineering students showed that ACT Math scores were highly linearlypredictive of student persistence outcomes, the study in question did not show similar results.The study revealed an interaction between ACT Math and high school GPA for students thatcompleted the course. The results showed an inverse relationship between ACT Math
questions. 1. Did students’ academic confidence or engineering self-efficacy improve after the project course? 2. Were there differences between the academic confidence or self-efficacy of male and female students? 3. Was there a relationship between the tasks students engaged in and their incoming confidence and self-efficacy measures? 4. Did any tasks correlate to observable changes in confidence or self-efficacy measures?Both academic self-confidence and self-efficacy have a strong effect on student motivation anddecision-making. Academic self-confidence in three particular areas (problem-solving,16 mathand science,17–19 and professional and interpersonal skills7) have been found to be importantfactors in student
for university photovoltaics education. Paper presented and published at the 37th Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Photovoltaic Specialists Conference. Seattle, WA.[3] Suresh, R. (2007). The relationship between barrier courses and persistence in engineering. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8, 215–239.[4] Nelson, K. G., Shell, D. F., Husman, J., Fishman, E. J., & Soh, L. K. (2014). Motivational and Self‐Regulated Learning Profiles of Students Taking a Foundational Engineering Course. Journal of Engineering Education, 104(1), 74-100.[5] Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and
Paper ID #11165A cross-sectional study of engineering students’ creative self-concepts: An ex-ploration of creative self-efficacy, personal identity, and expectationsDr. Sarah E Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Dr. Sarah Zappe is Research Associate and Director of Assessment and Instructional Support in the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Education at Penn State. She holds a doctoral degree in educational psychology emphasizing applied measurement and testing. In her position, Sarah is responsible for developing instructional support programs for faculty, providing evaluation support
a specific task such as problem solving or design.1 Results have indicated thatstudents with higher self-efficacy (a task-specific motivation2) have been shown to have improvedlearning and understanding in introductory engineering courses.3 Work focused on long-termgoals, such as graduating with an engineering degree, has shown that students who have higherexpectancies for their performance in engineering have significantly higher grade point averages(GPAs).4,5 Connections between these two scales of motivation have been proposed, yet little workhas been done to examine how these levels are connected and influence one another.6 Theoverarching purpose of our research is to understand the connection between multiple levels of
Learning Beliefs, Self-Efficacy for Learning& Performance, and learning strategies scales with Rehearsal, Elaboration, Organization,Metacognitive Self-Regulation, Time/Study Environmental Management, and Help Seeking. Inline with the desired measurement constructs for lifelong learning, the scales of Test Anxiety,Task Value, Peer Learning, and Effort Regulation were excluded. Also excluded was Critical Page 26.1176.7Thinking because alternate instruments in the larger research project measured this dimension.Analysis of findings from our MSLQ pilot found lower reliabilities than expected, and thatstudents demonstrated minimal engagement
theirbachelor’s degrees in engineering. We focus on these individuals due to the scarcity of researchon their experiences and the relevance of their perspectives to engineering education.29-31Implications of this work will focus on recommendations for educational research and practice.Framework and LiteratureThe overall EPS project is broadly situated in social cognitive career theory (SCCT) which positsthat a variety of factors influence career choice including self-efficacy beliefs, outcomeexpectations, and learning experiences.32 SCCT has been used extensively in the study ofengineering students’ career choices.33-37 A main goal of our study has been to identify theschool and workplace factors related to the career choices made by engineering
. Amelink is the Director of Graduate Programs and Assessment in the College of Engineering Virginia Page 26.506.1 Tech and affiliate faculty in the Department of Engineering Education and the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Virginia Tech. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Developing the Postsecondary Student Engagement Survey (PosSES) to Measure Undergraduate Engineering Students’ Out-of-Class Involvement Abstract A large body of literature focuses on the importance of student involvement in all aspects ofcollege for achieving
Paper ID #12549A Framework for Measuring the Sustainability of Academic Programs in theTechnical Fields: Initial Validity Study FindingsDr. Issam Wajih Damaj, American University of Kuwait Dr. Issam W. Damaj (Ph.D. M.Eng. B.Eng.) is an Associate Professor of Computer Engineering at the American University of Kuwait (AUK). He is the Chairperson of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. His University service experience is focused around assessment, quality assur- ance, program development, accreditation, and institutional effectiveness. His research interests include hardware/software co-design
learningsituations and the impractical, difficult-to-measure level of transient situations within one course[9, 13, 23]. By focusing on the roles of both motivation and cognition during learning, the MSLQreflects the research on self-regulated learning, which emphasizes the interface betweenmotivation and cognition [14-15]. Prior research using the MSLQ has found relationshipsbetween constructs on its motivational subscales such as: intrinsic goals, extrinsic goals, taskvalue, control of learning beliefs, self-efficacy, and test anxiety, and constructs on its use oflearning strategies subscales such as: rehearsal, elaboration, organization, critical thinking,metacognitive self-regulation, time and study environment, and effort regulation [16 - 17
self-efficacy are well equipped to educate themselveswhen they have to rely on their own initiative. One of the goals of teaching communicationskills is to develop students who feel competent and confident in the use of those skills [13]. Ourstudent survey is designed to measure the extent to which students at our study sites havedeveloped a sense of self-efficacy for communication.The survey lists the sub-skills we have identified, both from the literature and from experience inteaching communication skills, that student must master in order to successfully create anddeliver oral presentations, write, develop and use visual literacy skills, and participate inteamwork. For example, for oral presentations, we asked students about their
-regulated dimension highlights self-initiated actions and processes aimed at acquiring and applying information or skills that involve settinggoals, self-monitoring, managing time, and regulating one's efforts as well as physical and socialenvironment for goal fulfillment12. However, the most robust factors for motivation and learning Page 26.1172.3strategies could be self-efficacy and effort regulation. Motivational strategies are closely related to thegrades of university students.Research methodology:Participants: The targeted population included male and female freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniorsfrom both private and
Paper ID #12383Factors of Group Design Decision MakingMr. Andrew Jackson, Purdue University, West Lafayette Andrew Jackson is currently pursuing a Master of Science in Technology Leadership and Innovation in Purdue University’s College of Technology. His previous middle school teaching experience informs his role as a graduate teaching assistant for an introductory course in design thinking. His research interests are engineering self-efficacy, creativity, and decision making.Prof. Nathan Mentzer, Purdue University, West Lafayette Nathan Mentzer is an assistant professor in the College of Technology with a joint
between students who intent to major in STEM fields and their peers whoplan a major outside of STEM. A survey that intends to measure student interest in engineeringas a trait, should be able to distinguish students indicating future interest in STEM from thosewho do not. This finding indicates that a need to refine the FIDES 1.0 in order to measureinterest in engineering as a psychological construct in a way that more accurately reflects ourunderstanding of the intended population.FIDES 2.0: Revised Instrument DevelopmentRevised Item Construction Revisions were made to the FIDES instrument on the basis of results from the pilot study.First, two additional indicators were added (content knowledge and self-efficacy). Second, toaddress
Paper ID #13709Sometimes, Faculty Matter: The Contribution of Faculty Support to FutureEngagementDr. Denise Wilson, University of Washington Denise Wilson is a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Washington, Seattle. Her research interests in engineering education focus on the role of self-efficacy, belonging, and other non- cognitive aspects of the student experience on engagement, success, and persistence.Prof. Diane Carlson Jones Ph.D, University of WashingtonProf. Rebecca A Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato Rebecca A. Bates received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the
they were failing the course when in fact, their grades wereabove average. We also wondered, given the large number of items students miss in theseexams, whether instructors would review these items in class so that the exam could be used toinform instruction rather than just serve to measure and classify students.To find out more about LOC grading and related exam practices and their effects on students, wedesigned a survey to address the following questions: Assuming that their final grades remain the same, to what extent does the raw score of an exam affect students’ motivation, self-efficacy, learning strategies, or perception of the instructor? To what extent do students believe that exams should be criterion-based
grit have no meaning. More and more STEMeducation research, as noted, now interrogates the student experience of low self-efficacy or self-confidence as a contributing factor to minority under-representation, but unusually, LfSN asks usto interrogate the political instrumentality of that interrogation. It helps us ask: Where does suchanalytical emphasis on individual agency locate responsibility for educational attainment or itsabsence? On another level, acknowledging the differences between this qualitative research andcustomary quantitative studies of STEM education regarding causal factors lets us see the“reciprocally constituted relations” between morals and ethics on one hand and scientific conducton the other. This suggests still more
. First, our participants, all of whom were persisting inengineering majors at the time of this study, expressed high levels of self-efficacy, and self-identified as someone who seizes opportunities and combats self-doubt with a fierce work ethic.We call this type of student an “active agent.” Second, emerging across all domain categorieswas a strong sense of responsibility toward kin, and community and support from theseoftentimes-nontraditional sources. In identifying and analyzing these two seeminglycontradictory characteristics – strong individual drive and interdependent, relational orientation –we hope to inform diversity advocates in engineering about the unique attributes that helpstudents from low socioeconomic standpoints persist and
research interests are engineering self-efficacy, creativity, and decision making.Dr. Kevin Andrew Richards, Northern Illinois University K. Andrew R. Richards is currently a visiting assistant professor at Northern Illinois University. Prior to his current post, Richards was a post-doctoral research associate with the Center for Instructional Ex- cellence at Purdue University, USA. His post-doctoral position focused on the evaluation of a large-scale course transformation project that sought to increase active learning and student-centered pedagogies in university-level teaching. Prior to post-doctoral studies, Richards completed his Master’s degree and PhD at Purdue University, and Bachelor’s degree at Springfield
women’sprofessional outcome expectations using the same data.22 They found, after controlling forstudents’ demographic and academic background characteristics, pre-college self-efficacy andself-confidence, learning experience, academic and social contextual influence, and fourth yearself-confidence, participation in the living learning program positively influenced students’overall professional outcome expectation, as well as achieving career success and combining aprofessional career with having a balanced personal life.To sum, these studies reported positive influences of LLC on student engagement, connectionwith engineering programs, and career expectations. The LLC involvement affects studentdevelopment through interactions with peers and faculty and the
; Philadelphia, PA, 2014.35. Jones, M. G.; Howe, A.; Rua, M. J. Sci. Educ. 2000, 84, 180–192.36. Wang, J.; Werner-Avidon, M.; Newton, L.; Randol, S.; Smith, B.; Walker, G. J. Pre-College Eng. Educ. Res. 2013, 3, 2.37. McIlwee, J. S.; Robinson, J. G. Women in engineering: Gender, power, and workplace culture; SUNY Press, 1992.38. Modell, M.; Reid, R. C. Thermodynamics and its Applications; Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1974.39. Richardson, A. L. Tinkering self-efficacy and team interaction on freshman engineering design teams; ProQuest, 2008.40. Eccles, J.; Harold, R. Teach. Coll. Rec. 1993, 94, 568–587.41. Eshach, H. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2007, 16, 171–190.42. Mau, W.-C. Career Dev. Q. 2003, 51, 234–243.43
’ communication and teamwork skills4. It can also enhance students’ intrapersonal skills by promoting self-efficacy, character building, and resilience5. All of these traits are commonly cited desired attributes of a global engineer working in a multi-disciplinary world, and are reflected in engineering accreditation requirements today6-8. Project-based learning in particular can simulate an industry-like environment for students, to facilitate the development of the skills required for practicing professional engineers. In project-based learning, students are formally instructed to ensure they have the foundation of knowledge needed to work on and complete the project assigned9,10. Emphasis is
environments are created when a group ofindividuals work collectively and collaboratively to achieve a shared goal or objective. They canbe comprised of the atmosphere, individual members (experience, skillsets, and motivations),communication, shared resources, and the space (cognitive, affective and physical) in which theywork. Team-effectiveness within these environments can often be difficult and time consumingto measure, requiring training of the observers as well as a significant time investment in codingand analysis post-observation. As a result, observations of teams in engineering and computerscience education have typically looked at which tasks are performed and/or which behaviors areexhibited over a specific observation period.7-9 While