Displaying all 12 results
- Conference Session
- Engineering Cultures and Identity
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Allison Godwin, Purdue University, West Lafayette
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee
- Tagged Divisions
- Educational Research and Methods
engineeringpersistence49,50. Performance/competence beliefs are broader than self-efficacy, which has beentraditionally measured as task-specific attainment51. Students’ beliefs about their ability toperform the practices of their discipline and understand the content of their discipline – whetherscience, math, or engineering – has an impact on their ability to see themselves as the kind ofperson who can legitimately participate in these areas52.Figure 1. Framework for students’ identification with engineering adapted from Hazari et al.16These three factors (recognition, interest, and performance/competence) comprise the identitymeasures developed in this work and are consistent with prior literature from psychology,sociology, science education, and engineering
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Changing Engineering Culture
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Mary E Fitzpatrick, University of Wisconsin Madison College of Engineering; Manuela Romero, University of Wisconsin, Madison; Jennifer Sheridan, University of Wisconsin, Madison
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Women in Engineering
, 2016Changes in Undergraduate Engineering College Climate and Predictorsof Major Commitment: Results from Climate Studies in 2008 and 2015Abstract This paper presents results of two cross-sectional investigations of educational andinterpersonal climate in a college of engineering at a large mid-western university. In 2008 andin 2015 we deployed a survey ("Project to Assess Climate in Engineering”) to undergraduateengineering students. In each survey year, just over 1000 eligible students participated andresponded to items contributing to scales rating their professors, teaching assistants, collegeresources, confidence (self-efficacy) in engineering, student interactions, perceptions ofengineering, and commitment to an engineering major
- Conference Session
- Engineering Cultures and Identity
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Anita Patrick, University of Texas, Austin; Maura Borrego, University of Texas, Austin
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Educational Research and Methods
isevident and supported by Table 2. Despite this lack of coherence, these studies have beenimportant first steps in exploring specific aspects of identity development in engineering. Closely related to identity but not explicitly stated, others have provided a review andanalysis of existing research on the measurement of the characteristics of engineering students inorder to illuminate factors that affect college enrollment and retention.12 The authors, Li,Swaminathan, and Tang, found that many researchers are specifically looking at the factors thathelp or hinder the matriculation of underrepresented groups into engineering. Marra, Rodgers,Shen, and Bogue conducted a multi-institution study on self-efficacy and women engineeringstudents.36
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Retention Programs for Diverse Students
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Rachel Lauren Shapiro, Northeastern University; Emily Olina Wisniewski, Johns Hopkins University; Emma Kaeli, Northeastern University; Tyler Byrne Cole, Northeastern University; Paul A. DiMilla, Northeastern University; Rachelle Reisberg, Northeastern University
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Minorities in Engineering, Women in Engineering
, were factored intothe statistics. [4] GPA was a greater predictor of retention and eventual graduation for malestudents than female students. Meanwhile, moderate to high levels of achievement increasedlevels of confidence in females but accentuated female students’ social discomfort as a minority,making self-doubt and social discomfort better predictors of graduation rate for females thanGPA. This trend was valid when women were both a numerical minority in classes and werestereotyped, as women often are in engineering programs. [4]The existing literature suggests that factors other than just GPA impact a female student’sdecision to remain in and eventually graduate from an engineering program. For example, self-efficacy, or a specified level
- Conference Session
- Engineering Cultures and Identity
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Stephen Secules, University of Maryland, College Park; Andrew Elby, University of Maryland, College Park; Ayush Gupta, University of Maryland, College Park
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Educational Research and Methods
(recently) sexual minorities within higher educationSTEM programs. Likewise retention research highlighting additional corroborating factors instudent struggles, such as self-efficacy and cognitive attributes4,5,6, has informed the efforts ofsome of these support programs in affective and academic dimensions. Qualitative researchstrands that look at identity and marginalization have documented struggles from the studentperspective, noting how aspects of self can contribute to or come into conflict with one’sprogress and prosperity within a STEM major7,8,9. This research often employs a metaphor of“cultural mismatch” or “identity mismatch” to help extend the empathy and perspective ofpractitioners and those involved in the day to day of STEM in
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Changing Engineering Culture
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Omoju Miller, UC Berkeley
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Women in Engineering
77 college students chose to continue to the next more demanding firstcourse intended for CS majors, CS61A.Research MethodsFormative, mixed-method research was conducted to test out the effectiveness of Beauty and Joyof Computing (BJC) curriculum as implemented in UC Berkeley’s CS10, in attracting historicallyunderrepresented students. To gain a comprehensive analysis into the socio-curriculareffectiveness of the BJC curriculum as the first class in a student’s CS trajectory, it wasbenchmarked against CS61A—the first class for majors, and increasingly, for non-majors aswell.Survey instruments were developed to measure participants’ self-reported efficacy along severaldimensions. To determine the role of identity and self efficacy; as well as
- Conference Session
- Engineering Cultures and Identity
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Hank Boone, University of Nevada, Reno; Adam Kirn, University of Nevada, Reno
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Educational Research and Methods
dissociation from engineering but is more a measure of one’s “fit”14. FGS students may seetheir salient identity as separate from engineering, but they choose to associate (major in)engineering and thus take on engineering’s group affiliation. Social identity serves as theoverlying structure guiding our work. This theory serves to potentially bridge the gap betweenengineering identity and belongingness to engineering. Additionally, the role of social capitalfalls into this theory as it serves to moderate entrance into the engineering group and thedevelopment of feelings of belongingness in engineering. Identity, belongingness, and socialcapital will be used to measure the students’ engineering social identity for this study. Explicitframing of how we
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Improving Female Faculty Experiences in STEM
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- J. Kasi Jackson, West Virginia University ; Joel Alejandro Mejia, Angelo State University; Maja Husar Holmes, West Virginia University; Rachel R. Stoiko, West Virginia University
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity, Engineering Deans Council
- Tagged Divisions
- Women in Engineering
gender equity, we focused onsupporting the behaviors (e.g. the climate variables discussed above) to promote equity. Wewanted to see how this indirect dual agenda approach impacted faculty beliefs about their 11department’s ability to achieve gender equity, as well as their perceptions of other key aspects ofdepartmental climate.Our research addresses an issue raised by Acker: “Does the sex composition of change agentgroups make a difference in the success of projects?” (p. 627)4 Our goal was to see if there weredifferential impacts of the Dialogues process on departmental climate measures among academicdepartments that vary in the percent of
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Changing Engineering Culture
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Lisa Abrams, Ohio State University; Suzanne Grassel Shoger, The Ohio State University; Lauren Corrigan, Ohio State University; Steven Y. Nozaki, Ohio State University; Mitsu Narui, The Ohio State University Multicultural Center; Adithya Jayakumar, The Ohio State University
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity
- Tagged Divisions
- Women in Engineering
. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges (Report of the Project on the Status and Education of Women).5 Morris, L. K., & Daniel, L. G. (2008). Perceptions of a chilly climate: Differences in traditional and non- traditional majors for women. Research in Higher Education, 49(3), 256-273.6 Pascarella, E. T., Nora, A., & Terenzini, P. T. (1999). Women's perceptions of a “chilly climate” and cognitive outcomes in college: Additional evidence. Journal of College Student Development, 40(2), 163- 177.7 Malicky, D. (2003). A literature review on the under-representation of women in undergraduate engineering: Ability, self-efficacy, and the" chilly climate”.age, 8, 1.8 Haines, V. A., Wallace
- Conference Session
- Engineering Economy Division Technical Session 3
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Deborah Ann Pedraza, Texas Tech University; Mario G. Beruvides P.E., Texas Tech University
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee
- Tagged Divisions
- Engineering Economy
than either of the twoeffects alone.”[21] In his study, Henson[21] suggests that we may be able to predict outcomes notbased on a person’s past aptitude or grade point average, but rather, on their self esteem,dogmatism, and intrinsic or extrinsic motivation to be successful.[21] Evidence of the use of performance comparisons in efficacy belief formation is supportedby other research and supports the claim of self-efficacy theory that vicarious experiences aremore influential on students who have little experience in a particular area such as in comingfreshman engineering students.26 Yet, another study stated that individuals “who are lessconfident, experience negative interactions with peers and instructors, and hold
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Understanding and Improving Female Faculty Experiences in STEM
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Lydia Ross, Arizona State University; Eugene Judson, Arizona State University; Stephen J Krause, Arizona State University; James A Middleton, Arizona State University; Casey Jane Ankeny, Arizona State University; Ying-Chih Chen, Arizona State University; Robert J Culbertson, Arizona State University; Keith D. Hjelmstad, Arizona State University; Yong Seok Park, Arizona State University; Bethany B Smith, Arizona State University
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Engineering Deans Council
- Tagged Divisions
- Women in Engineering
., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. New York: Basic Books.11. Sprague, J., & Massoni, K. (2004). Student Evaluations and Gendered Expectations: What We Can’t Count Can Hurt Us. Sex Roles, 53(11-12), 779-793.12. Bailey, J. G. (1999). Academics’ Motivation and Self-Efficacy for Teaching and Research. Higher Education Research and Development, 18(3), 343-359.13. Schuster, J.H., & Finkelstein, M.J. (2006). The American Faculty: The Restructuring of Academic Work and Careers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.14. Winslow, S. (2010). Gender Inequality and Time Allocations Among Academic Faculty. Gender & Society, 24(6), 769-793.15. Hart, J., & Cress, C. M
- Conference Session
- Women in Engineering Division Technical Session - Retaining and Developing Women Faculty
- Collection
- 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
- Theresa M. Vitolo, Gannon University; Karinna M Vernaza, Gannon University; Lori D. Lindley, Gannon University; Elisa M. Konieczko, Gannon University; Weslene Tallmadge, Gannon University
- Tagged Topics
- ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity, Engineering Deans Council
- Tagged Divisions
- Engineering and Public Policy, Women in Engineering
director at-large (2013-15) positions.Dr. Lori D. Lindley, Gannon University Lori D. Lindley is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology and Counseling, and the Associate Dean of the College of Humanities, Education, and Social Sciences. She earned her B.A. in Psychology from the University of Notre Dame, and her M.S. and Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology from Iowa State University. She serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Vocational Behavior and the Journal of Career Assessment. Her research is on women’s career development, specifically self-efficacy and career barriers.Dr. Elisa M. Konieczko, Gannon University Elisa M. Konieczko, Professor of Biology at Gannon University, received her