students who did not submit homework (in either format)for that specific quiz topic were removed for the statistical analysis.To assess student perceptions regarding the use of WeBWorK in the course, online pre- and post-course surveys were sent to the students. Both pre- and post-course surveys asked for studentopinions regarding their identity and self-efficacy as engineering students. The post-coursesurvey also had questions measuring the level of agreement to various statements regarding theuse of WeBWorK as a homework delivery system and their experiences with it.Statistical Analysis of Quiz ScoresA binomial generalized linear mixed effect model was used to analyze the data mainly becauseof the variability between baseline student
” within an individual. The intellectual “equipment” is comprised of the learner’sknowledge and beliefs, whereas the value-based equipment are solely driven by the learners’personal goals and interests. Also, Deci 10 proposes that learners’ interests motivate them toparticipate in learning activities. According to Atkinson and Wickens 11 this motivation toengage in learning is a function of learners selecting activities that pique their interests, and alsopersisting and making efforts to accomplish goals they find interesting. Further, activities thatcater to students’ interests have also been claimed to be related with self-efficacy, educationalchoices, and career outcomes 12–14. The role of interests and the humanistic nature of
becompetitive in the entry-level job market with over 78% of respondents selecting these asimportant or very important (Figure 1). In comparison, study abroad experience was onlyselected by 7% of respondents as important or very important. Compared to reported data in theliterature, the value of some type of work experience for recent graduates’ employability issimilar. Stiwne and Jungert (2010), for instance, discussed the importance that engineeringgraduates placed on being able to carry out thesis projects at firms. This was not only for theexperience, but also to develop key skills for the workplace, such as subject-specific knowledge,self-efficacy, and time management skills. A similar study looked at how the experientiallearning that takes place
students’ ability to make decisions that are both integrative andinclusive (Hesse-Biber and Leavy, 2011). These interviews will also capture details about groupdynamics, engagement, self-efficacy, and cultural competency; each consenting student willanswer similar questions during recorded interviews. These interview reflections will serve as atool to enhance student metacognition while simultaneously serving as a form of triangulation tocorroborate other methods of assessment (Hesse-Biber and Leavy, 2011). We will use a contentanalysis methodology to extract behavioral data from student final reports, including argumentsand decision-making processes, to validate our qualitative data. Additionally, we will useaggregated qualitative information
this paper, the impact of the Engineering Ambassador Program (EAP), which engagesundergraduate engineering students as Ambassadors in K-12 outreach activities, on the stimulationof interest in STEM, self-efficacy, and actual academic attainment of Ambassadors is presented.The collected data over several years reveals that over 2/3 of activity leaders and projectcoordinators of the EAP at Howard University (HU) expressed higher confidence in their ability inunderstanding and succeeding in engineering because of their EAP experience. Also, the activityleaders and project coordinators achieved higher major and overall grade point averages (GPAs).Furthermore, improved academic performance in the courses related to the projects thatAmbassadors were
education researchers have long grappled with impact questions (in the ASEEconference archives alone, “impact” is mentioned in 568 titles; “measuring impact” is in 24titles), and proposed various study-specific methods to probe impact. In one study, for example,student impact of project-based service learning (PBSL) was described through engineeringcollege retention, participation by underrepresented students, fulfilment of ABET learningoutcomes, and enhanced student preparation to practice engineering design.16 Another study thatfocused on measuring the impact of infusing entrepreneurship across engineering curriculumused measures of self-efficacy and locus of control.17 Student attitudes towards math and sciencewere used to measure the impact of
Foundation.ReferencesAlexander, C. (2011). Learning to be lawyers: Professional identity and the law school curriculum. Maryland Law Review, 70(2), 465-483.Ampaw, F. D., & Jaeger, A. J. (2012). Completing the three stages of doctoral education: An event history analysis. Research in Higher Education, 53(6), 640-660.Auxier, C., Hughes, F. R., & Kline, W. B. (2003). Identity development in counselors-in- training. Counselor Education and Supervision, 43(1), 25-39.Bieschke, K. J., Bishop, R. M., & Garcia, V. L. (1996). The utility of the research self-efficacy scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4(1), 59-75.Bowen, W. G., & Rudenstine, N. L. (1992). In pursuit of the Ph. D. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Brace, N
intended outcomes, and the context of thework in some detail.Our data regarding outcomes of the experience for both mentors and mentees come from surveysconducted at the end of the semester, though we recognize that self-reported information fromthe end of the semester is not the perfect tool[7] . In the future, we may collect informationthroughout the semester to see how students’ and mentors’ perspectives change over time.This study follows a scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) process. We seek to evaluatesomething we are doing in the classroom; we did not begin with a theoretical framework likeengineering self-efficacy or teaching self-efficacy, though we believe both are relevant to thisstudy.How we use peer mentors in our first year
students sit in the same place doing their assignments individually [9]. If the instructors detect a mistake or a student requests their help, they sit together with the group of students and give them a set of “hints” rather than simply solving the problem for them. We teach our students that in order to learn mathematics they should never ask for the solution to the problem, instead they should do it on their own so that they learn by solving the problem [3]. After all, in this part we want to engage more students in learning mathematics. We want the teachers to become facilitators of learning experiences and improve the self-efficacy of students by boosting their confidence and help-seeking abilities [11]. It is worth mentioning that
interest in STEM content and careers.”When students are engaged in meaningful tasks that incorporate facets of science, technology,engineering, and mathematics, they will develop a stronger self-concept and greater interest inSTEM fields. Engineering design activities increase students’ interest and self-efficacy inengineering and their problem-solving abilities (Householder & Hailey, 2012). Thomasian(2011) noted when students were not provided with opportunities to engage in hands-on STEMactivities, their ability to complete a postsecondary degree in a STEM field was diminished. Healso stated that without a “rich supply of STEM-skilled individuals” the United States wouldstruggle “to compete in the global economy, where discovery, innovation
., Usher, E. L., Li, C. R., Economy, D. R. and Kennedy, M. S. (2016), Measuring UndergraduateStudents' Engineering Self-Efficacy: A Validation Study. J. Eng. Educ., 105: 366–395.8 Burton, J. D. and White, D. M. (1999), Selecting a Model for Freshman Engineering Design. Journal ofEngineering Education, 88: 327–332.9 Gunn, C., & Somerton, C., An Engineering Laboratory Experience For A Freshman Engineering Class Paperpresented at 2004 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2014 Salt Lake City, Utah.10 Alava, J.D. and Gardiner, K.M. The Development of the First Year Engineering Experience. Proceedings of Fall2010 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference, October 15-16, 2010, Villanova University. (http://www.asee.org/documents/sections/middle
Internet.Many participants took advantage of this option. The program integrated experiential learningtheory [5], 21st Century skills such as creativity and technology proficiency [6]–[8] and ethnicallymatched mentorship [9], [10] to increase academic success, self-efficacy and a sense of belongingin STEM. Where possible, instruction and activities were aligned with the Next GenerationScience Standards for engineering and Common Core Mathematical practices. In addition, near-peer mentoring was provided by undergraduate and graduate students in related disciplines.Summer ProgramThe components of the four week summer program are described below: 3D Modeling: Participants were introduced to visualization in three dimensions, geometry, isometric drawing
included.Interestingly, student feedback revealed that a number of “problems” with the lab sequence stemfrom the perception that either computational thinking is not a relevant skill for a materialsengineer, or that students were not in fact learning more than how to use a specific softwarepackage. To combat these factors and increase students’ self-efficacy, a “marketing campaign”was implemented for these courses. The results of these five years of aggressively includingcomputational modeling into the undergraduate materials science curriculum, including studentperceptions and achievement before and after these changes, can provide valuable insight for anydepartment interested in making similar changes.KeywordsMaterials Science, Modeling, Computation
]. Stout etal. found that by exposing girls to female experts in STEM, they were able to foster strongeridentification with STEM, more self-efficacy, and increased effort on STEM tests. They foundthat even if negative stereotypes remained in girls’ minds with respect to gender and STEM, thattheir own self perception benefited from contact with female experts in STEM [6]. Interventionsto increase interest, expectations, performance and self-esteem in STEM in young girls havebeen shown to be effective.How can Girl Scouts help close the gender gap? Royse found that the Girl Scouts curriculum hasa significantly positive impact on the self-esteem of adolescents [7]. From a report entitled“How Girl Scout STEM Programs Benefit Girls” published in 2016 by
. Professor Washington received his BS, MS and PhD degrees from NC State. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Integration of Entrepreneurship in a First-Year Engineering CourseAbstractThis evidence based practice describes the integration of entrepreneurship into a project-basedfirst-year engineering course to encourage student innovation, and to develop student leadershipand self-efficacy. A module featuring a series of lectures on entrepreneurship and business plandevelopment was introduced as part of the curriculum. The module was further enhanced withthe introduction of multiple company founders and industrial leaders who were invited to deliverpresentations and interact with students
mentioned ona high-level within the internal report. For example, the evaluator stated that two particular sitesleadership team members received overwhelming poor feedback from classroom mentors andthat NSBE SEEK should further investigate the potential causes [9].LITERATURE REVIEWThe unique structure of the NSBE SEEK program requires that it is youth led. For the purposesof this review, youth are defined as 18 - 25. Within this youth led model, it is necessary for thereto be components of service, cultural competency, and self-efficacy. Youth participation canhave a considerable effect on community change. Since the community of the NSBE SEEKprogram is one of youth leaders, you essentially have youth leading other youth. It is importantto note
new version of the software. This papersummarizes the results of revising a traditionally taught course, with notes and handouts, to onethat utilized a textbook, and finally into a hybrid flipped classroom model.IntroductionOne of the challenges in the teaching profession is to motivate and inspire students to learn.There are numerous examples to motivate students as expressed by Barbara Davis. These rangefrom incorporating different teaching methods to various ways to organize the course1.Chickering and Gamson argue that time on task and active learning leads to betterunderstanding2. Vogt emphasized and elaborated for “time expending the necessary mentaleffort.” She also continued in her study to show that student self-efficacy had “very
; Morgan, E. M. (2010). The role of self-efficacy and identity in mediating the effects of science support programs (Technical Report No. 5). Santa Cruz, CA: University of California Cooper, T. (2009, Spring). Collaboration or plagiarism? Explaining collaborative-based assignments clearly. POD Network News. Estrada, M., Woodcock, A., Hernandez, P. R., & Schultz, P. W. (2011). Toward a Model of Social Influence That Explains Minority Student Integration into the Scientific Community. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 206-222. doi: Doi 10.1037/A0020743 Finelli, C.J., Bergom, I., and Mesa, V. (2011). Student teams in the engineering classroom and beyond: Setting up students for
analysis of presence and extent. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(3), 1-26.Carberry, A. R., Lee, H. S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring Engineering Design Self-Efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 71-79.Dawes, L., & Rasmussen, G. (2007). Activity and engagement—keys in connecting engineeringwith secondary school students. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 13(1), 13-20.Duderstadt, J. 2008. Engineering for a changing world: A roadmap to the future of engineeringpractice, research, and education. Ann Arbor, MI: The Millennium Project, The University ofMichigan.IronCAD (Computer Software). (2015) Retrieved from http://www.ironcad.com/Kelly, A. E. (2014). Design-based research in engineering education: Current
fewer opportunities for undergraduate students tocultivate these skills before they are deeply embedded in their profession specific courses.11,12Educating pre-professional students in processes of creativity and innovation is recognized andencouraged to enhance innovation in addressing current health challenges.13 Studiesdocumenting the importance of Interprofessional Education (IPE) for medical and nursingstudents have identified successful outcomes including improved communication skills,increased knowledge of role, and greater self-efficacy.14,15 Moreover, IPE has been shown topositively change students attitude towards working in teams for medical students.16 Theseoutcomes are process-oriented; yet, two separate systematic literature
knowledge and developing a healthyappreciation for outside expertise. The collaboration also benefited the non-engineering studentsby demystifying the field of engineering, potentially alleviating “imposter syndrome” bynormalizing team performance expectations, and providing some literacy of the engineeringdesign process. In the case of early childhood education students, these altered perceptions of theengineering discipline may have impact on their self-efficacy for teaching science andengineering (Maier et al., 2013; Kallery 2004; Watters et al., 2000); as such their teaching inthese two content areas may positively influence the perceptions of engineering by their futurestudents, particularly females and minorities. This study adds to the
difficulties can consist of negative beliefs or thoughts that may“decrease the individual’s self-esteem and perceived self-efficacy, [and thus] …decrease theindividual’s confidence in his or her ability to make decisions” (Kleiman, 2004). Gati (1996)developed a taxonomy of career decision-making difficulties to explain possible sources ofvocational indecision. Examples of difficulties include lack of information about occupations,lack of information about oneself, internal conflicts, external conflicts, and dysfunctional beliefs,such as irrational expectations about the career-decision making process itself.Dysfunctional career thinking appears to have a large impact on STEM career choice in females.In a meta-analysis of literature exploring the
Annual Conference and Exposition.[3] Carberry, A. R., Lee, H.-S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring Engineering Design Self-Efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, (January), 71–79.[4] Daher, T., & Loehring, M. (2016). Shaping the Engineering Freshman Experience through active learning in a Flipped Classroom. In 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 1–10).[5] Estell, J. K., Reeping, D., & Reid, K. “Workshop - Envisioning the First-Year Engineering Body of Knowledge”, Seventh Annual First Year Engineering Experience Conference, August 2-4, 2015.[6] Everett, J. W., Morgan, J. K., Stanzione, J. F., & Mallouk, K. E. (2014). A hybrid flipped first year engineering course. In 6th First Year
microprocessors course. Pre and post data on students’ self-assessment of theircollaborative behaviors, ability to work with others to achieve a common purpose, ability tomaintain positive working relationships while respectfully disagreeing, ability to divide labor,fostering of a positive work environment, self-efficacy and reflection, approaching work withhonesty and integrity, commitment to task completion, empathy and understanding of others,along with self-assessment of their work to achieve technical competency are presented.Observations from a recorded hands-on lab period are also presented to categorize the behaviorsobserved by studentsThe following sections survey the literature on leadership skills necessary for success inengineering, discuss
construct their own general education pathways.23Innovation as a Content Area for General Education As a content area, innovation is a relatively new academic focus. As part of the challengeof working across disciplines, the team addressed the fact that there is no single accepteddefinition of innovation. Some define innovation from an organizational perspective24 – as anecessary trait for an organization (corporation) to be sustainably productive and for thatorganization to produce disruptive technology.25 Others define innovation from an individualabilities standpoint – as the capacity for students to execute the known processes of innovators,at which point the focus is on self-efficacy.26 There are multiple ways of connecting
and self-efficacy in the new generation of women STEM scholars", Women in engineering, science and technology: Education and career challenges, 97-114. 14. Grisselle Centeno, Susana Lai-Yuen, Iman Nekooeimehr, Audra Banaszak, Ashley Ishak, “The Impact of Healthcare-Related Pedagogical Interventions on Student Diversity, Motivation and Retention”, Proceedings of the 2016 Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference
same adults reported significantlylower levels of math self-efficacy. Despite the similar math test performances between older andyounger adults, graduation rates decline with the age of a nontraditional student 20.Additional nontraditional characteristics. Beyond the age characteristic, other nontraditionalfactors do not have as much empirical support. Despite this lack of research, there are somestudies that illustrate the benefits of being a nontraditional undergraduate student 21. Forexample, female students with children tend to report higher levels of psychological well-being,despite having higher levels of stress than students without children 22. For both traditional andnontraditional students, motivation varies by level and type 23
, L. E., & Williams, C. R. (2012). A behavioral framework for highly effective technical executives. Team Performance Management, 18(3/4), 210–230. http://doi.org/10.1108/13527591211241033[4] McCormick, M. J. (2001). Self-Efficacy and Leadership Effectiveness: Applying Social Cognitive Theory to Leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 8(1), 22–33. http://doi.org/10.1177/107179190100800102[5] Reddan, G. (2008). The benefits of job - search seminars and mock interviews in a work experience course. Asia Pacific Journal of Cooperative Educationacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 9(2), 113–127.[6] Butler, S. A., Sanders, D. E., & Whitecotton, S. M. (2000). Student And Recruiter
technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(7-8), 716-740.Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P‐12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-387.Brown, S., Street, D. & Martin, J. P. (2014) Engineering Student Social Capital in an Interactive Learning Environment, International Journal of Engineering Education, 30(4), 813-821.CAP (2016) Retrieved from: https://www.uc.edu/cap.htmlCarberry, A. R., Lee, H. S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring engineering design self‐efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 71-79.Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2004). Self
self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations, that go beyond the scope of thepresent study.27 Still, the analysis in this paper, which was designed to explore relationshipsbetween undergraduate co-curricular experiences and post-graduation retention, is useful in thatit provides some evidence for the efficacy of particular high impact practices for enhancingprofessional advancement in industry.Finally, the survey used in this study ascertained student involvement in particular practices, aswell as the length of time (i.e., in months) or degree of involvement (e.g., not involved,moderately involved, extremely involved). The survey did not ascertain information about thenature of student involvement. Simply put, not all HIPs are created