naturally uncomfortable towork on open-ended problems, because it feels risky to proceed along an ambiguous solutionpath. Nevertheless, some students seem to be more confidently uncomfortable, ready and willingto begin working on open-ended problems. We sought in this study to understand the factors thatmake a student better able to begin work on these projects without directed guidance from theinstructor. Here, this student ability is ascribed to, in part, a student’s ambiguity tolerance andself-efficacy on open-ended problems. A survey instrument to measure ambiguity tolerance and self-efficacy on open-endedproblems was created and subject to internal validation. Students taking a 2-course sequence ofrequired, foundational courses over
has shown to be related to students’ choice to leaveengineering. Jones et al. [8] found that engineering belonging was the most significant predictor of first-yearengineering students’ intention to remain in their selected engineering major.Engineering program expectancy. Expectancy is a subjective evaluation of one’s competence in a particulardomain.19 Self-perceptions of competence are central to many theories in the field of motivation, such as self-concepttheory,20 self-efficacy theory,21 and expectancy-value theory.16 An individual’s expectancy beliefs are influenced bymany factors including past experiences (e.g. how well they performed in a high school math class), the influences ofsocializers (e.g., parents, teachers and peers) and
] [7].Other tools that are helpful in developing self-awareness are the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator(MBTI), the DiSC profile, and the Kolb Learning Style Inventory. These inventories all measuredifferent aspects of an individual; CSF measures natural talent, MBTI measures preferred modesof psychological processing, DiSC measures behavioral style, and Kolb measures individuallearning styles [8]. Our campus chose to utilize the CSF as our primary tool because of Gallup'sspecific focus on college students with their StrengthsQuest platform. This platform utilizes thesame inventory (CSF), but the information provided after taking the inventory is geared towardstudents.Within the Engineering education community, MBTI has been widely used in team
. AcknowledgementThis work was conducted under the auspices of the National Science Foundation (NSF) undergrant number EEC-1640521. However, any items expressed in this paper do not necessarilyrepresent the views of NSF or its affiliates.ReferencesBandura, A. (1977). Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behaviorial Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.Engineering Accreditation Commission (2015). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs: Effective for reviews during the 2016-2017 accreditation cycle. Baltimore, MD: ABETFantz, T. D., Siller, T. J., & DeMiranda, M. A. (2011). Pre-collegiate factors influencing the self
aspirations, level of motivation, andacademic accomplishments” [8]. In the context of engineering, this is essential as students navigatetechnically challenging coursework and rigorous workloads. Self-efficacy has a strong relationshipto both learning and achievements. As Mamaril et al. state, it is most effective to measure self-efficacy at both the general engineering field level and the specific technical skill level [9].Evaluating at these different levels yields a more comprehensive understanding of a student’sconfidence in their overall engineering abilities. A major contributor to a student’s self confidence in completing engineering tasks is theirperceived proficiency in technical skills. Usher et al. investigated students in
freshmen’stransition into pursuing science, math and engineering degrees at the UIW. In order to achievethis goal, the objectives of the camp were (1) To address students’ academic readiness and self-efficacy for a rigorous STEM degree; (2) To strengthen incoming freshman students’ skills incommunication, effective collaboration, and data analytics through coding and hands-on roboticsactivities. The Summer Engineering Academy was a free one-week camp that provided serviceto a low-to-moderate income student population in STEM major. The camp participants werefrom diverse STEM fields that included engineering, biochemistry, nuclear medicine science,biology, computer information systems, meteorology, 3-D animation & game design. Weobserved that upon
the face of challenges. Beliefs about the nature of intelligence havebeen identified as a key lever across these critical behaviors linked to academic success and life-long learning [3].Beliefs are recognized as powerful sources of behavior and various outcomes, and they are awell-established construct of interest in engineering education research. For example, students’beliefs about their own capabilities, or self-efficacy beliefs are important [4-9], and theycorrelate with retention in educational pursuits [10, 11]. Prior work has shown the importance ofbeliefs held by engineering students about the self (i.e. identity) [12-14] and how those beliefsframe their interactions with others [15]. Theory has been generated that connects
Motivation, Self-Efficacy, Self-Determination, Grade Motivation, and CareerMotivation. Glynn and his associates define student motivation to learn science as the “internalstate that arouses, directs, and sustains student behaviors associated with the learning of science[8].Table 1. Student Scores on the SMQ II-Pre & Post TestsTest Students/Scores Intrinsic Self- Self- Grade Career Overall/Raw Motivation Efficacy Determination Motivation Motivation AggregatePre Total # 114 114 114 114 114 Average Score 14.25 14.23 13.64 16.92 15.35 74.39 (n=114) STEMGrow(n=86) 14.63
increase diversityand inclusion, the researchers were motivated to conduct this study to improve the belonging ofengineering pre-major students in STEM classrooms and their intended majors. This researchexplores the effect of embedding small interventions designed to improve engineering pre-majorstudents’ sense of belonging and self-efficacy into traditionally taught Introduction to Engineeringand Introduction to Engineering Physics classes. In addition, this study investigates the effect ofthe interventions on different student groups (women, first generation, students of color or ethnicbackground, community college vs. technical college vs. university students, etc.). This study hasthe potential to benefit first-year engineering education
designed to help preparestudents for university life. In order to facilitate the program and help students get involved inthe campus community, they are placed on a “pack” with five of their peers. Each pack is guidedby a “pack leader” who is a successful engineering student that acts as a mentor to the newstudents throughout their freshmen year. Having a peer mentor can aid in new students adjustingto campus life [9], [17]. Additionally, studies have shown that positive role models and socialsupport can impact the level of confidence and self-efficacy that students have in their ability tocomplete an engineering degree [18].MethodsParticipantsBoot camp participants were recruited through the Provost’s office and at various College ofEngineering
cornerstone and non-cornerstone (original 2 course sequence) sections on many topics covering textbooks, pedagogy,concepts taught, self-efficacy in engineering, and more; 2) student feedback teams used in manysections of the course; 3) University-administered student evaluations given at the end of eachsemester; and 4) the first-year teaching team, which met frequently and worked each summer toimprove course design and supporting materials.This paper outlines the differences between the Full versus Split Cornerstone approaches andlooks at the evolution of a first year culture and other positive effects created in instituting thenew Cornerstone courses. The analysis includes how both the students and instructors areaffected by each approach and the
engagement with students’ course ratings andcourse performance by analyzing learning analytics data (e.g., site access, timestamps, etc.)captured within the learning management system. Additionally, students from both online and in-person sections will be invited to participate in focus group interviews to explore faculty-studentconnections and course enjoyment. Furthermore, a follow-up study will further assess theimpact on student outcomes, student motivation, effort regulation and self-efficacy between thein-person and online sections as part of a retention study.References[1] M. Borrego, J. E. Froyd, T. S. Hall, “Diffusion of Engineering Education Innovations: A Survey of Awareness and Adoption Rates in U.S. Engineering Departments,” Journal
participants’ spatialperception, mental rotation, and spatial visualization skills, both the experimental group and acontrol group will complete the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test (PSVT) before the onlineworkshop, in the middle of the semester, and after completion of the workshop. Results of this pilotstudy will be analyzed to determine the value of offering online spatial reasoning content to allincoming engineering students. It is our hope to understand how to best increase spatial skills forwomen engineering students, and doing so early in their college careers might lead to increasedretention, success, and self-efficacy. This research also aims to expand representation of women inengineering by creating resources that properly address specific
many sophomores in mechanical orelectrical engineering would only begin to be exposed to. The progress over a short time spanalone indicates progressive projects that do not simply reboot from one semester to the next aremore rewarding and beneficial for student learning and development. Additionally, the studentsgain a real sense of what the design loop is, and how it can be utilized to create a great product.Students also learned how to leverage the skills diversity within their groups to maximize theeffectiveness of each individual and function within very diverse teams.Additional evaluation and self-efficacy exams need to be developed as metrics for studentgrowth and development to accurately assess the efficacy of the course, and data
studydesign, conclusions cannot be drawn about the impact of this pedagogical strategy, incomparison to other strategies, on student engagement, situated learning and studentperformance. With the longitudinal design, this study will continue to explore the impact of themulti-semester cardiograph project on situated learning, student engagement, studentperformance, and student self-efficacy, which could support student retention in engineeringprograms. The cardiograph project provides students with the practical experience of howdevices are made/work that students and industry desire in Engineering programs.References[1] ASME, "Vision 2030: Creating the Future of Mechanical Engineering Education, Phase 1 Final Report," ASME, New York2011.[2
,” Foster. Crit. Reflect. adulthood, vol. 1, p. 20, 1990.[30] J. Dewey, Experience and education. New York: Macmillan, 1938.[31] E. Elbers, “Classroom interaction as reflection: Learning and teaching mathematics in a community of inquiry,” Educ. Stud. Math., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 77–99, 2003.[32] A. Y. Lee and L. Hutchison, “Improving Learning From Examples Through Reflection,” J. Exp. Psychol. Appl., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 187–210, 1998.[33] D. Boud, D., Keogh, R. & Walker, “Promoting reflection in learning: a model,” in Reflection: turning experience into learning, London: Routledge, 1985, pp. 18–40.[34] B. J. Zimmerman, “Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn,” Contemp. Educ. Psychol., vol. 25, no. 1
increasing attention from many stakeholders in academia includingfaculty, staff, administrators and students. Its significance goes beyond the benefits for theacademic institutions to encompass national concerns.At a large land-grant university in the mid-Atlantic region, between 2003 and 2012, an averagethirty percent of first-year engineering students left engineering before their second year. Athree-year study (2007-2010) implemented to gain insight into this attrition rate, showed thatstudents left primarily because of lack of interest in and knowledge about engineering and theinstitution, disconnection from the engineering profession, low self-efficacy and academicdifficulty. Underrepresented minority (URM) students left at a disproportionately
sense of community is particularly important for first yearstudents to aid in retention efforts, and professional persistence is related to one’s identity as anengineer. The formation of an engineering identity plays a part in both interest in engineeringand contributes to perseverance in the major [7, 8, 9, 10]. Exposure to mentors and/or rolemodels within the STEM discipline has a positive impact on an academic sense of belonging, aswell as a positive impact of academic self-efficacy [11], while others have noted that poorfaculty-student relationships negatively impact a sense of belonging and the persistence in themajor [12, 13]. Curricular integration within various engineering departments combined withpeer-peer interactions, specifically
representation bygender and by race (Gleason, Boykin, Johnson, Bowen, Whitaker, Micu, & Slappey, 2010;Raines, 2012). For example, the work of Ackermann (1990; 1991), Cabrera et al. (2013), Garcia (1991),Kezar (2000), Strayhorn (2011) and Walpole et al. (2008) document the impacts of first-yearsummer bridge programs on students’ transition into college. In particular, these scholars notethat such programs can positively impact the academic, social, and personal development ofunderrepresented student populations (Ackermann, 1990; Garcia, 1991; Strayhorn, 2011). Inaddition to impacting these areas of student development, first-year summer programs canpositively influence students self-efficacy and sense of belonging (Cabrera et al., 2013; Stolle