opportunities can foster or hinder belongingness and identity development [7].Consistently, education researchers are investigating questions associated with students’ self-identification as professionals in their field of study. Factors such as gender, career goals, careerexposure, and academic success are predictors of this self-identification [9]. Vocational interests,occupational self-efficacy, occupational prestige are closely associated with each other, and withschool, leisure, and actual engagement in corresponding activities [10]. Career identity has beenlinked with career development [6]. The lack of adequate training, time, and incentives couldcreate tension with truly recognizing and forming professional identity. It is important that
, training on operation of research related equipment, rigorouspreparation and evaluation of curricular units, and participation in events aimed at developingteacher-faculty interaction and teacher-teacher communication. II.2. Undergraduate Research Program The undergraduate research program is a residential summer program that engagesundergraduate rising juniors and seniors in innovative “green” science and engineering researchduring a 10-week summer program and provides these scholars with professional developmentand academic training and exposure to cutting edge research equipment and facilities, where theprogram was designed to foster undergraduates’ understanding of and self-efficacy in scienceand engineering. Students who
pursuingengineering degrees [5-6]. This is particularly true for women in STEM [7-8]. Of the womenwho do graduate with an engineering degree, many seek jobs outside of the engineering industrymore often than their male counterparts. Many reports indicate that women leave engineeringjobs in part because of low self-confidence in their technical abilities. A study published by theAmerican Sociological Review shows that women express and feel less professional roleconfidence than men when in engineering [9]. This study, along with others, affirm that womenin engineering careers often have lowered self confidence in their technical competencies even ifthey persisted through getting an engineering degree [9-10]. Lowered self-efficacy coupled withan extra pressure
recipients with demonstrated financial need and academic talent in STEMmajors to better prepare them for the workforce through scholarship funding, mentoring, and 3educational enhancement activities. The intended outcomes were to increase participants’retention, graduation, readiness, and transition to the workforce in their field, or to transitionto graduate school in STEM. The purpose of requiring educational enhancement activities was to help build self-efficacy, community connectivity, and professional identity. Another reason was to increasewhat Sociologist/Anthropologist Pierre Bourdieu [4] refers to as social, cultural, andeconomic
engineering educationA multitude of factors can influence student engagement and retention in engineering programs,such as students’ background and preparation, attitudes, behaviors, self-efficacy, motivation, andlearning strategies [2, 9]. As such, universities across the world are implementing initiatives thatseek to transform engineering education in order to increase student engagement and reducedropout rates from courses and programs [10-12]. These initiatives demonstrate that studentengagement is a multidimensional construct that needs to be approached through a holisticperspective that transcends the presentation of content in the classroom [13]. Instructors canappeal to students’ personal interests, offer opportunities for self-reflection, or
manual for qualitative researchers, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2015.[30] J. W. Creswell, Qualitative inquiry and research: Choosing among five approaches, 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013.[31] A. Tashakkori, and C. Teddlie, Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, Volume 46, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.[32] A. Bandura, Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change, Psychological Review, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 191-215, 1977.[33] S. Bubany, T. Krieshock, M. D. Black, and R. McKay, College students’ perspectives on their career decision-making, Journal of Career Assessment, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 177-197, 2008.[34] G. Lichtenstein, H. G. Loshbaugh, B. Claar, H. L. Chen, K
Relationship Between Self- Efficacy and Retention in Introductory Physics,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1096–1121, 2012.[21] B. Rienties and D. Tempelaar, “Turning Groups Inside Out: A Socail Network Perspective,” no. November, 2017.[22] M. L. Loughry, M. W. Ohland, and D. J. Woehr, “Assessing Teamwork Skills for Assurance of Learning Using CATME Team Tools,” 2014.[23] Y. Benjamini and Y. Hochberg, “Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing,” J. R. Stat. Soc., vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 289–300, 1995.[24] A. Dinno, “Nonparametric Pairwise Multiple Comparisons in Independent Groups Using Dunn ’ s Test,” Stata J., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 292–300, 2015.[25] C. Smith and S
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
inform ways that students evaluate their belongingness in engineering, as well asways in which educators can help their students feel like they belong.IntroductionBelongingness typically describes a sense of community or affinity towards a certain group, asexpressed by an individual. In this article, we use the term to represent an individual’s judgementof whether they feel welcomed and wanted in engineering. Stronger feelings of belongingnessresult in higher self-efficacy [1], engagement [2], and ability [3]. Conversely, a lack ofbelongingness has been identified as one of the top reasons that students leave a university [4, 5].Belongingness is imbued throughout a student’s educational experience, at both the classroomand university levels [1
to create measures of neighborhood socioeconomic status for each student [19]. Otherdemographics of race/ethnicity, gender, and parent education status were collected are presentedwithin this work to inform about the study population and to support our claims of the existingunderrepresentation of minoritized groups in our data and engineering as a whole [9].Students who provided a ZIP Code and were identified as being enrolled in engineering (n = 2,372)were the focus of this study. Each student was then classified as “low,” “middle,” or “high”neighborhood socioeconomic status. Initially, we attempted to separate by average federalrepresentations of individual socioeconomic class; $0 to $39,554 (low), $39,555 to $118,072(middle), and $118,073
, insufficient preparation and barriers in recruiting into engineering programs at the K-12 level, low self-efficacy, lack of peer support, inadequate academic advising or faculty support, harmful stereotypes of particular groups that influence interactions in classrooms or in peer groups, and a chilly or unappealing climate [1- 9]. These factors may exist at the level of the institution, the engineering college, and/or the engineering-specific department. Given the current accreditation structure for engineering programs, students’ experiences may be more influenced by institution and college-level factors in their first two years, when they are taking basic science and breadth courses, and shift to department-level factors in their upperclassmen years
engineering students. The results indicate students who had taken one or moreentrepreneurship courses were more likely to have the desire to start their own business or workfor a small business or startup. They were also significantly more confident in specificentrepreneurial self-efficacy measures including their ability to ‘write a clear and completebusiness plan’ and ‘recognize when an idea is good enough to support a major business venture’.These students also possessed statistically significant higher levels of risk tolerance. Another recent quantitative study called the Entrepreneurship Education Projectinvestigates the motivational processes of three groups of undergraduate students participating inentrepreneurship (entrepreneurship
of creative problem solvingoutcomes for their community service learning projects, indicating that scaffolding throughquestion prompts may play an important role in self-regulated learning processes and creativeproblem solving outcomes. The authors’ ASEE conference paper published in 2015 revealedthe impacts of scaffolding for creative problem solving through question prompts on students’perception on creative problem solving, self-efficacy, identity, and application of creativestrategies based on data collected from implementation at that time [14]. Results fromanalysis of available data indicated that scaffolding for creative problem solving mightenhance students’ self-efficacy and their interest in engineering and promote their
, C. & Dweck, C. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33-52.Puentedura, R. R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. Retrieved on September 2, 2016 from http://hippasus.comZimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-Motivation for Academic Attainment: The Role of Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Personal Goal Setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676. doi:10.3102/00028312029003663AppendicesMid-Term Exam AnalysisAverage: 71 out of 100Standard Deviation: 19A few midterm problem averages:Problem 5. 71%Problem 8. 55%Problem 9. 70%Problem level analysis:Problem 1.Level
involving students in curriculum development and teaching through Peer Designed Instruction.Prof. Debbie Chachra, Olin College of Engineering Debbie Chachra is a Professor of Engineering at Olin College of Engineering. Her education-related research interests include self-efficacy, design, intrinsic motivation, and gender. She speaks and consults on curricular design, student-centered learning, and gender and STEM.Dr. Kate Roach, UCLMrs. Emanuela Tilley, University College LondonDr. Kyle G. Gipson, James Madison University Dr. Kyle Gipson is an Associate Professor at James Madison University (United States) in the Department of Engineering (Madison Engineering) and the Director of the Madison Engineering Leadership Program
for reviewer comments; only minor revisions were recommended in the review process.This client’s review indicated how well the team had been incorporating his feedback throughoutthe project.Our assessment of student learning is not based on a statistical model, as in large-scaleassessments, but rather it measures how students perform on a classroom-based assessment.Pellegrino argues that classroom assessments, which depend on interpretations made by teachersusing qualitative data, rather that statistical models, are not being used to their fullest potential[12]. The qualitative data that follow provide evidence for interpreting student performance,including students’ use of feedback in the revision process. These data are provided to
we saw with our young man’s frustration and outburst. We can see how simplestrategies and actions by researcher supported or hurt identity and self-efficacy. Learners of allages could possibly benefit from formal and informal activities which generate and mature a ‘gutfeel’ for how a language works and then how it connects to the commands and syntax. Foryoung learners developing confidence in using the technology and an identity as someonecapable of doing so is a valuable precursor skill towards later learning in programming.Limitations and Next Steps The main limitations in this research are the small number of trials and the ‘second hand’nature of the data. In total just over five hours of video were analyzed with about 60
hidden, such as our research on majority measurement bias in studies ofpersistence [47], Riley and Pawley’s [48] work critiquing myths of gender and race inengineering education, and Foor, Walden, and Trytten’s [49] ethnography of one female multi-minority student which provides “a microphone for the voices of the marginalized to be heard”(p. 113). The powerful lens of intersectionality contributes to the growing field of engineeringstudies, which considers how social categories (such as age, race/ethnicity, class, gender, abilityand sexual identity) are enacted in engineering [50]. Our other work on SVEs examined theintersection between first-generation, engineering, and military identities [51]. The current studyextends other research on the
Theory (by allowing for more individualized learning), and Self-Regulated Learning (in part through increased access to feedback) (see pp. 41-51 in Ref. 3). Intheir recent analysis of 62 articles about flipping in engineering classrooms, Karabulut-Ilgu,Cherrez, and Jahren identified “flexibility, improvement in interaction, professional skills, andstudent engagement” as frequently cited benefits. (see p. 7 in Ref. 5). A 2016 metastudy offlipping in STEM disciplines similarly found mainly positive results, including evidence ofincreased student engagement and of students' perceptions of self-efficacy.7Despite such benefits, it is necessary for any teaching strategy to be implemented as part of aprocess of, as adult education scholar Stephen
engineering education.Dr. Tanya Kunberger, Florida Gulf Coast University Dr. Kunberger is an Associate Professor in the Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering in the U. A. Whitaker College of Engineering at Florida Gulf Coast University. Dr. Kunberger received her B.C.E. and certificate in Geochemistry from the Georgia Institute of Technology and her M.S. and Ph.D. in Civil Engineering with a minor in Soil Science from North Carolina State University. Her areas of specialization are geotechnical and geo-environmental engineering. Educational areas of interest are self- efficacy and persistence in engineering and development of an interest in STEM topics in K-12 students.Dr. Thomas A. Lenox, American Society of Civil