todemographic characteristics (underrepresented racial/ethnic minority (URM), women, URM women),college experiences (internships/co-ops, having a job, conducting research, and study abroad), andengineering task self-efficacy (ETSE) which is a respondent characteristic that may be targeted ineducational interventions (i.e., outcome indicator for evaluation of impact of an intervention). All ofthese measures were collected on the survey instrument via self-report by student respondents to fixed-choice survey questions.Table 1. Variables compared between students classified as first-generation/low-income based on definitions Demographic Characteristics URM Underrepresented racial/ethnic minority status in response to ‘racial or ethnic
Scholars’ self-efficacy, identity, and sense of belonging, and (iv) to study the impactof cross-disciplinary “engaged-engineering” projects on retention through the end of the 2nd year.Moreover, this program has the potential to benefit society in a variety of ways. It will contributeto the development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce by preparing students forcareers in engineering. The program also contributes to the full participation of women andunderrepresented minorities in engineering by incorporating program features that are known toincrease the retention of these groups in engineering [9]. By measuring and studying the effects ofthe program elements and disseminating results, the research conducted will inform
unlabeled axes. Aquestion form of this inquiry could be “Do students interpret and recognize characteristics ofpotentially misleading bar and line graph axes?” The methods employed included havingsubjects draw conclusions based on complete or incomplete bar and line graphs and provide theconfidence in their answer. Sub-questions included “Do students accurately measure theirconfidence and self-efficacy regarding their ability to interpret and recognize characteristics ofpotentially misleading bar and line graph axes?” and “What, if any, differences exist betweenstudents from Maine and the general population regarding ability to interpret and recognizecharacteristics of potentially misleading bar and line graph axes?”Study of factors influencing
elements of affect. For example, feelings can often beconsidered to be measured by a students’ physiological state [20]; and one contributor to self-efficacy (an aspect of a student’s affect) is physiological state [5]. If a student has an upsetstomach or dizziness – in other words, symptoms of anxiety – they may experience reduced self-efficacy. Whereas if they experience an elevated heart rate or increased blood rush to the head,symptoms that can be associated with being excited, they may experience an increase in self-efficacy. In other words, a student’s most basic feelings will both be influenced by and, in turn,influence, their self-efficacy.Therefore, while it is recognized that it is important to study how different elements of
, students completed consent forms,academic and health histories (necessary for risk-management purposes, as EPICS students visitthe university), and provided parental contact information before completing a series of measures(see Table 1). The measures were aimed at capturing students’ attitudes and behaviors towardengineering. The main measures of interest include Engineering Identity (see Table 2) and DoingEngineering (see Table 3) designed by Terence J. Tracey, a counseling psychologist andTirupalavanam G. Ganesh, an engineering education researcher [17]. These measures weredesigned based on James Marcia’s theory [18], [19] and building upon Betz and Hackett’s [20]work in studying self-efficacy. Based on Marcia’s theory [18], [19], that identity
identity (overall and by dimension).Scope of workOur interest in the intersection of identity and motivation leads us to a mixed-methods approachin which we couple a quantitative measure of engineering identity (Engineering IdentityInstrument) with a qualitative investigation of motivation. Specifically, we interpret motivationthrough the lens of student responses to failure, and frame our results in the context ofachievement goal, self-efficacy, and attribution theories. Students who are motivated byachievement attribute effort as the cause of success or failure. When faced with failure, studentsof this mindset put forth more effort to overcome the situation. However, students are alsomotivated by their own perception of success and failure. This
industry working on water and wastewater treatment infrastructure projects.Dr. Eileen Kogl Camfield, University of California at Merced Since 1997, Eileen has been a college instructor, curriculum designer, and faculty pedagogy coordinator. She spent five years as Director of a University Writing Program, which included leading faculty learn- ing communities for Writing in the Disciplines. She subsequently served as the Executive Director of Student Academic Success Services. Eileen’s deep commitment to advancing equity, diversity and inclu- sion connects with her research interests pertaining to student success, writing self-efficacy development, resilience theory, and authentic assessment. At UC Merced, she has a dual
-efficacy and the students’ interests wereadapted from [3]. The remaining items were adapted for middle school students from a surveythat had been previously used to assess engineering students’ perceptions towards physics andmathematics [4, 5]. Each item asked the students to rank their perceptions of each of the STEMdisciplines that they encountered in middle school (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology,and computer science). This paper presents only the results of the students’ perceptions ofphysics. Table III details the 13 items that the students answered. TABLE III 13-ITEM TEST OF SELF-EFFICACY, INTEREST, AND PERCEIVED RELEVANCE OF PHYSICS # Statement about physics 1 I am very good at physics. 2
exam performance [24]-[29]. The literature shows increases instudent outcomes, student perceptions [14], even in self-efficacy with regards to complicatedsubject matter [29]. The flipped classroom pedagogy equalizes opportunities for students,especially for students of lower socioeconomic status and first-generation students. Incomparison to advantaged students who may have support systems in place to help completehomework and projects with tutors or advice from previous generations of how to navigatehigher education, disadvantaged students are able to take advantage of the relocation of thehomework and projects inside the classroom and benefit from interaction with the professor inthe classroom. The flipped class allows both subsets of
learning experience. OK Go Sandbox offers avariety of activities that are accompanied by different STEAM standards, meaning that theresource offers a comprehensive approach that students benefit from. Reference [3] alsodiscusses that motivation and engagement can be increased by implementing engineering/STEMinstruction through different integration techniques. Also discussed are different methodologiesof teaching engineering in K-12 schools. OK Go Sandbox allows engineering instruction tooccur in a variety of settings, especially when students are able to connect their learning topreviously learned knowledge and skills.Reference [4] discusses the necessity for teacher self efficacy to be measurable because itimpacts a teacher’s actions in the
students. This study focused on a STEM outreach program for 6th–9th grade students with no previous CS skills. The program's micro controllers’ curriculum was used to test students’ capabilities for learning CT concepts, the program was translated into Arabic, and its schedules were adjusted to ensure that these changes did not alter the study significantly. Pre- and post-program self-efficacy surveys measured students' comprehension of CT concepts, but because this was the first time Kuwaiti students were introduced to this type of assessment, the students were confused about some of the concepts. Additionally, the students' acumen for the survey was highly influenced by their culture. Despite
Engineering Education, 2020 Understanding How Co-op Students View their LearningAbstractThis research paper discusses student perspectives on learning while on co-op and suggests waysto improve co-op experiences for students. Successful outcomes of co-op, like graduating withhigher GPAs [1], [2], having an easier time transitioning into full-time work [3], or beginningwith higher starting salaries [2], [4] have been discussed in the past, however, little is formallydocumented on the ways in which co-op provides these benefits. These benefits could be realizedthrough many different pathways which may include students improving technical and/orprofessional skills, refining their identity, and increasing their self-efficacy, among
. Socialcognitive career theory developed by Xeuli Wang (2013) is the basis of the study. According tothis model, an individual’s decision to choose a STEM major is affected by a variety of highschool experiences, determined largely by prior mathematics success. Those experiences areimportant in determining the individual’s goals and interests. In other words, an individual’sbackground and participation in certain activities affect their learning experiences, andsubsequently their self-efficacy, and eventually their career choices. A survey about influenceson their decisions to major in engineering was completed by 251 students at a major researchuniversity. Possible influences were categorized by type (e.g., informal activities/camps, formalschooling
graduate, or professionalschool. He also found positive correlations between research involvement and a broad range ofself-reported growth measures and satisfaction with many aspects of an educational experience.(Astin, 1994)” They further reported that students, and faculty, overwhelmingly find it to be apositive experience. [5]To assess that the ASPiRe program creates a similar positive impact, a Likert Survey was createdto assess self-efficacy and confidence. Several surveys, such as the Longitudinal Assessment ofEngineering Self-Efficacy [LAESE] and the Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Attitude Survey[PFEAS] were researched to establish preliminary questions to assess self-efficacy and confidence.[2] The former was the primary influence for
-curricular [11]), and applications in specific courses, both traditional engineering[12] and those with a more specific EML focus [13].Outside of these more application-oriented areas, there have been workshops to contextualizewhat entrepreneurial education should look like in engineering [14], comparisons betweenengineering and business students’ interest in entrepreneurship [15], and exploration of thepredictors of entrepreneurial self-efficacy [16]. In addition, there is a rapidly growing literatureexamining the development of instruments to measure various conceptualizations ofentrepreneurial mindset in engineering students [8, 17-21]. What seems to be lacking in any ofthese studies is an investigation of the alignment between these measures and
chosen at random with 20 observed in each of the three groups (AL, AL+, and control).The instruments are being built based on other validated instruments, including those that wehave developed in our previous work [18]; however, since we are taking pieces from differentsurveys, we are doing additional validation with the surveys we build.Instructor SurveyTo assess instructors’ perceptions of their use of active learning instruction, we designed asurvey to measure instructors’ use of active learning and their self-efficacy towards using it.Moreover, the survey was designed to identify perceived barriers instructors face whenimplementing active learning into their curriculum. The instructor survey measures 20 constructswith 99 total items and will
and whether or not the individual is a first-generation college student.Model 2 adds the measure of commitment to an engineering career, career commitment, to thecontrol variables and finally, Model 3 adds the three social psychological measure belonging,scientific self-efficacy and engineering identity.We compare the statistical results of similar models before (Model 2) and after (Model 3) theinclusion of the career commitment variable in order to examine the possibility that careercommitment may mediate the relationship between engineering identity and sense of belongingand our academic outcomes. A variable is mediating a relationship when a prior effect between apredictor and outcome variable is significantly reduced when the third
may feel if they have low self-efficacy in this area of engineering and design.Lesson PlanPrep: Structured Practice:• Gather supplies 10 minutes• Fill bucket with water • Collaboration with partner(s). Must present finalGrouping: design before using materials. Have to spend 10• Instruction will be given as an entire group. minutes planning without touching materials. Must build exactly what is on
researchershave studied various factors for their ability to influence the performance of a student in anintroductory programming course discussed below.1.1 Factors of SuccessA wide range of factors spanning from a student’s gender to their experience with video gameshave been studied in the context of student success in programming courses. Some of the mostcommonly analyzed factors include gender [3], [4], [5], [6], prior programming experience [3],[5] – [9], and previous math or science courses [3], [8]. Other factors include self efficacy [6],[8], comfort level [3], [6], [10], motivation [10], and attributions [6], [8].There is currently little evidence that gender plays a major role in student success. Quille et al.[4] conducted a multi-institutional
towards securing my future.”Question 7. How do you feel when you have low grades in class?Low performance as measured by grades can have highly damaging and negative consequenceson students perceived self-efficacy, confidence, and motivation. As indicated by the participants’statements, students begin to question their capability to comprehend class material which impactstheir sense of self confidence to achieve academic success. “I feel terrible.” “Nervous and slightly concerned/stressed for my grade.” “Anxious because it will affect my GPA and I’m not sure that I’m learning well.” “Stressed out, hyper.” “I feel terrible and dumb. Like I know nothing in the class which is usually not true.” “I feel a little depressed since grades
], [28].Flipped classroom pedagogies, including POGIL, effectiveness on student outcomes has beendemonstrated thoroughly in the literature through longitudinal studies [18], STEM classes [15],[19], and quantitative studies of exam performance [20]-[25]. The literature shows increases instudent outcomes, student perceptions [12], even in self-efficacy with regards to complicatedsubject matter [25]. The flipped classroom pedagogy equalizes opportunities for students,especially for students of lower socioeconomic status and first-generation students. Incomparison to advantaged students who may have support systems in place to help completehomework and projects with tutors or advice from previous generations of how to navigatehigher education
in developingengineering students’ multiple skills and abilities, such as independent thinking, criticalthinking, creative thinking and hands-on skills [8]-[10]. For instance, using self-reported questionnaires among senior students , Marques (2017) pointed out thatengagements in SDPs can strengthen students' soft skills like communication andpublic speaking [9]. Also, Xiong and Liu (2012) suggested that students whoparticipated in SDPs got their critical thinking and engineering design thinkingimproved [13]. In addition, applying self-efficacy scales, Dunlap (2005) measuredstudents' self-efficacy in a capstone environment. Pre- and post- data showed astatistically significant change in student perceptions of personal ability andpreparedness
students [27]. The principles ofthe competency-belief component of this theory are similar to Shavelson’s self-concept of ability[28] and Bandura’s self-efficacy construct [29]. While by definition, these three concepts aredifferent, they have proven difficult to isolate empirically [30-34] and are usually measured in thesame manner [27]. Competency beliefs are frequently grounded in self-efficacy theory [22], whichfacilitates the connection between positive feedback and better academic achievement [35]. Valuebeliefs, on the other hand, have been studied less often but are by no means less vital. Whilecompetency beliefs focus on a person’s ability to do a task or engage in an activity, value beliefsfocus on an individual’s desire to engage in an
and fun circuits and providing a big picture view, andpromoting students’ motivation to continue pursuing the EE major. We have adopted this courseproject for two consecutive course offerings in fall 2018 and fall 2019, respectively. Studentfeedback in the form of survey questionnaires has confirmed that this pilot project has beensuccessful. Per the survey results, most students feel their abilities of developing design solutions,constructing prototypes, and communicating the design process have improved, which indicatesincreased students’ self-efficacy. Moreover, majority of students feel more motivated to continuewith the EE major of study.I IntroductionFor most Electrical Engineering (EE) and Engineering curricula, analog circuitry and
”responses related to strategies students realize they were not using effectively.A single researcher scored the responses; thus our study did not have the benefit of a more robustreview of the data or the benefit of inter-rater reliability.Conclusion and Implications for Future ResearchWe propose that a course environment that focuses on increasing metacognitive awarenessthrough self-directed learning in individual and collaborative settings may positively impactstudents’ self-efficacy. As students focus on attaining goals that are important to them, in settingswhere the challenge is not beyond their capability, in a social setting that supports persistence,students’ self-efficacy should be enhanced [16]. This is an area ripe for future
. Duncan-Wiles, “Design creativity in K-12 student designs: Exploring an egg packaging and drop activity,” in iSTEM – Integration of Engineering into other STEM Education: Proceedings of 2nd P-12 Engineering and Design Education Research Summit, Washington, D.C, April 26 - 28, 2012. 9[4] N. D., Fila and Ş, Purzer, “The relationship between team gender diversity, idea variety, and potential for design innovation,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1405–1418, December 2013.[5] M. Schar, S. Gilmartin, A. Harris, B. Rieken, and S. Sheppard, “Innovation self-efficacy: A very brief measure for engineering students,” in Proceedings of the
exception is that Huang (2017) conducted quantitative surveyon students who participated in “Creation Youth” National University StudentEntrepreneurship Competition, and found that entrepreneurship practice education includingentrepreneurship competitions had significant positive impacts on mediating variable ofentrepreneurial self-efficacy and therefore can improve college students’ entrepreneurialintention [23]. Although the prior study has proven the promoting effect of entrepreneurialcompetition on entrepreneurial intention, it remains to explore which specific learningexperiences in entrepreneurship competitions function. This current study shall continue toexplore the specific impact of engaging in TIECs on engineering students
first-time student retention at a public Midwest community college (Published doctoral dissertation)., Saint Louis University, USA., 2013.[14] P. K. Roberts, Perceived changes in career decidedness following completion of a for- credit career class (Published doctoral dissertation), University of Northern Colorado, USA, 2004.[15] R. Reese and C. Miller, "Effects of a university career development course on career decision-making self-efficacy," Journal of Career Assessment, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 252-266, 2006.[16] A. Scott and K. CIani, "Effects of an undergraduate career class on men’s and women’s career decision-making self-efficacy and vocational identity," Journal of Career Development, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 263
involved in research that focuses on STEM integration, Elementary Teacher STEM identity and self-efficacy development, and the interactions between Formal and Informal learning entities.Dr. Julie Thomas, University of Nebraska - Lincoln Julie Thomas is a Research Professor of science education in the College of Education and Human Sci- ences at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Thomas’ research has focused on children’s science learning and teacher professional development. Proud accomplishments include collaborative efforts – such as No Duck Left Behind, a partnership with waterfowl biologists to promote wetland education efforts, and En- gineering is Everywhere (E2), a partnership with a materials engineer to
“Zip to Industry: A First-YearCorporate-STEM Connection program”. This program connects first-year STEM students withco-op/intern students within their major (or in a similar major) for several four-hour jobshadowing experiences during their initial year on campus.The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact a first-year STEM job-shadowing programon first-year students’ retention in STEM, and their knowledge of careers in STEM fields. Thestudy reported in this paper is part of a larger study that is also investigating the relationshipbetween self-efficacy, interest in STEM, and retention.Theory of ActionThe use of shadowing experiences for first-year STEM students as a means to make progress onthe research questions of this project