Conference Session

Curricular Issues in Computing

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joshua Levi Weese, Kansas State University; Russell Feldhausen, Kansas State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Computing & Information Technology

exploration as a theme, and the other used micro controllers as thefoundation for activities. The goals of this research are as follows: 1. Develop effectivecurricula for improving student self-efficacy in CT, 2. Develop a reliable and effective wayof measuring student self-efficacy in CT, and 3. Enforce the notion that CT is not problemsolving (PS), but a component of cognition.Background and Related Work“Computational thinking involves solving problems, designing systems, and understandinghuman behavior, by drawing on the concepts fundamental to computer science”26. However,computational thinking (CT) is not intended to be equated to computer science; rather theessence of CT comes from thinking like a computer scientist when faced with problems

Conference Session

Curricular Issues in Computing

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tony Andrew Lowe, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering); Sean P. Brophy, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering)

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Computing & Information Technology

teams of four and complete in-class homework and projectchallenges with their team. Teams are assigned using a survey (discussed later) in order tobalance out multiple individual characteristics such as gender mix and self-reported efficacy andprior learning. The exact ‘formula’ by which the team assignments are made varies slightly inyear, but generally uses the same categories of data later discussed in Table 1. The methodologyfor forming team attempts to pick a ‘ringer’ for each team, based on self-reported self-efficacy inprogramming. The ringer is chosen based on the reported programming skills, but is balancedacross the demographic factors mentioned earlier as well as ensuring a balance of experienced,somewhat experienced and novice

Conference Session

Curricular Issues in Computing and Information Technology Programs II

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Vetria L. Byrd Ph.D., Purdue University; Camilo Vieira, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering)

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Computing & Information Technology

research instrument: self-efficacy, research skills, and scientificleadership. The sections below describe survey questions from each of these survey sections. Atotal of 17 questions are provided: 5 from General Self-Efficacy, one (1) from Research Skillsand Knowledge, and 11 from Scientific Leadership.General Self-Efficacy Feedback from students on general self-efficacy addresses student confidence in theirability to perform each of the activities listed in Table 5. Students select the rating that bestdescribe their degree of confidence by using the following scale: Strongly Agree (5), SomewhatAgree (4), Neutral (3), Somewhat Disagree (2), and Strongly Disagree (1).Table 5. General Self-Efficacy Student Survey 2015 Post Questions

Conference Session

Topics in Computing and Information Technologies I

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Wei Zheng, Jackson State University; Jianjun Yin, Jackson State University; Yanhua Cao, Jackson State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Computing & Information Technology

cooperation scaffolding might hinder students’ cooperation inlearning. The impacts of scaffolding on students' learning dispositions measured by MSLQ 23 wereexamined by comparing results between the post-test and the pre-test in terms of size effect, asshown in Table 10. According to the comparison, Group B enjoyed the increase in self-efficacy, intrinsic value, cognitive strategy use and self-regulation, but suffered intensified testanxiety. Group C, similar to Group D, experienced increase in self-efficacy and reduced testanxiety, but failed to develop in intrinsic value cognitive strategy use and self-regulation.However, Group D enjoyed the boldest increase in self-efficacy and largest decrease in testanxiety, but they suffered the largest