- Conference Session
- Emerging Computing and Information Technologies II
- Collection
- 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Authors
-
Sushma Sanga, Bosch Inc; Ali Eydgahi, Eastern Michigan University
- Tagged Divisions
-
Computing & Information Technology
-theft anxiety level in college students. This study performed several analyses ona developed questionnaire to ensure validity and reliability. After examining all proposedhypotheses, it was found that electronic devices self-efficacy and electronic devices usage havesignificant impact on identity-theft anxiety level of the students. The data also support arelationship between information security awareness of the students and their identity-theftanxiety level. This research also showed that gender, employment status, race, and age havemoderating effects on all hypotheses. The outcome of this study indicated that moreinformation should be provided to students regarding how to take proactive measures inusing their electronic devices in order to
- 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