their own predic-tion about their final course grade at the beginning of the semester. In particular, we study students’learning self-efficacy, that is, their confidence in themselves to learn in a CS1 course and outcomeexpectancy, that is their expected final grade in the course. We use the term learning self-efficacybecause it refers to students’ confidence measured at the beginning of the course. It’s a proxyfor their perceived ability to solve problems and learn to program. By taking factors like gender,prior programming experience, and GPA, we are interested in analyzing which factors influence astudent’s outcome expectancy and their learning self-efficacy at the beginning of a CS1 course.2 Background and Related WorkVarious instruments
personnel, and others. In our approach, first, we devised course-specificmentoring objectives through literature surveys and pre-course surveys. To achieve theseobjectives, we created a set of mentoring activities. We also designed evaluation metrics to assesswhether there are any changes in students' perceptions toward computing programs and perceivedimpacts on students' self-efficacy and sense of belonging over time. Through these analyses, wetried to measure whether we need to design course-level-specific mentoring to help ourunderrepresented students attain their computing careers. We believe our mentoring should helpour underrepresented and predominantly major students who may hesitate to pursue a computingprogram or require enhanced self
groups in computer science programs and careers have been suggested. Lackof access to computing technology, inadequate K-12 preparation, lack of role-models, stereotypethreat, and lower self-efficacy have all been identified as reasons non-majority students do notenter or eventually leave computing programs [8]-[19]. Specifically in STEM fields anddisciplines, non-majority students’ sense of belonging is imperative to their retention and successwithin STEM programs and is associated with a variety of positive outcomes for individualsincluding: increased GPA, increased self-reported health and well-being, and increased academicscores [20], [21]. Yet, in direct opposition to non-majority students cultivating this sense ofbelonging, or fit, in
acceptance that a student receives from variouspersonal stakeholders, such as family, peers, and mentors. Finally, competence/performance isthe closest construct to a student’s feeling of self-efficacy and indicates their level ofself-confidence in their knowledge and abilities in computing. While the four sub-constructsmeasure distinguishable aspects of a student’s sense of identity in a field, they also influence eachother in a dynamic manner based on a student’s unique environment and context [24], a facet weindicate with bi-directional arrows.Students’ computing identity has previously been used as a measure of persistence [27] and alsotheir career choice [24]. We applied the computing identity framework to study students’ ties tothe discipline
certifications are common among job postings for cybersecurity and informationtechnology positions. Although academic institutions have been advised against teaching solelytowards passing a certification exam, the domains covered in these exams can offer valuableinsights into evolving industry needs (Knapp et al., 2017). Ngo-Ye and Choi (2016) summarizeda few benefits of achieving an industry certification: demonstration of an applicant’scompetency, skills, and abilities; differentiation among applicants; and development of anapplicant’s confidence and self-efficacy. One international survey found that “90% ofrespondents who got a cybersecurity certification before their first job in cybersecurity found it
pursue a professional computing industry careerpathway [11]. Factors hindering computing students from pursuing internships are studentinterest in internships include, lower self-efficacy, the challenging application process forinternships, and other priorities such as family, focusing on their GPA, etc. [12]. Less frequently,students may consider going into business for themselves as an entrepreneurship pathway. Jobmarket conditions and socioeconomic status are primary factors influencing the students’decision to pursue entrepreneurship [4], [13]. Finally, though perhaps not exhaustively, studentscan consider attending graduate school and conducting research through a master’s or Ph.D.degree. Students’ interest and actual enrollment in graduate
performance, including motivation, self-efficacy, values,curiosity, and, most importantly, learning environments. Learning is a cognitive phenomenon thatdiffers from person to person. There is no doubt, however, that learning through hands-onexperience is an effective method of retaining information. Undergraduate students in this digitalage have grown up with technology and come from an education system that encourages criticalthinking, hands-on learning, teamwork, design skills, problem solving, and experiential learning[1]. Most students today are visual and interactive learners, and research in educational theory andcognitive psychology shows that this type of learning is one of the most effective methods forteaching students of all ages how to
graduate school, and I Am First program for first generation students. Inaddition, the BE-TEC program is extending or adapting successful evidence-based practicesfrom its Track 1 program. The planned support services and programs have been selected toincrease academic learning, completion, and career or graduate school placement, as well as toassist in soft-skills development which is so important for graduates such as communication,teamwork, self-efficacy, leadership, and knowledge integration.NSF BE-TEC Program AssessmentTo assess the outcome of our NSF BE-TEC program, a study has been started by the institution’sBusiness Intelligence and Research Services to compare the NSF BE-TEC students to twocontrol groups: UVU students
include subscales that assess research abilities, leadership potential, self-efficacy,sense of one’s identity as a scientist, plans to attend graduate school, plans to pursue engineering,mentorship connections, attitudes toward research, etc. The conclusions drawn from the SageFoxassessment report are presented in this section and available on the program website [15].REU HighlightsThe data collected during the four years of the program shows that the program has beensuccessful during the pandemic and beyond. The results from the survey suggest that there hasbeen an increase in STEM knowledge, confidence, and high intention to pursue engineering as adegree. Even though the program has been successful and met its goals, the data results showthat
] A. Robins, J. Rountree, and N. Rountree, “Learning and teaching programming: A reviewand discussion,” Computer Science Education, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 137–172, Jun. 2003, doi:https://doi.org/10.1076/csed.13.2.137.14200.[13] S. Katz, D. Allbritton, J. Aronis, C. Wilson, and M. L. Soffa, “Gender, achievement, andpersistence in an undergraduate computer science program,” ACM SIGMIS Database: theDATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 42–57, Nov. 2006, doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/1185335.1185344.[14] G.Y. Lin, “Self-efficacy beliefs and their sources in undergraduate computing disciplines,”Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 540–561, Nov. 2015, doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115608440.[15