Paper ID #29854Exploring how innovation self-efficacy measures relate to engineeringinternship motivations and outcomesAmy Huynh, University of California, Irvine Amy Huynh is a mechanical and aerospace engineering undergraduate student at the University of Cal- ifornia, Irvine. She is interested in better understanding and supporting the experiences of female and underrepresented engineers in the classroom and in industry. She is a Brooke Owens Fellow and has interned at NASA Goddard, Made In Space, and NASA Ames.Dr. Helen L. Chen, Stanford University Helen L. Chen is a research scientist in the Designing Education Lab
. Interview data was collected, transcribed, and coded. Results of thecoding process are analyzed and shared.The authors define self-efficacy as a psychological measure of the confidence an individual hastoward their abilities in a specific activity. It is a generative ability that can be developed in anindividual through experiences such as mastery experiences and vicarious experiences. Masteryexperiences pertain to activities or tasks in which the individual is personally engaged that canhelp them develop expertise in a particular field, whereas vicarious experiences are experiencesthe individual has witnessed that can provide insight. These experiences can have either positiveor negative effects on the self-efficacy of an individual. A high level
self-efficacy. In addition, thisstudy examined whether the relationship was different between genders. The students in the classwere from eight universities and worked in teams with a mentor from a government agency orlab who provided them with a real unclassified cybersecurity problem. The study was conductedin 2016 and included a sample of 18 students (males=13 and females=5) who responded to a pre-survey and a post-survey (Cronbach’s alphas for both surveys =.96) that measured researchedself-efficacy using a 100-point Likert scale (0=complete uncertainty and 100=completecertainty). Due to a small sample, a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test and a Mann-Whitney U Testwere used to analyze the data. As part of the posttest, students were asked open
significant improvement in students’ self-efficacy for applyingthese skills after completing the course. Furthermore, a notable number of students expressingdoubt in their abilities to complete a particular task with a maker skill had improvements to theirself-efficacy upon noting the steps towards successful completion of that task, and expressedconfidence in completing an even more complex task.IntroductionEngineering educators are often interested in knowing whether their students can confidentlyapply the skills they were taught from coursework. In many studies, exams and final grades areused as the key metrics in measuring students’ success towards applying theory to practice [1]–[5]. Yet, other researchers have repeatedly taken more interest in
, goals, and actions. We will leverage the framework by deeming the internship as the learning experience thatshapes interns’ self-efficacy and outcome expectations related to working in a data analyticsand/or sports industry career post-graduation. Levering the SCCT framework, we have designedour assessments to explore student beliefs as well as contextual (and environmental) variables byexploring the supervisor’s perspective. Figure 1. Social Cognitive Career Theory [12]Assessment methods To capture the individual student experience as well as the organizational context, we aredeveloping an assessment plan to measure changes in student learning and perceptions, as well ascollect data on program elements, including
to theengineering CoP as well as their imagination of their current relationship to the CoP in the formof self-efficacy. Two data sources were used to operationalize participants imagination as a modeof belonging: pre-post administrations of a self-efficacy survey and post-program used to probefor how participants’ saw themselves in relation to the CoP. Self-efficacy. The self-efficacy measure focused on participants’ imagined sense of theirown current capabilities related to engineering. At two points in the program (pre and post), REUparticipants were asked to rate themselves on a scale from 0 (Completely Unconfident) to 100(Completely Confident) with respect to their current level of self-efficacy or confidence forinnovation and
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
approaches students spend extended time (oftenmultiple semesters) working with engineering professionals outside the classroom [1]. These“co-op” experiences can have positive impacts on engineering students’ academic performanceand future compensation [2], [3], as well as strengthening self-efficacy, career development andpractical engineering skills [4]–[6]. Undergraduate research is another form of experientiallearning that allows students to engage in problem solving and investigative processes in alaboratory or with a research group. Undergraduate research is a “high impact” learningexperience [7], [8], although its value depends in part on how well students are integrated withand supported in the research setting [9]–[12].At a large research
personalities and psyches. Adding to the mix is thatmany programs have a required co-op rotation that adds an entire range of influences, many ofwhich are unforeseen and out of the control of the engineering programs.Co-op education has been shown to have numerous effects on students. Co-op education hasbeen shown to have an academic effect, with co-op students getting higher grades in somecourses, particularly in those based on soft skills [1]. Co-op education has also been shown tohelp in self-efficacy, particularly in work-related activities and has also shown to have a positiveeffect on retention [2]. Co-op education has also been shown to have a positive effect on startingsalaries (nearly 10%) [3]. The goal of this study is to gauge the effect of
, orSES. In the third and final pass, we focused on reading for details related to themes identified inthe initial analysis, including discussion of the conceptual framework and patterns in types of out-of-class involvement.Findings and DiscussionProfessional Development Outcomes Associated with Student Organization Involvement.Researchers have defined and examined student outcomes impacted by out-of-class experiencesin a variety of ways. In the realm of professional development, these outcomes range fromintellectual and competency development to value constructs (e.g., ethics, professionalresponsibility, sustainability affect) and constructs of self-efficacy and professional identity(including sense of belonging, work self-efficacy, and
education over the past several years.Active learning methods have proven to be an effective way to increase engineering self-efficacy (Carini RM,2006), academic performance(Freeman,2014), feelings of responsibility to complete futuretasks(Daniel,2016), and recently retention in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM)(Elgin,2016).Even authors in the cognitive science discipline suggest that classrooms with an active learning approachcan increase student motivation, knowledge retention, and content transferability (Michael, 2006; Norman andSchmidt, 1992; Vosniadou, Loannides, Dimitrakopoulous, & Papademetriou, 2001). The core elements of activelearning are student‟s activity and engagement in the learning
, inclusion and self-efficacy from thelearning sciences in a suite of program components designed to advance students into STEMcareers. Unlike many research experience programs, Akamai accepts students from diversebackgrounds with a wide range of GPAs and early in their college years, when they are most atrisk of leaving STEM - 56% are lower division students upon acceptance. Akamai also providessupport for mentors to instill inclusive, collaborative mentoring practices and to ensure mentorscan effectively prepare interns for integration into the 21st century workplace. To date, Akamaihas paired over 350 STEM undergraduates representing the full diversity of the islands includingmany groups traditionally underrepresented in the STEM workforce such as
students;the positive results of internships may even be contingent on certain qualities of the experience.For example, Raelin et al 2014 showed that the increase in student self-efficacy in internshipsdepends on students feeling as though they have made an impact on their organization, had theopportunity to work in teams, and were able to apply knowledge from their majors [21].Informal evaluation and inflexibility in internships may form a barrier to student learning goals,and students are not always fully prepared for their internships [16], [22]. This is particularly aproblem since internships may be formally integrated into curricula or even take the place ofcapstone projects [23], [24].Yet despite these difficulties, internships enjoy
internationally), knowledge production, philanthropy, socialentrepreneurship, voluntary simplicity, self-efficacy and independence and occupationexperiences [13, 14,15,16,17,18, 19]. These studies found that study abroad experiences have astrong influence on multiple markers of personal and professional growth, however, this impactvaries based on the amount of time elapsed since the experience [20].Higher education institutions have been settings elevated goals of facilitating high-impactlearning experiences such as study abroad programs. During 2018-19, the number of U.S.students who studied abroad for credit grew by 1.6 percent that represented about 1.8 percent ofall U.S. students enrolled at institutions of higher education in the United States [21
/ngv:78746.[3] K. A. J. Mohr and E. S. Mohr, “Understanding Generation Z Students to Promote a Contemporary Learning Environment,” J. Empower. Teach. Excell., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 84–94, 2017, doi: 10.15142/T3M05T.[4] H. Hyytinen, A. Toom, and L. Postareff, “Unraveling the complex relationship in critical thinking, approaches to learning and self-efficacy beliefs among first-year educational science students,” Learn. Individ. Differ., vol. 67, no. August, pp. 132–142, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2018.08.004.[5] S. K. Wang, H. Y. Hsu, T. C. Reeves, and D. C. Coster, “Professional development to enhance lecturers’ practices in using information and communication technologies (ICTs) as cognitive tools: Lessons
. The model was updated based on conversations with professors, facultymembers, and students outside of the institute of this study. This is because the model ismeant to be transcendent of location and context.Furthermore, certain exclusions to the data gathering and literature review were made: ● This project is focused on comparing programs; therefore, the individual experience is not as important as the group experience. This means that we excluded components of these skills that relate to the self (efficacy, comfort, confidence, etc.) ● We are using the community-centered framework, which means student motivation is not a major part of this study. It is accepted as part of the questioning and for contextualizing