Paper ID #49062How a Cornerstone Course Impacts Self-Efficacy and Entrepreneurial SkillsProf. Catalina Cortazar, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Catalina Cort´azar is a Faculty member in the engineering design area DILAB at the School of Engineering at Pontificia Universidad Cat´olica de Chile (PUC). Catalina holds a Ph.D. in Engineering Science with a focus on Engineering Education from PUC, an MFA in Design and Technology from Parsons The New School for Desing, an MA in Media Studies from The New School, and a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering, with a concentration in Structural Design.Gabriel
ininnovation-related tasks, was measured using a validated Innovation Efficacy scale. The studyfurther explores the effect of graduate students acting as learning coaches and project mentors.This work examines whether the learning coaches’ guidance and support contribute to increasinginnovation self-efficacy. The IES scale was modified to include role-specific items for studentsto rate how the coach and mentor contributed to their innovation self-efficacy.Innovation-Based Learning (IBL) is an educational approach designed to foster origination,particularly in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines such asbiomedical engineering. Unlike traditional project-based learning, IBL focuses on solving openproblems, identifying new
-efficacy of undergraduate environmentalengineering students is explored in a target course before and after a curricular interventionwhich has been shown to have the potential to enhance innovation self-efficacy. A design mentorand an education mentor outside of the course supported the students through their engineeringdesign process. During the start and end of this curricular intervention, a survey consisting of theVery Brief Innovation Self-Efficacy scale (ISE.5), the Innovation Interests scale (INI), and theCareer Goals: Innovative Work scale (CGIW) was administered to measure students’ shift in: 1)Innovation Self-Efficacy, 2) Innovation Interests, and 3) Innovative Work. Formal feedback fromthe mentors was utilized in interpreting the survey
-Efficacy Measure and Social Cognitive Career TheoryIn the realm of human behavior, self-efficacy holds profound importance, particularly ininnovation and entrepreneurship. Several self-efficacy measures have been developed in theinnovation and entrepreneurship research fields and tailored to the specific tasks that areassessed in this context (e.g., [20]–[24]). Innovation Self-Efficacy (ISE) refers to theindividuals’ confidence in their ability to innovate and engage in specific behaviors thatcharacterize innovative people [23], [25], whereas Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE) is thebelief and confidence individuals have in their own capabilities to execute tasks aimed atentrepreneurial outcomes and pursuing new venture opportunities [20], [21
. V., & Boldureanu, D. (2020).Entrepreneurship education through successful entrepreneurial models in higher educationinstitutions. Sustainability, 12(3), 1267. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031267Cai, W., Gu, J., & Wu, J. (2021). How Entrepreneurship Education and Social Capital PromoteNascent Entrepreneurial Behaviours: The Mediating Roles of Entrepreneurial Passion and Self-Efficacy. Sustainability, 13(20), 11158. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132011158Colombo, M. G., Guerini, M., Rossi‐Lamastra, C., & Bonaccorsi, A. (2021). The “first match”between high-tech entrepreneurial ventures and universities: The role of founders’ social ties.The Journal of Technology Transfer, 47(1), 270-306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-021-09848-3D’Este
could say that being creative,innovative, and problem-solving are basal characteristics at the heart of American culture. The history ofthe US is strongly colored by innovators dating back to Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and otherscontinuing through the development and expansion of the US. The drive to succeed is so strong in theculture that it is often named as “the American Dream” and as a whole, it overshadows a more criticalpoint – what are the components of “success” and how are we measuring them? The triple bottom linetheory [2] began a very critical and much need change associated with that definition of success: itexpanded it beyond just making profit for a corporation, to factoring in some way the effect of thecompany’s actions
technical skills in statistical analysis so they can face business environments with strength andcan make good decisions as entrepreneurs [18].As a practical case and analyzing the results section in a real scenario, we want to talk about howpolice officers in the city of Medellin, used this tool to predict the behavior patterns of car theftand thus take predictive and corrective measures in this situation, then, the description of the case:The data analysis is carried out to determine variables that allow us to evaluate the result andanalyze the strongest trends regarding the modality of vehicle theft in the city of Medellin.The process was carried out through the Crisp DM methodology [19], based on six fundamentalphases such as: understanding the
we take a different tack, wanting to identify the nexus, or common ground, ofInnovative and Entrepreneurial self-efficacies, and Innovative and Entrepreneurial behaviors.Thinking about common ground is a useful lens with which to look at the intentional or focusedcreativity of engineers, whether they are working in new or existing enterprises. First, we showthe development of this intersectional/nexus concept (which we call Embracing New Ideas, ENI)in terms of measures of self-efficacy (ENI-SE; consisting of six items, with a Cronbach’s Alphaof .85) and behavior (ENI-B; consisting of five items, with a Cronbach’s Alpha of .80). Thenbased on Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), we model ENI-B (our dependent variable) asa function of ENI-SE
conducted in a single junior-level course for environmentalengineering students. The innovation self-efficacy of participants was measured using a surveythat included items from the Very Brief Innovation Self-Efficacy scale (ISE.6), the InnovationInterests scale (INI), and the Career Goals: Innovative Work scale (IW). The drawings wereanalyzed for Artistic Effort (AE) and Creative Work (CW) by engineering and art evaluators,respectively. The ISE survey results were compared with the AE and CW scores and thecorrelations with travel, gender, and multilingualism on creativity attributes were explored. Astrong correlation between CW scores and AE scores was observed. A negative correlationbetween CW and ISE.6 was found. The CW scores were significantly
study evaluates the use of entrepreneurial design projectsin a first computer aided design (CAD) course. The study quantifies changes in affectivecapacities in terms of Need for Achievement (nAch), Generalized Self-Efficacy (GSE), andTolerance for Ambiguity (ToA). Surveys deployed at the start and conclusion of the CADcourse provide the data needed to evaluate these changes. A paired sample t-test for those whoresponded to both entry and exit surveys (N=14) shows an absence of significant change for anyof the measured affective capacities. However, a small number of individual students exhibitednoteworthy, though not statistically significant, changes for one or more of the three measures.This outcome points to the value of conducting larger
, no. 11, pp. 885–888, 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100688.[7] M. Schar, S. Gilmartin, A. Harris, B. Rieken, and S. Sheppard, "Innovation self-efficacy: Avery brief measure for engineering students," in Proc. 2017 ASEE Annual Conf. & Expo.,Columbus, OH, Jun. 2017. Available: https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--28533.[8] A. Bolhari, A. Bielefeldt, A. Gowrishankar, M. Leizerovich, S. Gavney, and R. Saxton,"Exploring the Relationships between Artistic Creativity and Innovation Attitudes inEngineering Students." [Online]. Available: https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10529229.[9] T. Heeren and R. D’Agostino, “Robustness of the two independent samples t-test whenapplied to ordinal scaled data,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 79-90, 1987,https
, document, observe, and quantify the development of a student’s EM during hands-on experiences in an REU. his work-in-progress paper describes the successful implementation of concept mapping as anTanalytical tool to measure student learning outcomes in the non-traditional learning environment of an REU. Furthermore, this paper describes a work in a current study to explore the development of research self-efficacy and engineering identity development of early career engineering students who participate in a 10-week interdisciplinary research experience and community-building activities through the Engineering Grand Challenges Scholars REUp rogram. This paper illustrates the key role of the
captures how integral participants perceived their entrepreneurial work totheir identity (e.g., “My work as a founder is an important part of who I am”). ENT self-efficacy(McGee et al., 2009) included sub-constructs such as marshalling (3 items; α = 0.70), whichassessed confidence in gaining support for one’s vision (e.g., “How confident are you in gettingothers to believe in your vision?”), and planning (4 items; α = 0.80), which measured confidencein estimating customer demand. Equity ethics (McGee et al., 2022) included 17 items (α = 0.96),focusing on participants’ efforts to create inclusive spaces for marginalized groups (e.g., “I applymy expertise to make spaces more inclusive of marginalized groups”). Racial activism (adaptedfrom Szymanski
://restream.io/tools/transcribe-video-to-textMamaril, N., Usher E.L, Li C., Ross, D., “Measuring Undergraduate Students' Engineering Self-Efficacy: A Validation Study,” Journal of Engineering Education, 105 (2), April 2016.DOI:10.1002/jee.20121McCroskey, J. C., “Measures of communication-bound anxiety,” Speech Monographs, 37, 269-277, 1970.Nash, G., Crimmins, G., & Oprescu, F, “If first-year students are afraid of public speakingassessments what can teachers do to alleviate such anxiety?” Assessment & Evaluation in HigherEducation, 41(4), 586–600, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1032212Perelman, P. “Can AI help with public speaking? A review of AI platforms” Duarte,Communication, Skills Training: https://www.duarte.com/blog/review-of
central to entrepreneurial competence.Recognition by Others Recognition from family, peers, and mentors played a crucial role in participants’entrepreneurial identity development. Grace shared how her family’s encouragement bolsteredher self-efficacy: “My family has always encouraged me to pursue my entrepreneurial dreams.They see my work ethic and think that I have what it takes.” Similarly, Cortex described howpeer validation reinforced his leadership identity: “I naturally gravitated towards this vicepresident role... because I showed up and liked the club.” Such external recognition strengthenedtheir confidence and reinforced their belief in their potential as entrepreneurs.Future Possible Selves (Hoped-for) Participants’ hoped
-curricular training fellowship offers the skill-building, cohort-based peer-support, 8+ semesters of time, and life experiences to help address this challenge.The rise in entrepreneurship education at the university level is rooted in student and faculty desireto teach abstract and applied STEM knowledge in a deeper way that delivers value for real-worldstakeholders. Students learn dynamism and adaptability while simultaneously obtaining thefundamentals [1]. While entrepreneurship education typically rose out of business school roots,engineering programs increasingly look to integrate those activities in their curricula due to naturalsynergies around the design process [2], customer/product fit, student demand for purpose-drivenwork, self-efficacy
study indicate thatentrepreneurship education successfully influences entrepreneurial self-efficacy, entrepreneurialattitude, and the entrepreneurial mindset. On the other hand, entrepreneurial self-efficacypromotes entrepreneurial attitude instead of the entrepreneurial mindset. Furthermore,entrepreneurial attitude plays an essential role in mediating both entrepreneurship education andself-efficacy toward students' entrepreneurial mindset.” (p. 1). They further argue that thecurriculum needs to focus on increasing self-efficacy and positive mindsets by providing those‘mastery experiences’ that allow students to try out entrepreneurship skills in supportedenvironments. In practice, this looks like supporting more internships, providing
provides a platform for students to identify real-worldchallenges and devise innovative solutions, fostering a sense of self-efficacy. Students’ sense ofbelonging, psychological safety, and decision-making processes about their future often alignwith their interests and curiosity, but anxiety can negatively influence these perceptions. Anxietycan affect children’s strategic behavior by discouraging them from choosing advanced strategiesand methods or even considering such options in the first place. Prior research efforts ininvention education have focused on intent to persist in STEM, attitudes towards STEM,inventor identity, teamwork, and collaboration skills, but further research is needed to explorehow to cultivate confidence and minimize
strong EM as recognizedthroughout the literature [41], [42], and a crucial element of translational research [6], [15]. Allstudents were able to reflect on this, but it is possible that the eREU students were more focusedon experiences they deemed directly beneficial to their future career goals. Research indicatesthat students with higher entrepreneurial self-efficacy tend to feel more inclined toentrepreneurial-focused careers [43], [44]. Since students in the eREU program were exposeddirectly to entrepreneurship interventions during the summer, including customer interaction andinteraction with mentors who were practicing entrepreneurs, it is possible they were influencedtoward a higher entrepreneurial self-efficacy [45], thus focusing their
misalignment between their perceptions and institutional expectations, especially in supportingthe integration of innovative practices. Experienced teachers often feel less need for professionaldevelopment in innovation, while those struggling with integration report lower confidence,leading to a potential cycle of diminished self-efficacy. Recommendations are proposed tostrengthen transversal training in innovation and entrepreneurship.Keywords: STEM Education, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Transversal Training, TeacherPerception, Higher Education CurriculumIntroductionImplementing a training program in innovation and entrepreneurship for engineering students ata Chilean university raises critical questions about the broader educational
, especiallyamong engineering students. Research highlights the influence of fear of failure on students,particularly women, pointing to factors like self-efficacy, gender role conflict, and the learningenvironment's perceived nature [12,13]. The intergenerational transmission of fear of failure [14]and the dual role of this fear as both a hindrance and a motivator [15, 16] emphasizes thecomplexity of navigating failure in educational settings. The influence of educators' attitudestowards failure [17] further illustrates the need for pedagogical strategies that reshape students'perceptions of failure, promoting resilience and a success-oriented mindset.Risk-taking, as an integral aspect of engineering education, demands a comprehensive approachto encourage
problem-solving.First-year experience (FYE) courses, aimed at easing transitions and fostering student success,have increasingly found a valuable partner in EML. EML can benefit FYE courses in diverseways: • Developing self-efficacy: FYE courses can incorporate EML, allowing students to identify opportunities, work collaboratively, and learn from failures, boosting their confidence and self-efficacy. • Building interdisciplinary connections: EML tasks can naturally weave in diverse disciplines, mirroring the interconnectedness of real-world challenges. FYE courses can leverage this feature to encourage students to appreciate the value of interdisciplinary thinking. • Fostering adaptability and resilience
practices enhance student autonomy or self-efficacy [4]. Linked to inclusion,autonomy improves learning outcomes, and motivation, in diverse student populations [5].Furthermore, autonomy, particularly as related to learner choice within a learning assessment,allows for inclusion of diverse backgrounds and skill levels [6]. Sereti & Giossos [7] defineautonomy as the learner’s ability and skill to decide what and how to learn a given topic.Layering choice (the “what”) within a unique educational assessment can open new pathways forstudents to “fit in” to a given career path. And providing students with opportunities to seethemselves as part of the field of study can increase overall belonging, motivation, andachievement [8] [9].With the
toresources such as incubators (Karataş-Özkan & Chell, 2015; Parker et al., 2017; Poggesi et al.,2020). More recently, Wheadon and Duval-Couetil (2018) created a “capital framework” thatoutlines categories of barriers that control access, participation, and persistence in technologyentrepreneurship. This framework moves beyond social and financial capital, to explore howhuman capital (e.g. education) and cognitive capital (e.g., self-efficacy) are also factors inviewing oneself as a technology entrepreneur.Women currently face negative stereotypes about their competence in STEM fields as well assimilar stereotypes about their entrepreneurial abilities (Gupta et al., 2009), leading scholars todescribe technology entrepreneurship as "doubly
fundamental components: curiosity, connections, and value creation [6].Entrepreneurial education shapes university students’ entrepreneurial intention and self-efficacy[6] [7]. It is implied that the entrepreneurial education programs cultivate students’entrepreneurship awareness apart from the mathematics theory, equations, calculation, orexperiment, which are from the traditional STEM education program.Intellectual capital and innovation were elements that enabled universities to achieve the goal ofknowledge transfer [8]. According to a study from ten European countries, the higher educationsystem contributed to two entrepreneurial-related developments in the 21st century: 1) forresearch, to improve scientific knowledge that can progress
for underrepresented students in undergraduatescience, technology, engineering, and math," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,vol. 117, no. 12, pp. 6476-6483, Mar. 2020.[17] S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P.Wenderoth, "Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, andmathematics," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., vol. 111, no. 23, pp. 8410-8415, Jun. 2014.[18] C. J. Ballen, C. Wieman, S. Salehi, J. B. Searle, and K. R. Zamudio, "Enhancing diversity inundergraduate science: Self-efficacy drives performance gains with active learning," CBE—LifeSciences Education, vol. 16, no. 4, ar56, 2017.[19] P. Gurin, B. A. Nagda, and X. Zúñiga, Dialogue Across
: Undergraduate Research Increases Self-Efficacy and Career Ambitions for Underrepresented Students in STEM,” J. Res. Sci. Teach. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21341.[3] Watkins-Lewis, K. M., Dillon, H. E., Sliger, R., Becker, B., Cline, E. C., Greengrove, C., James, P. A., Kitali, A., and Scarcella, A., 2023, “Work In Progress: Multiple Mentor Model for Cross-Institutional Collaboration and Undergraduate Research,” American Society for Engineering Education, Baltimore MD.[4] Dillon, H., Cline, E. C., Hadnagy, E., Rodriguez, S. L., Sesko, A. K., Sliger, R. N., and Wilson, N., 2024, “Work in Progress: Transformation Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (T-CURE).” [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/work-in
Research Workshop has been provided by the Kern Family Foundation.Dr. Doug Melton and Dr. Meg West provided thoughtful feedback about the workshop development overmany years. Special thanks to all the participants who took time to take our survey and learn with us!References[1] L. O. Flowers, “Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences at HBCUs,” J. Educ. Soc. Policy, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 33, 2021, doi: 10.30845/jesp.v8n1p4.[2] A. Carpi, D. M. Ronan, H. M. Falconer, and N. H. Lents, “Cultivating minority scientists: Undergraduate research increases self-efficacy and career ambitions for underrepresented students in STEM,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 169–194, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1002/tea.21341.[3] M. Villarejo, A. E. L
engineering and students’ expected success inengineering were found to decrease over the first year of study for first-year engineeringstudents, especially for women students [19]. Reasons for these feelings could be related toidealistic expectations of college or engineering in general, more difficult assignments thanexperienced in high school, or comparing to peers in a high-achieving peer group. In addition,students’ self-efficacy decreased over the first year of study, particularly for women students.However, both men and women experienced similar decreases in their value-related beliefs ofengineering [19].Importantly, researchers suggest that the potential impacts of the decrease in these expectanciesand value-related constructs on students
between thetwo groups. However, it was positive to see that the majority of the students who responded tothe follow-up survey continued their research, and those who did generated outputs that werevaluable to their own development, such as scholarships or awards, as well as the professionaldevelopment of their mentors, such as conference papers.Conclusions and future work:Research experiences support student skill development in a wide variety of areas, from researchplanning to data analysis to communication. However, mentors have limited time to spend withundergraduate mentees, and targeted training workshops have the potential to enhance studentskill development and self-efficacy during research experiences. By comparing an interventioncohort