online at http://caeeaps.stanford.edu/phpESP/admin/manage.php.[20] LAESE (Longitudinal Assessment of Engineering Self-Efficacy) survey versions 3.0 (copyright 2006) and 3.1 (copyright 2007), which are products of AWE (Assessing Women and Men in Engineering), available online at www.aweonline.org.[21] DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.[22] Armstrong, J.B., and Impara, J.C. (1991). The impact of an environmental education program on knowledge and attitude. Journal of Environmental Education, 22(4):36-40.[23] Barrow, L. H., and Morrisey, J. T. (1987). Ninth-grade students' attitudes toward energy: A comparison between Maine and New Brunswick. Journal of
on programming activities, facilitated by both graduate and undergraduate teachingassistants. Students would then have to complete homework assignments based on recitation modules.Motivation and Self-Efficacy OutcomesDesired ResultsThe development of this course was also informed by motivation and self-efficacy theory, and high-levelcourse outcomes were set to increase both student motivation in the course and their self-efficacy as aprogrammer. Motivation was measured using the five constructs of the MUSIC Model of AcademicMotivation[9]: Empowerment, Usefulness, Success, Interest, and Caring. These constructs are defined inTable 2. Table 2: The MUSIC Model MUSIC Letter Name
will have adirect and positive effect on grade performance.2.0 Study OverviewThis study is intended as a pilot study of the measures of social belonging in an engineeringclassroom. Data were collected from an introductory level solid mechanics class at a privateuniversity in the United States. Most student respondents were beginning their engineeringacademic careers, mostly as sophomore students taking their first-ever engineering specificcourse. The instrument used to measure engineering self-efficacy was developed by our researchteam. The instruments used to measure social belonging, engineering identity and interpersonalcloseness have strong research pedigrees but have never been used in this novel combination.2.1 Measuring Social Belonging
toward their backgroundknowledge and abilities to be successful in engineering and found subgroup differences, such asby genders and by persisters/non-persisters (Besterfield-Sacre, Atman, & Shuman, 1997;Besterfield-Sacre, Moreno, Shuman, & Atman, 2001). In the analysis of some freshmen students,students’ self-perceptions including self-efficacy were found to be a positive predictor offreshman retention (Hutchinson, Follman, Sumpter, & Bodner, 2006). Student research wasconducted by a study which consisted of two rounds of surveys from 663 participants to examinethe predictability of course grades and again self-efficacy for learning course materials emergedas one of the important factors key to achievement for the students (Stump
designed to assist students with self-efficacy beliefs and personal goals.At this University all engineering and computer science students take an introduction toengineering course that covers the engineering process, teamwork, communication skills, thedifferent branches of engineering, ethics, and co-curricular and extracurricular opportunities.Section sizes are ~30 students, so students can build community with peers and their professor.The professor of the Introduction to Engineering course is the academic advisor for his/her set ofstudents. Students declare or confirm their major by the end of the first semester. Resources tohelp students choose a major include laboratories, advisor meetings, student panels, a semester-long team project
), 525-548.[4] Mamaril, N. A., Usher, E. L., Li, C. R., Economy, D. R. & Kennedy, M. S. (2016). Measuring undergraduate students' engineering self-efficacy: A validation study. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(2), 366–395.[5] Thaler, R. & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
sense of belongingwith their selected major and college (Good, Rattan, & Dweck, 2012). Indeed, feelings ofbelonging are related to overall well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000) as well as higher levels ofacademic self-efficacy and motivation (Freeman, Anderman, & Jensen, 2007). It is particularlyconcerning that students who belong to groups that are underrepresented in engineering feel lessconnected with their major, which is also generally related to problems with adjustment to thecollege environment (Dennis, Phinney, & Chuateco, 2005). To address the issues of retention inengineering majors, many colleges and universities have implemented programs to supportstudents in their first year (Purdie & Rosser, 2011). This paper will
pursue undergraduate degrees in STEM fields, and have slightlyhigher undergraduate grade point averages6, while evaluations of FIRST Robotics programs haveshown similar outcomes7,8. One of the few studies exploring the effects of a wide range of pre-college engineering activities measured significantly higher engineering self-efficacy amongstudents who had participated in pre-college engineering classes or had engineering-relatedhobbies9. Overall, relatively little work has been done to broadly understand the effects of pre-college engineering participation on the experiences and success of university engineeringstudents, resulting in limited theory to guide the understanding of this experience.To address these limitations, we developed a
. However, point values wereincreased for the second Cohort and the data remained collapsible.Finally, it is possible that the measures used in the present investigation are not actuallypredictive of persistence in an engineering program, and therefore the null result we founddepicts the true state of reality. There are myriad components to self-regulation beyond thesubset chosen for this study. For example, self-efficacy, or the personal belief that one can orcannot accomplish particular tasks in particular domains, has been linked to academic outcomes[16], as have implicit theories regarding the source of one’s intelligence in subsequentimplications for outcomes [17, 18]. Nelson and colleagues incorporated knowledge building andclass goal
. Threedesign-focused mini-projects were piloted during the fall and winter quarters of the 2016 – 2017academic year. A professional skills-focused "micro-project" ran for the first three weeks of thefall quarter, followed by seven weeks of a design-focused "mini-project". Pilot sections in thewinter quarter began with a different seven-week mini-project followed by three weeks ofanother professional skills-focused micro-project. The first three mini-projects developed for thiseffort were titled: Robot Instruments, Heat Engine, and the Supercap Car Challenge. During thefall and winter quarters, students in the pilot sections were given self-efficacy surveys before andafter their projects based on a Likert-type scale. These gauged their impressions of
intended outcomes, and the context of thework in some detail.Our data regarding outcomes of the experience for both mentors and mentees come from surveysconducted at the end of the semester, though we recognize that self-reported information fromthe end of the semester is not the perfect tool[7] . In the future, we may collect informationthroughout the semester to see how students’ and mentors’ perspectives change over time.This study follows a scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) process. We seek to evaluatesomething we are doing in the classroom; we did not begin with a theoretical framework likeengineering self-efficacy or teaching self-efficacy, though we believe both are relevant to thisstudy.How we use peer mentors in our first year
Annual Conference and Exposition.[3] Carberry, A. R., Lee, H.-S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring Engineering Design Self-Efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, (January), 71–79.[4] Daher, T., & Loehring, M. (2016). Shaping the Engineering Freshman Experience through active learning in a Flipped Classroom. In 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 1–10).[5] Estell, J. K., Reeping, D., & Reid, K. “Workshop - Envisioning the First-Year Engineering Body of Knowledge”, Seventh Annual First Year Engineering Experience Conference, August 2-4, 2015.[6] Everett, J. W., Morgan, J. K., Stanzione, J. F., & Mallouk, K. E. (2014). A hybrid flipped first year engineering course. In 6th First Year
Opportunity in Higher Education, 20088. Meyers, Kerry L., Silliman, Stephen, E., Gedde, Natalie, L., Ohland, Matthew, W., "A comparison of engineering students’ reflections on their first year experiences.", J. Engineering Education, April 20109. Hutchison, Mica A., Follman, Deborah K., Sumpter, Melissa, Bodner, George M., "Factors influencing the self-efficacy beliefs of first year engineering students", J. Engineering Education, January 200610. Landis, R. B., "Student Development: An Alternative to 'Sink or Swim'", Proceedings of 1994 ASEE Annual Conference, June 199411. Lotkowski, Veronica A., et al. "The Role of Academic and Non-Academic Factors in Improving College Retention", ACT Policy Report, 200412. Turns, J