Conference Session

Mathematics Division (MATH) Technical Session 3

Collection

2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Zenaida Aguirre Munoz Ph.D., University of California, Merced; Melissa Almeida, University of California, Merced; Comlan de Souza, California State University, Fresno; Keith Collins Thompson, University of California Merced; Khang Tran, California State University, Fresno; Yue Lei, University of California, Merced; Erica M Rutter, University of California, Merced; Lalita G Oka, California State University, Fresno; Maribel Viveros, University of California Merced; Bianca Estella Salazar, University of California, Merced; Changho Kim, University of California, Merced

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Mathematics Division (MATH)

area involvesuniversities with small proportions of URMs. Thus, continued study of the impact of thesefactors on more diverse student populations is also necessary to better capture the calculusexperience of URM engineering majors. The purpose of the study was to examine student andclassroom-level factors that influence course performance measured by course grade. This studyfocused on two engineering-related psychosocial factors: (1) engineering self-efficacy and (2)engineering sense of belonging, and three mathematics-specific psychological factors which werefer to as math motivators, (1) math interest, (2) self-concept, and (3) anxiety. Classroom levelfactors included active engagement practices, proportion of females, proportion of

Conference Session

Mathematics Division (MATH) Technical Session 2

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Hui Ma, University of Virginia

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Mathematics Division (MATH)

and measure their course preparedness. Welch's t-test was also used to determineif there was any difference in the students' performance on the common final exam.For the test anxiety Likert questions, a score ranging from 5 to 20 was obtained by summing thescores for all five questions, with 1=almost never and 4=almost always. Paired t-tests wereperformed for both grading methods to identify any changes over the semester after taking thecourse. In the case of the self-efficacy questions, scores for each category (e.g. masteryexperience, vicarious experience, social persuasion, and physiological state) were averaged afterbeing set on a scale of 1=definitely false to 6=definitely true. Paired t-tests were performed forboth grading methods to

Conference Session

Mathematics Division (MATH) Technical Session 3

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mary E. Lockhart, Texas A&M University; Noor Hakim; Vainavi Chilukuri, Texas A&M University; Jason Champagne; Karen E. Rambo-Hernandez, Texas A&M University; Robin A.M. Hensel, West Virginia University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Mathematics Division (MATH)

investigated. Demographic information for thetotal analytic sample is as follows: 76% self-identified as men, 95% White, 50% were onEngineering Track 1, 30% were on Engineering Track 2, and 20% were on Engineering Track 3.Measures Engineering Self-Efficacy. Students’ confidence in their ability to complete necessarysteps for obtaining their engineering degree was measured using a three-item instrumentdeveloped by Lent and colleagues [45]. The items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1-noconfidence to 5-complete confidence) where participants indicated their level of confidence intheir ability to complete each step necessary to obtain their engineering degree. Engineeringself-efficacy scale scores were derived as the average of all items

Conference Session

Mathematics Division (MATH) Technical Session 1

Collection

2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Diana D Morris, University of Virginia; Hui Ma, University of Virginia; Farzad Shafiei Dizaji, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Mathematics Division (MATH)

in anxiety levels from aninitial mean of 11.97 to 9.78 by the end of the semester (p < 0.001). Additionally, masterystudents showed significant improvements in self-efficacy in mastery, vicarious experience, andsocial persuasion (p = 0.005, 0.012, 0.018), which was not observed in the traditional group. Wecompared students' placement scores between two groups and found no significant difference inpreparedness (p-value=0.49). Despite the expectation that constant revisiting of topics in masterygraded sections would enhance retention and performance, there was no significant difference inperformance at the end of the semester (p-value=0.86). However, the final grade distributionsbetween the two groups indicated a considerable difference