Education, 19, 100-118.9. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.10. Kerlinger, F.N. and Pedhazur, E.J. (1973). Multiple regression in behavior research. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.11. Thompson, B. (2006). Research synthesis: Effect sizes. In J. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.). Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 583–603). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.12. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological
“grit”, self-determination and social cognitive careertheories are used to explore self-efficacy, goal orientation and perception of institutionalculture as mediators of academic achievement. A significant part of this paper analyzesresponses to interventions designed to support retention of students lacking the mathbackground to “hit the ground running” upon entering a large, public predominantlywhite institution (PWI)’s college of engineering, with a disproportionate number ofminorities in the underprepared category. Targeted retention interventions for first yearstudents yielded statistically significant improvement in math course progression,particularly for minority students. Overall attrition decreased by 10% in two successiveyears
belongingness score.The growth mindset scales were obtained from the Stanford University Project on EducationResearch that Scales (PERTS) website22. It is comprised of three questions which proberespondents’ level of agreement to the fixed mindset. We implemented a 5-point Likert scale (1= strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree). Responses to the items were found to be internallyreliable (Cronbach’s α = 0.83), and the responses across the three items were averaged to form asingle growth mindset score.Scales measuring happiness, self-perceived health, and self-efficacy were also included from thispaper. While not the immediate focus of this study, they obscured the objective of the study toparticipants.Academic performance measures were collected in
. Seminar topics such as Campus Orientation and Resources (e.g., Financial Aid, Co-op,Housing, etc.) in some cases provide a point-of-contact for future reference. Time Managementand Study Skills along with Personal and Professional Development (e.g., “Presentation of Self”)are provided to increase student academic acculturation and self-efficacy. Coping Skills (e.g.,anxiety and stress management, etc.) help students to adjust to the mental workload required ofengineering students. Through the use of project based learning, students are introduced to thefield of engineering. Participants complete a real world simulated team-based project such as theSouthern Company Transmission Line Development. Through this project students were requiredto conduct
specific action) – which may, in turn, improve student outcomes. (22) (23) Oneattempt to quantify the effects of summer bridge programs showed statistically-significantincreases in measures of academic self-efficacy and academic skills following bridge programparticipation among a small sample of at-risk students attending a predominately whiteinstitution (PWI). (24) The study also showed a statistically significant positive relationshipbetween academic self-efficacy and first semester GPA. These particular variables are importantin light of a study of 400 freshman of all majors at a large Midwestern public university thatfound first-year GPAs and measures self-efficacy and outcome expectations taken midwaythrough the second semester to be strong
workshops in a wide variety of topics, including cross-cultural training, professional development, simultaneous interpretation, and e-learning. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Examining the Intersection of Graduate Student Funding, Mentoring and Training as a Mechanism of Success for Peer Mentors and their MenteesIntroductionOver the last two decades, mentoring at all levels of education, from students in elementaryschool to professional and graduate schools to staff at universities, has been proven to be aneffective tool for improving retention at schools, increasing self esteem and self efficacy, anddeveloping improved professional skills such as
levels of interest in engineering, their success andcompletion rates have been low due to a number of factors including low levels of preparationfor college-level work, especially in math; lack of awareness of academic and career options;lack of financial, academic, social and cultural capital needed for success; and lack of self-efficacy (i.e., students do not believe that they can succeed in engineering). To address thesebarriers to student success, Cañada College developed and implemented a number of programs tokeep students engaged and motivated towards achieving their academic goals. Among suchprograms is the Creating Opportunities for Minorities in Engineering, Technology, and Science(COMETS) program. Funded by a four-year grant from NASA
programming, while effective forstandardized, intervention-like programming, is limited in duration and scope in terms ofworkforce development compared to local chapter-based programming. However, localprogramming poses challenges as it is highly dependent volunteers’ self-efficacy and heterogenousin available resources and knowledge capital to obtain national uniformity. To the authors’knowledge, limited to no information about chapter-based programming or its evolution isavailable in the literature from these organizations. It is noted that there have been engineeringeducation research of students’ academic performance in their participation in national engineeringdiversity organizations [3, 4]. This experience report provides a decade-long insight
together during various mini projects in-class and duringthe “Independent Study” lab sessions. The mentor/tutor worked with faculty members andstudents to identify topics that were considered to be difficult and reviewed them during theselabs as well. Students were also given the opportunity to study for courses that were not part ofthe SUCCEEd program.Measures of Impact, Preliminary Results and DiscussionAs a part of the SUCCEEd program, we wished to assess both student achievement and otherfactors that may contribute to student success in the program. Achievement was measured viastudents’ grades, tests and quizzes results, and project results. The college self-efficacy (CSE),which refers to the students’ belief that they can succeed in college
in theworkplace and their career outcomes. Studies have shown that BWEF experience slightly higherstress than other faculty [2,3]. Time constraints on completing activities, promotion concerns, andvariations in expectations contribute to these higher stress levels; this is particularly true for women ofcolor at four-year colleges [3]. Additionally, the findings from other studies report that BWEF tend toencounter unique challenges along the tenure track [3], and have high extended family responsibility[1]. These factors can contribute to a lower self-efficacy, which correlates to feelings of institutionalfit [3]. On the other hand, perceptions of institutional fit can also be positively influenced bymentoring. Before moving on to mentoring
self-efficacy, sense of belonging, identification and identityintegration. Often, negative experiences are the result of subtle bias or schemas that all studentsbring with them into their teams, and occur despite the employment of best practices in teamformation.This paper presents a summary of a contemporary understanding of this phenomenon aspresented by several individual researchers covering the fields of stereotype threat, engineeringdesign, teamwork, motivation, and race, gender and their intersections. The content of this paperwas generated by collecting the individual responses of each researcher to a set of promptsincluding: • examples of how students can be marginalized in engineering teamwork and what governing
2015In total, 25 papers were nominated by 21 divisions and four Zones for consideration for BestDiversity Paper, 2015. There were six finalists invited to present; these papers were from the K-12, First Year Programs, Liberal Education/Engineering and Society, Mechanical Engineering,Entrepreneurship and Engineering Innovation, and Multidisciplinary Engineering Divisions. Thetop papers presented at the conference included an exploration of changes in Latinx adolescents’perceptions of engineering self-efficacy and of engineering during a community-basedengineering design experience [3], a baseline study on how engineering students identify asengineers and how they view the importance of diversity in engineering, [4], anautoethnographic study of
, were factored intothe statistics. [4] GPA was a greater predictor of retention and eventual graduation for malestudents than female students. Meanwhile, moderate to high levels of achievement increasedlevels of confidence in females but accentuated female students’ social discomfort as a minority,making self-doubt and social discomfort better predictors of graduation rate for females thanGPA. This trend was valid when women were both a numerical minority in classes and werestereotyped, as women often are in engineering programs. [4]The existing literature suggests that factors other than just GPA impact a female student’sdecision to remain in and eventually graduate from an engineering program. For example, self-efficacy, or a specified level
. Surveys of the student attendees as well as some of the presenters wereperformed to assess various measures of self-efficacy. Surveys indicated that the event wassuccessful in promoting self-efficacy.IntroductionThis paper discusses the Robotics Competition and Family Science Fair for grades 4-8 sponsoredby the Latino STEM Alliance, which was held at the end of the school year in an inner cityneighborhood in Boston.. In it, we will discuss the motivation for this event, its planning, itsexecution, its assessment, and next steps in the partnership between Latino STEM Alliance andSuffolk University.BackgroundEvidence has shown that robotics programs can encourage interest among underrepresentedgroups and others in studying STEM 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
moderatelyhigher (p < 0.05) than their non-FGCS peers. Indicating that, on average, FGCS enter engineeringwith higher confidence in understanding engineering, feeling like they can perform well on examsthan their non-first-generation college student peers. First-generation college students’ high self-reported measures of performance/competence is directly related to their self-efficacy andperception of themselves in relation to their chosen field, in this case engineering35. Theimportance of students’ self-confidence and self-efficacy for persisting in science and engineeringhas been further articulated in a literature review by Geisinger and Raman49. This study examinedliterature on engineering students’ attrition, while not explicitly focused on FGCS
)changes over time. There have also been several reviews of the literature on mentoring specificto higher education42-45. Reviews by Jacobi43, Roberts45, and Crisp and Cruz44 have yieldedsimilar characterizations to those offered by D’Abate et al. and Eby et al., though all agree that itis difficult to reach a unified definition or a quantitatively validated framework, even within asingle domain such as higher education. Mentoring is, however, consistently linked to academicsuccess (e.g. increased GPA), as well as increases in self-efficacy, integration into thecommunity, retention, career goals, intention to persist and much more. While such broaddefinitions and outcomes provide important starting points for understanding mentoring inengineering
interaction of MEPs and cultural engineering student organizations such asNSBE and the combined impact of their programs, activities, and services warrants furtherinvestigation [16], [18], [19]. Future studies will be conducted to explore how and why the associations present in thisstudy occur at this particular chapter. However, elements that have been identified in theliterature such as participation in social, academic, and professional activities of the chapter, aswell as regional and national conferences, may contribute to outcomes that support persistencesuch as fostering a strong sense of community or “family”, increased self-efficacy, increasedconfidence in technical and non-technical skills and abilities, and a strong social and
2013 iteration of the GI program.4.1 Survey ResultsPre-camp and post-camp surveys were used to examine the impact of the camp. In both surveys,campers were asked to answer questions to measure computer science self-efficacy and to evaluate theiropinions of computer science careers. Computer self-efficacy questions required the campers to rate, ona seven-point likert scale (1 – strongly disagree, 7 – strongly agree), statements such as, “If I get stuck onthe computer, I can get it working again ” and “I find working with computers very easy”. To gage theirthoughts on computer science careers we asked questions such as “Would you want a career in computerscience?” and “What does a typical computer scientist look like?”. Here, we report on
Sense of Belonging Task Oriented Self-Efficacy Figure 1: MMM Program Theory of ActionTable 1: Standards and Practices aligned with MMM Program Theoretical Underpinnings Common Core NGSS Science & Mathematical Standards for K-12 Engineering Education Engineering Practices Practices Make sense of MS-ETS1-1. Define the criteria and constraints of a Asking questions and problems and persevere design
are beginning to identify success outside of traditional academic metrics. A holistic integrated approach to the recruitment, selection, and support of transfer students into engineering is essential to ensure academic and career success. The theoretical framework of Bandura’s Self-Efficacy model, along with the implementation of Chickering’s Student Development Theory [2] have shown to be meaningful and impactful theoretical touchpoints throughout this process. Introduction The model utilized at Northeastern University prior to and during the invited student’s undergraduate experience includes but is not limited to the following: • Pre-enrollment: pre-transfer identification, two-way institutional visits, cross-institutional peer-to-peer
increase academicengagement,1 standardized test performance,2 and reduce drop-out rates.3 On the collegelevel, it has been shown4 that there is a positive correlation between participation in suchactivities, self efficacy, and academic engagement. Nonetheless, there is little in theliterature about the benefits of participating specifically in professional engineeringsocieties and student design teams in college.We conducted an observational study to address the paucity of data in this realm.Specifically, we used quantitative data (admissions and demographic data, and academicrecords) to determine what kind of students tend to participate in engineering-based co-curricular activities, and whether that participation is related to college success
study, the body of research on stereotype threat continuedto grow (Shapiro 2011) (Eschenbach, et al. 2014) (Thomas, et al. 2018), with much of theresearch focusing on race and gender-based stereotypes and stereotype threats, the impacts onindividual’s academic performance (Owens 2010), along with the developed coping mechanisms(von Hippel 2005). This research body determined that stereotype threat can take up valuablewhen experienced, which can affect many things including cognitive mechanisms and academicperformance and persistence.When an individual from a stigmatized group is presented with a negative stereotype, it cancause a heighted awareness of one’s own actions. This heightened awareness often leads to areduction in self-efficacy (the
needs of underrepresented students. The project design is grounded ineducational theories including retention/integration, cumulative advantage, engagement, andconstructivism. It incorporates established best practices for working with URM students such asSTEM identity formation through experiential programs including student research andinternships, a focus on critical junctures, training of faculty and staff to enhance culturalcompetency, and building of academic integration and STEM self-efficacy. An extensiveevaluation plan designed around the project logic model will be used as the basis for projectassessment. This paper includes a description of the project, partner institutions, and first yearresearch and evaluation results.Introduction
Black students in the U.S. attended a HBCUs in 200725. TheseHBCUs represent 104 colleges and universities that are federally-recognized MSIs establishedprior to 1964 with a primary mission to educate African Americans. Although HSIs werefederally-recognized more recently in 1992, HSIs enroll nearly 65% of all Hispanic collegestudents and nearly one-third of all U.S. underrepresented students11.Theoretical Framework The current study utilizes Social Cognitive Career Theory21 as a framework tohighlight the significance of social support and barriers for underrepresented engineeringstudents. SCCT builds on Albert Bandura‘s Social Cognitive Theory1 which emphasizes therelationship between social interaction and self-efficacy. SCCT not only
graduate studies, their engineering skills self-efficacy, andtheir level of school-related self-confidence23. An alumni version of the AGSS has also beendeveloped24.The McNair program recruits rising juniors majoring in the STEM fields that are classified asminorities or being from populations underrepresented in higher education. All students musthave a minimum grade point average of 3.2 (on a 4.0 scale) and must be highly motivated topursue an advanced degree upon completion of their undergraduate programs.Participation in the McNair program begins in the summer between students’ sophomore andjunior years. A competitive application process is used to select up to ten students for eachcohort. Students first participate in a 10-week summer
, 2015.[36] S. Cheryan, S. A. Ziegler, A. K. Montoya, and L. Jiang, “Why are Some STEM fields more gender balanced than others?” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 143, no. 1, pp. 1-35, 2017.[37] E. Yost, D. M. Handley, S. R. Cotten, and V. Winstead, “Understanding the links between mentoring and self-efficacy in the new generation of women STEM scholars,” In Women in engineering, science and technology: Education and career challenges. IGI Global, 2010.[38] J. Owens, C. Kottwitz, J. Tiedt, and J. Ramirez, “Strategies to attain faculty work-life balance,” Building Healthy Academic Communities Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 58-73, 2018.[39] E. M. Lee, “ ‘Where people like me don’t belong’: Faculty members from low
different from the last two ranked traits (“writes neatly” and “draws well”). Whattraits students believe are to be important and their confidence or self-efficacy of them may playa role in whether they choose to pursue engineering.Figures 6. Average ranking of traits in terms of importance to being a successful engineer.The high school or middle school student probably has a limited understanding of the professionof engineering. Throughout the camp, the students were told that creativity and innovation areimportant factors in engineering design. This seemed to contribute to the students understandingof engineering as a multifaceted profession. The summary of the questions and how the answerschanged after the camp are in Figure 7. These were
this paper, the impact of the Engineering Ambassador Program (EAP), which engagesundergraduate engineering students as Ambassadors in K-12 outreach activities, on the stimulationof interest in STEM, self-efficacy, and actual academic attainment of Ambassadors is presented.The collected data over several years reveals that over 2/3 of activity leaders and projectcoordinators of the EAP at Howard University (HU) expressed higher confidence in their ability inunderstanding and succeeding in engineering because of their EAP experience. Also, the activityleaders and project coordinators achieved higher major and overall grade point averages (GPAs).Furthermore, improved academic performance in the courses related to the projects thatAmbassadors were
doctoral students at the Adult Education program at NCSU.Dr. Rex E Jeffries, North Carolina State UniversityMs. Barbara Smith, North Carolina State University Page 23.8.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Mentoring Minority Students in Biomedical Engineering: An Engaged ApproachAbstract There is a compelling need for a program that develops self-efficacy inUnderrepresented Minority (URM) students in STEM related fields. To answer this need, aprofessor and lifelong mentor developed the national mentored-leadership initiative program toempower URM
pursuits: first year, mid-tenure (three to four years), and final year as an assistantprofessor. They determined that there exist unique challenges at each phase. First year professorscontended with the challenges of gendered and racial isolation. Mid-tenure faculty challengesconsisted of self-efficacy and lack of role clarity. Final year tenure track women that departedfrom the academe cited mismatch with their institution on the grounds of social acceptance, self-efficacy, and role clarity25. The researcher correlated social acceptance to isolation, self-efficacyto institutional fit, and role clarity to mentoring. Cultural norms in the engineering academe leadto social isolation for those that do not conform26. Tenure and Promotion