for pre-service teachers, there was no direct measure of self-efficacy, although the investigatorspostulate that confidence is related to self-efficacy [1]. Another study found that there are manyfactors that may encourage or discourage pre-service teachers from implementing open-endeddesign activities during their teacher training [3]. Most commonly cited reasons for notincorporating such projects included lack of host teacher support [3]. It is suggested that usingopen-ended design projects to lead to more formal scientific inquiry may be beneficial for bothelementary students and elementary teachers who lack content knowledge in science [3]. Neitherof these studies directly evaluates the self-efficacy of pre-service teachers, although they
instrument used to measure teachers’ perceptions ofengineering and familiarity with teaching engineering, engineering design, and technology. Priorto data analysis in the current study, the internal consistency of the Barriers to Integrating DETsubscale was determined using Chronbach’s α. The Chronbach’s α for the current study of α =0.63 was slightly lower than the value of α = 0.68 reported by Hong et al. [13]. Texas Poll of Elementary School Teachers. The Texas Poll of Elementary SchoolTeachers was a phone interview questionnaire designed to gather information that could be usedto improve science teaching at the elementary level [14]. For the current study, questions 3, 4, 5,6, 9, 10, 26, and 27 of the Texas Poll were modified by replacing
curriculumwriting portion of the EngrTEAMS: Engineering to Transform the Education of Analysis,Measurement, and Science Project. There were nine teachers that participated in all three years.Of these nine, seven had pre-interview data. These seven were invited to participate in thefollow-up interview. Six of the seven responded to our request for an interview. Table 1 providesan overview of the teachers’ demographics. Pseudonyms have been used to preserve the identityof the teachers.Table 1 Participant Background Years of Grade(s) Teaching Teacher Degree experience* taught assignment School information
small groups (60 min total). Results from the Repeated-Measures Analysis of Variance (RM-ANOVA) demonstrated that participants reported higherperceived ability to engage in scientific learning processes (d = .17) and in science learningbehaviors (d = 0.15). Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.Objective Self-efficacy is the judgement an individual makes regarding their ability to performvarious tasks and this judgement is domain and task specific (Bandura, 1977, 1982). Since theway in which people act, think, and feel, is a direct reflection of their own beliefs in theircapabilities, learners’ beliefs promote both engagement and learning (Linnenbrink & Pintrich,2003), as well as long-term achievement (Parker
ofdescriptive sub-codes, such as student discussion of particular stages within the engineeringdesign process or sources of self-efficacy, and magnitude codes, such as student responsesindicative of various levels of understanding. Following coding, interview data were thendescribed using conceptually clustered matrices [32] in order to illustrate variations in patternsbetween students and across the two years for each student. These patterns were thentriangulated with students’ engineering design logs and results from an engineering designprocess assessment and a measure of academic self-efficacy (described below) to confirmwithin- and between-case patterns.Engineering Design Process LogsEngineering Design Process (EDP) Logs for two focal students
in the ability to be successful based on suggestion from others Physiological The physical reaction to an experience influencing the perception of states ability to be successfulMany studies in engineering education have used self-efficacy as a framework. Those studieswith a focus on K-12 teachers include the development of a scale to measure self-efficacy theexamination of engineering teacher self-efficacy of K-12 teachers, and the effects of teacherinvolvement in different programs on their engineering-teaching self-efficacy [6], [11]–[13]. Literature ReviewSelf-efficacy in engineering education has been used to study engineering students and teachersat various education levels
effective professional development opportunities for K-12 math teachers. Theprofessional development opportunity included an introduction to engineering, the presentationof 14 experiential learning modules, and a create-your-own module session for 22 middle andhigh school math teachers over the course of three days. The participating teachers were askedto complete the Teaching Engineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS) survey [2] before and after theprofessional development opportunity along with a follow-up satisfaction survey. The paper alsodiscusses the immediate effect of professional development on teachers’ engineering self-efficacy along with their overall impression of the professional development opportunity.Background and Supporting
Loyola University Chicago and is currently holds the Walter P. Krolikowski, SJ Endowed Chair in the School of Education at Loyola University Chicago. He is an Associate Editor of the Journal of Counseling Psychology and his research interests span four related areas: multiculturalism, vocational psychology, social justice engagement, and applied psychological measurement. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Exploring the validity of the engineering design self-efficacy scale for secondary school students (Research to Practice)Introduction and BackgroundPre-college engineering education efforts and associated research has seen a
, provided additional context for theengineering design activities students engaged in as part of the project. Whenever possible, theseshort interviews were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis. When discussions were notrecorded, relevant comments were captured in field notes.Engineering Design Self-Efficacy InstrumentSelf-efficacy was measured using the engineering design self-efficacy instrument [18] which wasadministered online at the beginning and end of the course. This instrument is designed tomeasure students’ self-efficacy as it relates to engineering design generally and to each of thestages of the engineering design process. The full instrument includes a total of thirty-six items,with the same nine items aligned to the engineering
design tasks also include quantifying and analyzing differences in the self-efficacy held by individuals with a range of engineering experiences. Prior studies on self-efficacyin engineering design tasks have also examined how the self-efficacy values differ with genderand background of the participants [27,33].In this effort, our focus was to measure the change in self-efficacy values before and after thetraining with the objective of improving our PD. For this reason, we did not consider any genderand background related studies, instead we performed a generalized study. This survey had foursections for rating an individual’s perceived confidence, motivation, success expectation, andanxiety in performing several portions of the project-based
enrolledexhibit an engineering self-efficacy of at least 3.5 out of 5, and over 67% of the students reportthe ENGR 102 HS course increased their interest in becoming an engineer [2, 3, 4]. Teachereffectiveness is also measured and is consistently high year after year with 86% of studentsreporting that their teacher is always or usually effective.With the successful launch of the Advanced Placement (AP) Computer Science course in 2016,engineering educators, NSF and the College Board accelerated the development of anIntroduction to Engineering AP course. College of Engineering deans from across the countrywere surveyed and multiple meetings of engineering thought-leaders and educators wereconvened to decide on a course of action [5]. With these strides to
discussions with participants. Interviews and focus groupswere digitally recorded and transcribed. A reflective analysis process was used to analyze andinterpret interviews and focus groups.Test of Students’ Science KnowledgeA student science content knowledge assessment aligned to the instructional goals of the researchcourse was developed and administered at the onset and conclusion of each part of the course.S-STEM SurveyThe S-STEM Student Survey measures student self-efficacy related to STEM content, interest inpursuing STEM careers, and the degree to which students implement 21st century learning skills.The survey was administered in a pre/post format at the beginning and end of each project year.FindingsResults are organized by evaluation
Paper ID #29565Effects of High School Dual Credit Introduction to Engineering Course onFirst-Year Engineering Student Self-Efficacy and the Freshman Experience(Evaluation)Ms. J. Jill Rogers, University of Arizona J. Jill Rogers is the assistant director for ENGR 102 HS at the University of Arizona. ENGR 102 HS is an AP-type, dual credit college level, introductory engineering course offered to high school students. In 2014, the ENGR 102 HS program won the ASEE best practices in K-12 and University partnerships award. Over the years Rogers has developed K-12 science summer camps, conducted K-12 educational re- search
InterviewsMSEN teachers, student participants, and mentors participated in either focus groups or interviewsto determine the program’s impact on the items outlined in the evaluation criteria. Semi-structuredinterview protocols were used to guide discussions with participants. Interviews and focus groupswere digitally recorded and transcribed. A reflective analysis process was used to analyze andinterpret interviews and focus groups.Test of Students’ Science KnowledgeA student science content knowledge assessment aligned to the instructional goals of the researchcourse was developed and administered at the onset and conclusion of each part of the course.S-STEM SurveyThe S-STEM Student Survey measures student self-efficacy related to STEM content
instrumentality in the motivationliterature [2]. Both of the frameworks in this study measure different aspects of students' beliefsabout their abilities in math and engineering and are utilized as they can shift due to educationalexperiences [20], [21]. The operationalization of these constructs, along with our population andstudy design, are outlined below.Research QuestionBy building off the body of available literature about student mathematics and the role ofengineering in fostering positive beliefs, we sought to implement an integrated engineering,science, and mathematics unit and answer the following research question:How do 5th-grade students' mathematics and engineering self-efficacy and perceived usefulnessfor abstract mathematics concepts
Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Connecting Middle School Students’ Personal Interests, Self-efficacy, andPerceptions of Engineering to Develop a Desire to Pursue Engineering Career Pathways (Work in Progress)AbstractWith the increased exposure to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)through activities in-school and out-of-school K-12 learning environments and representation inmedia outlets, students who attend our summer engineering intervention tend to articulate a moreholistic understanding of the role of engineers within society. However, despite this increasedexposure and a diverse understanding, students from diverse backgrounds (e.g.,racially/ethnically diverse and women) still pursue
-efficacy scale, Riggs and Enochs’ [13]science teaching efficacy beliefs, Bandura’s [14] teacher self-efficacy scale and the Tschannen-Moran and Hoy’s [15] Ohio State teacher efficacy scale.Students' responses to the measures of math/science self-efficacy, math/science outcomeexpectations, and critical thinking were examined over time to see if there were significantchanges from the pre-test completed prior to the camps to the post-test that was completed at theend of the two-week camps. Of the 98 students who completed the pre-test surveys, 67 hadmatching post-test data for analyzing changes on the outcome variables over time. Resultsrevealed that students exhibited statistically significant increases in two of the three variables.Over the two
More training for students in collaboration skills Added more activities that relate to science or engineering Introduced an engineering design project I hadn't used before More effective in my science teaching More confident in my science teaching Started a robotics or STEM club No changes to my teachingAnalysesWe used a repeated measures ANOVA to look at the change in scores on each of the three self-efficacy measures. Focus group interviews from all eight sites were transcribed and coded forcommon themes related to teachers’ comfort with STEM, their perceptions of student gains, andtheir own learning experiences. A follow up survey was distributed in December, 2018, askingteachers to complete the efficacy
actions, or efforts to implement one’s goals such asseeking additional training (Lent, 2013). For example, after gaining entry into medical school, astudent may have difficulty completing the required coursework. He may also conclude that thework conditions and rewards available as a medical doctor suit him less well than he initiallyanticipated. These learning experiences may incite the student to revise his self-efficacy beliefsand outcome expectations, leading to a shift in interest and goals (selection of a new career path).Other instruments based on SCCTWhile there are instruments that measure student outcomes (content knowledge, reasoning skills,psychosocial attributes) after participating in various disciplines of STEM fields (Minner
evaluation measures were altered every1 The challenge of increasing diversity in STEM has been with us for more than two decades. Despite effort andtime, little has been achieved in changing the representation in STEM. The paradigm that exposure to STEMgenerates STEM degrees and drives the STEM workforce does not appear to work. Exposure to STEM is necessary,but it is not sufficient to diversify the STEM workforce. The PREP program focuses on activities that will increaseSTEM self-efficacy, STEM career awareness, and grit. This was accomplished by including activities led byyear. The modality of collecting data also changed throughout the years (paper and pencil,SurveyMonkey, Google Forms, and REDCap7,8) As such, it should be noted the remainder
Beliefs about engineering Methods integration (BEI) Collaboration 3 Self-efficacy for integrating Elementary Science Methods + Fluid engineering (SEI) MechanicsInstrumentsTwo survey instruments were used to assess the variables of interest. The Attitudes Surveymeasured PSTs’ beliefs about integrating engineering into their future teaching. The instrumentwas adapted from existing scales [22], [23], incorporating elements of social cognitive theory[24] to measure PSTs’ beliefs about engineering integration (BEI) and self-efficacy forintegrating engineering (SEI). Beliefs refer to one’s mental representations of reality that
science teacher fellows. Gunning presents her research on science teacher self-efficacy, vertical learning communities for teacher professional develop- ment and family STEM learning at international conferences every year since 2009 and is published. She is the Co-Director and Co-Founder of Mercy College’s Center for STEM Education.Dr. Meghan E. Marrero, Mercy College Dr. Meghan Marrero is a Professor of Secondary Education at Mercy College, where she also co-directs the Mercy College Center for STEM Education, which seeks to provide access to STEM experiences for teachers, students, and families. Dr. Marrero was a 2018 Fulbright Scholar to Ireland, during which she implemented a science and engineering program for
domain during the pre-college yearsthat is one of the strongest predictors of intent to pursue or persist in a STEM major in college.This exploratory case study examined the lived experiences of eight high school girls whoexhibited strong STEM identities. This work reports on the role that all-female STEM spacesinfluenced participants’ intent to pursue STEM majors in college. Eight junior and senior girlswere interviewed over the course of an eight-week period during fall 2019 regarding theirperceived feelings of self-efficacy, their feelings of recognition in STEM, and their interest inSTEM domains. This qualitative research was framed using Godwin’s 2016 Engineering IdentityFramework, adapting it to accommodate a broader STEM Identity and
to their students formany years. Some individual teachers may find it challenging to engage in robotics-aided STEMeducation due to their lack of required TPACK self-efficacy (see [5,9] for details about TPACKself-efficacy). Moreover, all robotics-aided STEM lessons are not the same, i.e., their difficultylevels may vary due to variations in the required TPACK. Specifically, while some lessons maybe more complicated from the design or programming (technology) point of view, others may becomplicated from the teaching, learning, or assessment (pedagogical) point of view, and theincorporation of robots (technology) may also impact the pedagogy. Thus, it is important toconcentrate on investigating the TPACK framework for individual teacher and
using the Math and Science Teaching Efficacy Beliefs instruments forteachers, and a validated 65-item STEM attitude survey for students. A content knowledgeassessment was also conducted for the students. Analyses of data from the professionaldevelopment workshop and the summer camp indicated a positive impact of the teaching andlearning technique. The teachers reported high self-efficacy in their ability to implement theapproach in their classrooms. Assessment of students’ content knowledge showed increasedunderstanding of the concepts taught with the approach. A positive attitude towards STEM wasalso reported by the student participants. This research is supported by NSF Grant# 1614249.IntroductionThe science, technology, engineering and
applications can make the world a better place.This paper presents an alternative to additive outreach programs prevalent in universities andengineering societies. The proposed teaching paradigm is demonstrably simple to implement,eases teacher workload, enhances student learning and creates a significant improvement inperceptions and beliefs about self-efficacy in physics, an indicator of student success andmotivation. The research identifies an unanticipated impact of introducing engineering designprinciples into Physics 11 classrooms. Physics 11 teachers participated in developing a lessonplan that guides facilitators of learning through the discovery- or inquiry-based activity. Themixed methods research methodology included surveys, observations
Less Obtrusive Peer Assessmentpractice, improve metacognition because students are using a using EEFK12metric to identify exemplars and will approximate the exemplarsthemselves, improve their self-efficacy regarding specific elements of the EEFK12, and grow intheir epistemological identity because they can see assessment results from their peers or self-reflect. This paper describes the development of the tool, LOPA2 (Less Obtrusive PeerAssessment Application).Engineering Epistemic FrameThe engineering epistemic frame (EEFK12) was developed as an alternatively comprehensiveassessment method for K-12 students in formal or informal settings[4]. It synthesizes
persistence and retention in the field [28], [29]. Godwin [30]dissociates identity into three separate factors: recognition from others, interest in engineering,and performance/competence, which is tied closely with self-efficacy. Similar measures are thusused in the survey instrument for this work. Also tied to engineering interest is the exposure ofstudents to seeing the ways in which engineers contribute to society, how they change the world,and how they make it a better place. Explicitly showing this can help encourage futureengineering interest and broaden participation in the field [31].The literature shows that much has already been implemented in the way of promoting equity inengineering and science. Much of what has been done has been in the
the 25 girlsin the FEMME program, 18 had attended the 4th grade FEMME program, 5 had attended the 4thgrade mixed-gender program, and there were 2 new students. One of the girls who hadpreviously attended the 4th grade FEMME program attended one of the mixed-gender programs.Except for the FEMME programs which had approximately 70% returning students, each of theother programs had approximately 40% returning students.The positive effects on female students acquired during the summer of 2015 were sustainedthrough the school year and were still evident from pre-measures for girls who returned duringthe summer of 2016. At the beginning of the 2016 program, the girls who had attendedFEMME4 showed higher levels of self-efficacy and demonstrated a
projects. Across two years, 32 teachers from two cohorts provided post-fairsurvey data from participating and non-participating students. We received data from 1,257students at the beginning of the year, but just 982 at the end of the year. Our matching effortsidentified 795 complete cases, which is the data we focus on here. See Table 1 for a breakdownof demographic information by teacher.MeasuresThe evaluation team developed these surveys to assess student attitudes towards science andengineering as well as experiences being involved in S&E fairs. Measures of science attitudes(value and self-efficacy for science) as well as science and engineering interest were drawn fromthe MSP-MAP project[12] that developed theoretically grounded measures