c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Measuring Community College Student’s Self-Efficacy toward Circuit AnalysisIntroductionDC circuit analysis has been identified in the literature as being particularly difficult for studentsto learn1,2,3. Research on the difficulties students face regarding this topic focuses solely on 4-year university students, which neglects students studying this topic in alternative institutionslike community colleges. The one common link between research on university and communitycollege students is self-efficacy. This is rooted in the fact that many strategies to increasestudent interest, achievement, retention and persistence in both engineering and
Paper ID #33241Creative Self-Efficacy of Undergraduate Women Engineering MajorsDr. Christine Delahanty, Bucks County Community College Dr. Delahanty is the Area Coordinator of Science and Engineering, and Professor of Engineering and Physics at Bucks County Community College (Bucks). She worked as an electrical engineer at General Electric Co. for nine years in both military and commercial communication satellite operations. Her research interests include investigating creativity within STEM education as a factor in cultivating diver- sity. She establishes technical, college level, programs of study for modernized
programmingincreased from 5.5% to 7.0 % in spring 2019, and that measure decreased from 7.1% to 3.6% infall 2019. Males who indicated they are good in computer programming in comparison to theirpeers increased from 16.7% to 29.6% in spring 2019. Similar patterns can be seen in fall 2019 pre-to post- results where self-efficacy grew from 29.8% to 42.9% for male students, but remained flatfor females.Figure 3. Perceptions of Male vs Female between pre-post survey in Spring 2019 and fall 2019 (Column labels are in percentage).With the post-survey results across semesters presented in Figure 4, gaps between positiveperceptions of programming ability among males versus females is evident. The perception ofmale students reporting to be better at computer
Engineers for over 24 years including eleven years on the faculty at the United States Military Academy.Prof. John C. Ryan, The Citadel c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Measuring Undergraduate Student Design Self-Efficacy within an Undergraduate Civil Engineering CurriculumIntroductionAs infrastructure is becoming deteriorated and outdated, there is a need for diverse, design-savvycivil engineers to develop the infrastructure of the future. In fact, the American Society of CivilEngineers has issued a grade of D+ for America’s infrastructure and declared a need for morediverse civil engineering talent to tackle the complex issues related to our infrastructure systems[1
the assessment of student learning, particularly the assessment of academic growth, and evaluating the impact of curricular change.Dr. Paul R. Hernandez, West Virginia University c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Measuring Student Content Knowledge, iSTEM, Self Efficacy, and Engagement Through a Long Term Engineering Design InterventionAbstractThe current study reports on the outcomes of a classroom-based long-term engineering designintervention intended to increase high school students’ perceptions of the integrated nature ofSTEM disciplines (iSTEM) and to assess the effect of the intervention on student participation inan extracurricular STEM activity (i.e., a research poster
Paper ID #29854Exploring how innovation self-efficacy measures relate to engineeringinternship motivations and outcomesAmy Huynh, University of California, Irvine Amy Huynh is a mechanical and aerospace engineering undergraduate student at the University of Cal- ifornia, Irvine. She is interested in better understanding and supporting the experiences of female and underrepresented engineers in the classroom and in industry. She is a Brooke Owens Fellow and has interned at NASA Goddard, Made In Space, and NASA Ames.Dr. Helen L. Chen, Stanford University Helen L. Chen is a research scientist in the Designing Education Lab
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
engineering design process to meet the needs of aclient; 2) iteratively prototype a solution; 3) work collaboratively on a team; and 4) communicatethe critical steps in the design process in written, oral, and visual formats. Students work on oneproject team for the entire semester, with the focus of delivering a built and tested solution to theclient. To better understand the effects of this course, we used a quantitative evaluation process.The survey addresses how the course contributes to students’ self-efficacy and commitment infour areas: professional development, professional skills, engineering/academics, and creativity.Using a repeated-measures design, all students taking the course in fall 2018 were invited toparticipate in a survey
appropriate since individual student cases are grouped by schools, and predictorvariables include both student-level and institution-level variables. The leadership construct,referred to as leadership self-efficacy in this work, includes self-rated growth in leadership ability,self-rating of leadership ability relative to one’s peers, participation in a leadership role and/orleadership training, and perceived effectiveness leading an organization.The primary independent variable of interest was a factor measuring engineering identitycomprised of items available on both the TFS and CSS instruments. Including this measure ofengineering identity from two different time periods in the model provides the relationshipbetween engineering identity in the
consistently shapes their persistence and success is their advisingrelationship. The way students perceive the support they receive from this relationship caninfluence their self-efficacy concerning the competences needed to finish their dissertation, thesisor applied project report. Understanding the relationship between the student’s self-efficacytowards their culminating tasks and their perception of their advisor’s support is essential, asfrom a motivational standpoint, it can serve as a closer proxy for degree completion.This research paper presents the development and validation of the Advisor Support and Self-efficacy for Thesis completion (ASSET) survey, which measures two constructs: Thesis Self-efficacy and Advisor Support. The former
attitudes and skillsets as they relate to the makerspace. Ourresearch team surveyed 172 undergraduate students in 6 unique courses that incorporate amakerspace based project into their curriculum. These courses varied by student year,department, subject matter, and project complexity. Each student was surveyed at the beginningand end of the semester, before and after they had completed a course project in the makerspace.The survey measured students’ affect towards design, design self-efficacy, technology self-efficacy, innovation orientation, and sense of belonging within the makerspace. Survey itemswere validated through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Subsequently, paired t-testswere used to analyze if, and how, these metrics
, teaching student success skills, and providingprofessional development.AcES students participate in the GRIT, LAESE, and MSLQ surveys at the start and end of eachfall semester and at the end of the spring semester each year. Focus group data is collected at thebeginning, middle and end of each semester and one-on-one interviews occur at the start and endof each semester. The surveys provide a measure of students’ GRIT, defined as perseverance forlong term goals, as well as, general self-efficacy, engineering self-efficacy, test anxiety, mathoutcome efficacy, intrinsic value of learning, inclusion, career expectations, and coping efficacy.A previous study, based on an analysis of the 2017 AcES cohort survey responses, produced asurprising result
authorsused content from this course to develop a skills-based self-efficacy measure designed to exploreundergraduates’ beliefs that they can perform the tasks in this specific field. The purpose of thisstudy was to create a materials science and engineering self-efficacy scale (MSE-SE) to helppredict student achievement in both MSE courses and within the broader engineering program.It is anticipated that the collected results could be used to improve student persistence andsuccess in engineering disciplines, particularly in the first two years of engineering study beforeundergraduates specialize in mastering the engineering major they came to school to pursue.Research Objectives The objective of this study was to create a self-efficacy scale
. Traditionallyused measures of self-efficacy include The General Engineering Self-Efficacy Scale and theEngineering Skills Self-Efficacy Scale and both instruments have been proven reliable, valid,and useful in the assessment of undergraduate engineering students [23].Self-efficacy as an independent variable ESE has long been studied to determine its relation to retention, persistence, and overallsuccess among students in the field. Aleta [24] reported that students who judged their ownengineering backgrounds as strong and positive were more likely to perform well in engineeringprograms and on engineering exams, and their engineering self-efficacy was also shown to becorrelated with academic achievement. Other research has been dedicated to the
sustained critical investigation; and develop ideas.4.2.3 Self-efficacyFive survey items using the same prompt were used to create a composite score measuring self-efficacy. These items included: feelings that your ideas are valuable, feelings that you could“make a difference,” ability to take responsibility for your own learning; ability to succeed inbusiness or industry, and ability to function effectively in the “real world.”4.2.4 Career PreparednessSurvey respondents were asked, “How well did your project experience at WPI prepare you foryour current career?” Response options were a five-point bi-directional Likert scale from verypoorly (1) to very well (5), with an option to indicate “not applicable” if the respondent was notworking.4.2.5
, “Measuring entrepreneurial self-efficacy to understand the impact of creative activities for learning innovation,” Intl J Mgmt Educ, 12, pp. 456-468, 2014.[9] J.H. Dyer, H. B. Gregersen, and C.M. Christensen, “Entrepreneur Behaviors, Opportunity Recognition, and the Origins of Innovative Ventures,” Strateg. Entrepreneurship J, 2 (4): pp. 317–38, 2008.[10] G. Balau, D. Faems, J. van der Bij, “Individual characteristics and their influence on innovation: A literature review,” Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Innovation and Management, Nov. 14-16, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Eds. G. Duysters, A. de Hoyos, K. Kaminishi, Wuhan University Press, pp. 887-901, 2012.[11] A. Bolhari, & S. Tillema
materials to help facilitate rapid prototyping activities.After survey completion, student data were grouped into two categories based on response to questionsrelated to engineering self-efficacy. The highest responders on the engineering skills scales greater than 4on a 5-point Likert Scale were grouped as high-engineering self-efficacy, or high-ESE, and compared tothose responders that scored less than 4 on a 5-point Likert Scale as low-engineering self-efficacy, or low-ESE.Student perceptions towards different design activities were also measured. To examine the reliability ofthe scales for engineering self-efficacy, rapid prototyping, CAD, and 3D printing, the set of questionsassociated with each scale were assessed using Cronbach’s alpha test
.[3] May, Vicki (2014). “Broadening the Path to Engineering,” Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vicki-may/broadening-the-path-to- engineering_b_4941739.html. March 2014.[4] Mamaril, Natasha A., Usher, Ellen L., Li, Caihong R., Economy, D. Ross, and Kennedy, Marian, S. (2016). “Measuring Undergraduate Students’ Engineering Self-Efficacy: A Validation Study.’ Journal of Engineering Education. Vol. 105, No. 2, pp. 366-395.[5] Hsieh, P., Sullivan, J. R., Sass, D. A., & Guerra, N. S. (2012). Undergraduate engineering students’ beliefs, coping strategies, and academic performance: An evaluation of theoretical models. Journal of Experimental Education, 80, 196–218. http://dx.doi.org
Paper ID #39297Building Research Self-efficacy in Undergraduate Students throughAuthentic Research ExperiencesDr. Robin Lynn Nelson, University of Texas at San Antonio College of Engineering and Integrated Design at the University of Texas at San Antonio. With a Ph.D. in Interdisciplinary Learning and Teaching with a cognate in Instructional Technology and MA in Education with a concentration in Instructional Technology, her research interests lie in the intersection of active learning, broadening participation, and supporting pre-service teachers, instructors, and mentors in their classrooms and educational programming
engineering, which can tip the scales in the students’ decision orability to stay in engineering [1]. Gateway courses to advanced study in engineering, such asCalculus II, have been historically perceived by students to be the most difficult [2]. Anecdotalreasons for this could include the complexity of the calculus curriculum, the amount ofbackground knowledge needed to keep pace with learning, and lack of time for conceptexploration and engagement during class. Studies have shown that self-efficacy is morepredictive of mathematics performance than prior mathematics experiences and measures ofmathematics anxiety [3], [4].Self-efficacy can be defined as an individual's belief in their innate ability to achieve goals, andis based on both skill mastery
Paper ID #14844Facilitating Learner Self-efficacy through Interdisciplinary Collaboration inSustainable Systems DesignDr. Tela Favaloro, University of California, Santa Cruz Tela Favaloro received a B.S. degree in Physics and a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the Univer- sity of California, Santa Cruz. She is currently working to further the development and dissemination of alternative energy technology; as project manager of a green building design initiative and researcher with the Center for Sustainable Engineering and Power Systems. Her background is in the development of characterization techniques and
intervention on studentmathematics self-efficacy: Development and application of revised measurement tool Page 26.1142.2Research into the effectiveness of a mathematics intervention course for first year engineeringstudents revealed anomalous results in relation to student persistence. While previous studies ofperformance of college engineering students showed that ACT Math scores were highly linearlypredictive of student persistence outcomes, the study in question did not show similar results.The study revealed an interaction between ACT Math and high school GPA for students thatcompleted the course. The results showed an inverse relationship between ACT Math
questions. 1. Did students’ academic confidence or engineering self-efficacy improve after the project course? 2. Were there differences between the academic confidence or self-efficacy of male and female students? 3. Was there a relationship between the tasks students engaged in and their incoming confidence and self-efficacy measures? 4. Did any tasks correlate to observable changes in confidence or self-efficacy measures?Both academic self-confidence and self-efficacy have a strong effect on student motivation anddecision-making. Academic self-confidence in three particular areas (problem-solving,16 mathand science,17–19 and professional and interpersonal skills7) have been found to be importantfactors in student
. AcknowledgementThis work was conducted under the auspices of the National Science Foundation (NSF) undergrant number EEC-1640521. However, any items expressed in this paper do not necessarilyrepresent the views of NSF or its affiliates.ReferencesBandura, A. (1977). Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behaviorial Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.Engineering Accreditation Commission (2015). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs: Effective for reviews during the 2016-2017 accreditation cycle. Baltimore, MD: ABETFantz, T. D., Siller, T. J., & DeMiranda, M. A. (2011). Pre-collegiate factors influencing the self
Paper ID #44125Examining Imposter Syndrome and Self-Efficacy Among Electrical EngineeringStudents and Changes Resulting After Engagement in Department’s RevolutionaryInterventionsMr. Jeffrey Luke Morrison, University of South Florida Jeffrey Luke Morrison is an undergraduate student pursuing his bachelors in Electrical Engineering at the University of South Florida with focuses in wireless circuits and nano-scale systems. He is an IEEE member and also a member of the USF Honor’s College. In addition to pursuing his EE degree, he is also pursuing a BS in Quantitative Economics and Econometrics.Dr. Chris S Ferekides, University
Their Own Words: How Aspects of Engineering Education Undermine Students’ Mental Health,” in 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, Minneapolis, MN: ASEE Conferences, Aug. 2022, p. 40378. doi: 10.18260/1-2–40378.[33] N. Mamaril, E. Usher, C. Li, D. Economy, and M. Kennedy, “Measuring Undergraduate Students’ Engineering self‐efficacy: A validation study,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 366–395, Apr. 2016, doi: 10.1002/jee.20121.[34] K. J. Jensen and K. J. Cross, “Engineering stress culture: Relationships among mental health, engineering identity, and sense of inclusion,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 110, no. 2, pp. 371–392, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1002/jee.20391.[35] S. Farrell, A. Godwin
be a better mediator of affect – how one feels about a task – while thelatter is a better mediator of academic achievement [4]. Further, self-concept may positivelyinfluence self-efficacy.We hypothesized that BME students’ self-concepts and feelings of self-efficacy might relate totheir unusual career goals (relatively speaking, among engineering fields). We therefore soughtto explore BME students’ career self-concept as engineers and as clinicians, and the relationshipof those self-concepts to engineering design self-efficacy [5]. Both constructs are measured viainstruments that rely on self-declarations – also known as explicit measures. Self-declarations, orexplicit measures, of self-concept carry with them the concern of unreliability
interpersonalskills are less likely to pursue a career in engineering (vs. in a non-engineering field) thanstudents with lower self-confidence in these skills [6, 10]. However, only one of the abovestudies [9] investigated the connection between engineering undergraduates' self-efficacy in theircommunication skills and their perceived importance of these skills directly, despite a suggestionfrom Riemer [4] that they might be related. Further, none of the above studies developedinstantiated items with which to measure communication skills. They instead relied on genericterms such as verbal communication skills, written communication skills, or presentation skills,suggesting that engineering students may not have a true understanding of what is involved ineach
retainingwomen engineering students? Do the virtual measures foster the same levels of self-efficacy inwomen engineering students as the previously offered face-to-face interactions? Do womenengineering students feel additional isolation from their peer group and perhaps question theircareer path when faced with an increased amount of online presence and the removal of criticalprograms aimed at increasing retention?While it is impossible to know the long-term impact on women engineering students due to thepandemic, it is possible to measure the immediate change in self-efficacy, sense of belonging andconfidence in program of study. This study measured changes in self-efficacy, belonging andconfidence of undergraduate women engineering students at a