dropoutrates and improving student success.Keywords: AI, data mining, dropout, engineering, first-year students, higher educationIntroductionOver the years, many studies have been conducted to understand why students leave theirstudies in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplinesprematurely. Research has delved into sociocognitive factors that play a critical role in studentpersistence in university. For instance, sense of belonging [1, 2], self-efficacy [3, 4], identity[5, 6], and intrinsic motivation [7], which are vital to student persistence in university. Forinstance, Andrews et al. [8] researched how the incorporation of makerspaces impactsstudents' self-efficacy and sense of belonging concerning design, engineering
, leadership skills, and contentknowledge, contributing to an increase in their computing self-efficacy. No statisticallysignificant differences were found based on gender or ethnicity, intersectional relationships werenot explored. The increase in self-efficacy seems to be directly related to the teachingexperience, a key part of the “performance outcome” measure of self-efficacy theory [41] inwhich having positive mastery experiences in a given topic increases your self-efficacy in thatspace.The second article presented a case study focused on a Latina CS transfer student (Juliet)attending a Hispanic Serving Institutions, who almost left CS due to “ability hierarchies” sheperceived within her introductory CS course [43]. Ability hierarchies are
pursuit of STEM careers. Example, “I can see myself in a STEM career.” 5. Intent to persist - Student intention to persist is highly indicative of actual persistence. Intent to persist can be examined in a temporal manner, looking at short-term, degree attainment, and long-term commitment [31]. Example, “I intend to attend graduate school in STEM.” 6. Self Awareness - Self Awareness represents the extent to which one can identify and articulate personal values and professional values, accurately assess strengths and limitations, and view challenges with a growth mindset. Self- awareness plays a critical role in how students learn and develop as STEM professionals [32]. 7. Self-Efficacy - Perceived self
-efficacy and the students’ interests wereadapted from [3]. The remaining items were adapted for middle school students from a surveythat had been previously used to assess engineering students’ perceptions towards physics andmathematics [4, 5]. Each item asked the students to rank their perceptions of each of the STEMdisciplines that they encountered in middle school (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology,and computer science). This paper presents only the results of the students’ perceptions ofphysics. Table III details the 13 items that the students answered. TABLE III 13-ITEM TEST OF SELF-EFFICACY, INTEREST, AND PERCEIVED RELEVANCE OF PHYSICS # Statement about physics 1 I am very good at physics. 2
General Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSES) The NGSES measures the student’s attitude towards their own sense of efficacy.13 Forexample, it tries to capture how easily they may give up or how persistent they see themselves asbeing, and whether they see themselves as someone who usually succeeds or not, or who seeksout challenges or not. A sense of self-efficacy is critical to moral development, because it iscritical to actually following through with moral actions. A person who has a keen sense ofethics will not be an effective ethical actor unless he or she also has a sense that his or her actionscan make a difference and unless he or she will have the perseverance to follow through evenwhen obstacles are encountered. We see the Self-efficacy
, and 2) to study the impactof the mentorship experience on the graduate student and postdoctoral mentors. The specific research questions explored included the following: 1) How did participationas a mentor impact mentors’ self-efficacy in research, leadership, or mentorship?; 2) Didworking with an REU student increase the mentors’ perceived research productivity, teachingskills, or communication skills?; 3) What types of approaches did the mentors utilize to superviseand mentor the REU students?; and 4) What challenges related to mentoring and/or the REUprogram did mentors report?Methods The study took place at a large mid-Atlantic research university. The REU program,funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), was in its
, family, andadults at school. The protocol, adapted from an existing protocol [18], was originally written toaugment quantitative research measures (such as student surveys, data from the LearningManagement System, and achievement data) and gather insight into socioenvironmental factorsimpacting BOAST participants. This interview protocol was revised before Year 2, for exampleto acquire more consistent math self-efficacy ratings and re-order questions for fluidity.Interviews were conducted one-on-one in person or via Zoom. Digital audio recordings weretranscribed and coded using Nvivo analytical software.Data Analysis The First Cycle of coding [19] highlighted SCCT theory-derived constructs (Table 1). Inthe Second Cycle, language used by
through P3). Also, students who reported better interactions withteammates (B.5) had a stronger sense of self-efficacy in engineering classes in a statisticallysignificant way. Except for interactions with teammates, all behavior metrics were positively andsignificantly linked to the EI dimension that measured how much they were perceived as a goodengineer by their professors and peers. Similarly, when a student was perceived as a goodengineer by their peers, he or she tended to do a better job keeping the team on track (B.2), at asignificance level of 0.001. Results were detailed in Appendix Table A.4.Teamwork behaviors were linked to team conflicts in modest ways. Students who ratedthemselves lower on interactions with teammates tended to
. trends in CIT/STEM student student self-efficacy, CIT/STEM student self-efficacy, enrollment, enrollment, retention, self-efficacy, enrollment,Obj 1.2 Establish retention, completion, and completion, and transfer. retention, completion,strategies for enlisting transfer (SERCT). and transfer.industry partnerships that Obj 3.3 Establishbecome self-sustaining Obj 2.3 Establish Leadership Leadership strategies Obj 4.3 Establish strategies committed to committed to Leadership strategiesObj 1.3 Use STEM-ESS accelerating Latinx student accelerating Latinx committed toto strengthen
exam performance [24]-[29]. The literature shows increases instudent outcomes, student perceptions [14], even in self-efficacy with regards to complicatedsubject matter [29]. The flipped classroom pedagogy equalizes opportunities for students,especially for students of lower socioeconomic status and first-generation students. Incomparison to advantaged students who may have support systems in place to help completehomework and projects with tutors or advice from previous generations of how to navigatehigher education, disadvantaged students are able to take advantage of the relocation of thehomework and projects inside the classroom and benefit from interaction with the professor inthe classroom. The flipped class allows both subsets of
Act [3]. The RET program included a 6-week paidinternship in multiple integrated circuit (IC) design labs at Oklahoma State University for highschool and community college teachers to learn about semiconductors and chip designfundamentals. After the RET program, teachers were also required to translate their researchexperience into new curriculum modules. The RET program is also mutually beneficial to the USsemiconductor industry and teachers. It benefits the industry by encouraging teachers andstudents to become familiar with new technologies. Teachers gain from enhanced self-efficacy atthe same time [4].However, it is challenging to measure the progress of teachers in acquiring semiconductorknowledge. In contrast to other aspects of
two instances in time: their Fall and Spring senior capstone designcourse. The findings from the prior longitudinal study also impelled the authors to implement aqualitative survey to gain insight into the student’s perspective of their motivation. Both of thesurveys measure five factors of student motivation: cognitive value, intrinsic value, self-regulation,self-efficacy, and test/presentation anxiety.This paper presents quantitative and qualitative results to further explore the impact of studentmotivation on their performance in senior capstone design courses. The study also examines thestudent’s motivation factors with regard to their demographic information. This includes thestudent’s gender, age, residency (domestic or international
. Scholarship recipients will be linked throughcohort teaming sessions with campus resources, local industry partners and experts, and facultymentors, to propose, critique, select, develop, and implement commercially viable technologyproducts. The novel approach to engineering education developed through this project will serveto enrich the creative potential of new graduates in technical fields and expand small businesscreation and employment, both of importance to growth regions where there may be fewer largecorporate employers. Key dimensions of those who exhibit entrepreneurial thinking include agrowth mindset, a regular practice of creativity, and high personal self‐efficacy. Withentrepreneurism seen as an enabling force to overcome employment and
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
strengths – collectively contributing to a cohortculture of collaboration and enhanced work ethic.With the measured gains in student success, self-efficacy, and identifying with their path inengineering, the ETS program has shown preliminary success in achieving these main outcomesfor students. The team will continue to provide special attention to getting students connected toeach other and continue building the teamwork and communication skills essential to strongacademic success, rewarding careers, and fulfilling lives.References1. Landivar, L. (September 2013). Disparities in STEM Employment by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin. American Community Survey Reports. Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce
it requires critical thinking and writing skills, which are difficult toexplain in a traditional classroom setting. In prior work, it was found to be among the mostmentally demanding for novices.6 Performance in this stage could be improved by smallerwriting assignments along the way, which we plan to implement in the future.From our surveys, it was possible to measure the shift in student self-efficacy in performing Page 26.1685.9iSLR and its perceived usefulness, as shown in Table 4. Shift is measured by assigning unitchange if the answers changed between neighboring categories. For example, change fromNeutral to Strongly agree gives a “+2
students. This study focused on a STEM outreach program for 6th–9th grade students with no previous CS skills. The program's micro controllers’ curriculum was used to test students’ capabilities for learning CT concepts, the program was translated into Arabic, and its schedules were adjusted to ensure that these changes did not alter the study significantly. Pre- and post-program self-efficacy surveys measured students' comprehension of CT concepts, but because this was the first time Kuwaiti students were introduced to this type of assessment, the students were confused about some of the concepts. Additionally, the students' acumen for the survey was highly influenced by their culture. Despite
examine the resistance toadvocacy efforts, which hinders increased representation, participation, and belonging inengineering. We did not initially plan to explain why individuals resist advocacy efforts, yet ourongoing research into self-efficacy and self-advocacy around HC messages in engineeringpositioned us to examine individuals’ resistance to advocacy. Our previous HC research hasfocused on women [9], undergraduate and graduate students [7], and faculty members [17] inengineering who utilize their self-efficacy to understand and cope with negative HC messages.Since this past research focused on individuals’ strategies, we have not considered theexperiences of individuals who are resistant to self-advocacy, or advocacy for others
Small and Big-C creativity in Poland,” The International Journal of Creativity &Problem Solving, vol. 19, pp. 7-26, 2009.[45] J. C. Kaufman and R. A. Beghetto, “Beyond big and little: The four c model ofcreativity,” Review of general psychology, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2009.[46] M. Karwowski, I. Lebuda, and E. Wiśniewska, “Measuring creative self-efficacy andcreative personal identity,” The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving, 2018.[47] P. Tierney and S. M. Farmer, “Creative self-efficacy development and creative performanceover time,” Journal of applied psychology, pp. 96, no. 2, 2011.[48] A. Bandura, Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.[49] T
developed to capture studentbeliefs in their academic and professional abilities, with the following constructs of interest: Self-Efficacy scales developed specifically for engineering [11] and for entrepreneurship [12];Innovation scales to measure creativity, teamwork, initiative and networking [13]. Additionaltracking includes participation in Bootcamps, use of Ventureprise Center Modules, and attainmentof Entrepreneurship Certificates, along with learning outcomes measures within each.Formative evaluation measures such as pulse-check polls, are deployed periodically amongstakeholders: faculty advisors rate the approach, students rate their experiences, and projectleaders and Advisory Board members provide pulse checks about the process, progress
cooperation scaffolding might hinder students’ cooperation inlearning. The impacts of scaffolding on students' learning dispositions measured by MSLQ 23 wereexamined by comparing results between the post-test and the pre-test in terms of size effect, asshown in Table 10. According to the comparison, Group B enjoyed the increase in self-efficacy, intrinsic value, cognitive strategy use and self-regulation, but suffered intensified testanxiety. Group C, similar to Group D, experienced increase in self-efficacy and reduced testanxiety, but failed to develop in intrinsic value cognitive strategy use and self-regulation.However, Group D enjoyed the boldest increase in self-efficacy and largest decrease in testanxiety, but they suffered the largest
in today will be important for my future goals”. Interest wasdefined as interest in the subject material. An example of Interest is “I found fulfillment in doingengineering ”.Self-perceptions and definitions were operationalized as students’ personal and social attributeswhile learning. Two underlying factors were used to measure self-perception and definitions:Self-efficacy (3 items; α= .83; ω=.86) and Self-concept (3 items; α= .73; ω=.78) [26-28]. All self-perceptions and definitions questions were listed in one block with the following prompt “Pleaseconsider how confident you were today in the camp”. Self-efficacy was defined as students’ self-assessment in solving content related problems. An example of Self-efficacy is “I
greater sense of belonging to discipline, self-efficacy, and career readiness; particularly for under-represented minority (URM) students [3].However, such active-learning experiences are usually offered late in their engineering degree(e.g., senior-capstone projects) rather than early and often throughout the curriculum. Mostredesign efforts to address this issue typically focus on single, or multiple but disjointed gatewaycourses [4]. An example of a critical path in the Electrical and Electronic Engineering (EEE)department at Sacramento State is shown in Figure 1.Figure-1: Example curriculum path in the EEE major, showing long engineering pre-requisite chains called critical-paths. Courses shown in Bold, shaded, are redesigned as a part of the
engineering education with a focus on emerging technology systems in thecontext of applications and societal impact. We do this through a program of faculty-mentoredmultidisciplinary research, professional development, and exposure to real-world issues thatreflect the impact of nanotechnology on society, the business community, human health, and theenvironment. This approach also supports self-efficacy, multidisciplinary team-building,understanding the broader impacts of technology, and building the skills necessary for researchand lifelong learning.Overall, the key goals are:1. To provide an exciting and productive research experience for each fellow.2. To create a small cohort of students, who share common goals, that supports the developmentof
concepts Compare students who took HCE courses with those on the concepts than students on standard prerequisite pathway. the standard prerequisite pathway.4. Sense of Correlate self-efficacy and perceptions as measured by the Key activities, support belonging adapted version of the Longitudinal Assessment of mechanisms, and programs Engineering Self-Efficacy survey (AWE, 2009) to activities, identified. support mechanisms, and programs that students participated in (self-report and tracking of certain programs such as First-Year Summer
. Shen and B. Bogue, “Women Engineering Students andSelf‐ Efficacy: A Multi‐ Year, Multi‐ Institution Study of Women Engineering Student Self‐Efficacy” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 27-38, Jan. 2009.[9] J. Gill, R. Sharp, J. Mills and S. Franzway, “I still wanna be an engineer! Women, educationand the engineering profession” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 33 ED-4, pp.391-402, Aug. 2008.[10] C. E. Brawner, M. M. Camacho, R. A. Layton, R. A. Long, S. M. Lord, M. W. Ohland, M.H. Wasburn, “Race, Gender, and Measures of Success in Engineering Education” Journal ofEngineering Education, vol. 100, pp. 225-252, April 2011[11] M. C. Smith, J. Rhee and B. Wei “Women in Engineering: Promoting Identity Explorationand Professional
graduate, or professionalschool. He also found positive correlations between research involvement and a broad range ofself-reported growth measures and satisfaction with many aspects of an educational experience.(Astin, 1994)” They further reported that students, and faculty, overwhelmingly find it to be apositive experience. [5]To assess that the ASPiRe program creates a similar positive impact, a Likert Survey was createdto assess self-efficacy and confidence. Several surveys, such as the Longitudinal Assessment ofEngineering Self-Efficacy [LAESE] and the Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Attitude Survey[PFEAS] were researched to establish preliminary questions to assess self-efficacy and confidence.[2] The former was the primary influence for
Surveys, Dimensions of Success (DoS) Observation tool, pre/post topic self-efficacy, and survey student interviews. The results showed that engineering design activitieshad a positive impact on attitude towards STEM learning and careers. Integration ofengineering design principles, student demographics and evaluation instruments and resultsare discussed in this paper.IntroductionEngineering is a natural platform for the integration of science, technology, engineering, andmathematics (STEM) content into K-12 classrooms, while sparking creativity amongst youngminds. Research around effective learning in K-12 classrooms demonstrates that anengineering approach to identifying and solving problems is valuable across all disciplines.Educators and
trainingorganization.Results22 undergraduate engineering students participating in the 2014 semester-long class participatedin pre- and post-class surveys. As mentioned above, self-efficacy has been shown to be anexcellent tool for measuring students for our key objectives. Figure 5 shows the results of the2014 semester-long class in comparison to the 2011, 2012, and 2013 fieldtrip classes and thecontrol group. Table 4 summarizes the improvements in the student survey’s following theclasses. Table 5 shows the standard deviation for each question and year. No, Not at All Yes, Definitely 3.4
relationships.The research represents a preliminary analysis of data examining the role of students’ socio-academic relationships in their learning in undergraduate science and engineering education. Thebroader study also examines sociocognitive influences, such as self-efficacy beliefs andacademic adjustment, in students’ socio-academic experiences. While findings from thispreliminary analysis appear to undermine research that has consistently documentedunderrepresented minorities (URM) students’ negative experiences in STEM classroomsbroadly, and within engineering classrooms specifically, we intend to analyze these andadditional data using social network analysis, which we believe may be better suited forunderstanding students’ socio-academic