, confidence, and professional skill development among students. Allof these factors also influence engineering identity and research self efficacy [1]. In addition tofacilitating interactions with strategically trained faculty mentors, these ECHS REU students arementored by more senior researchers in their respective research labs, and within the GCSP-REUprogram, where various levels and fields of students have been collaborating for five weeks priorto the ECHS joining the team. This structured, tiered mentoring approach lessens the burden onany one member and expands the community of practice each student has. It has already proveneffective in previous GCSP-REU cohorts and could serve as a model for scaling in similarinitiatives [1]. In reflection
allowsstudents to get involved [2] in meaningful ways in their campus community (and beyond).Understanding the navigation and impact of undergraduate research experiences for STEMstudents is limited and primarily derived from Research Experiences for Undergraduate (REU)programs [3]. There is a recognized need for research that more broadly explores undergraduateresearch experiences [3] considering their potential impact on individual students, institutions,and the engineering disciplines.For individual students, there are potential benefits in the form of professional competencydevelopment, persistence, self-efficacy, and GPA [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. Forinstitutions (especially R1 institutions like the one where this study was
Unique interdisciplinary courses offered through SFEWS 4.00 0.71 4.00 1.22 4.67 0.58 Professional development offered through SFEWS 3.40 0.55 3.80 0.84 4.00 0.00 Interaction with industry 3.00 1.22 2.80 0.84 3.33 1.15 Learning Outcomes. Participants’ perceived self-efficacy for aspects of professionaldevelopment was measured with a 5-point scale (Table 4). Overall, participants agreed that they wereconfident about research-related tasks and ethics (e.g., responsible conduct of research, lab safety, labmanagement, presentations); and their confidence overall increased slightly over time. Their
, doi: 10.1111/jcal.12130.[9] C. J. Fong et al., “Meta-Analyzing the Factor Structure of the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory,” The Journal of Experimental Education, pp. 1–21, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1080/00220973.2021.2021842.[10] M. K. Khalil, S. E. Williams, and H. G. Hawkins, “The Use of Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) to Investigate Differences Between Low vs High Academically Performing Medical Students,” Medical Science Educator, vol. 30, no. 1, p. 287, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s40670-019-00897-w.[11] J. Broadbent, “Academic success is about self-efficacy rather than frequency of use of the learning management system,” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 32
retention, as well as methods to improve NTS outcomes.Several studies focus on the pedagogy of NTS [26], [27].Factors affecting NTS persistence, completion, attrition, or retentionExisting studies have identified factors that affect NTS persistence, completion, attrition, orretention, that may be categorized as social factors, academic performance factors, demographicfactors, inter-role conflicts, and academic and social integration.Social factors refer to emotional and behavioral influences from another person including but notlimited to family members, classmates, and friends. Social factors affect NTS retention byinfluencing NTS self-efficacy and motivation in completing college [11]. As support orencouragement increases, student’s perception of
. High. Educ., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 297–315, Mar. 2009, doi: 10.1007/s10755-008-9084-x.[10] S. Kobayashi, B. W. W. Grout, and C. Ø. Rump, “Interaction and learning in PhD supervision – a qualitative study of supervision with multiple supervisors,” vol. 8, no. 14, pp. 13–25, Mar. 2013.[11] N. C. Overall, K. L. Deane, and E. R. Peterson, “Promoting doctoral students’ research self-efficacy: combining academic guidance with autonomy support,” High. Educ. Res. Dev., vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 791–805, Oct. 2011, doi: 10.1080/07294360.2010.535508.[12] K. G. Rice, H. Suh, X. Yang, E. Choe, and D. E. Davis, “The advising alliance for international and domestic graduate students: Measurement invariance and implications for academic
]. In turn, the nature of this engagement mayimpact children’s levels of self-efficacy in a task or concept, subsequently influencing theirinterest or perseverance in learning [13].Failure, Frustration and LearningSan Juan and Murai [21] note that frustration and failure are not synonymous. Rather, they arerelated constructs, with failure or perceptions of failure often developing into emotionalresponses such as frustration or dissatisfaction [22]. While both frustration and failure are oftenviewed as negative emotions or responses [23], [24], both can be catalysts for motivation orframed to support more positive cognitive-affective states [25], [26]. Experiences withfrustration while learning can shape an individual’s level of motivation and
sample, we noticed aroughly equal split of qualitative and quantitative data. Among the quantitative data sources, themost common data collection tool utilized was surveys administered either in the classroom,online or at an intervention. These surveys most often contained a Likert-type Scale andmeasured different aspects of student performance, such as self-efficacy and grit, or usedquestions from preexisting surveys such as mentor evaluation forms. Other forms of quantitativeinformation came from archival data from school records such as retention rates, completionrates, representation information, job placement rates, as well was individual studentperformance (in the forms of GPA, SAT and ACT scores, among others).Qualitative data came from a
to students'performance in campus environment [7]. Essentially, how students perceive the culture withinSTEM and their belonging within that culture is not contingent but does correlate with facultysupport through interactions during their academic careers [8]. As a result of this correlation,students describe feelings such as hostility and lack of caring when characterizing the instructor-student relationship [9]. Report from previous studies shows that there is still negative form ofinteraction between faculty and students like discrimination from instructors [10]. This reckoninghas allowed scholars to conclude that there is a beneficial connection between facultyrelationships and student’s self-efficacy and their persistence in STEM
. R. Lee, "Effects of an examiner’s positive and negative feedback on self- assessment of skill performance, emotional response, and self-efficacy in Korea: a quasi- experimental study," BMC medical education, vol. 19, no. 1, p. 142, 2019.[9] Wikipedia contributors, "Pedagogical agent," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 21 December 2019. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedagogical_agent. [Accessed 2 January 2020].[10] Wikipedia contributors, "Chatbot," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 26 December 2019. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatbot. [Accessed 2 January 2020].[11] J. Weizenbaum and others, "ELIZA---a computer program for the study of natural language communication between
, 2002, p. 110). In the context of this study, the expectancy-value theorypredicts that students’ motivation to develop and practice leadership will be influenced by theirperceived level of importance of, and their subjective competency in, this skill. Understandingstudents’ perceived importance of leadership ability and their confidence in it can therefore shedlight on their motivation to develop and practice this skill (Chan et al., 2017).In the expectancy-value theory, expectancies can also be understood in terms of self-efficacy, inthat “an individual’s beliefs about their abilities influence their motivation to engage in relatedlearning activities” (Chan et al., 2017, p. 303). In other words, students’ perception of theircompetency in
underrepresented populations in engineering whohad an interest in STEM fields and would benefit most from hands-on experience and student-ledinquiry. The goal was to increase self-efficacy in vulnerable populations. Teachers identified apossible participant pool of 50 students. 24 students decided to participate, 88% fromunderrepresented populations. In the first week, students met on AMSA’s campus to developteam-work capacity and plan what prosthetic prototype they would like to 3D print to respond toan issue or problem they identified within the field of prosthetics. In the second week, they wentto the university’s campus and 3D printed their design. They also created posters and developedtheir final presentation for friends and family. The
gender and ethnic differences in STEM participation (Eccles, 2005). Theyhypothesized that educational, vocational and avocational choices would be most directly relatedto person’s expectations for success and the value they attach to the available options. TheEccles’ theory suggests that choices to engage in activities are shaped by both competence andvalue beliefs. Competence is about acquiring skills and applying them. Competence beliefs havebeen studied more widely than value beliefs among K-12 and engineering students. They aremostly based on the self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977). Self-efficacy is enhanced by positivefeedback, better performance, and social comparisons. Value beliefs, on the other hand, have notbeen that well studied
been sparse research conducted on non-traditional collegestudents, and in particular those who have career paths in engineering and science. It is howeveruseful to note the important work of Rosenbaum and his colleagues who have studied suchstudents.18 These researchers determined that in general, community colleges performed poorlyin terms of providing out-of-class support to their non-traditional students. Our study measures,build upon the work of Deil-Amen, Rosenbaum and colleagues in addition to our pilotcommunity college engineering and science study that informed this research design.What must be better understood about community college support for studentsCommunity colleges have taken on a “demand absorbing” role, which includes
microcontroller board.More details on the Introduction to Engineering curriculum and the results of its implementationare described by Langhoff, et al. [4]. The curriculum has been successful in enhancing students’identity as engineers as indicated by pre- and post-program surveys. The course also showssuccess in increasing students’ self-efficacy and skills needed to succeed in college, as well asprovide insight into the university transfer process and academic pathway post-transfer. As aresult, students expressed increased self-efficacy in succeeding in their courses and increasedability to cope with and overcome doing poorly on a math exam.Engineering GraphicsThe online Engineering Graphics course developed through CALSTEP is a four-unit course
United States National Science Foundation (NSF) because the problems of the future weredeemed to be complex and required interdisciplinary study. Others think STEM was coined byNASA as SEM with the “T” added because it sounds better.Because this complexity is pervasive at every stage, most STEM research is focused on oneaffective construct (such as motivation, attitude, interest, self-efficacy) in a single STEM area[12]-[15]. And consequently, few if any instruments exist to capture STEM as multi-constructsand none in multiple STEM areas [16]. Currently few existing instruments fully capture thebreadth and complexity of the STEM disciplines. For example, in 2012, Minner, Ericson, Wuand Martinez [17] reported half of the cognitive assessment
”will be tracked and compared with the men in the computing degree programs to demonstrate theimpact of the initiatives of women students’ academic performance in addition to theirperception of ASC.References[1] Borg, A. 50/50 by 2020 [Video]. YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nImg8vPUe4[2] https://anitab.org/braid, Sources: BRAID Beacon school chairs, publicly reported data, andreport on Beacon school rate of change by Kaitlin Splett, UCLA.[3] M. Klawe, “Increasing female participation in computing: The Harvey Mudd Collegestory”. Computer, 2013, 46(3), 56–58. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2013.4[4] M. Bong, E. M. Skaalvik, “Academic Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: How Different AreThey Really?”, Educational Psychology Review, 2003, 15(1), 1
achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology.Zabriskie, C., R. Henderson, and J. Stewart. 2018. “The Importance of Belonging and Self-Efficacy in Engineering Identity.” AERA Open, January. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10058182-importance- belonging-self-efficacy-engineering-identity. 12Does endorsement of masculine ideals predict sense of belonging and identity over performance and peer interactions?Appendix A:Questions from each of the five instruments used in this paper in the order presented here. Allquestions had a 7-point Likert scale. Strongly Somewhat
that exist in K-16 education: (1) the underrepresentation of Blacks and Hispanicsreceiving science and engineering bachelor’s degrees, and (2) disparities in K-12 STEMeducation and student achievement among different demographic and socioeconomic groups andgeographic regions (National Science Foundation, 2022).The challenge of increasing the number of students interested in pursuing STEM, particularlystudents from excluded identities, is complex and multifaceted, and includes both externalfactors such as access to experiences and educational opportunities, and intrinsic psychologicalfactors such as identity, self-efficacy, sense of belonging and value perception (Allen, 2022;Anderson & Ward, 2014; Collins, 2018; Kricorian, Seu, Lopez
of our research. These data, along with a careful review ofdocuments and websites available from each community college and applicable higher educationliterature as a comparison informed the refinement of the CPPI which was developed, and testedin our previously described STEM community college study.5The Refined College Pedagogical Practice Inventory (CPPI-R): Refinement, testing, and use ofthe CPPI has been informed by measurement research of educational psychologicalresearchers.33 Specifically, the inventory was initially designed with the intent of enabling us toexplore relationships among the dependent and independent variables associated with collegepedagogical practices and to determine potentially predictive factors that relate to
community and occupational college personnel and students. For ourresearch forty-one interviews were conducted with approximately ten at each community collegesite during the first semester of our research. These data, along with a careful review ofdocuments and websites available from each community college and applicable higher educationliterature as a comparison informed the refinement of the CPPI which was developed, and testedin our previously described STEM community college study.5The Refined College Pedagogical Practice Inventory (CPPI-R): Refinement, testing, and use ofthe CPPI has been informed by measurement research of educational psychologicalresearchers.33 Specifically, the inventory was initially designed with the intent of enabling
shared understanding by organizational members regarding organizationalgoals, values, and general structures and procedures. When members are acculturated, theyusually have accepted the general goals and values of the organization, and are willing tointegrate into the culture. Familiarity with other individuals from the organization (i.e., get toknow the colleagues and establish relationships with members) can foster relationships (in bothmicro and macro-levels) bond individuals to their organizations, and become a way to increaseperceptions of self-efficacy and commitment toward the organization (Cheney et al, 2014).Recognition from others (i.e., perceiving one’s value to the organization and feeling recognized)can also link to job satisfaction
previous EFA,indicating that the Framing Agency Survey provides data that are valid for uses like instructionalrefinement and further studies into the role that framing agency plays in the professionalformation of engineers. However, such studies will require a larger dataset, as well as analysisexamining the structure of the survey that includes measures of relevant constructs, such asengineering identity, engineering self-efficacy, and persistence intentions. Our ongoing researchaims to develop full structural models that include demographic covariates to permitinvestigation of varied impacts on privileged and minoritized students.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1751369
they were failing the course when in fact, their grades wereabove average. We also wondered, given the large number of items students miss in theseexams, whether instructors would review these items in class so that the exam could be used toinform instruction rather than just serve to measure and classify students.To find out more about LOC grading and related exam practices and their effects on students, wedesigned a survey to address the following questions: Assuming that their final grades remain the same, to what extent does the raw score of an exam affect students’ motivation, self-efficacy, learning strategies, or perception of the instructor? To what extent do students believe that exams should be criterion-based
)developed by Pintrich, Smith, García, and McKeachie in 1991 was used to measure keyconstructs associated with students' success, such as motivation, epistemic and perceptualcuriosity, and self-efficacy. Signature assignments were developed to measure student successoutcomes from adopting the pedagogy. The results of the MSLQ administered to 44 studentsimpacted by the pedagogy reveal a significant increase in the students' key constructs associatedwith success. The pedagogy reveals better knowledge gain and classroom engagement than thetraditional teaching approach.IntroductionHistorically, concepts in engineering fields have been taught using traditional methods ofinstruction [1]. In this method, the instructor is the sole provider of knowledge
theirrelationship with academic performance. Second, longitudinal studies to identify the relationshipand impact of employed study strategies on the students' academic performance over the courseof their engineering degree should be conducted. Finally, the researchers may includemotivational factors to discuss the relationship between the students' study strategies and theiracademic performance.AcknowledgmentThe authors would like to thank Dr. Heidi Diefes-Dux and Dr. Morgan Hynes for access tostudent data.References[1] M. C. W. Yip, “Learning strategies and self-efficacy as predictors of academic performance: a preliminary study,” Qual. High. Educ., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 23–34, 2012, doi: 10.1080/13538322.2012.667263.[2] N. Rosenberg and R. R. Nelson
, racism, and social marginalization (First edition.). Stylus Publishing, LLC.[9] Mondisa, J. L. & McComb, S. A. (2015) Social community: A mechanism to explain the success of STEM minority mentoring programs. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning. 23(2), 149-163. doi:10.1080/13611267.2015.1049018[10] Maton, K. I., Beason, T. S., Godsay, S., Sto. Domingo, M. R., Bailey, T. C., Sun, S., & Hrabowski, F. A., III. (2016) Outcomes and processes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Program: STEM PhD completion, sense of community, perceived program benefit, science identity, and research self-efficacy. CBE - Life Sciences Education, 15(3), ar48. doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-01-0062[11] Atkins, K., Dougan, B. M
, orSES. In the third and final pass, we focused on reading for details related to themes identified inthe initial analysis, including discussion of the conceptual framework and patterns in types of out-of-class involvement.Findings and DiscussionProfessional Development Outcomes Associated with Student Organization Involvement.Researchers have defined and examined student outcomes impacted by out-of-class experiencesin a variety of ways. In the realm of professional development, these outcomes range fromintellectual and competency development to value constructs (e.g., ethics, professionalresponsibility, sustainability affect) and constructs of self-efficacy and professional identity(including sense of belonging, work self-efficacy, and
, 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