]. Learning mathematics andscience in engaging contexts, as in this project, through inquiry-based modeling and simulationof their individual and family’s health biometrics, supported by familial collaboration, has thepotential to reduce students’ math anxiety and impact their self-efficacy toward STEM careers. The underlying motivation for this project is to boost the decision-making processes thatinfluence middle school Hispanic students’ confidence in pursuing technology rich STEM careerchoices through positive interaction with user-friendly math and sciences technologies andassociated data collection, analysis, and modeling. Equity and inclusivity in education requiresincreasing diverse minority students’ access to technology rich educational
self-regulation in terms of cognitive, 1. Where would a “world-class” engineering students want metacognitive, and affective measures, this work in progress to be in the topic areas covered in class? focuses on reporting out initial results in how students talk 2. Where are you currently on each of these items? about their motivation and how that impacts academic, 3. What do you need to do to move from where you are to personal, and professional choices. Here, we define where you would need to be to become a “world-class” motivation loosely as the impetus that drives a person to do engineering student? something. Each
Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference August 6 – 8, 2017, Daytona Beach, FL W1A-1 Session W1A ENGINEERING IDENTITY TABLE 1The first year surveys administered to the GE students MEAN RESPONSE FOR UNDECIDED STUDENTS RESPONDING “NEGATIVELY”include validated measures of constructs related to Beginning of Fall End of Fall End of Springengineering identity and belonging created by the first year Q1
students,Bottesi, et al. [25] found that anxiety and intolerance of uncertainty can lead to negative beliefsand outcomes expectations that can affect student performance [see also: 26]. A study ofengineering students [20] found that low stress levels and positive outcome expectationsincreased students’ self-efficacy, a factor that, in turn, significantly predicted academicachievement. Related studies identified stress as a key predictor for low student engagement andpersistence [27] as even students with high ability in science often leave STEM majors due tosignificant accompanying pressure and accompanying physical and psychological distress [28,29].Minority students can be disproportionately impacted by such emotional experiences due to
Progress: Fellowship Year 2 The GC WSC Fellowship Program is currently in its second year with a new cohort ofstudents. The organizers aimed to create a more formalized method to evaluate the program’simpact on student participants. A survey was created to measure students’ research identity andself-efficacy pre- and post- program involvement. (Appendix I) This assessment tool wasdeveloped from the University’s Expanding Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences(ECURE) Impact Assessment and adapted to fit the needs of this program. [21] Questions aim toexplore 1) participants’ previous research and research communication experiences, 2) theiridentity as a researcher, 3) their research self-efficacy, 4) their perception of water
-college/[4] C.V Caldwell and R. Hughes, “Engineering Living Learning Community Experience: A Model for Improving First-Year Retention and Academic Performance of Black Students” ASEE Conference, Virtual, July 2021.[5] K. Inkelas, M. Soldner, S. Longerbeam, and J. Leonard, “Differences in Student Outcomes by Types of Living–Learning Programs: The Development of an Empirical Typology,” Journal of Research in Higher Education, vol. 49, pp. 495-512, 2008.[6] C. Caldwell and R. Hughes, "An Engineering Summer Bridge Program Utilizing a Safe Space to Increase Math Self-Efficacy" First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference, Virtual, August 2021[7] C.A. Bodnar, R.M. Clark, M. Besterfield-Sacre, Development and Assessment of an
implemented in fall 2017. Finally, future cohorts identity: Definitions, factors, and interventions affectingare anticipated to be larger, which may allow for insight into development, and means of measurement”, European journal ofthe efficacy of identity formation efforts on population engineering education, 2017, 1-23.subgroups. [9] Arnett, J. J, "Are college students adults? Their conceptions of the transition to adulthood", Journal of adult development 1, 4, 1994, CONCLUSIONS 213-224
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
composition of teams (considering factors like gender, ethnicity, major, GPA, prior circuit experience, and year in school) influence student perceptions of the CLE and, consequently, student outcomes?To address these questions, we investigate the relationships in our survey data set throughquantitative analysis, focusing on two dependent variables: student performance, in terms of theirexam scores (Exam), and Collaborative Learning Experience (CLE), a measured variable from asurvey questionnaire at the end of the semester about the student’s perception of thecollaborative learning experience. We in turn examine how these dependent variables may beaffected by other collected measures, such as task and general self-efficacy, test anxiety
understand the conditions that mayencourage engineering students to be more entrepreneurial and innovative. Among Epicenter’s severalresearch projects is an ongoing longitudinal survey study of the development of engineering students’career goals around innovation and engineering, referred to as the Engineering Majors Survey (EMS -2016). The EMS study follows a nationally representative sample of engineering students from theirundergraduate experiences through graduation and into the workplace (Gilmartin et al. 2017). Withinthis survey are measures of engineering task self-efficacy and innovation self-efficacy, as well as 39background learning experiences and extra-curricular activities spanning high school throughundergraduate education, which form
University in Ghana. Pre and post surveys were administered tounderstand changes in students’ self-efficacy as a result of the intervention. The project scopewas to design, build, and fly a quadcopter drone to simulate surveying a mining area inZimbabwe and transporting items between two sites. This scope was significantly morechallenging than anything most of them had done before, as evidenced by less than half of thestudents reporting prior experience designing and building any product, and nearly a thirddescribing the project as “impossible” at first. Significant (p < 1.04 E-2) increases with mediumto large effect sizes (|g| = 0.653 to 1.427) were measured for five of six self-efficacy measures,capturing how students’ belief in their own
Engineering Students Through an Intersectional LensAbstractHigh-impact academic experiences, particularly research and internship experiences, havepositive impacts for engineering students on engineering task self-efficacy (ETSE), a measure ofstudents’ perception of their ability to perform technical engineering tasks. However, under-represented racial/ethnic minority students (URM) and women in engineering are found to haverelatively lower self-perceptions across several academic and professional self-efficacymeasures. Previous studies examined the impact of research and internship experiences on ETSEfor students categorized by gender and URM status separately. The current study explores theimpact of these experiences on ETSE for the intersection
students have been conducted in the context of team discourse and studentachievement5, engineering design projects6, and developing validated self-efficacy instruments forengineers7. Moreover, there is evidence in literature on measuring self-efficacy of engineeringstudents in the context of programming8-9. Askar et al., examines factors related to self-efficacyfor Java programming in first year engineering students. These factors include gender, computerexperience, general computing skills, frequency of computer use, and family computer usage.Findings from this study confirm the link between students’ self-efficacy beliefs and their choiceof subject. It was also found that computer engineering students had higher self-efficacy beliefscompared to
wereattributed to mastery experiences and positive emotional states as the maximum percentage ofgirls who used words related to the four Bandura self-efficacy categories were: masteryexperiences (86%); emotional states (62%); vicarious experiences (59%); and verbal persuasion(36%). The broader 18 emergent themes of girls’ learning experiences included knowledge,doing, national priorities, fun, emotions, sustainability, civic responsibility, mentors, arts, softskills, minority, and persistence. Most girls had positive learning experiences, with sometransitioning from ‘difficult’ to ‘easy’ as they gained mastery experiences. A few girls expresseddifficulty and discomfort with mathematics, measurements, equipment usage, and outdoorenvironments. The
this transformation, there is cause towarrant a broader exploration of relevant constructs. First, there is concern that self-efficacy canbe considered as a deficit-based construct. Second, its creation in the American context may nottranslate directly to the African context. [4] compared results on the General Self-Efficacy Scaleacross 25 countries and found some variation in the internal consistency across countries, basedon the range of Cronbach’s alpha values, a reliability measure, seen. Most of these countrieswere located in the Global North, and no single African country was included in the study. It istherefore possible that the self-efficacy construct may not be as relevant to our students as thosein other contexts. Third, some
psychosocial needs of the students, with statements such as “My advisor takes aninterest in my well-being and life-work balance,” and “My advisor provides emotional supportwhen I need it.” Finally, TSE is our dependent variable and is measured by the Thesis Self-efficacy factor, measured on a confidence-anchored Likert scale and includes items that deal withthe various skills surrounding the completion of a terminal document.Participants and InstitutionsWhile our focus is set on the experiences of Latin* engineering graduate students, our surveywas open to students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. The target population could bedescribed as engineering graduate students enrolled in master’s and doctoral programs whowere actively working towards
-Efficacy Measure and Social Cognitive Career TheoryIn the realm of human behavior, self-efficacy holds profound importance, particularly ininnovation and entrepreneurship. Several self-efficacy measures have been developed in theinnovation and entrepreneurship research fields and tailored to the specific tasks that areassessed in this context (e.g., [20]–[24]). Innovation Self-Efficacy (ISE) refers to theindividuals’ confidence in their ability to innovate and engage in specific behaviors thatcharacterize innovative people [23], [25], whereas Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE) is thebelief and confidence individuals have in their own capabilities to execute tasks aimed atentrepreneurial outcomes and pursuing new venture opportunities [20], [21
their own predic-tion about their final course grade at the beginning of the semester. In particular, we study students’learning self-efficacy, that is, their confidence in themselves to learn in a CS1 course and outcomeexpectancy, that is their expected final grade in the course. We use the term learning self-efficacybecause it refers to students’ confidence measured at the beginning of the course. It’s a proxyfor their perceived ability to solve problems and learn to program. By taking factors like gender,prior programming experience, and GPA, we are interested in analyzing which factors influence astudent’s outcome expectancy and their learning self-efficacy at the beginning of a CS1 course.2 Background and Related WorkVarious instruments
engineering clubs and marketing campaigns with smiling female faces of all races haveemerged, and seem to help underrepresented students believe they can succeed and will “fit in”to the engineering culture. Recent reports and research measuring female student engineeringself-efficacy assert the positive impact of these types of treatments (American Association ofUniversity Women Educational Foundation, 2002; Burger, Raelin, Reisberg, Bailey & Whitman,2010; Corbett, Hill & Rose, 2008; Corbett, Hill & Rose, 2010; Fantz & Miranda, 2010; Marra,Rodgers, Shen & Bogue, 2009; Society of Women Engineers report, 2015).Self-efficacy beliefs are the thoughts or ideas people hold about their abilities to perform thosetasks necessary to achieve
otherhands-on learning opportunities increase student self-efficacy and have positive effects onretention of minority students, particularly into postgraduate studies. Here we focus on assessingthe short-term effects of “Making” activities. Assessment included pre- and post-student self-efficacy surveys with three distinct areas of measurement: general self-efficacy, self-efficacy incourse outcomes, and self-efficacy in EM-related constructs.Preliminary data suggests that inclusive PSS activities resulted in positive student motivationalresponses comprising high levels of identified regulation and external regulation, with moderatelevels of intrinsic motivation. Relative to the average motivational response of the entire class,underrepresented
, Science, & Arts and M-Engin which supports the engineering studentsin the College of Engineering. In this study we limit our focus to the experiences of engineeringstudents in the M-Engin program. Specific elements of the M-Engin program include: a summertransition program in which students gain exposure to the engineering curriculum, academiccoaching, study skill building, as well as career and professional development. Our studyexplores the relationship between students’ perceptions of the M-Engin program’s benefits andtheir engineering major confidence (a measure of self-efficacy) after their first year in college.We hypothesize that perceived program benefits of the M-Engin program will be positivelyrelated to women’s engineering major
program for high school students— NM PREP Academy—had a measurable effecton student confidence (a subcomponent of self-efficacy) and content knowledge. We also aimedto gain a greater understanding of how similar short-term intervention programs could be used toincrease interest, participation, and persistence in STEM-related careers, as well as to understandwhich specific portions of the program were most closely related to the students’ gains in eitherknowledge or confidence. Our research questions were as follows:1. Did the confidence and/or content knowledge of the students change as a result of engagement in the pre-engineering program?2. Was there a relation between changes in student confidence and knowledge?3. Was there a relation
. [15]We hypothesize that increased participation in co-curricular activities, especially engineeringstudent organizations, will provide positive experiences that will be a driving force to pursuemore activities and more responsibilities. The more students experience positive outcomes whenperforming responsibilities could lead to increased self-efficacy and increased academic success.[16] The compounding reward system proposes that participation in co-curricular activitiesincreases self-efficacy and academic success in college. Student GPA, time to degree completion,and internships will be used to measure student success. A survey and case study interview willbe used to assess self-efficacy. Figure 1 shows the possible scenarios between self
given the NILA’s leadership framework and curriculum focus onthe development in these areas. The average mean for leadership self-efficacy increased from 4.0to 4.3. The increase was significant, and it shows that NILA had a measurable positive effect.Nevertheless, the effect may or may not be sustainable. Most of the change was explained by thelower values (pre-test minimum=2.6, post-test minimum=3.0), which is reflected in a smallerstandard deviation for the post-survey. This shows that the effect may be larger for those whocome in with lower self-efficacy than those who are already confident in their abilities. While thesample size was small, the EFA analysis is statistically significant to tentatively support ourhypothesis. However, this can
self-efficacy. In addition, thisstudy examined whether the relationship was different between genders. The students in the classwere from eight universities and worked in teams with a mentor from a government agency orlab who provided them with a real unclassified cybersecurity problem. The study was conductedin 2016 and included a sample of 18 students (males=13 and females=5) who responded to a pre-survey and a post-survey (Cronbach’s alphas for both surveys =.96) that measured researchedself-efficacy using a 100-point Likert scale (0=complete uncertainty and 100=completecertainty). Due to a small sample, a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test and a Mann-Whitney U Testwere used to analyze the data. As part of the posttest, students were asked open
scores for all eight items were averaged to calculate the mean self-efficacystrength scores. Lower scores were indicative of weaker self-efficacy percepts, while higherscores were indicative of stronger self-efficacy percepts. The computed Cronbach’s α was.89, reflecting adequate internal consistency.Outcome Expectation (OE). Ten measures were used to determine participants’ OE, inspiredby Lent et al. (2003). Participants were required to answer their level of understanding withstatements that contained positive outcomes resulting from obtaining a Bachelor of Sciencedegree in engineering (e.g., “graduating with a BS degree in engineering will likely allow meto earn an attractive salary”). Their answers were ranked from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
, 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
thebottom notes the contribution of the Figure 1: How Self-Efficacy Theory Nests intoChronosystem (Time). Bioecology Theory In a qualitative approach this framework allows a shift in perspective. Bandura [13]presents the sources of self-efficacy as individual influences working together in developing aperson's ability to develop confidence, the top 4-part circle in Figure 2. Measuring sources ofself-efficacy in student academic development in STEM disciplines are found in work by Loo etal. [28], Usher et al. [29], and Mamaril et al. [30]. Their work quantitatively describes theamount of influence self-efficacy sources have in student confidence in their ability to besuccessful with challenging STEM
levels of confidence (self-efficacy) in their ability to design, code, and fabricatesolutions, and self-reported levels of self-determination and agency. The post-survey capturedthe same Likert-scale responses for self-efficacy, self-determination, and agency. Itadditionally captured open-ended responses on students’ experiences working on their finalproject, dwelling on how they felt about the project from the beginning until completion.Approval was obtained from the authors’ institution’s review board with an approval ID1282023 to conduct research through this project, maintaining student anonymity throughout.Survey questionsIn designing the items used to measure the three constructs in view, existing scales wereconsidered and, in some cases
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