Support Transfer credit assistance Orientation Course Academic Excellence Workshop Academic advising/counseling Dedicated Student study center and Tutoring Professional and Career development Links with Engineering Professional Student Orgs Industry advisory partnerships & Internships www.WashingtonMESA.orgResearch Questions 7 What influences do MESA Community College Program activities have on early college student STEM self- efficacy? What activities are most influential? Academic vs Social? MCCP influence on persistence & completion of STEM degrees
. 7, no. 1, pp. 9, 2016.[9] N. Honken, P. S. Ralston, “Freshman engineering retention: A holistic look,” Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, vol. 14, no. 2, pp 29-37, 2013.[10] M. W. Ohland, C. E. Brawner, M. M. Camacho, R. A. Layton, R. A. Long, S. M. Lord, and M. H. Wasburn, “Race, gender, and measures of success in engineering education,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 225, 2011.[11] T. D. Fantz, T. J. Siller, and M. A. Demiranda, “Pre-Collegiate Factors Influencing the Self- Efficacy of Engineering Students,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 604–623, 2011.[12] S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. Mcdonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P
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
.[11] Carberry, A. R., Lee, H. S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring engineering design self‐efficacy. Journal ofEngineering Education, 99(1), 71-79.[12] Martinez, L. J., & Sullivan, P. A., & Pines, E. (2017, June), Integration of Engineering Capstone within aMakerspace Environment Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio.[13] Nickols, F. (2003). Communities of practice. A start-up kit.
Makerspaces," presented at the International Symposium on Academic Makerspaces, Cleveland, USA, 2017.[8] M. Tomko, R. L. Nagel, M. W. Aleman, W. C. Newstetter, and J. S. Linsey, "Toward Understanding the Design Self-Efficacy Impact of Makerspaces and Access Limitations," in 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2017.[9] R. Morocz, B. D. Levy, C. R. Forest, R. L. Nagel, W. C. Newstetter, K. G. Talley, et al., "University Maker Spaces: Discovery, Optimization and Measurement of Impacts," in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, WA, 2015.[10] E. C. Hilton, M. Tomko, A. Murphy, R. L. Nagel, and J. Linsey, "Impacts on Design Self- efficacy for Students Choosing to Participate in a University
American Chemical SocietyAnnual Spring Meeting, and at the international Dresden Nexus Conference in Germany .(3)MeasuresThe pre- and post-questionnaires included the following quantitative measures.Academic self-efficacy. An 8-item measure (Chemers et al., 2001) assessing students’ beliefsregarding their ability to successfully achieve their academic goals was rated on a scale from 1(Very Untrue) to 6 (Very True). Items included statements such as, “I know how to study toperform well on tests” and “I usually do very well at school and at academic tasks.” The scalehad adequate internal consistency (Time 1 or T1 Cronbach’s α = .70, Time 2 or T2 α = .94).Items were averaged so that higher scores indicated higher levels of academic self
address certain challenges facing first-generation, low-income graduate students. In addition, measures of participants’ self-efficacyrelated to persistence in graduate school improved with participation in the program and changesin self-efficacy were greater than the general population of first-year graduate engineeringstudents. Future efforts will include a refinement of practices and resources creating moresuccessful strategies for increasing numbers of low-income, academically-talentedunderrepresented engineers with graduate degrees in the workforce.IntroductionRecent federal budgets for STEM education are based on the belief that “the United States mustequip students to excel in science, technology, engineering and mathematics to meet the
is important to understand which beliefs arerelevant to academic performance and how these frameworks of thought differ betweenadvantaged and disadvantaged students. These beliefs that students have relevant to theireducation are related to academic performance. If disadvantaged students enter college withmaladaptive beliefs, they may act as compounding obstacles in addition to financial strains andother external variables.A. Self efficacy Self-efficacy, or the beliefs about one’s ability to successfully complete a task, is criticalfor student retention and persistence through adversity [9]. Even when an individual possessesthe abilities necessary for success, their beliefs in personal capability to perform the taskinfluence their
this manuscript forcompleteness. The survey had 82 Likert-type items, with selections on agreement with each statementranging from 1-4 and 0-100. The survey took approximately 20 minutes to complete and wasemailed to all students enrolled in the two courses listed above. Measures of the followingandragogical measures and outcomes are as follows: Self-Directed Learning Dimensions AptitudeScale (SLDAS)24, Engineering Expectancy and Value Scale (EV)25, Epistemological BeliefsAssessment for Engineering (EBAE)26, Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood(IDEA)18, and Engineering Design Self-Efficacy Instrument (EDSE)27. Details on the individualmeasures can be found in the original manuscripts, however EBAE questions were adjusted
engineering.ConclusionIn engineering, HC is not well understood, including its mechanisms or potential constructs. Toour knowledge, there is no research that has attempted to explore the mechanisms and potentialconstructs behind HC in engineering. In this work, the authors have summarized some potentialconsiderations and constructs that can be measured for the exploration of HC in engineering.Collectively, the considerations posit that HC identification is central and could be tied to anindividual’s emotions, self-efficacy, and self-advocacy. It is believed that when individualsexperience scenarios, via vignettes, that center around HC in engineering, they can identify the HCthrough a frame of reference that can enable them to respond and react to the witnessed
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
based on geography. Engineeringeducation research have largely focused on issues and challenges, such as unsupportive academicenvironments, dissonant cultures; lack of role models; limited student-faculty interactions; andindividual differences in levels of self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and engineering identity [3] –[13]. Some studies have tied high school level factors to participation in engineering. For example,Tyson et al. [14], [15] investigate course-taking in high school and find that more courses highschool math and science courses is associated with majoring in a college STEM field. Other pre-college factors, such as math achievement and levels of self-efficacy also contribute to students’college major choice [5], [10], [16], [17
measures focus on student learning outcomes, as well as student attitudestoward science and engineering and self-efficacy. This paper examines the overall STEM-Inc project design and outcomes, especially the yearover year changes in project implementation based on both research needs and findings fromprior year. Results from three years of project implementation showed positive indicators in bothformative and summative data, which supported the use of business entrepreneurship practicesfor engaging middle school students, especially those from underrepresented groups, in STEMlearning.IntroductionSTEM workers drive America’s innovation and competitiveness by generating new ideas,companies and industries. The National Science Board (2010) cites
. Turner, J. E., Husman, J., & Schallert, D. L. (2002). The Importance of Students' Goals in Their Emotional Experience of Academic Failure: Investigating the Precursors and Consequences of Shame. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 79-89. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3702_3 18. Carberry, A. R., Lee, H., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring engineering design self-efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 71-79. 19. Hutchison, M. A., Follman, D. K., Sumpter, M., & Bodner, G. M. (2006). Factors influencing the self- efficacy beliefs of first-year engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(1), 39-47. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00876.x 20. Marra, R. M., Rodgers, K. A
exercises. In the lecture time, the instructor focused on the subjectsthat were problems to students from their quiz results and questions raised after groupdiscussion. Then the instructor used question sets for group activities and discussions. Thestudent group discussion was led by the assigned group leaders. Pre- and post-tests wereconducted for the AFL. The survey results were analyzed to compare students’ learningengagement, empowerment, self-efficacy, and satisfaction between the traditional classroomand with the AFL. It was found that the AFL model, by taking advantage of advancedtechnology, is a convenient and professional avenue for engineering students to strengthentheir academic confidence and self-efficacy in Engineering Mechanics by
success of the new school. “IntroductoryMathematics for Engineering Applications” is an integral part of the model which has aproven success rate of not only improving retention and consequently graduation rate butalso improving self-efficacy of students with above average high school GPA’s. It is believedthat, “The hard workers make it through because the course helps them believe they can doit.”4 This was especially true for females who, “Felt more strongly that the course hadincreased their chances of success in engineering than did males. It helped them believe thatthey had chosen the right major, and the result was an even greater impact on ultimategraduation rates.”4Therefore, the purpose of implementing this course for the student is to
-making after participating in an integrated science,technology, engineering, and mathematics academic/ career summer camp. Using a case studymethodology, we examine three of the students in detail regarding their changes in self-reportedfuture academic major choices and career goals utilizing measures of motivation, self-efficacy,and self-determination.Interview data provides qualitative evidence that participants’ experiences during camp mayindeed impact their short-term outlook towards their informed decision making and motivationrelated to pursuing STEM careers. Repeat participants (two or more years) are highlighted as casestudies and their survey and interview input is analyzed to determine to what extent, if any, studentsattribute changes
commonand uncommon viewpoints from students of different backgrounds to seek out and join suchresearch programs. Another purpose of this study was to gauge the impacts of summer researchexperiences on US and non-US students. The following research questions guided this study: 1. What is the REU impact on the students’ career goals? 2. What is the REU impact on the students’ self-efficacy about making decision about graduate school and success therein? 3. How do the REU participants perceive any changes on their research knowledge, skills, and engineering career path? 4. What is the difference in the impact of the REU between national and international students?II. MethodA. SettingA.1 Objectives of the REU Program
Women in MississippiAbstractThe NSF INCLUDES Mississippi Alliance for Women in Computing (MSAWC) strives to:generate interest and participation of women in computing; improve recruitment and retentionrates of women in undergraduate computing majors; and help post-secondary women make atransition to the computing workforce. Activities designed to engage girls and young womenwith computing, emphasizing computational thinking and cybersecurity knowledge andawareness, and to illuminate a pathway forward are hosted and facilitated through Alliancepartnerships.The authors will describe a project-based approach to facilitating learning among K-12 students.By engaging students at an early age, we believe we can promote the development of self-efficacy
2 6 17 complex systems. The Arduino kit manual was useful for learning 0 1 3 13 8 the kit basics. We received sufficient instruction on using the 0 1 4 9 11 Arduino kit to complete the final project. In the future, the class should continue using the 0 2 7 7 9 Arduino kit. Completing this course has made me well- prepared going into the 0 0 6 12 7 junior-level Mechatronics and Measurement Systems course …Self-efficacy results show some similar
Characterize Latent DiversityOn the survey, we measured multiple aspects of students’ mindsets and affective states usingestablished instruments and newly developed questions from pilot interviews with 12 diversestudents. These students were purposefully sampled to maximize demographic diversity includinggender identity, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, students with disabilities, and first-generationcollege students. We measured engineering identity, motivation, epistemic beliefs (students’perceptions of engineering as a discipline), personality, and self-efficacy for innovation to namesome of the constructs. We also measured students’ career intentions on this survey. Below, wedescribe the different dimensions that we measured on the survey and
, 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
to be inadequately prepared and lack the confidence to teach theengineering components of the standards, leading to avoidance or misrepresentation of theengineering practices in the classroom [4]. This paper describes the development of aprofessional development experience for science teachers designed to address these potentialpitfalls and support the implementation of the NGSS in science classrooms. The overarchingresearch question driving this work is: How do science teachers rate their self-efficacy inengineering knowledge and instruction, as well as the importance of engineering practices inlearning science? This paper reports on theoretical foundations, pre-treatment data, and a novelintervention design for improving science teachers
expressedincreased interest in attending college, increased interest in majoring in engineering, anappreciation of soldering as a useful skill, and recognition of how specific physics concepts wereapplied to electrical engineering design. Qualitative data allowed the researchers to elicitthematic elements of student impacts, including appreciation of hands-on tasks related topotential engineering careers, novelty of using circuit boards for a practical technological device,and self-efficacy in creating and building designs as part of a team effort to maximize deviceefficiency and performance. Future science and engineering curricular efforts may leverage thesefindings to replicate and design similar curricular activities for secondary
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
freshmen’stransition into pursuing science, math and engineering degrees at the UIW. In order to achievethis goal, the objectives of the camp were (1) To address students’ academic readiness and self-efficacy for a rigorous STEM degree; (2) To strengthen incoming freshman students’ skills incommunication, effective collaboration, and data analytics through coding and hands-on roboticsactivities. The Summer Engineering Academy was a free one-week camp that provided serviceto a low-to-moderate income student population in STEM major. The camp participants werefrom diverse STEM fields that included engineering, biochemistry, nuclear medicine science,biology, computer information systems, meteorology, 3-D animation & game design. Weobserved that upon
integration). At her free mobile makerspace for K-12 students and teachers, The MAKE Lab (http://themakelab.wp.txstate.edu), she is currently researching how recurring experiences with these design-based technologies impact visual spatial skills, self-efficacy, and positive attitudes toward failure (e.g. persistence in the face of obstacles; reconceptualization of failure as a paradigm for creative learn- ing) with teachers and K–12 students. These concepts are also part of her research as Co-Director of Bobcat Made, which is the collaborative university makerspace.Dr. Araceli Martinez Ortiz, Texas State University Araceli Martinez Ortiz, PhD., is Research Associate Professor of Engineering Education in the College of
(enjoyment) (Matusovich,Streveler, & Miller, 2010). More work on this construct in engineering education canhelp us better understand interest and its relationship to identity and persistence.Engineering performance/competence is also important to measuring engineeringidentity. For instance, Jones, Osborne, Paretti, and Matusovich (2014) found a positiverelationship between perceived ability and identity. As this area of research progresses,clear distinctions should be made between performance/competence and other similarconstructs in the literature such as self-efficacy. The significance of recognition in themodels of engineering identity points to a type of support that may be critical toengineering identity development. For example, role
to take ‘gatekeeper’ courses such as Pre-Calculus and Calculus (NCES, 2016).Purpose StatementAlthough, only in the preliminary stages of data collection, the primary goal of this work is toaddress the challenge of broadening participation in STEM, particularly among UR boys bybuilding on a pilot afterschool STEM program for UR boys. Specifically, this project proposesthe STEM Engagement through Mentoring (SEM) model as a way to address the followingquestions:1) In what ways do fathers/mentors motivate students to become aware of, interested in, and prepared for STEM careers?2) To what extent does involvement in SEM shape the students’ STEM identity?3) What impact does working with the SEM program have on the self-efficacy of pre-service