because it is linked to student success and persistence in STEM degrees30,33–39.Students’ self-efficacy in mathematics and science is also related to student success andpersistence in STEM degrees10,20,35,37,40–42.MethodsSelf-Determination TheoryI used Ryan and Deci’s self-determination theory of motivation as the theoretical framework formy study. Self-determination theory takes into consideration intrinsic and extrinsicmotivations43–46. ANSEP makes public the extrinsic motives they provide to their high schoolstudents, such as scholarships, to motivate them to complete advanced mathematics and sciencecourses19. Due to ANSEP’s high levels of success at motivating high school students to takeadvanced mathematics and science course19,21,22, ANSEP
women’sprofessional outcome expectations using the same data.22 They found, after controlling forstudents’ demographic and academic background characteristics, pre-college self-efficacy andself-confidence, learning experience, academic and social contextual influence, and fourth yearself-confidence, participation in the living learning program positively influenced students’overall professional outcome expectation, as well as achieving career success and combining aprofessional career with having a balanced personal life.To sum, these studies reported positive influences of LLC on student engagement, connectionwith engineering programs, and career expectations. The LLC involvement affects studentdevelopment through interactions with peers and faculty and the
better understanding of their early career work. Drawing from the PEARS data,Brunhaver4 showed that engineering graduates who were non-engineering focused four yearsafter earning their degree were different from their engineering focused peers in terms of certainundergraduate experiences (e.g., they were less likely to have participated in an internship or co-op) and level of technical interests. Moreover, while women and men graduates in this samplewere not different in terms of their current position (engineering or non-engineering), they weredifferent in terms of future plans. Women tended to have lower technical self-efficacy andinterests than did men, which helped to explain why they were more non-engineering focused intheir
, students’ sense of self-efficacy and task value. Self-efficacy isdefined as a students’ beliefs about their capabilities to succeed in a given task [18], and taskvalue refers to beliefs students’ hold about the potential importance, utility, and enjoymentassociated with an academic task [19]. Both motivational factors were found to predict classroomengagement and achievement [17].The seminal work of Seymour and Hewitt [20] found that a lack of belongingness drove manytalented women, as measured by grade point average, to switch out of their STEM undergraduateprograms to non-STEM programs. In their study, Seymour and Hewitt [20] noted that the culturein various STEM programs undermined women’s sense of belonging. Similar results have beenfound in
, education courses for PSTs shouldprovide resources and opportunities to increase science and engineering knowledge, andassociated pedagogies to help address the needs of elementary teachers and their students. Hsu et al. [11] found that while elementary school teachers believed that it was importantto incorporate engineering into their curricula, they did not feel confident to teach the concepts.A possible solution is to have PSTs implement engineering lessons in a supported and low-riskcontext. This strategy was found to be a powerful mediator of self-efficacy in a recent study within-service teachers [12]. One means to provide a supportive environment is to partner PSTs withengineering students as they develop lessons. One study found that
specific practices of inclusive pedagogy that faculty might implement to fostergreater belonging in their classrooms.Faculty play an important part in students’ sense of belonging. Rainey et al. [30] found thatwomen “were less likely to feel a sense of belonging” when compared to men and that womenstudents broadly did not feel as though their instructors wanted them to succeed (our previousresearch [3] echoes some of these claims.) However, when faculty emphasized their availabilityand willingness to help students with questions and cultivated an atmosphere of mutual respect,all students experienced a greater sense of belonging [30].In a recent study of early career engineering students [31], students’ self-efficacy and belongingwere examined
. McDermott, "Assessing the Effectiveness of the GradTrack Virtual Mentoring Program," in Proceedings of the 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 2023. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--42681[2] K. Atkins, B.M. Dougan, M.S. Dromgold-Sermen, H. Potter, V. Sathy, and A.T. Panter, "“Looking at Myself in the Future”: how mentoring shapes scientific identity for STEM students from underrepresented groups," International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 42, August 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00242-3[3] A. Carpi, D.M. Ronan, H.M. Falconer, and N.H. Lents, “Cultivating minority scientists: Undergraduate research increases self-efficacy and career ambitions for underrepresented students
who do not consider mentoring apriority, it should be noted that they were at least interested enough in mentoring or incentivizedsufficiently by the travel grants earmarked for students to have bothered completing thisvoluntary mentoring survey.Mentorship Seminar SeriesTo enable successful mentor-mentee relationships between graduate students and facultymembers, it is important to first understand how to start, build, and maintain one as well asrecognize what factors can contribute to failed mentoring. However, graduate students,especially minority graduate students, often lack this knowledge, significantly impacting theirresearch productivity, academic and research self-efficacy from experiencing unsatisfyingmentoring without the ability to
the USA,women represent only 19.7% of engineering graduates and 18.7% of computer sciencegraduates, lagging behind the 35.5% of women in all STEM fields [2]. The goal of this projectwas to understand student thinking about diversity and inclusion with the long-term aim ofimproving culture for females and under-represented groups. The engineering workforce andengineered products, infrastructure, and services can certainly benefit from designs created bydiverse teams. Prior researchers have linked diversity to increased creativity in teams andwork-groups [3, 4].Building an inclusive culture is challenging but very important. A negative campus climate canaffect students’ self-efficacy. A campus with a lack of diverse students can create a
learning and academic identity. CUREs provideauthentic learning experiences, raise the level of expectations for all students, and support thedevelopment of a community of learners – all critical for students who have been historicallyunderrepresented in STEM [11] [12] [13] [14]. These experiences support development of self-efficacy, interest and identity in STEM [12] [15], contribute to improved course outcomes [16],and generally result in higher retention and persistence for participating students [17].Place-Based Learning CommunityThe term “learning community” refers to a purposeful restructuring of curriculum to link two ormore courses from different disciplines to emphasize connections and provide coherence in thecurriculum [18]. They are a
/ngv:78746.[3] K. A. J. Mohr and E. S. Mohr, “Understanding Generation Z Students to Promote a Contemporary Learning Environment,” J. Empower. Teach. Excell., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 84–94, 2017, doi: 10.15142/T3M05T.[4] H. Hyytinen, A. Toom, and L. Postareff, “Unraveling the complex relationship in critical thinking, approaches to learning and self-efficacy beliefs among first-year educational science students,” Learn. Individ. Differ., vol. 67, no. August, pp. 132–142, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2018.08.004.[5] S. K. Wang, H. Y. Hsu, T. C. Reeves, and D. C. Coster, “Professional development to enhance lecturers’ practices in using information and communication technologies (ICTs) as cognitive tools: Lessons
and its constructivist framework,” Educational Technology, Vol. 35, No. 5, 1995, pp.31-38.16. Silva, A., Bispo, A., Rodriguez, D. and Vasquez, F. (2018) "Problem-based learning: A proposal for structuring PBL and its implications for learning among students in an undergraduate management degree program", Revista de Gestão, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2018, pp. 160-177.17. James N. Warnock & M. Jean Mohammadi-Aragh (2016) Case study: use of problem-based learning to develop students' technical and professional skills, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 41, No, 2, 2016, pp.142-153,18. Dunlap, J. (2005) “Problem-based learning and self-efficacy: How a capstone course prepares students for a profession
spatial skills for engineering students”. International Journal of Science Education. Vol 31(3), pp 459-80, Feb. 2009.[8] L. Van Den Einde, N. Delson, L. Cowan, “Sketching App to Teach Spatial Visualization Skills Suitable for Remote and In-Person Instruction”, Proceedings of INTED 2021, virtual conference, March 8-9, 2021.[9] N. Delson, L. Van Den Einde, E. Cowan, J. Tara “eGrove Education.” [Online] Available www.egrove.education.[10] J. Power, J. Buckley, and N. Seery. “Visualizing Success: Investigating the Relationship between Ability and Self-Efficacy in the Domain of Visual Processing”. 70th ASEE Engineering Design Graphics Division Midyear Conference, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, FL, January, 2016.[11
constructive influences on attitudes and beliefs associatedwith academic integrity, self-efficacy for course material. Using this multi-faceted perspective,previously untapped gains for learning outcomes, participation, and retention can be harvestedand parameterized into best practices for digitally-enabled STEM learning.3.0 Selected Related WorksTrends of increasing enrollment, reduction in costs of PCs, and the success of CBA in otherdisciplines have been motivating recent research in CBA within Engineering [4-6]. For example,the authors’ Engineering-specific 120-seat Engineering-specific testing center, called Evaluationand Proficiency Center (EPC), supports assessment and enhanced remediation [7]. Conversely,the 80-seat Computer-Based Testing
use of concepts [14, 15]. Many studies report that such methods have reducedfailure rate in comparison to instruction methods that merely rely on traditional lectures for contentdelivery and classroom management [16]. A sizable literature indicates that student engagement in classrooms has strong correlation totheir academic and professional success [17-20]. Student engagement in engineering classroomsis a challenge for several reasons. These include lack of preparation, self-efficacy, perceivedability, socio-economic factors and less-effective course delivery methods [21-28]. Additionally,each of these can contribute to a sense of alienation that exacerbates disengagement. Engineeringcourses require continuous development of sophisticated
graduate school, and I Am First program for first generation students. Inaddition, the BE-TEC program is extending or adapting successful evidence-based practicesfrom its Track 1 program. The planned support services and programs have been selected toincrease academic learning, completion, and career or graduate school placement, as well as toassist in soft-skills development which is so important for graduates such as communication,teamwork, self-efficacy, leadership, and knowledge integration.NSF BE-TEC Program AssessmentTo assess the outcome of our NSF BE-TEC program, a study has been started by the institution’sBusiness Intelligence and Research Services to compare the NSF BE-TEC students to twocontrol groups: UVU students
appointment in Engineering Education. His research interests include engineering identity, self-efficacy, and matriculation of Latine/x/a/o students to graduate school. He works with survey methods and overlaps with machine learning using quantitative methods and sequential mixed methods approaches.Dr. Janice Mej´ıa, Northwestern University Dr. Mejia is an Associate Professor of Instruction in the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences. She also teaches in the Design Thinking and Communication (DTC), Masters in Engineering Management (MEM), and College Prep programs. Her research interests focus on mixed methods research in engineering education, curriculum assessment and development, and engineering
teamwork throughout the course. Wefocus on the concept that leadership starts with self-knowledge (Sosik, 1999; Atwater, 1992;Colcleugh, 2013). A reflective self-evaluative process with respect to social intelligence iscorrelated to the development of leadership skills (Condon, 2011). The team and leadershiplearning activities begin with learning about self and are extended to how to inspire and leadothers. Reflection based on observing the impact of team and leadership decisions isincluded. Self-efficacy and accountability are foundational for leadership, professional, andlife long learning development. Assessment of individual skills, conflict managementstyles, and personality feed self-knowledge and reflection on how one's own actions
correlated with a higher likelihood of remaining in a STEM program. Riconscentediscusses how students with a robust STEM identity tend to have a clearer sense of purpose,motivation, and self-efficacy within their chosen field, making them more likely to persist(2013). Additionally, studies emphasize the importance of fostering a positive STEM identity,especially among underrepresented minority students, as it can counteract stereotypes and booststudents' resilience in the face of challenges (Cheryan et al. 2017).Belongingness is another critical aspect. Research finds that students who feel like they belong intheir STEM community are more likely to remain engaged and persist in their programs (Good etal. 2012). Similarly, Walton and Cohen (2007
view from the perspectives of students’ self-efficacy and theirmindset. ● low self-esteem For example, “They [troublemaking students] have usually a low self-respect for themselves or low self-esteem. So, they don't find the value and how valuable they are.” ● low trust to anyone For example, “A student to ..., cannot ..., they can't let their guard down. They always have to have their guard up. They always think someone after them. They're always wanting to be on the defense. They automatically think they are always doing the wrong thing when they don't realize that the right things that they do. They can't self-evaluate themselves. They struggle with that.” “You know, they're not open enough to
–something also mentioned frequently in the survey responses– which is arguably the most powerful reason to avoid something. 16 Preliminary Takeaways Pull factors • Women tend to pursue engineering when they experience positive feelings about their abilities (self-efficacy) and have positive role-models and programs that foster their individual growth Push factors • Women tend to struggle with their choice to pursue engineering when they feel like family members are not supportive or that engineering may hinder their future family goals
mentoring has thepotential to create a more diverse and inclusive learning environment that can promote thesuccess of Hispanic engineering students.AcknowledgementsThis work was funded by the Institute for Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Access in theGrainger College of Engineering, University of Illinois (Grant #GIANT2021-01). We also thankour mentors Victor Cervantes and Ivan Favila for their feedback.References[1] F. Arbelo, K. Martin, and A. Frigerio. Hispanic Students and Online Learning: Factors of Success. In HETS Online Journal, 9(2), May 2019.[2] A. Carpi, D.M. Ronan, H.M. Falconer, and N.H. Lents. Cultivating Minority Scientists: Undergraduate Research Increases Self-Efficacy and Career Ambitions for Underrepresented
, perceived learning, and academic performance," International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 73-84, 2010.[27] Y.-C. Kuo, A. E. Walker, K. E. Schroder, and B. R. Belland, "Interaction, Internet self- efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses," The internet and higher education, vol. 20, pp. 35-50, 2014.[28] Y.-C. Kuo, A. E. Walker, B. R. Belland, and K. E. Schroder, "A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs," International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 16-39, 2013.[29] M.-H. Cho and S. Tobias, "Should instructors require discussion in
peers,faculty, staff, and campus life. With 55% of engineering students being first-generation, andeven fewer having family members with careers in STEM fields, students’ ability to visualizelife as an engineer or computer scientist becomes more challenging. Non-cognitive factors suchas low self-efficacy may also play a role in students’ sense of belonging in college and in STEMmajors. Especially with the low state-wide K-12 ranking and the high percentage of first-generation students, these factors correlate with a need to support stronger study skills and studyhabits, including bridging gaps in K-12 learning and skills. Some students also report that theyand their families can often underestimate the importance of academic workload demands
, 2001). Some of the factors includesattributions where students rated possible reasons for success or failure on the midterm exam to(a) attribution to ability, (b) attribution to task ease/difficulty, (c) attribution to luck, and (d)attribution to effort. They also looked at factors like self-efficacy, previous programmingexperience, gender, and more. The attributions for success/failure were predictive toperformance.This proposed intervention is framed by attribution theory. Attribution theory is aphenomenological approach to the study of behavior. It is approach that focuses on how peopleexplain the reasons for their own and others' behavior. The idea is that two students could take aCS exam and both receive Ds. Student A could be very upset
, no. 2, pp. 33–49, 2020.[10] M. M. Gaudier-Diaz, M. Sinisterra, and K. A. Muscatell, “Motivation, belongingness, and anxiety in neuroscience undergraduates: Emphasizing first-generation college students,” Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, vol. 17, no. 2, p. A145, 2019.[11] N. K. Segool, P. Nathaniel, A. D. Mata, and J. Gallant, “Cognitive behavioral model of test anxiety in a high-stakes context: An exploratory study,” School Mental Health, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 50–61, 2014.[12] A. Krispenz, C. Gort, L. Schültke, and O. Dickhäuser, “How to Reduce Test Anxiety and Academic Procrastination Through Inquiry of Cognitive Appraisals: A Pilot Study Investigating the Role of Academic Self-Efficacy,” Frontiers in
, sense of community, perceived program benefit, science identity, and research self-efficacy. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 2016. 15(3): p. Ar48.[19] Murphy, T. J., Stafford, K. L., & McCreary, P. (1998). Subsequent course and degree paths of students in a Treisman-style workshop calculus program. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 4, 381–396.[20] Shultz, E. L., Colton, G. M., & Colton, C. (2001). The Adventor Program: Advisement and Mentoring for Students of Color in Higher Education. The Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development, 40(2), 208–218. doi: 10.1002/j.2164- 490x.2001.tb00118.x[21] Ehrich, L. C., Hansford, B., & Tennent, L. (2004). Formal
quota.’ ‘Anybody else smell affirmative action?’ ‘Looks like they got their headcount.’ ‘Here comes the Quota Queen!’(Locke, 2017).These stereotypes and biases can materialize in a number of ways that shape team dynamics,student learning and experience, and team productivity. For example, Meadows et al. (2015)found that these assumptions that women and students of color are not up to the task shape whattasks they are assigned on teams, whether or not their ideas are heard or validated, whether or nottheir work is acknowledged, as well as their self-efficacy and feelings of belonging.Since the fall of 2016, the authors have been engaged in a research project investigating thepresence of bias and stereotyping on first year project teams at
-economicfactors and emotional health as described by the following authors.As written by Richardson et. al, psychological and emotional health correlate with how a studentperforms at the university level and whether they complete their program. Richardson found thatdemographic and psychosocial factors, high school grade point average, SAT, ACT and self-efficacy were all correlated with a student’s GPA in college4. Conley et. al also presents on howACT scores and high school GPA predicted academic achievement best when combined withsocioeconomic status, academic self-confidence and motivation5. For this study, thepsychological and social predictors which are qualitative will not be explored. The focus will betowards quantitative predictors.Geiser et. al
. over the academic year) for the SEECRS scholars and a comparison group comprised of thescholars’ peers in the Associate in Science- Transfer (AS-T) degree program at WCC. We usedtwo instruments that will allow us to make valid claims about the extent of students’ STEMidentity. First, we used a modified version of the 12 items from the Science IdentityQuestionnaire [22] that asks about students’ connections to various STEM communities and theextent to which they view themselves as a “STEM person”. Second, we used a modified versionof the Chemistry Motivation Questionnaire [23], which includes 30 items that measure thefollowing six student factors: intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, self-determination, goal-orientation