students were invited to complete the survey a secondtime early in the fall quarter of their second academic year, thus bounding their first-year collegeexperience with pre and post survey administrations. This process of survey data collection wasrepeated for each new cohort of incoming students over the course of the study. The instrumentused was an adapted version of a survey developed by the Studying Underlying Characteristicsof Computing and Engineering Student Success (SUCCESS) project [18-19], which includesitems drawn from previously validated measures of self-efficacy, identity, and sense ofbelonging related to engineering [1, 11].Unfortunately, at least in part due to impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, response rates werelower on the post
end-of-semester presentations with direct feedback from mentors. Based on thefeedback from Fall 2021, the implementation was redesigned and introduced in Spring 2022.Two problems were assigned in Spring 2022 along with mentor interactions and students’presentations.Instrument Development and EmploymentThe study used two survey instruments to measure self-efficacy and engineering identity, whichwere chosen based on literature and piloted in two different courses. The surveys wereimplemented at the beginning and end of the Spring 2021, Fall 2021 and Spring 2022 semesters.Additionally, the study conducted interviews with randomly selected students, stratified bygender, at the beginning and end of both semesters, as well as with two mentors and
instrumentadapting existing self-efficacy and motivation measures to the CT and engineering problemsolving context. We will share a draft edition of this survey and solicit feedback.References [1] Jeannette Wing. Computational thinking. 24(6):6–7. [2] Kenneth Reid and David Reeping. A classification scheme for “introduction to engineering” courses: Defining first-year courses based on descriptions, outcomes, and assessment. In American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Indianapolis, IN (1-11). Washington DC: American Society for Engineering Education. [3] Michael McCracken, Vicki Almstrum, Danny Diaz, Mark Guzdial, Dianne Hagan, Yifat Ben-David Kolikant, Cary Laxer, Lynda Thomas, Ian Utting, and Tadeusz
2021 were given to women [3], but they constitute 16% of work-ing professionals in the field [4]. Additionally, Hispanic and Black populations are under-represented in the engineering/STEM workforce relative to the general workforce: 11% ofthe total workforce is Black, but only 5% of the engineering workforce, and 17% of the totalworkforce is Hispanic, but only 8% of the STEM workforce [3]. Addressing the issues thatcreate these disparities is multifaceted, but beginning with educational interventions for stu-dents that enhance their self efficacy for further pursuing engineering post graduate is a start.Prior research has indicated the need to increase self efficacy in engineering students, es-pecially from these diverse backgrounds, to help
, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 60-86, 2023.[10] C. C. Chen, P. G. Greene, and A. Crick, "Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?," Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 295- 316, 1998.[11] T. M. Fernandez, G. Sliva Coutinho, M. D. Wilson, and S. R. Hoffmann, "Development of entrepreneurial attitudes assessment instrument for freshman students," 2015.[12] P. B. Robinson, D. V. Stimpson, J. C. Huefner, and H. K. Hunt, "An attitude approach to the prediction of entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 13-32, 1991.[13] Y. Shou and J. Olney, "Measuring Risk Tolerance across Domains: Scale Development and Validation," (in English
with sixsubscales measuring six competencies: Maintaining Effective Communication (4 items),Aligning Expectation (4 items), Assessing Understanding (3 items), Fostering Independence (3items), Addressing Diversity (3 items), Promoting Professional Development (4 items). Therevalidated scale is called MCA-21 to distinguish it from the original MCA-26 [36].Newly Developed Instruments for Added Modules in EM As the NRMN Mentor Training Core expanded the EM curriculum by adding additionaltraining modules, they developed scale items to assess the training outcomes of these modules.For the self-efficacy training module, the instrument (Promoting Mentees’ Self-Efficacy – table1), which consisted of five items on a 7-point Likert scale, aims to
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Clinician-engineer self-concept in biomedical engineering students and its relationship to race, first-generation status, and mode of deliveryIntroduction and abstractRetention, recall, comprehension, and measurable skills are mainstays of the scholarship ofteaching and learning, and yet they represent only a fraction of what engineering educators hopeto achieve through education. The development of self-efficacy, for example, is a common goaland is often measured as a psychological construct. Less commonly measured constructs that arenonetheless commonly valued by educators are the development of creativity, perseverance(grit), and self-concept.Self-concept is particularly interesting in
opportunities? Modified Measure of Engineering Identity Student's Survey (MEI) survey scientific Modified Sense of Belonging Scale (SoBS) 3. Did students find the identity, survey program to stimulate their sense of Modified General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE) scientific identity, sense of belonging, Measuring Undergraduate Students' belonging, and self-efficacy? and self- Engineering Self-Efficacy Survey (MUSES) efficacy Modified Student
the course. This approach is rooted in the work on early intervention strategies.The idea is to focus on at-risk students. In this context, we do not consider the oral assessmentprimarily as being part of a summative assessment strategy. Instead, it is designed to be a touchpoint for a meaningful one-on-one interaction between a student and a member of theinstructional team. The value of early interventions for at-risk students is to increaseconnectedness to instructional staff and resources, and student engagement and self-efficacy. Theoral assessments were implemented explicitly with this focus. We also considered additionalbenefits, such as serving as formative assessments for the students to reflect on their level ofconceptual mastery and
. Dr. Hsu received his PhD in Educational Psychology from Texas A&M University and has a background of statistics education. He works closely with researchers in STEM to pursue high quality of STEM education for future researchers. He is currently participating in an NSF-funded grant (#1923452) to spearhead research into middle school students’ digital literacies and assessment. Recently, Dr. Hsu has received a seed grant at UML to investigate how undergradu- ate engineering students’ digital inequalities and self-directed learning characteristics (e.g., self-efficacy) affect their learning outcomes in a virtual laboratory environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Hsu’s research interests include advanced
StudentsAbstractThis Complete Research Paper presents changes in data from a combined wellness, self-efficacy,and mindset survey for new students in the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences(CEAS) at Western Michigan University (WMU) during their first semester. Correlationsbetween individual survey factors and student retention and success are explored. The generalstructure of a first-year experience course focused on various dimensions of wellness is alsodescribed.Two electronic surveys (start-of-semester and end-of-semester) were created in Qualtrics basedon the Perceived Wellness Survey (PWS), the Interpersonal, Community, Occupational,Physical, Psychological, and Economic (ICOPPE) wellness scale, mindset, and self-efficacy. Thecombined surveys were
. Suggestions for future enhancements ofthese automated assessments will be provided.I. IntroductionPractice and feedback are critical to student learning, and it is further enhanced when practice isaccumulated with timely feedback [1]. Assessment and evaluation are tools to measure orobserve knowledge gain from practice and feedback. With assessments instructors identify datato collect representing knowledge or skills, selects the instruments for measuring, andadministers the instrument [2]. Evaluation is then the practice of analyzing assessment data anddrawing conclusions from the results [2].Multiple studies have shown how low stakes formative assessments can lower test anxiety, aswell as improve student learning outcomes and self-efficacy
SWE member who zealously engages in community service work. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Full Paper: Impact of Inclusion of Makerspace and Project Types on Student Comfort with Additive Manufacturing and Three-Dimensional Modeling in First-Year Engineering ProgramAbstractThe following evidence-based practice study investigates the impact of utilizing a makerspace onthe exposure to additive manufacturing and three-dimensional modeling practices for first-yearstudents. This document builds upon recent literature which illustrated statistically significantgains in a plethora of self-efficacy and sense of belonging metrics over an academic year inwhich a makerspace was
their engineering workplace. DEIconcepts can be incorporated in first-year engineering curriculum to enhance student design andexposure to diverse cultures during this unique design for additive manufacturing (DfAM)teaching module. This paper describes the development of a DfAM workshop that incorporateshistorical and cultural themes. Students’ perception of the design experience will be measuredusing an engineering self-efficacy validated tool, pre- and post-workshop survey, and measureddesign outcomes (CAD model) after engaging in a DfAM workshop. The workshop uses activitiesguided by the Kern Engineering Entrepreneurial Network (KEEN) framework which includescuriosity, connections, and creating value. The workshop introduces the
," Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, vol. 9, pp. 339-363, 2022.[28] T. Sitzmann, K. Ely, K. G. Brown, and K. N. Bauer, "Self-assessment of knowledge: A cognitive learning or affective measure?," Academy of Management Learning & Education, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 169-191, 2010.[29] E. M. Kissling and M. E. O'Donnell, "Increasing language awareness and self-efficacy of FL students using self-assessment and the ACTFL proficiency guidelines," Language Awareness, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 283-302, 2015.[30] A. Knight, "Using self-assessment to build self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation in athletes: a mixed methods explanatory design on female adolescent volleyball players
interaction, network density, network bridging, and networkreach at the school, district, state, and national/international community level, using 18statements. This instrument uses social network analysis (SNA) with visual network scales(VNS) to visualize and quantify characteristics of the CoP and then relates this to the constructsof self-efficacy and identity [24]. Preliminary results measured before and after the PD areshown below from our initial group of TRAILS 2.0 teachers (COP) Network Survey (n = 7). • Overall CoP Network size increased at the 95% confidence level (p < 0.05). • CoP Network size at the national/international level increased at the 95% confidence level (p < 0.05) • CoP Network sizes at the school
student success is warranted.The College of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Western Michigan University implementeda new, alumni mentoring program for the 2022-2023 academic year. Initially conceived as beingfocused on first-year students, the program evolved to include students from all undergraduatelevels. The structure, development, and challenges for implementation of this program will bediscussed. In addition, data will be presented from a study focused on first-year students tounderstand potential correlations between participation in mentoring relationships and positiveacademic, self-efficacy, and career awareness outcomes for the students. The College StudentMentoring Scale was used to understand the presence of a mentor-like presence
and mentors.Evaluating Impacts of Trained Participants on the Bioengineering CommunityWhile we hypothesize that our course empowers participants to accomplish the learning goalsand develop greater self-efficacy as educators while taking the class, we aim to further evaluatethe longer-term impacts of our course participants within the bioengineering departmentcommunity by measuring their effectiveness as TAs. We will design our data collection alongthree key dimensions: (1) Sampling a greater proportion of graduate students in Bioengineeringincluding non-course participants as a control, (2) Evaluating content mastery of pedagogicalknowledge covered in the course via written and/or oral assessment, and (3) implementinglongitudinal surveys to
]. Eudaimonic well-being refers to self-realization, choosing to engage inchallenging activities and continuously seeking opportunities for personal growth [5]. Thesethree forms of well-being have been shown to correlate highly with one another [8] and clusteronto a higher order latent construct. Based on the literature, this study considers the full extent ofwellbeing by creating a composite measure that consists of constructs such as satisfaction withlife, positive affect, and self-efficacy-resilience.PISA evaluation considers wellbeing as a multidimensional construct consisting of subjective aswell as material components that should reflect students’ lifestyle and quality of life [9]. Thisstudy specifically focuses on three main elements in PISA
, regardless of their engineering concentration and lay theinitial work for future performance enhancements for the students, educators, and policymakersin the STEM areas.IntroductionBangladesh's engineering and technology sectors are expanding as the country's economydevelops. Despite the country's relatively low level of economic growth, its engineering studentshave achieved remarkable academic performance, becoming some of the world's most qualifiedengineers. Researchers have demonstrated that self-efficacy, or the positive attitudes individualshold about their skills to accomplish activities, influences how they operate in a particulardomain, such as mental health and others [1, 2]. Increasingly, research findings indicate thatpsychological and
(3) Provide support to BD Fellows beyond BD funding in preparation for graduation andcareer. Our theoretical framework, further described above, values (1) self-efficacy, (2)science/research identity, and (3) social cognitive career theory model to recruit, enroll, andgraduate 12 LSAMP Fellows with STEM doctoral degrees. Our goals, then, are to (1) evaluateour intervention’s success on the three stated objectives and (2) measure the stated constructswithin the theoretical framework to test our theory of change.Approach to assessment.Evaluation of the BD Program will utilize both internal and external expertise. Thiscollaboratively managed evaluation will have a mixed-methods approach emphasizing the designof several survey instruments
-based assessments, presentations, and reflections. Thesesections were distilled using a combination of classroom experience and research. Eachof these elements is powerful on its own but added together they create opportunitiesfor students to build self-efficacy, belonging, and inclusion. These qualities then lead toclassrooms that can foster students who can find resilience and joy in diversity andcreate equitable spaces. The framework I developed is visualized in Figure 1 below. Iwill describe each of these elements and the research that went into them.Before the Framework: While doing research around actionable science DEIB strategies, I encounteredand studied social-emotional learning (SEL). While the tenants of following theframework
undergraduate research experiences impacts theirengineering identity and self-efficacy developments [4-7]. In addition, enhanced self-efficacypositively impacts engineering identity [4-6]. Other research explores the impact of a sense ofbelonging and community building on student development [8-11]. This paper examines theimpact of building a community of practice conceptual framework on both engineering identityand self-efficacy development of engineering students who participated in 10-week summerresearch experiences focusing on the engineering grand challenges as identified by NAE.Through building a community of practice, students experience a sense of belonging which webelieve adds to the engineering identity and self-efficacy
embarked on the design, implementation, and testing of amobile application (app) that offers an alternative venue for FBD practice. The app providesstudents with asynchronous opportunities for training, varied tasks that target specific FBDissues, and several levels of immediate feedback. We hypothesize that the gamifiedenvironment and puzzle-based gameplay will improve student skill and self-efficacy in drawingFBDs, particularly for women, who may feel less confident in their spatial skills. Data collected todescribe student experiences may also provide additional insight into how to improve FBDinstruction generally.In this paper, we detail the process for designing and implementing the app and provide initialdata regarding student impressions
Well-being to produce effective outcomes. For example, according toRyff and Singer, there are six dimensions of Well-being [11]. The first dimension is self-acceptance, which predominantly targets increasing self-efficacy and creating a strongersense of self among teachers. Faculty development programs have been shown to increaseteachers’ self-efficacy [12], which in turn improves student learning, motivation andcontentment [13], and improve teaching practices [14] as an outcome. The second dimensionis the positive relationship with others, which articulates the need for social support amongteachers to exhibit Well-being [15]. Various research has shown that learning as a groupduring faculty development programs has a significant impact on the
on nine semesters of Fab Friday programming, a total of 107 Fab Friday participantscompleted the Fab Friday Student Satisfaction Survey designed to provide recommendations forprogrammatic improvement. We measured three major areas: skill building, learning computerscience, and teamwork. In addition, we administered the Glynn et al. (2011) Science MotivationQuestionnaire (SMQ) [9]. The SMQ provides scores on 5 domains: Career motivation (anextrinsic motivation for learning CS to secure a good career), Grade motivation (an extrinsicmotivation for learning CS in order to achieve good grades), Self-determination (an individual’sbeliefs in their personal control over learning CS), Self-efficacy (an individual’s confidence intheir ability to learn
accreditation cycle. Baltimore, MD: ABET. 11. Coelho, G.L.D.H., Hanel, P.H.P, & Wolf, L.J. (2018). The Very Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition: Developing a Six-Item Version. Assessment, online first, 1-16. 12. Cropley, D. H. (2015). Creativity in Engineering: Novel solutions to complex problems, San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 13. Cropley, D. H. and Cropley, A. J. (2016). Promoting creativity through assessment: A formative CAA tool for teachers, Educational Technology Magazine, 56:6, pp. 17-24 14. Karwowski, Maciej & Lebuda, Izabela & Wisniewska, Ewa. (2018). Measuring Creative Self-efficacy and Creative Personal Identity. The Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving. 28. 45-57. 15
Model to increased student motivation and self-efficacy, none has attempted to fullyquantify the impact of the associated restructuring of the curriculum. As a result, the currentpaper describes a detailed analysis of the Wright State Model using the Curricular Analyticsplatform (https://curricularanalytics.org/), which provides new and significant insight into therelative roles of curricular complexity and centrality on the success of the Wright State Model.In particular, results suggest that while the Wright State Model has had only a negligible impacton the overall complexity of the engineering curriculum, it has measurably reduced thecomplexity and dramatically reduced the centrality of the required calculus sequence. Moreover,the relative
a lack of preparedness of elementary teachers to confidentlyteach science and engineering. Smith [8] reported 77% of elementary teachers felt well preparedto teach reading/language arts compared to 31% for science and only 3% for engineering.Coppola [9] found engaging teacher candidates (TCs) in engineering mini-units withschool-based field experience significantly improved engineering pedagogical contentknowledge and dispositional self-efficacy. Web and LoFaro [10] found that TCs’ self-efficacy forteaching engineering was increased by including experiences in various courses rather thanshort-term exposure in a single methods course.Overview of the ChangeMaker K-12 ModelChangeMaker K-12 learning path is divided into a series of four
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