(NSWCCD). The partnership between University of Maryland andNSWCCD allowed for project mentorship by volunteers from NSWCCD, Lockheed Martin, andby the instructor. Within the scope of the project, students must use mathematical fundamentalsto conduct an engineering design. Examples include calculations for carrying capacity andairfoil selection based on experimentally measured principles of aerodynamics, such askinematic equations of motion, lift, drag, and thrust (Figure UM-1).The inclusion of the design project is motivated by the potential to increase the mathematical andengineering self-efficacy that students receive from the course. It is believed that employing themathematical fundamentals acquired in the course to solve real-world
for the reader.]1There is a growing national concern over decreases in science achievement in middle and highschool. Paired with it are challenges associated with workforce declines in STEM-relatedcareers. In response, in a recent PCAST report,2 recommendations for recruitment of science andengineering students and corresponding recommendations for increased attention to strategicSTEM-related instruction and teacher professional development have emerged. A significantchallenge facing urban science and math teachers is a low sense of self-efficacy in teachingSTEM content.3 Additionally, a recent large-scale study of teachers revealed that secondaryteachers indicated a strong need for help in the area teaching in science, and that a weakness
careers. Inresponse, in a recent PCAST report1 recommendations for recruitment of science and Page 24.1042.3engineering students and corresponding recommendations for increased attention to strategicSTEM-related instruction and teacher professional development have emerged. A significantchallenge facing urban science teachers is a low sense of self-efficacy in teaching STEMcontent.2 Additionally, a recent large-scale study of teachers revealed that secondary teachersindicated a strong need for help in the areas of English Language Development (ELD) andcontent teaching in science, and that a weakness of existing professional development was in
ofdeveloping student writing skills. The students were administered pre and post surveys. The firstsurvey consisted of twelve questions used to measure student preferences for instructionalpedagogy or student preferences for teaching methods and resources used to help teach classes.This survey used a Likert scale using the rankings of Strongly disagree (1), Disagree (2), Neutral(3), Agree (4), and Strongly Agree (5). PRISM statistical software was used to perform thestatistical analysis of survey data to calculate significance in compared data using a two-tailed t-test. The ABET survey consisted of eleven questions to measure student self-efficacy for theircompetencies in the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) criteria areas
theirteachers’ participation in the RET programs. Students gained science and engineeringknowledge, increased their science interest and motivation, and demonstrated gains in scienceliteracy as well. Introduction and program needThere is a growing national concern over decreases in science achievement in middle and highschool. Paired with it are challenges associated with workforce declines in STEM-relatedcareers. In response, in a recent PCAST report1 recommendations for recruitment of scienceand engineering students and corresponding recommendations for increased attention to strategicSTEM-related instruction and teacher professional development have emerged. A significantchallenge facing urban science teachers is a low sense of self-efficacy in
studentsfrom these schools are underrepresented minority students with financial need.The objective of PtoBP: to have Scholars show higher retention/persistence rates. Specifically, to have a90% second-year retention rate, and a 90% five-year graduation rate; and to have at least half of thePtoBP Scholars intern in power engineering and work in power engineering.Key Program FeaturesPtoBP dovetails well with BFCIT’s EE program, that strives to provide support to its students who tendto be low-income students from underrepresented groups. To that end, the EE program incorporatesactivities and infrastructure that promote conditions for student success in STEM fields such as: mathcompetency [1, 2, 3], self-efficacy [2, 4], met financial need [5, 6
[Portions of this paper in the review of the literature and research design have been reprintedfrom the 2016 ASEE Poster Session Papers, which provide preliminary material for the reader.]1There is a growing national concern over decreases in science achievement in middle and highschool. Paired with it are challenges associated with workforce declines in STEM-relatedcareers. In response, in a recent PCAST report2 recommendations for recruitment of scienceand engineering students and corresponding recommendations for increased attention to strategicSTEM-related instruction and teacher professional development have emerged. A significantchallenge facing urban science teachers is a low sense of self-efficacy in teaching STEMcontent.3 Additionally, a
, Hispanics, and Girls in STEM by Expanding Summer Engineering ExperiencesAbstractPromoting the participation of under-represented minorities in engineering is a nationalimperative. Focusing on elementary school students is critical for broadening participation inengineering, as many children form lasting beliefs about their STEM identities and STEM self-efficacy in elementary school. While there has been a recent surge in efforts to integrateengineering in curriculum in traditional school settings, out-of-school settings continue to playan important role in promoting equity in pre-college engineering experiences. Out-of-schoolsettings in particular can be ideal for providing children with culturally-relevant engineeringexperiences
. Specifically, there seems tobe a misalignment between teachers’ lessons and what the STIR is intended to measure, namely, afull scientific investigation. Furthermore, our observations also highlighted the challenge that highschool STEM teachers’ face in integrating nanotechnology into their classroom. While each of theclassroom lessons that we observed included a nano-component, the teacher’s primary focuscorresponded with something students were expected to know per state mandates and with respectto state tests. More time spent on nanotechnology, especially a full nano-lab would, we think,detract from what the teachers were expected to cover.Third, we did not find any changes in students’ STEM self-efficacy as measured by the S-STEMconstructs
of our project is the assessment strategy. Forboth undergraduates and high school students, we have been able to collect content areaknowledge both before and after completing the class, as well as information about their attitudestowards engineering and self-efficacy beliefs. This has been particularly illuminating in regardsto subgroups like women and students of color. The Knowledge Assessment can be seen inAppendix A. It contains 10 multiple choice and five essay questions to determine studentknowledge about the basics of the course. The Attitudinal Assessment was taken from apreviously validated metric of engineering undergraduates’ attitudes towards engineering andself-efficacy assessment on those skills [14-15]. It can be seen in
instrument. Aggregation provides increased power for inferential statistics to examinethe outcomes of the intervention on construct(s) of interest – including ones related to self-efficacy and place attachment. It also allows for more robust descriptive statistics to examinedifferences between characteristics of interest.Interviews Exploring Attachment to PlaceGiven our interest in the emergence of attachment to place within the C-EEEM efforts as anoutcome, the research team retained an independent external evaluator [24] specializing inenvironmental sociology to validate and expand on our findings. As noted, qualitative datacollection by internal researchers through the duration of the grant indicated a positive shift bymost interns in place
.[11] Walter R Boot, Neil Charness, Sara J Czaja, Joseph Sharit, Wendy A Rogers, Arthur D Fisk, Tracy Mitzner, Chin Chin Lee, and Sankaran Nair. Computer proficiency questionnaire: assessing low and high computer proficient seniors. The Gerontologist, 55(3):404–411, 2015.[12] Center for Digital Dannelse. The digital competence wheel. https://digital-competence.eu, 2016. Accessed: 02-06-2024.[13] Francisco G Barbeite and Elizabeth M Weiss. Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an internet sample: testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales. Computers in human behavior, 20(1):1–15, 2004.[14] Kelly S Steelman and Kay L Tislar. Measurement of tech anxiety in older and younger
and qualitative data were collected throughout the sessions (N=90) to measure impact.Participants were administered pre- and post-questionnaires at every session. The set of pre- and post-questionswere exactly the same and used to assess participants’ engineering knowledge and interest. At the end of theAcademy, participants were sent via an email a post-experience survey to evaluate their engineering self-efficacy related to their interest in engineering majors and careers and their comprehension of engineeringconcepts explained during the Academy. The survey was created and validated by engineering faculty.Pre and post multiple-choice questions administered throughout the Academy included: 1. What does the term ‘dimensions’ mean when
faculty and administrators will require a cognizant understanding ofwho these students are, -- the challenges they face, how they handle stress, their levels of self-efficacy, and their development of an engineering identity, -- if they are to successfully designand implement programs specifically targeted at this demographic.The semistructure interview and design protocols have resulted in large amounts of datacollected. Work continues to explore the intricacies of who these students are. The aim is to havelarge enough numbers that results can be generalized and broadly applied. Future work willdwell into adult learners’ level of preparedness and their student-faculty relationship.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the
additional courses [18], [19]. Interest and success build self-efficacy, an expectancy belief, that is defined as “beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize andexecute the courses of action required to produce given attainments'' [20]. Self-efficacy has beenshown to be one of the strongest predictors of academic achievement for undergraduates [21]. MethodologyThis study employed a causal-comparative, single group research design. A purposeful sample of281 participants taking the first semester general chemistry laboratory course for engineers wereconsented as participants. Demographics were determined based upon an initial survey whereparticipants indicated their major, gender identity and ethnicity. URM
longitudinal changes in the self-efficacy of undergraduatestudents studying engineering. The LAESE undergraduate instrument has been tested andvalidated on male and female engineering students. The LAESE questions will be administeredeach fall to determine if self-efficacy increases as they progress through school.The second section was based on the questions in the Clance Imposter Phenomenon Scale [54].The Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale was designed to measure the concept that individualsare successful by external standards but have an illusion of personal incompetence. Thequestions assess components of the phenomenon such as ideas about self-doubt and achievingsuccess by chance.The third section asked questions about the student’s advisors
-Atlantic private college. This exploratory study includes the perceptionsof two engineering faculty members and one educational support staff using mastery-basedteaching and assessment in a project-based engineering program. A semi-structured interviewwith multiple open-ended questions were used to prompt participants to share their experienceswith assessment in relation to their self-efficacy around teaching and their perceptions ofassessment in relation to their students’ failure mindset, metacognition (awareness of learningprocesses), and agency (ownership of learning). Directed content and thematic analysis wereused to identify codes and develop themes in relation to how participants described certainfeatures of assessment in their engineering
modelintegrated elements from Lent's Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) [7] and Tinto'sDeparture model [8] into a hybrid structure aimed at boosting success metrics among LIATS.Figure 1 reproduces the structure of interventions underpinned by the L-CAS model [9]. Figure 1: LIAT college access and success model [9].L-CAS activities followed a longitudinal path consonant with student development, withobjectives ranging from boosting their sense of belonging and self-efficacy beliefs to propellingthem into actions and immersing them into real-life contexts [10]. Context scenarios targeted thedevelopment of collaborations and interactions in communities of practice that led students todevelop practical skills for becoming future
selection of initial experiments toadapt, the modifications made, and resulting changes in the course delivery. Preliminary resultsusing measures of key constructs associated with student success, such as motivation,engineering identity, and self-efficacy are provided. This project is conducted at a historicallyblack college/university and most participants are from groups historically underrepresented inSTEM.IntroductionAccording to National Science Foundation data, African American students comprise 2% of theB.S. degree recipients in the geosciences, 2.6% in physics and 3.9% in engineering, while Blackscomprise 14.9% of the college-aged population [1]. Thus, there are opportunities to increase therepresentation of African American students in
education andbuild capacity for student success. This project will use a data-driven and evidence-based approachto identify the barriers to the success of underrepresented minority students and to generate newknowledge on the best practices for increasing students’ retention and graduation rates, self-efficacy, professional development, and workforce preparedness. Three objectives underpin thisoverall goal. The first is to develop and implement a Summer Research Internship Programtogether with community college partners. The second is to establish an HSI Engineering SuccessCenter to provide students with academic resources, networking opportunities with industry, andcareer development tools. The third is to develop resources for the professional
. Page 26.479.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Designing Effective Project-based Learning Experience using Participatory Design ApproachAbstractThis paper presents the progress and findings of the second stage of an NSF sponsoredinterdisciplinary research project that aims at developing guidelines of effective instructionaldesign using collaborative PBL (CPBL) to boost the self-efficacy of minority students inengineering. To achieve the above goal, an exploratory case study was conducted, where we firstutilized an innovative instructional design strategy called Participatory Design Approach toimprove the curricular structure and CPBL model in a pilot course
Study 4 and Study 5 into a singleprotocol. See below.Study 5: Frame-of-reference training makes participants better team membersPurpose of study: This study explores the effect of cognitive model development (measured by aknowledge test as in Study 2) on team performance and team-member effectiveness. Trainingmembers of teams to develop a more accurate cognitive model of teamwork should increaseteam performance, team cohesion, team self-efficacy, and satisfaction, and reduce team conflict.Status of study: Participants were recruited to the experimental and control groups at UNCCharlotte and Purdue University for lab studies, and the results of that work are being published.A significant research protocol was designed, developed, and launched at
. Brien, C. F. Bauer, and R. Champoux, "Assessing the self efficacy and spatial ability of engineering students from multiple disciplines," in Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference, 2005, pp. S2C-15.[11] N. Veurink and A. Hamlin, "Spatial Visualization Skills: Impact on Confidence and Success in an Engineering Curriculum," presented at the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC, 2011. Available: https://peer.asee.org/18591[12] M.-T. Wang and J. Degol, "Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy–value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields," Developmental Review, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 304-340, 2013.[13] D. B. Clark, E. E
cohesion, team self-efficacy, and satisfaction, and reduce team conflict.Study 6 will explore the effect of structured team experiences and use of a peer evaluation system on team skills and team-member effectiveness. Prior research has found that completing peer evaluations familiarizes students with team skills9,10 and improves new teammates’ satisfaction with those team members on a future team.1Study 7 will explore the effect of five feedback alternatives on team performance, Page 26.1566.4 satisfaction, team cohesion, team efficacy and team conflict: (1) self and peer evaluation data collected but no feedback given, (2) feedback
accurately perceive one’s own skill level.2 Prior research shows that this greater self- understanding is evidence of learning; in other words, these metacognitive gains are evidence of concomitant cognitive gains.7,8Study 4 will determine whether giving students feedback on the degree to which their ratings match those of other raters improves their rating practices.Study 5 will explore the effect of cognitive model development (measured by a knowledge test as in Study 2) on team performance and team-member effectiveness. Training members of teams to develop a more accurate cognitive model of teamwork should increase team performance, team cohesion, team self-efficacy, and satisfaction, and reduce team conflict.Study 6 will explore
study is an adaptation of the Laanan-transfer students' questionnaire (L-TSQ)1,2,3,4 plus a compilation of survey items extracted from the following multi-institutionalresearch studies that investigated transfer student experiences in STEM: Prototype to Production:P2P5 and Measuring Constructs of STEM Student Success Literacy: Community CollegeStudents’ Self-Efficacy, Social Capital, and Transfer Knowledge.6,7The final survey instrument, the “Engineering Transfer Student Survey”, was developedspecifically for this project and is comprised of six sections that include a mix of multiple choiceand open-ended questions. Multiple survey items are embedded in 16 of the 45 questions. Ahigh level summary for each section of the survey is provided as
engineering classes leading to a high probability of student success, and conduct formative and summative evaluations with special focus on determining effectiveness and impact of the project activities, strategies, and adjustments; 5. Conduct a research study that will focus on developing an evidence-based understanding of factors influencing development of STEM identity and the resulting impact on student success, attitudes, workforce readiness, and STEM self-efficacy, with particular attention to impact on first-generation and underrepresented students. 6. Conduct formative and summative evaluations of the project that explore the extent to which each objective is being met. A particular impetus will be
, connection, and self-efficacy. 100% of students agreed or strongly agreed that theyfeel a stronger sense of belonging since joining the program. All students also agreed that theyfeel welcomed by program mentors and peers, with 70% strongly agreeing. Further, 100% ofstudents reported feeling valued in the program, with 70% strongly agreeing. Most notably, 90%of students strongly agreed that they feel they can be successful since joining the APEXcommunity. Not a single student responded negatively or neutrally, demonstrating the program'sresounding effectiveness at fostering inclusivity, support, and empowerment for our studentscholars. Overall, the data highlights that comprehensive, consistent mentoring positivelyinfluences students' well-being and
by multiple analyses26.Students’ goal orientations will be measured using the Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goal Orientationssubscales of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ)27. The MSLQ is aLikert-scaled instrument that has high internal consistency, reliability, and predictive validity32,33 . The MSLQ will be administered to students enrolled in the courses described in section 3 bothat the start and end of each academic term. The SIMS will be administered on a weekly basis toobtain a granular view of student motivational responses to the desktop CNC integration.Self-efficacy and use of higher-level cognitive strategies: Students’ self-efficacy within open-ended design situations will be gauged using the self-efficacy
academic excellence. Through the formation of posses and similar cohort programs,universities have been able to successfully aid underrepresented students with their adjustmentinto the academic and social culture of the university.2 The NSF S-STEM program at RobertMorris University is one such academic center where the implementation of a cohort modelsuccessfully helped student self-efficacy and academic progress.3 While the PEEPS at Cal Polydoes not employ alternative admissions models to admit or identify cohort members, our termand acronym, “PEEPS,” captures the idea of a “posse,” “family” or “my peoples” as a group thatsupports and cares for one another.Our primary goal is to recruit, retain, and graduate academically talented, financially