of URG students [13],[14].We hypothesize that PLSGs will effectively provide engineering transfer students with socialsupport that, in turn, promotes institutional and major persistence in ways consistent with socialcognitive career theory (SCCT).Study DesignTreisman’s approach has been implemented at several institutions [15], [16], [17]. Our projectdiffers in four critical ways: we (1) utilize the PEERSIST model in an engineering context, (2)extend beyond student achievement to also measure self-efficacy beliefs, (3) employ a virtualplatform to accommodate the unique work and personal circumstances of transfer students and(4) compare PLSG results to a TA-led study group.After piloting the method with four students in Spring 2020, the
whenselecting a test.6, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 While each test measures a slightly different aspect of the broadtopic of spatial skills, many of them correlate highly with one another. Since this study calls for ameasure of general spatial skills, the authors chose a revised version of the PSVT:R test to assessparticipants’ spatial skills.Authors’ Previous Work Previous work by the authors indicates that individuals’ spatial ability differ by gender,age, and ethnicity.27 However, differences were not found on variables such as a student’sclassification (or year in school), early life experiences, and college major. Motivational factors,particularly domain-specific self-efficacy, are positively correlated with individuals’ spatial
measures to determine mismatches between how efficacious a woman in engineeringthinks she is versus the strategy she chooses and if it depends on the type of HC or who thecommunicator of the HC is. Our future work will compare the strategies used by people withother gender identities in engineering to see how:(1) others work to overcome HC inengineering, and (2) see how different others’ strategies are to those that women employ. We alsoplan to analyze responses to a self-advocacy item to determine how women extend their self-efficacy into advocating for themselves and others in engineering. With these findings, we aredeveloping professional development workshops to support women engineers’ advocacymentoring capacity within engineering
and taskorientation in first-year engineering design courses. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE),2014 IEEE (pp. 1-4). IEEE.[38] D. Baker, S. Krause, and S. Y. Purzer, “Developing an instrument to measure tinkering andtechnical self-efficacy in engineering,” presented at the 2008 ASEE Annual Conference andExposition, 2008.[39] Ohland, Matthew W., et al. "The comprehensive assessment of team member effectiveness:Development of a behaviorally anchored rating scale for self-and peer evaluation." Academy ofManagement Learning & Education 11.4 (2012): 609-630.[40] Basadur, G. Graen, and M. Wakabayashi, “Identifying individual differences in creativeproblem solving style,” J. Creat. Behav., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 111–131, Jun. 1990.
whoparticipated in a STEM competition. The review of the information gathered with these studentsis particularly critical in our main project since these students have a strong orientation towardSTEM. Students had a choice to participate in up to two subjects out of five available: physics,mathematics, biology, chemistry and computer science. We administered a science andtechnology questionnaire and 657 students out of 721 who participated in the competitionresponded. The survey included 13 questions in a Likert scale regarding self-efficacy andperception of the importance of the subjects presented. In the first section of the questionnaire,students responded to queries that assess physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics and computerscience self
theiracademic growth and development in science-related fields and a transformation of identity from student toprofessional, thereby promoting field-specific self-efficacy [9,10]. To date, undergraduate students were invited tocomplete the engineering design self-efficacy (EDSE) instrument to evaluate their engineering self-efficacy levels.The EDSE instrument will be used again at the end of the academic year to monitor students' engineering self-efficacychanges during their course participation. This 36-item questionnaire has been designed to measure students' self-concepts toward engineering design tasks [20]. It assesses four areas related to engineering identity development: self-efficacy, motivation, expectancy, and anxiety. Our students showed
include 1 mixed-method, 6 qualitative and 6quantitative studies. The sample sizes ranged from 4 to 15,771. All the sources included werepeer-reviewed and framed as research studies, rather than as practitioner papers. Additionally,the quality of each of these studies was systematically assessed. The full texts of the 13remaining qualifying studies were then examined and coded to reveal themes within the existingbody of knowledge.DiscussionAlthough the total number of publications examined was quite small, clear trends existed in thedata collected. The majority of articles measured students’ confidence or some form of self-efficacy in the classroom or the workplace. The quantitative studies measured a variety ofoutcomes, but almost never found
personnel, and others. In our approach, first, we devised course-specificmentoring objectives through literature surveys and pre-course surveys. To achieve theseobjectives, we created a set of mentoring activities. We also designed evaluation metrics to assesswhether there are any changes in students' perceptions toward computing programs and perceivedimpacts on students' self-efficacy and sense of belonging over time. Through these analyses, wetried to measure whether we need to design course-level-specific mentoring to help ourunderrepresented students attain their computing careers. We believe our mentoring should helpour underrepresented and predominantly major students who may hesitate to pursue a computingprogram or require enhanced self
SystemsTheory recognizes that variation in individuals’ development “exists across time within contexts,and across contexts within time;” as a result, “differences in time and place constitute vitalcontributors to plasticity across the life span” [13]. Given the variations by time and place, weexpect a diverse range of pathways of individuals who are on their way to the engineeringprofession.The Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) [14] posits that one’s learning experiences caninfluence their self-efficacy and outcome expectations, which in turn influences their interests,goals and, ultimately, career choice actions; these learning experiences are affected by personinputs (such as predispositions, gender and race) and contextual affordances (such as
self-efficacy are well equipped to educate themselveswhen they have to rely on their own initiative. One of the goals of teaching communicationskills is to develop students who feel competent and confident in the use of those skills [13]. Ourstudent survey is designed to measure the extent to which students at our study sites havedeveloped a sense of self-efficacy for communication.The survey lists the sub-skills we have identified, both from the literature and from experience inteaching communication skills, that student must master in order to successfully create anddeliver oral presentations, write, develop and use visual literacy skills, and participate inteamwork. For example, for oral presentations, we asked students about their
professional STEM careers. These students all live in the sameresidence hall and are afforded opportunities such as peer mentoring, on-site tutoring,professional certification opportunities, and social and community activities. Through this study,we attempt to answer the following questions: What are the essential elements of WISER thatcontribute to student academic and career development? What learning experiences embedded inWISER directly or indirectly increase student self-efficacy and positive outcome expectations inengineering?Literature ReviewThe theoretical framework for this study will be the social cognitive career theory (SCCT).SCCT is grounded in Bandura’s social cognitive theory and is used to explain how academicinterest along with career
SurveysThe PRISE assessments and surveys have been fully developed and administered via Qualtrics.The surveys on students’ engineering self-efficacy (Mamaril et al., 2016, self-coping efficacy(Concannon and Barrow, 2009), engineering interest measure (Henderson et al., 2002), andcareer outcome expectations (Concannon and Barrow, 2009) have been administered as our mainoverall program learning outcome. Data collection was at pre-intervention (before students’ firstyear), at mid-year (at the end of each fall semester), and post-intervention (end of each springsemester). Focus groups and/or individual interviews were used to evaluate scholars’ attitudesregarding their collegiate experience, impact of the program on their success and experience
-efficacy by asking four items on a 5-point scale (1= notconfident at all; 5=completely confident): “how confident are you in your ability to engage in thefollowing activities related to being an entrepreneur or an individual who starts a company, eitheralone or with others? 1) successfully identify new business opportunities, 2) create new products,3) think creatively, and 4) start a business with a new idea. The items were averaged to calculatethe entrepreneurial self-efficacy variable.Entrepreneurial identity aspirations We asked six items to assess the entrepreneurial identity aspirations measure on a 5-pointscale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree): “I think I can become an entrepreneur,” “I cansee myself as an entrepreneur
exploration as a theme, and the other used micro controllers as thefoundation for activities. The goals of this research are as follows: 1. Develop effectivecurricula for improving student self-efficacy in CT, 2. Develop a reliable and effective wayof measuring student self-efficacy in CT, and 3. Enforce the notion that CT is not problemsolving (PS), but a component of cognition.Background and Related Work“Computational thinking involves solving problems, designing systems, and understandinghuman behavior, by drawing on the concepts fundamental to computer science”26. However,computational thinking (CT) is not intended to be equated to computer science; rather theessence of CT comes from thinking like a computer scientist when faced with problems
impact ofcollaborative project-based learning (CPBL) on the self-efficacy of traditionally underrepresented minoritygroups in electrical engineering courses with the support of NSF. The project goals include: 1) Improve theunderstanding of the factors that affect the self-efficacy of minority student groups in Engineering; 2) Developbetter ways to measure the impact of collaborative learning in the developmental stages of the student learningprocess in addition to the learning outcomes; 3) Design a more effective instructional system that integratescommunity inquiry to boost the self-efficacy of underrepresented minority students.Since 2013, the research effort has produced interesting results that allowed us to better understand the
science teacher fellows. Gunning presents her research on science teacher self-efficacy, vertical learning communities for teacher professional develop- ment and family STEM learning at international conferences every year since 2009 and is published. She is the Co-Director and Co-Founder of Mercy College’s Center for STEM Education.Dr. Meghan E. Marrero, Mercy College Dr. Meghan Marrero is a Professor of Secondary Education at Mercy College, where she also co-directs the Mercy College Center for STEM Education, which seeks to provide access to STEM experiences for teachers, students, and families. Dr. Marrero was a 2018 Fulbright Scholar to Ireland, during which she implemented a science and engineering program for
-concepts of math ability are also examined 10,14. According toBandura16, math anxiety has an inverse relation to self-efficacy levels. Thus, increasing mathself-efficacy may decrease students’ feelings of anxiety when they perform math activities 17.There is some ambiguity concerning the possible effects of math anxiety on students, and thisambiguity is normally generated by the different ways by which math anxiety is measured. Forexample, including survey items and questions that could combine students’ perceptions of theirmath abilities with their feelings about performing math tasks can create ambiguity 13. If mathanxiety is not established and measured as an independent factor, developing a conclusion aboutits effects on students’ behavior and
(3), 175-213.19. Mamaril, N. A., Usher, E. L., Li, C. R., Economy, D. R., & Kennedy, M. S. (2016). Measuring undergraduate students' engineering self-efficacy: A validation study. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(2), 366-395. doi: 10.1002/jee.2012120. Kier, M. W., Blanchard, M. R., Osborne, J. W., & Albert, J. L. (2013). The development of the STEM career interest survey (STEM-CIS). Research in Science Education, 44(3), 461-481. doi: 10.1007/s11165-013-9389-321. Jackson, A., Mentzer, N., Kramer, R., & Zhang, J. (2017, June). Enhancing student motivation and efficacy through soft robot design. Paper presented at the 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, OH.
motivational itemssuch as perceived instrumentality and self-efficacy beliefs. We must note that this pilot study alsoserved to test the instrument. Future studies will gather data regarding prior training related tospatial visualization skills. 3.2 Data Analysis: To analyze the findings from the self-report questions, exploratory factor analysis (EFA)was used with the measures of motivational factors such as perceived instrumentality and self-efficacy beliefs. Based on the literature, we expected that individuals who were exposed in theirearly childhood and later on in live to experiences related to the manipulation of objects viasectional cuts, three dimensional rotations, and other mental operations will have higherperformance score on
national Ph.D. programs.The scope of this work is to develop a baseline of the data within a single Hispanic servinginstitution. The analysis completed to this point validates the survey instrument in measuring theidentified constructs. This validation is necessary so that this study may be expanded to a largersurvey population.Research QuestionsThis research investigates several factors that are believed to impact the identity of engineeringstudents as researchers. We seek to assess the role of research self- efficacy, researcher identity,and cultural compatibility on research persistence intentions. These variables were selected asthey have been determined to be relevant factors in prior identity studies [16], [29]–[35].Students that self
)they are interested, and 5) they feel cared about by the instructor and/or other students” [13].Marzano, Pickering and Heflebowen [14] noted that a pedagogical environment that elicits positiveresponses to questions: “a) How do I feel? b) Am I interested? c) Is it important? and d) Can I dothis?” may indicate an engaged student. Such an environment leads to self-efficacy which has beendefined by Bandura [15] as "how well one can execute courses of action required to deal withprospective situations". Academic achievement and self-efficacy have been empirically shown tobe related [16]-[20]. Successful learning enhances an individual’s self-efficacy [21]-[23].The objective of this work is to assess an innovative active learning environment. In
studied acrosseducation and psychology literature. As an example, Australian high school students’ academicself-efficacy is a significant predictor of academic resilience.27 Similarly, low-income Blackcollege students with high academic confidence who were also able to “bounce back” fromacademic challenges and setbacks in college (i.e., students labeled as “buoyant believers”)achieve greater academic success, as measured by grade-point average.29Using findings from the aforementioned study of low-income Black students, Strayhorn createdthe ‘buoyant believers’ framework. The framework positions students in four categoriesrepresenting the intersection of various degrees of academic self-efficacy and resilience. Thefour categories include (a
. Fivemotivation factors were studied to examine student motivation within and between the cohorts:cognitive value, self-regulation, presentation anxiety, intrinsic value, and self-efficacy. The datawas collected from three cohorts of mechanical engineering senior capstone design students,through three different yearlong senior capstone courses: 2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2016-2017.The data was analyzed using an ANOVA Single Factor analysis and a t-test for single variance toexamine which factors affected student motivation.The goal of this research is to examine the effect of the student’s choice of project type on theirmotivation and changes in motivation in senior capstone design. This will thereby provideeducators with insight on the impact of the
In partnership with the psychology department in our institution, a survey was developedand it contained measurable items regarding their attitudes, perspectives, science/engineeringidentity, and research self-efficacy. The first section of the survey consisted of 10 questionsfocusing on students’ demographic information. The second section contained Likert scaleditems to include “Research Self-Efficacy” (9 questions), “Science/Engineering Identity” (5questions), “Expectations and Goals” (4 questions), “Academic Integration” (5 questions), and“Senses of Belonging to Program and Campus (8 questions)”. The following describesdevelopment of the questions in each category. Research Self-Efficacy: It is measured by items from the
TransitionAbstractPeer mentoring has been shown to be an effective means of improving the retention of women inengineering, but few studies have explored the impact of participation on the development of theleadership abilities of undergraduate women. Transitioning to a leadership mentality as a peermentor has the potential to foster self-efficacy in science, technology, engineering, andmathematics (STEM) and socially stable academic relationships that may be replicated in post-graduate study and/or the workplace. This one-year study explored the experiences of junior andsenior female students in STEM majors (N=11) serving as mentors to first-year students in theWomen in Science and Engineering Honors Program (WISE) at Stony Brook University, a largeresearch
. Surveys included Likert-scale questions on self-efficacy, identity, and intent to persist that are supported by pre-existingliterature [13]–[15]. Additional questions on motivators, relevance of design challenges, andengineering skills were added for general instructor interest.Self-Efficacy Measured Across the Semester-Long CourseFour questions were asked to gauge self-efficacy (how certain are you that you can: identify adesign need, develop a design solution, evaluate and test a design, recognize changes needed fora design solution to work). Responses were collected on a Likert-scale, where 1 indicated“completely uncertain” and 7 indicated “completely certain.” Table 1 shows that responses to allfour questions could be grouped into one self
,engineering, and math (STEM) a function of objectively measured math competencies. Second,students are more likely to select math and science courses when they are confident in theirability to do well in these courses. In other words, students with greater self-efficacy in scienceand math are more likely to choose these courses. Third, the value a student places on particularschool subjects are important for their career trajectory. Finally, the perception of strong socialsupport for achievement is vital when a student is considering a career choice, which isparticularly true for females [7].Through the use of implicit and self-report measure, it was found that elementary school femalessupported the stereotype that math is for males, demonstrating
domain during the pre-college yearsthat is one of the strongest predictors of intent to pursue or persist in a STEM major in college.This exploratory case study examined the lived experiences of eight high school girls whoexhibited strong STEM identities. This work reports on the role that all-female STEM spacesinfluenced participants’ intent to pursue STEM majors in college. Eight junior and senior girlswere interviewed over the course of an eight-week period during fall 2019 regarding theirperceived feelings of self-efficacy, their feelings of recognition in STEM, and their interest inSTEM domains. This qualitative research was framed using Godwin’s 2016 Engineering IdentityFramework, adapting it to accommodate a broader STEM Identity and
(URCAD) enablestudents to explore and comprehend the essence of research.Undergraduate students participating in research experiences show to enhance many of theirtechnical and professional skills [2], [3]. Communication and critical thinking, careerclarification and even further aspirations to continue to graduate school have been documentedbecause of a research experience for a student [2], [4], [5]. Another key and important element,especially at UMBC, is the impact on diversity. These experiences demonstrate increasing self-efficacy in students who are working to complete a STEM degree, especially women andmarginalized populations [5], [6], [7], [8].However, not all students have the chance or find themselves in a position to pursue such
and thosestudents who were interested in a “socially oriented” (non-profit) career outcome. The theoreticalframework used for modeling these groups was Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT).Logistic regression analysis was conducted using a multi-measure survey that assessed cognitive,motivational, behavioral influences.Results show that students who are Starters tend to be “new seeking” and “iconoclastic”, andhave higher “domain self-efficacy”, compared with students who are Joiners. Further, studentswho are interested in Socially Oriented career outcomes are more “socially altruistic,” and have astronger sense of “personal morals” and a more hopeful future about their “quality of life”compared with their Market Oriented peers. Gender was an