Data Science and Analytics, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s41060-024-00509-w.[19] R. H. Kilmann and K. W. Thomas, “Developing a forced-choice measure of conflict- handling behavior: The" MODE" instrument,” Educational and psychological measurement, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 309–325, 1977.[20] A. C Graesser, P. W. Foltz, Y. Rosen, D. W. Shaffer, C. Forsyth, and M.-L. Germany, “Challenges of assessing collaborative problem solving,” Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Research and applications, pp. 75–91, 2018.[21] D. A. Kolb, Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press, 2014.[22] A. Bandura, “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.,” Psychological review, vol
for supporting teachers to demystify and bring concepts of AIand ML into classrooms [9].Teachers’ confidence is central to the integration of technology in the classroom in general, thehigher a teacher’s self-efficacy with technologies in their class, the more positive their attitude,which leads to a higher level of confidence and technology use[10]. This aligns with Ajzen andFishbein’s Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), which predicts teachers’ behavioral intentions,which lead to technology decisions, with high accuracy by understanding their attitude towardthe behavior [11]. Evidence also shows that the exploration and use of available technologytools relevant to the teachers’ subject matter during professional development training results
, especiallyamong engineering students. Research highlights the influence of fear of failure on students,particularly women, pointing to factors like self-efficacy, gender role conflict, and the learningenvironment's perceived nature [12,13]. The intergenerational transmission of fear of failure [14]and the dual role of this fear as both a hindrance and a motivator [15, 16] emphasizes thecomplexity of navigating failure in educational settings. The influence of educators' attitudestowards failure [17] further illustrates the need for pedagogical strategies that reshape students'perceptions of failure, promoting resilience and a success-oriented mindset.Risk-taking, as an integral aspect of engineering education, demands a comprehensive approachto encourage
problem-solving.First-year experience (FYE) courses, aimed at easing transitions and fostering student success,have increasingly found a valuable partner in EML. EML can benefit FYE courses in diverseways: • Developing self-efficacy: FYE courses can incorporate EML, allowing students to identify opportunities, work collaboratively, and learn from failures, boosting their confidence and self-efficacy. • Building interdisciplinary connections: EML tasks can naturally weave in diverse disciplines, mirroring the interconnectedness of real-world challenges. FYE courses can leverage this feature to encourage students to appreciate the value of interdisciplinary thinking. • Fostering adaptability and resilience
Paper ID #43539Validating Assessment Instruments for Use in Engineering Education: A Primerfor Conducting and Interpreting Factor AnalysisDr. Susan L. Amato-Henderson, Michigan Technological University Susan Amato-Henderson is an Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychology in the Department of Cognitive and Learning Sciences at Michigan Technological University. She received her Ph.D. in Experimental Psychology from the University of North Dakota. Her research interests broadly include STEM education, and focus on individual differences in terms of motivation, self-regulated learning, self-efficacy, grit, resilience, and
theindustry professionals are too removed from the first-year student experience to be helpful [19].The mentorship program at West Virginia University transitioned away from industry mentorsfor first-year students as they reflected that first-year students were not yet ready to interact withexperienced industry professionals [11]. Success in the early mentorship programs is often evaluated with surveys for self-efficacy,identity, social community, and/or sense of belonging [2,3,5,7,8,20], or with analysis ofacademic grades or retention in the program [5,8,16]. While mentorship programs are often totedas successful anecdotally, the data is not always as clear to indicate the benefits when comparedto those students not participating. Sense of
online qualitative and quantitative survey whichwas designed using questions from previously published self-efficacy and teacher experienceinstruments. Participants were also invited to discuss their experiences during a virtualinterview.Results indicate that COVID-19 continued to disrupt STE teaching and learning through the2021 – 2022 academic year and that STEAM Labs, collaborative group work, and investigativeproblem solving skills were missing from STE instruction. Findings reveal that there is renewedinterest in project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, innovative pedagogy, STEAM Labsand engineering as the “keystone” to STEAM education, especially as COVID-19 healthprotocols and restrictions subside. To apply the results of this
of work self-reported by students? 2. RQ2: Would there be any change in their work distribution if given a recommended collaboration workflow? 3. RQ3: What collaborative models do students in an introductory software engineering course follow when working in a team?Related WorkWorking in pairs on programming assignments is helpful for students as it improves performanceand self-efficacy [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. However, assessing individual work in group activities ischallenging. Therefore, several approaches to effectively evaluate group work have beenproposed – (a) give the same grade to all students; (b) give the same grade to all students unlessotherwise requested by the team or based on the instructor’s perception that the
. Minch, and L. Vanasupa, “Work in progress: A modular course on sensors, instrumentation, and measurement: Supporting a diversity of learners’ agency of self-direction,” in ASEE Virtual Annual Conference, 06 2020.[31] H. Celik, H. Pektas, and O. Karamustafaoglu, “The effects of the flipped classroom model on the laboratory self- efficacy and attitude of higher education students,” Electronic Journal for Research in Science and Mathematics Education, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 47–67, 07 2021.[32] B. D. Rio-Gamero, D. E. Santiago, J. Schallenberg-Rodriguez, and N. Melian-Martel, “Does the use of videos in flipped classrooms in engineering labs improve student performance?” Education Sciences, vol. 12, no. 11, 2022.[33] A. Dallal
early 1960s1,2 as a popular strategy, demonstrating itseffectiveness in engaging students with the learning process. Initially introduced within a reformpedagogy known as 'guided inquiry3 ', active learning unfolds in three phases: exploration,invention, and application. Research suggests that this pedagogical approach substantiallyenhances students' conceptual understanding when compared to traditional teaching methods4,5,6. 1Encouraging engineering faculty to incorporate active learning strategies, in classroominstruction is common. There is a necessity to explore self-efficacy at various academic levels tounderstand variations among different populations. At the same time, further research is
, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 391–400, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.03.003.[26] Trochim, Donnelly, and A. Kanika, Research Methods: The Essential Knowledge Base, 2nd edition. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2015.[27] S. Zappe, S. Cutler, S. Spiegel, J. Blacklock, and D. Jordan, “Development of Self- Efficacy and Mindset Scales for Advanced Manufacturing and Data Sciences,” In ASEE annual conference exposition, 2022.[28] E. Muraki, “INFORMATION FUNCTIONS OF THE GENERALIZED PARTIAL CREDIT MODEL,” ETS Research Report Series, vol. 1993, no. 1, Jun. 1993, doi: 10.1002/j.2333-8504.1993.tb01538.x.[29] G. N. Masters, “A rasch model for partial credit scoring,” Psychometrika, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 149–174, Jun. 1982, doi: 10.1007
had on programming labs’ completion. Such analysis may compare courses where hints were provided and courses where hints were not provided for the same problems, including controls for other confounds, such as different instructors, course offerings, student demographics, and more. Future work may also evaluate student self-efficacy, including a student's belief that the hint system impacted that student's self-efficacy.Conclusion dvanced zyLabs includes many powerful features, for students and instructors, includingAindustry-standard IDEs, highly-customizable development environment and tools, Linux machine’s desktop, collaborative environments, and more. Nonetheless, each metric of student usage was about the
added to surveys distributed in coursesfor other purposes (e.g., studies of identity, belonging, innovation self-efficacy). Coursesincluded in this study include two different engineering courses for first-year (FY) students,environmental engineering courses for junior/senior students, and a general engineering coursefor upper-division students. The surveys were distributed at the end of the semester in spring2023 and the beginning of the semester in fall 2023 and spring 2024. Response rates across thecourses ranged from 39% (spring 2023 post) to 93%. The data were collected as part of multipleresearch projects approved by the Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects Research.Statistical tests were used to evaluate differences observed
and Florida Ethics Frameworks in STEM Enculturation IT #6 Institutional Transformation: University of Washington 2023-2028 Anticipating Undesirable Consequences of Computer Science Research IT #7 Institutional Transformation: Virginia Tech 2023-2028 Transforming Cultures of Responsible Research through the Development of Ethics Expertise and Self-Efficacy 3 among Faculty through Social NetworksTable 1 NSF CCE STEM (ER2) funded institutional transformation grantsAfter identifying the seven institutional
experiences vary depending on the particular program ormodel students choose. For instance, the nature of the research undertaken by undergraduates working oncapstone projects differs from that involved in study abroad opportunities. Students participating incapstone projects have reported the development of professional skills such as project management,teamwork, and communication abilities [12], [13]. Alternatively, undergraduates conducting researchabroad consistently demonstrate growth in areas like cultural awareness, emotional resilience, linguisticskills, and research self-efficacy [4], [14], [15]. Extended involvement in undergraduate research hasbeen shown to result in more pronounced skill development [16]. While both models represent
allowsstudents to get involved [2] in meaningful ways in their campus community (and beyond).Understanding the navigation and impact of undergraduate research experiences for STEMstudents is limited and primarily derived from Research Experiences for Undergraduate (REU)programs [3]. There is a recognized need for research that more broadly explores undergraduateresearch experiences [3] considering their potential impact on individual students, institutions,and the engineering disciplines.For individual students, there are potential benefits in the form of professional competencydevelopment, persistence, self-efficacy, and GPA [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. Forinstitutions (especially R1 institutions like the one where this study was
retention, as well as methods to improve NTS outcomes.Several studies focus on the pedagogy of NTS [26], [27].Factors affecting NTS persistence, completion, attrition, or retentionExisting studies have identified factors that affect NTS persistence, completion, attrition, orretention, that may be categorized as social factors, academic performance factors, demographicfactors, inter-role conflicts, and academic and social integration.Social factors refer to emotional and behavioral influences from another person including but notlimited to family members, classmates, and friends. Social factors affect NTS retention byinfluencing NTS self-efficacy and motivation in completing college [11]. As support orencouragement increases, student’s perception of
to students'performance in campus environment [7]. Essentially, how students perceive the culture withinSTEM and their belonging within that culture is not contingent but does correlate with facultysupport through interactions during their academic careers [8]. As a result of this correlation,students describe feelings such as hostility and lack of caring when characterizing the instructor-student relationship [9]. Report from previous studies shows that there is still negative form ofinteraction between faculty and students like discrimination from instructors [10]. This reckoninghas allowed scholars to conclude that there is a beneficial connection between facultyrelationships and student’s self-efficacy and their persistence in STEM
”will be tracked and compared with the men in the computing degree programs to demonstrate theimpact of the initiatives of women students’ academic performance in addition to theirperception of ASC.References[1] Borg, A. 50/50 by 2020 [Video]. YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nImg8vPUe4[2] https://anitab.org/braid, Sources: BRAID Beacon school chairs, publicly reported data, andreport on Beacon school rate of change by Kaitlin Splett, UCLA.[3] M. Klawe, “Increasing female participation in computing: The Harvey Mudd Collegestory”. Computer, 2013, 46(3), 56–58. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2013.4[4] M. Bong, E. M. Skaalvik, “Academic Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: How Different AreThey Really?”, Educational Psychology Review, 2003, 15(1), 1
achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology.Zabriskie, C., R. Henderson, and J. Stewart. 2018. “The Importance of Belonging and Self-Efficacy in Engineering Identity.” AERA Open, January. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10058182-importance- belonging-self-efficacy-engineering-identity. 12Does endorsement of masculine ideals predict sense of belonging and identity over performance and peer interactions?Appendix A:Questions from each of the five instruments used in this paper in the order presented here. Allquestions had a 7-point Likert scale. Strongly Somewhat
that exist in K-16 education: (1) the underrepresentation of Blacks and Hispanicsreceiving science and engineering bachelor’s degrees, and (2) disparities in K-12 STEMeducation and student achievement among different demographic and socioeconomic groups andgeographic regions (National Science Foundation, 2022).The challenge of increasing the number of students interested in pursuing STEM, particularlystudents from excluded identities, is complex and multifaceted, and includes both externalfactors such as access to experiences and educational opportunities, and intrinsic psychologicalfactors such as identity, self-efficacy, sense of belonging and value perception (Allen, 2022;Anderson & Ward, 2014; Collins, 2018; Kricorian, Seu, Lopez
]. In this work, weemploy an identity framework consisting of four sub pillars: competence, performance, interest,and recognition taken from the work of Carlone and Johnson [6], Hazari [5], and Godwin [4].The first sub pillar, competence, is the ability [6] or belief in one’s ability [5] to understand math,science, or engineering content. In some instances, competence could be combined withperformance. In these cases it could be measured by looking at self-efficacy beliefs and taskattainment [4]. Performance is the ability or belief in the ability to do things related to math,science, and engineering. Students could show performance through having the skills to performscientific practices and task attainment, such as, getting good grades [6
, racism, and social marginalization (First edition.). Stylus Publishing, LLC.[9] Mondisa, J. L. & McComb, S. A. (2015) Social community: A mechanism to explain the success of STEM minority mentoring programs. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning. 23(2), 149-163. doi:10.1080/13611267.2015.1049018[10] Maton, K. I., Beason, T. S., Godsay, S., Sto. Domingo, M. R., Bailey, T. C., Sun, S., & Hrabowski, F. A., III. (2016) Outcomes and processes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Program: STEM PhD completion, sense of community, perceived program benefit, science identity, and research self-efficacy. CBE - Life Sciences Education, 15(3), ar48. doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-01-0062[11] Atkins, K., Dougan, B. M
.” AMCIS 2004 Proceedings. 397.[4] Milligan, S. K., and Griffin, P., 2016, “Understanding Learning and Learning Design in MOOCs: A Measurement-Based Interpretation,” Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2), pp. 88–115.[5] Jonassen, D. H., 1995, “Operationalizing Mental Models: Strategies for Assessing Mental Models to Support Meaningful Learning and Design¬ Supportive Learning Environments.” CSCL ’95 Proceedings. 182-186[6] Bucciarelli, M., 2007, “How the Construction of Mental Models Improves Learning,” Mind and Society, pp. 67–89.[7] Ramalingam, V., Labelle, D., and Wiedenbeck, S., 2004, Self-Efficacy and Mental Models in Learning to Program. SIGCSE Bull. 36, 3 (September 2004), 171–175.[8] Hwang, G. J., Shi, Y. R., and Chu
students' knowledge of abstractphysics concepts. A quasi-experimental study also found that the integration of AR movies intoonline teaching activities for physics enhanced students' comprehension of fundamentalprinciples [14]. Similarly, an intervention by Cai et al. [15] showed that AR in physicsclassrooms can increase students' self-efficacy by improving their understanding, higher-levelcognitive skills, knowledge application, and communication.Several AR applications have focused on learning vectors in the context of 3D geometry [16],electric forces [4], gravitational forces [1], as well as other physical forces and their Cartesiancomponents [17]. The study discussed herein details an AR app known as Vectors in Space [18]that was developed by
, and self-efficacy with conducting research and working on a research team and in a lab. • Skills: writing scientific papers, making oral presentations, and conducting observations in the lab or field. • Attitudes and Behaviors: working in a scientific community and feelings of creativity, independence, and responsibility around working on scientific projects.This survey instrument is shown in the literature to accurately validate a research experienceprogram for undergraduates in STEM [20]. A copy of the survey questions is provided in theAppendix section and listed as instrument A4. The survey was administered only once after theresearch experience. Despite pairing 8 students with mentors for the research
participation in an IAC is needed, including measuring the impacton student learning, self-efficacy, engineering identity, and retention. References [1] Moynihan, G. P., & Barringer, F. L. (2017). Energy efficiency in manufacturing facilities: assessment, analysis and implementation. Energy Efficient Buildings, 127-150. [2] Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains. (2024, March 6). Industrial Assessment Centers (IACs). Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/mesc/industrial- assessment-centers-iacs [3] Vora, H. D., & Niraula, P., & Chugani, A. S., & Baraskar, N. A., & Saraf, A. S., & McCombs, M. L. (2020, June), Relationship of the Industrial Assessment Center to the Land-grant Mission of Oklahoma State
journey and use culturally anchored curriculum to increase students’ knowledge and skills, improve students’ self-efficacy in pursuing higher education, increase sense of belonging on a university campus, and help students navigate campus systems.Ahmad Slim, The University of Arizona Dr. Ahmad Slim is a PostDoc researcher at the University of Arizona, where he specializes in educational data mining and machine learning. With a Ph.D. in Computer Engineering from the University of New Mexico, he leads initiatives to develop analytics solutions that support strategic decision-making in academic and administrative domains. His work includes the creation of predictive models and data visualization tools that aim to improve
distinct transformation categories. The studycorrelated these categories with the TROPOS subscales and examines demographic factors.Findings indicate higher TROPOS scores for first-generation students and female studentscompared to their peers.I. IntroductionThe perceptions and belief system of first year engineering students affects their self-efficacy,confidence, sense of belonging, satisfaction and other such constructs which are essential forshaping successful student experiences and outcomes. For example, Hutchison-Green [1] foundthat first year engineering students’ perception of their course success depended on their speed ofsolving problems and the amount of time taken to learn new material in comparison to theirpeers. Further, student
: Getting to Ph.D. JHU Press, 2006.[11] T. Hodapp and K. S. Woodle, “A bridge between undergraduate and doctoral degrees,” Phys. Today, vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 50–56, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1063/PT.3.3464.[12] J. M. Barth, S. T. Dunlap, A. C. Bolland, D. M. McCallum, and V. L. Acoff, “Variability in STEM Summer Bridge Programs: Associations with Belonging and STEM Self-Efficacy,” Front. Educ., vol. 6, 2021, Accessed: Jan. 19, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.667589[13] V. Born and C. Brock, “Writing for Social Sciences and Humanities: Bridge Programs and Improving Graduate Student Outcomes,” J. Polit. Sci. Educ., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 371–385, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1080