Community and Self-Efficacy Building of Civil Engineering StudentsIntroductionThe Citadel, a regional, residential military college, is currently engaged in a multi-year NSF S-STEMproject to encourage persistence of academically-talented, low-income civil engineering students. OurExcellence in Civil Engineering Leadership (ExCEL) scholarship program builds on a prior program (ofthe same name) that included 34 scholarship recipients, of which 85% graduated with a STEM degree and65% met the academic requirements to graduate as an ExCEL scholar [1]. The current ExCEL programseeks to retain several community-building and support services that were highly valued by our formerstudents, including: (1) funding to attend the
importance in relation to other identities in the self-concept), suggest that the design Fellows are unclear regarding the extent to which their identityas an engineer is one of the more important identities they have. The five items at the bottom ofthe table which measure identity salience (or the likelihood that the identity is activated acrosscontexts) however reflect somewhat higher scores. This suggests the Fellows’ identities asengineers are relevant within their social interactions across multiple contexts. As can be seen in Table 4, the Design Fellows on average reported a moderately highlevel of engineering self-efficacy with an overall mean of 5.44 across all scale items. Thissuggests that the fellows on average “Somewhat Agreed” or
surveys provide a quantitative measure of students’ GRIT, general self-efficacy,engineering self-efficacy, test anxiety, math outcome efficacy, intrinsic value of learning,inclusion, career expectations, and coping efficacy. Qualitative data from the focus group andindividual interview responses are used to provide insight into the quantitative survey results.Surprisingly, a previous analysis of the 2017 cohort survey responses revealed that students wholeft engineering had higher baseline values of GRIT, career expectations, engineering self-efficacy, and math outcome efficacy than those students who retained. Hence, the 2018 cohortsurvey responses were analyzed in relation to retention and are presented along with qualitativeresults to provide
college. This study presented assessment data from a NSFI-Corps site program at a Southwestern university to understand the impact of the program onundergraduate and graduate engineering students’ knowledge, perceptions, and practice ofentrepreneurship. In the four-cohort assessment data, participants indicated significantlyincreased confidence in value proposition, self-efficacy in entrepreneurship, and customerdiscovery, while maintaining high interest in entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the data indicatedthat participants with a GO decision (to continue pursuing their technology) had significantlyhigher perception on the current status of technology and business model than did participantswith a no-GO/unsure decision. In addition, this study
data analysis and synthesisprocess and to solicit input from the engineering education community on the initialconceptualization.Figure 2: Preliminary grounded theory modelNext Steps and Future DirectionsThe findings from the student interviews and preliminary model are being used to inform thedevelopment of an instrument. The instrument will include measures related to power, sharedprocess of leadership, transformational leadership skills, self-efficacy, and motivation to expandour understanding of how undergraduate engineering students perceive and engage in leadershipbased on constructs that were salient in the qualitative phase.AcknowledgmentsThe authors gratefully acknowledge the National Science Foundation for supporting this workunder
similar to the procedures that had been used in Study 1. We applied the samecriteria and one to five ratios to select our matched group, the final sample included 66 students.See Table 2 for their demographic information, ACT composite scores and high school GPA.MeasuresThese surveys involving eleven subscales (See Table 3 for details) were developed or adaptedfrom existing validated surveys. Two subscales (initial perceived social support and pre-collegeschooling) were surveyed only in the first semester, and two subscales (academic/socialintegration and institutional experiences) were only surveyed only in the second semester. Theremaining seven subscales (academic self-efficacy, career self-efficacy, self-regulation,perceived social support
UniversitiesWIP: Implementation and Assessment of ProjectAbstract: This paper documents the effects of an additive manufacturing course on two sets ofstudents: (1) the undergraduates who took the course and (2) the middle and high school studentswho visited our labs. At the time of the conference, nine semesters of data (three years at threeschools) will have been collected, as well as data from the middle and high school students whovisited our labs. Overall, our research questions were: (1) what is the effect of this course on thecontent knowledge of (a) enrolled undergraduates and (b) middle and high school students? And(2) what is the effect of this course on the attitudes towards engineering and self-efficacy inengineering for (a) enrolled
parts and ordering of needed parts; 2)creating a minimal viable prototypeand designing a production plan; 3)engage in production of kits; 4)packaging kits; 5)deploy kitsin the classroom; 6)perform a post-mortem review of strengths and weaknesses of the past sixweek’s production pipeline. As this was occurring, students were surveyed weekly to observe anychanges that occurred in their Maker Mindset and self efficacy on math and engineering. MakerMindset is a scale measure following a 7-point Likert scale using the Maker Mindset Assessment[3]. The assessment consists of 11 items that measures core facets of Making including creativityand teamwork (e.g., “I am willing to help other people”, “I like to share things I make with otherpeople
lowsocioeconomic status) be adequately and appropriately supported throughout their studies, bothacademically and in terms of affective factors like self-efficacy [4], identity [5] [6], and sense ofbelonging [7] (Recall we use SEIB as an abbreviation for these three factors). This perspective,and the corresponding measures described below, are grounded in social cognitive career theory[8] [9] and expectancy-value achievement models [10]. Specifically, undergraduate students’decisions to persist in STEM studies (and, ultimately, enter STEM careers) are believed to beinfluenced by their patterns of career interests and the value that they place upon STEM-specificacademic and career outcomes, with SEIB factors playing a key role in moderating theseinterests
Scholars’ self-efficacy, identity, and sense of belonging, and (iv) to study the impactof cross-disciplinary “engaged-engineering” projects on retention through the end of the 2nd year.Moreover, this program has the potential to benefit society in a variety of ways. It will contributeto the development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce by preparing students forcareers in engineering. The program also contributes to the full participation of women andunderrepresented minorities in engineering by incorporating program features that are known toincrease the retention of these groups in engineering [9]. By measuring and studying the effects ofthe program elements and disseminating results, the research conducted will inform
, students completed consent forms,academic and health histories (necessary for risk-management purposes, as EPICS students visitthe university), and provided parental contact information before completing a series of measures(see Table 1). The measures were aimed at capturing students’ attitudes and behaviors towardengineering. The main measures of interest include Engineering Identity (see Table 2) and DoingEngineering (see Table 3) designed by Terence J. Tracey, a counseling psychologist andTirupalavanam G. Ganesh, an engineering education researcher [17]. These measures weredesigned based on James Marcia’s theory [18], [19] and building upon Betz and Hackett’s [20]work in studying self-efficacy. Based on Marcia’s theory [18], [19], that identity
chosen at random with 20 observed in each of the three groups (AL, AL+, and control).The instruments are being built based on other validated instruments, including those that wehave developed in our previous work [18]; however, since we are taking pieces from differentsurveys, we are doing additional validation with the surveys we build.Instructor SurveyTo assess instructors’ perceptions of their use of active learning instruction, we designed asurvey to measure instructors’ use of active learning and their self-efficacy towards using it.Moreover, the survey was designed to identify perceived barriers instructors face whenimplementing active learning into their curriculum. The instructor survey measures 20 constructswith 99 total items and will
. Duncan-Wiles, “Design creativity in K-12 student designs: Exploring an egg packaging and drop activity,” in iSTEM – Integration of Engineering into other STEM Education: Proceedings of 2nd P-12 Engineering and Design Education Research Summit, Washington, D.C, April 26 - 28, 2012. 9[4] N. D., Fila and Ş, Purzer, “The relationship between team gender diversity, idea variety, and potential for design innovation,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1405–1418, December 2013.[5] M. Schar, S. Gilmartin, A. Harris, B. Rieken, and S. Sheppard, “Innovation self-efficacy: A very brief measure for engineering students,” in Proceedings of the
“Zip to Industry: A First-YearCorporate-STEM Connection program”. This program connects first-year STEM students withco-op/intern students within their major (or in a similar major) for several four-hour jobshadowing experiences during their initial year on campus.The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact a first-year STEM job-shadowing programon first-year students’ retention in STEM, and their knowledge of careers in STEM fields. Thestudy reported in this paper is part of a larger study that is also investigating the relationshipbetween self-efficacy, interest in STEM, and retention.Theory of ActionThe use of shadowing experiences for first-year STEM students as a means to make progress onthe research questions of this project
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
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
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
poster.FundingThis project is funded by the National Science Foundation under Award XXX- XXXXXX. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those ofthe authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] 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. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/18591.[2] E. Towle, J. Mann, B. Kinsey, E. J. O. Brien, C. F. Bauer, and R. Champoux, "Assessing the self efficacy and spatial ability of engineering students from multiple disciplines," in
confidence intechnical expertise was a prerequisite to any engineering leadership engagement. For engineers,this often meant problem-solving skills or expertise in particular content matter. Students whostepped into engineering leadership roles often reported self-efficacy in their ability to navigatethe technical challenges due to either previous experience or extensive previous classwork.Moreover, the relative expertise of these students seemed to be recognized by their peers. Whatwas striking however, was the frequency with which participants reported feeling inadequate tostep into roles of increased responsibility, when technical skills were essential. Given thiscommon hesitation, it is not surprising that so many engineering students did not
Paper ID #31756The Role of Teaching Assistants and Faculty in Student EngagementDr. Denise Wilson, University of Washington Denise Wilson is a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Washington, Seattle. Her research interests in engineering education focus on the role of self-efficacy, belonging, and other non- cognitive aspects of the student experience on engagement, success, and persistence and on effective methods for teaching global issues such as those pertaining to sustainability. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020
capital in rural development, networking and decision-making in rural areas," Journal of Alpine Research, vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 43-56, 2007.[27] C. C. Chen, P. G. Greene, and A. Crick, "Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?," Journal of Business Venturing vol. 13, pp. 295-316, 1998.[28] J. Cheng, "Intrapreneurship and exopreneurship in manufacturing firms: An empirical study of performance implications," Journal of Enterprising Culture, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 153-171, 2001.[29] E. J. Douglas and J. R. Fitzsimmons, "Intrapreneurial intentions vs.entrepreneurial intentions: Distinct constructs with different antecedents," Small Business Economics, vol. 41, no. 1
during group work andcollaborative learning [26], [27], but the lack of negative results among both US and non-UScitizens is notable. An interesting question that these results do not address is whether cross-national interactions led to any overall declines in non-US citizens’ self-efficacy or self-confidence about their CS knowledge and skills (as opposed to comparisons with one’s partner).With the exception of driving role, the lack of effects of partners’ national origin among UScitizens is also noteworthy. Any linguistic or cultural challenges that US citizens encounteredmay been balanced out by the benefits of potentially different perspectives that non-US citizensbrought to these collaborations. It is also possible that the work of
. Taking guidelines for good evaluation plans [19], the formative andsummative evaluation plan utilizes a comprehensive and widely used CIPP (Context, Input,Process, Product Evaluation) model [20]. Given the relatively small sample size, statisticalanalysis is expected to be largely descriptive, both aggregate and by subgroup, to report onproject implementation and progress toward performance measures. T-tests will be used todetermine significant differences in teachers’ self-efficacy survey responses from pre- to post-test. Qualitative data collected through interviews, product review, and observation, will beanalyzed throughout the project. The outcomes that are being evaluated are briefly outlined: Institution Outcomes: To strengthen a
. Pomeranz, and Douglas G. Schmucker. “The comprehensive assessment of team member effectiveness: Development of a behaviorally anchored rating scale for self-and peer evaluation.” Academy of Management Learning & Education 11, no. 4 pp. 609-630, 2012.[11] S.P. Schaffer et al., “Self-Efficacy for Cross-Disciplinary Learning in Project-Based Teams,” Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1), 82–94, 2012.[12] ABET, “Accreditation Changes,” abet.org, 2019. [Online] Available: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/accreditation-changes/. [Accessed: June 27, 2019].[13] K. J. Cross, “The Experiences of African-American Males on Multiracial Student Teams in Engineering,” PhD. thesis
defined problem, they develop higher level of creative confidence.This can have positive impact on self-efficacy as a science or engineering major. Moreover, thisapproach allows having greater emphasis on sociotechnical approach by applying scientificknowledge and technical skills to address societal and human needs using entrepreneurialmindset. Our future efforts will further explore the impact of user innovation module and thewhole course on students’ perception of and understanding about entrepreneurial mindset usingconcept map approach.References:1. Trilling, C. and Fadel, B. (2012), “21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times”, Jossey-Bass (a Wiley Imprint) ISBN-13: 978-0470475386. https://www.amazon.com/21st-Century-Skills
program provided both knowledge about research, andincreased the student’s self-efficacy related to graduate school. The majority of students alsoindicated a high-level of confidence in doing standard and new technical tasks related to theproject. The team-framework was viewed by students as beneficial to both their learning and theresearch progression. The mixture of different (vertical) researcher levels was perceived to havea positive impact on the research performance, as well as the multi-disciplinarity of the team. Foritem-(iii), all participants rated the aspects of the program administration at ~5.5 out of 6 (Likertscale: 6 = very satisfied). Overall, the participants responded positively on the programadministration, housing (improvement
culture, some students were able to thrive, while others’ low levelsof self-efficacy prevented them from having successful experiences. Since most REU studentsworked individually, opportunities for mutual support among research teams were not developed.This project determined to create research experiences that would address these issues. With aPBL approach in mind, engineering faculty members recruited students with a variety of STEMbackgrounds to work collaboratively on a complex problem in transportation engineering. Theresearch was intended to be a collaborative effort among students to reach their common goal.This paper has described the REU as it has developed over two years.During the first year of the project (summer 2018), the eight