quantities related to the First Law of Thermodynamics.The students purchased a low-cost TeCS kit consisting of individual components, which theyassembled. Beginning in the first week, the students utilized the TeCS to apply thermodynamicsconcepts and continued to use it throughout the course. The students measured temperatures, airflow rates, mass, electrical current, and voltage to analyze the energy inputs and outputs of thesystem. The course material was designed to increase their understanding and intuition offundamental principles through the hands-on projects related to their systems, culminating in athorough analysis of the entire system.This study assesses the impact of the TeCS on engineering self-efficacy using a validated pre- andpost
-efficacy levels.The results suggest that the original hypothesis does not fully hold, and it may require a morenuanced view. While the author expected the initial self-efficacy measures towards design andfabrication reported by the 2020 cohort (online) to be lower, they were somewhat higher than the2019 cohort (in person), with small effect size for both genders (gmen = 0.172, gwomen = 0.281).The change in self-efficacy levels over the semester were also equally to more significant for the2020 cohort who attended online compared to the 2021 cohort completing the same mini-coursewith weekly sessions in-person.These results suggest that intangible sources of self-efficacy may have a greater influence thanthe tangible items in the physical
’ perceptions of their experiences withintheir Mechanical Design Project module and use this to examine the following researchquestions: 1. To what extent do students believe that their interactions within this module have resulted in academic self-efficacy, peer learning and team efficacy? 2. How does team efficacy impact peer learning and the academic self-efficacy of students within this module? 4Research MethodologyOur research questions were examined using an anonymously self-administered (online),semi-structured questionnaire which evaluated students’ feedback at the end of theirMechanical Design Project module. Twenty-five closed-ended descriptors were used to mapand measure the three
composition of teams (considering factors like gender, ethnicity, major, GPA, prior circuit experience, and year in school) influence student perceptions of the CLE and, consequently, student outcomes?To address these questions, we investigate the relationships in our survey data set throughquantitative analysis, focusing on two dependent variables: student performance, in terms of theirexam scores (Exam), and Collaborative Learning Experience (CLE), a measured variable from asurvey questionnaire at the end of the semester about the student’s perception of thecollaborative learning experience. We in turn examine how these dependent variables may beaffected by other collected measures, such as task and general self-efficacy, test anxiety
-efficacy that must be considered in educational psychological researchis that it is domain specific: self-efficacy measures are particular to certain tasks in certainsituations [4, 5, 14]. To put it differently, self-efficacy shall be defined and studied for a specifictask and situation, as opposed to a “general” measure for an individual’s behavioral characteristic.Over the past two years, we investigated the hypothesis that project-based active learningtechniques used in a biomedical computing class enhance the computer programming academicand career self-efficacy of undergraduate BME students.MethodThis study was carried out under an official exemption by the Institutional Research Board at theUniversity of Akron. Both project- and problem
. Alexander J. De Rosa & Maxine Fontaine Stevens Institute of TechnologyIntroduction MethodologySpatial visualization skills (SVS) are critical to success in STEM. To answer this question, student affective skills were measured pre-These skills have been correlated with high-level problem-solving and post- workshop using the “Self-Efficacy Formativeability, particularly in science and mathematics. Numerous studies Questionnaire” developed by Erickson & Noonan [3
understand the conditions that mayencourage engineering students to be more entrepreneurial and innovative. Among Epicenter’s severalresearch projects is an ongoing longitudinal survey study of the development of engineering students’career goals around innovation and engineering, referred to as the Engineering Majors Survey (EMS -2016). The EMS study follows a nationally representative sample of engineering students from theirundergraduate experiences through graduation and into the workplace (Gilmartin et al. 2017). Withinthis survey are measures of engineering task self-efficacy and innovation self-efficacy, as well as 39background learning experiences and extra-curricular activities spanning high school throughundergraduate education, which form
AC 2009-885: THE TECT WORKSHOP: RAISING HIGH-SCHOOL TEACHERS’AND GUIDANCE COUNSELORS’ SELF-EFFICACY IN COUNSELINGSTUDENTS ABOUT ENGINEERING CAREERS AND MAJORSBruce Gehrig, University of North Carolina, Charlotte Associate Professor, Department of Engineering Technology and Construction Management. PI for the Teaching Engineering to Counselors and Teachers (TECT) project.Lyndon Abrams, University of North Carolina, Charlotte Associate Professor, Department of CounselingDeborah Bosley, University of North Carolina, Charlotte Associate Professor, Department of EnglishJames Conrad, University of North Carolina, Charlotte Associate Professor, Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringStephen Kuyath
University in Ghana. Pre and post surveys were administered tounderstand changes in students’ self-efficacy as a result of the intervention. The project scopewas to design, build, and fly a quadcopter drone to simulate surveying a mining area inZimbabwe and transporting items between two sites. This scope was significantly morechallenging than anything most of them had done before, as evidenced by less than half of thestudents reporting prior experience designing and building any product, and nearly a thirddescribing the project as “impossible” at first. Significant (p < 1.04 E-2) increases with mediumto large effect sizes (|g| = 0.653 to 1.427) were measured for five of six self-efficacy measures,capturing how students’ belief in their own
, What’s Next?” Thishigh impact practice (HIP) is used to help students process their experiences, gain perspective onthem, and use them as a basis for future action. The benefits to students as a whole are growth intheir ability to craft reflections and in their feelings of inclusion (as measured by the LongitudinalAssessment in Engineering Self-Efficacy (LAESE) survey instrument). Students find the programhelpful in envisioning their future development, citing conversations with faculty and peers asessential in helping them consider their career options. Students in the “hands-on” fields ofengineering technology see the benefits to reflective practices. Introducing regular reflection intotheir curricula can help their personal and professional
biological and environmental engineering majors, but it oftenfocuses solely on mechanical and civil engineering applications. With no connection to theircareer, students often see a drop in performance and career development. Therefore, newproblems from biological and environmental engineering disciplines are introduced into thecourse. This study examines the self-efficacy developed within students and the perceived valuethey ascribe to new problems that teach fundamental statics concepts and focus on biological andenvironmental principles. The study collected data from 133 students over three semesters. Theeffect of this intervention was measured by administering a pre-and post-survey at the beginningand end of the course to the Biological, Civil
Engineering Students Through an Intersectional LensAbstractHigh-impact academic experiences, particularly research and internship experiences, havepositive impacts for engineering students on engineering task self-efficacy (ETSE), a measure ofstudents’ perception of their ability to perform technical engineering tasks. However, under-represented racial/ethnic minority students (URM) and women in engineering are found to haverelatively lower self-perceptions across several academic and professional self-efficacymeasures. Previous studies examined the impact of research and internship experiences on ETSEfor students categorized by gender and URM status separately. The current study explores theimpact of these experiences on ETSE for the intersection
students have been conducted in the context of team discourse and studentachievement5, engineering design projects6, and developing validated self-efficacy instruments forengineers7. Moreover, there is evidence in literature on measuring self-efficacy of engineeringstudents in the context of programming8-9. Askar et al., examines factors related to self-efficacyfor Java programming in first year engineering students. These factors include gender, computerexperience, general computing skills, frequency of computer use, and family computer usage.Findings from this study confirm the link between students’ self-efficacy beliefs and their choiceof subject. It was also found that computer engineering students had higher self-efficacy beliefscompared to
careers.3 The expressed purpose of URPs is criticallyimportant given that minorities tend to have lower self-efficacy, lower confidence in their mathand science skills, and less access to scientific courses and highly technical learning experiencescompared to their majority peers.4 And while previous research has focused on the intendedpurpose and general nature of URPs, as well as sex differences in URP participants’ perceptionsof the program,5 no studies were readily uncovered that measured the influence of URPparticipation on specific learning outcomes such as research self-efficacy. This is the gapaddressed by the present study.PurposeThe purpose of this study was to measure the influence of background traits and research-relatedexperiences
wereattributed to mastery experiences and positive emotional states as the maximum percentage ofgirls who used words related to the four Bandura self-efficacy categories were: masteryexperiences (86%); emotional states (62%); vicarious experiences (59%); and verbal persuasion(36%). The broader 18 emergent themes of girls’ learning experiences included knowledge,doing, national priorities, fun, emotions, sustainability, civic responsibility, mentors, arts, softskills, minority, and persistence. Most girls had positive learning experiences, with sometransitioning from ‘difficult’ to ‘easy’ as they gained mastery experiences. A few girls expresseddifficulty and discomfort with mathematics, measurements, equipment usage, and outdoorenvironments. The
course gradesbeyond standardized test scores [15]; further details on exam content are outlined in a relatedscale development study [16]. This measure is discussed further in the Method section.Interpretations of Past EventsStudents’ self-efficacy is their belief in their ability to perform tasks as well as desired [10]. Self-efficacy informs students about desirable courses of action and increases the likelihood that theywill act [17]. People tend to form goals and engage in tasks aligned with those activities in whichthey feel the most efficacious [18]. Academic self-efficacy beliefs may be the result ofperceptions of past performance in academic domains [19].Reflecting the predictions of the expectancy-value model, high school STEM
these workshops. This investigation recounts the results of self-reportedevaluations by TA and non-teaching graduate student (NTGS) attendees intended to measure thedegree to which TA self-efficacy related to the use of pedagogical knowledge and pedagogicalcontent knowledge was impacted by the workshop series. Results indicate that all graduatestudents reported higher levels of confidence in their ability to implement pedagogicalknowledge and pedagogical content knowledge after taking the workshops than they did on thepre-survey. There was a statistically insignificant trend for NTGS to report a larger change inself-efficacy. Recommendations for increasing TA self-efficacy and preparedness on universitycampuses are provided as are directions
minority status, and school size. We conducted t-tests to compare the average scoresbetween different groups.To compare respondents with high and low question-asking self-efficacy and outcomeexpectations, we divided the respondents into two groups as described below: students with lowand high QSE, SOE, and COE.For all categories (QSE, SOE, and COE), the “low” group contained those who markedthemselves as 3 or below on a scale from 1-5, and the “high” group included those who marked 5on a scale of 1-5. We chose these markers to try and capture the top and bottom groups (ideallyquartiles) as consistently as possible for each measure. See Table 4 for the number of students ineach category.Table 4: Categorizing students with low and high QSE, SOE, and
, particularly at the Proceedings of the 2010 American Society for Engineering Education Zone IV Conference Copyright © 2010, American Society for Engineering Education 356precollege level.The focus of this study is to answer one broad question: Is there a significant correlation betweenstudents’ goal orientation (GO) and their self-efficacy for learning and performance (SELP)? Inthis study, students’ goal orientation was measured through constructs such as intrinsic andextrinsic goal orientations. Students’ self-efficacy for learning and performance was used toindicate students’ self-efficacy and expectancy for success
this transformation, there is cause towarrant a broader exploration of relevant constructs. First, there is concern that self-efficacy canbe considered as a deficit-based construct. Second, its creation in the American context may nottranslate directly to the African context. [4] compared results on the General Self-Efficacy Scaleacross 25 countries and found some variation in the internal consistency across countries, basedon the range of Cronbach’s alpha values, a reliability measure, seen. Most of these countrieswere located in the Global North, and no single African country was included in the study. It istherefore possible that the self-efficacy construct may not be as relevant to our students as thosein other contexts. Third, some
engineering to real-world problems. While similar models ofreal-world engagement (e.g., EPICS) exist, they are either limited to a specific category ofstakeholders, such as industry or community, or a particular program, such as capstonedesign. The TRUE projects allow learners across the four-year engineering curriculum toparticipate while holistically building the skills required for the projects via specializedcourses, outreach programs, and mentorship.Implementation of the TRUE initiative over the past seven years provides an opportunity toqualitatively understand the development of students' engineering self-efficacy as a result oftheir participation. Self-efficacy measures students' beliefs in their ability to achieve tasks [2].In this study, it
found that course evaluations were improved, thatstudents better connect learning to skills, and that students appreciated the opportunity to developa uniform skill set by the end of the semester. This is in contrast to a project-based class whereskills development was not uniform between or within teams, and students did not connectlearning to skills development. We further assessed this pedagogical approach by measuring thepsychological construct engineering design self-efficacy at the beginning and end of thesemester, since there are prior reports of gains in the confidence of students in their fabricationskills as a result of immersive design-build projects [10], [11]. We found that students’ belief intheir abilities improved significantly
psychosocial needs of the students, with statements such as “My advisor takes aninterest in my well-being and life-work balance,” and “My advisor provides emotional supportwhen I need it.” Finally, TSE is our dependent variable and is measured by the Thesis Self-efficacy factor, measured on a confidence-anchored Likert scale and includes items that deal withthe various skills surrounding the completion of a terminal document.Participants and InstitutionsWhile our focus is set on the experiences of Latin* engineering graduate students, our surveywas open to students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. The target population could bedescribed as engineering graduate students enrolled in master’s and doctoral programs whowere actively working towards
their abilities have higher academic performance and will consider a larger array ofcareer options. Improving self-efficacy is therefore very important to the academic and futuresuccess of students.Understanding the design process and the application of technical skills is important for students.Outside of some labs and capstone courses, these concepts are not often put into practice inacademic settings. Since students do not have many opportunities to work on real-world problemsthroughout their college career, the UTDesign EPICS team wanted to measure the impact ofworking on real-world projects on learning the design process and motivation to complete work.We surveyed the students after the semester on these topics. We also wanted to measure
research. He is affiliated with the Engineering Education Transformation Institute and the school of Electrical and Computer Engineering. His research interest focuses on instructional design in remote and virtual environments and students’ interaction with learning environments. He is also interested in learning process measures; educational measurement and validation; learning strategies and engagement, and systematic review/meta-analysis research methodology. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Work in Progress: The Effects of Hands-on Learning on STEM Students Motivation and Self-Efficacy: A Meta-Analysis
-Efficacy Measure and Social Cognitive Career TheoryIn the realm of human behavior, self-efficacy holds profound importance, particularly ininnovation and entrepreneurship. Several self-efficacy measures have been developed in theinnovation and entrepreneurship research fields and tailored to the specific tasks that areassessed in this context (e.g., [20]–[24]). Innovation Self-Efficacy (ISE) refers to theindividuals’ confidence in their ability to innovate and engage in specific behaviors thatcharacterize innovative people [23], [25], whereas Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE) is thebelief and confidence individuals have in their own capabilities to execute tasks aimed atentrepreneurial outcomes and pursuing new venture opportunities [20], [21
taking the course [18], [19]. The MUSIC model of motivationsurvey can be found in the literature [19]. All statements were based on a 6-points Likert scaleranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (6). One qualitative question was also askedof the students: how has being part of this class changed your perspective on computerprogramming and computation?Data AnalysisThe data was analyzed using two approaches. First, the quantitative data was analyzed usingsimple descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients to understand if the two measures ofmotivation and self-efficacy may be related. Additionally, a thematic analysis process was usedto analyze the qualitative data responses from the students [20].ResultsHow are students
explore if such a relationship exists in the context ofengineering.Research QuestionsThe main goal of this study is to describe the characteristics of team interactions that relate toachievement and self-efficacy. However, before investigating these correlations, we establishedthe reliability and the validity of the instruments we developed. We investigated three researchquestions: 1. Is there a correlation between the self-efficacy scores, measured by the instrument designed for this study, and student achievement? Page 13.415.4 2. What type of team interactions correlate with self-efficacy? 3. What type of team
their own predic-tion about their final course grade at the beginning of the semester. In particular, we study students’learning self-efficacy, that is, their confidence in themselves to learn in a CS1 course and outcomeexpectancy, that is their expected final grade in the course. We use the term learning self-efficacybecause it refers to students’ confidence measured at the beginning of the course. It’s a proxyfor their perceived ability to solve problems and learn to program. By taking factors like gender,prior programming experience, and GPA, we are interested in analyzing which factors influence astudent’s outcome expectancy and their learning self-efficacy at the beginning of a CS1 course.2 Background and Related WorkVarious instruments
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