More Like this

1. The Roots of Entrepreneurial Career Goals among Today’s Engineering Undergraduate Students.

   Rameseder, G.; Sheppard, S.; Reithmann, M.; Brubaker, R. (January 2017, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 25-28. Columbus, OH.)

   This study examines the roots of entrepreneurial career goals among today’s U.S. undergraduate engineering students. Extensive literature exists on entrepreneurship education and on students’ career decision making, yet little work connects the two. To address this gap, we explore a sample of 5,819 undergraduate engineering students from a survey administered in 2015 to a nationally representative set of twenty-seven U.S. engineering schools. We identify how individual background measures, occupational learning experiences, and socio-cognitive measures such as self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and interest in innovation and entrepreneurship affect students’ entrepreneurial career focus. Based on career focus, the sample is split into “Starters” and “Joiners” where Starters are students who wish to start a new venture and Joiners are those who wish to join an existing venture. Results show the demographic, behavioral, and socio-cognitive characteristics of each group. Findings suggest that relative to Joiners, Starters have stronger occupational self-efficacy beliefs which are driven by higher interests in innovation-related activities and ascribing greater importance to involvement in innovation practices early in their careers. Additionally, the significant influence of particular learning experiences is discussed. These results have implications for engineering and entrepreneurship education. (This paper earned Best Research Paper Award, 3rd Place, in the ENT division.) 

   more » « less
2. Impact-Driven Engineering Students: Contributing Behavioral Correlates.

   Brubaker, E.; Schar, M.; Sheppard, S. (January 2017, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 25-28. Columbus, OH.)

   Engineering has a long history of developing solutions to meet societal needs, and humanity currently faces many and varied societal challenges. Who are the engineering students motivated to address such challenges? This study explores a sample of 5,819 undergraduate engineering students from a survey administered in 2015 to a nationally representative set of twenty-seven U.S. engineering schools. The survey was developed to study the background, learning experiences, academic activities and proximal influences that motivate an engineering undergraduate student to pursue innovative work post-graduation. As part of this survey students indicated their interest in pursuing work that addresses societal challenges. A step-wise regression analysis is used to predict interest in societal impact and by contrast interest in financial potential with respect to 71 demographic, background and academic experience variables. The results confirm previous studies – a large majority of engineering undergraduates are interested in impact-driven work with an over-representation of female and under-represented minority students. This study sheds new light on the background and academic experiences that predict interest in impact-driven as compared to financially-driven engineering work. It is found that experiences promoting a service ethic and broadening oneself outside of engineering are important predictors of interest in impact-driven work. What is less expected is the significant importance of innovation interests and innovation self-efficacy for engineering students interested in creating societal impact. Deeper exploration reveals that certain academic experiences and proximal influences have a direct and significant effect on a student’s interest in impact-driven work, and this relationship is strengthened by the partial mediation of innovation self-efficacy. As such, this study suggests that the development of innovation self-efficacy is important in cultivating engineering students who are interested in impact-driven work, and to a lesser extent, financially-driven work. These findings have implications for how engineering educators and employers attract, inspire, and equip future engineers, particularly female and under-represented minority students. 

   more » « less
3. Work in Progress: Exploring Innovation Self-Efficacy in Neurodiverse Engineering Students.

   Bolhari, Azadeh; Bielefeldt, Angela (July 2023, 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Baltimore, Maryland.)

   It is critical to incorporate inclusive practices in the engineering curriculum which prepares neurodiverse students to achieve their full potential in the workforce. This work-in-progress paper seeks to capitalize on the unique strengths of marginalized neurodiverse engineering students. In this study, the innovation self-efficacy of engineering students who self-identify as neurodiverse is explored before and after a curricular intervention, which has been shown to have the potential to enhance innovation self-efficacy, in an environmental engineering target course. A previously validated Likert-type survey was used, which included the Very Brief Innovation Self-Efficacy scale, the Innovation Interests scale, and the Career Goals: Innovative Work scale. Among the 47 responses on the pre-survey, 13% of the students self-identified as neurodiverse and an additional 19% indicated that they were maybe neurodiverse. This included a much higher percentage of female than male students in the course (23% vs. 5% neurodiverse). There were no significant differences in the pre-survey or post-survey in the innovation self- efficacy and innovation interest among students who self-identified as neurodiverse, maybe neurodiverse, and not neurodiverse. Career goals based on the innovative work scale differed in the pre-survey among the three groups, being lowest among students who self-identified as maybe neurodiverse; there were no differences among the groups in the post-survey. It appeared that there were gains in the innovation self-efficacy between the pre and post-survey among the students who self-identified as neurodiverse and maybe neurodiverse but these differences were not statistically significant. A limitation of the study was the lack of ability to pair the data for individual students and a low number of neurodiverse students in the dataset. This preliminary work calls attention to the need to consider neurodiverse students in our instructional practices. In the future, we hope the research will expand our understanding of a neurodiverse-friendly curricular design in preparation for engineering students with autism spectrum disorder and other types of neurodiversity for the workforce, as well as assisting engineering educators in the adoption of practices that have the tendency to enhance innovation self-efficacy in neurodiverse students. 

   more » « less
4. The Making of an Innovative Engineer: Academic and Life Experiences that Shape Engineering Task and Innovation Self-Efficacy.

   Schar, M.; Gilmartin, S.; Rieken, B.; Brunhaver, S.; Chen, H.; Sheppard, S. (January 2017, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 25-28. Columbus, OH.)

   This research paper presents the results of a study that uses multivariate models to explore the relationships between participation in learning experiences, innovation self-efficacy, and engineering task self-efficacy. Findings show that many engineering students participated in learning experiences that are typically associated with engineering education, such as taking a shop class or engineering class in high school (47%), taking a computer science (81%) or design/prototyping (72%) class as an undergraduate, working in an engineering environment as an intern (56%), or attending a career related event during college (75%). Somewhat surprisingly, given the rigors of an engineering curriculum, a significant number of students participated in an art, dance, music, theater, or creative writing class (55%), taken a class on leadership topics (47%), and/or participated in student clubs outside of engineering (44%) during college. There also were important differences in rates of participation by gender, underrepresented racial/ethnic minority status, and first generation college student status. Overall prediction of engineering task self-efficacy and innovation self-efficacy was relatively low, with a model fit of these learning experiences predicting engineering task self-efficacy at (adjusted r2 of) .200 and .163 for innovation self-efficacy. Certain patterns emerged when the learning experiences were sorted by Bandura’s Sources of Self-Efficacy. For engineering task self-efficacy, higher participation in engineering mastery and vicarious engineering experiences was associated with higher engineering task self-efficacy ratings. For the development of innovation self-efficacy, a broader range of experiences beyond engineering experiences was important. There was a strong foundation of engineering mastery experiences in the innovation self-efficacy model; however, broadening experiences beyond engineering, particularly in the area of leadership experiences, may be a factor in innovation selfefficacy. These results provide a foundation for future longitudinal work probing specific types of learning experiences that shape engineering students’ innovation goals. They also set the stage for comparative models of students’ goals around highly technical engineering work, which allows us to understand more deeply how “innovation” and “engineering” come together in the engineering student experience. 

   more » « less
5. Early-career Engineers at the Workplace: Meaningful Highs, Lows, and Innovative Work Efforts.

   Klenk, M.; Bjorklund, T.; Gilmartin, S.; Sheppard, S. (January 2018, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, June 24-27, 2018. Salt Lake City, Utah.)

   Beyond engineering skills, today’s graduates are expected to have a number of professional skills by the time they enter the working world. Increasingly, innovation is one of the arenas where professional engineers should be adept at operating. However, in order to educate our students for contributing to innovation activities in their organizations, we need a better understanding of the knowledge, skills and attitudes that are relevant for early-career engineers in their development efforts. As a starting point to add to this understanding, we start by asking: what does meaningful engineering work look like in the eyes of early career engineers? We then go on to consider engineering work that is not only meaningful but also innovative, asking: What does innovative work look like in the eyes of early career engineers? Finally, we consider: How do innovative work and engineering work more generally compare? Based on qualitative in-depth semi-structured interviews, this paper analyzes the work experiences of 13 young engineers in their first years of work after graduating from universities in the United States. Interviewee-reported critical incidents of top and bottom moments, as well as experiences in creating, advancing and implementing new ideas in work, were coded into different dimensions of learning experiences according to Mezirow’s [1] transformative learning theory in order to understand better what these experiences comprise. Many positively experienced innovation efforts were related to implementing new features or components to products or process improvements, and collaboration and feedback played an important role in these efforts. Negatively experienced innovation efforts, in contrast, were related to a lack in implementation, solutions and resources. Top and bottom moments were strongly tied to the social dimension of work: top moments were typically related to camaraderie with peers or recognition coming from managers, and bottom experiences with an absence of social connections in addition to falling short of one’s own expectations. The results suggest that managers should be cognizant of the importance of social connections and feedback cycles with their young engineers who are looking for guidance and validation of their efforts. For educators, the results highlight the importance of equipping our graduates with skills suited to navigate this active, social landscape of engineering practice. There are more challenges to tackle in today’s educational settings to prepare students for the collaboration, people-coordination, presentation, and community-building skills they will need in their professional lives. 

   more » « less