An official website of the United States government
Measures of subject-related role identities in physics and math have been developed from research on the underlying constructs of identity in science education. The items for these measures capture three constructs of identity: students’ interest in the subject, students’ feeling of recognition by others, and students’ beliefs about their performance/competence in the subject area. In prior studies with late secondary and early post-secondary students, participants did not distinguish between performance beliefs (e.g., believing that they can do well in a particular subject) and competence beliefs (e.g., believing that they can understand a particular subject); therefore, performance/competence beliefs are measured as a single construct. These validated measures have been successful in predicting STEM career choices including physics, math, and engineering. Based on these measures of identity, literature on engineering identity, and my prior work on understanding engineering choice and belongingness through students’ science and math identities at the transition from high school to college, I developed a set of new engineering identity measures that capture and overall identification as an engineer, future engineering career identification, and students’ engineering-related interest, recognition, and performance/competence beliefs. I conducted a pilot survey of 371 first-year engineering students at three institutions within the U.S. during the spring semester of 2015. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed to examine the underlying structure of the piloted questions about students’ engineering identity. The measures loaded on three separate constructs that were consistent with the hypothesized constructs of interest, performance/competence and recognition. The developed items were used in a subsequent study deployed in the fall semester of 2015 that measured more than 2500 first-year engineering students’ attitudes and beliefs at four institutions within the U.S. The data on engineering identity measures from this second survey were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The results indicated that the developed measures do extract a significant portion of the average variance in the latent constructs and the internal consistency of the measures (Cronbach’s α) falls within the acceptable and better range. The development of these items provides ways for engineering education researchers to more deeply explore the underlying self-beliefs in students’ engineering identity formation through quantitative measures with strong evidence for validity.
more »
« less
Prediction of Engineering Identity in Engineering Graduate Students
Contribution: This study shows that identification with engineering for engineering graduate students is positively and significantly predicted by engineering interest, competence, recognition, and interpersonal skills competence. Background: Prior studies of engineering identity on undergraduates identified several factors (e.g., engineering interest, engineering recognition) as positive predictors of identification of engineering. Engineering competence, achieved by participating in design projects, is a crucial part of students’ efforts to become more innovative engineers. Identity theory is used to understand undergraduates’ persistence in engineering, as students with stronger engineering identification are more likely to persist. More work is needed focusing on graduate students. Research Questions: Do engineering identity measurement frameworks studied for undergraduate students also apply to graduate students? Do they correlate with intention to complete the degree? What predicts the engineering identity of engineering Master's and doctoral students? Methodology: Interviews informed development and adaptation of a multi-scale survey instrument. Factor analyses identified four factors that relate to graduate engineering identity: engineering interest, engineering recognition, engineering competence, and interpersonal skills competence. Three sequential multiple linear regression models were used to predict engineering graduate students’ engineering identity. Findings: The final regression model, which includes student characteristics and the four factors resulting from Confirmatory Factor Analysis, predicts 60% of the variance in engineering identity—substantially more than similar undergraduate engineering identity models. All four factors were significant and positive predictors of graduate students’ engineering identity. The engineering recognition factor in particular needed adaptation to emphasize peers and faculty members over family, although family remained important.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1636449
- PAR ID:
- 10100965
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- IEEE Transactions on Education
- ISSN:
- 0018-9359
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 7
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Contribution: This study explores the factors contributing to the development of engineering identity in Latinx students at two institutions. A better understanding of these factors will support the development of more inclusive engineering education environments and experiences. Background: Persistence of Latinx engineering students is of particular interest due to their underrepresentation in the field. Identity is a lens for understanding student persistence, but Latinx students are underrepresented in prior engineering identity studies. This study seeks to identify the unique factors, academic and professional, that contribute to engineering identity development, and potential means for supporting the persistence of Latinx engineers. Research Questions: (1) What academic and professional affect factors predict engineering identity development of Latinx students? and (2) What role does the institution play in Latinx students’ engineering identity development? Methodology: A mixed-methods approach was used to measure engineering identity based on a framework incorporating both academic and professional affect elements. Regression analyses were conducted on 892 responses to an online survey from Latinx engineering students, with additional insight from interviews with ten Latinx engineering students. Findings: Six of the nine factors analyzed (performance/competence, interest, recognition, analysis, framing and solving problems, and tinkering) were significant predictors of Latinx students' engineering identity, as were institution, gender, and having a parent with an engineering degree. Engineering identity was higher for Latinx students at the Hispanic Serving Institution, but none of the interaction terms were significant, so the relationship between these factors and engineering identity is similar at each institution.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundGraduate education literature tends to focus on faculty careers with little attention to industry careers. However, more than one‐third of U.S. engineering doctorates enter industry. PurposeOur purpose is to understand engineering graduate students' interest in industry, academia, and government careers as it relates to their graduate engineering identities. Design/MethodA total of 249 engineering thesis master's and doctoral students completed a survey about their graduate engineering identities and career preferences. We created regression models to predict students' likelihood of pursuing careers in industry, academia, and government. Then, we used cluster analysis to understand the extent to which students are considering multiple options and used chi‐squared and ANOVA tests to compare the clusters. ResultsIn the regression model predicting an academic career, research recognition and research performance/competence were positive predictors and engineering performance/competence was a negative predictor. Regression models of industry and government described less than 10% of the variance. Four clusters emerged, which collectively demonstrate that engineering graduate students are considering careers in multiple sectors. Students with internships during graduate study were more likely to pursue industry careers. Master's students were underrepresented in the cluster with highest likelihood of an academic career. International students were keeping more options open than some domestic students. There were also differences by engineering discipline. ConclusionsEngineering graduate students are considering multiple career sectors. Advisors and education researchers should focus not only on academic career preparation but also on industry and government career preparation, particularly on preparing for multiple options simultaneously.more » « less
-
https://peer.asee.org/28741 Previous studies quantitatively and qualitatively measured and validated the constructs that make up math identity, physics identity and engineering identity (i.e., interest in the subject, recognition by others, and beliefs about one’s performance/competence) for predicting engineering choice. To answer the first research question, a Welch’s t-test was used to compare the averages of first-generation college students and non-first-generation college students on overall measures of mathematics, physics, and engineering identity as well as the constructs of interest, recognition, and performance/competence in each subject area. This t-test was selected because it corrects unequal variance within the two populations. To answer the second research question, we used multiple linear regression to predict the choices of STEM and non-stem majors using measures of identity, affective factors, and first-generation college student status. Results from the first analysis demonstrate that first-generation college students entered engineering with a high sense of engineering identity, particularly in the performance/competence and interest constructs. Regression results showed that first-generation college students’ physics identity positively predicted choice of a non-STEM career; that is, first-generation college students with high physics identity were more interested in non-STEM careers (e.g., non-profit/non-government organization and medicine/health). This work highlights that first-generation college students may have different career pathway intentions and motivations in studying engineering during college.more » « less
-
The purpose of this research paper is to test to see if science and engineering identity differ between students along the basis of minoritized sexual and gender identities. LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning) students are more likely to leave engineering and other STEM majors before the end of their fourth year of college, much of which is due to the hetero- and cisnormative climate they experience in STEM departments. The climate may undermine students' identification with science and engineering, affecting their motivation, belonging, and persistence in these fields. The data for this study was collected from student surveys at four research universities nationally, with 548 students forming the analytic sample. About 56% of the sample are LGBQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer), 16% TGNC (transgender, gender nonconforming, or nonbinary), and 65% are in a STEM major. Students completed a two-part survey which encompassed data about their social networks and their college experiences. The data for this analysis were drawn from the section on students' college experiences, which included an adaptation of Godwin's engineering identity measures to assess students' interest in their chosen field of study, students' assessment of their competence and performance in their courses, and students' perceptions of being recognized as a science person and as an engineering person. Demographic data on sexual identity, gender identity, and major were used to test comparisons. ANOVA and regression modeling were used to test group differences. For the most part, few differences were observed between groups regarding measures of science and engineering identity. Interest in their field of study only differed marginally by LGBQ status, with LGBQ students scoring slightly higher than heterosexual students. Perceptions of competence and performance in their field of study differed only by STEM major, with STEM students scoring slightly lower, suggesting some potential degree of insecurity among STEM students regarding their academic performance. Recognition as a science person only differed by STEM major as STEM students reported much higher recognition than their non-STEM peers. Recognition as an engineering person also differed by STEM major similar to recognition as a science person, but to a somewhat lesser degree; however, LGBQ students also reported being less likely to be recognized as an engineering person as well. Taken together, if engineering and other STEM fields look to broaden participation among people from groups historically excluded from full, authentic participation, one factor is the extent to which LGBTQ people see themselves as part of these fields. The data presented here suggest to some extent that LGBTQ people score similarly to their peers on indicators of science and engineering identity, but that attention to their experiences is still warranted. As LGBTQ issues become politicized across the nation, LGBTQ individuals need safe environments in STEM fields to nurture their intrinsic motivation and pursue fulfilling careers.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2019.2901777
