More Like this

1. Impact of COVID Transition to Remote Learning on Engineering Self-Efficacy and Outcome Expectations

   Milord, Johanna; Yu, Fan; Orton, Sarah; Flores, Lisa; Marra, Rose (July 2021, 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference)

   null (Ed.)

   The outbreak of COVID-19 and sudden transition to remote learning brought many changes and challenges to higher education campuses across the nation. This paper evaluates the impact of the transition to remote learning on the engineering-related social cognitions of self-efficacy (belief in one’s abilities to successfully accomplish tasks in engineering) and outcome expectations (beliefs about the consequences of performing engineering behaviors). These social cognitions can be attributed to important academic and career outcomes, such as the development of STEM interests and goals (Lent et al., 2019) and may be especially important in the success of women in non-traditional fields such as engineering. As an extension to a NSF RIEF (Research Initiation in Engineering Formation) study evaluating engineering social cognitions, students in 8 engineering classes were surveyed at the beginning of Spring 2020 semester (N=224), shortly after the transition to remote learning (N = 190), and at the end of the semester (N=101). The classes surveyed included a common early engineering class at the sophomore level (Engineering Statics) and required junior level courses in different departments. The students were surveyed using reliable and validated instruments to measure engineering self-efficacy (Lent et al. 2005, Frantz et al. 2011), engineering outcome expectations (Lent et al. 2003, Lee et al. 2018), and engineering persistence intentions (Lent et al. 2003). The results show a gradual increase in the mean scores on the engineering self-efficacy and outcome expectation measures through the semester. Two tailed t-tests of matched participants showed no significance when comparing the data between the beginning and mid-semester surveys, as well as the mid-semester and end surveys. However, significance was found in the two engineering self-efficacy measures between the beginning and end of semester surveys. Results are compared across courses at different levels and across gender. Results indicate that despite the sudden change in instructional mode, students’ perceptions of engineering self-efficacy and outcome expectations showed a slight increase or no change. 

   more » « less
2. A Structured Mentoring Program Addressing Graduate Student Challenges, Well-Being and Success

   McCallum, C; Libarkin, J; Vasquez, E; Webb, S; Sule, V; Choudhuri, D; Tornquist, W (January 2022, The Chronicle of Mentoring & Coaching)

   Dominguez, N (Ed.)

   There is clearly a retention issue in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for underrepresented groups (Estrada et al., 2016; Sithole et al., 2017). Although students leave STEM for many reasons (Bonous-Harmmath, 2000; Estrada et al., 2016; Gasiewski et al., 2012; Hurtado et al. 2011), one underlying and well documented cause is lack of attention to effective mentoring and student well-being, especially in graduate school (Becker et al., 2002). The paper presents a National Science Foundation sponsored mentoring program that prepares graduate students to become effective mentors while simultaneously providing them the necessary tools to advocate for themselves as mentees. In addition to mentoring, the program emphasizes the importance of mental and physical well-being. Evaluation results conclude that the program has improved students' sense of belonging on campus and provided them with support for navigating graduate school and socializing into careers. 

   more » « less
3. Impact of Video-Based Analysis-of-Practice Professional Learning: Comparing Online and Face-to-face Models

   Kowalski, S. M.; Belcastro, A.; Hvidsten, C.; Ollison, G.; Askinas, K.; De Vaul, R.; Roehrig, G. (September 2022, Annual Meeting for the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness)

   Video-based analysis of practice models have gained prominence in mathematics and science teacher education inservice professional learning. There is a growing body of evidence that these intensive professional learning (PL) models lead to positive impacts on teacher knowledge, classroom instructional practice, and student learning (Roth et al., 2018; Taylor et al., 2017), but they are expensive and difficult to sustain. An online version would have several benefits, allowing for greater reach to teachers and students across the country, but if online models were substantially less effective, then lower impacts would undercut the benefits of greater accessibility. We designed and studied a fully online version of the face-to-face Science Teachers Learning from Lesson Analysis (STeLLA) PL model (Roth, et al., 2011; Roth et al., 2018; Taylor et al., 2017). We conducted a quasi-experimental study comparing online STeLLA to face-to-face STeLLA. Although we found no significant difference in elementary student learning between the online and face-to-face versions ( p = .09), the effect size raises questions. Exploratory analyses suggest that the impact of online STeLLA on students is greater than the impact of a similar number of hours of traditional, face-to-face content deepening PL, but less than the impact of the full face-to-face STeLLA program. Differences in student populations, with higher percentages of students from racial and ethnic groups underserved by schools in the online STeLLA program, along with testing of the online STeLLA model during the pandemic, complicates interpretation of the findings. 

   more » « less
4. Cultural Context in Engineering Design: Exploring the Influence of Communication on Design Practices

   https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4068593  

   Marshall, Avery; Fu, Katherine (December 2025, Journal of Mechanical Design)

   Just as engineering designs can be uniquely created for different cultures around the world, engineers come from all over and view design through their own cultural lenses. Culture can impact how designers perceive themselves, their self-efficacy, and the way they interpret the design task at hand. Studies have shown that cultural values and behavior (i.e., cultural context) impact communication patterns, as well as learning strategies (Newman et al., 2017, “Psychological Safety: A Systematic Review of the Literature,” Hum. Resour. Manage. Rev., 27(3), pp. 521–535. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.01.001; Hirsch et al., 2001, “Engineering Design and Communication: The Case for Interdisciplinary Collaboration,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., 17(4/5), pp. 343–348). Halls' information processing continuum illuminates how some cultures communicate explicitly through written and spoken words (low context), while others communicate with a common awareness of nonverbal cues (high context) (Handford et al., 2019, “Which ‘Culture’? A Critical Analysis of Intercultural Communication in Engineering Education,” J. Eng. Educ., 108(2), pp. 161–177. 10.1002/jee.20254). Designers from low-context cultures are more comfortable in a low-context learning environment (e.g., with explicitly written instructions), whereas those from high-context cultures benefit more from face-to-face interactions (Goel and Pirolli, 1992, “The Structure of Design Problem Spaces,” Cogn. Sci., 16(3), pp. 395–429. 10.1207/s15516709cog1603_3). These communication differences impact cross-cultural collaboration within global companies and virtual teams. This study examined whether communicating a design task in a more engaging manner would impact solution quality and self-efficacy, particularly in light of the designer's culture and/or familiarity with the design problem. Engineering undergraduate students and professionals were recruited from each of 10 countries, including the United States, to complete a design task and respond to self-perception questions. Participants were presented with the design problem in one of two modes: written (low context) or video (high context). Results showed that delivery modality and cultural context did impact design solution quality and self-efficacy; however, differences were found between professionals and students. 

   more » « less
5. Interdisciplinary Teamwork Challenges in a Design Competition Team

   Beddoes, Kacey; Nicewonger, Todd E. (December 2019, Australasian Association for Engineering Education Annual Conference)

   Communication and collaboration are key components of engineering work (Trevelyan, 2014), and teamwork, including interdisciplinary teamwork, is increasingly seen as an important component of engineering education programs (Borrego, Karlin, McNair, & Beddoes, 2013; Male, Bush, & Chapman, 2010, 2011; Paretti, Cross, & Matusovich, 2014; Purzer, 2011). Employers and education researchers alike advocate teamwork as a means of developing skills that engineering graduates need (Purzer, 2011), and accreditation bodies consider the ability to both lead and function on teams as an important outcome for engineering graduates (Engineers Australia, 2017). However, “despite the clear emphasis on teamwork in engineering and the increasing use of student team projects, our understanding of how best to cultivate and assess these learning outcomes in engineering students is sorely underdeveloped (McGourty et al., 2002; Shuman, Besterfield-Sacre, & McGourty, 2005)” (Borrego et al., 2013, p. 473). In order to contribute to the current conversation on interdisciplinary teamwork in engineering education, and to advance understandings of how best to cultivate teamwork learning outcomes, this paper discusses the most common teamwork challenges and presents boundary negotiating artifacts as a conceptual framework for addressing them. Drawing on data from long-term ethnographic observations of a design competition project, and the challenges students experienced, we utilise findings from a systematic literature review and the conceptual framework of boundary negotiating artifacts to present a case study of how boundary negotiating artifacts can support important teamwork constructs. 

   more » « less