More Like this

1. Work in Progress: A Study of Variations in Motivation Related to Computational Modeling in First-year Engineering Students

   Alison Polasik ( June 2022 , 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings)

   It is increasingly critical that engineering students develop proficiency with computational modeling tools, and many curricula include some introduction to such tools during their first year. It is clear that student interest and skill can vary significantly based on prior experiences, but it is less clear whether student motivation specifically related to computational modeling varies as well. This study hypothesizes that the self-efficacy and utility value related to computational methods varies significantly in students’ first year and that engineering students pursuing some disciplines (such as computer, software, and electrical engineering) will begin with a higher initial self-efficacy than others (such as chemical, materials, and biomedical engineering). A survey was used to investigate the utility value and efficacy of approximately 700 undergraduate students in their first year of engineering studies at both a large public institution and a small private institution. Data is analyzed for variations in baseline motivation based on the students’ intended major. This analysis also considers known confounding factors such as gender, race, and prior experience with programming. The results of this survey will help determine whether efficacy and interest related to computational methods vary based on intended major early in an engineering student’s academic career. Ultimately, it is hoped that this study can inform future studies related to what types of interventions might benefit students. 

   more » « less
2. The Impact of Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceptions of Engineering on Their Self-Efficacy with Teaching Engineering

   Chesnutt, Betsy ; Mountain, Daniel ; Faber, Courtney ( July 2023 , ASEE annual conference exposition)

   Although engineering is becoming increasingly important in K-12 education, previous research has demonstrated that, similar to the general population, K-12 teachers typically hold inaccurate perceptions of engineering, which affects their ability to provide students with relevant engineering experiences. Studies have shown that K-12 teachers often confuse the work of engineers with that of automotive mechanics or construction workers or assume that engineering is only for “super smart” students who are naturally gifted or who come from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. This indicates that many teachers do not understand the nature of engineering work and have stereotypical attitudes about who is qualified to be an engineer. These inaccurate perceptions of engineering among K-12 teachers may influence the way that teachers introduce engineering practices to their students and make connections between engineering and the other STEM disciplines. In addition, teacher self-efficacy has been shown to not only influence teachers’ willingness to engage with a particular topic, but also to have a significant influence on the motivation and achievement of their students. Research also indicates that high-efficacy teachers typically exert more effort and utilize more effective instructional strategies than low-efficacy teachers. The goal of this study was to examine the perceptions that pre-service K-12 teachers hold about engineers and engineering, and to further explore how those perceptions influence their self-efficacy with teaching engineering and beliefs about what skills and resources are necessary to teach engineering in a K-12 classroom. We first developed a survey instrument that included questions taken from two previously published instruments: the Design, Engineering, and Technology survey and the Teaching Engineering Self-Efficacy Scale for K-12 Teachers. Forty-two students enrolled in an undergraduate program at {Name Redacted} in which students simultaneously pursue a bachelor’s degree in a STEM field and K-12 teacher licensure completed the survey. Based on survey responses, six participants, representing a range of self-efficacy scores and majors, were selected to participate in interviews. In these interviews, participants were asked questions about their perceptions of engineers and were also asked to sort a list of characteristics based on whether they applied to engineers or not. Finally, interview participants were asked questions about their confidence in their ability to teach engineering and about what skills and/or resources they would require to be able to teach engineering in their future classrooms. The results of this study indicated that the participants’ perceptions of engineering and engineers did impact their self-efficacy with teaching engineering and their beliefs about how well engineering could be incorporated into other STEM subjects. A recurring theme among participants with low self-efficacy was a lack of exposure to engineering and inaccurate perceptions of the nature of engineering work. These pre-service teachers felt that they would not be able to teach engineering to K-12 students because they did not personally have much exposure to engineering or knowledge about engineering work. In future work, we will investigate how providing pre-service teachers with training in engineering education and exposure to engineers and engineering students impacts both their perceptions of engineering and self-efficacy with teaching engineering. 

   more » « less
3. Retention Focused S-STEM Support Program

   Hensel, Robin ; Morris, Melissa ; Dygert, Joseph ( September 2019 , AAAS/NSF 2019 S-STEM Symposium)

   POSTER. Presented at the Symposium (9/12/2019) Abstract: The Academy of Engineering Success (AcES) employs literature-based, best practices to support and retain underrepresented students in engineering through graduation with the ultimate goal of diversifying the engineering workforce. AcES was established in 2012 and has been supported via NSF S-STEM award number 1644119 since 2016. The 2016, 2017, and 2018 cohorts consist of 12, 20, and 22 students, respectively. Five S-STEM supported scholarships were awarded to the 2016 cohort, seven scholarships were awarded to students from the 2017 cohort, and six scholarships were awarded to students from the 2018 cohort. AcES students participate in a one-week summer bridge experience, a common fall semester course focused on professional development, and a common spring semester course emphasizing the role of engineers in societal development. Starting with the summer bridge experience, and continuing until graduation, students are immersed in curricular and co-curricular activities with the goals of fostering feelings of institutional inclusion and belonging in engineering, providing academic support and student success skills, and professional development. The aforementioned goals are achieved by providing (1) opportunities for faculty-student, student-student, and industry mentor-student interaction, (2) academic support, and student success education in areas such as time management and study skills, and (3) facilitated career and major exploration. Four research questions are being examined, (1) What is the relationship between participation in the AcES program and participants’ academic success?, (2) What aspects of the AcES program most significantly impact participants’ success in engineering, (3) How do AcES students seek to overcome challenges in studying engineering, and (4) What is the longitudinal impact of the AcES program in terms of motivation, perceptions, feelings of inclusion, outcome expectations of the participants and retention? Students enrolled in the AcES program participate in the GRIT, LAESE, and MSLQ surveys, focus groups, and one-on-one interviews at the start and end of each fall semester and at the end of the spring semester. The surveys provide a 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. Focus group and interview responses are analyzed in order to answer research questions 2, 3, and 4. Survey responses are analyzed to answer research question 4, and institutional data such as GPA is used to answer research question 1. An analysis of the 2017 AcES cohort survey responses produced a surprising result. When the responses of AcES students who retained were compared to the responses of AcES students who left engineering, those who left engineering had higher baseline values of GRIT, career expectations, engineering self-efficacy, and math outcome efficacy than those students who retained. A preliminary analysis of the 2016, 2017, and 2018 focus group and one-on-one interview responses indicates that the Engineering Learning Center, tutors, organized out of class experiences, first-year seminar, the AcES cohort, the AcES summer bridge, the AcES program, AcES Faculty/Staff, AcES guest lecturers, and FEP faculty/Staff are viewed as valuable by students and cited with contributing to their success in engineering. It is also evident that AcES students seek help from peers, seek help from tutors, use online resources, and attend office hours to overcome their challenges in studying engineering. 

   more » « less
4. Developing Best Practices for Teaching Scientific Documentation: Toward a Better Understanding of How Lab Notebooks Contribute to Knowledge-building in Engineering Design and Experimentation

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--34426  

   Evans, Rick ; Moses, Jeffrey ; Nathans-Kelly, Traci ( June 2020 , 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings)

   null (Ed.)

   Laboratory notebooks perform important roles in the engineering disciplines. They at once record an engineer’s work, serve as an important reference for future reports and/or articles, and perform as a kind of journal that enables questioning presuppositions, considering new approaches, and generating new ideas. Given the importance of notebooks, there is surprisingly little scholarship on how to teach their use. Stanley and Lewandowski (2016) surveyed students in undergraduate laboratory courses and evaluated how their notebooks were being used. They found that “few [students] … thought that their lab classes successfully taught them the benefit of maintaining a lab notebook.” Moreover, the authors’ later survey of the literature and of college faculty led them to conclude that in undergraduate lab courses “little formal attention has been paid to addressing what is considered ‘best practice’ for scientific documentation …[or] how researchers come to learn these practices” (Stanley and Lewandowski, 2018). At XXX University, two courses, Interfacing the Digital Domain with the Analog World (AEP 2640) and Engineering Communications (ENGRC 2640) are taught in conjunction. In AEP 2640, students use a computer to control equipment and acquire measurements in an engineering design and experimentation laboratory. Laboratory activities such as the development of a computer interface for an oscilloscope, a set of motors, and a photodiode culminate in the realization of an automated laser scanning microscope system. In ENGRC 2640, students receive instruction and feedback on their lab notebook entries and, in turn, use those notebooks as a resource for preparing a Progress Report and an Instrument Design Report. The instructors encourage peer review in order to facilitate improvement of students’ skills in the art of notebook use while allowing them to develop these skills and personal style through trial and error during the research. The primary learning objectives are: 1) to enable students to engage in real laboratory research; and 2) to develop proficiency with select genres associated with that research. The educational research objectives are: 1) to study students’ developing proficiency in order to generate best practices for teaching and learning scientific documentation; and 2) to better understand the contribution of scientific documentation to the teaching and learning of authentic research. This study is a work-in-progress. We will present the study design. That design involves, first, developing a self-efficacy scale for both conducting laboratory research and performing those genres associated with that research. Self-efficacy or a “person’s awareness of their ability to accomplish a goal” (Kolar et. al, 2013) has proven to be a powerful predictor of achievement. Our intent is to track learner agency. Second, the design also involves conducting a content analysis of students’ laboratory notebooks and reports. Content analysis is a methodology that encourages inferencing "across distinct domains, from particulars of one kind to particulars of another kind" (Krippendorff,, 2019). Our intent is to learn about students' mastery of the engineering design and experimentation process through analyzing their lab notebooks. We will present the results of a preliminary content analysis of a select sample of those notebooks and genres. 

   more » « less
5. The Continued Development and Validity Testing of an Engineering Design Value-Expectancy Scale (EDVES) for High School Students

   Youssef, S. ( August 2022 , ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition)

   As more institutions create first year engineering programs that teach an engineering design process, there is a growing desire to prepare students for this coursework in the high school setting. When exposing such a broad population to these ideas, a primary question arises regarding student attitudes toward engineering and how these attitudes develop over time. That is, how does this exposure to engineering design influence student attitudes toward engineering? Moreover, answering this question will allow educators to better understand what motivates students to learn, how much their motivation impacts their overall mastery of these skills, and how these aspects of engineering self-efficacy and engineering design may differ between those who are on a pre-engineering track and those who are not. To begin answering this question, high school students enrolled in the Olathe City school system of Olathe, Kansas completed Engineering Problem-Framing Design Activities (EPDAs) in participating science courses (AP physics, physics, advanced biotechnology, chemistry, honors chemistry, biology, honors biology, and physical science specifically) of the traditional science and engineering academy curriculums offered by the district. Student engineering self-efficacy and motivation was also measured at the beginning and end of their coursework. This was conducted via a new instrument, the Engineering Design Value-Expectancy Scale (EDVES), which includes 38 items across three primary subscales: expectancy of success in, perceived value of, and identification with engineering and design. The development of this tool was presented and discussed in a previous study where the EDVES instrument was analyzed for validity among first-year undergraduate engineering students. In this work, the responses of high school students on the EDVES were analyzed to establish validity in this new population and to begin exploring trends in student responses based on their sub-population. Validity testing was completed via Cook’s validation evidence model with respect to scoring, generalization, and extrapolation evidence. The pre-course EDVES responses obtained were used to complete validation and trend analysis (note that post-course data was not readily available at the time of analysis). 

   more » « less