More Like this

1. Work in Progress: A Study of Variations in Motivation and Efficacy for Computational Modeling in First-year Engineering Students

   https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637463  

   Polasik, Alison; Suggs, Anna; Kajfez, Rachel (October 2021, 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE))

   Computational modeling skills are critical for the success of both engineering students and practicing engineers and are increasingly included as part of the undergraduate curriculum. However, students' belief in the utility of these skills and their ability to succeed in learning them can vary significantly. This study hypothesizes that the self-efficacy and motivation of engineering students at the outset of their degree program varies significantly 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 materials science and engineering and biomedical engineering). In this pilot study, a survey was used to investigate the motivational and efficacy factors of approximately 70 undergraduate students in their first year of engineering studies at a large public university. Surveys were implemented after students were introduced to MATLAB in their first-year engineering design course. The data was analyzed for variations in baseline motivation based on the students' intended major. The results of this survey will help determine whether efficacy and interest related to computational modeling are indeed lower for certain engineering disciplines and will inform future studies in this area. 

   more » « less
2. Engineering students’ attitudinal beliefs by gender and student division: a methodological comparison of changes over time

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00269-6  

   Andrews, Madison E.; Patrick, Anita D.; Borrego, Maura (December 2021, International Journal of STEM Education)

   null (Ed.)

   Abstract Background Students’ attitudinal beliefs related to how they see themselves in STEM have been a focal point of recent research, given their well-documented links to retention and persistence. These beliefs are most often assessed cross-sectionally, and as such, we lack a thorough understanding of how they may fluctuate over time. Using matched survey responses from undergraduate engineering students ( n = 278), we evaluate if, and to what extent, students’ engineering attitudinal beliefs (attainment value, utility value, self-efficacy, interest, and identity) change over a 1-year period. Further, we examine whether there are differences based on gender and student division, and then compare results between cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses to illustrate weaknesses in our current understanding of these constructs. Results Our study revealed inconsistencies between cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of the same dataset. Cross-sectional analyses indicated a significant difference by student division for engineering utility value and engineering interest, but no significant differences by gender for any variable. However, longitudinal analyses revealed statistically significant decreases in engineering utility value, engineering self-efficacy, and engineering interest for lower division students and significant decreases in engineering attainment value for upper division students over a one-year period. Further, longitudinal analyses revealed a gender gap in engineering self-efficacy for upper division students, where men reported higher means than women. Conclusions Our analyses make several contributions. First, we explore attitudinal differences by student division not previously documented. Second, by comparing across methodologies, we illustrate that different conclusions can be drawn from the same data. Since the literature around these variables is largely cross-sectional, our understanding of students’ engineering attitudes is limited. Our longitudinal analyses show variation in engineering attitudinal beliefs that are obscured when data is only examined cross-sectionally. These analyses revealed an overall downward trend within students for all beliefs that changed significantly—losses which may foreshadow attrition out of engineering. These findings provide an opportunity to introduce targeted interventions to build engineering utility value, engineering self-efficacy, and engineering interest for student groups whose means were lower than average. 

   more » « less
3. Towards Development of an Engineering Design Value-expectancy Scale (EDVES)

   Hylton, J. Blake; Herak, Patrick; France, Todd; Youssef, Sherri (January 2021, 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference)

   null (Ed.)

   As high school programs are increasingly incorporating engineering content into their curricula, a question is raised as to the impacts of those programs on student attitudes towards engineering, in particular engineering design. From a collegiate perspective, there is a related question as to how first-year engineering programs at the college level should adapt to a greater percentage of incoming students with prior conceptions about engineering design and how to efficaciously uncover what those conceptions may be. Further, there is a broader question within engineering design as to how various design experiences, especially introductory experiences, may influence student attitudes towards the subject and towards engineering more broadly. Student attitudes is a broad and well-studied area and a wide array of instruments have been shown to be valid and reliable assessments of various aspects of student motivation, self-efficacy, and interests. In terms of career interests, the STEM Career Interest Survey (STEM-CIS) has been widely used in grade school settings to gauge student intentions to pursue STEM careers, with a subscale focused on engineering. In self-efficacy and motivation, the Value-Expectancy STEM Assessment Scale (VESAS) is a STEM-focused adaptation of the broader Values, Interest, and Expectations Scale (VIES), which in turns builds upon Eccles’ Value-Expectancy model of self-efficacy. When it comes to engineering design, there have been a few attempts to develop more focused instruments, such as Carberry’s Design Self-Efficacy Instrument. For the purposes of this work, evaluating novice and beginning designer attitudes about engineering design, the available instruments were not found to assess the desired attributes. Design-focused instruments such as Carberry’s were too narrowly focused on the stages of the design process, many of which required a certain a priori knowledge to effectively evaluate. Broader instruments such as the VESAS were too focused on working and studying engineering, rather than doing or identifying with engineering. A new instrument, the Engineering Design Value-Expectancy Scale (EDVES) was developed to meet this need. In its current form the EDVES includes 38 items across several subscales covering expectancy of success in, perceived value of, and identification with engineering and design. This work presents the EDVES and discusses the development process of the instrument. It presents validity evidence following the Cook validation evidence model, including scoring, generalization, and extrapolation validity evidence. This validation study was conducted using pre- and post-course deployment with 192 first-year engineering students enrolled in a foundational engineering design course. 

   more » « less
4. Academic Success and Retention of Underprepared Students

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--36635  

   Hensel, Robin A.; Dygert, Joseph; Morris, Melissa Lynn (July 2021, 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference)

   null (Ed.)

   The Academy of Engineering Success (AcES) program, established in 2012 and supported by NSF S-STEM award number 1644119 throughout 2016-2021, employs literature-based, best practices to support and retain underprepared and underrepresented students in engineering through graduation with the ultimate goal of diversifying the engineering workforce. A total of 71 students, including 21 students supported by S-STEM scholarships, participated in the AcES program between 2016-2019 at a large R1 institution in the mid-Atlantic region. All AcES students participate in a common program during their first year, comprised of: a one-week summer bridge experience, a common fall professional development course and spring “Engineering in History” course, and a common academic advisor. These students also have opportunities for: (1) faculty-student, student-student, and industry mentor-student interaction, (2) academic support and student success education, and (3) major and career exploration – all designed to help students develop feelings of institutional inclusion, engineering self-efficacy and identity, and academic and professional success skills. They also participate in the GRIT, Longitudinal Assessment of Engineering Self-Efficacy (LAESE), and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) surveys plus individual and focus group interviews at the start, midpoint, and end of each fall semester and at the end of the spring semester. The surveys provide a measure of students’ GRIT, their beliefs related to the intrinsic value of engineering and learning, their feelings of inclusion and test anxiety, and their self-efficacy related to engineering, math, and coping skills. The interviews provide information related to the student experience, feelings of inclusion, and program impact. Institutional data, combined with the survey and interview responses, are used to examine four research questions designed to examine the relationship of the elements of the AcES program to participants’ academic success and retention in engineering. Early analyses of the student retention data and survey responses from the 2017 and 2018 cohorts indicated students who ultimately left engineering before the start of their second year initially scored higher in areas of engineering self-efficacy and test anxiety, than those who stayed in engineering, while those who retained to the second year began their engineering education with lower self-efficacy scores, but higher scores related to the belief in the intrinsic value of engineering, learning strategy use, and coping self-efficacy. These results suggest that students who start with unrealistically high expectations of their performance leave engineering at higher rates than students who start with lower personal performance expectations, but have stronger value of the field and strategies for meeting challenges. These data appear to support the Kruger-Dunning effect in which students with limited knowledge of a specific field overestimate their abilities to perform in that area or underestimate the level of effort success may require. This paper will add an analysis of the academic success and retention data from 2019 cohort to this research, discuss the impact of COVID-19 to this program and research, as well as illuminate the quantitative results with the qualitative data from individual and focus group interviews regarding the aspects of the AcES program that impact student success, their expectations and methods for overcoming academic challenges, and their feelings of motivation and inclusion. 

   more » « less
5. Work in Progress: Motivational Differences Between Civil and Environmental Engineering Doctoral Students in the Pre-writing and Writing Phases

   Rodriguez_Mejia, Eduardo; Bodnar, Cheryl A (June 2024, ASEE Conferences)

   This work in progress paper describes the preliminary findings from the implementation of a graduate engineering student motivation survey with Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) doctoral students. In the doctoral process, two phases can be identified: pre-writing and writing. The first phase is generally where most of the coursework is taken, while the second phase is when the dissertation takes most of the time. These phases have been found to be of importance when seeking to address graduate students’ motivation because they present a transition between a more structured and guided process into an unstructured, self-directed, and isolated phase that is prescribed as challenging for students. The graduate student motivation survey, derived from the Expectancy-Value Theory constructs (i.e., interest, attainment, utility, cost, and self-efficacy), was developed by the authors in a prior study. The constructs of interest/intrinsic (how fun and interesting is a task), attainment (personal/identity importance of a task), utility (usefulness for present or future goals), and cost (resources to be invested in a task) are values that individuals consider when selecting and taking actions; Whereas, the self-efficacy construct explores an individual’s beliefs about how well their performance will be on an upcoming task. This motivation survey was distributed among 20 CEE doctoral students during the second week of the Fall 2023 semester. Out of the 20 participants, 3 were in the research phase of their dissertation (writing phase), 16 were still in the process of completing their coursework requirements (pre-writing phase), and 1 did not provide a response about their program phase. Measurement of Expectancy-Value Theory constructs on a scale from 1 to 7 was performed. Analysis of the mean values for each construct between students in the pre-writing phase and those in the writing phase of their doctoral program showed statistical significance with large effect size values for the constructs of attainment and utility. Values for students in the pre-writing phase were higher on the attainment and utility construct, with students in pre-writing phase having attainment and utility mean values of M = 6.29 and M = 5.69, respectively, and those in the writing phase having M = 5.50 and M = 4.17 respectively. These preliminary results can help to better understand students' motivations during their doctoral journey, especially as they make the transition from the pre-writing to the writing phase and may lead to identification of areas where additional support can be provided. 

   more » « less