An official website of the United States government
This research paper measures college students' sense of belonging. Students' sense of belonging (SB) has been identified as a critical contributor to engineering students’ persistence, academic success, and professional identity in engineering. Therefore, how to accurately measure SB has become an emerging topic but is still challenging. Although engineering education researchers are interested in measuring students’ SB, they have presented concerns over selecting an appropriate instrument that results in trustworthy measurement outcomes. One of the reasons that cause challenges is that SB is a complicated construct that has various conceptual definitions. For example, Goodenow (1993) defined SB as “being accepted, valued, included, and encouraged by others...feeling oneself to be an important part of the life and activity of the class” (p. 25), which can be measured as a general SB. On the other hand, Freeman et al. (2007) viewed SB as a multi-dimensional construct that includes class belonging, university belonging, professors’ pedagogical caring, and social acceptance. Thus far, several instruments have been developed to measure SB from a single-dimensional perspective (e.g., Goodenow’s Psychological Sense of School Membership) and a multi-dimensional perspective (e.g., Slaten et al.’s the University Belonging Questionnaire). To our best knowledge, little research effort has been made to synthesize the information of instruments developed for measuring college students’ SB. This paper attempts to close the gap in the literature by conducting a systematic review following PRISMA (the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to summarize the information and characteristics of existing SB instruments, including the theoretical framework underlying the instrument, psychometric properties in previous studies, and validation works that have been carried out. Specifically, this paper focuses on the following aims: (a) to summarize how SB has been constructed and defined by different theories in higher education, (b) to report existing measurement instruments of SB used in higher education and their psychometric properties (reliability and validity), and (c) to compare various analytical plans for establishing the construct validity (including multicultural validity) in prior instrument development studies. The emergent findings provide insights into how to effectively measure SB and would facilitate school leaders' and educators’ work in promoting engineering students’ success and broadening participation in engineering. Keywords: Sense of belonging, engineering education, instrument, systematic review
more »
« less
A Tool for Gaining Insight into Students’ Self-Directed Learning Skills
New engineering educators need to be equipped with instruments that can provide easy and meaningful insight into students’ self-directed learning (SDL) status so they can better foster students’ success. Students who are self-directed learners can independently initiate and take full responsibility for learning, effectively utilize available resources in the pursuit of their goals, develop awareness of their learning, and demonstrate the appropriate attitude essential for individual and collaborative learning. Despite these benefits, developing SDL skills in engineering students is often overlooked. To address this, educators have a facilitating role to play in the development of engineering students’ SDL skills, however, this role can be challenging for them due to the (a) high cost of using SDL instruments, especially in a large classroom and (b) uncertainty about the validity of SDL instruments. Moreover, these challenges may be more pronounced for new engineering educators. This study addresses these challenges by reporting the validity evidence for an SDL assessment instrument called the Self-Rating Scale of Self-Directed Learning (SRSSDL). The SRSSDL instrument has been widely utilized in medical education, but in this study, it was modified for the engineering education context. The utility of this 8-constructs, 46-item scale was demonstrated in engineering education with 111 undergraduate students across all academic levels, and the validity test was conducted in line with the contemporary validity framework. The result of the validity test of the SRSSDL revealed inconsistencies or instability of its constructs in the engineering education context.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2235227
- PAR ID:
- 10506931
- Publisher / Repository:
- American Society for Engineering Education
- Date Published:
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- self-directed learning students quantitative
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Portland, OR
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)The purpose of this study is to re-examine the validity evidence of the engineering design self-efficacy (EDSE) scale scores by Carberry et al. (2010) within the context of secondary education. Self-efficacy refers to individuals’ belief in their capabilities to perform a domain-specific task. In engineering education, significant efforts have been made to understand the role of self-efficacy for students considering its positive impact on student outcomes such as performance and persistence. These studies have investigated and developed measures for different domains of engineering self-efficacy (e.g., general academic, domain-general, and task-specific self-efficacy). The EDSE scale is a frequently cited measure that examines task-specific self-efficacy within the domain of engineering design. The original scale contains nine items that are intended to represent the engineering design process. Initial score validity evidence was collected using a sample consisting of 202 respondents with varying degrees of engineering experience including undergraduate/graduate students and faculty members. This scale has been primarily used by researchers and practitioners with engineering undergraduate students to assess changes in their engineering design self-efficacy as a result of active learning interventions, such as project-based learning. Our work has begun to experiment using the scale in a secondary education context in conjunction with an increased introduction to engineering in K-12 education. Yet, there still is a need to examine score validity and reliability of this scale in non-undergraduate populations such as secondary school student populations. This study fills this important gap by testing construct validity of the original nine items of the EDSE scale, supporting proper use of the scale for researchers and practitioners. This study was conducted as part of a larger, e4usa project investigating the development and implementation of a yearlong project-based engineering design course for secondary school students. Evidence of construct validity and reliability was collected using a multi-step process. First, a survey that includes the EDSE scale was administered to the project participating students at nine associated secondary schools across the US at the beginning of Spring 2020. Analysis of collected data is in progress and includes Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) on the 137 responses. The evidence of score reliability will be obtained by computing the internal consistency of each resulting factor. The resulting factor structure and items will be analyzed by comparing it with the original EDSE scale. The full paper will provide details about the psychometric evaluation of the EDSE scale. The findings from this paper will provide insights on the future usage of the EDSE scale in the context of secondary engineering education.more » « less
-
Abstract The transformative learning scale for the innovation mindset (TLSIM) is an instrument that effectively assesses both process-related experiences and outcome-oriented shifts in students’ self-awareness, open-mindedness, and innovation capabilities resulting from participation in innovation competitions and programs (ICPs), namely, experiential learning opportunities. It was developed using transformative learning theory (TLT) and the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network’s (KEEN) 3Cs framework (Curiosity, Connections, and Creating Value). The study involved developing scale items, validating content and face validity through expert reviews and student focus groups, as well as conducting psychometric analysis using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on data collected from 291 STEM students (70.2% from engineering) who participated in ICPs. The CFA results showed strong factor loadings across most constructs, with Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) values within acceptable limits, confirming the robustness of the TLSIM for measuring both process-oriented (RMSEA = 0.047, CFI = 0.929) and outcome-oriented constructs (RMSEA = 0.052, CFI = 0.901) in the development of an innovation mindset. The analysis showed that TLSIM is a reliable and valid instrument with strong psychometric properties for measuring key constructs related to the innovation mindset. TLSIM can capture significant changes in students’ beliefs, attitudes, and self-perceptions regarding innovation. Future research should refine TLSIM across various disciplines.more » « less
-
The purpose of this study is to develop an instrument to measure student perceptions about the learning experiences in their online undergraduate engineering courses. Online education continues to grow broadly in higher education, but the movement toward acceptance and comprehensive utilization of online learning has generally been slower in engineering. Recently, however, there have been indicators that this could be changing. For example, ABET has accredited online undergraduate engineering degrees at Stony Brook University and Arizona State University (ASU), and an increasing number of other undergraduate engineering programs also offer online courses. During this period of transition in engineering education, further investigation about the online modality in the context of engineering education is needed, and survey instrumentation can support such investigations. The instrument presented in this paper is grounded in a Model for Online Course-level Persistence in Engineering (MOCPE), which was developed by our research team by combining two motivational frameworks used to study student persistence: the Expectancy x Value Theory of Achievement Motivation (EVT), and the ARCS model of motivational design. The initial MOCPE instrument contained 79 items related to students’ perceptions about the characteristics of their courses (i.e., the online learning management system, instructor practices, and peer support), expectancies of course success, course task values, perceived course difficulties, and intention to persist in the course. Evidence of validity and reliability was collected using a three-step process. First, we tested face and content validity of the instrument with experts in online engineering education and online undergraduate engineering students. Next, the survey was administered to the online undergraduate engineering student population at a large, Southwestern public university, and an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on the responses. Lastly, evidence of reliability was obtained by computing the internal consistency of each resulting scale. The final instrument has seven scales with 67 items across 10 factors. The Cronbach alpha values for these scales range from 0.85 to 0.97. The full paper will provide complete details about the development and psychometric evaluation of the instrument, including evidence of and reliability. The instrument described in this paper will ultimately be used as part of a larger, National Science Foundation-funded project investigating the factors influencing online undergraduate engineering student persistence. It is currently being used in the context of this project to conduct a longitudinal study intended to understand the relationships between the experiences of online undergraduate engineering students in their courses and their intentions to persist in the course. We anticipate that the instrument will be of interest and use to other engineering education researchers who are also interested in studying the population of online students.more » « less
-
Self-efficacy has been found to be one of the key factors that are responsible for academic success of engineering students. However, there exist multiple instruments for determining the self-efficacy of engineering students and studies conducted in this area in the past have varied significantly in their use of a general or engineering domain-specific constructs. This work investigates whether an engineering-domain specific self-efficacy measurement instrument is required for determining the self-efficacy beliefs of engineering students or whether a general instrument will suffice. Furthermore, this study also aims to investigate the effect of gender, class level, and transfer status of students on their engineering self-efficacy beliefs. Over two hundred engineering students from Texas A&M University and Houston Community College are surveyed on 39 questions divided across 6 distinct self-efficacy instruments. The survey data was then analyzed to determine whether there exists a significant difference in the scores obtained across the generic and the domain-specific instruments. Factor analysis is also performed to explore the interrelationships among the questions belonging to different self-efficacy instruments. The results reveal that there exists a significant difference in the scores across the two types of instruments.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
