Search for: All records

The Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) has been developed over many years with substantial investment by the National Science Foundation through Engineering Education and Centers in the Engineering Directorate and the Division of Undergraduate Education in the Education and Human Resources Directorate. This project is focused on transitioning MIDFIELD to the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). The current team of MIDFIELD researchers continues to support this project including helping others learn to use the database. We have developed detailed tutorials in R that introduce MIDFIELD, key metrics, and example scenarios. We have also designed and facilitated workshops. In year 2, we offered the MIDFIELD Institute, an online three-day workshop to help researchers learn about and use MIDFIELD effectively. Attendees included graduate students, early career faculty, senior faculty, and an NSF program officer. Results from the 2023 offering of the MIDFIELD Institute are described in this paper. Dissemination and products are also summarized. 

Abstract — In this Full Research Paper, we propose a new definition of overpersistence in an engineering discipline and investigate its implications at one institution. Precisely defining overpersistence in both a conceptual and operational sense is a critical step in predicting overpersistence and identifying indicators that will allow for personalized guidance for students at risk of overpersisting. We have previously identified our population of interest as students who enroll at the institution as first-time-in-college students for at least one year, attend full time, have had six years to graduate, and have enrolled in only one degree-granting program. Within this group, we operationalized overpersistence by identifying students as overpersisters if they either (i) left the university without a degree or (ii) enrolled in the same major for six years and did not graduate. In this work, we revisit our definition of overpersistence using more recent data by reconsidering two groups of students in particular – those who spend only a short time in the discipline before leaving the institution (formerly classified as overpersisters), and those who spend a long time in the discipline but eventually switch majors (formerly excluded from the initial population). We conclude that the most appropriate definition of overpersistence at an institution with a first-year engineering program is when a student spends three or more semesters in their first discipline-specific major and does not graduate in that major within six years of matriculation to the institution. These results will be useful for researchers and practitioners seeking to identify alternative paths for success for students who are at risk of overpersisting in a major. 

The main objective of this project is to help students learn to make decisions that lead to academic success. Our first goal is to map curriculum pathways, which begins by studying overpersistence (when a student persists in a particular major but does not make timely progress toward a degree). We seek to identify curriculum-specific indicators of overpersistence and corresponding alternative paths that could lead to success. Our second goal is to improve the structure of the Decision-Making Competency Inventory (DMCI) so that it can explain student's decision-making competency in more detail and in congruence with the Self-Regulation Model of Decision-Making. This instrument will be used to map decision-making competency to academic choices and outcomes. The third goal is to develop an Academic Dashboard as a means for sharing relevant research results with students. This will allow students to have access to the strategies, information, and stories needed to make and implement adaptive decisions. This paper highlights our progress in the fifth year of the project and our plans going forward. 

This paper provides a summary activities and accomplishments of an NSF CAREER project, “Empowering Students to be Adaptive Decision-Makers.” We discuss our progress on (1) identifying indicators of poor academic fit in engineering majors; (2) examining relationships between the measures of theoretical constructs (Decision-Making Competency Inventory, DMCI) with the real-world, academic behaviors (major choice and major change); (3) revisions to the DMCI; and (4) development of the Academic Dashboard for putting students in the driver’s seat of their education. A prototype of the Academic Dashboard and its functionality are described.