Search for: All records

The goal of the study presented here was to test the reliability and validity of faculty responses to the Strategies to Reduce Student Resistance (SRSR) a measure of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics university faculty use and motivation (self-efficacy and value) for using instructional strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning. The development of this measure will support research and interventions designed to support faculty implementation of active learning strategies. The scale examined here was adapted from a student version, developed and tested as part of a national study on student resistance to active learning in engineering programs. This project reveled a set of faculty behaviors which supported students’ positive response to active learning strategies (Authors, 2017). Although student perspectives on faculty behavior is important, we felt it was necessary to adapt the scale to measure faculty’s perspectives on the strategies they use and their motivation to use those strategies as part of their use of active learning in their classroom. 

Despite many studies confirming that active learning in STEM classrooms improves student outcomes, instructors;' adoption of active learning has been surprisingly slow. This work-in-progress paper describes our broader research study in which we compare the efficacy of a traditional active learning workshop (AL) and an extended version of this workshop that also specifically highlights instructor strategies to reduce resistance (AL+) on instructors' beliefs about and actual adoption of active learning in undergraduate STEM classrooms. Through a randomized control trial (RCT), we aim to understand the ways in which these workshops influence instructors' motivation to adopt and the actual use of active learning. This RCT involves instructors and students at a large number of institutions including two-year college, four-year college, and large research institutions in three regions of the country and strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning. We have developed and piloted three instruments, which allow for triangulation of classroom data: an instructor survey, a student survey, and a classroom observation protocol. This work-in-progress paper will cover the current progress of our research study and present our research instruments. 

https://peer.asee.org/engineering-identity-development-of-hispanic-students 

https://peer.asee.org/27502 

ISBN 9781510849419 

Identity, or how people choose to define themselves, is emerging as an attractive explanation for who persists in engineering. Many studies of engineering identity build off of prior work in math and science identity, emphasizing the academic aspects of engineering. However, affect towards professional practice is also central to engineering identity development. This paper describes the methods used to create a new survey measure of individuals’ affect toward elements of engineering practice. We followed the item generation, refinement, and instrument validation steps required for psychometric validation of a new survey measure. We generated items deductively using the literature on engineering professional skills and practice and inductively based on interviews with practicing engineers, engineering graduate students, and engineering undergraduate students. We blended the inductively and deductively derived item lists to create a list of initial items for the measure. We circulated this list of items to a set of engineering and professional identity experts to establish face validity and made modifications based on their feedback. The final list included 34 items. These 34 items were administered in a questionnaire survey in the fall of 2016 to 1465 engineering undergraduates in three majors at two institutions. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and established internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha on a subset of the analytical sample data (n=384). The resulting factors fit our a priori assumption of the factors theorized to characterize affect towards engineering professional practice. Using the remaining data (n=904), we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis on the reduced set of items resulting from EFA. The results indicate an emergent factor structure for affect towards elements of engineering practice. 

Identity, or how people choose to define themselves, is emerging as an explanation for who pursues and persists in engineering. Recent developments in the study of engineering identity, including studies of math and science identity, tend to emphasize the academic aspects of engineering without considering aspects of professional practice central to the development of an engineering identity. This paper outlines the methods used to create a new survey measure: affect toward elements of engineering practice. We followed the item generation, refinement, and instrument validation steps required for psychometric validation of a new survey measure. Through this process a final list of 34 items was administered in a survey in the fall of 2016 to engineering undergraduates. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis and established internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha on a subset of the data sample (n=384). The resulting factors reflect key elements of affect towards engineering professional practice.