Search

The disproportionately low number of women iii engineering faculty roles is concerning to academic administrators, faculty, and students. Prior studies have focused on engineering identity but not on how the interests of women engineering graduate students may change throughout their program progression. The research reported here focuses on the differences in the professional plans of women engineering graduate students early in their Ph.D. programs as compared to those near completion of their graduate studies. A mixed method study was conducted using survey and focus groups at a medium-sized, Midwestern, private institution during the summer 2021. A survey was sent to about 600 engineering Ph D students (both male and female) with analysis primarily utilizing Kruskal-Wallis H tests. Additionally, focus groups of four to six students were conducted based on program progression and gender to better understand the quantitative findings. Survey responses were analyzed by program progression, gender, and international status. Results show that women engineering Ph.D. students' interest in an academic career decreases as they progress through their graduate studies. There are also differences between domestic and international Ph.D. students in terms of their professional interests which is entangled with their legal and immigration status. It is recommended that engineering graduate programs offer formal professional discernment opportunities for 2nd year Ph. D. students, both maie and female, to help them to recognize the opportunities available to them upon program completion. And additionally, for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion efforts be expanded to consider the needs of graduate students in retention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many approaches for improving engineering student retention have been considered, including living learning communities (LLCs). The current study is focused on evaluating the benefits of intentional housing placement of female students to increase retention in engineering (the "living" portion of an LLC), operationalized by three-year retention to graduation referred to herein as "engineering living community." At the residential university studied, intentional placement of women engineering intent students has taken place since the early 2000s. Using institutional data of a private university, retention of women engineering students is compared to women who were not placed in a residence hall with other engineering students from 2005-2016 by examining the descriptive statistics and conducting statistical analysis, including Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum test and linear logistic regression. Additionally, a short survey was sent to current women engineering students to ask specifically what impact their residential hall placement had on their decision to continue in engineering. Results show that students placed in tin engineering living community were significantly more likely to be retained to their third year in engineering and on to graduation than those that were not in an engineering living community. The implication of this finding is that a living community without the added administrative structures of course alignments or formal mentorship can still offer substantial benefit to participants and are a no cost way to improve retention of women and potentially other underrepresented groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In understanding undergraduate students' success in college, their choice of career path must be fully understood. Different paths are appropriate for different students, and even a student may not fully grasp what will work best for them. Understanding the mechanisms behind a successful choice in college major is important for several reasons. Retention is necessary for the continued health of engineering programs. One of the earliest steps in this career path is selecting a major. Research has been done investigating major selection across all majors, and even focusing on STEM careers. This research has frequently overlooked the broad variety present in engineering majors with very limited research conducted that distinguishes between one engineering major and another. This paper seeks to address this absence by surveying engineering students from several different majors at three different institutions. The d ata for this paper was gathered using surveys of first year engineers at three dissimilar institutions. The survey data examined were open-response questions. These questions asked students to describe how they viewed specific engineering career paths. It is the goal of analyzing these responses to gain better insight into the student perception of various engineering majors. The data was coded through an inductive coding process. This coding process resulted in nine unique codes. The codes were analyzed to allow broader trends to surface. The results of this analysis have shown that no t only do students in different engineering majors view these disciplines differently, but also that students at these different institutions view engineering differently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A 1 credit hour First-Year Engineering Course which provides background to students on the engineering disciplinary options available to them was redesigned to help inform the selection of their engineering major for future study. Initially, course administration was a large lecture class but was transformed into a smaller classes that were partially flipped (for the first half of the semester, the content was presented in videos posted on-line relating to engineering disciplines) that allowed students to attend sessions that were of greatest interest to them. Both versions of the course were assessed through surveys. Finally, all students enrolled in the redesigned course were interviewed to discuss their progress in selecting an engineering major. The baseline data from the original course and data from the redesigned course were compared to better understand the effectiveness of the approach for informed selection of an engineering major. And while there were no statistically significant difference between the original course and the redesigned course in terms of background knowledge gained; the newly designed, partially-flipped course was more effective in all other categories. Statically significant improvements were found for students in terms of: learning, interest, and engagement. In the case of engineering major selection, a partially flipped classroom is deemed an effective approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A large-scale collaborative learning project involving first-year engineering students and fifth graders from local schools was developed and implemented during the fall of 2010. Entitled 'I2D2: Imagination, Innovation, Discovery, and Design,' the program's success in the first year inspired program continuation during the 2011 school year and beyond. The program was developed for an intended dual benefit of both college and intermediate school students. The college students worked with the intermediate school students on LEGO® activities and then had the opportunity to talk with them about their ideas for a Robotic Pet--in this way serving as a 'customer' to a first-year engineering design project. For the intermediate school students, the goal was to offer exposure to a university setting and instill an interest and recognition of the engineering/scientific process to help prepare them for their science fair projects. The results indicate that while intermediate school students are already interested in going to college, exposure through hands-on activities with college students can increase their interest level in STEM fields. For the first-year engineering students, differential responses were indicated by women and students with younger siblings. Finally, the intermediate school teachers were interviewed after the event for their feedback and reaction to the event. Future plans for improved program administration and assessment are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Engineering identity has been linked to both educational and professional persistence, but little has been reported on the views of professionals. The purpose of this study was to understand the relationship between engineering identity for students and professionals and how self-identification as an engineer changes over time and with certain key experiences. We surveyed a cross-section of undergraduate engineering students and alumni, within 10 years of receiving their undergraduate engineering degree, from the same institution during the spring of 2009. The survey yielded over 700 student responses and over 500 responses from alumni, and the differences in terms of who self-identifies as an engineer and what factors are viewed as most critical to engineering are reported. It was found that for both students and alumni work experiences are critical to self-identification but that gender was significant only for students. Finally, alumni were almost universally more selective in defining what factors (behaviors, experiences, etc.) are necessary to be considered an engineer. The one notable difference was in establishing relationships with fellow engineers in which a much higher percentage of alumni than students recognized it as necessary to be considered an engineer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The motivation for the current study was to examine the experiences that contribute to engineering identity both in terms of educational and professional pathways; this was accomplished through both qualitative and quantitative means. A cross-sectional study of undergraduate engineering students was conducted at a medium-sized Midwestern private university. A large-scale survey of all undergraduate engineering students, ~1100, yielded responses from ~700 students during the spring of 2009. Survey questions were based on a study approach defining adulthood by Jeffrey Arnett, but specifically applied to engineering identity as a parallel but unique instrument. Engineering identity from a student perspective was assessed, both in terms of self-identification (do engineering students consider themselves to be engineers?) and identifying factors that are "necessary" to be considered an engineer. A qualitative inquiry followed to better inform the quantitative survey results. Individual student interviews across class levels and engineering self-identifications were conducted as a collection of case studies. While it was not surprising to find that individual student experiences contribute to an overall sense of belonging to the college, it was interesting that key experiences such as internships and undergraduate research were not found to be statistically significant predictors of engineer self-identification. Student interviews offered insight into this finding; those experiences were formative, but there is a bi-directionality to these experiences-they can be either affirming or discouraging. Students cited experiences that were positive, challenging learning opportunities as reaffirming their engineering identity as it relates to future career plans. Conversely, negative student experiences were also formative but were related to non-identification and dissuaded students from future engineering related career plans. Finally, the implications for an institution's curricular structure as it relates to engineering identity are discussed as are suggestions for promoting multiple student experiences before graduation and formal assessment of those experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]