1 / 13

Bryce E. Hughes and Sylvia Hurtado UCLA Association for the Study of Higher Education

Investing in the future: Testing the Efficacy of Socialization within Undergraduate Engineering Degree Programs . Bryce E. Hughes and Sylvia Hurtado UCLA Association for the Study of Higher Education November 2013 St. Louis, MO. Problem.

feoras
Download Presentation

Bryce E. Hughes and Sylvia Hurtado UCLA Association for the Study of Higher Education

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Investing in the future: Testing the Efficacy of Socialization within Undergraduate Engineering Degree Programs Bryce E. Hughes and Sylvia Hurtado UCLA Association for the Study of Higher Education November 2013 St. Louis, MO

  2. Problem Projections indicate the United States will need an additional 500,000 engineers by 2018 Institutions of higher education produce relatively few engineering degrees Additionally, engineering bachelor’s recipients may not pursue engineering careers Engineering identity may bridge degree completion with career decision Marginalization may affect engineering identity development for underrepresented groups of students

  3. Purpose To examine the effect of socializing experiences within engineering programs on engineering identity, and whether campus climate affects students’ identification with and commitment to engineering

  4. Framework • Engineering Identity (Allie et al., 2009; Loui, 2005; Meyers et al., 2012; Pierrakos et al., 2009; Tonso, 2006) • Competence in engineering knowledge • Recognition as an engineer by others • Commitment to engineering as a career • Graduate and professional school socialization (Weidman et al., 2001) • Desired outcomes: Professional identity, Commitment to the profession • Core elements of socialization: • Acquisition of professional knowledge • Investment in the professional field • Involvement in the academic program and the broader professional community • Multicontextual Model of Diverse Learning Environments (Hurtado et al., 2012) • Campus climate includes individual and organizational dimensions • Individual dimensions: behavioral and psychological • Weidman et al. specifically pointed to the applicability of this campus climate model to their socialization model

  5. Methods • Data source and sample • 2004 CIRP Freshman Survey • 2008 CIRP College Senior Survey • Longitudinal sample matched by student • Filtered for engineering aspirants in 2004 • 979 students from 129 institutions • More than 3/4 male; 36.45% White • Analysis • Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) and Hierarchical Generalized Linear Modeling (HGLM)

  6. Methods • Dependent variables • Engineering identity (factor; α=0.710, 2004 α=0.703, 2008) • Importance of becoming an authority in my field (0.862, 0.783) • Obtaining recognition from my colleagues for contributions to my special field (0.695, 0.782) • Making a theoretical contribution to science (0.491, 0.461) • Commitment to an engineering career (dichotomous)

  7. Methods • Independent variables • Socializing experiences • Internship programs • Undergraduate research • Major-related clubs or organizations • Faculty support and mentoring • Career concern: Working for social change • Campus climate • Negative cross-racial interactions • Singled out on the basis of gender, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation • Heard faculty express racial stereotypes in class • Interactions

  8. Methods • Controls • Pretest for both dependent variables • Student background characteristics and demographics • High school academic preparation • Pre-college expectations and aspirations • Institutional characteristics

  9. Results: Engineering Identity

  10. Results: Commitment to Engineering Career

  11. Conclusions • Interventions enhance students’ sense of engineering identity and commitment • Campus climate does not appear to affect engineering identity • However feelings of isolation among women and negative cross-racial interactions remain common • Students more concerned with social change have stronger engineering identities • Different socialization experiences may influence outcomes in different ways

  12. Implications Continue and expand internship programs and engineering student organizations Though campus climate appears unrelated to engineering identity, attention to improving the climate is still necessary Engineering programs should identify channels for students to engage in social justice work (i.e. Engineers Without Borders) Tying these engineering experiences to different socialization outcomes helps faculty more intentionally structure them

  13. Thank you!

More Related