Keywords: motivation, confidence, coursework, instruction
Portraying the Academic Experiences of Students in Engineering: Students’ Perceptions
of Their
Educational Experiences and Career Aspirations in Engineering
Understanding better the experiences of students pursuing an engineering degree is an important issue for
the pedagogy of engineering programs. This study sought to identify students’ perceptions of their educational
experiences and their motivations for and dreams of a career in engineering.
Implications of Findings
This paper argues that the learning environment of the engineering program includes structural, cultural, and
processual factors that may undermine student learning. The findings of this study indicate that the system through
which students acquire their education affects not only what and how they learn, but also informs students’ as
they develop a set of values and beliefs about the profession of engineering. An educational system that promotes
competition, individual effort, and test results with limited attention to the learning process, including
opportunities for practical and hands-on experiences, seems to create unnecessary difficulties for students.
Conceptually, there is merit in students’ decisions to leave engineering programs if they conclude there is not a
good fit with their interests, aspirations, and goals. However, in some cases, fully capable and eager students are
leaving, not because the discipline is a poor fit, but because the educational experience is a poor fit. Regarding
the concern of attrition and the goal of increasing the number of women and minorities in engineering programs, it
seems counter-productive to drive away talented and capable students with pedagogical practices that create
unnecessary difficulties.
(Please see the full-text paper at the link below to read a discussion of the “Seven Principles of Good Practice
in Undergraduate Education” (Tinto, V., 1993) as they relate to the findings of this study.)
| It is important to recognize that what students learn about engineering may be at odds with our
best intentions, the needs of the students, and the future of the profession.
|
Method and Background
This study was an extension of the Academic Pathways Study (APS) developed by the Center for the Advancement of
Engineering Education (CAEE). It attempted to understand the perceptions of engineering students’ educational
experiences and knowledge of engineering in the Institute of Technology (IT) at the University of Minnesota (UMN).
This study was cross-sectional and gathered a wealth of information about students’ motivations and perceptions
of engineering, as well as the educational experiences of students.
The UMN online survey cross-sectionally targeted 160 students across the four undergraduate classes. The survey
was administered in the fall of 2005 and again in the spring of 2006. The spring administration also included an
additional sample of transfer students. As a supplement to the quantitative data, a series of six focus groups were
conducted—two each for non-transfer women, non-transfer men, and mixed gender transfer students. Each group lasted
from 1.5 to 2 hours and included students from each of the four academic years. Questions covered the same topics
covered in the survey and were designed to elaborate on the survey information.
What We Found
The survey asked students about four different sources of motivation to study engineering: financial, family,
social good, and mentor influence. Survey findings reported that social good was rated the highest, followed by
financial motivation. There were no significant differences between men and women or upper and lower division
students regarding motivations to study engineering, however, non-transfer students were more highly motivated by
financial reasons to study engineering than transfer students.
Many students in the focus groups also described a strong preference for engineering because they perceived it
was more objective, logical, and concrete. Students also preferred the practical or applied nature of engineering.
They held little interest and found little value in debate, subjectivity, and opinion, which they claimed were the
attributes of liberal arts classes.
Overall, students reported moderate levels of confidence in their engineering and non-engineering skills and rated
math and science skills as more important than professional and interpersonal skills for engineering success.
However, students rated their level of knowledge of engineering relatively low. The most debilitating experiences
related to course load and pedagogy.
Women reported significantly more difficulty coping with the pace and load demands of engineering-related courses
and higher levels of involvement in extra-curricular activities. And compared to transfer students, non-transfer
students reported higher levels of academic disengagement for liberal arts classes and lower levels of overall
satisfaction with their collegiate experience.
Students also described their frustrations with the grading procedures (the curve) and problems with their TAs.
These problems were most acute for lower division students. Upper division students also experienced, what to them,
were more reasonable grading procedures in their major classes. They also had TAs that were involved more in their
major topics.
It is important to recognize that what students learn about engineering may be at odds with our best intentions,
the needs of the students, and the future of the profession. Furthermore, it may confound our best efforts to
recruit and retain students who are not only fully capable of contributing to this profession, but may be our best
resource for creativity and innovation in the future.
Authors: Russell Korte and Karl Smith
Source: Proceedings of the 2007 American Society for Engineering Education Conference
The full paper, including references, is available via ASEE proceedings search.
For a printable pdf of this research brief, click here.
Brief created August 2007
Back to Research Briefs