2013 - Investing in the Future: Testing the Efficacy of Socialization Within Undergraduate Engineering Degree Programs

Attribution: Hughes, Bryce E., & Hurtado, Sylvia
Researchers: Bryce E. HughesSylvia Hurtado
University Affiliation: University of California, Los Angeles; Montana State University
Email: Bryce.Hughes@montana.edu
Research Question:
This study looks to understand how an engineering identity is developed, particularly with underrepresented minorities (URMs) and women. Also, this study looks at what factors encourage an engineering student to commit to an engineering career.
Published: No
Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation: N/A
Journal Entry: N/A
Year: 2013
Findings:
  1. The strongest predictor in the engineering identity model and the model for commitment to an engineering career is initial sense of engineering identity at college entry, the pretest.
  2. Among college experiences, three experiences are significantly related to change in engineering identity. Students with greater concern for a career where they can work for social change, students who receive more mentoring and support from faculty, and students who experience more negative cross-racial interactions also indicate developing a stronger sense of engineering identity.
  3. The relationship between being singled out on the basis of race/ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation and engineering identity development is more pronounced for women than men. Women with a stronger sense of engineering identity report a higher frequency of being singled out.
  4. Students who participate in internship programs and in major-related clubs and organizations are more likely to commit to an engineering career.
Scholarship Types: Unpublished Institutional Report (e.g.Keywords: CommitmentEngineeringHigher EducationIdentitySocializationRegions: NationalMethodologies: QuantitativeResearch Designs: Secondary Survey DataAnalysis Methods: Descriptive StatisticsMultilevel Models Sampling Frame:Undergraduate Students
Sampling Types: Non-Random - PurposiveAnalysis Units: SchoolStudentData Types: Quantitative-Longitudinal
Data Description:
  • This study utilizes Weidman et al. (2001) theory of socialization. Weidman et al.(2001) indicate the primary outcome of graduate and professional school socialization is the development of a novice professional practitioner. In their model, this outcome is represented by what they posit are the two elements of successful socialization, professional identity and commitment to the field. However, while Weidman et al. may identify professional identity and commitment as the “outcomes” of the socialization process, they also argue that their model is dynamic and interactive. As a result, they conclude that the development of a professional identity and commitment to the field are interactive elements of the overall socialization process and thus affect and are affected by the other aspects of the model.
  • The data for this study came from the 2004 Freshman Survey and the 2008 College Senior Survey which were both administered by the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP). Students’ 2008 responses were matched to their 2004 responses to produce a longitudinal data set. The overall data set contains 6,224 students from 237 colleges and universities. The sample of interest in this study were students that aspired to an engineering degree at college entry. The sample size contained 979 students from 129 institutions. 22.74% of the sample were females, 53.64% were URM students, 9.91% were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 29.59% were first generation.
  • The dependent variables were engineering identity and commitment to an engineering career. Engineering identity was measured as the importance of becoming an authority in the field, gaining recognition from colleagues for contributions to the field, making a theoretical contribution to science, and working to find a cure for health problems. Commitment to an engineering career variable was measured by whether a student aspired to an engineering career in their fourth year as a dichotomous variable indicating whether their planned career in 2008 was engineering or not.
  • The independent variables contained two sets of variables. The first set of independent variables includes whether or not students participated in internships, major-related clubs, and undergraduate research programs as well as construct measuring faculty mentoring and support. The second set measures perceptions of a hostile climate. These include a construct measuring frequency of negative cross-racial interactions and items measuring being singled out on the basis of gender, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation and hearing faculty express racial/ethnic stereotypes. The control variables consisted of three sets of variables. The first set were pretests of the dependent variables that were used to control for initial measures of engineering identity at college entry. The second set included demographic items like sex and race/ethnicity. The third set of control variables included items measuring students’ pre-college academic preparation.
  • A limitation of this study is that several of the independent variables were measured on the same survey as the dependent variables. While the control variables were taken from a survey administered to this group of students four years prior to the measurement of the dependent variable, the relationship that their key independent variables of interest have with the outcomes is cross-sectional.
Theoretical Framework:
Relevance:Factors Related to STEM Readiness, STEM Entrance and Majoring in STEM
Archives: K-16 STEM Abstracts