IMPORTANCE OF FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING DESIGN PROJECTS TO SELF-EFFICACY: DO FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS FEEL LIKE ENGINEERS?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-efficacy, a belief that one can achieve a certain level of attainment, is important to student retention in engineering and technology fields. Developing ways to increase self-efficacy should be a primary concern for engineering programs. Several key tasks will be investigated including (a) the importance of design projects to self-efficacy in first-year engineering, and (b) making first-year engineering students feel like engineers. A team-based “Cornerstone” design project was undertaken by first-year engineering students as part of a Design and Graphics course. Two groups of first- year engineering students were surveyed, (1) students who had completed the course and design project in first term, and (2) students who were enrolled in the second term offering of the same course, before completing the design project. The survey focused on Bandura’s four identified sources of self-efficacy: (a) Mastery experiences, (b) Vicarious experiences, (c) Social persuasions, and (d) Physiological states, as well as a fifth often added characteristic (e) Drive and motivation. Additionally, students were asked to quantify their agreement or disagreement to the statement “I feel like an Engineer.” This paper will present the results between these two groups and will be of interest to faculty involved in freshmen design.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it