Differences in Pre-College Engineering
Participation Between Engineering Majors
Noah Salzman and Mathew W. Ohland
[email protected], [email protected]
Abstract - The inclusion of engineering in formal and
informal K-12 learning activities has grown increasingly common in recent years, resulting in increasing opportunities and greater numbers of students encountering and studying engineering prior to matriculation in a university engineering program. To understand how these programs may be influencing students’ major decisions, we conducted a survey of all first-year engineering students at a large research university upon completion of the introductions to the various engineering schools as part of the first-year engineering class. Students reported their choice of engineering major, along with their level of participation in a variety of pre-college engineering settings including
stand-alone engineering classes, engineering
incorporated in mathematics or science classes, and various informal learning opportunities such as extracurricular programs or summer camps. Results of the survey show that approximately 78% of students have had some significant exposure to engineering prior to attending university, with “significant” defined as one or more projects, courses or activities involving engineering. Including those students that reported at least minimal participation increases the rate of participation to approximately 89%. Clear differences in participation between the different majors exist. Students in Civil Engineering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nuclear Engineering, and Aeronautics and Astronautics were more likely to have participated in pre-college engineering activities, while students in Chemical Engineering, Environmental Engineering, and those intending to leave engineering at the end of the semester were less likely to have been involved in pre-college engineering activities.
Index Terms – K-12 Engineering, Pre-College Engineering
INTRODUCTION
Students can experience pre-college engineering in many different contexts. With the inclusion of significant engineering content in many states education standards, many students will encounter engineering concepts and projects in their mathematics or science courses [1], [2]. The inclusion of significant engineering learning outcomes in the Next Generation Science Standards may result in more students undertaking engineering design projects as part of their science curriculum [3]. The growth of
standalone pre-college engineering classes such as those developed by Project Lead The Way (PLTW), the International Technology and Engineering Education Association (ITEEA) and others has resulted in numerous opportunities for students to study topics related to engineering and do design projects at the middle and high school. Engineering is Elementary (EiE), is a curriculum and professional development provider working to increase the presence of engineering in the elementary classroom. As a result of these initiatives, students are much more likely to encounter engineering as part of their pre-college studies.
In addition to formal learning within the classroom, numerous opportunities exist for students to learn about engineering in informal learning environments. These include extracurricular programs such as robotics competitions or after school engineering clubs, engineering-focused summer camps, and university sponsored pre-college engineering outreach programs designed to engage students and encourage them to pursue further study in engineering. Other ways students can be exposed to engineering prior to university include internships at engineering companies, school or community-based maker spaces, among others.
Despite the growing prevalence of pre-college engineering opportunities, relatively little is known about engineering students’ overall participation in these experiences or how they affect their pursuit of an undergraduate engineering education. Research on individual programs such as Project Lead The Way [4] and FIRST Robotics [5] suggests that students who participate in these programs tend to pursue engineering degrees at higher rates than students who have not participated in pre-college engineering programs. Participation can also positively affect students’ transitions from secondary education to First-Year Engineering by helping students develop a stronger identity as an engineer and increasing their comfort solving open-ended design problems as part of a team [6]. They can also have negative effects by creating unrealistic expectations about the content of university engineering courses and the level of mathematic and scientific ability necessary to be successful in most engineering programs[6].
In addition to a lack of information on the effectiveness of pre-college engineering programs at preparing students for studying engineering at the university level, most universities do not know how many of their incoming students have had these experiences, or their role in
influencing students’ choice of engineering major. This is of particular concern to first-year engineering programs, as these programs are responsible for helping students transition from secondary to university education, and many first-year engineering programs address major selection as part of their curricula.
To address these issues, we sought to answer the following research questions: 1) What is the prevalence of participation in different contexts of pre-college engineering among First-Year Engineering students? 2) Does a relationship exist between students’ rates and types of pre-college engineering participation and their intended major?
METHODS
The first engineering class in the First-Year Engineering program at Purdue University includes visits from each of the schools within the College of Engineering to provide students with information about each of the engineering majors available within the college and assist the students in choosing an engineering discipline. Upon completion of the last school presentation, all of the First-Year Engineering students completed a short survey administered via Qualtrics. The survey requested their first choice of engineering major, and also asked students to indicate their exposure to engineering prior to university across 9 different contexts. The contexts were elementary school class, middle school engineering class, engineering within a middle school mathematics or science class, high school engineering class, engineering within a high school mathematics or science class, extracurricular activity, university-sponsored pre-college engineering activity, and other. For each of the contexts, students indicated their level of participation. Their options were no exposure, minimal exposure, one project or class, two projects or classes, three projects or classes, and four or more projects or classes. These options were coded numerically as 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively.
RESULTS
A total of 1576 students completed the survey. Of the respondents, 1227 or ~78% indicated at least one context where they had more than minimal exposure. Including students who only reported minimal pre-college engineering experiences increases those numbers to 1411 or ~89%. Only 165 students (~11%) indicated no exposure to engineering prior to attending the university.
To analyze variations in pre-college participation across the different major preferences indicated by the respondents, we began by calculating an average level of participation for each context by engineering discipline. Note that we did not attempt to average or combine scores across the different contexts, as the data represented different kinds of participation. For example, for the middle school and high school engineering classes, students indicated the number of classes that they took, whereas for middle school and high school mathematics and science classes they indicated the number of engineering projects they participated in within
those classes. Overall engineering participation is shown in Table 1.
TABLE I
OVERALL PRE-COLLEGE ENGINEERING PARTICIPATION
Context Number indicating minimal or greater Number indicating one or more projects or classes Mean Participation University 415 (26.3%) 279 (17.7%) 0.38 Summer Camp 462 (29.3%) 303 (19.2%) 0.40 Elementary School 685 (43.4%) 248 (15.7%) 0.45 Middle School Engineering Class 739 (46.8%) 382 (24.2%) 0.56 Other 783 (49.6%) 469 (29.7%) 0.76 Middle School Math or Science Class 1012 (64.1%) 589 (37.3%) 0.83 Extracurricular Activity 929 (58.9%) 664 (42.1%) 1.09 High School Engineering Class 972 (61.6%) 769 (48.7%) 1.42 High School Math
or Science Class
1183 (75.0%) 870 (55.1%) 1.43
To facilitate comparisons between both the different pre-college engineering contexts and the different engineering disciplines, we created two sets of data displays. The first set, shown in Figure 1, shows the average level of participation for each of the engineering majors, grouped by pre-college engineering context. The red line on each chart shows the median participation for each of the contexts.
These graphs show several interesting areas of variation in the students’ pre-college engineering participation. The graphs are sorted in decreasing order of overall level of participation, and there is considerable difference in the level of participation between the different engineering contexts. This ranges from an average of slightly less than 1.5 engineering projects in a math or science class, to typically minimal or no exposure to engineering in an elementary school class. Other prevalent pre-college activities include high school engineering classes and extracurricular activities. Students generally reported moderate exposure to both middle school engineering classes or engineering projects in middle school math or science classes, and in addition to elementary schools also reported low participation in engineering summer camps or university-sponsored outreach programs.
The graphs in Figure 1 also show different amounts of variability in participation between majors for the contexts of pre-college engineering, as well as some interesting outliers. For most of the contexts, each major’s average participation lies fairly close to the median, indicating relatively little variation between the majors. However, high school math and science class engineering projects, high school engineering classes, and extracurricular activities all show considerable variation and differences between the highest and lowest levels of participation. These graphs also allow for easy identification of outliers, in particular that Nuclear Engineering students are much more likely to report having completed engineering projects in their high school
FIGURE 1
AVERAGE LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION FOR EACH OF THE ENGINEERING MAJORS, GROUPED BY PRE-COLLEGE ENGINEERING CONTEXT (N=1576)
Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer (226) Nuclear (16) Civil (87)
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
High School Math or Science
Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 High School Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Extracurricular Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87)
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Middle School Math or Science
Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Other Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Middle School Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Summer Camp Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 University Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer Nuclear (16) Civil (87) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Elementary Environmental (28) Leaving Engineering (31) Chemical (152) Materials (41) Construc=on Mngmt. (38) Undecided (212) Biomedical (73) Industrial (95) Agricultural and Biological (46) Mechanical (383) Aero and Astro (141) Electrical and Computer (226) Nuclear (16) Civil (87)
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Average
Average Par=cipa=on of Given Major Median Par=cipa=on Across All Majors
FIGURE 1
AVERAGE LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION FOR EACH OF THE PRE-COLLEGE ENGINEERING CONTEXTS, GROUPED BY INTENDED MAJOR (N=1576)
University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Environmental University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Intend to Leave Engineering University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Chemical University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Materials University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Construc?on Management University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Undecided University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Biomedical University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Industrial University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Agricultural and Biological University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Mechanical University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Aeronau?cs and Astronau?cs University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Electrical and Computer
University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 Nuclear University Summer Camp Elementary Middle Other Middle Math Sci Extracurricular High High Math Sci
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Civil
Average Par=cipa=on for the Indicated Major
Median Par=cipa=on Across All Majors (Same for Each Graph)
math and science classes, whereas environmental engineering students were much less likely to report being exposed to any engineering in high school.
The second set of data displays, shown in Figure 2, shows the average level of participation for each of the pre-college engineering contexts, grouped by intended major. In each of these plots, the diamond markers indicate the average participation level for each engineering context for the given major, while the dot markers indicate the median participation for each context.
These charts also show several interesting trends. For majors like Environmental Engineering, Chemical Engineering, and Materials Engineering that have lower overall levels of participation in pre-college engineering activities, they have lower levels of participation across all of the pre-college engineering contexts. Likewise, higher participation majors such as Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nuclear Engineering, and Civil Engineering tend to report higher levels of participation across all of the engineering contexts. This suggests that there may be a relationship between pre-college participation and major selection. Students indicating that they were planning to leave engineering were generally less likely to have participated in pre-college engineering activities, although they did have similar participation to their peers in high school engineering classes, engineering summer camps, and university-sponsored pre-college engineering programs.
CONCLUSION
Examining students’ experiences with engineering prior to attending Purdue University shows that an overwhelming majority of students have had some exposure to engineering, and clear differences in experiences exist related to intended engineering major. Given the significant and increasing amount of experience students have with engineering prior to university, it is important that university engineering programs are actively engaged in pre-college engineering and understand the content and pedagogy of these formal and informal learning experiences.
Based on the results presented in this paper, it seems like a relationship exists between pre-college engineering experiences and students’ choice of engineering major. Disciplines such as Environmental Engineering or Chemical Engineering that are not addressed as often as part of pre-college engineering programs and activities may face recruiting issues. Conversely, the popularity of mechanical design experiences, particularly robotics, in pre-college settings may help explain the recent rapid increases in enrollment in Mechanical Engineering across the country. Other majors that have higher average levels of pre-college engineering participation such as Aeronautics and Astronautics and Electrical and Computer engineering also tend to be well represented in pre-college engineering content through activities such as rocketry or model airplanes and electronics fabrication or programming, respectively. This is not a stable trend, as Civil and Nuclear
Engineering, the majors with the highest levels of pre-college engineering participation, do not represent content that is commonly included in the pre-college engineering curriculum.
This information is important to first-year engineering programs for several reasons. Historically, most First-Year engineering program treat their incoming students as
tabulae rasae, expecting little in the way of background
knowledge beyond a level of competency in mathematics and science. If significant portions of incoming students have prior experience with engineering, this may entail a curriculum shift to address students’ changing preparation and expectations of first-year engineering.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thank you to Dr. Stephen Hoffman of Purdue University for his assistance with data collection.
REFERENCES
[1] R. L. Carr, L. D. Bennett, and J. Strobel, “Engineering in the K 12 STEM Standards of the 50 US States: An Analysis of Presence and Extent,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 539–564, 2012.
[2] T. J. Moore, K. M. Tank, A. W. Glancy, and J. A. Kersten, “NGSS and the landscape of engineering in K-12 state science standards,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 296–318, Mar. 2015.
[3] National Research Council, Next Generation Science
Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press, 2014.
[4] R. H. Tai, “An Examination of the Research Literature on Project Lead The Way,” Project Lead The Way, Nov. 2012.
[5] A. Melchior, C. Burack, J. Gutbezahl, M. Hoover, and J. Marcus, “FIRST Longitudinal Study: Summary of Preliminary Findings – Year 2,” The Center for Youth and Communities, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, Mar. 2015.
[6] N. Salzman, G. D. Ricco, and M. W. Ohland, “Pre-College Engineering Participation Among First-Year Engineering Students,” presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN, 2014.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Noah Salzman, Assistant Professor, Boise State University, [email protected]
Matthew W. Ohland, Professor, Purdue University, [email protected]
