Session F2A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TO AND ... - ICEE

111 downloads 16278 Views 41KB Size Report
Nov 5, 2003 - A survey to measure high school students': 1) attitudes to engineering, 2) ... engineers and knowledge about engineering as a career are changing in a more .... and 7) academic and technical characteristics of engineers.
Session F2A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TO AND KNOWLEDGE ABOUT ENGINEERING Linda S. Hirsch 1 , Siobhán J. Gibbons 2 , Howard Kimmel3 , Ronald Rockland 4 , and Joel Bloom5 Abstract –The demand for engineers is expected to increase both nationally and in New Jersey. The Pre-Engineering Instructional and Outreach Program, established to enlarge the future pool of engineers in New Jersey, focuses on implementing pre-engineering curricula in middle and high schools and informing students, teachers, parents, and school counselors about the rewards of engineering careers. Along with increased enrollment in college engineering programs, successful outcomes include increased knowledge about engineering careers and more positive attitudes to engineering in high school students. A survey to measure high school students': 1) attitudes to engineering, 2) engineering skills self-efficacy, 3) self-confidence in academic abilities, 4) knowledge about engineering and 5) academic history was developed. The current paper describes the development of the survey. Preliminary results suggest that even students who have positive attitudes to engineering and are considering studying engineering know little about engineering careers and what engineers do. Index Terms – Attitudes to engineering, high school students’ attitudes, knowledge about engineering careers. The demand for engineers is expected to increase by 20% between 1998 and 2008 [12]. In New Jersey the number of baccalaureate degrees conferred between 1989 and 1999 declined approximately 23% [13]. Furthermore, women and certain race/ethnic minorities are chronically underrepresented in engineering fields in New Jersey. The proportion of women in engineering has never exceeded 11% and the proportion of African Americans and Hispanic engineers has changed very little since 1989 [13]. A crucial reason for many students’ failure to pursue engineering careers is lack of academic preparation in high school, especially in science and math. But even those students who are adequately prepared and initially choose engineering often do not persist. From their investigation of first year dropouts from engineering colleges and universities, Besterfield-Sacre et al, [2] argue that grades, while important, only partially explain why students quit engineering. Students who left in good standing had grades similar to those that stayed, but had significantly poorer attitudes to engineering: they had lower general impressions of engineering; less positive perceptions of the work engineers do; valued engineering work less; enjoyed

math/science less and; placed a lower value on engineering compared to other majors. Thus they conclude that students’ attitudes to engineering upon arrival in college are an important predictor of persistence in the major [2]. Blaisdell [5] found high school students’ interest in engineering to be another important predictor of pursuit of engineering but to date very little research has been conducted in either area. The work of Besterfield -Sacre et al [1-3], Moreno et al [11], Fuller et al [7] and Hartman [8] with college students suggests a number of other possible reasons why high school students do not choose engineering as a career. Many students have negative stereotypes about engineers (e.g. engineers are nerds) or have exaggerated positive stereotypes about engineers (e.g. engineers have to be geniuses). Students may also have incorrect notions about engineering (e.g. engineering requires no knowledge about business or the environment) or they may believe that engineering is incompatible with family life or that the monetary rewards are not worth the effort involved [5], [9]. Another possible reason why students do not pursue engineering may be that they simply know very little about the field. Unlike legal and medical careers, engineering careers are rarely depicted in TV and movies, and parents, teachers and school counselors often do not discuss engineering as a possible career. Blaisdell [5] suggests that high school students attending an engineering college recruiting event have sufficient knowledge about engineering to have formed opinions, but what they know about engineering has yet to be investigated. Thus an instrument that measures not only high school students’ attitudes to but also knowledge about engineering and engineering careers is needed. The current paper describes the development of a survey with attitudinal scales to measure high school students’ attitudes to engineers and engineering as a possible career, their engineering skills self-efficacy, their level of academic self-confidence, their academic history as well as a measure of their knowledge about engineering careers and pertinent demographic information. The survey was developed as part of the Pre-Engineering Instructional and Outreach Program (PrE-IOP), a three-year project funded by the New Jersey Commission on Higher Education, to increase the number of students, particularly those from groups traditionally underrepresented in engineering, who enroll in engineering schools in New Jersey. Chief among the project’s objectives

1

Linda S. Hirsch, Evaluation Assistant, Center for Pre-college Programs, New Jersey Institute of Technology, [email protected] Siobhan J. Gibbons, Program Evaluator, Center for Pre-college Programs, New Jersey Institute of Technology, [email protected] 3 Howard Kimmel, Executive Director, Center for Pre-college P rograms, New Jersey Institute of Technology, [email protected] 4 Ronald Rockland, Associate Dean of Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology, [email protected] 5 Joel Bloom, Vice-President for Academic and Student Services, New Jersey Instit ute of Technology, [email protected] 2

0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F2A-7

Session F2A are to increase the knowledge and awareness of engineering in high school students, their teachers, parents/guardians, and school counselors and to promote more positive attitudes to engineering. Information from this survey is being used to shape program interventions and provides data to determine whether high school students’ attitudes to engineers and knowledge about engineering as a career are changing in a more positive direction.

necessarily be an adequate assessment of students’ current knowledge about different types of engineers and what they do. Therefore, for the Knowledge of Engineering Careers measure a multiple-part open-ended format was used. Students are asked to name five different types of engineers and to give an example of the work each type of engineer does. Space is provided to list five types of engineers and one example of work done by each type of engineer.

DEVELOPMENT O F THE S URVEY

Design of the Survey

The first stage in developing the survey was to decide what specific information was needed. The questions of most importance were: • What positive and negative impressions do high school students have about engineers and engineering as a possible career for themselves? • What is their self-efficacy for engineering-related skills? • What is their academic history and level of selfconfidence in the appropriate academic subjects? • What do they know about engineering careers?

For the first two measures, the Attitudes to Engineering and Engineering Skills Self-Efficacy Scales students are asked to indicate the degree to which they agree or disagree with statements about engineers, engineering and their own engineering-related skills using a modified five point Likert scale. The typical five-point scale (1=Strongly disagree, 3=No opinion, 5=Strongly agree) has been altered to include a sixth point, “0” (zero) to indicate, “I don’t know”. The literature on survey development suggests that if people are asked to indicate responses on a scale, they will often do so, even if they feel unable or unqualified to respond [16]. Allowing the “I don’t know” option will help assess the extent to which high school students have or do not have knowledge about engineering and will provide data to measure changes in their knowledge as a result of PrE-IOP. Decreases in the number of “I don’t know” and “No Opinion” responses would indicate an increase in knowledge or the formation of an opinion, negative or positive. Items on the Attitudes to Engineering Scale refer to engineering stereotypes, skills necessary for engineering, the perceived rewards of becoming an engineer, and what engineers actually do. The Engineering Skills Self-Efficacy Scale is a self-assessment of students’ skills, interests, and preparation for engineering careers. Students are also asked whether their friends, parents/guardians, teachers or school counselors have spoken to them about engineering as a possible career. The Self-confidence in Academic Abilities Scale asks students to indicate how confident they are about their abilities in specific subject or skill areas using a sixpoint Likert scale (0=Never taken, 1=Strongly unconfident, 5=Strongly confident). The Academic History measure asks students which science, math and language arts courses they have taken in school (e.g. general math or advanced placement math). The Knowledge of Engineering Careers is an open-ended item. The demographic section asks students their gender, grade, race/ethnicity, school location, and students’ acquaintance with people who are engineers. Several drafts of the survey were reviewed and revised based on feedback from engineers and interviews with a small number of students who were asked to complete the survey. A panel of expert judges reviewed the survey and identified seven potential subscales within the attitudes to engineering section: 1) money and respect, 2) what engineers do, 3) cost vs. benefits of becoming an engineer, 4) personal inclination toward engineering, 5) contributions

As a result the survey has five measures: 1) the Attitudes to Engineering Scale, 2) the Engineering Skills Self-Efficacy Scale, 3) the Self-Confidence in Academic Subjects Scale, 4) an Academic History, 5) a Knowledge about Engineering Careers measure and a short demographic section. Survey Format and Initial Items

A mostly closed-ended questionnaire format was selected because it is the quickest and easiest method for collecting information from large numbers of respondents. Items for the initial survey were either constructed by the authors, or borrowed and adapted from existing surveys. Some attitude and self-efficacy items from the Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Attitude Survey, developed by Besterfield Sacre and her colleagues [1], were borrowed without change while others were adapted for high school students. Robinson et al’s survey [15], aimed at the adult population, provided many examples of negative stereotypes that students may have about engineers and engineering. A critical stereotype about the engineering profession is that its climate and/or career structure may not be suitable for women or anyone who wishes to have a vibrant family or leisure life. Therefore, items about equity in engineering careers, developed by Blaisdell [4], were included. Engineers who have worked in industry or teach college engineering courses provided feedback on the initial set of items and suggested a number of additional items. Absent from the current literature was an efficient means to assess high school students’ knowledge about engineering careers. A number of possible methods, including prompting students for definitions and/or examples were discussed but rejected. Providing prompts would allow for easier coding and evaluation but would not 0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F2A-8

Session F2A made by engineers , 6) personal characteristics of engineers, and 7) academic and technical characteristics of engineers. Three possible subscales within the engineering skills selfefficacy section were also identified: 1) self-efficacy for engineering related skills, 2) general academic self-efficacy, and 3) personal interest in math, science or engineering. Initial Pilot Testing New Jersey Institute of Technology provided the opportunity to survey high school students from its many outreach initiatives. These students represent high school students of various socio-economic and race/ethnic backgrounds from whom engineering recruits might be drawn i.e. girls and boys who attend career days and summer programs at NJIT. An initial version of the survey was given to 431 junior and senior high school students from urban and suburban schools in New Jersey who attended either a career day seminar or another engineering related field trip at NJIT. Sixty-two percent were male, 38% were female. Items on the Attitudes to Engineering and EngineeringSkills Self-Efficacy Scales were subjected to a principal component factor analysis to explore the validity of the ten possible subscales. Results of the analysis on the Attitudes to Engineering Scale did not support the seven subscales identified by the panel of experts (i.e. items did not group together as hypothesized). A six-factor solution accounting for 55% of the variance, suggested the items grouped differently into subscales identified as: 1) the utility of engineers/engineering, 2) interest in engineering, 3) how engineers think, 4) how engineers spend their time, 5) negative perceptions of engineers, and 6) money and respect. Results of the factor analysis on the Engineering Skills SelfEfficacy Scale showed more support for the three subscales identified by the panel of experts. Although the item structures of the subscales were not identical to those named by the panel of experts, results suggest the same three subscales with an additional subscale: friends and selfconfidence. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to determine the internal consistency of both scales and their respective subscales. Internal consistency measures the extent to which responses to items within a subscale are consistent with (similar to) responses to all other items within the same subscale. Internal consistency ranges from zero, being the lowest, to one being the highest. Items that were found to lower the internal consistency of their subscale were examined and either revised, replaced or eliminated. Items intended to measure gender and racial equity were also added at this stage and a revised version of the survey was re-piloted with several smaller groups of students. Concurrent with the piloting of the survey was the development of a coding protocol for the open-ended Knowledge of Engineering Careers measure. Three sources were used to develop the coding protocol: four introduction to engineering textbooks [6], [10], [14], [17]; web sites such as American Society for Engineering Education, National

Academy of Engineering, Engineer Girl, and those for various professional engineering organizations and; a panel of engineering experts. Responses to “Name a type of engineer” were coded as correct and given a score of “1” (one) or incorrect and given a score of “0” (zero). Possible total scores range from zero to five. All responses were coded and scored by two independent coders and compared for agreement. Inter-rater reliability (using a kappa statistic) was found to be .96. All discrepancies were discussed until agreement could be reached and the coding protocol was revised accordingly. Coding of “Give an example of the work they do”, is more complex and is not yet complete. Analysis of the Revised Version The revised version of the survey was given to 305 high school students who attended federal, state, and privately funded summer programs at NJIT. Results of a principal component factor analysis of the Attitude to Engineering Scale found subscales similar to those identified in the initia l pilot study but, as expected, the revisions and the addition of the equity items changed the overall factor structure. Though the item structures changed slightly two strong subscales remained: interest in engineering, and negative perceptions of engineers and engineering. Most of the items from the previous utility and how engineers think subscales grouped together in what appears to be a positive perceptions subscale. Different items loaded on the how engineers spend their time subscale and seemed to be more of a what engineering is subscale. Some of the money and respect items grouped with the positive perception items, while the others did not appear to belong to any factor. Items that no longer loaded on their original or another more appropriate factor were examined. One item was revised because, in retrospect, it appeared ambiguous but the remaining questionable items were eliminated. Additional items were eliminated because of their similarity to other items or because there was no variability in the distribution of responses and therefore, they provided little information. Analysis of the Engineering Skills Self-efficacy Scale found continued support for the self-efficacy for engineering-related skills and general academic self-efficacy subscales but not for the personal interest or friends and selfconfidence subscales. Several items found to over lap with those on the Attitudes to Engineering Scale were deleted. No changes were made to the Self-confidence in Academic Subjects Scale, the Knowledge of Engineering Careers measure, the Academic History or demographic sections.

RESULTS FROM THE CURRENT VERSION The current version of the survey has 25 items on the Attitudes to Engineering Scale, 8 items on the Engineering Skills Self-efficacy Scale, 9 items on the Self-confidence in Academic Subjects Scale and the Academic History. The Knowledge of Engineering Careers measure requires 10

0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F2A-9

Session F2A responses, five types of engineers and an example of the work each type does. The demographic section has 7 items. The survey was given to 381 high school juniors and seniors (70% male, 30% female) who attended a career day at NJIT in 2002. This was not a random sample, rather it represented students who were either interested in attending an engineering university or perhaps, simply wanted a day off from school. Fifty-two percent of the students were White, 14% were Hispanic, 10% were African American, 10% were Asian; 12% indicated other or did not respond to the question. Students were asked whether they talked to their parents/guardians, teachers, school counselors and/or friends about engineering as a possible career. Twenty-three percent did not indicate they had talked to anyone about careers in engineering. Twenty-seven percent indicated they had talked to teachers, 25% indicated they had talked to their parents/guardians and 21% indicated they had talked to friends but only 16% indicated they had talked to school counselors about engineering careers. Factor Structure and Reliability Analysis Results of the analyses performed on the current version of the Attitude to Engineering and Engineering Skills Selfefficacy Scales were consistent with the previous version. A principal component factor analysis found four factors accounting for 46% of the variance in students’ Attitude to Engineering: positive aspects of engineering (POSITIVE ); interest in an engineering career (INTEREST ); negative opinions about engineering (NEGATIVE ) and; job issues related to engineering (JOB I SSUES) (e.g. A career in engineering would leave me enough time to have family and leisure activities). Two items that express stereotypes about how engineers spend their time (e.g. Engineers spend most of their time working with computers.) grouped together in a small fifth factor (TIME) that explained an additional 5% of the variability. Responses to the TIME items indicated widely varied opinions with high percentages of "I don't know/No Opinion" responses, a result that is discussed later. A gender equity item (A woman can succeed in engineering just as easily as a man of similar ability.) did not load on any factor, a favorable result, as this is a unique item and should stand-alone. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to measure the internal consistency of the five subscales and the Total scale (POSITIVE .75, INTEREST .68, NEGATIVE .71, JOB I SSUES .59, TIME .43, TOTAL .87). Analysis of the Engineering Skills Self-efficacy Scale found two factors, accounting for 50% of the variability: enjoyment of engineering-related skills (ENJOYMENT ) and self-efficacy for engineering-related skills (SELF-EFFICACY). A third, single-item factor expressing a study-related preference accounted for an additional 13% of the variance. The internal consistency of the two subscales and the total scale were .71, .75 and .71 respectively.

Attitude and Efficacy Scales Responses to many of the Attitude to Engineering items were positive. Most students (86%) agreed that engineering could be an interesting career and 64% indicated they were considering studying engineering in college. Seventy percent disagreed that engineering was boring and 50% disagreed that engineers are usually people who were called nerds in high school. Only 47% wanted to study engineering because it could provide more money than most careers and 68% agreed that engineering skills would be useful in everyday life. And 67% agreed a woman could succeed in engineering as easily as a man of similar ability (see Table 1). TABLE I THE ATTITUDES TO ENGINEERING SCALE: SELECTED ITEMS Agree

Disagree

Don’t Know

I think that engineering could be an interesting career. I am considering studying engineering in college.

86%

2%

12%

64%

8%

28%

From what I know engineering is boring. Engineers are usually those people who were called "nerds" in high school.

5%

70%

25%

7%

53%

30%

Engineers have little need to know about environmental issues.

11%

66%

23%

I would like to study engineering because it provides more money than most careers.

47%

14%

39%

Most of the skills learned in engineering would be useful in everyday life.

68%

3%

29%

A woman can succeed in engineering as easily as a man of similar ability.

67%

10%

23%

If I became an engineer, I would expect the same opportunities, pay raises and promotions as my fellow workers.

64%

5%

31%

Engineers are highly respected by others.

60%

4%

36%

The rewards of becoming an engineer are not worth the effort.

5%

67%

28%

To be an engineer requires an IQ in the genius range. Engineering plays an important role in solving society's problems.

8%

60%

32%

70%

4%

26%

Engineers spend most of their time doing difficult mathematical calculations.

38%

23%

39%

I would have no problem finding a job if I had an engineering degree.

49%

10%

41% *

The advantages of studying engineering outweigh the disadvantages.

45%

6%

47% *

Engineers spend most of their time working in laboratories.

12%

38%

50% *

Engineers spend most of their time working with computers.

33%

25%

42% *

Engineers seldom get involved in business decisions.

21%

35%

44% *

A career in engineering would leave me time for family & leisure activities

35%

13%

52% *

0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F2A-10

Session F2A Note. For this table, agree and strongly agree are combined in Agree, disagree and strongly disagree are combined in Disagree and I don’t know and No opinion have been combined into Don’t Know. * Indicates items with high “I don’t know” and/or “No Opinion” responses.

The average response to all items on the Attitudes to Engineering Scale was 3.89 with a standard deviation of .44. Higher averages (close to 5) on the subscales that emphasize positive aspects of engineering (POSITIVE , INTEREST , and JOB ISSUES) are desirable while lower averages (close to 1) are desirable for the subscales that emphasize negative aspects (NEGATIVE and TIME ). For the TOTAL scale, negatively stated items were reversed so that higher average scores indicate more positive attitudes. Although the expectation was for the positive subscales to be higher than those obtained and for the negative subscales to be lower than those obtained, responses were in the desired direction. Average responses to items on the positive subscales were greater than three and average responses to the negative subscales were less than three (see Table 2). Responses to the Engineering Skills Self-Efficacy Scale were also positive. Sixty-nine percent indicated that they felt confident in their ability to study engineering in college and almost 71% said they enjoyed the subjects of math and science the most. Seventy-seven percent also felt they had good problem solving skills. Average responses close to five are also desirable for the Engineering Skills Self-Efficacy and Self-Confidence in Academic Subjects Scales and subscales. Again the average responses were not as high as expected but they were greater than three (see Table 2). As might be expected, average self-confidence scores were higher for math and science (4.07) abilities than for writing and speaking skills (3.88). TABLE II ATTITUDES TO ENGINEERING, ENGINEERING SKILLS SELFEFFICACY AND SELF-CONFIDENCE IN A CADEMIC A BILITIES SCALES: M EANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS. Attitudes To Engineering Scale POSITIVE subscale NEGATIVE subscale * INTEREST subscale JOB ISSUES subscale TIME subscale*

N 380 379 379 378 364 344

Mean 3.89 4.03 2.37 3.79 3.63 2.89

(SD) (.44) (.48) (.60) (.67) (.72) (.82)

Engineering Skills Self-efficacy Scale SELF-EFFICACY subscale ENJOYMENT subscale

373 367 373

3.84 3.87 3.87

(.66) (.87) (.68)

Self-Confidence in Academic Abilities MATH & SCIENCE WRITING & SPEAKING

374 373 360

4.01 4.07 3.88

(.55) (.68) (.86)

* For these subscales items are phrased negatively. Therefore a lower mean is desirable.

Average responses to all the attitudinal scales and the respective subscales were compared among the African

American, Hispanic, Asian and White students but no significant differences were found on either Total scale or any of the subscales. Academic History Students were asked to indicate whether they had taken courses in algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, chemistry, physics, writing and speaking. While less than 2% of all the students indicated that they had not yet taken algebra and only 5% indicated they had not yet taken geometry, a high percentage of the seniors indicated they had not taken trigonometry (17%) or calculus (30%). Only 17% of all students indicated they had not yet taken chemistry (7% of the seniors) but almost 42% (16% of the seniors) indicated they had not taken physics. Knowledge of Engineering Of the 381 students in the current sample only 96 (25%) could correctly name five different types of engineers. One hundred eleven (almost 30%) either gave no response or none of their responses were correct. The dis tribution of scores was not normally distributed so it was not possible to calculate a mean score but the median score was three. The distributions of all items on the Attitudes to Engineering Scale were examined to identify items with high percentages of "I don't know" and/or "No Opinion" responses. Although the average response to most items was fairly positive students provided a high percentage of “I don’t know” and “No opinion” responses to a surprising number of items. For instance, 41% of the students indicated that they had no opinion or do not know whether they would have a problem finding a job if they had an engineering degree. Forty-four percent indicated they did not know or had no opinion as to whether engineers get involved in business decisions. Even more (50%) do not know or have no opinion as to whether engineers spend most of their time working in laboratories (see Table 1).

DISCUSSION The current sample of students is not representative of the general population of high school students in New Jersey. Rather, they represent the students from whom engineering recruits are likely to be drawn: those who elect or are selected to attend career day at a technological university. The students indicated some predictably positive attitudes to engineers and engineering as a career. For instance, approximately 86% agreed that engineering could be an interesting career and 64% indicated that they were considering studying engineering in college. Only 47% said they would like to study engineering because it could provide them with more money than most careers indicating at least some of the students are being motivated by something more intrinsic than money.

0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F2A-11

Session F2A The generally positive response to engineering from this group of students is not surprising; nevertheless, they exhibit some reservations. Not all of those who thought that engineering might be an interesting career were considering studying engineering in college. The data provides some clues as to why this might be. Only two-thirds think that becoming an engineer would be worth the effort and almost half indicated that they did not know if the advantages of studying engineering outweighed the disadvantages. Responses to other items suggest what some of the disadvantages might be, for instance, their assessment of the demands and the working conditions of an engineering career. Only half indicated that they would have no problem finding a job if they had an engineering degree and slightly less than two-thirds think that they would be given the same opportunities as their fellow workers. Moreover, only one third believe that an engineering career would leave them enough time for family and leisure activities. How much do students know about engineering and engineering careers? Over 80% realize that engineering requires flexibility in thinking and good problem solving skills but they seem less sure about what engineering entails. While almost two-thirds indicate that engineers need to know about environmental issues, 43% don’t know or have no opinion on whether engineers get involved in business decisions. Their knowledge about specific engineering careers seems even less adequate. Only one-quarter of these students, who are ostensibly interested in engineering careers, could correctly name five different types of engineers. Nearly half gave two or fewer responses. Thus it seems likely that these students, despite having many of the prerequisite for engineering such as interest in engineering, self-confidence in math and science subjects, simply have very little knowledge about engineering. Some of their unfamiliarity with engineering may be explained by the fact that only 16% have spoken to their school counselors about engineering, and 23% percent haven’t discussed engineering as a career with anyone. Not talking to a school counselor might also explain why some of the seniors had not yet taken physics or chemistry. Future studies will examine what middle school students, their parents, teachers and school counselors think about engineering and engineering careers.

[3] Besterfield-Sacre, M., Atman, C.J. & Shuman, L.J. “Engineering students attitudes assessment.” Journal of Engineering Education, 87(2), 1998. 133-141. [4] Blaisdell, S. Social Cognitive theory predictors of entry into engineering majors for high school students, Unpublished Dissertation University of Arizona. 2000. [5] Blaisdell, S. “Students’ decision to enter engineering: How men and women differ.” WEPAN Annual Conference, 2000. 243-251. [6] Craver, W.L, Schroder, D.C. & Tarquin, A. Introduction to engineering, New York: Oxford University Press. 1987. [7] Fuller, H., Grant, S.C., Lawyer, K.C., Porter, R.L. & Rajala, S.A. “Attitude about engineering survey: A study of confidence by gender", Fall 1995 and 1996, ASEE Annual Conference, Washington D.C. Sep. 19-20, 1997. [8] Hartman, H. "A gender lens on Rowan University’s College of engineering", Joint NAMEPA/WEPAN National Conference, Alexandria, Virginia, Apr. 21-24, 2001.32-38. [9] Hofman, H. "Engineering as a career choice: Strengthening the weakest link" WEPAN National Conference, 2000. 137-143 [10] Kemper, J. D. Introduction to the engineering profession. New York: Oxford University Press. 1993 [11] Moreno, M., Besterfield-Sacre, M., Shuman, L.J., Wolfe, H. & Atman, C.J. "Self assessed confidence in EC-2000 Outcomes: A study of gender & ethnicity differences across institutions", 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Annual Conference. Kansas City, MO., Oct 2000. TA23-28. [12] National Science Board. Science and engineering indicators 2000, Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, 2000 (NSB-00-1). [13] New Jersey Commission on Higher Education. Higher education outcomes and high-tech workforce demands. The fifth annual system wide accountability report. 2001. [14] Oakes, W.C., Leone, L.L. & Gunn, C.J. Engineering your future. An introduction to engineering, St. Louis, MO: Great Lakes Press. 2002.

REFERENCES

[15] Robinson, M., Fadali, M.S., Carr, J. & Maddux, C. “Engineering principles for high school students.” 29th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Nov 10-13, 1999. San Juan, Puerto Rico. [16] Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M. Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1982. [17] Wright, P.H. Introduction to engineering, New York: John Wiley & Sons. 2002.

[1] Besterfield-Sacre, M. & Atman, C.J. "Survey design methodology: Measuring Freshman attitudes about engineering", ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Edmonton, Canada. June 1994. [2] Besterfield-Sacre, M., Atman, C.J. & Shuman, L.J. "Characteristics of freshman engineering students: Models for determining student attrition in engineering", Journal of Engineering Education, 86(2), 1997. 139-149.

0-7803-7961-6/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE November 5-8, 2003, Boulder, CO 33 rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference F2A-12