Engineering Dropouts: A Qualitative Examination of Why Undergraduates Leave Engineering

Abstract

Background While spending to prepare precollege students for engineering at universities increases, the number of engineering graduates continues to decrease, and attrition rates for engineering undergraduates remain high. Universities are motivated to understand the factors contributing to low retention of engineering undergraduates. Purpose/Hypothesis This article explores the experiences of four undergraduates who chose to leave engineering and provides insight into their reasons for leaving. Through attention to their experiences, this study captures participants' points of view as they explain how they made their decisions. Design/Method Students who recently left engineering were interviewed and completed a journey‐mapping exercise describing their motivations and experiences. Analysis identified institutional and individual factors that contributed to their decisions to leave. Results Common themes of nonpersisting engineering undergraduates included individual factors (such as poor performance, feeling unprepared for demands of the engineering program, difficulty fitting into engineering) and institutional factors (such as disappointment with engineering advising). Concepts uncovered in this article not present in existing research include an emotional attachment between participants and the concept of being an engineer, students' sense of loss and failure, and their easy transition from engineering to another major. Conclusions Individual factors leading to attrition include unwillingness of students to adapt to the rigor of the engineering program and loss of confidence due to poor performance. Institutional factors also contribute to attrition. The key to understanding why students leave engineering is at the confluence of institutional and individual factors.

Gender neutrality improved completion rate for all

“…This culture in engineering departments is a contributing factor to why students leave engineering; they find it difficult fitting into engineering and don't feel comfortable or accepted (Amelink & Meszaras, 2011;Meyer & Marx, 2014). If students on the other hand have a sense of belonging in the environment it will improve their perception of their own ability in the field, since comfort level has been shown to be a positive influence on success in computer science courses (Wilson, 2002;Veilleux et al, 2013).…”

“…In order to go beyond narrow and deterrent stereotypes of programming and programmers, the subject should not be presented and represented as a male interest and career, but rather as a practice and a craft that often is creative and social and where the coder is in a constant learning process (Doubé & Lang, 2012;Cheryan, Master & Meltzoff, 2015). A more facetted view of the subject that challenges incomplete and incorrect notions about the field could help enhance the perception of and interest in the subject, which in turn can have an impact on motivation and the decision to persist (Barnard et al, 2012;Ngambeki et al, 2012;Meyer & Marx, 2014;Dempsey et al, 2015). In chapter 1 the students get information about computers, programming and the application of them.…”

Teaching a College-wide Introductory Engineering Course Within a Freshman-year Experience

“…The final instructional approach implemented was the use of student mentors to assist with daily classroom activities and establish their role as mentors to the new students [8] . We were able to obtain financial support to pay the mentors for their participation in the program.…”

Sophomore Unified Core Curriculum for Engineering Education (SUCCEEd) at Cal State L.A.

“…Without proper preparation in these foundational years, students are not Page 26.1385.3 able to keep up with their classes and end up transferring to non-engineering majors or, in many cases, dropping out. There are several individual and institutional factors that have been associated to the inability of students to complete an engineering degree 4 . Herein, we are focusing on what seems to be one of the main causes of failure: lack of preparedness 5,6 .…”