Influence of Learning Preference on Self-Efficacy and Performance in Mixed-Modality First-Year Engineering Design

Abstract

All students have preferences for the way they receive and distribute information when the objective is learning. These preferences can be shown to have an effect on self-efficacy and on performance. The relationships between learning preference, self-efficacy and performance were studied using survey and grade data obtained from a first-year Engineering Design and Graphics course. The students were placed in one of three groups according to the modality (type) of design project they were given; a Simulation-Based project (SIM) using a software simulation tool, a Prototyping project (PRT) using a 3D printer, or a Simulation and Prototyping project (SAP) where they had to complete a design using both tools. Participants were given a custom survey that assessed self-efficacy and the VARK learning styles inventory which assesses learners on Visual, Aural, Read / Write and Kinesthetic learning preferences. 97 students were surveyed representing a response rate of 22.6%. Student performance was assessed by examining scores on a subset of questions related to design visualization on the final examination for the course. Data analysis involved examining the correlation between learning style and self-efficacy, and scores on final examination for each of the three course modality groups. Findings from this study include higher performance for Kinesthetic learners assigned a simulation-based project and low performance for Read/Write learners with a prototyping project. This study supports the hypothesis that student performance may depend on learning preferences coupled with design project modality.

Using Motivation Theory to Inform Engineering Course Design

“…Design Courses [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] Introductory Technical Courses [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31] Upper Level Technical Courses [32], [33], [34]…”

“…Case Studies, Real-World Labs, Service Learning [26], [32], [15], [17], [28], [34], [31], [35] Course Delivery [26], [27], [29], [36], [37], [30], [33], [38], [39] Assessment [13], [16], [40], [41], [22], [42], [23], [43], [44] Theory Based or Survey Results [11], [45], [46], [47], [10], [19], [48], [1], [39], [49], [24], [25], [50], [51], [52] Out-of-class activities [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58] While there have been many successful interventions that improved student motivation discussed in the CEEA 2010-2018 proceedings, the relevant motivation theory behind each intervention is often missing. Understanding motivation theory may not be necessary ...…”

Emotions Experienced by First-Year Engineering Students During Programming Tasks

“…Besides programming courses, researchers have sought to identify other causes of attrition from engineering programs. For this purpose, researchers have studied background factors (May & Chubin, 2003;Wladis, Hachey, & Conway, 2014) and non-cognitive factors like students' selfefficacy beliefs (Booth, Doyle, & Musson, 2013) and their effect on student retention in engineering. However, little is known about how emotions affect student performance, learning, and retention in engineering.…”

Board # 40 : The Relationship between Engineering Students' Self-efficacy Beliefs and Their Experience Learning Computer Programming: A Sequential Explanatory Mixed-Methods Investigation

“…Engineering education researchers have been studying the impact of students' self-efficacy beliefs on their academic achievement and persistence in engineering 4 . Studies on self-efficacy of engineering students have been conducted in the context of team discourse and student achievement 5 , engineering design projects 6 , and developing validated self-efficacy instruments for engineers 7 . Moreover, there is evidence in literature on measuring self-efficacy of engineering students in the context of programming [8][9] .…”