工程专业本科生的课外参与:他们有时间和动力吗?

IF 5.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Stem Education Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1
Andrew Olewnik, Yunjeong Chang, Mengchen Su
{"title":"工程专业本科生的课外参与:他们有时间和动力吗?","authors":"Andrew Olewnik,&nbsp;Yunjeong Chang,&nbsp;Mengchen Su","doi":"10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Co-curricular activities are often touted as valuable STEM learning opportunities in higher education settings. Particularly in engineering, industry encourage and seek students with co-curricular experiences. However, many engineering undergraduates do not regularly participate in those experiences. Some researchers have suggested that the rigors of the curriculum leave little time for co-curriculars. Yet, little research has empirically examined the reality of the undergraduate students' involvement in co-curriculars. Thus, as an initial study, we situated our study in a large public university to explore students' motivations for co-curriculars. In this paper we report on our efforts to understand student perceptions about the value and costs of that involvement. We considered how undergraduate engineering students used their time and what motivated them to engage (or not) in co-curriculars using Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT). Students' motivation was investigated with a quantitative research methodology and complemented by interview data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results of our motivation survey show that students who participated in co-curriculars perceived less cost than those who never participated. We also found that the achievement values of co-curriculars does not necessarily motivate student involvement. Interview data were used to further interpret quantitative data results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the context of study findings and existent literature, we discuss several implications for future research and practice. First, we argue for a more granular investigation of student time use and its impact on co-curricular participation. Second, despite the potential for high impact outcomes, students who have never participated perceived high cost for co-curricular engagement. Those perceptions may aggravate inequitable engagement of student populations, including historically marginalized populations in the STEM field. Third, students do not necessarily associate co-curricular experiences with the types of achievement values and learning that institutions, alumni, and industry might consider most important. Thus, to build and support co-curricular programs that provide the holistic educational experiences and learning that are anticipated, research that supports design of co-curricular programs and policies to improve engagement and persistence in those programs for all students is necessary.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1.</p>","PeriodicalId":48581,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Stem Education","volume":"10 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10074349/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Co-curricular engagement among engineering undergrads: do they have the time and motivation?\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Olewnik,&nbsp;Yunjeong Chang,&nbsp;Mengchen Su\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Co-curricular activities are often touted as valuable STEM learning opportunities in higher education settings. Particularly in engineering, industry encourage and seek students with co-curricular experiences. However, many engineering undergraduates do not regularly participate in those experiences. Some researchers have suggested that the rigors of the curriculum leave little time for co-curriculars. Yet, little research has empirically examined the reality of the undergraduate students' involvement in co-curriculars. Thus, as an initial study, we situated our study in a large public university to explore students' motivations for co-curriculars. In this paper we report on our efforts to understand student perceptions about the value and costs of that involvement. We considered how undergraduate engineering students used their time and what motivated them to engage (or not) in co-curriculars using Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT). Students' motivation was investigated with a quantitative research methodology and complemented by interview data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results of our motivation survey show that students who participated in co-curriculars perceived less cost than those who never participated. We also found that the achievement values of co-curriculars does not necessarily motivate student involvement. Interview data were used to further interpret quantitative data results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the context of study findings and existent literature, we discuss several implications for future research and practice. First, we argue for a more granular investigation of student time use and its impact on co-curricular participation. Second, despite the potential for high impact outcomes, students who have never participated perceived high cost for co-curricular engagement. Those perceptions may aggravate inequitable engagement of student populations, including historically marginalized populations in the STEM field. Third, students do not necessarily associate co-curricular experiences with the types of achievement values and learning that institutions, alumni, and industry might consider most important. Thus, to build and support co-curricular programs that provide the holistic educational experiences and learning that are anticipated, research that supports design of co-curricular programs and policies to improve engagement and persistence in those programs for all students is necessary.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Stem Education\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10074349/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Stem Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Stem Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:在高等教育环境中,课外活动经常被吹捧为有价值的STEM学习机会。特别是在工程、工业方面,鼓励和寻找有课外经验的学生。然而,许多工科本科生并不经常参加这些体验。一些研究人员认为,严格的课程安排几乎没有给课外活动留出时间。然而,很少有研究对大学生参与课外活动的现实情况进行实证检验。因此,作为一项初步研究,我们将研究地点设在一所大型公立大学,以探索学生选修联合课程的动机。在本文中,我们报告了我们为了解学生对这种参与的价值和成本的看法所做的努力。我们使用期望价值理论(EVT)来考虑工程本科学生如何利用他们的时间,以及是什么促使他们参与(或不参与)联合课程。学生的学习动机采用定量研究方法,辅以访谈资料。结果:我们的动机调查结果显示,参加课外活动的学生比从未参加过课外活动的学生认为成本更低。我们还发现,合作课程的成就价值并不一定会激发学生的参与。访谈数据用于进一步解释定量数据结果。结论:在研究结果和现有文献的背景下,我们讨论了未来研究和实践的几点启示。首先,我们主张对学生时间使用及其对课外参与的影响进行更细致的调查。其次,尽管有可能产生高影响的结果,但从未参加过课外活动的学生认为参与课外活动的成本很高。这些看法可能会加剧学生群体的不平等参与,包括在STEM领域历史上被边缘化的群体。第三,学生不一定把课外经历与学校、校友和行业可能认为最重要的成就价值观和学习联系起来。因此,为了建立和支持提供预期的整体教育体验和学习的课外课程,支持课外课程设计和政策的研究以提高所有学生对这些课程的参与度和持久性是必要的。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,下载地址:10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Co-curricular engagement among engineering undergrads: do they have the time and motivation?

Background: Co-curricular activities are often touted as valuable STEM learning opportunities in higher education settings. Particularly in engineering, industry encourage and seek students with co-curricular experiences. However, many engineering undergraduates do not regularly participate in those experiences. Some researchers have suggested that the rigors of the curriculum leave little time for co-curriculars. Yet, little research has empirically examined the reality of the undergraduate students' involvement in co-curriculars. Thus, as an initial study, we situated our study in a large public university to explore students' motivations for co-curriculars. In this paper we report on our efforts to understand student perceptions about the value and costs of that involvement. We considered how undergraduate engineering students used their time and what motivated them to engage (or not) in co-curriculars using Expectancy-Value Theory (EVT). Students' motivation was investigated with a quantitative research methodology and complemented by interview data.

Results: Results of our motivation survey show that students who participated in co-curriculars perceived less cost than those who never participated. We also found that the achievement values of co-curriculars does not necessarily motivate student involvement. Interview data were used to further interpret quantitative data results.

Conclusions: In the context of study findings and existent literature, we discuss several implications for future research and practice. First, we argue for a more granular investigation of student time use and its impact on co-curricular participation. Second, despite the potential for high impact outcomes, students who have never participated perceived high cost for co-curricular engagement. Those perceptions may aggravate inequitable engagement of student populations, including historically marginalized populations in the STEM field. Third, students do not necessarily associate co-curricular experiences with the types of achievement values and learning that institutions, alumni, and industry might consider most important. Thus, to build and support co-curricular programs that provide the holistic educational experiences and learning that are anticipated, research that supports design of co-curricular programs and policies to improve engagement and persistence in those programs for all students is necessary.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40594-023-00410-1.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Stem Education
International Journal of Stem Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
12.40
自引率
11.90%
发文量
68
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of STEM Education is a multidisciplinary journal in subject-content education that focuses on the study of teaching and learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). It is being established as a brand new, forward looking journal in the field of education. As a peer-reviewed journal, it is positioned to promote research and educational development in the rapidly evolving field of STEM education around the world.
期刊最新文献
Nine years of development in establishing the journal as a learning and research hub in STEM education Using intensive longitudinal methods to quantify the sources of variability for situational engagement in science learning environments STEM education institutional change projects: examining enacted approaches through the lens of the Four Categories of Change Strategies Model ChatGPT and its ethical implications for STEM research and higher education: a media discourse analysis Motivational climate predicts effort and achievement in a large computer science course: examining differences across sexes, races/ethnicities, and academic majors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1