The Influences of First-Year Engineering Matriculation Structures on Electrical and Computer Engineering Students' Self-Efficacy

While first-year engineering (FYE) programs have grown dramatically over the last 30 years, they take a variety of different structures. However, few if any, researchers and FYE program developers has considered how program structure, and specifically matriculation, impacts retention – an issue that continues to be of concern as we seek to grown the national engineering workforce. Low retention rates combined with lack of diversity becomes even more acute when considering the field of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) which ranks as one of the least diverse engineering disciplines. One factor that has been shown to support retention is self-efficacy or individuals' beliefs in their ability to succeed. Therefore, to help address the retention issues in ECE, this dissertation explores the programmatic influence of first-year engineering matriculation structures on self-efficacy development in electrical and computer engineering students. In particular, it compares declared engineering (DE) programs, which admit students to a specific engineering field, to general engineering (GE) programs, in which students are admitted to engineering but do not select a specific engineering field until after their first year.

Using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, this dissertation presents three manuscripts: 1) a quantitative secondary analysis comparing competency beliefs in a GE program and a quasi- DE first-year engineering program for ECE students; 2) a qualitative secondary analysis of self-efficacy development in a DE first-year program; and 3) a qualitative analysis exploring similarities and differences in self-efficacy development in EE students at two universities, one with a DE program and one with a GE program.

The exploratory studies resulted in findings that demonstrate strong similarities in self-efficacy development in students from the DE and GE programs. Those differences that did emerge are largely attributed to how self-efficacy is discussed by students: 1) self-efficacy is developed differently between the two programs because the tasks associated with each program are different; 2) GE students discuss self-efficacy more broadly regarding engineering in general, focusing on domains like professional skills; 3) DE students discuss self-efficacy development more narrowly, specifically related to being an electrical or computer engineer. Additionally, the findings from study 2 suggest that pedagogical structures may be more important regarding self-efficacy development than matriculation structures. These results broaden our understanding of how FYE programs impact self-efficacy development within the context of a specific major, but still lend themselves to further exploration regarding factors most related to persistence and the experiences of underrepresented minorities in engineering.