Marisa K. Orr

Engineering matriculation paths: Outcomes of Direct Matriculation, First-Year Engineering, and Post-General Education Models

Longitudinal data from ten U.S. institutions are used to characterize outcomes of three matriculation models: Direct Matriculation to a specific major (DM), First-Year Engineering programs (FYE), and Post-General Education Programs (PGE). Both DM and FYE programs show high persistence rates, but FYE programs are less likely to attract transfer students and switchers. FYE graduates are the most likely to stick with their first choice of major (after completing FYE requirements), followed by DM graduates who begin in undesignated engineering (taking extra time to decide), then DM graduates who choose their major as part of the matriculation process, and then PGE graduates. FYE students also have the shortest time to graduation. We conclude that encouraging students to associate with engineering or an engineering discipline from the start, yet maintaining the curricular flexibility to allow alternate entry points onto the engineering path improves persistence, accessibility, effectiveness of major choice, and time to graduation.

Understanding engineering transfer students: Demographic characteristics and educational outcomes

Transfer students make up a significant share of engineering college graduates, yet their persistence is seldom studied, largely because of the lack of longitudinal data. This analysis used longitudinal data from 11 universities enrolling large numbers of engineering students to investigate the demographic characteristics and educational outcomes of transfer students in engineering relative to non-transfers. We find that students who transfer to four-year engineering programs are more likely to come from under-represented minority groups (URMs) and less likely to be women, although both groups are over-represented at two-year colleges. The findings confirm existing research indicating that, on average, non-transfers outperform transfer students, and non-URMs outperform URMs. But we also find that URM transfers, and especially Black transfers, are no less successful than nontransfer students - indicating that the transfer pathway is an effective bridge to a four-year degree. This is partly true for women transfers who do as well as men but are outperformed by women non-transfers. Finally, we find significant variation in outcomes between full- and part-time students, which may be driving the observed differences by transfer status. Our results should inform debates regarding the efficacy of the transfer pathway in engineering, particularly for women and URMs.

Introducing “stickiness” as a versatile metric of engineering persistence

A new metric, “stickiness,” is proposed, tracking longitudinally all students who have contact with a discipline to determine the likelihood those students will “stick” to that discipline and graduate in it. This metric has the versatility to be relevant for students making contact with engineering through a variety of pathways. Stickiness exhibits significant disciplinary differentiation. Whereas earlier work has shown that Industrial Engineering is the most successful at attracting and retaining students, the disciplinary distribution of stickiness shows that Industrial Engineering is exceptional. Disaggregating by race/ethnicity and gender, much larger variations in stickiness are observed (as much as 48 percent), and positive and negative outcomes are identified where students in particular subpopulations are more or less likely to stick than expected. Aggregated by race/ethnicity and gender, the stickiness of transfer students ranks the disciplines in the same order as the stickiness of first-time-in-college students, but transfer stickiness exhibits less disciplinary variation and transfer students in all disciplines exhibit higher stickiness than first-time-in-college students.

Student Demographics and Outcomes in Mechanical Engineering in the U.S.

Using a dataset from universities in the U.S. that includes over 90,000 first-time-in-college students and over 26,000 transfer students who majored in engineering, this work describes the demographics and outcomes for students starting in and transferring into Mechanical Engineering (ME). This aims to inform the decision making of faculty, department heads, and deans. Although men consistently outnumber women in ME, the rates of matriculation and six-year graduation vary by race/ethnicity and gender. Retention is higher in ME than in the aggregate of all engineering majors for Asian, White, and Black students, but not for Hispanic students. While about half of ME starters leave, most are replaced by switchers and transfers. Black males are noticeably absent from this ‘replacement’ population. Black males are also the least likely to stick with ME through graduation. Asian females are the most likely to graduate in ME. Pathways of ME starters and ME graduates are illustrated. Nearly half of all ME graduates started somewhere other than ME.

Student demographics and outcomes in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering

Using longitudinal data from eleven institutions in the U.S., this study explores the persistence of students in the two largest engineering disciplines: Electrical (EE) and Mechanical (ME). These programs have large enrollments of students but small percentages of women. Despite these similarities, enrollment and persistence in these majors is qualitatively different. In this research, we adopt an intersectional framework and consider both race/ethnicity and gender. Our results show that ME attracts more White students while EE attracts more Black and Asian students. Hispanic men and women are attracted in similar numbers to EE and ME. Overall, ME has higher graduation rates than EE and women have higher rates than men in both disciplines. Transfer students of nearly all race/gender groups are more likely to persist to graduation than starters in the same disciplines. Black and Hispanic female transfer students are particularly successful in EE and ME, which suggests enhancing the transfer pathway as a strategy to improve diversity. The success of ME starters causes a shift in the demographic profile between starters and graduates. ME could learn from EE how to diversify its enrollment and EE could learn from ME strategies to retain its diverse students. These findings suggest that program factors affect each race-gender group differently. Therefore, the success of recruitment and retention strategies may depend on considering both the target population and the discipline.

Gaining Access or Losing Ground?: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students in Undergraduate Engineering, 1994–2003

Expanding access to engineering for underrepresented groups has by and large focused on ethnicity/race and gender, with little understanding of socioeconomic disadvantages. In this study, we use economic, human, and cultural capital theories to frame and then describe access to undergraduate engineering degree programs and bachelor’s degrees. Using individual student-level data from 10 universities from the Multiple-Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) and aggregate school-level data (i.e., free-lunch status) from the Common Core of Data between 1994 and 2003, we first describe students who enter engineering programs by peer economic status (PES) with attention to gender, ethnicity/race, and SAT Math score. Second, a subset of the data is analyzed to describe access to bachelor’s degrees in engineering by PES using graduation rates. The findings show an increase in access to engineering degree programs by disadvantaged students, but that access to engineering bachelor’s degrees may be constrained, and especially for underrepresented ethnic/racial groups. The data highlight variable PES differences that accrue in engineering at entry and upon graduation (6 years later) across ethnic/racial groups; these differences have implications for broadening participation. Recommendations for future research and improving engineering access at the secondary and postsecondary levels are discussed.

Student Choice and Persistence in Aerospace Engineering

This longitudinal multi-institution study examines student outcomes and demographics in aerospace engineering in the United States over the period of 1987 to 2010. This large sample allows adoption of an intersectional framework to study race/ethnicity and gender together. In this paper, the demographics of students who choose aerospace engineering, their six-year graduation rates, trajectories of students entering and leaving aerospace engineering, and the “stickiness” of the discipline are examined. Hispanic men and women starting in engineering choose aerospace engineering at the highest rates (13.3 and 12.0%, respectively). Aerospace engineering graduation rates lag other disciplines, at best, by nine percentage points among Hispanic females and, at worst, by 24 percentage points among Black females. Retention in aerospace engineering is low for all students, but it is particularly so for Black men and women (both less than 12%). The result is an average of one Black woman graduate per program every 1...

The effect of matriculation practices and first-year engineering courses on engineering major selection

Sixty-one sophomores were interviewed at six large public institutions to learn why they chose their institution and their engineering major. The institutions were categorized as either requiring a first-year engineering (FYE) program or allowing students to matriculate directly into a major. At these institutions, the first-year experience either required a common introduction to engineering course, required introduction to engineering courses that were not common to all majors or included an optional introduction to engineering course. The impact of the matriculation mode on selection of the institution and the presence or absence of a required first year course are studied. We find that cost of attendance is far more important than matriculation mode for most students choosing their institutions. Required and optional first-year courses, when taken, do tend to help students either affirm their prior choice of major or select an engineering major that suits their interests.

Performance trajectory of students in the engineering disciplines

The purpose of this study is to examine differences in student performance among engineering disciplines, as measured by term GPAs. Results indicate that: 1) Women outperform men in most engineering disciplines; 2) Student performance starts low at the freshman level, drops slightly at the sophomore level, and then increases over the junior and senior levels (without controlling for mortality); 3) Significant differences in GPAs remain between majors after controlling for relative SAT score, academic class level, race, and gender; 4) After controlling for major, relative SAT score, academic class level, and race, the gender gap in performance grows even larger.

Making the Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) more accessible to researchers

The Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD) is expanding to include 113 institutions and is being redesigned and archived to be more accessible to researchers. This special session will describe how researchers can better use or gain access to MIDFIELD. At the conclusion of the session participants should be able to: describe MIDFIELD including common data elements, discuss how new variables can be derived from MIDFIELD, understand what is necessary to access the data on the Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research, and define quantitative and qualitative data types and structures and outline research questions and methods of personal interest to them.