A Systematic Literature Review of the Impact of Undergraduate Work Experiences on Women in Engineering

Numerous studies have examined the reasons that students leave engineering pathways, identifying a strong sense of self-efficacy as a key indicator of students’ retention and persistence. Research has hypothesized that mastery experiences, such as cooperative education, typically develop self-efficacy, but the impacts may vary between genders (Mamaril & Royal, 2008). The disproportionate representation of women at all points along the engineering pathway offers a strong motivation to study the full extent of how cooperative education and internship experiences differ between genders and how those differences manifest themselves in student retention and persistence. To better understand these differences, a systematic literature review was used to identify and examine all relevant existing knowledge of the effects of undergraduate work experiences on key factors in student retention. This method allows for a holistic perspective by sourcing information from multiple sources and primary studies. Inclusion criteria are defined as follows: (1) examines participants of an undergraduate engineering program who are employed full-time before obtaining their degree; (2) presents empirical research or evaluates results of affective student outcomes; (3) disaggregates data by gender; (4) published as a report, article, conference paper, or dissertation in English since 1990. The search yielded 13 results. Examining these results provides insight into students’ experiences. Most studies examined some measure of interest or efficacy, noting benefits from working as a student. The quantitative studies measured a range of different outcomes, but almost never found statistically significant relationships by gender. However, qualitative studies revealed that the type of and perceived importance of interpersonal relationships in the workplace are drastically different between genders. Most students valued professional role models, but women perceived greater significance in these mentors. Women also consistently reported mistreatment and blocked access in the workplace; these experiences contributed to feelings of self-doubt and often caused women to question their future in engineering. Background The National Science Board’s annual report on science and engineering indicates that 20.1% of bachelor’s degrees in engineering are earned by women, who go on to hold only 14.5% of industry engineering positions (National Science Board, 2018). This increase in the already disproportionate representation throughout engineering pathways offers a strong motivation to study women’s experiences and factors that influence their career decisions. Several studies have examined the reasons that students leave engineering and have identified a strong sense of self-efficacy as a key indicator of both retention and persistence. While self-efficacy can be developed in variety of ways, research has shown that mastery experiences can be very influential developers of self-efficacy in both men and women (Mamaril & Royal, 2008). Cooperative education programs and internships, two such mastery experiences, are becoming increasingly more common in undergraduate engineering and influential in securing future employment. In cooperative education programs, students rotate between semesters of full-time employment and coursework, sometimes on a university-mandated schedule. Internships tend to occur only during summer months and participation is typically voluntary. As students participate in co-ops and internships more frequently, it is important to understand how these experiences impact women during their undergraduate career. A systematic literature review is needed to identify and examine the following: 1. How are the outcomes of undergraduate work experiences measured? 2. What outcomes, if any, see gendered differences? 3. How do those differences manifest themselves in students’ career decisions? Relevant results have been published across a wide range of sources, but have not been synthesized to create a comprehensive report on this common feature of undergraduate engineering education. Methodology Systematic reviews can provide comprehensive summaries of previously conducted research, assessing both the general understanding of and the gaps within the literature of focus. By synthesizing the existing body of knowledge, these reviews provide easier access to the literature and foundations for future work. Systematic reviews are guided by the following procedure: (1) identification of research questions and bounds of the focus area; (2) a systematic search and filtration of existing literature; (3) assessment and coding of selected publications; (4) synthesis and dissemination of results (Borrego, Foster & Froyd, 2014). A comprehensive collection of relevant publications was compiled by identifying appropriate search terms, databases and inclusion criteria. Ebscohost was to search the following databases: Academic Search Complete, Business Source Complete, Educational Administration Abstracts, Education Source, ERIC, Gender Studies Database, PsycINFO, Science & Technology Collection, and SocINDEX with full text. Additional searches were conducted within ProQuest, Engineering Village, Web of Science and World Cat. The search terms used limited the results to peer-reviewed publications which contain terms and synonyms for gender, engineering, undergraduate, and work experience. An initial search narrowed the results to exclusively cooperative education programs, but due to the small number of relevant results, the search was expanded to include engineering internships, another common formal work experience that undergraduate students may partake in before graduation. The search results from each database were examined using the following inclusion criteria: (1) examines participants of an undergraduate engineering program who are employed full-time before obtaining their degree; (2) presents empirical research or evaluates results of student outcomes; (3) disaggregates data by gender; (4) published as a report, article, conference paper, or dissertation in English since 1990. Results The search within Ebscohost identified 216 results. Once 84 duplicates were removed, the titles and abstracts of the remaining publications were screened using the inclusion criteria. 79 results were removed. The full-text of the 53 remaining results were then evaluated, leaving 14 qualifying studies. This process was repeated for each database searched, while also removing results that were already collected from the preceding databases, so that only unique studies remained. Searches were conducted within ProQuest, where 13 results were narrowed to 3, within Engineering Village, where 98 results were narrowed to 8, within Web of Science, where 58 results were narrowed to 3, and within World Cat, where 153 results were narrowed to 2. From the five databases searched, a total of 30 unique, qualifying studies were then evaluated with respect to the purposes of this review. A second reviewer jointly screened these qualifying studies and helped eliminate 17 articles, leaving a total of 13 qualifying studies. Sources were evenly distributed between the databases searched and include 6 American Society for Engineering Education conference papers, 4 journal articles, 2 dissertations, and 1 poster from an NSF Human Resources Division Annual Meeting. The journal articles were published in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Journal of Engineering Education, and Work and Occupations. The 13 qualifying studies include 1 mixed-method, 6 qualitative and 6 quantitative studies. The sample sizes ranged from 4 to 15,771. All the sources included were peer-reviewed and framed as research studies, rather than as practitioner papers. Additionally, the quality of each of these studies was systematically assessed. The full texts of the 13 remaining qualifying studies were then examined and coded to reveal themes within the existing body of knowledge. Discussion Although the total number of publications examined was quite small, clear trends existed in the data collected. The majority of articles measured students’ confidence or some form of selfefficacy in the classroom or the workplace. The quantitative studies measured a variety of outcomes, but almost never found statistically significant relationships in these outcomes by gender. Interpersonal relationships in the workplace, however, were drastically different between gender groups. Women reported positive outcomes from interacting with professional role models that were both more frequent and more significant to their experiences than their male peers did. However, women also experienced a wide range of mistreatment while working. Non-Gendered Outcomes Self-efficacy, in its various forms, is a commonly used indicator of the benefits of co-ops and internships. Many studies spoke directly or indirectly of work self-efficacy, a measurement of students’ confidence in their ability to perform requirements of the workplace (Raelin et al., 2007). Work self-efficacy, while slightly dependent on the level of responsibility given to a student, increases with every employment and has been shown as a strong predictor of desire to graduate and retention rates in engineering (Raelin et al., 2014). Pink et al. (2017) examined the impact of work experiences on question-asking self-efficacy, social outcome expectations, and career outcome expectations and found positive correlations across all measures. Ramirez, Main & Ohland (2015) found work experiences increased cumulative GPA, likelihood of graduating in engineering and time to graduation. Schuurman, Pangborn & McClintic (2008) found students with work experience were more likely to receive a job offer and started at a higher salary than their peers. Other studies examined interest in engineering careers and coursework, skills learned during employment and value placed on the experience (Cr