English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This research paper investigates the ways first-year engineering students develop their identity. Research on first-year students suggests the first semester plays a major role in student retention, particularly in fields such as engineering, as many students know whether or not they will continue studying engineering by the end of the fall semester and few students transfer into engineering after the first year. Motivational psychologists such as Deci (1995) have argued that autonomy is essential to student identity development, as well as lifelong learning. In this study researchers investigated how first-year students spent six hours of free time as part of a first year, first semester course at a small engineering college. The instructor designed these six hours to encourage student identity development in a self-directed learning environment. Students were told that they would not have class during the final two weeks of the semester but instead were required to sign-up for “mini-classes” that focused on activities of their own interest. Students selected activities from a wide range of examples (speakers, workshops, seminars, tutorials) and were asked to record the activities they completed. These data were collected over the course of four years. In order to understand the areas of development engineering students prioritized, these data were analyzed within the framework of Chickering’s seven vectors of student development and Deci and Ryan’s self determination theory of motivational psychology. Mini-classes were categorized using Chickering’s seven vectors: Developing competence, managing emotions, moving through autonomy toward interdependence, developing mature interpersonal relationships, establishing identity, developing purpose, and developing integrity. A quantitative analysis explored differences between data sets (class year), the different vectors, and the role of gender. The researchers found Chickering and Reisser's theory to be a practical lens through which one can understand different vectors of student development, as engineering students in the study choose a variety of activities to pursue with their free-time. The research team found student development in the first year to be complex and involved many different areas of growth. The researchers did find however that the students in the study were highly focused on activities that developed specific engineering skills and competencies. Students actively choose to develop their sense of engineering identity. They spent significantly less time developing “soft skills” such as managing emotions and interpersonal relationships. Additionally, the researchers found statistically significant differences in the kinds of activities that men and women pursued, which aligned with themes within the literature on gender differences between men and women. Literature Review Results of previous research: ABET accreditation requirements for engineering institutions include, “a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in lifelong learning.” 2 In order to address this need for lifelong learning, colleges and universities have tried to encourage student autonomy in different ways. In trying to address problems such as retention, motivational psychologists such as Deci (1995) have argued that educators could motivate students by supporting their sense of autonomy. The need for autonomy in student development is an underlying theme in the discussions surrounding Chickering’s seven vectors, self-directed learning, and self determination theory. Chickering’s Theory of College Student Development: Chickering and Reisser (1993) suggest understanding college student development, learning, and growth through seven different vectors of identity development: developing competence, managing emotions, moving through autonomy toward interdependence, developing mature interpersonal relationships, establishing identity, and developing integrity. Chickering and Reisser’s theory is distinct from many other prominent psychosocial developmental theories as it is nonlinear and applies to student development while in college. Students can move along any of the vectors within their first year of college, whereas in many other development theories, such as Erickson’s (1959) theory of psychosocial development and Kegan’s (1982) stages of social maturity, individuals only reach the later stages of development later in life. Uniquely, the seven vectors specifically refer to development through college, regardless of the age of the student. As one travels along a vector, they increase awareness, confidence, complexity, stability, and integration. A vector is a kind of “highway” that the student journeys towards the discovery of self, relationships with others, and understanding of society as a whole. Each individual is a unique driverthey can take multiple highways in different orders at varying rates. (p 34-35) In Education and Identity, Chickering and Reisser describe each vector in detail. They start with Developing competence, which is split into four categories: knowledge of subject matter, cultural and aesthetic appreciation, physical and manual skills, and interpersonal competence. Intellectual development, which falls into the knowledge of subject matter category, is traditionally considered the main purpose of college, with 76.1% of professors indicating it as their institution’s highest priority in a survey of 35,478 professors. Knowledge of subject matter is increased when students engage in most activities. As students move along this sub-vector, they progress from passive, concrete, and superficial ways of thinking and learning to more active, creative, abstract and in-depth perspectives. Cultural and aesthetic appreciation are increased when students engage in classes and activities that involve cultural awareness, such as watching a performance or exploring a museum. Physical and manual competence include the development of athletic, artistic, and manual skills. Activity in these areas allows for the expression of emotions that otherwise must be muted in society, and lets students create something physical. This aspect of the vector is especially important to balance the traditionally intellectual focus of college classes. The final branch of competence, interpersonal competence, can be found as students start listening, asking questions, giving feedback, and working in groups. Students move through this part of the vector by increasing their interpersonal skills such as sensitivity, empathy, communication. Managing emotions generally concerns some students’ need to regulate their emotions and others’ need to acknowledge and experience emotions they have been oppressing. Students learn to control emotions such as anger, fear, hurt, and longing as well as ways to release them in a non-destructive manner. Positive emotions such as wonder and inspiration are allowed to exist and supported. As students move along this vector, they learn to recognise all different “flavors” of their emotions and balance self-control with self-expression. (p 90) Moving through autonomy toward interdependence is defined as the freedom from continual need for reassurance, affection, and approval. As students move through this vector, they begin by separating from their parents, move to relying on peers and mentors for support, and end with a diminished need for support and an increase in their ability to sacrifice friends and social status for their beliefs and convictions. Throughout this vector, students start solving problems in a self-directed way, respecting the autonomy of others, and finding resources and help without assistance. Developing mature interpersonal relationships includes two categories: tolerance and appreciation of differences as well as a capacity for intimacy. Tolerance and appreciation of differences involves appreciation and acceptance in both an intercultural and interpersonal context. Having a capacity for intimacy involves a shift away from dominance, reliance and narcissism and towards an interdependence between individuals, and students are more selective in their relationships. Establishing identity builds on each of the previous vectors. It involves 1) comfort with body and appearance, 2) comfort with gender and sexual orientation, 3) sense of self in a social, historical, and cultural context, 4) clarification of self-concept, 5) sense of self in response to feedback from respected others, 6) self-acceptance and self-esteem, and 7) personal stability and integration. (p 49) As students develop in this vector they become more comfortable with who they are, and a solid sense of self appears. Developing purpose includes three major categories, 1) vocational plans and aspirations, 2) personal interests, and 3) interpersonal and family commitments. (p 50) Students move from having no purpose or sense of who they want to be to unifying their disparate goals and interests within a larger, meaningful purpose. Developing integrity includes 1) humanizing valuesshifting away from applying uncompromising beliefs and towards the use of principled thinking, 2) personalizing valuesconsciously affirming core values and beliefs while respecting other points of view, and 3) developing congruencematching one’s beliefs with one’s actions. While developing integrity, rules become more relative and less rigid, and values become personalized instead of inherited and acquired. Self-directed Learning: Self-directed learning is traditionally defined by Knowles as a process where an individual takes initiative in their own learning by diagnosing learning needs and strategies, formulating goals, identifying learning resources, and evaluating learning outcomes. The authors consider selfdirected learning in a broader sense, and have adopted Gibbons’ definition, (p 2) which states that self directed learning is, “any increase in knowledge, skill, accomplishment, or personal

Conceptualizing Student Identity Development through Self-Directed Learning Opportunities in the First Year of an Engineering Program