Is Modeling of Freshman Engineering Success Different from Modeling of Non-Engineering Success?

The engineering community has recognized the need for a higher retention rate in freshman engineering. If we are to increase the freshman retention rate, we need to better understand the characteristics of academic success for engineering students. One approach is to compare academic performance of engineering students to that of non‐engineering students. This study explores the differences in predicting academic success (defined as the first year GPA) for freshman engineering students compared to three non‐engineering student sectors (Pre‐Med, STEM, and non‐STEM disciplines) within a university. Academic success is predicted with pre‐college variables from the UCLA/CIRP survey using factor analysis and regression analysis. Except for the factor related to the high school GPA and rank, the predictors for each student sector were discipline specific. Predictors unique to the engineering sector included the factors related to quantitative skills (ACT Math and Science test scores and placement test scores) and confidence in quantitative skills.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/95487/1/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00993.x.pd

Identifying Future Scientists: Predicting Persistence into Research Training

This study used semistructured interviews and grounded theory to look for characteristics among college undergraduates that predicted persistence into Ph.D. and M.D./Ph.D. training. Participants in the summer undergraduate and postbaccalaureate research programs at the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine were interviewed at the start, near the end, and 8–12 months after their research experience. Of more than 200 themes considered, five characteristics predicted those students who went on to Ph.D. and M.D./Ph.D. training or to M.D. training intending to do research: 1) Curiosity to discover the unknown, 2) Enjoyment of problem solving, 3) A high level of independence, 4) The desire to help others indirectly through research, and 5) A flexible, minimally structured approach to the future. Web-based surveys with different students confirmed the high frequency of curiosity and/or problem solving as the primary reason students planned research careers. No evidence was found for differences among men, women, and minority and nonminority students. Although these results seem logical compared with successful scientists, their constancy, predictive capabilities, and sharp contrast to students who chose clinical medicine were striking. These results provide important insights into selection and motivation of potential biomedical scientists and the early experiences that will motivate them toward research careers