Journal of Engineering Education Research (공학교육연구)

Korean Society for Engineering Education (한국공학교육학회)
권호 표지

A Study on the Differences of Academic Achievement, Self-Efficacy, and Engineering Self-Efficacy with Gender of Engineering Students

공학계열 대학생의 성차: 학업 성취도, 일반적 자기효능감, 공학 자기효능감을 중심으로

  • Kang, Seung-Hee (Innovation Center for Engineering Education, Pukyong National University)
  • Received : 2010.04.10
  • Accepted : 2010.07.28
  • Published : 2010.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there were difference between gender of engineering students in terms of academic achievement, self-efficacy and engineering self-efficacy. A total of 387 engineering students (male=284, female=103) completed the self-efficacy and engineering self-efficacy test. And students self-reported their grade point average(GPA) in their former semester. The results of t-test with gender about academic achievement indicated that there were not differences in academic achievement between gender. The results of MANOVA with grades indicated that there were differences in self-efficacy and engineering self-efficacy between gender. Male students scored significantly higher than female students in self-efficacy, and engineering self-efficacy.

본 연구는 공학계열 대학생의 성차가 학업성취도, 일반적 자기효능감, 공학 자기효능감 변인 중 어느 변인에서 나타나는 지를 알아보는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 본 연구에는 공학계열 3학년에 재학중인 남학생 284명, 여학생 103명이 참여하였다. 학업성취도는 연구대상 학생의 전 학기 학점을 자기보고식으로 취합하였으며, 일반적 자기효능감과 공학 자기효능감은 검사를 실시하였다. 학업성취도에 대한 차이 검증결과 공학계열 여학생과 남학생의 학업성취도에는 유의한 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 그러나 일반적 자기효능감에 대한 다변량 분석 결과, 유의한 차이가 나타났으며, 단변량 분석에서도 자신감, 자기조절 효능감, 과제난이도 선호 모두에서 남녀간에 유의한 차이가 나타났으며, 남학생의 자기효능감이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 또한 공학 자기효능감에 대한 다변량 분석결과에서 남녀간에 유의한 차이가 나타났으며, 단변량 분석결과 전공영역 효능감, 직무효능감, 팀활동 효능감, 창의성 효능감 모두에서 남녀간에 유의한 차이가 나타났다. 이러한 결과를 통해 공학계열 대학생의 성차는 학업성취도가 아닌 효능감 영역에서 나타나고 있음을 알 수 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 교육통계연보(2009). 교육통계연보. http://std.kedi.re.kr/index.jsp
  2. 김지현(2007) 국내 여성 화학공학 인력의 활용방안. NICE, 25(2): 114-119.
  3. 김지현(2008). 국내 공과대학 여학생 현황. 공학교육, 15 (3): 16-20.
  4. 김지현, 오명숙, 정윤경(2007). 현장 적응력 향상을 위한 여성 공학인력 양성방안 연구. 한국산업기술재단 연구보고서.
  5. 도승이(2008). 공대생의 진로관련 변인에 대한 성별 및 학년별 차이분석 연구, 교육심리연구, 22(3): 519-535.
  6. 도승이, 오명숙(2008). 여학생 공학교육이란 무엇인가? 공학교육, 15(3): 21-28.
  7. 민무숙(2003). 여성 공학교육의 질 제고를 위한 대학의 과제. 공학교육과 기술, 10(1): 98-102.
  8. 박지은, 김지현, 정윤경, 오명숙(2009). 해외 여성 공학교육 프로그램의 분석. 공학교육연구, 12(3): 79-95.
  9. 오명숙(2007). 여학생 공학교육의 장벽 및 프로그램 개발. NICE, 25(3): 250-255.
  10. 윤대희, 한경희(2003). 공학분야 여학생 교육의 현황과 과제, 공학교육, 10(4): 77-82.
  11. 이진령(2009). 공학 자기효능감 척도 개발 및 타당화. 부산대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.
  12. 정윤경, 오명숙, 김지현(2008). 공대 여학생의 전공 관련 심리적 특성의 탐색, 공학교육연구, 11(4): 34-45.
  13. 차정은(1997). 일반적 자기효능감 척도 개발을 위한 일 연구. 이화여자대학교 석사학위논문.
  14. Aleman, C.(1998). Women and men of the engineering path: A model for analysis of undergraduate careers. U. S. Department of Education ad the National Institute for Science Education, Washington, DC.
  15. Bandura, A.(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2): 191-215.
  16. Bandura, A.(1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist. 37: 122-147.
  17. Bandura, A.(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
  18. Bandura, A.(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
  19. Bebbington, D.(2002). Women in science, engineering and technology: A review of the issues. Higher Education Quarterly, 56: 360-375.
  20. Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. E.(1986). Women's way of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books Inc.
  21. Bennett, D., Burnner, C., & Honey, M.(1999). Gender and technology: Designing for diversity, Educational Development Center, New York.
  22. Cozzens, S. E.(2008). Gender issues in US science and technology policy: Equality of what? Science Engineering Ethics, 14: 345-356.
  23. Glover, J.(2000). Women and scientific employment, Macmillan, New York.
  24. Goodman Research Group(2002). Final report of the women's experiences in college engineering (WECE) project. Goodman Research Group, Cambridge, MA.
  25. Hackett, G., & Bets. N. E.(1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of women. Journal of vacational behavior, 18: 326-339.
  26. Hartman, H., Hartman, M.(2009). Do gender differences in undergraduate engineering orientations persist when major is controlled? International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 1(1): 61-82.
  27. Hutchinson, M., Follman, D. K., Sumpter, M., & Bodner, G. M.(2006). Factors influencing the self-efficacy beliefs of first-year engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 (1): 39-48.
  28. Ihsen, S.(2005). Special gender studies for engineering? European Journal of Engineering Education, 30 (4): 487-494.
  29. Jawitz, J., & Case, J.(2002). Guest editorial-women in engineering: Beyond the stats. International Journal Engineering Education, 18: 390-391.
  30. Lent, R. W., et al.(2005). Social cognitive predictions of academic interests and goals in engineering: Utility for women and students at historically black universities. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(1): 84-92.
  31. Lent, R. W., Singley D., Sheu, H., Schmidt, J., & Schmidt L.(2007). Relation of social-cognitive factors to academic satisfaction in engineering students. Journal of Career Assessment, 15(1): 87-97.
  32. Lewis, S., Harris, R., & Cox, B.(2000). Engineering a better workplace: A diversity guide for the engineering profession, National Centre for Gender and Cultural Diversity, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
  33. Lin, T., & Cheng Y.(2007). The influence of teaching with situated learning rational on 7th graders' learning in biology. Proceeding of the national association of research in science teaching conference. New Orleans.
  34. Lynch, I., & Nowosenetz, T.(2008). An exploratory study of students' constructions of gender in science, engineering and technology, Gender and Education, 21(5): 567-581.
  35. Maree, D. J. F. & Maree, M.(2007). Assessing the impact of gender training on engineering students. In Gender and engineering: Strategies and possibilities, I. Welpe,, & B. Reschka., & J. Larkin(eds.), 191-210. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
  36. McIlwee, J., & Robinson. G.(1992). Women in Engineering: Gender, Power and Workplace Culture. Albany, NY, State University of New York Press
  37. Mills, J., & Ayre, M.(2003). Implementing an inclusive curriculum for women in engineering education, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 129(4): 203-210.
  38. National Science Board.(2007). Moving forward to improve engineering education(NSB Publication No. 07-122). http://www.nsf.gove/nsb.
  39. National Science Board.(2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/.
  40. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H.(2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and application. (2nd edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hall.
  41. Rosser, S.(1995). Reaching the majority: Retaining women in the pipeline. In S. Rosser(ed.). Teaching the Majority: Breaking the gender barrier in science, mathematics and engineers. Teachers College Press. New York, 1-21.
  42. Schunk. D.H., & Hanson, A.R, & Cox, P.D.(1987). Peer-model attributes and children's achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology. 79(1): 54-61.
  43. Sen, A.(1992). Inequality reexamined. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  44. Shackleton, L., & Riordan. S., & Simonis, D.(2006). Gender and the transformation agenda in South African higher education. Women's Studies International Forum, 29: 572-580.
  45. Swanson, J. L., & Gore, P. A. Jr.(2000). Advances in vacational psychology theory and research. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent(Eds.). Handbook of counseling psychology(3rd. ed. pp. 223-269). New York: Wiley.
  46. Wigfield, A.(1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6: 49-78.
  47. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S.(1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12: 265-310.