Early career outcomes of engineering alumni [electronic resource] : exploring their connection to the undergraduate experience

Concerns from government and industry about a future shortage of well-trained engineers have led to significant engineering education research on undergraduate engineering retention. By comparison, relatively few studies have examined the choices of early career engineering graduates to pursue careers within or outside of engineering, despite evidence that just 60 percent of recent engineering graduates work in engineering fields 1-2 years after graduation (National Science Foundation, 2013). This study addresses this issue by investigating the work and career choices of recently graduated engineers. The overarching research question was: what kinds of positions do early career engineering graduates see themselves as having, and what factors influence their career choices? Data for this study come from the Pathways of Engineering Alumni Research Survey (PEARS), an online survey deployed for the first time in November of 2011 as part of the NSF-funded Engineering Pathways Study (EPS). Respondents to the survey were 484 graduates four years past earning bachelor's degrees in engineering from four U.S. research universities. The focal sample for this study was the 86 percent of respondents (n=415) who were working in non-graduate school related employment when they were surveyed. Using Lent, Brown, and Hackett's Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) as a guide, the analyses in this study followed a multi-step procedure. First, a framework based on respondents' occupational titles and perceptions of themselves as working in an engineering or non-engineering position was developed and used to compare respondents on measures related to the nature of their work. From these comparisons, a new, more inclusive definition for working in an engineering position emerged. This measure was used to describe and identify the differences between two groups, respondents who were employed in, or saw themselves as working in, engineering ("engineering focused respondents") and respondents who were not employed in, and did not see themselves as working in, engineering ("non-engineering focused respondents"). Specifically, differences in the groups' demographic characteristics, precollege, undergraduate, and initial post-undergraduate experiences, current self-efficacy, current interest, and current contextual factors were examined. Finally, the relationships between these factors and respondents' future career plans were explored using path analysis. Findings from this study demonstrate that while most early career engineering graduates are engaged in engineering work of some kind four years after graduation, a subset of graduates appear to be non-engineering focused. Compared to other respondents, these graduates rated certain technical competencies as less important to their work, saw their jobs as less related to their undergraduate education, and tended to have non-technical occupations. Non-engineering focused respondents had distinct undergraduate and post-undergraduate experiences as well. They were less likely than other respondents to have participated in an engineering internship/co-op, to have had engineering focused plans as seniors, to have started out working in an engineering position after college, and to have high levels of technical interest. Factors related to graduates' future plans included participation in engineering internship/co-op and study abroad experiences, choice of engineering major, career plans as a senior, and whether they had earned or were pursuing advanced degrees. Two main paths through which these factors predicted future plans were: through respondents' first position and current position ("the employment path"), and through their technical self-efficacy and technical interest ("the engagement path"). This research provides important implications for both research and practice. Specifically, it contributes tools that can be used in SCCT and engineering education research to better understand professional persistence. In addition, the findings have valuable implications for federal policymakers, engineering educators, and engineering employers as they prepare the next generation of engineering graduates.

Keywords: Mechanical Engineering.
Advisor: Sheppard S. (Sheri) primary advisor. Thesis advisor
Antonio Anthony Lising
Barley Stephen R. advisor. Thesis advisor