Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 188

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Outcomes of a Longitudinal Administration of the Persistence in Engineering Survey

Eris, Ozgur, Chachra, Debbie, Chen, Helen L., Sheppard, Sheri, Ludlow, Larry, Rosca, Camelia, Bailey, Tori, Toye, George·2010·Journal of Engineering Education

Abstract

B ackground Understanding more about student decisions to leave engineering may lead to higher retention. This study builds on the literature and focuses on the experiences of a cohort of students who aimed to complete their undergraduate work in 2007. P urpose (H ypothesis) This paper presents the outcomes of the longitudinal administration of the Persistence in Engineering survey. The goal was to identify correlates of persistence in undergraduate engineering education and professional engineering practice. D esign/M ethod The survey was administered seven times over four years to a cohort of students who had expressed interest in studying engineering. At the end of the study, the participants were categorized as persisters or non‐persisters. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used, in conjunction with other approaches, to test for differences between the groups. R esults Persisters and non‐persisters did not differ significantly according to the majority of the constructs. Nevertheless, parental and high school mentor influences as a motivation to study engineering, as well as confidence in math and science skills, were identified as correlates of persistence. Intention to complete an engineering major was also a correlate of persistence; it appears to decline sharply at least two semesters prior to students leaving engineering. The findings also suggest that there might be differences among non‐persisters when they are further grouped by when they leave engineering. C onclusions Facilitating higher levels of mentor involvement before college might increase student motivation to study engineering, and also constitute a mechanism for fostering confidence in math and science skills. Since the intention to complete an engineering degree decreases well before students act, there may be opportunities for institutions to develop targeted interventions for students, and help them make informed decisions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01069.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 188

Metadata

Authors
Eris, O., Chachra, D., Chen, H. L., Sheppard, S., Ludlow, L., Rosca, C., Bailey, T., & Toye, G.
Venue
Journal of Engineering Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-10
Volume
99
Issue
4
Pages
371-395
ISSN
  • 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-9830
OpenAlex
W1998326408
Cited by
188
References
0
FWCI
28.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Outcomes of a Longitudinal Administration of the Persistence in Engineering Survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01069.x
The paper
Eris, O., Chachra, D., Chen, H. L., Sheppard, S., Ludlow, L., Rosca, C., Bailey, T., & Toye, G. (2010). Outcomes of a Longitudinal Administration of the Persistence in Engineering Survey. Journal of Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01069.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.