Effects of a first-year undergraduate engineering design course: survey study of implications for student self-efficacy and professional skills, with focus on gender/sex and race/ethnicity

International Journal of STEM Education

Table 4 Sample characteristics, Study 1

	N	%
Gender/sex*^a
Male	202	58.9
Female	139	40.5
Did not report	2	0.6
Race and ethnicity*
White, Caucasian	162	47.2
Asian, Pacific Islander (API)	105	30.6
African-American, Black or Hispanic, Latino (AABHL)	29	8.5
Multiracial, other	45	13.1
Did not report	2	0.6
Course participation
Took EGR 101	343	100
Did not take EGR 101	0	0

^aRegarding use of gender/sex and categories: (1) Note that Study 1’s survey data source asks respondents to report self-identified gender identity; Study 2’s university records data source on gender/sex addresses legal sex as indicated in university application. (2) For both Study 1 and 2, we speak to specific gender/sex categories as “male” and “female” (versus women and men) as these were the terms used in both data sources. For this reason, the terms “female respondents” and “male respondents” are also generally used when speaking to direct results from these data in the Results section. (3) Otherwise, throughout this paper, use of the terms “women”, “men”, “male”, and “female” in this paper follow current APA guidelines, with “women”/ “men” as nouns and “female”/ “male” only used as adjectives (e.g., “female respondents”). (4) We note that “female”/“male” is often understood as speaking to a biological category whereas “women/woman/men/man” refers to a person’s gender identity; future data efforts may consider this in choices around terminology used
*For study 1, gender and race/ethnicity is self-reported, and multiple racial/ethnic identities was allowable