Examining the relationship of active team-based learning and technology and engineering students' research self-efficacy in a cybersecurity trainee-ship class

Abstract

This research paper investigated the relationship of a cybersecurity active team-based learning research class and technology and engineering students' research self-efficacy. In addition, this study examined whether the relationship was different between genders. The students in the class were from eight universities and worked in teams with a mentor from a government agency or lab who provided them with a real unclassified cybersecurity problem. The study was conducted in 2016 and included a sample of 18 students (males=13 and females=5) who responded to a pre-survey and a post-survey (Cronbach's alphas for both surveys =.96) that measured researched self-efficacy using a 100-point Likert scale (0=complete uncertainty and 100=complete certainty). Due to a small sample, a Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test and a Mann-Whitney U Test were used to analyze the data. As part of the posttest, students were asked open-ended questions about their negative and positive experiences of the class that was analyzed using qualitative inductive and summative strategies. The study found the following, students' research self-efficacy posttest score was higher than pretest, and the observed difference was statistically significant. Both males and females had a higher research self-efficacy posttest score than pretest. The observed difference of the pretest and posttest for males was found to be statistically significant. Males had a higher research self-efficacy posttest score compared to females, but the observed difference was not statistically significant. The qualitative analysis results are, increasing self-efficacy could be attributed to students (1) having the feeling that they are gaining knowledge, skills, and abilities in research; (2) having a mentor to guide and learn from; (3) working on a real-world cybersecurity problem; (4) working in a team that is cohesive; and (5) do not feel they have a short amount of time to work on a project. It is important to note that the results should be interpreted carefully, because of the small sample and large variances.