Full report

Original page 1

iii:i:i:i iiiiii i:i:iiiiiii iiiiiiii:iii iiii ii ii iiii iiiiii:iii:iiiiiii iiiiii ii:iii iiiiii:i:iiiii:iiiii:i:iii ii ii:i:i ii ii iiiiiii :i:iii ii iiii:iii:i ii ii iiii:i:i ii ii iiiiii:i:i :iii iiii iiiiii ii ii iiiiiiii ii ii iiii :iii :i :i ii ii ii ii ii ii ii iiiiii iiii ii ii iiii ii ii iiii iiii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii iiii iiii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii iiii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii ii iiii ii ii iiii ii ii ii :i ii iiiiiiii:i ii:i:i :iiiii :i iiii ii:iiiii:i ii ii:i:iiiii :iii:i :iii iiii:iii iiiiii:i ii :ii :i iiii ii ii ii :i ii ii iiii:i ii ii:iii :iii :i:iii:iii:i:iii ¸111:111:1:1%i:ii i:i:i i:iiiii:i i iii i:i iii i i:i i i:i i iii:i i i i/iii i:iiiii:i:ii i i:i i:i:i:i i ii ii i!i!i!i_i_i!i!i!i!i_i!i!i!i_i!i!i!i!i!i_i!i!i!i!i!i!iiiii!i!i!i!iii!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i_i!i!i!i!i!i_i!i!i!i!i!i!i:i!i!i_i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i_i!i!iii!i!i!iii!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!iii!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!iii!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!iiiii!i!i!i!iiiiiiiiiii!i!iii!i!i!i!i!iii!i!iiiiiii!i!iiiii!i!iii!ii iiiii!i!i_i!iii!i!i!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_ili!i!i!i_i!i!i_i!i!i!iii_i_i_i!iii!ili_i!i!ili!i!i!i!i_i!i!i!i!i_i_i!i!iii!i_ili!i!i_iiiiiii iiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiii_iiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_i_iiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiiii¸i_ilili¸i¸i:iiii¸ili¸i_iiiiii_i_ii_i¸ili:iii¸ili_iiiiiiiiii¸iiiii:ilili__ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii__iiiiEiiiiiiiPii_i_"iiiii_iiiiiii_iiiii_iiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_i_i_iiiii_iiiiii_i_i_iiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiii_iii!iii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiii!i_i!iii!i! iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiR_ib_iiii_iiii_iiB_i_I_iiiiii!iii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiii!iiiiiiiii_iiiiiii!iiiiiii!i!iii_iiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiiiii_i_i!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijiiijiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiii_i!i_(NASA-TM-10<121)NASA/OO_T) N95-I;C! AEROSPACE KNOWLEDGE DIFFUSION RESEARCH PROJECT. EPO_T 26: TH iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiii_i_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Unc1_s T_CHNICAL COMMUNICATION PRACTICES OF AERSSPACE ENGINEERING STUgENTS: iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiii RESULTS OF THE PHASE ] AIAA iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiii_iiiiiiiiiii! STUDENT SURVEY (NASA. G3/SZ 0039125 NATIONAL iiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiLang|eyiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiii iiiiiii_eseaFchCenteF)59p i iiiiiii_i_iiiiiii!iiiiiii_iii_i_i!i!iii_iii_iiiii!i_iii_ii_iii_i_i_iii_i_iii_p_i_i_d_i_i_iii!iiiiiii_iiiii_i!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii_i!i_iiiiiiiii!iiiii_i_i_i!iiiiiii_i_iiiiiiiii_i!i!iii_iii!i!iii_

Original page 2

INTRODUCTION The growing national debate over U.S. competitiveness appears to have produced a consensus of opinion on the following points: (1) the production, transfer, and use of knowledge is of paramount importance to the process of technological innovation; (2) current "supply-side" U.S technology policy, which emphasizes the creation of knowledge, should be modified to include the transfer, absorption, and utilize of that same knowledge; (3) a mechanism that contains a "proactive" scientific and technical information (STI) component is needed for the diffusion of knowledge from government research facilities to industry; (4) engineers and scientists should be proficient in the acquisition, communication, and use of STI; and (5) engineering and science students should be trained in the acquisition, communication, and use of STI as part of their educational preparation. Studies such as those conducted by Mailloux (1989) demonstrate that communicating information takes up as much as 80% of an engineer's time and is considered essential to successful engineering practice. Surveys of industrial firms that employ engineers and scientists indicate that employers place a high priority on engineers' ability to acquire, to communicate orally and in writing, and to use STI. These same studies show that industry respondents rate the importance of communications skills as high as or higher than their technical skills. Many industry respondents hold the opinion that newly graduated engineers and scientists lack proficiency in communications skills (Black, 1994; Morrow, 1994; Evans, et al., 1993; Katz, 1993; Strother, 1992; Garry, 1986; Devon, 1985; and Sylvester, 1980). Because the effective communication of information is fundamental to engineering, questions arise of what communications skills should how much communications instruction is necessary, is missing from any discussion of communications be taught to engineering students and when, and how effective that instruction iSo What skills instruction for engineering student is (1) a clear explanation from the professional engineering community about what constitutes "acceptable and desirable communications norms" generalizable data from engineering students about within that community; (2) adequate and the communications skills instruction they receive; (3)adequate and generalizable data from entry-level engineers about the adequacy and usefulness of the instruction they received as students; and (4) a mechanism, probably focused within academia, that solicits feedback from the workplace and a system that utilizes the feedback for answering the questions of what and how much mining the effectiveness of instruction. should be taught and when, and for deter- To address the second question and help provide a student perspective, we undertook a survey of engineering students who were student members of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) 1 in the spring of 1993. The questions were assembled according to the following topics: (1) the students' selection of a career in engineering; (2) the importance 1Similar surveys were conducted among engineering and science students attending the University of Illinois, aerospace engineering students at Texas A&M, and technology students at Bowling Green State University. Aerospace engineering students in India, Japan, Russia, and the United Kingdom were also surveyed.

Original page 3

of selectedcommunicationsskills to professionalsuccess,the instruction received in theseskills, and the helpfulness (usefulness)of that instruction; (3) the use and importance of libraries and other information sourcesandproducts; and (4) the use of computers,selectedinformation technologies,and electronic networks. This study contributes to our understandingof the production, transfer, and use of information by aerospaceengineering and provides feedback that may be helpful in shaping the communicationscomponentsof engineering curricula in higher education. BACKGROUND The diffusion of knowledge, including its production, transfer, and use, is an essential part of aerospace R&D and is of paramount importance to the process of innovation within the U.S. aerospace industry. To learn more about this process, researchers at the NASA Langley Research Center, the Indiana University Center for Survey Research, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and institutions in selected counties organized a research project to study knowledge diffusion in aerospace. Sponsored by NASA and the DoD, endorsed by aerospace professional societies, and sanctioned by several groups and panels, the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project was begun in 1989 as a five-year project "to provide descriptive and analytical data regarding the flow of scientific and technical information (STI) at the individual, organizational, national, and international levels and to examine both the channels used to communicate STI and the social system of the aerospace knowledge diffusion process" (Pinelli, Kennedy, and Barclay, 1991). The Project, in four phases, focuses on technology rather than science and on engineers rather than scientists and takes the position that STI resulting from federally funded aerospace R&D is an economic asset or resource rather than a component of national security. The Project Fact Sheet is Appendix A. The research results of the Project could be used to understand the information environment in which U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists work (that is, the academic, government, and industrial sectors), the information-seeking behaviors of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists, and the factors that influence their use of STI. Such an understanding could (1) lead to the development of practical theory, (2) contribute to the design and development of systems for diffusing aerospace information, and (3) have practical implications for transferring the results of federally funded R&D to the U.S. aerospace community. METHODS AND SAMPLE DEMOGRAPHICS Self-administered (self-reported) questionnaires were sent to a sample of 4,300 aerospace engineering students who were members of the AIAA. A group of engineering faculty members, librarians, and technical communicators worked with the Project team to compile the list of survey questions. The questions were pretested before distribution. The student survey is Appendix B. The questionnaire and cover NASA Langley Research Center in spring returned the questionnaire by the completion letter on NASA stationery were mailed from the 1993. Altogether, 1,673 AIAA student members date of September 1, 1993. Due to the summer 2

Original page 4

break, only one mailing was possible. After reducing the sample size for incorrect addresses and other mailing problems, the response rate for the survey was 42%. This rate is very acceptable for a student survey with one mailing. The presentation of survey results compares undergraduate students with graduate students. Chi-square tests (for categorical variables) and student t-tests (for interval data) are used to estimate if observed differences between statistically significant. A significant test result undergraduates and graduate students are (p < .05) indicates that there is only a 5% probability that the observed differences between undergraduate and graduate students' distribution of responses can be attributed to chance. A significant result is therefore interpreted as evidence that students' responses on the factors or variables in question are influenced by (vary systematically with) a student's academic (undergraduate or graduate) status. A code book containing the aggregate responses from the AIAA national student survey is Appendix C. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA Demographic characteristics of the AIAA student survey respondents are summarized in table 1. The final sample included 948 undergraduate students (57.3%) and 707 graduate students (42.7%). The majority of respondents are male. About 82% of the undergraduates and 87% of the graduate students were male. Most respondents report that they are studying to become engineers. Among undergraduates, about 95% are preparing to become engineers; about 2% reported that they are preparing to become scientists. About 90% of the graduate students are preparing for careers in engineering; a slightly higher percentage of graduate students, about 7% reported that they were preparing to become scientists. Most AIAA student members are U.S. citizens; about 92% of the undergraduate students and about 81% of the graduate students indicated (native) language for most of the student participants. reported that English is their first (native) language indicated that English is their first (native) language. survey participants. About 84% of the undergraduates indicated that the U.S. was their native country. they were U.S. citizens. English is the first About 87% of the undergraduate students and about 77% of the graduate students The U.S. was the native country of most and about 73% of the graduate students We also asked respondents to compare their families's incomes with the incomes of most families in their native countries. Most students report that their family's incomes were either the same as or higher than the incomes of other families. About 30% of undergraduates and about 34% of the graduate students reported that their family's incomes were higher than the incomes of other families in their native countries. About 16% of the undergraduate and graduate students reported that their family's had lower incomes that other families in their native countries. About half of the student respondents (52.1% undergraduate and 47.9% graduate) reported that their families's incomes were about the same as other families in their native country. 3

Original page 5

Table 1. Survey Demographics IN = 1655] Demographics Gender Female Male Educational Status Educational Preparation As An Engineer A Scientist Other Native Country China Japan Korea Taiwan U.S. Other Native (First) Language English Chinese Japanese Korean Spanish Other U.S. Citizen Yes No Relative Family Income Higher than Other Families About the Same as Other Families Lower than Other Families Can't Compare to Other Families Undergraduate Graduate (n = 948) (n- 707) % (n) % (n) 18.2 172 13.0 92 81.8 775 87.0 614 57.3 948 42.7 707 95.4 904 89.7 634 1,8 17 6.9 49 2.8 27 3.4 24 0.1 1 2.1 15 0.2 2 1.0 7 0.8 8 1.4 10 1.1 10 2.4 17 84.1 796 73.4 518 13.7 130 19.7 139 86.9 824 76.9 544 2.7 26 5.1 36 0.2 2 1.0 7 0.6 6 1.1 8 2.4 23 1.7 12 7.4 67 14.1 100 92.1 871 80.9 572 7.9 75 19.1 135 29.4 276 33.7 236 52.1 490 47.9 335 16.3 153 16.3 114 2.2 21 2.1 15 4

Original page 6

Aerospace Engineering Most students made their decision to study table 2). Nearly two-thirds of undergraduates as a Career Choice engineering prior to beginning college (see made their decisions to pursue a career in engineering while in high school, and about 16% made their decisions while in elementary school. About 55% of graduate student reported that they made their decisions in high school and about 11% while in elementary school. A higher percentage of graduate than undergraduate students made their decisions to pursue a career as an engineer either when they started or after they had started college. Table 2. Career Choice/Selection Decision Point of U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Decision Points While Still In Elementary School While In High School When Starting College After Starting College IOther Factors Influencing Career Choice Students were asked to rate the importance Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 15.8 150 10.5 74 64.0 607 54.5 385 9.0 85 14.7 104 7.4 70 15.3 108 3.3 31 4.5 32 of six factors that may have influenced their choice of careers (table 3). Three of the factors deal with the influence of people (i.e., parents, other family members, and teachers) in helping students to make their career choices; one factor focused on the influence of information about the career. The remaining two factors related to the career itself and include such elements as financial security. Mean ratings for each factor are listed in table 3. For both undergraduate and graduate students, the most important factors were those related to the job itself. The perception that engineering is a career with rewarding activities _received the highest mean ratings from both undergraduates (X = 6.3) and graduate students (X = 6.1) followed by the perception that a career in engineering will lead to financial security (X - 4.6 and X = 4.3). The undergraduate importance ratings for these two factors were significantly higher than the rating assigned to these factors by the graduate students. The availability of information on career opportunities also appears to have an important influence on the career decision. The importance of this factor was also rated significantly higher by undergraduate C)( = 4.5) than graduate C)( = 4.2) students. Importance ratings of the influence of other people -- parents, teachers, and other family members -- were lower than the importance rating of job-related factors. There were no significant differences in the importance ratings

Original page 7

Table 3. Influence (Importance) of Selected Factors on Career Choice of U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Factors Your Parents Encouraged Your Area Of Study/Major Other Family Members Encouraged Your Area Of Study/Major Teachers Encouraged Your Area Of Study/Major You Feel That A Career In Your Major/Area Of Study Will Lead To Financial Security You Feel That A Career In Your Major/Area Of Study Will Provide A Career With Rewarding Activities Information On The Career Opportunities Available In Your Major/Area Of Study Undergraduate Graduate Mean a (n) Mean a (n) 3.4 879 3.6 666 2.9 853 2.8 636 3.7 884 3.7 664 4.6 932 4.3* 690 6.3 94O 6.1" 700 4.5 918 4.2* 671 aStudents used a 7-point scale to rate the importance of each factor, where 7 indicates the highest rating. *p < 0.05. undergraduate and graduate students assigned to the influence of others on career choice. Of the three factors concerned with the influence of people (i.e., parents, other family members, and teachers) in helping students to make their career choices, the encouragement of teachers C_ = 3.7 for undergraduate and graduate students) appears to have exerted greater influence on career choice than did encouragement from parents Satisfaction with Career Choice and other family members. Students were asked to rate their current level of satisfaction with their career choice (table 4). About 28% of undergraduate and 28% of the graduate students reported that they are happier about their career decisions now compared to when the decisions were first made. About 47% of undergraduates and about 42% of graduate students surveyed reported that they feel about the same now as when they first made their career decision. However, a higher percentage of graduate students reported they were less happy with their career choice now (30.6%) compared to undergraduate students (24.2%). 6

Original page 8

Table 4. Career Choice/SelectionSatisfaction of U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Satisfaction Level I Am Happier About My Career Choice Now Than When I First Made It I Feel About The Same Now As When I First Made It I Am Less Happy About My Career Choice Now Than When I First Made It * p < 0.05. Career Expectations and Goals Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 28.6 268 27.6* 194 47.2 443 41.7 293 24.2 227 30.6 215 This section explores the expectations of AIAA student respondents concerning several aspects of their future careers. Students were asked to indicate the type of organization in which they hope to work after graduation. They were also given a list of 15 specific career goals and aspirations and asked to rate the importance of each to a successful career. Type of Organization. Students were asked they hope to work after graduation. Table 5 shows to identify the type of organization in which their organizational preferences. Most students report that they plan to work in industry. Graduate students (25.6%) were significantly more likely than undergraduates (7.3%) to aspire to work in academia. Undergraduate students were significantly more likely to select industry as the type of organization were they plan to work. About 75% of the undergraduates plan to work in either national (44.1%) or multi-national (30.8%) industrial organizations. Less than 60% of the graduate students plan to work in either national (35.6%) or multi-national (23.5%) industrial organizations. About 34% of the undergraduate and 30% of the graduates reported that they planned to work for a government organization. Less than 2% of graduate students and less than 1% of undergraduates reported that they planned to work for a non-profit organization. Professional Aspirations. Students were asked to rate the importance of 15 goals to a successful career. The list includes aspirations that are classified as either engineering, science, or management goals. Table 6 shows the mean importance ratings for each goal. Both undergraduate and graduate students gave high ratings to the engineering-related goals and aspirations. The ordering of mean importance ratings for these factors, from highest to lowest, is similar for both undergraduates and graduate student members. 7 The opportunity to explore new ideas about

Original page 9

Table 5. Type of Organization Where U.S. Aerospace Engineering Type Of Organization Academic !Government Industry (National) Industry (Multi-national) Not for Profit Other Students Plan to Work Undergraduate Graduate (n) %_ (n) 7.3 69 25.6* 181 34.1 323 30.0 212 44.1 418 35.6* 252 30.8 292 23.5* 166 0.8 8 1.8 13 6.7 63 4.7 33 apercentages do not total 100 because students could select more than * p < 0.05. one response. technology or systems ranked highest (X = 6.3 for both undergraduates and graduate students). The opportunity to work on projects that require learning new technical knowledge ranked second = 5.9 for both undergraduates and graduate students). Having the opportunity to work on complex technical problems ranked third (X = 5.7 for undergraduates and X = 5.9 for graduate students). Graduate students assigned significantly higher importance ratings than did undergraduate students to the goals of having the opportunity to work on complex technical problems and to working on projects that utilize the latest theoreticalresults in their specialty. Developing a professional reputation important to graduate than to undergraduate outside of the organization was significantly more students. Establishing a reputation outside your organization as an authority in your field (X = 5.3 for undergraduates and ){ = 5.4 for graduate students) and being evaluated on the basis of your technical contributions C)_ = 5.3 for undergraduates and X = 5.5 for graduate students) were the goals rated highest in this category. Presenting papers at professional society meetings (X = 4.8 for undergraduates and X = 5.2 for graduate students) and publishing articles in technical journals (X = 4.5 for undergraduates and = 5.2 for graduate students) were the goals in this category rated least important. Attaining a leadership or management position was a significantly more career goal (aspiration) for undergraduate than for graduate students. Advancing to a high level staff or technical position (X = 5.4 for both undergraduate and graduate students) and planning projects and making decisions affecting the organization (X = 5.4 for undergraduates and X = 5.2 for graduate students) were the goals rated highest in the organization (X = 5.1 for undergraduate in this category. Becoming a manager or director and X = 4.7 graduate students) and advancing to a policy-making position in management QT, = 4.7 for undergraduates and X = 4.4 for graduate students) were the goals in this category rated least important by survey participants.

Original page 10

Table 6. Career Goals and Aspirations of U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Goals Engineering Have The Opportunity To Explore New Ideas About Technology Or Systems Adance to High Level Staff Technical Position Have The Opportunity To Work On Complex Technical Problems Work On Projects That Utilize The Latest Theoretical Results In Your Specialty Work On Projects That Require Learning New Technical Knowledge Science Establish A Reputation Outside Your Organization As An Authority In Your Field Receive Patents for Your Ideas Publish Articles In Technical Journals Communicate Your Ideas To Others In Your Profession by Presenting Papers At Professional Meetings Be Evaluated On The Basis Of Your Technical Contributions Leadership (Management) Become A Manager Or Director Plan And Coordinate The Work Of Others Advance To A Policymaking Position In Management Plan Projects And Make Decisions Affecting The Organization Be The Technical Leader Of A Group Of Less Experienced Professionals Undergraduate Graduate Mean _ (n) Mean" (n) 6.3 942 6.3 700 5.4 928 5.4 695 5.7 946 5.9* 702 5.6 943 5.5* 699 5.9 946 5.9 703 5.3 938 5.4 697 4.5 923 4.1" 686 4.5 937 5.2* 697 4.8 941 5.2* 704 5.3 930 5.5* 700 5.1 928 4.7* 690 5.1 932 4.8* 688 4.7 924 4.5* 688 5.4 937 5.2* 693 5.3 936 5.1" 692 aStudents used a 7-point scale to rate the importance of each goal, where 7 indicates the highest rating. * p < 0.05. 9

Original page 11

Communications Skills The literature on engineering education establishes the importance of effective communications skills to professional success (Black, 1994; Morrow, 1994; Evans, et. al., 1993; Katz, 1993; Garry, 1986; Devon, 1985). AIAA student members were asked to assess the importance of selected communications skills to professional success, to indicate if they had received instruction in these skills, and to rate the helpfulness (usefulness) of that instruction. Importance of Communications Skills TraininE Students were asked to rate the importance of six communications skills to professional career success (table 7). Students assigned the highest importance ratings to the ability to use computer, communication and information technology (X = 6.6 for undergraduates and X = 6.5 for graduate students). Oral and written technical communications skills received the next highest importance ratings. The mean ratings for these two communication skills were X = 6.3,6.3 for undergraduate and X = 6.3,6.4 for graduate students. Significant differences in the means exist between undergraduate and graduate students for five of the six communications skills. Table 7. Importance of Selected Communications Skills to U.S. Aerospace Competencies Effectively Communicate Technical Information In Writing Effectively Communicate Technical Information Orally Have A Knowledge And Understanding Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Ability To Search Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases Ability To Use A Library That Contains Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Effectively Use Computer, Communication And Information Technology Engineering Students Undergraduate Graduate Mean a (n) Mean" (n) 942 6.4* 702 942 6.3 701 Of 936 6.1" 702 919 5.3* 697 5.8 938 5.7* 701 6.6 943 6.5* 701 aStudents used a 7-point scale to rate the importance of each competency, where 7 indicates the highest rating. *p < 0.05. 10

Original page 12

Receipt and Helpfulness of Communications Skills Instruction Table 8 shows the percentage of students who have received communications skills instruction. About 87% of the undergraduates and 78% of the graduate students have received instruction in the use of computer, communication, and information technology. Approximately 73% of the undergraduates and 71% of the graduates have had technical writing instruction. About 65% of the undergraduates 58% of the graduate students have received instruction in speech/oral communication. About two-thirds of the undergraduates and slightly more than half of the graduate students had received instruction resources and materials and (2) using a library in (1) using engineering/science information that contains engineering/science information resources and materials. About 55% of the undergraduates and 43% of the graduate students had received instruction in searching electronic (bibliographic) data bases. Table 8. Communications Skills Instruction Received by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Instruction Technical Writing/Communication Speech/Oral Communication Using A Library That Contains Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Using Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Searching Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases Using Computer, Communication, And Information Technology Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 73.4 692 71.1 500 64.8 611 58.0 408 64.5 608 53.8 378 68.7 648 55.8 392 55.2 521 43.0 302 87.1 821 77.9 547 Students receiving communications skills instruction were asked to rate the helpfulness (usefulness) of that instruction (table 9). For the most part, students reported that the instruction they received was helpful. Furthermore, undergraduate and graduates students assigned similar importance ratings to the helpfulness of the skill instruction they had received. They assigned the highest ratings CX = 6.0 for undergraduates and X = 5.8 for graduate students) to instruction in using computer, communication, and information technology. Importance ratings for the five remaining_ skills ranged_from a high of Y, = 5.6 to a low ofX = 5.0 for undergraduates and a high ofX - 5.4 to a low ofX = 4.9 for graduate students. Statistical differences between the scores reported by undergraduate and graduate students for helpfulness of instruction received in technical writing/communication and in using computer, 11 communication, and information technology.

Original page 13

Table 9. Helpfulness of Communications Skills Instruction Received by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Instruction Technical Writing/Communication Speech/Oral Communication Using A Library That Contains Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Using Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Searching Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases Using Computer, Communication, And Information Technology Undergraduate Graduate Mean" (n) Mean" (n) 5.6 680 5.3 * 509 5.5 606 5.4 427 5.2 604 5.0 381 5.3 648 5.2 395 5.0 533 4.9 318 6.0 808 5.8 * 543 aStudents used a 7-point scale to rate the helpfulness of each competency, where 7 indicates the highest rating. *p < 0.05. .Impediments to Preparing Written Technical Communications We asked students the extent to which a lack of knowledge/skill about certain communications principles impedes their ability to write (table 10). Overall, students did not report serious problems with their writing skills, at least to the point that any deficiencies might impede the technical writing process. The clustering around 3.0) were recorded for writing quoting, editing and revising, and developing lowest "impedance" scores (i.e., mean scores grammatically correct sentences, notetaking and paragraphs. In terms of their ability to prepare written technical communication, both undergraduate and graduate students appear to have the greatest difficulty with preparing/presenting information in an organized manner, defining the purpose of the communication, and assessing Collaborative Writing Most of the students in this study have of both undergraduate and graduate students the needs of the reader. experience in collaborative writing. About 80% report that they have produced written technical communication as part of a group. On average, undergraduate students report that they collaborate on about 33% of their written technical communication. A slightly higher percentage, on average about 35%, of graduate students' report that their written technical communication is collaborative. However the difference is not significant. 12

Original page 14

Table 10. Factors Impeding the Ability of U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students to Produce Written Technical Communication Principles Defining The Purpose Of The Communication Assessing The Needs Of The Reader Preparing/Presenting Information In An Organized Manner Developing Paragraphs (Introductions, Transitions, Conclusions) Writing Grammatically Correct Sentences Notetaking And Quoting Editing And Revising Undergraduate Graduate Mean t (n) Mean" (n) 3.7 840 3.6 640 4.0 864 3.9 643 3.6 870 3.6 647 3.3 874 3.5* 648 3.1 873 3.2 653 3.1 856 3.1 627 3.3 855 3.3 622 "Students used a 7-point scale to measure the extent to which each principle impedes their ability to produce written technical communications, *p < 0.05. where 7 indicates greatly impedes. Table 11 also reports the percentage of students' written technical communication that is required to be collaborative. A significantly greater percentage of undergraduate students' written technical communication is required to be collaborative. On average, undergraduate students report that they are required to collaborate on about 48% of their written technical communication compared to about 43% of written technical communication prepared by graduate students. We also asked students who write collaboratively to compare the productivity of group writing to the productivity of writing alone (table 12). A high percentage of students (47.1% undergraduate students; 39.2% graduate students) feels that group writing is more productive than writing alone. About 27% of the undergraduates that group writing is less productive. About 26% graduate students reported that group writing was and about 30% of graduate students reported of undergraduate students and about 30% of as productive as writing alone. Use and Importance of Libraries and Selected Information Sources and Products This section examines the use and importance of libraries and STI sources and products to engineering and science students. First, we examine the type of library use instruction that 13

Original page 15

) _ _ :_ : ..... _ __ < ; _ _ _ : _ _ i: .... , i:: i/il; i+!/ii!i i ! !/i! !i!!i;!!iiiii!/i;!i_ii_!i!;!i_i_i_i_iii!i!i_i_i_iiii_ii_i_iii_iiiii Table 11. Production of WrittenTechnical Communication By U.S. Factor Percentage Of Written Technical Communication Involving Collaborative Writing 0% 1 - 24% 25 - 49% 50 - 74% 75 - 99% 100% Mean Percentage Of Written Technical Communication Required To Be Collaborative? O% 1 - 24% 25 - 49% 50 - 74% 75 - 99% 100% Mean *p < 0.05. Table 12. Productivity of U.S. Aerospace How Productive Less Productive Than Writing Alone About As Productive As writing Alone More Productive Than Writing Alone Aerospace Engineering Students Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 19.4 158 18.8 124 29.2 239 25.7 168 14.7 119 14.5 95 19.7 161 24.6 162 15.2 124 11.9 78 1.6 13 4.9 32 33.3 35.3 4.5 27 9.6 46 21.5 128 21.8 114 18.4 111 18.3 88 30.4 184 28.0 134 14.7 89 10.6 51 11.1 67 11.7 56 47.6 of Collaborative Writing Engineering Students Undergraduate Graduate & (n) %" (n) 26.8 179 30.4 162 26.2 175 30.4 162 47.1 315 39.2 209 apercentages exclude students who report that they never collaborate on academic writing projects. 14

Original page 16

student respondents received, the effectiveness of the information obtained from the library in meeting students' engineering/science information needs, and their use (search) of electronic (bibliographic) data bases. Finally, we explore the use and importance of selected information sources and products. Library Use Instruction We asked students to indicate whether they had received instruction in six areas related to library use. These data are summarized in table and about 40% of the graduate students reported 13. About half of undergraduate respondents that they had received a tour of their library; about 41% and 31% of the undergraduate and graduate students, respectively, had received a library presentation as part of their academic orientation. A higher percentage of undergraduates compared to graduate students received instruction in six of the seven types of instruction. Less than one-fourth of students surveyed had taken a library skill/use course in engineering/science information resources and materials instruction as part of their engineering curriculum. Nearly 30% of both student groups had received library instruction for end-user searching of electronic (bibliographic) data bases. Less than 20% of both groups of students had received library skill/use resources and materials. instruction in engineering/science information Table 13. Library Training Received by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Type Of Instruction Library Tour Library Presentation As Part Of Academic Orientation Library Orientation As Part Of An Engineering/Science Course Library Skill/Use Course (Bibliographic Instruction) Library Skill/Use Course In Engineering/Science Information Resources And Materials Library Instruction For End-user Searching Of Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases 15 Undergraduate Graduate (n) % (n) 50.2 464 39.9 275 41.1 377 30.8 212 23.3 215 20.8 142 32.5 295 21.7 147 18.1 165 19.6 133 30.4 272 28.6 195

Original page 17

Library Use We also asked students respondents to indicate the number of times that they had used a library during the current school term (see table 14). Undergraduates appear to use a library significantly less often than do graduate students. About 15% of the undergraduates indicated that they had not used the library at all, compared to about 5% of graduate students. Overall, undergraduates averaged 8.8 "uses of the library" during the current school term compared with 11.0 "uses" for graduate students. Table 14. Use of A Library This School Term by U.S. Aerospace Visits 0 Times 1- 5 Times 6- 10 Times 11 - 25 Times 26 - 50 Times 51 Or More Times *p < 0.05. Effectiveness of Information Obtained From Engineering Students Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 15.1 139 5.2 35 42.5 391 36.2 243 18.7 172 28.9 194 16.4 151 20.0 134 6.0 55 6.6 44 1.3 12 3.3 22 Mean Median the Library Those students who had used a library during the current term were asked to rate the effectiveness of the information obtained from the library in meeting their engineering/science information needs (see table 15). The overall rating of the "effectiveness of the information received" given by graduate students C_ = 5.1) was significantly higher than undergraduates' overall rating C_ = 4.8). About 42% of graduate students indicated that the information they received was very effective in meeting their undergraduates. Less than 7% of both student information needs, compared to about 33% of the groups indicated that the information they obtained from the library was very ineffective in meeting their engineering/science information needs. About 51% of the undergraduate students reported that the information they received from the library was neither effective nor ineffective, compared to about 51% of the graduate students who reported that the information they received from the library was neither effective nor ineffective in meeting their engineering/science information needs. 16

Original page 18

Table 15. Effectivenessof Information Obtained From the Library in Meeting Information Needs Effectiveness Very Effective Neither Effective Nor Ineffective Very Ineffective Mean *p < 0.05. Reasons for Nonuse of a Library Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 32.5 259 42.2 278 60.7 484 51.4 339 6.9 55 6.4 42 4.8 5.1" We also asked the 139 undergraduate students and 35 graduate students who had not used a library during the current term to indicate their reasons for non-use. The percentages of undergraduate and graduate non-users by the reason for non use of a library appear in table 16. About 75% of undergraduate non-users and about 47% of graduate students reported that they had no information needs. About 68% of undergraduate non-users and 88% of graduate nonusers indicated that their information needs were more easily met by sources other than the library. About 22% of the undergraduate and about 32% of graduate students reported that they had tried the library before but could not find the information they needed. Searching of Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases We were also interested in finding out how students search electronic (bibliographic) data bases (table 17). About 40% of undergraduates and about 44% of the graduate students do all of their own searching. About 37% of undergraduate students and about 36% of graduate students reported that they did most of their own searching. Less than 10% of the undergraduate searching and about 12% of graduate student searches involve a librarian. About 11% of undergraduates and about 8% of graduate students do not use electronic data bases; about 5% of the undergraduates and about 2% of the graduate (bibliographic) data bases. Student Information-Seeking Behavior students do not have access to electronic To learn students' preferences for using particular information sources, we asked students to indicate the sequence in which they consulted a range of information resources (table 18). The first step for most undergraduate and graduate students was to consult their personal stores of technical information. (About 48% of undergraduates and 51% of graduate students consulted their personal stores of technical information first.) 17 The second step for most undergraduates was

Original page 19

Table 16. Reasons U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Did Not Use A Library During This Current School Term Reasons I Had No Information Needs My Information Needs Were More Easily Met Some Other Way Tried The Library Once Or Twice Before But I Couldn't Find The Information I Needed The Library Is Physically Too Far Away The Library Staff Is Not Cooperative Or Helpful The Library Staff Does Not Understand My Information Needs The Library Did Not Have The Information I Need I Have My Own Personal Library And Do Not Need Another Library The Library Is Too Slow In Getting The Information I Need We Have To Pay To Use The Library We Are Discouraged From Using The Library Undergraduate Graduate % (n) (n) 74.8 101 46.7 14 68.3 86 87.9 29 22.6 28 32.1 9 4.1 5 17.9 5 3.3 4 7.7 2 8.2 10 7.4 2 16.5 20 14.8 4 11.6 14 18.5 5 7.5 9 12.0 3 0.8 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 Table 17. How U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Search Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases Approach iI Do All Searches Myself I Do Most Searches Myself I Do Half By Myself And Half Through A Librarian I Do Most Searches Through A Librarian I DoAll Searches Through A Librarian I Do Not Use Electronic Data Bases I Do Not Have Access To Electronic Data Bases 18 Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 40.3 378 43.5 304 36.9 346 35.8 250 5.5 52 6.6 46 1.3 12 3.7 26 0.4 4 1.3 9 10.9 102 7.6 53 4.6 43 1.6 11

Original page 20

Table 18. Information SourcesUsed by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students in Problem Solving Used Used 1_ 2,a Information Source % % Undergraduate Used Personal Store Of Technical Information 48.2 14.1 Spoke With Students 14.5 34.3 Spoke With Faculty Members 19.3 20.0 Used Literature Resources (e.g., Conference Papers, Journal Articles, Technical Reports) 6.4 10.5 Spoke With A Librarian 0.6 1.9 Used Literature Resources Found In A Library 4.6 9.7 Searched (Or Had Someone Search For Me) An Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Base In The Library 5.9 10.2 Used None Of The Above Steps 0.2 ............... Graduate Used Personal Store Of Technical Information 51.4 15.4 Spoke With Students 4.9 21.9 Spoke With Faculty Members 23.3 21.8 Used Literature Resources (e.g., Conference Papers, Journal Articles, Technical Reports) 10.4 22.5 Spoke With A Librarian 1.1 1.8 Used Literature Resources Found In A Library 3.8 7.9 :Searched (Or Had Someone Search For Me) An Electronic Bibliographic) Data Base In The Library Used Nolle Of The Above Steps Used Used Used Used Used Did Not 3,a 4th 5t_ 6tb 7 tb Use % % % % % % 14.9 6.7 4.6 2.6 0.9 8.0 17.6 9.7 8.6 5.6 1.3 8.5 26.1 11.5 7.3 5.0 1.7 9.0 14.6 26.0 12.7 5.9 1.6 22.2 3.5 5.7 5.7 4.9 3.9 73.9 12.5 18.9 19.3 7.3 2.1 25.7 8.3 7.4 7.8 8.3 2.5 49.7 11.3 6.2 6.1 4.3 1.2 4.1 16.9 13.5 12.5 10.5 4.9 14.8 20.3 12.2 10.2 6.1 1.0 5.0 21.0 22.9 0.4 7.8 2.7 4.4 7.9 66.7 19,4 23.7 21.3 6.3 2.2 15.4 9.6 11.7 4.0 41.2 to speak with other students; about 34% for undergraduate students. For graduate students, the pattern of the most frequently chosen source used second in the search process is mixed. The search strategy of graduate students tended to be divided between using literature resources (22.5%), speaking with other students (21.9%), and speaking with faculty members (21.8%). About 26% of undergraduates spoke with faculty 19 members as the third step in searching for

Original page 21

information. Graduate students most frequently used literature resources (21.0%) and spoke to faculty members (20.3%) during the third step. Undergraduate students do not begin to use formal resources such as literature sources and libraries until the fourth step in the search process. Graduate students used literature sources found in a library (23.7%) and used literature sources (22.9%) during the fourth step. Undergraduates and graduate students relied on literature sources found in a library (19.3%;21.3%) during the fifth step. About 74% of the undergraduate students did not consult a librarian during the search process and about 50% did not search (or have searched) an electronic (bibliographic) data base in the library during the search process. A higher percentage of graduate students (66.7%) did not consult a librarian during the search process and a lower percentage (41.2%) did not search (or have searched) an electronic (bibliographic) data base in the library during the search process. Use and Importance of Selected Information Sources Student participants were also asked to indicate the frequency of their use of selected information sources and the importance of these sources (table 19) in meeting the in- formation needs of U.S. aerospace engineer students. mation more than any other information source for graduates). For undergraduates, the second Students used their personal collections of infor- (X = 3.9 for undergraduate students and X = 4.1 most frequently used source of information was Table 19. Frequency of Use and Importance of Information Sources Used to Meet Information Needs Under- Undergraduate Graduate graduate Graduate Information Source Mean a Your Personal Collection Of Information 3.9 Other Students 3.4 Faculty Members 3.2 Library 2.9 Librarian 1.8 Your Personal Contacts Within Industry 2.6 Your Personal Contacts At Government Laboratories 2.8 During the Most Recent School Term Use Importance (n) Mean a (n) Mean a (n) Mean a (n) 935 4.1" 699 5.8 938 6.1" 697 936 3.2* 697 4.8 936 4.4* 697 935 3.4* 697 5.2 938 5.2 698 932 3.4* 697 4.5 935 5.2* 697 928 2.0* 685 2.6 933 3.0* 695 937 2.6 696 4.4 937 4.1" 695 937 2.6 696 4.6 936 4.3 696 aFrequency of use was measured using a 5-point scale, where 1 = never and 5 = always. Importance was measured using a 7-point scale, where 1 = very unimportant and 7 = very important. *p < 0.05. 20

Original page 22

other students. In contrast, the second most frequently used source of information for graduate students were faculty members and a library (X = 3.4). The third most frequently used source of information for undergraduates was faculty members. The third most frequently used source of information for graduate students was other students. Both undergraduates and graduates used their personal contacts in industry and in government laboratories more often than they consulted a librarian. Graduate students were significantly more likely than undergraduates to use their personal collection of information (X - 4.1 and X = 3.9), ask faculty members (X = 3.2 and X = 3.4), use a library (X = 3.4 and X = 2.9), and consult a librarian (X = 2.0 and X = 1.8). Undergraduate students were significantly more likely -- 3.4 and X = 3.1). Use and Importance of Selected Information Products than graduate students to ask other students (X Students were also asked about the frequency of their use of a variety of information products during the most recent school term and to rate the importance of these products in satisfying their information needs (table 20). There were significant differences between undergraduate and graduate students both in the extent of their usage and the importance of the information products listed. Undergraduate students reported the highest frequencies of use for the following products: textbooks C)( -- 4.4), computer programs/documentation (X = 3.2), handbooks (X = 2.9), journal articles (X = 2.7), and technical reports Q( = 2.4). There are statistical differences between undergraduate and graduate students and their use of 11 information products. Undergraduate students used significantly more textbooks, handbooks, audio/visual materials, and drawing/specifications used significantly more journal articles, computer than did graduate students. Graduate students programs/documentation, conference/meeting papers, theses/dissertations, U.S. government and industry technical reports, and technical translations than did graduate students. Undergraduate_ students recorded the highest textbooks_(X = 6.3), computer programs/documentation importance rating for the following products: C)( = 5.0), handbooks C)( = 4.6), journal articles (X =4.2), and technical reports (X = 3.8). Graduate students recorded the highest importance rating for the following products: textbooks (X = 6.0), journal articles (X =5.6), conference/meeting papers (X = 5.1), computer programs/documentation (X = 4.9), and technical reports (X = 4.8). There are statistical differences between undergraduate and graduate students and their importance ratings for 10 information products. Undergraduate students assigned a significantly higher important rating to textbooks, computer programs/documentation, handbooks, drawings/specifications, audio/visual materials, and patents than did graduate students. Graduate students assigned a significantly higher importance rating to journal articles, conference/meeting papers, U.S. government technical reports, abstracts, and thesis/dissertations than did undergraduate students. Use of Foreign and Domestically Produced Technical Reports Students were asked if they use technical reports produced in the U.S. and foreign countries (table 21). Overall, use of foreign produced technical reports by undergraduate and 21

Original page 23

Table 20. Frequency of Use and Importance of Information Products Used to Meet Information Needs Information Product Mean (n) Mean (n) Mean (n) Mean (n) Abstracts Conference/Meeting Papers Journal Articles Handbooks Textbooks Computer Programs/Documentation Bibliographic, Numeric, Factual Data Bases Theses/Dissertations Technical Reports Audio/Visual Materials Foreign Language Technical Reports Technical Translations Patents Industry Technical Reports Drawings/Specifications Preprints Or Deposited Manuscripts Informal Information Products (e.g., Vendor/Supply Catalogs, Company Literature, Trade Joumals/Magazines) During the Most Recent School Term Use I Importance Under- Undergraduate Graduate graduate Graduate 2.1 936 2.8* 696 3.2 922 4.2* 693 2.1 935 3.3* 699 3.3 924 5.1" 695 2.7 935 3.6* 698 4.2 924 5.6* 695 2.9 936 2.8 693 4.6 925 4.4* 689 4.4 937 ":4.0* " 697 6.3 926 "6.0* 694 3.2 938 3.4* 698 5.0 924 4.9 692 I 2.2 936 2.3 691 3.6 922 3.6 692 1.6 934 2.5* 699 2.8 922 4.0* 693 2.4 933 3.1" 695 3.8 922 4.8* 693 1.8 932 1.7" 695 2.9 923 2.6* 690 1.3 933 1.4 693 2.1 922 2.1 691 1.4 932 1.5" 696 2.3 922 2.3 694 1.3 934 1.2 698 2.3 922 2.0* 691 1.9 933 2.0* 695 3.3 922 3.4 689 2.2 930 1.9" 692 3.5 923 2.8* 687 1.5 923 1.6 693 2.6 913 2.5 682 2.4 931 2.4 695 3.6 924 3.4* 693 aFrequency of use was measured using a 5'point scale, where 1 = never and 5 = always. Importance was measured using a 7-point scale, where 1 = very unimportant and 7 = very important. *p < 0.05. graduate students was low. A higher percentage of graduate students than undergraduates reported using technical reports from all nine highest use of U.S. (NASA) technical reports countries/organizations. Both groups report the (64.8% of undergraduates and 89.1% of graduate students). Undergraduate students made the greatest use of AGARD technical reports followed by ESA technical reports, and British ARC and RAE technical reports. Graduate students made the greatest use of AGARD technical reports reports, ESA technical reports, technical reports followed by British ARC and RAE technical produced in Germany, and French ONERA tech- 22

Original page 24

Table 21. Use of Foreign and Domestically Produced Technical Reports by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Country/Organization AGARD Reports British ARC and RAE Reports Dutch NLR Reports ESA Reports (European Space Agency) Indian NAL Reports French ONERA Reports German DFVLR, DLR, and MBB Reports Japanese NAL Reports Russian TsAGI Reports U.S. NASA Reports * p < 0.05. Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 10.2 94 35.1" 243 5.7 52 15.4" 106 1.2 11 3.3* 23 8.5 78 14.6" 101 0.2 2 2.3* 16 1.5 14 10.7" 74 3.1 28 11.3" 78 1.7 16 4.2* 29 1.6 15 3.2 22 64.8 604 89.1" 624 nical reports. Graduate students used a statistically significantly higher number of technical reports than did undergraduate students. Bilingual and Foreign Language Fluency About 83% of the student respondents indicated that English was their first (native) language. (About 80% of the survey participants indicated that the U.S. was their native country. Furthermore, about 88% indicated that they are a citizen of the country where they are attending college.) About 20% student participants indicated that they are bilingual. Table 22 reports students opinions concerning the importance of being bilingual relative to achieving career success. A significantly greater percentage of undergraduate students believe that, in terms of achieving their career goals and aspirations, being bilingual is important. About 38% of undergraduates report that it is very important to be bilingual, compared to 33% of graduate students. Only about 19% of the undergraduate students indicated that knowing a second language is very unimportant to career success, compared to 25% of the graduate students. Survey respondents were asked to provide information about their reading and speaking competencies in six languages (table 23). About 99% of the respondents read and speak English fluently. Few students reported skill in reading or speaking languages other than English. Undergraduate reading and speaking abilities were recorded for the following languages: French (26.8%/24.4%), German (20.8%/19.2%), and Spanish (17.8%/16.3%) (languages for which instruction is offered at most U.S. high schools and colleges). Less than 6% reported that they read or speak Japanese or Russian. Undergraduate 23 reading and speaking abilities were recorded

Original page 25

Table 22. Importance of Being Bilingual Importance Very Important Of Average Importance Very Unimportant in Achieving Career Goals and Aspirations Undergraduate Graduate %a (n) %a (n) 37.9 254 33.1" 164 43.0 288 41.7 207 19.1 128 125 i 25.2 apercentages exclude students who reported that they are not bilingual. * p < 0.05. Table 23. Language Fluency of U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Undergraduate Graduate Reading Speaking Reading Speaking % Mean % Mean % % Mean Read Ability a Read Speak Ability a Abilitya Speak [Language English 98.5 5.0 98.2 French 26.8 2.0 24.4 German 20.8 2.0 19.2 Japanese 3.8 1.7 4.3 Russian 5.2 2.0 5.4 Spanish 17.8 2.8 16.3 Other 6.4 3.5 6.9 Mean Ability a 5.0 99.2 5.0 99.0 4.9 1.8 24.9 2.1 22.7 i 1.9 2.0 20.9 1_9 18.9 2.0 1.6 4.3 2.4 3.7 2.4 1.9 5.4 1.9 4.9 1.8 2.6 9.4 2.5 7.7 2.5 3.7 5.6 3.6 5.9 3.8 aA 5-point scale was used to measure fluency with "1" being passably and "5" being fluently; hence, the higher the average (mean), the greater the ability (fluency) of the student to read/speak the language. for the following languages: French (24.9%/22.7%), German (20.9%/18.9%), and Spanish (5.4%/4.9%) (languages for which instruction is offered at most U.S. high schools and colleges). Less than 6% reported that they read or speak Use of Computer and Information Japanese or Russian. Technology and Electronic Networks The use of computer technology to prepare written technical communications was investigated. Students were asked about their current and anticipated use of selected information technologies. Specifically, students were asked 24 about their use of electronic networks, their use

Original page 26

of electronic networks for specific purposes, and their use of electronic networks to exchange messages and files. Computer Ownership and Use of Computers to Prepare Written Technical Communications Almost two-thirds of the survey respondents own a personal computer (see table 24). Nearly all the students we surveyed use computers Table 24. Computer when they prepare written technical communi- Use/Nonuse by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Factor Do you own a Personal Computer? Yes No Do You Use A Computer To Prepare Written Technical Communication? No Yes Sometimes Frequently Always Your Reason(s) For Not Using A Computer? No/Limited Computer Access Lack Of Knowledge/Skill Using A Computer Prefer Not To Use A Computer Other Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 67.9 642 66.9 471 32.1 303 33.1 233 2.5 23 0.1 1 97.5 898 99.9 700 4.9 45 3.0 21 15.3 141 8.3 58 77.3 712 88.6 621 34.8 8 100.0 1 39.1 9 0.0 0 17.4 4 0.0 0 21.7 5 0.0 0 cations (97.5% of undergraduates and 99.9% of graduate students). Undergraduate students who do not use computer technology to prepare written technical communications gave the following reasons for "non-use": lack of knowledge/skill using a computer (39.1%), no/lack of access to computer technology (34.8%), and prefer not to use a computer (17.4%). Use of Electronic (Computer) Network_ Most students also use electronic networks. Table 25 shows that about 82% of the undergraduates and about 90% of graduate students report that they use electronic (computer) networks. About 66% of the undergraduates and about 80% of the graduate students reported 25

Original page 27

that they personally use them. About 12% of undergraduates and about 7% of the graduate students use electronic (computer) networks through intermediaries. Table 25. Use of Electronic (Computer) Networks by U.S. Aerospace Engineers Students Factor !Do You Use Electronic (Computer) Networks? Yes Yes, I Personally Use Them Yes, I Use Them But Through An Intermediary No No, Because I Do Not Have Access To Electronic Networks : No, But I May Use Them In The Future Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 82.2 720 89.6 608 66.1 622 79.5 558 11.5 108 7.1 50 17.8 166 10.4 3 6.0 56 3.7 26 11.8 111 6.7 47 Table 26 lists the percentages of undergraduate and graduate students who use electronic (computer) networks for 11 different functions. Nearly all students use networks for exchanging electronic mail (87.6% of undergraduates and 93.7% of graduate students). Students also make extensive use of networks for searching library catalogs (74.7% of undergraduate and 83.7% of graduate students) and for transferring files electronically (72.8% of undergraduates and 87.7 % of graduate students. Other network functions connecting to geographically distant sites, using utilized by high percentages of students include networks for computational analysis and access to design tools, searching electronic (bibliographic) data bases, and for information search and retrieval. The functions used least included using network computers to control laboratory instruments and design tools, ordering documents from the library, and preparing STI with colleagues at geographically distant sites. Less than 20% these purposes. of students reported that they use networks for Although high percentages of undergraduates use electronic (computer) networks for most of the functions described in table 26, significantly greater percentages of graduate students use networks for nearly all functions. There were only two network functions that undergraduate and graduate students used in similar proportions. These include the use of electronic bulletin boards or conferences (51.1% of undergraduates and 53.2% of graduate students) and using networks to control instruments and tools (15.5% of undergraduates and 17.6% of graduate students. Students who use electronic (computer) networks to exchange messages or files do so with others at a wide array of locations (table 27). Over 80% of both undergraduate and graduate students 26

Original page 28

Table 26. Uses of Electronic Networks by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Purpose Connect To Geographically Distant Sites Electronic Mail Electronic Bulletin Boards Or Conferences Electronic File Transfer Log Into Computers For Computational Analysis Or To Use Design Tools Control Equipment Such As Laboratory Instruments Or Machine Tools Access/Search The Library's Catalog Order Documents From The Library Search Electronic (Bibliographic) Data Bases Information Search And Data Retrieval !Prepare Scientific And Technical Papers With Colleagues At Geographically Distant Sites p < 0.05. Undergraduate Graduate Mean (n) Mean (n) 56.3 407 71.5" 429 87.6 635 93.7 565 51.1 369 53.2 317 72.8 526 87.7* 522 67.5 489 77.4* 466 i 15.5 112 17.6 104 74.7 541 83.7* 503 17.2 124 21.7" 129 54.8 395 60.9* 363 58.0 418 57.4* 342 8.2 59 22.3* 133 reported that they use electronic networks to exchange messages with members of their academic classes (see table 27). Graduate students are significantly more likely to exchange messages with others outside of their academic classes both at the same geographic site (68.8%) and at different geographic sites (63.3%) compared to undergraduate students (58.5% and 39.7%, respectively). A significantly higher percentage of graduate students also uses networks to contact people outside of their academic community (67.2%) compared to undergraduates (52.1%). Use of Selected Information Technologies Students were asked about their use and nonuse of a wide range of information technologies (table 28). Specifically, they were asked to indicate if they "already use it," "don't use it but may in the future," and "don't use it and doubt if I will." Undergraduate and graduate students reported the greatest use of computer-based information technologies such as electronic publishing, electronic mail, desk top publishing, and electronic bulletin boards and data bases. Graduate students also make extensive use of FAX/TELEX 27 technologies. Students do not yet participate

Original page 29

Table 27. Use of Electronic Networks by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students to Exchange Messages or Files Exchange With -- Members Of Your Academic Classes Other People In Your Academic Community At The SAME Geographic Site Who Are Not In Your Academic Classes Other People In Your Academic Community At A DIFFERENT :Geographic Site Who Are Not In Your Academic Classes People Outside Of Your Academic Community * p < 0.05. Undergraduate Graduate % (n) % (n) 84.0 609 81.5 492 58.5 421 68.8* 414 39.7 284 380 52.1 374 403 in video or computer conferencing, but a majority of students expect to use these technologies in the future. Most students do not expect to use audio tapes or motion picture tapes in the future. Most students do not yet participate in video or computer conferencing, but between 80% and 90% of students expect to use these technologies in the future. Less than 15 percent of undergraduates and less than 10% of graduate students report that they use audio tapes or motion picture tapes. About 40% of undergraduates and between 50 and 60% of graduates do not expect to use audio- or videotapes during their future FINDINGS careers. 1. The average AIAA student member in our sample is male, a U.S. citizen, and is preparing for a career as an aerospace engineer, and made the career decision prior to entering college. 2. Graduate student members are more likely upon graduation, while undergraduate student 3. In defining career success, graduate student than undergraduates to aspire to work in academia members prefer to work in industry. members feel that it is important to develop a professional reputation outside of the organization by communicating their ideas to others in the discipline by publishing articles and presenting papers at professional meetings. Undergraduates feel that it is important to advance within the organization by taking on management and leadership roles. 28

Original page 30

•...... • • : • ••:: : • : i•? _ i_ _ _ _:•//i ¸•: : i • ii•••_i_i!ii!_iii!i_i_iiiiill/i!_i_i_ii_ii_i_iii_i_iiiiiiii_i_i!ii_i_i Table 28. Use, Nonuse, and Potential Use of Information Technologies by U.S. Aerospace Engineering Students Already But May In And Doubt Use It Future If Will Information Technologies % Undergraduate Audio Tapes And Cassettes 14.8 Motion Picture Film 12.9 Videotape 35.0 Desktop/Electronic Publishing 64.4 Computer Cassettes/Cartridge Tapes 24.0 Electronic Mail 58.9 Electronic Bulletin Boards 35.0 FAX Or TELEX 37.7 Electronic Data Bases 45.6 Video Conferencing 2.7 Computer Conferencing 10.2 Micrographics And Microforms 29.2 Graduate Audio Tapes And Cassettes 9.7 Motion Picture Film 8.7 Videotape 34.3 Desktop/Electronic Publishing 76.6 Computer Cassettes/Cartridge Tapes 36.1 Electronic Mail 78.3 Electronic Bulletin Boards 38.9 FAX Or TELEX 66.3 Electronic Data Bases 55.9 Video Conferencing 6.0 Computer Conferencing 8.9 Micrographics And Microforms 37.6 Don't Use It, Don't Use It, (n) % (n) % (n) 139 43.8 411 41.4 389 121 47.6 447 39.5 371 330 59.1 557 5.9 56 608 33.3 314 2.3 22 225 51.0 477 25.0 234 557 38.0 359 3.1 29 330 59.7 562 5.3 5O 356 61.5 581 0.7 7 430 52.1 491 2.2 21 25 88.7 832 8.6 81 96 84.2 793 5.6 53 273 60.3 563 10.5 98 68 29.5 207 60.8 426 61 39.5 277 51.9 364 240 55.9 391 9.9 69 530 20.4 141 3.0 21 251 39.1 272 24.7 172 549 21.0 147 0.7 5 272 55.0 385 6.1 43 463 33.0 230 0.7 5 388 41.4 287 2.7 19 42 81.1 567 12.9 90 62 80.2 559 10.9 76 259 44.6 307 17.9 123 4. Both undergraduate and graduate student members feel that mastering information skills is important to career success. Most students communicating STI. 29 receive training in skills in locating and

Original page 31

1. Most students have experience in producing written STI as a member of a group, and feel that group writing is as productive or more productive than writing alone. 6. Less than half of undergraduate and graduate student members received training directed solely at library skills. 7. Both undergraduate and graduate students use (or expect to use) electronic media (computers and networks) at higher rates than other media in locating and communicating STI. 8. Undergraduate students are more likely than graduate students to indicate that they had no information needs that must be satisfied by using a library. 9. Graduate student AIAA members use formal information resources and products more often and value them more highly than undergraduate students do. Consider the following: • graduate students use the library more often than undergraduate students; with the exception of personal collections of information, undergraduates students consult faculty and other students more often, and value them more highly as information resources, than graduate student do. Graduate students use libraries (and librarians) more often, and value them more highly, than undergraduate student do; undergraduate students use information products related to classroom use (textbooks, computer programs, and handbooks) more frequently and value them more highly than graduate students. In additions to textbooks, the information products that graduate students use most frequently (and conference and meeting papers; value most highly) include journal articles and greater percentages of graduate students use technical reports, produced both in the U.S. and in other countries, compared to undergraduate students. 10. Undergraduate student members are more likely than graduate students to feel that knowing a second language is important to achieving career success, although there are only minor differences between undergraduate and graduate students in both the percentages which read or speak a foreign language and their ratings of their abilities in reading and speaking a second language. CONCLUDING REMARKS We interpret the survey data to indicate that there are two major differences between undergraduate and graduate AIAA student members. The first difference is rooted in the types of organizations that they plan to join upon academic experience which defines students' meeting them. graduation. The second is the structure of the information needs and the strategies employed for 3o

Original page 32

Undergraduate students expect to work in industry, at both the national and multi-national levels. The high importance values that undergraduate students placed on goals which define career success through advancement within expectations. Undergraduate students also value the organization are consistent with these knowledge of a second language more highly than graduate students do; this may result from the greater proportion of undergraduate students who aspire to work in multi-national industry. Graduate students are more likely than undergraduates to aspire to work in academia. The high importance ratings that graduate students assigned to developing a professional reputation ideas is consistent with this goal. through written and oral communication of their There were also clear differences in the information seeking habits of undergraduate and graduate students. Although undergraduates are at least as well trained in information seeking skills as graduate students are, undergraduate students apply these skills less often. Industry recommendations for improvement of engineering education curricula consistently point to the need for better training in skills related to locating, using, and communicating STI. This survey of AIAA student members indicates that students are reasonably well trained in information skills, and that they appreciate the importance of these skills for future career success. Nevertheless, it appears that undergraduate students -- those students destined to work in industrial setting -- lack the opportunity to hone these skills by applying them routinely during the course of their education. As long as undergraduate students are able satisfy their STI needs through informal channels and by mainly using textbooks and other classroom materials, they will continue to be unprepared to meet the expectations their careers, these students will be expected of their future employers. When they begin to show competence in locating, using and communicating STI on an ongoing basis; classroom-type materials are not adequate sources for these information needs. At the undergraduate level, students would therefore benefit from curricular changes that require them to use and communicate STI that they must locate on their own. Students indicate that they already make intensive use of computers and computer networks for a wide variety of functions, and the majority have received training in using computer networks for searching bibliographic databases. Course requirements should take advantage of students' willingness to use computers in ways that provide students with the opportunity to use their computer skills, while at the same time helping them to hone their skills in locating and communicating STI. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors acknowledge the Council on Library Resources (CLR) and its president, Dr. W. David Penniman, for providing the funds used to analyze these data. The authors also thank Ms. Barbara Lawrence, Division Director - Technical Information, AIAA for her assistance in making this study possible. 31

Original page 33

REFERENCES Black, K.M. (1994). "An Industry View of Engineering Education." Journal of Engineering Education, 83:1, 26-28. Devon, R. (1985). "lndustry's Advice for the First Two Years." Engineering Education, 76:2, 112-114. Evans, D.L., G.C. Beakley, P.E. Crouch, Engineering Graduates and Their Impact Education, 82:4, 203-211. and G.T. Yamaguchi. (1993). "Attributes of on Curriculum Design." Journal of Engineering Garry, F.W. (1986). "A Business Look at Engineering Education." Engineering Education, 76:4, 203-205. Katz, S. (1993). "The Entry-Level Engineer: Problems in Transition from Student to Professional." Journal of Engineering Education, 82:3, 171-174. Mailloux, E.N. (1989). "Engineering Information Systems." In The Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Publishers, Amsterdam, 239-266. Vol. 25. M.E. Williams, ed. Elsevier Science Morrow, R.M. (1994). "Issues Facing Engineering Education." Journal of Engineering Education, 83:1, 15-18. Perucci, R. and J.E. Gerstl. (1969). Profession Society. New York: Random House. Pinelli, T.E., J.M. Kennedy, and R.O. Barclay. Without Community: Engineers in American (1991). "The NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Research Project." Government Information Quarterly, 8:2, 219-233. Pinelli, T.E. and J.M. Kennedy. (1990). "Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion in the Academic Community." Paper Presented at the 1990 Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education, Toronto, Canada. Strother, J.B. (1992). "Reality vs Expectations: Practicing Engineers vs Engineering Students." Paper presented at International Professional Communication Conference. Santa Fe, NM. Sylvester, N.D. (1980). "Engineering Education Must Improve the Communication Skills of its Graduates." Engineering Education, 70, 739-740. 32

Original page 34

APPENDIX NASAfDoD AEROSPACE DIFFUSION RESEARCH Fact Sheet A KNOWLEDGE PROJECT The process of producing, transferring, and using scientific and technical information (STI), which is an essential part of aerospace research and development (R&D), can be defined as Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion. Studies tell us that timely access to STI can increase productivity and innovation and help aerospace engineers and scientists maintain and improve their professional skills. These same studies indicate, however, that we know little about aerospace knowledge diffusion or about how aerospace engineers and scientists find and use STI. To learn more about this process, we have organized a research project to study knowledge diffusion. Sponsored by NASA and the Department of Defense (DoD), the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project is being conducted by researchers at the NASA Langley Research Center, the Indiana University Center for Survey Research, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. This research is endorsed by several aerospace professional societies including the AIAA, RAeS, and DGLR and has been sanctioned by the AGARD and AIAA Technical Information Panels. This 4-phase project is providing descriptive and analytical data about the flow of STI at the individual, organizational, national, and international levels. It is examining both the channels used to communicate STI and the social system of the aerospace knowledge diffusion process. Phase 1 investigates the information-seeking habits and practices of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists, in particular their use of government-funded aerospace STI. Phase 2 examines the industry-government interface and emphasizes the role of the information intermediary in the knowledge diffusion government interface and emphasizes the information process. Phase 3 concerns the academicintermediary-faculty-student interface. Phase 4 explores the information-seeking behaviors of non-U.S, aerospace engineers and scientists from Western European nations, India, Israel, Japan, and the former Soviet Union. The results of this research project will help us to understand the flow of STI at the individual, organizational, national, and international levels. The findings can be used to identify and correct deficiencies; to improve access and use; to plan new aerospace STI systems; and should provide useful information to R&D managers, information managers, and others concerned with improving access to and utilization of STI. These results will contribute to increasing productivity and to improving and maintaining the professional competence of aerospace engineers and scientists. The results of our research are being shared freely with those who participate in the study. Dr. Thomas E. Pinelli Dr. John M. Kennedy Mail Stop 180A Center for Survey Research NASA Langley Research Center Indiana University Hampton, VA 23681-0001 Bloomington, IN 47405 (804) 864-2491 (812) 855-2573 Fax (804) 864-8311 Fax (812) 855-2818 T.E.Pi nelli@larc.nasa.gov kennedy@isrmail.soc.indiana.edu 33 Rebecca O. Barclay Dept. of Language, Lit. & Communication Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY 12180 (804) 399-5666 Fax (804) 397-4635 barclay@infi .net

Original page 35

APPENDIX B Technical Communications in Aerospace: The AIAA National Student Membership Study These questions ask about your career goals and aspirations. 1. To have a successful career, how important will it be for you to: (Circle number) Very Unimportant 1 Have the opportunity to explore new ideas about technology or systems ............. 1 2 Advance to a high-level staff technical position ......... 1 3 Have the opportunity to work on complex technical problems ..... 1 4 Work on projects that utilize the latest theoretical results in your specialty ............. 1 5 Work on projects that require learning new technical knowledge ............ 1 6 Establish a reputation outside your organization as an authority in your field ............. 1 7 Receive patents for your ideas .... 1 8 Publish articles in technical journals ............. 1 9 Communicate your ideas to others in your profession through papers delivered at professional society Very Don't Important Know 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 meetings ............. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 Be evaluated on the basis of your technical contributions ....... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 Become a manager or director in your line of work ........ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 12 Plan and coordinate the work of others ............. 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 13 Advance to a policy-making position in management ...... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 14 Plan projects and make decisions affecting the organization ...... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 15 Be the technical leader of a group of less experienced professionals . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 34

Original page 36

These questions ask about your decision science. to choose a career in engineering or 2. How important were each of the following in making your career choice? (Circle number) Very Very Not Unimportant Important Applicable 1 Your parents encouraged your area of study/major .............. 1 2 Other family members encouraged your area of study/major ......... 1 3 Teachers encouraged your area of study/major .............. 1 4 You feel that a career in your major/area of study will lead to financial security 1 5 You feel that a career in your major/area of study will provide a career with many rewarding activities ........ 1 6 Information on the career opportunities available in your major/area of study . . . 1 7 Other important factors (Please specify) 3. 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 When did you first decide on your area of study/major? (Circle number) 1 While still in elementary school 2 While in high school (or equivalent) 3 When you started college (or equivalent) 4 After starting college (or equivalent) 5 Other (Please specify) 4. How well do your current feelings about the career opportunities in your major/area of study match with those you had when you first decided on your career path? Would you say: (Circle ONLY one) 1 I am more happy about my career choice now than when I first made it 2 I feel about the same now as when I first made it 3 I am less happy about my career choice now than when I first made it 35

Original page 37

These questions ask about the importance success. of certain skills for your professional 5. How important do you think it will it be for you to: (Circle number) Unimportant Important Know 1 Effectively communicate technical information in writing .......... 2 Effectively communicate technical information orally ............ 3 Have a knowledge and understanding of engineering/science information resources and materials ......... 4 Be able to search electronic (bibliographic) data bases ........ 5 Know how to use a library that contains engineering/science information resources and materials .............. 6 Effectively use computer, communication, and information technology ........ Very Very Don't 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The next group of questions asks about course work or instruction you might have received as part of your education or academic preparation. 6. Have you received training or course work in: (Circle number) 1 Technical writing/communication .......... 2 Speech/oral communication ............. 3 Using a library that contains engineering/science information resources and materials ......... 4 Using engineering/science information resources and materials ............... Yes No No Instruction Available 1 2 8 1 2 8 1 2 1 2 8 5 Searching electronic (bibliographic) data bases ..... 1 2 8 6 Using computer, communication, and information technology .................... 36 1 2

Original page 38

1. If you receivedtraining or instruction in any of the following,was it helpful? (Circle number) Not Helpful 1 Technical writing/communication 1 2 2 Speech/oral communication ..... 1 2 3 Using a library that contains engineering/science information resources and materials ...... 1 2 4 Using engineering/science information resources and materials ...... 1 2 5 Searching electronic (bibliographic) data bases ............ 1 2 6 Using computer, communication_ and information technology ....... 1 2 These next questions ask about your preparation Did Not Very Don't Receive Helpful Know Training 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 3 4 5 6 ? 8 10 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 3 4 5 6 ? 8 10 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 of written technical communication as part of your education or academic preparation. 8. What percentage of your written technical communication involves collaborative writing (i.e., writing as a member of a group)? % (If 100% of your writing is done alone, 9. If you do write as a member of a group, what communication is required to be collaborative? _% go to Question 11.) percentage of your written technical 10. In general, do you find writing as part of a group more or less productive (i.e. quantity/ quality) than writing alone? (Circle number) 1 Less productive than writing alone 2 About as productive as writing alone 3 More productive than writing alone 11. Do you use a computer to prepare written technical communication? (Circle number) 1 Never 3 Frequently Go to Question 13. 2 Sometimes} 4 Always 37

Original page 39

1. If NEVER, which one of the following best (Circle numbers) 1 No or limited computer access 2 Lack of knowledge/skil] using a computer 3 Prefer not to use a computer 4 Other (Please specify) 13. To what extent does lack of knowledge/skill explains your reasons for non-use? about each of the following communication principles impede your ability to produce (i.e., quality/quantity) written technical communication? (Circle all that apply.) Does not Impede 1 Defining the purpose of the communication ......... 1 2 2 Assessing the needs of the reader ............ 1 2 3 Preparing/presenting information in an organized manner .... 1 2 4 Developing paragraphs (introductions, transitions, and conclusions) ......... 1 2 5 Writing grammatically correct sentences ....... 1 2 6 Notetaking and quoting ..... 1 2 7 Editing and revising ...... 1 2 8 Other (Please specify) Greatly Don't Impedes Know 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 ? These questions ask about your use of electronic/information technologies. 14. Describe your use of the following electronic/information technologies for communicating technical information. (Circle number) I already Information Technologies use it 1 Audio tapes and cassettes ..... 1 2 Motion picture film ........ 1 3 Video tape ............ 1 4 Desktop/electronic publishing 1 5 Computer cassette/cartridge tapes . 1 6 Electronic mail .......... 1 ? Electronic bulletin boards ...... 1 8 FAX or TELEX .......... 1 9 Electronic data bases ........ 1 10 Video conferencing ......... 1 11 Computer conferencing ....... 1 12 Micrographics & microforms .... 1 38 I don't use I don't use it, but may it and doubt in the future if I will 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3

Original page 40

1. Do you ever use electronic (computer) networks? (Circle number) 1 Yes, I personally use them 2 Yes, I use them but through an intermediary 3 No 4 No because I do not have access to electronic networks 5 No but may use them in the future Go to Question 18. If you answered "no" to Question 15, please go to Question 18. If you answered "yes" to Question 15, please continue to Question 16. 16. Do you use electronic networks for the following purposes? (Circle number) Yes No 1 To connect to geographically distant sites ......... 1 2 2 For electronic mail ................... 1 2 3 For electronic bulletin boards or conferences ........ 1 2 4 For electronic file transfer 5 To log into computers for such things as 1 2 computational analysis or to use design tools ........ 1 2 6 To control equipment such as laboratory instruments or machine tools ............... 7 To access/search the library's catalogue .......... 8 To order documents from the library ........... 9 To search electronic (bibliographic) data bases 1 2 1 2 1 2 ....... 1 2 10 For information search and data retrieval ......... 1 2 11 To prepare scientific and technical papers with colleagues at geographically distant sites .......... 1 2 • 17. Do you exchange electronic messages or files with: (Circle number) 1 Members of your academic classes ............. 2 Other people in your academic community at the SAME geographic site who are not in your academic classes .................... 3 Other people in your academic community at a DIFFERENT geographic site who are not in your academic classes .................... Yes No 1 2 1 1 2 4 People outside of your academic community ........ 1 2 These questions ask about your use of libraries education. and library services as part of your: 18. During this current school term, about how many times have you used a library to meet your engineering/science information needs? number of times If you answered "0" times to Question 18, please go to Question 20. If you answered "1 or more" times to Question 18, please continue to Question 19. 39

Original page 41

•• .... : _ .....: : ::::•::•:::_ __::• :: : •::: i:/•• ii : : :: :•:: :: : :!i•!¸ i:¸¸::!ii_i:_!i!ii!:i_ii¸:!::iii:i:!ii:iiii_i:iiii!i_i_i_i_i_i_i!_ii_i_i_iiii_ii_i_i 19. During the current school term, how effective library for meeting your engineering/science Very Very Ineffective Effective 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 was the information obtained from the information needs? (Circle number) _ GOQuestiontO21. Don't Know 8 20. Which of the following statements best describes your reasons for not using a library during this current school term? (Circle ALL that 1 ! had no information needs .................. 2 My information needs were more easily met some other way ....................... 3 "I¥icd the library once or twice before but apply) Yes No 1 2 1 2 I couldn't find the information I needed ............ 1 2 4 The library is physically too far away ............. 5 The library staff is not cooperative or helpful 1 2 .......... 1 2 6 The library staff does not understand my information needs 1 2 7 The library did not have the information I need ......... 1 2 8 I have my own personal library and do not need another library ....................... 9 The library is too slow in getting the information I need ........................... 10 We have to pay to use the library ............... 1 2 1 2 1 2 11 We are discouraged from using the library ........... 1 2 21. As part of your academic preparation, have library activities? (Circle ALL that apply) 1 Library tour .................. you received or participated in the following Not Don't Yes No Available Know 1 2 6 8 2 Library presentation as part of academic orientation 1 2 6 8 3 Library orientation as part of an engineering/ science course ................. 4 Library skill/use course (bibliographic instruction) 5 Library skill/use course in engineering/science information resources and materials ....... 6 Library instruction for end-user searching of electronic (bibliographic) data bases ....... 22. Which ONE of the following BEST characterizes data bases? (Circle ONLY ONE number) 1 I do all searches myself 2 I do most searches myself 3 I do half by myself and half through a librarian 4 I do most searches through a librarian 5 I do all searches through a librarian 6 I do not use electronic data bases 7 I do not have access to electronic data bases 4O 1 2 6 8 1 2 6 8 1 2 6 8 1 2 6 8 your use of electronic (bibliographic)

Original page 42

These questions ask about the use and importance of information to engineering/ science students. 23. How OFTEN during this current school term have you used the following information sources to meet your engineering/science information needs? (Circle numbers) Never Seldom 1 Your personal collection of information ........ 1 2 2 Other students ....... 1 2 3 Faculty members ...... 1 2 4 Library .......... 1 2 5 Librarian ......... 1 2 6 Your personal contacts within industry ......... 1 2 7 Your personal contacts at government laboratories . . . 1 2 24. Not Sometimes Frequently Always Available 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 How OFTEN during this current school term have you used the following information products to meet your engineering/science information needs? (Circle numbers) Never Seldom 1 Abstracts ......... 1 2 2 Conference/meeting papers .......... 1 2 3 Journal articles ...... 1 2 4 Handbooks ........ 1 2 5 Textbooks ........ 1 2 6 Computer programs and documentation ...... 1 2 7 Bibliographic, numeric, factual data bases ..... 1 2 8 Theses/dissertations .... 1 2 9 Technical reports ..... 1 2 10 Audio/visual materials • . 1 2 11 Foreign language technical reports .......... 1 2 12 Technical translations . . 1 2 13 Patents .......... 1 2 14 Industry technical reports 1 2 15 Drawings/specifications 1 2 16 Preprints or deposited manuscripts ........ 1 2 17 Informal information products e.g., vendor/supply catalogs, company literature, trade journals/magazines) .... 1 2 41 Not Sometimes Frequently Always Available 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6

Original page 43

< : : .... < < : ..... : < <:<< ':_ :::::::: : <:i<:: ¸¸ : : _ :i> :!!i?!!:¸¸<!<</!i!i_i_i!ii!i_iii_ii_!i!_i_i_iiii 25. How IMPORTANT are the following information sources in meeting your engineering/ science information needs? (Circle numbers) Very Unimportant 1 Your personal collection of information .......... 1 2 2 Other students ........ 1 2 3 Faculty members ....... 1 2 4 Library ............ 1 2 5 Librarian ........... 1 2 6 Your personal contacts within industry ........... 1 2 7 Your personal contacts at government laboratories .... 1 2 Very Not Important Available 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7 26. How IMPORTANT are the following information products in meeting your engineering/ science information needs? (Circle numbers) Very Unimportant 1 Abstracts .......... 1 2 2 Conference/meeting papers . . 1 2 3 Journal articles ........ 1 2 4 Handbooks ......... 1 2 5 Textbooks .......... 1 2 6 Computer programs and documentation ........ 1 2 7 Bibliographic, numeric, factual data bases ...... 1 2 8 Theses/dissertations ..... 1 2 9 Technical reports ....... 1 2 10 Audio/visual materials .... 1 2 11 Foreign language technical reports ........... 1 2 12 Technical translations ..... 1 2 13 Patents ........... 1 2 14 Industry technical reports . . . 1 2 15 Drawings/specifications .... 1 2 16 Preprints or deposited Very Not Important Available 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 manuscripts ......... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 17 Informal information products (e.g., vendor/supply catalogs, company literature, trade journals/magazines) ...... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 42

Original page 44

: ::..... :.... ::: : : :: _ .... : : ::::: :::,: :: !:: i: • :/?!:i!!! !:i:iiii::i!?!!!iiiii:¸!•i!ii_ii_i_i_i_ii!i_iii!_i_i_i_i¸ 27. Do you use the following technical reports in meeting your engineering/science information needs? (Circle numbers) 1 AGARD reports ................. 2 British ARC and RAE reports ........... 3 Dutch NLR reports ................ 4 ESA reports ................... 5 Indian NAL reports ............... 6 French ONERA reports .............. 7 German DFVLR, DLR, and MBB reports ...... 8 Japanese NAL reports .............. 9 Russian TsAGI reports .............. 10 U.S. NASA reports ................ Don't Have Yes No Access 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 1 2 6 28. Think of the most technically challenging assignment you have worked on this current school term. What steps did you follow to obtain the information you needed to complete this assignment? Please sequence these items (e.g., _1, _2, _3, 4, 5) and mark an X beside the step(s) you DID NOT USE. Sequence Used my personal store of technical information Spoke with other students Spoke with faculty members Used literature resources (e.g., conference papers, Spoke with a librarian Used literature resources found in a library Used none of the above steps journal articles, technical reports) Searched (or had someone search for me) an electronic (bibliographic) database in the library. These questions will be used to determine whether students with different backgrounds and from different countries have practices. 29. What is your gender? (Circle number) 1 Female 2 Male 30. What is your educational status? (Circle number) 1 Freshman 2 Sophomore 3 Junior 4 Senior 5 Graduate 6 Other (Please specify) 43 different technical communication

Original page 45

• : • .... : :•: • _ _ :: 31. Is your education primarily as: 1 An engineer 2 A scientist 3 Something else (Please specify) 32. What is your native language? Please specify 33. What is your native country? Please specify _ : _ :::i::::::ei_ii!:!:::i:::i!:1%i:4::!!::;i/i:L;!_iiG!ii_j_i_ii_ii_i_iii!iii_i_iii_i_iii¸ 34. Are you a citizen of the country where you are attending school? (Circle number) 1 Yes 2 No 35. How well do you read the following languages? Passably 1 English ............ 1 2 2 French ............ 1 2 3 German ............ 1 2 4 Japanese ........... 1 2 5 Russian ............ 1 2 6 Other (please specify) 36. How well do you speak the following languages? Passahly 1 English ............ 1 2 2 French ............ 1 2 3 German ............ 1 2 4 Japanese ........... 1 2 5 Russian ............ 1 2 6 Other (please specify) 44 (Circle numbers) Do not Read This Fluently Language 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 (Circle numbers) Do not Speak This Fluently Language 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 over .o

Original page 46

.... : : •: _ :.... •• • ......:•••: •.... • :••!% i:ii_ii_i!::!ii%i!i::!•_•_ili!iiii_i?!iiiii!!i;!i_i_i_i!i_i!ii_iiiii_iii_i_ii_i_i¸ 37. In terms of your career goals and aspirations, how important will it be for you to be bilingual (i.e., read and speak more than one language)? (Circle number) Very Very Unimportant Important 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Am Not Don't Bilingual Know 8 9 38. In what type of organization do you hope to work after graduation? (Circle number) 1 Academic 2 Government 3 Industry (national) 4 Industry (multi-national) 5 NOT for profit 6 Other (please specify) 39. When you were growing up, do you think your family's income was: (Circle number) 1 Much higher than that of most families in your native country 2 Higher than that of most families in your native country 3 About equal to the •average family income in your native country 4 Lower than that of most families in your native country 5 Much lower than that of most families in your native country 6 I cannot compare my family's income with incomes of other families 40. Do you own a personal computer? (Circle number) 1 Yes 2 No 41. As a high school student, how often did you use your: (Circle number) Not Never Seldom Sometimes Frequently Always Available 2 High school library ..... 1 2 3 Public library ....... 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 4 5 6 42. As a technology major, about how many hours a week (exclusive of classroom and course assignments) do you spend reading (keeping current with) the professional literature associated with your discipline? hours each week 43. Are you a member of a professional student (national) engineering, scientific, or technical society? (Circle number) 1 Yes 2 No 45

Original page 47

APPENDIX C AIAA NATIONAL These questions ask about your career goals and aspirations. 1. To have a successful career, how important will it be for you to: Very Unimportant 1 STUDENT MEMBERSHIP Very Important 2 3 4 5 6 7 % % % % % % % Have the opportunity to explore new ideas about technology or systems 1.0 0.5 0.8 2.2 11.1 28.7 55.7 Advance to a high-level staff technical position 1.6 2.3 4.9 14.4 27.1 25.6 24.3 Have the opportunity to work on complex technical problems 0.9 1.3 2.0 8.5 20.9 32.7 33.7 Work on projects that utilize the latest theoretical results in your specialty 1.1 1.9 4.5 12.2 22.9 26.7 30.7 Work on projects that require learning new technical knowledge 0.6 0.6 1.8 7.2 19.9 34.4 35.4 Establish a reputation outside your organization as an authority in your field 2.6 3.1 6.5 15.2 21.6 22.7 28.3 Receive patents for your ideas 5.7 9.8 14.6 23.8 21.0 11.6 13.5 Publish articles in technical journals 3.8 5.2 10.2 21.0 22.5 19.7 17.6 Communicate your ideas to others in your profession through papers delivered at professional society meetings 2.5 4.9 8.7 18.1 24.9 24.5 16.4 Be evaluated on the basis of your technical contributions 1.6 2.3 4.4 12.3 26.4 30.6 22.4 Become a manager or director in your line of work 3.8 4.8 8.6 18.3 23.5 21.6 19.4 Plan and coordinate the work of others 2.9 3.0 10.1 18.8 25.1 22.2 17.9 Advance to a policy-making position in management 5.6 7.3 11.4 19.9 20.8 18.3 16.7 Plan projects and make decisions affecting the organization 2.3 3.2 Be the technical leader of a group of less experienced professionals 1.2 3.2 5.3 13.7 26.1 27.0 22.4 5.8 15.1 27.7 29.2 17.8 46

Original page 48

AIAA National Student Membership These questions ask about your decision to choose a career in engineering or science. 2. How important were each of the following in making your career choice? Very Unimportant 1 2 % % Your parents encouraged your area of study/major 20.1 14.5 Other family members encouraged your area of study/major 27.5 16.2 Teachers encouraged your area of study/major 14.9 12.3 You feel that a career in your major/area of study will lead to financial security 6.5 7.2 You feel that a career in your major/area of study will provide a career with many rewarding activities 0.8 0.9 Information on the career opportunities available in your major/area of study 7.8 7.3 3. When did you first decide on your area of study/major? While still in elementary school While in high school (or equivalent) When you started college (or equivalent) After starting college (or equivalent) Other 4, How well do your current feelings about the career opportunities first decided on your career path? Very Important NA 3 4 5 6 7 9 % % % % % % 12.1 17.7 15.1 7.2 7.2 6.1 13.3 17.9 8.2 3.9 3.4 9.6 13.1 21.6 16.9 9.9 5.4 5.9 11.8 21.5 24.7 16.8 10.3 1.2 1.2 4.2 11.2 30.2 51.2 0.3 11.8 22.9 22.5 14.5 10.3 3.0 13.4% 60.1% 11.5% 10.9% 4.1% in your major/area of study match with those you had when you I am more happy about my career choice now than when I first made it 28.8% I feel about the same now as when I first made it 44.4% I am less happy about my career choice now than when I first made it 26.8% 47

Original page 49

AIAA National Student Membership These questions ask about the importance of certain skills for your professional success. 5. How important do you think it will be for you to: Very Unimportant 1 % Effectively communicate technical information in writing Very Important 2 3 4 5 6 7 % % % % % % 0.9 0.3 0.9 2.8 11.2 25.5 58.3 Effectively communicate technical information orally 0.7 0.5 0.6 2.9 11.6 26.1 57.6 Have a knowledge and understanding of engineering/science information resources and materials 0.7 0.5 0.5 2.6 15.4 30.3 50.0 Be able to search electronic (bibliographic) data bases 0.8 1.7 4.4 13.7 28.0 27.2 24.2 Know how to use a library that contains engineering/science information resources and materials 0.7 1.5 2.3 8.3 23.3 31.8 32.1 Effectively use computer, communication, and information technology 1.0 0.2 0.4 1.2 6.1 21.7 69.2 The next group of questions asks about course work or instruction you might have received as part of your education or academic preparation. 6. Have you received training or course work in: Technical writing/communication Speech/oral communication Using a library that contains engineering/science information resources and materials Using engineering/science information resources and materials Searching electronic (bibliographic) data bases Using computer, communication, and information technology 48 No Instruction Yes No Available 1 2 8 % % % 72.2 25.2 2.6 62.2 35.0 2.9 59.9 32.6 7.5 63.6 29.4 7.0 50.2 40.9 8.9 82.9 14.5 2.7

Original page 50

AIAA National Student Membership 7. If you received training or instruction in any of the following, was it helpful? Not Helpful 1 2 % % Technical writing/communication 1.0 1.5 Speech/oral communication 0.7 1.2 Using a library that contains engineering/science information resources and materials 0.6 1.7 Using engineering/science information resources and materials 0.5 1.4 Searching electronic (bibliographic) data bases 1.1 2.2 Using computer, communication, and information technology 0.5 1.2 Very No Helpful Training 3 4 5 6 7 10 % % % % % % 3.7 8.7 19.0 19.1 20.1 27.0 3.2 7.5 17.0 16.2 18.3 35.8 4.5 12.2 18.1 12.8 11.4 38.6 4.2 10.8 19.0 16.1 12.9 35.0 5.4 9.4 13.1 12.7 9.3 46.7 2.5 8.1 14.2 20.0 36.9 16.7 These next questions ask about your preparation of written technical communication as part of your education or academic preparation. 8. What percentage of your written technical communication involves collaborative writing? 0 percent 18.9% 1 through 25 percent 32.9% 26 through 50 percent 24.3% 51 through 75 percent 10.9% 76 through 99 percent 9.9% 1 O0 percent 3.2% 9. If you do write as a member of a group, what percentage of your written technical communication is required to be collaborative? 0 percent 6.7% 1 through 25 percent 28.7% 26 through 50 percent 34.8% 51 through 75 percent 9.3% 76 through 99 percent 9.2% 1 O0 percent 11.4% 10. In general, do you find writing as part of a group more or less productive than writing alone? Less productive than writing alone 28.0% About as productive as writing alone 28.3% More productive than writing alone 43.7% 11. Do you use a computer to prepare written technical communication? Never 1.4% Sometimes 4.0% Frequently 12.3 % Always 82.3% 49

Original page 51

AIAA National 12. Which of the following best explains your reasons for non-use? No or limited computer access Lack of knowledge/skill using a computer Prefer not to use a computer Other Student Membership 37.5% 37.5% 16.7% 20,8 % 13. To what extent does lack of knowledge/skill about each of the following communication principles impede your ability to produce written technical communication? Does not Impede 1 2 % % Defining the purpose of the communication 22.4 17.3 Assessing the needs of the reader 10.3 13.2 Preparing/presenting information in an organized manner 22.6 17.4 Developing paragraphs (introductions, transitions, and conclusions) 25.3 16.7 Writing grammatically correct sentences 33.7 15.6 Notetaking and quoting 24.3 17.8 Editing and revising 24.3 18.5 Greatly Impedes 3 4 5 6 7 % % % % % 11.1 10.0 13.8 10,4 15.0 16.9 19.2 19.7 13.5 7.1 12.5 12.0 10.6 12.7 12.2 12.4 13.3 14.9 10.3 7.1 9.6 11.8 10.7 10.5 8.0 17.6 17.6 13.5 5.3 3.9 13.4 14.3 12.2 10.2 7.1 These questions ask about your use of electronic/information technologies. 14. Describe your use of the following electronic/information technologies for communicating technical information. I already it, but may it and doubt use it in the future if I will 1 2 3 % % % I don't use I don't use Audio tapes and cassettes 12.5 38.0 49.5 Motion picture film 11.0 44.4 44.6 Video tape 34.7 57.6 7.6 Desktop/electronic publishing 69.6 27.9 2.5 Computer cassette/cartridge tapes 29.6 45.8 24.6 Electronic mail 67.1 30.7 2.1 Electronic bulletin boards 36.7 FAX or TELEX 50.6 Electronic data bases 50.2 57.7 5.6 48.6 0.8 47.4 2.4 Video conferencing 4.1 85.5 10.4 Computer conferencing 9.8 82.4 7.8 Micrographics & microforms 32.9 50 53.8 13.3

Original page 52

AIAA National Student Membership 15. Do you ever use electronic networks? Yes, I personally use them 71.7% Yes, I use them but through an intermediary 9.4% No 4.1% No, because I do not have access 5.2% No, but I may use them in the future 9.7% 16. Do you use electronic networks for the following purposes? To connect to geographically distant sites For electronic mail For electronic bulletin boards or conferences For electronic file transfer To log into computers for such things as computational analysis or to use design tools To control equipment such as laboratory instruments or machine tools To access/search the library's catalogue To order documents from the library To search electronic (bibliographic) data bases For information search and data retrieval To prepare scientific and technical papers with colleagues at geographically distant sites 17. Do you exchange electronic messages or files with: Members of your academic classes Other people in your academic community at the same geographic site who are not in your academic classes Other people in your academic community at a different geographic site who are not in your academic classes People outside your academic community Yes No 1 2 % % 63.6 36.4 90.1 9.9 52.0 48.0 79.4 20.6 71.9 28.1 16.7 83.3 78.9 21.1 19.4 80.6 57.7 42.3 58.1 41.9 14.9 85.1 Yes No 1 2 % % 82.7 17.3 62.8 37.2 50.3 49.7 59.2 40.8 These questions ask about your use of libraries and library services as part of your education. 18. During this current school term, about how many times have you used a library to meet your engineering/science information needs? 0 times 1 through 25 times 26 through 50 times 51 through 75 times More than 75 times 51 10.9% 80.8% 6.2% 0.4% 1.8%

Original page 53

AIAA National Student Membership 19. During the current school term, how effective was the information obtained from the library for meeting your engineering/science information needs? Very Ineffective 1 2 3 4 5 % % % % % Very Effective 6 7 % % 2.0 4.6 8.7 15.5 31.9 22.5 14.8 20. Which of the following statements best describes your reasons for not using a library during this current school term? Yes No 1 2 % % I had no information needs 70.9 29.1 My information needs were more easily met some other way 72.0 28.0 Tried the library once or twice before but I couldn't find the information I needed 24.2 75.8 The library is physically too far away 7.1 92.9 The library staff is not cooperative or helpful 4.5 95,5 The library staff does not understand my information needs 7.8 92.2 The library did not have the information I need 16.3 83.7 I have my own personal library and do not need another library 12.4 87.6 The library is too slow in getting the information I need 8.7 91.3 We have to pay to use the library 0.6 99.4 We are discouraged from using the library 0.0 100.0 21. As part of your academic preparation, have you received or participated in the following library activities? Library tour Library presentation as part of academic orientation Library orientation as part of an engineering/ science course Library skill/use course (bibliographic instruction) Library skill/use course in engineering/science information resources and materials Library instruction for end-user searching of electronic (bibliographic) data bases Not Yes No Available 1 2 6 % % % 46.1 47.8 6.1 36.6 55.2 8.2 22.4 61.6 16.0 28.0 61.3 10.7 18.9 64.8 16.3 30.0 58.5 11.5 22. Which one of the following best characterizes your use of electronic data bases? do all searches myself do most searches myself do half by myself and half through a librarian do most searches through a librarian do all searches through a librarian do not use electronic data bases do not have access to electronic data bases 52 41.9% 36.5% 6.0% 2.3% 0.8% 9.1% 3.3%

Original page 54

AIAA National Student Membership These questions ask about the use and importance of information to engineering/science students. 23. How often during this current school term have you used the following information sources to meet your engineering/science information needs? Not Never Seldom Sometimes Frequently Always Available 1 2 3 4 5 6 % % % % % % Your personal collection of information 1.2 4.1 17.3 49.2 27.4 0.8 Other students 4.1 15.6 35.4 37.2 7.3 0.5 Faculty members 3.5 17.3 37.9 34.4 6.4 0.5 Library 6.5 22.3 30.6 30.9 9.3 0.3 Librarian 37.4 39.6 18.2 3.7 0.5 0.6 Your personal contacts within industry 35.7 22.8 17.9 7.2 1.8 14.7 Your personal contacts at government laboratories 44.9 14.1 12.4 4.8 1.4 22.4 24. How often during this current school term have you used the following information products to meet your engineering/science information needs? Not Never Seldom Sometimes Frequently Always Available 1 2 3 4 5 6 % % % % % % Abstracts 32.7 21.1 26.8 15.6 2.3 1.6 Conference/meeting papers 30.6 15.6 24.8 22.5 4.8 1.7 Journal articles 14.5 14.1 29.0 34.5 7.9 0.2 Handbooks 17.1 20.8 31.3 23.0 7.1 0.8 Textbooks 1.1 2.0 12.7 43.3 40.7 0.1 Computer programs and documentation 11.1 13.7 25,2 35.6 13.3 1.0 Bibliographic, numeric, factual data bases 31.0 29.3 26.3 10.1 2.2 1.2 Theses/dissertations 47.0 22.4 19.9 8.5 1.3 0.9 Technical reports 20.3 22.1 30.1 22.5 4.4 0.6 Audio/visual materials 55.4 23.7 12.9 5.7 0.9 1.3 Foreign language technical reports 82.5 9.8 3.7 0.9 0.6 2.3 Technical translations 74.0 15.5 7.0 0.9 0.3 2.3 Patents 85.8 8.1 2.8 0.6 0.0 2.7 Industry technical reports 47.2 24.0 19.9 6.1 0.8 2.0 Drawings/specifications 45.1 21.0 21.2 9.0 2.1 1.6 Preprints or deposited manuscripts 70.4 16.3 8.0 1.9 0.4 3.1 Informal information products (e.g., vendor/supply catalogs, company literature, trade journals/magazines) 29.2 23.2 26.6 16.7 3.3 1.1 53

Original page 55

AIAA National Student Membership 25. How important are the following information sources in meeting your engineering/science information needs? Very Unimportant Very Not Important Available 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 % % % % % % % % Your personal collection of information 1.6 2.3 4.7 7.3 13.5 19.1 51.2 0.3 Other students 4.2 9.3 11.6 17.7 22.4 19.5 15.0 0.2 Faculty members 1.3 4.1 9.8 15.7 21.9 24.8 22.0 0.4 Library 4.0 9.1 10.6 17.4 18.7 18.7 21.3 0.2 Librarian 28.3 23.2 17.7 14.6 8.8 4.0 2.8 0.7 Your personal contacts within industry 18.0 13.8 11.5 13.1 11.0 6.4 6.2 19.9 Your personal contacts at government laboratories 24.0 11.4 7.3 9.1 8.1 5.2 5.6 29.3 26. How important are the following information products in meeting your engineering/science information needs? Very Unimportant 1 2 3 Very Not Important Available 4 5 6 7 8 % % % % % % % % Abstracts 20.5 13.1 13.8 17.8 14.2 8.7 9.0 2.8 Conference/meeting papers 17.9 10.2 12.5 14.1 14.6 13.3 14.7 2.6 Journal articles 8.7 6.1 9.2 14.3 19.6 18.1 23.4 0.6 Handbooks 9.3 9.2 10.5 18.8 18.3 16.6 16.2 1.2 Textbooks 0.6 0.5 2.0 6.9 13.4 24.1 52.1 0.3 Computer programs and documentation 6.1 5.6 9.1 14.5 19.0 20.1 24.4 1.2 Bibliographic, numeric, factual data bases 18.2 14.4 15.8 Theses/dissertations 24.3 17.0 14.8 Technical reports 12.7 9.0 10.5 Audio/visual materials 35.9 19.4 13.6 Foreign language technical reports 59.2 16.3 7.0 Technical translations 51.7 17.8 9.1 Patents 57.5 15.0 8.3 Industry technical reports 27.6 12.9 14.3 Drawings/specifications 31.7 12.4 11.9 Preprints or deposited manuscripts 46.2 16.9 9.5 Informal information products (e.g., vendor/supply catalogs, company literature, trade journals/magazines) 23.9 13.5 13.5 20.0 13.8 8.8 7.0 2.0 15.9 12.0 9.2 5.2 1.7 18.1 19.7 16.7 12.1 1.3 13.0 7.4 4.8 3.5 2.4 6.7 2.9 1.9 1.5 4.4 8.7 4.5 1.8 2.4 4.0 7.6 3.1 1.5 1.7 5.4 15.9 11.9 8.2 5.8 3.4 15.6 11.9 7.6 6.0 2.8 11.9 4.8 3.0 2.1 5.5 15.3 14.0 9.9 7.9 1.9 54

Original page 56

_ ...... • _ _ _ ...... _ _ _ _ ii _ i ¸ _ i: _ ! i¸¸ ii ! i_i!il/i!!!!i_!•!ii_!_!_ii_i_ii_i_i_i_iiii_iii_iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii AIAA National Student Membership 27. Do you use the following technical reports in meeting your engineering science information needs? AGARD reports British ARC and RAE reports Dutch NLR reports ESA reports Indian NAL reports French ONERA reports German DFVLR, DLR, and MBB reports Japanese NAL reports Russian TsAGI reports U.S. NASA reports 28. Don't Have Yes No Access 1 2 6 % % % 21.4 54.5 24.0 10.1 62.6 27.3 2.1 67.7 30.2 11.1 62.1 26.8 1.1 68.4 30.5 5.6 65.0 29.4 6.7 63.7 29.6 2.8 67.0 30.2 2.4 67.0 30.5 75.4 17.2 7.4 Think of the most technically challenging assignment you have worked on this current school term. What steps did you follow to obtain the information you needed to complete this assignment? Step 1 2 3 % % % Used my personal store of technical information 49.3 14.7 13.3 Spoke with other students 10.6 28.7 17.2 Spoke with faculty members 21.1 20.8 23.3 Used literature resources 8.1 15.7 17.6 Spoke with a librarian 0.8 1.9 3.1 Used literature resources found in a library 4.3 8.9 15.6 Searched an electronic data base in the library 5.8 10.2 8.8 Used none of the above steps 1.0 Steps Did 5 Not through Use 4 7 O % % % 6.6 9.5 6.5 11.2 20.7 11.7 12.0 15.2 7.6 24.8 18.0 15.8 5.0 18.3 70.8 20.8 29.3 21.2 9.3 19.7 46.1 These questions will be used to determine whether students with different backgrounds and from different countries have different technical communication practices. 29. What is your gender? Female 16.0% Male 84.0% 30. What is your educational status? Undergraduate 55.0% Graduate 41.0% Other 4.1% 55

Original page 57

AIAA National Student Membership 31. Is your education primarily as: An engineer 92.8% A scientist 4.1% Something else 3.1% 32. What is your native language? Chinese 3.6% English 82.8% Farsi 0.5 % French O. 6 % German 0.8% Greek 0.6% Hindi 0.5% Japanese O. 5 % Korean 1.0% Malayalam 0.3 % Portuguese 0.5 % 33. What is your native country? Brazil O. 6 % Canada 1.3 % China O. 9 % France 0.2 % Germany 0.7% Hong Kong 0.6% India 2.4% Iran 0.5% Japan 0.5% Korea 1.2 % Malaysia 0.5 % Mexico 0.5 % 34. Are you a citizen of the country where you are attending school? Yes 87.5% No 12.5% 35. How well do you read the following languages? Passably 1 2 3 % % % English O. 1 0.0 0.4 French 12.6 5.0 4.9 German 10.5 4.3 3.3 Japanese 2.1 0.9 0.5 Russian 3.0 1.2 0.4 Romanian 0.2 % Russian 0.3% Spanish 2.2 % Tagalog O. 2 % Tamil 0.9% Telugu 0.3% Turkish 0.3% Vietnamese O. 6 % Arabic O. 5 % Italian O. 1% Other 2.7 % Philippines O. 5 % Romania 0.2 % Russia O. 2 % Singapore 0.4% Taiwan 1.6% USA 79.8% Vietnam 0.8% Spain 0.3% Italy 0.1% Greece 0.4% Portugal O. 2 % Other 5.6% Do not read this Fluently language 4 5 6 % % % 2.1 96.2 1.2 2.4 1.2 73.9 1.5 1.1 79.3 0.1 0.5 95.9 0.5 0.4 94,5 Spanish 31.3 19.3 17.6 12.9 18.9 0.0 Other 17.9 7.4 18.9 12.6 43.2 0.0 36. How well do you speak the following languages? Passably 1 2 3 % % % English 0.0 0.2 0.9 French 12.7 5.2 3.5 German 9.9 2.7 3.8 Do not speak this Fluently language 4 5 6 % % % 3.6 93.8 1.5 1.5 1.0 76.1 1.3 1.3 81.1 Japanese 2.5 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.6 95.9 Russian 3.2 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 94.7 Spanish 35.9 17.2 19.1 8.1 19.6 O.0 Other 19.4 6.8 11.7 6.8 55.3 56 0.0

Original page 58

AIAA National Student Membership 37. In terms of your career goals and aspirations, how important will it be for you to be bilingual? Very Very Am Not Don't Unimportant Important Bilingual Know 1 2 3 4 5 6 % % % % % % 6.7 8.8 7.6 10.0 12.8 8.8 38. In what type of organization do you hope to work after graduation? Academic 14.7% Government 31.9 % Industry (national) 40.3.% Industry (multi-national) 27.7% Not for profit 1.3% Other 6.0% 39. When you were growing up, do you think your family's income was: Much higher than that of most families in your native country Higher than that of most families in your native country About equal to the average family income in your native country Lower than that of most families in your native country Much lower than that of most families in your native country 7 8 9 % % % 16.4 19.6 9.2 2.6% 28.5% 50.4% 13.5% 2.8% I cannot compare my family's income with incomes of other families 2,2% 40. Do you own a personal computer? Yes 67.7% No 32.3% 41. As a high school student, how often did you use your: Never Seldom Sometimes 1 2 3 % % % High school library 8.0 26.3 31.8 Public library 9.5 26.7 30.6 Not Frequently Always Available 4 5 6 % % % 26.3 6.4 1.3 24.9 7.2 1.2 42. As a technology major, about how many hours a week (exclusive of classroom and course assignments) do you spend reading the professional literature associated with your discipline? 0 hours 4.5% 1 through 5 hours 78.1% 6 through 10 hours 11.5% 11 through 25 hours 5.0% More than 25 hours 1.0% 43. Are you a member of a professional student (national) engineering, Yes 96.0% No 4.0% 57 scientific, or technical society?

Original page 59

Original page 60

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Fo_ oprov OMB No. 0704-0188 iPublic reporting burdenfer this collectionof in;_o._i._t;onis _t;,e,3 to average 1 hour per response, includingthe time for reviewing instructions,searching existingdata sources gathering and maintainingthe data needed, and completingand reviewing the collectionof information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect ofthi collection of information,includingsuggestionsfor reducingthis burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jeffersor Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington.VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Pap_work Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE December 1994 4. i I liE AND SUBTITLE The Technical Communication Practices of Aerospace Student Survey* WU 505-90 Students: Results of the Phase 3 AIAA National AUTHOR(S) Thomas E. Pinelli, Laura M. Hecht, Rebecca O. Barclay, and John M. Kennedy 7. PERFORMING ORGANZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA 23681-0001 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Technical Memorandum 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Engineering 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORIING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, DC 20546-0001 i11.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES *Report number 26 under the NASA/DoD Aerospace AGENCY REPORT NUMBER NASA TM-109121 Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Thomas E. Pinelli: Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA; Laura M. Hecht and John M. Kennedy: Indiana University, Bloomington, IN; Rebecca O. Barclay: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY. 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABIUTYSTATEMENT Unclassified--Unlimited Subject Category 82 Availability: NASA CASI (301) 621-0390 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE This report describes similarities and differences between undergraduate and graduate engineering students in the context of two general aspects of the educational experience. First, we explore the extent to which students differ regarding the factors that lead to the choice of becoming an engineer, current satisfaction with that choice, and career-related goals and objectives. Second, we look at the technical communication practices, habits, and training of aerospace engineering students. The reported data were obtained from a survey of student members of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research The survey was undertaken as a phase 3 activity of the Project. Data are reported for the following categories: student demographics; skill importance, skill training, and skill helpfulness; collaborative writing; computer and information technology use and importance, use of electronic networks; use and importance of libraries and library services; use and importance of information sources and products; use of foreign language technical reports; and foreign language (reading and speaking) skills. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES Knowledge diffusion; Aerospace engineering and science students; Computer and 58 information technology use; and Library use and importance 17. SECURITY' CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE Unclassified Unclassified NSN 7540-01-28C-5.,00 16. PRICE CODE A04 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. UMITATION OF ABSTRACT OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18 298-102