Engineering Student Stress Experiences Questionnaire (ESSEQ): Development and Preliminary Implementation

Introduction:: Engineering culture has been described as a culture of “suffering and hardship” [1 p. 12], which likely negatively impacts the wellness of biomedical engineering undergraduate students [2-5]. This has led to calls for a shift towards a culture of wellness in engineering [6]. To better understand student stressors and perceptions of culture and stress, we previously developed the engineering student stress experiences questionnaire (ESSEQ). This survey was designed to measure engineering student experiences of academic stress that occurred at a large, R1 public institution. The ESSEQ consists of nine factors which were determined via exploratory factor analysis (EFA) that describe stressors and perceptions of stress for undergraduate engineering students [7]. To further validate the ESSEQ, we administered the survey at a second institution and analyzed the resulting data by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).


Materials and Methods:: We distributed the ESSEQ along with validated survey subscales showing intention to remain [8] and measures of stress [9] in February 2023 as part of a longitudinal quantitative study. The factors for the ESSEQ are shown in Table 1. Participants included undergraduate engineering students (N = 577) at a large, R1 public institution who were taking first-year engineering courses. We conducted a CFA to validate the previously developed survey measures.


Results, Conclusions, and Discussions:: Among surveys of engineering students taking first-year classes, student responses indicated a culture of stress as present in their engineering programs. For example, 82% of students slightly to strongly agreed that they “have felt pressure to stay up late in order to complete engineering work,” which is a question in Factor 3 (Normalization of High Stress and Poor Self-Care). 94% of students slightly agreed or strongly agreed that “Engineering students experience higher levels of stress compared to other majors on campus” and 69% that “Mental health issues are more common for engineering students compared to other majors on campus.” A preliminary CFA with all ESSEQ factors shows promising results, with a Root Mean Square Error of Approximation of 0.063 and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual of 0.075. At this work in progress stage, additional longitudinal data is being collected and the preliminary CFA was underpowered, suggesting that higher participant numbers will continue to improve upon these already significant goodness of fit statistics. However, 43% of students indicated moderate or higher levels of stress symptoms, with 21% indicating severe or higher levels of stress symptoms.Preliminary results with the ESSEQ show promise that this is a valid survey for measuring experiences of stress among engineering students. The ESSEQ can help us to understand the effectiveness of programs and interventions implemented to enhance wellness for undergraduate engineering students. Future work will explore the results of this longitudinal survey data collection.


Acknowledgements (Optional): : This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. [redacted for review]. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The authors thank project advisory board members [redacted for review]. The authors also thank the students for sharing their experiences and insight on this survey.


References (Optional): : [1] Godfrey, E., et al., J. Eng. Educ., 2010, vol. 99, pp. 5-22.

[2] Auerbach, R.P., Psychol. Med., 2016, vol. 46, pp. 2955-2970.

[3] Lipson, S.K., J College Stud Psychother, 2016, vol. 30, pp. 23-41.

[4] Jensen, K. J., et al., J. Eng. Educ., 2021, vol. 110, pp. 371-392.

[5] Danowitz, A., et al., IEEE Trans. on Educ., 2022, vol. 65, pp. 257-266

[6] Jensen, K., Stud. Eng. Educ 2021 vol. 2, pp. 42-45.

[7] Redacted for review

[8] Perez, T., et al., J. of Educ. Psychol., 2014, vol. 106, pp. 315–329.

[9] Lovibond, S. H., et al., PsycTESTS, 1995, Database record