Abstract Background Commitment to degree and career are commonly connected to developing identity in the discipline and feelings of confidence (self‐efficacy) about disciplinary practices. While these psychosocial factors are well studied in engineering, they are less often linked to specific learning experiences. In design education, such experiences include framing agency —the ability to use one's agency to frame design problems. Purpose We extend typical models of persistence intentions to examine the effects of engaging in design problem framing. We conjectured that framing agency relates to engineering identity and engineering design self‐efficacy. We sought to answer the following research questions: To what extent do framing agency constructs predict first‐year and senior students' design self‐efficacy, engineering identity, and persistence intentions? Does this vary for students from privileged and minoritized genders or from privileged and minoritized racial/ethnic groups? Methods We used a previously tested survey to measure framing agency, engineering identity, engineering design self‐efficacy, persistence intentions, and demographics. We employed structural equation modeling on a national sample ( n = 636 first‐year students; n = 355 seniors). Results Overall, engineering identity predicted persistence intentions for all students, but design self‐efficacy did not. Specific framing agency constructs, especially individual consequentiality, explained variance in self‐efficacy and identity across models. For women/non‐binary students, shared consequentiality predicted engineering identity and design self‐efficacy. For students from minoritized racial/ethnic groups, learning as consequentiality and individual consequentiality predicted career persistence intentions. Conclusions Providing students with multiple opportunities to develop design problem framing skills may play a role in broadening participation.
Wilson-Fetrow et al. (2026) studied this question.