Klingbeil, N. W., & High, K. A., & Keller, M. W., & White, I. M., & Brummel, B. J., & Daily, J. S., & Cheville, R. A., & Wolk, J. (2012, June), The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3  Paper presented at 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, Texas. 10.18260/1-2--22113

\bibitem{asee_peer_22113}
  Klingbeil, N. W., \& High, K. A., \& Keller, M. W., \& White, I. M., \& Brummel, B. J., \& Daily, J. S., \& Cheville, R. A., \& Wolk, J. (2012, June), \emph{The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3}
  Paper presented at 2012 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, San Antonio, Texas.
  10.18260/1-2--22113

Nathan W. Klingbeil, Karen A. High, Michael W. Keller, Ian M. White, Bradley J. Brummel, Jeremy S. Daily P.E., R. Alan Cheville, and Jennifer Wolk.  "The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3".  2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, Texas, 2012, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2012.  https://peer.asee.org/22113 Internet.  23 Apr, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_22113}
  Nathan W. Klingbeil, Karen A. High, Michael W. Keller, Ian M. White, Bradley J. Brummel, Jeremy S. Daily P.E., R. Alan Cheville, and Jennifer Wolk.
  "The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3".
  \emph{2012 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, San Antonio, Texas, 2012, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2012.
  https://peer.asee.org/22113 Internet.  23 Apr, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_22113
author = "Nathan W. Klingbeil, Karen A. High, Michael W. Keller, Ian M. White, Bradley J. Brummel, Jeremy S. Daily P.E., R. Alan Cheville, and Jennifer Wolk"
title = "The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3"
booktitle = "2012 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2012"
month = "June"
address = "San Antonio, Texas"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/22113}
number = {10.18260/1-2--22113}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -             A National Model for Engineering Mathematics Education:               Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3AbstractThe inability of incoming students to advance past the traditional first-year calculus sequence is aprimary cause of attrition in engineering programs across the country. As a result, this paper willsummarize an NSF funded initiative at Wright State University to redefine the way engineeringmathematics is taught, with the goal of increasing student retention, motivation and success inengineering.The Wright State model begins with the development of a novel first-year engineeringmathematics course, EGR 101 “Introductory Mathematics for Engineering Applications.”Taught by engineering faculty, the course includes lecture, laboratory and recitation components.Using an application-oriented, hands-on approach, the course addresses only the salient mathtopics actually used in core engineering courses. These include the traditional physics,engineering mechanics, electric circuits and computer programming sequences. The EGR 101course replaces traditional math prerequisite requirements for the above core courses, so thatstudents can advance in the curriculum without first completing a traditional first-year calculussequence. The Wright State model concludes with a more just-in-time structuring of the requiredmath sequence, in concert with college and ABET requirements. The result has shifted thetraditional emphasis on math prerequisite requirements to an emphasis on engineeringmotivation for math.Since its inception in Fall of 2004, the Wright State model has had an overwhelming impact onthe retention, motivation and success of engineering students at Wright State University. As partof a CCLI Phase 3 initiative, various aspects of the approach are now being piloted by 15institutions across the country (primarily university, but also at the community college and K-12levels). These institutions represent strategic pockets of interest in some of our nation's mostSTEM critical regions, including Ohio, Michigan, Texas, Oklahoma, California, Maryland andVirginia. The dissemination component of the project has resulted in the addition of numerousunfunded collaborators, and the approach is now under consideration by at least two dozeninstitutions across the country.Our last two papers have highlighted progress at a subset of these institutions, including thedetails of their diverse implementations and a preliminary assessment of their results. This year'spaper (Volume 3) will highlight progress at several additional institutions, including at least oneinstitution not even funded under the CCLI Phase 3 award. It will also include the latest datafrom Wright State's own implementation, including its cumulative impact on student retentionand success from first-year through graduation.
AU  - Nathan W. Klingbeil
AU  - Karen A. High
AU  - Michael W. Keller
AU  - Ian M. White
AU  - Bradley J. Brummel
AU  - Jeremy S. Daily P.E.
AU  - R. Alan Cheville
AU  - Jennifer Wolk
CY  - San Antonio, Texas
DA  - 2012/06/10
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/22113
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--22113
ER  -