Montreal, Quebec, Canada
June 22, 2025
June 22, 2025
August 15, 2025
Mechanics Division (MECHS)
Diversity
21
https://peer.asee.org/56098
Andrew Sloboda is an Assistant Professor at Bucknell University where he teaches a variety of mechanics-based courses, including statics, solid mechanics, fluid mechanics, dynamics, system dynamics, and vibration. His research interests lie primarily in the fields of nonlinear dynamics and engineering education.
Prof. Sarah Wodin-Schwartz joined WPI in August 2015. While at UC Berkeley for her Ph.D., Prof. Wodin-Schwartz was a teaching assistant for both mechanical and electrical engineering courses including Introduction to Mechatronics for which she received th
Dr. Kimberly LeChasseur is a researcher and evaluator with the Worcester Polytechnic Institute. She has a dual appointment with the Center for Project-Based Learning and the Morgan Teaching and Learning Center. She holds a PhD in Educational Leadership
Objectives: This paper 1) examines the potential of an FBD App to close equity gaps in skills for drawing free-body diagrams between BIPOC students and their white peers in Statics; and 2) assesses hypotheses for explaining the app’s impact.
Significance. While advancing the research on educational technology in the context of mechanical engineering, the study contributes to a growing body of research that challenges deficit-based assumptions about BIPOC engineering students and explores best practices to improve BIPOC student retention in engineering. Deficit-based assumptions include beliefs about the shortcomings of BIPOC students that impede learning (eg, limited intelligence, motivation, training) in higher education [1,2]. Engineering education studies are beginning to explore the prevalence and implications of these beliefs [3] and to propose ways to frame engineering education research in less prejudiced ways to determine what best helps BIPOC students persist in engineering [4,5].
Methods: The study is quasi-experimental. Six statics courses (taught by three Mechanical Engineering faculty at two universities) offered students the use of the FBD app to complement the typical curriculum. The sample was 317 students - two thirds chose to use the app and one third did not. Fourteen percent of students were BIPOC, yielding a small, but sufficient sample for exploratory analyses. Independent t-tests were conducted to assess differences across BIPOC and white students. Four hypotheses for explaining differences were assessed using hierarchical multiple regression modeling. Significance was set at p < .05 for all tests.
Findings: BIPOC students significantly increased their ability to draw FBDs [t(42) = -1.78, p<.05], closing a gap between BIPOC students and white students who did not use the app [t(113) = 1.84, p<.05]. Among those who used the app, BIPOC students indicated that it had a significantly greater impact on their learning than their white peers [t(192) = -2.72, p<.05].
The first three hypotheses were all rejected (with evidence provided in the full paper): Hypothesis 1: BIPOC students liked the app environment more than their white peers Hypothesis 2: BIPOC students are more likely to be underprepared for college-level work and therefore found the extra assistance provided by the app more useful Hypothesis 3: BIPOC students have different learning styles and the FBD app better suits how they learn
Hypothesis 4 that BIPOC students have less self-efficacy, which negatively effects their FBD skills, was supported by the evidence. The FBD App increased BIPOC students’ self-efficacy, closing a gap between them and their white peers. In modeling growth in FBD drawing skills, confidence in statics had a significant effect (ß = .13), similar in size to attending lecture (ß = .18). The model was significant, F(15,370) = 20.37, p<.05.
There may be other hypotheses that could contribute to explaining why the FBD App is particularly useful for BIPOC students and closing equity gaps and these findings are not generalizable. Our next phase will involve implementing the app with a larger sample across multiple institutional contexts.
[1] Valencia R. R. (1997). Conceptualizing the notion of deficit thinking. The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice, 19(1): 1-12.
[2] Smit, R. (2012). Towards a clearer understanding of student disadvantage in higher education: problematising deficit thinking. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(3), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.634383
[3] Vielma K. I., Mejia J. A. (2023). Deficit Ideologies in Engineering Education: Unveiling Challenges and Implications. 2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), College Station, TX, USA, 1-5.
[4] Mejia J. A., Revelo R. A., Villanueva I., Mejia J. (2018). Critical Theoretical Frameworks in Engineering Education: An Anti-Deficit and Liberative Approach. Education Sciences, 8(4):158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040158
[5] Harper, S. R. (2010). An anti-deficit achievement framework for research on students of color in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 63-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.362
Sloboda, A. R., & Wodin-Schwartz, S., & LeChasseur, K. (2025, June), Closing Equity Gaps in Statics for BIPOC Students with a Free-Body Diagrams App Paper presented at 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Montreal, Quebec, Canada . https://peer.asee.org/56098
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2025 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015