: Exploring Engineering Students’ Changing Perception of Racism in Automation during a First-Year Computation CourseAbstractThis Complete Evidence-based Practice paper describes first-year engineering students’perceptions, and specifically their shifts in those perspectives, towards the role of automation anddata science in society as well as the racial implications of how those human-made systems areimplemented and deployed. As part of a larger curricular change being made to a first-yearengineering course in computation, this paper specifically examines two reflection assignmentswhere students wrote, at different points in the semester (week 2 and week 12), regarding theirpersonal questions and understandings related
creating inclusive and equitable learning environments through the development and implementation of strategies geared towards increasing student sense of belonging. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 GIFTS: Sharing Stories and Building Belonging in a First Year Engineering CourseAbstractThis Great Ideas for Teaching, and Talking with, Students (GIFTS) paper presents a method forfostering a sense of belonging in students through a story sharing assignment in a first-yearengineering course. The authors present how story sharing is integrated into an introductoryengineering course and provides a reflection of the experience on the successes, challenges, andimpact on student
in general – whichsome students described as illustrative of the potential worth and impact of a single engineer.The breadth of approaches, observations, and principles relating to beauty and eleganceillustrated by this limited sample is desirable, as the point of the class is not to converge on adefinition of beauty but rather for each student to find examples, methods, and possibly widerprinciples that are meaningful to them. An individual student’s findings could potentially informor expand their appreciation for what engineering can be and accomplish, offer them places tointegrate engineering with their existing identities or interests, or influence career planning.After class, students are assigned to write reflections based on prompts
/users. Student groupscollaborated and communicated to the whole group about their motivations and perspectives fortheir design choices. The students then reflected on the possible value of their designs. Studentsthen wrote reflections that described the societal benefits of creating inclusive designs. Theirreflection pieces included thoughts on unconscious bias, challenging/disrupting beliefs, norms,habits and expectations that highlights problems behind oppressive worldviews, and socialinsight/imagination of what life is like for others considering social circumstances such as culturalidentity, privilege, and positionality. A self-reflection rubric is used to assess student self-reflectionsubmissions.Overall, this module enables educators to
documents your design selection process, explains your manufacturing process, and describes the testing and iteration steps you took. 3. Final Design and See Appendix ReportA template is provided to the students for the final report, which requires students to documentthe different steps of the EDP. Students use the previous milestones and comments from theinstructors to complete their final document. Additionally, students are required to include alltheir team meeting minutes as well as personal reflections about the project and theircontributions. Bonus points are awarded for the top three performing teams during the tower-platform stability testing. The requirements of the final report can
understanding of power, privilege, andoppression, and equip them with the tools to employ their knowledge as engineers throughdiscussions of inclusive design. Co-created and co-facilitated by faculty, teaching assistants, anddiversity, equity, and inclusion experts at the institution, the workshops feature short lectures bythe facilitators, individual reflection activities, and small group discussions, culminating in acommunity-wide discussion on lessons learned and actionable items to build an inclusivecommunity within our program. We seek to build our teaching assistants’ sense of agency in theclassroom by cultivating a positive self-concept, developing their understanding of sociopoliticalenvironments, and providing resources for action.To
learning, and changes in the module’s design over thethree semesters, with rationales behind those decisions. Prominent among the instructionalstrategies was the use of various formative assessment approaches to adjust instruction whileproviding evidence of student progress in using design practices and engineering concepts in aninformed way. Tasks included: Triad Sorting, proposing and applying Design Rules-of-Thumb,Small Group Discussions, Interviews, using Contrasting Cases and reflecting on design practiceusing an Informed Design Rubric. These approaches were used in a context where human-centered designing and “design with us, not for us” was emphasized. Design thinking was introduced and elaborated upon in a variety of ways
-evaluation, andactive involvement in learning processes contribute to student's academic experiences andoutcomes. Each construct has been carefully chosen and defined to capture the multifacetednature of student engagement in first-year engineering courses. Building on the theoreticalframeworks we discussed earlier, it's important to note how each construct within our instrumentis aligned with specific dimensions of student engagement in first-year engineering courses.Constructive EngagementCourse Knowledge, reflecting the dimension of constructive engagement, is grounded in theconstructive aspect of Chi's ICAP theory [10]. Michelene Chi's ICAP framework categorizesstudent cognitive engagement into four distinct levels based on their interaction
term, offer a continuous evaluative framework, crucial formonitoring student progress and adapting teaching strategies to meet evolving educational needs.In Fall 2021, the CATME assessment process was implemented in a third-year course on RobotManipulation (RBE 3001). The study’s sample consisted of 75 RBE students from the course,offering a representative cross-section of the RBE program’s demographic and skill diversity.This sample size and composition provide a robust basis for understanding the programming skillvariance within the cohort. The context in which these surveys were administered—during theinitial phase of the course—ensures that the data reflects the students’ current competencies andchallenges. RBE 3001 traditionally expects
first-year engineering experienceto incoming students in general, and particularly those that have additional challenges for asuccessful transition to college, many of whom have underrepresented or marginalized identities.During the first two years of these improvements, which started in Fall 2022, the maininstructional additions have consisted of (1) inclusion of opportunities for students’ self-reflection, (2) inclusion of training in metacognition, and (3) specific modifications to courseassessments.Literature review on first-year innovationsIn what follows, we present a review of some successful research-based initiatives that havesucceeded in supporting students’ achievement and retention through the first years inengineering.A pilot
lasted between twenty minutes and an hour long and wereconducted in-person. The questions explored how the students found out about the SEL position,why they decided to apply, and questions about their experiences, including what they thoughtwas going well and what they would like to change. Interviews were designed and conducted inaccordance with internal review board policies and researchers ensured the confidentiality of theparticipants. The interviews were recorded and transcribed.The journal entries were designed to gather insight on the mentor experience over the course ofthe academic year. Mentors were asked to summarize the work they completed and reflect ontheir experience of being a mentor. Questions were open-ended and prompted the
and asked to reflect on theirexperiences in classes and involvement in engineering related activities. These interviews tend tobe about an hour to two hours long, depending on how much the student enjoys reflecting. Someof the interview questions were geared towards engineering identity. Some were geared towardsaffect, global affect, and affective pathways [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. Most of the otherquestions surrounded the information the student provided in the survey, confirming that all ofthe boxes they checked match how they truly feel about their attitudes, demographics, andoutside identities. We examined evidence from the participants’ first and second post-semesterinterviews with facts from the preliminary survey as contextual
addressintrinsic bias, including methods during application decisions such as using partiallyde-identified application materials used in admissions decisions.PositionalityThis work is presented from the positionality of the researchers at Stanford University,examining outreach programs situated in the United States and in Lebanon, from the authorperspectives of the program designers and staff. The authors have a focus on supporting accessand equity in engineering, and approach this from a practical perspective of finding practices thatcan be integrated into current educational outreach efforts. As a result, we briefly reflect on ourpersonal experiences in relation to the topics we address in this work in this brief positionalitystatement [16]. Aya
ability to assessconceptual understanding and connections within complex topics such as EM [4, 5]. It alsoprovides students with an opportunity to reflect and synthesize the connections between bigideas, so it can be useful as a metacognition activity. Concept maps have been used successfullyto help students recognize connections between topics in complex courses [5]. Fostering theability to make these types of connections is a key component in the Entrepreneurial Mindset.The motivation for this work is to study how student perceptions of EM change over the courseof a design project using concept maps as an assessment tool.BackgroundEntrepreneurial MindsetThe Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) is a leader in defining and
theindustry professionals are too removed from the first-year student experience to be helpful [19].The mentorship program at West Virginia University transitioned away from industry mentorsfor first-year students as they reflected that first-year students were not yet ready to interact withexperienced industry professionals [11]. Success in the early mentorship programs is often evaluated with surveys for self-efficacy,identity, social community, and/or sense of belonging [2,3,5,7,8,20], or with analysis ofacademic grades or retention in the program [5,8,16]. While mentorship programs are often totedas successful anecdotally, the data is not always as clear to indicate the benefits when comparedto those students not participating. Sense of
-based project work has also been found to be ahave a significant positive influence on retention [5]. An integrative team-based learning projectutilized in another entry level undergraduate computer science course was observed to helpstudents forge connections between the topics covered in the separate modules of the course anddemonstrate how that content could be integrated and synthesized to solve a problem [6].Improvements were noted in both student attendance and engagement. Including reflectionfocused team meetings as part of a team-based project was observed to improve the developmentof reflective skills important for addressing difficult engineering problems [15].Project-based LearningProject-based learning is a popular and engaging
can have a profound effect on motivation to learn andpersist to degree completion. Undeniably, student interest can change over time and majoring insomething other than a student’s initial interest at the time of university or college matriculationshould be encouraged based on exploration and self-reflection. However, there are policies basedon capacity limits in majors and constraints such as classroom capacity and course offerings thatschools grapple with which exclude students from their interest. From literature, we know thatabout half of females interested in engineering actually enter the major they were initiallyinterested in during their first year [1]. While there is some engineering education research whichexamines entry into
isintended to clear up any remaining confusion by providing students with chances tocommunicate with both the professor and fellow learners. Often these discussions will centeraround student explanations and solutions as a way of preparing them for independent work. Onhomework, students may consult their notes, textbook, and other resources such as a tutor or theinstructor. These assignments include multiple attempts and flexible deadlines and areconsidered complete once students earn an 80% or better. After the class preps and homework,there are in-class understanding checks (often in the form of quizzes or tests) as well as writingassignments. The writing assignments are done outside of class and include reflections as well asopportunities for
, technologies used for teaching, pedagogical strategies, student engagement, andpotential cognitive demand [32]. Data was recorded every two minutes for every category usinga set of established codes. Along with the codes, thorough notes were taken at each time interval,and an analytical memo was created after every observation. Given that every class had a similarweekday schedule, another important element was the class timetable. For the pilot study, theresearcher performed two classroom observations. She observed each section at a different time.This helped the researcher to compile an analytical memo reflecting on the observation.Semi-structured interviewThe main goal of employing semi-structured interviews for gathering data was to learn moreabout
% DT 0.6017 -14.7% LR 0.5930 -16% NB 0.5709 -19.1%Final ModelThis study employed an artificial neural network with a specific structure to analyze andmodel a dataset (see Fig. 2). The network featured a hidden layer comprising two neurons, achoice-balancing model complexity, and efficiency. The network's target variable was“Dropout,” and all other available dataset variables were used as inputs to predict this target.This configuration allowed for an in-depth exploration of the relationships between” Dropout”and other variables. A key feature of the network was its focus on classification, reflected inits nonlinear
disciplines.Section six describes the course assessment methods, including the post-course survey and ananalysis of students' responses from a pilot implementation, focusing on their comprehension ofengineering disciplines, readiness for academic challenges, and confidence. Section sevendiscusses how students’ feedback has been used to enhance the course and the nextimplementation. Finally, the last section concludes by reflecting on the effectiveness of thecourse, arguing the potential impact of this course on students' academic and career decisions.2. Literature ReviewA student choosing an engineering major is influenced by factors ranging from personal interestsand abilities to external influences like family, educators, and societal perceptions [3
such a way that this alignmenttermed their academic identities has a certain impact on their efforts and achievements. Thestudy [8] reveals that the college experience for individual students is influenced by theirperceptions of interpersonal interactions and norms, which a reflective of the college culture andthus play a pivotal role in shaping student performance, engagement, and persistence, surpassingpredictions solely based on socioeconomic status or academic preparedness indicators.The fundamental concept of Engineering Stress Culture (ESC) originates from the uniquedemands and challenges inherent in the culture of engineering education which equates learningwith suffering and shared hardship identity, as emphasized in one of the six
the habitat. Finally, the smaller groups integrated theircomponents and collaborated to maximize the energy efficiency and performance of the Solar-powered Habitat.The assessments of this project were designed for each level of teamwork: 1) Studentshighlighted their contributions through an Engineering Portfolio. 2) Smaller groups reflected ontheir design and building process by submitting weekly engineering logs and a semester-endposter. Finally, 3) Each group habitat (comprising 5~6 groups) presented its energy-efficienthabitat design in the first-year design expo at the end of the semester. The ongoing datacollection of this effort on project-based, multidisciplinary, multilevel teamwork proved how thisproject design effectively cultivated
college is to only admit high achieving, financially secure, andemotionally (e.g., college adaptive) ready students. However, our country deserves better thanthat and our economy demands more engineers, not less. Additionally, all three of theseprograms could be easily adopted at other institutions.A side benefit of the programs was student increased confidence and the development ofleadership skills for both existing and new freshmen students. While leadership was not directlyassessed, strong anecdotal evidence reflected students engaging in leadership activities (e.g.,officers in student organizations). This benefit will be better assessed in the future to determineits impact.As engineering educators, we must continue to evolve and find ways to
Mean St. Dev Mean St. Dev Non-Traditionally Underrepresented Students 3.510 0.426 29.30 3.797 Traditionally Underrepresented Students 3.236** 0.717 28.20 5.448 PMP-Eligible Students 3.161** 0.813 28.02 5.255 PMP Participants 3.343 0.546 28.46 5.782Significance reflects results of an independent samples t-test between non-TU students and TU studentsubpopulations. * p ≤ 0.05, ** p < .01, *** p < .005.Since RQ2 seeks to understand the relationship between participation in the PMP and studentacademic
self-advocacy processes. A brief reflective assignment that asks allstudents to consider personal assets and challenges that they are facing in their collegiatejourneys might be beneficial. The FYED course already introduces students to social styles, andthis information is often used in teaming. The instructional team could consider whether thisexercise could be modified to introduce other diversity characteristics and specifically addressneurodivergence and potentially mental health issues. The faculty development series forinstructors could also introduce topics related to ND and encourage faculty to integrate UDLprinciples.AppendixSurvey items to measure teamwork experiences during the semester (response options): Rate your experience on