Engineering from Ohio State and Ohio Northern University. Prior to her time at OSU, she worked at Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio. Her research interests include pre-college engineering education, informal engineering education, and identity development. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 GIFTS: Using Storybooks and Storytelling to Prompt Discussion and Reflection of Growth MindsetThis GIFTS paper describes an effort to engage first-year engineering students in thinking andanalyzing their Personal Grit through a Reflective and Story-based approach. Almost every“orientation” course covers the basics of advising and essential student success strategies
students to reflect on their team’s operationalbehavior and their team’s design habits so that they could better understand what was needed forsuccess in this course and beyond. To address these needs, the team of instructors for ENES100developed and implemented a “Team Performance Rubric”.Although there are many tools and software that are available for assessing the performance of ateam and gathering peer evaluations [1], a novel aspect of the rubric is a reflective andresponsive approach for assessing design practices within the team. A rubric was developed forrating a team’s engineering design process habits, such as"effective use of modeling techniques”and “design iteration,” as well as the team’s effectiveness, such as “productive discourse
innovation by analogy and reflection in their career pathways project. The objective isfor students to learn about the engineering design process and to apply it to their academicchallenges by analogy. This prepares students with meta skills to help solve future problems intheir academic path, and at each iteration, the students transform themselves, hence the use of theterm self-transformation (also referred as “self-innovation”). Data collected from pre and postsurveys will be presented to measure self-efficacy in engineering design, grit, motivation tolearn, and STEM identity. Participant interviews provide a qualitative insight into theintervention. This project is funded by NSF award 2225247.IntroductionIn recent years, the transition of
: 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
engineering-related scenarios, situations, or dilemmas. The students areassessed based on the following: (1) individual or team responses to the engineering-relatedscenarios, situations, or dilemmas discussed in teams in class; (2) a reflective paper on theengineering profession, (3) a peer-reviewed paper on addressing a professional dilemma inengineering, and (4) two team-based assignments—an infographic and a video. Students areassigned to teams randomly by the instructor at the start of the semester (a maximum of 6students per team) and work in the same team throughout the semester, i.e., for the in-classdiscussions and the two team-based assignments.To facilitate team building, students participate in a number of ice-breaking activities. Teams
approaches they used. For instance, the instructors faced aninteraction barrier—sources of resistance to initiating a student-instructor interaction, such as alack of instructor self-confidence or student reticence. We illustrate challenges instructors facedand their approaches to resolve them through reflective episodes from the instructors. Ouraudience is twofold: Education researchers will find new lines of investigation for future work onstudios, while early instructors will learn how to get started with teaching in studios.IntroductionStudio instruction is a useful active learning alternative to passive approaches, such as purelecture. Drawing on a tradition from architecture and the fine arts [1], studio instructionde-emphasizes the instructor
other aspects of the curriculum.After attending a d.school Teaching and Learning Studio and being asked to document their ownlearning journey through an activity [1], two of the co-authors wanted to help students in thefirst-year engineering courses reflect on both their learning and emotional journeys throughouttheir first course. In particular, we wanted to focus our study on this study of MATLAB andidentify where students struggled in the learning of the material and where they struggledemotionally in the content.Student Learning Journey MappingOne definition of a journey map is a visual representation of a person’s journey throughout anexperience. Figure 1 below shows the version developed by the d.school and explains how thelearning
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
diversity and inclusioninitiatives. The course culminates with the project competition. Students are also required towrite reflections and a roadmap to their careers. We hypothesize that the multidimensionalapproach to the course will develop belonging to the profession and STEM Efficacy. STEMEfficacy is the students' beliefs about their abilities to perform STEM learning activities [22-23].II.2. Engineering Speaker Series, Reflection Paper, and Career RoadmapEvery semester, a minimum of 10 professional speakers are invited to speak about the threedimensions through 1. their specific field, 2. the skills to be successful in the field, 3. their story and insights on how to succeed in college, as an engineer, and as a professional for
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024WIP: Using ePortfolios to Enable Life Project MentoringAmong First-Year Engineering StudentsConstanza Miranda 1,2, Mareham Yacoub 1, Rachel McClam 21 Johns Hopkins University, Whiting School of Engineering.2 Johns Hopkins University, Biomedical Engineering Department.2 Johns Hopkins University, School of Education.AbstractThis is a work in progress. ePortfolios are portfolios in electronic form. These are known topromote folio thinking, a reflective technique that allows students to describe their learningexperiences through a purposeful gathering of objects. This systematic gathering of proof oflearning and professional development could also empower students as they build a digitalpresence
retention and engagement in the university community?This 1-unit introductory course has been developed around three themes: • Entering the Engineering/Computer Science Profession • Engaging in the University Community • Building Skills for SuccessTo develop students’ professional skills and knowledge of career paths available, the first-yearstudents in this course meet with student leaders, engage in breakout group discussions with theChairperson or a faculty member from their intended major, watch and reflect on brief videosabout each of the majors offered in the School of Engineering and Computer Science, andparticipate in classroom activities focused on professional communication and ethics.Active engagement in the university community is
qualitative case study research design and identifies the successes andchallenges of institutionalizing a successful NSF-funded S-STEM recruitment and retentionprogram. Institutionalization of successful educational programs is a goal of many NSF-fundedprograms. Reflection and critique of the institutionalization of our program will provide criticalinsights for similar programs on planning their institutionalization and contribute to theunderstanding of the institutionalization process, timeline, and effort areas. Throughout a“COVID-interrupted” 7-year period, this NSF-funded S-STEM program implemented research-based student success and retention strategies to serve 90 students and provide scholarshipsupport to 42 students. As programmatic elements
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
techniques and statistics trended downward over the years. Researchers believethis reflects the relative use of these skills by upperclassmen.Figure 5: Importance of Technical Skills by Self-Reported YearStudents were asked to evaluate the importance of various non-technical skills via the sameLikert scale. Figure 6 shows how students evaluated these non-technical skills. The highestscoring skill was time management, followed by teamwork. It is unsurprising that timemanagement and effective teams are valued by busy engineering students who often work inteams. It is of interest that these skills scored above all other technical skills, indicating thatstudents found them of greater importance, even more than mathematical problem solving.Figure 6
thesurvey results is beyond the scope of this paper, the three groups of stakeholders agreed (>70%in each group) that a range of technical subject matter is important for all engineers, regardless offield. These included single variable calculus, differential equations, probability and statistics,general purpose computing and programming, the engineering design process, modeling(including prototyping), and project management. The three stakeholder groups also agreed thata number of professional proficiencies are important for all engineers, including communication(oral, written, graphical), codes of ethics and identification, working with people of diverse anddifferent backgrounds, reflection, feedback, and career skills, among others. These
students they serve; They developleadership skills, learn about counseling and educational theories, and reflect on their valuableexperiences [3], [7].Learning objectives for the course include: • Articulate different definitions and related sub-themes that could comprise peer advising, peer mentoring, interpersonal communication, and leadership soft skills. • Evaluate the current level of development in soft skills and develop a plan for future reflection, evaluation, and adjustment to said skills. • Demonstrate effectiveness in your role and build confidence in providing advising assistance. • Demonstrate familiarity with resources and opportunities in the College of Engineering and the greater campus and
, acceptance of responsibilities, level of participation, time commitment, and work load. 2. Work Contribution: Below, write how much (by percentage) yourself and each group member contributed to the overall project 3. Group atmosphere: How would you assess yourself and each member of your groups in terms of your ability to work together effectively and create a functional atmosphere from 1-5? Please explain your answer. 4. Self-Reflection. What areas of the project do you feel like you could have improved upon/supported your group better? 5. How would you rate your groups' use of time? (Keep in mind your Gantt Chart and if it was followed) 1- Procrastinated heavily to 5 - Met every deadline 6. How would you
solicitation of the College of Engineering in 2020 and a three-yearredesign was undertaken and completed in Fall 2023 with its third iteration.This paper assesses how the redesign achieved the initial goals and how its delivery reflects thedesired characteristics. Four course outcomes were adopted: 1) Develop creative solutions byapplying engineering design, math, science, and data analysis, 2) Construct an effectiveprototype or model using technology and tools, 3) Demonstrate improved power skills(communication, teamwork, information literacy, professionalism), and 4) Employ NSPE Codeof Ethics to examine case studies and extrapolate for other situations. In terms of the courseoutcomes, this paper describes how students self-assessed their achievement
-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
semester by goingthrough this process and to provide a thoughtful conclusion on how this exercise can help themin the future. Reports were reviewed from four engineering communications sections, eachtaught by a different instructor, from the Fall 2023 semester for a total of 89 reports. Notes weretaken on anything that students indicated to be useful about the assignment, including things theylearned, applied, reflected on, etc.The secondary aims of the study will be addressed using quantitative data collected from first-year engineering students enrolled in the engineering communication course at *university*during the Fall 2021, Fall 2022, and Fall 2023 semesters. Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 gradesfrom the Teamwork Report assignment will be
participation in learning [9]. Developing teamwork skillsbenefits students academically and has long-term implications for personal and professionaldevelopment. It develops leadership skills, enhances problem-solving abilities, and developsdecision-making skills, all contributing to students' overall growth and readiness for futureefforts [2], [10], [11], [12]. Teamwork skills gained through academic settings are crucial forstudents' future careers as employers highly value them [13]. It also enhances empathy, socialawareness, and improved decision-making abilities, which are essential for navigating diversework environments and making informed choices [14], [15]. Effective time management skillsand self-reflection abilities in students are being
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
generative AI, he created venues in theclass to maintain open communication about the exploration.The students were provided with web-based tools “PrimeBot” and “WebDeveloperBot”, bothdeveloped by the instructor and his team incorporating the API of ChatGPT (refer to figure 1 forscreenshots). With prompts input by users, “PrimeBot” generates Python code for programmingLEGO Education SPIKE Prime Robotics sets, and “WebDeveloperBot” generates HTML codeto help create online portfolios. The students were encouraged to use these tools for their projectsand reflect on their use. They were also provided with “GeneralBot” which has the same featuresas ChatGPT. The students were informed that all data including students’ input and the bots’output would be
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