program has had a positive impact onparticipants’ attitudes towards STEM majors, STEM careers, and STEM research. The one-yearretention rate of the first cohort is much higher than the baseline STEM retention rate at the startof the IUSE grant. The first cohort is also making satisfactory progress on completion of thecalculus sequence for their STEM majors and their academic progress mirrors that of the overallCSUB population.IntroductionCalifornia State University, Bakersfield (CSUB) is located in a region with low educationalachievement according to U.S. Census data (US Census Bureau, 2010). The high schoolcompletion rate and the percentage of the adult population with university degrees is lower thanthe national average. This leads to a high
factors such as potentialfor societal contribution, personal academic interests, perceived job prospects, and their decisionbefore they entered the engineering program. However, Myers (2016) found that students felt afirst-year engineering course which included lectures and/or activities designed to exposestudents to engineering majors did influence their plans for a future engineering discipline. Astudy by Chamberlain, Benson, and Crockett (2008) found that core passions, the appeal of non-engineering courses and professions, a General Engineering course exposing students toengineering majors, and career interest surveys were significant factors in first-year studentsleaving engineering.Description of the StudyMichigan Technological University
Assistant Dean for Inclusive Excellence, she leads the Broadening Opportunity through Leadership and Diversity (BOLD) Center, overseeing efforts to attract and prepare students for the rigors of engineering study and careers, and to improve student performance and graduation rates. Appointed in January 2014, Miller comes to CU-Boulder from the National Science Foundation, where she worked in STEM education as a American Association for the Advancement of Science Fellow. Sarah believes that every child deserves an excellent education. She has worked in inner-city public schools, both as a teacher and as an administrator, and in the admissions office of Amherst College, where she earned a B.A. in Chemistry. She holds a PhD
Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Univ. Illinois, Urbana-Champaign in 2006. He was a TMS Young Leader International Scholar in 2008, received the NSF/CAREER award in 2009, the Xerox Award for Faculty Research at Illinois in 2011, the AIME Robert Lansing Hardy Award in 2014, co-chaired the 2011 Physical Metallurgy Gordon Research conference, and became a Willett Faculty Scholar at Illinois in 2015. His research focuses on defects in materials using density-functional theory, and novel techniques to understand problems in mechanical behavior and transport.Prof. Kelly Ritter, University of Illinois Urbana-ChampaignP. Scott Carney, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign P. Scott Carney is a Professor in the
determine if there is a correlation between these two. Specifically, thisstudy investigates the number of reasons students cited for choosing to study engineering and theirretention in engineering.Background Literature There are many theories as to why students choose a career or educational path. For thisstudy two main theories stand out: Social Cognitive Theory and Expectancy Value Theory.Social Cognitive Theory The Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a relatively new theory that sheds light on howbasic academic and career interests develop, how educational and career choices are made, andhow academic and career success is obtained. The basic building blocks of this theory are self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, goals or
Engineering Students Select a MajorAbstractThis evidence-based practice paper evaluates a set of resources to help first-year engineeringstudents choose their major among four fields. Choosing a major can be a daunting task for first-year college students, especially if the choices span fields with which students have littleexperience. In order to provide first-year engineering students time to discern, a set of resourcesand course activities were designed to assist students in this decision-making process. Theeducational theory that serves as a framework for this study is social cognitive career theory,developed by Lent, Brown, and Hackett in 1994. In particular, resources, activities, andexperiences in the introduction to engineering course were
participation in engineering education. He is a Research Scientist and Lecturer in the School of Engineering at Stanford University and teaches the course ME310x Product Management and ME305 Statistics for Design Researchers. Mark has extensive background in consumer products management, having managed more than 50 con- sumer driven businesses over a 25-year career with The Procter & Gamble Company. In 2005, he joined Intuit, Inc. as Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer and initiated a number of consumer package goods marketing best practices, introduced the use of competitive response modeling and ”on- the-fly” A|B testing program to qualify software improvements. Mark is the Co-Founder and Managing
field trials.Also covered are lessons learned from the field trials, the revision process, and plans fordisseminating the module to partner universities in the future.BackgroundBiogeotechnics is a rapidly emerging branch of geotechnical engineering that focuses on learningfrom nature to help address engineering challenges. Although many freshman engineeringstudents may have already decided to pursue one of the main branches of engineering (e.g.,mechanical, electrical, civil, or chemical), many are still exploring the sub-fields andspecializations within each branch (Shamma & Purasinghe, 2015). Exposing undergraduates toresearch being conducted in biogeotechnics, along with various career options available, whichare often dependent upon
under-represented minority groups.Dr. Mark Tufenkjian, California State University, Los Angeles Dr. Tufenkjian is Chair of the Civil Engineering Department at Cal. State LA. His research interests include advanced geotechnical laboratory testing and in-situ testing of soft clay soils. His research has been funded by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) and the Department of Defense. He is currently the PI on a STEM grant from ONR to provide engineering students pathways to careers at Navy Labs in the southern California region.Dr. Emily L. Allen, California State University, Los Angeles Emily L. Allen, Ph.D., is Dean of the College of Engineering, Computer Science, and Technology at California State University, Los
University and Assistant Dean for Student Advancement and Program Assessment in the College of Engineering. Dr. Briedis is involved in several areas of education research including student retention, curriculum redesign, and the use of technology in the classroom. She has been involved in NSF-funded research in the areas of integration of computation in engineering curricula and in developing comprehensive strategies to retain early engineering students. She is active nationally and internationally in engineering accreditation and is a Fellow of ABET, ASEE, and AIChE.Dr. S. Patrick Walton, Michigan State University S. Patrick Walton received his B.ChE. from Georgia Tech, where he began his biomedical research career in
include “(1) facilitating the first year students’ and newtransfer students’ transition into the school of engineering; (2) increasing students’ commitmentto engineering majors through career clarification and goal setting; (3) reducing the barriers tosuccess that students may face, particularly those for women and underrepresented students; and(4) enhancing the positive personal and environmental factors for students in engineering.”(Smith, Fourney, & Pertmer, 2009) Ultimately, the SEEDS program seeks to promote persistenceand success among engineering students, particularly through their first year in the Clark Schoolof Engineering.The SEEDS program is comprised of a series of programs, including the Engineering Living &Learning
science earn significantly more than students who major in the humanities andsocial sciences. Finally, high ability students have been found to shift to majors that result inmore profitable professional pathways and lower ability students shift to “easier majors”7.Student ability and their expectation of future earning potential were reported as importantfactors in the selection of a college major; however, these perceptions may have errors thatwould influence major change8. Social Cognitive Career Theory is based on the idea that careerdevelopment is a process related to self-exploration and choice, but that there can be barriers thatconfound decision making. For example an individual’s prior experiences and background(culture, gender, genetic
career in engineering, retention ofcertain subgroups of students, i.e. underrepresented minorities and first-generation students, isdifferentially lower6,7. This issue means that students who have the potential to be excellentengineers are subject to higher attrition rates, possibly due to their lack of preparation in areassuch as transitioning and being successful in college and engaging in strategies necessary to besuccessful engineering students. This demonstrates the need for increased focus on first-yearengineering education through strengthening a student’s commitment and efficiency to graduatewith an engineering degree.A study by Meyers et al.8 investigated why students stay in engineering and found that increasingthe first-year student’s
these skills during introductory coursework must “catch up” in later courses,where the technical content is more challenging. We hypothesize this can lead to unpreparednessfor challenging content or careers as an engineer and can negatively impact academic standing,leading to decreased retention. Thus, the goals of this work were to 1) improve retention rates forfirst-year engineering students, specifically mechanical engineering, and 2) improvecomputational and software skills of first-year students, specifically MATLAB and MicrosoftExcel.MATLAB is a common computational package which can be used for a broad range ofengineering problems throughout a curriculum [2]. However, learning Excel and MATLABthrough lecture is challenging, as these
survey instrument used in this study was largely adopted from Prybutok, Patrick, Borrego,Seepersad, and Kiristis4 who completed a similar study. Prybutok, Patrick, Borrego, Seepersad,and Kiristis4 developed their engineering identity survey based on a physics identity model8,9.This physics model used four factors: performance, competence, interest, and recognition4,8,9.Performance is where a student believes in their ability to perform tasks specific to engineering4.Competence is when a student believes in their ability to be success in engineering4. Prybutok,Patrick, Borrego, Seepersad, and Kiristis4 described interest as “how motivated a student is in thecontent and career they are pursuing, often encompassing the motives a student has for
., friends, family members who work as engineers) of information about engineeringpractices, because such experiences can provide opportunities for students to try on theseidentities. If most of their course-based experiences are passive, or highly constrained problemsets, they won’t have this opportunity. In contrast, opportunities to make design decisions cansupport professional engineering identity [37].Identity development is socially negotiated [27-29], meaning students benefit from working withothers on authentic and meaningful tasks and from being part of a social community of engineers[38]. It also means that engineering identity is contextualized by students’ perceptions ofengineering careers and their potential contributions as engineers
leadershippositions throughout the remainder of their undergraduate careers. In the female living learningcommunity we currently have 204 first year students and 89 upper class leaders. In the malecommunity we have 279 first year students and 68 upper class leaders.The first-year experience focuses on social support and academic skill development that helppromote successful transitions from high school to college, as well as encouraging students tobegin exploring possibilities for transitioning from college to career. This work is accomplishedthrough a seminar course that includes assignments targeting college success skills, careerexploration, and interaction with upperclassmen leaders through peer mentoring and communityactivities. The second-year
sight of one’s engineering goals when all one does is take prerequisiteclasses and other college requirements. Students from underprepared backgrounds tend tostruggle especially hard during their first year and often end up dropping their plans to studyengineering quite early on in their college career. These students are especially vulnerable duringtheir first year here since, after having been high achievers in their high schools, they now mightexperience their first class in which they struggle and receive a poor or even failing grade.Students’ confidence often drops after one such event, and it is our goal to supply the academicand emotional support to prevent a first poor grade from derailing a student’s path through ourschool.The Thayer
Paper ID #19771First-Year Engineering Students’ Perceptions of their Abilities to SucceedDr. Tanya Dugat Wickliff, Texas A&M University Delivering significant results in pivotal roles such as Sr. Consultant to high-profile clients, Sr. Project Manager directing teams, and Executive Leader of initiatives and programs that boost organizational effectiveness and optimize operations have been hallmarks of Dr. Wickliff’s career spanning more than 24 years with leaders in the oil & gas and semiconductor industries. As an expert in the areas of Executive Leadership and Team Development, Strategy Design & Execution
important factor in persistence to degree completion. For example, somestudies report that the diversity gap in STEM participation may be attributed more to perceptionsand beliefs than to academic preparation or achievement levels [1-5]. To the extent that suchperceptions and beliefs form an inaccurate (or “negative”) vision of a future engineering career,curricular approaches that aim to form a more “positive” vision may be warranted. Theseapproaches can be pedagogical, such as collaborative and project-based learning [6-8], content-based by aiming (for example) to expose the positive contributions of engineering to society [9-12], or both. All other things being equal, curricular features than can foster among students amore positive
), freshman students begin their studies within theirchosen major, typically taking an introductory engineering course specific to their discipline.For undecided engineering students, they have the option to start in a general engineeringprogram to help them select a major. FIT has had great success using this general engineeringmodel to improve student retention and time to graduation; however, improvement can be madein preparing students to be innovative, entrepreneurial-minded professionals. The purpose of thispaper is to describe the activities focused on exposing students to the entrepreneurial mindset andpreparing them for engineering careers. An introductory course in the General Engineeringprogram comprises both a lecture and a lab component
conversations reported by the faculty indicate that students begin sharing informationthey did not know would help them in their engineering careers. The third course in the sequence being more of a team design course, employs methodsfrom other design courses from FYE institutions in contact with our team (Adams, 2002; Atmanet al., 2007; Crismond & Adams, 2012; Turns et al., 2006). One engagement protocol that mixesbest practices from Adams’ work and is similar to the liberative ones employed by Riley is usedby one faculty member who requires all students to stand while discussing an element of designfrom the project, and the next speaker must amplify the previous student’s statement in terms ofhis own. Students in this scenario must engage
% Heavy course load 26.79% 47.83% Unhappy with instructor 21.43% 28.26% Unsure of major 17.86% 8.70% No clear career goals or plans 16.07% 8.70% Poor class attendance 16.07% 19.57% Housing/roommate issues 16.07% 15.22% Trouble making friends 16.07% 13.04% Homesickness 12.50% 6.52% Working too many hours 12.50% 17.39% Family issues
Liang and Grossman [4] mentors can aide youth from diverse backgrounds. Inaddition, minority students who have had a mentor show greater success in academics.According to Chesler & Chesler [5] peer mentoring can provide a positive impact on engineers,and can provide both technical and psychosocial support. As the research shows peer mentorscan play a vital role in student success.Chesler & Chesler (2002) also note the importance of establishing mentor to menteerelationships early in a student’s academic career to increase student success. They also discussthe active role of listening and questioning to be a key aspect of effective mentoring. One of thefocal points at mentor training is effective listening and communication skills
2.88 2.95 2.79 2.84 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 I am excited about How valuable to Solid understanding I expect that my I see how To what extent are this course your overall of what it means to career will utilize engineering you considering
-285, 2009.[10] A. M. Schmidt and R. P. DeShon, "Prior performance and goal progress as moderators of the relationship between self-efficacy and performance," Human Performance, vol. 22, pp. 191-203, 2009.[11] R. W. Lent, H.-B. Sheu, D. Singley, J. A. Schmidt, L. C. Schmidt, and C. S. Gloster, "Longitudinal relations of self-efficacy to outcome expectations, interests, and major choice goals in engineering students," Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 73, pp. 328-335, 2008.[12] R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and K. C. Larkin, "Self-efficacy in the prediction of academic performance and perceived career options," Journal of counseling psychology, vol. 33, p. 265, 1986.[13] R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and K. C
on projects, and project management skills to monitor project progress. Students are then given multiple in-class design challenges and out-of-class projects to provide them with opportunities to act on these skills and reflect on their process to improve for the next design activity. The first year engineering course is worth 3.5 credits each semester and has 3 2-hour sessions. Class sessions use a studio model of instruction and encourage peer instruction in teams for every class session. The "context" for the course is to prepare students for their academic and professional engineering careers. This means developing skills in innovative design, computational modeling/analysis, project management and teaming. Engineering students
attitudes towards becoming engineers, their problem solving processes, and cultural fit. His education includes a B.S. in Biomedical Engineering from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, a M.S. in Bioengineering and Ph.D. in Engineer- ing and Science Education from Clemson University.Dr. Allison Godwin, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Allison Godwin, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her research focuses what factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr
academicadvisers who are tasked with advising the incoming class as well as teaching (Freeman,2016). These advisers work with incoming engineering students, starting the summer beforethey arrive, and continuing through their first year. The advisers utilize the Advising-as-Teaching model and collaborate on advising and mentoring students, facilitated by having co-located offices in a suite. Advisers work with each student to collaboratively determine thestudent’s educational goals and develop a path for her to achieve those goals.Each adviser’s primary objectives are to: • Each assist ~100 first-year students with their major selection and academic planning, then serve as a resource throughout their undergraduate careers; • Teach three courses
administrators in first year programs understand whattheir students are learning in the first year, how students are defining the practice of engineering,and the current themes that the authors found from students definitions of the practice ofengineering. The researchers thought it would be helpful to include an analysis of the syllabusused in the class and how much time was dedicated to each topic to see if there was anycorrelation to how the students were defining the practice of engineering.BackgroundThe career of engineering has long carried the reputation as a field of people that are good atmath and science 2. However, now it is recognized as a distinct and separate discipline with itsown components of thinking and execution 3. This research