tosolve math problems, to be creative, to work collaboratively on a team, to understand science,and to perform a few other abilities. For every ability, the average student ranked themselvesabove average relative to peers. Data on incoming student self-efficacy towards general project-related tasks is shown infigure 1a, with results split by self-identified gender (a non-binary gender option was given, butsurveys that selected that response were too few to create a meaningful average). Differencesbetween genders were generally statistically insignificant except for the most general question of a) b) Figure 1. Responses to the (a) pre-class and (b) post-class survey questions on general engineering project self-efficacy, averaged
Engineering, to the first year engineering students with the aim to increase retention rate and reduce graduation time. Dr. Tiwari is an ABET program evaluator for ASEE.Dr. Pradeep Nair, California State University, Fullerton Pradeep Nair received his Ph. D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Texas at San Antonio in 2009. His research interests include power/performance tradeoffs in the nanoscale domain, leakage power reduction in digital systems, computer performance analysis and evaluation, low Power FPGAs, and biomedical circuits and systems. He has published several peer-reviewed papers as part of his re- search. At CSUF, Dr. Nair has taught several engineering courses ranging from the freshman level to
tutorial guide [3], and abook by Pardum [4]. Students used the tutorials and book to explore the basics of microcontrollers.Small projects were used to allow exploration and application. By the end of the semesterstudents were able to write structured programs with simple strings. Electrically they could dealwith analog inputs/outputs, servo motors, distance sensors, and others self-selected.Projects in engineering courses are effective to motivate students’ interest in Engineering andenhance their understanding of the knowledge [5-7]. Thus, a semester project in EGR 106 wasused to ensure that students were able to integrate and apply the knowledge. In previoussemesters the project was a ‘sumo bot’. These robots were designed and built by teams of
create a mathematicalmodel to meet particular criteria and constraints for a stakeholder based on provided, relevantdata [1]. While MEAs have demonstrated success across a broad spectrum of characteristics(e.g., improved retention of women, increased experience with peer review, improvedprofessional skills attainment), adoption of MEAs can be challenging, in part because MEAs aretime consuming to meaningfully implement and evaluate, as well as initially design and develop[10-12]. Not only is there a lot of resistance for faculty buy-in, many students complain about theworkload required to complete the activities. In part of this larger project, the team has workedon utilizing the Models and Modeling Perspective (M&MP) design principles and
thus they will default to a role that is more familiar or is perceived to be less challenging. Another reason that a student may take on a certain role is that that the student may become pigeon-holed into a certain role: if a student volunteers to write the first progress memo, for example, the other team members may expect that student will complete subsequent writing assignments, thus not leaving enough time for the student to take on other tasks. Or, another example is that there could be a student who previously had a lot of experience on a robotics team, and thus is expected by their teammates to do the wiring or coding work for the course project. This keeps that student from experiencing
systems (A1) 21. apply engineering economics to solve time value of money problems (A1) COMMUNICATION: 22. utilize the specified engineering problem solving approach when completing assignments (A1,A4) 23. properly present technical information in tables and graphs (A4) 24. communicate the results of investigations and projects both orally and in writing (A4) 25. assess potential impacts of selected global and societal forces on our planet and its inhabitants (A5,A6,A7) 26. regularly attend professional society meetings and other student-led functions (A7,A8,A9) 27. work individually and collaboratively to complete course assignments (A4,A8) 28. apply creative problem solving techniques for product design (A3) 29
study asked individuals to indicate the ethics topics thatthey taught in one or more of their courses (18 topics were identified, an additional “other” wasprovided with a space to write-in; “no topics” was also an option). For any individuals whoselected one or more topics), this was followed by a question where respondents indicated all ofthe types of courses where they taught these topics (9 options provided and “other”); results aresummarized in Table 2. Among the survey respondents, 71 only reported teaching these topics infirst-year courses (either first-year introductory course and/or a first-year design course) and noother types of courses. On average, four different ethics related topics were reported by eachinstructor of these first
academic support on both campuses was also identifiedas a way to better provide access to academic resources. Drop-in tutoring with graduateassistants as well as peer tutors was organized on both campuses. The attendance at these drop-insessions is tracked for scheduling and assessment purposes.Through review of first year seminars, relevant topics and activities to help students developappropriate learning skills were identified [7-9]. These topics were prepared into a series ofmodules that could be used in a first-year seminar. To add a credit for a mandatory first-yearseminar required a broader overview of the engineering foundations courses (required forsecondary admission into the engineering programs). This review is being completed as part
multiple team projects anddeliverables. ENGG 233 is a required first-year technical course that introduces foundationalconcepts in programming and software engineering to all students, regardless of their intendedprogram.In 2015, ENGG 233 was redesigned to focus on algorithmic thinking through exploratory andapplied learning, as opposed to syntax-focused programming education [Pears, 2007]. Thisresulted in a course format similar to ENGG 200.Both courses have a significant regular laboratory component, where students are given theopportunity to collaborate with peers and receive coaching from instructors and teachingassistants. In these laboratory sessions, students work on exploratory exercises and larger design-based projects. This interactive
thepopular Intro 160 course and will have teams of students solving real-world engineeringproblems with real clients. In addition, this course will offer more department involvement viaonline videos and lectures. Collectively, the online videos, lectures, and tutorials will provide a"flipped classroom" style course. Students will complete assignments that align with learningthe engineering design process including: online assignments, solve engineering problems, buildand manage teams, fabricate and test prototypes, give presentations, and write a technical report.Active Learning StrategiesActive learning is generally defined as anything in addition to the passive listening of atraditional lecture format. There is some disagreement regarding the most
unit.During their research students were told to keep records of all their work. At the end of thecourse, students turned in all documentation created (in the form of several-inch-thick binders) aswell as bound reports of their research. Students were encouraged to use the reports whenapplying to internships as a way to show the research they had performed and evidence of theirrecordkeeping and writing skills.The entire course concluded with two final presentations of the student groups, with smaller, in-class presentations throughout the class to improve students’ public speaking skills. The finalpresentations consisted of a poster presentation as well as a more formal presentation to a groupof peers. The poster presentation allowed the student to
introduced to fluidmechanics and CFD software. Students watch short (1-15 minute) videos covering the basicprinciples of fluid mechanics over several days, and complete an accompanying worksheet forthe derivation of a velocity profile across a cylindrical channel. Following their completion ofthis worksheet, students complete a guided worksheet for a rectangular channel during class,using the principles discussed in the videos and the cylindrical coordinates worksheet.After completing the worksheets, students use their derived equations to write a program (usingMATLAB, C++, or LabVIEW) to determine flow characteristics of an incompressibleNewtonian fluid through a rectangular channel. Also after completion of these worksheets,students perform a two
Evening was simply one facet of thethree-pronged exploration curriculum comprised of career research prior to the event, the eventitself, and directed reflection and writing that help the students synthesize the overall experience.The exploration curriculum was assumed seamlessly into our overall undergraduate careerdevelopment plan and was implemented through our engineering student success courses.Understanding that the engineering faculty teaching the success courses are not careerdevelopment experts, the career exploration curriculum incorporated online components as wellas face-to-face components in the classroom that were lead by our career center staff and ourtrained career peer coaches. Since the faculty has ultimate authority over their
to the course in 2010. He is co- author, with Robert Irish, of Engineering Communication: From Principles to Practice (Oxford Canada, 2008), and is also on the writing team for a new design/communication textbook for first-year engineering students. Page 25.507.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Effects of lecture capture on a large first year engineering courseIntroductionOur first year engineering classrooms are undergoing many obvious changes, such as increasingclass sizes, growing international student body, greater diversity in student background, and
servicelearning pedagogy has significant positive effects on students’ academic performance (GPA,writing skills, critical thinking skills), leadership skills, and increased commitment to continuedcivic participation7. 68% of students engaged in the Engineering Projects in Community Service(EPICS) projects from Purdue University reported that participation in service learningpositively impacted their determination to continue in engineering8.The premise is that engineering design can function as a motivator for learning foundationalskills that are necessary precursors to higher level engineering skills9. Therefore, the use ofdevelopmentally-appropriate engineering curricula that builds on current cognitive researchbecomes an attractive instructional
asexperimentally (the part done in and for the engineering class). The students, working in smallgroups, must create a solution as well as write a technical report and present the problem andtheir solution to the class.Approximately 130 students participated in these joint math-engineering projects. Theirperformance, primarily in calculus, was measured and compared to historical performance dataas well as to calculus classes without the joint projects. Preliminary data suggests that theseprojects result in improved grades in calculus. Additionally, the student enthusiasm for thesehands on projects has increased as well.* Acknowledgement and Disclaimer:This material is based upon work supported by the NASA WV Space Grant Consortium, NASA Training Grant
group. They had to also identify thetypes of engineers and non-engineers that are needed to address the challenge and explain howthe various people would need to be involved. Page 24.1314.3The second assignment was to prepare an annotated bibliography. Rather than simply asking thestudents to find a number of sources that were relevant to their topic, they were also asked toreview the sources and write a brief summary of the information presented in the sources. Thisencouraged them to consider the relevancy of the information and then to describe theinformation in their own words by preparing the summary. This assignment was due by thefourth
their camera to their desired height usingtethers, and have it take a photograph of the target area. Then analysis of the photographwould be done using the MATLAB program developed in stages during the course. Theresult of the analysis was to determine the area enclosed by the figure on the ground. Many Page 22.149.2different designs for timers were created from the materials given, ranging from water clocktimers, viscous timers, ice timers, etc.The programming component of the project was done as individuals, i.e. each student wasresponsible for writing the analysis software. The lab component of the course taught basicprogramming constructs such
seeing an increased number ofstudents coming in with college credit, either Advanced Placement (AP) or other. In 2014 whenthe original cornerstone pilot was completed, over 50% of entering students had some AP creditin Calculus, 20% had Chemistry credit, 35% have College Writing credit and 35% have Physicscredit. These students as well as current students with advanced credit face a limited courseselection to complete their academic schedules in these early semesters since it is difficult to findcourses that they can take in the first year that do not have prerequisites. This created the need torevise the curriculum to offer students the opportunity to accelerate their exploration of anengineering major. In order to accomplish this, students
the university. We use our summer orientation programs to address these items, and also help studentsbecome aware of the changes that are taking place in their lives and begin the transition in thestudent's immediate family structure by introducing professional counselors and advisors duringthe summer registration program [10 – 12]. This expansion of their family is continued in thefall semester, in our seminar course ENGR0081 and introduction to Engineering courseENGR0011, as peer mentors and faculty are added to their family structure. Mentoring is often thought to be a lot like coaching. In fact, many mentors do find that theirrole as mentor takes on the task of coaching the students through the various difficult transitionsfrom
pursuing their major [10] [12] [13] [14].Hutchison-Green et al interviewed first-year engineering students to determine what factors, inthe students’ first semester, begin to affect self-efficacy [15]. They found that performancecomparison (i.e., a student comparing his/her performance to his/her peers) makes a significantimpact on self-efficacy, and that depending on the student and the situation, self-efficacy couldeither increase or decrease in response to the situation. Team-based project courses can thusmitigate the possibility of decreasing students’ confidence because they do not require studentsto work individually and then compare their performance to that of their peers. Instead, studentswork together toward a common goal. Team-based
designed to assist students with self-efficacy beliefs and personal goals.At this University all engineering and computer science students take an introduction toengineering course that covers the engineering process, teamwork, communication skills, thedifferent branches of engineering, ethics, and co-curricular and extracurricular opportunities.Section sizes are ~30 students, so students can build community with peers and their professor.The professor of the Introduction to Engineering course is the academic advisor for his/her set ofstudents. Students declare or confirm their major by the end of the first semester. Resources tohelp students choose a major include laboratories, advisor meetings, student panels, a semester-long team project
Lego MazeRobot had significant impact with respect to the Autonomous Waste Sorter project. Thus, aftercompleting the Grand Challenges Project and the Lego Maze Robot Project, both groups ofstudents considered that their engineering related skills had improved compared to their peers,while students who completed the Autonomous Waste Sorter Project did not think that their skillsimproved compared to their peers. Page 26.259.8 Highest 10% Score Relative to Classmates Above Average Pre-Survey
topic of student success andretention at the undergraduate level, and it has been found that in addition to prior demonstrationof academic success (e.g., high school GPA, SAT scores, and other academic achievements), amain factor in determining student success at the college level was student motivation.9In an effort to enhance student motivation, some engineering schools have made changes to theirprogram’s digital and physical infrastructure to keep up with the rapidly evolving technologiesand learning styles of the modern engineering student. For example, New Mexico StateUniversity (NMSU) has implemented a new first year program at their institution, with a focuson PBL, flipped classroom instruction, and peer mentoring.10 Programs such as
security.John K. Estell, Ohio Northern University John K. Estell is Chair of the Electrical & Computer Engineering and Computer Science Department, and Professor of Computer Engineering and Computer Science, at Ohio Northern University. He received his doctorate from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. His areas of research include simplifying the outcomes assessment process, user interface design, and the pedagogical aspects of writing computer games. Dr. Estell is a Senior Member of IEEE, and a member of ACM, ASEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, and Upsilon Pi Epsilon.Brenda Hart, University of Louisville Professor Hart is the director of student affairs in the School of Engineering
major in one ofthe engineering specialty areas upon matriculation, or soon thereafter. Previous research hasshown that significant factors influencing choice of major for college students include (1)general interest subject; (2) family and peer influence; (3) assumptions about introductorycourses, (4) potential job characteristics, and (5) characteristics of the major. The student'sdecision on choice of major is often difficult because traditional university-aged students havelittle to no direct experience with the engineering profession or practicing engineers. Someuniversities confront this problem with a common first-year engineering experience, whereinengineering majors are given the opportunity to explore the specialty areas and make a
education curriculum with a focus on laboratory courses for the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department. His courses leverage project-based learning, experiential learning, and self-paced activities. David has over ten years of industry experience specializing in mixed-signal RF integrated circuit design, power systems, and power electronics.Prof. Kia Bazargan, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Prof. Kia Bazargan is an Associate Professor with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Minnesota. Has has published over 70 peer-reviewed papers and book chapters related to FPGAs and VLSI computer-aided design. He received his Bachelors degree
aimed at supporting underprepared students through theirprerequisites, both academically and emotionally. The program was designed afterinterviewing many students, both those who persisted and those who left engineering,researching programs at other schools, and building upon prior experience. The mainprogram goals include an increased retention rate in engineering amongstunderprepared students and the creation of meaningful relationships and networks forthese students within their engineering experience.Specific program goals: ● Support the development of meaningful relationships for underprepared first-year students within their engineering experience. A student survey about interpersonal experiences with peers as well as
Paper ID #12690A Student-Led Approach to Promoting Teamwork in an Introductory Engi-neering PresentationDr. Christopher Leslie, New York University Polytechnic School of Engineering (formerly Polytechnic Univer-sity) Christopher Leslie is a Lecturer of Science, Technology and Media Studies at the New York Univer- sity Polytechnic School of Engineering in Brooklyn, New York, and he is codirector of the Science and Technology Studies program there. Dr. Leslie’s research considers the cultural formations that surround technology, science, and media in the 19th- and 20th-century United States. He is the head writing con
conducted on the CSEQ to consider inputand output measures. Existing programs were analyzed. Strayhorn concluded student learningwas the result of inputs and environment, as outlined by Astin’s model. Findings indicated apositive correlation with interventions that enhanced student learning outcomes and institutionsshould consider programs which brought students together and supported learning such as peerstudy groups, peer mentors, and social outreach. Academic advisors guide students to becomeinvolved with those specific activities which increase engagement in the academic environment.Mindset is a concept explored by Carol Dweck, a professor of psychology5. Dweck hasidentified two types of mindsets: a fixed mindset and a growth mindset. A fixed