Conference Session

FPD6 -- Early Intervention & Retention Programs

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Daniel Knight, University of Colorado at Boulder; Jacquelyn Sullivan, University of Colorado at Boulder; Beverly Louie, University of Colorado at Boulder

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

requirements to include agreater emphasis on professional skills. [8, 10]In the retention analysis, the more assertive students — those exhibiting the Driving andExpressive styles — had a higher rate of retention (Figure 4). Perhaps this reflects the goalorientation of more assertive people. High retention rates for students with a Driving style werenot surprising, as these folks make decisions early and tend to stick by their decisions. Higherretention rates for students with an Expressive style were perhaps somewhat surprising, as thesefolks are more likely to change courses to follow new dreams. Here again, the interactive natureof the FYEP course may have helped with the retention of students with an Expressive style.Alternatively, those with an

Conference Session

FPD5 -- Placement & Early Success

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mwarumba Mwavita, Oklahoma State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. International students (n = 20) accounted for the remaining 6.8 %.The dependent variable in this study was calculus success. This variable was scaled from 5 to 1.An “A” grade = 5, “B” grade = 4, “C” grade = 3, “D” = 2, “F” = 1. This variable was obtainedfrom the SIS archived data.One of the independent variable examined in this study was academic engagement. Academicengagement is a term often used to describe active involvement, commitment, and attention asopposed to apathy and lack of interest. 10 Researchers of academic engagement identify certainindicators of engagement. For example, Singh, Granville and Dika11 consider doing homework,coming prepared for classes, regular attendance, not skipping classes as a reflection of studentengagement. In

Conference Session

FPD8 -- Systems, Nanotechnology & Programming

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Youssef Allam, Ohio State University; David Tomasko, Ohio State University; John Merrill, Ohio State University; Bruce Trott, Ohio State University; Phil Schlosser, Ohio State University; Paul Clingan, Ohio State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

very broad multi-disciplinary project that appeals to manyinterests and this is reflected in the nanotechnology teaching modules contributed by a diversegroup of nanotechnology researchers from around campus.Nanotechnology is introduced in related readings and laboratory tours as well as a nominalexperimental component. Pre- and post-tests on nanotechnology concepts helped to gaugeincreases in student knowledge and understanding of fundamental nanotechnology topics. Pre-and post-surveys indicated the effects of the course on student interest and participation inresearch and nanotechnology-related issues at an undergraduate, graduate, or professional level.Efforts to expand the initial pilot implementation into a scaled-up regular course

Conference Session

FPD 3: Research on First-Year Courses

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kenneth Reid, Ohio Northern University; Tyler J Hertenstein, Ohio Northern University; Graham Talmadge Fennell, Ohio Northern University; Elizabeth Marie Spingola, Virginia Tech Department of Engineering Education; David Reeping, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

, Page 23.414.8orientation to the program from the viewpoint of the university and orientation to the engineeringprofession. There has been some disagreement of specific categories beneath these majorheadings. The Delphi study and culminating workshop should shed light on the differences andsolidify a classification scheme for these courses.Acknowledgment:The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the U.S. National ScienceFoundation (Award DUE-1042030). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, and/orrecommendations are those of the investigators and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation.References:[1] Magee, C.L. and O.L. deWeck, 2004. “Complex System Classification”, proceedings of the Fourteenth

Conference Session

FPD X: Addressing Retention in the First Year

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Lizzie Y. Santiago, West Virginia University; Robin A.M. Hensel Ed.D., West Virginia University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

secondeducational choice was business. The fact that our engineering students are switching to generalstudies reflects either an inability to make a decision about which major to pursue at the time ofthe transfer or the fact that some of our students are in academic probation. At the time of theanalysis, only 6.5% of all students that transferred to general studies completed a bachelor degreein a given discipline. Only 45% of the students that transferred to general studies are stillenrolled in our college. The remaining 48% dropped from college, were suspended, or neverreturned to the university.Another difference with Ohland’s study, was the high percent of students transferring out ofengineering with GPA below 2.0 (39.5% of all transfer students). Our

Conference Session

FPD X: Addressing Retention in the First Year

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andria Costello Staniec, Syracuse University; Helen M. Doerr, Syracuse University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

” have demonstrated higher student outcomes, includingpersistence to graduation9. While a variety of programs have evolved over the past two decades,in Arendale’s review of postsecondary peer cooperative learning programs, they are divided intotwo groups: (1) those that provide additional support through outside of class activities withlittle change by the primary instructor and (2) those that reflect a transformed learningenvironment for all students enrolled in the course9. Included in the second category are thoseworkshops using the Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) model developed in science education.Keys to the success of the PLTL model are a peer-led workshop that is integral to the course, theclose involvement of the faculty in working with

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ryan Fries, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville; Ryan W. Krauss, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. f3f/8-f3f/12,2002. Page 24.150.714. ABET. 2013. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Effective for Reviews During the 2014-2015Accreditation Cycle. Available at. Accessed 1/2/2014.15. Adams, R., Evangelou, D., English, L., Dias De Figueiredo, A., Mousoulides, N., Pawley, A. L., Schifellite, C.,Stevens, R., Svinicki, M., Trenor, J. M., and Wilson, D. 2011. Journal of Engineering Education. January. 100 (1).48-88.16. Meyers, K. L., Silliman, S. E., Gedded, N. L., and Ohland, M.W. (2010). A Comparison of EngineeringStudents’ Reflections on their First-Year Experiences. Journal of Engineering Education. April. 169-178.17

Conference Session

FPD 11: Culminating Considerations

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John A. Mirth, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; John P Iselin, University of Wisconsin, Platteville

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

topicsrelated to blower design. The housing features of the commercial design shown in Fig. 3 arehighlighted and explained. These features include the 1) volute, 2) diffuser and 3) throat. Thesefeatures are examined after initial design development to allow students to reflect on whether ornot they have thought about the effect of the fluid flow features in their initial design concept.Teams seldom incorporate all three of these features in their initial design, and many of them donot include any of the features.Since the blower is a dynamic machine it requires a conversion from kinetic energy to internalenergy in the form of increased pressure. The diverging volute allows this deceleration andcommensurate pressure rise to occur. The diffuser is a

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ishbah Cox, Purdue University, Band and Orchestra Department; Monica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Libraries and the Writing Center. Speakersalso included professors within the Band and Orchestra department, professors within theCollege of Engineering, a campus historian, a Resume’ writing workshop, and upper-level students within engineering who were musicians within the department.Students were required to attend a minimum of two different types of live on-campusmusical performances that differed from the primary ensemble in which they wereinvolved, and to reflect on those attended live performances. For example, if a studentwas involved with the orchestra, he would be required to attend a performance by a windband or jazz band in the department. Students also had the opportunity to exploreleadership and service opportunities informally and

Conference Session

FPD 2: Building Community

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mangilal Agarwal, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis; Maher E. Rizkalla, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis; Sudhir Shrestha; Kody Varahramyan, IUPUI

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

(Introduction to Engineering, Introduction toEngineering Profession, and Fundamentals of Speech Communication). TLC faculty membersclosely worked with each other to coordinate teaching and learning efforts that reflect the goalsof the developed nanotechnology track.This paper presents the components of the developed and implemented TLC program includingdetails of the courses and assessment data, showing the impact on freshman engineering studentsin nanotechnology education. Comparative assessment data show, 20% higher freshmanretention in the TLC cohort than the traditional group, which highlights the impact of the TLCprogram on freshman engineering students in nanotechnology education. Data also shows thatthe TLC (three courses) has guided over 75% of

Conference Session

FPD I: Research on First-year Programs Part I

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Chirag Variawa, University of Toronto; Susan McCahan, University of Toronto

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

0.008937 40 continuation 0.008237 softening 0.007719 onset 0.005516 agb 0.00783 50 onset 0.007397 agb 0.007072 cry 0.004803 leads 0.006723 60 test 0.006167 theoretical 0.005505 unique 0.004257 strain 0.005992 70 crystalline 0.005691 yx 0.004857 shaded 0.004044 plastic 0.005177… … … … … … … … … 100 matrix 0.004542 lowering 0.004413 pinned 0.00349 speaking 0.004469 200 offset 0.002845 atoms 0.002752 mainly 0.002289 reflect 0.002914

Conference Session

First-year Programs Poster Session

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jaby Mohammed, Petroleum Institute; Nicholas J. Dimmitt, Petroleum Institute

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

show the quality of studentwork thereby reflecting a quality program. Capstone projects are also valued highly in theaccreditation process. The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET),which provides accreditation to engineering programs in US have different criteria toevaluate a program. There are many general criteria and some specific criteria applied tothe program. The general criteria are related to programs, educational objectives,continuous improvement process, program outcomes, curriculum, faculty, facilities, andsupport. Program outcomes are more specific, since the ABET report would show thecurricula, course work, and other documentation to show the effectiveness of theprogram. Program outcomes are criteria 3 of the

Conference Session

FPD VII: Research on First-year Programs Part II

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Julie M. Little-Wiles M.S.M., Ph.D. (A.B.D.), Purdue University, West Lafayette; Stephen Hundley, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis; Wanda L. Worley, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis; Erich J. Bauer, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

reflected aslight increase from 42% in the freshman year to 48% in the sophomore year. Unfortunately,though, this demonstrated that at least half of the students are still not reading theseannouncements despite both the University and School’s efforts to inform them.One area where there was significant change was in the use of the LMS for communicationpurposes. In the initial survey, 77% of the students indicated that they did, in fact, use the LMSto communicate with other students and faculty; this increased to 97% by their sophomore year.Likewise, alternative means of communication was considerably reduced by the sophomore year.See Table 6. Page

Conference Session

First-year Programs Poster Session

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Daniel Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder; Beverly Louie, University of Colorado, Boulder; Jordan Michelle Hornback, University of Colorado at Boulder

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

typical first-yearcourse. Students encounter no exams, self- and peer-reflections (i.e., writing!) are assigned, andcollaborating with fellow classmates is expected. A problem-based learning (PBL), activeapproach is used to guide the learning experiences of these students. After the formation ofsemester-long teams, students take on challenging, open-ended projects in diverse topics such asassistive technology, Rube Goldberg, sustainable technology, science concept demonstrations,recreating existing devices and robotics challenges. Along the way, students must developsufficient proficiency in technical drawing, testing, machining, electronics, and/or

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Poster Session

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ghada Salama, Ph.D., Texas A&M University, Qatar; Beena Ahmed, Texas A&M University at Qatar

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

complicating the situation. Furthermore as Qatar is a small country with limitedemployers, students realize that grievances can be continued into the workplace, if by chancethey or their family members end up working at the same company.Students also struggled in correctly using the provided forms to accurately reflect individualcontributions. The instructors asked the students to provide multiple assessments not only at theend of the project but also during it. This provided the students with the opportunity tofamiliarize themselves with the peer evaluation process. These results were analyzed and used inevaluating individual student performance. The peer evaluations were able to provide asomewhat better picture of the “inside story” on student

Conference Session

FPD IX: Research on First-Year Programs and Students, Part II

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jae Hoon Lim, University of North Carolina, Charlotte; Patricia A. Tolley, University of North Carolina, Charlotte; Kimberly Warren, University of North Carolina, Charlotte; Peter Thomas Tkacik, University of North Carolina, Charlotte

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

educationresearch.”48Contrasting research results regarding the importance of “social engagement” in the academicsuccess and retention of freshman engineering students is at least twofold. Empiricalinvestigations that present a significant variation between general education students andengineering students may suggest that engineering students possess a set of unique pre-collegiatecharacteristics that is different from those of their non-engineering counterparts.47 In this case, anew model should be proposed reflecting the unique characteristics of engineering students (e. g,quantitatively-oriented learning dispositions). Additionally, contradictory results from empiricalinvestigations could be based on the inconsistent use of different measures.48

Conference Session

FPD VIII: Crossing Bridges and Easing Transitions into the First Year

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Theodore Demetrius Caldwell, Michigan State University, Diversity Programs Office, College of Engineering; Kyle P. Foster, Diversity Programs Office, College of Engineering, Michigan State University; Tonisha Brandy Lane, Michigan State University; Rickey Alfred Caldwell Jr, Michigan State University; Claudia Elena Vergara, Michigan State University; Jon Sticklen, Michigan State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

facing all institutions with such summer bridge programs is the follow upafter the summer bridge; what happens to the bridge students in their subsequent first year ofuniversity studies?Our experience indicates that bridge students need a follow on program that reinforces thelessons embedded in the summer bridge and extends those lessons to develop good student andprofessional habits of mind during students’ first year. Our data reflects this same issue as westruggle to retain URM students in Engineering. Since Fall Semester 2002 of new freshmendeclaring Engineering as a major: Page 22.1681.2 · 6% placed into Intermediate Algebra. Of that 6

Conference Session

FPD 3: Research on First-year Programs and Students, Part I

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Malinda S. Zarske, University of Colorado, Boulder; Derek T. Reamon, University of Colorado, Boulder; Daniel Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

-learning (SL) instruction, helps themtransfer knowledge from the classroom to real-world settings. Combining project-based learningand service-learning (PBSL) has the potential to foster skills needed for a more global engineer,including cultural awareness, community-mindedness, and greater flexibility in defining andsolving engineering problems. Practicing engineering in a community context, partnered with astrong emphasis on teamwork and reflection, PBSL programs may be effective approaches torecruit and retain more students, including women and minority students, into engineeringprograms and the engineering workforce.One goal of this project is to incorporate PBSL curricula into existing undergraduate engineeringdesign courses. This paper

Conference Session

Research on The First Year II

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Junqiu Wang, Purdue University; P.K. Imbrie, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

the course assignments requires your team to meet regularly as well as have equal contributions from all members. For this evaluation you should reflect on the performance of hypothetical member of your team, Kris. During the team meetings, you noticed that Kris never came prepared. Furthermore, Kris did not work well with the other team members to complete assignments. Finally, while Page 15.1136.3 working on the course assignments, Kris's role on the team was never clear, which did not help ensure a synergistic effort by everyone else on the team. During the team meetings, you noticed that

Conference Session

Multidisciplinary First Year Programs

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andrew Lowery, West Virginia University; Steve Kane, West Virginia University; Vicki Kane, West Virginia University; Robin Hensel, West Virginia University; Gary Ganser, West Virginia University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

No.NNG05GF80H. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those Page 15.820.2of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NASA or the NASA WV Space Grant Consortium.While improved student performance in calculus was the primary objective of this effort, theexperience of developing and implementing the math-engineering joint projects has resulted inimproved communication between both departments and has helped the math faculty see howstudents work in groups to discuss and solve problems and to create reports and presentations oftheir work. The interactive nature of these problems

Conference Session

Innovations in First Year Programs

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Zane Mitchell, University of Southern Indiana; Marco Lara Gracia, University of Southern Indiana; Ronald Diersing, University of Southern Indiana; Glen Kissel, University of Southern Indiana

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

start of the program the student had some background on the wind industry in generalfrom courses he took in high school and from reading independently articles related to theinstallation of wind farms in Indiana. However, what makes a difference in his case are hisability to work with numbers, his advanced analytical and problem solving skills and his interest,knowledge, and experience in computer programming. In addition to that, the student is able towork hard in an independent way which reflects his motivation. In projects of this naturecreativity is a critical and to date the student has delivered creative work.The student spent the first part of the summer reading material about the wind industryworldwide and eventually focused his

Conference Session

First-Year Programs (FPD) Poster Session

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gail D. Jefferson, University of South Alabama; Sally J. Steadman, University of South Alabama; Tom G Thomas, University of South Alabama; Kuang-Ting Hsiao, University of South Alabama

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

as in the spinningwheel. A strip of reflecting tape was placed every 90 degrees with two pieces of tape marking afull revolution. Steel, aluminum and polypropolene were repeatedly tested to illustrate different Page 23.932.7failure modes as well as different shear moduli. During this test, students manually recordedtorque with respect to time, while their robot collected time and revolution information. Theparticipants analyzed the data and calculated various material and mechanical properties.Day four began with a communications overview, focused presentations of the workshopactivities. The students also designed and programmed a robot to

Conference Session

FPD 2: Retention

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Marisa K. Orr, Louisiana Tech University; Catherine E. Brawner, Research Triangle Educational Consultants; Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Richard A. Layton, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

so.AcknowledgmentThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.0935157. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. Page 23.1192.8Bibliography1. Chen, X., C.E. Brawner, M.W. Ohland, and M.K. Orr. A Taxonomy of Engineering Matriculation Practices. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education. 2013. Atlanta, GA.2. Multiple-Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development. 2011 [cited 2011; Available from

Conference Session

FPD6 -- Early Intervention & Retention Programs

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeffrey Froyd; Xiafeng Li, Texas A&M University; Arun Srinivasa, Texas A&M University; William Bassichis, Texas A&M University; Jacque Hodge, Texas A&M University; Donald Maxwell, Texas A&M University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

engineering students, depending on their major. Students whohad elected to major in Aerospace, Biomedical, Civil, Industrial, Mechanical, or NuclearEngineering were assigned to Track A. Students who had elected to major in Computer orElectrical Engineering were assigned to Track B. Students who had elected to major inBiomedical, Chemical, or Petroleum Engineering were assigned to Track C. Content of the twofirst-year engineering courses in each track was modified to reflect the goals of faculty membersin departments associated with each track. However, if students changed majors, courses in anytrack are satisfactory for completion of the first-year engineering courses. For the initial pilot ofthe STEPS first-year curriculum in the 2004-05 academic

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Professional Skill Development

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

María del Carmen Garcia-Higuera, Universidad Panamericana; Rocio Chavez-Telleria, Universidad Panamericana; Armando Alemán-Juárez, Universidad Panamericana ; Isabel Joaquina Niembro García P.E., Universidad Panamericana

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

si de medirlas o de desarrollarlas… Y estaba el asunto de la rúbrica,,, era un poco compleja. No sé cómo se la dieron a entender a los alumnos. [MP5]Professor 4 ads, “Above all, teamwork, there was a particular evaluation for teamwork.” “Ysobre todo el trabajo en equipo, porque había una evaluación en particular de trabajo enequipo. [MP4]In this previous section, we described the challenges that professors experienced while teachingtheoretical contents through PBL. Professors reflect on their previous practice and compare theresults with the new learning model. They cited uncertainty about how to develop students’ softskills while fostering rigorous learning of Physics. In the next session, we present how the newmethodology allowed

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Retention & Bridge Programs #2

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Andrew Charles Bartolini, University of Notre Dame; Carson Lee Running, University of Notre Dame; Xiaojing Duan, University of Notre Dame; G. Alex Ambrose, University of Notre Dame

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

, and was motivatedby the obvious fact that boosting students with non-thriving behavior earlier in the semester yieldsmore time for them to make substantial adjustments for success. Specifically, identifying andboosting non-thriving students at the end of week four provides each of them with over a week tomake changes before the first exam, which accounts for 15%.The first step in this analysis was to manually calculate an adjusted final grade for each student.This adjusted grade only accounted for scores on each of the homework assignments and twoexams. This adjusted final grade reflected each students’ individual ability compared to the actualfinal grade which accounted for ≈ 50% of group project work, the discernment paper, andparticipation

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Metacognition, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation #2

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Racheida S. Lewis, University of Georgia; Holly M. Matusovich, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

fifty or something that’s not reflective of the effort, put in, that would just be discouraging and I think it would probably make me try less, because if I know a hundred percent effort is gonna give me fifty percent of the grade, then I can scale it down, right? I can do less and get about the same. [135_Interview_Lam_M4_2010]But, another found these negative experiences served as fuel to fire their desires to do better inthe course: And for someone to tell you, 'I feel like you didn't—you weren't really as—as on point with the situation as you should have been.' So now that kind of helps me to sit back and think outside of the box and analyze every problem that I'm faced with

Conference Session

FPD6 -- Early Intervention & Retention Programs

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cindy Foor, University of Oklahoma; Susan Walden, University of Oklahoma; Tyler Combrink, University of Oklahoma; Lindsey McClure, University of Oklahoma; Deborah Trytten, University of Oklahoma

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

have identified peer adviceas more valued by students than advice from formal sources.7 Students are, in some sense, morequalified than formal sources to give advice to undergraduate science, technology, engineering,and mathematics (STEM) students. Many counselors and advisors were not STEM studentsduring their undergraduate program. Faculty, while more often STEM students asundergraduates, are likely to have been elite students, who underestimate the challenges facingthe average student.The advice expressed by our 185 interviewees, most of whom are upper division, derives fromtheir actual lived experiences, reflecting on the challenges they have faced in the context ofsuccessfully negotiating an engineering curriculum. Most perceptions of

Conference Session

Potpourri of First-Year Issues

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

S. Scott Moor, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

assignments or tests, or to ask questions IV. Performance Engagement 15. Getting a good grade 16. Doing well on the tests 12. Being confident that I can learn and do well in the classThe second part of the instrument used asks students directly for their reflections on the learningspace (Now they are asked for their opinion). The questions for this part of the survey areshown in Table 2. This includes four Likert-scaled items asking students to directly comparetheir experiences in the classroom of interest to other classrooms. These questions ask directlyabout interaction with other students and the instructor, time spent on group activities and time

Conference Session

Administering First-Year Programs

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Russell Korte, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; David Goldberg, University of Illinois, Urbana

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

intheir home departments. That these efforts were important and largely successful is reflected instudent blogs and the student presentations at iCheckpoint and iExpo; many of these studentcommunications discussed the missing basics, the iCommunity, the iTeams, and other iFoundryconcepts explicitly and favorably.Still, prior to iCheckpoint there was a palpable rise in student frustration—and faculty concern.At the end of September and beginning of October, students complained about the classwork, theprojects, the meetings, just about everything that was going on, but then something interestinghappened. First, in ENG100++, the steam turbine cars started to work. Then, at roughly thesame time, the students had to get their act together to present