specialists, looking at first-yearengineering retention.IntroductionInterdisciplinary research holds great value in today’s academic environment as researcherspursue the betterment of teaching and learning within all fields of study. Among the mostinfluential organizations that promote interdisciplinary activity are the National ScienceFoundation (NSF) [1], the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), the AmericanEducational Research Association, and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) [2]. NSFrewards funding submissions that maintain interdisciplinary structure, and in addition, promoteseducation and training focused on interdisciplinary approaches to research. Calls continue forinterdisciplinary research, yet the traditional nature
problem, a relatively small set of designrequirements and constraints, and a budget of $100 per team. An exhibition was hosted at the endof the semester at which the students' projects were presented to the public. This work describesthe logistical, pedagogical, and social challenges encountered by the instructors and facilitatorsin creating and implementing this interdisciplinary and multi-institutional design assignment.IntroductionSuccessful engineers must be able to work effectively on interdisciplinary projects and asmembers of multidisciplinary teams [1]-[3]. This is also true for many creative arts professionals,especially those who work in fields driven by technological innovation [4]. Several collaborativeprojects involving both
are compiled and presented in this paper, and show broadimprovement across a variety of subjects. The introduction of project-based learning with anemphasis on engineering communication skills in AE 100 has improved the experience of thestudents in the Aerospace Engineering Department at the University of Illinois.1. IntroductionFirst-year students in the aerospace engineering program at the University of Illinois are stronglyencouraged to take Aerospace Engineering 100, a two-hour introductory course during their firstsemester. This class introduces students to aspects of aeronautical and astronautical engineeringthrough team-based competitive projects. Prior to this effort these projects had majordeficiencies, and the researchers used the
DukeUniversity. Over the course of a semester, students work in teams to learn and apply theengineering design process to a client-based problem drawn from a community partner. In thecourse, the students should learn to 1) apply the engineering design process to meet the needs of aclient; 2) iteratively prototype a solution using appropriate tools and materials; 3) workcollaboratively on a team; and 4) communicate the critical steps in the design process in written,oral, and visual formats. The course was created following many best practices in first-yearengineering education. This paper focuses specifically on how the course contributes to students’ confidence aboutthemselves as engineers, students’ understanding of the engineering design
2015, the authors used asimple concept map assignment, given on the first and last day of each section, to evaluatestudent learning in the course [1]. This pilot project compared student learning in two sections ofthe course taught by faculty in the same engineering discipline but with different student learningoutcomes. The authors found the exercise to be a useful way to understand student learning inrelation to the overall and specific student learning outcomes for each of their sections as well asvariations in student learning across the two course sections. The latter proved to be a usefulfoundation for in-depth discussions regarding the different pedagogical approaches used by theauthors. The work led to the development of multiple
RET Grant and a USDA NIFA grant, and is currently co-PI on three NSF-funded projects in engineering and computer science education, including a Revolutioniz- ing Engineering Departments project and a CAREER project, FRAME. She was selected as a National Academy of Education / Spencer Postdoctoral Fellow. Dr. Svihla studies learning in authentic, real world conditions; this includes a two-strand research program focused on (1) authentic assessment, often aided by interactive technology, and (2) design learning, in which she studies engineers designing devices, sci- entists designing investigations, teachers designing learning experiences and students designing to learn.Chen Qiu M.Sc., University of New Mexico Chen
engineering graduates have the skills to be successful in the workplace (e.g., [1]-[2]).These courses act as a foundation on which build the rest of a student’ educational experienceand seek to, as recommended by the National Academy of Science, “introduce the “essence” ofengineering early in their undergraduate careers” [1, p. 2]. One widely adopted practice fromthese proposed changes is that of First-Year Engineering (FYE) courses, with nearly 60% ofengineering programs adopting a FYE course by 2013 [3]. Due to each institution’s uniquehistory, structures and needs, FYE programs across the country vary with regards to theircontent[4] and structure[3]. Additionally, there is some variation in timing of FYE courses, astransfer students are often
chose. Practical experience (how devicesare made/work) was chosen by 55.5% of managers as a weakness, in contrast to only 33% ofdepartment heads and 37.3% of early-career MEs [1-4].In the Engineering Science department of Loyola University Chicago (LUC), we are developinga four-semester design project to build a functional cardiograph, which will give our studentsthis practical experience. All engineering courses are taught using a minimal lecture style. Forevery 50 minute course period, the first ten to fifteen minutes are a mini-lecture to go over finepoints of the homework. The remaining course period time is devoted to active learning.BackgroundActive learning, which is generally defined as “any instructional method that engages studentsin
this presentation exercise is two-fold: 1) Seniors gain experience presenting their design to a non-technical audience (with only amath and science background) and 2) the Freshmen, by learning about the design processthrough peers in their major, obtain a perception of connectivity with the major and thedepartment. The connection may help Freshmen envision where they will be by senior year andstrengthen their identity as engineers. This work in progress presents these approaches alongwith survey data from each cohort and additional insight from the instructors. Initial results fromthe second and third year students indicate they enjoyed the approach, recognize the applicabilityof their current coursework within the context of a larger design
Education, 2018IntroductionIn 2013, the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan launched the CommonReading Experience (Edington, Holmes Jr., & Reinke, 2015). This program was developed forincoming first-year engineering students with three goals in mind: 1. Students build and develop a sense of community (including a sense of belonging and engineering student identity) 2. Students broaden their thinking about the skills (both technical and non-technical) that they need to be a successful engineer in the 21st century 3. Model intellectual engagementThroughout the history of the Common Reading Experience (CRE), program evaluations havebeen compiled annually. However, to determine if the program was meeting its
Work in Progress: Development and Implementation of a Self- Guided Arduino Module in an Introductory Engineering Design CourseAbstractThis Work in Progress paper discusses the implementation of an online module designed to teachbasic Arduino programming skills to students enrolled in a first-year engineering design course.The learning objectives for students were (1) to learn the basics of Arduino programmingthrough hands-on activities, (2) to connect with the numerous online resources available forcreating their own projects for personal or class purposes, and (3) to gain a sense of curiosityabout what types of challenges and problems they may be able to solve with their newfoundskills. This module
aims to address the broadeningparticipation challenge in engineering. Through a National Science Foundation sponsoredproject, a pilot collective impact alliance [1], [2] was formed to enhance entry and persistence inengineering of first-generation students, women, under-represented ethnic minorities, and thosewith socio-economic need. The distinctive mark of this alliance is that it comprises a range oforganized to self-adapting systems [3] that learn from and respond to each other around the goalof broadening participation in engineering. The approach adopted is to foster engineering identity [4], [5], [6], [7
notion and as a result, many of them miss out on valuable learning opportunities. In amidterm exam study, a survey was given to 285 freshmen engineering majors and only 25% ofstudents reported trying to learn from their mistakes while the material was fresh in their minds.The majority of the students put the test away and often never looked at it again. In anotheranonymous survey of 456 first-year engineering students, only 21% reported that they would usethe exam again later, and many specified that would only be if the final were cumulative [1].This data prompted the First-Year Engineering Honors Program at The Ohio State University(OSU) to implement exam corrections as a mandatory assignment for any student scoring lessthan 90% on an exam. It
, introduce amultidisciplinary project to teach the fundamental principles of engineering, and to introduce awide array of engineering disciplines within a single course.The assumption entering into this project was that core engineering concepts can be graspedthrough practice, as opposed to traditional classroom lecture, to teach students the engineeringdesign loop, intra- and intergroup collaboration and communication, design methodology, andcritical thinking skills [1]. However, the idea of learning through practice in no way eliminatesthe traditional lecture to communicate topics necessary for practicing engineering, such as staticsor basic circuit design. Therefore, the course that was developed incorporates two learningstyles: active learning
active team member. We used CourseMIRROR mobilelearning system to collect students’ reflections during an academic semester. We also evaluatedeach student reflection based on its quality. The reflection quality here refers to specificity orvagueness of reflections. Based on our prior research on the significance of the reflection qualityon student learning [1], we developed a coding schema to specify the degree of reflection’squality. We further used the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness(CATME) for peer and self-evaluation on five dimensions. Initial findings reveal statisticallysignificant relations between five aspects of CATME and reflection’s quality. We also conductedlinear regression analyses to explore how these five
. GOOD SOLUTIONSThese solutions typically require the determination of Correct Suitablesome numerical answer, and the quality of these solutions Technical Designis generally determined by evaluating a student’s work ona spectrum of correctness (Fig 1). Design solutions, on Design Design
recognized that all their communication skills were a work inprogress mirroring the initial course message that engineers need to be lifelong learners. Withthis understanding, we hope that they would pursue other opportunities to sharpen theircommunication skills.IntroductionThe three pillars of communication are considered to be one of the important professional skillsin engineering practice [1]. They are reported to be even more important than technical skills [2].Graphical communication, one of the pillars that is unique to the engineering practice, coverstechnical requirements of drawing and visual skills. Most students have shown to struggle inpresenting and understanding, graphically, ideas that require high visualization skills [3
framework is analogous to healthcare environments where a nurse meets with a patient first inquire on the patient’s symptoms and to measure the vitals. The notes are then passed on to the medical provider as a high-level summary in order to save the medical provider’s time. After running a first semester pilot of this ongoing study, the proposed process has resulted in shorter and more streamlined advising sessions. It has also resulted in higher advisor and student satisfaction.1. Introduction First-year student advising is critical to student’s retention and path to success [1]. Significant work has been done to enhance the advising process in multiple universities [2]. Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering
participation, students were given a problem set comprising of 10questions. The first four questions were from the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test:Visualization of Rotations (PSVT:R) (Guay, 1976; Maeda & Yoon, 2013) and the last sixquestions were from the Santa Barbara Solids Test (SBST) (Cohen & Hegarty, 2012). ThePSVT:R involved questions that required students to indicate what an object would look likeafter it has been rotated. Conversely, the SBST requires knowledge of cross-sections, in whichstudents determine the shape of an object after it had been cut at a plane. Figures 1 and 2 belowshow sample problems from each of these two tests. Participants were asked to think aloud, thatis, verbally express their process of approaching each
Transition and Enhanced Preparationfor Undergraduates Program (STEPUP) as a case study intervention to increase student success inengineering. The STEPUP program can serve as a model to assist institutions in the developmentof a comprehensive, step-by-step process to improve the recruitment, motivation, and retention ofunderrepresented student populations (USP). STEPUP was established at the University ofFlorida's College of Engineering twenty-five years ago and has demonstrated great promise andsuccess retaining first-year students in engineering. The STEPUP program model includesparameterized engineering related courses, experiential learning activities, and teachingmethodologies. The primary objectives of the program include 1). Increasing
enrollment in ENGR194 and apreviously described two-week Summer Bridge Program (SBP) offered only for entering S-STEMscholars before their first semester.To measure the impact of this course on student retention and academic success, various evaluationmetrics are compared for three separate Comparison Groups (C-Groups) of students. The resultsshow that the ENGR194 course had a significant positive impact on the first-year retention rate.The results also revealed that students who participated in both ENGR194 and SBP (C-Group 1)made changes to their declared majors earlier than students who had only taken ENGR 123 orneither of the courses (C-Groups 2 and 3 respectively). Furthermore, students in C-Group 1received better grades in math and science
predictors of preparedness for college (SAT scores), thoseexam attendees (attending 2 or 3 exam sessions) outperformed their non-exam (attending 0 or 1exam session) attending peers with similar scores. Qualitative survey data indicated strongpositive perceptions of the collaborative exam review and its impact on students’ study time anduse of effective study strategies.IntroductionIn the summer of 2019, our research collaborators attended the Annual ASEE Conference and inparticular, a session presentation on the use of collaborative practice exams in historicallydifficult introductory math and science courses at the University of Kansas [1]. The methodimplemented by this team is detailed in their paper and described below.The collaborative mock exam
academicpotential in high school, they may need more preparation to successfully transition from highschool academics into an engineering program at MSOE in addition to getting used to theMSOE’s fast-passed quarter system and campus facilities. The Carter Academy program isoffered fully-funded to students; participants are not responsible for paying for housing, food orclasses. During this summer residential program, which runs for four weeks, the students attendclasses in math, engineering, writing, chemistry, and physics, with organized study time duringthe evenings and projects. These classes are limited to about 18 students per section [1].The chemistry portion, Chemistry Preparation lectures, has always focused on studentpreparation for Chemistry I
important components are, they will start to design their own infographics. In this course,each learner will design their own infographic and then share it with the whole class to have peerfeedback about their design. Thus, the students will learn what an infographic is and the process of designing it. The first key idea is understanding the data, specifically with respect to the principle of data visualization. The second major idea is the understanding of the data visualization techniques and making sure that they know several of them. The third big idea is that they need to map and apply those two together. Table 1 provides a visual concept map for teaching infographic design. The guiding concept is data, data visualization and their connection
directly call for them. Criterion 1 mandates “an ability to identify, formulate,and solve complex engineering problems” which ABET defines as “involving wide-ranging orconflicting technical issues, having no obvious solution, addressing problems not encompassedby current standards and codes” [1]. Criterion 4 further mandates “an ability to recognize ethicaland professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments,” andcriterion 7 further calls for “an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, usingappropriate learning strategies” [1]. The ABET criteria strongly imply that engineering studentsmust understand how to research a diversity of sources, distinguish credible sources from lessreliable sources, and
Course1 AbstractThis complete research paper works to tie the processes of identifying students that show signs ofpotentially being non-thriving at the end of the semester with a strategy to boost these studentsduring the early part of the semester. The work in this paper, which applies the integratedclosed-loop learning analytics scheme (iCLAS) that was used in previous similar studies at theUniversity of Notre Dame, focuses on a general first-year engineering course. This paper followsthe three phases of the iCLAS: (1) Architecting for Collection, (2) Analyzing for Action and (3)Assessing for Improvement. In the first phase, the course is designed and built to be able tocapture the data needed to identify the students who show signs of being
at the Center for Postsecondary Success within Florida State University. He received Ph.D. degree in Higher Education and Student Affairs from the Ohio State University. His re- search His research interests broadly focus on two areas: (1) higher education policy, particularly policies related to college access and success; and (2) internatinalization of higher education, with an emphasis on the global mobility of students and scholars. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Improved Student Performance in a First-Year Engineering Course with Integration of Entrepreneurial Minded LearningAbstractIntroductionIn collaboration with KEEN, a network of thousands of
elementary school [1]. First-year engineering programsoften take on the task of providing students with engineering experiences to help mold theirexpectations of what an engineer does and what various engineering disciplines are available tothem in an effort to improve retention [2].As many different first-year engineering (FYE) programs have shown, students can beintroduced to engineering experiences earlier in their education through course work, designprojects, or lab experiences. A challenge of this discipline-exposure component of a first-yearengineering curriculum is how to efficiently use course time to introduce so many differentengineering disciplines in ways that are impactful and meaningful to students. One such way ofproviding first-year
students are most likely to experience success in college? The literature suggests thatstandardized test scores, high school GPA or a combination of the two may be used to predictstudent success in college to some degree [1, 2]. In addition to these cognitive variables, studiesalso focus on noncognitive factors that affect student success such as academic motivation andinstitutional integration [2,3]. While standardized test scores are uniformly administered to allstudents under similar conditions, they only measure a students’ current knowledge base. Manystudies have shown that success in high school academics (i.e. GPA) is a better indicator ofsuccess in college academics because it indicates students’ intellectual habits; i.e. work ethic [4-7
programs. This study focuses ondata gathered in the mid-summer survey and the focus groups, specifically, that gauged howstudents felt starting engineering college.The findings presented here aim to investigate how students feel as incoming first-yearengineering students, and what elements of their experience may relate to those feelings. If wecan better understand how students feel, we can better support and encourage them, and helpthem to develop more positive affect and to succeed more easily. The work presented here isguided by the following research questions: 1. How do incoming first-year students feel about starting engineering college? 2. How do engineering students describe their feelings about being accepted to and starting