year, andthe percentage of women in most undergraduate engineering programs has remained at or below20% for decades, as estimated from enrollment and degrees awarded from National Center forScience and Engineering Statistics data (2012). Further research indicates that women inengineering programs value social context in their program of study. To this end, the designproject discussed in this paper integrates humanitarian application experiences using the NAEGrand Challenges as well as campus-specific projects.It is hypothesized that implementation of this module will a) increase students’ perspective ofengineering as a socially meaningful career option and, b) show higher retention and successfulcompletion by female and underrepresented
skills used for writing reports and preparing presentations are also veryimportant and useful in both upper level courses and future careers.”“Actually working on the design process and learning how to do engineering memos and designreports felt so important to me. Those are skills that I know I will carry with me for years andthat I will actually use. Also, I went from being very shy and not voicing my opinions to feelinglike I can speak intelligently. This class has given me my voice and my confidence.”“I felt most like a maker/future engineer when I was in peer mentor hours or meeting with mygroup outside of class hours. Being able to talk about design with my group members in a lessstructured environment helped us brainstorm more freely and
usually unseen bystudents and not acknowledged by faculty [1]. When exposed to this approach, many facultyrecall an “aha” moment in graduate school where the common structure underlying engineeringsuddenly became apparent. One of the goals of using the CAP framework is to help students seethis early in their career and use this framework to organize their learning and problem solving.History of CAPIn 1988, a group of faculty at Texas A&M University began work on a new integratedengineering curriculum to replace the core engineering science courses in a typical curriculum.The result was an interdisciplinary sequence of four courses called the Texas A&M/NSFEngineering Core Curriculum, which was organized around what they called the
selected as a National Academy of Education / Spencer Postdoctoral Fellow and a 2018 NSF CAREER awardee in engineering education research. Dr. Svihla studies learning in authentic, real world conditions; this includes a two-strand research program fo- cused on (1) authentic assessment, often aided by interactive technology, and (2) design learning, in which she studies engineers designing devices, scientists designing investigations, teachers designing learning experiences and students designing to learn.Dr. Pil Kang, University of New Mexico Sung ”Pil” Kang is an assistant professor at the University of New Mexico. His academic interests include change management, change model validation, and mindset evolution. He may
they arepresented with assignments requiring quality academic sources. It is crucial to reach studentsearly in their college career to instill IL skills into their scholarly endeavors. To help remedy thisdeficiency, academic librarians collaborate with teaching faculty to provide IL instructionsessions to their classes, providing students with a basic introduction to the library to advancedresearch skills. While important to an engineer over the course of their studies and professionalpractice, little has been done to integrate IL to engineering curriculum.Those studies that have examined IL, focus on the self-perceived skills of upper-divisionstudents in design courses [1]; are for a singular major course [2] or are focused on
developinga learning strategies course for first-year engineering students in a cohort who enter theuniversity underprepared for success in Calculus I. Revisions to the course includeimprovements in scaffolding metacognitive development and engaging students in professionalpractices to develop learning capacity and career competency. All members of the cohort are co-enrolled in STEM courses that are prerequisites for changing into their engineering major ofchoice. Additionally, the students are enrolled in a 2-credit learning strategies course focused onthe development of personal and professional strategies relevant to academic success.The pedagogical model for the learning strategies course is Entangled Learning [2], whichproposes an iterative
profile of two women on student teams,” J. Bus. Tech. Commun., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 33–68, 2002.[19] N. Dasgupta, M. M. Scircle, and M. Hunsinger, “Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering.,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 112, no. 16, pp. 4988–4993, Apr. 2015.[20] A. Straus and J. Corbin, “Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.” Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1990.[21] M. B. Miles, A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldana, Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, 3rd ed. SAGE Publications, Inc., 2013.[22] R. Frary, “A Brief Guide to Questionnaire Development,” 2012. [Online]. Available: http
data obtained through amixed-methods approach. Results indicate that students’ attitudes toward teamwork andtheir perceptions of their own teamwork skills improved over the semester.IntroductionTeamwork is vital to engineers’ professional lives. Passow 2012 surveyed over 4000practicing engineers representing eleven different disciplines asking them to evaluatethe importance of the different ABET competencies in their careers [1]. Teamwork(ABET Outcome 5, formally ABET Outcome D) received the highest rating.Considering its importance to the field, team-based assignments, particularly semester-long design projects, are commonly employed in engineering curricula. Whileteamwork can be a rewarding experience, it can also be a source of anxiety and
). “The role of motivation, parental support, and peer support in the academic success of ethnic minority first-generation college students.” Journal of College Student Development, Vol. 46, pp. 223-236.[18] M.J. Miller, R.W. Lent, R.H. Lim, K. Hui, H.M. Martin, M.M. Jezzi, N.A. Bryan, M.A. Morrison, P.E. Smith, B. Watford, G. Wilkins and K. Williams. (2015). “Pursuing and adjusting to engineering majors: A qualitative analysis.” Journal of Career Assessment. Vol. 23, pp. 48 – 63.[19] Janet Usinger. (2016). “Nevada FIT Final Report 2016.” Reno, NV
communicate effectively with a range of audiences (e) Students will demonstrate an appropriate mastery of the knowledge, techniques, skills, and modern tools used in the engineering field; Attainment of these outcomes prepares students in the SEE program for the core courses within engineering disciplines and provides them with the ability to succeed in their professional career paths.4.1 Learning Outcomes Evaluation of SEE program by FacultyAs observed in table 1, each group project presented by students on the last day of the SEEprogram, June 30, 2017, is used to measure specific student learning outcomes related to theirresearch topic. The results for four groups of reports on the presentations, as demonstrated in thetable below, are used
peers in a team context and evaluated interventions that mayhelp them improve their rating abilities. Teamwork is an important professional skill and canhave significant benefits during a student’s academic career, and peer feedback is onemechanism to help students improve their teamwork performance. A web-based tool calledCATME (Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness) was used to measure theeffect of two different interventions on students’ ability to provide good feedback on teamworkperformance to their peers: Frame-of-Reference training (FOR) and Rater Error Training (RET).This paper is meant to address how much freshman engineering students’ peer evaluation ratingsof themselves and their teammates vary with and without these
instructor, which allowed for even greater connections between the ELC courses. Overallthis course was designed to help ELC students develop the reading and writing skills they willuse in their future courses and later in their professional lives. Although doing well in classes is an essential component to a students’ success in theirengineering programs, many of the reasons that students left their programs were not related toacademics. The research mentioned previously, suggests that engineering students often leavetheir programs due to non-academic reasons such as student engagement. In order to address thisissue, the ELC connected students to various campus resources including the Learning ResourcesCenter, the Career Center and the
in Engineering Division, the Educational Research and Methods Division, and the Design in Engineering Education Division. She is also a member of the Society of Women Engineers (SWE) and is the Faculty Adviser for SWE at VT. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Developing a Coding Rubric for Students Visualization StrategiesAbstractThere are many calls for increasing the number and diversity of students pursuing STEM careers.Equally important is retaining those students who initially express interest in these careers. Oneof the myriad of factors that influences students’ success in a STEM major is their spatialvisualization ability. Fortunately, research has shown that spatial ability
most of her career. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Effectiveness of Freshman Level Multi-disciplinary Hands-on Projects in Increasing Student Retention Rate and Reducing Graduation Time for Engineering Students in a Public Comprehensive UniversityAbstractThis complete Evidence-based Practice paper describes the effects of hands-on multidisciplinaryprojects on the retention and graduation rates of engineering majors in California StateUniversity, Fullerton (CSUF), a public comprehensive university. The US national trend showsthat undergraduate students in engineering majors have lower retention rates and take longer tograduate compared to other majors. Declaring an engineering
, basketball, guitar, etc.) and Value Symbolic Images (e.g., sketches to depict the USnational flag, institution mascot). Over these two typologies, participants demonstrated thegreatest degree of intersection focusing their drawings on the hobbies that best inform theirindividual identities as well as the symbols that represent the institutions, disciplines, andmetacognitive reflections. While most of these depictions did not explicitly connect toengineering, much of the discipline-specific symbolic drawings were images of mathematicalsymbols and computers. These particular symbols may be related to the educational componentsthat inform students’ major and career choices. Without longitudinal evidence, however, makinginferences about student interest
aboutengineering skills generally and visualization in particular. 44 Students responded to the pre-survey and 24 to the post survey, 37 students completed the course.The course, ECS 101 Introduction to Engineering (Civil), is a required course for civil engineeringmajors. The learning outcomes for the course are that students: get exposure to civil engineering,career opportunities, and the engineering education process; develop an understanding of theengineering code of ethics, professional licensing, and an engineer’s responsibility to society; getexposure to several of civil engineering’s supporting technologies, including infrastructure, soilmechanics, transportation, structures, and materials; develop the skills to “learn” course materialthrough a
problems. As a result of a five-year grant aimed toward improving first-yearretention, the first-year course was substantially revised in 2013 to focus on developingmathematics skills, based on the work of Klingbeil and colleagues1–3. This paper describes thesemost recent modifications to the course and presents results from students who took the modifiedcourse as they moved forward in their academic careers and took second year mathematics andscience courses. We collected data both in the form of grades and measurements of students’self-efficacy to explore how increasing mathematical content in the first-year engineering classcan improve students’ performance in both co-enrolled and subsequently enrolled mathematicsand science courses.The work
were framed in the context of the engineering disciplineof the faculty member leading the module. The panel sessions were designed to provide studentswith an overview of engineering disciplines not represented by course instructors. Thus, ABE,CEE, CSE, ISE, and ME hosted panel sessions with two 45-minute panels held on each panel Page 26.867.10day. Suggested panel composition included a student, a faculty member, the undergraduate coordinator, and the department head, with final panel composition left to department heads’discretion. Each panel was asked to briefly introduce different concentrations available in theirmajor, typical career paths
Paper ID #13526A Tale of Two Common Reads: Models for Developing a Successful CommonReading Program for First Year Engineering StudentsStacie Edington, University of Michigan Stacie Edington is the Honors and Engagement Program Officer within the University of Michigan, Col- lege of Engineering.Prof. Archie L Holmes Jr., University of Virginia Archie is a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering and serves as Vice Provost for Educational Innovation and Interdisciplinary Studies at the University of Virginia.Prof. Petra Reinke, University of Virginia Petra Reinke started her career with a M.S. degree in Chemistry and a
large, research focused institution in the Midwestern region of the United States; studentsbegin their engineering careers as first-year engineers, before applying to a specific engineeringdiscipline, within the college. Most first-year engineering students complete two introductoryengineering courses, which expose them to compound engineering problems. These problemsdevelop students’ problem solving skills as the problems increase in complexity, ill-definednessand context dependence, over the duration of the first course. Students initially work on short,close-ended problems as they develop basic skills in using Excel and statistics, then they work ona model eliciting activity, which helps them learn to integrate mathematical thinking
professional engineer with APEGA (Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta). Prior to her career at MacEwan, Shelley worked in industry as a research engineer and a consulting engineer for several years. Her current research interests include engineering education, enhanced heavy oil recovery and basic research in diffusion/dispersion mechanisms in porous media.Dr. Jeffrey A Davis P.Eng., Grant MacEwan University Dr Davis obtained his PhD at ETH Zurich specializing in multiphase flows and thermal hydraulics in nuclear reactors. With a passion for teaching, Dr. Davis’ research focuses on pedagogical topics such as student engagement, active learning, and cognitive development. Projects
Page 26.1461.5departmental consensus was reached that ENGR100 should emphasize to the inter-disciplinaryaspects of engineering. Therefore, team-building exercises as one of the instructional approaches,was one the most important modules of the class[4]. Not only was this an instructional strategy,but a critical skill that engineering students will need for success in their college career and intheir professional life. Team building and teamwork is a crucial component to help studentssucceed in college and also help them succeed in the workplace. Teamwork is an essential partof the curriculum and the faculty worked to find methods and learning activities to help studentsbecome better teammates and produce quality group work.Student mentorsThe
, MS). He has authored/co-authored over a hundred technical papers and reports during his career in private industry, government and academia. His current research interests are nearshore wave trans- formations, coastal structures, tsunami inundation, hurricane surges, high performance computing, and engineering education.Ms. Qing J Pang, Jackson State University Ms Qing Pang is Instructor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, College of Science, Engineering & Technology, Jackson State University. She earned her MS in Electrical and Computer Engineering from Georgia Institute of Technology in 2000. She worked for several private companies before joining Jackson State University in 2007 as an
average grade of theproject assignments increased by about 23%.The multiple-games format of the ‘Robot Olympiad’ encourages a large group of students withvaried aptitude and academic standing to maximize their ability and make an achievement. Oneimportant function of EGR 106 class is to expose the discipline to students and motivate theirinterest to pursue an engineering career. By the time they started their robot project, the studentshave shown varied proficiency on the topics taught. The previous ‘sumo robot’ game did anexcellent job on recognizing excellence, but also discouraged those students with limitation. Forexample, in the previous ‘sumo robot’ semester, a team that is relatively weak at programminghave little chance to complete the
classes, more and more universities are including a design project within their first-yearexperience (9). This gives students an opening to understanding engineering early in theiracademic career and can provide a meaningful touchstone during future engineering coursework. With collaborative, project based design in mind, the University of Notre Damedeveloped a new project for its first-year engineering course sequence. First and foremost, theproject was intended to increase student exposure to design through a hands-on experience. Inaddition, the project was created for the first-semester, where students would be concurrently incalculus and chemistry (physics is not taken until second semester). Therefore, the focus shouldbe on a simple model
this regard. • Provide the students with abundant instruction on ideation. • Develop a strategy to prevent the instructors from giving teams conflicting advice. • Do not underestimate the importance of providing the students with convenient transportation options.References[1] H. Bridle, A. Vrieling, M. Cardillo, Y. Araya, and L. Hinojosa, “Preparing for an interdisciplinary future: A perspective from early-career researchers,” Futures, vol. 53, pp. 22-32, 2013.[2] M. Levy, Y. Shlomi, and Y. Etzioni, “When engineering and design students collaborate: The case of a website development workshop,” in Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems, S. Kunifuji et al. Eds., Springer, 2016, pp
renovated projects.2. Course ChangesPrior to 2015 the introductory course was split into two separate classes, one focusing onastronautics and one focusing on aeronautics. In the astronautics section, students learned aboutspace engineering and built model rockets. The aeronautics section had students learn aboutaircraft and build a remote-controlled model airplane. Students were restricted to register foronly one section, forcing them to choose which topic to focus before they even began theircollege careers. Students in the aerospace engineering program at the university eventually needto choose between astronautics and aeronautics for their senior design classes, but the researchersbelieved that imposing this choice on first year students was
for Engineering Science majors, and is therefore takenby students with a variety of career interests within the broad umbrella of engineering. In thespring of 2017, when the data for this paper was collected, the class enrollment was 13 students.The class met twice weekly using a regular classroom format, with an additional weekly 3-hourlab session, where students worked on a semester-long design project.As part of the course requirements, each student was individually required to research acrowdfunding project and give a brief (5-10 min) presentation to the class, during which theywere to provide some insight into the design process itself. Specifically, students were asked tofocus on the following aspects of their chosen project in their
with exam wrappers was framed asa four-stage after-action review in order to correlate their experiences as students and their futureprofessional careers as engineers (Appendix A). After-action reviews, originating from themilitary, are used to debrief the process and performance on an event or activity and include fourphases: planning, preparation, execution, and follow-up [3]. Often used as informal evaluationsof a team’s performance, after-action reviews should be framed as an opportunity for growth [7].In industry, these reviews are sometimes referred to as “post mortems” or “lessons learned,” withthe main idea being to provide a systematic way to capture process improvement [8]. The examwrapper activity was intentionally created to model
Engineers Australia Seg Meeting.” Melbourne, 2010.[3] B. N. Geisinger and D. R. Raman, “Why they leave: Understanding student attrition from engineering majors,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 29, no. 4, p. 914, 2013.[4] PCAST, President’s Council on Advisors on Science and Technology. Washington, DC: Office of the President, 2012.[5] W. Tyson, “Modeling engineering degree attainment using high school and college physics and calculus coursetaking and achievement,” J. Eng. Educ., 2011.[6] J. Levin and J. H. Wyckoff, “Predictors of persistence and success in an engineering program,” NACADA J., 1995.[7] W. Pearson Jr and J. D. Miller, “Pathways to an engineering career,” Peabody J. Educ., vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 46