Conference Session

First-year Programs Division: Collection

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Benjamin Emery Mertz, Arizona State University; Daniel M. Ferguson, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Mohd Iramul Hoque, CATME

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

PowerPoint slides that were discussed in lecture. Theslides included descriptions of common rating problems including giving everyone on the teamthe same scores across all dimensions, giving the same teammate the same scores across alldimensions, bimodal ratings (giving one teammate all 1’s and others all 5’s), etc. This lecturealso included a discussion of what information you are trying to give your teammates whenrating them and how the results of the evaluations can be interpreted in order to improve teamperformance. General comments were also made regarding what the rating patterns looked likein the class without identifying individuals or teams that used poor rating patterns. The goal wasto help students reflect on their own ratings and

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division: Retention

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Maryam Darbeheshti, University of Colorado, Denver; Dakota Ryan Edmonds, University of Colorado, Denver

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

when compared to other university Calculus I courses and is a modelthat should be continued. These results also show a drastic improvement from the 2016 ELCwhere 6 of the 18 ELC students were in the ELC Calculus I course, however only 4 passed theclass. The ELC Precalculus course was not as successful, as only 6 out of the 16 students, or37%, passed the course. There were many beneficial differences in the structures of the 2016 ELC and the 2017ELC. The expansion in the 2017 ELC gave students more opportunities and had a structure thatbetter reflected the learning community concept as a whole. The two math course choices gavestudents more options and allowed a greater number of students to enroll in the ELC. TheEnglish course was very

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Postcard Session 2: Identity and Sense of Belonging

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David R. Ely, Ivy Tech Community College, Lafayette; Jason E. Bice, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Kendra A. Erk, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

(learning by applying information) and reflective learning (learning byexamining/manipulating information) [2]. At the same time, deeper learning is also achievedthrough peer-to-peer collaboration. To achieve this, students are paired based on experience andinterest, which helps keep them engaged throughout the course [3]. In this way, students mustbecome familiar with topics of less interest or familiarity, but also thrive by inevitably teachingothers topics they are familiar with, which also helps keep them engaged due to the confidencethey already have with the material they are assisting others with [3] and increases their ownlearning through teaching [4].While the teaching approaches incorporated into the developed course are suitable for

Conference Session

FPD and DEEDs Joint Postcard Sessions

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Derek Breid, Saint Vincent College

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education, First-Year Programs

and conditions vary bycrowdfunding platform and by project, but generally speaking contributions are considered eitheras donations or investments; to reflect this, contributors are referred to as “backers”.Crowdfunding campaigns for consumer products are quite common. Often these productsrepresent innovative but unproven designs, emerging technologies, or niche products with alimited but passionate consumer base, such as hobbyists or fans of a particular franchise. Somecampaigns represent products in the early stages of development seeking funding to enablefurther testing and refinement of the design. Others are more complete, soliciting funds toenable a production run. Because these projects are seeking investors, designers

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division: Best Papers

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andrew H. Phillips, Ohio State University; Krista M. Kecskemety, Ohio State University; David A. Delaine, Ohio State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. Delaine is a co-founder and past president of the Student Platform for Engineering Education Development (SPEED) and has served two terms as an executive member of the International Federation of Engineering Education Societies (IFEES) as a Vice President for Diversity & Inclusion. He is investigating university-community engagement as empow- erment settings and working to further the research agenda of the global community of practice within Diversity and Inclusion in Engineering Education. His research laboratory aims to support an inclu- sive, global pipeline of STEM talent and to unify the needs of the engineering education stakeholders in order for engineering education to more accurately reflect societal

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division: Retention

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Darlee Gerrard, University of Toronto; Chirag Variawa, University of Toronto

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

first-year students (n=353) just beyond the mid-point of their first-year.The Workload Measurement Survey (WMS) was administered weekly, and was distributed byemail to groups of 20 first-year students from each program throughout the first semesters inYears 1 (2016) and 2 (2017) of our study. These twenty students were selected at random fromeach of our 8 engineering programs each week; surveys were distributed at the end of the weekfor a twelve-week fall semester in order to encourage reflection and responses based on thatparticular week of study. In 2016, the survey received a response rate of 26.87% with acompletion rate of 77.88%; in 2017, the response was 46.27% and presented a completion rate of77.87%. This survey explored the perceived

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division: Design

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ryan Munden, Fairfield University; Marcia Arambulo Rodriguez, Fairfield University; Djedjiga Belfadel, Fairfield University; Michael Zabinski, Fairfield University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

categories reflected, and grew out of the previous presentation rubric, but with specificpoints now guiding student preparation, peer assessment, and instructor assessment, equally.The Content area was reworded to address the points from the Target rubric, so that the studentswere given the expectation that their critical thinking process needed to be demonstrated duringtheir oral presentation as well as during the writing. The other points addressed technical aspectsof the presentation including: organization, visuals/slides, timing, speaking, and nonverbalcommunication. The full IOP Rubric is given in Appendix B.The student poll of rubric effectiveness (see appendix A) indicates that 83% of respondentsAgreed or Strongly Agreed that they found the

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Postcard Session 1: Retention and Student Success Strategies

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elizabeth R. Kurban, University of Maryland, College Park; Paige E. Smith, University of Maryland, College Park; Kurubel Belay, University of Maryland

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

student development and transfer into engineering.Participants were recruited from the 2013 to 2016 cohorts through a recruitment email explainingthe purpose of the study. Two focus groups of six participants each were conducted, lastingapproximately 75 minutes each. Focus group participants provided their consent for recordingthe session. Following an introduction, overview of the study, and completion of the IRB consentforms, the focus group facilitator engaged the students in a series of discussion questions andactivities, encouraging students to reflect on and share about their experiences in the FYSEprogram. After the sessions, the recordings were transcribed and reviewed by the researchers.Transcriptions and notes were then coded for

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Postcard Session 1: Retention and Student Success Strategies

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Krystal S. Corbett, Louisiana Tech University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

students were coming in with proficiency with the Parallax BOE-Bot.Additionally, the Arduino provided more functionality. Thus, changing to the Arduino allowedfor advances to the projects being conducted in the classes. Also, choosing to use the Arduinorequired the curriculum developers to design a chassis to make the microcontroller mobile for theENGR 120 robot challenge. This chassis construction added more fabrication opportunities forthe students to experience.When the Arduino was implemented in the curriculum in 2011, updates were made to coursematerials to reflect the new microcontroller. However, since that time six years ago, the coursehas not undergone a major update. Viewing curriculum as a living document, faculty atLouisiana Tech

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division: Design

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard Whalen, Northeastern University; Susan F. Freeman, Northeastern University; Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University; Kathryn Schulte Grahame, Northeastern University; Joshua L. Hertz, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Conference Session

FPD and DEEDs Joint Postcard Sessions

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jessica Daniels; Sophia T. Santillan, Duke University; Ann Saterbak, Duke University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education, First-Year Programs

at Duke University than they were about being successful inthe engineering industry after graduation. As was reflected in the open-ended responses fromSurvey 1 and Survey 3, participants in the focus group also listed math as their most difficultSTEM course. As far as their opinions on the Engineering Design and Communication course,students had a positive experience to date in the class. They appreciated learning a quantitativeapproach to choosing a design solution as well as the unique opportunities the course providedwhich they might not find elsewhere at Duke. Students elaborated on learning the engineeringdesign process, saying the process is different than expected as it took much more time than theythought would be necessary for