Conference Session

First-Year Advising and Transition

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mary Anderson-Rowland, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

beginning ofcollege, generally believed they knew everything there was to know about college. As aconsequence many of these entering engineer freshmen did not put in the time to learn thematerial in their classes until they hit the first quizzes or midterm and suddenly realized that theyhave a lot of learning to make up to be on top of the class material.After the first two years of the Academic Success Program, the evaluations reflected a deficiencyin the program. The students reported that the Academic Success class did not help them withtheir academics. The students had not learned or been inspired by the time management helps,nor a series of videos on “How to get an A”, to take the time to learn the class material. Thestudents, in general, did

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Design in the First Year

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Joseph Frank, Ohio State University; Kelly Lynn Kolotka, Ohio State University; Andrew H. Phillips, Ohio State University; Michael Schulz, The Ohio State University; Clare Rigney, Ohio State University, Engineering Education Department; Allen Benjamin Drown, Ohio State University; Robert G. Stricko III, Ohio State University; Kathleen A. Harper, Ohio State University; Richard J. Freuler, Ohio State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

the necessary runtime information for a givencomponent (such as I2C bus, resistor pull-up/pull-down configuration, pin number, etc.) isincluded. A major design goal for this system was configurability, along with reusability. Allnetworking information is present in the XML document as well, so should any networkingparameters change, those changes can be reflected in the XML document and no changes need tobe made to the software itself. Therefore, this system facilitates the development of innovativeand creative tasks in the future without any barriers.Robot Positioning SystemIn addition to the core software and hardware that allows students operate and test on thecourses, there is also the Robot Positioning System (RPS). The RPS is a system

Conference Session

First-year Programs: Focus on Students

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Christopher Rennick, University of Waterloo; Carol Hulls P.Eng., University of Waterloo; Mary A. Robinson, University of Waterloo

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. Purposivesampling of students who remained on campus was used for the interviews to ensure theirperspective was captured by the researchers.Results show a significant number of students, regardless of where they spent the break, studiedinefficiently during the break from school, which is reflected in their academic performance; andstudents who remained on campus while most of their peers left, found the time lonely andlargely unproductive.IntroductionAlthough a fall break has become the norm for many universities in Canada, little research hasbeen conducted to determine the impact of fall breaks on students, whether it is an evaluation asto whether the stated goals of the break – which typically focus on stress and mental health [1] –are being met, or

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

First-Year Programs: Monday Cornucopia (Classroom Innovations)

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joshua L. Hertz, Northeastern University; Duncan Davis, Northeastern University; Brian Patrick O'Connell, Northeastern University; Constantine Mukasa, Northeastern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

) 0, (𝑏)The compatibility score for one team is calculated as a weighted sum of each of the attributescores and the schedule score. As previously described, each attribute score ranges between 0and 1, and the schedule score ranges roughly between 0 and 1. These values are multiplied by theinstructor’s chosen weighting factors in order to reflect their relative importance. Onto thiscompatibility score is added any prevented teammates penalty, required teammates penalty,and/or gender isolation penalty. This final sum is then normalized in order to give a score thatlies generally within the range 0 to 100. A team score can go outside this range only bybecoming negative because one or more of the penalties applies, or by going over 100

Conference Session

The Best of First Year Programs: Best Paper Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kelsey Joy Rodgers, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Jaqi C. McNeil, University of Louisville; Matthew A. Verleger Ph.D. (He/His/Him), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach; Farshid Marbouti, San Jose State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

skills related to mathematical modelcomplexity, modifiability, and reusability dimensions. This research will build upon this idea byfurther analyzing impact of the revised modeling language in more courses and covering moretypes of modeling, including physical and business models.AcknowledgementsThis work was made possible by a collaborative research grant from the National ScienceFoundation (DUE 1827392; DUE 1827600; DUE 1827406). Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] A. R. Carberry and A. F. McKenna, "Exploring student conceptions of modeling and modeling uses in engineering

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Technical Session 9: Evaluating and Measuring Recruiting and Major Selection Strategies

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Melissa A. Dagley, University of Central Florida; Cynthia Y. Young, University of Central Florida; Michael Georgiopoulos, University of Central Florida; Andrew Patrick Daire, University of Houston; Christopher L. Parkinson, University of Central Florida; Diandra J. Prescod , Pennsylvania State University ; Christopher T. Belser, University of Central Florida

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Technical Session 10: Paying Attention to Retention

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William John Palm IV P.E., Roger Williams University; Charles R Thomas, Roger Williams University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

post-secondary institutions, the study university has implemented several programs tohelp first-year students transition to college. Three such programs relevant to this study include: 1. First Year Seminars (FYS) – special sections of a three-credit core curriculum course. Compared to other sections of the core courses, FYS include only first-semester students, are limited to an enrollment of eighteen students per section, are taught by a full-time faculty member (instead of adjunct faculty), and include additional learning outcomes intended to develop academic habits of mind (i.e., reflection, explanation, etc.). 2. RWU Experience (RWUXP)41 – a non-credit course meeting one hour per week. Led jointly by a faculty

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Technical Session 6: Hands-on Projects and Spatial Skills

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University; Susan F Freeman, Northeastern University; Kris Jaeger-Helton, Northeastern University; Richard Whalen, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

need or want to go there”. In summary, the small percentage ofstudent respondents who knew the Learning Center existed but did not visit felt that they didn’tneed the Learning Center’s resources, probably because they had their own tools or foundresources elsewhere (at home, for example).DiscussionThe survey data along with our own observations and reflections enable us to summarize ourthoughts on what needed to be improved, what worked, what we changed, and what could beconsidered accomplishments. As for what needed to be improved, we identified the number ofopen lab hours per week, communicating the open lab hours, our initial inventory of tools,training for the graduate student Lab Supervisors, and more computers as areas that wereaddressed

Conference Session

First-year Programs Division Technical Session 16: That Important Decision - Which Engineering Major?

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Frank Blubaugh, Purdue University; Joyce B. Main, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. Therefore, we examine studentmusic genre preference in the context of self-efficacy to reflect multiple aspects of the studentexperience.With  the  nation’s  call  for  more diverse engineering professionals, engaging music preferencemay provide a unique approach to broadening participation in engineering. Therefore, weexplore whether music preference plays a role in engineering discipline choice. Our researchfindings have the potential to inform how diversity in experiences and preferences may play a Page 26.347.2role in student choices. The findings therefore may have implications for how key stakeholders,instructors, academic

Conference Session

The Best of First-Year Programs Division

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Darlee Gerrard, University of Toronto; Kirstin Newfield, University of Toronto; Narges Balouchestani Asli, University of Toronto; Chirag Variawa, University of Toronto

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

student to complete the deliverable.The second survey was distributed to current students weekly throughout their first semester oftheir first-year in 2016. Twenty students were selected at random from each engineering programeach week (N~120/week). Surveys were distributed at the end of the week in order for studentsto reflect and respond based on that particular week of study. The survey received a response rateof 26.87% with a completion rate of 77.88%. This survey focuses on the perceived operationaland conceptual difficulty of course content, the nature of that content, the perception of courseassignments, deadlines and expectations, and the overall instructional experience. Data at thepoint of analysis will be anonymized and used in

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

Conference Session

First-year Programs: Student Perceptions and Perspectives

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Joanne Kay Beckwith, University of Michigan; Laura Hirshfield, University of Michigan

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Conference Session

FPD4 - Teaching Methods for First Year Students

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John K. Estell, Ohio Northern University; Laurie Laird, Ohio Northern University; John-David Yoder, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

assessment of their presentation by using theRSVP rubric. The results of this self assessment, along with reflection as to how to improve the Page 13.518.5student’s specific oral presentation skills, were then submitted as a memo to the instructor.5. ResultsThe results of this research are divided into four reporting categories: the ability of students torecall the names of famous engineers and to associate them with their artifacts, the students’awareness of engineering, additional post-activity survey results, and the effectiveness of theRSVP rubric.5.1. Engineering Personalities and ArtifactsIn both the pre- and post-activity surveys, students

Conference Session

FPD 4: First-Year Engineering Courses, Part I: Multimedia, Large Classes, and TAs

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Farshid Marbouti, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Kelsey Joy Rodgers, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Hyunyi Jung, Purdue University; Alena Moon, Purdue University; Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

”.3 In addition, faculty should make their role visible andexplicit in the classroom. Finally, UTAs should be evaluated by students and should reflect ontheir experience.3 Wallace (1974) adds to these claims by arguing that consistent and frequenttraining is necessary to ensuring the success of UTAs.2TAs unique position as both student and instructor introduces the challenge of balancingteaching responsibilities with student responsibilities. The time and grading components of theteaching responsibilities can become overwhelming. This effect has been especially observed inclassrooms where novel and experimental approaches are being used.10 In response to calls forreform in engineering programs, the course being researched implemented the use

Conference Session

FPD 1: Projects and Teamwork in First-Year Courses

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Diana G. de la Rosa-Pohl, University of Houston (CoE); Stuart A. Long, University of Houston (CoE); Casey Goodwin, University of Houston Honors Engineering Program

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

challenging while having a clear goal.”One of the major concerns about introducing this ALU project into a mostly non-ECE group wasthat the students would complain about the lack of diversity or relevance of the course content.Surprisingly, there were only four student comments reflecting such a view. Other unfavorablecomments referred mostly to the amount of time provided for course projects. (There were 4projects in all for a 15-week course.) Despite those particular student concerns, the overallresponse from students regarding the course was very favorable, meaning that the introduction ofthe digital logic project did not have a significant negative impact on either student cognitive oraffective outcomes and in fact appeared to have a significant

Conference Session

FPD 2: Retention

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Herbert P. Schroeder, University of Alaska Anchorage; Linda P. Lazzell, University of Alaska Anchorage

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

, safety, and a community of belonging. The Tlingit dugout canoedesign of the structure has become a landmark in our state. Students meet in the ANSEPBuilding to study and form the relationships that bring them success. The impact will endure forgenerations.The ANSEP partners provided the funding necessary for construction. The students drove thedesign process and were adamant that the building overtly reflect Native culture and values. Thebuilding opened in October 2006. Having dedicated space provides an excellent venue for eachof the ANSEP programmatic components. Photo 1: The Alaska Native Science & Engineering Building on the University of Alaska Anchorage campus.Students, industrial partners, and university faculty and staff gather

Conference Session

FPD IV: Innovative Curriculum Elements of Successful First-year Courses

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Brian M. Argrow, University of Colorado, Boulder; Beverly Louie, University of Colorado, Boulder; Daniel W. Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder; Nathan E. Canney, University of Colorado, Boulder; Suzana Brown, University of Colorado, Boulder; Adam J. Blanford, University of Colorado, Boulder; Corrina Ladakis Gibson, University of Colorado, Boulder; Eric Donnelly Kenney

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

required to select two of the four majorsthat had been presented in the plenary sessions then compare and contrast the two majors, reporton an out-of-class discussion about the majors with another student, and then reflect upon theirassessment of the major relative to their current interests. After the completion of the second setof major discussions in Weeks 7-9, the essay assignment was repeated for those remainingmajors. The plenary assignments concluded with a third and final essay in which the studentswere asked: “Which major or majors most made you consider engineering as a profession, and Page 25.851.6why?”; “Which major or majors appealed

Conference Session

FPD I: Attacking the Problems of Retention in the First Year

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alan D. Niemi, LeTourneau University; Robert W. Warke, LeTourneau University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

retention rates from 1998 through 2007 are shown in Figure 2. The one-yearretention rate graph reveals no overall improvement. It should be noted that the 2007 cohortshows about the same retention as the 2002 cohort (the final year of the graduation rate study inwhich the graduation rate was 33%). The two-year retention rate is also relatively flat from 1998through 2005 at about 50%. The 2006 cohort however, shows a significant increase to 68%. Itwill be interesting to see if this is reflected in future graduation rates. 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 1-year retention

Conference Session

Research on The First Year II

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Melissa Dagley-Falls, University of Central Florida; Michael Georgiopoulos, University of Central Florida; Cynthia Young, University of Central Florida

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

/TakingRetentionSeriously.pdf33. Habley, W. & McClanahan, R. (2004). What works in student retention. Retrieved June 26, 2007, from ACT,Inc. Web site: http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/reports/retain.html34. Braxton, J. M. & Hirschy, A. S. (2005). Theoretical developments in the study of college student departure. InA. Seidman (Ed.), College student retention: Formula for student success (pp. 61-87). Westport, CT: Praeger.35. Braxton, J. M. & Mundy, M. E. (2002). Powerful institutional levers to reduce college student departure.Journal of College Student Retention, 3(1), 91-118.36. Kitchener, K. (1986). The reflective judgment model: Characteristics, evidence, and measurement. In R. Mines& K. Kitchener (Eds.), Adult cognitive development. (pp. 76

Conference Session

FPD 4: First-Year Engineering Courses, Part I: Multimedia, Large Classes, and TAs

Collection

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kimberly C. Huett, University of West Georgia; Barbara B. Kawulich, University of West Georgia; P.K. Raju, Mechanical Engineering Dept, Auburn University,Al; Chetan S Sankar, Auburn University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

pedagogical changes made throughout the study and facilitatedsharing of feedback to make course improvements. Qualitative data were collected through aseries of open-ended surveys and focus groups to determine the effectiveness of the instructionalmethods. Data were collected after each semester, and results were disseminated to the team toguide course modifications for the next semester.Qualitative research, known for its flexibility in theoretical frameworks and methodologies,emphasizes the importance of context, researcher/participant engagement, perceptions ofparticipants, inductive data analysis, and reflection by researchers and participants.13 Quality ofresearch findings in qualitative research is established through the “high standards of

Conference Session

FPD 8: Teaching Design in the First Year

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Wallace Martindell Catanach III, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Mary Lynn Brannon, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Christopher Stephen Smith, Pennsylvania State University, University Park

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

were reading thechallenge to design a rake for a one-handed person, they were going through the needs of theuser and the process intuitively. However, this was difficult because they had to keep remindingthemselves that the rake was for one hand. “You have to put yourself in the mindset…one hand,one hand.” A female student shared that she experienced doing a project in high school thatinvolved using the engineering process and a male student agreed. However, they did not knowthey were actually using the engineering design process until they reflected upon this in this firstyear college course.Regarding how this project was most helpful to your learning, the project and the class in generalgave the students more confidence. “I learned how to

Conference Session

FPD 4: Peers and Perceptions

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeff Johnson, LeTourneau University; Alan D. Niemi, LeTourneau University; Matthew G. Green, LeTourneau University; Lauren Elise Gentry, LeTourneau University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

to constantly evaluate all aspects of the program and determine what is working and what may need to be adjusted.Finally, a PM program needs to build momentum. Immediate results may not be realized and thisprogram even suffered in recruiting PM’s the first two years as many potential candidates did notrealize the benefit the program provided to the school or the avenues it provided for leadershipand social development.AcknowledgementThe project, entitled First-Year Initiatives for Retention Enhancement (FIRE), is supportedby the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0969382. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the