, there were only significant differences in course grades between thosewho entered with 1-20 credits and those who entered with more than 20 credits (p=0.046).Among students entering with zero pre-college credits, females had higher course grades thanmales (F=8.38, p=0.005). No differences were observed between genders for those entering with1-20 credits (F=1.29, p=0.26) or those with more than 20 credits (F=0.22, p=0.64).Previous use of SI and study methodsWe also examine whether prior use of SI and other study methods, including attending officehours and studying in groups, in high school correlated with planned SI use for students’ firstsemester in college and subsequent academic outcomes. Our previous research has shown thatfirst semester
, visioning and decision-making.The content that students explore within these themes is intended to encourage the developmentof self-authorship, a critical foundation to decision-making for first-year students [2]. At the endof the course, students design a Personal Action Plan for their educational experience at theUniversity of Michigan.The structure of the course has been substantially revised to align with these themes as part ofthe Foundational Course Initiative. The course includes two primary structural elements:synchronous, weekly discussion sections and asynchronous, self-paced online modules. Thisformat is designed to provide choice within a well-defined structure and to support the courselearning goals, particularly those related to self
various aspects of their academic and personal life to before and during the pandemic.Questions ranging from current schoolwork, to future plans and well-being are addressed. Thisinformation may inform both long-term and immediate changes that universities and instructorsmay be able to take to improve student learning outcomes and experiences within engineeringprograms.Methods An initial online survey was sent to 383 students among eight different sections of a first-year engineering course that was being conducted in a 100% remote learning environment duringthe Fall 2020 semester. The online questionnaire included a total of 10 COVID-related questions,each on a 5-point Likert scale. The questionnaire asks questions related to student
and sentiments from student responses visually, to inform a novice-led analysis toultimately help with course planning for future semesters.Keywords: COVID-19, First-Year Engineering, Machine Learning, Sentiment Analysis, AssessmentIntroductionWe consider integrating student feedback and experiences into course planning as critical, since studentsare an important stakeholder in the learning environment (Lattuca and Stark 2009). Our approach ofusing heuristic approaches through automated tools to enable faster preliminary insights from studentresponses may be a first step towards helping instructors and administrators make informed decisions fortheir courses. Amplifying students’ voices and allowing them to significantly contribute to
program and plans to pursue further educational and career opportunities involving human-centered design, product development, and global health.Frank J. Marsik, University of Michigan Frank Marsik is the Faculty Director of First Year Student Engagement in Undergraduate Education within the University of Michigan, College of Engineering. He received his PhD from the University of Michi- gan. In addition to serving as the primary instructor for ”Engineering 110: Design Your Engineering American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Paper ID #34818Experience”, he also teaches a
Grainger College of Engineering. Sara performs undergrad- uate research in soft robotics and engineering education funded by the IDEA Institute at UIUC. Sara is interested in pursuing a career in Engineering Education as well as furthering her education upon gradu- ating.Mrs. Ilalee Harrison James, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Ilalee Harrison James is the Associate Director of The Hoeft Technology & Management Program. She serves as a lecturer in addition to leading the strategic plan for the program’s co-curricular outcomes. She is a first-generation college graduate who is passionate about improving career outcomes for underrepre- sented students in STEAM.Prof. Holly M. Golecki, University of
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at California State University, Fullerton (CSUF). Her research interests include traffic flow modeling, statistical methods for transportation data analysis, and sustainable transportation planning. Her work has been published in several peer-reviewed journal publications and conference papers, and presented at numerous academic conferences. Dr. Reina has also served as an advisor of undergraduate research and applied projects such as those conducted by the student chapter of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and awardees of the Dwight David Eisenhower Transportation Fellowship. American c Society
projects, campus scavengerhunts, themed hands on activities, and strategies for academic and career planning will be used tohighlight student engagement and course improvements.Summary of Related Literature A consistent factor that influences learning is the powerful impact of engagement,defined as the level at which students invest physical, psychological, emotional, and intellectualenergy in educationally related activities [1]. Successful engagement early in a student’s courseof study is critical as early engagement is sometimes insufficient at large universities, wherestudents do not normally feel “belonged” early due to large class sizes or lack of interactionamong students for a variety of reasons [2]. FYS classes have a statistically
develop a plan tomitigate the risk. Asking the teams for pitfalls in several deliverables was another way to give usvisibility to challenges and offer feedback throughout the project. Note that asking for challengeswas a theme throughout the deliverables, but we won’t explicitly mention each time it was askedin the remaining short descriptions.PR2: Conceptual Design Candidates – Due week 7At this point in the project, we asked each team to identify which design or pair of designs theyare continuing to pursue, along with rationale for both the continuation and abandonment ofother options. In the lecture portion of the class, we discussed techniques for effective decisionmaking and design narrowing. To reinforce the value of these techniques, we
-practicesresearched and presented by Brown and Wilson, who present ten concise best-practices intendedfor a general audience engaging in programming-related education [1], and by Wells et al., whopresent a case example in the use of video tutorials to support learning and promote engagementwithin an engineering-specific context [3]. Most notable in Brown and Wilson’s work was theemphasis on pushing students into active roles that require students to engage in and articulateproblem definition, ideation and planning, and prediction. These core activities elevate thestudent activity in programming from lower-level cognitive skills (i.e., remembering,understanding) to higher-level cognitive skills (i.e., applying, analyzing, and evaluating). Wellset al. provide
Fundamentals (Fundamentals) course was developed in response to aninformal faculty survey to identify curriculum weaknesses, and it is intended to provide a strongfoundation in the civil engineering discipline6. It introduces students to tools and techniques,such as surveying, understanding maps and plan sets, field sampling, and data analysis, asrequired for their civil engineering curriculum as well as throughout their professional career.By incorporating software and surveying skills, the course also provides resume enhancement forfirst-year students seeking summer internships, which can further enhance their engineeringidentity7, 8.The objectives of the course are as follows: 1. Define the profession of Civil Engineering, 2. Develop
" ismotivated by a "strategic search for meaning" [11], [12].Approaches to learning are often manifested in the practice of learning strategies, which arebehaviors that students use for studying and learning course material, such as memorizing, re-writing course notes, planning and organizing materials, questioning self and others, andreflection [13]–[15].When students describe their approaches to learning and related strategies, they are answeringthese two questions [11]: What do I want to get out of this? (i.e., the product of study) How do I get there? (i.e., the process of studying)The former question is task-, motive-, and goal-oriented, while the process-focused questioninvolves choices of learning approaches and strategies in view of
work is part of a larger study exploring the experiences of rural engineering students. Inaddition to investigating the motivations behind rural students’ decisions to pursue engineering,the study explored the formation of engineering identity and barriers rural students face whileentering an engineering community of practice [20]. A sample of the questions developed tospecifically probe the research question of this paper is as follows: • Why did you choose to attend college? • Why did you choose this university? • Why did you choose an engineering major? • What motivates you? • After graduation, do you plan to return to your rural community? Why or why not?Data AnalysisInterviews were recorded and transcribed by a
becomes the only synchronously available instructionalcoach for small groups. Prior work [25]–[27] indicates that TAs can serve as effective co-instructors, particularly in facilitating team-based activities; however, TAs do require oversightand coaching in order to be effective in their role. In a large-enrollment course setting, the sheernumber of TAs required to support course activities necessitates robust professional developmentand a clear plan for TA management by course instructor(s) [29], [30].In this paper, we present strategies for offering large-enrollment FYE courses in an entirelyonline setting; and we critically examine the effectiveness of this approach by comparing studentoutcomes between FTF and online course formats. Our
programs were taught by adjunct faculty in the early days of the program. When theday mechanical engineering program started, the string of adjuncts who had taught the eveningcourse were not available to the new full-time day instructor. As a result, the author developed anew, three credit version (per the ME academic plan) of the course with little outsideconsultation. About a year after the formation of the day version a full-time faculty membertook over the evening cornerstone/intro course which resulted in more opportunity forcollaboration and sharing of resources between the versions. This change provided goodcontinuity between the introduction course and subsequent courses in the programs. Further, therigor of the evening course was further
thinking embeddedin the course activities (e.g. screencasts)? What were these changes?TAs and instructors pointed out that flexible structure in facilitating activities like prototyping,sketches, and cardboard design allowed students to think different aspects of the needs ofstakeholders. As observed by a TA, “before students think of stakeholders as “barriers” inengineering but now they integrated or internalized the needs of stakeholders in their designs, theimportance of the product and thus beginning to see stakeholders not as a barrier but a mediumto inform their plans and that describes more about empathy and digging deeper on the whyquestions.”Table 4. Students’ perception of systems thinking as perceived by the instructors and TAs
1 deadlines for a given timeframe; documents team progress, planning and evolution of design plan ● Primary Research Lead: Plans and leads client interview, user observations, user testing; oversees documentation of this research ● Secondary Research Lead: Establishes relationships and conducts interviews with subject-matter experts, discovers and extracts standards, ideas, and opportunities from relevant and credible sources; oversees analysis, synthesis, and documentation of these findings ● Training-Building-Testing Lead: Establishes relationships with shop staff, lab directors, and key equipment vendors, arranges training on equipment, places materials orders, coordinates team
of cohort, andstudent burnout. To avoid these barriers, which disproportionately affect students fromunderrepresented backgrounds [5], it is critical to help students understand their plans of studyand the rigor of these plans, and provide accessible support mechanisms early in the collegeexperience.In order to begin addressing these barriers to academic success and degree attainment, the CEprogram at Boise State conducted a review and subsequent remodel of its curriculum. Thisreview included input from faculty, current students, alumni, academic advisors, and theirIndustry Advisory Board. After these narratives were gathered, the faculty and a member of theadvising staff worked to address major negative themes such as a lack of a sense of
Global Engineering Leadership in the University of Maryland’s A. James Clark School of Engineering. He supports Clark School students in incorporating global experiences into their academic plan and oversees engineering global programming. In addition, he supports the onboarding initiatives for new Clark School students. During his time at Maryland, he has taught courses in international culture both on campus and abroad in Australia, the Netherlands, and Spain. Brian joined the University of Maryland from AMIDEAST where he administered Fulbright students from the Middle East and North Africa. In addition, he has experience teaching and working abroad, primarily in Taiwan. He received his MA in International Training
createimprovement plans to strengthen specific facets of their learning approach. Although pre-intervention scores are often given little attention after submission, the students in this studywere responsible for revisiting their initial scores through a series of reflection assignmentsincorporated into each major unit of the course throughout the semester.The LASSI dimensions can be divided into three categories: skill, will, and self-regulation [4].To better accommodate course content, the designers of GELC’s learning strategies coursecategorized the ten LASSI dimensions to align with the three primary course units: Habits ofProfessionals, Habits of Learning, and Habits of Mind (Figure 1). Within Habits ofProfessionals, the LASSI dimensions included
transitioned to 100% online teaching due to theonset of COVID-19, and this modality continued through Summer 2020. Responding to studentand parent requests, WIT introduced plans to return to limited in-person teaching for Fall 2020.These plans included adoption of CDC guidelines published at that time which required:face coverings to be worn at all times, individuals to maintain six feet of distance from others,and robust protocols for cleaning and disinfecting. To satisfy distancing requirements, a de-densified model for academic spaces was introduced leading to reduced student capacity inclassrooms and labs. This created logistical challenges with the execution of several labs in theENGR 1000 course. In addition, enhanced cleaning protocols raised
vectors, linear and rotational motion, Newton’s laws, friction, work andenergy, conservation of linear and angular momentum, collisions, and moment of inertia. Inaddition to foundational physics principles, the course has a heavy focus on teaching students howto develop a solution to a problem while reinforcing their critical thinking skills. The problem-solving method for all questions requires students to explicitly write out their approach in thefollowing steps: Given, Find, Figure, Plan, Assumptions, Estimations, Solution, and Reflections[14]. As PHY160 is taken during the first year, the requirement of the problem-solving approachon all homework and exams and lays the foundation for a good engineering and science problemsolving approach that
to share the teaching load and learn bestpractices from each other such as project design and LMS (online learning management system)usage. This team-teaching model can readily continue even after the pandemic is over.Throughout the course, the instructors met weekly or biweekly to share observations of the classand adjust plans for the next few weeks. Content-wise, the instructors were able to share theirexpertise on different topics in several formats. Besides learning about multiple topics, thestudents conducted two team-projects with typically three students on a team. The first projectwas to build a touchless candy dispenser. We invited community children and their families tovisit the project room, one family at a time, for a safe
someway proportional to represents buildings, the actual plane. The same applies for cars, something else that etc. trains, and buildings. The model is just a is bigger. much smaller representation of something that is from the real world, with the dimensions being in someway proportional. A model in the A city A city plan can be a 3d design on a computer Physical, STEM fields is a 3d plan & a of cubes and other shapes that represent and rendering that is model car buildings, trees and sidewalks. A model car Graphical/ used for reference
well as Europe, and spent time as a researcher in the software industry. His research inter- ests include knowledge management, software engineering, mobile computing platforms, and computer science education. Dr. Hicks received his B.S. degree in computer science from Angelo State University, and his MCS and Ph.D. degrees in computer science from Texas A&M University.Dr. Michael Preuss, Exquiri Consulting, LLC Michael Preuss, EdD, is the Co-founder and Lead Consultant for Exquiri Consulting, LLC. His primary focus is providing assistance to grant project teams in planning and development, through external eval- uation, and as publication support. Most of his work is on STEM education and advancement projects
support services. They found thatinteractions students have with faculty, staff, and peers can directly influence undergraduateretention, and the mechanism of action of this direct influence is that it affects students’ sense ofcommunity and connection to the university, their ability to navigate the college experience andmeet academic expectations. We acknowledge that the SI program could achieve this type ofinfluence, but that intentional planning and action had to be taken to create and enact theseholistic approaches.I. Motivation for StudyThe coronavirus pandemic that hit the globe in 2020 forced our university to conduct all our firstyear engineering courses virtually. Despite previous research on the positive impact of SI onstudent outcomes
years, universities are looking toimprove their retention and completion rates and the first two years of study are playing a big rolein these two parameters. In addition, the average number of new enrollments in undergraduate EEprograms is flat or increased slowly nationwide, while the same number for the other programsincreased [1]. On the other hand, many of the EE employers are looking only for highly skilledworkers or the students with a graduate degree. Getting graduate degree will result in more yearsof study to get hired in Electrical Engineering.The previous course plan in the EE program at California State University San Marcos was startingwith math, science, and general study courses. Then the plan proceeds into basic circuit theory
2020, 28 withdraw from the course in lieu oftheir poor performance. Due to the impact of COVID in Spring 2020, the withdrawal deadline forour institution was pushed back significantly and also students planned to utilize the alreadyadvertised pass/fail policy. These reasons could seem to explain the low withdrawal rate and highfailure rate. In Fall 2020, students were offered to take the pass/fail policy on any two courses, butthis was announced much later in the semester. By then most students had already withdrawn fromthe course. Figure 5 shows the pass/fail/withdraw grade break down for FED101 for all threesemesters. A significant number of students (more than half of the class) failed the class duringSpring 2020. Fall semesters overall
110) instead of the Calculus, at least one semester delay in thegraduation can occur. Additionally, if a student fails one or more of these pre-requisite chains,the student’s graduation will be delayed by at least one more semester. Another factor thataggravates this situation is that most of the higher division courses are only offered once a yearat CSU Chico and are not offered during the summer or at other universities across the nation.Therefore, the importance of passing the math courses at the scheduled semester is evident of thestudy plan to reduce the time-to-graduation.About 19.1% of the incoming freshman and transfer students in the College of Engineering andComputer Science did not enroll in Calculus as their first math course in
provided opportunity for the student groups to worktogether in breakout rooms. Presentation slides and lesson plans for these synchronousworkshops were prepared by the instructor and provided to the peer leaders in advance. Week Day Topic / Goal Introduction M Course introduction 1 W Introduction to sustainability F Introduction to life cycle thinking M Design thinking 2 W Design thinking Tools F Engineering communication M