Conference Session

FPD 6: Course Content and Educational Strategies

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Victoria E. Goodrich, University of Notre Dame; Everaldo Marques de Aguiar Jr., University of Notre Dame; G. Alex Ambrose, University of Notre Dame; Leo H. McWilliams, University of Notre Dame; Jay B. Brockman, University of Notre Dame; Nitesh Chawla, University of Notre Dame

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

) as an assessment tool for their Introduction toEngineering course sequence. While each year the ePortfolio assignments have expanded, theyhave been focused largely in three types of reflections: (1) student experiences within the collegebut outside of the course, (2) the skills gained specifically through course projects, and (3) theirfour year plan to be a successful engineering student as defined by the ABET a-k criteria.ePortfolio assignments were initially included to allow students to reflect on their education,develop evidence of their blossoming skills, and take control of their graduation plan. After thefirst year of practice, there was a clear secondary benefit to the faculty and student advisors.Anecdotally, student reflections

Conference Session

FPD 10: Teamwork

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David W. Gatchell PhD, Northwestern University; Bruce Ankenman, Northwestern University; Penny L. Hirsch, Northwestern University; Adam Goodman; Koshonna Brown, Northwestern University Center for Leadership

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

which all engineering freshmen work on real design projects for real clients.Prof. Adam GoodmanMs. Koshonna Brown, Northwestern University Center for Leadership Koshonna Brown is a Life Science doctoral student at Northwestern University. As a fellow with North- western University’s Center for Leadership, she analyzes the date collected through the Center’s online assessment tools. Such assessments allow students and faculty to reflect and develop their own leadership and apply lessons and insights gained to current leadership challenges and positions. Page 24.1048.1 c American

Conference Session

FPD 11: Culminating Considerations

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nicole L Hird, Ohio State University; Deborah M. Grzybowski, Ohio State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

majorrequiring fluid mechanics were asked two questions reflecting basic fluid mechanics, to testwhether the course had in fact been helpful in overcoming common misconceptions.Grade data was separately gathered without identifying information using the StudentInformational System (SIS). Data was gathered for all students having taken major-requiredfluid mechanics courses and one of the design course options from the honors first-year program.Not all majors had students from both the nanotechnology and robot courses; those majors werenot used in determining relative performance. A non-usable number of students from theinfrastructure option had taken a fluid mechanics course, so only the robot and nanotechnologycourses were compared. Data was used for

Conference Session

FPD 7: Beyond Course Content

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University; Susan F. Freeman, Northeastern University; Daniel Allan Sullivan, Center for STEM Education, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

observations and from the first-year engineering students’ ownobservations and feedback about their experiences. As a result of faculty members’ experiences,observations and reflections, 15 success factors have been identified for first-year engineeringstudents and engineering faculty to consider before implementing meaningful service-learningengineering projects in an urban community. The purpose of this paper is to share these 15success factors with other engineering educators who may be considering STEM educationservice-learning projects in their curriculum, especially those who will be initially managing theprojects all by themselves. “What Sticks” refers to what has been successful and meaningful forboth the first-year engineering students and

Conference Session

FPD 7: Beyond Course Content

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan F Freeman, Northeastern University; Beverly Kris Jaeger, Northeastern University; Richard Whalen, Northeastern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Page 24.880.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Making a First-year Impression: Engineering Projects that Affect and ConnectIntroductionAfter years of having passed through multiple assessments, iterations, and updates of the coreGeneral Engineering courses in the first-year program at Northeastern University (NU), severalengineering professors wondered the following, “With our engineering courses so full ofactivities, topics, and projects, how can we identify which of those elements have the greatestimpact on our students?” It was time for a more detailed reflection on all that had been put inplace in the first-year courses in order to identify which

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William C. Oakes, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Monica E. Cardella, Purdue University, West Lafayette; William Travis Horton, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Page 24.782.7EPICS. Assignments were tailored to complement the learning community sequence. Anexample is that the reflection assignments in the new course built on the EPICS experiences. Forexample, critical and reflective thinking is an area assessed in EPICS but first-year students oftenstruggle. To help them, a weekly reflection was included in the common engineering course ontheir EPICS experience. Feedback was provided and this helped their work in the EPICS course.The common course also provided a means to address their experiences and introduce aspects ofthe EPICS experiences. For example, the assessments in EPICS are modelled after professionalperformance appraisals and require students to identify their most significant

Conference Session

FPD 11: Culminating Considerations

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Silvia Husted, Universidad de las Americas Puebla; Judith Virginia Gutierrez; Nelly Ramirez-Corona, Universidad de las Americas Puebla; Aurelio Lopez-Malo, Universidad de las Americas Puebla; Enrique Palou, Universidad de las Americas Puebla

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

” (Figure 4) on two actual design projects. Students were organizedinto multidisciplinary teams of three to four members; the group had a total of thirty-eightstudents (15 male). The “Concepts” section uses quizzes given in nearly every session toascertain whether students have understood the material in their pre-class reading assignments.In addition, we encourage students to write brief reflective journal entries to further solidify andreinforce their own understanding, as well as demonstrate that improved understanding for animproved quiz grade. Universidad de las Américas Puebla’s Chemical, Environmental, and Foodengineering students have in the studied course a great opportunity for a multidisciplinarycollaborative experience

Conference Session

FPD 10: Teamwork

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Laura K Alford, University of Michigan; Robin Fowler, University of Michigan; Stephanie Sheffield, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

to together develop a sharedunderstanding of and solution for an ill-structured problem.4 Teachers are redefined as coacheshelping students work toward a set of possible open-ended solutions, and students take someownership of their own learning through reflection. Typically, students learn about team skills inaddition to the course content. Engeström5 identified three stages characteristic of collaborativelearning. In his view, for learning to be truly collaborative, students must (a) work towards ashared problem definition, (b) cooperate to solve the problem, and (c) then engage in reflectivecommunication, reconceptualizing the process. Similarly, Johnson et al.6 argue that there arefive basic elements critical for cooperative work to be

Conference Session

FPD 10: Teamwork

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Oguz Hanoglu, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Aladar Horvath, Ivy Tech Community College; Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

video-recordings. The conversationsin these frames were compared to the related part of their documented works to see how theyconveyed their ideas. Portions of the video-recordings which were found to be related to theresearch question of this study were transcribed and used to triangulate findings from the writtendocuments and interviews.Interviews were transcribed and relevant pieces about how they respond to TA feedback wereselected. These pieces provided insights to students’ individual reflection on their teamwork.Results of Team A and Team B were constantly compared with each other to identify thesimilarities and differences in the ways they respond to TA feedback and conveyed their ideas intheir documented works.IV. ResultsSubmitted

Conference Session

FPD 7: Beyond Course Content

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Angela R Bielefeldt, University of Colorado, Boulder; Nathan E. Canney PE, Seattle University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

courses contributed to their views of SR. Atthe small public university all of the civil and environmental engineering students worked on SL projects,but 21% still indicated that none of their courses contributed to their understanding of SR. These resultsseem to indicate that the impacts of courses on the SR of students may be more limited than instructorsintend. This may reflect a typical dichotomy between “what is taught” versus “what is learned”. It mayalso indicate that instructors should use reflective essays or in-class discussions to encouragemetacognition and thinking around how engineering can and should try to positively impact society andhelp underserved populations.26Ethics provides a counter example to the minimal impact of courses

Conference Session

FPD 4: Peers and Perceptions

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joseph Pow, Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science, RIT; María Helguera, Rochester Institute of Technology; Elizabeth Pieri, Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science, Rochester Institute of Technology; Sadie Wolters; Michael Glynn Augspurger, Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science, Rochester Institute of Technology; Briana A. Neuberger, Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science, Rochester Institute of Technology; Victoria Scholl, Rochester Institute of Technology; Elizabeth Bondi, Rochester Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

succeed, and where institutions support such communities of learners.3 Higher education should produce new frames of understanding by piloting new ideas, tools, and approaches to keep students’ learning on the cutting edge.4In 2010 the Chester F. Carlson Center for Imaging Science, an imaging systems engineeringdepartment at the Rochester Institute of Technology, developed and implemented a newfreshman-level course, known as the Freshman Imaging Project, which embodies thispedagogical framework. While the architects of this new pedagogy wanted it to reflect the mostrecent research on STEM education, it was also built upon other fundamental beliefs. Forexample, the belief that first year students are capable of understanding advanced

Conference Session

FPD 9: First-Year Projects

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

S. Scott Moor, Indiana University Purdue University, Fort Wayne; Stephen Heindel, Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne; Yanfei Liu, Indiana University Purdue University, Fort Wayne

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

micro-battery to their output of their charging circuitand measure the charging of the battery over time using a multimeter. Students are asked tocharge the battery for 30 minutes, stopping every five minutes to remove the battery and measureits charge. At the end of the projects students individually write a reflection memo.MATLAB Signal Analyzer DesignThe sound card analyzer is a simple MATLAB program with a graphical user interface. TheMATLAB code (.m and .fig files) are available on the project website.5 The initial screen thatopens is shown in Figure 1. It is organized into three sections based on the steps users shouldfollow. The first section (“1. Select Source”) allows users to choose the signal to analyze. Anew signal can be recorded

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ryan Fries, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville; Ryan W. Krauss, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. f3f/8-f3f/12,2002. Page 24.150.714. ABET. 2013. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Effective for Reviews During the 2014-2015Accreditation Cycle. Available at. Accessed 1/2/2014.15. Adams, R., Evangelou, D., English, L., Dias De Figueiredo, A., Mousoulides, N., Pawley, A. L., Schifellite, C.,Stevens, R., Svinicki, M., Trenor, J. M., and Wilson, D. 2011. Journal of Engineering Education. January. 100 (1).48-88.16. Meyers, K. L., Silliman, S. E., Gedded, N. L., and Ohland, M.W. (2010). A Comparison of EngineeringStudents’ Reflections on their First-Year Experiences. Journal of Engineering Education. April. 169-178.17

Conference Session

FPD 11: Culminating Considerations

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John A. Mirth, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; John P Iselin, University of Wisconsin, Platteville

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

topicsrelated to blower design. The housing features of the commercial design shown in Fig. 3 arehighlighted and explained. These features include the 1) volute, 2) diffuser and 3) throat. Thesefeatures are examined after initial design development to allow students to reflect on whether ornot they have thought about the effect of the fluid flow features in their initial design concept.Teams seldom incorporate all three of these features in their initial design, and many of them donot include any of the features.Since the blower is a dynamic machine it requires a conversion from kinetic energy to internalenergy in the form of increased pressure. The diverging volute allows this deceleration andcommensurate pressure rise to occur. The diffuser is a

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Poster Session

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ishbah Cox, Purdue University, Band and Orchestra Department; Monica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Libraries and the Writing Center. Speakersalso included professors within the Band and Orchestra department, professors within theCollege of Engineering, a campus historian, a Resume’ writing workshop, and upper-level students within engineering who were musicians within the department.Students were required to attend a minimum of two different types of live on-campusmusical performances that differed from the primary ensemble in which they wereinvolved, and to reflect on those attended live performances. For example, if a studentwas involved with the orchestra, he would be required to attend a performance by a windband or jazz band in the department. Students also had the opportunity to exploreleadership and service opportunities informally and

Conference Session

FPD 2: Building Community

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mangilal Agarwal, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis; Maher E. Rizkalla, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis; Sudhir Shrestha; Kody Varahramyan, IUPUI

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

(Introduction to Engineering, Introduction toEngineering Profession, and Fundamentals of Speech Communication). TLC faculty membersclosely worked with each other to coordinate teaching and learning efforts that reflect the goalsof the developed nanotechnology track.This paper presents the components of the developed and implemented TLC program includingdetails of the courses and assessment data, showing the impact on freshman engineering studentsin nanotechnology education. Comparative assessment data show, 20% higher freshmanretention in the TLC cohort than the traditional group, which highlights the impact of the TLCprogram on freshman engineering students in nanotechnology education. Data also shows thatthe TLC (three courses) has guided over 75% of

Conference Session

FPD 8: Teaching Design in the First Year

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeffrey Scott Bates, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

“speed dating” session with themwhere they asked about how they chose their major and what they would have done differently.The design process was presented, and then the students were then introduced to the grandchallenges. During the 2012 class, eight weeks were used to discuss and learn about the grandchallenges, during the 2013 class, only four weeks were allotted. Condensing the time spent onthe grand challenges increased the rigor of the course. Reflection assignments during this timewere designed to assess their understanding of the grand challenges as well as to provide theapplication of the design process. Students learned how to translate the challenges intomanageable problem and needs statements. Each week, the topic went slightly

Conference Session

FPD 9: First-Year Projects

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Roy W. Melton, Department of Computer Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology; Shanchieh Jay Yang, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE); Adriana Becker-Gomez, Rochester Institute of Technology (KGCOE)

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

requirements are in Table 5. Part data sheetsand schematics for basic connections were also provided. To get teams started, a hands-ontutorial session with the mbed NXP LPC11U24 microcontroller board was held in the fourthweek. Then teams worked independently with their mentors over the next two weeks. Table 4. Materials Provided Provided Parts · RACE-TIN radio-controlled 1:16-scale model of the Dodge Challenger SRT8® 392 · Up to 3 sets of four AA batteries · ARM mbed NXP LPC11U24 microcontroller board · Pololu QTR-8A reflective sensor array · TI L293D motor driver chip · Small breadboard · Jumper wires · Storage containerIn the seventh week, class time was used for each team to

Conference Session

FPD 8: Teaching Design in the First Year

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ann Saterbak, Rice University; Tracy Volz, Rice University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. Work is ongoing to determine statisticalsignificance between the administration of the two different prompts. Page 24.203.10Most notable are the high scores in the post-test for the contextualized prompt. Previously, wewere disappointed in the overall low scores for many levels (Table 5).22 Based on othermeasures of student work, such as an exam and design prototypes, we were not confident thatstudent responses to the generic prompt were an accurate reflection of their learning. Thismotivated us to take a closer look at the prompt and revise it to the current contextualizedprompt.With this contextualized prompt, the post-test values for all

Conference Session

FPD 1: The Path to Engineering

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shelley Lorimer, Grant MacEwan University; Jeffrey A. Davis, Grant MacEwan University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. Page 24.315.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 A Study of the Consistency in Assessment of Pre-Engineering SkillsAbstractAssessment tools are often used in a predictive way to gauge the overall skills of first-yearengineering students as they begin their engineering education. They are also useful in settinginterventions in terms of tutorials, as well as providing self-improvement motivation for thestudents who achieve scores that are not consistent with earlier high school performance.Previous research1 has demonstrated that the academic averages obtained in high school, may notnecessarily reflect the skill level (competency) of the students entering first-year, especially inmathematics

Conference Session

FPD 3: Retention

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Claudia Elena Vergara, Michigan State University; Theodore Demetrius Caldwell M.Ed., Diversity Programs Office/College of Engineering/Michigan State University; Jon Sticklen, Michigan State University; Subashini Nagendran Sivakumar, Michigan State University; Kyle P. Foster, Michigan State University College of Engineering; Tonisha Brandy Lane, Michigan State University; Rickey Alfred Caldwell Jr.; Lisa R. Henry, Michigan State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

” have higherretention rates in engineering programs. In addition to academic challenges, students matriculatewith a distinct set of attitudes and expectations that reflect their experiences in their socialcontext i.e. family, community, and economic background. According to Foor, 6 students fromlow socioeconomic backgrounds and who attended resource-poor high schools enter engineeringprograms on an uneven plane.For example in the College of Engineering (COE) at MSU a large number of under-preparedstudents start their engineering mathematics coursework below calculus or even below collegealgebra. Figure 1 shows the retention data for all new freshmen that start their mathematicscoursework with Math 1825, a no-credit introductory math. A student

Conference Session

FPD 2: Building Community

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nora Honken, University of Louisville; Patricia A. Ralston, University of Louisville

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

sample of female students would add credence to the results of thisstudy. This study was correlational; thus no cause and effect could be determined from theresults. The values for collaboration were gathered on a survey that asked students tocharacterize their collaboration in terms of frequency of collaborations based on all homeworkand tests. As with all surveys, it is unknown how accurately the answers reflect actualcollaboration levels and if students’ responses were influenced by current collaborationactivities. Also the measures of collaboration were based on the answer to one question; futurevalidation on this measure is needed. It is clear from the plethora of research on academic performance and retention ofengineering

Conference Session

FPD 11: Culminating Considerations

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Yvette Pearson Weatherton, University of Texas, Arlington; Andrew P. Kruzic, University of Texas, Arlington; Stephen P Mattingly, University of Texas, Arlington; Ziaur Rahman, The University of Texas at Arlington; Heather L Frost

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

to transfer students and to analyze differences amongdemographic groups.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the University of Texas at Arlington’s QualityEnhancement Plan Phase II and work performed by the lead author while serving at the NationalScience Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. The authors also gratefully acknowledge Geraldine E. Jackson, MBA forcopyediting this manuscript.References1. Tyson, W. “Modeling Engineering Degree Attainment Using High School and College Physics and Calculus Coursetaking and Achievement.” J. Engineering Education. Vol

Conference Session

FPD 5: Course Delivery Methods and Issues

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Farshid Marbouti, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Johannes Strobel, Texas A&M

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

meta-analysis study reveals that sleep duration and sleepiness have asignificant negative relation to school performance 13. Another review study also concludes thatstudents’ sleep duration and quality is related to students’ academic performance and learningcapacity 14.Chronotype, a biological attribute of human beings, reflecting the time of the day their functionsare active or reach a certain level and its relationship to preferred time to wake up, study, retire,etc. is well studied 15. Individuals vary from extremely early types to extremely late types 16, 17.Early chronotype individuals tend to get up early in the morning and have difficulty staying uplate at night. On the contrary, late chronotype individuals tend to get up late in the

Conference Session

FPD 9: First-Year Projects

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Thomas Shepard, University of St. Thomas; Broderick W. Carlin, University of St. Thomas

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta,GA, Paper 7539.12. Sheppard, S., Gilmartin, S., Chen, H.L., Donaldson, K., Lichtenstein, G., Eris, O, Lande, M., and Toye, G.,(2010). Exploring the Engineering Experience: Findings from the Academic Pathways of People LearningEngineering Survey (APPLES), TR-10-01, Center for the Advancement for Engineering Education, Seattle, WA.13. Davis, C., Yeary, M., and Sluss, J., (2012). Reversing the trend of engineering enrollment declines withinnovative outreach, recruiting and retention programs, IEEE Transactions on Education, 55(2), pp.157-163.14. Kolmos, A., (1996). Reflections on project work and problem-based learning, European Journal of EngineeringEducation, 21, pp. 141-148.15. Malicky, D., Huang

Conference Session

FPD 8: Teaching Design in the First Year

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jessica E.S. Swenson, Tufts Center for Engineering Education and Outreach; Merredith D. Portsmore, Tufts University; Ethan E. Danahy, Tufts University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

. Meyers, Silliman, Gedde, and Ohland (2010) A Comparison of Engineering Students’ Reflections on Their First-Year Experiences. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(2), 169-178.5. Niemi, A., M. Green & M. Roudkovski (2013) Evolution of a First-Year Retention Project: Findings at Halftime. Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Atlanta, Georgia.6. Paretti, M. & K. Cross (2011) Assessing First-Year Programs: Outcomes, Methods, and Findings. Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference. Vancouver, Canada.7. Cross, N. (2000) Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. Chichester, New York: Wiley.8

Conference Session

FPD 4: Peers and Perceptions

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sudhir Kaul, Western Carolina University; Robert D. Adams, Western Carolina University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

possible that eachgroup designated one specific member as the report writer. Individual reports on project status aswell as reflection essays could be assigned in the future in order to enhance the achievement ofthis outcome. This needs to be investigated further since improving written communication skillsis an important learning outcome of this course that is expected to be strengthened through thePBL course sequence.4. Discussion and ConclusionsThe investigation of learning outcomes in this paper provides an interesting insight into studentperceptions about an important introductory course for engineering students. Student self-assessment of each outcome is seen to correlate with the results from direct assessment.Particularly, it is observed

Conference Session

FPD 1: The Path to Engineering

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Catherine E. Brawner, Research Triangle Educational Consultants; Marisa K. Orr, Louisiana Tech University; Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University and Central Queensland University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

engineering courses. And I saw civil and I saw that there was a lot of equivalencies so that I could just keep going with the course and not really pay attention to co-reqs. Because I’ve already taken the co-reqs and pre-reqs. I: So you went to civil because many of the courses that you had taken would apply in civil? M: Yes. Yes.When reflecting on the transfer experience, Mike noted that he had been admitted to D-State as afreshman and chose to go to Southeast D-State instead. I: So what do you think would’ve been different if you had decided to come here as a freshman? M: I probably wouldn’t even gone through engineering. I probably would’ve stayed

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