a complete evidence-based practice paper. Engineering education aims to equipstudents with essential skills including intentional learning, curiosity, and effective collaboration[1], [2], [3] in addition to extensive training in mathematics, sciences, and engineering-specifictopics. The goal is to provide a strong technical foundation and introduce essential skills forprofessional and personal development by integrating core courses with concepts fromengineering education [2]. These essential skills help students address pressing 21st-centurychallenges, such as sustainability [4], [5], as they navigate the growing complexities of modernindustries in their careers. Curiosity, intentional learning and effective collaboration go
developed through coaching. However, we find that students can developsimilar skills through participation in research. We report on student mindset development froma sustained collaborative autoethnographic (CAE) study of student culture and mathematicalmodeling. Our results suggest two benefits: 1. Engaging in reflective practice through CAE canlead to both enhanced metacognition and advanced learning (benefiting students), 2. Engaging insustained CAE creates ample opportunities to represent student voices, sharpening ourunderstanding of the research object (benefiting researchers). Our results are of interest toengineering educators seeking research methods that simultaneously promote student mindsetdevelopment and authentically represent
. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Instruments to Measure Connections and Creating Value in First-Year Engineering StudentsIntroductionTo effectively tackle global challenges and meet industry demands, it is crucial for today'sengineering graduates to possess both technical expertise and professional skill competencies [1]- [5]. In response to this need, the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) hasidentified the 3Cs (Curiosity, Connections and Creating Value) for supporting the developmentof an Entrepreneurial Mindset (EM) in engineering [6] - [8]. Cultivating an EM, and associatedbehaviors, with first-year engineering students is one positive step towards fostering
, which requires a more flexible approach to allow students to better engage with thefield of engineering and to allow curricula to adapt to the ever-changing landscape ofengineering practice and technology. The significant curricular change involves taking thecurrent 6 credit hours of first year engineering courses and breaking them into a set of 1 credit(or less) modules from which students can select. This paper discusses in detail the first year ofthe project which has involved implementing changes to the current courses to prepare for thechange to the modular format along with getting buy-in from the administration and facultywithin the college. The paper also discusses outcomes from the changes implemented during thefirst year of the
teamwork experiences. Building on prior work suggestingenhanced performance in diverse teams, this study extends the scope to address team harmony andinterpersonal relationships. Results are expected to provide actionable insights into optimizing teamcomposition in engineering education, enhancing student experiences, and fostering inclusive learningenvironments.1. IntroductionIn today's engineering education, diversity and inclusion play a pivotal role in shaping a progressive andinnovative academic landscape. Embracing individuals from different cultural, social, and economicbackgrounds enriches classroom interactions and drives creativity. Engineering programs aim to providestudents of all genders, ethnicities, and socioeconomic statuses with
focuses onhow engineering and technology have influenced societal development throughout history. Thisreview activity can also be used to engage students in team problem-solving.1.0 IntroductionFaculty are always trying to find new ways to engage students in learning and to make learningmore fun. In my Engineering in History course, I look for ways to (1) help students see theconnections between technological innovation and societal advancement and (2) make learningthe important “facts” more engaging. While playing Team Trivia at a restaurant with friends, Ithought of adapting that game to review for tests in my course.The objective of this activity is to promote content review before an exam. Students reviewcontent during class and develop an
week’s lesson, the author and students researched ideas for alternativeinstruction and drafted suggestions for more interactive learning in place of the traditionallectures. The practices of other schools were examined and discussed to see how they integrateprojects into their introductory engineering content [1-6], and the literature reinforced thebenefits of incorporating project work into the course. Textbook options were reviewed with theemphasis placed on smart books with guided reading and examination through quizzes to ensurestudents had done the pre-reading and came prepared for discussion, activities, or project work.Lecture content was reduced to make room for project workdays. Changes were made withconsideration to the assessment of
compete for prizes andrecognition such as for innovative design, fabrication achievements and best presentation. Thecompetition event is a high energy celebratory experience open to the public (Fig. 1).Figure 1. An MAE 3 Undergraduate Tutor (left) with students (right) and their robotat the course-wide final robot competition.Through a process of continuous improvement, the popular course has maintained a mixedreputation among students as “being a lot of work!” and as a valuable high impact learningexperience. Students often share with instructors that the course experience provided a solidfoundation in essential hands-on engineering skills and prepared them for advanced coursework,engineering clubs, capstone design and technical careers. The
providing support andcontext for many of the requisite gateway courses and to provide a more substantial engineering-related experience.Starting in the Spring 2019 semester and included in every subsequent course semester up topresent day (thus providing a large sample size of thousands of responses), ENGR 111 studentswere surveyed on this topic at the end of the semester(s). Specifically, students were asked: Towhat extent do you intend to keep pursuing an engineering major?, via a 10-point Likert scale(10 = definitely will and 1 = definitely will NOT). This question was then followed up with thefollowing query: Please indicate below how much (if any) impact your ENGR 111 experiencehad on the answer you provided on the previous question related to
-awareness, academic success and retention,motivation, and access for students who are academically talented but may face additionalbarriers related to accessing resources, materials, courses, and programs for preparing students forpostsecondary education. In recognition of the need for, and effectiveness of, summer bridgeprograms, they are prevalent throughout postsecondary institutions, and their effectiveness andchallenges have been studied [1].Summer bridge programs can motivate students while preparing them for their future studies.Research has been done to study how a summer bridge program impacts students’motivation-related perceptions, and how those perceptions vary across different groups ofstudents [2]. A two-week residential summer bridge
is atraditional adage to say that “students are not like they used to be.” Such assessment is true, asgenerational shifts affect the way our students live and learn [1]. The majority of college studentsnowadays belong to Generation Z, who are technology natives, ethnically diverse, that are ontrack to become a most educated generation [2]. However, they are also the generation that hasstruggle the most with their mental health; surveys have documented that their sources of stressleading to such struggles include mass shootings, money and work stressors, the political climateand discrimination [3]. Not surprisingly, the COVID-19 pandemic and the racial reckoning in theU.S. has also negatively influenced the mental health of Gen Z’s [4], [5
percent require FYS enrollment [1], [2], [3]. Studies found that FYS is bestembedded within the general education requirements (university core), and FYS courses ingeneral show increased benefit to all students above those students who do not take a FYS course[2], [3]. Moreover, at-risk students such as first-generation and male students, students of color,and conditionally admitted students saw greater benefits with higher level FYS credit loads. And,when analyzing persistence and progress toward degree all students benefitted the most withthree credit-hour FYS courses [3].It is important to know that students most influenced by current FYS courses fall into thegenerational category, Gen Z, and are typically described as between ninth grade and
Engineering to realize the NAE’s vision forEngineering in the 21st century: “Continuation of life on the planet, making our world moresustainable, secure, healthy, and joyful,” [1]. Each student in the GCSP develops their ownpathway in the program to gain experience in research, interdisciplinary, entrepreneurship,global, and service-learning activities and coursework, all focused on an overarching GrandChallenges theme (Sustainability, Security, Health, or Joy of Living). Though all the GCSPs inthe GCSP Network are guided by the same framework and program outcomes, referred to as theGCSP Competencies (Talent, Multidisciplinary, Viable Business/Entrepreneurship,Multicultural, and Social Consciousness) [2], each GCSP has its own specific
” [1]. Thisfollow-up will offer an additional three years of data related to course content, course materials,student demographics, and grades. Student’s progress and performance in future math coursesand performance in continuing in engineering courses will be evaluated over 2019-2022.Notably, the last two years evaluated in this study (2021 – 2022) represent a fully in-personexperience compared to the hybrid cohort of 2020.The first-year engineering math curriculum at Clemson University was designed to help studentsunderstand the relevance of basic math skills in engineering and strengthen mastery ofprerequisite math learning outcomes to improve preparedness for engineering. While engineeringprograms and professional industries expect
high schools increasingly integrate engineering into their curricula [1], introductoryengineering courses are often where students first become acquainted with the foundationalprinciples of engineering. As such, these courses aim to shape students’ initial impression ofengineering and excite them about it [2], [3]. Beyond exposing students to engineering,introductory engineering courses are typically structured to establish an academic environment,develop critical study skills, instill the engineering culture, and promote camaraderie among peerstoward success in subsequent coursework [4], [5], [6], [7].Introductory engineering courses have been demonstrated to boost students’ retention rates withintheir academic track [8], yet attrition
sometimes face barriers to earning adegree. These barriers may include departmental, institutional, and national policies and thefrequency of institutional-level engagement with students [1]. One pathway includes Pre-Engineering programs, which provide essential competencies and information for students totransition to an engineering bachelor's program, considerably impacting their careers. The Pre-Engineering program helps students improve their math and science foundations, providingacademic support that can prevent them from not completing their bachelor's degree, repeatingmath subjects, or not enrolling in advanced engineering courses. School administratorsfrequently assess Pre-Engineering programs by measures such as student enrollment
State University (WSU) modelfor engineering mathematics. The WSU approach to engineering mathematics uses anapplication-oriented, hands-on approach which focuses on only the math topics used in coreengineering courses and is taught by engineering faculty [1].Traditionally the course structure at our university includes lectures, studio and lab. The lectureis one hour per week and introduces mathematical concepts as well as describing their relevanceto engineering problems. The studio time is two hours per week and offers collaborativeproblem-solving sessions where students practice applying mathematical concepts to engineeringscenarios. The lab sessions are two hours per week. The labs provide hands-on experience withexperiments and
in courses and curricula ontheir own campuses. The paper originally was submitted in January 2025. In revising, we haveadded an Appendix that discusses conditions in April 2025, which represent an abrupt change innational conditions related to DEIJ topics as compared to Fall 2024 when the teaching activitieswere conducted.IntroductionEngineering programs continue to adapt to changing stakeholder demands for better integrationof diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) into both classrooms and curricula. Forexample, ABET’s approved new Criterion 5 will require programs to offer curricula “thatensure[s] awareness of diversity, equity, and inclusion for professional practice consistent withthe institution’s mission” [1] (note that this
Engineering. Brian is co-founder and Deputy Editor in Chief of Biomedical Engineering Education. Brian’s educational scholarship encompasses active learning, collaborative and inclusive pedagogies, and alternative grading. His science and engineering research interests include cardiovascular physiology, cellular mechanobiology, and nanotechnology-based biomaterials. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: A Peer-Taught Course to Lower Barriers to Undergraduate Research ExperiencesIntroductionFirst-year engineering students experience challenges as they work to build a sense ofcommunity [1]. During the period of adjusting to the university environment, students
knowledge about the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) framework [1] for Entrepreneurial Minded Learning (EML), and how this framework has worked for engineering students, and realizing that this framework can also work for any discipline, the instructor prepared the course based on the KEEN framework, and each of the individual course’s learning objectives. The unintended interdisciplinary nature of such a course, blending engineering and humanities presented an opportunity for the instructor to select a community-based approach with active learning and information literacy. A community based approach was chosen based on the course theme
process.IntroductionSince the early 2000s, there have been numerous and repeated calls for changes to engineeringeducation with the aim of ensuring that graduates are prepared to be successful contributors tothe field (e.g., [1]-[3]). Many universities responded to this call by developing first-yearengineering (FYE) courses, and by 2013, nearly 60% of engineering programs had adopted somekind of FYE course [4]. These FYE courses lack universal learning objectives and courseoutcomes, but commonly introduce the students to the university and the engineering field [5],and have also been shown to be a critical factor in non-technical skills such as belonging andidentity within engineering (e.g., [6], [7]).One common feature of many FYE courses is a design project
part of the MAP2E program, students participated in a one-week summer transition programto help students build their engineering identity and develop core competencies [1-3]. During theacademic year, students became part of an Impact Learning Community (ILC), where they tookengineering, math, and science courses together. The ILC also includes weekly meetings, groupmeetings, intrusive advising practices, field trips, guest speakers, and a study center with tutoringand supplemental instruction. This work in progress paper will present reflections from our firstsemester.IntroductionOld Dominion University (ODU) has a non-selective admissions policy for STEM majors,meaning that any student wishing to major in engineering can be admitted. Students
a large metropolitan area.Program Goals: A primary goal of the program was to improve student retention by providingstudents with social belonging, a key aspect of the retention process. The expectation is that thepeer mentoring program facilitates a community context in which first-year students can gain asense of belonging. Peer mentoring can have bidirectional benefits for students.Program Details: Since Fall 2022, a peer mentoring program has been implemented in threeacademic years: Program Year 1 (2022-2023), Program Year 2 (2023-2024), Program Year 3(2024-2025). All first-year students are required to participate in the peer mentor program. Eachpeer mentor is assigned to approximately 10 first-year students. The mentors meet and
the course, a survey was sent out toengineering first-year students who completed ENGR 1100 to find out what engineeringcompetencies they felt strongest and weakest in and what topics could be implemented to suit first-year engineering students better. 71% of students responded to the survey that their weakestengineering competency was technical communication. Technical communication is a key skill that students across many disciplines should beexposed to throughout their undergraduate and graduate careers. Engineers must communicatetheir designs and findings effectively to their teams, bosses, companies, and/or funding agencies[1]. A lapse in engineering communication can lead to detrimental consequences, such as thecollapse of the
incomingstudents. Summer bridge programs have been widely recognized as effective interventions forimproving retention and success rates [1], particularly among underrepresented andunderprepared students in STEM fields (e.g., [2], [3], [4]). These programs typically offer acombination of academic instruction, advising, and mentorship, which collectively help studentsbuild a strong foundation for their college education (e.g., [2]). Research has shown thatparticipation in summer bridge programs can lead to higher GPAs, increased retention rates, anda greater likelihood of graduating with a STEM degree [5].Research shows that bridge programs providing targeted academic preparation and mentorshipare critical for increasing retention and success rates among
thatstudents struggling in the course found the Synthesis Sheets more useful, and students whoidentified Synthesis Sheets as a part of their study process in the middle of the academic termperformed up to half a letter grade better than their peers. Future studies will use a refined SynthesisSheet based on student feedback, adjust post-exam reflections to gather more data on resource use,and further analyze links between conditional thinking and performance.II. Motivation and backgroundMotivationMetacognition served as the guiding framework for this study. Often described as being aware ofone’s thinking [1], metacognition involves the development of metacognitive knowledge, throughwhich someone learns when, why, and how to apply information [2
the digital age ofsmart phones and increased device use, students report increasing isolation from their in-classpeers [1]. At the author's university, feelings of loneliness and a lack of community are some ofthe biggest complaints by the student population. I have found that a low-stakes, easy assignmentdubbed 10 Minute Talkies (10MTs) has increased student peer interactions and feelings ofsatisfaction for the community in the class. In 10MTs, the students are semi-randomly assignedto meet in pairs for 10-minutes outside of the scheduled class time with a required submission ofa picture of the meeting as evidence. The assignments are easily adaptable for online or in-personmeetings and can be used multiple times in a semester to increase
components and the design decisions made by professional engineers. Byworking with a commercial product, students gain hands-on experience with the design process,while receiving more guidance and concrete examples than they would when designing a productfrom scratch [1]. This approach also offers several benefits in introductory courses, includinglow cost, minimal faculty overhead, and the promotion of teamwork among students [2].For the Fall 2024 semester, two sections of students reverse engineered a garbage disposal.Students worked in groups of 3-4 students to investigate the garbage disposal and break it downinto its components. They then focused more specifically on the motor of the garbage disposaland the design choices that were embedded
a broad spectrum of learning preferences. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Work-In-Progress: Belonging in Engineering? A Grouping Strategy Comparison1. Introduction and PurposeThis work-in-progress paper investigates how grouping teams by specific characteristics couldaffect feelings of belonging in engineering. A national (US) focus on broadening theparticipation in engineering endeavors to move beyond the commonly reported bachelor’sdegrees proportions awarded to women and to minorities of all genders [1]. For instance, ASEE-reporting institutions in 2020 noted the bachelor’s degrees awarded, without regard to majortype, were 23.5% female and 29.2
Design ChallengeAbstractThis evidence-based practice paper details a hands-on design challenge for first-year engineeringstudents aimed at fostering creativity, problem-solving, and iterative design thinking. Studentswere tasked with designing and 3D printing miniature boats capable of supporting maximumweight before sinking.Motivation: The project integrates theoretical concepts of buoyancy with a practical application,allowing students to experience engineering constraints and iterative design.Objectives: 1. Enhance understanding of buoyancy principles through hands-on learning. 2. Develop skills in computer-aided design (CAD) and additive manufacturing. 3. Cultivate iterative problem-solving and adaptability through multiple design