hardware engineers [1]. This engineer shortage isattributed to several issues including declining interest among undergraduate students forpursuing careers in hardware engineering or the educational gaps condition where structuralopportunities for students to develop practical skills in hardware engineering are limited.Trevelyan [2] highlighted that there has been a severe lack of curricula in higher education toimprove employability and prepare engineers for sustainable development goals.To address this social and educational problem, this study focuses on a particular curriculuminnovation for first-year engineering students’ career choice. According to Trafford et al. [3],first year students’ course experience is closely associated with the
, 2025 WIP: What Does It Look Like: How Early College Students Describe What Engineers DoIntroductionThis is a Work-in-Progress study that was initiated to explore the impressions that early collegestudents have about what engineers do through the examination of student-generated shortnarratives. We also wanted to learn more about how engineering curricula have influenced theirimpressions, such as why many of them seem to have an abstract understanding of whatengineers actually do when they describe engineering work as “problem solving.” To complicatematters further, it has been argued that problem solving in an engineering course is a lot differentfrom problem solving in the engineering workplace [1
transition to university can bedemanding for first-year engineering students as they will face more rigorous coursework,unfamiliar work environments, and more stringent professional requirements [1]. The KolbExperiential Learning Cycle (Spiral) where students cycle through concrete experience, reflectiveobservation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation is a framework that can makelearning difficult or new concepts easier [2]. In recognizing the opportunity to implement theseconcepts, the Principles of Mining Engineering course (MIN ENG 1912) underwent acomprehensive redesign to better support first-year mining engineering students’ academic,professional, and community development. The redesign of this course was made possible
in the first year of an engineering curriculum reinforcestheir foundational nature. As first-year students enter university with a wide range ofbackgrounds, it can be difficult to create an immersive and engaging introductory experience thatreinforces these foundational skills without relying on a deeper understanding of technicalmaterial. In fact, for some students, introductory projects with roots in highly technical materialmay be alienating, damaging to student confidence, and ultimately detrimental to measures ofacademic success and degree persistence. It has been shown that student confidence in their ownacademic ability is affected by self and peer performance [1],[2] and the first year of a student’suniversity experience impacts
, effective learning strategies, and mindfulness practices.Through the final project, students apply systems engineering principles to synthesize coursetopics into meaningful groupings, reflecting on their personal and academic growth.The study addresses three research questions: (1) Which course topics do students identify asmost influential and useful for their future? (2) What common grouping strategies do studentsuse, and do these align with the course framework? (3) Does the systems engineering approachfoster unique metacognitive insights? A qualitative analysis of student submissions from the Fall2024 cohort reveals that time management and rest are identified as the most impactful skills.Grouping strategies ranged from simple categories
students. This study generated practical and actionablefindings that will help four-year engineering institutions develop or modify intensive transitionprograms to improve the academic performance and retention of first-year engineering students.Keywords: first-time college students, engineering, summer bridge program, and academicsuccessIntroduction and BackgroundResearch indicates that retention rates for STEM students are influenced by several factors,including negative experiences in first-year classes, financial challenges, a sense of notbelonging, limited faculty-student and peer interactions, and the demanding nature of thecurriculum [1, 2, 3]. The majority of students who leave STEM do so within their first two years.Muller [4] reports
(WIP) paper, we propose investigating why students who initiallyindicate interest in STEM are not enrolling in a STEM major using a detailed interview protocoland an analysis of enrollment data.At our small liberal-arts college, students declare a major in their second year. However, in thesummer preceding their arrival they declare academic interests and are matched to advisors in thedisciplines they self-selected. Throughout their first year, students take a common first-yearseminar, a first-year writing course (of their selection), and STEM students take 1-3 introductorySTEM courses. Several years of data shows that a large proportion of the students who initiallyexpressed interest in STEM declare a non-STEM major in their second year. We
for undergraduate, peer teaching assistants (peer-TAs or PTAs) working inengineering courses. The employment of PTAs has become more common in large enrollmentengineering courses to increase student-to-instructor interactions. PTAs might be able to rely ontheir own experiences in the classroom, but learning experiences are not enough to translate toeffective teaching. Therefore, it is essential to provide PTAs with training to guide and maximizetheir positive impact on students and their learning. This review addresses the research questionHow are PTAs trained to work in engineering classrooms? More discretely, (1) How are PTAtraining programs structured? (2) What skills or lessons are taught and prioritized? and (3) Howis effective training
WIP: Introducing Research in Summer Bridge ProgramsIntroductionA challenging issue for most engineering degree programs is the relatively high rate (~50%) thatundergraduate students leave or switch from engineering majors before graduating [1], [2], [3],[4]. Previous work shows that a significant portion of STEM students (~35%) switch majors orleave the university between the first and second year in their degree [2], [5], [6]. These attritionnumbers are even higher for students from historically underrepresented groups [7], [8]. As aresult, it is most helpful to implement intervention strategies that help engineering studentspersist beyond their second year.One proven method to increase retention and graduation rates of historically
(administrator or faculty member) prescribes planactivities for students to see academic improvement. This structure applies a deficit-basedframework, common in many student success formulations, in which student challenges aretreated as problems to be solved, and problem-focused planning is applied [1, 2, 3]. While theremay be some benefit to these approaches, the deficit focus can increase feelings of shame andinferiority in struggling students, leading to a feeling of disconnectedness, disengagement, andfor many students, a breakdown in the student success system [4, 5, 6]. Not only can theseapproaches potentially harm students, but they can also be detrimental to student successprofessionals, who may develop a sense of paternalism in solving
nowcommonplace within undergraduate engineering programs, which often begin with a first-yeardesign course for engineering majors. This is consistent with Outcome 5 for students in the 2024-2025 ABET criteria, which asserts that students should develop “an ability to function effectivelyon a team whose members together provide leadership, create collaborative and inclusiveenvironment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives” (p. 6) [1]. There are severalreasons to promote team-based learning within design courses, including that it emulates realdesign practice [2]; increases satisfaction among students in the course [3]; and helps to retainstudents, including those underrepresented in engineering [4].An inherent part of working on a team is
of mechatronics stands as aparticularly notable example of this ever-rising collaboration in industry. We adapted theprinciples of mechatronics as a multidisciplinary field into the first-year engineering curriculumthrough a hands-on activity. Mechatronics-based activities have been studied for a range ofapplications such as in developing entrepreneurial mindsets [1] or to analyze and reduce genderdisparities in engineering fields [2].However, we aimed to uniquely create and implement such an activity in a manner emphasizingthese fundamentally collaborative outcomes to equip future generations of engineers. Wedeveloped a novel mechatronic arm construction activity complete with a supportinginstructional manual and questionnaire targeting
an increasing trend forengineering majors to be placed in Precalculus in their first semester [1]. This trend, coupledwith concerns about the college enrollment “cliff” and a critical need for engineers, led the SEASto explore issues around retention and student success outcomes in engineering [2]. Additionally,previous research into retention in engineering linked student confidence in college-level mathand science (self-efficacy) to their persistence in the degree, which raises concerns when placingstudents in a math class that could be considered behind what is considered on track [3].First Year Student Success and Retention in EngineeringA commonly quoted number is that roughly half of engineering students change out ofengineering or
dynamic userinterfaces generated by AI agents.In this paper, we discuss the structure of this AI-driven tool in a required first-year computingcourse, the level of usage and reported usefulness by students, and the impact of this tool onstudent performance in this course.Motivation for Study:Educators across the globe are investigating the impacts of generative AI tools on studentlearning outcomes in various fields of study such as computer programming [1], sciences [2],[3], economics [4], and medicine [5]. The reports suggest that these tools have an overall positiveeffect for reasons such as getting instant feedback from chatbots resulting in student questionsgetting resolved immediately, thereby promoting student engagement [6]. In a recent
statements. This highlights the potential of integrative first-year coursesto foster design problem framing through connections to students' local knowledge andexperiences.MotivationStudies of first-year experiences provide guidance on how such courses support students’ senseof belonging, self-efficacy, and understanding of the work engineers do [1, 2]. The variability inapproaches has provided insight into these effects. For instance, first-year design experiencesappear to have long-lasting impacts, as students who have such experiences are more effectiveteam members in their senior capstone course [3]. Integrative and sociotechnical designexperiences can provide an engaging introduction to engineering and computer science degrees[4]. An
, behavioral regulation, and emotional regulation. The team effectiveness and teamregulation was scored on a scale from 1 to 3 on the rubrics, reflecting the extent to whichstudents demonstrated these attributes. For the intercultural goals setting, a rubric was used withcategories for goal setting, progress and reflection, and application and future planning, scoredon a 1 to 4 scale. After the reflections were scored, we calculated the descriptive statistics forteam effectiveness (TE), team regulation (TR) and intercultural competence (IC). Mean standarddeviation and median for each of the three was calculated. The median score for team regulationwas used to group the high and low categories. Further a matrix was created for teameffectiveness and
dedication to both his profession and his community makes him a respected and valued member of Greenville University.Prof. Natalie Schleper, Saint Louis University Natalie Schleper is an instructor in the Department of Chemistry at Saint Louis University. She holds both a B.S. and an M.S. in Chemistry from Southern Illinois University Edwardsville and researched student misconceptions and their effects on student understanding of chemistry. Natalie is dedicated to fostering a deep understanding of chemistry among her students. At SLU, Natalie is known for managing large class sizes averaging between 600-800 students per semester. She has taught various classes such as Fundamentals of Chemistry lecture, General Chemistry 1
academic andprofessional development [1]. Recent industry data underscores this urgency - while 98% ofemployers rate teamwork as a critical career readiness competency, 73% report difficulty findinggraduates with essential soft skills like teamwork and conflict resolution [2], [3]. This gap isparticularly concerning as only 77% of recent STEM graduates rate themselves as proficient inteamwork, suggesting a disconnect between workplace demands and graduate preparedness [2].The problem is further exacerbated by the fact that 60% of STEM employees never receive basicconflict resolution training [4], highlighting the crucial need to address these skills duringacademic preparation.Engineers, scientists, and technologists often work in interdisciplinary
and learningprocesses [1]. Generative AI tools continue to grow dynamically facilitating innovation,supporting inquiry-based learning, fostering creativity and personalizing education. Its usages inthe classroom span diversely from acting as learning aids in STEM discussion [2] to preparatorytools in a flipped classroom [3]. Adaptive learning systems powered by AI have garnered theability to analyze student performance in real time and tailor content to individual needs, therebyenhancing the learning experience. AI-driven platforms, such as intelligent tutoring systems,provide immediate feedback, helping students improve their skills and understanding at theirown pace. Hence, generative AI is changing the way students are interacting and
engineering [1, 2]. These courses have been shown toimprove students' self-efficacy and problem-solving skills, which are crucial for persistence inengineering majors [1, 3, 4]. Additional support for the effectiveness of active learning andproject-based instruction comes from The Association of College and University Educators(ACUE) [5]. FEP instructors have recently completed high-quality and research-backedprofessional learning courses to earn certification in Effective Teaching Practices throughACUE. The Designing Learner-Centered Courses and Promoting Active Learning modulesemphasized the benefits of these techniques on students’ success and provided resources [6].FEP’s first implementation of project-based learning was in 2012. The content of
the third-grade drawings and the first-year college students showed improved skill in CADand 3D printing. Future implementations of this project should involve more interaction with the thirdgraders to enhance engineering education outreach opportunities. 1 GIFTS: Third Grade Drawings into 3D Printed ModelsMotivationCurrently, Oklahoma shows a deficit in the number of engineers they need in the work force [1].Therefore, it is important to increase the number of engineers in the state to meet this demand.This can be done by two avenues: recruitment and retention [2]. Recruitment starts with K12student outreach to inspire children to
well-being has been a topic of ongoing interest over the past decade and continues to bean important consideration for university educators. In 2015, the International Conference onHealth Promoting Universities and Colleges resulted in the creation of the Okanagan Charter [1]that outlines two calls to action: to embed health into all aspects of campus culture and to leadhealth promotion action and collaboration locally and globally. Canadian engineering studentsare known to have heavy course loads, in part due to the requirements of the nationalaccreditation system for engineering programs. In addition to workload, many engineeringstudents are motivated to participate in extracurricular activities such as design teams, studentgovernment, and
improving Scholarship programming.BackgroundStudents from low-income backgrounds demonstrate interest in pursuing an engineering careerto “contribute to the well-being of their communities” through engineering and for theprofessional and financial opportunities it can afford, among other reasons [1, p. 4]. However,low-income students face barriers in pursuing engineering, such as others' lack of belief in thestudent’s pursuit of a STEM education, their motivations and interests not being supported inSTEM education, and the financial impacts of pursuing STEM education [2]. Furthermore, a"deficit discourse" pervades the experience of low-income students, which results in "othering"this group of students [10, p. 5]. Researchers urge educators to
students to build broad professional abilities while considering a varietyof restrictions and designing applications that go beyond technical content understanding [1].Including framing engineering in a larger social perspective will also aid to retain students whoidentify as female or from other underrepresented minority groups, who have been proven to bemore sensitive to the link between engineering and enhancing people's life [2,3]. According toChristensen and Ernø-Kjølhede [4], the engineering education community globally values socio-technical thinking and capabilities. According to research on the benefits of incorporating socio-technical abilities into engineering courses, engineers must be deliberate and careful whiledeveloping solutions
performance [1]. High-achieving studentsdemonstrate self-regulated learning by consistently engaging with academic resources [2]. Inresponse, universities have expanded the variety of academic resources available to students andhave designed a variety of interventions to improve student resource engagement. For example,some interventions work to improve student understanding of the available resources by providingall students with regular advising sessions in first-year seminars [3] Others acknowledge the needfor support structures that connect to students’ identities [4].But personal [5], social [6], and institutional [7] barriers can influence student help-seekingbehaviors and hinder the effective use of academic resources. Past studies have
, which aims to increase the proportion offemale registrants to 30% by 2030, it is unlikely that this goal will be achieved. As of 2022,newly licensed female engineers make up 20.2% of total registrations, up from 17.2% in2017 [1]. Further, Indigenous participation in engineering is 0.6%, despite having a 4.9%share of the total population in Canada [2].Transfer pathways between colleges and teaching intensive universities (TIUs) andengineering schools at (typically) research-intensive universities (RIU) disproportionatelyimprove access to, and persistence within, engineering degrees for visible minorities [3,4].This impact may extend to other so-called “hidden” demographic student characteristics (e.g.,social economic background, sexual
industry experience to her academic roles. She has a proven track record of addressing critical environmental challenges. In her recent endeavors, Dr. Worthy is actively collaborating with the Lemelson Foundation to institutionalize the Engineering for One Planet framework at Kennesaw State University. This initiative reflects her commitment to sustainability and innovative engineering practices. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Improving Major Selection and Academic Trajectories: The Impact of a Common First-Year Engineering Orientation CourseAbstractThis Complete Evidence-Based Practice paper studies the impact of Kennesaw StateUniversity’s new, 1 credit hour engineering
tools likeChatGPT in academic and personal contexts. The post-survey evaluates changes in awareness,confidence, and interest after the lecture and assignment. Results provide insights into AI’simpact on academic performance and efficiency, guiding curriculum development. Additionally,the cohort will be surveyed again in three years to assess their long-term AI experiences andcareer readiness. 1. IntroductionArtificial Intelligence (AI) traces its origins to the mid-20th century when researchers beganexploring the possibility of creating machines capable of simulating human intelligence [1]. Earlyefforts focused on symbolic reasoning [2], problem-solving [3], and basic learning algorithms [4].As computing power increased, data became more
developing engineering technologies and learning environments, specifically makerspaces, to support engineering education at many levels. He’s also heavily involved with his local FIRST Robotics Challenge team as a mentor. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: Identifying The Pre-College Engineering Experiences Of Our First-Year Engineering StudentsAbstractThis Work-in-Progress seeks to begin filling a gap in our understanding of our first-yearengineering students' pre-college experiences. Initiatives such as the Next Generation ScienceStandards (NGSS) aim to enhance STEM learning [1], The majority of states in the United Statesinclude engineering skills within
year of college is a pivotal period for engineering students, laying thegroundwork for their academic and professional trajectories. First-year seminar (FYS) coursesare designed to support this transition by fostering essential skills and knowledge. Researchindicates that well-structured FYS courses can significantly enhance student retention,motivation, academic performance, and engagement [1-7]. This is particularly crucial in the fieldof engineering, where retention rates have historically been lower compared to other disciplines[8-9]. The challenges are even more pronounced for underrepresented student populations, suchas women, African Americans, Hispanic-Latino, and Native-American students, who face uniquebarriers including socio