application of AI to education. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: Efficacy of Connecting Engineering and Calculus through AI Problem Generation1. IntroductionCalculus courses have long served as gatekeepers to STEM fields, presenting significantchallenges to students and contributing to high rates of attrition in engineering programs [1], [2].Despite being foundational, these courses often fail to connect abstract mathematical concepts totheir practical applications in engineering, leaving students disengaged and unprepared for real-world problem-solving [3]. This disconnect has been identified as a barrier to retention, withmany students citing calculus as a primary reason for abandoning STEM
undergraduates approached contextual factors during problem-scoping, a critical partof the design process, was studied by Kilgore et al [1]. Other studies have characterizedengineering students’ design processes with regard to the breadth of problem-scoping andconsideration of the design context. Some research studies uncovered differences in the breadthof problem-scoping exhibited by “novice” student engineers and “expert” designers, who aretypically advanced professionals with significant work experience. Christiaans and Dorst [2]found that novices solicited less information and exhibited less extensive problem-scoping,compared with expert designers. Additional studies include analyzing undergraduate studentproblem-scoping activity across academic
Peirce Starling (Leyf Starling) is a founding faculty member and current Director of the First Year Engineering Center at the University of Virginia. She is currently developing curriculum and teaching the Foundations of Engineering 1 and 2 courses as well as advising 1st year engineering students. Starling earned a BS in Mechanical Engineering (UVA ’03); enhanced that with a MAT in Special Education-General Curriculum (University of North Carolina- Charlotte ’07); and she has taught math, science, engineering, and robotics for over 20 years in both public and private middle schools, high schools, and universities. Her goal and passion is to make engineering accessible at all levels and across disciplines. Starling
in a First- Year Engineering CourseIntroductionRetention of undergraduate engineering students has been of significant concern at manyuniversities as the percentage of students who begin in engineering programs and successfullycomplete their degree has remained stagnant at approximately 50% for the past several decades[1]. Retention of first- and second-year students is a particularly pressing issue; these studentstypically have the largest drop-out rates from STEM majors [2]. Several authors have attemptedto understand why students leave engineering and other STEM programs and have found that alack of belonging in engineering [3], academic reasons [3], and a lack of connection and qualityrelationships with peers and
, and ODEs.By leveraging modern computational tools such as Julia, Large Language Models(LLMs), and Wolfram Alpha Pro, the course shifts the focus from tedious handcalculations to conceptual mastery and real-world application. Three engineeringprojects reinforce this approach: (1) numerically integrating drone IMU accelerationdata to estimate velocity and position while correcting acceleration bias, (2)optimizing motion through gradient descent and equality constraints in applicationssuch as basketball trajectories and gymnast posture, and (3) modeling and designingcontrollers for a planar BallBot using state-variable models andLaplace-transform-based feedback control. Student evaluations indicate strong engagement: 85% of students reported
building; it is about understanding how pastinnovations, challenges, and failures have shaped the world we live in today. From theconstruction of ancient aqueducts to the development of cutting-edge technologies, engineeringhas always been deeply intertwined with human history, culture, and society. However, inengineering education, the rich history of mathematicians, scientists and engineers who madesignificant contributions which greatly improved human beings’ lives are often overlooked.Some researchers recognized these issues and worked on integrating historical content intoengineering education [1-7]. Godoy [4] presents the development and application of an on-linemodule to learn historical perspectives in relation to an engineering topic. The
training session are tailored according to the outcomes of acomprehensive questionnaire that explores knowledge of the basics of sustainable circularengineering design and the circular pedagogical methodology used. Of special significance is thestudents’ interest shown after this short training in learning the more advanced engineeringcourses that will equip them to apply their technical knowledge to technology developmentsdesigned towards a better world, not only for future generations but also for the present.IntroductionThe paradigms of sustainability and the circular economy (CE) are creating new constraints onthe design and development of products for everyday use [1],[2],[3]. The circular economypromotes a restorative and regenerative system
engineering experience. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 WIP: Mapping Faculty Opinions of Student Skills Development in a Large- scale First-Year Design ProgramIntroductionThis work-in-progress examines the differing perspectives of faculty teaching in the first-yeardesign program at a mid-sized private R1 university. Findings here provide the groundwork of alarger study aiming to address a critical gap identified by the National Science Foundation'sDivision of Engineering Education and Centers [1]: that while significant strides have been madein both first-year engineering education and senior capstone experiences, many essentialprofessional competencies introduced in first-year courses
actually trying toaccomplish with and for these students? This paper describes the 6-step process that was used toinvestigate this issue (1. Team-building, 2. Goal Exploration, 3. Curricular Definition, 4.Interventions and Innovations, 5. Outcomes, and 6. Conclusions). Starting with assembling ateam of invested faculty, we focused on determining the critical outcomes for the first-year usingthe collective wisdom of the group leavened with key findings from the relevant literature. Withkey outcomes at the forefront, it became apparent that defining all the various steps and activitiesand estimating the impact of each on the proposed outcomes across a sprawling enterprise thatcommunally served six distinct program was a must. Key interventions and
Paper ID #48183GIFTS: Integrating Generative AI into First-Year Engineering Education:From Knowledge Acquisition and Arduino Projects to Defining AccessibilityProblems and SolutionsAnna Leyf Peirce Starling, University of Virginia Anna Leyf Peirce Starling (Leyf Starling) is a founding faculty member and current Director of the First Year Engineering Center at the University of Virginia. She is currently developing curriculum and teaching the Foundations of Engineering 1 and 2 courses as well as advising 1st year engineering students. Starling earned a BS in Mechanical Engineering (UVA ’03); enhanced that with a MAT in
nuanced understanding of how self-efficacy, outcome expectations, career interest, and career intention interact as central constructs[1], [2]. Brown and Lent’s framework [3] also emphasizes the role of personal factors, includingpersonality traits, prior experiences, gender, and race/ethnicity, alongside contextual factors,such as socioeconomic status and prior education, in shaping career and educational outcomes.These elements interact to shape self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and career interests,highlighting the complex influences that guide career development.In particular, Brown and Lent [3] highlight the critical role of gender in career outcomes, oftenmediated through social learning experiences. Gender-specific opportunities
in helpingstudents recognize their responsibility to create inclusive engineering solutions while developingspecific strategies for preventing, detecting, and mitigating bias in their future engineeringpractice.MotivationEngineering education plays a crucial role in shaping future professionals who will design anddevelop technologies that impact society. Students entering engineering programs often view thefield primarily through a technical lens, focusing on problem-solving and innovation withoutfully considering the social implications of design decisions [1]. However, research shows thatunconscious bias in design processes can lead to products that exclude or potentially harmcertain populations [2] [3]. For example, early automobile crash
solve a real, ill-structured engineeringproblem of reasonable complexity with a humanitarian aspect that required innovation andcreativity.IntroductionTraining students to become effective engineers is a very complex problem that continues toevolve and improve. One of the most important aspects of that training is teaching students howto design processes and equipment to meet client specifications. These projects incorporate manyaspects of actual engineering practice such as design, teamwork, verbal and writtencommunication, and project management. Gutiérrez-Berraondo et al. (2024) [1] wrote, “STEMhigher education faces the challenge of educating its students in top level skills such asabstraction, generalization and transfer required to solve
DesignIntroductionIt has been well documented that hands-on, project-based learning can benefit engineeringcourses [1, 2]. At the University of Denver, the first-year engineering courses have includeddesign projects for several years. These projects have varied from catapults to STEM basedpreschool toys to dog toys. The hands-on learning opportunities are ideal for first year studentsbecause often they are still in introductory math and science courses which can feel like they lackcontext for the greater engineering world. It is also a great opportunity to introduce students toadditional skills such as teamwork, communication, computer aided design, and the overallengineering design process.Recently our department has looked at adding components of human
connected to other contexts and disciplines.ObjectivesThis activity provides first-year engineering students with hands-on, scaffolded experiences thatintroduce them to the potential of generative AI without simply providing “the answers.” It offersthem a space to practice interacting with AI, including priming and prompt engineering forgenerative AI systems, in a low-stakes environment that supports productive client basedengineering design and prepares them for more advanced, in-depth applications of generative AIthroughout their later studies.The design activity is structured around the Stanford d-school’s Design Thinking Process [1],particularly focusing on empathy and iterative design (Figure 1). Figure 1. Stanford d.school
engineering courses, focusing on student success, retention, and fostering a welcoming community for incoming students. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 GIFTS: Introduction of the Engineering Design Process in a First Year Multidisciplinary Course though use of Wind PowerIntroductionFirst-year engineering students seek hands-on learning experiences to introduce them to thefundamental tools they will use in their future careers. Previous research has also shown thatfirst-year design experiences can help support engineering identity formation and retention [1].At Kansas State University, the KidWind competition, a popular design challenge for teachingdesign and critical thinking
these escalating threats, straining the resources and capabilitiesof their existing cybersecurity teams and further underscoring the need for a skilled workforce.Yet, the cybersecurity industry is currently facing a significant skills gap; in 2024 there wasfound to be an estimated global shortage of 4.8 million cybersecurity professionals. Workforcegrowth has plateaued at around 5.5 million globally, while the skill gap widened by 19%compared to the previous year [1]. In the United States alone, the supply of cybersecurityprofessionals met only 83% of employer demand, leaving over 225,000 positions unfilled as ofJune 2024 [2, 3, 4].According to recent industry reports, professionals with the following technical and professionalskills are needed
has emerged as afundamental skill requisite for success in diverse academic and professional domains. However,the journey to mastering programming languages is often fraught with challenges, particularlyfor students encountering feelings of fear and intimidation. This paper endeavors to delve intothe complexities of addressing and overcoming these obstacles, thereby empowering students intheir pursuit of programming proficiency. The significance of programming proficiencytranscends disciplinary boundaries, encompassing fields ranging from computer science andengineering to data analysis and beyond. Rushkoff [1] contends that lacking an understanding ofdigital technology puts us at risk of being controlled by it. He asserts that programming
sub-branch of artificial intelligence that uses machinelearning. It allows machines to understand, analyze, and generate responses that are easy forhumans to understand. NLP already facilitates the interactions between our students and all sortsof artificial intelligence like chatbots (ChatGPT), smart assistants (Siri), and more. Calls formore integration of artificial intelligence into education grow louder by the day. For instance, aspecial committee was established in the US to make recommendations, including around AI ineducation [1]. Outside of academia, regular interaction with AI tools is becoming commonplacein industry. Scholars have already outlined a plethora of opportunities and concerns aroundapplying this technology in the
diverse set of identities and characteristics across the entire deck. Studentsdraw cards randomly and then complete the project or classroom activity with the person ontheir card as the intended user for their design. Initial student feedback suggests that using thiscard deck to complete their project increased students’ experience designing for persons unlikethemselves — a key element of the engineering profession.MotivationMany incoming first-year engineering students cite a desire to help people as one of the reasonsthey chose to major in an engineering discipline [1]. Additionally, first-year engineering coursesoften aim to introduce students to the idea of human-centered design. Teaching human-centereddesign in the first year takes on
well as biology [1,2], students can feelunderqualified in the depth and breadth of topics, or ‘othered’ compared to their peers. This isoften observed especially in first-year students or those transferring from other fields [3,4].Introduction to Bioengineering (BIOE 120, Table 1) is a 1 credit hour course offered to non-bioengineering majors at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Students in this coursewish to learn more about the field yet come from a variety of backgrounds, resulting in differinglevels of knowledge and academic experience. As survey-style courses take a broad approachand often offer fewer credit hours, it can be difficult to teach technical concepts, especially tostudents who lack prerequisite courses [5,6
, prototyping anditerating each lesson with a recruited student audience before revising and publishing.Background: Design Thinking (DT) is now a transdisciplinary field that has diverged inimportant ways from its origins in, among other disciplines, engineering design (ED) in the late20th century [1]. Crucially, most DT practitioners today have adapted: ethnographic methods tounderstand stakeholder needs and anticipate unintended consequences of technologies;discoveries in the brain sciences to enhance creativity and team effectiveness; and techniquesfrom across design disciplines to navigate ambiguity and complexity. Several other OERs existthat introduce design thinking, e.g. [2] and [3]. The published lessons introduced in this projectand paper
engineering, thus building a sustainable and resilient society while using appropriate ways to reduce, reuse, and recycle. He is also actively involved in engineering education research and strives for effective pedagogy practices and student success. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 GIFTS: Intro to Civil & Environmental Engineering - First-year Engineering Course designed for Student Engagement and BelongingIntroductionThis GIFTS (Great Ideas For Teaching (and Talking With) Students) paper examines thedesign and implementation of a 1-credit Intro to Civil & Environmental Engineeringcourse (CEE 101), and its impact on student engagement, belonging, and retention. Ijoined Juniata
activity provides students with a real-world scenariowhere they must use a people-first, human-centered engineering problem-solving approach tosolve a scenario that affects people of all backgrounds [1]. This activity introduces the careerreadiness competencies required of successful engineers and crucial in engineering design. Thesecompetencies are identified by the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) aswell as by the ABET engineering program accreditation organization [2-3]. Through this activity,we stress the importance of being a well-rounded engineer and how lacking technical or socialcompetencies can lead to unintentional engineering design failures that exclude critical groups andpopulations. Examples include products only
the field of engineering. Manyengineering students enter their majors with minimal knowledge of the discipline. Additionally,many current high school students report being interested in STEM-related fields, but areunprepared for this endeavor [1]. To help address this issue, the authors launched “TheEngineering Student Experience Podcast" in 2019 to enhance awareness of engineering as amajor and a career option. In a study conducted by Nissenson et al. (2020), the first five episodeswere evaluated by engineering students enrolled in California State Polytechnic UniversityPomona’s College of Engineering’s First Year Experience course, “EGR 1000: Engineering,Society, and You” [2]. After listening to the episodes, students completed surveys that
, Physics, and Computing CoursesIntroductionFirst-year students enter college with diverse backgrounds and varying levels of preparedness fortheir higher education journey. These prior experiences and skills, encompassing both academicand social competencies, significantly influence their overall college experience.Pre-academic skills play a crucial role in facilitating the transition to college, especially in STEMfields where students are required to pass introductory course credits. Students with strongacademic foundations typically adjust more easily to college coursework compared to those withweaker skills.1 Academic resources such as tutoring, advising, faculty interaction, and libraryservices can mitigate the challenges associated with this
findings aim to inform curricular improvements and contribute to broader discussions onhow to effectively teach design thinking at the secondary and postsecondary levels.IntroductionEngineering design has long been a central component of ABET-accredited engineeringprograms, with many programs emphasizing the design process early in the undergraduateexperience. First-year design courses are widely implemented, focusing on realistic projects,teamwork, and the integration of technical skills [1], [2], [3]. A spiral curriculum approachreinforces and builds upon design knowledge throughout the four-year program [4]. Thesecurricula aim to develop attributes desired by industry employers and enhance students’ designcompetencies. Engineering design
support for their first semester and math, chemistry, and statics/physics support for thesecond. Second year students still completing this coursework can also take part.While our initial sample size is small with two cohorts of 77 students, we are excited to reportpromising initial results. In the 2023 cohort, one-third of the students progressed into their majorin their first year, three more progressed into their major at the end of the Fall 2024 semester, and5 students received progression extensions. In the 2024 cohort, all students maintained orincreased their math placement. Forty-three percent placed into Calculus 1 and 10 students wereable to start General Chemistry.IntroductionStudents entering an engineering program underprepared for
paper focuses on validatingthe survey as presented in Dirisina & Shehab [1].The development of the survey instrument was grounded in social cognitive theory and self-concept research, with a specific focus on the domain specificity self-concept. It was hypothesizedthat a well-constructed survey would capture the multifaceted nature of engineering self-concept,and underlying sub-constructs that aid in predicting an individual’s self-concept. The methodologyinvolved a two-stage process. First, survey pre-testing was conducted with subject matter expertsto ensure content validity and clarity of items. This iterative process allowed for refinement of thesurvey questions and structure [1] Second, as described in this paper, the survey was
contributing to the academic success of mid-range engineering studentsThis is a works-in-progress submission. In engineering, the expectation is that students oftenhave a 3.0 GPA or above to be eligible for internships and scholarships and are on track for acareer in the field. The present study seeks to examine how students can use forms of communitycultural wealth [1] to enhance their engineering identity and self-efficacy and increase thesupport of community and resources to increase their GPA performance and persistence inengineering. Using an assets-based approach to examine how students achieve academic success,this study will examine the effect participation in an academic program aimed at student successhad on mid-range